Attachment 26June 1, 2017
The Mayor, Vice Mayor and Town Co uncil of Los Gatos
110 East Main Street
Los Gatos
California 95031
D ear Madam Mayor, Mr Vice-Mayor, Members of the Town Council,
Re. 341 Bella Vista Avenue, Architecture and Site Application S-12-103
148 Maggi Court
Los Gatos
California 95032
We are writing t o ask you to reject the Applicant Mr Ros s's proposal and deny his appeal, as we
b eli eve his design does not conform to the rules and regulations of the Town including the
General Plan, the Hillside Design Standards and G uidelines and the Re sidential Guidelines. Mr
Ross h as offered some changes t o his d esign however we believe it is substantially the same
house with substantially the sam e issues as in previous iterations including overall size, the
FAR, bulk and mass, prominence, footprint and impac t o n the hillside (including impact on
individual trees that he s h ould be preserving) and fit with the neighborhood. Eith er Mr Ross
did not want to m a ke the changes requir ed to the extent required o r he cannot with his current
d es ign ..
Furthermore we believe the approach of 'many opti ons' th at Mr Ross is using (another one was
added to the Staff Report this evening) is disingenuous to the planning process, and it is clear to
u s that Mr Ross is wanting t o n egoti ate with the Counci l, and believes h e can negotiate wi th th e
Counci l, ra ther than try to comply fu ll y w ith its laws and direction. The Town Council might
w ish that this hillside s to ry was closed, however Mr Ross knew w hat he was getting into when
he bought this land and we strongly believe the Council should not be tempted t o put
exp ediency in place of good law making and good adjudicati on.
Yours sincer ely,
Nick and La u ra Williamson
williamsonnick@a ol.com
408 601 9284 (Nick)
ATTACHMENT 2 5
-----Original Message-----
From : Rebecca Wilson [mailto:reverendwil son@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2017 11 :06 AM
To: Council@LosGatos.CA.gov; Town Manager
Subject: Bella Vista Avenue application
Dear Council Persons:
As residents of 312 Bella Vista Avenue in Los Gatos, we ask you to deny the application for at
341 Bella Vista Avenue .
It has a detrimental impact on the residences of Bella Vista Avenue and a severe impact on the
residents of Maggi Court as presented at the Planning Commission and Council Meetings.
Respectfully submitted,
Rebecca & Ron Wilson
Sent from my iPhone
From: Richard Harris [mailto:4richardharris@ gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2017 11 :11 AM
To: Council ; Town Manager
Subject: Proposed Project on 341 Bella Vi sta Avenue
June 2, 2017
Dear Council Members,
I am Richard Harris from 316 Bella Vista Avenue . I have talked with
most of the neighbors in the area around this project and none of them
are for the project.
Reasons being, the size of the home, removal of hundred year old oak
trees,
and unsafe egress.
I am sure there are many in favor of this project, all being developers
and speculators. I am sure the developers are all looking at this project
to see how you are handling this project . Los Gatos has many hills that
they are looking to develope.
Richard Harris
From: Natallia Stulski [mai lto :na ta ll ia @g mail.co m ]
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2017 11 :14 AM
To: Town Manager; Council
Subject: CORRECTION : 341 Bella Vista Ave. Los Gatos , CA Application
J une 2nd , 20 17
Mayor Sayoc and Council Members
T own of Los Gatos
Community Develo pment D ep artment 110 East Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 9503 1
R e: 341 B ell a Vi sta Ave . Los Gatos, CA A pplication
Dear Mayor Sayoc and Council Members,
We a re writin g aga in to r einfo rce our ex tre me conce rn w ith the pro posed r esidenti a l
develo pment at 34 1 Be ll a V ista Avenue submitted b y Mr. D an Ross. We live at 152 Maggi C t.
Los Gatos, CA i n Bell a V ista Vi llage and we are th e owners of thi s property.
T he n ew pro p osal still fail s to address man y co nc ern s th at I p er so na ll y and our co mmunity
exp re ssed in many heari ngs and letters befo re.
1. Significant privacy issues : includin g visibility into ne ighborin g pro pe rti es;
2. Bulk and Mass: Guide lines are int erpreted in favo r of th e develo pe r. Pro posed structu re
p lan suggests ad di ng squ ar e foo tage ever y possibl e way. Fro m dow nhill , thi s s truc ture w ill l oo k
exactl y like w hat it is: 2800 sq . feet house, no matter th at 12 00 sq . fee t is counte d as a cell ar.
3. Environmental impact: cutting trees and tran sfo rming a li vely g reen steep hill into a huge
h ouse that c over s the mo st of th e hill sid e and very visibl e fro m the pro perties d ow n th e hi ll.
We would like to kind ly as k the Council Members to deny thi s appli cati o n.
Since re ly Yours,
Vitaliy Stul sk i and Natalli a Stul skaya
Owne rs of 152 Maggi Ct. Los Gatos, CA.
From: Rob DiNapoli [rnai lto:rob @dinapoli.biz]
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2017 1:18 PM
To: Council
Cc: Town Manager
Subject: Request to Deny 341 Bella Vista Avenue Development Proposal
Dear Mayor Sayoc and Council Members,
My wife Karin and I have been a resident at 322 Bella Vista Ave and have enjoyed our neighbors
and neighborhood for 18 years. Despite being a busy thoroughfare for the high school , joggers,
dog walkers and afternoon commuters bypassing the left hand turn from Hwy 9 onto Los Gatos
Blvd, we have managed to maintain a quaint and rural feel along thi s busy and narrow street.
For the last 1/3 of our tenure on Bella Vista we have watched and fought efforts to build an
oversized home on the steep slope of 341 Bella Vista. While we support an individual 's right to
build a home on their property, we believe it is the job of our elected and appoint representatives
to determine which existing regulations apply to such buildings; keeping in mind that such
regulations were originally implemented to maintain harmony, value and usefulness within the
community.
Each time the 431 Bella Vista Ave development has come before the Planning Commi ss ion,
there have been a ho st of requests to 'work around ' exi sting regulation s. In the seemingly end less
redesigns we 've seen requests for Ex ce ss ive FAR, Living Room s li sted as Cellars, excessive tree
removal , merged lots to increase bulk and mass ... the li st goes on. Fortunately, each time the
project has been presented to the Planning Commis sion, it has been denied.
The bottom line is that there are far too many problems with the s ite to make exceptions and
allowances for such a large home to be built! The Town Council formed the Planning
Commission and appo inted its members to study building requests, app ly appropriate regulations
and determine which projects are built in our community. Like the Planning Commission, the
neighborhood and developer hav e al so been acti ve working and commentin g on thi s project.
The Planning Commission has patiently studied and heard from the involved parties and each
time the project has been DENIED.
I urge you not to try and fix what isn 't broken! Deny the appeal and require the appl i cant to
co mply with ALL of th e standards and g uid e li nes that are in pl ace to maintain harmony, value
and usefulness within our community.
Thank you for your service to the Town of Los Gatos .
Respectfully yours,
Rob & Karin DiNapoli
DiNapoli Specialty Foods
322 Bella Vi sta Ave.
408-356-0228
www.dinapol i .biz;
Sally Zarnowitz
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Town of Lo s Gatos:
Barnickel , John, RVP <john.barnickel@medtronic.com >
Friday, June 02 , 2017 1:38 PM
Sally Zarnowitz; Rob Rennie; Marico Sayoc ; Marci a Jensen; Steven Leonardis
339 -341 Bella Vista
Thank you in advance for reviewing my thoughts on the proposed home at 339-341 Bella Vista. By way of background, I
live in the neighborhood near Caldwell and Bella Vista, I pass the site by car and on foot on a regular basis. In short, I
support the development of this lot. Here are factors that I believe make this project very acceptable to the community
and immediate surrounding area:
-Many of the neighbors on Bella Vista have known for years that these two lots could be built on . The current plan
consists of one home instead of two, it retains the wooded nature of the site, preserves the majority of the trees, and is
reasonable for the neighborhood.
-I live in a larger Bluebird Lane home (3 ,508 square feet) on a smaller lot (4,922 square feet) than this proposal. This is a
modest 1100 SF footprint on a 10,000 SF lot.
-This is urban living, su rrounded by medium density housing, a motel, houses with apartments in back, and within
earshot of Hwy 9 and 17.
-I have a concern that the process has become overly burdensome to citizens of the Town . Especially given the shortage
of cu rrent h ousing units available in Lo s Gatos, responsible development such as this proposal should be encouraged,
not st ifled .
-This plan has been recommended for approval by your Town Planning Department, is compliant with no exceptions or
variances and ha s been ve tted by your Town Engineer/Public Works, Town Consulting Architect, Town Geotechnical
Engineer and Town Arborist.
It's hard to understand there are any grounds for denial when you look at the density and lot coverage of the other
homes in the neighborhood. I would have attended the upcoming hea ring in person to present my position but will be in
Florida for a business meeting. Please accept this written correspondence and please approve this plan. Feel free to ca ll
me with any questions. Thank you for your time.
John Barnickel
Vice President, Pacific Region
Cardiac and Vascular Group
Medtronic, Inc .
(925) 872-3000 Mobile
w w w.medtro n ic.com
John Barnickel
Vice President, Pacific Region
Cardiac and Vascular Group
Medtronic, Inc.
(925) 872-3000 Mobile
1
www.medtronic.com
John Barnickel
Vice President, Pacific Region
Cardiac and Vascular Group
Medtronic, Inc .
(925) 872-3000 Mobile
www.med tronic .com
[CONFIDENTIALITY AND PRIVACY NOTICE] Information transmitted by this email is proprietary to Medtronic and is
intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is private,
privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or it
appears that this mail has been forwarded to you without proper authority, you are notified that any use or
disse mination of this information in any manner is strictly prohibited. In such cases, please delete this mail from your
records. To view this notice in other language s you can either se lect the following link or manually copy and pa ste the
link into the address bar of a web browser: http://emaildisclaimer.medtronic.com
2
From: Vitaliy Stulski [mailto:vstulski@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2017 2:02 PM
To: Council; Marico Sayoc
Cc: Town Manager
Subject: RE: 341 Bella Vista Avenue
To Mayor and Council Members of Los Gatos,
Executive summary
I and my family are owners of 152 Maggi Ct. We are Los Gatos residents for 11 years.
I respectfully request that you deny the appeal.
I oppose the development of a property at 341 Bella Vista Av. for the following reasons:
• Bulk and mass
• Abuse of cellar policy
• Danger for downhill properties in case of an earthquake or heavy rain
• Removal of trees and vegetation
• Increased risk accidents on Bella Vista
• Privacy issues
I also would like to put on notice that I do not follow the procedural override when the project
reviews go around a normal and established consideration flow with required scrutiny (where
Planning Commission is involved and appeals are handled through the chain of command in
Town Council). I am confused with 4/5 new draft-quality options (at best) the developer has
submitted. What decision he tries to solicit from the Council?
Details
1. Bulk and mass: house is simply way to large for the steep hill and overall nature of the lot. In
every dimension it exceeds an acceptable size. It's tall, it's wide, it's pushed too deep down the
hill.
2. Abuse of ce llar policy: cellar size is roughly matches the size of the countable FAR and used
to double livable space (and therefore size of the house). It has walls that extend above the
ground. Gigantic portions of the rooms are qualified as a cellar.
3. Danger for downhill properties: We wrote numerous times to the Planning Commission and
Town Council on that topic. Nowhere along this hills side property sits in such close proximity
to the downhill residencies on a such steep slope.
4. Removal o[the trees: Nowhere on this hillside all large trees were removed top to bottom to
facilitate construction. In the options presented the builder states that shifting of a large house
a long the hill will not save more trees . True statement. But making the house 2 or more times
smaller will.
5. Increasing a risk of traffic accidents: tum on Bella Vista and no side walk on the side of the
property make a narrow street with heavy high school students traffic in the morning more
dangerous.
6. Privacy issue: the house will tower over downhill properties and violate privacy of their
residents.
A very difficult and seemingly unbuildable nature of the lot pushes the developer to make hard
choices. Instead of making tough calls himself and significantly reducing the size of the property,
he pushes problems on the surrounding neighborhood asking everyone around to surrender in
quality of life (be it privacy, traffic, trees , security). I firmly believe that it is too big of an ask.
My ask for the Council is much simpler: please follow the law and deny the appeal.
Thanks You and Regards,
Yitaliy Stulski
152 Maggi Ct
Los Gatos, CA
On Jun 2, 2017 , at 2:40 PM, Jennifer Colson <jco lson@ gm ail.com> wrote:
June 2 , 2017
Mayor Sayoc and Council Members
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Dear Mayor Sayoc and Council Members,
I am writing regarding the proposal for a home on 339-341 Bella Vista. I am surprised that a fully compliant
plan would be so difficult to get approved . Multiple proposals have been recommended for approval by the
Planning Department only to be denied by the Planning Commission. Over the years , the Ross ' have made
countless concessions, thoughtfully taking into consideration the neighbors on Maggi Ct., those on Bella Vista
as well as those requests and direction given by the Planning Commission and Town Council : far more than
any legal or zoning requirements would necessitate. They've addressed the trees and location of the home on
the lot, the height of the home, window placement, lines of sight, driveway and safety concerns , traffic and
mass and scale concerns . Each time, only to be denied again, the "carrot" moved and new requests for
change.
I've heard the complaints from the Maggi Ct. neighbors. I understand that many of them d idn 't realize the
property behind them was zoned residential and that eventually a home or two would ultimately be built
there. The reality is they won't support any project on that land of any size . The Ross' have reached out to
them in the past only to be met with anger and hostility. No one came to the table for the purposes of
compromise . They've made it very clear that they intend to continue to be the squeaky wheel and pull as many
strings as they can to obstruct the process. Even so, the Ross' plans are very thoughtful of them . They always
intended to be neighborly. They are part of our community and never intended to be in this bitter battle . While
anyone can appreciate the feelings and disappointment from the Maggi Ct. community, their rights certainly
don 't surpass the property rights of the Ross' as owners to build on these residential lots. This would create a
very dangerous precedent for the discretion at which our town can approval or obstruct development.
Please take the time , council members to look at the history here and stand up for what is right by approving
the plans as presented. I attended the last Town Council meeting and was extremely disappointed in the lack
of progress. Bringing back up the trees and possibly finding another building site on the lot when these issues
had been addressed years before is counterproductive . To not recognize that this is a very moderately sized
home compared to the neighbors makes further discussion of mass and scale appear punitive. And ultimately
to bring up the suggestions of removing the garage entirely or of re-zoning the property to agriculture was
mind -blowing to me and horribly disappointing. This is not progress! These are not reasonable requests . This
home fully complies with all the zoning and building restrictions as approved by the town. It was recommended
for approval by the Planning Department and should have been approved by the Planning Commi ssion . Please
remedy this by voting your approval.
Regards,
Jennifer Colson
Jennifer Colson
Sally Zarnowitz
From:
Sent:
Phillips, Jay R. <jphillips@newmarkccarey.com >
Saturday, June 03, 2017 1:17 PM
To: Sally Zarnowitz
Cc: dan.ross@wellsfargo.com
Subject: 339-341 Bella Vista
Ms. Zarnowitz,
I have been a Los Gatos r esident for severa l decades and currently live o n Bella Vista .
I am strongly in favor of this home proposal. It is compatible with the neighborhood, will retain a majority of t re e s, a nd
will allow for safe egre ss from the driveway.
Best Regards,
Jay R . Phillips
Sen ior Managing Director
CA i\E i.iCt;:1 St ::()07 ~5380
-'-._,/
Newmark Cornish & Carey
2804 Mission College Blvd , Suite 120
Santa Clara , CA 95054
D 408.987.4164 F 408.988.6340
c 408 .836.5968
jph illips@newmarkccarey.com Profile
(1;) !:-ave a Tree·· T hi nk B efor e You P rint.
------------
1 ' • i m ll •rJ 11tend<d 0n y ' r the rer o i or t t1ty to v.t11 t 1 id Jr es ,l'd JncJ n d 01 ta1n
. d1...,•1n nc on or •ithe1 u.e cf .. Jr 1a~11 g c.f any d "01 n rel1<1m;P Jpon. It s 1n101rii.it 011 typer
J r ,e1ved 1ri~ 111 er,or plea· e c.o ll ict he ender dr J de1e1e t e m, •e11a f on any ... or pi.tPr
1
From: Philip Knopf [mailto:pwknopf@yahoo.com ]
Sent: Saturday, June 03, 201 7 4:15 PM
To: Council
Subject: 339-341 Bella Vista Ave
Mayor and Members of the Los Gatos Town Council,
Last week I heard about the ordeal the Ross's have been going thru for the
past 12 years. When they purchased the property their son was in
kindergarten, he is now a sophomore in High School.
The project has been approved by the Town Planning Staff, I feel it is now
time to approve this project.
Please support the Ross's with their appeal
Thank you
Phil Knopf
-----Original Message-----
From: judycoughlin@comcast.net [mailto:judycoughlin@comcast.net]
Sent : Sunday, June 04, 2017 8 :2 1 PM
To : Council
Subject : 341 Bella Vista Ave
Please deny thi s project . The Planning Commission spent many hours reviewing this application
and denied it. Nothing much has changed since then . The mass and scale of the home
proposed are too big for the lot. The house will loom over our downhill neighbors . While the
issues of loss of major trees and unsafe traffic conditions have been discussed and seemingly
set aside as "taken care of", I am still troubled by these iss ues. These trees provide a major
buffer for us from freeway noise and visibility of our downhill neighbors. Once the biggest ones
are removed, how will the remaining survive? Mr. Ross has made some adjustments to his
driveway to make it safer, but Bella Vista is a narrow street used by lots of walker, joggers,
bikers -and children on their way to school. I am worried about everyone's safety. Finally, Mr
Ross bought his property with the full knowledge of the issues it presented and the constraints
that our current laws place on the development of hillside property. Please apply those laws
and guidelines as they were intended, uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and
deny this project .
Thanks you for your time.
Judy Coughlin
320 Bella Vista Ave
From : lgvi sion@com cast.net [mailto: lg vis ion@comcast.net]
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2017 10:06 PM
To: Council
Cc: Town Manager
Subject: June 6 Agenda Item #15 -339 & 341 Bella Vista Ave.
June 4 , 2017
Town Council
Town of Los Gatos
110 East Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
c oun ci l@lo sgato sca .gov
manag e r@ losgatosca.gov
Timothy S . Coughl in, 0.0.
320 Bella Vista Ave.
Los Gatos, CA 95032
(408) 356-8092
LGVision@Comcast.Net
RE: 339 & 341 Bella Vista Avenue
Applicant: Dan Ross
Town Council Meeting 6/6/17
Dear Council Members:
We are writing in response to the above application and the Letter of Justification dated
May 23, 2017 . Many of the same issues we faced in 2003 , 2008, 2011 and 2016 when
this project was denied , have not changed substantially. We urge you to deny this
application.
The most significant issue for us is t he remova l of protected trees.
This current application includes plans to remove two of the biggest and healthiest trees
on the property. The arborist's report states that the two biggest trees , the Coast Live
Oaks that are directly across the street from our home, are slated for removal. They are
among the healthiest on the property. A mitigated negative declaration has been filed.
• We disagree with the report's assessment that the removal of trees would be of
minimal impact.
• When trees are removed for the construction of this development the building
with all of its vents and chimneys will be plainly visible from viewing platforms.
• The view of all the power lines, now obscured by the tree-backdrop, will be stark
and constitute a degradation of the "vista" from our street.
• The trees now shield us from the light pollution from nearby sources below. They
also shield us from the noise coming from Highway 17. Their removal will
substantially increase the freeway noise.
• The report states "no significant impact, with mitigation". What are the
mitigations for cutting down two or more ancient oak trees? Are replacement
trees to be planted?
• Where will these replacement trees be placed on the site? No amount of money
or the planting of trees in some other location will mitigate the loss of these trees.
• These trees along the west side of Bella Vista Avenue constitute a significant
green belt which birds use to migrate from south to north with relative p rotection
from human activity. Removal of trees on this site would disrupt this corridor.
Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines Section 29.10.0990 States:
"Standards of review.
"(6) Except for properties located within the hillsides, the retention of a protected
tree would result in reduction of the otherwise-permissible building envelope by more
than twenty-five (25) percent."
In other words, the removal of a protected tree because it is in the way of development
is not an option in the hillside zone. The house needs to be made smaller to save the
trees .
Any construction on this site will seriously endanger these beautiful heritage oaks.
Perhaps a small-footprint home on the north corner of the lot could be considered if any
building is to be done at all. Even then, the safety impacts and esthetics cannot be
mitigated satisfactorily.
We urge you to deny this application .
Thank you .
Sincerely,
Dr. Tim Coughlin
Attached: letter to Planning Commission April 6 , 2016
April 6, 2016
Planning C ommission
Town of Los Gatos
Timothy S. and Judith A. Coughlin
320 Bella Vista Ave.
Los Gatos, CA 95032
( 408) 356-8092
LGVision@Comcast.N et
Community Development Department
110 East Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
mmoseley@losgatosca.gov
RE : 341 Bella Vista Avenue
Architecture and Site Application S-12-103
Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-16-001
Subdivision Application M-12-008
Dear Commissioners:
We are writing in response to the above application . Many of the same issues we faced in 2011
when this project was last den ied, have not changed substantially.
Trees
This current application includes plans to remove many trees including some of the biggest and
healthiest on the property . The arborist's report states that the two biggest trees, the Coast Live
Oaks that are directly across the street from our home , are slated for removal. They are among
the healthiest on the property. A mitigated negative declaration has been filed .
• We disagree with the report's assessment that the removal of trees would be of minimal
impact.
• When trees are removed for the construction of this development the building with all of
its vents and chimneys will be plainly visible from viewing platforms.
• The view of all the power lines, now obscured by the tree -ba ck drop , will be stark and
constitute a degradation of the "vista" from our street.
• The trees now shield us from the light pollution from nearby sources below. They also
shield us from the noise co ming from Highway 17. Their removal will substantially
increase the freeway noise .
• The report states "no significant impact, with mitigation". What are the mitigations for
cutting down two or more ancient oak trees? Are replacement trees to be planted?
• Where will these replacement trees be placed on the site? No amount of money or the
planting of trees in some other location will mitigate the loss of these trees.
• These trees along the west side of Bella Vista Avenue constitute a significant green belt
which birds use to migrate from south to north with relative protection from human
activity. Removal of 10 or more trees on this site would disrupt this corridor.
Ingress and Egress/Safety
• We are very concerned about the narrowness of the street and the ability of fire
equipment to navigate it with the increased parking and the presence of a new driveway.
Bella Vista Ave . is extremely narrow where it meets Simons Way and this is because
there are houses on both sides and cars parked on the right-of-way. We do not want to
see that happen here.
• Bella Vista Avenue is a bike route. Residents paid for surfacing the street with the help
of federal dollars for the bike-route designation. The additional driveway, parking and
ingress/egress would add to the danger of riding on the street.
• The proposed driveway configuration would necessitate that the driver back out uphill
onto Bella Vista, a dangerous move, especially during high-school commute times . Th is
is a significant hazard as the driveway is steep.
• How will increased traffic be mitigated? How will the safety for bicyclists be ensured?
How will fire-engine access be assured?
The development created by this applicant on the south end of Bella Vista stands as a
monument to his vision of how this neighborhood should look. It is crowded , unsafe , and
frustrating for drivers trying to navigate the narrow, parked-up street. This is not our vision for
this neighborhood .
We urge you to deny the application.
Thank you .
Sincerely,
Tim and Judy Coughlin
The Town's Tree Protection Ordinance states:
Sec. 29.10.0950. Intent.
This division is adopted because the Town of Los Gatos is forested by many native and non-
native trees, and contains individual trees of great beauty. The health and welfare of the citizens
of the Town require that these trees be saved in order to preserve the scenic beauty of the
Town, prevent erosion of topsoil , provide protection against flood hazards and risk of landslides ,
counteract pollutants in the air, maintain climatic balance and decrease wind velocities. Trees
contribute significantly to the value of land in the Town . It is the intent of this division to regulate
the removal of trees within the Town in order to retain as many trees as possible consistent with
the purpose of this section and the reasonable use of private property. It is th e intent of this
division to preserve as many protected trees as possible throughout the Town through staff
review and the development review process . Special provisions regard ing hillsides are included
in Section 29 .10 .0987 of this division in recognition of the unique biological and environmental
differences between the hillside and non-hillside areas of the Town. This section does not
supersede the provisions of Chapter 26 of this Code.
(Ord. No. 2114, §§I, 11, 8-4-03)
Sec. 29.10.0987. Special Provisions-Hillsides
The Town of Los Gatos recognizes its hill sides as an important natural resource and sensitive
habitat which is also a key component of the Town's identity, character and charm . In order to
maintain and encourage restoration of the hillside environment to its natural state, the Town has
established the following special provisions for tree removal and replacement in the hillsides:
( 1 ) All protected trees located 30 or more feet from the primary residence that are removed shall
be replaced with native trees listed in Appendix A Recommended Native Trees for Hillside
Areas of the Town of Los Gatos Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (HDS&G).
(2) All protected trees located within 30 feet of the primary residence that are removed shall be
replaced as follows :
(a) If the removed tree is a native tree listed in Appendix A of the HDS&G, it shall only be
replaced with a native tree listed in Appendix A of the HDS&G.
(b) If the removed tree is not listed in Appendix A, it may be replaced with a tree listed in
Appendix A, or replaced with another species of tree as approved by the Director.
(c) Replacement trees listed in Appendix A may be planted anywhere on the property.
( d) Replacement trees not listed in Appendix A may only be planted within 30 feet of the primary
residence .
(3) Replacement requirements shall comply with the requirements in Table 3-1 Tree Canopy
Replacement Standard of this Code.
( 4) Property owners should be encouraged to retain dead or declining trees where they do not
pose a safety or fire hazard, in order to foster wildlife habitat and the natural renewal of the
hillside environment.
Sec. 29.10.0960. Scope of protected trees .
This division shall apply to every property owner and to every person, corporation, partnership,
sole proprietorship or other entity responsible for removing, maintaining or protecting a tree . The
trees protected by this division are:
(1) All trees which have a twelve-inch or greater diameter (thirty-seven and one-half-inch
circumference) of any trunk or in the case of multi-trunk trees, a total of eighteen inches or
greater diameter (fifty-six and one-half inch circumference) of the sum of all trunks, where such
trees are located on developed residential property.
(2) All trees which have an eight-inch or greater d iameter (twenty-five-inch circumference) of
any trunk or in the case of multi-trunk trees, a total of eight inches or greater diameter (twenty-
five-inch circumference) of the sum of all trunks, where such trees are located on developed
Hillside residential property.
(3) All trees of the following species which have an eight-inch or greater diameter (twenty-five-
inch circumference) located on developed residential property:
a . Blue Oak (Quercus douglasii)
b . Black Oak (Quercus kellogii)
c. Californ ia Buckeye (Aesculus californica)
d. Pacific Madrone {Arbutus menziesii)
(4) All trees which have a four-inch or greater diameter (twelve and one half-inch circumference)
of any trunk, when removal relates to any review for which zoning approval or subdivision
approval is required.
Page 5
(5) Any tree that existed at the time of a zoning approval or subdivision approval and was a
specific subject of such approval or otherwise covered by subsection (6) of this section (e.g.,
landscape or site plans).
(6) Any tree that was required by the Town to be planted or retained by the terms and conditions
of a development application, building permit or subdivision approval in all zoning districts, tree
removal permit or code enforcement action .
(7) All trees, which have a four-inch or greater diameter (twelve and one half-inch
circumference) of any trunk and are located on property other than developed residential
property.
(8) All publicly owned trees growing on Town lands, public places or in a public right-of-way
easement, which have a four-inch or greater diameter (twelve and one half-inch circumference)
of any trunk.
(9) A protected tree shall also include a stand of trees, the nature of which makes each
dependent upon the other for the survival of the stand.
(10) The following trees shall also be considered protected trees and shall be subject to the
pruning permit requirements set forth in Section 29.10.0982 and the public noticing procedures
set forth in Section 20.10.0994:
a. Heritage trees
b . Large protected trees
(Ord. No. 2114, §§I, II, 8-4-03)
From: Erika Varga McEnroe [mailto:Erika.Varga.McEnroe@synopsys.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2017 11:30 PM
To : Sally Zarnowitz ; Rob Rennie; BSpector ; Mari ca Sayoc; Marcia Jensen; Steven Leonardis
Cc: mark@intervision .com
Subject: 339-341 Bella Vista
Dear Los Gatos Town Council Members,
Ask anyone who really knows the Ross family and they will tell you that the Rosses are very
special people and one of the most wonderful families in the Los Gatos community. They are model
citizens of Los Gatos. They are also a very modest family and they simply want to build one modest
residential house on a legal buildable lot. This should not be so hard to do . The Rosses are not some
huge, uncaring, non-local co r poration without feelings. And this property is not the North 40 or a multi-
unit complex. It is unconscionable that it has taken more than eight years for them to get an
approval. The plan has been deemed compliant, and recommended for approval, by the Town Planning
Department . We believe that the Town Council should now approve the Ross's plan .
Please put yourself in their shoes. The amount of stress that this protracted process has caused
the Ross family is palpable . The financial stress alone is jaw-dropping -they have spent hundreds of
thousands of dollars paying architects, engineers, and arborists, doing and redoing plans over and over
just to get an approval to start build ing. And the strain on their personal life, their family, and their
health is enormous. It is not fair or reasonable to put any family through this, let alone one of our own
Los Gatos devoted families. This feels very personal, and the process is not allowed to be personal.
The Rosses are not asking for anything unreasonable here.
• A 2,200 square foot home is not unreasonable -it is probably less than the averaged-s iz ed
home in Los Gato s and it is compatible with the neighborhood.
• A 1,100 square foot footprint on a 10,000 square foot lot is not unreasonable -it is only 10% of
the property. The square footage of the entire home is only 20% of the property, unlike some of
the homes owned by the very people opposing this project which have homes that are 120% of
the property.
• Building 30 feet away from their closest neighbor is not unreasonable -the neighbors ne xt to
the Ross 's current home on Villa just added a second story six feet off the Ross's property line.
• The height of the home is not unreasonable -the proposed house is 22 feet high, at its highest
point, while some homes in the neighborhood are 35 foot high.
• Building a house on a slope is not unreasonable -there are houses all over town, and many
houses on the very same street, that are built on such a slope.
What is unreasonable is for this town to say that a lot is buildable, but then repeatedly deny
reasonable requests to build on it for 8+ years. What is unrea sonable is for many of the neighbors to
expect that this buildable lot remain empty. This piece of property is not a park. There simply is no
question that this is a buildable lot. Everyone in Los Gatos should expect that an empty lot will be
developed, or that their neighbor with a small house will want to expand their house -it is happening
everywhere . It is just a matter of time . And , yes, it stinks -no one actually likes development or
expansion next to them, but it is just a fact of life and consequence of living in Silicon Valley. The
neighbors have been fortunate that the property hasn 't been developed to date. But it is time for the
neighbors and the Town Council to recognize that these neighbors do not have the right to stop the
development of this property and that this fellow Los Gatos family does have the right to build a
rea son able home on this buildable lot.
The Rosses have worked hard and spent a lot of money to meet the many requests over the
years . The plans before the Town Council for the development of 341 Bella Vista meet all of the legal
requirements. To deny this application, yet again, after all of the compromises that the Rosses have
made, is to continue to favor the neighbors with a NIMBY attitude over the owners of the property who
have right to build. This is simply not fair. We ask that you please approve this plan.
Thank you,
Erika and Mark McEnroe