01 Attachment 5Page 1 of 4
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor & Council
From: Robert Schultz, Town Attorney
Date: January 15, 2019
Subject: Ordinance and Policy Priorities for the January 22, 2019
Priority Setting Study Session
__________________________________________________________________________________
The Town Attorney’s Office is continually evaluating the Municipal Code for needed
updates and provides this Memorandum to assist the Town Council in its Priority Setting Study
Session. The list is in order of recommended priority. However, please realize that although
these ordinances are in recommended priority, many issues may arise during the year that can
alter these priorities.
1. Short Term Rental Ordinance
The Town currently does not have any regulations for short term vacation rental properties.
Since the Town does not have any regulations, it has prohibited the rental of property for less
than 30 days. In October 2018, the Town Council voted unanimously to refer the item to the
Policy Committee for further discussion with input from Council members. Council requested
additional research regarding how neighboring municipalities have responded to this issue and
considerations that those jurisdictions took into account when formulating their approaches. The
Policy Committee studied and analyzed the impacts of short term vacation rentals on residential
neighborhoods, the overall cost and availability of housing in the Town, and the revenue th at
could be generated by short term vacation rentals. After studying the issue and receiving input
from the public, the Policy Committee voted to forward a draft Short Term Rental Ordinance to
Council. The Town Council will consider the draft ordinance on February 5, 2019.
2. Alternating Use of Parking Ordinance
In 2018, the Town Council Policy Committee considered e conomic vitality initiatives to
streamline application processes for Town businesses. Members of the Town’s business
community attended the meeting. One of the topics discussed was shared parking and how to
make the process streamlined and affordable for businesses. Based upon the discussion, the
Policy Committee’s recommendation was to bring forward a code amendment to Planning
Commission and Town Council to deregulate and create an incentive for shared parking by no
longer requiring a CUP and allowing shared parking through a ministerial permit process. The
Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on this matter on January 23, 2019 and make a
recommendation to the Town Council.
ATTACHMENT 5
Page 2 of 4
3. Appeal Process Ordinance
Based upon the number of appeals in 2017, the Town Policy Committee asked staff to place
streamlining the land use appeal process on their agenda so that the matter could be discussed.
The Policy Committee reviewed, analyzed, and received public comment on proposed
potentially amendments to the Town appeals process. The proposed amendments to the Town’s
appeal process will first be heard by the Planning Commission in the Spring and then their
recommendation will then be forwarded to the Town Council.
4. Hillside Fence Ordinance
On December 5, 2017, the Town Council considered a draft Ordinance for amendments to
the Town Code regarding fences, hedges, and walls. During public testimony, David Weissman
suggested alternative ordinance language. The Town Council discussed the draft Ordinance and
continued the matter pending the outcome of the Strategic Priorities session. On February 20,
2018, the Town Council adopted Strategic Priorities for 2018 – 2020, which included continuing
work on the Fences Ordinance. In 2018, Staff worked with Mr. Weissman and members of the
public on a draft Ordinance that was considered by the Town Council on October 16, 2018. At
that meeting, Town Council moved to forward the draft Ordinance to the Town Council Policy
Committee. The Policy Committee reviewed, analyzed, and received public comment on
proposed potentially amendments to the Fence Ordinance. The proposed amendments to the
Fence Ordinance will first be heard by the Planning Commission in Spring and then their
recommendation will then be forwarded to the Town Council.
5. Wireless Facilities Ordinance
The Town’s current Wireless Facilities Ordinance was adopted in 2003 to conform to the
1996 Telecommunications Act and is now outdated based on the ongoing changes to State and
Federal legislation and leaves the Town unprepared for the scale of expansion that is on the
horizon. Our current Ordinance only deals with the collocation of wireless facilities on existing
utility poles. Various wireless facility companies are now proposing installations in the public
right of way. Such installations could be on existing Town -owned structures, such as street light
poles, or could involve the companies putting in their own new poles. The Town needs to update
its wireless telecommunications ordinance to address the current status of Federal and State law
as well as to reflect best practices in siting and design standards to preserve the aesthetics of the
Town but to also facilitate providing competitive, varied, and high quality wireless
communications service infrastructure.
6. Weed Abatement Ordinance
The Town’s Weed Abatement Ordinance was adopted in 1968 and establishes a program and
procedure to maintain weeds in an effort to eliminate hazardous conditions. Following the
devastating wild fires of the past few years, the Town should update the Ordinance to expand the
definition of weeds to include other dead vegetation, fallen limbs, and combustible trash on
private property and add additional language to clarify and strengthen the Town’s weed
Page 3 of 4
abatement program. Additionally, ordinance amendments would help property owners to
understand their responsibilities in property maintenance.
7. Horse Drawn Vehicles Ordinance
The Town’s Horse Drawn Vehicles was adopted in 1968 and establishes specific parameters
for the operation of horse-drawn carriages in Town and includes a few provisions that may be
modified with Town Council approval, including carriage route, hours of operation, and loading
zone location. The ordinance specifically does not allow a horse-drawn vehicle to be operated by
more than one (1) horse carry more than four (4) passengers at one time excluding the drive r
even though historically they have been allowed. The Town should update the Ordinance to
conform to current practice and be reviewed for other needed changes.
8. Shared Mobility Device Ordinance
The Town does not have a Shared Mobility Device Ordinance. Shared mobility devices, such
as electric scooters (e.g., Bird, Lime-S) and bikes (e.g. LimeBike, JUMP, Mobike, Spin), have
surged locally and in cities throughout the United States. These mobility devices can be rented
by the public via a smartphone application that unlocks the motorized devices from any location
and lets the user park it when the rider arrives at their chosen destination. These mobility devices
are highly visible, drawing considerable attention and controversy when they arrive in any area.
They have raised significant community concerns about safety and enforcement, including
concerns about users riding on the sidewalk, doubling up on scooters, users failing to observe
traffic controls in violation of the California Vehicle Code and other unsafe or uncivil rider
behaviors. The devices have also posed new challenges in managing the safe public use of the
street and sidewalks. The Town should adopt an ordinance regulating shared mobility service in
the Town that would include permitting requirements and an operational framework.
9. Public Nuisance Ordinance/Administrative Abatement Hearing Ordinance
The Town does not have a comprehensive Public Nuisance Ordinance related to the
identification, definition, and enforcement of nuisances. Such an Ordinance would make
identification of violations easier for residents and businesses to understand and thereby comply
with, as well as to assist the Town in enforcing the Code and providing due process. The
Nuisance Ordinance would provide a just, equitable, and practicable method for preventing,
discouraging, and/or abating certain conditions which endanger the life, limb, health, property,
safety, or welfare of the general public. Currently, the Administrative Abatement of Violations
section of our Town Code is antiquated and needs to be updated to allow for the enforcement of
Code violations through administrative hearings effectively applied and administered in a fair,
expedient, and cost-efficient manner.
10. Drone Ordinance
The Town does not have a Drone Ordinance. The issue of drones and Radio Controlled (RC)
aircraft, otherwise referred to as unmanned aerial systems (UAS) is a growing concern for towns
and cities with multiple incidents of interference with firefighting, other aircraft, and accidents.
Page 4 of 4
Towns/cities are attempting to address the dramatic increase in recreational UAS with various
types of regulations and are beginning to enact regulations that supplement and/or codify federal
law. The major challenge in drafting these ordinances is the federal pre-emption of this issue but
a Drone Ordinance could regulate the following issues for the Town: 1) Protection of persons
and property in the jurisdiction; 2) Aviation safety, including a specific prohibition against
careless and reckless operations that endanger life or property; 3) Designated take-off and
landing zones for UAS within the Town limits; 4) Identification of critical infrastructure within
the Town limits, or immediately adjacent to its boundaries, with appropriate rules for operation
of UAS in proximity to that infrastructure; and 5) Permissible hours of operation.
11. Noise Ordinance
The Town’s Noise Ordinance was adopted in 1991. With the changes to the Town’s
Entertainment Policy, the Town needs to analyze and determine whether the noise levels set
forth in the Noise Ordinance adequately protect the residents of Los Gatos from unnecessary,
excessive, and disturbing noise and vibration.
12. Motor Vehicle and Traffic Ordinance
In the course of defending a traffic ticket appeal, it was revealed that there are some
necessary changes to the Motor Vehicles and Traffic section of the Code, Chapter 15.
Specifically, Chapter 15 was adopted in 1968 and requires the Chief of Police to approve any
street sign before obedience to same can be required. This section controverts the common sense
requirement that street sign approval is the province of the Town Engineer; however it gives
credence to challenges by litigious individuals. The rest of this Code s ection would also be
reviewed for other needed changes.
13. Claims/Settlement Authority Ordinance
The Town’s current Claims Ordinance has not been updated since 2003. With the passage of
time, certain provisions have become outdated and other provisions have not historically been
followed. This proposed update to the Ordinance would conform to current practice, and update
current settlement limits to allow for more expeditious settlement of claims and disposition of
workers compensation claims.
RWS