Attachment 5 - June 26, 2017 Town Council Policy Committee Staff Report (with Attachments 1-2)DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
POLICY COMMITTEE REPORT
JUNE 22, 2017
POLICY COMMITTEE
LAUREL PREVETTI, TOWN MANAGER
MEETING DATE: 06/26/2017
ITEM NO: 4
REVIEW AND DISCUSS SECTION B. OF CHAPTER II. (CONSTRAINTS
ANALYSIS AND SITE SELECTION) OF THE HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES.
RECOMMENDATION'.
Review and d lS C\iSS Section a. of Chapter JI. (Constrai nts An~lys1s and Site SelectiQn) of the
Hillside Oeveiopment Standards an.d Gui(ielines (HDS&G) and provide direction to staff for next
steps.
BACKGROUND:
On May 18; 2017 the Policy Committee continued their discussion of proposed modifications to
Section B. ofChapter II. of the HDS&G reaarding the visibility methodology. The Committee
also considered comm en~ on the visibility methodology from members of the public.
Following their discussion the Cammittee continued the matter to June 26, 2017 with the
following direction:
1. How do other cities .analyie off-site trees when considering the visibility of a home?
2. Provide a cl~u~e that woµld address the removal .of off-site trees which were used as
part of an applicant's visibilify ana·lysis.
3. Language regarding trees with a sparse canopy would not be included in the visibility
analysis; however, If the Consulting Arborist determined that a tree was in poor health it
may not be included in the visibility analysis.
PREPARED BY: JOEL PAULSON
Community Development Director
Reviewed by: Town Manager and Town Attorney
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 • 4{18-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov ATTACHMENT 5
PAGE2 OF4
SUBJECT: REVIEW AND DISCUSS SECTION B. OF CHAPTER II. (CONSTRAIN T S ANALYSIS
AND SITE SELECTION) OF THE HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND
GUJDELINES
DATE : JUNE 22, 2017
BACKGROUND (cont'd):
4 . The designated viewing platforms shall be modified to be called viewing areas with the
additional language as described in Attachment 2 to the May 18, 2017 staff report that
the location of the viewing area is along a public road up to 500 feet in any direction.
5. Native and non-native trees may be included in the visibility analysis. Valley floor
vegetation may not be included In the visibility analysis; it would be considered an
obstruction just like a sign or a building which would require an applicant to move
within 500 feet in any direction of the viewing area.
DISCUSSION:
In response to the Committee's direction, staff has provided the following responses :
1. Staff researched how the Town of Woodside and the Town of Los Altos Hills handle off-
site trees when analyzing the visibility of a proposed home and found the following
information:
a.) The Town of Woodside does not consider existing or proposed landscaping when
analyzing the visibility of a home.
b.) The Town of Los Altos Hllls considers both existing and proposed landscaping when
analyzing the visibility of a home. However, this process is not comp leted during the
entitlement process for the home. After a building permit has been issued and the
home is framed, a Landscape Design Application is required i n which a landscape
plan must be provided illustrating that the structure is unobtrusive from off-site
views and it is reviewed at a public hearing before the Planning Commission.
2. Staff has revised bullet #7 and bullet #10 of the visibility analysis below to address
concerns over the use of off-site trees in a visibility analysis.
3. Staff has revised bullet #9 of the visibility analysis below in response to the Comm ittee's
recommendation that trees with a poor health condition may not be included in the
visibility analysis .
4. Staff has revised bullet #2 and bullet #7 of the proposed visibility analysis in response to
the Committee's recommendation that the designated viewing platforms be modified to
be called viewing areas with additional language that the location of the viewing area
includes areas along a public road up to 500 feet in any direction (see discussion later in
this report).
5. Staff has included language in the proposed visibility analysis in the section addressing
the location of the viewing areas, which states that buildings, signs, or foreground
vegetation are considered an obstructi on and a clear and unobstructed view must be
obtained by moving away from the viewing area location along a public road up to 500
feet in any direction.
N:\MGR\AdminWorkFiles\Council Co m mittee -POLICY\2017\06.26.17\Hillsldes\Visibility _6-26-17 _Staff Report_Flnal .d ocx 6/23/2017 1:36 PM
PAGE30F4
SUBJECT: REVIEW AND DISCUSS SECTION B. OF CHAPTER II. (CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
AND SITE SELECTION) OF .THE HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND
GUIDELINES
DATE: JUNE 22, 2017
DISCUSSION (Continued):
In response to the Committee's direction, staff has prepared a draft update to the visibility
analysis. Items #2, #31 and #4 above as recommended by the Committee are provided below in
bold font and deletions are shown in stFiket:~reust=i font.
B. Visibility Analysis.
1. Viewing areas ~atfeFFRs.
E~ch development pro1ect with the potential for being visible (see glossary for
definition) from any established vi.ewing areas platfeFRt shall be subject to a visibility
Yiew-analysis. {"Potential" is defined as capable of beins seen from a viewing area
plat:feri:A if trees or large shrubs are removed, significantly pruned or impacted by
construction.) The vislblllty Ylew-an-alysis shall be conducted fn compUanc.e with
established Town procedures using story pales that identify the builcOng envelope.
After installing the story poles, the applicant shall take photographs of the project from
appropriate established viewing areas platferms that clearly shQw the $tory poles
and/or house a11d subject property. Visual aids such as photo simulations or three
dimensional illustrations and/or a scale mod~I may be required wh~n it Is deemed
necessary to fully ond .erstand the impacts of a p.rQposed ptoject.
The following steps shall be taken fn completing a visibility analysis:
• Install story pol~s per adopted policy.
• After the instaltation of story poles, photographs of the project shall be taken from
the applicable viewing areas platf&FRts using 50 MM and 300 MM lenses. Other
location(s) as dee.med appropriate by the Community Development Director may be
chosen in addition to the exlstlng viewing areas platfeRAs.
• A photograph with a 50 MM lens will represent the visibility of the proposed
residence from the naked eye.
• A photograph with a 300 MM lens will represent an up-close perspective and help
identify any visible story poles, netting, trees, and/or shrubbery.
• E>elst i ng vegeta:tion and/or land~plng proposed to be removed entirely or partially
shaU not be Included In the visibility analysis,
• If determined necessary by the Community Development Director, three
dimensional illustrations or photQ simulations of the structure may be required .
• A vis ible home ts defined as a single-family residence where 24.5% or more of an
elevation can be seen frQm any of the Town's established viewing areas platferFRs.
Percentages shall be rounded to the nearest whole number.
N:\MG k\Admi nWorkFiles\Council Co mm itte e -PO UCY\2017\06.26 .17\Hillsl des\Vi siblllty_6-26-17 _Staff Report_Final.docx 6/23/2017 1:36 PM
PAGE40F4
SUBJECT: REVIEW AND DISCUSS SECTJON B. OF CHAPTER II. (CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
AND SITE SELECTION) OF THE HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND
GUIDELINES
DATE: JUNE 22, 2017
DISCUSSION (Continued):
• A Deed Restriction shall be required that identifies the on-site and off-site trees that
were used to provide screening in the visibility analysis and requires their
replacement if they die or are removed.
• Trees with a poor er fair/,aeer health rating 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.
• A five year Maintenance Agreement shall be required for on-site and off-site trees
that were used to provide screening in the visibility analysis and requires their
preservation.
The locations of the viewing areas ,alatfer~s 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 (across from Leigh High School)
3. Hwy 17 overcrossing/Los Gatos -Saratoga Road (Highway 9)
4. Main Street/Bayview Avenue
5. Other location(s) as deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director
Viewing area locations are intended to provide a general vicinity for the visibility
analysis and photo locations. Where there are obstructions (buildings, signs, or
foreground vegetation) that block a clear and unobstructed view of the site, the
origination point shall be adjusted so that a clear and unobstructed view is obtained
by moving away from the viewing area location along a public road up to 500 feet in
any direction.
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. Revised Town of Los Gatos Hiiiside Area and Viewing Area Map (one page)
2. Public comment received June 15, 2017 (one page)
N:\MGR\AdmlnWorkFites\Council Committee -POLICV\2017\06.26.17\Hillsides\Vislbllity_6·26-17 _Staff Report_Flna l.dooi 6/23/2017 1:36 PM
·'
,1 •. -, _,-:/r------I I I ,.-,, ! : .. l
6/26/17 Policy Committee Rpt -ATTACHMENT 1
.Ju • .00.!l .. 1.,.-n.,.,P.u .. p.,_.. __ ,"--..,..._.,,_,_rw;-.,_,."""...,,..... _ _..w_,,__,, __ ,,_, __________ • ..,. ___ _,, __ .,.,
From~
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Follow Up Ffag:
Flag Status:
Categories:
Ms. Puga
ROBT. RICE <ricerskier@msn.com>
Thursday, June 15, 20i7 1:31 PM
Jocelyn Puga
Hillside Development Standards Review
Follow up
Flagged
Red Category
First, thanks yot.1 for making these type of things .availabte while under revi ew and open to
public comment.
After studying the staff reports it looks like good recommendations. I particularly like the
existing requirement that neighbors should be contacted prior to design drawings being
started. This did not happen in our case however things were resolved to our satisfaction but
required a total relocation and redesign. Very expensive for the homeowner.
Thanks.
Bob Rice
150 Wooded View Dr. Los Gatos
6/26/li Policy Committee Rpt -ATTACHMENT 2
Jocelyn Pufla
To: Bob Burke
Subject: RE: Hillside Visibility
From: Bob Burke [mailto:bobburkeat@gmail.mmJ
sent: Th~rsday, June 22., 2017 1:25 PM
To: Jocelyn Puga
Subject: Re: Hillside Visibility
Hi , Jocelyn.
Here is my input:
1 -The list of ridges is not complete: Glen Ridge Ave & Bella Vista Ave both stand at the top of ridges.
2 -The illustration on P14 needs to iIJustrate "ridge-top" elevations & r~trictions.
Thanks for the Hyperlink
Regards,
Bob Burke
408-896-7896
"Timely action combined with market knowledge creates excellence and value in the introduction of new
technology."
l