The URL can be used to link to this page

10 Staff Report - 15881 Linda Avenue and 15950 Stephanie LaneMEETING DATE: 01-22-08 ~Ow N 0 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT DATE: JANUARY 18, 2008 TO: MAYOR AND TO«T COUNCIL FROM: ORRY P. KORB, TO WN ATTORNEY© AGENDA ITEM: 10 SUBJECT: 15881 LINDA AVENUE AND 15950 STEPHENIE LANE (OWNERS: JENNIFER DEN DAAS AND DAN BLUE. APPLICANT: LINDA COURT PARTNERS) A. ADOPT RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING APPROVAL OF A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONE FROM R-1:8 TO R-1:8 PD AND TO DEMOLISH A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE B. ADOPT ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONE FROM R-1:8 TO R-1:8:PD FORA SEVEN LOT SUBDIVISION, FOR A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN TWO PARCELS ZONED R-1:8 AND APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH A SINGLE FAMILY RECOMMENDATION: Adopt an ordinance amending the zoning ordinance effecting a zone change from R-1:8 to R- 1:8:PD at 15881 Linda Avenue and a portion of 15950 Stephenie Lane. Also, adopt a resolution reflecting Council's findings in support of the proposed ordinance and the demolition of an existing single-family residence. DISCUSSION: On December 18, 2007, Council voted to introduce an ordinance amending the zoning ordinance effecting a zone change from R-1:8 to R-1:8:PD at 15881 Linda Avenue and a portion 15950 Stephenie Lane. Council also approved the demolition of a single-family residence. The Ordinance introduced by Council is attached. (Attachment 1) Council's factual findings and conclusions are reflected in the attached proposed resolution (Attachment 2). Attachments: (.Introduced Ordinance 2.Proposed Resolution PREPARED BY: ORRY P. KORB, TOWN ATTORNEY OPK LStBlwp [C (Documents and Semngslpgarcia LOSGATOSCAALocal Settlrgs;TerrplkPgrpw seUdepor, 15881 Linda Avenue wp4 Reviewed by: Town Manager Assistant Town Manager Clerk Finance Community Development Rev: 1/18/08 3:25 pm Reformatted: 7/19/99 F11C4 1-;as ORDINANCE ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE EFFECTING A ZONE CHANGE FROM R-1:8 TO R-1:8:PD AT 15881 LINDA AVENUE AND A PORTION OF 15950 STEPHENIE LANE THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I The Town Code of the Town of Los Gatos is hereby amended to change the zoning at 15881 Linda Avenue and a portion of 15950 Stephenie Lane as shown on the map which is attached hereto marked Exhibit A and is part of this Ordinance from R-1:8 (Single Family Residential, 1 to 5 dwelling units per acre), to R-1:8:PD ((Single Family Residential, 1 to 5 dwelling units per acre, Planned Development). SECTION II The PD (Planned Development Overlay) zone established by this Ordinance authorizes the following construction and use of improvements: 1. Demolition of a single-family residence and a nonpermitted second dwelling unit; 2. Construction of seven single family residences; and 3. Landscaping, streets, parking, open space and other site improvements shown and required on the Official Development Plan. ATTACH`1E`T I 4. Uses permitted are those specified in the underlying R-1 (Single Family Residential) zone by Sections 29.40.385 (Permitted Uses) and 29.20.1 S5 (Conditional Uses) of the Zoning Ordinance, as those sections exist at the time of the adoption of this Ordinance, or as they may be amended in the future, subject to any restrictions or other requirements specified elsewhere in this ordinance including, but not limited to, the Official Development Plan. However, no use listed in Section 29.20.185 is allowed unless specifically authorized by this Ordinance, or by Conditional Use Permit. SECTION III COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS All provisions of the Town Code apply, except when the Official Development Plan specifically shows otherwise. SECTION N Architecture and Site Approval is required before the demolition of the single family residence and construction work for the new dwelling units, whether or not a permit is required for the work and before any permit for construction is issued. Construction permits shall only be in a manner complying with Section 29.80.130 of the Zoning Ordinance. SECTION V The attached Exhibit A (Map) and Exhibit B (Development Plans, 30 sheets), are part of the Official Development Plan. The following must be complied with before issuance of any grading, demolition or construction permits: 2 TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: (Planning Division) 1. ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPROVAL REQUIRED. The Official Development Plans and this ordinance establish the allowed uses and intensity of development. The Official Development Plans are conceptual in nature such that minor deviations may be approved through the Architecture and Site approval process if necessary to achieve architectural excellence. The Development Review Committee shall be the deciding body of the Architecture and Site applications. 2. BMP. Prior to final occupancy of each unit, the applicant shall pay the Below Market Price (BMP) as established by Town Council Resolution. 3. HOUSE SIZE. The footprint and size of each house shall be determined during the Architecture and Site approval process. 4. LANDSCAPE PLAN. A final landscape plan shall be submitted during the Architecture and Site approval process. 5. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT. A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained prior to the issuance of a Building, Grading or Encroachment Permit. 6. RECYCLING. 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 type and weight of material, shall be submitted to the Town prior to the Town's demolition inspection. 7. *ARCHAELOGICAL. In the event archaeological traces are encountered, all construction within a 50 meter radius of the find shall be halted, the Director of 3 Community Development shall be notified and an archaeologist shall be retained to 8 9 10 examine the find and make appropriate recommendations. *NATIVE AMERICAN REMAINS. If human remains are discovered, the Santa Clara County Coroner shall immediately be notified. The Coroner will determine whether or not the remains were Native American. If the Coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, who would attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native American. *ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIND. If the Director of Community Development finds that the archaeological find is not a significant resource, work will resume only after the submittal of a preliminary archaeological report and after provision for reburial and ongoing monitoring are accepted. Provisions for identifying descendants of a deceased Native American and for reburial will follow the protocol set forth in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. If the site is found to be a significant archaeological site, a mitigation program must be prepared and submitted to the Director of Community Development for consideration and approval, in conformance with the protocol set forth in Public Resources Code Section 210812. *FINAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT. A final report shall be prepared at the applicant's cost when a find is determined to be a significant archaeological site and/or when Native American remains are found on the site. The final report shall include background information on the completed work, a description and list of identified resources, the disposition and curation of these resources, any testing, other recovered information, and conclusions. 4 11. *NESTNG. If land clearing, grading, tree and brush removal, tree trimming or demolition activities are to occur during nesting season (i.e., between February 1 and August 15), a preconstruction survey for nesting migratory birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist from one to four weeks prior to the initiation of work. In no nesting birds are observed, work may proceed. If work is delayed more than four weeks from the date of the survey, and it is still within the nesting season, the pre-construction survey shall be repeated. 12. * ACTIVE NESTS. If occupied active nests of a migratory bird species are identified, a suitable buffer shall be established around the nest tree. Work within the buffer zone shall be prohibited until August 15th or until the young have fledged, as determined by the project biologist. The dimensions of each buffer zone shall be determined by the biologist in consultation with the CDFG. Buffer zones vary depending on the species and site topography, with passerines typically requiring 75 to 100 feet and raptors 200 to 500 feet. 13. *TREE REMOVALS - CDFG. To comply with the California Fish and Game Code, the project proponent shall consult with the CDFG prior to removal of the following trees: Tree#l DBH'- 61 coast live oak 14 63 black walnut 5 65 coast live oak 8 66 coast live oak 5.5 69 willow 7 78 willow 8 94 coast live oak 16 For tree locations, please refer to Sheet L-2 of project plans 2 Diameter at breast height 5 The following measures shall be implemented to ensure restoration and enhancement of the riparian habitat on Ross Creek: a. Remove the non-native trees from within the riparian corridor, which have been identified by the project's arborist and accepted by the Town's Consulting Arborist. b. Remove the cape ivy from within the riparian corridor. c. Incorporate non-native species management into the Homeowners Association Codes, Covenants & Restrictions. This will include on-going eradication of cape ivy and follow up removal of non-native tree and shrub re-sprouts, d. Install native riparian tree and shrubs species in gaps within the riparian corridor and within the riparian setback (Figure 2 of the Riparian Enhancement Plan). Special care must be taken to not plant trees within the 10-foot wide sanitary sewer easement, which runs through the existing riparian corridor. The proposed riparian trees on Sheet L-1 of the Landscape Plan are acceptable species to be planted in this area. If California sycamore (Platanus racemosa) is included in the final planting plan, special care should be taken to confirm that the trees are NOT propagated from California sycamores that have hybridized with the London plane tree. Additional shrub species that could be added to the final planting plan include, coffeeberry (Rhamnus californica), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), California blackberry, (Rubus ursinus), and California rose (Rosa californica). 6 e. All street and outdoor residential lighting will be directed downward or away from the riparian corridor. f. Install a split rail fence along the proposed garden walls to discourage human intrusion within the riparian corridor. g. As shown in the Landscape Plan, incorporate bioswales for water treatment prior to discharge into the creek. The bioswales will be located outside the 10- foot wide storm sewer easement (Figure 2 of the Riparian Enhancement Plan). The bioswales will be vegetated with native bunch grasses and will have outfalls designed in accordance with Design Guide 12 - Outfall With Rock Slope Protection, of the Santa Clara Valley Water District's Water Resources Protection Manual. 14. *REPLACEMENT TREES IN CORRIDOR. To the extent feasible, replacement plantings (in accordance with the Town of Los Gatos' Tree Protection Ordinance) shall be placed within the riparian corridor and consist of native species. 15. *NON-NATIVE REMOVALS. The project proponent shall remove existing invasive non-native plants within the riparian corridor. Specifically, Tasmanian blue gum (tree #92), silver wattle (trees 480 and 87) cherry plum (tree #68), Japanese privet (tree 483), and Peruvian pepper (tree #67). 16. *CONSTRUCTION NEAR RIPARIAN HABITAT CORRIDOR. All construction related activities shall avoid the riparian habitat corridor, to the maximum extent feasible. Riparian habitat shall be designated as a sensitive area and clearly shown on construction plans. Orange construction fencing shall be installed prior to issuance of a grading or 7 building permit, wherever there is a risk of vehicles or equipment accidentally impacting riparian vegetation. All access/travel routs, staging areas, and equipment maintenance areas shall be located outside of riparian habitats. IT *REPLANTINGS N CORRIDOR. Only native tree and shrub species indigenous to western Santa Clara may be planted within the riparian corridor. All proposed plantings shall be reviewed and accepted by CDFG and SCVWD. 18. * INVASIVE PLANTS. The project sponsor shall avoid planting ornamental species reported by the California Invasive Plant Council to have the potential to be invasive. Species on this list that can spread by windborne seed shall be prohibited from use in landscaping and shall be noted in the CC&R's. 19. *ARBORIST REPORT. The applicant shall implement the 29 recommendations provided by the Town's Consulting Arborist, Arbor Resources, in the report dated February 5, 2007. These recommendations are included as Attachment 1 of the Initial Study. 20. BLUE OAK TREE. During the Architecture and Site approval process, the applicant shall work with the Town's Consulting Arborist, at the applicant's expense, to reassess the condition of the Blue Oak tree and to evaluate whether or not the tree can be saved and that it will not be a hazard. 21. *MINIMIZE VISIBILITY. One of the following measures shall be required to minimize the visibility of the proposed house on Lot 1 from the existing house at 15900 Rochin Terrace. The measures are in order of preference. If the first measure is determined to be not feasible, the next measure is required and so on. 1) Reconfigure the design of the residence proposed for Lot 1 to accommodate a buffer landscape strip along the eastern 8 edge of the building envelope for this lot. 2) Adjust the site plan layouts of Lots through 3 to provide sufficient area for buffer landscape plantings along the eastern Lot 1 property line: or 3) Offer to plant buffer landscaping on the adjoining property owner's lot to the east (15900 Rochin Terrace). 22. *GOOD NEIGHBOR FENCE. The proposed six foot high, solid wood "Good Neighbor" fence along the east side of Lot 1 and south side of Lot 5 shall be constructed as early as possible (prior to project grading activities if possible) to help reduce construction noise at existing adjacent residences. 23. CC&R's. CC&R's shall include a statement regarding the responsibilities of living next to a riparian corridor and the limitations of the rear yards for Lots 1 through 4. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and accepted by the SCVWD. 24. DEED RESTRICTION. Prior to final occupancy, deed restrictions shall be recorded for Lots 1 through 4 at the applicant's expense, which discuss the responsibilities of living next to a riparian corridor and the limitations of the 30 foot setback for Lot 4 25. FENCING. Prior to final occupancy, a low open design fence shall be installed on top of the garden walls along the creek. The final fence designs shall be reviewed during the Architecture and Site approval process. 26. TREE REPLACEMENTS ALONG CREEK. During the Architecture and Site approval process, the applicant shall work with Town staff, SCVWD and CDFG to determine the location, size and species of native trees and shrubs that can be planted in the riparian corridor and buffer zone to create a new screen. 27. GARAGES. The garages on Lots 1 and 2 shall be designed during the Architecture and Site approval process to be deeply recessed. 9 28. RELOCATION OF REAR PROPERTY LINES. During the subdivision application process, the rear property lines of the properties along the creek shall be aligned with the proposed garden walls. The portion beyond the walls shall be incorporated with the common area parcel. 29. GARDEN WALLS. The proposed garden walls along the creek shall be less than four feet in height and shall be located along the property line for the parcels adjacent to the creek. The garden walls shall be extended along the entire length of the properties along the creek. The side property line fence shall cease at the garden wall and shall not extend beyond the property towards the creek. The stairs beyond the garden walls shall also be eliminated. These modifications shall be shown on the plans for the Subdivision and Architecture and Site applications. 30. WILLOW TREES. Trees #70, 74, 75, 77, 79 and 90 shall not be removed unless CDFG, RWQCB and a biological consultant determine otherwise. 31. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. The amount and location of the impervious surfaces in the backyards of the houses facing the creek, (Lots 1 through 4), shall be designed during the Architecture and Site approval process to not impact the creek. (Building Division) 32. PERMITS REQUIRED: A building permit shall be required for the seven proposed dwelling units and the demolition of any structure(s). 33. CONSTRUCTION PLANS: The Conditions of Approval shall be stated in full on the cover sheet of the construction plans submitted for a building permit. 34. SIZE OF PLANS: The maximum size of construction plans submitted for building permits shall be 24" x 36". 10 35. PLAINS: The construction plans for this project shall be prepared under the direct supervision of a licensed architect or engineer. (Business and Professionals Code Section 5538) 36. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS: Contact Town of Los Gatos Building Counter technicians for demolition requirements and complete the process before obtaining a building permit for demolition of such work. 37. *LEAD-BASED PAINT. A state certified lead-based paint professional shall be retained to perform a lead-based paint survey of the existing structures and the recommendations of the professional shall be followed for abatement of any identified lead-based paint prior to demolition of the structures. 38. *HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. The identified hazardous materials being stored on site shall be carefully removed prior to demolition and grading, and legally disposed of in accordance with local, county and state regulations. 39. HOUSE NUMBERS: The developer shall submit requests for additional house numbers prior to the building permit application process. 40. RESIDENTIAL TOWN ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS: The residences shall be designed with adaptability features for single-family residence per Town Resolution 1994-61. a. Wooden backing (no smaller than 2" x 8") shall be provided in all bathroom walls, at water closets, showers and bathtubs located at 34" 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" wide on accessible floor. 11 C. Primary entrance shall have a 36" wide door including, a 5"x5" level landing, no more than 1" out of plane with the immediate interior floor level, with an IS" clearance. 41. SOILS REPORT: Two copies of 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. 42. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall be submitted to the project building inspector upon foundation inspection. This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the soils report and the building pad elevation and on-site regaining wall locations and elevations are prepared according to approved plans. Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer for the following items: a. Pad elevation b. Finish floor elevation c. Foundation corner locations 43. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: California Title 24 Energy Compliance forms CF- 1R and MF-1R. 44. TOWN FIREPLACE STANDARDS: New fireplaces shall be EPA Phase II approved appliances as per Town Ordinance 1905. Tree limbs shall be cut within 10 feet of chimneys. 12 45. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is required by UBC Section 1701, the architect or engineer of record shall prepare an insp,:L~_tion program that shall be submitted to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the building permits, in accordance with UBC Section 106.3.5. Please obtain Town Special Inspection form from the Building Division Service Counter. The Town Special Inspection schedule shall be blue-lined on the construction plans. 46. NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION STANDARDS: The Town standard Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program specification shall be part of the plan submittal. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division Service Counter. 47. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following agencies approval before issuing a building permit: a. Community Development Department b. Parks and Public Works Department c. West Valley Sanitation District: 378-2407 d. Santa Clara County Fire Department: 378-4010 e. * Santa Clara Valley Water District f. California Regional Water Quality Control Board g. *California Department of Fish and Game h. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers i. Los Gatos Union School District Note: Obtain the school district form from the Town Building Service Counter after the Building Division plan check has approved the plans. 13 TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS: (Engineering Division) 48. BIO-SWALE - Bio swales shall be located outside of the riparian buffer zone. 49. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. The Applicant shall enter an agreement to construct public improvements in accordance with Town Code §24.40.020. 50. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT SECURITY. The applicant shall supply suitable securities for all public improvements that are a part of the development in a form acceptable to the Town in the amount of 100% (performance) and 100% (labor and material) prior to issuance of any permit. Applicant shall provide two (2) copies of documents verifying the cost of the public improvements to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department. 51. *GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION. Geotechnical investigations shall be conducted for this project to determine the potential for surface fault rupture on the site. The geotechnical study shall provide recommendations for site grading as well as the design of foundations, retaining walls, concrete slab-on-grade construction, excavation, drainage, on-site utility trenching and pavement sections. The project shall incorporate all recommendations of the investigation in order to minimize the potential impacts resulting from regional seismic activity and subsurface soil conditions on the site. 52. GRADING PERMIT. A grading permit is required for site grading and drainage. The grading permit application (with grading plans) shall be made to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public Works Department located at 41 Miles Avenue. The grading plans shall include final grading, drainage, retaining wall location, driveway, utilities and interim erosion control. Grading plans shall list earthwork quantities and a 14 table of existing and proposed impervious areas. Unless specifically allowed by the Director of Parks and Public Works, the grading permit will be issued concurrently with the building permit. The grading permit is for work outside the building footprint(s). A separate building permit, issued by the Building Department on E. Main Street is needed for grading within the building footprint. 53. PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING. Prior to issuance of any permit or the commencement of any site work, the general contractor shall: a. Along with the project applicant, attend a pre-construction meeting with the Town Engineer to discuss the project conditions of approval, working hours, site maintenance and other construction matters, b. Acknowledge in writing that they have read and understand the project conditions of approval, and will make certain that all project sub-contractors have read and understand them prior to commencing work and that a copy of the project conditions of approval will be posted on site at all times during construction. 54. RETAINING WALLS. A building permit, issued by the Building Department at 110 E. Main Street, may be required for site retaining walls. Walls are not reviewed or approved by the Engineering Division of Parks and Public Works during the grading permit plan review process. 55. SOILS REPORT. One copy of the soils report shall be submitted with the grading permit 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. 15 56. SOILS REVIEW. Prior to issuance of any permit, the applicant's soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainage plans to ensure that designs for foundations, retaining walls, site grading, and site drainage are in accordance with their recommendations and the peer review comments. The applicant's soils engineer's approval shall then be conveyed to the Town either by letter or by signing the plans. 57. SOILS ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION. During construction, all excavations and grading shall be inspected by the applicant's soils engineer prior to placement of concrete and/or backfill so they can verify that the actual conditions are as anticipated in the design-level geotechnical report, and recommend appropriate changes in the recommendations contained in the report, if necessary. The results of the construction observation and testing should be documented in an "as-built" letter/report prepared by the applicant's soils engineer and submitted to the Town before final release of any occupancy permit is granted. 58. CERTIFICATE OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT. A Certificate of Lot Line Adjustment shall be recorded prior to recordation of the final map. Two copies of the legal description for each new lot configuration, a plat map (8-%2 in. X I I in.) and two copies of the legal description of the land to be exchanged shall be submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public Works Department for review and approval. The submittal shall include closure calculations, title reports less than 90 days old and the appropriate fee. The certificate shall be recorded before any permits may be issued. 59. DEIVIvLITION. Existing structures on the site shall be removed prior to recordation of the final map. 16 60. FINAL MAP. A final map shall be recorded. Two copies of the final map shall be submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public Works Department for review and approval. Submittal shall include closure calculations, title reports and appropriate fee. The map shall be recorded before any permits are issued. 61. UTILITY COMPANY REVIEW. Letters from the electric, telephone, cable, and trash companies indicating that the proposed improvements and easements are acceptable shall be provided prior to recordation of the final map. 62. DEDICATIONS. The following shall be dedicated on the final map. The dedications shall be recorded before any permits are issued. a. Linda Court. A 22-foot private street right-of-way with a 36-foot radius cut-de- sac. b. Public Service Easement (PSE). Five (5) foot wide, next to the Linda Ct. right-of- way. c. Ingress-egress, storm drainage and sanitary sewer easements, as required. d. Sanitary Sewer Easement. Ten (10) to twelve (12) feet wide, as shown on the tentative map. e. Emergency Access Easement. Twenty (22) feet wide, from the end of the public road over the entire Linda Ct. Private right of way. f Riparian Parcel. The Riparian Parcel, identified on the Tentative map as Conservation Easement, shall be dedicated in fee to the Town and a flood control and maintenance easement shall be dedicated to SCVWD. g. The trail easement shown on Sheet C-5 at the east side of Lot 1, shall be eliminated from the final plans. 17 63. JOINT TRENCH PLANS. Joint trench plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Town prior to issuance of any permit. 64. ABOVE GROLND UTILITIES. The applicant shall submit a 75-percent progress printing to the Town for review of above ground utilities including backflow prevention Z:i devices, fire department connections, gas and water meters, off-street valve boxes, hydrants, site lighting, electrical/communication/cable boxes, transformers, and mail boxes. Above ground utilities shall be reviewed and approved by Community Development prior to issuance of any permit. 65. PRIVATE EASEMENTS. Agreements detailing rights, limitations, and responsibilities of involved parties shall accompany each private easement. The easements and associated agreements shall be recorded simultaneously with the final map. 66. CC&R's. CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Attorney, Community Development Department, and Parks and Public Works Department prior to recordation of the final map. 67. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. The following improvements shall be installed by the developer. Plans for those improvements shall be prepared by a California registered civil engineer, reviewed and approved by the Town, and guaranteed by contract, Faithful Performance Security and Labor & Materials Security before the issuance of a building permit or the recordation of a map. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. a. Drive. Curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, tie-in paving, suing striping, storm drainage and sanitary sewers, as required. 18 b. RestripeiCommunity Benefit. The applicant shall re-stripe the Blossom Hill Road intersection with Linda Avenue and Old Blossom Hill Road. The striping shall provide left turn pockets for both eastbound Blossom Hill Road traffic turning left on Linda Avenue, and for westbound Blossom Hill Road traffic turning left on Old Blossom Hill Road. 68. SITE LIGHTING. Lighting photometrics shall be provided and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to the approval of the Tentative Map. 69. DESIGN CHANGES. The Applicant's registered Engineer shall notify the Town Engineer, in writing, at least 72 hours in advance of all differences between the proposed work and the design indicated on the plans. Any proposed changes shall be subject to the approval of the Town before altered work is started. Any approved changes shall be incorporated into the final "as-built" drawings. 70. INSURANCE. One million dollars ($1,000,000) of liability insurance holding the Town harmless shall be provided in a format acceptable to the Town Attorney before recordation of the map. 71. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION FEE. The developer shall pay a proportional the project's share of transportation improvements needed to serve cumulative development within the Town of Los Gatos. The fee amount will be based upon the Town Council resolution in effect at the time the request of Certificate of Occupancy is made. the fee shall be paid before issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. The traffic impact mitigation fee for this project using the current fee schedule is $5,742 per each new home. The credit for the existing home will be pro-rated across each new home. The final 19 fee shall be calculated form the final plans using the rate schedule in effect at the time of the request for a Certificate of Occupancy. 72. FUTURE STUDIES. Any post project traffic or parking counts, or other studies imposed by Planning Commission or Town Council shall be funded by the applicant. 73. PLAN CHECK FEES. Plan check fees shall be deposited with the Town prior to submittal of plans to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department. 74. INSPECTION FEES. Inspection fees shall be deposited with the Town prior to issuance of any Permit or recordation of the Final Map. 75. FISH AND GAME REQUIREMENTS. A "1603" permit shall be obtained for the California Department of Fish and Game for proposed improvements in or near riparian areas within their jurisdiction. A copy of the permit shall be provided to the Parks & Public Works Department before any permits are issued. 76. SCVWD. A Santa Clara Valley Water District permit for all work within their jurisdiction shall be obtained prior to issuance of any Town permits. 77. REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD. Any necessary permits from the Regional Water Control Board shall be provided prior to issuance of any permits. In the event that no permit is required from this agency, a letter stating as much shall be provided. (This condition is intended to address the storm drain outfall). 78. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. Any necessary permits from the Army Corps of Engineers shall be provided prior to issuance of any permits. In the event that no permit is required from this agency, a letter stating as much shall be provided. (This condition is intended to address the storm drain outfall). 20 79. TREE REMOVAL. Copies of all necessary tree removal permits shall be provided prior to issuance of a grading permit. 80. GENERAL. All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town Standard Drawings and the Town Standard Specifications. All work shall conform 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 materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will not be allowed unless a special 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 the Town performing the required maintenance at the developer's expense. 81. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT. All work in the public right-of-way will require a Construction Encroachment Permit. All work over $5,000 will require construction security. 82. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS. The developer or his representative shall notify the Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (24) hours before starting any work pertaining to on-site drainage facilities, grading or paving, and all work in the Town's right-of-way. Failure to do so will result in rejection of work that went on without inspection. 83. 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. 21 84. CONSTRUCTION ACCESS. Construction access shall be provided from Linda Avenue. No access will be allowed via Stepheme Lane. 85. EROSION CONTROL. Interim and final erosion control plans shall be prepared and submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public Works Department. A Notice of Intent (NOI) and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be submitted to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board for projects disturbing more than one acre. A maximum of two weeks is allowed between clearing of an area and stab ilizinglbuilding 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 fences, fiber rolls (with locations and details), erosion control blankets, Town standard seeding specification, filter berms, check dams, retention basins, etc. Provide erosion control measures as needed to protect downstream water quality during winter months. The grading, drainage, erosion control plans and SWPPP shall be in compliance with applicable measures contained in the amended provisions C.3 and C.14 of Order 01-024 of the amended Santa Clara County NPDES Pen-nit. 86. 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 times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, 22 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 will 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 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 25 MPH. All trucks hauling soil, sand, or other loose debris shall be covered. 87. CONSTRUCTION STREET PARKING. No vehicle having a manufacturer's rated gross vehicle weight exceeding ten thousand (10,000) pounds shall be allowed to park on the portion of a street which abuts property in a residential zone without prior approval from the Town Engineer 15.40.070). 88. SITE DRAINAGE. Rainwater leaders shall be dischar ' to splash blocks. No through curb drains will be allowed. 89. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. A storm water management shall be included with the grading permit application for all Group 1 and Group 2 projects as defined in the amended provisions C.3.d. of Order No. R2-2005-0035 of the amended Santa Clara County NPDES Permit No. CAS029718. The plan shall delineate source control measures and BMP's together with the sizing calculations. The plan shall be cert~..d by a professional pre-qualified by the Town. In the event that storm water measures proposed on the Planning approval differ significantly from those certified on 23 the Building/Grading Permit, the Town may require a modification of the Planning approval prior to release of the Building Permit. The applicant may elect to have the Planning submittal certified to avoid this possibility. 90. AGREEMENT FOR STORMWATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS. The homeowrner's association shall enter into an agreement with the Town for maintenance of the storm water filtration devices required to be installed on this project by Town's Storm Water Discharge Permit No. CAS029718 and modified by Order No. R2-2005-0035. The agreement will specify that certain routine maintenance shall be performed by the homeowner's association and will specify device maintenance reporting requirements. The agreement will also specify routine inspection requirements, permits and payment of fees. The agreement shall be recorded prior to release of any occupancy permits. 91. SILT AND MUD IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. It is the responsibility of contractor and home owner 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. 92. UTILITIES. The developer shall install all utility services, including telephone, electric power and all other communications lines underground, as required by Town Code §27.50.015(b). All new utility services shall be placed underground. Underground conduit shall be provided for cable television service. 93. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. The developer shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because of developer's operations. Improvements such as, but not limited to: curbs, 24 gutters, sidewalks, driveways, signs, pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings, etc. shall be repaired and replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original condition. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the Engineering Construction Inspector, and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. Developer shall request a walk-through with the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. 94. DRIVEWAY APPROACH. The developer shall install one Town standard residential driveway approach at each new driveway. The new driveway approach shall be constructed per Town Standard Details. 95. AS-BUILT PLANS. After completion of the construction of all work, the original plans shall have all changes (change orders and field changes) clearly marked. The "as-built" plans shall again be signed and "wet-stamped" by the civil engineer who prepared the plans, attesting to the changes. The original "as-built" plans shall be review and approved the Engineering Inspector. A Mylar' and AutoCAD disk of the approved "as- built" plans shall be provided to the Town before the Faithful Performance Security or Occupancy Permit is released. The AutoCAD file shall include only the following information and shall conform to the layer naming convention: a) Building Outline, Layer: BLDG-OUTLINE; b) Driveway, Layer: DRIVEWAY; c) Retaining Wall, Layer: RETAIN `NG WALL; d) Swimming Pool, Layer: SWIMMING-POOL; e) Tennis Court, Layer: TENNIS-COURT; f) Property Line, Layer: PROPERTY-LNE; g) Contours, Layer: NEWCONTOUR. All as-built digital files must be on the same coordinate basis as 25 the Town's survey control network and shall be submitted in AutoCAD version 2000 or higher. 96. SANITARY SEWER LATERAL. Sanitary sewer laterals are televised by West Valley Sanitation District and approved by the Town of Los Gatos before they are used or reused. Install a sanitary sewer lateral clean-out at the property line. 97. SANITARY SEWER BACKWATER VALVE. Drainage piping serving fixtures which have flood level rims less than twelve (12) inches (304.8 mm) above the elevation of the next upstream manhole and/or flushing inlet cover at the public or private sewer system serving such drainage piping shall be protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved type backwater valve. Fixtures above such elevation shall not discharge through the backwater valve, unless first approved by the Administrative (Sec. 6.50.025). 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 section 103(e) of the Uniform Plumbing Code adopted by section 6.50.010 of the Town Code and maintain such device in a functional operating condition. Evidence of West Valley Sanitation District's decision on whether a backwater device is needed shall be provided prior to issuance of a building permit. 98. 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, constriction, 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. If the device is located within a structure on the property, the measurement shall be made at distances as close to twenty-five (25) 26 feet from the device as possible. The noise level at any point outside of the property plane shall not exceed eighty-five (85) dBA. 99. GOOD HOUSEKEEPING. Good housekeeping practices shall be observed at all times during the course of construction. Superintendence of construction shall be diligently performed 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 a special permit is issued by the Engineering Division. 100. SITE SUPERVISION. The General Contractor shall provide qualified supervision on the job site at all times during construction. 101. 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 and Engineering Department Engineering Inspectors to devise a traffic control plan to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow under periods when soil is hauled on or off the project site. 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. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose debris or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. 102. UTILITY SETBACKS. House foundations shall be set back from utility lines a sufficient distance to allow excavation of the utility without undermining the house foundation. The Town Engineer shall determine the appropriate setback based on the depth of the utility, input from the project soils engineer, and the type of foundation. 27 103. MAINTENANCE ACCESS. The applicant shall propose maintenance access improvements for the Town Engineer to review, comment on, and approve. The Engineering Division shall approve the surface materials over each public easement. 104. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN. The Applicant shall submit a constriction management plan that shall incorporate at a minimum the Earth Movement Plan, Traffic Control Plan, Project Schedule, site security fencing, employee parking, constriction staging area, construction trailer, and proposed outhouse locations. All construction staging and parking shall occur on-site. (Parks and Forestry Division) 105. WATER EFFICIENCY. This project is subject to the Town's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, Chapter 26, Article IV of the Town Code. A fee as established by Town Council resolution shall be paid when the landscape, irrigation plans and water calculations are submitted for review prior to the issuance of building permit. 106. NEW TREES. All newly planted trees are required to be double staked to Town standards. 107. GENERAL. All newly planted trees shown on the plan are specific subjects of approval of this plan and must remain on the site. 108. IRRIGATION. All newly planted landscaping shall be irrigated by an in-ground irrigation system. Special care shall be taken to avoid irrigation which will endanger existing native trees and shrubs. 109. PROTECTIVE FENCING. Prior to any equipment arriving on site and prior to constriction or building permits being issued, the applicant shall meet with the Town's Consulting Arborist, at the developer's expense, concerning the need for protective 28 fencing around the existing trees and other required tree protection measures identified in this ordinance. Such fencing is to be installed prior to, and be maintained during, construction. The fencing shall be a five foot high chain link attached to steel poles driven at least IS inches into the ground when at the dripline of the tree. If the fence has to be within eight feet of the trunk of the tree, a fence base may be used, as in a typical chain link fence that is rented. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT: 110. REQUIRED FIRE FLOW. Required fire flow for this project is 1,000 GPM at 20 psi. residual pressure. 109. FIRE HYDRANTS. Provide one public fire hydrant at a location to be determined by the Fire Department and the San Jose Water Company. Hydrant(s) shall have a minimum single flow of 1,000 GPM at 20 psi residual, with spacing not to exceed 500 feet. Prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant shall provide civil drawings reflecting all fire hydrants serving the site. To prevent building.permit delays, the developer shall pay all required fees to the water company ASAP. 110. HYDRANT INSTALLATION. Fire hydrants shall be installed and located along the new or replacement water main installation(s), at a maximum spacing of 500 feet. Provide hydraulic calculations to show that the required fire flow will be provided. 111. TIMING OF REQUIRED WATER SUPPLY HYDRANTS. Installations of required fire service(s) and fire hydrant(s) shall be tested and accepted by the Fire Department, prior to the start of framing or delivery of bulk combustible materials. Building permit issuance may be withheld until required installations are completed, tested and accepted. 29 112. FIRE ACCESS ROADS. The applicant shall provide access roadways with a paved all weather surface, a minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet six inches, minimum circulating turning radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside, and a maximum slope of 15%. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet A-1. 113. ROADWAY TURNAROUND. The applicant shall provide an approved fire department engine roadway turnaround with a minimum radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet A-1. Cul-de-sac diameters shall be no less than 72 feet. 114. FIRE LANE MARKINGS. The applicant shall provide marking for all roadways within the project. Markings shall be per fire department specifications. Installations shall also conform to Local Government Standards and Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications A-6. 115. PARKING ALONG ROADWAYS. The required width of the fire access roadways shall not be obstructed in any manner and parking shall not be allowed along roadways less than 28 feet in width. Roadway widths shall be measured curb face to curb face. 116. TIMING OF ROADWAY INSTALLATIONS. Required access roads, up through First lift of asphalt, shall be installed and accepted by the Fire Department prior to the start of construction. Bulk combustible materials shall not be delivered to the site until installation is complete. During construction, emergency access roads shall be maintained clear and unimpeded unless alternative solutions are approved by the Fire Department. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall contact the Fire Department to discuss their plan for maintaining the emergency access road during 30 construction. Note that building permit issuance may be withheld until installations are completed. 117. PREMISES IDENTIFICATION. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their background. *Required as Mitigation Measures 31 SECTION VI This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos on 2008, and adopted by the following vote as an ordinance of the Town of Los Gatos at a meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos on effect 30 days after it is adopted. COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA ATTEST: CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA N:~DEV\ORDS\linda 15881.1 Am 32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 15881 Linda Avenue Architecture and Site Applical on S-06-050 Requesting approval to demolish a single family residence on property zoned R-1:8. PROPERTY OWNERS: Jennifer Den Daas APPLICANT: Linda Court Partners TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Planning Division 1. APPROVAL: The approval of this application is contingent upon the adoption of the Planned Development for the subject site and no permits shall be issued until such time. 2. EXPIRATION OF APPROVAL. The Architecture and Site application will expire two years from the date of approval unless the approval is used before expiration. Section 29.20.335 defines what constitutes the use of an approval granted under the Zoning Ordinance. 3. RECYCLING. 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 type and weight of material, shall be submitted to the Town prior to the Towns demolition inspection. Building Division 4. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS: Contact Town of Los Gatos Building Counter technicians for demolition requirements and complete the process before obtaining a building permit for demolition of such work. 5. *LEAD-BASED PAINT. A state certified lead-based paint professional shall be retained to perform a lead-based paint survey of the existing structures and the recommendations of the professional shall be followed for abatement of any identified lead-based paint prior to demolition of the structures. 6. *HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. The identified hazardous materials being stored on site shall be carefully removed prior to demolition and legally disposed of in accordance with local, county and state regulations * Required as mitigation measures N:ADEV\C0N'D1TNSv2007\1 nda1588Ldoc RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN' COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING APPROVAL OF A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONE FROM R-1:8 TO R-1:8 PD AND TO DEMOLISH A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE APN: 523-25-020 AND 523-25-036 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PD-05-02 ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATION S-06-050 NEGATIVE DECLARATION ND-07-07 PROPERTY LOCATION: 15881 LINDA AVENUE AND 15950 STEPHENIE LANE WHEREAS: A. This matter came before Council for public hearing on December 18, 2007, and was regularly noticed in conformance with State and Town law. B. Council received testimony and documentary evidence from the applicant and all interested persons who wished to testify or submit documents. Council considered all testimony and materials submitted, including the record of the Planning Commission proceedings and the packet of material contained in the Council Agenda Report dated December 11, 2007, along with any and all subsequent reports and materials prepared concerning these applications. C. On July 11, 2007, August 22, 2007, September 26, 2007, and October 10, 2007, the Planning Commission considered the subject applications for Planned Development and Architecture and Site approval for a seven (7) lot subdivision of single-family residences located adjacent to Ross Creek. The public hearings followed a study session on the project held by the Planning Commission on July 12, 2006. The Commission voted to approve the Architecture and Site application and recommended approval of the Planned Development application. D. Council finds as follows: i. That the proposed zone change is consistent with the General Plan. The General Page 1 of 14 Attachment 2 Plan designates the project site as "R-l, Low Density," allowing for residential densities of zero (0) to five (5) units per net acre. The site is 1.9 acres (net) allowing up to ten (10) dwelling units. Existing zoning would allow the proposed single-family residential use, and the proposed density of 3.7 units per acre would be consistent with the existing zoning. The applicant seeks approval of a zone change from R-1:8 to R-1:8PD for a seven (7) lot subdivision. The Planned Development application would limit the project to seven (7) units and would allow the project design to vary from existing zoning code requirements, specifically allowing one (1) nonconforming side setback and a narrower street than normally permitted by code. The project also complies with General Plan Land Use Element Policy L.P.2.2 regarding the balancing the size and number of units to achieve appropriate intensity of new development; Policy L.P.3.5 regarding consistency of proposed type and intensity of land use with the immediate neighborhood, which is also residential with lots similarly sized; Policy L.P.4.5 regarding maintaining the Town's capacity to meet its housing needs as identified in the Housing Element of the General Plan; Conservation Element Policy C.P.2.14 regarding protecting riparian corridors though the use of restrictive setbacks, as are present in this project; Policv C.P.4.3 regarding preservation of native habitat, which is a feature of this project in the riparian corridor. EVIDENCE: Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration dated March 2007 ("IS/NVIND"), Town Council Staff Report ("TCSR") dated December 11, 2007, Attachment 21, page 12; Staff Report to the Planning Commission ("PCSR") dated July 5, 2007, page 8, 12/11/07 TCSR Attachment 3; Letter of Justification from McElroy Properties received by Town Planning Department on July 3, 2007, Exhibit A to 7/5/07 PCSR, 12/11/07 TCSR, Attachment 3; Testimony of Sandy Baily to Planning Commission on July 11, 2007, 12/11/07 TCSR, Attachment 8, 4:12-6:13. ii. As required by the Town's Traffic Policy for a Community Benefit, the Page 2 of 14 project's benefit to the community outweighs traffic impacts associated with the project. A traffic study was prepared by the applicant based on a previously considered nine (9) lot alternative. That study concluded that the trips generated were relatively small and would have no impact on nearby intersections or roadways. The traffic impact for a project with greater density than the current seven (7) unit project is considered minor based on the Town's Traffic Policy. Nevertheless, the project includes improvements at the intersection of Linda Avenue and Blossom Hill Road, including a left turn pocket to turn onto Linda Avenue and Old Blossom Hill Road. The project would help restore the ecosystem of Ross Creek by removing invasive nonnative plants and replacing them with native plant species. The project would increase housing stock in the Town and would contribute to the Town's Below Market Price Housing Fund. EVIDENCE: 12/11/07 TCSR, p. 4-5; Testimony of Terry McElroy to Planning Commission on July 12,2006,12/11/07 TCSR, Attachment 2,8:16- 20; Letter of justification from McElroy Properties received by Town Planning Department on July 3, 2007, Exhibit A to 7/5/07 PCSR, 12/11/07 TCSR, Attachment 3. Ili. As required by the Town's Infill Policy for a Community Benefit: 1. This infill project contributes to the further development of the surrounding neighborhood in that the density of proposed development is consistent with the existing development in the surrounding neighborhood, the project will improve the intersection of Linda Avenue and Blossom Hill Road, and the project will restore a portion of Ross Creek. EVIDENCE: See findings and evidence cited in sections i and ii above. 2. This in-fill project is designed in context with the neighborhood and surrounding structures, provides comparable lot sizes and open space, considers garage placement, setbacks and density, provides adequate circulation and on-street parking and, therefore, blends rather than competes with the established character of the area. EVIDENCE: See findings and Page 3 of 14 evidence cited in sections i and ii above. 3. Finding regarding corridor lots not applicable to this project which does not feature corridor lots. 4. This Planned Development is proposed to accomplish objects #1 and #2 above. EVIDENCE: See findings and evidence cited in sections i and ii above. 5. This in-fill project demonstrates a strong community benefit as demonstrated in section ii above. iii. As required by section 29.10.09030(e) of the Town Code regarding the demolition of a single family residence: 1. Demolition of the existing structure will not adversely affect the Town's housing stock because it will be replaced by seven (7) single family units. EVIDENCE: 12/11/07 TCSR, p. 2. 2. There is no evidence that structure proposed for demolition is structurally or architecturally significant. 3. The property owner has no desire to maintain the structure, the removal of which is necessary to facilitate this seven (7) residential unit project. EVIDENCE: Passim. 4. There is no evidence that the economic utility of the structure proposed for demolition exceeds that of the seven (7) residential units that would be added by the project. iv. The IS/MND is adequate for the project. Project opponents argued that the IS/MND failed to properly address issues regarding potential project impacts on the project site, specifically in regards to Ross Creek and its associated riparian area. These issues, including aesthetics, biological resources, hydrology and water quality, were addressed by experts in the development of the IS/MND. Opposing opinions of persons purported to be experts was not presented to the Town until the third Page 4 of 14 meeting of the Commission on the project on August 22, 2007, when David Crites, presented the Commission with copies of a document dated August 22, 2007, entitled: "Conservation Ecological Evaluation: Initial Study for 15881 Linda Court & 15950 Stephenie Lane, Los Gatos, CA Along Ross Creek, tributary to Guadalupe River," authored by Verna Jigour of Verna Jigour Associates, [12/11/07 TCSR, Attachment 111 ("Jigour I") and referred to as a "draft." An evaluation and response to Jigour 1 by the Town's expert Geier and Geier was submitted to the Town on October 5, 2007 [12/11/07 TCSR, Attachment 14] ("Geier Response"). On December 17, 2007, the day of the hearing before Council, a second document apparently prepared by Verna Jigour dated December 17, 2007, entitled: "December Follow-up Memorandum: Conservation Ecological Evaluation: Initial Study for 15881 Linda Court & 15950 Ste..,:ienie Lane, Los Gatos, CA Along Ross Creek, tributary to Guadalupe River" [submitted immediately prior to hearing] ("Jigour 2") was submitted to the Town. Additionally, on or about December 5, 2007, members of Council received a document authored by Lawrence Johmann, President of the Guadalupe-Coyote Resource Conservation District, dated November 30, 2007, entitled: "Ross Creek at Stephanie Lane & Linda Ave" [12/11/07 TCSR, Attachment 241 ("Johmann Report"). As explained below, Council finds that Jigour 1 and 2 and the Johmann Report do not constitute substantial evidence in support of a fair argument that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. Jigour 1 and 2. These documents express opinions regarding the following potential negative impacts of the project: aesthetics, primarily the visual impacts resulting from the removal of non-native trees from the riparian area; biological resources, primarily concerning downstream Guadalupe River steelhead population, loss of riparian habitats and California Quail; hydrology and water quality, primarily the elevation of the "top of bank;" and land use planning under the Town Code. [Jigour 1 and 2, passim] Jigour concludes that the Initial Study prepared for Page 5 of 14 this project insufficiently addresses numerous direct and cumulative impacts of the proposed project and thus fails to provide mitigation which will reduce those impacts to a level less than significant. [Jigour 2, p. 11 a. Council finds that Jigour is not qualified as an expert in the areas on which she opines in Jigour 1 and 2. Both documents refer to Jigour as a I SA Certified Arborist. [Jigour 1 and 2, coversheets] Neither document contains a statement of Jigour's experience, skill, training, professional certification or other qualifications to opine on any subject other than the condition of trees. The condition of trees on site is the one subject Jigour does not considefjigour 1, p. 1]. Jigour 1 and 2 are not signed. b. Notwithstanding Jigour's lack qualifications to give the opinions contained in Jigour 1 and 2, Council further finds that Jigour's opinions and conclusions are not supported by facts. Jigour's description of the characteristics of Ross Creek is erroneous and nonsensical. For example, Jigour concludes by the presence of a single Blue Oak tree that Ross Creek was originally intermittent rather than perennial. [Jigour 1, p. 2] Based solely on the fact of a low flow in August 2007, the import of which Jigour fails to explain, Jigour concludes that the perennial nature of Ross Creek is solely attributable to urban runoff. [Jigour 1, p. 2] Jigour then attributes the existence of native willow trees to increased water flows resulting from urban runoff. [Jigour 1, p. 2] Jigour next speculates that these native trees might not have been present in their current location absent some form or location of development. [Jigour 1, p. 2] Jigour expresses surprise at the clarity of water in Ross Creek despite low water flows [Jigour 1, p. 2], but fails to consider the possibility that sediment disruption is reduced in periods of low flow. [9/14/07 Garner Itr., Eah. CC to 10/5/07 PCSR, 12/11/07 TCSR, Attachment 14, p. 6] Jig our concludes that the top of bank Page 6 of 14 determination is erroneous based solely on her determination that it crosses a topographical contour at the northeast corner of the project plan. [Jigour 1, p. 3] Jigour fails to explain the significance of the topographical contour or her basis for concluding that a line of d~ uarcation cannot cross a contour. Jigour concludes that proposed bioswales would be located in an area "that distinctly appears to be a flood terrace," [Jigour 1, p. 3] but does not explain the facts that support this determination. Jigour never acknowledges in Jigour 2 that the bioswales are proposed to be relocated entirely outside of the riparian corridor. [12/11/07 TCSR, p. 5] Jigour concludes that the removal of native willow trees in the riparian corridor will have a negative aesthetic impact by removing screening, thus making the project visible to neighboring properties. [Jigour 1, p. 5; Jigour 2, p. 1] Jigour fails to acknowledge in Jigour 2 the Linda Court Riparian Enhancement Plan, prepared by H.T. Harvey & Associates and incorporated into the project [10/5/07 PCSR, Ex. DD, 12/11/07 TCSR, Attachment 14] ("Harvey Report"), calls for the retention of seven (7) native trees in the riparian corridor [Harvey Report, p. 4,], and screening value of 23 replacement trees that must be planted. [Gier Response, p. 2] Instead, Jigour dismisses the Riparian Enhancement Plan for its failure to include a "visual analysis." [Jigour 2, p. 1] Jigour fails to cite any relevant aesthetic standard adopted by the Town requiring either a visual analysis, the nature of which is not explained by Jig our, or a requirement that projects be invisible to any neighboring property. In fact, the Town has no such standard that is applicable to this project. Lastly, Jigour fails to acknowledge Mitigation Measure # 1 specifically designed to minimize project visibility. [Geier Response, p. 3] Jigour concludes that the project will contribute to cumulative water impacts to the Guadalupe River steelhead population based solely on her conclusion that the project will result in a reduction of the riparian canopy caus inc, a loss of its cooling effects on stream flows. [Jigour 1, p. 6] That conclusion ignores the effects of Page 7 of 14 Ross Creek conditions upstream and downstream from the projects I te; in particular, that any shading and cooling effects of surface waters at the project site are soon lost since the downstream end of the vegetated portion of Ross Creek is 3.7 miles from Guadalupe River, resulting in a significant area of solar heating. [Geier Response, p. 2] Furthermore, the conclusion ignores Riparian Enhancement Plan calling for the retention of seven (7) native willow trees and the planting of replacement native vegetation, all of which contribute to the riparian canopy. [Geier Response, p. 2] Jigour erroneously concludes that mitigation is improperly deferred.[Jigour 1, p. 5] In fact, the IS/MND identifies significant environmental impacts for six (6) impact categories as revealed through the performance of detailed studies conducted during the environmental review process. [Geier Response, p. 5 - 61 No required studies were deferred. [Id.] In response to these potentially significant impacts, the IS/MND identifies and requires the implementation of mitigation measures for each of these impacts before, during and/or after project development. [Id.] Jigour concludes without factual foundation that the project will potentially impact the movement of California quail through the Ross Creek riparian corridor. [Jigour 1, p. 8] In reaching this conclusion, Jigour fails to demonstrate that the project site currently has a significant function as a wildlife movement corridor or substantial breeding habitat for significant wildlife species. [Geier Response, p. 2] Jigour fails to acknowledge that the riparian corridor will be retained and restored through the removal of nonnative vegetation and the planting of native vegetation. [Id.] C. The conclusions reached in Jigour 1 and 2 are in the nature of advocacy regarding ultimate policy questions rather than scientific descriptions of site conditions and potential project impacts. For example, the Executive Summary in Jigour 1 concludes: '`Even without time to fully flesh out this report, it is clear that the Town of Los Gatos will be seriously in error and in violation of the California Environmental Quality Act if it proceeds to grant a Mitigated Negative Page 8 of 14 Declaration to the project as proposed." [Jigour 1, p. l] In the Limits of Assignment section of Jigour 1, Jigour states that her work is limited as follows: I've had only a week and a half to complete this assignment and was not able to devote all my time to it." [Jigour 1, p. 2] In the Overview section of Jigour 1, Jigour essentially admits her bias as follows: "As one who has appraised the potential for steelhead restoration at a regional scale, and with my background and expertise in watershed-scale habitat restoration plans, I cannot help but view open spaces along riparian corridors from that perspective. My initial thought was that this site as a whole would be ideal for conservation and habitat restoration. Having now visited the site twice I'm even more convinced that the option should be considered [Jigour 1, p. 2] Later in the same section Jigour again shows bias as follows: it has been my deep disappointment to find few clients sincerely interested in such proactively responsible planning and design approaches. Site planning is typically done by engineers or architects with little or no thought to relationships with affected ecosystems. Site design motivations have tended to be purely monetary and concessions to ecological issues are offered only in response to regulatory requirements." [Jigour 1, p. 4] In her Conclusions in Jigour 1, Jigour states: the proposed project fails miserable [ sic] with respect to the insensitivity of its site planning to the Ross Creek riparian system and the Guadalupe River watershed. The Town cannot, in good conscience, approve the change of zoning based on design excellence and certainly cannot approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project." [Jigour 1, p. 10] The Executive Summary in Jigour 2 concludes that the Town "must either deny the requested Mitigated Negative Declaration and zone change that will permit this development, or initiate an Environmental Impact Report." [Jigour 2, p.1] In the Ass ignmenUTntroduction section of Jigour 2, Jigour states: "I respond herein because I am seriously concerned about the Town's stance on this project, with respect to the site and impacted ecosystems and also the truly alarming precedent it sets for other agencies now I C, Page 9 of 14 charged with implementing the Guidelines & Standards for Land Use Near Streams." [Id.] In a section IV.b. of Jigour 2, Jigour states: "My observation is that public recourse agencies get bullied into complying with what project proponents want - usually there is no one around to stand up for the resources and the pressure put on them is so overwhelming that they must choose their battles carefully." [Jigour 2, p. 3] Later in the same section regarding riparian buffers, Jigour asks: "'Does the Town of Los Gatos want to end up looking like the most urbanized part of this valley in 50 years??? [sic]" [Id.] In section IV.e. of Jigour 2, in the context of the removal of unhealthy trees as expressly permitted in the Town Tree Protection Ordinance (Town Code section 29.10.0990) Jigour offers her own interpretation of the ordinance stating: "It should be remembered that the purpose of this ordinance is tree conservation not tree culling." [Jigour 2, p. 5] Later in the same section, Jigour argues the position of project opponents as follows: "If the current site plan were modified by simply eliminating the houses that back up to the creek (1 to 4) and retained the houses facing the creek (5 to 7) the grading required for houses 1 to 4 would be eliminated, the entire 'garden'/retaining wall along the creek would be eliminated, and most of the trees slated for removal could be retained." [Jigour 2, p. 61 2. The Johmann Report. The Johmann Report includes information on the history and configuration of Ross Creek in general, hydrologic analysis of the Ross Creek stream gauges, C~ C, cross section data, and geomorphic evaluation of the stream conditions on the project site. It also includes observations regarding the state and nature of Ross Creek in the vicinity of the project site, the general contributions of riparian habitat wildlife and the preservation of water quality, and the roles of creek and riparian setbacks. It concludes that the "top of bank" should be set at the 100 year flood line elevation [Johmann Report, p. 13], that the riparian setbacks are inadequate when measured from that elevation [Id.], and that the proposed development at the Building 1 Site show Page 10 of 14 a bioswale and retaining wall within the flood area. [Id.] a. Council finds that Johmann is not qualified as an expert in the areas on which he opines in the Johmann Report. This finding is not intended to reflect on Johmann's qualifications to serve as an officer of the Guadalupe-Coyote Resource Conservation District, which are assumed. Johmann signed the Johmann Report as a "P.E." [Johmann Report, p. 15] However, Johmann's Qualification Information shows that he received degrees in "Manufacturing Engineering Technology" and "Engineering Management," and that his work experience with professional associations are in the areas of quality, reliability and manufacturing engineering. [Johmann Report, p. 16] Johmann's training regarding rivers and streams is limited to a series of workshops and on the subjects of monitoring, stabilization and restoration, primarily within the singular system of "fluvial geomorphology." [Id.] Johmann's Qualification Information does not show any license, training or experience in the areas of hydrology. Additionally, and as discussed below, the Johmann Report fails to follow commonly accepted hydrological methods of determining stream flows and flood levels. b. Notwithstanding Johmann's lack qualifications to give opinions on the subjects of the Johmann Report, Council further finds that Johmann's opinions and conclusions are not supported by facts. Johmann's approach to determining flood levels is based on a geomorphological method associated with river and stream restoration projects rather than a hydrological analysis of current and projected water flow in an existing condition. [12/17/07 Testimony of Kirk R. Wheeler ("Wheeler Testimony")] While the Johmann Report contains substantial descriptions of existing stream conditions, including the condition of the two relevant stream gauge conditions, the relevance of these observations to floodplain elevations is unclear in the report. [Id.] Contrary to what is normally found in a hydrological report prepared by a qualified professional, the Johmann Report fails to show the location within the project site of cross-sections Page 11 of 14 used by Johmann, and whether the survey ties to project datum and elevations. [12/17/07 Letter from Kirk Wheeler to Fletcher Parsons, 12/17/07 TCSR, Attachment 37 ("Wheeler Letter"), p. 1] It is also not clear whether the floodplain elevations and extents were based on cross-section hydraulics or field indicators. [Id.] Observations made by Johmann relating to biological resources and riparian habitat does not raise any issues that were not already discussed and addressed in the preparation of the IS/MND. [12/12/07 Letter from Michael Wood, 12/17107 TCSR, Attachment 36 ("Wood Letter"), p. 1] C. ilmann's essential difference with the IS/MND concerns the width of the riparian setback and the location of "top of bank," each of which constitutes a policy determination of Council in its application of the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams, adopted by the Town on February 20, 2007 (Resolution 2007-020) ("Guidelines") Johmann's conclusions in this context constitute advocacy regarding how the Guidelines should be applied rather than scientifically supported opinions. For example, the Guidelines only recommend a riparian setback and do not mandate riparian setbacks of any specific width. [Wood Letter, p. 2] Nevertheless, without factual support or explanation, Johmann concludes that there should be at least a 25 foot buffer from the outer dripline of the vegetation for passive activities and a 50 foot buffer for structures. [Johmann Report, p. 9; Wood letter, p. 2] Regarding the top of bank determination, the Guidelines state that the stream boundary should be "where a majority of normal discharges and channel forming activities take place." [Johmann Report, p. 13, Wood Letter, p. 2; Wheeler Testimony] Top of bank for purposes of the project is set according to the standard used by the California Department of Fish and Game which is the "well defined break in slope associated with the active low channel." [Wood Letter, p. 2; California Department of Fish and Game Definition Page 12 of 14 received August 21, 2007, 12/11/07 TCSR, Attachment 10] This is generally determined to be below the 100 flood elevation. [Wheeler Testimony] Nevertheless, Johmann concludes that the top of bank should be set at the 100 year flood elevation, an elevation associated with less common flood occurrences, based solely on the existence of riparian vegetation in the area. [Johmann Report, p. 9 and 13] Johmann's advocacy is demonstrated in the concluding statement in the Johamann Report: "Ross Creek neighbors and all concerned citizens should also join together to pressure town officials and the SCVWD [Santa Clara Valley Water District] to implement projects to restore the degraded, denuded, channelized segments of the creek to a more natural state for the benefit of all citizens, as well as wild/aquatic life, in accordance with the SCVWD's `Clean, Safe Creeks and Natural Food Protection Program,' which property owners have been paying for since 2001." [Johmann Report, 15] V. The application of the Town's Tree Protection Ordinance regarding the determination of whether to retain or remove trees is proper and consistent with both the intent of the ordinance and with past practice. Town Code section 29.10.0990(5), provides that no protected tree shall be removed in connection with a proposed subdivision unless subject to one of the exceptions permitted therein. The project requires, among other things, a subdivision of land. Nevertheless, section 29.1090990(5) is not applicable to this project. The intent of section 29.10.0990(5) is to ensure that a subdivision application alone does not also permit the removal of protected trees. This prohibition is necessary to tree protection because the law presumes approval of a subdivision application meeting minimum zoning requirements. Proposals to remove protected trees in connection with land development are ripe for determination only when considered in conjunction with detailed land development applications that include site planning such as building envelopes and architecture. The provisions of Town Code section 29. are engaged to evaluate the necessity for tree removal, Page 13 of 14 options for avoiding tree removal and replacement options in the context of proposed new development. This planned development project includes detailed site planning of building envelopes, architecture, riparian corridor restoration and landscaping. Consequently, the provisions of section 29.10.1000, and not section 29.10.0990(5), apply to this project. The Town has consistently applied the provisions of the Tree Protection Ordinance in this manner in the administration of planned development applications. RESOLVED: That this resolution be incorporated into the record of Council's determination of this application as the statement of findings regarding the matters contained herein. PASSED AND ADOPTED 1-, a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, California held on the day of January, 2008 , by the following vote: COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA ATTEST: CLERK ADMINISTRATOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA N:AATY\Resos & Ords\RESO t X881 Linda Ave.wpd Page 14 of 14