13 Staff Report - Shannon Valley Ranch, Shanon Oaks Lane & Mountain Laurel
\3 DATE: COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT January 9, 2009 MEETING DATE: 1120/09 ITEM NO. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: GREG LARSON, TOWN MANAGER CONSIDER A REQUEST
FOR APPROVAL OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENTTOALLOWACCESSORY STRUCTURES. APN 567-24-010 THROUGH 023. PROPERTY LOCATION: SHANNON VALLEY RANCH, SHANON OAKS LANE & MOUNTAIN LAUREL LANE.
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: KEVIN THOMPSON & GHC SHANNON VALLEY RANCH. #PD-08-03. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Open and hold the public hearing and receive public testimony. 2. Close the
public hearing. 3. Upbold the Planning Commission's recommendation and approve Planned Development Application PD-08-03 as follows: a. Make the required findings (Attachment I) and approve
the application subject to the conditions included in the Planned Development Ordinance (Attachment 2) (motion required); b. Direct the Clerk Administrator to read the title ofthe ordinance
(no motion required); e. Move to waive the reading of the ordinance (motion required); d. Inh'oduee the ordinance to effectuate Plamled Development PD-07-0l (motion required). BACKGROUND
On March 18, 2002, the Town Council adopted a Planned Development Ordinance allowing a 14-lot subdivision of an 80 acre property located at the northeast comer of Shannon & Hicks Roads.
The developer of the project is Greenbriar Homes and the project is called Shannon Valley Ranch. PREPARED BY: .-p.[I\..--Bud N. LOl'i\CDireetor of Community Development Reviewed by:
Town Manager Attomey __Clerk Finance V Community Development Revi"d: 119109 9:06 AM Reformatted: 5130/02
PAGE 2 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: SHANNON VALLEY RANCH PD AMENDMENT II; FILE #PD-08-03. January 20, 2009 The Planning Commission approved the Tentative Map on January 22,2003 and
Architecture and Site applications for 13 new homes on January 14, 2004. The 14th lot was retained by the seller of the property and has yet to be redeveloped. The previous home on the
lot 14 site bumed down prior to Greenbriar acquiring the property. On June 19, 2006, the Town Council adopted an ordinance amending the Planned Development (PD) to allow additional grading
on the upslope lots (#6 though 11). No other conditions ofthe original PD approval were modified. The PD restricts the allowable floor area ofthe propeliies and does not include provisions
for future structures. A number ofnew homeowners are developing and installing landscape plans and would like to add accessory buildings such as a pool or guest house. The subject application
was initially. filed by one property owner who would like to construct a game room in the rear yard ofhis propeliy at 297 Mountain Laurel Lane (lot 11). The developer has since partnered
with the owner so the question of allowing accessory buildings can be addressed for the entire project rather than a single home site. On March 12,2008 the Conceptual Development Advisory
Committee (CDAC) considered the request for construction on an accessory structure on lot 11 and amendment of the PD. The Committec comments are attached as Exhibit 4 of Attachment 4.
On November 12,2008 the Platming Commission considered the subject PD amendment and voted unanimously to forward a recommendation for approval to the Council. Attachment 3 is a verbatim
tratlscript of the Connnission meeting. PROJECT SUMMARY: TIle applicants are requesting approval of a PD amendment to allow an increase in the allowable floor area. Staffhas received
a number ofinquiries ii'om other homeowners and prospective buyers (Greenbriar still owns three ofthe homes in the development) and anticipates that there will be more applications of
this type. PD Ordinance 2097 does not expressly prohibit accessory structures, . although it does not include provisions for any additional floor area beyond what was approved for the
residences and garages through the PD and A&S processes. Ifthe PD amendment is approved, homeowners will have the ability to propose accessory structures in compliatlce with the HDS&G
and within the 6,400 square foot floor area limit allowed by the HDS&G. This allows for an increase in the allowable floor area ofbetween 750 and 950 square feet per lot depending on
the existing floor area total. The Planning Connnission recommended restricting the size of accessOlY structures to 750 square feet.
PAGE 3 SUBJECT: SHANNON VALLEY RANCH PD AMENDMENT II; #PD-08-03. January 20, 2009 DISCUSSION: Shannon Valley Ranch is surrounded byhillside
residential properties, although only one is in close proximity to the new homes (the residence at 17311 Hicks Road). Other homes in the area are separated by the large open space areas
that were dedicated with the development and/or roadways. Lands to the east are in the City of San Jose and are separated from the proj ect by Hicks Road and Guadalupe Creek. TIle average
lot size in the development is three acres. The homes vary in size, the largest being 4,850 square feet, with an average size of4,650 square feet. The garages are about 800 square feet.
Ifapplied to the project, the HDS&G floor area criteria would allow amaximum of6,400 square feet total. The maximum floor area would be inclusive ofthe house, garage and any accessory
structures. The existing floor area range for the 13 developed lots is 5,450 to 5,650 square feet. Approval processes for accessory structures vary depending on the size. Structures
larger than 450 square feet require approval of a Minor Residential Development application, which includes written notification to immediate neighbors. Structures larger than 600 square
feet are required to be approved by the Development Review Committee through a noticed public hearing. Structures that. do not exceed 450 square feet may be constructed with a building
pennit. The proposed accessory structure for lot 11 is compliant with required setbacks for theHR zone and within the 15 foot height maximum allowed for accessory structures. The owner
shared his plans with surrounding neighbors and provided a SUppOlting petition signed by nearby residents on Hicks and Shannon Roads as well as those on Mountain Laurel and Shannon Oaks
Lanes (see Attachment 5). Story poles have been in place since mid-October and written notice was mailed to over 40 propelty owners and residents living in the vicinity of the Shannon
Valley Ranch development. Other than the applicant, there was no public testimony at the Planning Commission meeting. If the PD amendment is approved, an Architecture and Site application
will be required for the proposed accessOlY structure on lot 11 as it exceeds 600 square feet. The application may be approved at a Development Review Committee public hearing unless
the Council decides that accessory structures of this size should be reviewed by the Planning Commission (see discussion below). PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: The Planning Commission considered
this project on November 12,2008. The Commission voted. unanimously to forward the application to the Council with a recommendation for approval. Condition #9 was modified to restrict
the size of accessory structures to 750 square feet, allow one structure per lot and to require structures that are 600 square feet or larger to be reviewed by the Commission as a consent
item.
PAGE 4 SUBJECT: SHANNON VALLEY RANCH PD AMENDMENT II; #PD-08-03. January 20, 2009 Staff recommends that accessory structures not be required
to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. In the event a proposed accessory structure does not comply with the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines (HDS&G), is a visual impact,
or is otherwise inappropriate for a particular site, staff will forward the application to the Commission. Additionally it is recommended that accessory structures not be limited to
750 square feet unless that is the maximum allowed for a particular lot based on the existing floor area. Adoption of a size restriction and a change in policy for review of accessory
structures would be inconsistent with the process for other properties governed by the HDS&G. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There was no public testimony at the Planning Commission meeting. However,
a property owner on Santa Rosa Drive recently submitted a letter stating their objection to tlle proposed amendment because the PD Ordinance established a floor area limitation for the
houses (see Attachment 6). As previously stated, a primary reason for limiting the floor area of the homes within the Shannon Valley Ranch PD was the lack ofany floor area restrictions
for lots larger than 30,000 square feet. In addition, the hillside standards in existence at the time the PD was approved were not nearly as detailed or complete as the HDS&G adopted
in 2004. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: An Environmental In1pact Report (EIR) and Addendum were previously prepared for the Planned Development. The EIR Addendum was certified by the Town
Council on March 4, 2002. No further enviromnental analysis is required for the proposed PD amendment. CONCLUSION: At tlle time the PD was approved, the Town did not have a floor area
cap for lots larger than 30,000 square feet. The floor area limits were placed on the PD in the absence of an applicable FAR or other floor area limitation. The HDS&Gwere subsequently
adopted in January 2004. Application of the HDS&G to the PD will allow the homeowners the same ability to have accessory structures as any other hillside property in the Town. Staffsupports
allowance of accessory structures within the limits prescribed by the HDS&G and recommends that the Council approve the PD amendment as outlined in the recommendation section. Staff
recommends that accessory structures not be required to be reviewed by the Planning Commission as this would be deviating from the process that any other homeowner in the Hillside Area
would be allowed to follow. In the event a proposed accessOlY structure does not comply with the HDS&G, is a visual impact, or is otherwise inappropriate for a particular site, staffwill
forward the application to the Commission. It is also recommended that the size of accessOlY structures be governed by the HDS&G and a 750 square foot limitation not be imposed.
PAGE 5 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: SHANNON VALLEY RANCH PD AMENDMENT II; FILE #PD-08-03. January 20, 2009 FISCAL IMPACT: None Attachments: 1. Required Findings (one page) 2. Planned
Development Ordinance (18 pages) 3. November 12, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes (27 h'anscribed pages) 4. November 12, 2008 Planning Commission Report with Exhibits 1 through 6 5.
Petition in support of accessory structure on lot 11 (one page) 6. Letter from Alex & Suzy Leupp (one page), received January 14, 2009 Distribution: Kevin Thomspon, 297 Mountain Laurel
Lane, Los Gatos, CA 95032 Tim Stanley, Greenbriar Homes Communities, Inc., 43160 Osgood Road, Fremont, CA 94539 BNL:SD N:\DEV\SUZANNE\COUNCIL\REPORTS\FWD. TO TaGREENBRIAR\SVR-PDAII-TC.OOC
TOWN COUNCIL -DECEMBER 15, 2008 REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR: Shannon Valley Ranch Platmed Development Application PD-08-03 Requesting approval ofan amendment to a Planned Development to allow
an accessory structure(s) on property zoned HR-5:PD. APNs 567-24-010 through 023. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Kevin C. Thomson & GHC Shannon Valley Ranch, LLC FINDINGS: Required consistency
with the Town s General Plan: • That the proposed Zone Change is internally consistent with the General Plan and its Elements. Required compliance with the Hillside Development Standards
& Guidelines • That the proposed amendment is in compliance with the Hillside Development Standat'ds & Guidelines. N;\DEV\FlNDINGS\2008\SVR-PDA2.DOC ATTACHMENT 1
ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AMENDING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PD-99-02 RELATIVE TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND REPEALING ORDINANCE 2150 FOR THE SHANNON VALLEY RANCH PROJECT AT SHANNON
& HICKS ROADS (SHANNON OAKS AND MOUNTAIN LAUREL LANES) 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 on property at Shannon and Hicks Roads (Santa Clara County Assessor Parcel Numbers 567-24-010 through 025) as shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A, and
is part ofthis Ordinance, from HR-5:PD (Hillside Residential, 5 Acres per Dwelling Unit, Planned Development) to HR-5:PD (Hillside Residential, 5 Acres per Dwelling Unit, Planned Development).
SECTION II The PD (Planned Development Overlay) zone established by Ordinance 2150 is hereby amended to authorize the following construction and use of improvements: 1. Demolition of
two existing pre-1941 and two post-1941 single family residences and one pre-1941 bam. 2. Construction of 13 new single-family dwelling units and reconstruction ofone single-family dwelling
that was destroyed by fire. 3. Landscaping, streets, trails, and other improvements shown and required on the Official Development Plan. 4. Dedication of 45.4 acres of hillside and riparian
open space as shown on. the Official Development Plans. 5. Dedication of trail easements to the Town of Los Gatos as shown on the Official Development Plans. 6. Revised grading shown
on the plan attached as Exhibit D. 7. Accessory structures in compliance with the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines. 8. Ordinance 2150 is hereby repealed. 9. Uses permitted
are those specified in the HR (Hillside Residential) zone by Sections Page I of24 ATTACHMENT 2
29.40.235 (Pennitted Uses) and 29.20.185 (Conditional Uses) of the Zoning Ordinance, as those sections exist at the time ofthe adoption ofthis Ordinance, or as theymaybe amended in the
future. However, no use listed in Section 29.20.185 is allowed unless specifically authorized by this Ordinance, or by a Conditional Use Pennit. SECTION III COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS All provisions of the Town Code apply, except when the Official Development Plan specifically shows otherwise. SECTIONN Architecture and Site Approval and Subdivision Approval
is required before construction work for the dwelling units is perfonned, whether or not a permit is required for the work and before any pennit for construction is issued. Construction
pennits shall onlybe in a manner complying with Section 29.80.130 of the Town Code. SECTION V The attached Exhibit A (Map), Exhibit B (Official Development Plans), and Exhibit D (Modified
Grading Plan), are part ofthe Official Development Plan. The following conditions must must be complied with before issuance of any grading, or construction pennits: TO THE SATISFACTION
OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Planning Division 1. EXPIRATION/USE OF APPROVAL. The approval for the requested grading modifications shall expire two years from the date of
approval unless the application has been vested pursuant to Town Code Section 29.20.320. 2. ARCHITECTUREAND SITE APPROVAL REQUIRED. A separate Architecture and Site application and approval
is required for the residential units proposed. Page 2 of24
3. OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS. The Official Development Plans provided are conceptna1 in natnre. Final footprints and building designs shall be determined during the architectnre and
site approval process. 4. HOUSE SITING. The siting of the homes shall be determined during the Architectnre & Site approval process. 5. RECYCLING. All wood, metal, glass and aluminum
materials generated from the demolished structures shall be deposited to a company which will recycle the materials. Receipts from the company(s) accepting these materials, noting type
and weight ofmaterial, shall be submitted to the Town prior to the Town's demolition inspection and the issuance of any building permits. 6. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT. A Tree Removal Pennit
shall be obtained for the removal of any ordinance sized tree prior to the issuance of a Building, Grading or Encroachment Permit. 7. FENCING. Fence locations shall be reviewed and approved
during the Architecture &Site review(s), including privacy and yard fencing. Developer will include in the CC&R's for the project a restriction limiting the home owners from replacing
the fence type as installed by the Developer and as shown on the Official Development Plans, or as otherwise approved during the Architecture & Site review(s). Any replacement or addition
ofother fence types shall be restricted to open fence types including wood with wire mesh and wood or concrete split-rail fencing. Solid fencing will be permitted only where installed
bythe Developer and as shown on the approved development plans. CC&R's shall require fences to be set back a minimum of 10 feet for from property lines. 8. BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE. All
project homes will be limited to amaximum size of 4,850 square feet with an average of4,650 square feet, and at least 2/3 ofthe homes shall be limited to a one story design. Final building
design and size will be determined during Architecture and Site review. No further expansion ofthe homes will be allowed unless this Ordinance is amended bythe Town Council. Lot 14 shall
be developed under guidelines ofa replacement structure and shall be similar is size, mass and scale to the original home that was destroyed by fire. Page 3 of24
9. ACCESSORY STRUCTRES. Accessory structures that are in compliance with the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines (HDS&G) and do not require a grading pennit maybe considered
on individual lots. One accessory structure shall be allowed per lot, and shall not exceed 750 square feet. Accessory structures shall be reviewed through the appropriate approval process
specified by the HDS&G. 10. SETBACKS. The minimum setbacks are those specified by the HR-5 zoning district. 11. HEIGHT. The maximum height for single-story homes shall be 25 feet and
the maximum height for two-story homes shall be 30 feet. The maximum height for accessory structures shall be 15 feet. 12. EXTERIOR LIGHTING. All exterior lighting shall be reviewed
and approved as part ofthe Architecture & Site review(s). Lighting shall be down directed, and no street lighting shall be included in the development. Ifit is detennined that lighting
is needed for safety reasons at the intersection of Hicks Road and the new road into the development, a street light may be required, but only ifthere is not alternative safety devices
that can adequately delineate the intersection. Ifit is detennined that a new light must be installed, it shall be designed to only illuminate the minimum area necessary for safety.
13. BIOLOGICALRESOURCES MITIGATIONMEASURE 6-3a. During the design phase, the property owner/developer shall implement the following measures: a. Any plan affecting trees shall be reviewed
by the Consulting Arborist to ensure that improvement plans, utility and drainage plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and demolition plans will not adversely affect
the tree to be retained. b. The horizontal and vertical elevations of trees to be preserved within development areas shall be established and included on all plans. c. The Consulting
Arborist shall identify a Tree Protection Zone for trees to be preserved in which no soil disturbance is pennitted. For design purposes, the Tree Protection Zone shall be defined by
the dripline. Where development must encroach within the dripline, the Consulting Arborist shall identify an appropriate Tree Protection Zone. d. No underground services including utilities,
sub-drains, water or sewer shall be placed in the Tree Protection Zone. Page 4 of24
e. Tree Preservation Notes shall be included on all plans. f. Any herbicides placed under paving materials must be safe for use around trees and labeled for that use. g. Irrigation systems
must be designed so that no trenching will occur within the Tree Protection Zone. 13. BIOLOGICALRESOURCES MITIGAnONMEASURE 6-3b. During the pre-construction phase, the property owner/developer
shall take the following measures: a. A fence shall be constructed around all trees to be retained and it shall completely enclose the Tree Protection Zone prior to demolition, grubbing,
or grading. Fencing shall be 6-foot chain link or equivalent. Fencing shall be placed at the dripline or as otherwise directed by the Consulting Arborist. Fences are to remain until
all grading and construction is completed. b. All trees to be retained shall be pruned within and adjacent to development areas shall be reviewed by a certified arborist to determine
which trees shouldbe pruned to clean the crown, reduce end weight and/or provide clearance. Tree #20I will require pruning to reduce weight throughout the crown. Clearance shall be provided
by selectively thinning low-hanging lateral branches. c. All pruning shall be performed by a Certified Arborist or Tree Worker in accordance with the Tree Pruning Guidelines of the International
Society ofArboriculture. d. Prior to the start of any demolition and clearing, the Consulting Arborist will meet with the demolition, grading and other relevant contractors to review
limits of construction activity, identify areas requiring fencing, identify trees to be removed and review work procedures. 14. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-3C. Prior to
the construction phase of the project, the applicant shall take the following measures: a. Any grading, construction demolition, or other work within the Tree Protection Zone shall be
monitored by the Consulting Arborist. b. Anyroot pruning required for construction purposes shall receive the prior approval of, and be supervised by, the Consulting Arborist. c. Ifany
injury to a tree should occur during construction, it should be evaluated as soon Page 5 of24
as possible by the Consulting Arborist so that appropriate treatments can be made. d. Root-injured trees have a limited capacity to absorb water. Therefore, itis important to ensure
adequate soil moisture in the area ofactive roots. One to several irrigations may be needed for trees that are at risk of impacts. Irrigations shall be specified by the Consulting Arborist.
e. No excess soil, chemical, debris, equipment or other materials shall be dumped or stored within the Tree Protection Zone. f. Any additional pruning required to provide clearance during
construction shall be performed by a Certified Arborist and not construction personnel. 15. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-3d. Following construction, a comprehensive management
plan for the trees shall be developed that considers the broad objectives of development as well as the needs of the specific species. This management plan shall specify pruning, fertilization,
mulch, pest management, replanting and irrigation requirements. In addition, provisions for monitoring both tree health and structural stability following construction must be made a
priority. As trees age, the likelihood of failure of branches or entire trees increases. Therefore, the management plan must include an annual inspection for hazard potential. 16. BIOLOGICAL
RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-4. To minimize impacts on nesting raptors, the applicant shall complete necessary pre-construction surveys and monitoring. Ifit is not possible to schedule
construction between August and February, then pre-construction surveys for nesting raptors will be conducted by a qualified ornithologist in order to ensure that no raptor nests will
be disturbed during project construction. This survey will be conducted no more than 15 days prior to the initiation of construction activities during the early part of the breeding
season (February through April) and no more than 30 days prior to the initiation ofthese activities during the late part ofthe breeding season (May through August). During this survey,
the biologist will inspect all trees in and immediately adjacent to the impact areas for raptor nests. Ifan active raptor nest is found close enough to the construction area to be disturbed
by these activities, the ornithologist, in consultation with CDFG, will determine the extent of a construction-free buffer zone to be established around the nest. Page 6 of24
17. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-5a. To minimize impacts on yellow warblers, the property owner/developer shall retain sycamore riparian habitat along Shannon Creek and
shall maintain setbacks ofat least 50 feet between proposed development and sycamore riparian habitat. If a small amount of development encroaches into this 50foot setback, then this
encroachment (indirect impact) shall be mitigated byplanting riparian habitat at a 1:1 ratio. 18. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-5b. The property owner/developer shall implement
the following measures to minimize potential impacts on any roosting bats: a. Surveys shall be conducted up to one year in advance ofbuilding demolition and tree removal, ifpossible,
to determine if active roosts are present. These surveys shall not substitute for pre-constructionlpre-disturbance surveys for nesting raptors, as bats could move on or adjacent to the
site between survey periods. If roosting bats are found during these surveys, either avoidance of the maternity roost season, establishment of buffer zones or exclusion of bats shall
be implemented as appropriate. b. Avoidance: Construction activities involving potential roost sites shall be conducted outside the maternity roost season ifthe project commences after
young are volantby July 31 and finished before the formation of maternity roosts begins (as early as March 1). c. Pre-demolition Surveys and Buffer Zones: Ifthe project schedule does
not allow for early detection surveys to occur, a pre-demolition survey for roosting bats shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist 14 days prior to construction as determined
by a Memorandum of Understanding with the California Department ofFish & Game (CDFG) prior to any removal ofbuildings, particularly those with closed areas such as an attic space, or
trees 12 inches in diameter. No activities that would result in disturbance to active roosts shall proceed prior to the completed surveys. Ifno active roosts are found, then no further
action is warranted. If a maternity roost were present, a qualified bat biologist shall determine the extent ofconstruction-free zones around active nurseries located during surveys.
CDFG shall also be notified of any Page 7 of24
active nurseries within the construction zone. d. Surveys: Initial surveys can be conducted any time prior to the pre-demolition surveys to establish ifa particular location has supported,
or supports, roosting bats. A survey for indications of nursery roosts shall be conducted prior to March 1. If indications ofa maternity roost are present, the structure can be removed
or modified before a maternity roost becomes reestablished. e. Exclude Bats Prior to Construction Near Roost: Bats can be excluded after July 31 and before March 1 to prevent the formation
of maternity colonies. Such nonbreeding bats can be safely eVicted, under the direction ofa qualified bat biologist, by sealing crevices and providing them one-way exclusion doors. Such
a device should be employed in all expansion joints during dark hours as a temporary device to prevent the formation of a maternity colony. In order not to exclude all potential maternity
roost habitat at once, only one-halfofthe expansionjoints should be sealed at anyone given time during the maternity colony-nesting season. This should allow bats to leave during dark
hours, thus increasing their chance of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation during daylight. After construction, all exclusion devices shall be removed to allow bats
to re-establish habitat for colonies. 19. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-6. The property owner/developer shall implement the following protection measures to mitigate impacts
to the red-legged frog (see Addendum to the project EIRfor additional details): a. Avoidance to the extent possible. b. Minimization. The project shall be designed, built and operated
in the following ways that will minimize both direct and indirect impacts to these species. Any construction near or adjacent to the Shannon Creek drainage will be preceded by a pre-construction
survey. The existing culvert over the Shannon Creek drainage will not be widened and will only be used as an EVA road. The primary egress and ingress for the project will be be offofHicks
Road. In addition, impacts relating to the construction of the outfalls for the project are likely to be covered by the Programmatic Section 7 for the red-legged frog. Ifformal consultation
(via Section 7) for the red-legged frog is required, then the project applicant shall implement
all of Page 8 of24
the Minimization measures outlined in the Programmatic Section 7 Biological Opinion. c. Compensation by Wetland Creation. Any impacts from the project (i.e., outfalls) shall be mitigated
by creating habitat on-site at a minimum of 1:1 ratio. Page 9 of24
d. Compensation by Riparian Restoration. A riparian restoration plan for mitigation shall be developed by a qualified biologist. The mitigation area(s) should be designed to expand existing
riparian vegetation and re-create high quality riparian habitat along the Shannon Creek drainage and northern drainage. The mitigation goal is to create and enhance riparian habitat
with habitat functions and values equal to, or greater than those existing along the Shannon Creek drainage and northern drainage. The final species selection and configuration shall
be determined during final mitigation design. The trees and shrubs to be installed should be oflocal origin, preferably contract grown from seed or cuttings from within five miles of
the site. e. A detailed monitoring plan including specific success criteria shall be developed and submitted to The Town of Los Gatos for approval. The mitigation area will be monitored
in accordance with the plan approved bythe Town. The basic components of the monitoring plan are final success criteria, performance criteria, monitoring methods, data analysis, as-built
plans, monitoring schedule, contingency/remedial measures and reporting requirements. f. Specific success criteria and characteristics shall be developed during preparation of the mitigation
and monitoring plan. At a minimum, the final success criteria shall include absolute percent cover by native trees and shrubs of 60% and 40%, respectively. The performance criteria should
include tree and shrub survival at three years of80% ofthe original planting. Ifthe final encroachment estimates exceed 1.0 acre, monitoring of the mitigation site shall be conducted
for 10 years. Annual monitoring reports shall be sent to the appropriate agencies. If the required mitigation planting is less than 1.0 acres, monitoring shall be conducted annually
for five years. g. During the development ofthe riparian restoration plan, an appropriate area (or areas) shall be identified to replace encroachment impacts at a 1:1 basis. h. Maintain
Water Quality ofthe Watershed. The project shall be designed, constructed and built in such a way as to maintain the water quality in the adj acent drainage channels and ponds. Appropriate
best management practices (BMPs) shall be Page 10 of24
developed for the project. 20. SOLAR WATER SYSTEM. Each residence shall be pre-plumbed for a solar water heater system prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 21. COLOR REFLECTNITY
DEED RESTRICTION. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a deed restriction shall be recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder's Office that requires all exterior
paint colors to be maintained in conformance with the Town's Hillside Development Standards. 22. SUBDNISION REQUIRED. A separate tentative map application submittal and approval is required
for the proposed project prior to the issuance ofbuilding permits. 23. BELOWMARKETPRICE (BMP) IN-LIEU FEE: A BelowMarket Price (BMP) in-lieu fee shall be paid by the property owner/developer
pursuant to Town Code Section 29.10.3025 and any applicable Town Resolutions. The fee amount shall be based upon the Town Council fee resolution in effect at the time a final or vesting
tentative map is approved. 24. FINAL CC&R's. Final CC&R's shall be approved by the Town Attorney prior to the recording ofthe Final Map. The CC&R's shall include provisions for traffic
circulation, vehicle parking enforcement procedures, and landscaping, exterior lighting and fencing restrictions. The approved CC&R's shall become conditions of this Ordinance. Building
Division 25. PERMITS REQUIRED. A building permit application shall be required for each proposed structure. Separate Electrical/Mechanical/Plumbing permit shall be required as necessary.
25. CONSTRUCTION PLANS. The Conditions ofApproval shall be stated in full on the cover sheet of the construction plan submitted for building permit. 26. SIZE OF PLANS. The maximum size
of construction plans submitted for building permits shall be 24 inches by 36 inches. 27. PLANS. The construction plans for this project shall be prepared under direct supervision of
a licensed architect or engineer (Business and Professionals Code Section 5538). 28. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS. Contact the BayArea Air QualityManagement District at (495) 771-771-6000
and complete their process as necessary before obtaining a demolition Page 11 of24
permit from the Town Building Department. No demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a demolition permit from the Town. 29. 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. 30. 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 retaining 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 comer locations 31. RESIDENTIALTOWN ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS.
The residences shall be designed with adaptability features for single-family residences per Town Resolution 1994-61. ff. Wooden backing (no smaller than 2-inches by eight-inches) shall
be provided in all bathroom walls at water closets, showers and bathtub, located at 34-inches from the floor to the center of the backing, suitable for installation of grab bars. gg.
All passage doors shall have a 36-inch wide door including a five foot by five foot level landing no more than one-inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level, with an
18-inch clearance at interior strike edge. hh. Door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired. 32. SOLARHOTWATER HEATING. The residences shall be pre-plumbed for solar hot water heating.
The plans shall show the location of a stub and valve located in the attics for solar heating use. 33. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE. California Title 24 Energy Compliance forms CR-IR and
MF-IR shall be printed on the construction plans. Page 12 of24
34. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE. This project requires Class A roofing assembly. 35. TOWN FIREPLACE STANDARDS. New fireplaces shall be EPA Phase II approved appliances per Town Ordinance 1905.
Tree limbs within 10 feet of chimneys shall be cut. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS. When a special inspection is required byUBC Section 1701, the architect or engineer ofrecord shall prepare an
inspection program that shall be submitted to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of any 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 printed on the construction plans. 36. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION STANDARDS.
The Town standard Santa Clara Valley Non-point Source Pollution Control Program specification sheet shall be part ofplan submittal. The specification sheet is available at the Building
Division service counter. 37. ADDITIONAL AGENCY APPROVALS REQUIRED. The project requires the following agencies approval before issuance of a building permit: a. West Valley Sanitation
District 378-2407 b. Santa Clara County Fire Department: 378-4010 c. Lots 1-13: Los Gatos School District: 335-2000 d. Lot 14: Uuion School District: 377-8010 Note: Obtain the school
district forms from the Town Building Department, after the Building Department has approved the building plans. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS: Engineering
Division 39. GRADING. Grading shall be kept to a minimum to construct the roads wi1:hiti the project. Any future grading will be considered at the time ofArchitecture & Site review(s).
40. GRADING PERMIT. A grading permit is required for all on-site grading, erosion control and improvements (roadway, storm drainage, utilities, lighting, etc.). A separate application
for a grading permit (with grading plans) shall be made to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public Works Department. The grading plans shall include final grading, drainage, Page
13 of24
retaining wall location, driveway, utilities and interim erosion control. Unless specifically allowed by the Director of Parks & Public Works, the grading permit will be issued concurrently
with the building permit. 41. SOILS REPORT. One copy of the soils and geologic 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 report shall be signed and "wet stamped" by the engineer or
geologist, in conformance with Section 6735 ofthe California Business and Professions Code. 42. FINAL MAP. A final map shall be recorded. Two copies ofthe final map shall be submitted
to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public Works Department for review and approval. The submittal shall include closure calculations, title report and appropriate fees. The map
shall be recorded prior to issuance of any building permits for the project. 43. DEDICATIONS. The following shall be dedicated prior to issuance of any permits: a. Hicks Road. A 40-foot
half street right-of-way with the chord ofa 20-foot radius at the intersection with the new street. b. Shannon Road. A 20-foot half street right-of-way. c. New interior streets. A 40-foot
street right-of-way with the chord ofa 20-foot radius at all intersections and a standard 42-foot radius cul-de-sac. d. Public Service Easement (PSE). Ten (l0) feet wide, next to the
new street right-ofways. e. Ingress-egress, storm drainage and sanitary sewer easements, as required. f. Trail Easement. Ten (10) to twenty (20) feet wide, as shown on the Official Development
Plan. g. Emergency Access Easement. Twenty (20) feet wide, from the new public road to Shannon Road, as shown on the Official Development Plans. 44. 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 Page 14 of24
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. New Streets.
Curb, gutter, new street paving, signing, striping, storm drainage and sauitary sewers, as required. Curbs shall be rolled concrete to the satisfaction ofthe Director ofParks and Public
Works. 45. INSURANCE. One million dollars ($1,000,000) of liability insurance holding the Town harmless shall be provided in a format acceptable to theTown Attorney before recordation
of the map. 46. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION FEE (RESIDENTIAL). The developer shall pay a proportional the project's share oftransportation 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 ofCertificate ofOccupancy is made. The fee shall be paid
before issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. The traffic impact mitigation fee for each new house in this project using the current fee schedule is $5,730. The final fee shall be
calculated from the [mal plans using the rate schedule in effect at the time ofthe request for a Certificate ofOccupancy. Credit shall be given for the house on Lot 14, where a house
was previous located, and for the three residences to be demolished. 47. GENERAL. All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town Standard Drawings and the
Town Standard Specifications or as otherwise approved by the Director of Parks and Public Works. 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. 48. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT. All work
in the public right-of-way will reqmre a Construction Encroachment Permit. All work over $5,000 will require construction security. Page 15 of24
49. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS. The developer or his representative shall notify the Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (24) hours before starting an 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 resnlt in rejection of work that went on without inspection. 50. GRADING MORATORIUM.
No grading or earth-disturbing activities shall be initiated in hillside areas between October 1 and April 15 of each year. For grading operations commenced before October 1, all grading
or earth-disturbing activities shall cease October 15 and will not be allowed to restart until April 15. Grading permits will not be issued between September 15 and April 15. These limitations
include, but are not limited to these items: driveways, building pads, foundation trenches and drilled piers, retaining walls, swinrming pools, tennis courts, outbuildings and utility
trenches. Install interim erosion control measures, shown on the approved interim erosion control plan, by October 1, iffinal landscaping is not in place. Maintain the interim erosion
control measures throughout the October 1 to April 15 period. 51. GRADING INSPECTIONS. The soils engineer or herlhis qualified representative shall continuously inspect all grading operations.
The soils engineer shall submit a final grading report before occupancy/Certificate of Completion. 52. 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. c. Top of future curb along one side ofthe new street. 53. EROSION CONTROL. Interim and final erosion control plans shall be prepared and submitted to the
Engineering Development Division of the Parks & Public Works Department. ANotice ofIntent (N0l) shall be submitted to the San Francisco BayRegional Water Quality Control Board. A Storm
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be submitted to the Town Engineering Division concurrently with the grading permit application. Grading activities shall be limited
to the period ofleast rainfall (April 15 to Page 16 of24
October I). A maximum oftwo weeks is allowed between clearing ofan arealbuilding on an area if grading is allowed during the rainy season. In addition, straw bales and plastic sheeting
shall be stored on-site for emergency control, ifneeded. Install fiber berms, check dams, retention basins, silt fences, erosion control blankets and fiber rolls as needed on the project
site, to protect down stream water quality during winter months. 54. . 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 or creeks.
55. NPDES REQUIREMENTS. All work within the project shall be in conformance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit issued to local agencies within Santa Clara
County by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board on October 17, 200I. 56. FISH FISH & GAME REQUIREMENTS. A "1603" permit shall be obtained for the California Department
ofFish & Game for proposed improvements in or near riparian areas within that agency's jurisdiction. A copy of the permit shall be provided to the Parks & Public Works Department before
any permits are issued/final map is recorded. 57. 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). Cable television capability shall be provided to all new lots. 58. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. The developer shall repair
orreplace 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, 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 ofthe 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. Page 17 of24
59. DRIVEWAY APPROACH. The developer shall install a minimum of one (1) Town standard residential driveway approach for each lot. The new driveway approaches shall be constructed per
Town Standard Detail. 60. LOT 14 DRIVEWAY. The driveway to Lot 14 shall be the minimum width required to provide fire access. The intent is to minimize the visibility ofthe driveway.
61. AS-BUILT PLANS. After completion ofthe construction ofall work in the public right-ofway or public easements, 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 Construction Inspector. A Mylar ofthe approved "as-built" plans shall be provided to the Town before the Faithful Performance Security is released.
62. 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 of each new lot. 63. SIDEWALK REPAIR. The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any sidewalk damaged now or during
construction of this project. Sidewalk repair shall match existing color, texture and design, and shall be constructed per Town Standard Detail. The limits ofsidewalk repair will be
determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase ofthe project. 64. CURB AND GUTTER. The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards
any curb and gutter damaged now or during construction ofthis project. New curb and gutter shall be constructed per Town Standard Detail. The limits of curb and gutter repair will be
determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase ofthe project. 65. CURB RAMPS. The developer shall construct curb ramp according to State Standard
Drawings at at all intersections. The actual "Case" as shown on the standard to be used will be decided by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of the
project. Page 18 of24
66. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURE 7-3. Energy dissipaters should be provided at the outfalls of proposed storm drains to minimize the increased potential for erosion
hazards due to project development. 67. HYDROLOGYAND WATER QUALITY MITIGATIONMEASURE 7-4. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared prior to start of construction.
The SWPPP and project plans shall be reviewed by the Town Engineering staff. The SWPPP shall be in conformance with the Santa Clara CountyNPDES Permit as amended by the San Francisco
BayRegional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) on October 17, 2001. The SWPPP shall be approved concurrently with the grading, drainage and erosion control plans. Reference the Addendum
to the EIR for additional details. 68. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURE Theprojectdesign shall incorporate water quality mitigation measures in accordance with current
NPDES requirements. Water qualitymeasures should include use ofbiofilters, drainage swales, and detention facilities to mitigate non-point source impacts. In addition, the SCVWD and
RWQCB recommend the incorporation of site planning design measures to help reduce potential contributions ofurban pollutants from the project. See the Addendum to the EIR for additional
details. 69. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURE 8-2. In order to minimize potential traffic safety impacts the property owner/developer shall take the following measures:
a. Adequate sight distance shall be provided for the project access road/Hicks Road intersection through removal of vegetation and grading of the embankment. b. A stop sign shall be
installed to control traffic on the project access road to Hicks Road. The stop sign for the proposed driveway shall be located along and parallel to the north edge of pavement on Hicks
Road. c. Warning signs shall be installed indicating a "T" intersection along Hicks Road approaching the new driveway. These signs shall be located approximately 300 feet east and west
of the project entrance/Hicks Road intersection. Page 19 of24
d. Traffic reflectors shall be installed on the south side ofHicks Road at the intersection with the entrance road to the project. 70. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURE 8-3.
A separate pedestrian trail shall be installed along the north side of Hicks Road. 71. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURE 8-4. Use of trails by bicyclists, particularly the
trail parallel to Hicks Road, shall be considered during Architecture and Site review. In addition, design issues such as the appropriateness oftrail widths, pavement versus compacted
earth, and trailhead facilities shall be considered during Architecture and Site Review. 72. GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT PLANS. The project geotechnical consultant
shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects ofthe subdivision improvement plans to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The results ofthe plan review
shall be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer forreview, prior to issuance ofpermits for construction ofsubdivision level improvements.
73. GEOTECHNICAL PLAN REVIEW (LOTS 1 THROUGH 13). The project geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project building and grading plans for
individual residences on Lots 1 through 13. To ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The consultant shall verifY that recommended measures to address potential
debris flows on Lot 6, and potential co-seismic ground deformation on Lots 1 and 13 have been incorporated. 74. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION (LOT 14). The project geotechnical consultant
shall complete a site specific soil and foundation investigation as a basis for preparing recommended geotechnical design parameters for Lot 14 residential improvements. The results
ofthis investigation shall be submitted to the Town for review bythe Town Engineer and Town Geotechnical Consultant prior to approval of a site specific development plan. Page 20 of24
75. GEOTECHNICAL FIELD INVESTIGATION. The project geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The results
ofthese inspections and the as-built conditions ofthe project shall be described by the project geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior
to final inspection. For further detail on conditions 71 through 74, see the letter from Cotton, Shires & Associates dated February 12,2002. Parks Division 76. AERATION TUBES. All impervious
surface encroaching under the dripline of existing trees shall have aeration tubes installed and these tube locations shown on the plans. 77. 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 vegetation. 78. BUILDING FOUNDATIONS:
Anybuildings under the dripline ofexisting trees shall have a foundation built from pier and and grade beam to minimize impaction on existing trees. 79. TREE STAKING: All newly planted
trees are required to be double staked to Town standards. 80. GENERAL. All existing and newly planted trees shown on the plan are specific subjects of approval of this plan and must
remain on site. 81. IRRIGATION SYSTEM. Water efficient irrigation systems shall be utilized to conserve water in all project irrigation ofpublicly landscaped areas. 82. VEGETATIVE SCREENING.
Vegetative screening shall be used along the development edges, where appropriate, to soften views ofperipheral buildings and to integrate landscaping and native vegetation. 83. WATEREFFICIENT
ORDINANCE. This project is subject to the Town's Water Efficient. Ordinance. A fee of $472 is required when the landscape, irrigation plans, and water calculations are submitted for
review. Page 21 of24
84. TREE PROTECTION. Tree protection fencing shall be placed at the dripline of existing trees to be saved in the area of construction. Fencing shall be four feet high chain link attached
to steel poles driven two feet into the ground when at the dripline ofthe tree. Ifthe 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. The fencing must be inspected and approved by the Parks Superintendent and must be installed prior to issuance of a grading and/or building permit. 85.
ORNAMENTAL LANDSCAPING. All formal landscaping shall be within 30 feet of the perimeter of the houses. Any planting beyond the 30-foot perimeter shall be native vegetation that is drought
and fire resistant, and planted in natural clusters. 86. LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES. The adopted landscape guidelines and native plant lists shall include the recommendations of the Town consulting
arborist, except that lawn areas shall not exceed 5,000 square feet. The landscape landscape guidelines are attached as Exhibit C. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE
DEPARTMENT: 87. WATER SUPPLY. Two water tanks with a capacity of 10,000 Gallons and one wharfstyle hydrant shall be provided unless the proposed public water system can be extended to
provide appropriate lot protection, or other acceptable means offire protection can provided as authorized by the Fire Department. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard
Details and Specifications W-1. 88. FIRE APPARATUS (ENGINE) ACCESS. Provide access roadways with a paved all weather surface and a minimum unobstructed width of20 feet, vertical clearance
of13 feet 6 inches, minimum circulating turning radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside, and a maximum slope of15%. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details
and Specifications A-I. 89. FIRE APPARATUS (ENGINE) TURN-AROUND REQUIRED. Provide an approved fire department engine roadway turnaround with a minimum radius of36 feet outside outside
and 23 feet inside. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications A-I. Cul-De-Sac Diameters shall be no less than 64 feet. Page 22 of24
90. FIRE APPARATUS (HYDRANT). Where buildings exceed 150 feet travel distance from the street either an on-site (private) hydrant or an approved residential fire sprinkler system shall
be provided. 91. PUBLIC FIRE HYDRANT(S) REQUIRED.
Provide public fire hydrant(s) at location(s) to be determined jointlyby the Fire Department and the San Jose Water Company. Maximum hydrant spacing shall be 500 feet, with a minimum
single hydrant flow of 1,750 GPM at 20 psi, residual. Consult with San Jose Water Company relative to main sizing requirements and hydrant spacing. Prior to applying for building permit,
provide civil drawings reflecting all fire hydrants proximal to the site. To prevent building permit delays, the developer shall pay all required fees to the water company as soon as
possible. 92. TIMING OF REQUIRED WATER SUPPLY INSTALLATIONS. Installations ofrequired fire service(s) and fire hydrants(s) shall be tested and accepted bythe Fire Department, prior to
the start of framing or delivery ofbulk combustible materials. Building permit issuance may be delayed until required installations are completed, tested, and accepted. 93. TIMING OF
REQUIRED ROADWAY INSTALLATIONS. Required driveways and/or access roads up through first lift of asphalt shall be inspected and accepted by the Fire Department prior to the start of construction.
Bulk combustible materials shall not be delivered to the site until installations are completed as stated above. Building permit issuance may be delayed until installations are completed.
94. FIRE APPARATUS (HYDRANT). Prior to project inspection, the general contractor shall ensure that a "Blue" dot has been placed in the roadway as directed by the Fire Department. 95.
HOUSE NUMBERS. 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. Page 23 of24
SECTION VI This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting ofthe Town Council ofthe Town ofLos Gatos on December 15, 2008, and adopted by the following vote as an ordinance ofthe
Town ofLos Gatos at a meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos on January _, 2009 and becomes effective 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 ADMINISTRATOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA Page 24 of24
LoS Gatos Planning commissioners: A P PEA RAN C E S: Michael Kane, Chair John Bourgeois Marcia Jensen E'hil Micciche Marico sayoe Joanne Talesfore 145 CHAIR KANE: We go on to new public
hearings, and tonight we have four, our first being Item #2 on tonight's agenda, Shannon Valley Ranch; that's Shannon Oaks Drive and Laurel Lane. This is Planned Development
Amendment 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 13 24 Director of Community Development: Assistant Director of Community Development: Town Attorney: Transcribed by: Bud Lortz Orry Korb
vicki L. Blandin (510) 337-1558 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 PD-08-D03, requesting approval of a Planned Development to allow an accessory structure
(8). The Applicant and property owner is Kevin C. Thompson and Greenbriar Hames. Ms. Hamilton, do we have a Staff Report? JEANNE HAMILTON: Yes, Ms. Davis will give the Staff Report this
evening. CHAIR KANE: Ms. Davis, thank you. SUZ1LNNE DAVIS: Good evening. shannon valley valley Ranch is an SO-acre Planned Development located at the corner of Shannon and Hicks Roads,
the new street name for Shannon Oaks Lane and Mountain Laurel Lane. We have 13 lots that were already developed with new homes by Greenbriar, the developer, and there is a fourteenth
lot that has yet to be developed, and that was retained by the seller of the property and at some point we'll see a new house there, but it's still in development, and that's the one
up at the top on the knoll. The maximum floor area for the houses was established by the Planned Development and that was a e:; .-lIw 25 PRO C E E DIN G S: LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION
11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon valley Ranch 1 25 maximum size of 14,850 square feet with an average of 4,650 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon valley Ranch 2
4 square feet. The question of floor area did corne up ouring the Architecture and Site the homes and at time the Town Council approved 800 square foot
garages, but 4 Iwe didn't have any discussion about accessory buildings, so 1 Igarage and any outbuildings, so the question is being asked 2 Iwhether we should apply the Hillside Standards
to this property like we do with all other hillside lots. There is a specific proposal for Lot #11. That 57 10 11 12 now that they've subsequently sold a number of the homes-the developer
still owns three of them and the remainder have been sold-a number of the homeowners are asking to add accessory buildings. The PD doesn't have provisions for or against accessory structures,
so we have one homeowner right now that was interested in doing one and submitted an application, and that's Kevin Thompson; he owns Lot #11. The CDAC considered a specific request by
Mr. Thompson in March, does not need to be decided on specifically this evening, but but the owner gave us enough information in terms of the style that he wanted to do to match his
home, where it would be located, and put up story poles so that the question of whether it was visible or whether it would impact any neighbors could be answered. If the planned Development
10 Amendment is approved, then an Architecture and Site 11 Application will be required for that specific structure. So 12 you don't need to make a specific decision on Lot #11 at 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and those minutes are attached. Subsequently the developer added onto this application so that we could answer the question for the whole project
and not do this lot-by-lot or look at a single lot independently. I think that one of the reasons we got into a floor area maximum on this particular project was the PD was originally
approved in 2002. At that time we have a floor area restriction, floor lots greater than 30,000 square feet. The Hillside Standards were adopted in January 2004 following
approval of the PD. We are following those when people come in with landscape plans, and under the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines these lots would each be allowed 6,400
square feet inclusive of house, LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon Valley Ranch 3 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 this point, the question is do we want
to allow accessory buildings in this development? You could potentially approve it on just Lot #11 since we have a specific proposal, but then we might have more of these coming forward
on an individual basis and it gets very time consuming for everybody involved and it's very expensive for an individual to amend the PD to add a structure like this, so it seemed appropriate
to answer the question for the whole development one way or the other. The Commission is a recommending body in this case. Because it's a Planned Development and it's technically a zone
change we wouldn't being changing the zoning from the existing HR-5 PD, but we are amending the the LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon Valley Ranch 4
l lordinance that governs the property, so it's still considered a zone change and the Council is the deciding body, so the Commission will be making a recommendation to CHAIR KANE:
Thank you, Ms. Davis_ Commissioners, 2 lany questions for Staff? commissioner Bourgeois. COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS: Thank you, Ms_ Davis. 4 on this. There is a required
finding that the 4 IJust to be clear, this is only applying to accessory Planned Development must be in compliance with the General plan, and we also would want
to say that the proposed structure and then any subsequent structures that might be allowed will be compliant with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines. 5 structures and
the building square footage limitations that are set forth in existing PD will not change? SUZANNE DAVIS: Correct. The houses couldn't be expanded under this. COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS:
Okay. And not having Right now there are three ways of approving an 10 10 Ibeen around when this original PD was developed, or I was accessory structure for a hillside parcel. If it's
smaller 11 than 450 square feet it is done with a building permit; if 12 it is between 450 and 600 square feet we do what's called a 11 12 not on the Conceptual Development Advisory
Committee, I noticed they expressed some hesitancy to change the PD 19 Ilot has right now, the potential increase in floor area with 20 lenclosed structures would be between 750 to 950
square feet 13 14 15 16 17 18 Minor Residential Development Application; and if it's larger than 600 square feet it's an Architecture and Site Application. This particular structure
for Lot #11 would be an Architecture and Site Application, because it's 650 square feet. Depending on what amount of floor area an existing 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 based on how much
work went into the PD itself, so I was just wondering if you could comment, and if any of my fellow commissioners were on the CDAC at that time I'd like to hear what those concerns were
and if Staff has an opinion on it_ DAVIS; Commissioner Talesfore was on CDAC at that time. "21 Ion independent lots and still meet the 6,400 square foot maximum established
by the Hillside Standards_ 21 " COMMISSIONER MICCICHE; And on the Planning Commission at that time. "24 That concludes the presentation. We're happy to answer any questions you may have.
"24 SUZANNE DAVIS: Yes, and we had also one of the Council members expressed that concern that so much went 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon Valley Ranch
5 25 Iinto this PO, should we change anything, so that was LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon Valley Ranch 6
something that was raised. We had another Council member that felt it was appropriate if it was consistent with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines, so we can't tell which
way the Council would want to go on this issue since one was one way one was the other. Staff feels it's reasonable to allow them to develop to the Hillside
Standards and Guidelines, because that is something that would be allowed for any other hillside lot in the Town and we didn't have 10 12457 10 to Planning commission, whether it's required
to do that or not. CHAIR KANE: Commissioner Micciche. COMMISSIONER MICCICHE: Refresh my memory, but as I recall the original application came in for 19 homes. It was the Planning Commission
that dropped it back down. SUZANNE DAVIS: The original came in for 30. COMMISSIONER MICCICHE: Well that was 30. SUZANNE DAVIS: They were trying to down some to 11 12 13 that document
in place at the time this thing was approved, so now we have rules and regulations set set up to govern the accessory building. 11 12 13 and the Planning Commission did
not want to downzone and the Council concurred, and at that tiIDe they indicated that HR-S was appropriate, wasn't. The HR-S zoning 14 COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS: And each accessory
14 lallowed 14 and that's where we came up with the 14. 15 Ibuilding would still go through the process, whatever of 15 COMMISSIONER MICCICHE: And I remember at the 16 Ithose steps is
appropriate? 16 Itime of the 19 the application was for the maximum, for the 17 SUZANNE DAVIS: Right. 17 square footage on the homes as they are now at 4,700 square 18 19 COMMISSIONER
BOURGEOIS: a zone change? It just wouldn't require 18 19 feet, and I believe at that time we allowed them the maximum, because we cut it back down to 14, and I believe 20 SUZANNE DAVIS:
Correct. And of course if we felt 20 we would have at that time increased it to the six if in 21 22 2J 24 25 that something wasn't appropriate we wouldn't necessarily approve it. It
could come to the Planning Commission, which would not be typical, but any time we have application we don't think is appropriate for a site we do forward it LOS GATOS PLANNING
COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon valley Ranch 7 21 22 2J 24 25 fact we would have been allowed by the Hillside specifications at that time. So I think there was quite a bit of
work that was done on that to bring it back down to that area, and I'm only mentioning that because I see no LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon valley Ranch 8
235 problem with the 600' addition to this place at all. They are very large lots and can take that type of building. SUZANNE DAVIS: We would have a few restrictions on location. For
the uphill lots, #6 through #11, we allowed some additional grading through a Planned Development Amendment in 2006, and those lots have retaining walls and have a valley
gutter for drainage above them, and they couldn't put an accessory building beyond specific in what we're allowing, and at the time I think accessory structures just weren't really contemplated.
It's a lesson to be learned; when we have a future PD in the hillside we need to write that into it. COMMISSIONER SAYOC: And then the subsequent question to that is why was it worked
as a Planned Development versus just regular subdivisions? SUZANNE DAVIS: I don't know why it originally 10 11 12 13 that point.They also have open space easements within this project,
because forty-five acres of this site was granted as open space, and so none of the structures could go in 10 11 12 13 came in as a PD, except that they were asking to downzone the property
from HR-5 to and they were doing a rezoning and a General Plan Amendment with that. The process wouldn't have been any different if it was a 14 Iwithin that open space area,
so all those uphill lots have 15 Iopen space easements over portions of their property, and 16 Ithe ones along Shannon Road and Hicks Road do as well. 14 Istraight subdivision, they
could have potentially done 15 Ithat, but they weren't asking for exceptions in terms of 16 Iheight or coverage or setbacks or anything like that. We 17 CHAIR KF:J:\TE: Commissioner
Sayoc. 17 didn't make any exceptions to any of the rules of the zone 18 COMMISSIONER SAYOC: Ms. Davis, if the project 18 to approve that project. 19 had been subdivided under our normal
process and this were 19 CHAIR KANE: Commissioner Talesfore. 20 to go forward, would there have been limitacions on 20 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: The only thing I will 21 22 23 24 25 accessory
sizes or accessory buildings, or is it just because it's a Planned Development? SUZANNE DAVIS: It's because it's a Planned Development and because a Planned Development is very LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon Valley Ranch 9 21 22 23 24 25 add, since my fellow commissioner asked if any of the CDAC members could elaborate a bit, was that the CDAC
review for me is paramount because of who makes up the composition of the which is the mayor, the vice-mayor and three LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item
#2, Shannon Valley Ranch 10
commissioners, the gist of the whole thing, 1 Igo on these properties to 5,000 square feet maximum. When 45 the intent for all the eleven comments they made,
was that we maintain a rural atmosphere and ambience of that area out there, and the four comments that I am reminded of and I reviewed was that we would have better rationale for the
increase in floor area ratio, try to minimize the number of buildings within the PD, visibility was an issue and no more excavation besides being hesitant in modifying the PD, 23 they
do landscaping we are lOOking that they don't put ornamentals beyond 30' of the construction area. An accessory building could potentially go outside those fence lines, out we do have
open space easements over the other lots as well. There's an easement that runs all along Hicks where the trail is, so there are limitations on same of the other lots, not just #6 through
#11. 10 but those were the reasons to modify this PD was the three 10 COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS: Okay, thank you. 11 I mentioned before modifications, so it wasn't like wow, 11 CHAIR KANE:
Commissioner Talesfore. 12 let's do this, but not that we can't be reasonable, so I 12 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: And I do have one more 13 14 think that as we continue to discuss we can
maybe draw out what is reasonable. So I think we need to be cautious. 13 14 question. In the original approval process for this PD we did ask for a community benefit, isn't that correct?
So my 15 16 CHAIR KANE: Commissioner Eourgeois. COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS: Thank you, Ms. Davis. If 15 lquestion to you is in this modification would there also be 16 Isome kind of an incremental
community benefit request? 17 I could follow-up, you talked about limitations on where 17 SUZANNE DAVIS; It's not required. The community natural one, then it's supposed to be natural
area. 23 23 SUZANNE DAVIS: We restricted the fencing 24 24 location. We also restricted the amount of turf that could 18 19 20 21 22 25 these could be located on Lots #6 through #11.
Are there any limitations on the other lots, because if I remember correctly there's like three landscaping zones? There's like an intense one right around, then there's kind of a 18
19 20 21 22 25 benefit offering is triggered by traffic usually or an infill project. When theY're adding traffic impact, which this project did, the community benefit, the big one on
this was the 45 acres of open space out of the 88 existing. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Right. LOS GATOS PLANNLNG COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Snannon valley Ranch 11 LOS GATOS PLANNING
COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon valley Ranch 12
SUZANNE DAVIS: And then they put some trails in and connected up to Santa Rosa. They all got Alta (inaudible) . SUZANNE DAVIS: We did in this particular PO in 2006, and it's not out
of the ordinary to amend a PO, but it's not something we do on a regular basis. The Sobrato 4 COMMISSIONER Yeah, incremental to me 4 development, the PD was amended
twice before that whole 57 could be something like maintaining or improving a trail, or landscaping along Hicks, something like that. I don't know, would that be something
we need to look at or we should consider? Who could answer that? 57 thing got built, so sometimes things change and then they come in and ask to change it. You're correct, Mayor Spector
was the other person that made that particular comment, and we record all comments at CDAC whether one person says it ::'0 SUZANNE DAVIS: It wouldn't be typical, but 10 or six do, and
it was heard from two people at that 11 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 perhaps the the Town Attorney could weigh in on that. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: But then this isn't typical
either, is it? Thank you. CHAIR Ms. Davis, one of my primary concerns comes from the CDAC minutes of March 12, 2008, and there were 11 comments recorded, and we've covered visibility
and excavation. The one I'm having trouble with is the last one, that there was a hesitancy to modify a Planned Development which had been through so much public input and scrutiny when
first adopted. I believe one of the proponents of that idea was Commissioner Talesfore, and I believe the other was Mayor Spector. I don't think in my four years we've amended a PD,
so can you address my comfort level? LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon Valley Ranch 13 11 12 13 l< 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 meeting. CHAIR KANE: Okay.
Commissioner Talesfore, you have any comment on that concern, amending a PD? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Other than the fact that it was a concern and an issue that we weren't really...
It meant that will all PDs now have the-I guess they wouldhave the right to corne back for amending? I mean this went under such public scrutiny, lots of hours, lots of people, and I
think that the generous offering of the Council to include 800 square feet beyond what the original house square footage was allowed was something they thought was extremely more than
generous and would cover the garages plus the extra storage that seemed to be needed for, I LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon valley Ranch 14
4 don't even know, other vehicles or just plain storage, and so we thought that would be covered. The point is that we were trying to keep the intensity at a level that would maintain
this ru=al 12 and that have come up in the many previous review sessions we've had on this. Grading. As far as grading is, there is no grading required for this. This structure will
be put on the 57 ambience, and when went out there today I was reminded of how successful I think we have been with this PD. It is absolutely spectacular, so that's my comments. CHAIR
KANE: Thank you. Other questions for 5 Iexisting building pad in the backyard although with a 4' retaining wall, so in no way is it going to disturb the 7 Iground above the retaining
wall, and that retaining wall as you are aware is part of the first amendment to the PD, which was Ordinance #2150 that was done in June of 2006, so 10 11 "13 14 25 16 17 Staff? I'm
going to open the public hearing and shortly we'll call up the Applicant, who will have up to five minutes to speak. After other public members speak the Applicant may then have three
additional minutes to rebut what was said. If there are members of the public who wish to speak on this matter after the Applicant, please turn in a speaker card. You will each have
up to three minutes to speak. Now I call the Applicant, Kevin Thompson. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 I'm conforming with that requirement and I'm not putting anything above the retaining
wall. As far as the intended rural nature of the area and the building intensity, I'm stating that putting that structure back there will not impact it. If you look at the FAR from the
Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines, the floor area ratio, even with this structure in there and you calculate it discounting for the 18% slope there, which you probably wouldn't
have to do on a flat pad but I 2.8 KEVIN THOMPSON: Good evening, Commissioners. My 18 included that in there, again that ratio is still less than 19 20 21 22 23 name is Kevin Thompson,
287 Mountain Laurel Lane. I'm the owner. I'm the guy that's trying to put the structure in the backyard_ My intent is to put a single-story structure, approximately 650 square feet,
in the backyard. I won't 19 20 21 22 23 7%, and if you look at the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines the lowest numbers there are about 18% to 19%, so I'm still one-third
of what would be granted by the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines. As far as the amount of impervious area under use 24 25 elaborate or repeat the items Suzanne talked about,
but I would like to address some of the comments that I've heard LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item Shannon valley Ranch 15 24 Ithere, I calculate it to be about 10%
of the total area, so 25 Iincluding all these structures, swimming pool, hardscaping LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon valley Ranch 16
1 land the new structure, it's still a fairly low percentage, and of that the new structure is only one-half of 1%, so 1 Itheir landscaping. So these are the two newest neighbors; 2
Ithe rest didn't have much of an interest. 45 it's still, again, maintaining the rural nature of the area and complies with what I think is the intent of the PD. Visibility was another
issue brought up. Lot #11 is fairly unique in that it's enclosed by two sides by the The other item was there is really no negative impacts from the neighbors that were outside of the
property on Shannon and Hicks Roads, and they actually didn't seem to mind, they didn't care about this. 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 hills and so YOU're down in
a hole there, and the third side is enclosed by the house, so the visibility is very limited in what you see unless you walk up on the trail and you can look down and see it. It's also
concealed by trees and foliage from direct visibility from the public roads and Shannon and Hicks, so you have a hard time actually seeing in the backyard there. What I've done as pa=t
of the landscaping on the exposed eastern side whe=e I'm clOsest to the neighbor, who isn't in yet, house wasn't sold yet, I planted trees and bushes to conceal on that side,
so I've tried to limit the exposure, the neighbor's view, on that side. Last, one of the items that came up was neighbor's input. I generated a petition which walked around and went
to all the neighbors inside the development and immediately on Shannon and Hicks Roads, and I've actually got very positive support from the neighbors within the development, as you
can expect, because I've talked to two of the neighbors, the newest ones, and they have expressed interest to include closed structures in the backyard as part of LOS GATOS PLANNING
COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item valley Ranch 17 , 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 So those were the comments I kind of made. Again, I didn't want to
repeat the issues that Suzanne had brought up. That's all I have. CHAIR KANE: Thank you. Are there questions for Mr. Thompson? Seeing none, thank you. I have one speaker card. Citizen
Ray. RAY DAVIS; Speaking in the community interest, okay? Ladies and gentlemen, I've got to tell you I continue to be outraged by the performance of these employees who abuse their status
by using a recommendation, and I ask you, where in the Town Code does an employee get the authority to use their discretionary judgment without any public input or input from the Commission
and getting a recommendation for approval? After many years doing what I do, I can only ask a question: Are these people on the take? Is that what motivates them to exceed their authority?
I will continue to ask that over and over again until we get some answer from what I perceive to be very corrupt and dishonest and deceitful performances by these employees. I'll be
back. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon Valley Ranch 18
1 CHAIR KANE; Mr. Thompson, if you wish to rebut 1 COMMISSIONER SAYOC: I was not with the Commission anything you heard, you have three minutes to do so. KEVIN THOMPSON: I don't think
I will at this 2 Iwnen this was first brought forward, and I do appreciate commissioner Micciche's comments, because in general when 45 time. CHAIR KAl."\iE: All right. I'm going to
close the 45 Planned Developments come forward I like to be respectful of the commission and Staff and all the work that went into the 7 10 11 12 13 14 public hearing and turn to the
commission for discussion or a motion. will the Commission give a show of hands those who visited the site, and are there any disclosures or additional evidence that needs to be put
on the record? Then let us begin with Micciche and move to his left. COMMISSIONER MICCICHE: I'd like to announce I'm not on the take, but I have no problem
with this request. CHAIR KANE: You sound defensive to me, commissioner Micciche. 7 10 11 12 13 14 decision of the Planned Development, and I echo what some members of the CDAC had said,
that there was a lot of public comment, there was a lot of work, there were a lot of Staff hours that went into this, and when this application was brought forward to CDAC I had also
mentioned that to the Applicant that I understand the Applicant's concern that he would like some consistency with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines, and that to me is
fair. However, when you do have a Planned Development and it's brought forward and there'S significant public comment to it, you're 15 COMMISSIONER MICCICHE: I can't believe it. 15 assuring
people that what they see is what they get, and COMMISSIONER MICCICHE: I was with this 16 16 17 RAY DAVIS: Thank you. oftentimes these amendments that come afterwards, the public 17
Imay not be as involved, and so is that a disservice to those 21 19 Ifirst time? 18 lapplication from the very beginning when they were asking 18 Ithat had spent so much time and effort
reviewing it the 19 jiOr 30 lots. In particular knowing that this thing is not 20 going to be visible, that it's well within the standards of the Hillside specific rignt now, my comment
is I have no 20 23 So I'm really grappling with that, a Planned Development and what was decided upon and all the 22 23 24 25 issue with it. I'd like to hear my other fellow
but hearing no negatives I probably would make a motion to go ahead with this thing. CHAIR KANE: All right. Commissioner Sayoc. 22 23 24 25 justification
put forward into that versus an Applicant's preference to change that to suit their own personal need, and so I do appreciate commissioner Micciche since he was there and he was involved
with the discussion that went LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon Valley Ranch 19 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon Valley Ranch 20
forward at that time, and I would like to hear roy other 2 Icornrnissioners and their thoughts on the matter before I make my own decision. 1 lather lot in the hillside, and by not amending
it I think we're actually not treating them the same, so I agree with Commissioner Micciche. CHAIR KANE: commissioner Jensen. COMMISSIONER JENSEN: I both comments
that we've heard already. I was not here in 2002 for the consideration of the Planned Development or on the CDAC at the time it was considered. It strikes me with respect to what Commissioner
4 CHAIR KANE: Commissioner Bourgeois. BOURGEOIS: I came into this meeting a little hesitant to... Actually I prefer to be deferential to previous decisions. I
know a lot of work from a lot of smart people went into this PD, but I would concur with what Commissioner Jensen says. Sayoe has said; the Hillside Design Standards and Guidelines 10
11 12 13 14 15 were not in place at the time of the Planned Development. There was a lot of public input and work that went into those and how the hillsides should be developed and what
should happen. It strikes me that the Planned Development at the time it was developed was more restrictive than what we have in the Hillside Guidelines and Standards, and I think a
10 11 12 13 14 15 However, I would like to see maybe a little more specificity in Condition #9. I like the recommendation of possibly limiting the number of accessory structures to one
per lot, and perhaps even to put a square footage number on that, because in Condition #8 when we talked about the residents, we have hard numbers, and so I think for the residents to
know what they can and can't do, I think it 16 16 17 lot of work and public input went into those. So my position is rather than consider these kinds would be nice to have a little more
specificity in that 17 Icondition. For example, I think they would be allowed up to 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of things piecemeal and come in for a zoning change every time that someone
wants to do something, my position would be to forward, because all we're doing is recommending this to the Town Council. The Town Council seems to me can decide whether it's appropriate
to the Planned Development or not, because after all, it's their authority to do that. aut it seems to me that by recommending that, what we're really doing is saying we will
treat these lots as we treat every LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Sharynon valley Ranch 21 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 6,400 square feet, and if the house size is 4,850,
garages are about 800, that's 5,650, which leaves about 750 square feet for an accessory building, and what we're looking at tonight is 650, so I think that's a reasonable request, but
I would like to maybe have that maximum number in the condition just so that we don't come in with these huge multi-part accessory structures. So if we can make that change to Condition
#9, I would go ahead and make a motion LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, shannon Valley Ranch 22
to find that the PD Amendment is consistent with the Gene=al 1 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: That's what I thought. 2 I Plan. I'll hold off making a if you'd like to make co:mrnents.
CHAIR KANE: Commissioner Bourgeois, make your motion. COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS: okay. So I would make the findings that the PD Amendment is consistent with the General Plan, that the proposed
accessory structure for #11 is consistent with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines and I would like to forward a recommendation 10 for approval of the PD Amendment
to the Town Council with 11 the amendment to Condition #9 as stated. 12 CHAIR KAt\!E: Do we have a second? 2 IOkay, because what I would suggest, since one of the CDAC concerns was
minimize the number of buildings within this 4 I?D that bringing it up to 6,400 square feet is fine, but we do have to come to a finite number. Now I think 750 square feet additional,
I think that's too much. I think it's too much to add two buildings of 300 square feet. feet. Do you know what I'm saying? So I think we need to keep that in mind. That would be my recommendation.
CHAIR KANE: Why don't we see if we get that piece 10 in? 11 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: All right. 12 CHAIR KANE: To the maker of the motion? 13 COMMISSIONER MICCICHE: I'll second. 13 COMMISSIONER
BOURGEOIS: So it's my understanding " CHAIR KA..t.\!E: commissioner Micciche, thank you. 14 that that was part of my condition, to limit one accessory 15 16 Discussion? Commissioner
Talesfore. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Thank you_ I was going to 15 16 building lot to a maximum of 750 square feet, and if it's over 600 it has to go through the A&S application
17 second it if there could be some additional conditions. 17 process, and I'm confident that that process would serve 18 CHAIR KANE: Well provide the maker of the motion 18 Ithis development
well. 19 Iwith those. 19 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: okay, fine. 20 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: okay. So I could agree 20 CHAIR KANE: Is that acceptable, Commissioner? 21 Iwith us modifying
this PD or recommending the modification 21 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Yes. " for accessory structures, but I have to understand that 22 CHAIR KANE: What's your second point? 23 we're not...
Are we approving this particular? 23 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: My second point was even "25 COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS: No. 24 25 though 450 square feet can be approved at the Staff level,
450 square feet could be a small house. I would to at least, LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon valley Ranch 23 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2,
Shannon valley Ranch 24
especially with this PD I would to recommend that any structure that be approved out at this 1 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: No. COMMISSIONER MICCICHE:
No. 45 10 11 12 13 14 15 Shannon Valley Ranch, it would come back on consent to this commission, because of all the work and scrutiny that has gone before us, I would be very pleased
with that I think, and I would like to make that recommendation. CHAIR KANE: To the maker of the motion? COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS: Through the Chair, if I could ask maybe a clarification.
I sounds like Commissioner Talesfore was concerned about the use of that outbuilding when she was referencing that it could be a residence. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Oh, no. I'm sorry;
I was trying to make that a comparison. Because of the size its architecture would be extremely important in these cases, period. Architecture and Site would be extremely important;
because it could also... In this one case of the project in 457 10 11 12 13 14 15 COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS: No, we're not making a decision on Lot #11 tonight. We're making an amendment
to the PD, and my understanding is they still have to go through the A&S process. CHAIR KANE: So we still could see potentially 14 separate applications? We're not approving everything
at once right now, is that correct? COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS: That's correct. CHAIR KANE: Good. SUZANNE DAVIS: What Commissioner Bourgeois is suggesting is that if it requires an Architecture
and Site approval, which would be a structure 600 square feet or larger, then that corne back to the Planning Commission, as opposed to all accessory buildings. 16 front of us the 650
square feet isn't impacting; I mean 16 CHAIR KANE: Okay, thank you. And you wanted 450, 17 Ithere won't be any excavation. However, we don't know what 17 Icommissioner? :8 Icould happen
in the future. I would just like to be assured 19 Ithat we could see it on consent. 18 19 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Yes, as consent. CHAIR KANE: So let's stay with that narrow 20 COMMISSIONER
BOURGEOIS: I would be amenable to 20 Iquestion, to the maker of the motion. 22 21 lany application that required an A&S application to come to us on consent, but I'd look to the seconder
and perhaps even 21 22 COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS: No, I would like to stick with my saying that if it requires an A&Si we would like to 23 24 25 Staff for some comment on that. CHAIR KANE:
me ask a question. Your motion is for this specific lot? LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon Valley Ranch 25 23 24 25 see it on consent. CHAIR KANE: All
right. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item #2, Shannon Valley Ranch 26
COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS: I think that's a good 2 I line in the sand. CHAIR I got it. Further discussion? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Also this is a recommendation, do we do it
in the form of a motion? We do, okay. CHAIR KANE: Yes. And if you have reservations about the motion, since it is a recommendation we'll make extra certain that your reservations are
made known to Council. 10 COMMISSIONER TALESFQRE: Thank you very much. 11 CHAIR KANE: As they have been on the record so 12 far. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Thank you.
CHAIR KANE: Other discussion? Seeing none, I'm going to call the question, if we understand the motion. All those in favor, say aye. Opposed? Motion passes 6-0. Ms. Hamilton, do we have
appeal rights? Do we have appeal rights with a recommendation? ANNE HAMILTON: No, this is a recommendation 20 I forwarded on to Council and their legislative action would 21 I then make
its way to the court if anybody had issue with it. 22 23 "2S CHAIR KANE: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mr. Thompson. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11/12/2008 Item *2, Shannon valley Ranch
27
TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: November 12, 2008 ITEM NO.: 2 PREPARED BY: APPLICATION NO.: LOCATION: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNERS: APPLICATION SUMMARY:
RECOMMENDATION: Suzanne Davis, Associate Planner PD-08-003 Shannon Valley Ranch (Shannon Oaks Lane & Mountain Laurel Lane; access on west side of Hicks Road, north of Shannon Road) Kevin
Thompson & Greenbriar Homes Kevin C. Thompson, GHC Shannon Valley Ranch, LLC, et al Requesting approval of an amendment to a Planned Development to allow an accessory structure(s) on
property zoned HR-5:PD. APNs 567-24-010 through 023. DEEMED COMPLETE: October 14, 2008 FINAL DATE TO TAKE ACTION: Rezoning applications are legislative acts and are therefore not governed
by the Permit Streamlining Act. Approval, subject to conditions. PROJECT DATA: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Applicable Plans & Standards: Parcel Size: Surrounding Area:
Hillside Residential HR-2Yi:PD PD Ordinance 2150 Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines Hillside Specific Plan 80 acres (14 residential lots) i Existing Land Use I General Plan
l Zoning 'No'rthTHiiiSi&-Residenti;lCl--H:iflside -------------1--------------------
East i __ Guadalupe Creek -City of San Jose i -
--West-rHill;de-Residenti-af-l-HilisideResidentiaiTH'R=-2lh----ATTACHMENT 4
Planning Connnission Staff Report -Page 2 Shannon Valley Ranch PDA PD-08-003 November 12,2008 CEQA: An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Addendum were prepared for the Planned Development.
The ErR Addendum was certified by the Town Council on March 4, 2002. No further environmental analysis is required. FINDINGS: • That the rezoning is consistent with the General Plan.
ACTION: EXHIBITS: BACKGROUND: • That the proposed accessory structure is consistent with the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines. Recommendation to Town Council. 1. Location
map (one page) 2. Required Findings (one page) 3. Draft Planned Development Ordinance (24 pages) 4. March 12,2008 CDAC Sunnnary Minutes (two pages) 5. Applicant's letter and petition
(three pages), received July 14, 2008 6. Development Plan (one sheet), received September 17, 2008 On March 18, 2002, the Town Council adopted a Planned Development Ordinance allowing
a 14-lot subdivision of an 80 acre property located at the northeast comer of Shannon & Hicks Roads. The developer of the project is Greenbriar Homes and the project is called Shannon
Valley Ranch. The Planning Commission approved the Tentative Map on January 22,2003 and Architecture & Site applications for 13 new homes on January 14, 2004. The 14th lot was retained
by the seller of the property and has yet to be redeveloped (the previous home on the site burned down prior to Greenbriar acquiring the property). On June 19, 2006, the Town Council
adopted a new ordinance amending the Planned Development (PD) to allow additional grading on the upslope lots (#6 though 11). No other conditions of the original approval were modified.
The PD restricts the allowable floor area of the properties and does not include provisions for future structures. A number of new homeowners are developing and installing landscape
plans and would like to add accessory buildings such as a pool or guest house. The subject application was initially filed by one property owner who would like to construct a game room
in the rear yard of his property on Mountain Laurel Lane (lot 11). The developer has since partnered with
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 3 Shannon Valley Ranch PDA PD-08-003 November 12, 2008 the owner so the question of allowing accessory buildings can be addressed for the entire
proj ect rather than a single lot. On March 12, 2008 the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) considered the request for construction on an accessory structure on lot 11.
The Committee comments are attached as Exhibit 4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood Shannon Valley Ranch is surrounded by hillside residential properties,
although only one is in close proximity to the new homes (the residence at 17311 Hicks Road). Other homes in the area are separated by the large open space areas that were dedicated
with the development and/or roadways. Lands to the east are in the City of San Jose and are separated from the project by Hicks Road and Guadalupe Creek. B. Architecture & Site Approval
If the PD amendment is approved, an Architecture and Site application will be required for the proposed accessory structure on lot 11 as it exceeds 600 square feet. The application may
be approved at a Development Review Committee public hearing. C. Zoning Compliance The proposed accessory structure is compliant with required setbacks for the HR zone and within the
15 foot height maximum allowed for accessory structures. PD Ordinance 2097 does not expressly prohibit accessory structures, although it does not include provisions for any additional
floor area beyond what was approved for the residences and garages through the PD and A&S processes. ANALYSIS: A. Architecture & Site The owner of lot 11 is proposing to construct a
650 square foot detached structure that will be used as a game room and changing facilities for the pool and yard area (see Exhibit 5). He intends to construct a building that will match
the exterior style, color and materials of the residence and to install solar panels on the roof to heat the swimming pool. Story poles have been placed on the site. The new structure
can be constructed in compliance with accessory structure regulations and the Hillside Development Standards
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 4 Shannon Valley Ranch PDA PD-08-003 November 12,2008 & Guidelines (HDS&G). However, given that the PD does not allow any expansion beyond the
approved floor area, the project cannot be allowed without amending the PD. The applicants are requesting approval of a PD amendment to allow an increase in the allowable floor area.
Staff has received a number of inquiries from other homeowners and prospective buyers (Greenbriar still owns three of the homes) and anticipates that there will be more applications
of this type. If the PD amendment is approved, homeowners will have the ability to propose accessory structures in compliance with the HDS&G and within the 6,400 square foot floor area
limit allowed by the HDS&G. This allows for an increase in the allowable floor area of between 750 and 950 square feet per lot depending on the existing floor area total. Approval processes
for accessory structures vary depending on the size. Structures larger than 450 square feet require approval of a Minor Residential Development application, which includes notification
of immediate neighbors. Structures larger than 600 square feet require approval by the Development Review Committee through a noticed public hearing. Structures that do not exceed 450
square feet may be constructed with a building permit. B. Neighborhood Compatibility The average lot size in the development is three acres. The homes vary in size, the largest being
4,850 square feet, with an average size of 4,650 square feet. The garages are about 800 square feet. If applied to the project, the HDS&G floor area criteria would allow a maximum of
6,400 square feet total. The maximum floor area would be inclusive of the house, garage and any accessory structures. The existing floor area range for the 13 developed lots is 5,450
to 5,650 square feet. C. CEOA Determination An Environmental Impact Report (ErR) and Addendum were previously prepared for the Planned Development. The EIR Addendum was certified by
the Town Council on March 4, 2002. No further environmental analysis is required for the proposed PD amendment. PUBLIC COMMENTS: The owner of lot 11 shared his plans with surrounding
neighbors and provided a supporting petition signed by nearby residents on Hicks and Shannon Roads as well as those on Mountain Laurel and Shannon Oaks Lanes. Story poles have been in
place for the past month and written notice was mailed to over 40 property owners and residents living in the vicinity of the Shannon Valley Ranch development. Staffhas not had contact
from any neighbors.
Planning Commission StaffReport -Page 5 Shannon Valley Ranch PDA PD-08-003 November 12, 2008 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: A. Conclusion At the time the PD was approved the Town did
not have a floor area cap for lots larger than 30,000 square feet. The floor area limits were placed on the PD in the absence of an applicable FAR or other floor area limitation. The
HDS&G were subsequently adopted in January 2004. Application of the HDS&G to the PD will allow the homeowners the same ability to have accessory structures as any other hillside property
in the Town. Staff supports allowance of accessory structures within the limits prescribed by the HDS&G and recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation for approval
of the PD amendment to the Town Council, as outlined in the recommendation section below. A revised PD Ordinance has been prepared for the Commission's consideration (see Exhibit 3).
B. Recommendation 1. Find that the Planned Development amendment is consistent with the General Plan; 2. Find that the proposed accessory structure for lot 11 is consistent with the
HDS&G; 3. Forward a recommendation for approval of the PD amendment to the Town Council. n<'7Jkl/¥L8aM ,c Prepared by: Suzanne Davis Associate Planner BNL:SD cc: Kevin Thompson, 287
Mountain Laurel Lane, Los Gatos, CA 95032 Tim Stanley, Greenbriar Homes Communities, Inc., 43160 Osgood Road, Fremont, CA 94539 N:\DEV\REPORTS\2008\SVR-PDAdoc
Shannon Valley Ranch Mountain Laurel Lane & Shannon Oaks Lane EXHIBIT 1
PLANNING COMMISSION -NOVEMBER 12, 2008 REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR: Shannon Valley Ranch Planned Development Application PD-08-03 Requesting approval ofan amendment to a Planned Development
to allow an accessory structure(s) on property zoned HR-5:PD. APNs 567-24-010 through 023. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Kevin C. Thomson & GHC Shannon Valley Ranch, LLC FINDINGS: Required
consistency with the Town s General Plan: • That the proposed Zone Change is internally consistent with the General Plan and its Elements. Required compliance with the Hillside Development
Standards & Guidelines • That the proposed amendment is in compliance with the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines. N:\DEV\FlNDINGS\2008\SVR-PDA2.DOC EXHIBIT 2
ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AMENDING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PD-99-02 RELATIVE TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND REPEALING ORDINANCE 2150 FOR THE SHANNON VALLEY RANCH PROJECT AT SHANNON
& HICKS ROADS (SHANNON OAKS AND MOUNTAIN LAUREL LANES) 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 on property at Shannon and Hicks Roads (Santa Clara County Assessor Parcel Numbers 567-24-010 through 025) as shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A, and
is part ofthis Ordinance, from HR-5:PD (Hillside Residential, 5 Acres per Dwelling Unit, Planned Development) to HR-5:PD (Hillside Residential, 5 Acres per Dwelling Unit, Planned Development).
SECTION II The PD (Planned Development Overlay) zone established by Ordinance 2150 is hereby amended to authorize the following construction and use ofimprovements: 1. Demolition of
two existing pre-1941 and two post-1941 single family residences and one pre-1941 bam. 2. Construction of13 new single-family dwelling units and reconstruction ofone single-family dwelling
that was destroyed by fire. 3. Landscaping, streets, trails, and other improvements shown and required on the Official Development Plan. 4. Dedication of 45.4 acres of hillside and riparian
open space as shown on the Official Development Plans. 5. Dedication of trail easements to the Town of Los Gatos as shown on the Official Development Plans. 6. Revised grading shown
on the plan attached as Exhibit D. 7. Accessory structures in compliance with the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines. 8. Ordinance 2150 is hereby repealed. 9. Uses permitted
are those specified in the HR (Hillside Residential) zone by Sections Page 1 of24 EXHIBIT 3
29.40.235 (Permitted Uses) and 29.20.185 (Conditional Uses) ofthe Zoning Ordinance, as those sections exist at the time ofthe adoption ofthis Ordinance, or as theymaybe amended in the
future. However, no use listed in Section 29.20.185 is allowed unless specifically authorized by this Ordinance, or by a 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 IV Architecture and Site Approval and Subdivision Approval
is required before construction work for the dwelling units is performed, whether or not a permit is required for the work and before anypermit for construction is issued. Constructionpermits
shall onlybe in a manner complying with Section 29.80.130 ofthe Town Code. SECTION V The attached Exhibit A (Map), Exhibit B (Official Development Plans), and Exhibit D (Modified Grading
Plan), are part ofthe Official Development Plan. The following conditions must be complied with before issuance of any grading, or construction permits: TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR
OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Planning Division I. EXPIRATIONIUSE OF APPROVAL. The approval for the requested grading modifications shall expire two years from the date of approval unless
the application has been vested pursuant to Town Code Section 29.20.320. 2. ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPROVAL REQUIRED. A separate Architecture and Site application and approval is required
for the residential units proposed. Page 2 of24
3. OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS. The Official Development Plans provided are conceptual in nature. Final footprints and building designs shall be determined during the architecture and
site approval process. 4. HOUSE SITING. The siting of the homes shall be detennined during the Architecture & Site approval process. 5. RECYCLING. All wood, metal, glass and aluminum
materials generated from the demolished structures shall be deposited to a company which will recycle the materials. Receipts from the company(s) accepting these materials, noting type
and weight ofmaterial, shall be submitted to the Town prior to the Town's demolition inspection and the issuance of any building pennits. 6. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT. A Tree Removal Pennit
shall be obtained for the removal of any ordinance sized tree prior to the issuance of a Building, Grading or Encroachment Pennit. 7. FENCING. Fence locations shall be reviewed and approved
during the Architecture & Site review(s), including privacy and yard fencing. Developer will include in the CC&R's for the project a restriction limiting the home owners from replacing
the fence type as installed by the Developer and as shown on the Official Development Plans, or as otherwise approved during the Architecture & Site review(s). Any replacement or addition
ofother fence types shall be restricted to open fence types including wood with wire mesh and wood or concrete split-rail fencing. Solid fencing will be pennitted only where installed
bythe Developer and as shown on the approved development plans. CC&R's shall require fences to be set back a minimum of 10 feet for from property lines. 8. BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE. All
project homes will be limited to a maximum size of 4,850 square feet with an average of4,650 square feet, and at least 2/3 ofthe homes shall be limited to a one story design. Final building
design and size will be determined during Architecture and Site review. No further expansion ofthe homes will be allowed unless this Ordinance is amended by the Town Council. Lot 14
shall be developed under guidelines ofa replacement structure and shall be similar is size, mass and scale to the original home that was destroyed by fire. Page 3 of24
9. ACCESSORY STRUCTRES. Accessory structures that are in compliance with the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines (HDS&G) and do not require a grading permit maybe considered
on individual lots. Accessory structures shall be reviewed through the appropriate approval process specified by the HDS&G. 10. SETBACKS. The minimum setbacks are those specified by
the HR-5 zoning district. 11. HEIGHT. The maximum height for single-story homes shall be 25 feet and the maximum height for two-storyhomes shall be 30 feet. The maximumheight for accessory
structures is 15 feet. 12. EXTERIOR LIGHTING. All exterior lighting shall be reviewed and approved as part ofthe Architecture & Site review(s). Lighting shall be down directed, and no
street lighting shall be included in the development. If it is determined that lighting is needed for safety reasons at the intersection of Hicks Road and the new road into the development,
a street light may be required, but only ifthere is not alternative safety devices that can adequately delineate the intersection. Ifit is determined that a new light must be installed,
it shall be designed to only illuminate the minimum area necessary for safety. 13. BIOLOGICALRESOURCES MITIGAnONMEASURE 6-3a. During the design phase, the property owner/developer shall
implement the following measures: a. Any plan affecting trees shall be reviewed by the Consulting Arborist to ensure that improvement plans, utility and drainage plans, grading plans,
landscape and irrigation plans, and demolition plans will not adversely affect the tree to be retained. b. The horizontal and vertical elevations of trees to be preserved within development
areas shall be established and included on all plans. c. The Consulting Arborist shall identify a Tree Protection Zone for trees to be preserved in which no soil disturbance is permitted.
For design purposes, the Tree Protection Zone shall be defined by the dripline. Where developmentmust encroach within the dripline, the Consulting Arborist .shall identify an appropriate
Tree Protection Zone. d. .No underground services including utilities, sub-drains, water or sewer shall be placed in the Tree Protection Zone. e. Tree Preservation Notes shall be included
on all plans. Page 4 of24
f. Any herbicides placed under paving materials must be safe for use around trees and labeled for that use. g. Irrigation systems must be designed so that no trenching will occur within
the Tree Protection Zone. 13. BIOLOGICALRESOURCES
MITIGATIONMEASURE 6-3b. Duringthepre-construction phase, the property owner/developer shall take the following measures: a. A fence shall be constructed around all trees to be retained
and it shall completely enclose the Tree Protection Zone prior to demolition, grubbing, or grading. Fencing shall be 6-foot chain link or equivalent. Fencing shall be placed at the dripline
or as otherwise directed by the Consulting Arborist. Fences are to remain until all grading and construction is completed. b. All trees to be retained shall be pruned within and adjacent
to development areas shall be reviewed by a certified arborist to determine which trees should be pruned to clean the crown, reduce end weight and/or provide clearance. Tree #20 I will
require pruning to reduce weight throughout the crown. Clearance shall be provided by selectively thinning low-hanging lateral branches. c. All pruning shall be performed by a Certified
Arborist or Tree Worker in accordance with the Tree Pruning Guidelines of the International Society ofArboriculture. d. Prior to the start of any demolition and clearing, the Consulting
Arborist will meet with the demolition, grading and other relevant contractors to review limits of construction activity, identify areas requiring fencing, identify trees to be removed
and review work procedures. 14. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-3C. Prior to the construction phase ofthe project, the applicant shall take the following measures: a. Any grading,
construction demolition, or other work within the Tree Protection Zone shall be monitored by the Consulting Arborist. b. Anyroot pruning required for construction purposes shall receive
the prior approval of, and be supervised the Consulting Arborist. c. Ifany injury to a tree should occur during construction, it should be evaluated as soon as possible by the
Consulting Arborist so that appropriate treatments can be made. Page 5 of24
d. Root-injured trees have a limited capacity to absorb water. Therefore, it is important to ensure adequate soil moisture in the area ofactive roots. One to several irrigations may
be needed for trees that are at risk of impacts. Irrigations shall be specified by the Consulting Arborist. e. No excess soil, chemical, debris, equipment or other materials shall be
dumped or stored within the Tree Protection Zone. f. Any additional pruning required to provide clearance during construction shall be performed by a Certified Arborist and not construction
personnel. 15. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-3d. Following construction, a comprehensive management plan for the trees shall be developed that considers the broad objectives
of development as well as the needs of the specific species. This management plan shall specify pruning, fertilization, mulch, pest management, replanting and irrigation requirements.
In addition, provisions for monitoring both tree health and structural stability following construction must be made a priority. As trees age, the likelihood of failure of branches or
entire trees increases. Therefore, the management plan must include an annual inspection for hazard potential. 16. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-4. To minimize impacts on
nesting raptors, the applicant shall complete necessary pre-construction surveys and monitoring. Ifit is not possible to schedule construction between August and February, then pre-construction
surveys for nesting raptors willbe conducted by a qualified ornithologist in order to ensure that no raptor nests will be disturbed during proj ect construction. This survey will be
conducted no more than 15 days prior to the initiation of construction activities during the early part of the breeding season (February through April) and no more than 30 days prior
to the initiation ofthese activities during the late part ofthe breeding season (May through August). During this survey, the biologist will inspect all trees in and immediately adjacent
to the impact areas for raptor nests. If an active raptor nest is found close enough to the construction area to be disturbed by these activities, the ornithologist, in consultation
with CDFG, will determine the extent of a free buffer zone to be established around the nest. Page 6 of24
17. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-5a. To minimize impacts on yellow warblers, the property owner/developer shall retain sycamore riparian habitat along Shannon Creek and
shall maintain setbacks ofat least 50 feet between proposed development and sycamore riparian habitat. If a small amount of development encroaches into this 50foot setback, then this
encroachment (indirect impact) shall be mitigated byplanting riparian habitat at a 1:1 ratio. 18. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-5b: The property owner/developer shall implement
the following measures to minimize potential impacts on any roosting bats: a. Surveys shall be conducted up to one year in advance ofbuilding demolition and tree removal, ifpossible,
to determine if active roosts are present. These surveys shall not substitute for pre-construction/pre-disturbance surveys for nesting raptors, as bats could move on or adjacent to the
site between survey periods. If roosting bats are found during these surveys, either avoidance of the maternity roost season, establishment of buffer zones or exclusion of bats shall
be implemented as appropriate. b. Avoidance: Construction activities involving potential roost sites shall be conducted outside the maternity roost season ifthe project commences after
young are volant by July 31 and finished before the formation of maternity roosts begins (as early as March 1). c. Pre-demolition Surveys and Buffer Zones: Ifthe project schedule does
not allow for early detection surveys to occur, a pre-demolition survey for roosting bats shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist 14 days prior to construction as determined
by a Memorandum ofUnderstanding with the California Department ofFish & Game (CDFG) prior to any removal ofbuildings, particularly those with closed areas such as an attic space, or
trees 12 inches in diameter. No activities that would result in disturbance to active roosts shall proceed prior to the completed surveys. Ifno active roosts are found, then no further
action is warranted. If a roost were present, a qualified bat biologist shall determine the extent ofconstruction-free zones around active nurseries located during surveys.
CDFG shall also be notified of any Page 7 of24
active nurseries within the construction zone. d. Surveys: Initial surveys can be conducted any time prior to the pre-demolition surveys to establish ifa particular location has supported,
or supports, roosting bats. A survey for indications of nursery roosts shall be conducted prior to March 1. If indications ofa maternity roost are present, the structure can be removed
or modified before a maternity roost becomes reestablished. e. Exclude Bats Prior to Construction Near Roost: Bats can be excluded after July 31 and before March 1 to prevent the formation
of maternity colonies. Such nonbreeding bats can be safely evicted, under the direction ofa qualified bat biologist, by sealing crevices and providing them one-way exclusion doors. Such
a device should be employed in all expansion joints during dark hours as a temporary device to prevent the formation of a maternity colony. In order not to exclude all potential matemityroost
habitat at once, only one-halfofthe expansionjoints should be sealed at anyone given time during the maternity colony-nesting season. This should allow bats to leave during dark hours,
thus increasing their chance of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation during daylight. After construction, all exclusion devices shall be removed to allow bats to
re-establish habitat for colonies. 19. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-6. The property owner/developer shall implement the following protection measures to mitigate impacts
to the red-legged frog (see Addendum to the project EIRfor additional details): a. Avoidance to the extent possible. b. Minimization. The project shall be designed, built and operated
in the following ways that will minimize both direct and indirect impacts to these species. Any construction near or adjacent to the Shannon Creek drainage will be preceded by a pre-construction
survey. The existing culvert over the Shannon Creek drainage will not be widened and will only be used as an EVA road. The primary egress and ingress for the project will be off ofHicks
Road. In addition, impacts relating to the construction of the outfalls for the project are likely to be covered by the Programmatic Section 7 for the red-legged frog. Ifformal consultation
(via Section 7) for the red-legged frog is required, then the project applicant shall implement all of Page 8 of24
the Minimization measures outlined in the Programmatic Section 7 Biological Opinion. c. Compensation by Wetland Creation. Any impacts from the project (i.e., outfalls) shall be mitigated
by creating habitat on-site at a minimum of I: I ratio. d. Compensation by Riparian Restoration. A riparian restoration plan for mitigation shall be developed by a qualified biologist.
The mitigation area(s) should be designed to expand existing riparian vegetation and re-create high quality riparian habitat along the Shannon Creek drainage and northern drainage. The
mitigation goal is to create and enhance riparian habitat with habitat functions and values equal to, or greater than those existing along the Shannon Creek drainage and northern drainage.
The final species selection and configuration shall be determined during final mitigation design. The trees and shrubs to be installed should be oflocal origin, preferably contract grown
from seed or cuttings from within five miles of the site. e. A detailed monitoring plan including specific success criteria shall be developed and submitted to The Town of Los Gatos
for approval. The mitigation area will be monitored in accordance with the plan approved bythe Town. The basic components of the monitoring plan are final success criteria, performance
criteria, monitoring methods, data analysis, as-built plans, monitoring schedule, contingency/remedial measures and reporting requirements. f. Specific success criteria and characteristics
shall be developed during preparation of the mitigation and monitoring plan. At a minimum, the final success criteria shall include absolute percent cover by native trees and shrubs
of 60% and 40%, respectively. The performance criteria should include tree and shrub survival at three years of80% ofthe original planting. Ifthe final encroachment estimates exceed
1.0 acre, monitoring of the mitigation site shall be conducted for 10 years. Annual monitoring reports shall be sent to the appropriate agencies. If the required mitigation planting
is less than 1.0 acres, monitoring shall be conducted annually for five years. g. During the development ofthe riparian restoration plan, an appropriate area (or areas) shall be identified
to replace encroachment impacts at a 1:1 basis. Page 9 of24
h. Maintain Water Quality ofthe Watershed. The project shall be designed, constructed and built in such a way as to maintain the water quality in the adj acent drainage channels and
ponds. Appropriate best management practices (BMPs) shall be developed for the project. 20. SOLAR WATER SYSTEM. Each residence shall be pre-plumbed for a solar water heater system prior
to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 21. COLOR REFLECTIVITY DEED RESTRICTION. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a deed restriction shall be recorded by the applicant
with the Santa Clara County Recorder's Office that requires all exterior paint colors to be maintained in conformance with the Town's Hillside Development Standards. 22. SUBDIVISION
REQUIRED. A separate tentative map application submittal and approval is required for the proposed project prior to the issuance ofbuilding permits. 23. BELOW MARKETPRICE (BMP) IN-LIEU
FEE: A Below Market Price (BMP) in-lieu fee shall be paid by the property owner/developer pursuant to Town Code Section 29.10.3025 and any applicable Town Resolutions. The fee amount
shall be based upon the Town Council fee resolution in effect at the time a final or vesting tentative map is approved. 24. FINAL CC&R's. Final CC&R's shall be approved by the Town Attorney
prior to the recording of the Final Map. The CC&R's shall include provisions for traffiC circulation, vehicle parking enforcement procedures, and landscaping, exterior lighting and fencing
restrictions. The approved CC&R's shall become conditions ofthis Ordinance. Building Division 25. PERMITS REQUIRED. A building permit application shall be required for each proposed
structure. Separate Electrical/Mechanical/Plumbing permit shall be required as necessary. 25. CONSTRUCTION PLANS. The Conditions ofApproval shall be stated in full on the cover sheet
of the construction plan subnritted for building permit. 26. SIZE OF PLANS. The maximum size ofconstruction plans submitted for building permits shall be 24 inches by 36 inches. 27.
PLANS. The construction plans for this project shall be prepared under direct supervision of a licensed architect or engineer (Business and Professionals Code Section 5538). Page 10
of24
28. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS. Contact the BayArea Air Quality Management District at (495) 771-6000 and complete their process as necessary before obtaining a demolition pennit from the
Town Building Department. No demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a demolition permit from the Town. 29. SOILS REPORT. Two copies of a soils report, prepared to the
satisfaction ofthe Building Official, containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, shall be submitted with the building pennit application. This report shall be prepared
by a licensed civil engioeer specializing in soils mechanics. 30. 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 retaining 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 engioeer for the following items: a. Pad elevation b. Finish floor elevation c. Foundation corner locations 31. RESIDENTIALTOWNACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS. The residences
shall be designed with adaptability features for single-family residences per Town Resolution 1994-61. ff. Wooden backing (no smaller than 2-inches by eight-inches) shall be provided
in all bathroom walls at water closets, showers and bathtub, located at 34-inches from the floor to the center of the backing, suitable for installation of grab bars. gg. All passage
doors shall have a 36-inch wide door including a five foot by five foot level landing no more than one-inch out ofplane with the immediate interior floor level, with an l8-inch clearance
at interior strike edge. hh. Door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired. . 32. SOLARHOTWATER HEATING. The residences shall be pre-plumbed for solar hot water heating. The plans shall
show the location of a stub and valve located in the attics for solar heating use. Page 11 of24
33. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE. California Title 24 Energy Compliance fOnTIS CR-IR and MF-IR shall be printed on the construction plans. 34. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE. This project requires
Class A roofing assembly. 35. TOWN FIREPLACE STANDARDS. New fireplaces shall be EPA Phase II approved appliances per Town Ordinance 1905. Tree limbs within 10 feet of chimneys shall
be cut. Page 12 of24
36. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS. When a special inspection is required byUBC Section 1701, the architect or engineer ofrecord shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted to the
Building Official for approval prior to issuance of any 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 printed on the construction plans. 37. NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION STANDARDS. The Town standard Santa Clara ValleyNon-point
Source Pollution Control Program specification sheet shall be part ofplan submittal. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division service counter. 38. ADDITIONAL AGENCY
APPROVALS REQUIRED. The project requires the following agencies approval before issuance of a building permit: a. West Valley Sanitation District 378-2407 b. Santa Clara County Fire
Department: 378-4010 c. Lots 1-13: Los Gatos School District: 335-2000 d. Lot 14: Union School District: 377-8010 Note: Obtain the school district forms from the Town Building Department,
after the Building Department has approved the building plans. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS: Engineering Division 39. GRADING. Grading shall be kept to
a minimum to construct the roads within the project. Any future grading will be considered at the time of Architecture & Site review(s). 40. GRADING PERMIT. A grading permit is required
for all on-site grading, erosion control and improvements (roadway, storm drainage, utilities, lighting, etc.). A separate application for a grading pennit (with grading plans) shall
be made to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public Works Department. The grading plans shall include final grading, drainage, retaining wall location, driveway, utilities and
interim erosion control. Unless specifically allowed by the Director of Parks & Public Works, the grading permit will be issued concurrently with the building permit. Page 13 of24
41. SOILS REPORT. One copy of the soils and geologic 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 report shall be signed and "wet stamped" by the engineer or geologist, in conformance with Section
6735 of the California Business and Professions Code. 42. FINAL MAP. A [mal map shall be recorded. Two copies ofthe final map shall be submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks
& Public Works Department for review and approval. The submittal shall include closure calculations, title report and appropriate fees. The map shall be recorded prior to issuance of
any building permits for the project. 43. DEDICATIONS. The following shall be dedicated prior to issuance of any permits: a. Hicks Road. A 40-foot half street right-of-way with the chord
ofa 20-foot radius at the intersection with the new street. b. Shannon Road. A 20-foot half street right-of-way. c. New interior streets. A 40-foot street right-of-way with the chord
of a 20-foot radius at all intersections and a standard 42-foot radius cul-de-sac. d. Public Service Easement (PSE). Ten (l0) feet wide, next to the new street right-ofways. e. Ingress-egress,
storm drainage and sanitary sewer easements, as required. f. Trail Easement. Ten (10) to twenty (20) feet wide, as shown on the Official Development Plan. g. Emergency Access Easement.
Twenty (20) feet wide, from the new public road to Shannon Road, as shown on the Official Development Plans. 44. 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 ofa map. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate
of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. a. New Streets. Curb, gutter, new street paving, siguing, striping, storm drainage and Page 14 of24
sanitary sewers, as required. Curbs shall be rolled concrete to the satisfaction ofthe Director of Parks and Public Works. 45. INSURANCE. One million dollars ($1,000,000) of liability
insurance holding the Town harmless shall be provided in a format acceptable to the TownAttorneybefore recordation of the map. 46. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION FEE (RESIDENTIAL). The developer
shall pay a proportional the project's share of transportation improvements needed to serve cumulative development within the Town ofLos Gatos. The fee amount will be based upon the
Town Council resolution in effect at the time the request ofCertificate ofOccupancy is made. The fee shall be paid before issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. The traffic impact
mitigation fee for each new house in this project using the current fee schedule is $5,730. The final fee shall be calculated from the final plans using the rate schedule in effect at
the time ofthe request for a Certificate ofOccupancy. Credit shall be given for the house on Lot 14, where a house was previous located, and for the three residences to be demolished.
47. GENERAL. All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town Standard Drawings and the Town Standard Specifications or as otherwise approved by the Director
of Parks and Public Works. 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 uuless 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. 48. 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. Page 15 of24
49. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS. The developer or his representative shall notifY the Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (24) hours before starting an 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. 50. GRADING MORATORlUM.
No grading or earth-disturbing activities shall be initiated in hillside areas between October 1 and April 15 of each year. For grading operations commenced before October 1, all grading
or earth-disturbing activities shall cease October 15 and will not be allowed to restart until April 15. Grading pennits will not be issued between September 15 and April 15. These limitations
include, but are not limited to these items: driveways, building pads, foundation trenches and drilled piers, retaining walls, swimming pools, tennis courts, outbuildings and utility
trenches. Install interim erosion control measures, shown on the approved interim erosion control plan, by October 1, iffinal landscaping is not in place. Maintain the interim erosion
control measures throughout the October 1 to April 15 period. 51. GRADING INSPECTIONS. The soils engineer or herlhis qualified representative shall continuously inspect all grading operations.
The soils engineer shall submit a fmal grading report before occupancy/Certificate of Completion. 52. 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. c. Top offuture curb along one side of the new street. 53. EROSION CONTROL. Interim and final erosion control plans shall be prepared and submitted to the
Engineering Development Division of the Parks & Public Works Department. ANotice ofIntent (N0l) shall be submitted to the San Francisco BayRegional Water Quality Control Board. A Stonn
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be submitted to the Town Engineering Division concurrently with the grading pennit application. Grading activities shall be limited to the
period ofleast rainfall (April 15 to Page 16 of24
October 1). A maximum oftwo weeks is allowed between clearing ofan arealbuilding on an area if grading is allowed during the rainy season. In addition, straw bales and plastic sheeting
shall be stored on-site for emergency control, ifneeded. Install fiber berms, check dams, retention basins, silt fences, erosion control blankets and fiber rolls as needed on the project
site, to protect down stream water quality during winter months. 54. 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 SHALLNOT be washed into the Town's storm drains or creeks.
55. NPDES REQUIREMENTS. All work within the project shall be in conformance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit issued to local agencies within Santa Clara
County by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board on October 17,2001. 56. FISH & GAME REQUIREMENTS. A "1603" permit shall be obtained for the California Department
ofFish & Game for proposed improvements in or near riparian areas within that agency's jurisdiction. A copy of the permit shall be provided to the Parks & Public Works Department before
any permits are issued/final map is recorded. 57. UTILITIES. The developer shall install all utility services, including telephone, electric power and all other communications lines
underground, as required by Town Code §27.50.0l5(b). Cable television capability shall be provided to all new lots. 58. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. The developer shall repair
orreplace 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, 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. Page 17 of24
59. DRIVEWAY APPROACH. The developer shall install a minimum of one (I) Town standard residential driveway approach for each lot. The new driveway approaches shall be constructed per
Town Standard Detail. 60. LOT 14 DRlVEWAY. The driveway to Lot 14 shall be the minimum width required to provide fire access. The intent is to minimize the visibility of the driveway.
61. AS-BUILT PLANS. After completion ofthe construction ofall work in the public right-ofway or public easements, 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 Construction Inspector. A Mylar ofthe approved "as-built" plans shall be provided to the Town before the Faithful Performance Security is released.
62. 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 ofeach new lot. 63. SIDEWALK REPAIR. The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any sidewalk damaged now or during
construction of this project. Sidewalk repair shall match existing color, texture and design, and shall be constructed per Town Standard Detail. The limits ofsidewalk repair will be
determined bythe Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of the project. 64. CURB AND GUTTER. The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards
any curb and gutter damaged now or during construction ofthis project. New curb and gutter shall be constructed per Town Standard Detail. The limits
ofcurb and gutter repair will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase ofthe project. 65. CURB RAMPS. The developer shall construct curb
ramp according to State Standard Drawings at all intersections. The actual "Case" as shown on the standard to be used will be decided by the Engineering Construction Inspector during
the construction phase of the project. Page 18 of24
66. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURE 7-3. Energy dissipaters should be provided at the outfalls of proposed storm drains to minimize the increased potential for erosion
hazards due to project development. 67. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATIONMEASURE 7-4. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared prior to start of construction.
The SWPPP and project plans shall be reviewed by the Town Engineering staff. The SWPPP shall be in conformance with the Santa Clara CountyNPDES Permit as amended by the San Francisco
BayRegional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) on October 17,2001. The SWPPP shall be approved concurrently with the grading, drainage and erosion control plans. Reference the Addendum
to the EIR for additional details. 68. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURE The project design shall incorporate water quality mitigation measures in accordance with current
NPDES requirements. Water qualitymeasures should include use ofbiofilters, drainage swales, and detention facilities to mitigate non-point source impacts. In addition, the SCVWD and
RWQCB recommend the incorporation of site planning design measures to help reduce potential contributions ofurban pollutants from the project. See the Addendum to the EIR for additional
details. 69. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURE 8-2. In order to minimize potential traffic safety impacts the property owner/developer shall take the following measures:
a. Adequate sight distance shall be provided for the project access road/Hicks Road intersection through removal of vegetation and grading ofthe embankment. b. A stop sign shall be installed
to control traffic on the project access road to Hicks Road. The stop sign for the proposed driveway shall be located along and parallel to the north edge ofpavement on Hicks Road. c.
Warning signs shall be installed indicating a "T" intersection along Hicks Road approaching the new driveway. These signs shall be located approximately 300 feet east and west of the
project entrance/Hicks Road intersection. Page 19 of24
d. Traffic reflectors shall be installed on the south side ofHicks Road at the intersection with the entrance road to the project. 70. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURE 8-3.
A separate pedestrian trail shall be installed along the north side ofHicks Road. 71. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURE 8-4. Use of trails by bicyclists, particularly the
trail parallel to Hicks Road, shall be. considered during Architecture and Site review. In addition, design issues such as the appropriateness oftrail widths, pavement versus compacted
earth, and trailhead facilities shall be considered during Architecture and Site Review. 72. GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT PLANS. The project geotechnical consultant
shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects ofthe subdivision improvement plans to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The results ofthe plan review
shall be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review, prior to issuance ofpermits for construction ofsubdivision level improvements.
73. GEOTECHNICAL PLAN REVIEW (LOTS 1 THROUGH 13). The project geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project building and grading plans for
individual residences on Lots 1 through 13. To ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The consultant shall verify that recommended measures to address potential
debris flows on Lot 6, and potential co-seismic ground deformation on Lots 1 and 13 have been incorporated. 74. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION (LOT 14). The project geotechnical consultant
shall complete a site speCific soil and foundation investigation as a basis for preparing recommended geotechnical design parameters for Lot 14 residential improvements. The results
ofthis investigation shall be submitted to the Town for review by the Town Engineer and Town Geotechnical Consultant prior to approval of a site specific development plan. Page 20 of24
75. GEOTECHNICAL FIELD INVESTIGATION. The project geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The results
ofthese inspections and the as-built conditions ofthe project shall be described by the project geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior
to final inspection. For further detail on conditions 71 through 74, see the letter from Cotton, Shires & Associates dated February 12, 2002. Parks Division 76. AERATION TUBES. All impervious
surface encroaching under the dripline of existing trees shall have aeration tubes installed and these tube locations shown on the plans. 77. 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 vegetation. 78. BUILDING FOUNDATIONS:
Anybuildings under the dripline ofexisting trees shall have a foundation built from pier and grade beam to minimize impaction on existing trees. 79. TREE STAKING: All newly planted trees
are required to be double staked to Town standards. 80. GENERAL. All existing and newly planted trees shown on the plan are specific subjects of approval ofthis plan and must remain
on site. 81. IRRIGATION SYSTEM. Water efficient irrigation systems shall be utilized to conserve water in all project irrigation ofpublicly landscaped areas. 82. VEGETATIVE SCREENING.
Vegetative screening shall be used along the development edges, where appropriate, to soften views ofperipheral buildings and to integrate landscaping and native vegetation. 83. WATER
EFFICIENT ORDINANCE. This project is subject to the Town's Water Efficient Ordinance. A fee of $472 is required when the landscape, irrigation plans, and water calculations are submitted
for review. Page 21 of24
84. TREE PROTECTION. Tree protection fencing shall be placed at the dripline of existing trees to be saved in the area of construction. Fencing shall be four feet high chain link attached
to steel poles driven two feet into the ground when at the dripline ofthe 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. The fencing must be inspected and approved by the Parks Superintendent and must be installed prior to issuance of a grading and/or building permit. 85.
ORNAMENTAL LANDSCAPING. All formal landscaping shall be within 30 feet of the perimeter of the houses. Any planting beyond the 30-foot perimeter shall be native vegetation that is drought
and fire resistant, and planted in natural clusters. 86. LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES. The adopted landscape guidelines and native plant lists shall include the recommendations of the Town consulting
arborist, except that lawn areas shall not exceed 5,000 square feet. The landscape guidelines are attached as Exhibit C. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT:
87. WATER SUPPLY. Two water tanks with a capacity of 10,000 Gallons and one wharfstyle hydrant shall be provided unless the proposed public water system can be extended to provide appropriate
lot protection, or other acceptable means offire protection can provided as authorized by the Fire Department. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications
W-I. 88. FIRE APPARATUS (ENGINE) ACCESS. Provide access roadways with a paved all weather surface and a minimum unobstructed width of20 feet, vertical clearance of13 feet 6 inches, rninimum
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 A-I.
89. FIRE APPARATUS (ENGINE) TURN-AROUND REQUIRED. Provide an approved fire department engine roadway turnaround with a minimum radius of36 feet outside and 23 23 feet inside. Installations
shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications A-I. Cul-De-Sac Diameters shall be no less than 64 feet. Page 22 of24
90. FIRE APPARATUS (HYDRANT). Where buildings exceed 150 feet travel distance from the street either an on-site (private) hydrant or an approved residential fire sprinkler system shall
be provided. 91. PUBLIC FIRE HYDRANT(S) REQUIRED. Providepublicfrrehydrant(s) atlocation(s) to be determined jointlyby the Fire Department and the San Jose Water Company. Maximum hydrant
spacing shall be 500 feet, with a minimum single hydrant flow of 1,750 GPM at 20 psi, residuaL Consult with San Jose Water Company relative to main sizing requirements and hydrant spacing.
Prior to applying for building pennit, provide civil drawings reflecting all fire hydrants proximal to the site. To prevent building pennit delays, the developer shall" pay all required
fees to the water company as soon as possible. 92. TIMING OF REQUIRED WATER SUPPLY INSTALLATIONS. Installations ofrequired fire service(s) and fire hydrants(s) shall be tested and accepted
by the Fire Department, prior to the start of framing or delivery ofbulk combustible materials. Building pennit issuance may be delayed until required installations are completed, tested,
and accepted. 93. TIMING OF REQUIRED ROADWAY INSTALLATIONS. Required driveways and/or access roads up tlrrough first lift of asphalt shall be inspected and accepted by the Fire Department
prior to the start of construction. Bulk combustible materials shall not be delivered to the site until installations are completed as stated above. Building pennit issuance may be delayed
until installations are completed. 94. FIRE APPARATUS (HYDRANT). Prior to project inspection, the general contractor shall ensure that a "Blue" dot has been placed in the roadway as
directed by the Fire Department. HOUSE NUMBERS. 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. Page 23 of24
SECTION VI This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting ofthe Town Council ofthe Town ofLos Gatos on "2009, and adopted by the following vote as an ordinance ofthe Town ofLos 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 ADMINISTRATOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA Page 24 of24
TOWN OF LOS GATOS 110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 354-6872 SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF
LOS GATOS FOR MARCH 12,2008 HELD IN THE TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER, 110 EAST MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA. The meeting was called to order at 4:30 P.M. ATTENDANCE Members
Present: Barbara Spector Mike Wasserman Stephen Rice Marico Sayoc Joanne Talesfore Absences: Staff Present: Bud Lortz, Director of Coinmunity Development Suzanne Davis, Associate Planner
ITEM I: 287 Mountain Laurel Lane Conceptual Development Application CD-08-00l Requesting preliminary review to amend Planning Development PD-99-02 (Ordinance 2150) to increase the square
footage allowed on Lot 11 for property zoned HR-5:PD. APN 567-24-020. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Kevin C. Thompson General consensus of the Committee is that hearing applications on a
case by case basis for the proj ects part of the overall Planning Development PD-99-02 is appropriate. Could be problematic in amending PD considering what went into the original approval
of this PD. Comments: 1. Excellence in design is important. 2. Concerned about size of structure. 3. Neighborhood input is important. 4. Try to minimize number of buildings within the
Planned Development. 5. Natnrallooking structures preferred. 6. Visibility may be a concern. 7. Square footage is within what is allowed by HDS&G. 8. No more excavation. 9. Need better
rationale for increase in floor area. 10. May apply as separate PD amendment and do not need to wait for neighbors.EXHIBIT 4
11. Hesitancy to modify a Planned Development which had been through so much public input and scrutiny when first adopted. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m. The next regular
meeting of the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee is Wednesday, April 9, 2008. Prepared by: Bud N. Lortz, Director of Community Development cc: Planning Commission Chair N:\DEV\CDAC\MINUTES\20
08\3-12-08.cdacmin.doc
THOMPSON PETITION FOR SHANNON VALLEY RANCH LOT 11 BACKGROUND It is proposed by Kevin and Sharon Thompson, Owners, 287 Mountain Laurel Lane, to construct an accessory structure on Lot
11 of the Greenbriar Shannon Valley Ranch Development (SVR), Tract No. 9505, located at the corner of Hicks and Shannon Roads, Los Gatos, Ca. Whereas the proposed construction of the
accessory structure described below requires an amendment to Ordinance 2150, dated June 19, 2006; Whereas any modifications to an approved Planned Development PD-99-02 requires public
notification of intent; It is the purpose of this document to notify neighbors within the Development and immediately adjacent to it, of the nature of the proposed construction and to
obtain information regarding neighbor concerns or to confirm there will be no objections to the construction. JUL 1 2003 TOWr-l OF LOfj GATC''= EXHIBIT 5
THOMPSON PETITION FOR SHANNON VALLEY RANCH LOT 11 DESCRIPTION The Project consists of the planned construction of a detached single story ChangelGame Room (CIG R). The CIG R would be
located at the northwest corner of the existing building pad below the retaining wall in the rear of Lot 11. The structure would be consistent with the existing architecture of the main
home in composition and texture of building materials and color tones of the exterior paint. The CIG R would be erected on a concrete slab foundation and include services and utilities
such as water, sewage, power, and lighting. This structure will not contain any living quarters for full time occupancy. In addition, the structure would provide a platform for the roof
installation of south facing solar panels to provide heating for the proposed SVR Architectural Review Committee and Town of Los Gatos swimming pooL It is estimated that the proposed
structure will not exceed 650 square feet and will not be greater than 15 feet in height. The structure would be located in the backyard below an existing 4 foot high retaining wall.
The yard is enclosedon two sides by the surrounding hillside and is concealed by trees and foliage from direct visibility from the public roads. The site will be landscaped with trees
and screening bushes to minimize visibility from the neighbors on the exposed sides of the yard. It is envisioned that this structure will not impact the intended rural nature of the
Shannon Valley Ranch Development, nor create negative visual impacts on the scenic easements or with the neighbors. 2
THOMPSON PETITION FOR SHANNON VALLEY RANCH LOT 11 PETITION I We the undersigned, based on the information presented to us at this time, haveno to the proposed
construction of the described accessory structure on Lot 11, Greenbriar Shannon Valley Ranch Development. ------SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE 7-) -DC!' J 1-O'G Ubl _-,,-/_/,-;'
ii i, /3
de"gner William M. Justi Assoc. L<st<r .....,. "'" O""".CaI1f"""-'. 1l5O", ph"",Ifa1 4O&-35G-.'l81O :;0 m() m<rn o , , , If' , , , , , LEWKE\IlN1HOMPSON
lim lUI!;;,] 287 MOUNTAIN LAUREL LN. LOS GATOS, CA 95032 PH 408-323-8914 '= _
We the undersigned, based on the information presented to us at this time, have no objections to the proposed construction of the described accessory structure on Lot 11, Greenbriar
Shannon Valley Ranch Development. - " • :1'>.-". __ . /.(leAirJ;) kt/YI.·')};'''
j,{) :)9."/',YL6i LiIIiAv-l) Ut.1Wi"i {J;<(D' ),( C.S'. ff]/;t/!:a.A\))/VI #n ;l&f /1JtJJVf)hun '. t
c?,fD ·Sft/liJ;J,;·;i DAts (>, -tIL;' .../.tv4-,,<;,<;j ... ,. -,y' <-(JL1 Ct4Q ---'! )'-V7e:s /itc iJ If") 1/o'%, (,vV\¥L /1 /l Hli1t1 1M, {<Jl
7-2 -{, /»/..Si't41V(ih-,cJo.h \ -..,..... /r, /\ ('-'I. 7-) Del ,In In" /\6 Pi 6-1..,rA-4( I '-f.0962f-,cU7t1mM 7 -j"6-o5{" , j j II JYVJ
""-'71(:;1 C; . !'toct;, 7 10 -6 ":! iU ;,W't Q(J{P f1{ L-AvUl.../S.L 7- MlfIllwdf '2\ :111; fh7YNt!«;/1 /A',u.//10 /)-10-cJ> ;;:)
(1/u A L/j,i!rkZ;;1-LC J-C!;O fL.tOVl.k+t>..UL k"lA)__ (l-/O-OS" J j .-, 3 ATTACIlMENT 5
RECEiVED JAN 142009 MAYOR &TOWN COUNCIL Town Council of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 Subject: PD-08-003 Planned Development Amendment to allow accessory structure,
Shannon Valley Ranch Dear Members of the Town Conncil, January 13,2009 Unfortunately we cannot appear in person at your next scheduled hearing of January 20, 2009. But we would like
to voice our objection to the subject Planned Development Amendment. The original Greenbriar Project (Shannon Valley Ranch) was approved after several Town Council hearings and a solution
was found that satisfied the concerns of the neighbors as well as the needs of the developer and the town. In the meantime additional grading requests were approved as well as the exclusion
of a generous garage space from the overall 4850 sqft building limit. Now there is another request to allow additional buildings on the same lot. This is just another way of getting
around the guidelines set earlier. These guidelines limiting the overall size of the homes were set for very good reasons and specific to the Greenbriar Development. The Planning Commission
is recommending to treat this development now like any other Hillside project. This would be wrong because the Greenbriar project was from the beginning treated as a special development.
As mentioned before it took several hearings at the Town Council to come up with the rules and guidelines and they are still valid and justified today. There is no reason to change them
now. The real question is would the Town Council approve a 650 -850 sqft addition to all of the main houses? If such a request would be approved then why set guidelines. We strongly
urge the members ofthe Town Council to reject this request. Sincerely Alex & Suzy Leupp 530 Santa Rosa Drive Los Gatos, CA 95032 ATTACHMENT 6