Loading...
Item 07 - 341 Bella Vista Ave - Addendum & Exhibit 23-24• 1 . TOWN OF LOS GATOS -PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 'os 6~,~., Meeting Date: June 22, 2016 ITEM NO: 7 ADDENDUM PREPARED BY: APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: CONTACT: APPLICATION SUMMARY: EXHIBITS: Marni Moseley, AICP, Associate Planner MMo scley@ losgato sca.go v Architecture and Site Application S-12-103 Subdivision Application M-12-008 Negative Declaration ND-16-001 341 Bella Vista A venue (west side of Bella Vi sta A venue, north of Charles Street) Jake Peters and Dan Ro ss Dan Ross Requesting approval to merge two lots and to construct a new single - family residence and remove large protected trees on property zo ned R-1 :8 . No significant environmental impact s have been identified and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended. APN 52 9-23-015 and 016. Previously received under separate cover March 4, 2016: I. Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Previously received with April 13, 2016 Staff Report: 2. Location map 3. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (six pages) 4. Response to comments on Mitigated Negative Declaration (48 pages) 5. Required findings (two pages) 6. Recommended Conditions of Appro val (13 pages) 7 . Project data sheet (two pages) 8. Consulting Architect 's report (four pages), recei ved November 13, 2013 9. Consulting Arbori st report (35 pages), dated October 28, 2013 10. Consulting Arbori st report (11 pages), dated September 24, 2014 11. Applicant's letter (seven pages), received March 25 , 201 6 12. Town Co uncil Reso lution 2012-057 (three pages) 13. Public Comments received by 11 :00 a.m. o n April 7, 2016 ( 15 8 pages) 14. Deve lopment Plans (26 sheets), received March 24, 2016 Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 2 341 Bella Vista Avenue/S-12-103/M-12-008/ND-l 6-001 June 22, 2016 REMARKS: Previously received with April 13, 2016 Desk Item: 15. Comments recei ved from 11:01 a.m. on April 7, 2016 to 11:00 a.m. on April 13, 2016 Previously received with May 25, 2016 Staff Report: 16. Comments received from 11:01 a.m. on Thursday, April 13 , 2016 to 11:00 a.m. on Wednesday, May 19 , 2016 17. Applicant's respon se letter and material s, received May 19 , 2016 (25 pages) Previously received with May 25, 2016 Addendum Report: 18. Comments received from 11 :01 a.m. on Wednesday May 19 , 2016 to 11 :00 a.m. on Tuesday, May 24, 2016 Previously received with May 25, 2016 Desk Item Report : 19 . Comments received from 11 :01 a.m. on Wednesday May 19 , 2016 to 11:00 a.m. on Wednesday, May 25, 2016 Previously received with June 22, 2016 Staff Report: 20. Applicant's response letter, received June 16 , 2016 (two pages) 21. Comments recei ved between 11:01 a.m. on Wednesday May 25 , 2016 and 11 :00 a.m. on Thursday June 16 , 2016 22. Revised development plans, recei ved June 16, 2016 (14 pages) Received with this Addendum Report: 23. Comments received between 11:01 a.m. on Thursday June 16, 2016 and 11 :00 a.m. on Monday June 20, 2016 24. Additional information provided by the applicant, received June 20, 2016 (three pages) Additional comments were recei ved after completion of the Staff report (Attachment 23). Additionally, the applicant has provided neighborhood/site renderings and additional information regarding the ability to turn around on-site, reducing the need for a car to back-up onto Bella Vista Avenue (Attachment 24). Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 3 341 Bella Vista A venue/S-12-103 /M-12-008/N D-16-001 June 22 , 2016 Prepared by: Marni Moseley, AICP Associate Planner JP:MM:cg .tpproved by: Joel Paulson, AICP Community Development Director cc: Dan Ro ss, 188 Villa A venue, Lo s Gatos, CA 95030 Jake Peters, P.O. Box 3486, Ketchum, ID 83340 N :\DEV\PC REPORTS\20 16\Bella Yi sta-341-6-22-16-ADD.doc This Page Intentionally Left Blank Ken Lown 156 Maggi Ct. Los Gatos, CA 95032 June 20, 2016 Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department 110 East Main Street Los Gatos , CA 95031 RE: 341 Bella Vista Avenue RECEIVED JUN 2 0 2016 TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING DIVISION The last two Planning Commission (PC) meetings bn the topic of the proposed development at 341 Bella Vista Avenue were disappointing. The PC had asked the neighbors meet with Dan Ross to discuss an enhanced proposal from Dan that would address the neighbor's concerns, my concerns. The meeting with Dan Ross and the neighbors, including my wife Mary Ann, happened last week but unfortunately I was traveling on business and was unable to attend. My understanding, however, is that Dan was unprepared and discussed the same proposal provided towards the end of the last PC with some expectations that the neighbors would design his landscaping for screening. There was no real attempt by the developer to reduce the Mass and Scale to be within the Hillside Guidelines. This is unacceptable. The main concerns have still not been addressed, in particular Mass and Scale. The proposed structure is still too large. The Hillside Guidelines suggest something below -1400 Sq. Ft. in total floor area for this slope and lot size. It also states (and this has been reiterated several times) that an applicant may not be allowed the maximum FAR depending on lot restrictions which suggest the PC has some discretion. Although I understand the imposed definition of a "cellar" it was clear from at least one presentation, including the comments by Sandy Decker, during the last Planning Commission meeting on this development that Dan's proposed usage of the "cellar" as living space is not within the spirit or intent of the guideline. It appears to me, this is a case were the PC should apply their discretion and drive the development to something that does meet the letter, spirit, and intent of the Hillside Guidelines.. I recall the Town Counsel during the last PC meeting stating repeatedly that the PC has discretion. There are two other points where the proposed development hits the maximum allowable. One is the driveway at a 15 degree slope. This is incredibly steep and could be remedied by a significantly smaller structure pushed further up the hill. There was some suggestion during the last PC meeting on this topic that a variance might be allowed for a shorter driveway (i .e., discretion applied). It was odd to me that it was suggested that Bella Vista Avenue is already a traffic problem so a small addition to that problem would be OK. Pushing the structure further up would provide a much less steep driveway that would improve visibility of the people backing up this driving into the street and people driving on the street to see the car trying to back up the driveway. The 2°d point is the concept of a three story elevation which goes to the total actual height of the three story structure vs. the fact that is has three floors. So which is it, the total height or the fact EXHIBIT 2 3 that it has three actual floors given the garage forms the 3rd floor? The PC has apparently applied discretion in this case indicating that 3 floors are OK providing it does not exceed a 3 story elevation. I ask the Planning Commission to reject the current proposal by Dan Ross for 341 Bella Vista Avenue as being excessive in Mass and Scale with respect to the both the Hillside Standards and the significant negative impact on the neighbors below. Regards, Ken Lown Negatively impacted neighbor June 20, 2016 Town of Los Gatos Los Gatos Planning Department llOE. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 Subject: 339 &341 Bella Vista Avenue Applications Applicant: Dan Ross Planning Commission Meeting June 22, 2016 Objections to proposed Construction Settlement RECE IVED JUN 2 0 2016 TOWN OF LO S GATOS P L AN N!NG Dl\ilSi O N At the insistence of the planning Commission I decided to meet with Dan Ross to listen to his newest proposal to address the issues raised by myself and my neighbors on Maggi Ct and Bella Vista Avenue . We had proactively reached out to Dan requesting he present the plans prior to a meeting. He continued to postpone our planned meetings and promised to have plans to us no later than Tuesday June 14th. With that promise we agreed to meet on Wednesday June 15th. The Maggi Ct neighbors reserved a meeting room at the Los Gatos Recreation Center at our expense. As of 5 pm that Wednesday Dan still had not provided the plans for us to review so I assumed there would be no meeting. However, at 6pm Dan contacted Nick Williamson and stated that he did have the plans and was prepared to show them to us. I and the other neighbors agreed to meet with him in person at the rec center to pick up the plans . He said he was printing them and would meet us at 7:15 pm . He showed up but did not have the plans. He tried to show them to us on his computer but was unable to do it. I stayed and listened to him tell us about the plans which were no different than what he had presented at the last Planning Commission. He spoke about plants, shrubs tress and his landscape contractor but had no drawings to show. He said we could decide where to put plants when the building was complete. I was disappointed with the meeting. Too many delays and in the end nothing new or different to review. He promised to have the plans delivered to my home by the next day Thursday. I did not see the plans on Thursday or Friday. It was late Friday that he posted electronically for us to revi ew. I am very concerned about the Bulk and Mass of this home. This is a three story home (I don't consider the lower floor as a cellar) and it is very threating to the neighbors below. It invades our privacy with a house so close and so high where people can look into our bedrooms and backyards. The look and feel of the home does not blend in with the Bella Vista neighborhood or anywhere in Los Gatos . I am requesting that the planning commission deny this petition. Sincerely. Mary Ann Lown 156 Maggi Ct, Los Gatos Marni Moseley From: Sent: To: Subject: Lead agency: Application No: Project Location: Debra Chin <debrachin@aol.com > Monday, June 20 , 2016 9:59 AM Marni Moseley 341 Bella Vista Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 Architecture and Site Application S-12-103 Subdivision Application M-12-008 Negative Declaration ND-16-001 341 Bella Vista Avenue Dear Vice Chair Kane and Planning Commissioners: Thank you for continuing the hearing from May 25 to allow time for the applicant and neighbors to discuss proposed changes that would address the privacy and bulk/mass issues with the current application for 341 Bella Vista Avenue. I will be unable to attend the hearing on June 22nd as I will be traveling on business, so am documenting my position via this correspondence. I am submitting this as an addendum to go out to the Planning Commission in advance of the Desk Items related to this matter .. I was one of the neighbors who facilitated the meeting space and met with Dan Ross at the Los Gatos Recreation Center on the evening of June 15th. Unfortunately, Mr. Ross only came with the initial drawings for the plans and talked through the same changes that he described at the last hearing on May 25th so there was no new information conveyed regarding plans to reduce bulk and mass. He did describe the suggestions made by his landscaper, who included recommendations for various plants and the addition of a 10' to 14' wall for screening purpose to address privacy concerns. I have now reviewed the updated drawings and landscaping plan as submitted to the town by the applicant on June 16th . From my perspective , the main issue that remains unaddressed is the bulk and mass of the project for the extreme nature of these hillside lots . While Mr. Ross is open to feedback/discussion on the type of flora and walls used in the landscape plan, he is not willing to discuss a more significant reduction in overall square footage that would make it appropriate for the site and consistent with the intent of the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines. In fact, during the June 15th meeting Mr. Ross remarked that he had rejected the idea of reducing the overall size of the house further as "we don't see it changing anyone 's life that much". Including the latest revisions, the proposed house is 2,470 square feet. I am well aware that the town staff has determined that the level with the bedrooms and bathrooms of the house is a cellar due to the fact that it meets the technical specifications . However, the classification of this space (nearly 50% of the entire house square footage) as a cellar directly contradicts the original intent and spirt of the cellar policy to "reduce the appearance of bulk and mass" as expressed so eloquently by former Los Gatos Mayor Sandy Decker during the May 25th hearing. In past communications to the Planning Commissioners on this project, Mr. Ross has used the Bella Vista townhomes to justify the size of his proposed home(s). T he largest of the floor plans for the town homes are a total of 1650 square feet, situated on flat lots. We have bylaws that govern privacy and any changes to our exteriors to ensure that we have recourse if there are transgressions against any of the proximate neighbors. Mr. Ross' house sits 30 feet away from his nearest neighbor, and there is no protection for the community (60 affected neighbors on Bella Vista and on Maggi Court) if the plan for this excessively large house that is out of character with the neighborhood is allowed to proceed as planned . 1 It is in the purview of the Planning Comm ission and w ithin the di sc retion of the Planning Commi ssion to determine whether or not the proposed house is appropriate for the site, regardless of whether it meets individual zoning standards or is consistent with individual aspects of the Hillside Standards and Guidelines . Please deny the application and continue to uphold the Hillside Standards and Guidelines which were enacted to preserve the character and beauty of the Town of Los Gatos . Sincerely, Debra Chin 154 Maggi Court 2 This Page Intentionally Left Blank 6/16/16 DRAWING DATE:SHEETNOTES:REVISIONS:© COPYRIGHT:THESE DRAWINGSAND DETAILS ARECOPYRIGHTED ANDARE THE EXCLUSIVEPROPERTY OF JAKEPETERS. ANYUNAUTHORIZED USEOR REPRODUCTION ISPROHIBITED BY LAWWITHOUT THEEXPRESS WRITTENPERMISSION.CONTACT::GARAGE PLANA-2.1 CONTRACTOR:: ENGINEERING::N2 2 1 1 3 3 3 3 24'-0"12'-6"20'-0"6'-5"19'-9"8'-0"26'-21/4"26'-3" TO FENCE3'-0"13'-101/4"6'-111/2"15'-5"8'-43/4"17'-13/4"2'-51/2"15'-91/4"20'-93/4"12'-6"41'-1"1 8'-0" D RIV E W ID T H 5'-0"26'-3" DRIVE LENGTH TO PROP LINE14'-3"2 0 '-0 " 2 0 '-1 1 "20'-11"100' 19 PROPOSED "PRIVACY" SCREENING (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) PROPOSED "PRIVACY" SCREENING (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) PROPOSED "PRIVACY" SCREENING (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) 20 10 12 13 14 18 17 PLANTINGS PLANTINGS PLANTINGS 2 11 3 21 8 16 15 TRENCH DRAIN GUARD RAIL LOCATE UTILITIES (BELOW) UTILITIES (NEW SERVICE) -TO BE LOCATED PROPOSED "PRIVACY" SCREENING (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) PROPOSED "PRIVACY" SCREENING (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) SHIELDED LED PATHWAY LIGHTS (TYP) SHIELDED LED PATHWAY LIGHTS (TYP) SHIELDED LED PATHWAY LIGHTS (TYP) SHIELDED LED PATHWAY LIGHTS (TYP) SHIELDED LED PATHWAY LIGHTS (TYP) SHIELDED LED PATHWAY LIGHTS (TYP) SHIELDED D.L. RAISED PLANTER GARDEN PRIVACY WALL WIDE ENOUGH TO BLOCK VIEWS DOWNSLOPE PROVIDE DRAINAGE AT ALL LANDINGS & PATIO LOCATIONS COORDINATE WITH CIVIL DRAIN PROVIDE DRAINAGE AT ALL LANDINGS & PATIO LOCATIONS COORDINATE WITH CIVIL DRAIN PROVIDE DRAINAGE AT ALL LANDINGS & PATIO LOCATIONS COORDINATE WITH CIVIL DRAIN PROVIDE INTERNAL ROOF DRAINS NOTE: OUTDOOR LIVING SPACE LOCATED TO OFFER MAXIMUM PRIVACY FOR BOTH RESIDENTS AND NEIGHBORS. LOCATIONS ARE STRATEGICALLY PLACED ON THE SOUTH (SCREENED) END OF THE STRUCTURE, HEMMED IN BY GARAGE WALLS, PATIO WALLS AND EXISTING TREE CANOPIES NOTE: OUTDOOR LIVING SPACE LOCATED TO OFFER MAXIMUM PRIVACY FOR BOTH RESIDENTS AND NEIGHBORS. LOCATIONS ARE STRATEGICALLY PLACED ON THE SOUTH (SCREENED) END OF THE STRUCTURE, HEMMED IN BY GARAGE WALLS, PATIO WALLS AND EXISTING TREE CANOPIES SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" GARAGE PLAN/ROOF PLAN 339 SETBACK PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE SETBACK OFF PAVEMENT65.0177.24 69.50PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEEDGE OF PAVEMENTBELLA VISTA AVENUE FENCE-LINETO FACE OFBUILDINGPROP. LINETO FENCE341 SETBACKSETBACK OFF PAVEMENT2 CAR GARAGE ROOF DECK TURNAROUND DN DN EL = 102.0' EL = 95.75' EL = 96.33'' EL = 96.33' GREEN ROOF EL = 84.75'OFFSET BETWEEN BUILDINGSOFFSET FROM PROP LINEOFFSET BETWEEN BUILDINGS400 sq ft SETBACKCONC SLAB, SLOPE TO DRAIN EDGE OF PAVEMENT ALLOWABLE FAR 1,620 sq ft2548 TOTAL sq ft MAIN 1,188 sq ft PROPOSED FAR 1,392 sq ft2ND LVL 204 sq ft CELLAR 1,156 sq ft = 15% GARAGE 24' x 22'400 S.F.BUILDING SETBACKBUILDING SETBACKBUILDING SETBACKBUILDING SETBACK BUILDING SETBACK S E T B A C K L I N EBUILDING SETBACKBUILDING SETBACKBUILDING SETBACKPROP. SETBACKDN DN R O O F O V E R H A N G ROOF OVERHANGPROVIDE DRAINAGE AT ALL LANDINGS & PATIO LOCATIONS TIE INTO 4" INTERNAL DRAINPIPES COORDINATE WITH CIVIL SHEET C-2 EL = 84.75' LIGHTWELL BELOW PATIO BELOW 3 3 20'-0"25'-9" 3 0 '- 4 1 / 2 " 1 SHIELDED D.L. NOTE: OUTDOOR LIVING SPACE LOCATED TO OFFER MAXIMUM PRIVACY FOR BOTH RESIDENTS AND NEIGHBORS. LOCATIONS ARE STRATEGICALLY PLACED ON THE SOUTH (SCREENED) END OF THE STRUCTURE, HEMMED IN BY GARAGE WALLS, PATIO WALLS AND EXISTING TREE CANOPIES POTTED 6'-0" OLIVE TREE 6/18/16 DRAWING DATE:SHEETNOTES:REVISIONS:© COPYRIGHT:THESE DRAWINGSAND DETAILS ARECOPYRIGHTED ANDARE THE EXCLUSIVEPROPERTY OF JAKEPETERS. ANYUNAUTHORIZED USEOR REPRODUCTION ISPROHIBITED BY LAWWITHOUT THEEXPRESS WRITTENPERMISSION.CONTACT::CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGSA-5.7 CONTRACTOR:: ENGINEERING:: VIEW FROM THE SOUTHVIEW FROM THE NORTH VIEW LOOKING WEST AERIALBELLA VISTA NORTHBOUNDBELLA VISTA SOUTHBOUND 6/18/16 DRAWING DATE:SHEETNOTES:REVISIONS:© COPYRIGHT:THESE DRAWINGSAND DETAILS ARECOPYRIGHTED ANDARE THE EXCLUSIVEPROPERTY OF JAKEPETERS. ANYUNAUTHORIZED USEOR REPRODUCTION ISPROHIBITED BY LAWWITHOUT THEEXPRESS WRITTENPERMISSION.CONTACT::CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGS (2)A-5.8 CONTRACTOR:: ENGINEERING:: REVISED - VIEW FROM THE SOUTH REVISED - VIEW FROM THE NORTH PREVIOUS - VIEW FROM THE SOUTH PREVIOUS - VIEW FROM THE NORTH VIEW FROM PATHVIEW FROM STAIRSKITCHEN WINDOW SCREEN FINS ALTERNATIVE DRIVE W/ TURNAROUND ALTERNATIVE DRIVE W/ TURNAROUND