Hillside Fences, Hedges, and Walls - Desk Item and Exhibit 7
PREPARED BY: SEAN MULLIN, AICP
Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Planning Manager and Community Development Department 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: 5
DESK ITEM
DATE: JULY 26, 2017
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: JOEL PAULSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: TOWN CODE AMENDMENT APPLICATION A-17-002. PROJECT LOCATION:
TOWN WIDE. APPLICANT: TOWN OF LOS GATOS.
CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 29 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF
THE TOWN CODE REGARDING FENCES, HEDGES, AND WALLS.
REMARKS:
The attached public comments (Exhibit 7) were received after distribution of the staff report.
EXHIBITS:
Previously received with July 21, 2017, Staff Report:
1. Findings
2. Ordinance Priorities Memorandum dated February 12, 2017, from Robert Shultz, Town
Attorney
3. Draft Amendments to Chapter 29 of Town Code
4. General Plan Policies and Actions pertaining to Fences, wildlife habitats, and migration
corridors
5. Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines pertaining to fences
6. Public Comments received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, July 21, 2017
Received with this Desk Item:
7. Public Comment received between 11:01, Friday, July 21, 2017, and 11:00 a.m., Wednesday, July 26,
2017
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\Fences Amendments 07-26-17 DESK.docx 7/26/2017 11:38 AM
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
To : Los Gatos Planning Commission
Re: Fence Ordinance Revision , 7/26/2017
From : Dave Weissman and Lee Quintana
A. There has been good citizen input, which is always useful since few people can think of
everything. Assuming that the PC accepts the need for this fence revision , we list some
areas from the public comment letters that we think have validity and that should be
incorporated into the next draft. We ask the PC to discuss on 7 /26/2017
1. Hillside (E) (1): Add vegetable and edible food gardens more than 30 feet from
primary structure . Also consider BBQ picnic and playground areas .
2 . Can Minor Residential Development permits fees be reduced? Presently some
$2,223 . We are interested in getting people into COD so that they can be up dated as
to these new regulations -high fees could inhibit such compliance. Also, under
Hillside Replacement and Modification, (C) (2), if the property owner is improving
wildlife movement, can we charge just a waiver fee of $233?
3. We are mostly interested in side and back yard perimeter fences being wildlife
friendly, not front yard fences. If you agree, we would like to make appropriate
changes in the next draft.
B. Here we show some specific wording that we suggest should be changed in the current
draft (shown underlined)
1. Hillside areas, (B) (5) a. The minimum height above grade for new fence bottom
rungs, shall be 16 inches to allow small animals to easily pass under.
2 . (B) (7) f. Vertical fence posts shall be at least 8 feet apart, since I understand that
this is the standard board length and not 10 feet.
3 . In G, add after " ... without required approval, except as provided for in (0) and (E) ... "
REC _-.:vED
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
r '"'"}',....'"' ] ?LJ~!'~~:~~'-.J _n ,_.,JI 1
EXHIBIT 7
C. We reply to some public comments, since there is inadequate time to discuss during 3
minutes and there are some good suggest ion s in the 6 submitted letters.
1. Dav i d Klinger is concerned about his 6' high fence with a 1 foot lattice on top. Since
he lives in a non -hillside area , the code doesn 't change for him . Plu s, he can get a
waive r for the con struction of a privacy fence .
2. Pamela Bond is concerned that a 42" tall fence is too short to keep in a dog and
protect her kids from coyotes . We agree, as the code is mostly aimed at perimeter
side and back yard fences . We propose to add playground areas to the (E) (1)
Exceptions section . We don't support fencing in a large part of the back yard since
such might increase coyote interaction s with her children as the animals will have
fewer ways to avoid people .
3. Christopher Kankel says that corral and domestic animal fencing will be prohibited
>30' from the primary structure . This is wrong -see (E) (3). Mr. Kankel also worries
about a secure automobile gate, which is already covered by HDS&G on pages 43
and 44 . Mr. Kankel al so asks for greater flexibility in placing a security fence . Again ,
the aim of thi s ordinance is to increase the amount of wildlife friendly habitat but he
can always ask for an Exception under section (E) (4).
4. Peter Donnelly thinks that 30 ' is too hard a rule . He can always apply for a hard ship
exception (E) (4). He also wants 30 ' mea sured from accessory structure and not j ust
from primary residence . If the owner can demon strate a need for a fence around a
patio, then he can apply for an Exception . The code already provide s, and in fact,
requires a fence around a pool. Lastly, entry gates are already permitted by the
HDS&G.
5. Anthony Badame makes 2 sugge stions and we agree with both.
2
6. Tanya Kurland is worried about deer and deer ticks and Lyme Disease . In fact, in
California, the main hosts for deer ticks are western gray squirrels and wood rats , not
deer. Plus, wooden fences are good habitats for western fence lizards, whose blood
kills the Lyme Disease bacteria when the juvenile ticks feed on lizard blood. She
would like to expand possible fenced areas to include certain activity sites like picnic
and playground areas, probably because of her concern about ticks . Fence heights, if
needed for privacy, can exceed 42 inches under non-hillsides (B) (2)(a) and can be
added to the hillside Exceptions (E) section . There are no restrictions on her fixing
her community gate if it needs repair.
3
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank