26 Alpine Ave- Staff Report and Exhibits 2-14
PREPARED BY: JOCELYN PUGA
Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Planning Manager and Community Development Director
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6874
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION
REPORT
MEETING DATE: 07/26/2017 ITEM NO: 4
DATE: JULY 21, 2017 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: JOEL PAULSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SUBJECT: ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATION S-16-052 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ND-17-001. PROJECT LOCATION: 26 ALPINE AVENUE. APPLICANT: TOM SLOAN. PROPERTY OWNER: TOBY AND SUSAN COREY. REQUESTING APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND REMOVE A LARGE PROTECTED TREE ON VACANT PROPERTY ZONED R-1:20. APN 529-37-042. DEEMED COMPLETE: JUNE 27, 2017 FINAL DATE TO TAKE ACTION: DECEMBER 27, 2017
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval, subject to the recommended conditions of approval.
PROJECT DATA:
General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential
Zoning Designation: R-1:20, Single-Family Residential, minimum lot size 20,000
square feet
Applicable Plans & Standards: Residential Design Guidelines and Hillside Development
Standards and Guidelines
Parcel Size: 20,000 square feet
Surrounding Area:
Existing Land Use General Plan Land Use Designation Zoning
North Residential Medium Density Residential R-1D
South Residential Low Density Residential R-1:20
East Residential Low Density Residential R-1:20
West Residential Low Density Residential and Medium
Density Residential
R-1:8 and
R-1D
PAGE 2 OF 8 SUBJECT: 26 ALPINE AVENUE/S-16-052 AND ND-17-001 JULY 21, 2017
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Alpine 26.docx 7/21/2017 9:04 AM
CEQA:
It has been determined that this project will not have a significant impact on the environment.
Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Errata, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program to mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant level is recommended.
FINDINGS:
As required by CEQA for adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
As required by the Residential Design Guidelines that the project complies with the Residential
Design Guidelines.
As required by the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines that other than the exception
to the Least Restrictive Development Area, the project complies with the applicable sections of
the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines.
CONSIDERATIONS:
As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for granting approval of an Architecture
and Site application.
ACTION:
The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed within ten days.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is the remaining undeveloped lot of a three lot subdivision which was
approved by the Planning Commission in 1991. During the course of the subdivision hearing,
several Planning Commissioners and neighbors raised concerns over the future lot development
including “grading, tree removal, impact on the creek, privacy, shadow studies, the square
footages of the buildings, and how obtrusive they might be” on surrounding properties. It was
decided that the subdivision of the property located at 38 Alpine Avenue into three lots could be
approved if conditions were set to limit the square footage of the future houses to no more than
2,500 square feet, protect specimen trees, and meet hillside grading and drainage standards. The
Commission should note that pursuant to the State Subdivision Map Act, these types of conditions
restricting the development of the site cannot be imposed. However, this direction can be
considered during the Architecture and Site approval process.
On July 27, 1993, the issue of modifying the 2,500-square foot maximum was discussed by the
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee. The Committee determined that they would
recommend an increase in the allowable square footage if such an increase was not in conflict
with the adjacent neighborhood. However, the Committee expressed concerns about allowing
PAGE 3 OF 8 SUBJECT: 26 ALPINE AVENUE/S-16-052 AND ND-17-001 JULY 21, 2017
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Alpine 26.docx 7/21/2017 9:04 AM
any significant square footage increases on two of the lots that had the steepest slopes, which
included the subject parcel.
Subsequently, applications for Architecture and Site approval for the subject property were
applied for in 1995 and 1998; both applications were withdrawn due to concerns from neighbors
regarding the size of the home and potential construction impacts.
On June 30, 2004, another Architecture and Site application was filed to construct a 2,500-square
foot multi-level home with a 1,382-square foot cellar for a total of 3,882 square feet with a 740-
square foot attached garage. On May 27, 2009, the Planning Commission considered the
application and continued the item to July 8, 2009. At the applicant’s request, the item was
continued to August 12, 2009. On August 12, 2009, the Planning Commission denied the
application due to concerns regarding the mass of the home. The applicant appealed the decision
by the Planning Commission and on October 5, 2009, the Town Council considered the appeal and
remanded the project back to the Planning Commission with direction that the project be
modified as the Planning Commission requested to reduce the mass of the right elevation and that
the applicant work with staff. Following the Town Council decision, the applicant did not resubmit
plans for Planning Commission consideration.
Although the property is zoned R-1:20, it has a slope greater than 10 percent and as a result is
subject to Chapter 2, Chapter 3, and Section C. of Chapter 6 of the Hillside Development Standards
and Guidelines (HSD&G).
The project is being considered by the Planning Commission due to the applicant’s request for an
exception to the Least Restrictive Development Area (LRDA) pursuant to the HDS&G.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
A. Architecture and Site Application
Architecture and Site approval is required to construct a new residence.
B. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood
The subject site is a vacant lot located approximately 300 feet north of East Main Street
(Exhibit 2). The lot is 20,000 square feet with an average slope of 41 percent, extensive tree
cover, and a creek along the western portion of the property. The project site is accessed from
Alpine Avenue.
C. Zoning Compliance
A single-family residence is permitted in the R-1:20 zone. The proposed residence is in
compliance with the allowable floor area for the property. Additionally, the proposed
PAGE 4 OF 8 SUBJECT: 26 ALPINE AVENUE/S-16-052 AND ND-17-001 JULY 21, 2017
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Alpine 26.docx 7/21/2017 9:04 AM
residence is in compliance with height, setback, building coverage, and on-site parking
requirements.
DISCUSSION:
A. Architecture and Site Analysis
The applicant is proposing to construct a new single-family home with 1,993 square feet of
living floor area, 1,439 square feet of cellar, and a 415-square foot attached garage. The
maximum height of the proposed building would be approximately 29 feet.
The project proposes a contemporary style home with cedar siding, stone walls, and glass
railing. Additionally, the project proposes sustainable design elements which include solar
panels, a green eco roof, recycled and reclaimed building materials, and radiant floor heating.
A color and materials sheet is included as Exhibit 11. A color and materials board will be
available at the public hearing.
Due to the slope of the lot, staff analyzed the project with the applicable sections of the
HDS&G, including site selection, grading, drainage, driveways, parking, geologic safety, and
retaining walls. The site does not contain a building area that is within the LRDA. The
applicant has designed the house to be set into the hillside, appearing as a single-story along
the front elevation to reduce the mass of the home from Alpine Avenue and as two stories at
the rear and right elevations from Jackson Street.
The Commission should note that a house cannot be designed at this site that is completely
within the LRDA due to the fact that the majority of area with a slope of less than 30 percent is
located within the required front and left side setbacks or within the required creek setback
pursuant to the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams (see creek discussion
later in this report). Please see the applicant’s letter of justification (Exhibit 6) for additional
information regarding the proposed project.
B. Design and Compatibility
The Town’s Architectural Consultant reviewed the project to provide recommendations
regarding the architecture and neighborhood compatibility. The Consulting Architect noted
that while the architectural style is different from others in the immediate neighborhood, the
scale of the home related to Alpine Avenue would be complementary to the streetscape. In
addition, the substantial tree cover would largely obscure views to the home from Jackson
Street (Exhibit 7).
The Consulting Architect had one recommendation to consider eliminating the circular
driveway at the front of the home even though the existing curb cut for the driveway exists.
PAGE 5 OF 8 SUBJECT: 26 ALPINE AVENUE/S-16-052 AND ND-17-001 JULY 21, 2017
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Alpine 26.docx 7/21/2017 9:04 AM
The applicant proposes to keep the circular driveway due to the fact that there is no on-street
parking permitted at this end of Alpine Avenue to accommodate off-street parking.
C. Neighborhood Compatibility
The immediate neighborhood is made up of single and two-story residences and includes a mix
of architectural styles. Based on Town and County records, the surrounding residences range
in size from 1,316 square feet to 5,021 square feet. The floor area ratios (FAR) range from 0.06
FAR to 0.36 FAR. The applicant is proposing a residence of 1,993 square feet on a 20,000-
square foot parcel (0.10 FAR).
The following Neighborhood Analysis table reflects current conditions of the immediate
neighborhood:
ADDRESS House Garage Gross
Lot Area
House
FAR
Stories
38 Alpine Avenue 4,309 1,062 21,671 0.20 2
50 Alpine Avenue 3,120 824 21,671 0.14 2
27 Jackson Street 1,316 440 3,750 0.35 2
23 Jackson Street 1,577 399 4,376 0.36 2
19 Alpine Avenue 2,715 400 43,847 0.06 1
25 Alpine Avenue 5,021 795 44,523 0.11 2
47 Alpine Avenue 2,398 400 33,040 0.07 1
57 Alpine Avenue 3,827 764 26,100 0.15 2
26 Alpine Avenue (N) 1,993 415 20,000 0.10 2
26 Alpine Avenue (E) 0 0 20,000 0 0
The proposed residence would be the seventh largest home in the immediate neighborhood in
terms of square footage and the seventh largest in terms of FAR. Pursuant to the HDS&G,
properties with an average slope greater than 30 percent are subject to a net lot reduction of
60 percent. After the slope reduction, the maximum allowed square footage is 2,608 square
feet.
PAGE 6 OF 8 SUBJECT: 26 ALPINE AVENUE/S-16-052 AND ND-17-001 JULY 21, 2017
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Alpine 26.docx 7/21/2017 9:04 AM
D. Trees
The Town’s Consulting Arborist completed a peer review of the applicant’s arborist report
dated June 26, 2016 (Exhibit 8). The Consulting Arborist had two recommendations (Exhibit 9),
which noted that the tree protection sheets should be included in the plan set and that four
existing trees that are outside of the proposed development area should be shown on the site
plan. Comments by the Consulting Arborist were incorporated in the plan set and addressed in
the memorandum dated January 17, 2017 (Exhibit 10).
The project proposes to remove 12 protected trees, of which one is considered to be a large
protected tree. Eight of the 12 protected trees to be removed (trees #10, #12, #32, #33, #34,
#35, #36, #37, and #57) are Coast Live Oaks, California Bays, or California Buckeyes which are
proposed to be removed to accommodate the proposed residence.
The project proposes to retain 21 Coast Live Oak trees (trees #1, #3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 14, 15, 18, 22,
23, 24, 27, 30, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 52, and 55), five Valley Oak trees (trees #17, 21, 25, 51, and
54), eight California Bay trees (trees #16, 20, 26, 29, 38, 41, 45, and 53), six California Buckeye
trees (trees #28, 39, 40, 49, 50, and 56), two Prunus trees (trees #19 and 48), and two Blue
Gum trees (trees #2 and 13)
If the project is approved, tree protection measures would be implemented prior to and during
construction. Replacement trees would be required to be planted pursuant to Town Code.
Tree protection measures are incorporated as conditions of approval (Exhibit 4) to protect the
trees to remain on the subject property and within the development area.
E. Creek Setbacks
The applicant is proposing a 26-foot 10-inch, setback from the top of bank, adjacent to the
creek. The proposed setback conforms to the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near
Streams which recommends a 20 to 25-foot setback from top of bank with an additional five
feet of setback for parcels larger than 10,000 square feet. For the project’s 20,000-square foot
parcel, the recommended setback for the proposed structure is 25 to 30 feet.
F. Grading/Geotechnical Review
The applicant submitted geologic investigations that were reviewed by the Town’s
Geotechnical Consultant. As noted above, the average slope of the lot is 41 percent. The
project proposes the excavation of approximately 1,550 cubic yards of soil with an export of
1,520 cubic yards being exported off-site during the construction. Although the site has very
steep slopes, the investigations concluded that development of the site is feasible from a
geologic and geotechnical engineering viewpoint. Conditions of approval have been included
requiring compliance with the geotechnical recommendations.
PAGE 7 OF 8 SUBJECT: 26 ALPINE AVENUE/S-16-052 AND ND-17-001 JULY 21, 2017
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Alpine 26.docx 7/21/2017 9:04 AM
G. Environmental Review
An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) (Exhibit 1) have been prepared for
the project by the Town’s Environmental Consultant, Kimley-Horn and Associates (available
online at www.losgatosca.gov/26Alpine). The 30-day public review period began on June 23,
2017 and will end on July 24, 2017. The project will not result in a significant effect on the
environment because mitigation measures have been added for Air Quality, Biological
Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, and Hydrology and Water Quality, mitigating
potential impacts to a less-than-significant level. An Errata is included in Exhibit 12 illustrating
changes and clarifications to the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program has also been prepared for the project and is included in
Exhibit 13.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Story poles and signage were installed on the site and written notice was sent to property owners
and tenants within 300 feet of the subject property. Staff has received a public comment
regarding the project from a neighbor with concerns regarding tree removal, construction noise,
view impacts, roof and chimney height, and construction parking (Exhibit 14).
CONCLUSION:
A. Summary
The proposed project would allow the applicant to construct a new single-family residence on
a vacant lot. As proposed, the project would create a 1,993-square foot residence with a
1,439-square foot cellar, and a 415-square foot attached garage. Due to the slope of the site,
the applicant is requesting an exception to the LRDA pursuant to the HDS&G.
The MND prepared for the project found no significant environmental impacts from the
construction of the proposed project.
B. Recommendation
Based on the analysis above, staff recommends approval of the Architecture and Site
application subject to the recommended conditions of approval (Exhibit 4). If the Planning
Commission finds merit with the proposed project, it should:
1. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (Exhibits 1 and 13), including the Errata Sheet (Exhibit 12);
2. Make the required finding that the project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines
(Exhibit 3);
PAGE 8 OF 8 SUBJECT: 26 ALPINE AVENUE/S-16-052 AND ND-17-001 JULY 21, 2017
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Alpine 26.docx 7/21/2017 9:04 AM
3. Make the finding that the exception to the Least Restrictive Development Area is
appropriate and the project is otherwise in compliance with the applicable sections of the
Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (Exhibit 3);
4. Make the required considerations as required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for
granting approval of an Architecture & Site application (Exhibit 3); and
5. Approve Architecture & Site Application S-16-052 with the conditions contained in Exhibit 4
and the development plans in Exhibit 15.
C. Alternatives
Alternatively, the Commission can:
1. Continue the matter to a date certain with specific direction; or
2. Approve the application with additional and/or modified conditions; or
3. Deny the applications.
EXHIBITS:
Previously received under separate cover:
1. Mitigated Negative Declaration
Received with this Staff Report:
2. Location Map
3. Required Findings and Considerations (one page)
4. Recommended Conditions of Approval (14 pages)
5. Project Description, received July 20, 2017 (two pages)
6. Letter of Justification, received July 20, 2017 (six pages)
7. Consulting Architect’s Report, received August 29, 2016 (five pages)
8. Applicant’s Arborist Report, dated June 26, 2016 (21 pages)
9. Consulting Arborist’s Peer Review Report, dated November 8, 2016 (two pages)
10. Applicant’s Addendum to Arborist Report, dated January 17, 2017 (one page)
11. Color and Material Sheet, received August 3, 2016 (one page)
12. Errata Sheet (two pages)
13. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (seven pages)
14. Public comments received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, July 21, 2017
15. Development Plans, received July 3, 2017 (29 sheets)
Distribution:
Toby and Susan Corey, 122 8th Avenue, Santa Cruz, CA 95062
Tom Sloan, 1475 S. Bascom Avenue, Suite 208, Campbell, CA 95008
26 Alpine Avenue
E MAIN ST
EXHIBIT 2
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
PLANNING COMMISSION -July 26, 2017
REQUIRED FINDINGS & CONSIDERATIONS FOR:
26 Alpine Avenue
Architecture and Site Application S-16-052
Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-17-001
Requesting approval to construct a new single-family residence on vacant property
zoned R-1:20 APN 529-37-042.
PROPERTY OWNER: Toby and Susan Corey
APPLICANT: Tom Sloan
FINDINGS
Required findings for CEQA:
• It has been determined that this project will not have a significant impact on the
environment. Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Errata, and M itigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program to mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant
level is adopted.
Required Compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines:
• The project is in compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines for single-family homes
not in hillside residential areas .
Required Compliance with Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (HDS&G):
Parcels with an average slope of 10 percent or greater outside of the Town of Los Gatos Hillside
Area which shall be governed by the Residential Design Guidelines and the following sections of
the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines: Constraints Analysis and Site Selection
excluding the standards for the visibility from off site and ridge line view protection, Site Planning
for grading, drainage, driveways and parking, geologic safety, and Site Elements for retaining walls.
• The project is in compliance with the applicable Hillside Development Standards and
Guidelines with the exception to the Least Restrictive Development Area due to the slope
of the site which has been determined to be acceptable .
CONSIDERATIONS:
Considerations in review of Architecture & Site applications:
• As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code, the considerations in review of an
Architecture and Site application were all made in reviewing this project.
N:\DEV\FI NDINGS\2017\Alpine 26.docx
EXHIBIT 3
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
PLANNING COMMISSION -July 26, 2017
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
26 Alpine Avenue
Architecture and Site Application S-16-052
Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-17-001
Requesting approval to construct a new single-family residence and remove a large
protected tree on vacant property zoned R-1:20. APN 529-37-042.
APPLICANT: Tom Sloan
PROPERTY OWNER: Toby and Susan Corey
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT :
Planning Division
1. APPROVAL : This application shall be completed in accordance with all ofthe conditions of
approval listed below and in substantial compliance with the plans approved and noted as
received by the Town on June 27, 2017. Any changes or modifications to the approved
plans shall be approved by the Community Development Director, the Development
Review Committee, the Planning Commission, or Town Council, depending on the scope
of the changes .
2. EXPIRATION: The approval will expire two years from the approval date pursuant to
Section 29 .20 .320 of the Town Code , unless the approval has been vested .
3. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Exterior lighting shall be kept to a minimum, and shall be down
directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. No flood lights
shall be used unless it can be demonstrated that they are needed for safety or security.
The lighting plan shall be reviewed during building plan check.
4 . GENERAL : All existing trees shown on the plan and trees required to remain or to be
planted are specific subjects of approval of this plan , and must remain on the site .
5 . TREE REMOVAL PERMIT: A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained for any trees to be
removed, prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit.
6. ARBORIST REQUIREMENTS: The developer shall implement, at their cost, all
recommendations made by Gareth Jones, identified in the Arborist reports, dated as
received June 26, 2016 and January 17, 2017, in addition to the peer review report
prepared by Deborah Ellis on November 8, 2016, respectively, on file in the Community
Development Department . A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared by the
applicant and submitted with the building permit application detailing how the
recommendations have or will be addressed . These recommendations must be
incorporated in the building permit plans, and completed prior to issuance of a building
permit where applicable.
7. TREE FENCING : Protective tree fencing shall be placed at the drip line of existing trees and
shall remain through all phases of construction. Fencing shall be six foot high cyclone
attached to two-inch diameter steel posts drive 18 inches into the ground and spaced no
further than 10 feet apart. Include a tree protection fencing plan with the construction
plans.
EXHIBIT 4
8. REPLACEMENT TREES: New trees shall be planted to mitigate the loss of trees being
removed. The number of trees and size of replacement trees shall be determined using
the canopy replacement table in the Town Code. Town Code requires a ~inimum 24-inch
box size replacement tree. New trees shall be double staked with rubber ties and shall be
planted prior to final inspection and issuance of occupancy permits.
9. WATER EFFICIENCY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE: The final landscape plan, including
landscape and irrigation plans and calculations, shall meet the Town of Los Gatos Water
Conservation Ordinance or the State Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, whichever is
more restrictive. The final landscape plan shall be reviewed by the Town's consultant
prior to issuance of building permits. A review fee based on the current fee schedule
adopted by the Town Council is required when working landscape and irrigation plans are
submitted for review.
10. FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE : Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the front yard
must be landscaped.
11 . STORY POLES: The story poles on the project site shall be removed within 30 days of
approval of the Architecture & Site application.
12 . TOWN INDEMNITY: Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.115 requires that
any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement from the Town shall defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless the Town and its officials in any act ion brought by a third
party to overturn, set aside, or void the permit or entitlement. This requirement is a
condition of approval of all such permits and entitlements whether or not expressly set
forth in the approval, and may be secured to the satisfaction of the Town Attorney.
13. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE BI0-1: Special-status and Migratory Bird
Species. The following avoidance measures shall be required to avoid the project's
potential effects on special-status and migratory bird species.
a. The removal of trees and shrubs shall be minimized to the extent feasible.
b. If tree removal, pruning, grubbing and demolition activities are necessary, such
activities shall be conducted outside of the breeding season (i.e ., between September
1 and January 31), to avoid impacts to nesting birds.
c. If tree removal, pruning, grubbing and demolition activities are scheduled to
commence during the bird breeding season (i.e., between February 1 and August 31),
a preconstruction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than two
weeks prior to the initiation of work. The preconstruction survey shall include the
project footprint and up to a 300-foot buffer, access and sight-lines permitting. If no
active nests of migratory birds are found, work may proceed without restriction and
no further measures are necessary. If work is delayed more than two weeks, the
preconstruction survey shall be repeated, if determined necessary by the project
biologist.
d. If active nests (i.e . nests with eggs or young birds present, or hosting an actively
breeding adult pair) of special-status or migratory birds are detected, the project
biologist shall designate non-disturbance buffers at a d istance sufficient to minimize
disturbance based on the nest location, topography, cover, species, and the
type/duration of potential disturbance . No work shall occur within the non-
disturbance buffers until the young have fledged, as determined by a qualified
biologist. The appropriate buffer size shall be determined in cooperation with the
CDFW and/or the USFWS . If, desp ite the establishment of a non-disturbance buffer it
is determined that project activities are resulting in nest disturbance, work shall cease
immediately and the CDFW and the USFWS shall be contacted for further guidance.
e. If project activities must occur within the non-disturbance buffer, a qualified biologist
shall monitor the nest(s) to document that no. take of the nest (i.e., nest failure) will
result. If it is determined that project activities are resulting in nest disturbance, work
shall cease immediately and the CDFW and the USFWS shall be contacted for further
guidance .
14. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE BI0-2: Special -s tatus Bat s. The following
avoidance measures shall be required to avoid the project's potential effects on special-
status bats .
a. Prior to the removal or significant pruning of trees and the demolition of buildings, a
qual ified bat biologist shall as sess them for the potential to support roo sting bats .
Suitable bat roosting sites include trees with snags, rotten stumps, and decadent trees
with broken limbs, exfoliating bark, cavities, and structures with cracks, joint seams
and other openings to interior spaces. If there is no evidence of occupation by bats,
work may proceed without further action.
b. If suitable roosting habitat is present, the bat biologist shall recommend appropriate
measures to prevent take of bats . Such measures may include exclusion and humane
eviction (see "c" below) of bats roosting within structures during seasonal periods of
peak activity (e .g., February 15 -April 15, and August 15 -October 30}, partial
dismantling of structures to induce abandonment, or other appropriate measures.
c. If bat roosts are identified on the site, the following measures shall be implemented:
• If non-breeding/migratory bats are identified on the site within a tree or building
that is proposed for removal, then bats shall be passively excluded from the tree
or building. This is generally accomplished by opening up the roo st area to allow
airflow through the cavity/crevice, or installing one-way doors. The bat biologist
shall confirm that the bats have been excluded from the tree or building before it
can be removed.
• If a maternity roost of a special-status bat species is detected, an appropriate non-
disturbance buffer zone shall be established around the roost tree or building site,
in consultation with the CDFW . Maternity roost sites may be demolished only
when it has been determined by a qualified bat biologist that the nursery site is
not occupied. Demolition of maternity roost sites may only be performed during
se asonal periods of peak activity·(e .g., February 15 -April 15, and August 15 -
October 30).
• No additional mitigation for the loss of roosting bat habitat is required.
15 . BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE BI0-3: Tree Planting Plan. The applicant
shall comply with the recommendations in the arborist report prepared for the proposed
project by Gareth Jones on June 26, 2016 and January 17, 2017, in addition to the peer
review report prepared by Deborah Ellis on November 8, 2016 . The Tree Planting Plan
shall include the following :
a. Removal of all protected trees (all with 30-35 feet canopy diameters) will be replaced
by four 24-inch box trees or two 36-inch box trees per tree removed. Replacement
trees must be species from the Town of Los Gatos' approved tree species list.
b. Removal of riparian tree species should be mitigated by additional plantings in the
project area . Planting additional trees in the riparian set back is not advised due to the
heavily shaded nature of the existing canopy cover.
c. Ecologically suitable native understory plants should be planted on the hillside above
the riparian set back.
d. All landscaping shall be done with plants that are not known to be invasive. Use a
reputable nursery to source native plants that are genetically similar to those found in
the Santa Cruz Mountains.
16. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE BI0-4: Sudden Oak Death Syndrome.
a. Prior to removal or trimming of any potentially infected tree or carrier tree species,
samples will be taken by a qualified arborist and sent to a laboratory to determine the
presence or absence of SODS. If a positive test result occurs, the applicant shall
immediately consult with the Oak Mortality Task Force and follow all applicable
recommendations for further tree removal, trimming, disposal of vegetation, and for
decontamination of equipment.
17. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND HUMAN REMAINS MITIGATION MEASURE CUL-1:
a. In the event that archaeological traces are encountered, all construction within a 50-
meter radius of the find will be halted, the Community Development Director will be
notified, and an archaeologist will be retained to examine the find and make
appropriate recommendations.
b. If human remains are discovered, the Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified. The
Coroner will determine whether or not the remains are Native American. If the
Coroner determines char the remains are not subject to his authority, he will notify
the Native American Heritage Commission, who shall attempt to identify descendants
of the deceased Native Americans.
c. If the Community Development Director finds that the archaeological find is not a
significant resource, work will resume only after the submittal of a preliminary
archaeological report and after provisions for reburial and ongoing monitoring are
accepted . Provisions for identifying descendants of a deceased Native American and
for reburial will follow the protocol set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5( e). If
the site is found to be a significant archaeological site, a mitigation program will be
prepared and submitted to the Community Development Director for consideration
and approval, in conformance with the protocol set forth in Public Resources Code
Section 21083.2.
d . A final report shall be prepared when a find is determined to be a significant
archaeological site, and/or when Native American remains are found on the site . The
final report will include background information on the completed work, a description
and list of identified resources, the disposition and cu ration of these resources, any
testing, other recovered information, and conclusions.
18 . GEOLOGY AND SOILS MITIGATION MEASURE GE0-1: Geotechnical Report
Recommendations .
a. The project applicant shall implement all of the recommendations of the project
geotechnical report, and any associated updates or revisions, related to site
preparation and grading, foundation design, driveways, retaining walls, and drainage
improvements. To ensure correct implementation, the geotechnical engineer shall
review project plans and observe geotechnical-relevant aspects of proposed initial
construction of roads and infrastructure. The geotechnical eng ineer shall submit an
"as built" letter to the Director of Public Works stating that the project has been
constructed in conformance with the recommendation s of the geotechn ical report .
19. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURE HWQ-1: GHG-1 :
a. Pr io r to the is suance of grading permits or improvement plans in l ieu of grading
permits, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer that
the project's stormwater quality control mea sures, including the erosion control
features described in the project's final Erosion Control Plan have been incorporated
into the project design .
20. COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM : A memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with
the building plan s detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed.
Building Division
21. PERMITS REQUIRED : A Building Permit is required for construction ofthe new single-
family residence . This is a combination Building Permit which includes all required
electrical , mechanical, and plumbing work as necessary. A separate Building Permit is
required for any site retaining walls.
22 . APPLICABLE CODES: The current codes as amended and adopted by the Town of Los Gatos
as of January 1, 2017, are the 2016 California Building, Electrical , Mechanical, Plumbing,
Fire, and Energy Code s and the 2016 California Residential Code and 2016 California
Green Build ing Standards Code -Mandatory Measures on ly.
23 . CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL : The Cond itions of Approval must be blue-lined in full on the
cover sheet of the construction plans. A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared and
submitted with the building permit application detailing how the Conditions of Approval
will be addressed .
24 . SIZE OF PLANS : Submit four sets of construction plans, minimum size 24" x 36 ", maximum
si ze 30" x 42".
25. SOILS REPORT : A Soils Report (Geotechnical Investigation), prepared to the satisfaction of
the Building Official, containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations,
shall be submitted with Building Permit Application .
26 . FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS : A pad certificate prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer or
Land Surveyor shall be submitted to the project building Inspector at foundation
inspection . Thi s certificate shall certify compliance with recommendations as specified in
the soils report and that the building pad elevation and on-site retaining wall locations
and elevations have been prepared according to the approved plans . Horizontal and
vertical controls shall be set and certified by a licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer for
the following items:
a. Bu i lding pad elevation
b . Fini sh floor elevation
c. Foundation corner locations
d. Retaining wall locations and elevations
27. TOWN RESIDENTIAL ACCESSIBILITY/ADAPTABILITY STANDARDS: The new residence shall
be designed with adaptability features for single-family residences per Town
Resolution 1994-61 as follows :
a. Wood backing (2" x 811 minimum) shall be provided in all bathroom walls at water
closets, showers, and bathtubs, located 34-inches from the floor to the center of the
backing, suitable for the installation of grab bars in needed in the future.
b . All passage doors shall be at least 32-inches wide on the accessible floor level.
c. The primary entrance shall be a 36-inch wide door with a 5' x 5' level landing no more
than 1-inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level and with an 18-inch
clearance on the interior strike edge .
d. A door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard-sired at the primary entrance.
28. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE : All required California Title 24 Energy Compliance Forms
must be blue-lined (sticky-backed) onto a sheet of the plans.
29. BACKWATER SEWER VALVE : The scope of this project may require the installation of a
sanitary sewer backwater valve per Town Ordinance 6 .50 .025. Please provide information
on the plans if a backwater valve is required and the location of the installation. The
Town of Los Gatos and West Valley Sanitation District (WVSD) require backwater valves
on drainage piping serving fixtures that have flood level rims less than 12-inches above
the elevation of the next upstream manhole.
30. TOWN FIREPLACE STANDARDS: New wood burning fireplaces shall be an EPA Phase II
approved appliance or gas appliance per Town Ordinance 1905. Tree limbs shall be cut
within 10 feet of chimneys.
31. FIRE ZONE: All projects in the Town of Los Gatos require Class A roof assemblies .
32 . WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE : This project is located in a Wildland-Urban Interface High
Fire Area and new buildings must comply with Section R337 of the California Residential
Code regarding materials and construction methods for exterior wildfire exposure.
33. DEFENSIBLE SPACE/FIRE BREAK LANDSCAPING PLAN : Provide a Defensible Space/Fire
Break Landscaping Plan prepared by a California licensed Landscape Architect in
conformance with California Public Resources Code 4291 and California Government Code
Section 51182 .
34. FIRE BREAK LANDSCAPING FINAL INSPECTION: Prior to Final Inspection, provide a letter
from a California licensed Landscape Architect certifying that the landscaping and
vegetation clearance requirements have been completed per the California Public
Resources Code 4291 and California Government Code Section 51182.
35 . SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is required by CBC Section 1704, the
architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be
submitted to Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit.
The Town Special Inspection form must be completely filled out and signed by all
requested parties prior to permit issuance. Special Inspection forms are available from
the Building Division Service Counter or online at www.losgatosca.gov/building
36. BLUEPRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara County Valley
Non point Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (24x36) shall be part of the plan
submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division
Service Counter or ARC Blue Print for a fee or online at www.losga tosc a.gov/building
37. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following departments and agencie s
approval before issuing a building permit:
a. Community Development -Planning Division : Jocelyn Puga (408} 354-6875
b . Engineering/Parks & Public Works Department: Kevin Bagley (408) 395-5340
c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010
d . We st Valley Sanitation Di strict: (408) 378-2407
e. Local School District: The Town will forward the paperwork to the appropriate
school district(s) for processing. A copy of the paid receipt is required prior to
permit issuance.
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS :
Engineering Division
38. GENERAL : All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town
Standard Plan s, Standard Specifications and Engineering De sign Standards. All work shall
conform to the applicable Town ordinances . The adjacent public right-of-way shall be
kept clear of all job-related mud, silt, concrete, dirt and other construction debris at the
end of the day . Dirt and debris shall not be washed into storm drainage facilities . The
storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will not be allowed
unless an e nc roachment pe rmit is iss ued by the Engineering Divi sion of the Park s and
Publi c Works Department. The Applicant's representative in charge shall be at the job site
during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right-of-way according to this
condition may re sult in the iss uance of correction notices, citations, or stop work orders
and the Town performing the required m aintenance at the Applicant's expen se.
39. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordanc e with all of the condition s of
approval li sted below and in substantial compliance with the latest reviewed and
approved development plan s. Any changes or modifications to the approved plan s or
condition s of approvals shall be approved by the Town Engineer.
40 . ENCROACHMENT PERMIT : All work in the public right-of-way will require a Con struction
Encroachment Permit. All work over $5,000 will r equire construction security. It is the
re spon sibility of the Applicant to obtain any necessary encroachment permits from
affected agencies and private parties, including but not limited to, Pacific Gas and Electric
(PG&E), AT&T, Comcast, Santa Clara Valley Water District, California Department of
Tran sportation (Caltran s). Copie s of any approvals or permits must be submitted to the
Town Engineering Divi sion of the Park s and Public Works Department prior to relea sin g
any permit .
41. PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (INDEMNITY AGREEMENT): The
property owner shall enter into an agreement with the Town for all existing and proposed
private improvements within the Town's r ig ht-of-way. The Owner shall be solely
re spon sib le for maintaining the improvements in a good and safe condition at all time s
and shall indemnify the Town of Los Gatos. The agreement mu st be completed and
acc epted by the Town Attorney, and a copy of the recorded agreement shall be submitted
to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department, prior to the
issuance of any permits.
42. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS: The Applicant or their representative shall notify the
Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (24) hours before starting any work pertaining
to on-site drainage facilities, grading or paving, and all work in the Town's right-of-way.
Failure to do so will result in penalties and rejection of work that went on without
inspection .
43. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: The Applicant shall repair or replace all
existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because
of the Applicant's operations. Improvements such as, but not limited to: curbs, gutters,
sidewalks, driveways, signs, pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic
pavement markings, etc., shall be repaired and replaced to a condition equal to or better
than the original condition. Any new concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names,
graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed
and replaced at the Contractor's sole expense and no additional compensation shall be
allowed therefore. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the
direction of the Engineering Construction Inspector, and shall comply with all Title 24
Disabled Access provisions. The Applicant shall request a walk-through with the
Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing
conditions.
44. SITE SUPERVISION: The General Contractor shall provide qualified supervision on the job
site at all times during construction.
45. STREET /SIDEWALK CLOSURE: Any proposed blockage or partial closure of the street
and/or sidewalk requires an encroachment permit. Special provisions such as limitations
on works hours, protective enclosures, or other means to facilitate public access in a safe
manner may be required.
46. PLAN CHECK FEES: Plan check fees shall be deposited with the Town prior to plan review
at the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department.
47. INSPECTION FEES: Inspection fees shall be deposited with the Town prior to the issuance
of any permits.
48. PLANS AND STUDIES : All required plans and studies shall be prepared by a Registered
Professional Engineer in the State of California, and submitted to the Town Engineer for
review and approval. Additionally, any studies imposed by Planning Commission or Town
Council shall be funded by the Applicant.
49. GRADING PERMIT: A grading permit is required for all site grading and drainage work
except for exemptions listed in Section 12.20.015 of The Code of the Town of Los Gatos
(Grading Ordinance). The grading permit application (with grading plans) shall be made to
the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department located at 41 Miles
Avenue. The grading plans shall include final grading, drainage, retaining wall location(s),
driveway, utilities and interim erosion control. Grading plans shall list earthwork
quantities and a table of existing and proposed impervious areas . Unless specifically
allowed by the Director of Parks and Public Works, the grading permit will be issued
concurrently with the building permit. The grading permit is for work outside the building
footprint(s). A separate building permit, issued by the Building Department on E. Main
Street, is needed for grading within the building footprint.
SO . GRADING ACTIVITY RESTRICTIONS : Upon receipt of a grading permit, any and all grading
activities and operations shall not commence until after the rainy season, as defined by
the State Water Resources Control Board (October 1-April 30), has ended .
Sl. COMPLIANCE WITH HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES : All grading
activities and operations shall be in compliance with Section Ill ofthe Town's Hillside
Development Standards and Guidelines. All development shall be in compliance with
Section II of the Town's Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines.
S2. DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT: Prior to the issuance of any grading/improvement permits,
whichever comes first, the Applicant shall : a) design provisions for surface drainage; and
b) design all nece ssary storm drain facilities extending to a satisfactory point of disposal
for the proper control and disposal of storm runoff; and c) provide a recorded copy of any
required easement s to the Town .
S3. TREE REMOVAL : Copies of all necessary tree removal permits shall be provided prior to
the issuance of a grading permit/building permit.
S4. SURVEYING CONTROLS: Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a
licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer qualified to practice land surveying, for the
following items:
a. Retaining wall: top of wall elevations and locations.
b . Toe and top of cut and fill slopes .
SS . RETAINING WALLS: A building permit, issued by the Building Department at 110 E. Main
Street, may be required for site retaining walls . Walls are not reviewed or approved by the
Engineering Division of Parks and Public Works during the grading permit plan review
process.
S6 . SOILS REPORT: One copy of the soils and geologic report shall be submitted with the
application . The soils report shall include specific criteria and standards governing site
grading, drainage, pavement de sign , retaining wall design, and erosion control. The
reports shall be signed and "wet stamped" by the engineer or geologist, in conformance
with Section 673S of the California Business and Professions Code .
S7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS MITIGATION MEASURE: A geotechnical investigation shall be
conducted for the project to determine the surface and sub-surface conditions at the site
and to determine the potential for surface fault rupture on the site. The geotechnical
study shall provide recommendations for site grading as well as the design of foundations,
retaining walls, concrete slab-on-grade construction, excavation, drainage, on -site utility
trenching and pavement sections . All recommendations of the investigation shall be
incorporated into project plan s.
S8 . SOILS REVIEW : Prior to issuance of any permits, the Applicant's engineers shall prepare
and submit a design-level geotechnical/geological investigation for review and approval
by the Town. The Applicant's soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainage
plans to ensure that designs for foundations, retaining walls, site grading, and site
drainage are in accordance with their recommendations and the peer review comments.
Approval of the Applicant's soils engineer shall then be conveyed to the Town either by
letter or by signing the plans.
59 . SOILS ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION: During construction, all excavations and
grading shall be inspected by the Applicant's soils engineer prior to placement of concrete
and/or backfill so they can verify that the actual conditions are as anticipated in the
design-level geotechnical report, and recommend appropriate changes in the
recommendations contained in the report, if necessary. The results of the construction
observation and testing shall be documented in an "as-built" letter/report prepared by
the Applicant's soils engineer and submitted to the Town before final release of any
occupancy permit is granted.
60. SOIL RECOMMENDATIONS: The proj ect shall incorporate the geotechnical/geological
recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Update Report & Supplemental
Recommendations by Pollak Engineering. Inc., dated August 5, 2016, and any
subsequently required report or addendum. Subsequent reports or addendum are
subject to peer review by the Town's consultant and costs shall be borne by the Applicant.
61. WATER DESIGN : Water plans prepared by San Jose Water Company must be reviewed and
approved prior to issuance of any permit.
62. UTILITIES: The Applicant shall install all new, relocated, or temporarily removed utility
services, including telephone, electric power and all other communications lines
underground, as required by Town Code Section 27 .50.015(b). All new utility services
shall be placed underground . Underground conduit shall be provided for cable television
service . The Applicant is required to obtain approval of all proposed utility alignments
from any and all utility service providers before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new
building can be issued. The Town of Los Gatos does not approve or imply approval for
final alignment or design of these facilities.
63. SIDEWALK REPAIR: The Applicant shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any
sidewalk damaged now or during construction of this project. All new and existing
adjacent infrastructure must meet current ADA standards. Sidewalk repair shall match
existing color, texture and design, and shall be constructed per Town Standard Details.
New concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified
that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor's sole
expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. The limits of
sidewalk repair will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the
construction phase of the project . The improvements must be completed and accepted
by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued .
64. CURB AND GUTIER REPAIR: The Applicant shall repair and replace to existing Town
standards any curb and gutter damaged now or during construction .of this project . All
new and existing adjacent infrastructure must meet Town standards. New curb and
gutter shall be constructed per Town Standard Details . New concrete shall be free of
stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or
equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor's sole expense and no additional
compensation shall be allowed therefore. The limits of curb and gutter repair will be
determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of
the project. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a
Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued .
65. SIGHT TRIANGLE AND TRAFFIC VIEW AREA: Any proposed improvements, including but
not limiting to trees and hedges, will need to abide by Town Code Sections 23.10 .080,
26.10 .065, and 29.40.030.
66. FENCES : Fences between all adjacent parcels will need to be located on the property
lines/boundary lines. Any existing fences that encroach into the neighbor's property will
need to be removed and replaced to the correct location of the boundary lines before a
Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. Waiver of this condition will
require signed and notarized letters from all affected neighbors.
67 . TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION FEE: The Applicant shall pay the project's proportional share
of transportation improvements needed to serve cumulative development within the
Town of Los Gatos. The fee amount will be based upon the Town Council resolution in
effect at the time the building permit is issued . The fee shall be paid before issuance of a
building permit. The final traffic impact mitigation fee for this project shall be calculated
from the final plans using the current fee schedule and rate schedule in effect at the time
the building permit is issued, using a comparison between the existing and proposed uses.
68. CONSTRUCTION STREET PARKING: No vehicle having a manufacture's rated gross vehicle
weight exceeding ten thousand (10,000) pounds shall be allowed to park on the portion of
a street which abuts property in a residential zone without prior approval from the Town
Engineer. The contractor would need to provide one-lane 2-way traffic control if they
want to use a portion of the street for construction purposes, if approved by the Town
Engineer .
69 . HAULING OF SOIL: Hauling of so il on-or off-site shall not occur during the morning or
evening peak periods (between 7:00 a.m. and 9 :00 a.m . and between 4 :00 p .m. and 6:00
p.m .), and at other time s as specified by the Director of Parks and Public Works. Prior to
the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall work with the Town Building
Department and Engineering Division Inspectors to devise a traffic control plan to ensure
safe and efficient traffic flow under periods when soil is hauled on or off of the project
site. Thi s may include, but is not limited to provisions for the Applicant/Owner to place
construction notification signs noting the dates and time of construction and hauling
activities, or providing additional traffic control. Coordination with other significant
projects in the area may also be required. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand and other
loose debri s.
70. CONSTRUCTION NOISE: Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p .m., weekdays and 9:00
a.m . to 7:00 p.m. weekends and holidays, con struction, alteration or repair activities shall
be allowed. No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding
eighty-five (85) dBA at twenty-five (25) feet from the source. If the device is located
within a structure on the property, the measurement shall be made at distances as close
to twenty-five (25) feet from the device as pos sible. The noise level at any point outside
of the property plane shall not exceed eighty-five (85) dBA.
71. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN SHEET: Prior to the issuance of any permits, the
Applicant shall submit a con struction management plan sheet (full-s ize) within the plan
set that shall incorporate at a minimum the Earth Movement Plan, Project Schedule, site
security fencing, employee parking, construction staging area , materials storage area(s),
concrete wa shout(s) and propo se d outhouse location(s).
72. WVSD (West Valley Sanitation District): Sanitary sewer laterals are televised by West
Valley Sanitation District and approved by the Town of Los Gatos before they are used. A
Sanitary Sewer Clean-out is required for each property at the property line, or at a
location specified by the Town .
73. SANITARY SEWER BACKWATER VALVE: Drainage piping serving fixtures which have flood
level rims less than twelve (12) inches (304.8 mm) above the elevation of the next
upstream manhole and/or flushing inlet cover at the public or private sewer system
serving such drainage piping shall be protected from backflow of sewage by installing an
approved type backwater valve. Fixtures above such elevation shall not discharge
through the backwater valve, unless first approved by the Building Official. The Town
shall not incur any liability or responsibility for damage resulting from a sewer overflow
where the property owner or other person has failed to install a backwater valve as
defined in the Uniform Plumbing Code adopted by the Town and maintain such device in
a functional operation condition . Evidence of West Sanitation District's decision on
whether a backwater device is needed shall be provided prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
74. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs): The Applicant is responsible for ensuring that all
contractors are aware of all storm water quality measures and that such measures are
implemented. Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be maintained and be placed for
all areas that have been graded or disturbed and for all material, equipment and/or
operations that need protection. Removal of BMPs (temporary removal during
construction activities) shall be replaced at the end of each working day. Failure to
comply with the construction BMP will result in the issuance of correction notices,
citations, or stop work orders.
75. SITE DESIGN MEASURES: All projects shall incorporate the following mea sures :
a. Protect sensitive areas and minimize changes to the natural topography.
b. Minimize impervious surface areas.
c. Direct roof downspouts to vegetated areas .
d . Use permeable pavement surfaces on the driveway, at a minimum .
e. Use landscaping to treat stormwater.
76. EROSION CONTROL: Interim and final erosion control plans shall be prepared and
submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department. A
maximum of two (2) weeks is allowed between clearing of an area and stabilizing/building
on an area if grading is allowed during the rainy season. Interim erosion control
measures, to be carried out during construction and before installation of the final
land sca ping, shall be included. Interim erosion control method shall include, but are not
limited to: silt fences, fiber rolls (with locations and detail s), erosion control blankets,
Town standard seeding specification, filter berms, check dams, retention ba sins, etc.
Provide erosion control measures as needed to protect downstream water quality during
winter months. The Town of Los Gatos Engineering Division of the Park s and Public Works
Department and the Building Department will conduct periodic NP DES inspection s of the
site throughout the recognized storm season to verify compliance with the Construction
General Permit and Stormwater ordinances and regulation s.
77 . DUST CONTROL: Blowing dust shall be reduced by timing construction activities so that
paving and building construction begin as soon as possible after completion of grading,
and by landscaping disturbed soils as soon as possible. Further, water trucks shall be
present and in use at the construction site . All portions of the site subject to blowing dust
shall be watered as often as deemed necessary by the Town, or a minimum of three (3)
times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas,
and staging areas at construction sites in order to insure proper control of blowing dust
for the duration of the project. Watering on public streets shall not occur. Streets shall be
cleaned by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the Town
Engineer, or at least once a day. Watering associated with on-site construction activity
shall take place between the hours of 8 a.m . and 5 p .m. and shall include at least one (1)
late-afternoon watering to minimize the effects of blowing dust. All public streets soiled
or littered due to this construction activity shall be cleaned and swept on a daily basis
during the workweek to the satisfaction of the Town. Demolition or earthwork activities
shall be halted when wind speeds (instantaneous gusts) exceed twenty-five (25) miles per
hour (MPH). All trucks hauling soil , sand, or other loose debris shall be covered .
78 . CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES : All construction shall conform to the latest requirements of
the CASQA Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbooks for Construction Activities
and New Development and Redevelopment, the Town's grading and erosion control
ordinance, and other generally accepted engineering practices for erosion control as
required by the Town Engineer when undertaking construction activities.
79. SITE DRAINAGE: Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through curb
dra i ns will be allowed. Any storm drain inlets (public or private) directly connected to
public storm system shall be stenciled/signed with appropriate "NO DUMPING -Flows to
Bay " NPDES required language. On-site drainage systems for all projects shall include one
of the alternatives included in section C.3.i of the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit.
These include storm water reuse via cisterns or rain barrels, directing runoff from
impervious surfaces to vegetated areas and use of permeable surfaces. If dry wells are to
be used they shall be placed a minimum of ten (10) feet from the adjacent property line
and/or right-of-way. No improvements shall obstruct or divert runoff to the detriment of
an adjacent, downstream or down slope property.
80. SILT AND MUD IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: It is the responsibility of Contractor and
homeowner to make sure that all dirt tracked into the public right-of-way is cleaned up on
a daily basis. Mud, silt, concrete and other construction debris SHALL NOT be washed into
the Town's storm drains.
81. GOOD HOUSEKEEPING: Good housekeeping practices shall be observed at all times during
the course of construction. All construction shall be diligently supervised by a person or
persons authorized to do so at all times during working hours. The Applicant's
representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to
maintain the public right-of-way according to this condition may result in penalties and/or
the Town performing the required maintenance at the Applicant's expense.
82. COVERED TRUCKS: All trucks transporting materials to and from the site shall be covered.
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT :
83. WILDLAND -URBAN INTERFACE: This project is located with i n the designated Wildland-
Urban Interface Fire Area . The building construction shall comply with the provisions of
Sect ion R327 of the Cal ifornia Residential Code or the California Building Code (CBC)
Chapter 7 A ., as applicable. Note that vegetation clearance shall be in compliance with
CBC Section 701A.3.2.4 prior to project final approval. Check with the Planning
Department for related landscape plan requirements.
84. FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED : An automatic resident ial fire-sprinkler system sha l l be
installed in one-and two-family dwellings as follows: In all new one-and two-family
dwellings and in existing one-and two-family dwellings when additions are made that
increase the building area to more than 3,600 square feet. Exception : A one-time addition
to an existing building that does not total more than 1,000 square feet of building area .
Note: The owner(s), occupant(s), and any contractor(s) or subcontractor(s) are
responsible for consulting with the water purveyor of record in order to determine if any
modifications or upgrade of the existing water service is required. A State of California
licensed (C-16) Fire Protection Contractor shall submit plans, calculations, a completed
permit application, and appropriate fees to this department for review and approval prior
to beginning their work. CFC Section 313.2 as adopted and amended by LGTC.
85. CONSTRUCTION FIRE SAFETY : All construction sites must comply with applicable
provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and our Standard Detail and Specification Sl-7 . Provide
appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. CFC
Chapter 33.
86. ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION : New and existing bu i ldings shall have approved addres s
numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is
plainly legible and vi sible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers
shall contrast with their background . Where requ ired by the fire code official, address
numbe rs shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency
response . Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbe r s
shall be a minimum of 4 inches (101 .6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch
(12 .7 mm). Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed
from the public way, a monument, pole or other signs or means shall be used to identify
the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained. CFC Section 505 .1
N:\DEV\CO NDITI ONS\2017\Alpine 26.docx
July 20, 2017
Dear Lo s Gatos Planning Com mi ssion a nd Community,
RECEIVED
JUL -2 0 2017
TOVVN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
My wife Susan and I are sure you've heard many stories of families with th e same dreams ofliving in
the Town of Los Gatos. Although our 'story' may look like a long read from thi s letter, I'll provide yo u
with the succinct point and then you ca n read our family story below.
My wife and I moved to Los Gatos 25 years ago and this is where we want to stay through our
retirement and the birth of our first grandchild early next year. Los Gatos is the only home
and neighborhood our daughters have ever known. They have been shaped by the community
here and have chosen to make Los Gatos their home as they start to raise their own families.
Our s tory probably mirrors m any of the young Los Gatos families living an exci ting life at the
epicenter of Silicon Valley; experiencing the greatest innovation era of all tim e. Our California
journey began in 1988 with a technology company relocating our family with an 8-month-old
daughter in-toe from Connecticut. We toured many South Bay areas looking for the right sense of
community, schools, great weather and vibrant culture for our new hom e, and instantly connected
and fell in lov e with the beauty and serenity of Los Gatos. At that early s tage of our family life, we
couldn't afford to buy a home in Lo s Gatos, but we never gave up on our drea m .
Finally in 1992, as a young family, with two beautiful daughters and our o ld est entering
kindergarten, we moved to a rental property on Cherry Blossom Lane in the Manor. As w e settled
into our life in Los Gatos w e reali zed the town we h a d hoped to call hom e was indeed the b es t place
to raise our young family and four years later we were lu cky enough to be able to afford our very firs t
Los Gatos home on Johnson Avenue.
Our girls Alexandra a nd Jordan attended Louise V an Meter Elementary School. We especially lov ed
the insane yearly Halloween parade of 'Trick or Treaters' on Johns on Avenue. The n e ighborhood
came a li ve with everyone trying to show their s pirit of the holiday with the scariest house. In 2001,
with teenage girls and now lots of ni eces and nephe w s who moved n earby, w e need e d a bigger home.
We w ere able to purchase a beautiful fam il y home at 38 Alpine Avenu e that was a s pecial place for u s.
No t only did we get to stay in the same neighborhood and continue to build on the friendships we
had ma de there, but it a ls o beca me a pl ace for the Lo s Ga tos middle and hi gh sc hool kids to hang out
Th ere w ere always large groups of kid s at our house either hanging out in the s wimming pool or
enjoying out 'rec room' on the ground floor. There was n ever a dull moment and made for many
enduring m emories. We called 38 Alpine Avenue home for 15 years and loved every minute of our
time there as a family. Recently, our oldest daughter Alexandra and h er hu s band purchased a hom e
in Los Gatos not far from where s h e grew up and they are pregnant with our first grandchild.
We've always been a fam ily that loved a nd respect ed n a ture and grew to love it more with the setting
of our house on Alpine Avenue that was s urrounded by beautiful native trees a nd a creek running
behind our house.
As so m eone who truly cares about th e planet, our environme nt and th e b eauty and power of nature, I
was fortun ate e nough to b e asked to join the Board of Directors at WildLife Direct with Dr. Richard
Leakey as our Chairman. Dr. Leaky authored the book "The Sixth Extinction: Patterns of Life and the
Future of Humankind" wher e he predicted the devastating impacts of climate change. In 2012,
fo llowing my unwavering commitment to doing wha t I could to do my p a rt to e n s ure a future of
sustainability a nd a nurturing of our beautiful planet, I acce pted a two-year executive position at
SolarCity -an Elon Mu s k company-where we lead a solar revolution r a di cally r educing fo ssil fu e l
e lectricity consumption and thereby elim inating half a million metric tons of C0 2 from the
atmosphere. I then was asked to return in 2016 to h elp orchestrate the Tes la acquisition ofSolarCity,
EXHIBIT 5
integrate the companies and run the Tesla Energy Sales and Customer Experience groups. I'm sure
you're wondering why all this matters in the context of this letter.
Several years ago we purchased a lot on 26 Alpine Avenue to build our retirement home, right next
door to 38 Alpine Avenue, where we lived for 15 years. We thoughtfully selected 26 Alpine Avenue
because of the beautiful hillside, abundant trees, creek and serene setting. We partnered with local
Architect, Tom Sloan, who helped establish the Los Gatos Hillside Development Standards and
Guidelines, and long-time local Los Gatos Builder, Dave Zicovich. We set out with a vision to create a
home that would follow the natural beauty of the hillside, preserve the tranquil habitat, produce a
low environmental footprint, enhance the community and create a Zen influenced environment for
my wife, our daughters and grandchildren. We are proud of our unique, custom, "Zen" home, it's a
design that fulfills our lofty goals and brings value to the Los Gatos community. The new home design
literally grows out from the natural contours of the property with no over-bearing and intrusive
retaining walls or destructive grading. The design of the house and surrounding landscape allows us
to retain over 80% of the trees which was critically important to us and we will preserve the natural
beauty of the property.
We are grateful for having spent a quarter of a century living and contributing to our home
community of Los Gatos . Our family continues to experience the "magic" of Los Gatos and we are
excited to build our retirement home in a place that has provided us with a unique lifestyle, a balance
of nature and nurture and an opportunity for our expanding family to call home for generations to
come.
Thank you for listening to our story,
Toby and Susan Corey
METRO
DESIGN
GRO U P
Corey Residence
26 Alpine Avenue
Project Description
RECEIVED
JUL 2 U 2017
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
The site is located within the R-1-20 zoning district with steep topographic conditions and an
average slope of 41 % and extensive tree coverage. The site includes several natural features
such as a seasonal water course, steep grades, multiple mature trees and 2 street frontages on
Alpine Ave . as well as Jackson St. These distinctive site conditions within an established
neighborhood dictate that design opportunities for the residence are limited .
The home is designed on two levels that assimilate into the natural terrain and natural contours
of the site. Grading for the home is limited essentially within the footprint thus enabling the
residence to appear as if it has grown out from the site rather than placed upon a level graded
surface that would result in an un-natural contrived appearance . The siting of the home
preserves the most healthy and valuable trees in site that result in framing the residence from
Alpine and screening the residence from Jackson Street. The proposed residence is sited well
below the neighbor located uphill and has an excessive setback distance to the downhill
neighbor. This sensitivity to providing visual privacy benefits the owner as well as the
neighbors.
The Architectural style uses contemporary forms that respect the characteristics of the site
rather than traditional home styles that are usual constructed on flatter lots. The building
materials and architectural elements harmonized together with contrasting light and shadow to
emulate the site natural features.
The floor area for the proposed residence is of modest size relative to other surrounding homes
and includes private outdoor living space that integrates directly to the habitable spaces . The
home incorporates minimal outdoor spaces into the architectu re of the residence, leaving the
remaining site in its natural state. The inhabitants of the home are treated to a lifestyle that
brings in the surrounding natural setting inside the home's primary living spaces. Daylighting
into the residence along with privacy is provided in portions of the home using a highly
insulated, fire-resistant product called Ka/wall. Natural sunlight into the main living space is only
provided by the south facing widows located within a light well. £X HIBll.6
1475 SOUTH BA SCO M , SUITE 208, CAMPBE LL, CA 95008 •TELEPHONE (408) 871 -1071 •FAX (408) 871 -1071
Sustainable Design Elements and Green Building Products used in the design include but are
not limited to the following:
• Pre-wired for integrated PV Solar Panels and electric vehicles
• Green -Eco Roofing system
• Recycled and reclaimed Building Materials
• Precast Concrete Permeable Eco -Pavers
• Radiant Floor Heating System
• Kalwall -translucent wall panels
• Compliance with Residential Design Guidelines
1.) The Allowable Floor Area for the residence is 2,614 sq.ft. and the proposed Floor
Area for the residence 1,993 sq.ft .. The allowable Garage area is 735 sq .ft. and the
proposed Garage is 558 sq .ft. A substantial portion of additional floor area for this
residence is integrated with a subterranean "cellar" level, daylighting on the downhill
side of the residence.
2.) The Street Presence of this home skillfully integrates the floor area into a
contemporary massing which steps gracefully with the natural contours of the site. An
eclectic and varied neighborhood architectural character and setback distance from
the street along with an atypical site necessitates a creative architectural solution. The
proposed house uses diminishing building height to emulate greater setbacks from the
street and a low profile, deeply articulated fac;ade to relate to the natural setting.
3.) The Form and Mass of the proposed residence are intended to relate and augment
the dramatic site conditions then to maintaining a typical neighborhood street edge.
The entrance was comprehended as negative space between the forms of the building
rather than prominent and conspicuous architectural elements
4.) The Garage is also designed to be conspicuous; deploying a surface that matches
the typical buildings siding and no distinctive door frame, the garage virtually vanishes
as an architectural element. Additionally it is positioned along with a short driveway to
take advantage of the difficult site conditions while providing safe ingress and egress.
The project intends to take advantage of existing curb cuts in the street and reuse the
existing driveway a safe way to for guests to park on site. On-street parking along
Alpine Avenue's narrow roadway in not considered as a safe option.
5.) The intent for the Site Development is to leave much of the existing natural
landscape in place . The residence is sited to complement and maintain the wooded
character of the existing site to the greatest extent possible was seen as being
sensitive to the existing neighbor's concerns.
6.) The Building Design Principles that were used for this project did not assimilate the
incongruence of architectural styles and elements established along Alpine Avenue.
Rather, as discussed above, it was the outcome of the complex site conditions and
passion to undertake a sustainable design that lead to the p arti pris.
A compilation flat roof planes at varying heights have been designed to support solar
panels and a vegetated eco-green roofing system that mutually work together to
create a sustainable and environmentally friendly residence . Exterior building materials
were selected solely because they were high quality, sustainable, green, maintenance
free, and fire-resistive. The proposed res idence combines timeless bu ilding materials
and modern structural technology and design into a naturalist's aesthetic.
The primary building finish is the exterior cedar siding. Using an ancient Japanese
woodworking technique called "Shou Sugi Ban", the cedar siding planks are hydrated
then charred on the exterior surface, transforming it to a dark gray glaze that in turn
creates a fireproof finish . The dark coloring will reduce the visual impact of the house
and recede into the forested background. Additionally, rustic horizontally stacked
stone walls will accent and bifurcate the massing elements while diminishing the bulk
and mass of the residence . The jagged texture of the stone walls will appear darker
because of the shadows being cast upon itself. The transparency of the glass guard
railings are intended to recede and accentuate the modulating wall and roof plains.
Deep overhanging balcony and roof planes were designed to cast shadows upon the
walls that ultimately fuse the entire residence into the forested context. Windows and
Doors are not designed as simple openings in wall planes but rather as transparent
and absent wall planes that provide the occupant and observer an ability to
communicate the exterior and interior environments. The taller wall and roof planes
highlight this inside fo outside relationship and create a living environment that is
highly interconnected to the natural environment that surrounds the residence . The
taller walls in the main living space are also required to allow south facing natural light
to enter the home above the retaining walls located on the uphill side of the
residence.
The roof surface will be a combination of an eco-green roof and metal standing
seam.
The metal standing seam will be a dark bronze color that matches the metal clad door
and window frames and balconies support elements.
The Eco Green Roof is proposed on an uphill portion of the residence that is closest to
the large surrounding oak trees that loom nearby and is likely to continuously shed
their leaves. The eco-green roof system requires less maintenance and is more
sustainable, is a tremendous insulator of air and sound, reduces storm water runoff
and associated pollutants and reduces the "heat-island" effects and provides an
agreeable aesthetic surface facing the neighbors.
Together, both roof systems will harmonize with the natural environment and provide
the uphill neighbor with a direct view over the top if the new residence.
The driveway will be paved with a permeable pre-cast concrete paver system that is
100% permeable, allowing storm water to dispose into the natural aquifer and capture
pollutants and heavy metal particulates from runoff into the local streams.
Compliance with the Guidelines & Standards for Land Use Near Streams
• Unlike neighboring properties that gain access to the site over an ephemeral/
seasonal watercourse located along the easterly side of Jackson Street, this site is
accessed from Alpine Avenue. Also unlike the neighboring sites, there will be no
disturbance or diversion of the watercourse proposed along the Jackson Street for this
project.
A Soil Stability Analyses was completed for this property that addresses both the steep
site gradients as well as the hydrological conditions such as a potential of liquidation
during a seismic event. The Geotechnical Report indicates "the proposed construction
will improve the site stability".
• The Guidelines & Standards for Land Use Near Streams section II.(E) indicates that a
Soils Stability setback of 20 to 25 feet plus an additional 5 feet due to the site being
larger than 10,000 sq.ft. Due to the source of the water-course being storm water
run-off, it could be categorized as an "ephemeral stream". A required setback of 25
to 30 feet from the "top of bank" is required . As designed, the project has a
cantilevered overhang 26'-10" away from the top of creek bank with the nearest
foundation element setback 30 feet from the top of creek bank.
• The closest manmade disturbance proposed will be setback greater than the minimum
25 feet from the top of the bank.
• Storm drainage outfall is located up hill and a great distance away from the top of
back to ensure that any storm water that should be deposited into the stream will be
treated from several source controls that have been integrated into the Grading and
Drainage Plans for the project.
Compliance with a portion of the Hillside Design Standards 8r. Guidelines
• Justification for Development outside the LRDA -With the vast majority of the
site having a slope of over 30 percent, the solution for this dwelling required a non-
traditional solution in order to fulfill the "vision" of the HDS&G. Siting the entire
development within the LRDA was not going to be possible and meet the owner's
modest necessities for a home. The largest areas of the LRDA are located within the
setback areas leaving 2 small and irregular areas to locate the proposed development.
The architect sought to find the best location that could create an outstanding project
meeting the intent of the HDS&G by 1.) Maintaining the open wooded character of the
site, 2.) Harmonize with the natural setting, 3.) Conserve the natural landforms, 4.)
Preserve the natural habitat, and 5.) Protect the view-sheds.
The one area that provides the most level surface to construct a residence is located
at lowest portion of the site and along the northwesterly property line. This location
would create privacy impacts between the neighbors living at 27 Jackson Street and
the owners of the proposed residence. This level area on the site has several oak
trees that could provide screening from the alternate building site and would
otherwise need to be removed in order to construct a new residence. It is also an area
disposed to to flooding. The best and preferred alternate location to site the
residence has an LRDA extending the entire length of the Alpine Road frontage,
providing a gently sloping frontage facing Alpine Avenue that follows most moderate
contours of the site. The proposed driveway enters the site straight into the Garage
providing safe and level egress and ingress and requiring virtually no amount of
grading. While a portion of the existing house is located outside the LRDA, an
observer on Alpine Road views the residence as being within an LRDA due to the
residence's complete integration into the hillside; following the natural contours and
landforms. All retaining walls are integrated into the architecture, thus rendering them
imperceptible from any surrounding location thus meeting the intent of Section III of
the HDS&G for Site Planning to reduce physical and visual impacts.
Storm Water collected on the roof and paved surfaces are all collected at the source
and directed into vegetated swales and drainage courses that have been designed to
integrate into the natural contours and collect and disburse storm water uniformly into
the natural aquifer.
• Justification for the Ma in Floor plate height -relative to the immediate
neighborhood. The architecture of this project is derived out the site conditions,
sustainable design principles and the dient's necessities. Within the significantly
wooded site, natural sunlight is a limited . The orientation of the hillside dictates that
the largest wall surfaces face downhill and to the north. Taller glass surfaces will
provide sunlight into the residence providing daylighting and eliminating the need to
supplement with electrical lighting. The taller window and door planes achieve a
deeper, highly interconnected relationship between the interior living environment and
the encompassing, natural environment. The taller walls in the main living space are a
required to allow south facing natural light to enter the home above the retaining
walls located on the uphill side of the residence .
Natural sunlight is required to provide a healthy interior environment and provide for
the health and welfare of the residents. There is a long list of health benefits that
come from natural sunlight that includes killing bacteria, lowering cholesterol and
one's blood pressure and building the immune system.
The project has traded the removal of an urban forest to provide outdoor space with a
smaller footprint and smaller outdoor areas that have been integrated into the
architecture of the home .
Professionally Submitted,
Tom Sloan AIA
Principal Architect
August 29, 201 6
Ms. Joyce lyn Puga
C ommunity Development D epartment
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Mai n Street
Los Gatos, CA 95031
RE: 26 Alpine Avenue
Dear Jo cely n:
ARCHITECI1JRE PLANNING URBAN DESIGN
I reviewed the draw in gs, and v isited the site. I previously reviewed a proposed n ew ho me o n chis site in 2006. My
comments and recommendations are as follows:
Neighborhood Context
The site faces both Alpine Avenue and Jackson Street on steeply sloped site with h eavy tree cover. The adjacent co ntex t
on Alpine Ave nue is very eclectic with both smaller homes and much larger homes in close prox imity. Photographs of the
n eig hbo rhood are shown o n the following page.
700 LA RKS PU R LANDI NG CIRC LE . SU ITE 199. LA RKS PU R . CA . 94939
EXHIBIT?
TE L: 4'15 .33 '1.3 7 9 5
CDGPL AN @ PAC BHI .NET
View to t he site on Jackson St reet
Immediatel y adjacent home t o t he left
on Al p ine Avenue
Nearby home on A lp ine Avenue
Nearby home on Alpine Avenue
CANNON DESIGN GROUP
26 Alpine Avenue
Design Review Comments
August 29, 20 16 Page 2
View lo t he site on Alpine Avenue
Immediately adjacent home lo the right
on Al pine Avenue
Nearby home on Alpine Avenue
Nearby home on Alpine Avenue
700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA. 94939
Issues and Recommendations
26 Alpine Avenue
Design Review Comments
August 29, 2016 Page 3
The proposed house is contemporary in arch it ectu ral style and very well designed with a grea t deal of articu lation and d etail
appropriate to its style -see Alpine Avenue sketch and other proposed elevation s below.
Proposed Rear f/evation
Proposed Left Side Llevation
Proposed Right Side [/evation
CANNON DESIGN C RO U P 700 LARKSPUR LANDI NG C IRCLE . SUITE 199 . LAR KSPU R . CA. 94939
26 Al p in e Avenue
Design Review Comments
August 29, 2016 Page 4
Whil e the architectu ral style is different from others in the immediate n eigh borhood, the scale of the h ome related to Alpine
Ave nue and other near by ho m es would b e complementary to the streetscape. The substantial tree cover will largely obscu re
views to the h o use from Jackson Srree t and w ill filter views at the Al p ine Ave nue facade -see context aerial photo below.
My o nly recommend ation would b e to consider eliminating th e
circul ar driveway element at th e front of t he house. Although the •
vestiges of a driveway currently exist in that location, the circular
d riveway would be inconsistent with Res idential Design G uide-
line 2.4.4.
Landscaping
in lieu of
paving unless i--__,~.__~~·
absolutely
necessary
for egress
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARK SP UR LANDING C I RC LE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR. CA. 94939
I have no other recommendations for changes.
26 Alpine Avenue
Design Review Comments
August 29, 2016 Page 5
Jocelyn , please let me know if you have any question s, or if there are other issues thac I did noc address.
Sincerely,
CANNON DESIGN GROUP
Larry L. Cannon
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE. SUITE 199 . LARKSPU R . CA . 94939
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
r
I
~rtiilan 1Lanbilcapeg -~rboriilt ~erbiceil
Gareth Jones, Certified Arhorist WE-8379A
ArtisanLandEscape s@ Gmail . Com
12150 HWY 9, Boulder Creek, Ca. 95006
(408) 674-7856
P ag e I I
PRELIMINARY TREE SURVEY PLAN & TREE PRESERVATION REPORT Rev . 2
June 26 , 2016
Attn: Susan B. Corey
26 Alpine A venue
Los Gatos, Ca. 95030
FOR
26 ALPINE A VE, TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Note: This is revision 2 of this arborist report, Dated 6/6/2017. Revised to address Jocelyn Puga 's review
letter dated May 25 1
\ 2017 .
Table of Contents
Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 1
Assignment ................................................................................................................................................... 2
Methods ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
Purpose ......................................................................................................................................................... 3
General Site Observations ............................................................................................................................ 3
General Suggestions for proposed development. ......................................................................................... 4
Tree specific and Proposed Development Specific Notes: ........................................................................... 5
Appendix A-Complete Tree Survey Table .................................................................................................... 11
Explanation of Tree Table Columns ........................................................................................................... 11
Appendix B -City of Los Gatos Tree Protection Standards .......................................................................... 16
Appendix C -Glossary of Terms .................................................................................................................... 17
Appendix D -Works Cited ............................................................................................................................. 19
Appendix E -Certification of Performance .................................................................................................... 20
Appendix F -Tree Survey Drawing and Tree protection Plan
Gareth Jones , Certified Arborist WE-8379A-ArtisanLandEscapes@ Gmail.com (408) 674-7856
12150 HWY 9, Boulder Creek , Ca. 95006
JEXfflBIT 8
( (
Pag e 12
Assignment
Mrs. Corey contacted me on June 151\ 2016 and asked if! would like to perform the arborist reporting
duties for a proposed developme nt of new Hills ide property in Los G a t os. I rev iewed the town code and
agreed to b egin by performing a preliminary Tree Survey Plan & Tree Preservation Report.
Sec. 29.10.1000. New property development.
(a) A tree survey s hall b e conducted prior to submittal of any development application proposing the removal
of or impact to one or more protected trees. The development applicati on shall include a Tree Survey Plan
and Tree Preservation Report based on thi s survey. The tree survey inventory numbers shall correspond to a
numbered metal tag placed on each tree on site during the tree s urvey . The tree survey plan shall be prepared
by a certified or consulting arborist, and shall includ e the following information:
(I) Location of all existing trees on the property as described in section 29.10.0995 ;
(2) Identify all tre es that could p otentially be affected by th e p roject (directl y or indirectly-immediately or in
lon g term), such as up slope grading or compaction outside of the dripline;
(3) Notation of all trees classified as protected tre es ;
(4) In addi tio n , for trees four (4) inches in diameter or larger, the plan shall spec ify the precise location of the
trunk and crown spread, and the species, size (diameter , height, crown spread) and condition of the tree .
(b) The tree s urvey plan shall be reviewed by the Town 's consulting arborist who shall, after making a field
visit to the property, indicate in writing o r as shown on approved pl ans , whi ch trees are recommended fo r
preservation (based on a retention rating of high/moderate/low) u sing, as a minimum, the Standards of
Review set forth in secti on 29.10.0990. This plan shall be made part of the staff report to the Town reviewin g
body upon its consideration of the application for new property development ;
Methods
On June 161h I visited the site and v isually inspected the crowns, branches, trunks, root collar s , above
ground roots, cavities, and s ite conditions of all the trees 4" and larger in diameter a t breast heigh t (DBH)
within. 15 ' of the PL. I nailed a numbered aluminum tag to each tree, measured th e DBH (Diameter at
breast heigh t) with a loggers/diameter tape, meas ured the approximate height and w idth of canopy with a
di stance la ser, a nd recorded sp ecies , standard condition r a tings for various parts of th e tree and tree specific
~rtisan Jl.anbscapes · ~rborlst ~erbices
Gareth Jones, Certified Arborist WE-8379A -ArtisanLandEscapes@Gmail.com (40 8) 674-7856
121 50 HWY 9, Boulder Creek, Ca. 95006
f
'
Page 13
notes for trees potentially affected by the proposed project. I compiled this information in this report and
locations on the recent topographical survey attached. I also rated them per "The Guide for Plant Appraisal
(9th edition, 2000)" and assigned rough values based on the Trunk Formula Method described therein using
values given by the "Supplemental Species Classification and Group Assignment-A Regional Supplement
to the CTLA guide for plant appraisal, 9th ed. (WCISA, 2004)" . I performed a rough test of
reasonableness by checking that the total of the tree values (approximately 300k) against the property value.
Trees have been known to contribute up to 20% of the value to a property, so this does not seem totally out
of line. I also reviewed the latest proposed plans "Proposed Site Plan -Corey Residence" by Metro Design
Group, dated 7-28-16. See Attached Tree Preservation Plan for this.
Purpose
The purpose of this survey is to satisfy section 29. l 0.0990 for new Hillside Development and more
specifically for review by the towns consulting arborist who shall , after making a field visit to the property,
indicate in writing or as shown on approved plans, which trees are recommended for preservation (based on
a retention rating of high/moderate/low) using, as a minimum, the Standards of Review set forth in section
29.10.0990.
General Site Observations
1. The Site is a densely wooded hillside falling into a riparian corridor with a nice mix of a typical
young native forest , an understory of coast live oak, bay and buckeye overarched by some larger live oaks
and quite a few fine young valley oaks climbing up from the creek.
2 . There is a pocket of Phytopthera ramorum (The not always lethal fungus responsible for sudden oak
death ) that apparently came through the front of the property (Live oaks #6 & #8) show signs of healed
over P.ramorum cambial dieback at the base) and down into the riparian corridor (Quercus agrifolia #36
has an active canker) and perhaps some of the surrounding bays as indicated by some leaf spots) and will
now work its way upstream from the base of the hill. This could be slowed by removing some of the small
bays in between infected trees and those that are apparently free of disease. (Tedmund J. Swiecki, 2008)
l!lrtisan Jl.anbscapes -l!lrborist ~erbices
Gareth Jones, Certified Arborist WE-8379A -Arti sanLandEscapes@Gmail.com ( 408) 6 74-78 56
12150 HWY 9, Boulder Creek, Ca. 95006
/
I
General Suggestions for proposed development.
(
1. Tree Protection Distances: Predicting where the actual roots are is very difficult but some
standard distances may be applied for design consideration. The ideal protection zone would
be 1 foot of tree protection for every inch of diameter, thus a 12" DBH tree would have a 12 '
diameter protection zone around it. If absolutely nece ssary one can encroach up to 3x the
DBH on one side and 5 x the DBH on several sides and retain most of the structural roots.
These exceptions will allow a younger and more vigorous tree to survive construction but
care must be taken with older or weaker trees as the y are much more sensitive to change.
These distances are shown on the Tree Protection Plan as the 3 dotted circles surrounding
trees that are affected by construction.
2. Driveway Paving: Pervious pavers are shown on the proposed plan. The concept of pervious
pavers is good, however in actuality they are often specified for installation over very deep
sections (2-4 ') of impermeable class 2 base rock compacted to 95%. This totally negates any
water passing through and requires excavating to a great depth, effectively destroying any
existing roots. It also requires an even deeper retaining structure. By using a more traditional
impervious paving such as concrete one typically only needs 4" of base excavation, little or
no edge retention and one might even retain the existing base section and place any new
required base on top of this . This of course is up to the client, architect and engineer but I
thought it was an observation worth noting as trees #2, 3, 6 & 8 will have large roots in the
area to be repaved . #2 may have large structural roots, and #6 & 8 are older and more
sensitive to change and must be given every advantage possible.
§rtis-an JLanbS'capeS' -§rboriS't i>erbiceS'
Gareth Jones, Certified Arbori st WE-83 79A -Arti sanLandEsca pes@Gmail.com (408) 674-78 56
12 150 HWY 9, Boulder Creek, Ca. 95006
' I
'Page 15
3. Fencing/Retaining wall structure: I would , as shown on the attached tree protection plan,
place all of the rest of the site behind a tree protection fence. I don't know what kind of
retaining structure will be specified on the uphill side, but perhaps a gunnite style wall might
be considered, if feasible, in order to maintain as much of the root system for trees 6 , 7 & 9
as possible. Normal retaining walls require 3-4' of over excavation, construction of forms
and placement of drainage structures. Gunnite walls can have bored footings, and
insulation/drainage structures placed directly against the dirt and then gunnite applied
directly to this, requiring almost no over excavation. I am not an engineer or class A
contractor so I don't know if this is feasible, or perhaps if smaller over excavations are
possible but merely as suggestions toward using a retaining wall system that minimizes the
intrusion into the tree protection zone and delicate surface root mat of 6 , 8 and 9 who are all
mature, and therefore more sensitive to change.
4. All excavation that is within the defined tree protection zone (Inches DBH in feet) as shown
on the attached tree protection plan shall be performed under the the supervision of a
certified arborist. This is pretty much all the demolition of the driveway and the excavation
of the new driveway and retaining structures, including the back of the proposed residence.
All roots over%" should receive clean cuts with a pruning saw.
5. Tree protection will be according to Los Gatos Tree Protection Standards. See Appendix B.
6. The viewshed would not be affected from either Alpine or Jackson. The percent of tree
cover would still be more than approximately triple any of the neighboring parcels. The net
reduction in canopy area for the proposed removals would be less than %13 ( 2,027sq
ft/16,238sq ft) sq ft from cad) and the site would still have 71 percent canopy cover.
Tree specific and Proposed Development Specific Notes:
All trees and their ratings and protected status are g iven in appendix A.
#1-(Retain and Protect) This young coast live oak is nice but its proximity to the existing paving
edge will create problems for it. The designers have changed the driveway to give this tree adequate
room to flourish in the long run. Demolition of the existing driveway should be done with care next
~rtisan Jlanbscapes -~rborist ~erbicrs
Gareth Jones, Certified Arbo ri st WE-8379A -ArtisanLandEscapes@ Gm a il.com (408) 6 74 -785 6
12150 HWY 9, Boulde r Creek, Ca. 95006
( (,-
P n g e l 6
to this tree. Backfill after removal of driveway should be uncompacted.
#2-(Retain and Protect) Big blue gum mostly located on neighboring parcel. Some care should be
taken protecting roots in paving operations and protection of the root zone during construction.
#3-(Retain and Protect) Nice Live oak, lopsided from being under previously removed eucalyptus
but should fill in nicely over time. Again root zone needs protection during construction.
#4-(Retain and Protect) Same as 3.
#5-NA (no tag in numbered set)
General comment for # 6, 8 &9; Once oaks reach maturity, they have less tolerance for changes in
root area and canopy. They can survive off of reserves for a while but then several years later
succumb to whatever pest or fungus is around as they cannot mount a sufficient defense. These
trees just went through a historic drought, survived sudden oak death attacks, which reduce
cambium and nutrient supply up and down the trunk, have perhaps a quarter of the canopy a wild
oak would have, have either recent development or hardscape on one side and so they are most
likely pretty fairly low on reserves. You must be very sensitive to development and th e root zones
must be preserved as much as practically possible in order for them to make it through the next 3
years following construction.
#6 -(Retain and Protect) Nice established coast live oak that appears to have survived and healed
over a virulent attack of P. ramorum judging by the scarring and healing over at the base. Has some
scaffold cavities and a pretty sparse canopy ..
#7-(Proposed remove) A black acacia that in addition to being a virulent pest is well situated so as
to broadcast seed into the waterway, has a codominant trunk with extreme angle and should be
removed from an environmental and structural standpoint. Suggest removal then immediately
panting the stump with more than 55% glyphosate in order to kill the root system. Dispose of chips
s eparately at the county waste facility so as to not spread seeds everywhere.
#8 -(Retain and Protect) Another nice established live oak that appears to have nicely healed over
from a P . ramorum lower cambial die-back and has a little fuller canopy than #6 also with some
~rtiS'an llanbS'capeS' · ~rboriS't ~erbiceS'
Gareth Jones, Certified Arbori st WE-8379A -Arti sanLandEscapes@Gmail.com (4 08) 674-7856
12150 HW Y 9 , Boulder Creek, Ca. 9500 6
Poge 17
cavities in the main scaffold. This also needs fierce protection of the root zone in order to keep it
from the tipping point as it, #6 & #9 are a focal centerpieces.
#9-(Retain and Protect) An established older live oak straddling the property that needs as much
protection of the root zone during construction as possible. The adjacent side has been fairly
recently disturbed with hardscape & landscaping. See general notes on proposed site development
for ideas on maximizing protected root zone to give this old veteran and focal centerpiece a fighting
chance.
#10-(Proposed remove) A coast live oak shown below to the right who appears to have lost most of
its main trunk a while back. There a large oozing pocket of rot working its way down the middle of
the trunk from the break. It retained a side branch and has regrown a small canopy from epicormic
sprouts that have a larger possibility of failure down the line once they eventually support a full
canopy. This coupled with the large rotting canker working its way down the broken trunk indicate
poor chances of it eventually recovering into a structurally sound, established tree. I believe the
proposed plans call for its removal and while it does have some wildlife value its removal would
not alter the overall canopy view shed from either adjacent streets or houses.
#11-(Proposed Remove) An ancient peach? Shown above to the left, that is rather long in the tooth
§rtlS'an Jlanl:JS'taptS' -§rboriS't ~trbittS'
Gareth Jones , Certified Arbori st WE-8379A -Arti sanLandEscapes@Gmail.com (408) 674-7856
12150 HWY 9, Boulder Creek, Ca. 95006
(
Page 18
and lost most of its scaffold branches in the last drought.
# 12-(Proposed Remove) Another Oak that would need to be removed in order to build the
presently proposed residence. It has a fairly nice canopy although all of the tree is leaning to one
side of the trunk which would indicate a higher propensity to fall over in a saturation event and it is
over the house electrical drop for the neighbors. The top of this oaks canopy is just barely visible
from Jackson St. and fairly visible from Alpine but there are trees behind it to protect the green
viewshed, were it to be removed.
Trees # 13 through #31 would be unaffected by the development proposed in the reviewed plans,
Excepting #s 21, 22 and 26 who may lose some root mass to grading and excavation. They are
fairly young and vigorous and should be ok but care needs to be taken with clean root pruning cuts.
#32-(Proposed Remove) An 8" bay tree shown below to the left, of little use except as a vector for
P . ramorum .
#33 -(Proposed Remove) A 24 " DBH live oak seen below in the middle that appears to have lost its
trunk from about 6 ' up some time ago . The previous normal branch structure has been replaced
with epicormic sprouts forming a very small canopy (for DBH) that will never form solid unions
with trunk. The tree has little long term value as it will eventually suffer failure of its improperly
joined codominant scaffold limbs as they gain leaf mass and be eroded from within by cavities
from the old wound underneath .
#3 4-(Proposed Remove) A small Oak with heavy lean shown below on the right.
m:rtisan 1!.anbscapes -m:rborist ~erbices
Gare th Jones, Certifi ed Arbo ri st WE-8379 A -ArtisanLand Escapes@Gmail.com (408 ) 6 74 -78 56
121 50 HWY 9 , Boulde r Creek, Ca. 95 0 06
#35-(Proposed Remove) A small buckeye being choked out by the ascending forest.
#36-(Proposed Remove) A s ma ll oak with an oozing, active P. ramorum canker.
P ag e /9
#37-(Proposed Remove) A small bay with what may be P. ramorum spots on leaves but is s ure to
be infected due to proximity to #36 and shou ld be removed before it broadcasts more active
inoculum from high in the canopy.
#38-through #56 would be unaffected by the development proposed in the reviewed plans .
~r t iS'an JLanbs-capeS' · ~rboriS't ~er\JiceS'
Gareth Jones, Cert ifi ed Arbori st WE-8379A-Arti sanLa nd Escapes@ Gmail.com (408) 6 74-78 56
12 150 HWY 9 , Boulder Creek, Ca. 95 006
I
I (
#57-(Proposed Remove) A leaning bay with codominant stems and poor structure.
Pagel JO
#58-(Proposed Remove) An ancient Mexican elderberry with a half dead and decayed trunk that is
being choked out by the ascendant forest.
mrtisan Jlanbscapes . mrborist ~erbices
Gareth Jones, Certified Arborist WE-8379A -ArtisanLandEscapes@Gmail.com (408) 674-7856
12150 HWY 9, Bo ulder Creek, Ca. 95006
(
Page Ill
Appendix A-Complete Tree Survey Table
Explanation of Tree Table Columns
• ID#: Number on aluminum tag on tree and number on attached plans.
• Species: Scientific name for the tree.
• Affected By Proposed Construction: Yes or no to whether the tree will be affected by the
proposed construction.
• Proposed Action: Removal or protection of specified tree required for impl ementation of
proposed construction.
• Protected Tree: Y=yes or N=no whether it is a protected tree according to LG code.
• Approximate Height in feet: Distance from ground to top of canopy, measured with a
distance laser.
• Diameter at Breast Height in". Diameter of the trunk measured at 4.5 ' above the ground
level in inches.
• Canopy Spread in FT. Distance across canopy at widest point in feet.
• Species Rating: A value assigned by the regional plant appraisal committee of the value of a
particular type of tree in this particular region. For example a native , long lived tree =1 or
90% and a short lived invasive pest would be a 5 or 10%.
• Condition Rating %: An overall condition rating which is an average of the Roots, Trunk,
Scaffold Branches, Branches and Twigs, and Foliage and bud ratings.
• Roots%: Condition of the roots expressed as a percentage.
• Trunk%: Condition of the trunk expressed as a percentage.
• Scaffold Branches%: Condition of the scaffold branches expressed as a percentage.
• Foliage and buds%: Condition of the Foliage and buds expressed as a percentage.
~rtiS'an J!.anbS'tapeS' -~rboriS't SS>erbiceS'
Gareth Jones, Certified Arbori st WE-8 3 79A -Arti san LandEscapes@Gmail.com ( 408) 6 74-7856
12 150 HWY 9 , Bo ulder Creek, Ca. 95006
I
Pag e 112
• Location Rating %: An average of site, contribution and placement ratings.
• Site%: Relative value of property based on location.
• Contribution % : How much the tree adds to the site.
• Placement % : The trees placement.
• Adjusted Trunk Area in Sq. ": The area in square inches of the trunk. Because value is not
related to size directly after a certain size it shifts to a quadratic equation to more accurately
capture real value increase with size.
• Cost per square inch of trunk: A value based on local nursery and installation costs. The
values were obtained from the regional plant appraisal committee.
• The basic tree cost: Is the cost per square inch multiplied by the adjusted trunk area for a
perfect tree in the perfect location. This value is then multiplied by the location, condition
and species modifiers to obtain the Estimated Tree Value.
• Estimated Tree Value: The estimated value of the tree as appraised per "The Guide for
Plant Appraisal (9th edition, 2000)" using the Trunk Formula Method described therein
Some values were obtained from the "Supplemental Species Classification and Group
Assignment-A Regional Supplement to the CTLA guide for plant appraisal , 9th ed .
(WCISA, 2004) "
•
l!lrtisan llanbscapes · l!lrborist ~er\Jices
Gareth Jones, Certified Arbo ri st WE-8379A -Arti sanLandEscapes@Gm ai l.c om ( 4 08) 6 74-7856
12150 HW Y 9 , Bo ulde r C reek, Ca. 95006
0
~ :
.s -
0
"' @ s-......
0 = -~
Q
~
5i
(!>
0.
-~ c: f-I:.
0 0
t> ..... ! c: " -ti: ,,.
Q) .E -,,, 0 0 § I 5 I s _§ ~ .. 0 g CD c i a. i g ~ !? -~ a ~ "' a: j i i § (/J I ~ i >-• <.'l g ,. .. a g 8. 0 8' i i J .. § 0 0 c
'O ~ 0:: 0:: 8 8
~ ~
N 0
"'1
::l. ~-...,. ~
0
:ii
:I: ~ :::::
~ t;l'1 ~
-< 00 :ii ..,, ::s
.'-0
.....i Q'
'-0 lft.
o:i )> s
0 I ti
c ~. !">
0:: lft.
(!> .., "' Q "' ~ = g ~ "'1
C'
:r 0 0
p 0. "'1
t'l'1 ;;,·
"' -(')
'-0 ~ ~ ...,.
0 ct !">
0 "' "'1
°' ® er-
0 ;::;
3
!">
lft.
~
(')
1 Qu:ercus Mrl1a!ia y ~e tam & Protect y 25 35 10 1 87
2 Eu catvmvs o!obu!vs y Rota in & Prolctt y 55 35 32 5 71
J OuefC!Jl$ a~t1fol1a v Retain & Prot~ v 45 40 18 1 85
4 Oueu;us ?Qrifolia v Re tain & Protect y 45 30 18 1 85
5 11:01 U sed
6 O t10rcus al}r lfa~!.-y Re tain & Protr:ci y 45 ~45 26 1 81
7 AC<?cia m ('!ano~y<o n y Remove y 30 lO 12 4 69
8 O ..i.,n:us agn~ct.la v Ret.im & Prolecl y 45 3t) 30 1 88
9 ~cus ag "folia y Retain & Ptotect v 45 40 26 1 79
10 Ooo,cus an n'O"fa v Remove y 25 lO 14 1 61
t1 Pru nus SOP v Remo ve y 20 5 6 4 73
12 Ouercus awrto'ia v Remove v 30 30 18 1 83
13 Eut:a ~-mus lt.obu'us N Retain & Protea v &n 40 45 5 86
14 Ouercus a13rdo!ta N Retam & Protect v 45 30 12 1 91
t S Ouercus aanfa'13 N Retam & Protect y 50 JS 15 1 89
16 Umbel'ulana ca!ifomica N Retam & Protect y 20 20 4 2 82
t i Ouercus ICCafa N ~etain & ProtEct y 50 40 14 1 87
18 Ouercus aun10111 N Retain & Proted v 35 30 14 1 83
0
3 t9 Prunvs son N Reta in & Ptott'ci y zo to 6 4 70
,-..
""' 20 Urnb~ria caltlcm!r;a N Reta rtt & Protect v 35 25 11 2 87
0
00 .._, 21 Ou ercu s lcJbat;i y R~m&Protect y 45 35 12 1 90
°' .....i 22 0.1etcus a~ri10!1a v Reta ln & Protect y so 30 13 , 90
""' .'..i Cll
00 ...,.
°'
~~ ,.
"" to" t,?. ~ ...., OI
0 i .. , OI g ,_ B c -::: ..
~ ,_.~
t! • c ~ a: m 0
II) c B ~ ;/t. "O ! ..2 (II ..., ~ 0 ~ Cl 1i ;?.
8 :i:: s ~ 5 llJ "' 8 ~
;:; ~ m 0 ~ a: LL -'
75 90 90 90 90 68 90 85
7 5 55 85 75 75 85 90 75
85 85 85 es 85 90 90 90
85 85 85 85 85 90 90 90
85 75 75 85 75 93 90 95
35 50 75 85 90 67 90 55
85 90 90 90 85 93 91> 95
56 90 75 85 80 95 95 95
45 50 65 75 85 88 90 90
85 85 65 65 65 53 90 20
80 75 85 85 90 87 90 85
65 85 90 85 90 75 90 85
90 95 90 90 90 90 90 90
90 85 90 93 90 90 90 90
90 50 90 90 90 90 90 90
85 85 85 90 85 90 90 so
90 75 8S 85 80 90 90 90
85 50 65 65 8S 77 90 90
75 90 90 90 90 90 9t> 9 0
90 90 90 90 go 90 90 90
90 90 80 90 90 90 90 90
1 : c
i E
Cl 0 e ~ c .. -c 0 ... ~ ":$ ~'!. ~ :::>
E c:T
J "" (II & ~ Gt
~ .:!. § a: :
30 79 45.5
90 788 364
90 254 45.5
90 254 45.S
95 531 45.5
55 113 455
95 707 45.5
95 531 45.5
85 154 45.5
50 28 n
85 254 <l5.5
50 1353 364
90 113 455
90 177 455
90 13 77
90 154 77
90 154 45.5
so 28 n
90 95 n
90 113 n
90 133 455
~ u
g .... I-
u
0 ..; m
$3.~9
$28.636
$t 1,5$2
$11.562
$24.124
$5,139
S3 2,1t7
$24,t24
$6,994
S2.177
S11 .562
$49.200
$5,139
$8.029
$968
$1 1,853
$6.994
$2.177
$7.318
$8.109
$6.031
• ~
~
~ ...
J
I • Ill
S1.9Ul
S1,73Cl
$8.DDll
$8.GOCl
$1&.400
$71Cl
$23,700
$16.JOCI
$3.670
S25Cl
$7.SOC
$3,17Cl
$3,79Cl
$5..llOtl
S50Cl
S8.44nl
S4.7Ut
$350
S401C
$6..JUt
$4,40(
~ .,,
(J~
(1)
\>)
.........
)
-
Q • ~ .s:
a e;
~ .....
0
::l Jl
~
::11
2.
iii .c c
0 t Q
u c ! i -G: .,.
:E -ell : § 2> .~ DI • .e c Cl) "C .. .,,
0 I :I: co ID .5 i a -~ .. * Q) -i9 >. ... ~ • .0 c:t g 't> 't> E .! ell i (II Cl) i ·;c & = QI & g j ! 0 ti 0
} -c% ~ 0 ~ 0 8 < ... ct "C 0..
23 Ouercus agrifolla N Retain & Protect y 25 15 7 1 88
~ ~
'"I
t-.) -
VI a· iA."
0 -:::>
::i:: ~ ::::
~ til ~
Oo :::>
<.;> ::::
.ID -l O'
\0 ISl
t:O > s
0 I 't::
c:
0: > !'I)
0 ::I.
ISl
.., ;;;·
~ I» ~ ::l r '"I
0 Cl"
·"'" ::l 0
f,?
0. '"I
f;;1 ;;.·
.g -
\0 ~ VI
0 0 !'I)
0 "' '"I
°' ® g:
Cl ....
3
!'I)
ISl
~
0
0
3
24 Ouercus aarifolla N Aelain & Protect y 20 15 6 1 85
25 Ouercus lobata N Retain & Protect y 50 55 24 1 89
26 Umbellularia californica y Reta in & Protect y 25 30 12 2 72
27 Quercus anrifolia N Retain & Protect y 45 45 18 1 80
28 Aosculus califomica N Retain & Protcd y 25 15 10 2 84
29 Umbellularia ealilornlca N Retain & Protect y 35 20 12 2 78
30 Ouercus aarifolia N Retaln & Protect y 40 30 12 1 88
31 Not Used
32 UmbeHularia calilornica y Remove y 35 20 8 2 90
33 Ouercus agrifolia y RenioV8 y 40 30 24 1 79
34 Ouercus aQrifolla y Remove y 25 15 11 ·1 88
35 Aesculus calitomica y Remove y 15 10 7 2n
36 Ouercus aQritolia y Remove y 38 15 10 1 89
37 Umbeflularia calilornica y Remove y 30 10 8 2 90
38 Umbeflularia calilornica N Retain & Protect y 40 15 1 2 90
39 Aesculus califomica N Retain & Protect y 40 30 15 2 90
40 Aescutus calilomica N Retain & Protect y 25 10 8 2 87
41 Umbenularia calilornica N Retain & Protect y 40 25 14 2 75
42 Quercus aarlfolia N Retain & Protect y 35 20 8 1 90 ..-.
"'" 0
00 .._.
43 Ouercus agrifolia N Retain & Protect y 39 20 9 1 90
44 Quercus aQrilolia N Retain & Protect y 40 20 9 1 89
°' -l
"'"
45 Umbellularia calilornica N Retain & Protect y 35 15 10 2 83
..'...i
00
VI
°'
a<>.
~~ ell ..:.• ~! 0 o · en "i ~ ~ GI ... c ;: -a! 1? co i c: co ~ ci5 g
i I 1 ~ ... "O "' Q) 0 g> ':fl ~ .x u c: z::: ~ 0
8 ~ G> ~ :g ffi a: u.. -'
85 85 90 90 90 88 90 85
90 80 85 85 85 87 90 85
90 es 90 90 90 93 90 95
50 40 90 90 90 47 90 25
85 80 65 75 85 73 85 85
90 70 70 85 90 87 90 85
90 so 70 80 90 47 90 25
85 85 90 90 90 90 90 90
90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
90 35 45 90 90 90 90 90
85 85 90 90 90 90 90 90
80 45 65 85 90 90 90 90
85 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
90 9{) 75 90 90 92 90 95
95 85 85 90 90 92 90 95
90 75 90 90 90 77 90 50
85 80 65 65 80 87 90 75
90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
90 85 90 90 90 90 90 90
85 75 85 85 85 90 90 90
z. .. c s i • 0
! =. • u c:
~ ·-c Q)
ia ;:, ~ ... ;:i ... ~ g J & i .,
.i. lll ~ J a: u
90 38 45.5
85 28 45.5
95 452 77
2S 113 77
50 25' 45.5
85 79 45 .5
25 113 77
90 113 45.5
90 50 n
90 452 45 .5
90 95 45 .5
90 38 45.5
90 79 45.5
90 50 77
90 38 77
90 177 45.5
90 !50 45 .5
95 154 77
90 50 45.5
90 64 45.5
90 64 45.5
90 79 77
iii
0
(.)
* .:::
u ·c1;
Ill Cl)
$1 ,749
$1.285
$34.834
$8.709
$11.562
$3.569
$8,709
$5.139
$3.870
$20.555
$4 .318
$1.749
$3.569
$3,870
$2.963
$8.029
$2.284
$11.853
$2.284
$2.891
$2,891
$6 .048
• 3 • >
I ...
J
I
~
S1.22C
S850
$26,000
$2.050
$6.100
$1,820
$2.220
$3,660
$2.190
$13.200
$3,080
S850
$2,570
$2,190
$1,710
$4.640
$1,070
$5.3!Hl
$1,660
$2.110
$2.080
$3,1tit
'"O
Q)
(J::J
~
-~
~
§ : , ~ .s
Cl a :r ._
0
t:l
~
~
5i
2.
iii ~ c: t GI Q
(.) ! c: i -t '# E -Ill i § Et .5 CD .s c Qi ~ ~ 0 0 * J:: CD c • a. u 0 Cl> i a: ~
c% ->-co I-~ Cl c a: c i i I 0 U'I 'C a ~ l = 41 ¢1 .,, ~ u ti ~ t ~ j q) 41 ~ n ~ ~ ct .. cs 8 0..
46 Oueccu s aa•rtclla N Retain & Protect y 40 30 11 1 93
~ ta r::r '"' 47 Ouercus agrifolia N Reta in & Protect v 45 30 11 1 95
N 0
:l. ~-
Vl "' 0 -;ii
::i:: ~ ::I
~ t;1 ~
-< 00 ;ii
w ::I
:0 -.J a
IO IA.
t:D > £
0 I ts
c:
5: > ...
IA.
n ::1 .... ;;;·
(') "' ~ iil ::s
n r C'
.T ::s 0
(')
0.. '"' rT1 -·
?'
IA.
\!l -
IO "' ~ Vl
...,
0 ~ ...
0 '"'
0\ ® S:.
~ .... ...
IA.
48 Pru nus soo N Retain & Protect v 25 10 10 4 72
·19 Aesculus cahf omica N Reta in & Protea y 20 35 10 2 85
50 Aesculus cahforruca y Retain & Protect y 30 35 24 2 90
51 O uercus labara N Rota rn & Protect y 35 40 18 1 78
52 Oueri:us agritalia N Retain & Protect v 35 35 13 1 89
53 Umbe!tulana californica N Rel3in & Protea y 35 30 22 2 85
54 Ouercus lcbata {Dead; N Retain & Pro!ect y 25 0 24 1 0
55 Ouercus aQutclla N Retain & Protect y 40 20 13 1 85
56 AeSCtJl us califomiea N Retain & Protect y 25 35 12 2 85
57 Umbellularia Cl\hforn11:a y Remove y :ro 30 20 2 82
58 Sambucus me xicana v Remove y 20 35 6 4 45
~
8
3 .-..
""' 0
~
0\
-.J
""' ..'..i
00
l.n
0\
~4 "' # Ill -;l # OI .,, ·;: ~ ~ al .... .E ... ,c -g D -O'
fl ..,, l:> 5 f'3 as c ll llS c ~ ?,t ... 't) .2 ..... 0 ~ i:a en .!IC g g' § -..?. ! I ] = ~ I'S ~ C)
a; ~ LL -'
85 95 95 95 95 90 90 90
95 95 95 95 95 90 90 90
85 8 0 80 65 6 5 55 90 25
85 85 85 85 85 90 90 90
90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
60 80 90 80 90 90 90 95
90 95 90 85 90 93 90 95
eo 85 85 85 90 90 90 95
0 0 0 0 0 72 90 75
85 85 85 85 85 90 9 0 90
85 85 85 85 85 90 90 90
85 65 75 85 90 83 90 75
35 15 35 55 6 5 73 90 65
.:IC
r c
i ::l :::
0 • t! £ • s J/t Cl> c iii 2 i'~ g. .... ~ J UI
8. J • 3. i.i ~ 0 u
90 95 45_5
go 95 45.5
50 79 n
90 79 45 5
90 452 45.5
85 254 77
95 133 45.5
85 380 n
50 452 n
90 133 45_5
90 113 455
85 314 n
65 28 45.5
iii
0 u a: ......
I-
~ en
~
$4.318
$4,318
$6.048
$3.569
$20.555
$19.594
$6.03,
$29,271
$34,834
$6.031
$5,139
$24.19 1
$1.285
.. :::s
ii >
I ....
1 -! -• w
$3.250
$3,320
sm
$1.,910
$11,TIMl
$12.AOc:
S4.51 0
$15.700
$0
S4,15Cl
$2750
$11,eoc:
$130
" ti>
(JO
(1)
VI
.... ,
)
( r
Page I 16
Appendix B -City of Los Gatos Tree Protection
Standards
Sec. 29.10.1005. Protection of trees during construction.
(a) Protective tree fencing shall specify the following:
(I) Size and materials. Six (6) foot high chain link fencing, mounted on two-inch diameter galvanized iron posts, shall be driven
into the ground to a depth of at least two (2) feet at no more than I 0-foot spacing. For paving area that will not be demolished and
when stipulated in a tree preservation plan, posts may be supported by a concrete base.
(2) Area type to be fenced. Type I: Enclosure with chain link fencing of either the entire dripline area or at the tree protection
zone (TPZ), when specified by a certified or consulting arborist. Type II: Enclosure for street trees located in a planter strip: chain
link fence around the entire planter strip to the outer branches. Type Ill: Protection for a tree located in a small planter cutout
only (such as downtown): orange plastic fencing shall be wrapped around the trunk from the ground to the first branch with 2-
inch wooden boards bound securely on the outside. Caution shall be used to avoid damaging any bark or branches.
(3) Duration of Type I , ll, III fencing. Fencing shall be erected before demolition, grading or construction permits are issued and
remain in place until the work is completed. Contractor shall first obtain the approval of the project arborist on record prior to
removing a tree protection fence.
( 4) Warning sign. Each tree fence shall have prominently displayed an 8.5 x I I-inch sign stating: "Warning-Tree Protection
Zone-this fence shall not be removed and is subject to penalty according to Town Code 29.10.1025".
(b) All persons, shall comply with the following precautions:
( 1) Prior to the commencement of construction, install the fence at the dripline, or tree protection zone (TPZ) when speci tied in
an approved arborist report, around any tree and/or vegetation to be retained which could be affected by the construction and
prohibit any storage of construction materials or other materials, equipment cleaning, or parking of vehicles within the TPZ. The
dripline shall not be altered in any way so as to increase the encroachment of the construction.
(2) Prohibit all construction activities within the TPZ, including but not limited to: excavation, grading, drainage and leveling
within the dripline of the tree unless approved by the Director.
(3) Prohibit disposal or depositing of oil , gasoline, chemicals or other harmful materials within the dripline of or in drainage
channels, swales or areas that may lead to the drip line of a protected tree.
(4) Prohibit the attachment of wires, signs or ropes to any protected tree.
(5) Design utility services and irrigation lines to be located outside of the dripline when feasible.
(6) Retain the services of a certified or consulting arborist who shall serve as the project arborist for periodic monitoring of the
project site and the health of those trees to be preserved. The project arborist shall be present whenever activities occur which
may pose a potential threat to the health of the trees to be preserved and shall document all site visits.
(7) The Director and project arborist shall be notified of any damage that occurs to a protected tree during construction so that
proper treatment may be administered.
(Ord. No. 2114, §§ l, II, 8-4-03)
Gareth Jones, Certified Arborist WE-8379A -ArtisanLandEscapes@Gmail.com (408) 674-7856
12150 HWY 9, Boulder Creek, Ca. 95006
r
t
(
'
Pagel l7
Appendix C -Glossary of Terms
• Butt : The base of a trees trunk.
• Canker : A discrete area of dead or malformed bark caused by a pathogen.
• Canopy: Extent of the outer layer of leaves of a tree or group of trees .
• Cavity : A hole or space within that is significantly different than the surrounding tissue,
usually hollow or filled with decayed matter.
• Codominant: 2 or more main stems (or "leaders") that are about the same diameter and
emerge from the same location on the main trunk and have the same diameter and canopy.
These form little to no connective tissue and are significantly weaker than a connection
involving a bigger (dominant) and smaller branch .
• Conk : Another term for a fruiting body.
• Crown : Upper part of a tree, measured from the lowest branch, including all the branches
and foliage.
• Epicormic Growth : Epicormic growth is a shoots growing from an epicormic bud, which
lies latent underneath the bark of a trunk, stem, or branch of a plant. These are normally
suppressed by plant hormones but after a topping cut they sprout to form the new canopy.
Their connections are only bark deep and attached to an open decay column at the topping
cut thus forming branches prone to failure in the future.
• Fruiting Body : The fruitbody is part of the sexual phase of a fungal life cycle, with the rest
of the life cycle being characterized by vegetativemycelial growth and asexual spore
production.
• Included Bark : A codominant union that grows together, so the tree forms bark inside the
space where trunks should be connected, greatly weakening the union.
~rtiian llanl:licapei -~rboriit ~erbicei
Gareth Jones, Certified Arbori st W E-8 379A -Arti san La ndE scapes@ Gmail.com (408) 674-7856
12 150 HW Y 9 , B oulder C reek, Ca. 9 5006
(
Page l18
• Phytopthera ramorum: A fungal disease responsible for sudden oak death. Forms necrotic
pockets of cracked and oozing bark at the base of the tree.
• Probe : A thin metal rod for poking into soft wood.
• Resistograph : is a trademark characterizing electronic high-resolution needle drill
resistance measurement devices, developed by Frank Rinn (since 1986 in
Heidelberg/Germany), for inspecting trees and timber.
• Scaffold Branches : The main branches that come off the trunk .
• Root collars : The slight bulge and slight change in bark that separates the trunk from the
roots in a tree.
• Topping cuts : A cut that does not leave a side branch at least 'h to 2/3rds diameter of the
removed branch so the tree will be forced to grow epicormic sprouts as the remaining branch
cannot absorb the plant growth regulation hormones.
• Trunk: A trees central superstructure or the main wooden axis of a tree .
~rtiS'att 1LattbS'capeS' -~rboriS't ~ertJiceS'
Gareth Jones, Certified Arborist WE-8379A-ArtisanLandEscapes@Gmail.com (408) 674-7856
12150 HWY 9, Boulder Creek, Ca. 95006
Pag e 1 19
Appendix D -Works Cited
Appraisers, C. o. (2000). Guide for Plant Appraisal. (9th . ed.). Champaign, Illinois : Internationa l Society of
Arboriculture.
Dunster, J . A ., Smiley, T., Matheny, N., & Lilly, S . (2013). Tree Ris k Assessment Manual. Champaign, IL.:
International Society of Arboriculture.
ISA. (2011). Glossary of Arboricultural Terms . Champaign , IL: Intern ational Society of Arboriculture.
Smiley, E . M ., & Lilly, N. (2011 ). Best Management Practices: Tree Risk Assessment. Champaign, IL:
International Society of Arboriculture.
Tedmund J. Swiecki, E. A. (2008). Increasing Distance from California Bay reduces the ri s k and severity of
Phytopthera ramorum canker in coast live oak. Proceedings of th e Sudden Oak D eath Third Science
Symposium (pp. 181-194). Albany: Pacific Southwest Research Station: USDA Forest Service.
Puhl.
Gare th Jones, Certifi ed Arbori st WE-8379A-Arti sanLandEscapes@Gmail.com (408) 674-7856
12150 HW Y 9, Boulder Creek, Ca. 95006
P a g e I 20
Appendix E -Certification of Performance
I , Gareth B. Jones, certify:
• That I personally inspected the trees and property referred to in this report, and have stated my
findings accurately.
• The scope of the evaluation is stated in the report section 'Assignment'
• I have no current or future interest in the vegetation or the property that is the subject of this report
or in the work su ggested in my report.
• I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved.
• The analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are my own an d were developed and according
to commonly accepted Arboricultural practices.
• Nobody else provided significant professional assistance to m yself.
• My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the
cause of the client or any other party, nor upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of
stipulated results, or the occurrence of any other subsequent events
• I am an International Society of Arboricult ure Certified Arborist. I have been so s in ce 2008. I have
been involved with the practice of Arboriculture and the care and stud y of trees since 200 I .
Gareth B . Jones
ISA Certified Arborist WE-8379A
~rtisan Jlanbscapes · ~rborist ~erbices
Gareth Jones, Certified Arborist W E-8379A -Art isan LandEscapes@Gmail.com (408) 674-78 56
12150 HWY 9, Boulder Creek, Ca. 95006
· ... ....
,~<.... '?-s
0
/44 .-/43
/42
TREE PROTECTION PLAN
~
LEGEND:
STANDARD TREE PROTECTION ZONE (1" Dia =1 ' TPZ Rad.)
3 X DBH & 5X DBH ENCROACHMENT LIMI TS .
--<>--SUGGESTED TR EE P ROTECTION ZONE FENCING
SUGGESTED TREE PROTECTI ON ZONE
APPROXIMATE EDGE OF CANOPY
x SUGGEST REMOVE EXISTING TRE E
... i
.. ' .' I
' ' I
I
I
1-___ __
/'
/
----------------------------
'\A 3i 8 ~ ~o~ ~ . -°' w (/)~;j
°ltt W08_· ~~~~h = ffi~~~~ re ~~~~~ "'·-ill"-O:i ·e~~ = ~~<.,;:!.. m ~~1~ ... ""') n):c t: ~(!)§
l~ <3 ~
~Ii
&II
¥•-
z
0
I-~ i
l) ~~ ~ w 5:0 ~~ I-0(1) ~
0 UJO ~ ~ .... ! O:::Ci:~a~ a..~~ H lli e ~
0:::
""TP-0 .1
CNG.OWC....t:JiJllL ....... ........,.___
""'-
Deborah Ellis, MS
Consulting Arbo rist & Horticulturist
Jocelyn Puga
Communit y Development Department, Town o f Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street,
Los Gatos, CA 95030
November 8, 20 16
26 Alpine Avenue, Review of Arborist Report & Tree Protection Plan
Dear Jocelyn:
Seri ice si11 ce 1984
I have reviewed the following documents that you sent me last week relative to the above project:
1. Preliminary Tree Survey Plan & Tree Preservation Report for 26 Alpine Avenue. June 26, 2016.
Twenty pages. Gareth Jones , Artisan Landscapes. Note that this is an updated version of
document #4 below although both documents have the same date and no referen ce to
revision.
2. Tree Protection plan shee t TP -0.1. Ibid. July 10, 2016.
3. Tree Survey plan sheet TS-0.1. Ibid .
In addition, I previously reviewed these documents and commented to you by email (due to
deficiencies in these documents) on Sept ember 14, 2016 and November 2, 20 16:
4. Preliminary Tree Survey Plan & Arborist's Notes for 26 A lpine Ave., Town of Los Gatos. June 26,
2016. Five pages. Gareth Jones, Ar tisan Landscapes.
5. Tree Survey plan sheet TS-0.1 . Ibid. July 10, 2016
Comments:
1. The second June 26, 2016 report (the revised 20 page report) is muc h better than the original 5
page report. I did not go to the site t o check any of the trees, but the report looks re asonable
and the recommendations seem reasonable. The author did in c lude estimated tree values in
the second report, which I recommended in my September 14 e mail, and also
recommendations for tree protection.
2. It would be helpful if the tree protection plan sheets were included in the report as well as
attached as separate documents. Separat e sheets like this t end to get lost.
3. Trees missing on the plan sheets:
PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408-725-1357. decah@ pacbell .net. http://www.decah.com.
26 Alpine Ave . Arborist Report Review . November 8, 2016 . Page 1 of 2
EXHIBIT 9
Deborah Ellis, MS
Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
Service si11ce 1984
• Tree numbers 5 and 31 were not used (I discovered this in the text of the report). It would be
helpful to include a note about this on the plan sheets.
• Tree numbers 30 and 40 are not shown on the plans. In the text of the report I read that
these trees are far enough away from proposed improvements so that they will not be
affected . These tree trunk locations and numbers should be included on the plan sheets in
any case, so that we can be sure of this .
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
I certify that the information contained in this report is correct to the best of my knowledge, and that
this report was prepared in good faith. Thank you for the opportunity to provide servi ce again.
Please call me if you have questions or if I can be of further assis tance.
Deborah Ellis, MS.
Cons ulting Arborist & Horticulturist
Certified Professional Horticulturist #30022
ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #305
LS.A. Board Certified Master Arboris t WE-457B
LS.A. Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408-725-1357. decah@pacbell.net. htt p://www.decah.com.
26 Alpine Ave . Arborist Report Review . November 8, 2016. Page 2 of 2
( r
P ageJ l
~rtigan 1Lanbgcapeg -~rborigt ~erbiceg
Response letter to Deborah Ellis' comments letter dated November 81h , 2016.
January 17, 2017
Attn: Jocelyn Puga
FOR
26 ALPINE A VE, TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Community Development Department, Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, Ca. 95030
Dear Jocelyn,
Please find corrections and clarifications following in response to Deborah E lli s' comments in her letter
dated November 8, 2016. I have used her numbering and sometimes added a sentence fragment to aid in
following along.
In response to her first 3 items, I added a current date and revision 1 to all documents and drawings.
In re sponse to her Comments: section,
2. "It would be helpful if the tree protection plan sheets were included ... "
The tree survey and protection plan sheets are part of the same pdf and scaled as Tabloid in order to
be folded and stapled in the back of the report. Printing th em as letter may make for difficult
reading.
3. "Trees missing on the plan sheets:"
"Tree numbers 5 & 31 were not used ... "
I ad ded note to this effect on plan sheets with rev cloud.
"Tree numbers 30&40 are not shown"
#3 0 was th ere but #40 I bad failed to copy from my original field drawings & notes. I added
40 and rev. clouded both on tree survey and tree protection plan.
Please feel free to contact me if you hav e any questio ns or concerns,
Sincerely,
(408) 674-7 856
Sllrtisan 1Lanbscapes -Sllrborist ~erbices
Gareth Jones, Certified Arb orist WE-8379A -Art isanLandEscapes@Gmail.com (408) 6 74-7856
121 50 HWY 9, Boulder Creek, Ca. 95006
EXHIBIT 1 0
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
RECE\VED
AUG 0 3 2016
COREY RESIDENCE
26 ALPINE AVE LOS GATOS, CA 95030
FINISH BUILDING MATERIALS : MET R 0
DESIGN
GR 0 UP
ROOFING GREEN ROOF SYSTEM:
GAF 'EVERGUARD ® EXTENSIVE GARDEN ROOF
TPO', CLASS "A" BY "HYDROTECH USA"
-MANSARD BROWN COLOR
EXTERIOR WINDOWS/DOORS. RAILINGS.
EXTERIOR WALLS METAL CLAD
ALUMINUM WOOD CLAD / ALUMINUM CLAD
'DARK BRONZE' ANODIZED ALUMINUM
---------------1
EXTERIOR WALL FINISH&.
GARAGE DOORS:
GREY WOOD SIDING -8" EXPOSURE
ROOF FASCIA
CUSTOM 24 GA. PRE-PAINTED 'GALVALUME'
METAL
I
I
I r
I
1
EXTERIOR KALWALL PANEL
SYSTEM:
TRANSLUCENT PANELS
EXTERIOR WALL FINISH :
'COOPER STONE' -CHESTNUT LEDGESTONE -
NATURAL THIN STONE VENEER
RETAINING WALLS. PLANTERS: DRIVEWAY. WALKWAYS AND
GREY POURED IN PLACE CONCRETE PATIOS PERMEABLE PAYERS
ECO -FRIENDLY 'PERMEABLE MISSION PAVEMENr
-PREMIUM PETALUMA CO LOR BY 'BASALITE'
1475 S BASCO M AVE SUITE 208 •CAMPBE LL , CA 9S008 • (408) 871 -1071 PH• (408) 87 1 -107~f[ l 1 7-28-16
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Errata Sheet
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
26 Alpine Avenue
Architecture and Site Application S-16-052
Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-17-001
Changes and clarifications to the Initial Study (IS) text and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), as
outlined below, were initiated by staff subsequent to publication of the IS to add additional information
received after the release of the IS. None of the text changes result in new significant environmental
impacts not previously disclosed in the IS.
The following changes should be made in the IS and MND dated June 2017 (added text is underlined and
deleted text is shown as strikeout):
CUL-l: Archaeological Resources and Human Remains.
MND, page 6, and IS, pages 43 and 44, Mitigation Measure CUL-1:
Prior to the issuance of any building permits or grading permits, the applicant shall submit to
the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, evidence that the following
measures have been completed or have been incorporated into the construction documents.
In order to avoid impacts to archaeological resources, tribal cultural resources and human
remains during project implementation, the measures outlined below shall be implemented.
With the incorporation of the following measures, significant impacts on these species would be
avoided.
a. In the event that archaeological traces or tribal cultural resources are encountered, all
construction within a 50-meter radius of the find will be halted, the Community
Development Director will be notified, and an archaeologist will be retained to examine
the find and make appropriate recommendations.
b. If human remains are discovered, the Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified. The
Coroner will determine whether or not the remains are Native American. If the Coroner
determines the remains are not subject to his authority, he will notify the Native
American Heritage Commission, who shall attempt to identify descendants of the
deceased Native Americans.
c. If the Community Development Director finds that the archaeological find or tribal
cultural resource is not a significant resource, work will resume only after the submittal
EXHIBIT 1 2
of a preliminary archaeological report and after provisions for reburial and ongoing
monitoring are accepted. Provisions for identifying descendants of a deceased Native
American and for reburial will follow the protocol set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5{ e). If the site is found to be a significant archaeological site, a mitigation
program will be prepared and submitted to the Community Development Director for
consideration and approval, in conformance with the protocol set forth in Public
Resources Code Section 21083.2.
A final report shall be prepared when a find is determined to be a significant
archaeological site, and/or when Native American remains are found on the s ite. The
final report will include background information on the completed work, a description
and list of identified resources, the disposition and curation of these resources, any
testing, other recovered information, and conclusions.
Tribal Cu ltural Resources
IS, page 64, paragraphs 1 and 2 :
Tribal cultural resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.l{k) have not been
previously identified within the project site and are considered unlikely to be present given the
sloped topography of the site. The project site is undeveloped and does not contain any
existing structures or extant historical tribal cultural resources with the potential for inclusion
on the California Register of Historical Resources or a local register. Furthermore, the Town has
not been contacted by any tribes who are traditionally and culturally affi liated with the
geographic area of the Town pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3 subd . (b).
·Mitigation Measure CUL-1 has been included with the project to ensure construction activities
are halted if archaeological resources, tribal cultural resources, or human remains are
discovered . As such , potential impacts on historic tribal cultural resources are considered less
than significant.
2
I
::i
"""" \N
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE 26 ALPINE AVENUE PROJECT
Mitigation Measures
AQ-1: BAAQMD-Recommended Bas ic Construction
Mitigation Measures
T o limit the project's construction -related dust and criteria
pollutant emissions, the foll owin g BAA Q MD-
recommended Basic Con structi o n Mitigation Measures
s hall be included in the project's g rading plan, building
pl ans, and contract speci fi cations:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas,
soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be
watered two times per day. Recycled water sho uld b e used
wherever feasible.
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose
material off-site shall be covered.
c. All vis ibl e mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public
roads shall be removed usin g wet power vacuum street
sweepers at lea st o n ce p er day. The use of dry power
sweeping is prohibited.
d. All veh icle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to
15 mph.
e. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalk s to b e paved s hall
be completed as soon as possible.
f . Idling times shall be minimiz ed ei ther by shutting
equipment off w hen not in use or reduc in g th e maximum
idling time to five minutes (as required by th e Californ ia
airborne toxic s control measure Titl e 13 , Section 2485 of
Cal ifornia Code of Regul ation s jCCRJ). Clear signage
s hall b e provided for construction workers at all access
points.
g. All construction equipment sh all be maintained and
p ro perly tuned in accordance w ith manufacturer's
Party Responsible for
Implementation
Project Engineer and
Construction
Contracto r
Implementatio n
Trigger/Timing
Prior to issuance o f
grading p ermit /
during construction
Agency Responsible
for Monitoring
Planning Division,
Community
Development
Department (C OD)
26 Alpine Avenue
S-1&-052
ND-17-001
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Timing and
Monitoring
Review
specifications;
monitor prior to and
during regular
insp ections
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
I nitials:
Date: ___ _
Initials:
D ate: __ _
lnitiak
Date: ___ _
Initials:
Date: ___ _
'°.DIIBIT 1 3
SUMM ARY OF MITIGATION M EASURES AND MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE 26 ALPINE AVENUE PROJECT {CONTINUED)
specificatio ns. All equipment shall be checked by a
certified mec hanic and determined to be running in
proper condition prior to operation.
h. Post a publicl y visibl e sign with the telephone num ber
and person to contact at the Town regarding dust
complain t'" This perso n shall resp ond and take corrective
actio n within 48 hours. T he BAA QMD's phone number
shall al so be visible to ensure compliance with ap plicable
regulatio n s.
BT0-1: Spec ial-statm; and !Vfigratory Bird Species
Prior to t he iss uance of any grad in g permits or
improv ements plans , t he applicant shall submit to the
satisfaction of the Director o f Community D evelopm ent,
evidence that the foll owing measures have been
completed o r have been in corporated into the
construction documents.
a. The removal o f trees an d sh rubs shall be minimi zed to
the ex tent feasib le.
b. I f tree removal, pruning, grub bing and de mo lition
activities arc necessary , such activities shall be conducted
outside o f t he breeding season (i.e., between Se ptember 1
and January 31 ), to avoid impacts to nesting bird s.
c. If tree removal, pruning, grubbing and demolitio n
activities are sc heduled to commen ce during the bird
breeding season (i.e., betwe en Fe bruary 1 and August 31 ),
a preconstruction survey shall be conducted by a qualified
b iologist no more than two weeks prior to the initiation of
work. The p reconstruction survey shall include the proj ect
footprint a nd up to a 300-foot buffer, access and sight-
lines permitting. If no ac ti ve n ests of migratory birds a rc
found, work may proceed without restriction and no
furth er m eas ures are n ecessary. If work is delayed more
than two weeks, the preconstructio n survey shall be
repeated, if determined necessary b y th e project biologist.
Project ap pli cant-
con tracted biologist
Prior to the issuan ce
o f grading permits o r
improvement plans.
2
Planning Divisio n,
Community
Development
D epartment (C DD)
26 Alpin e Avenue
S-16-052
ND-17-00 1
Mitigation Mo nitorin g and Reportin g Program
Prior to issuance o f
g rading permit,
ensure m eas ures are
incorpora ted into
project plan s;
monitor during
construction
Initials:
Date: __ _
Initials:
Date: __ _
Initials:
Date: __ _
Initials:
Date: ___ _
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE 26 ALPINE AVENUE PROJECT (CONTIN UED)
d. If active nests (i.e. n es ts with eggs or yo ung birds
present, or hosting an actively breeding adult pair) of
spec ial -s tatus or migratory birds are d etecte d, the project
biologist shall d esignate no n-disturbance buffers at a
distance sufficient to minimi ze disturbance b ased on th e
nest location, topograph y, cover, sp ecies, and the
ty pe/ duration of potential disturbance. No work shall
occ ur within th e non-disturbance buffers until the young
have Aedged, as d etermined by a qualifi ed biologist. The
appropriate buffe r siz e shall be d etermined in cooperation
with the CDf'W and/or the USf'WS. I f, despite the
establishment of a n on -disturbance buffe r it is determined
that project activities arc resulting in n est disturbance,
work shall cease immediately and th e C Df'W and the
USFWS shall be co ntac ted for further guidance.
e. If project activities must occur within t he non-
disturbance buffer, a qualified biologist shall monitor the
n cs t(s) to document that no take of the nest (i.e., nest
failure) will re sult. If it is determined that project activities
arc resu lting in nest disturbance, work shall cease
immediately and th e C Df'W and th e USFWS shaU b e
contacted for furth er gu idance.
BI 0-2 Special -s tatus Bats
Prior to the issuance of any grading p ermi ts o r
improve ments plans, th e applicant shall submit to th e
satisfaction of th e Direc tor of Community Development,
evidence that the following measures have been
com pleted or have been in corporated into th e
construction docume nts.
a. Prior to the rem oval o r significant pruning of trees and
th e demolition of buildings, a qualified bat biologist shall
assess them for th e potential to support roosting bats.
Suitable bat roosting si te s include trees with snags, rotten
stumps, and d ecadent trees with broken limbs, exfoliating
bark , cavities, and structures with cracks, joint seam s and
other openings to interior spaces. If there is no evid ence
of occupation by bars, work may proceed without furth e r
Project applicant-
contracted bat-bio logist
Prior to the iss uance
of grading permits or
improvement plans ..
3
Planning D iv ision ,
Community
D evelopment
Department (C OD)
26 Alpine Avenue
S-16-052
ND-17-001
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Prio r to issuance o f
grading permit,
ensure measures ar e
inco rporated into
project plans;
monitor du ring
con struction
Initial s:
Date: ___ _
Initial s:
Date: ___ _
Initi als:
Date: ___ _
Initials:
Date: ___ _
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE 26 ALPINE AVENUE PROJECT (CONTINUED)
action.
b. If su itab le roosting habitat is present, the bat biologist
shall recommend appropriate m easu res to prevent tak e of
bats. Such measures may include exclu sio n and humane
eviction (see "c" below) of bats roosting within structures
during scawnal periods of peak activity (e.g., February 15
-April 15 , and August 15 -October 30), partial
dismantling o f structures to induce abando nment, or other
appropriate measures.
c. 1 f bat roosts are identified o n th e site, the following
measu res shall be implemented:
• If non-breeding / migratory bats arc id entified on the site
within a tree or build ing that is proposed for removal,
then ba ts shall be passively exclud ed from th e tree or
b uilding. This is ge nerally accomplished by o pening up
the roost area to allow airfl ow through the
cavity/crevice, or in stallin g one-way doors. The bat
bi o logist shall confirm that th e bats have been excluded
from th e tree or building before it can be removed.
• If a maternity roost of a special-s tatu s bat species is
d etected, an appropriate n on-disturbance buffer zone
shall b e es tablished around th e roost tree or building
site, in consultation with the CDFW. Maternity roost
sites may be demolished only when it has been
determined by a qualified bat bio logist th at the n ursery
site is not occupied. D emolition of maternity roost sites
may only be p er for med during seasonal periods of peak
activity (e.g., February 15 -April 15, a nd August 15 -
October 30).
• No additio nal mitiga tion for the loss o f roosting bat
hab itat is required.
BI0-3: Tree Pl anting Plan
Prior to th e issuan ce of any grading permits or
improvements plans, the applicant shall s ubmit to th e
satisfaction of the Director of Community Development,
evidence that th e following measures regarding
P roject applicant-
contracted arborist
Pri or to issuance of
any grading permit or
improvem ent plan.
4
Planning Division,
Community
Development
Department (C OD)
and Parks and Public
Works
26 Al pi ne Avenue
S-16-052
ND-17-001
Mitiga tion Monitorin g and Reporti ng Prog ra m
Prior to and d uring
removal of and
replanting of trees,
and prior to and
during land scaping
activities .
Initial s:
Date: ___ _
Initials:
Date:
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE 26 ALPINE AVENUE PROJECT (CONTINUED)
development of a Tree Pl anting Plan have been completed
or hav e b een incorporated into the construction
documents.
The Tree Planting Plan shall includ e the following:
a. Removal of the 5 prote cted trees (all with 30-3 5 feet
ca nopy diameters) will be replaced by four 24-inch box
trees o r two 36-inch box trees p er tree removed.
Replaceme nt trees must be species from the T own of Los
Gatos' approved tree specie s list.
b. Removal of 3 riparian tree species should be mitigated
by additional plantings in the project area. Planting
additional trees in the ri parian set back is not advised due
to the heavily shaded nature of the existing canopy cover.
c. Ecologically suitable native understory plants should be
p lanted o n the hill side above the riparian set back.
d. All landscaping shall be done with pla nes that are not
known to be inva sive.
Use a reputable nursery to source native plants that are
ge neticall y simil ar to those found in t he Santa Cruz
Moun tains.
B l0-4: Su dden Oak Death Sy ndrome
Prior to the issuance of any grading pe rmi ts or
improvements pl ans, th e appli cant shal l submit to the
satisfaction of the Director o f Com m unity Developme nt,
evidence that the followi ng measures have been
completed or have been incorporated into the
construction documents.
Prior to removal or trimming of any potentiall y infected
tree o r carrier tree species, sa mples will be taken by a
qualified arbo ri st and se nt to a labo ratory to determine th e
p resence or absence of SODS . If a positive t es t result
occurs, the applicant shall immediately consult with the
Oak Mortality Task Force and follow all applicable
recommendations for further tree removal, trimming,
d isposal of vegetation, and for decontamination of
equ ipment.
CUL-1: Archaeological Resources and Human Remains
Proj ect appl icant-
contracted arborist
Project applicant
Prior to issua n ce of
any grading permit or
improvement plan
Prior to issuance of
building permit
5
Plannin g Division,
Community
Development
Department (C DD),
an d Oak Mortali ty T as k
Force
Planning Division,
Community
26 Alp ine Avenue
S -16-052
ND -17--00 1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Prior to and during
tree removal
incorporate tree
testing
Prior to iss uance of
grading permit and
Initials:
Date: __ _
Initials:
Date: ___ _
Initials:
Date: ___ _
Initials:
Date: ___ _
Initials:
Date: ___ _
Initials:
Date: ___ _
Initials:
Date:
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE 26 ALPINE AVENUE PROJECT (CONTINUED)
Prior to the issuance of any grading permits or
improvements p lans, the applicant shall submit to t he
satisfaction of the Director of Community Development,
evidence that the following meas ures hav e been
completed or have been incorporated into th e
construction documents.
a. In the event that archaeological traces arc encountered,
all construction within a SO-m e ter radius of the find w ill
b e halted, th e Community D evelopment Director will be
notified, and an archaeologist will be retain ed to examine
t he find and make appropriate recomme ndations.
b. If human remains are discovered, the Sa nta Clara
Coun ty Coroner w ill be notified. T he Coron er will
determine whether or not the remains are Native
American. If the Coroner determines char the remains arc
not subject to his authority, he will notify the Native
A merica n Heritage Commission, who sh all attempt to
identi fy d escendants of the d eceased Native A merica ns.
c. I f th e Community Development Director finds that the
archaeological find is not a sign ifi cant resou rc e, work wil l
resum e only after the submittal of a p reliminary
arc haeological report and after provisions for reburial and
o ngoin g monitoring are accepted. Pro vis io n s for
identifying descenda nts o f a deceased Native American
and for re burial w ill foll ow the protocol se t forth in
CEQA G uide lines Section 15064 .5( e). If the site is found
to be a signi fica nt archaeological site, a mitigation program
wil l be prepared and submitted to the Community
D evelopme nt Director for con sideration an d approval, in
con formance wit h the protocol set forth in Pub lic
Resources Code Sec tio n 21083.2.
d. A final report s hall be p repared when a find is
determined to be a significant archaeological site, and/ o r
when Native American remains are found on the site. The
final report will include background information on th e
completed work, a desc ripti on and list of identified
resources, the disposition and curation of these resources,
any testi ng, o th er recovered information, and conclusio ns.
6
Development
Department (CDD),
County Coroner, and
Native American
lle ritage Commission
26 Alpine Avenue
S-16-052
ND-17-001
Mitigation Monitoring and Repo rting Program
during grading
ac ti vities.
Initial s:
Date: ___ _
Initials:
Date: ___ _
Initials:
Date: ___ _
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE 26 ALPINE AVENUE PROJECT (CONTIN UED)
G E0-1: Geotechnical Report Recommendations.
The project applicam shall implement all of the
recommendation s of t he project gcotcchnical report, and
any associated updates or revisions, related to site
preparation and grading, foundati o n design, driveways,
retain in g walls, and drainage improvements. To emure
correct implementation, the geotec hnical engineer shall
re view project plan s and o b serve geotechnical-re lcvant
aspects of propose d initial construction of roads and
infrastru cture. The geotechnical e ngin eer shall submit an
"as built" le tter to the Direc tor o f Public Works stating
that the project has been constructed in con formance with
th e recommendations of the geotcchnical rep o rt.
HWQ-1: Cons truction E rosio n Control Me asures.
Pri o r to the iss uance of grading p ermits or improvement
plans in li eu of g rading permits, th e applicanc shall:
D emo nstrate to the satisfactio n of the Town Engineer
that th e project's stormwate r q uality control measures ,
including the erosion control features described in the
project's final Erosion Control Plan have been
incorporated into th e project d esign.
Proj ect appli cant
Proj ect applicant
Prior to issuan ce of
b uilding permit
Prior to th e issuance
of grading p ermits
7
Planning Division,
Community
D evelopment
D epartment (C DD)
and Parks and Public
Works
T own E ngin eer
26 Alpine Avenue
S-16-052
ND-17-001
Mitigation Monitori ng and Repo rting Program
Prior to issuance of Initials:
building permit, Date:
ens ure d es igns arc
im plemented during
construction Initials:
Date:
Initials:
Date:
Initi al>:
Date:
Prio r to the iss uance Initi al s:
of grading permits Date:
Initi al s:
Date:
A
TREE #9
Removal of additional trees
Co ncern ab out root sys tem, BOT H o f our tree since it is on property line
Need opinion from Consulting Arb o ris t , not Arborist , but a Co ns ulting Arborist
Initial arborist said di gging u n d e r the tree fo r pool will kill it (da mage t o ro ot syst em)
How will the tree b e prot ect ed during construction
What is the remedy if the tree dies as a result of construction (old g rowth Oak Tree)
Why two p ermits fo r r emoval of trees, why the n ee d t o r emove mor e?
... _ ...
Barrie D. Coate and Coate, Barrie. Cert. 23535 S ummit Road Office: 408-3 53-1052
Associat es A rb orist # 1897. Los Gatos. CA 95033-9307 Fax : 408-353-1238
'LPINE AVE NUE
Consulting Arboris t #23 7
Ccn. in Honiculturc, UC
Santa Cn1z. 1991.
PROPOSED RESIDEN CE
26 ALPINE AVENUE
Stree t Profil e A
RECEIVED NAME FROM:
Bill B erridge
Tr ee Div. Manage r
Certified Arborist #WE-5525
v . (40 8 ) 288-294 0
F. (4 08) 392-9014
C. (4 0 8 ) 595-8455
1
AV EN UE
' \. J,I
... ~~ ..., -
- l fu
L.\
PRO POSED RESll
26 ALPINE AVE
IXBIBIT 1 4
B
NOISE AND VIBRATIONS
DRILLING, BLASTING, DIGGING
How are they digging into the hill?
Who is monitoring the noise a nd vibration levels?
If digging impacts our home, what is the remedy?
TQ\XI N OF I.OS GATOS
2 0 2 0 G E N E R A l P I . A N
:-l O I SE E LE M E :-.IT
Action N Ol-7.3 Any Environmental Review document prepared for the
Town fo r a project that identifies n oise factors shall relate
the n oise data to the Town's Noise Ordinance to give the
Planning Commission and Town Council a standard for
comparison.
c
VIEW
The house was sold to us with a "view'', the Corey's told u s repeatedly that we would not see the new home
at all. As you can see from the photos of the story poles, our view is being obstructed and we can see the
home. Once again, we were told by Susan Corey and Micheal Riese that we would NOT see the home once
it was built. They even markete d the view it in brochures, see copies of the marketing material. We asked
to see the drawings of the home and was told by both Mrs. Corey and Mr. Riese that the drawings were
not available, they had not begun the process. Please note, they submitted the drawings for the proposed
home days after closing of 38 Alpine Ave. This is all on record.
Closing of 38 Alpine Aye ,July 19, 2016. The drawings that I see at Los Gatos are from August 29, 2016.
This suggested that the drawings were drawn and approved within 1 month according of closing, clearly
this is not possible. To prove that, my husband was asked to review drawings at the Architects office in
November 2016, and the drawings were actually dated January 2016, seven months before we purchased
the house! Clearly the Corey's chose to not properly disclose their plans. even when repeatedly asked.
D
ROOF AND CHIMNEY HEIGHT
My husband met with the Architect in Novembe r 2016. H e expressed his concern about the roof and
chimney height. Neither the Corey's nor the Architect have contacted my husband since he expressed his
concern.
E
WORK SCHEDULE
Dropping off of equipment and materials . My husband was already blocked in the street by work trucks,
r eturning home from work, and this was only for the poles were being ins talled. This is just the
beginning. How is the work schedule being regulated and controlled? Please note all the justifiable
concerns that the neighborhood exp ressed during the parking discussions with the town . If trucks are
parked on both sides of the street, how are emergency vehicles going to pass. Please refer to notes at the
recent town hall meeting approving the Alpine Ave. 90 Minute Parking Restrictions. Construction trucks
should abide by all the rules approved and upheld in recent sessions.
F
90 MINUTE PARKING
Who is enforcing this? Who do we call?
G
Contact Person
Who do we contact if we have a concern regarding, Construction, Parking or No ise Levels? How does it get
resolved. Not th e Corey's directly , a town planner in Los Gatos or working on the project
H
POOL LOCATION
Once again, the Corey's stated at tour of the house that we would not see the n ew home. Pl ease note, they
designed a pool at the property line. When they sold u s 38 Alpine there are three sitting areas t o enjoy the
view of the woods. One is a courtyard (photo), one has an outdoor fireplace and a deck on the second
floor. All three will have a direct view of the home.
I
PENALTIES
I doubt anything would be intentionally circumvented, but in the event any restrictions are not followed,
how will that be rectified, what are the penalties? There needs to be established ground rules up front.
J
FENCE
Since the proposed home is so close to the property line, additional bushes and trees should be planted on
the constructio n side, to block workers looking into my Family Ro om
K
ADDITIONAL WORK ON STREET
Additional project across the street from proposed site
There will be an additional project across the street, how will the two be reconciled?
. ' ....
l
OFFERED AT $5,145,00~
...
.. -t >,,. '~.. • •. I
nt~wri &ta~:,. · -' 1 .~ .:.t
. . .. .t ..... 4) ' f
' { • • • ?> • • :~ ' • •
..
l
:
Rare~ does one find ~ P!Qpe,rty such as this. An elegaMSy de$igned and app(>ir\ted borne boasting
unrivaled curb appeal a'ntt priyacy' sltuateid irt 8'18 of tbe prerntet doWritown los Gatos locations. Located
on Alpine Avenue, Qne of th~ rare gems of ~,-this home offer.s immediate accem to downtown
Los Gatos ame~ wf;i" offering the stately .elegan"€e of an expansive, ~~ YJ ~re ~·.
. . · ·, ~ _. • . • ~:: "l . ., .; : •_ • . , . . · · , ,. . . . 'r·.: -: .. ~ , ·_'. .._ . ··.. ' . .. I :
Set bad from th&~ ~d el~~ i ·~ ~~of green 1aw n a mature landsc.aping,
• .. -.. ,_ • ' * • ~ ., ,... •
one is iinmedia~ struCk by,..-the Ofd world el~nce anct ~i-gn of the home.' From the stamped
cbncrete-driveway to . the cast concrete steps and walkwaysr no exterior aeiail has been ovet1ooked.
.....
Upon entering the home one is immediate_!Ystrutk :byihe ~lted tellings and amazing flow of the home, a
combinatiOn of etegant design ~With~ amenlt~)lld comforts .
• .• I
.• .
., ..
SUMMARY OF THE HOME
Elegant and timeless estate home situated on a
very privat-e 112 acre in down~ Los Gatos
.
Breathtaking circular entrance with elegant and
--~iaetm grass-cloth wall coverings
• Tom T. Travers designed home and interiors <.JOl'CJe!(). us master suite with attached balcony
ering privacy and views of surrounding hills
•
using the finest materiab · ·
Multiple outdoor areas to entertain It'd unwfnd,
\nc\ud\~ ¥\ ouuioat ~ f\tep\a<.~-
· · • SePJirate ground-floor bonus room or au pair/
~'Y. maintained and updated ho~ : · . gitest suite with abitlty to add walk·m closet
withd.es~~r, lightiflg and fixtures~ -. . . .
Tremendous bonus room with kitchen
~~ m\\\t-j tot ext~ Cj\fe'f>t~fau-?a\{ 0{
entertainment space .
. · • .ure and metieulously maintained
Custom -cabinetry, woodwork a nd trim · scaping with tremendous privacy
throughout ·
Custom front doors feat wing natural fight
.~ -. • Solid wpotldt>Or s 1811d windoWs with
t-~ .• ' . . <.·~ ; · :~ ~; , ;tremendous nature~ light • Gorgeously flmshe~ !~n~ r~ with
double washer and ~s:. ··-. _ ·
. " •! • ' . .
~~/ . ... .. '. ·~ t. " .... ~.1 • '
r ~.:: .... •. -~ ~.,. Gtea~i~ ~tiart Pie~~ f't<>M · ··· ~ -r~
· · · · • •· Four-car garage wt.th ability to convert to five or
' • · · ~r effle~t/gr~rt home wttn pre-paid solar · use as workshop, featuring sol\d wood carriage
system and -$2Sk of energ~ efficiency upgra~s doors . ... ~ . ' . . ... . ~ ., .,
A short stroll .ta Los Gatos High School, Library.
anddowntown · ·
r.
l \,.. .. . . . ..
.... .:& ;...:... ~---,f, Q .... •• ...;... •
1
...... rl' . -_ ...
'fvHCRAEL RIESE
408 .781 .7692
650.209.0613
michael .rie se@cbnorc al.com
Riese Rea I Estate . com
CalBRE #01366625
. ..
Coldwell Banker Team
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank