Attachment 4 - May 18, 2017 Town Council Policy Committee Staff Report (with Attachments 1-2)DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
POLICY COMMITTEE REPORT
MAY 12,2017
POLICY COMMITTEE
LAUREL PREVETTI, TOWN MANAGER
MEETING DATE : 05/18/2017
ITEM NO: 2
REVIEW AND DISCUSS SECTION B. OF CHAPTER JI. (CONSTRAINTS
ANALYSIS AND SITE SELECTION) OF THE HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review and discuss Section B. of Chapter II. (Constraints Analysis and Site Selection} of the
Hiiiside Development Standards and Guidelines (HDS&G) and provide direction to staff for next
steps.
BACKGROUND:
On April 20, 2017 the Policy Committee discussed the proposed modifications to Section B. of
Chapter II. of the HDS&G. The Committee requested that the discussion be continued w ith
direction for the following additional analysis from staff:
1 . How does staff define an elevation?
2. Are there legal issues with requiring a Deed Restriction for trees used in a vlslblllty analysis?
In addition, the Committee requested that members of the public Incorporate their comments
into a redlined version of the proposed visibility methodology. Attachment 1 and Attachment 2
contain redlined versions of the visibility methodology from the public regarding this matter.
PREPARED BY: JOEL PAULSON
Community Development Director
Reviewed by: Town Manager and Town Attorney
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 • 408-354-6832
www .losgatosca .gov ATTACHMENT 4
PAGE2 OF 2
SUBJECT: REVIEW AND DISCUSS SECTION B. OF CHAPTER II. (CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
AND SITE SELECTION) OF THE HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND
GUIDELINES
DATE: MAY 12, 2017
DISCUSSION:
In response to the Committee's directi on, st.aff has provided the following responses:
1. An elevation is a horizontal orthographic projection of a building on to a vertical plane. An
elevation includes the wall plane and roof.
2. Staff met with the Town Attorney and clarified that there are no legal issues associated with
requiring a Deed Restriction for trees used in a visibility analysis. Presently, Deed
Restrictions are required for new homes in the Hillsides, which state that all exterior
materials shall be In conformance with the light reflectivity values (LRV) of the HDS&G .
Staff i s requesting input from the Committee on the following topics related to the direction
provided by the Town Council on February 20, 2016 :
• Should trees with a sparse canopy be allowed a percentage of screening to be included i n
the visi bility analysis?
• Should language be added that a measurable distance in any one direction of a viewing
platform also be analyzed as part of a larger view corridor?
Staff is also requesting input on the following topics suggested by members of the public:
• Should only native trees be allowed to be included in the visibility analysis?
• Should only trees on-site be allowed to be included in the visibility analysi s?
Staff looks forward to the discussion and direction of the Committee for next steps.
COORDINATION:
The preparation of this report was coordinated with the Town Manager's Office and the Town
Attorney.
ATIACHMENTS:
1. Proposed View Methodology and Analysis submitted by members of the public, received
May 11, 2017 (four pages)
2. Proposed View Methodology and Analysis submitted by members of the public, rece i ved
May 12, 2017 (six pages)
C:\Users\l.PreYetti\AppOlta\Local\Mlcrosoft\Windows\ Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\52KVSJOB\Vlsiblllty_S-18-17 _Staff
ReportlRP.docx 5/12/2017 4:58 PM
DRAFI' VISIBILITY ANALYSIS
UJJ./17
B. tfDlgde Vlslblllty Analysis
The following steps shall be taken : iA ee~pletiA& a •t:isilililit\' aAall15ls:
METHODOLOGY
~IR5'81l 1~t o ry poles shall be in st alled pe r adopted !2wn_pollcy and the Tree
Protection Ordinance~
Storv pole inst11lat1on mall occur prior to sictcnninati011 of the lRDAj
Dead branch~ greater than 4" in W!llDSltGI. !! identified by the Tow_ri:if.o!'suJtjng
Arbori!.t. ~hall be rcmoyed from polenti.111 Qn-sitc screening !Tees before photographs
trcbkcQ.
!_Afte r t he Installat ion of story poles, phot<>1raphs of t he proj ect .!im.shall be taken
from BR'/ ef tl:le app li&il lJle all aepropriate. designated viewing platforms. Other
location(s). includi ng vantage points on the valley floor and alon1 hills ide collector
streets las identified in the General flmj. as ~ee~ app!opriate by the
Community Development Dlrecto r1 decldlna bpdy. or apo!lcant 1 ~~be chosen1
The locations of the designated viewing platforms are shown on the foldout-map, titled
HiHside Area an d Viewing Platfor m Map. eA !be A!!l &He in ttie Hos&G. and are as
fol lowsi;
1. Blossom HUI Road/Los Gatos Boutevardi
2. Los Gatos · Almaden Road/Selinda Way (across from Leigh High School h
3. Hwy 17 overcrosslng/Los Gatos -5arat<11• Road (H ighway 9)&
4. Main Street/Bayview Avenue4
5. And ot her location(s) as deemed appropriate by the community Development
Di r ector. decidin& body. or applicant. including but not limited to: additional
v iewi ng pl atforms on the valley floor and vantage point s in the Los Gatos
h•ll~ides.
After storv poles arc installed and photographs ta)cen . if ~taf! c;ondudes lhat the
oriman· !itruc<ure will be l~s than 10% visible from all considqpd viewing platforms
and vantage poims llS dis.:ussed above. no further visibility analysis is bmW"4
coinr-.t (Oftlcitl.1: We.._. .. 1loih Sec
2910 IOOS(b)(4)re lta!VpaieA1pe11nchandio -...11111 ..... •11t•,......_P1pllct
Ware'lhe«lll)I ................. .w.a ,,_
Or,•lellt. •lilli.-.. ~~'°-no neno..,.·1~tsec2910.1005l•>
(3)) fim<:eS ID pllllf bcflft ltCly rolcS. CJaly dllno&
danolillcn_ plllf. Cle. 1111-nno .-. polel
mid nlll!UIJ IDl'r m....,...~-. llicJ.
nuld lint be protlCted," lll9Ch .. po111~1e, .. 1111
fonca ..,lllil 111eM ·i-n1111 qindb'l llOIY
Jlllle..........ins""*'r,14.._,.. ...---
-lll lbe H!pludl
co...t[Ol'lcll2,li .._ ~ .... 111>' ...
ullelalltcl CIGll ......... 4etlmul111lhl.
UU>A(-HDS&G,PIF 12) Or<Gll!dlll6
llop11U111 betequa .. to do a~"""
bcrotc tbl. I.RDA p.......-....tl
CiDllnellt (OlllmJJ: A ~penmt"
tap:ttdbYlllcTPO(Sac2916.0!lll)IO,_ea .............. "' ........... ,.... -ClomlMllt[OftlCIMJt "-•-bel-IMI
llip, deH lnMIMl lliciuitt bl OCllllllecl u:.irm41na
-• Plus,llllC!idaotllldidl-lii•.ieo
pn of the HDSltO delballllc 'I*& 'l"'ddlllell °"
p-.el$
c:oru.lt [Olllcie5J1 ..... col1edocs_
tilled DD ...ac TRA-4 ...... Gllllllp FlJ TRA-1
OMii~ [Ofllclll)~ We-~ Iba! ....
...... llDUG tltftD11i•~cotid be
•Inf) 1111~ lrl'lll di9 HDSaO,:Mldllplad
1llt1lt. .... all-dllt .......... 11au .. 11'8 limallll
to111r-1nhaPf ri......_-..l*ll111e-
.... dcwfopc< ltl e.plaa -~ ll&r *Ud bi:
1M4ted ""e.czpHXI to l'a.I II IOtd •• hel&ftl (LI
Ml""lan¥1ia,llOl..WC6-llll)''~
,....... ohllllate poa11<, ao lnocS ll!lpaClod, .11~.1
SMdl • Jfnk:to' '•01Jld llbodlhD 1bcclcai.blli11 of
'bllaldltll a 750·"1~ tl!oil ....... Iha< IS IOO't .isdole
1lom lhe ••lley 0-0\11'• 6,DIKMq-'°'11 house
dMI, while ""'> ~ "*dlle 5-1111. ~alley floor .. ..._..._..__......,,Ille
C;Oilt-U1fls .......... llal&
eo...t [Olllcl7) ...,..,.,..-
MIJeneowageappltcan!Jtf>,....Ul'r~ -m ror.,~\._.(ICllllb.-""""
Cllllld -.nlmc the:~ lllllCU11fleu.,.,,._.,'
A110. lhc hlllllnc m ~· pllCllDWOllld bcllal 1l
11111 mn tS poMbo.aed bci-t lllc]llicoostapher. A '°"' pbaco "ol"oo t11e 10 ..,_ Do-v.....i ti>
_..~.,co-·,~·
5 /18 /17 P o licy C01mn i ttee Rp t -ATTACHMENT I
PAGE20F4
DATE: APRIL 21 , 2017
After insti !latioo of story poles the follow ing photomphs sball be taken wbjcb will
be Used to detenninc vis ibi!itv :
__ _,I .... .._Ph.otograph§.. with an appropriate resolution that will represent the visibility of
the proposed residence f!eAtwith the naked )~ __
____ _.2.., . ....._.f-hot0f5raphi. with an appropriate resolution that will represent an up-dose _
-----!perspective and help Identify any visible story poles, netting, treeS, and
----~hrubber\\._ ____ .. __ _
Each photograph shall jdentjzy screening trees usi ng the Town's Consultjna
Arborist 's tree numbers. L.ar ae. native shrubs that provjde screening shall also be
identified.
Photographs for determinjng visjbjlity mav be taken at any time of the vear.
ANALYSIS
• Pmiare a vhoto·simulation that phvsicallv removes those trc:es and lam :shrubs that
shall not count as W.ma acco rdin g tg}he criterig ~siw .
• E1dstb1e veaatatieA pirepesed te lie reflll&'Jed eA~rel'f' er pal'liall'( s"all A&t Ale
IA&h111lei iA t"e tAslllllit·; aAal•11is.
Io count as a syUCnine tree. criteria 1-6 below ~hall a/I be sat isfied;
( t l Be !o..-ated on-:,jtc, and
{2) Ttee5 off-site. but in the immediate. bil !side wcjnity. if meeting all criteria
3-<i below. can be counted .as scn:cmng .at rhc d1sqeiion ofthe Communitv
Deve lonment bim;tsxl ansj g~1djng body.
(3) Have a preservation su1tah1lih· rating ofHfair. fllir /good. good. or
excellent•. b specified in the Town·~ Coru;ultmg Arborist's report. Some
deciduous oaks m:t\< reguire oomph;te !ate·springtearly summer leaf out for
accurate Tuwo 's Consulting Amonst p1 PPsnnl and
(4) Be native to the immed iate vicinity and plant bxnmunir4 or be J qatiX"
tree 5pecies planted more than S v;ars m Jnd
CS> Br re;..-omrnendcd for retention in the Town'11 Consultjng Arborist's tree
rmon.and
(6) faperiencs "no•· or "low .. impact. trom C911struction, as predicted in the
Town's Consulting IAdzc1ili'~ tees rspon.
!'..\U:0!!\<£<1M:o•\.1\p£1)1ts\l ou!\Mr.to>ott\W1 ,r,....,;\T•mp<>r;uy ~.tt ff"I F1'c1 \Co·~ert Ou\:ook~S\Y\5 ·11 ·1 7. P•.U li!!!...tf..!l.\( 2 •
JJ-.;fy+H (2)ooev.cktt 1~~\?s"'="'Ol!hN"'•• f 4etti•"•ler ·f1&-1r ..-H1le9'$1 •;ar1..: ~ 17 pnfr"--1lll~
~;.,..,,1~1tlllwo l&-•~·~~· ~~~SfMSfUliOHi P P'!~/41~01' I ~
a.-.1: IClfllmlJI Wo iiiU b l to apprccta!O
llle~of.....,'*'4~""''°"•£-11
di-, llOl)'pola•lll .... ,..,""' ......
abill llndlft. lit.-of !IS JU.r .._.,.i DUI& --~ ..
,..,..,,. •ioo'llk.
. ~ l0Mcd)1 Du '"""'-ant I<> sup.alulo
di•( die l&IO shmll4 1Ni bdiilld Ille ~"*'l;nll!h::r"' -nm... ci.iey lllld ftll!OIW.,.·1
ClDNiellt [OlllcaU]1 Tllo lltdtill, ,,......._,
wcll-bdftli al .-.ilon or olf .. '\e -i11llll • l!to
dill:nllion oltM lpplialn!. ~'Uli ieltu. ""' of&r
thfll tollpOl'A"" filr lhooo 1112tin• ._kt tho
~ ...,m .. ~'G pco,-.1) If
--~--a-..t [Olllcd2) [);:borah Eli.
•-I i'RJ """'n M """""""* illCldlh fm' M l
1mr .,,,. .~ No --·"' c®n1 ~ t!cild -•pmidil>&~
~ (Dl'lklBUJI The Tn:: fmtutoOll
~~·lbc -.aof-·~
llftl in.111r hlliHIP 'Ju 29 10 -09?0 WM ,,.,..._ .......................... 10-~
....-k-c1r.au -ns•1nlef:OiltilflUlllv
llyina to-asi: 1toar ™-'111 m tb.l bilhNIS'
ClDlnmmt [OlllclJ.4): "~ lhomld....,
-.blind ofter 5 yl>ll1and 1he Tl'O """"-•'I·
:iwrlftaillldllllle ~ forne w-tlut 1n
~-ednn ~11 .... 1rild10 •
!Wm:llly ..,..,;,ie111,.'ith •• .-w ...,i.c.hl• Town
code!.
c....it I~ ·n.c IIDl!a.c.t~ m
"'JOlllattrcCI " iMpludll)'-...
bellUIC\1 Ille -M "Mmovad• ~
.,.....,..,. trm We ,,..,,.,, boo-9" lhol al1-. •
.,_,,,..,. -tlflnlpo<I w1dloPI 11limonatma the''"
...... L'CMlderl:liOll
l'clrMlllllld: Right: 0.25"
PAGE3 OF4
DATE: APRIL 21, 2017
!7) Sg,«uin& Jc;tjdyoui. tn;e". if jn "fair"' nt hctte' condition. accordin& to th£
Town's Cqn,uJtmg Arbgrjst. shall be crsdit¢JIU(Q\1ding 60% oftheit
calculated screenine lva.
,_ A flve*year Maintenance Agreement, with t he Town, shall be required for trees that
were used to provide screening in the visibility analysis. aRll Flil'IWIFes ihelr li'FlilHF\'iltieA.
Th is agreement shall require t heir preservation and replacement. in the same origina l
location, should the tr!!0 d ie or be Qmmrsci
Vegetation shall not be count~ as screening i( 1m1· ufthe following aiteria exi~:
(I) Trees or large shrubs that are to be ranoved..gr
_( 21 Trees or large lihmbs requiring more than 25% ~ntr11nl, or
_ _(3) Tr~es sulije\.1 to potential "low !modmte. moderate, or ~Ve.TC''
con~truction impacb accordin~ 10 the }·:·;.:1.£..{ onsuhing. Arborist's tree report.
or trees given a .. aeb11tablc a\.1ion·· or Kdispusitilln un.:lca1 .. assess111c:n1 ::· thc:
Town's Consulling Arborist 's tree report. or
(4) Trees that Qrt' dead or have a •poor or poor/fair" preservation suitability
rating, accordin g to he Town ·s ('· •n.,ul mg A -bt. s ·cc: rcpon ~
_($) trees that are injured or harmed during any pre-constnu:ti0f1 (im:luding
~u1 vc:yiug and ~1ory pole instillation) acd\•it!~. even if sui:h injury is an
incidental Pccum:occj
• When determined necessary by the Community Developmen t Director, th ree
dlmensional lllustratlori> or photo s1mulat!o o s of the $1;1"Uctum matMhall be requir ed.
•
• OTHER CONS!OEAATIONS
!_A visible home Is defined as a single-family residence where 24.5" or more of an
elevation can be seen from any of the applicable viewing platforms or va ntage
lm.!.D.U.· er etlleF le£atie11(1)1 as tleeMetl 11pprepriate II·; tile CieRlfRYA~'
ge¥el81i'IHRt i:»irear fRa\' 9e ellaseR iR 11lld~ieR te tlte e1dsti11g vie\ll'iRg lillatf11FfRS.
Percentages shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. Elevation includes both
the facade and the root lire\
• The Community Development Director or decidlna body shall determine If the use of
a third-party consultant is required to peer review 1n applicant's visibility 1nalysls.
• A Deed Restriction shall be required that identifies the trees that were used to
provide screening in the vlslbilrtv analysis and requir95 their replacement, in the
same ~ocat!or4 if they die or are removed .
S:\UW•l cplfl,HY t ill H ~..,.... ~\!f,..,oorarr .nwnst ""•\Cor:!nl-!Mj,_ U1f>FQl;5 S·ll-17. •II ~ 3•
A'l t>1.112)copr_d~-~~. ~-~""M 11 •'.,r ,,. .. .,.,_.,,,11-•1111 '(I J~~ff~-.!-c-'f>
~--·~ ..... Iola ; ... l ~ ., • ..,., ..... "'' '·i,A ;., ... _. 2i nm·-~ll"'~Pb 4?rfft."'9f'i;>.eU ~M4'M
------comment [orn..u)I SMICC m trrcs...-1111
lea\ ft ibr aboil. aJ9.. ofa. -Tiie PC, on
12.'2/2015, tappOllf6 ....... .......,..,_I per-. ........ ni...-.lh.A&S .......
-dmd .A1..,ni111...,.__.., _.dl&-
llolld 6W. medil I.& -..atll> .,..,. m)lll•
r Com-.&: [Oftlce11)• "-'Jae 29 ID JU!U(l)
I ~lpcn>llit0-·-11w1~.0'4 lnle,
.. llbbt I 1"Y"' pcnod, "'"*"'" sueh ID IDNI CU
loll 1 ..... Aho, Debcnl> ill"' ~1....i1~ he>
1
-. R-pllll. 6-1P'11N1111tlllMlldOlll,N11111111
~1~ ,,...1?0dth11MR
..-&•-.-ll"ef•-n.,lhelWSAO
....iially Ul)•llla• _._.llcad, Jk'llllld ebooll4
1'e vcludcd in 1111e >11lbllll'i _.,.111 uom tQ
""JClllO\'&d «ldll*led..., -"IM#
CDm11-.t comc.19)• "----10
Dito-Ii Ellis,M:hq ... _ if_ CMrnult
Ill fllogl>s grvwth kJUiaa well·-Milli~ 1 .....
,an Tbla~ .... -.o.e .. 1,
pi.c-t oCtnc imite.,._ '-
Comment[OlllCllUJ: AspP\ec29.lO 1025 ,,,.
felrln;dtad: Right: 0.25"
PAGE40F4
DATE : APRIL 21, 2017
• lrees witl:t 1 peer er falr/peer_FatiR1:5tlall Aat lie IA&lwdea IA ttle 'l'isilitilW,· aAal\'Sis.
• A five year MalAteAaA&e ~FeaMeAt sl:tall lite r111twlreEI Jar trees tl:tat were wsed ta
pr:e ... iEle s&reeAiAg iA the 'tisilJility aAal.,.sis ref!wire tl:telr l'R!Sef'klatiaA
lhe la&alleAs af tt:.e 'tiawiA8 platfar111& are shalM'I BA the "'IP aR tt:.e Ae.t 1'illle1 aAd are
asfalla.,..5;
lo llla&&a11t Mill Raa~'l.es Gata& laYl~HI
~. I.es &ates Al111adeA Raad}SellAda Wa1 (aerass fra11t loel11h Miah Sd1ael)
a. HW'/ 17 9\lllfEFeSSIAg/les Giates SaFatesa Read {Mi11llway 9)
4, MaiA S&Fe8'/lw,,·i8"' "-eAwe
9, Qtl:ter la&atiaAlsl as dea"'aa appFepriate it'/ tl:ta Ga"'11twAiW ge\!alapFMaAt g1reaar
Q\lat~<;C.Y/'Z~Ui\ppDeU \\oce l \M icr p.IOft\Wind91!!•\ Toropgrory Int• rMl 'lle•\<;.onte ~\&JJU20~\l 16f Cl!SSW\5 · l l-l 7. 0 1111 Ylr•bl!!!Y 4 •
Ar.e Nsi112 1 topy .d 2cy/Aff¥~iss11R a ,.'0!•~'8p 0 'i1•• th\ti•••••• fpl!tFW!!:ff.CSdf eljor§ I lZ Qr'9 '1jsilWM1 ""''""
~~ ......... g .. ,,,,,,g ... 11 "i•ielli11 '••lv&I•-• ., 1' (lJ .... ™ll.l;dS PMi IU/il917 am PU §,11};10J1-6<~
~I IU!tt: 0.25"
Jocelyn Pup•
To: David Wilson
Subject: RE: Draft Visibility Analysis
From: David Wilson Cmailto :dwjlson@HMHca.com]
Sant: Fri~, May 12, 2Q17 11:01 AM
To: J()Celyn Puga
Cc: Azhar Khan; Joel Paulson; sahadi@sahadl.net
SUbjed: RE : "Draft Vlsiblllty AnalySis
Attached are my comments on Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines section 11.B. View Analysis and the
visibility methodology. My comments consist of (1) a marked version ~f the updated text provided by email from the
Town on April 25, 2017, (2) a revised version of the Viewing Platform Map, (3) ·an enalysls for ii possible alternate
definition oh Vislbl~ Structure, and (4) general process and methodology comments for discussion at the next Town
Council PoltcyCOmrnlttee Meetl"8 described below.
i think the'°' Wc>utd be some benefit in mapping out the process. tt seems to be currently ml~lng elements that If
added, would prQVlde clarity.
STEP 1. Determine is the project Is proposing a v1st~le home or homes.
That step .ls n~ed for proposed subdivision without known architecture and for the proposed construction of a single
home on an existing lot. There should be a process for that and it she>uld be simple, and not subject to the size of the
home(s) proposed . ··
Possible alternate method for determining is a proposed .structure is visible
There has been much discussion and debate In the past about wteat "vlsible"' rneans and how It should be -defined. The
current deflnltton of 25% has a :(Jw prot>lems; It requires know•edge of the spe¢tfic size· of the home to determine a
pe.rcentage and an applicant could just Increase the size of the home in an area block from view to reciuce the visible
percentage .
The alternate t·am proposing for consideration takes a different approach:
A visible structure is defined as a structµre that can be seen In more than (a percentage to be determined) of a View
Window with a dlmensl9n of 200 wi~ by 3$' tal.1 PP$ltie)n'd to •ritlud.e all elements of the proposed structure from the
site line of each View p1atform. If 'lislble elements of a proposed structure exceed a certain percentage of the view
window, then the structure would be constdered visible.
This analvsis can be performed without story poles, using computer modeling from a program like google
earth. Supplemental information may be needed to refine the results, if it is close to the threshold definition of
"visibl.e".
If the results show visible percentages below the threshold, no further analysis is necessary. If above, then the project
will need to conform to the appropriate restrictions (limits height, no color averaging?)
ST£P 2. Detailed Visibility Analysis
Follow the steps outlined (separate document)
5/18/17 Poli c y Commit t ee Rpt -.ATrACHl\fENT I
1
B. Vlslhllity Analysis
DRAFf VISIBILITY ANALYSIS
4/25/17
rtt Mti COM MENTS (P. WUSJo p 5 /U /17)
The following steps shall be taken in completing a vlslbiUty analysis:
For a pplic atio ns without ~L?ecific archite ctural design (proposed rez oning or subdivisio ns}
• In Lieu o f sto ry p o l es . computer mode lil!JI may be used that i nco rporat es propo sed
buildina "blockt sr . appropria t ely plac.ed on t he ;;ite and sca led to represent
ap oroxlma t~ si ze and height of bu Uding(s}, al qng w ith exist ing 3-dimen si onal terrain and
vegetation modelin g 'as ava ila ble in Google Earth}.
• Prepare sim ulated site line studies from viewing platforms a s descri bed he!Q.w ~nd
provide act ual photos to validate t he co mputer modeling of exi st ing terrain and
ve,getation . ·
For &II ~&5 app lications
• Install story poles per adopted policy and the Tree Protection Ordinance.
• After the installation of story poles, photographs of the project shall be taken from
allMy of the applicable viewing platforms. Other location(s) as deemed appropriate
by the Community Development Director may be chosen In addition to the
es tab!lsheqo1:iot.t.~a viewing platforms.
• One A; photograph shall be taken with an appropriate resolution that will represent
the vislbllity of the proposed J:l i Oiect r~:!ee~~ as seen with .fr.e:'r:·the naked eye _m:.
zoom).
• Onr~ ,!>,-photograph sbi;ll b~ !aken with an appropriate resolution that will represent
an up-close perspective .Lti~m or t"i'!filfil.}uit~hle to ;::t<>,d-1~::~~ Identify 1my visible
story poles, netting, trees, and_incl ividw·:I trlli}or shrubbery.
• Eac h phot ograph sho ll IJe printed t o fit on n minimum QSlP<?r siz <i Qf U.5'' 1: U '' and p e
sub. !~ in <11 commo nly re adable cligltiil file format.
• _Exist ing vegetation proposed to be ~~~~-entirely .r:emove.2..<*"~~~lf'shall not
be included in the visibility analysis. 8MJ:.qnrj <Jt~Jf.~e11t i flgi_tlpo of e~c:h t ree to h~
r~n d photo edltin"' will b e rfill1!!rC!d.
• El:i stinr: vef]etr:ticm tc b nmed or cut 1&.cl: sll<i!I b e appropriatetv j~ntifleQ. AtJX
no ri ion of e :istinflJ'.ege ot!on that v:ill be removed throu:.l1ghoto r;9JS.!afJ.
!echnf oiyes and shall OJlJ be includ ~-d in thc_yisibilit\1 ~jylii,
• lf determined necessary by the C.Ommunity Development Director, three
dimensional illustrations or photo simulatlons of the structure may be required.
• A visible home is defined as a single-famlly residence where ~i~% or more of the
££<JJCct cd builc;in cl . .ffili\!ll.<re v!s il:ilr; as s~n ~·~-c!-ove:!~:1 ~:-:-!,e-~cc:!-from any of
{--~-,--. fannlltlled: lndellt: First li1e: rr
r::.~·~----· ------~~--···.
l ~-~! .. ~!Ea.!~.
J
!
PAGE ZOF2
DATE : APRIL 21 , 2017
-~~!:c"~:~:J.¥·h&o?'£~~;:::-:~~~
~:ffs.W,-;g-¥!~:";;-.""~?J.r~?{~:~. Percentages shall be rounded to the nearest whole
number.
• A 9 eed Res.triaieA 59al!-b..~ t Rat leeAti~es tl'lc tFees tl:iat we~ea ta
pro¥i ae SCI eeAiAg IA the uisfbHj ~ a A a l;d~ <:nf.i r~~iFeS t Re ir repl i1£e l'ffelt if t Rey die
eHiF&-fC~
• ~tr .es <i nd w .g t <lt ion mav be-r:n 11si ai'ered as s(;reen inir. 1-m l<i:~s t here ur<?
imowo i;q nd itfons t fmt r.~t ab llsh r emg.;f)I , On·sitg t:Jrees WtlJ uv ~ 1too1 id nt lfled
S2.b ~ 9 p2or r.113!£1'! Gf ;:uryiy ol i.:Ml ; a pl'-l"'~~:."•--f°*1:1f(~'.i:'ir;r from u ho~lt b
ccnc!ilJ.gn or from qrp !l'O!;(((J adjacent i.11p 1ov~m e nts) shall not be included in the
visibility analysis.
• The Community Development Director shall determine if the use of a third party
consultant Is required to peer review an applicant's visibility analysis.
~-M~ .. ··:-~~.-.... e~.._~ ,,..~~··~H.~
_,.,.I ~ ~~~ ~~·i;t~yc.!•._·~.' .. ··~:.,. '""'°''::~:'°""~
The locations of the viewing platforms are shown on the map on the next page, and are
as follows:
1. Blossom Hill Road/Los Gatos Boulevard
2. Los Gatos -Almaden Road/Sel inda Way (across from Leigh High School}
3. Hwy 17 overcrosslngflos Gatos -Saratog1 Ro1d I Highway 9)
4. Main Street/Bayview Avenue
s. Other locatlon(s) as deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director
Viewing platfonn loca tions arc int~'ltd~ lo pro\ ic.k a gl'l1cr.il \ icinity for t he visibility m ah ~is
ind photo loc:1tion s. Where there '!.~Obstruct iQns {hui'dings. s igns. or foreground vegetatio n)
!h!!t b lock a clc nr nnd unobstnict£d y icw of the site, lh c origination pl.int sh all be a djoMcd so that
a cl ear and unobstructed is ohtaincd try mov in_g away ftom t he viewing platfo rm loc;gl ion Al!:l!UUl
nu...bli ~ road up to .500' in any direction .
hlQ.t~"I!.!~ 'l.~; ~'I "' 4·2S·17,dau.>l'.DriUIJOQA'Ai\l'ol"I i:. .... 11ur\lf•ll''Yilollit) • .. 1,100 • ._.l-
~ 5/1,/2S'l712;~? l'M'U (i)Ol? 1 111 "tt~lll~U...
TOWN OF Los GATOS
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
2. Consultation with Neighbors.
Before siting and designing the house and landscaping, the property owner, architect or builder
should meet with neighbors to discuss any special concerns they might have. Resolution of
Issues ear1y in the design process can save time and a>st as well as reducing the processi ng
time for applications. If a conflict occurs between a property owner's desire to develop their
property and legitimate Issues raised by a neighbor, a design solution will be sought that
attempts to balance all issues or cona!ms that are raised by both parties .
3. Pre-application meeting/staff consultation/site visit.
Before designing a project, the property owner/archlt.ect/builder is strongly encouraged to meet
with Town staff to consider a building location that best preserves the natura l terrain and
landscape cl the lot and positively addresses the objectives of the Hillside Development
Standards and Guidelines. On heavily wooded lots, or on lots where trees may be impacted by
proposed development, an arborist's report shall be prepared wh ich evaluates potential tree
impacts . The report shall be prepared at the applicant's expense.
B. View Analysis.
1. Viewing platforms.
with consideration for the proposed removal or
significant pruning of trees and/or large shrubs
necessary to accommodate the development project.)
Each development project with the potential for ng visible (see glossary for definition) from
any e..a!)Ushed ·Viewing platform shall be subject a view analysis. (MPotential" is defined as
capable of being seen from a viewing platform ~~ignificentiy-
_pruned~r:n~.smu;tioo.-} The view analysis shall be conducted in oompliance with
established Town procedures -usiRg-Stei:y-iooles-that identify the building envelope. l\fter:-
-tnst'mlllng-the-sW.7-psler,,,...r.a-.a ?l3llmRt ahall-ti:k~ategr-a;*is4 the-pr:ejea-ir:sm-apt;>rop::iate-
....estab.!Js b.ed Jewing-platfor..m ~ tnat-Cleaw1-5how he~-poles-and/er:-.qei .. ise-aRd-sub,iea-
-property: Visual aids such as photo simulations or three dimensional Illustrations and/or a scale
model may be required when it is deemed necessary to fully understand the impacts of a
proposed project.
The locatlons of the viewing platfonns are shown on the map on the next page, and are as
follows:
1. Blossom Hill Road/Los Gatos Boulevard
2. Los Gatos -Almaden Road/Selinda Way (aaoss from Leigh High School)
3. Hwy 17 overaossing/Los Gatos -Saratoga Road (Highway 9)
4. Main Street/Bayview Avenue
5. Other loc:ation(s) as deemed appropriate by the deciding body
Page 13
• I
I
I
Q ..
a
•
I ..
I
I
I
VIBWING PLATFORM
LOCATIONS
·~IDE
.. 14
VISIBLE STRUCTURE ANALYSIS
1 Determine maximum area of a structure that is visible while maintaining a
non~visible home status under current criteria:
Use Highlands of Los Gatos homes as a sample:
MAXIMUM BUILDINCi AREA Maximum Area
LOT BUILDING (25' tall liide Visible (24.4%) LENGTU projection)
1 134 3,350 817
2 160 4,000 976
3 140 3,500 854
4 135 3,375 824
5 161 4,025 982
6 154 3,850 939
11 155 3,875 946
12 185 4,625 1,129
14 130 3,250 793
15 124 3,100 756
16 133 3,325 811
17 128 3,200 781
18 135 3,375 824
19 121 3,025 738
AVERAGE 143 3,563 869
2 Consider alternate definition of "Visible Structure" using a percentage of a
fi1<ed dimensioned view window.
PROPOSED VIEW WINDOW 200' x 35'
200
7,000
869
12.4%
Square Feet in View Window
Visible Square Feet (based on. ,!iighlands)
Maximum Visible Structure in ·view Window
Consider Visible Structure percenta1e of 10 to 12% visible w1thin View Window