Item 03 - 125 Wheeler Ave - Staff Report & Exhibits 1-10TOWN OF LOS GATOS ITEM NO: 3
PLANNING COMMISSI ON STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: August 24, 2016
PREPARED BY:
APPLICATION NO:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT/
CONTACT PERSON:
PROPERTY OWNER:
Jocelyn Puga, Assistant Planner
jpuga@losgatosca.gov
Architecture and Site Application S-16-039
125 Wheeler Avenue (located on the north side of Wheeler
A venue, east of Los Gatos Boulevard)
Tony Jeans
Jeffrey Avilla and Darcy Viale-Avilla
APPLICATION SUMMARY: Requesting approval to demolish an existing single-family
residence and to construct a new single-family residence on
property zoned R-1 :8. APN 532-36-065.
RECOMMENDATION :
PROJECT DAT A :
CEQA:
DEEMED COMPLETE: August 9, 2016
FINAL DATE TO TAKE ACTION: February 9, 2017
Approval, subject to recommended conditions.
General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential
Zoning Designation: R-1 :8 -Single-Family
Residential , 8,000-square foot lot
mlillmum
Applicable Plans & Standards: General Plan; Residential Design
Guidelines
Parcel Size: 8,000 square feet
Surrounding Area:
Existing Land Use General Plan ZoninJ:?;
North Residential Low Density Residential R-1 :8
East Residential Low Density Residential R-1:8
South Residential Low Density Residential R-1 :8
West Residential Medium Density R-lD
Residential
The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted
Guidelines for the Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures.
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 2
125 Wheeler Avenue/S-16-039
August 24, 2016
FINDINGS :
CONS ID ERA TIO NS:
ACTION:
EXHIBITS :
• As required , pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,
this project is Categorically Exempt, Section 15303: New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.
• As required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the Town Code for
the demolition of a single-family residence.
• As required by the Residential Design Guidelines that the
project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines.
• As required by Section 29 .20.150 of the Town Code for
granting approval of an Architecture and Site application.
The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless
appealed within ten days.
1. Location Map
2. Findings (one page)
3. Recommended Conditions of Approval (12 pages)
4. Project Data Sheet (one page)
5. Applicant's Letters of Justification, received May 18, 2016
(two pages)
6. Applicant's Arborist Report, received on May 18, 2016 (28
pages)
7. Town's Consulting Arborist Report, received June 6, 2016
(five pages)
8. Town's Consulting Architect Report, received June 15, 2016
(five pages)
9 . Neighbor Correspondence, received June 30, 2016
(four pages)
10. Applicant's Response to Neighbor Correspondence,
received August 15, 2016 (four pages)
11 . Neighbor Letter of Objection, received July 18, 2016 (120
pages)
12. Applicant's Response to Neighbor Letter of Objection,
received August 15, 2016 (one page)
13. Neighbor Letter of Support, received July 18, 2016 (one
page)
14. Color and Material sheet, received July 19, 2016
(one page)
15. Public Comments received by 11 :00 a.m. August 18 , 2016
16. Development Plans, received August 9, 2016 (12 pages)
17. Additional Neighbor Objections, received August 18 , 2016
(27 pages)
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 3
125 Wheeler Avenue/S-16-039
August 24, 2016
BACKGROUND:
The subject site is located on the north side of Wheeler Avenue, east of Los Gatos Boulevard
(see Exhibit 1). The lot is approximately 8,000 square feet with an existing 2,084-square foot
two-story residence. The immediate neighborhood is a mix of single-family and multi-family
housing and contains one and two-story homes .
The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing home and construct a new 2 ,586-square foot
two-story residence with a 561-square foot attached garage. The project is being forwarded to
the Planning Commission because of neighborhood concerns regarding privacy, setbacks,
neighborhood compatibility, cellar area, grading, and shadow impacts that could not be resolved.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
A. Architecture and Site Application
The app licant is proposing a 2,586-square foot two-story residence with a 561-square foot
attached garage. The proposed craftsman style residence would have a maximum height of
28 feet , six inches. The proposed materials include: wood shingles , wood siding, stone,
wood trim, and composition roofing. A color and material sheet is included as Exhibit 14:
A color and materials board will be available at the Planning Commission meeting and
Exhibit 4 includes general project data.
B. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood
The project site is located on the north side of Wheeler Avenue, east of Los Gatos
Boulevard (see Exhibit 1). Properties to the south, north, and east contain single-family
residences and multi-family units exist to the west.
C. Zoning Compliance
The proposed project complies with the floor area, height, and structure coverage
limitations. The proposed project complies with setback requirements and all required
parking is being provided on-site. The zoning permits a single-family residence.
ANALYSIS:
A. Floor Area
The applicant is proposing a 2,586-square foot two-story residence with a 561-square foot
attached garage. The floor area table shown on Page 4 reflects the proposed floor area and
countable floor area pursuant to the Town Code.
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 4
125 Wheeler A venue/S-16-039
August 24, 2016
Total Floor Area
First Floor 1,376.5
Second Floor 1,209 .5
Cellar* 1,484
Garage** 561
Total 4,630 s.f.
* Ce llars are exempt from countable floor area.
Countable Floor Area
1,376.5
1,209.5
0
0
2,586 s.f.
**Non-Hillside zoned properties have a separate garage floor area calculation .
Based on Town and County records, the residences in the immediate area range in size
from 1,260 square feet to 3,273 square feet. The floor area ratios (FAR) range from 0.07
FAR to 0.44 FAR. The proposed residence would b e 2,586 square feet with a 0 .32 FAR.
Pursuant to Town Code, the maximum house square footage for the lot size is 2,608 square
feet with a maximum FAR of 0.33 and the maximum garage square footage is 733 square
feet.
The following Neighborhood Analysis table reflects current conditions of the immediate
area.
House House
ADDRESS House Garage and garage Lot size FAR
129 Wheeler Ave. 2,224 516 2,740 6,577 0.34
141 Wheeler Ave. 1,620 640 2,260 23,451 0 .07
127 Wheeler Ave. 2,674 442 3,116 10,659 0.25
119 Wheeler Ave. 2,500 762 3,262 8,379 0 .30
262 Los Gatos Blvd. 2,449 434 2,883 7,564 0.32
256 Los Gatos Blvd . 3,273 0 3,273 7,361 0.44
120 Wheeler Ave. (multi-family) 2,620 0 2,620 12,332 0.21
160 Wheeler Ave. 1,318 360 1,678 10,002 0.13
136 Wheeler Ave. 1,502 240 1,742 8,907 0.17
142 Wheeler Ave. 1,036 224 1,260 13,652 0.08
125 Wheeler Ave. (E) 2,084 0 2,084 8,000 0.22
125 Wheeler Ave. (P) 2,586 561 3,147 8,000 0.32
At 2,586 square feet, the proposed residence would be the third largest home in the
immediate area and have the third largest FAR. The proposed FAR and square footage is
compatible with the immediate neighborhood.
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 5
125 Wheeler Avenue/S-16-039
August 24, 2016
8. Architectural Considerations
Staff requested that the Town 's Architectural C onsultant review the project to provid e
recommendations regarding architecture and neighborhood compatibility. The Consulting
Architect commented that the proposed home is modest in size and well designed. The
embedding of the second floor area within the roof form will limit the visual bulk and the
home should fit comfortably into the neighborhood of traditional style homes . The
Cons ultant recommended two changes in order to bring the project into compliance with
the Town 's Residential Design Guidelines (E xhibit 8).
1. Rear balcony privacy
The Town's Consulting Architect recommended exploring the option of adding
evergreen plantings to block views from the balcony onto adjacent properties.
Th e applicant modified the design by reducing the size of the rear balcony and.further
e mbedding it into th e roof form to reduce potential privacy intrusions. Th e applicant
s hared th e plans for th e modified balcony with the neighbor to th e rear at 127 Wh eel er
Avenue who is co mfortable with th e modification (Exhibit 13). Th e balcony
modifica tion is incorporated into th e plans (Ex hibit 16, Sh eet A 4. l).
2. Design refmement
The Town 's Consulting Architect recommended modifying the beams and columns for
the front entry porch and garage trellis .
Th e applicant modified th e d esign by implementing all of the Consulting Architect 's
recommendations by in cr easing th e b eam depth, decreas ing th e column s ize, re.fi ning
th e column caps, and in cr easing th e beam and c olumn sizes at the garage tre llis . Th e
architec tural modifications are incorporated into the plans (Ex hibit 16, Sh eet A 4. 0).
C. Neighbor Concern
The Town has received written comments (Exhibits 9 , 11, 15, and 17) in opposition to the
project. The adjacent neighbor in opposition to the project is located directly east of the
project at 129 Wheeler Avenue. The neighbor submitted an email on June 30, 2016
(Exhibit 9), a letter on July 18 , 2016 (Exhibit 11), and a packet on August 18 , 2016
(Exhibit 17), outlining how the proposed project would impact their property. The neighbor
is opposed to the project due to the following concerns:
• The proposed bulk and siz e of the home will not be compatible with the immediate
neighborhood ;
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 6
125 Wheeler A venue/S-16-039
August 24, 2016
• The setbacks are not proportionate to the mass of the home;
• The proposed cellar is shown above grade and should be considered in the floor area
assessment;
• The proposed home will block and deny access to views, sky exposure, and sun
access to 129 Wheeler;
• The proposed rear balcony presents privacy concerns to adjacent properties; and
• The proposed home will cause drainage issues to adjacent properties due to
excavation for the proposed cellar.
The applicant discussed the project and shared iterations of the plans with their
neighbors. The applicant also had discussions with the neighbor at 129 Wheeler on
multiple occasions to discuss their concerns. Exhibits 10 and 12 contain the applicant's
responses to the neighbor 's email and letter. The applicant has submitted the following
justification in response to the neighbor's concerns:
• The Town's Consulting Architect found that the "house is well designed and fits into
the neighborhood." All minor suggestions of the Consulting Architect have been
incorporated into the plans ;
• The proposed setbacks are in compliance with Town Code requirements and
compatible with the setbacks in the immediate neighborhood (Exhibit 16, Sheet C3).
The proposed layout provides the owners with a larger rear yard and lessens the
privacy impacts to the rear neighbor located at 127 Wheeler A venue;
• The proposed cellar is in compliance with the Town Code definition for a cellar and
as a result does not count towards the required floor area;
• The proposal does not shadow the adjacent property for 12 months of the year before
3 p.m. The previous plans mistakenly showed the shadow impact for 6:35 p.m. as
opposed to the required Summer Solstice time of 3 p .m. The incorrect shadow was
used as an illustration in the neighbor 's letter (Exhibit 11, Page 5). The shadow study
has been corrected to show the accurate shadow depiction for the Summer Solstice at
3 p.m. (Exhibit 16, Sheet A 1.0);
• All of the windows facing 129 Wheeler, with one exception do not result in privacy
issues. The windows facing the adjacent property include a garage window on the
first floor, two family room windows with a high sill height on the first floor , and two
windows in the cellar. The one window with potential for a privacy concern is
located in bedroom 3 on the second floor . The applicant has agreed to use obscured
glass for the bedroom window. Alternatively, the applicant is willing to relocate the
window to the front elevation, embedding it into the roof if deemed appropriate by
the Planning Commission; and
• The project has been reviewed by Parks and Public Works staff to ensure that the
proposal will not result in drainage issues to adjacent neighbors .
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 7
125 Wheeler A venue/S-16-039
August 24, 2016
Staff and the Consulting Architect concluded that the proposed architectural style is
compatible with the immediate neighborhood, the setbacks are in compliance with Town
Code requirements, the proposed cellar is in compliance with the Cellar Policy and at no
point does the proposed cellar extend four feet above grade, the proposal would not
create additional shade to the adjacent property before 3 p .m ., the applicant is proposing
obscured glass for the east facing window of bedroom 3 (Exhibit 3, Condition 5), and the
project has been reviewed by Parks and Public Works staff and will not result in
drainage impacts to adjacent properties. Therefore, the application has been referred to
the Planning Commission for their consideration.
D. Environmental Review
The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the
Implementation of California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Staff has received comments from the public (Exhibit 15). The body of the staff report discusses
the neighborhood letters which are also included in Exhibit 9, 11, and 13 .
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
A. Summary
As currently proposed, the project would create a two-story craftsman style residence that
meets parking requirements, setbacks, allowable floor area , lot coverage, and allowable
height. The proposal would result in the third largest house and the third largest FAR in
the immediate neighborhood. The applicant has worked with the adjacent neighbor to try
to resolve concerns that still remain outstanding regarding neighborhood compatibility,
setbacks, cellar area, shadow impacts, privacy, and grading.
The proposed project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines, Town Code, and is
compatible with the immediate neighborhood in terms of setbacks, mass, scale, FAR, and
square footage. Although, staff supports the proposed project, the matter has been referred
to the Planning Commission for consideration due to the unresolved objections by the
adjacent neighbor.
B. Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions to approve the
Architecture and Site application:
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 8
125 Wheeler Avenue/S-16-039
August 24, 2016
1. Find that the proposed project is categorically exempt, pursuant to Section 15303 of the
California Environmental Quality Act as adopted by the Town (Exhibit 2); and
2. Make the required findings as required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the Town Code
for granting approval of a demolition of a single-family residence (Exhibit 2); and
3 . Make the finding that the project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines
(Exhibit 2); and
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 2); and
5 . Approve Architecture and Site Application S-16-039 with the conditions contained in
Exhibit 3 and the development plans in Exhibit 16.
ALTERNATIVES :
Alternatively, the Commission could :
1. Approve the application with additional or modified conditions of approval ; or
2 . Deny the application; or
3 . Continue the application to a date certain with direction to staff and the applicant for
desired revisions.
Community Development Director
JSP :JGP :cg
cc: Tony Jeans, P.O. Box 1518 , Los Gatos, CA 95031
Jeffery Avilla and Darcy Viale-Avilla, 6566 Stonehill Drive, San Jose, CA 95120
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2016\Wheeler 125 .docx
125 Wheeler Avenue
0 0.25 --------m:================::J Miles
0 .125
EXHIBIT 1
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
PLANNING COMMISSION -August 24, 2016
REQUIRED FINDINGS & CONSIDERATIONS FOR:
125 Wheeler A venue
Architecture and Site Application S-16-039
Requesting approval to demolish an existing single-family residence and to construct a new
single-family residence on property zoned R-1 :8. APN 532-36-065.
PROPERTY OWNER: Jeffrey Avilla and Darcy Viale-Avilla
APPLICANT: Tony Jeans
FINDINGS
Required fmding for CEQA:
• The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.
Required fmding for the demolition of a single-family residence:
• As required by Section 29 .10.09030( e) of the Town Code for the demolition of a single-
family residence:
1. The Town's housing stock will be maintained as the single-family residence will be
replaced.
2 . The existing structures have no architectural or historical significance, and are in poor
condition.
3. The property owner does not desire to maintain the structures as they exist; and
4. The economic utility of the structures was considered.
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.
CONSIDERATIONS
Required 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\FIN D!NGS\201 6\Wheelerl25 .DOCX
EXHIBIT 2
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
PLANNING COMMISSION-August 24, 2016
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
125 Wheeler Avenue
Architecture and Site Application S -16-039
Requesting approval to demolish an existing single-family residence and to construct a new
single-family residence on property zoned R-1:8. APN 532-36-065.
PROPERTY OWNER: Jeffrey A villa and Darcy Viale-A villa
APPLICANT: Tony Jeans
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
Planning Division
1. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions
of approval and in sub stantial compliance with the approved plans. Any changes or
modifications to the approved plans and/or business operation shall be approved by the
Community Development Director, DRC or the Planning Commission 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 li ghts
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 s ite.
5. WINDOW: Obscured glass shall be used for the window of bedroom 3 facing the adjacent
property located 129 Wheeler A venue.
6. 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.
7 . ARBORIST REQUIREMENTS : The developer shall implement, at their cost, all
recommendations made by both Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC, identified in the
Arborist report dated as received May 18 , 2016 and Deborah Ellis, identified in the
Arborist report dated as r eceived June 6 , 2016, 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
plan s, and completed prior to issuance of a building permit where app li cable.
8. TREE FENCING: Protective tree fencing and other protection measures shall be placed at
the drip line of existing trees prior to issuance of demolition and building permits and shall
remain through all phases of construction. Refer to tree fencing requirements and other
protection measures identified in the Arborist Report prepared by both Monarch Consulting
Arborists LLC, identified in the Arborist's report dated as received May 18 , 20 16 and
Deborah Ellis, identified in the Arborist 's report dated as received June 6 , 2016 on file in
the Community Development Department. Include a tree protection plan with the
construction plans.
IXlilBlT 3
9 . TREE STAKING: All newly planted trees shall be double-staked using rubber tree ties.
I 0 . WATER EFFECIENCY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE: The final landscape plan shall
meet the Town of Los Gatos Water Conservation Ordinance or the State Water Efficient
Landscape Ordinance, whichever is more restrictive. A review fee based on the current fee
schedule adopted by the Town Co uncil is required when working landscape and irrigation
plans a re submitted for review.
11 . FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE: Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the front
yard must be landscaped.
12. SALVAGE OF BUILDING MATERIALS: Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit,
the developer shall provide the Community Development Director with written notice of
the company that will be recycling the building materials. All wood , metal, glass, and
aluminum materials generated from the demolished structure shall be deposited to a
company which will recycle the materials. Receipts from the company(s) accepting these
materials, noting the type and weight o f materials, shall be submitted to the Town prior to
the Town's demolition ins pection .
13 . STORY POLES: The story poles on the project site shall be removed within 30 days of
approval of the Architecture & Site application.
14. TOWN INDEMNITY: Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.115 requires
that any a pplicant who receives a permit or entitlement from the Town shall defend ,
indemnify, and hold harmless the Town and its officials in any action 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.
15. COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM: A memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with
the building plans detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed.
Building Divis ion
16. PERMITS REQUIRED: A Demolition Permit is required the demolition of the exi sting
single family residence and garage and a Building Permit for the construction of the new
s ingle-famil y residence. Separate permits are required for electrical , mechanical, and
plumbing work as necessary.
17. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions 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.
18 . SIZE OF PLANS: Four sets of construction plans, minimum size 24" x 36", maximum
si ze 30" x 42 ".
19. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS: Obtain a Building Department Demolition
Application and a Bay Area Air Quality Management District Application from the
Building Department Service Counter. Once the Demolition Forms have been completed,
all signatures obtained, and written verification from PG&E that all utilities have been
disconnected , return the completed Forms to the Building Department Service with the Air
Di strict's J# Certificate(s), PG&E verification, and three (3 ) copies of the Site Plan
showing all existing structures, existing utility service lines such as water, sewer, and
PG&E gas and electric . No demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a Permit
from the Town.
20. SOILS REPORT: A Soils Report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Official,
containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, shall be submitted with
the Building Permit Application. This report shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer
specializing in soils mechanics.
21. 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. This certificate shall certify compliance with the 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 surveyor or registered civil engineer
for the following items:
a. Building pad elevation
b. Finish floor elevation
c. Foundation comer locations
d. Retaining Walls
22. RESIDENTIAL TOWN ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS: The residence shall be
designed with adaptability features for single family residences per Town Resolution 1994-
61:
a. Wood backing (2 " x 8" 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.
b. All passage doors shall be at least 32-inches wide on the accessible floor.
c. Primary entrance shall be a 36-inch wide door including a 5 'x5' level landing, no
more than I-inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level with an 18-inch
clearance at interior strike edge.
d. Door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired at primary entrance.
23. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: All required California Title 24 Energy Compliance
Fonns must be blue-lined, i.e. directly printed, onto a plan sheet.
24. BACKWATER 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 Ordinance and West Valley Sanitation District (WVSD) requires backwater
valves on drainage piping serving fixtures that have flood level rims less than 12-inches
above the elevation of the next upstream manhole.
25. TOWN FIREPLACE STANDARDS: New wood burning fireplaces shall be an EPA Phase
II approved appliance as per Town Ordinance 1905. Tree limbs shall be cut within I 0-feet
of Chimney.
26 . HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE: The project requires a Class A Roof assembly.
27. 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 the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit.
The Town Special Inspection form must be compl etely 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.l osgatosca.gov/b uildin g
28. BLUE PRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara County
Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (24x36) shall be part of th e plan
submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division
Service Counter for a fee of $2 or at San Jose Blue Print for a fee or online at
www.losgatosca.gov/b uilding.
29. APPROVALS REQUIRED : The project requires the following departments and agencies
ap proval before issuing a building permit:
a. Community Development -Planning Division: Jocelyn Puga (408) 354-6875
b . Engineering/Parks & Public Works Department: Mike Weisz (408) 395-5340
c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: ( 408) 378-4010
d . West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-2407
e. Local School Di strict: 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:
Engin eering Division
30 . GENERAL: All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town
Standard Plans , Standard Specifications and Engineering Design Standards. All work shall
co nform to the applicable Town ordinances. The adjacent public right-of-way shall be kept
clear of all job-related dirt and debris at the end of the day. Dirt and debris shall not be
washed into storm drainage facilities . The storing of goods and materi a ls on the sidewalk
and/or the street will not be allowed unless an encroachment permit is issued. The
Developer's representative in charge shall be at the job site during all wo rking hours.
Failure to maintain the public right-of-way according to thi s condition may result in the
Town performing the r equired maintenance at the Developer's expense.
3 1. AP PROV AL : This application shall b e completed in accordance with all of the conditions
of approval li sted b e low and in s ub stantial compliance with th e lates t reviewed and
approved development plans. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans or
co nditi ons of approvals shall be approved by the Town Engineer.
32. ENCROA C HMENT PERMIT: All work in the public right-of-way will require a
Cons truction Encroachment Perm it. All work over $5,000 will require construction
security . It is the respon si bility of the Applicant/Developer to obtain a ny necessary
encroachment permits from affec ted 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 Transportation (Caltrans). Copies of any approva ls or pennits
must be submitted to th e Town Engineering Division of the Park s and Public Works
Department prior to releasing an y permit.
33. PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY (INDEMNITY
AGREEMENT): The property ow ner shall enter into an agreem ent wi th the Town for all
existing and proposed priv ate improvements within the Town's right-of-w ay. The Owner
s hall be so lely responsible for maintaining the improvements in a good and safe condition
at all times an d shall indemnify the Tow n of Los Gatos. The agreement must be completed
and accepted by the Town Attorney , and a copy of the recorded agreement shall be
s ubmitted to the Engineering Di visio n of the Parks and Public Works Department, prior to
the issuance of any permits.
34. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS: The Develo per or their representati ve shall notify the
Engin eerin g In s pector at least twenty-four (24) hours before starting any work pertainin g to
on-s ite drainage facilities , grading or paving, an d all work in the Town's right-of-way.
Failure to do so will res ult in penalties a nd rejection of work that went on w itho ut
inspection .
35. R ESTORATION OF PU BLI C IMPROVEMENTS : The Developer shall rep a ir o r re pl ace
all existi ng improvements not designated for r emoval that are damaged or r em oved because
of th e Develo per's operations. Impro vements such as, but no t limited to: curbs, gutters,
sidewalks, driveways, s igns , pavements, raised pave ment markers , th ermo plastic paveme nt
markings, etc ., s ha ll b e re paired and replaced to a condition equ al to or better than the
original condition. Any new con crete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc.
Any concrete id e ntifi ed that is displaying a stamp o r equal sh all be removed and r e pl aced at
th e Contractor's sole expense and no a dditi onal compensation s ha ll be allowed therefore.
Ex istin g improvement to b e repaired or replaced sh a ll be a t th e directi on of the En gin eerin g
Co ns truction Inspector, and shall compl y with a ll Title 24 Di sabl ed Access provi sion s. The
Deve lo per shall request a walk-through with the Engineering Cons truction Ins pector before
the start of constructi o n to verify ex is ting conditions.
36. SITE SUPERVISION: The General Contractor shall provide qu a lified s upervi s ion o n th e
job site at all times during construction.
37. STREET CLOSURE : Any proposed blockage o r partial clos ure of the street requires a n
encroachment permit. Special provisions such as limitations o n works hours, protective
enclosures, or other means to facilitate public access in a safe manne r may be required .
38. PLAN C HECK FEES: Plan check fees s ha ll be d epos it ed with th e Town prior to plan
review at th e Engineerin g Di v ision of the Pa rk s an d Public Works Department.
39. INS P ECTION FEES: Inspection fees shall be depos ited with the Town prior to the
issuance of a ny permits .
40. PLANS AND STUDIES : All requ ired plans and studies s ha ll be prepared b y a Register ed
Professional Engineer in the State of California, and submitted to the Town Engi neer fo r
review and approval.
41. GRADING P ERMIT: A grading permit i s required for all site grading a nd drai nage work
except for exemptions li sted in Section 12.20.015 of The Code of the Town of Los Gatos
(Grading Ordinance). The gra din g permit application (wi th grad in g pl ans) shall be made to
th e E ng in eerin g Di v is io n of the Parks and Public Works Departm ent located at 41 Miles
A venue. The grading plans sh a ll include fin a l grading, drain age, retaining wall locati on ,
driveway, utilities and interim erosion control. Grading plans s hall li st earthw ork
qu antiti es a nd a table of existing and proposed impervi ous ar eas. Unless specifically
allowed by the Director of Parks and Public Works, the gradin g p ermit wi ll be issu ed
concurrently with the building permit. The grading permit is for wo rk outs ide the building
foo tprint(s). A separ a te building permit, iss ued b y the Building Department o n E. Main
Street , is needed for grading within the building footprint.
42. DRIVE WAY: The drivewa y conform to existing pavement on Wheeler Avenue shall be
constructed in a manner s uch that the exi s ting drainage patte rn s will no t be obstructed.
43 . DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT: Pri or to the issuance of a ny grading/improvement
permits, the Applicant s hall: a) d esign prov is ion s fo r surface drainage; and b) design a ll
necessary s torm drain facilities extending to a sati sfactory point of d isposal for the proper
control and disposal of stonn runoff; and c) provide a recorded copy of any required
easements to the Town.
44 . TREE REMOVAL: Copies of all necessary tree removal pennits shall be provided prior to
the issuance of a grading pennit/building permit.
45. 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.
46. PAD CERTIFICATION: A letter from a licensed land surveyor shall be provided stating
that the building foundation was constructed in accordance with the approved plans shall be
provided subsequent to foundation construction and prior to construction on the structure.
The pad certification shall address both vertical and horizontal foundation placement.
47 . 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 Divi sion of Parks and Public Works during the grading permit plan
review process.
48 . 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 design , retaining wall design , and erosion control. The reports
shall be signed and "wet stamped" by the engineer or geologist, in conformance with
Section 6735 of the California Business and Professions Code.
49. 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 detennine the potential for surface fault rupture on the site. The geotechnical study
shall provide recommendations for site grading as well as the design of foundation s,
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 plans.
50 . SOILS REVIEW: Prior to iss uance 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 soil s 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.
51. 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 a ctual conditions are as
a nticipated 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
Applica nt 's soils engineer and submitted to the Town before final release of any occupancy
permit is granted.
52. SOIL RECOMMENDATIONS : The project shall incorporate the geotechnical/geological
recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Investigation for Proposed New Residence
by Pollak Engineering, Inc ., dated April 18 , 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.
53. WATER DESIGN: Water plans prepared by San Jose Water Company must be reviewed
and approved prior to issuance of any permit.
54. UTILITIES: The Developer 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.
55. TRENCHING MORATORIUM: Trenching within a newly paved street will be allowed
subject to the following requirements:
a. The Town standard "T" trench detail shall be used.
b. A Town-approved colored controlled density backfill shall be used.
c . All necessary utility trenches and related pavement cuts shall be consolidated to
minimize the impacted area of the roadway.
d . The total asphalt thickness shall be a minimum of three (3) inches, meet Town
standards, or shall match the existing thickness, whichever is greater. The final lift
shall be 1.5-inches of one-half (Yi) inch medium asphalt. The initial lift(s) shall be
of three-quarter(%) inch medium a sphalt.
e. The Contractor shall schedule a pre-paving meeting with the Town Engineering
Construction Inspector the day the paving is to take place.
f. A slurry seal topping may be required by the construction inspector depending their
assessment of the quality of the trench paving. If required , the slurry seal shall
extend the full width of the street and shall extend five (5) feet beyond the
longitudinal limits of trenching. Slurry seal materials shall be approved by the
Town Engineering Construction Inspector prior to placement. Black sand may be
required in the slurry mix. All existing striping and pavement markings shall be
replaced upon completion of slurry seal operations. All pavement restorations shall
be completed and approved by the Inspector before occupancy.
56. SIDEWALK IN-LIEU FEE: A curb and sidewalk in-lieu fee of $5,528.00 shall be paid
prior to issuance of a building permit. This fee is based on 345.5 square feet of 4 .5 -foot
wide sidewalk at $16/SF in accordance with Town policy and the Town's Fee Schedule.
57. CURB AND GUTTER REPAIR: The Developer 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, logo s,
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 pha se of the project. The
improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of
Occupancy for any new building can be iss ued.
58. DRIVEWAY APPROACH: The Developer shall install one (I) Town standard residential
driveway approach. The new dri veway approach shall be constructed per Town Standard
Plans and must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy
for any new building can be issued. New concrete shall be free of stamps, logo s, names,
graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal s hall be removed
and replaced at the Contractor's sole expense and no additional compensation shall be
allowed therefore.
59. FENCING: Any fencing proposed within two hundred (200) feet of an intersection shall
comply with Town Code Section §23 . I 0.080 .
60. 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.
61. 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 thi s condition will
require signed and notarized letters from all affected neighbors .
62. CONSTRUCTION STREET PARKING: No vehicle having a man ufacture'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 to approval from
the Town Engineer.
63. HAULING OF SOIL: Hauling of soil 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.). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall work with the Town
Building Department and Engineering Division Inspectors to d evise a traffic control plan to
ensure safe and efficient traffic flow under periods when soil is hauled on o r off of the
project s ite. This may include, but is not limited to provisions for the Developer/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 debris.
64. CONSTRUCTION HOURS: All subdivision improvements and site improvements
construction activities, including the delivery of construction materials, labors, heavy
equipment, supplies, etc., shall be limited to 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. The Town may authorize, on a case-by-
case basis , alternate construction hours. The Applicant shall provide written notice twenty-
four (24) hours in advance of modified construction hours. Approval of this request is at
di scretion of the Town.
65. 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, construction, 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 possible. The noise level at any point outside of
the property plane shall not exceed eighty-five (85) dBA.
66. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN: Prior to the issuance of any pennits , the
Applicant shall submit a construction management plan 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 washout(s) and
proposed outhouse locations.
67. MAINTENANCE ACCESS: Prior to the issuance of any pennits, the Applicant shall
propose maintenance access improvements for the Town Engineer to review , comment on ,
and approve . The Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department shall
approve the surface materials over each public easement.
68. 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 or
reused. A Sanitary Sewer Clean-out is required for each property at the property line, or at
a location specified by the Town.
69. SANITARY SEWER BACKWATER VALVE: Drainage piping serving fixture s 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 pennit.
70. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs): The Applicant is responsible for ensuring
that all contractors are aware of all stonn 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.
71 . SITE DESIGN MEASURES: All projects shall incorporate the following measures:
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 penneable pavement surfaces on the driveway , at a minimum.
e. Use landscaping to treat stormwater.
72. 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 landscaping, shall
be included. Interim erosion control method shall include, but are not limited to: silt
fence s, fiber rolls (with locations and details), erosion control blankets, Town standard
seeding specification, filter benns, check dams, retention basins, etc. Provide erosion
control measures as needed to protect downstream water quality during winter months.
The Town of Los Gatos Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department
and the Building Department will conduct periodic NPDES inspections of the site
throughout the recognized storm season to verify compliance with the Construction
General Permit and Stormwater ordinances and regulations.
73. 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.
74. 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.
75. SITE DRAINAGE: Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through
curb drains 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 (I 0) 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.
76. SILT AND MUD fN 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.
77. 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 storing of
goods and/or materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will not be allowed unless an
encroachment permit is issued by the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works
Department. The adjacent public right-of-way shall be kept clear of all job related dirt and
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 encroachment permit is issued. The Developer'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 Developer's expense.
78. PERMIT ISSUANCE: Permits for each phase; reclamation, landscape, and grading, s h all
be issued simultaneously.
79. COVERED TRUCKS: All trucks transporting materials to and from the site shall be
covered.
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT:
80. FIRE SPRINKLERS: An automatic residential fire-sprinkler sys tem shall 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 modification or upgrade of the
existing water service is required. Note: Covered porches, patios, balconies, and attic
spaces may require fire sprinkler coverage. A State of California licensed (C -16) Fire
Protection Contractor shall submit plans, calculations, a completed pennit application and
appropriate fees to thi s department for review and approval prior to beginning their work.
CRC Sec. 313 .2 as adopted and amended by LGTC
81. WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS: Potable water supplies shall be protected from
contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the
applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying
the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such
requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any water-based fire protection
systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be
physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of
the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under
consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of
the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the
ap plicant(s). 2010 CFC Sec. 903.3 .5 and Health and Safety Code 13114.7.
82. CONSTRUCTION SITE 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 Chp 33.
83. ADDRESS INDENTIFICATION: New and existing buildings s hall ha ve approved
address numbers, building numbers, or approved building id e ntification placed in a position
that is plainly legible and visible from the s treet or road fronting the property. These
numbers shall contrast with their background. Address numbers s hall be Arabic numbers
o r alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches (IO 1.6 mm) high with a
minimum s troke width of 0.5 inch (12 .7 mm). Where access is by mean s of a private road
and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or
means shall be used to identify the structure. CFC Sec. 505.1.
N:\DEV\CO N DITIONS\20 16\ Wheel er! 25.docx
--
12 5 Wh eeler Ave -PROJECT DATA ---
EXISTING PROPOSED REQUIRED/
CONDITIONS PROJECT PERMITTED
Zoning district R-1:8 s ame -
Land use Sing l e Fami l y Si ngle Fa mi ly Sin gle fa mil y
Lot size :
$ Square f eet/acres 8,00 0 8 ,0 00 8 ,00 0
Exterior materials :
$ siding T-111 Si di ng/Shing l e -
$ trim l x4 l x4
-
$ wi ndows Wood /Al um i nu m Wo od -
$ roofing Comp Shi ng l e Comp Si ngle -
Building Floor Area
$ fi r st floor 1,350 1 ,376
$ second floor 400 1 ,209
561 $ garage
.
$ cellar -148 4 -
Setbacks (ft .):
$ front 24 '0 25 '0 25 fe et mi ni mum
$ rear 16'0 26 '9 20 fe e t mi ni mum
$ side 2 5' /17'6 8' /8' 8 f e e t mi n i mu m
$ side street 15 fee t minimum
Hax i mum height(ft .) 2 5'6 28'6 30 fee t max i mum
Floor Area Ratio(%)
$ house 22% 32% 33%
$ garage 0 7% 9%
Park i ng 1 2+ tw o spaces min i mum
Sewer or Sept i c Sew e r Same -
Grading (cu . yds .)
$ house C:405 /7 5 :F FU!CE~Ve o
$ driveway C:0/90:F JUN 1 3 20 16
$ landscape area C:0/140:F T OWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANN ING UlVl~lV I~ EXHIBIT 4
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
'· .
r
T .H .l.S . DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT P .0 .Box 1518, Los Gatos, CA 95031
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos , CA 95032
Attn: Planning Department
The Project:
New Construction
At 125 Wheeler Avenue
Tel: 408.354.1863 Fa x: 408.354.1823
Ma.Y. 18 ~ 2016 RECEIV~D
MAY 17 2016
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
)-}6-03~
This Project consists initially of the demolition of a sub standard home [see structural report]
and shed, built in 1915 which the Historic Committee has previously approved the removal from
the historic register. Subsequently a new single-family home with an attached garage will be
built. This home will incorporate a cellar into the design , but it will not be finished as habitable
space in this phase of the project, however under slab plumbing for waste lines will be included .
The Neighborhood:
The surrounding neighborhood comprises a mixture of older single and two story homes and new
homes on similar sized lots. House sizes range from older 1,500 -2 ,000 square ft homes to
newer homes over 2,600 sq ft. The older homes are ranch style, craftsman and Victorian houses
with newer homes being less traditional. A mixture of hip and gable roofs exist with gable roofs
predominating. Roof pitches vary from 5 :12 to 8 :12 and the he ights of homes vary from 20ft -
30 ft. Exterior materials are mainly wood siding with some shingle and a few with brick or stone
accents. Roofing materials are typically composition shingle.
A Neighborhood Context sheet [C4] has been included in the plans in lieu of a streetscape,
which would not show anything useful because of the fences and trees at the street and the
flag lot behind. The addition of this house will not change the streetscape in any significant way
as the existing home is 2 story at 2084 sq ft [MLS]. Both the existing home and the new home
are set back behind the alignment of neighboring homes and a significant amount of tree
screening is proposed.
Proposed New Home :
A traditional 2 story bungalow style home is proposed with a front porch and recessed entry.
Wood siding and shingle siding will be accented with brick at the lower level and at chimneys.
The 8:12 pitch composition shingle roof will be consistent with this architectural style. The
front garage doors are recessed from the plane of the front porch and will receive a trellis to
minimize their prominence. The size of the proposed house is a little under 2,600 sq ft and is
compatible in terms of both size and FAR.
Grading & Drainage :
A cellar and lightwell is proposed and a portion of the spoils will be retained on site as
engineered fill at the front of the property in order to grade the slope away from the house
and to reduce water runoff to the neighboring properties. This is in part recommended by the
soils report , which suggests that the grade should slope away from the house . This wi ll also help
EXH.lBlT 5
to eliminate export. The Construction drawings will show continued sheet flow drainage on the
property without changing the natural drainage pattern at the rear portion of the site.
Dissipaters and splash-blocks will be used.
Driveway and Streetwork:
A new paver driveway will grade to the street and a new driveway approach is proposed with the
existing driveway approach being returned to curb and gutter. A reflector will be relocated a
few feet to the east.
Trees and Landscaping:
There are no significant trees on the property and four will be removed . A tall fan palm is the
only tree given a •tair" rating as being suitable fro preservation, but this tree is too close to
the house to retain and the area will be graded for drainage purposes. The pepper [street tree]
will remain and so will a small redwood in the rear yard, wh ich will be protected during
construction . A birch [street tree] is proposed for removal and 2 town approved street trees
will be planted in its stead. An arborist report has been provided . Any peer review needed
should be cursory.
Canopy coverage dictates that 18 Replacement trees are needed, but more are proposed.
Screening trees will be placed along the side property lines, but further discussions with
neighbors will determine exact locations and species. A small amount of drought tolerant
vegetation will be incorporated into the final project design, together with synthetic permeable
turf and decomposed granite at the entry walkway. Drip irrigation is proposed.
Please call me at 408-354-1833 if you have any questions.
Yours truly,
T.H.I .S . Design & Development
per: A. T. Jeans
Tree Inventory, Assessment,
And
Protection
125 Wheeler Avenue
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Prepared for:
T.B.LS. Design
May 16, 2016
Prepared By:
Monarch .1 Consulting Arborists LQ..C
P.O. Bex 1010 .
Felton, CA Bl5018
831. 331. 81182
ASCA -Registered Consulting Arborist ® #496
ISA-Bolll'd Certified Master Arborist® WE-4341B
0 Copyright Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC, 2016
-... ···< .. ~1 "lorn I ,,, I u
EXHIBIT 6
> (~
125 Wheeler Avenue tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Table of Contents
Summary .••.•.•.•....•...•.•...•••.••• -................................................................................. 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1
Background ............................................................................................................. 1
Assignment ............................................................................................................. 1
Limits of the assignment ......................................................................................... 1
Purpose and use of the report ................................................................................ 1
Observations ··································•11••11•111••······························································2
Trees and Site ......................................................................................................... 2
Proposed Plans and Improvements ........................................................................ 2
Analysis ................ -...................................................................................................... 3
Discussion .............................. 11.; .......•........................................................................ 4
Tree Inventory ......................................................................................................... 4
Condition Rating ..................................................................................................... 5
Suitability for Preservation ...................................................................................... 6
Influence Level. ....................................................................................................... 7
Tree Protection ....................................................................................................... 8
Trenching near pepper tree .................................................................................... 9
Conclusion .•...•....•.....•.....•..•....•.•.••.•..•.•..•.••••.••..•.•....••.•..•.•..•...•......•.•.•...••..••......••• 9
Recommendations ................................................................................................ 1 O
Pre-Construction Phase ........................................................................................ 1 O
Construction Phase .............................................................................................. 1 O
Post-Construction Phase ....................................................................................... 1 O
Bibliography ••.•.••...••....•.•....•.•..•..•..•..•.•..••..•...••.••••....•••..•.••.••..•...•.••.....•.••..••.....•.. 11
Glossary of Terms ·································•11••························································· 12
Appendix A: Tree Inventory Map ............................................. " .......................... "' ...... 13
Appendix B: Tree Inventory and Disposition Tables ..••••.•••.•••.•.••••.•.••••..••.••..•. 14
B 1 : Tree Inventory, Assessment, Disposition ........................................................ 14
82: Appraisal Summary ........................................................................................ 15
Append ix C: Photog rap ha .................................................................................. 16
C1 : Coast redwood #904 and orange #903 .......................................................... 16
C2: Photinia #902 ................................................................................................. 17
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 101 o, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 1 of2
> (
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, At;sessment and Protection May 16, 20·i6
C3: Pepper tree #908 ........................................................................................... 18
C4: Fan palm #907, walnut #906, and birch #905 ................................................ 19
Appendix D: Tree Protection Guidelines .......................................................... 20
Section 29.10.1005. ~ Protection of Trees During Construction ............................ 20
Tree Protection Zones and Fence Specifications ................................................. 20
All persons, shall comply with the following precautions ...................................... 20
Additional tree protection measures: ....................................................... : ............ 21
Monitoring ............................................................................................................. 21
Root Pruning ......................................................................................................... 21
Boring or Tunneling ............................................................................................... 21
Tree Pruning and Removal Operations ................................................................ 21
Appendix E: Tree Protection Signs ................................................................... 22
E1 : English ............................................................................................................ 22
E2: Spanish ....... " .. " ................................................................................................. 23
Qualifications, Assumptions, and Limiting Conditions .................................. 24
Certification of Per1ormance .............................................................................. 25
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC-P.0 Box 1010, Felton, CA95018
831.331.8982 -r1ck@monarcharborist.com 2of 2
(r-' '
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Summary
The property is located along the north side ofWheeler Avenue and contains seven trees
comprised of seven different species. Three trees are :in poor condition while the remaining four
are in fair shape. The fan palm (Wahingtonia filifera) and the coast redwood (Sequoia
sempervirens) have fair suitability for preservation and the remaining five trees are poorly suited
for retention. All the trees will be highly affected by the proposed plans except the coast
redwood and pepper (Schinus molle) being moderately influenced. A total of seven trees were
appraised for a rounded value of$12,190.00 using the Trunk Formula Method.
Introduction
Background
T.H.I. S Design asked me to assess the site, trees, and proposed footprint plan, and to provide a
report with my findings and recommendations to help satisfy the Town of Los Gatos planning
requirements.
Assignment
1. Provide an arborist's report that includes an assessment of the trees within the project area
and on the adjacent sites. The assessment is to include the species, size (trunk diameter),
condition (health and structure), and suitability for preservation ratings. Affix aluminum
number tags on the trees for reference on site and on plans.
2. Provide tree protection specifications and influence ratings for trees that will be affected by
the project.
3. Provide appraised values for the trees to be retained.
Limits of the assignment
1. The information in this report is limited to the condition of the trees during my inspection on
February 5, 2016. No tree risk assessments were performed.
2. The plans reviewed for this assignment were as follows: Site Plan dated May 2, 2016,
provided by T.H.I.S. Design and Development.
Purpose and use of the report
The report is intended to identify all the trees within the plan area that could be affected by a
project. The report is to be used by T.H.I.S Design, the property owners, their agents, and the
Town of Los Gatos as a reference for existing tree conditions to help satisfy the Town's planning
requirements.
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 101 o, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 1 of25
,-
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Observations
Trees and Site
The property is located along the north side of Wheeler Avenue. The site contains seven trees
with the largest and most mature being a Peruvian pepper (Schinus molle) located in the front
southwest comer. There are three other trees in front including one California fan palm
(Washingtoniafilifera), one declining black walnut (Jug/ans nigra), and one declining European
birch (Betula pendula). In back of the site are a young coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens)
and an orange (Citrus sinensis). The last tree on the site is a large multi-stem red leaf photinia
(Photinia xfraseri) near the existing front door.
Proposed Plans and Improvements
The existing structure will be demolished and a new two story residence with a basement will be
constructed
1. The basement excavation will cause the removal of the California fan pa]m (907).
2. The driveway will be in conflict with birch (905) and black walnut (906).
3. The joint trench is close to the pepper tree (908).
4. Landscaping in the new backyard will cause the orange (903) to be removed.
5. The Photinia (902) is in conflict with the covered porch and general construction and
demolition.
6. Coast redwood (904) can be retained and is close to the property buunc.lary in back.
Monarch ConsultingArborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 2of 25
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Analysis
Tree appraisal was performed according to the Council of Tree & Landscape Appraisers Guide
for Plant Appraisal 9th Edition, 2000 (CLTA) along with Western Chapter International Society
of Arboriculture Species Classification and Group Assignment, 2004. The trees were appraised
using the "Cost Approach" and more specifically the "Trunk Formula Method" (Appendix B).
"Trunk Formula Method" is calculated as follows: Basic Tree Cost = (Appraised tree trunk
increase X Unit tree cost + Installed tree cost) Appraised Value = (Basic tree cost X Species % X
Condition % X Location % ).
The trunk formula valuations are based on four tree factors; species, size (trunk cross sectional
area), condition, and location. There are two steps to determine the overall value. The first step
is to determine the "Basic Tree Cost" based on size and species rating which is determined by the
Species Classification and Group Assignment, 2004 Western Chapter Regional Supplement.
The second part is to depreciate the value according to the location and condition of the trees.
The condition assessment and percentages are defined in the "Condition Rating" section of this
report. The condition ratings deviate from the Guide's condition assessment numerical rating
system. The reason for this deviation is the Guide's assessment criteria fails to account for
significant health or structural issues creating high percentages for tree with either significant
structural defects or health problems that could ultimately lead to failure or irreversible decline.
Location rating is an average of three factors; site, contribution, and placement. Site is
determined by the relative property value where the trees are planted. The residential site would
be classified as ''very high" value with a 90 percent rating compared to similar sites in the area
(ISA, 2000).
Contribution and placement is determined by the function and aesthetics the trees provide for the
site and their location on the property. The percent of contribution and placement can range from
10 to 100 percent depending on the trees influence to the value of the property. These
percentages ranged from 0 to 90 percent in my assessment.
A total of seven trees were appraised for a rounded value of$12,190.00 using the Trunk Formula
Method (Appendix B2).
Appraisal worksheets are available upon request.
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.0 Box 101 o, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 3 of 25
' .
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Discussion
Tree Inventory
The tree inventory consists of trees protected by the Town of Los Gatos located on the site and
those in close proximity on neighboring properties. The Town of Los Gatos protects all trees
with a trunk diameters greater than (4) four inches at (54) fifty-four inches above grade on vacant
or underdeveloped lots (Appendix A and B). Aluminum tree tags have been affixed to all trees
listed in the. inventory (Table 1 ).
The tree inventory contains seven trees comprised of seven different species.
Table 1 : Tree Inventory and Characteristics
f'±~'T!;?P ~ ::·~~~f-:'~~~:··::r~~;
. ·, -· = -•.-..
Peruvian pepper 908 42 4-0
( Schinus molle)
California fan palm 907 18 55
( Washingtonia filifera)
Black walnut (Jug/ans 906 29 45
nigra)
Birch (Betula pendula) 905 14 40
Redwood (Sequoia 904 11 35
sempervirens)
Orange (Citrus sinensis) 903 8 15
Photinia (Photinia x 902 12 30
frasen)
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.0 Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@rnonarcharborist.com
40
15
40
30
20
15
30
4of 25
',
( {
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Condition Rating
A tree's condition is a determination of its overall health and structure based on five aspects:
Roots, trunk, scaffold branches, twigs, and foliage. The assessment considered both the health
and structure of the trees for a combined condition rating.
• 100% = Exceptional = Good health and structure with significant size, location or quality.
• 75% = Good= No apparent problems, good structure and health.
• 50% = Fair= Minor problems, at least one structural defect or health concern, problems can be
mitigated through cultural practices such as pruning or a plant health care program.
• 25% = Poor= Major problems with multiple structural defects or declining health, may not be
· a good candidate for retention.
• 0% = Dead/Unstable = Extreme problems, irreversible decline, failing structure, or dead.
Three trees are in poor condition which are the pepper, walnut, and birch while the remaining
four trees are in fair shape (Ta~le 2).
Table 2: Condition Ratings
-· • -."7,_ ----~·~-------·~-.
~umber 'T:r;Uatt
, $.1•ewr
Co~dtticn '~ i
. ·:~~-.-.. _r . ~·-.. _' -.
Peruvian pepper 908 42 40 Poor
( Schinus mo/le)
California fan palm 907 18 55 Fair
( Washingtonia
filifera)
Black walnut 906 29 45 Poor
. (Jug/ans nigra)
Birch (Betula 905 14 40 Poor
pendula)
Redwood (Sequoia 904 11 35 Fair
sempervirens)
Orange (Citrus 903 8 15 Fair
sinensis)
Photinia (Photinia x 902 12 30 Fair
frasen)
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.0 Box 1010, Felton, CA 9501 B
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com
Trunk decay,
poor structure
Declining
sparse crown
Declining
sparse crown
Young tree
water stressed
Multi-trunk
5of25
(
125 Wheeler Avenue ) ree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Suitability for Preservation
A tree's suitability for preservation is detemiined based on its health, structure, age, species
characteristics, and longevity using a scale of good, fair, or poor. The following list defines the
rating scale (Tree Care Industry Associatio~ 2012):
• Good = Trees with guud health, structural stability and longevity.
• Fair =Trees with fair health and/or structural defects that may be mitigated through treatment.
These 1rees require more intense management and monitoring, and may have shorter life spans
than those in the good category.
• Poor = Trees in poor health with significant structural defects that cannot be mitigated and will
continue to decline regardless of treatment The species or individual may possess
characteristics that are incompatible or undesirable in landscape settings or unsuited for the
intended use of the site. .
The fan palm and the coast redwood have fair suitability for preservation and the remaining five
trees are poorly suited for retention (fable 3).
Table 3: Suitability Ratings
r.--''•"":'• "-';""-~---· ·.-·"r."7-::--.· •. ~ ~ ··---:---.-........... ~-.-"T"""O~. ..--·;-\··--.... -... --.-·--r--r ...,_..~ -:~---":' ...... -r· --.-·~:":":""":,_......~~---......... - .--::. --~;·-~ i'1i ::·a~ .'·:-. ··-~ ·n..u ··k -' ... .-·~f'' te.d -~ttl.Y · N9*.· ··~· .. >. · .: ... ·· .. :i k.0 . ·.·.· :· .. ·., .. ..~ ... -; .... D:f~.· ·' ..... :. ,: ... ". ~-· . . .'~ _., · ..... ··. ·... _,. .. ;·.:",:::._ ·1
.. '· . ' . .. .. -. . •.
Peruvian pepper 908 42 40 Poor Large old specimen with
(Sch/nus mo/le) typical decay and issues
with the species
Califomia fan palm 907 18 55 Fair
(Washington/a filifera)
Black walnut (Jug/ans 906 29 45 Poor Declining remnant tree
nlgra)
Birch (Betula pendula) 905 14 40 Poor Declining crown high water
user
Redwood (sequoia 904 11 35 Fair High water user. Large
sempervirens) growing species
Orange (Citrus 903 8 15 Poor Replaceable fruit tree
sinensis)
Photinia (Photinla x 902 12 30 Poor Multi-trunk
frasen)
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC-P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA95018
831.331.8982 ~ rick@monarcharborist.com 6of 25
. ( (
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May16, 2016
Influence Level
Influence level defmes how a tree may be affected by construction activity and proximity to the
tree, and is described as low, moderate, or high. The following scale defines the impact rating:
• Low = The construction activity will have little influence on the tree.
• Moderate = The construction may cause future health or structural problems, and steps must be
taken to protect the tree to reduce future problems.
• High =Tree stnicture and health will be compromised and removal is recommended, or other
actions must be taken for the tree to remain. The tree is located in the building envelope.
All the trees will be highly affected by the proposed plans with the coast redwood #904 and
pepper #908 being moderately influenced. The joint trench will affect the pepper while nearby
landscaping and water stress may continue to affect the coast redwood. The remaining trees are
either within the footprint of the proposed improvement or close enough to require removal
(Table4).
Table 4 : Influence Ratings
fl ' ' ··-.. -' ~i'M$1MCtes
Number -~~1--~ ' ,*'APloted ,J~ftu.Clt,Jlce .. ,. ~
.. .... ·:~~ .. f:t~-b~ _{ila11nq·
Peruvian pepper 908 42 40 Moderate-Joint trench
( Schinus mo/le) high
California fan palm 907 18 55 High Basement
( Wsshingtonia filifera)
Black walnut (Jug/ans 906 29 45 High Driveway
nigra)
Birch (Betula pendula) 905 14 40 High Driveway
Redwood (Sequoia 904 11 35 Moderate Landscape
sempervirens)
Orange (Citrus 903 8 15 High Landscape
sinensis)
Photinia (Photinia x 902 12 30 High Construction and
frasen) -demolition
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton , CA 95018
831 .331 .8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 7 of 25
(
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection · May 16, 2016
Tree Protection
Tree protection focuses on protecting trees from damage to the roots, trunk, or scaffold branches
from heavy equipment (Appendix D).
The tree protection zone (TPZ) is the defined area in which certain activities are prohibited to
minimize potential injury to the tree. The TPZ can be determined by a formula based on species
tolerance, tree age, and diameter at breast height (DBH) (Matheny, N. and Clark, J. 1998) or as
the drip line in some instances. The town requires protection at the drip line or designated TPZ.
Preventing mechanic'al damage to the main stems from equipment or hand tools can be
accomplished by wrapping the main stem with straw wattle. The wattle will create a porous
barrier around the trunk and prevent damage to the bark and vascular tissues underneath.
8.Sxll-inch Warning Signs
one each side ~-....-=:::::I
6-foothigh
chain link fence,
~)
Figure 1 : Type I Tree protection with fence placed at a radius of ten
times the trunk diameter. Image City of Palo Alto 2006.
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA95018
831.331.8982 -rick@iTionarcharborist.com 8 of 25
( (
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Trenching near pepper tree
Root Management
Prior to removing roots greater than two inches (2") in diameter each tree shall be evaluated by
the project arborist to help determine its likelihood of failure after root loss. If roots over two
inches iii diameter are encountered they should be pruned by hand with loppers, handsaw,
reciprocating saw, or chain saw rather than left crushed or tom. Roots should be cut beyond
sinker roots or outside root branch junctions and be supervised by the project arborist. When
completed, exposed roots should be kept moist with burlap or backfilled within one hour. No
roots shall be cut within six times the trunk diameter distance in feet on one side without arborist
approval.
Where possible trenches shall be dug under existing roots and utilities should be ••snaked" under
the roots. When large roots, greater than 4 inches in diameter, are encountered they shall be
excavated by hand or with pneumatic excavating tools such as an Air Spade® or Hydrovac®.
Trunk Protection
Preventing mechanical damage to the main stem from equipment or hand tools can be
accomplished by wrapping the main stem with straw wattle. The wattle will create a porous
barrier around the trunk and prevent damage to the bark and vascular tissues underneath. When
working in close proximity to the trees they should be wrapped with wattle for protection.
Conclusion
The property is located along the north side of Wheeler Avenue. The tree inventory contains
seven trees comprised of seven different species with one of each of the following: pepper, fan
palm, walnut, birch, redwood, orange, and photinia. Three trees are in poor condition which are
the pepper, walnut, and birch while the remaining four trees are in fair shape. The fan palm and
the coast redwood have fair suitability for preservation and the remaining five trees are poorly
suited for retention. All the trees will be highly affected by the proposed plans with except the
coast redwood #904 and pepper #908 being moderately influenced. The joint trench will affect
the pepper while nearby landscaping and water stress may continue to affect the coast redwood.
Where possible trenches shall be dug under existing roots and utilities should be "snaked" under
the roots. A total of seven trees were appraised for a rounded value of$12,190.00 using the
Trunk Formula Method.
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.0 Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 9 of 25
125 Wheeler Avenue
..
I
Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection
Recommendations
Pre-Construction Phase
(
May 16, 2016
1. Place all tree protection fence around coast redwood #904 and pepper tree #908 at their drip
line and all the locations are to be located on the plans including civil and construction
documents.
2. Obtain all necessary permits prior to removing or significantly altering any trees and remove
trees prior to grading.
3. Provide a copy of this report to all contractors and project managers, including the architect,
civil engineer, and landscape designer or architect. It is the responsibility of the owner to
ensure all parties are familiar with this document.
4 . Arrange a pre-construction meeting with the project arborist or landscape architect to verify
tree protection is in place, with the correct materials, and at the proper distances.
5. Arrange for the project arborist to monitor and document initial grading activity near the
trees to be retained.
Construction Phase
1. Maintain tree protection fence around all trees to be retained.
2. Have the project arborist monitor the joint trench installation work around pepper tree #908.
Use alternative trenching techniques and/or trench by hand preserving all roots greater than
two inches in diameter.
3. Water the pepper and the coast redwood during the construction process and place two to
four inches of mulch under the the trees.
Post-Construction Phase
I. Monitor the health and structure of all trees for any changes in condition annually and after
any significant storm events.
2. Perform any other mitigation measures to help ensure long term survival.
3. Monitor soil moisture and place two to four inches of mulch in the area around tree 921 .
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharbortst.com 10 of 25
r
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Bibliography
American National Standard for Tree Care Operations: Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant
Management : Standard Practices (Management of Trees and Shrubs During Site
Planning, Site Development, and Construction)(Part 5). Londonderry, NH: Secretariat,
Tree Care Industry Association, 2012: Print.
ISA. Guide For Plant Appraisal. Savoy, IL: International Society Of Arboriculture, 2000. Print.
ISA. Glossary of Arboricultural Terms. Champaign: International Society of Arboriculture, 2011.
Print.
ISA. Species Classification and Group Assignment, 2004 Western Chapter Regional Supplement.
Western Chapter ISA
Matheny, Nelda P. Trees and development: A technical guide to preservation of trees during land
development. Bedminster, PA: International Society of Arboriculture, 1998.
Smiley, E. Thomas, Fraedrich, Bruce R ., and Hendrickson, Neil. Tree Risk Management. 2nd ed.
Charlotte, NC: Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories, 2007.
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.0 Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rlck@monarcharborist.com 11 of 25
I •
125 Wheeler Avenue · 1 ree lnventOf}', Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Glossary of Terms
Basic Tree Cost: The cost of replacement for a perfect specimen of a particular species and cross
sectional area prior to location and condition depreciation.
Cost Approach: An indication of value by adding the land value to the depreciated value of
improvements.
Defect: An imperfection, weakness, or lack of something necessary. Jn trees defects are injuries,
growth patterns, decay, or other conditions that reduce the tree's structural strength.
Drip Line: Imaginary line defined by the branch spread or a single plant or group of plants.
Mechanical damage: Physical damage caused by outside forces such as cutting, chopping or
any mechanized device that may strike the tree trunk, roots or branches.
Scaffold branches: Permanent or structuml branches that for the scaffold architecture or
structure of a tree .
Straw wattle: also known as straw worms, bio~logs, straw noodles, or straw tubes are man made
cylinders of compressed, weed free straw (wheat or rice), 8 to 12 inches in diameter and 20 to 25
feet long. They are encased in jute, nylon, or other photo degradable materials,
and have an average weight of 35 pounds.
Tree Protection Zone (TPZ): Defined area within which certain activities are prohibited or
restricted to prevent or minimize potential injury to designated trees, especially during
construction or development.
Tree Risk Assessment: Process of evaluating what unexpected things could happen~ how likely
it is, and what the likely outcomes are. In tree managemen~ the systematic process to determine
the level of risk posed by a tree, tree part, or group of trees.
Trunk: Stem of a tree.
Trunk Formula Method: Method to appraise the monetary value o f trees considered too large
to be replaced with nursery or field grown stock. Based on developing a representative unit cost
for replacement with the same or comparable species of the same size and in the same place,
subject to depreciation for various factors. Contrast with replacement cost method.
This Glossary of terms was adapted from the Glossary of Arboricultural Terms (ISA, 2011 ).
Monarch Consulting Arborlsts LLC-P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 12 of 25
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection
Appendix A: Tree Inventory Map
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC-P.0 Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com
May 16, 2016
13 of 25
125 Wh~r Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Appendix B: Tree Inventory and Disposition Tables
81: Tree Inventory, Assessment, Disposition
Table 5: Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Disposition
!. Tree Specie& # Trunk ~Heigh~"'. -~~ndtU~ .. Sultablllfy . int,uence R•move ;
1 Diameter , Diameter . · Level · /Retain ;
I Peruvian ! 908 j 421 40 I 40 I Poor · j Poor I Moderate I Retain
• pepper : I ! l i ; ! -High I I
II (Sch/nus I i j
1 ! l. 1
1
j ! . I I • ' I j ~~mta ~-1-90~ ;at ~m -Ss ! .. -·1stF~;---~F;i~---·tH~h -tR~~ 1
I (Washingtonia i j I J I I I i I ~lifers) [__~ ~ I ---~! -----+-I ! ~ I Black walnut J 906 ! 29 I 45 . 40 I Poor I Poor ! High ! Remove J
,;;1arrs_._! ·-1 · --_I --·--f-___ J ______ , ---1 ..... _J .. _.J
II Birch (Betula i 905 i 14 / 40 l 30 ! Poor i Poor I High ) Remove I
1 pendula) I i ! I · i : i i
f "'"'""··-, ·---"••·--··r" , .. _ ·--1-..... _ .... ---·· I ..... ·--·-.. ··r-• -""" .. : .... -........... -... !-····-·-..... ···---1 .. ·-.. --_ .. -· ... ·:· .. ·-.. ·-··----, ! Redwood i 904 ! 11 I 35 20 i Fair i Fair : Moderate ! Retain :
I (Sequoia 1 ! 1 1 I : ' I l~~>+;oa r1 ·-------d--·1J---;;f F.;i;----~p~~--iH;h··-· [A~ 1
I (C't i i I ! I I : : ' JrUS I ' I ' I ; I i i
i sinensis) l ! l t ! i i ! i
!Photinia ----f-9o2 1----12l _ .... ____ aoi-·---· 3o ; Fair ------1 Po~~-----r High ·-.. ·--t Remov;-1
~:;~~,a ~---L ____ J ______ J __ ---·----_J _________ L .. _ ... _____ J ______ ._ .. _____ .l. __ . __ .... _ ..... J __________ ..J
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC-P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 14 of 25
( (
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection
82: Appraisal Summary
Table 5: Tree Inventory, Assessment, and Disposition-1
·' .-~ .
Peruvian pepper 908 42 25.0% 50.00% 63.33%
( Schinus mo/le)
California fan palm 907 18 50.0% 50.00% 63.33%
( Washingtonia
filifera)
Black walnut 906 29 25.0% 50.00% 63.33%
(Jug/ans nigra)
Birch (Betula 905 14 25.0% 30.00% 63.33%
pendu/a)
Redwood 904 11 50.0% 70.00% 63.33%
(Sequoia
sempervirens)
Orange (Citrus 903 8 50.0% 70.00% 63.33%
sinensis)
Photinia (Photinia 902 12 50.0% 70.00% 63.33%
xfrasen)
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 101 o, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com
May 16, 2016
...
$4,460.0
$1,520.0
$1,930.0
$350.0
$840.0
$940.0
$2,150.0
15 of 25
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Pr:otection
Appendix C: Photographs
C1: Coast redwood 1904 and orange #903
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rlck@monarcharbortst.com
May 16, 2016
16 of 25
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection
C2: Photinia #902
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com
May 16, 2016
17 of 25
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection
C3: Pepper tree #908
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC-P.0 Box 1010, Felton, CA95018
· 831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com
May 16, 2016
18 of 25
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection
C4: Fan palm #907, walnut #906, and birch #905
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC-P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331 .8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com
May 16, 2016
19 of 25
{
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Appendix D: Tree Protection Guidelines
Section 29.10.1005. -Protection of Trees During Construction
Tree Protection Zones and Fence Specifications
I
1. Size and materials: Six (6) foot high chain link fencing, mounted o:n 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 ten-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 ID: 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 two-inch wooden boards bound securely on
the outside. Caution shall be used to avoid damaging any bark or branches.
3 . Duration of Type I, II, ID 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 eight and one-half-inch
by eleven-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." Text on the signs
should be in both English and Spanish (Appendix E).
All persons, shall comply with the following precautions
1. Prior to the commencement of construetion, install the fence at the driplinc, or tree
protection zone (TPZ) when specified 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 drip line 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 dripline 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.
Monarch Consulting Arborlsts LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331 .8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 20 of 25
( (·
125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
6 . Retain the services of a certified or consulting arboriSt who shall serve as the project arborist
for periodic monitoring of the project sit.e 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.
Additional tree protection measures:
Monitoring
Any trenching, construction or demolition that is expected to damage Qr encounter tree roots
should be monitored by the project arborist or a qualified ISA Certified Arborist and should be
documented.
The site should be evaluat.ed by the project arborist or a qualified ISA Certified Arborist after
construction is complet.e, and any necessary remedial work that needs to be performed should be
not.ed.
Root Pruning
Roots greater than two inches in diameter shall not be cut. When roots over two inches in
diameter are encountered and are authorized to be cut or removed, they should be pruned by
hand with loppers, handsaw, reciprocating saw, or chain saw rather than left crushed or tom.
Roots should be cut beyond sinker roots or outside root branch junctions and be supervised by
the project arborist. When completed, exposed roots should be kept moist with burlap or
backfilled within one hour.
Boring or Tunneling
Boriilg machines should be set up outside the drip line or established J:ree Protection Zone.
Boring may also be performed by digging a trench on both sides of the tree until roots one inch
in diameter are encount.ered and then hand dug or excavated with an Air Spade® or similar air or
wat.er excavation tool. Bore holes should be adjacent to the trunk and never go directly under the
main stem to avoid oblique (heart) roots. Bore holes should be a minimum of three feet deep.
Tree Pruning and Removal Operations
All tree pruning or removals should be performed·by a qualified arborist with a C-61/D-49
California Contractors License. Treatment, including pruning, shall be specified according to
ANSI A-300A standards and limitations and performed according to ISA Best Management
Practices, and adhere to ANSI Z133. l safety standards. Trees that need to be removed or pruned
should be identified in the pre-construction walk through.
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 21of25
('
, 125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection
Appendix E: Tree Protection Signs
E1: Engllsh
CD c
0
N
·C en o C.-·-... c ... ca
~
(.)
CD ...
0 ... a.
CD
CD
~
t2
"'C C>
CJ) c: > ·-0 '"0
E 0 LO
CJ) 0 C\I a: 0 0
CJ) <( r:
m ~o -~ ...... ro .
0 c: 0) z Q) C\I
= 0.. Q) ca o u ..c: F o en ...... o
Q) ~ c:
(,) • ---t :::::.. c .c >
CJ) :J t2 u. (J)
en en ·--..c: -c
I-c:
<(
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC-P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com
May 16, 2016
22 of 25
(
, 125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection
E2: Spanish
0 -c .....
• Cl).
a; ...
OD.
io -c .c ·-.... :1 <C
0 Cl)
c
ca c
0
N
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC • P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831 .331.8982 · rlck@rnonarcharborist.com
May 16, 2016
23 of 25
. . 125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Qualifications, Assumptions, and Limiting Conditions
Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Any titles or
ownership of properties are assumed to be good and marketable. All property is appraised or
evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and ~ompetent management
All property is presumed to be in conformance with applicable codes, ordinances, statutes, or
other regulations.
Care has been taken to obtain information from reliable sources. However, the consultant cannot
be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others.
The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or attend meetings, hearings, conferences,
mediations, arbitration, or trials by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual
arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services.
This report and any appraisal value expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant, and
the consultant's fee is not contingent upon the reporting of a specified appraisal value, a
stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event.
Sketches, drawings, and photographs in this report are intended for use as visual aids, are not
necessarily to scale, and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or
surveys. The reproduction of information generated by architects, engineers, or other consultants
on any sketches, drawings, or photographs is only for coordination and ease of reference.
Inclusion of said information with any drawings or other documents does not constitute a
representation as to the sufficiency or accuracy of said information.
Unless otherwise expressed: a) this report covers only examined items and 1heir condition at the
time of inspection; and b) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items
without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed
or implied, that structural problems or deficiencies of plants or property may not arise in the
future.
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 101 o, Felton, CA 9501 B
831 .331 .8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 24 of 25
.., 125 Wheeler Avenue Tree Inventory, Assessment and Protection May 16, 2016
Certification of Performance
I Richard Gessner, Certify:
That I have personally inspected the tree(s) and/or the property referred to in this report, and
have stated my findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation and/or appraisal is stated in the
attached report and Ten;ns of Assignment;
That I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is the subject
of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved;
That the analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are my own;
That my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared
according to commonly accepted Arboricultural practices;
That no one provided significant professional assistance to the consultant, except as indicated
within the report.
That 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 further certify that I am a Registered Consulting Arborist® with the American Society of
Consulting Arborists, and that I acknowledge, accept and adhere to the ASCA Standards of
Professional Practice. I am an International Society of Arboriculture Board Certified Master
Arborist®. I have been involved with the practice of Arboriculture and the care and study of
trees since 1998.
Richard J. Gessner
ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist® #496
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist® WE-4341B
ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualified
Copyright
@ Copyright 2016, Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC. Other than specific exception granted for copies made by
the client for the express uses stated in this report, no parts of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, recording, or otherwise without
the express, written permission of the author.
Monarch Consulting Arborists LLC -P.O Box 1010, Felton, CA 95018
831.331.8982 -rick@monarcharborist.com 25 of 25
Deborah Ellis, MS
Consultlng Arborl1t ~: Hortlculturl•t •
Jocelyn Puga
Town of Los Gatos Community Planning Department
11 O E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95031
June 6, 3016
Servia sitla 1984
125 Wheeler Avenue -Peer Review fl of the arborlst report and recommendations
for trees In the vicinity of the proposed development
Contents
Summary: ...................................................................................... -.................................................................... 2
Pepper Tree #908 ................................................................. ; ............................................................................ 3
Recommendations: .......................................................................................................................................... 4
Tree Root Protection Distances: ....................................................................................................................... 5
PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408-725-1357. decah@pacbell .net. http://www .deca h.com.
Page 1of5
t:mIBII 'l
Deborah Ellis, MS
Conauliing Arboriat & Horticulturist
SUMMARY:
I visited the project site on June 3, 3016 . This is my first report for this project.
I have reviewed the following document for this projed:
1) Tree Inventory, Assessment and Prot ection, 125 Wheeler Avenue. Monarch Consulting Arborists,
May 16, 2016.
2) Plans Reviewed:
PLAN DATE REVIEWD SHOULD SHEET NOTES REVIEW
Existing Site Topographic Map 3/16 x co inc/udina existina tree trunk locations
Construction Staalna x
Demolltlon x
Proposed Sita Lavout 512/16 x C1
Gradfria/Dralnaae 5/2/16 x C2
Underaround Utility
Site & Bulldlna Sections 5/2116 x A6.0
Erosion Control
Building Exterior Elevations 512/16 x A4.0,
4.1
Roof 512116 x A5.0
Shadow Study 512116 x A1.0
Con1truct1on Details that would affect
trees {for example building foundations,
pavement Installation including sub-x
grade preparation, underground utility
installation)
Landscaoe Plantlna x
lrrlaation Plan x
Landscane & lrrlaatlon Detans x
All of the protected trees on site will be removed except for Peruvian (California) pepper tree #908
in the front yard (southwest comer) and coast redwood #904 in the back: yard (northeast corner). I
feel that further explanation of the trunk decay in the pepper tree is necessary, and improvements
are also too close to this tree (see page 3).
For clarification Photinia tree #902 does not have a 12 inch trunk DBH. Instead, It is a multi-trunk
tree/shrub with about 15 trunks ranging from 2 to 5 inches. Average trunk diameter is 4 Inches. This
shrub is not in very good condition and it will be removed because it is very close to the corner of
the proposed porch.
PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408-725~1357. decoh@pacbell .net. http://www.decah.com.
Page 2 of 5
PEPPER TREE #908
Deborah Ellis, L\(j S
Consulting Arborist & Hortlculturlet
Servia sitia 1984
This tree is listed as having a 42 Inch trunk DBH Jn
the previous report. This didn't look right to me in
the field, and so I measured the trunk diameter(s}
myself and found them to be 20, 13 and 11.5
inches. The central 13-lnch trunk is dead and
decoyed, and this is where the trunk decay
mentioned in the previous report comes from. I
mallet too tested' the lower trunks and the decay
seems to be Rmited to the dead trunk, but I cannot
be sure about this. Since the entire trunk is dead
and decayed to the ground, decay may be
present in the root system of the tree as well. The
dead trunk should be removed and then the
-~-__,;;...;.... _______ -_ .. _ ••. _, .-J. decay evaluated in greater detail if the tree may
remain. Also remove ivy from the remaining trunks. The vigor of the canopy originating from the two
live trunks looks good, so at least the entire tree does not appear to be declining.
Proposed Improvements (utility trenches) are too close to the tree and may cause excessive root
damage. The centerline of a joint trench proposed at 4 feet from the trunk and a water line at 7
feet. The joint trench originates at an existing joint power pole which is only 4 feet from the trunk. so
It appears that the power lines wHI be relocated underground. Excavation for the joint trench wm
come closer to the tree trunk than 4 feet because only the centertine of the trench is shown on the
plans. This may likely kill the tree and/or cause it to fall over. The 3xDBH djstance2 for this tree is 6.5
feet (using 20 inch trunk diameter plus half of the second live trunk, 20 + (11 .5/2)) = 26 inches.
Therefore at minimum I do not want to see the nearest edge of a trench or other soil disturbance
closer than 6.5 feet from the base of the trunk. The 6xDBH distance ( 13 feet) is preferable. If it is not
possible to maintain at least the 3XOBH root protection distance however, then consider removing
the tree. Or, can the power lines not be relocated underground so the joint trench excavation can
be avoided~ Pepper trees are very sensitive to root disturbance and do not tolerate it well. The
root management recommendations for the pepper tree (page 9 of the previous report) may not
be enough to save the tree. More undistu:'bed son space between tnink and trench is necessay.
Future landscaping around this tree should be done carefully. Pepper trees are very drought
tolerant and are predisposed to root rot crrseases when exposed to irrigation -particularly if the tree
hos existed in a non-irrigated state as the subject pepper has. This tree will fare best with a 4 inch
depth of wood, bark or tree trimming mulch underneath as much of its drfplfne as possible, with no
additional planting or irrigation.
1 ~~ (also called "trunk sounding''), A rubber mallet is used to tap a tree trunk or branch to look for
obvious loose bark, decay, cavities or other obvious defects that can be found by this quick, simple, Inexpensive but
cursory method. Sound, feel and the bounce of the malet can be used to find obvious defects, but It usually cannot
detect deep interior defects which are not visible to the user.
PO Box 37 14, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408-725-1357. decah@poc bell .net. http://www.decoh.com.
Page3 of 5
Deborah Ellis, MS
Consulting Arborlet & Horticulturist
Sll'Viu sina 1984
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1) Address problems with pepper tree #908 as discussed on the previous page.
2) The Town's current Tree Protection requirements should be included in the final project plan set
and are enclosed as a separate attachment.
3) Do not remove or prune to remove more than 25% of the live branches of any protected tree
until a valid tree removal permit has been obtained from the Town of Los Gatos .
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
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 service again.
Please call me if you have questions or if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
~Utv
Deborah Ellis, MS.
Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
Certified Professional Horticulturist #30022
ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #305
LS.A. Board Certified Master Arborist WE-4578
LS.A. Tree Risk Assessment Quaflfied
Enclosures:
• Los Gatos Town Code. Chapter 29 -Zoning Regulations. Article I. -In General Division 2. Tree
Protection. Sec. 29.10.1005. Protection of Trees during Construction.
• Los Gatos Tree Protection Sign template (to be placed on tree protection fencing)
PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408-725·1357. decah@pacbell .net. htt p://www.decah.com.
Page 4 of 5
Deborah Em&, MS
Coneurtfng A rboriat & Hortlc ulturl1t
Service .n,,ce 1984
TREE ROOT PROTECTION DISTANCES:
No one CGll e stimate and predict with abso lute certcinty ho w f ar a soil dist urbance such as Gn excavation must be
from the edge of the trunk of en individual tree to effect tree stability or health at ca low. moderate or SC\Ve
degree ·--there are simply too many variable inwMd that we cannot see or anticipate. 3xl:>BH however. is a
reasonable ·rule of thumb• minimum distance (in feet) any soil disttrbance should be from the edge of the trunk on
one side of the trunk. This is supported by se...ercd separate research studies includ ing (Smiley, Fraedrich, cl
Hendrickson 2002, Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories). C>BH is trunk "diameter ot breast height• (4.5 fut
above the ground). This distance is ofi·~ used dur ing the duign and planning phases of a construction project in
order to estimate root damage to a tree due to the proposed constn.iction. It tends to ccrrelate reasonably well
with the zone of rapid taper, which is the area in which the large buttress roots (main support roots close to the
trunk) rapidly decrease in diameter with increasing distance from the trunk. For example, using the 3X C>BH
guideline an excavation should be no closer than 4.~ feet from the trunk of an 18-inch C>BH tree. For trees with
multiple trunks, an adjusted DBH is often calculated using 100% of the for~ trunk plus 50% of the remaining
smaller trunks. Such distances are guidelines only, and should be increased for trees with heavy canopies,
significant leans, decay, structural problems, etc. I will generally not recommend a root pr otection distance of less
than ~ feet for any tree, ewn ...ery small trees. It Is also important to understand that in actual field conditions
we often find that much less root damage occurs than was anticipated by the guidelines. 3xDBH may be more of on
aid in preserving tree stability and not necesSGrily long-term tree health.
6 to 18 X l>BH is the minimum distance which is recommended in the ANSI (AmeriCGn National Standard) A300
(Part 5)-Z012 Management of Trees & Shrubs C>uri~ Site PlaMing, Site Deve lopment , & Construction, ond also in
the companion publication from t[ie Ir1ternational Society of Arboricul'fvre, Best Manageinent Practices, Manag ing
Trees Dll"ing Construction, 2008. When the 6 to 18 x C>BH distance cannot be met, "appropriate mitigation or
determination that the work will not impact tree health and stabili1y shall be performed". according to the ANSI
Standcrd. ANSI A300 (Pert 8) -2013 Root Management, states: •When roots are damaged within 6 times the
trunk diameter (C>BH) mitigation shall be recommended ! For practical purposes I use the 6 x DBH distance as the
minimal distance acceptable (in most circumstances) in order to maintain good tree health and structured st~b ilify.
The 6 x DBH distance or greater should definitely be used when there are so il disturbances on more than one side
of the trunk.
OTPZ (Optimum Tm Protection Zone): OTPZ is the distance in feet from the trunk of the tree, ctll around the
tree, that construction or other disturbance should not encroach within. !f this :&:o~ is respected , then chances
of the tree surviving construction disturbance are very good . This method takes into account tree age and t M
particular speciu tolerance to root disturbance. Although there are no scientifically based methods to determine
the minimum distance for construction (for example, root severonce).from trees t o assure their N"vival and
stability, there are some guidelines that are often used in the arboricultural industry. The most cc.rrent gu ideline
comes from the text, Trees & Development, Matheny et ed., International Society of Arboriculture , 1998 . Due to
the crowded, constrained nature of many building sites it is often not be possiblz to maintain the OPTZ ~istance
recommended for mcny of t he trees --therefore I hClve only listed root protection distanca of 3 and 6X C>BH.
PO Box 37 14, Saratoga, CA 95070 . 408-725-1357. dec:ah@po.cbell .net. http://www.decah.com.
Page 5 of 5
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
June 15, 2016
Ms. Jocelyn Puga
Community Development Depanment
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95031
RE: 12S Wheelu A"VeDue
Dear Joc.clyn:
ARCH ITECTU RE PLANNING URBAN DESIGN
I reviewed the drawings and evaluated the site cont:e:n. My comments and n:commendarions are as follows:
Neighborhood Context
The site is located in an established neighborhood conWning a mix of one and two-story traditional style. Phoros of the sire
and surrounding neighborhood uc sh.own on the following page.·
700 LA RKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSP U R . CA 94939
EXHIBIT 8
TEL: 4 1 5.331 .3795
CDGPLAN@P.-.CBELL.NET
.,,,, 11 1 flag lot entry driv. ii 11
Hr11 . .1 e ro immediate left
Nearby house
CANNON DES IGN GROUP
125 Wheeler Avenue
Design Review Comments
June 15, 2016 Page 2
l 1 .., , o site from Whitney Avenue
House to i mmediate right
Nearby house
700 lARKSPUR lANDING CIRClE SUITE 19 9 LARKS PUR CA 94939
Issues and Recommendations
·125 Wheelei Avenue
Design Review Comments
)llnC 15, 2016 Page 3
The proposed house is modest in si7.e and well designed. The embedding of the second floor area within the rood form
will limit its visual bulk. The howe should fit comfortably into this neighborhood of traditional style homes . I see only a
couple of issues.
1. There may be a potential fur privacy intrusions on the private outdoor space of nearby homes -see diagrams bdow.
----·· ----
.... .... ------
___ ..
----·· ....
Recommendation: The balcony could be eliminated. but that would severely oompromise the visual quality and design
unity of the howe. My recommendation would be to explore the option of adding evergreen plantings to block views
from the deck into the adjacent properties.
CANNON DESIG N GRO U P 700 LARKSPUR LANDI NG C I RC LE SUI TE 199 LARKSPUR CA 9 4939
2. There arc a few details that would benefit from design refinement.
• The porch beam is not deep enough.
• The corbels appear too small in relation to the beam.
• The columns arc too large and bulky.
'" The column caps and bases are too large and bulky.
• The beam and columns at the garage trellis arc too small.
Beam depth and corbel size could use some refinement
Columns are too large and column
caps and bases are too bulky
125 Wheeler Avenue
Design Review Comments
June 15, 2016 Page 4
Recommendation: Refine the above elements as noted on the illustrations below. These recommendations apply to all
al l faca des wher e th ere arc similar conditio ns .
Increase beam and corbel size slightly
Appl/•• to 111/ si milar canditiot111 on -11 facade•
Decrease column size and refine caps and bases
Applin to all similar condlUons on all ftlt:ades
See example photo
T.irfi ~Desirable . +~ -I but optional . I
Porch column and beam detail examples
H lncrease beam and
column sizes slightly
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 LARKSPUR . CA. 94939
125 Wheeler Avenue
Design~ Comments
June 15, 2016 Page 5
Jocelyn, please let me know if you have any specific questions or need any other specific issues addressed.
Sincerely,
CANNON D ESIGN GROUP
~~
Larry L. Cannon
CAN N O N DESIGN G RO UP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING C IRCL E. SU ITE 199 . LA RKSPUR • CA. 94939
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Jocelyn Puga
To:
Subject:
Adam Green
RE: Thank you
From: Adam Green [mailto:adamgreen@mac.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 9:21 PM
To: Jocelyn Puga
Cc: Estelle McGechie
Subject: Re: Thank you
Thank you Jocelyn for your followup. I was hoping to have a full 3D rendering completed by now, but we were
delayed by a week and should have something later next week.
Some of issues we have with the plans are privacy and the shadow cast on our house. We have a proposal that
would solve both of those issues.
Our request is that the proposed building be no closer than the current house distance. We would propose that
the garage be at least 19 .5 feet from the property line, and that the living quarters above have an offset, making
the occupied area upstairs no closer than 27 feet from the property line. This offset can be seen in 119 Wheeler-
the property next door.
I have an attachment that demonstrates our request (pdf doc).
In the attachment, you' 11 see three pages .
• Page one repre sents the current houses on both lots. You 'll see that the average distance of 125 Wheeler
is between 20 feet and 27 feet from our lot line
• Page two represents the current 125 Wheeler proposed plans, with an eight foot distance from the lot
line.
• Page three represents our proposal, which solves all concerns. The first floor is 19.5 feet from the
property line, and the second story is offset to 27 feet from property line, allowing for adequate privacy
and diminishing the impact of the shadows cast on our house.
We appreciate you checking in, we look forward to talking with you after you have reviewed the documents.
Please let us know the next steps in thi s process.
Than you,
Adam & Estelle Green EXHIBIT 9
1
2
Current House
-··--
WEST 125 Wheeler
EAST
---·---11 129 Wheel er
SOUTH
~--~
Proposed Construction
-··--
WEST 125 Wheeler
EAST
129 Wheeler
SOUTH
~--=====-
Proposed Solution
-··--
WEST 125 Wheeler "' ~
EAST
!ii
~
"' i --···--129 Wheeler
SOUTH
~--=======--
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
T .H.1 .5 . DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT P.O.Box 1518, Los Gatos , CA 95031
Tel: 408.354.1863 Fax : 408.354.1823
July 3rd , 2016 [Revised August 13 t h. 2016]
Why We Designed The House the Way We [)id:
The neighbor at 129 Wheeler has asked us to redesign the house [primarily?] for their benefit, so I will share
a part of the process, which lead to my choice of design and which we are presenting for your consideration.
This evaluation approach is one that I follow when commissioned with the task of designing a home for a
client; but in the circumstance of this request, I feel the need to share what we have done so far in ensuring
that the project will work well for all concerned.
1. Homeowner Needs
2 . Neighborhood Compatibility
3 . Site Considerations
4. Resulting Design Approach
Homeowner Needs:
RECE\VED
AUG 1 5 Z016
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING D IV IS ION
Jeff and Darcy Avilla are moving to this location because they have parents who live on Alpine Ave, round the
corner, and they wish to be within walking distance for the time being and build a home which will work well as
their parents age and possibly become less mobile. As such I am designing a home, which can support a future
in-law suite with some separation and an elevator to accommodate future needs. Jeff and Darcy would like
the ability to add solar Photovoltaic panels to their home either now or in the future depending on the overall
cost of the project. The lower level [cellar] will be finished at a later date.
Neighborhood Compatibility:
I e xplored both the immed iate and broader neighborhood in terms of Zoning, House Size, FAR , setbacks,
predominate house characteristics and recent trends. Some of this is suggested by the development process,
and can be obtained in some measure from Google Earth, but I also use the Town Aerial Maps which provide a
great deal of addit ional information. Site visits and preliminary neighborhood d iscussions with neighbors who
have lived there for a while also provide useful details not otherwise obvious .
Site Considerations :
The physical site and the characteristics of the immediate neighboring homes then come into play. In this
case there are a few things of note, which influenced my design:
There is no significant privacy impact from the neighbors to the west [119 Wheeler Ave and 2
Charles Ave]. because there is a driveway as a buffer.
There is a large potential impact from the house to the east [129 Wheeler Ave] because its design
has created a significant rear yard space at the north-east portion of the lot. This has meant that
the house itself extends along the entire west property line of the subject property. It is
e xacerbated by the staggered front property line of the 2 properties, and the fact that 129
Wheeler is a deeper property than the subject property.
The e xisting home impacts severely the house at 127 Wheeler Ave on the flag lot behind. That home
is "hemmed in " by surround ing homes posing mutual privacy concerns. The existing Balcony also
impacts 2 Charles Ave as it is very large and is on the West side of the house.
The lot at 125 Wheeler Ave also has the problem of being almost directly across from Whitney Ave
and the potential impact of car head lights and the noise of cars slowing/stopping and starting are a
real issue.
The lot is slightly depressed below the street grade, which makes drainage a serious consideration.
A number of trees have previously been removed from the front of the property. [Google]
EXHIBIT 1 0
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Resulting Design Approach:
By carefully analyzing this data I laid out the broad concepts of the design of a house for the property.
1. Garage on the right hand side.
More mutual privacy with closest house to east [129 Wheeler]
Keeps primary living areas away from any other home
Avoids glare from approaching headlights as Whitney Ave is "off-center" to the right.
2. Primarily East-West orientation of house with South-facing significant roof element.
Brings house forward on the lot to remove mutual privacy issues with flag lot behind at 127
Wheeler Ave .
• Allows for good solar photovoltaic placement.
Provides a rear yard buffer from 127 Wheeler Ave [and a courtyard design at the cellar]
Allows for drainage design to bring water to the street, rather than neighbor properties.
• House Width= Garage [21ft] + Elevator [5ft] +Stairs [11 ft]+ Entry [?ft]+ Living Rm [16ft].
These dimensions include the walls and the result is a house width of 60ft. This , in turn,
results in Bft side yard setbacks, so reducing the second level prof ile becomes important.
3. Have a smaller second story and embed the second floor into the roof structure. [main floor + garage
= 1938 Sq Ft and the second floor is only 1209 Sq ft] The second story element will resemble 139
Whitney Ave, 4 doors away, which I designed 25 years ago.
Enables the overall mass of the home to be minimized .
Allows a reduced profile at the right side of the house [toward 129 Wheeler] starting from a
single story plate he ight above grade [front and rear) and sloping up to a peak in the middle -
rather than having a constant 2 story wall along the side of the building -which is what 129
Wheeler looks like from the subject property and why I am trying to design "away" from it.
When taking into account the staggered front property line, the design allows the master
bedroom windows at 129 Wheeler Ave to be 100% unobstructed.
There is a potential staggered window privacy issue between 125 Bedroom 3 window and 129
master tub window . This can be mitigated. [See thoughts below].
The Town's Consulting Architect pointed out a potential privacy concern in the initial design
at the Master Bedroom balcony. After subsequent discussions with ne ighbors at 2 Charles
Ave and 127 Wheeler I have redesigned it to remove these privacy concerns.
4 . Plant a Significant Number of trees in the front yard.
This home is directly across from Whitney Ave and good screening will work well for both
the owners and the neighborhood residents. It will also help replace those previously lost.
Possible Mitigations for Potential Privacy Issues ay 129 Wheeler Ave:
1. Bedroom 3 Windows facing 129 Wheeler Ave could be resolved by having obscured glass at
the window as suggested by the neighbor at 129 Wheeler Ave. Alternatively the side window
could be eliminated and replaced by a forward facing window embedded in the roof. I did
this 25 Years ago at 139 Whitney Ave 4 doors away. This window would require black-out
curtains to mitigate the approaching headlights on Whitney Ave and it would reduce the area
for future PV solar panels . But we are open to both options.
In Conclusion:
The Town Consulting Architect summarized : "The proposed house is modest in size and we ll designed. The embedding
of the second floor area with in the roof form will limi t its visual bulk. The house should f it comfortably into this
neighborhood of traditional style homes.• We have implemented ALL of his recommendat ions .
I hope that this explanation of our design process shows that we SERIOUSLY considered ALL neighbors in
arriving at our final design and that the end result is appropriate and pleas in g.
Tony Jeans
For T.H.I.S Design
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
T .H .l .S . DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT P.0.Box 1518, Los Gatos, CA 95031
Tel: 408.354.1863 Fax: 408.354.1823
July 6th , 2016 [Revised August 12th , 2016]
Specific Critique of Suggestion for Alternative House Placement [Revised]:
There are no benefits to the suggested house siting as identified below -both to the owner, nor to other
neighbors , nor in deed to the Town .
a) A forward-facing garage will be the predominant feature of the property. This is poor
design architecturally. There is no reversing room for a side-facing garage.
b) The suggested house is long rather than wide so several rooms would face 129 Wheeler's 2-
story wall, which looms over 125 Wheeler. This is not acceptable to the owners of 125 .
c) The orientation would preclude the optimal use of the PV solar panels want to install.
d) The present design opens up views and removes privacy issues from the flag property at 127
Wheeler Ave . The suggested design perpetuates this problem rather than solves it.
e) The suggested design eliminates any yard for 125 Wheeler. Again -poor design concepts.
f) Most houses in the immediate and broader neighborhood are "forward Looking" not
"Sideways facing" so the suggested design would be less compatible . As this proposal is, per
the Town Consulting Architect -·modest in s ize and well designed" and "f i t s comfor tably into th is
neighborhood" -this would be a step in the wrong direction.
g) The Town Consulting Architect would reject the suggested proposal as "Not Compatibleff .
This suggested house siting is not needed from the standpoint of 129 Wheeler for the following reasons:
a) 129 Wheeler is a fun ctional design with its main yard being the northeast portion of the lot
which is the focus of the primary living areas of the house [family/nook/kitchen].
b) The only s ignificant windows facing the proposed home are the kitchen sink window, wh ich is
not a focal point for entertaining or living and could be screened with plantings; the dining
room -which is often not heavily used during the day, and could also be screened with
plantings; and the master bath window for which privacy concerns can be mitigated.
It would be a dangerous precedent for the town to enforce setbacks that are not compatible with the
surrounding homes based solely on a neighbor request. The 3 properties in the "immediate neighborhoodff that
are of moderately recent construction are 119 Wheeler Ave , 127 Wheeler Ave and 129 Wheeler Ave . Of the
si x S ide Yard Setbacks on those 3 homes , 5 are 8 Ft +/-[2 at 127 Wheeler, 2 at 129 Wheeler and 1at119
Wheeler]. 119 Wheeler is larger and 30% wider and is less comparable from a design perspective.
I have talked with the owners of 129 Wheeler Ave . They are nice, bright, creative designers('?) from Apple
and I initially felt that they were trying to make a positive contribution to the project. However , in my
estimation , the project does, in fact , work well in its curr ent form , but not as suggested.
I have attached the suggested s ite layout that they prov ided the town for c onsideration at 125 with an
overlay in Red of the project currently under consideration. I would ask the Plann ing Commissioners to look at
the two approaches [proposed and s uggested] with a view t o both compatibility and functionality for the
owners.
I would then ask you to consider what you would prefer if this were your new home'?
Thank you
Tony Jeans
For T.H.I.S Design
RECEIVED
AUG 1 5 20 16
TOWN OF LOS GATO S
PLANN ING DIV IS ION
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
A CONTRAST IN SOLUTIONS
TO S I TE DESIGN & PLANNING
W EST
---r--------~'--.... ---~
REAR YARD
•'
'J.O' RECREATION AREA
/
NEIGHBOR PREFERENCE
[IN BLACK]
' t
SUBJECT PROPOSAL
[IN RED]
I
I
PROPOSED
DRIVEWAY
I ~ SETBACKS
I I
11
_jL
NORTH
REAR YARD
RECREATION AREA ~
EA ST
2 9 Wheeler s'
SOUTH
f,() UI"