Attachment 1TOWN F
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
`O8s Meeting Date: May 28, 2014
PREPARED BY: Jennifer Savage, Associate Planner
isavage LZulosgatosca.gov
APPLICATION NO: Architecture and Site Application S -14 -003
ITEM NO: 3
LOCATION: 15540 El Gato Lane (east side of El Gato Lane, approximately
150 feet south of Los Gatos Almaden Road)
APPLICANT: Chris Spaulding
PROPERTY OWNER/
CONTACT PERSON: Florence and Fletch Sullivan
APPLICATION SUMMARY: Requesting approval to demolish an existing single - family
residence and to construct a new single - family residence on
property pre -zoned R-1:8. APN 523 -23 -021.
DEEMED COMPLETE: May 7, 2014
FINAL DATE TO TAKE ACTION: November 7, 2014
RECOMMENDATION: Denial.
PROJECT DATA: General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential, 0 -5
dwelling units /acre
Zoning Designation: R -1:8 — Single- Family
Residential, 8,000 square foot lot
minimum
Applicable Plans & Standards: General Plan; Residential Design
Guidelines
Parcel Size: 8,096 square feet
Surrounding Area:
Existing Land Use
General Plan
Zoning
North Single Family
Low Density Residential
County
East Two- Family
Medium Density
RD
Residential
South Single Family
_
Low Density Residential
.
County
West ` Single Family
Low Density Residential
County
CEQA: The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15301
of the State Environmental Guidelines as adopted by the Town
because the project consists of the demolition and construction of
a single - family residence. ATTkcF€ 1 'I
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 2
15540 El Gato Lane /S -14 -003
May 28, 2014
FINDINGS: ■ As required by Section 15301 of the State Environmental
Guidelines as adopted by the Town that this project is
Categorically Exempt.
■ As required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the Town Code for
the demolition of a single family residence.
■ As required by the Residential Design Guidelines that the
project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines.
CONSIDERATIONS: ■ As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code for
granting approval of an Architecture and Site application.
ACTION: The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless
appealed within ten days.
EXHIBITS: I.
Location Map
2.
Findings and Considerations
3.
Recommended Conditions of Approval
4.
Project Data Sheet (two pages)
5.
Project Description and Letter of Justification, received
January 10, 2014 (one page)
6.
Applicant's Supplemental Letter, received May 9, 2014 (two
pages)
7.
Structural Condition Report, dated December 24, 2013 (15
pages)
8.
Architectural Consultant Report, received March 20, 2014
(eight pages)
9.
Architectural Consultant Report, received May 13, 2014 (six
pages)
10.
Arborist Consultant Report, received May 2, 2014 (nine
pages)
11.
Neighborhood Support, received March 27, 2014 (six pages)
12.
Development Plans, received May 7, 2014 (four sheets)
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is 8,096 square feet and contains a 1,110 square foot single - family
residence and 405 square foot detached garage. The application to annex the property into the
Town is in progress. The homes in the immediate neighborhood are all one story in height and
are of the same architectural style.
The majority of El Gato Lane is in Santa Clara County. Some of the homes on El Gato Lane,
outside the immediate neighborhood, were remodeled or reconstructed with architectural styles
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 3
15540 El Gato Lane /5 -14 -003
May 28, 2014
different from those found in the immediate neighborhood. Some of the remodeled or
reconstructed homes are two stories.
The application is being referred to the Planning Commission because the project would result in
the largest residence in the immediate neighborhood in terms of square footage and FAR, and
would create the only two story home in the immediate neighborhood.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
A. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood
The property is located at 15540 El Gato Lane on the east side of El Gato Lane,
approximately 150 feet south of Los Gatos Almaden Road. Properties to the north, south,
and west contain single - family residences under Santa Clara County's jurisdiction. The
property to the east contains a two - family dwelling.
B. Architecture and Site Application
The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing 1,110 square foot single - family
residence and 405 square foot detached garage, and to construct a 2,581 square foot
single- family residence and a 588 square foot detached garage.
The two story single - family residence would be 25 feet, six inches high. Materials would
consist of fiber cement hardi -plank horizontal and shingle siding, wood trim, wood -clad
windows, stone veneer at the porch, and a composition shingle roof. The garage would
be 14 feet, eight inches high and consist of the same materials. A color and materials
board will be available at the meeting.
Exhibit 4 provides general project data. A project description and letter of justification
are attached as Exhibit 5, a supplement letter is attached as Exhibit 6, and development
plans are attached as Exhibit 12.
C. Zoning Compliance
The proposed project complies with the height, setback, and structure coverage
limitations. The zoning permits a single - family residence.
ANALYSIS:
A. Demolition
The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing single - family residence and detached
garage. A licensed engineer reviewed the site and condition of the structures (Exhibit 7).
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 4
15540 El Gato Lane /5 -14 -003
May 28, 2014
He concluded that there will be extensive foundation, shear wall, and roof diaphragm
work required to bring the buildings structurally up to the current code. He
recommended that the structures be demolished if the overall costs of upgrading the
structures to the current building code are more than the replacements costs of the new
structures. The Building Official reviewed the report, concurs with the recommendation,
and concludes it is not economically feasible to bring the structures up to code.
B. Architecture
The project was reviewed by the Town's Consulting Architect (Exhibit 8). The
consultant found two issues:
1. The two story design and architectural style are very different than the homes in
the immediate neighborhood.
2. The relative size of the second floor to the first.
The consultant identified that the proposed project is difficult to evaluate. The immediate
neighborhood consists of Eichler -like architecture often referred to as LikEichlers —
homes with flat and low- sloped roofs and minimal detail that were influenced by the
Eichler Homes of the time, but did not approach the level of design quality and
sophistication of the originals. The proposed project consists of a Craftsman style
architecture.
After considering the Town's Residential Design Guidelines, the immediate
neighborhood's architectural significance, and that the neighborhood may be in
transition, he concluded:
1. A two story structure would be difficult to accomplish if the existing architectural
style was used.
2. If the proposed architectural style was acceptable, minor changes to the second
story design should be made.
The applicant revised the plans. The architectural consultant determined that the
revisions addressed his concerns in the event that the deciding body finds merit with the
second story and proposed architectural style (Exhibit 9). The consultant made one
recommendation to enlarge the dormer. The recommendation has two options and the
applicant is amenable to the gable option. A condition of approval is included in Exhibit
3 to modify the plans prior to submitting building permits to meet the recommendation.
Pursuant to Town Council Resolution 2002 -25, the Planning Commission must make one
of the following findings to modify the Architectural Consultant's recommendations:
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 5
15540 El Gato Lane /S -14 -003
May 28, 2014
That the recommendations of the Architectural Consultant were made based on
erroneous information provided by the applicant;
That the consulting architect made a mistake of fact; or
That there is compelling evidence, received through public testimony that there is
privacy or other neighborhood impact to warrant plan modifications.
If the deciding body determines that the neighborhood is in transition, there may be merit
to allow both a second story and a deviation in architectural style. If the deciding body
determines that a second story is not appropriate for the immediate neighborhood, there
may be merit to deviate from the architectural style of the immediate neighborhood given
that the architectural consultant did not identify any architectural significance of the
existing style. The Planning Commission should consider whether a two story residence
and the proposed architectural style are appropriate and/or acceptable.
C. Neighborhood Compatibility
The immediate neighborhood contains only one -story homes. Based on Town and
County records, the residences in the immediate neighborhood range in size from 1,100
square feet to 1,460 square feet. The floor area ratios (FAR) range from 0.12 FAR to
0.18 FAR. The applicant is proposing 2,581 square feet on an 8,096 square foot parcel
(0.32 FAR). The maximum square footage for the lot size is 2,633 square feet.
The Neighborhood Analysis table below reflects current conditions of the immediate
neighborhood.
S 4 ` i' }' '.` `!k ?!hs'
E •-' ,io'# Y`
6 i "a. 61M '-fir
r!��+'.i{+t'
v
15525 El Gato
1,100
892
8,940
1
0.12
15535 El Gato
1,350
276
8,046
1
0.17
15545 El Gato
1,460
399
8,046
1
0.18
15555 El Gato
1,100
276
8,046
1
j 0.14
15565 El Gato
1,448
688
8,046
1
0.18
15560 El Gato
1,100
276
8,003
1
0.14
15550 El Gato
1,100
276
8,003
1
0.14
15530 El Gato
1,176
399
8,003
1
0.15
15520 El Gato
1,100
400
91060
1
0.12
15540 El Gato
2,581
588
8,096
2
0.32
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 6
15540 El Gato Lane /S -14 -003
May 28, 2014
At 2,581 square feet, the residence would be the largest in the immediate neighborhood in
terms of square footage. The residence would be 1,121 square feet larger than the 1,460
square foot residence at 15545 El Gato Lane. At 0.32 FAR, the proposed project would
also be the largest in terms of FAR. The Residential Design Guidelines specify that
residential development shall be similar in mass, bulk and scale to the immediate
neighborhood. The guidelines also specify that consideration will be given to the existing
FAR's, residential square footages, and lot sizes in the neighborhood.
Staff referred the project to the Planning Commission because the residence would result
in the largest residence in the immediate neighborhood in terms square footage and FAR,
and create the only two story home in the immediate neighborhood. The Planning
Commission should consider if the proposed project is compatible with the immediate
neighborhood.
D. Tree Impacts
The development plans were reviewed by the Town's Consulting Arborist (Exhibit 10).
The arborist recommended removing seven of the trees (one Chinese elm, four Italian
cypress, and two glossy privets) due to construction and the condition of the trees.
Replacement trees would be required to be planted pursuant to Town Code. Tree
protection measures are incorporated as conditions of approval to protect the trees to
remain on the subject property and within the development area.
E. General Plan
The goals and policies of the 2020 General Plan applicable to this project includes but is
not limited to:
• Policy LU -6.8 — New construction, remodels, and additions shall be compatible and
blend with the existing neighborhood.
• Policy CD -1.2 — New structures, remodels, landscapes, and hadscapes shall be
designed to harmonize and blend with the scale and rhythm of the neighborhood and
natural features in the area.
• Policy CD -1.4 — Development on all elevations shall be of high quality design and
construction, a positive addition to and compatible with the Town's ambiance.
Development shall enhance the character and unique identity of existing commercial
and /or residential neighborhoods.
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 7
15540 El Gato Lane /5 -14 -003
May 28, 2014
F. CEQA Determination
The proposed project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Sections 15301 of the State
Environmental Guidelines as adopted by the Town because the project consists of the
demolition and construction of a single - family residence.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
The applicant submitted letters of neighborhood support (Exhibit 11).
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
A. Summary
Although the project is well designed, the project would create the largest residence and
only two story in the immediate neighborhood and may not be compatible with the
unique character of the neighborhood's architectural style. The neighborhood may be in
transition. However, the transitions to two stories and in architectural style have occurred
well outside the project's immediate neighborhood.
The application is being referred to the Planning Commission because the project would
create the largest home in terms of square footage and FAR and the only two story in the
immediate neighborhood, and deviate from the architectural style in the immediate
neighborhood. The Planning Commission should consider if the proposed floor area and
FAR is compatible with the immediate neighborhood. The Planning Commission should
also consider whether a two story residence and the proposed architectural style are
appropriate and /or acceptable.
B. Recommendation
Staff recommends denial because the proposed residence would be the largest residence
with the largest FAR and the only two story home in the immediate neighborhood.
If the Commission finds merit with the project, it should take the following actions:
1. Find that the proposed project is categorically exempt, pursuant to Section 15301 of
the California Environmental Quality Act as adopted by the Town (Exhibit 2); and
2. Make the required findings as required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the Town Code
for granting approval of a demolition of a single- family residence (Exhibit 2); and
3. Make the finding that the project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines as
required by the Residential Design Guidelines; and
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 8
15540 El Gato Lane /5 -14 -003
May 28, 2014
4. Make the required considerations as required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code
for granting approval of an Architecture & Site application (Exhibit 2); and
5. Approve Architecture & Site Application 5 -14 -003 with conditions contained in
Exhibit 3 and development plans attached as Exhibit 12.
Alternatively, the Commission can:
1. Approve the application with additional or modified conditions of approval; or
2. Continue the matter to a date certain with specific direction.
PPr4 ared by: Approved by:
J' nifer L. Savage, AICP Laurel R. Prevetti
Associate Planner Assistant Town Manager /Director of
Community Development
LRP:JS:cg
cc: Chris Spaulding, 801 Camilla Street Suite E, Berkeley, CA 94710
Florence & Fletch Sullivan, 15540 El Gato Lane, Los Gatos, CA.95O32
N: \DEV \PC REPORTS\2014 \EIGato15540.docx
0
w
z
0
EMARR V
LOS GATOS
Ii 1
5/28/14 PC Report
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
PLANNING COMMISSION — May 28, 2014
REQUIRED FINDINGS & CONSIDERATIONS FOR:
15540 El Gato Lane
Architecture and Site Application S -14 -003
Requesting approval to demolish an existing single- family residence and to construct a new
single - family residence on property pre -zoned R -1:8. APN 523 -23 -021.
PROPERTY OWNER: Fletch and Florence Sullivan
APPLICANT: Chris Spaulding, Architect
FINDINGS
Required finding for CEQA:
■ The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15301 of the State Environmental
Guidelines as adopted by the Town in that the project consists of the demolition and
construction of a single - family residence.
Required finding for the demolition of a single - family residence:
w As required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the Town Code for the demolition of a single -
family residence:
1. The Town's housing stock will be maintained as the single - family residence will be
replaced.
2. The existing structures have no architectural or historical significance, and are in poor
condition.
3. The property owner does not desire to maintain the structures as they exist; and
4. The economic utility of the structures was considered; it is not economically feasible to
maintain the existing structures.
Required Compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines:
■ The project is in compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines for single - family homes
not in hillside residential areas.
CONSIDERATIONS
Required considerations in review of Architecture & Site applications:
n As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code, the considerations in review of an
Architecture and Site application were all made in reviewing this project.
N: \DEV \FINDINGS\2014 \ELGAT015540, DOCX
EXMBIT 2
5/28/14 PC Report
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
PLANNING COMMISSION —May 28, 2014
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
15540 El Gato Lane
Architecture and Site Application S -14 -003
Requesting approval to demolish an existing single - family residence and to construct a new
single - family residence on property pre -zoned R -1:8. APN 523 -23 -021.
PROPERTY OWNER: Fletch and Florence Sullivan
APPLICANT: Chris Spaulding, Architect
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
Planning Division
1. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions
of approval listed below and in substantial compliance with the plans approved and noted
as received by the Town on May 7, 2014. Any changes or modifications to the approved
plans shall be approved by the Community Development Director, the Development
Review Committee, the Planning Commission, or Town Council, depending on the scope
of the changes.
2. EXPIRATION: The approval will expire two years from the approval date pursuant to
Section 29.20.320 of the Town Code, unless the approval has been vested.
3. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Exterior lighting shall be kept to a minimum, and shall be down
directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. No flood lights
shall be used unless it can be demonstrated that they are needed for safety or security. The
lighting plan shall be reviewed during building plan check.
4. SALVAGE OF BUILDING MATERIALS: Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit,
the developer shall provide the Community Development Director with written notice of
the company that will be recycling the building materials. All wood, metal, glass, and
aluminum materials generated from the demolished structure shall be deposited to a
company which will recycle the materials. Receipts from the company(s) accepting these
materials, noting the type and weight of materials, shall be submitted to the Town prior to
the Town's demolition inspection.
5. GENERAL: All existing trees shown on the plan and trees required to remain or to be
planted are specific subjects of approval of this plan, and must remain on the site.
6. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT: A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained for any trees to be
removed, prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit.
7. ARBORIST REQUIREMENTS: The developer shall implement, at their cost, all
recommendations made by Deborah Ellis, MS, identified in the Arborist's report, dated as
received May 2, 2014, on file in the Community Development Department. A Compliance
Memorandum shall be prepared by the applicant and submitted with the building permit
application detailing how the recommendations have or will be addressed. These
recommendations must be incorporated in the building permit plans, and completed prior to
issuance of a building permit where applicable.
8. ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTANT REQUIREMENTS: The developer shall implement,
at their cost, the recommendation made by Cannon Design Group, identified in the
Architectural Consultant report, dated as received May 13, 2014, on file in the Community
1T 3
5/28/14 PC Report
Development Department. A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared by the applicant
and submitted with the building permit application detailing how the recommendation has
or will be addressed. This recommendation must be incorporated in the building permit
plans, and completed prior to issuance of a building permit.
9. TREE FENCING: Protective tree fencing shall be placed at the drip line of existing trees
prior to issuance of demolition and building permits and shall remain through all phases of
construction. Include a tree protection fencing plan with the construction plans.
10. STORY POLES: The story poles on the project site shall be removed within 30 days of
approval of the Architecture & Site application.
11. TOWN INDEMNITY: Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.115 requires
that any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement from the Town shall defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless the Town and its officials in any action brought by a third
party to overturn, set aside, or void the permit or entitlement. This requirement is a
condition of approval of all such permits and entitlements whether or not expressly set
forth in the approval, and may be secured to the satisfaction of the Town Attorney.
Building Division
12. PERMITS REQUIRED: A Demolition Permit shall be required for the demolition of the
existing single- family residence and garage and a Building Permit the construction of the
new single family residence. Separate permits are required for electrical, mechanical, and
plumbing work as necessary.
13. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue -lined in full on
the cover sheet of the construction plans. A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared
and submitted with the Building Permit application detailing how the Conditions of
Approval will be addressed.
14. SIZE OF PLANS: Four sets of construction plans, minimum size 24" x 36 ", maximum
size 30" x 42 ".
15. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS: Obtain a Building Department Demolition Application
and a Bay Area Air Quality Management District Application from the Building
Department Service Counter. Once the demolition form has been completed, all signatures
obtained, and written verification from PG &E that all utilities have been disconnected,
return the completed form to the Building Department Service Counter with the Air Quality
District's J# Certificate, PG &E verification, and three (3) sets of site plans showing all
existing structures, existing utility service lines such as water, sewer, and PG &E. No
demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a permit from the Town.
16. SOILS REPORT: A Soils Report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Official,
containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, shall be submitted with
the Building Permit Application. This report shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer
specializing in soils mechanics.
17. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or
land surveyor shall be submitted to the project building inspector at foundation inspection.
This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the soils
report, and that the building pad elevation and on -site retaining wall locations and
elevations have been prepared according to the approved plans. Horizontal and vertical
controls shall be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer for the
following items:
a. Building pad elevation
b. Finish floor elevation
c. Foundation corner locations
d. Retaining Walls
18. RESIDENTIAL TOWN ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS: The residence shall be
designed with adaptability features for single family residences per Town Resolution 1994-
61:
a. Wood backing (2" x 8" minimum) shall be provided in all bathroom walls at water
closets, showers, and bathtubs, located 34- inches from the floor to the center of the
backing, suitable for the installation of grab bars.
b. All passage doors shall be at least 32- inches wide on the accessible floor.
c. Primary entrance shall be a 36 -inch wide door including a 5'x5' level landing, no
more than 1 -inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level with an 18 -inch
clearance at interior strike edge.
d. Door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired at primary entrance.
19. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: All required California Title 24 Energy Compliance
Forms must be blue - lined, i.e. directly printed, onto a plan sheet.
20. BACKWATER VALVE: The scope of this project may require the installation of a
sanitary sewer backwater valve per Town Ordinance 6.50.025. Please provide information
on the plans if a backwater valve is required and the location of the installation. The Town
of Los Gatos Ordinance and West Valley Sanitation District (WVSD) requires backwater
valves on drainage piping serving fixtures that have flood level rims less than 12- inches
above the elevation of the next upstream manhole.
21. TOWN FIREPLACE STANDARDS: New wood burning fireplaces shall be an EPA Phase
II approved appliance as per Town Ordinance 1905. Tree limbs shall be cut within 10 -feet
of Chimney.
22. FIRE ZONE: The project requires a Class A Roof assembly.
23. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is required by CBC Section 1704,
the architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be
submitted to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the building permit. The
Town Special Inspection form must be completely filled -out and signed by all requested
parties prior to permit issuance. Special Inspection forms are available from the Building
Division Service Counter or online at www.loseatosca.gov/building.
24. BLUE PRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara County
Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (24x36) shall be part of the plan
submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division
Service Counter for a fee of $2 or at San Jose Blue Print for a fee or online at
www.losaatosca.2ov /building.
25. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following departments and agencies
approval before issuing a building permit:
a. Community Development —planning Division: Jennifer Savage (408) 399 -5702
b. Engineering/Parks & Public Works Dept.: Trang Tu- Nguyen (408) 354 -5236
c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378 -4010
d. West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378 -2407
e. Local School District: The Town will forward the paperwork to the appropriate
school district(s) for processing. A copy of the paid receipt is required prior to permit
issuance.
f. Bay Area Air Quality Management District: (415) 771 -6000
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS:
Engineering Division
26. GENERAL: All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town
Standard Drawings and the Town Standard Specifications. All work shall conform to the
applicable Town ordinances. The adjacent public right -of -way shall be kept clear of all job
related dirt and debris at the end of the day. Dirt and debris shall not be washed into storm
drainage facilities. The storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and /or the street
will not be allowed unless a special permit is issued. The developer's representative in
charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public
right -of -way according to this condition may result in the Town performing the required
maintenance at the developer's expense.
27. 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. It is the responsibility of the applicant /developer to obtain any necessary
encroachment permits from affected agencies and private parties, including but not limited
to, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG &E), SBC, Comeast, Santa Clara Valley Water District,
California Department of Transportation. Copies of any approvals or permits must be
submitted to the Town Engineering Department prior to releasing of any permit.
28. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS: The developer or his representative shall notify the
Engineering Inspector at least twenty -four (24) hours before starting any work pertaining to
on -site drainage facilities, grading or paving, and all work in the Town's right -of -way.
Failure to do so will result in rejection of work that went on without inspection.
29. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: The developer shall repair or replace
all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because
of developer's operations. Improvements such as, but not limited to: curbs, 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.
30. PLAN CHECK FEES: Plan check fees shall be deposited with the Town prior to plan
review at the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department
31. INSPECTION FEES. Inspection fees shall be deposited with the Town prior to issuance of
any Permit or recordation of the Final Map.
32. DESIGN CHANGES: Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be subject to the
approval of the Town prior to when altered work is started. The Applicant Project
Engineer shall notify, in writing, the Town Engineer at least 72 hours in advance of all the
proposed changes. Any approved changes shall be incorporated into the final "as- built"
plans.
33. DRIVEWAY: The driveway conform to existing pavement on El Gato Lane shall be
constructed such that existing drainage patterns will not be obstructed
34. TREE, REMOVAL: Copies of all necessary tree removal permits shall be provided prior to
issuance of a grading permit/building permit.
35. SURVEYING CONTROLS: Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a
licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer qualified to practice land surveying.
36. RETAINING WALLS: A building permit, issued by the Building Department at 110 E.
Main Street, may be required for site retaining walls. Walls are not reviewed or approved
by the Engineering Division of Parks and Public Works during the grading permit plan
review process.
37. SOILS REPORT: One copy of the soils report shall be submitted with the application.
The soils report shall include specific criteria and standards governing site grading,
drainage, pavement design, retaining wall design and erosion control. The reports shall be
signed and "wet stamped" by the engineer or geologist, in conformance with Section 6735
of the California Business and Professions Code.
38. SOILS ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION: During construction, all
excavations and grading shall be inspected by the applicant's soils engineer prior to
placement of concrete and /or backfrll so they can verify that the actual conditions are as
anticipated in the design -level geotechnical report, and recommend appropriate changes in
the recommendations contained in the report, if necessary. The results of the construction
observation and testing should be documented in an "as- built" letter /report prepared by the
applicants' soils engineer and submitted to the Town before final release of any occupancy
permit is granted.
39. UTILITIES: The Developer shall install all new, relocated, or temporarily removed utility
services, including telephone, electric power and all other communications lines
underground, as required by Town Code Section 27.50.015(b). All new utility services
shall be placed underground. Underground conduit shall be provided for cable television
service. Applicant is required to obtain approval of all proposed utility alignments from
any and all utility service providers. The Town of Los Gatos does not approve or imply
approval for final alignment or design of these facilities.
40. SIDEWALK IN -LIEU FEE: A curb and sidewalk in -lieu fee of shall be paid prior to
issuance of a building permit. This fee is based on a square feet of 4.5 -foot wide sidewalk
at $16 /SF in accordance with Town policy.
41. CURB AND GUTTER: The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards
any curb and gutter damaged now or during construction of this project. New curb and
gutter shall be constructed per Town Standard Details. The limits of curb and gutter repair
will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction
phase of the project.
42. AS -BUILT PLANS: An AutoCAD disk of the approved "as- built" plans shall be provided
to the Town prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The AutoCAD file shall
include only the following information and shall conform to the layer naming convention:
a) Building Outline, Layer: BLDG - OUTLINE; b) Driveway, Layer: DRIVEWAY; c)
Retaining Wall, Layer: RETAINING WALL; d) Swimming Pool, Layer: SWIMMING -
POOL; e) Tennis Court, Layer: TENNIS - COURT; f) Property Line, Layer: PROPERTY -
LINE; g) Contours, Layer: NEWCONTOUR. All as -built digital files must be on the same
coordinate basis as the Town's survey control network and shall be submitted in AutoCAD
version 2000 or higher.
43. CONSTRUCTION STREET PARKING: No vehicle having a manufacture's rated gross
vehicle weight exceeding ten thousand (10,000) pounds shall be allowed to park on the
portion of a street which abuts property in a residential zone without prior to approval from
the Town Engineer.
44. HAULING OF SOIL: Hauling of soil on or off -site shall not occur during the morning or
evening peak periods (between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00
p.m.). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the developer shall work with the Town
Building and Engineering Department Engineering Inspectors to devise a traffic control
plan to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow under periods when soil is hauled on or off the
project site. This may include, but is not limited to provisions for the developer /owner to
place construction notification signs noting the dates and time of construction and hauling
activities, or providing additional traffic control. Coordination with other significant
projects in the area may also be required. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other
loose debris.
45. CONSTRUCTION NOISE: Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., weekdays; and
9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekends and holidays, construction, alteration or repair activities
shall be allowed. No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding
eighty -five (85) dBA at twenty -five (25) feet. If the device is located within a structure on
the property, the measurement shall be made at distances as close to twenty-five (25) feet
from the device as possible. The noise level at any point outside of the property plane shall
not exceed eighty -five (85) dBA.
46. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP's): The applicant is responsible for ensuring
that all contractors are aware of all storm water quality measures and such measures are
implemented. Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be maintained and be placed for
all areas that have been graded or disturbed and for all material, equipment and /or
operations that need protection. Removal of BMPs (temporary removal during construction
activities) shall be placed at the end of each working day. Failure to comply with the
construction BMP will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or stop orders.
47. SITE DESIGN MEASURES: All projects must incorporate the following measures:
a. Protect sensitive areas and minimize changes to the natural topography.
b. Minimize impervious surface areas.
c. Direct roof downspouts to vegetated areas.
d. Use permeable pavement surfaces on the driveway, at a minimum.
e. Use landscaping to treat stormwater.
48. DUST CONTROL: Blowing dust shall be reduced by timing construction activities so that
paving and building construction begin as soon as possible after completion of grading, and
by landscaping disturbed soils as soon as possible. Further, water trucks shall be present
and in use at the construction site. All portions of the site subject to blowing dust shall be
watered as often as deemed necessary by the Town, or a minimum of three times daily, or
apply (non- toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging
areas at construction sites in order to insure proper control of blowing dust for the duration
of the project. Watering on public streets shall not occur. Streets will be cleaned by street
sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the Town Engineer, or at least once a
day. Watering associated with on -site construction activity shall take place between the
hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. and shall include at least one late- afternoon watering to
minimize the effects of blowing dust. All public streets soiled or littered due to this
construction activity shall be cleaned and swept on a daily basis during the workweek to
the satisfaction of the Town. Demolition or earthwork activities shall be halted when wind
speeds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 MPH. All trucks hauling soil, sand, or other loose
debris shall be covered.
49. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: All construction shall conform to the latest requirements
of the CASQA Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbooks for Construction
Activities and New Development and Redevelopment, the ABAG Manual of Standards for
Erosion & Sediment Control Measures, the Town's grading and erosion control ordinance
and other generally accepted engineering practices for erosion control as required by the
Town Engineer when undertaking construction activities.
50. SITE DRAINAGE: Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through
curb drains will be allowed. Any storm drain inlets (public or private) directly connected
to public storm system shall be stenciled /signed with appropriate "NO DUMPING - Flows
to Bay" NPDES required language. On -site drainage systems for all projects shall include
one of the alternatives included in section C.3.i of the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit.
These include storm water reuse via cisterns or rain barrels, directing runoff from
impervious surfaces to vegetated areas and use of permeable surfaces. If dry wells are to
be used they shall be placed 10' minimum from adjacent property line and /or right of way.
51. 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.
52. GOOD HOUSEKEEPING: Good housekeeping practices shall be observed at all times
during the course of construction. Superintendence of construction shall be diligently
performed by a person or persons authorized to do so at all times during working hours.
The storing of goods and /or materials on the sidewalk and /or the street will not be allowed
unless a special permit is issued by the Engineering Division. 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.
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT:
53. FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED: An automatic residential fire sprinkler system shall be
installed in one- and two - family dwellings as follows: In all new one- and two - family
dwellings and in existing one- and two - family dwellings when additions are made that
increase the building area to more than 3,600 square feet. Exception: A one -time addition
to an existing building that does not total more than 1,000 square feet of building area.
Note: The owner(s), occupant(s), and any contractor(s) or subcontractor(s) are responsible
for consulting with the water purveyor of record in order to determine if any modification
or upgrade of the existing water service is required. Note: Covered porches, patios,
balconies, and attic spaces may require fire sprinkler coverage. A State of California
.licensed (C -16) Fire Protection Contractor shall submit plans, calculations, a completed
permit application and appropriate fees to the Fire Department for review and approval
prior to beginning their work.
54. WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS: Potable water supplies shall be protected from
contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the
applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying
the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such
requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any water -based fire protection
systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be
physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of
the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under
consideration will not be granted by the Fire Department until compliance with the
requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having
been met by the applicant(s).
55. CONSTRUCTION SITE FIRE SAFETY: All construction sites must comply with
applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and the Fire Department's Standard Detail
and Specification SI -7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as
appropriate to the project.
56. PREMISES IDENTIFICATION: Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all
new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the
street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their background.
N:ADE V VCGNDITNS\2014 \E1Gato 15540.docx
MAR 2 7 2014
6 A -T-C:,
Zoning district
R-1:8
same
Land use
single family residence
General Plan Designation
low density residential
same
Lot size (sq. ft,)
C--)
8,000 sq. ft. minimum
Exterior materials:
• siding
#} a(z12oP3Ril
kdWG If Siitg6tc�
• trim
• windows
• roofing
fA ry (2A v'E L-
Building floor area:
■ first floor
• second floor
C
• cellar
, 5
• garage
Setbacks (ft,):
77777,7717
• front
Z�i -2- 1�
25 feet minimum
• rear
20 feet minimum
• side
8 feet minimum
• side
8 feet minimum
Maximum height (fij
30 feet maximum
Building coverage
40% maximum
Floor Area Ratio (0/)
house
sq, ft. maximum
EXHIBIT 4 5/28/14 PC Report
garage
0. � -1
sq. ft. maximum
Parking
2 SQE{c.
`z - FACES
two spaces minimum
Tree Removals
(-z- LC-FS
l "t4- '� �A�—
canopy replacement
Sewer or septic
5 E W E 0-
�
-
RECENED
JAN 10 2014
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
15540 El Gato Lane — Letter of justification & Project Description
Our home is located on the edge of Los Gatos and will be annexed into the town when
we do any substantial changes to our house. The house is part of a subdivision built in 1955 and
it is small and functionally obsolete. Our family needs more space, so we have explored ways
to expand the existing house or to build a new home.
In researching whether to add to the existing home or build a new home, the
contractors and architect advised us that the amount of upgrades to the existing home that
would be necessary (structural, electrical, mechanical) would classify the work as a "re- build"
and would cost nearly the same as a new home of the same size, so we have decided to build
new.
When we started this process we did not think that our property would be annexed into
the Town of Los Gatos and were distressed to discover that we would be, since the Town's rules
are so much more strict than the County's. As a result, we have had to compromise
substantially on what we really wanted (which was a home with 3 bedrooms and 2 baths
upstairs). We have been advised that since the homes around us have not been substantially
changed, adding onto our home will make it the largest house of our part of the neighborhood
and so will automatically have to go before the Planning Commission. We have also been
advised that the Planning Commission is very reluctant to approve homes that are larger than
the neighbors and that are 2- stories when the neighbors are one - story. Our neighbors are
supportive of this project and have encouraged us to press onward.
We are hoping that the Town's planning staff and the Planning Commissioners will
approve this home, even though it is larger than the neighbors. We have kept the garage in the
back of the lot, like the current garage, so the house will look smaller. We also made the 2 "d
floor as small as possible by only putting the master bedroom upstairs (we looked at having a
one -story home, but then the back yard became really too small to be practical for our family's
needs). Thank you in advance for your consideration.
EXHMIT 5
5/28/14 PC Report
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
To: Planning Commissioners
Subject: 15540 El Gato Lane
Dear Planning Commissioners,
RECEIVE
MAY 092014
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
In advance of our upcoming hearing we wanted to write a letter to introduce ourselves and our project. We
are Fletch and Florence Sullivan, we have lived in Los Gatos our whole lives — Florence graduated from LGHS
in 1986 and Fletch from Mitty in 1982, now we are raising our family here —we have two kids, Chuck and
Riley. We are very involved in our community— Florence is a regular volunteer at Alta Vista (where Riley is in
the firth grade) and Fletch has been coaching LGLL, basketball and softball for over 15 years here. When we '
bought our house 11 years ago, our son, Chuck, was just entering the firth grade and now he is about to go
off to college — how time flies!
We wanted to let you know that we love our neighborhood /neighbors and have many great memories here
therefore rather than sell our home and move elsewhere — we made the decision to re- build. our plans for
the rebuild are modest —we retained a well -known LG architect, Chris Spaulding, and asked him to design a
craftsman style home similar to others we have seen throughout LG. In our plans, we have a very small
second story (only the master suite) to minimize the impact on our neighbors.
The reason for this letter is because since this process began we have been receiving some mixed signals —
we have been to two technical review meetings and each time the documents stated that the planning dept.
may not support our project, yet they gave us a list of action items that we need to complete to go through
the process. We have jumped through every hoop we have been thrown — commissioned the variety of
inspections requested, paid thousands of dollars in fees, paid your experts to review our experts work,
modified our plans as your experts have suggested, etc. We have also reached out to all of our neighbors —
owners as well as renters and they are all very supportive of our project — I have submitted testimonials
outlining their support and have invited them to attend our upcoming hearing.
The reason the planning dept. indicated that they may not be able to support our project is because our
proposed home is larger than our neighbors existing homes and therefore we are not conforming to the
immediate neighborhood and that this could be a problem. If you review your architect's report —you will
see that many houses on the other end of our street have been redeveloped and are much larger than the
home we are proposing. Those homes (on the other end of El Gato) are worth double the price of the homes
on our end of the street. We are essentially the pioneers for our end of the street — our neighbors are
supportive because they know that improvements like the ones we are proposing will increase their property
values and open the door for projects that they may want to do down the road.
Right now we are situated in a cluster of substandard housing — if the town does not approve our plans and
forces us to make improvements to match the current size and architecture of the surrounding homes, it will
perpetuate the mediocrity at our end of the street and our immediate neighborhood will never develop like
the other side of the street. It would seem that we are being discriminated against because we currently
reside in a cluster of substandard houses and quite frankly this does not make any sense.
In the end, we decided to take a chance — to be the pioneers for our end of the street. We have designed a
modest and tasteful home that would blend into any part of LG (as stated by your architect). We are hopeful
that the planning commissioners will give us the opportunity to start the redevelopment process on our side
of El Gato Lane.
E%11IM f
5/28/14 PC Report
Thank you for your consideration,
FI rence nndd Fletch /Sullivan \
MAY 092014
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
STRUCTURAL, CONDITION REPORT
for
Sullivan Residence
at
15540 El Gato Lane
Los Gatos, CA 95032
Prepared for
Florence and Retch Sullivan
15540 El Gato Lane
Los Gatos, CA 95032
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
9996 Tarob Court
Milpitas, CA 95035
408.957.9220
S 4976
c� Exp. 12/31/15 �;'
2F CAIF
rr 7
5/28/14 PC Report
December 24, 2013 13 -217
Structural Condition Rep (,_ - dullivan Residence
December 24, 2013
Page 2
PURPOSE
The Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department requires a structural report
prepared by a licensed architect or structural engineer unrelated to the project if an existing
residential building is to be demolished. The report shall describe in detail the physical
condition of the building and its components, approximate cost to rehabilitate the structure to
the current code requirements, and a recommendation as to under what conditions the
building should be rehabilitated or demolished.
EXISTING BUILDING CONSTRUCTION
There are two structures on the project site. The main building is a single story residential
structure constructed circa 1955. It is rectangular in plan, approximately 25' -2" wide x 44'-
4" long and of wood construction with a stucco exterior finish, see Photo 1, 2, and 3. The
roof consists of a lower flat roof and an upper shed roof that creates a transom down the
middle of the structure. There is also a detached single story garage structure constructed
during the same period. The garage is rectangular in plan, approximately 19' -0" wide x 21'-
2" long and of wood construction with a stucco exterior finish, see Photo 4 and 5. The roof is
a shed type roof.
Photo 1 - Main Residence Front View
Structural Condition Rep (,_ - aullivan Residence
December 24, 2013
Page 3
Photo 2 — Main Residence Side View
Photo 3 — Main Residence Back View
Structural Condition Repo. oullivan Residence
December 24, 2013
Page 4
Photo 4 — Garage Front View
Photo 5 — Garage Back and Side View
Structural Condition Repo_ oullivan Residence
December 24, 2013
Page 5
Main Residence
Foundation S,, stem
The foundation system consists of a 6" perimeter concrete stem wall over 12"
concrete spreading footing and concrete pier blocks at 5' o.c. maximum at the
interior, see photo 6. There is a 2x4 still plate bolted to the top of the stem wall
with '' /z" diameter anchor bolts at 10' o.c. maximum along the perimeter of the
structure.
Photo 6 — Foundation System
Floor System
The floor system consists of 2x6 tongue and groove straight floor sheathing over a
4x6 beam grid supported by the perimeter stem wall and interior concrete pier
blocks.
Wall /Lateral System
The wall/lateral system consists of 2x4 studs at the exterior walls and interior
walls. The exterior walls are covered with a stucco finish and the interior walls
are covered with gypsum board. No walls sheathed with wood structural panels
rated for shear resistance were observed. Some sill plate anchors were observed
but in limited quantities.
Structural Condition Rep, oullivan Residence
December 24, 2013
Page 6
Roof System
The roof system consists of 1x6 straight sheathing over 4x8 rafters at 5' -8" o.c.
maximum. Most of the sheathing and rafters are exposed in the interior of the
structure, see Photo 7. The roofing material over the flat roof consists of rolled
composition roofing and composition shingles over the shed roof. The
homeowner stated that plywood sheathing was installed over the straight
sheathing when the structure was re- roofed.
Photo 7 — Roof Framing
Garase Structure
Foundation/Floor System
The foundation/floor system consists of a concrete slab of unknown thickness
with a concrete perimeter curb.
Wall System ,,
The wall system consists of 2x4 studs at the exterior walls. The exterior walls are
covered with stucco with no observable wood structural panels rated for shear
resistance.
Structural Condition Rep,_ — oullivan Residence
December 24, 2013
Page 7
Roof System
The roof system consists of lx6 straight sheathing over 2x10 rafters at 16" o.c.
maximum. The roofing material consists of a gravel layer.
STRUCTURAL UPGRADES TO CURRENT BUILDING CODE
There appears to have been no structural upgrades to both the main and garage structures
since its original construction. The following upgrades would be required to bring the
structures up to general compliance with the 2010 California Building Code, Chapter 16 —
Structural Design, Chapter 17 — Structural Tests and Special Inspections, Chapter 18 — Soils
and Foundations, Chapter 19 — Concrete, Chapter 23 — Wood, and other applicable
referenced standards.
Main Residence
Foundation System
There is the appearance of efflorescence on the face of the concrete stem walls in
the crawlspace underneath the structure, see Photo 6 and 8. The efflorescence
appears to have affected the concrete integrity to a depth of at least '/" in some
locations. Peoples Associates recommends that a special inspection testing
company review the effects of the efflorescence on the concrete to determine the
extent of the degradation, this includes compressive strength.
Photo 8 — Efflorescence at Concrete Stem Wall
Structural Condition Repc - oullivan Residence
December 24, 2013
Page 8
A drainage system should also be installed around the structure to divert water
away from the foundation system to help reduce the effects of the efflorescence.
The width of the concrete footing below the stem walls along the short sides of
the structure will need to be increased to 3' -6" wide, minimum, to support the
loads from the new shear walls above, see Appendix A — Main Residence Plan.
Install new Simpson Strong -Tie `A35' clips at the rim board to sill plate
connection and `UFP' foundation plates at the sill plate to concrete stem wall
connection, see Appendix A — Detail 1 and 2.
Along the long sides of the structure at the new shear walls above, new `A35'
clips at the rim board to sill plate connection, and `UFP' foundation plates at the
sill plate to concrete stem wall connection are required, see Appendix A — Detail
1 and 2.
Floor System
Verify that 2 -16d nails are installed at each 2x6 tongue and groove floor board to
2x rim board connection.
Wall System
Install new exterior shear walls on all four sides of the structure. The shear walls
on the short sides of the structure will consist of Y2" Structural 1 plywood
sheathing with l Od nails at 3" o.c. at the panel edges and 1 O nails at 12" o.c. in
the field, see Appendix A — Main Residence Plan.
The shear walls on the long sides of the structure will consist of Ys" CDX
plywood sheathing with 10d nails at 6" o.c. at the panel edges and 10d nails at
12" o.c. in the field.
Install new Simpson `HDU' holdowns at the ends of the new shear walls and '' /d'
SDS screws at 6" o.c. for the existing 2x bottom plate to existing 2x floor
sheathing connection, see Appendix A — Detail 1.
Install a new continuous Simpson `CS14' coil strap along the length of the top
plate of the flat roof and across the entire length of the shed roof wall. Between
the studs of the shed roof wall, install 3x blocking to attach the strap, see
Appendix A — Detail 3. This occurs at both exterior walls along the short sides of
the structure to develop the chord and collector forces.
Roof System
Install 2x4 blocking, flat, at the plywood panel edges and verify the installation of
10d nails at 6" o.c. at all panel edges and IOd nails at 12" o.c. in the field. The
roof diaphragm currently does not meet the maximum diaphragm aspect ratio of
3:1 for unblocked wood structural panel diaphragms. Install Simpson `A35' clips
Structural Condition Repc__ oullivan Residence
December 24, 2013
Page 9
at the blocking between rafters to new shear wall top plate connection and at the
top plate to end rafter connection at the exterior short side walls of the structure,
see Appendix A — Detail 4.
Garage Structure
Foundation System
Install new Simpson '/2" diameter `Titen HD' screw anchors at 36" o.c.,
maximum, at the existing 2x sill plate to concrete curb connection at the new
shear walls, see Appendix A — Detail 5.
Wall System
Install new exterior shear walls on three sides of the structure, garage door side
excluded, see Appendix A — Garage Plan. The shear walls will consist of '/2" CDX
plywood sheathing with l Od nails at 6" o.c. at the panel edges and l Od nails at 12"
o.c. in the field. New'HDU' holdowns are required at the ends of the shear walls.
Roof System
Install new ' /2" CDX plywood sheathing with 10d nails at 6" o.c. at panel edges
and IOd nails at 12" o.c. in the field over the existing roof framing. Install
Simpson `A35' clips at the blocking between the existing rafters to new shear
wall top plate connection, see Appendix A — Detail 4.
ESTIMATED STRUCTURAL UPGRADE CONSTRUCTION COST
Based on information from previous projects, it is estimated that the construction cost to
upgrade the existing structures to the current building code is approximately $105,000.00.
This does not include the cost of upgrading the structures for mechanical, electrical, and
plumbing code requirements and for unforeseen existing conditions.
STRUCTURAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the observable condition of the existing structures, the year of construction, and
since no structural upgrades have been performed on the structures, there will be extensive
foundation, shear wall, and roof diaphragm work required to bring the buildings structurally
up to the current code. Not all of the structure areas were accessible for visual observation
and there is the possibility, given the age of the structures, that insect and /or water damage is
present in the existing structural elements. This may require repair /replacement of the
elements.
Peoples Associates recommends that the structures be demolished if the overall costs of
upgrading the structures to the current building code is more than the replacement costs of
new structures.
Appendix A
Structural Plans and Details
DETAILS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION
BUT FOR "ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE"
CONSTRUCTION PRICING PURPOSES. DETAILS
DEPICT STRUCTURAL DESIGN INTENT.
(N) SHE
(r
H(
(N) EDGE
DRILL 8" DEEP HOE
INTO CONC. FOOTIN
CLEAN & EPDXY R�
IN PLACE
FOOTING
DETAIL 7
(N) CONC.
FOOTING -
DOWEL INTO
(E) FOOTING, TYP.
DETAILS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION
BUT FOR "ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE"
CONSTRUCTION PRICING PURPOSES. DETAILS
DEPICT STRUCTURAL DESIGN INTENT.
(N) SHEAR WALL
2 -16d PER 2x—
FLOOR SHEATHING
(N) EDGE NAIL
2x TONGUE &
GROOVE FLOOR
SHEATHING
CONC.
FOOTING
DETAIL 2
3/4 " =1' -0" _
(N) 'A35' CLIP 0 24" O.0
(N) 'UFP' FOUNDATION
PLATE @ 36" O.C. W/
(N) EPDXED THRD. RODS
& SOS SCREWS
SULLIVAN RESIDENCE
SHEET NO. — OF
PEOPLES ASSOCIATES JOB NO. 13 -211
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS BY — DATE
1996 Torob Court
408- 957 -9220
Milpitas, CA 950351 CHKD. BY DATE—
Fax 408 - 957 -9221 Q
DETAILS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION
BUT FOR "ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE"
CONSTRUCTION PRICING PURPOSES. DETAILS
DEPICT STRUCTURAL DESIGN INTENT.
(N) 3x BLKG.-
DETAIL 3
3/4 " =1' -0" _
SULLIVAN RESIDENCE
- DOUBLE
TOP PLATE
(N) -CS14' STRAP
ROOF SHEATHIM
DETAIL 3
3/4 " =1' -0" _
SULLIVAN RESIDENCE
- DOUBLE
TOP PLATE
DETAILS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION
BUT FOR "ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE"
CONSTRUCTION PRICING PURPOSES. DETAILS
DEPICT STRUCTURAL DESIGN INTENT.
ROOF
(N) EDGE NAIL
2x SHAPED BLKG. (N) W/'A35'
CLIP ® 24" O.C.
(N) EDGE NAIL
2x FASCIA
(N) EDGE NAIL
(N) }" PLYWOOD
SHEATHING
DETAIL 4
3/4 " =1' -0" _
(N) EDGE NAIL
(N) BLKG.
SHEAR WALL
SULLIVAN RESIDENCE
SHEET NO. — OF
PEOPLES ASSOCIATES JOB NO, 13 -211
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS BY — DATE
1996 Tarob Court Milpitas, CA 95035) CHKD. BY-
408 - 957 -9220 Fax 408 - 957 -9221 A —
DATE —
DETAILS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION
BUT FOR "ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE"
CONSTRUCTION PRICING PURPOSES. DETAILS
DEPICT STRUCTURAL DESIGN INTENT.
(N) SHEAR WALL
(N) EDGE
(N) CONC. CURB
(N) 4 "4 TITEN HD CONC.
SCREW ® 36" O.C.
CONC.
FOOTING
DETAIL 5
3/4 " =1' -0" _
SHEET NO. — O
j F.
�L
P ( I T JOB NO. 13 -211
STRUCTURAL ENGI N EERS BY - DATE.
1996 Torob Court Milpitas, CA 95035 CHKD. BY DATE_
408 - 957 -9220 Fax 408 - 957 -9221 n -
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
March 19, 2014
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING
RECEIVED
Ms. Jennifer Savage
MAR Z Q 2Q
Community Development Department
1't
Town of Los Gatos
TOWN OF LOS GATO5
110 E. Main Street
PLANNING DIVISION
Los Gatos, CA 95031
RE: 15540 El Gato Lane
Dear Jennifer:
I reviewed the project drawings, and visited the site. My comments and recommendations are as follows:
URBAN DESIGN
NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT
The site is contained within a neighborhood that contains many one -story Eichler -like homes with Hat and low sloped
roofs. Some homes outside of the immediate neighborhood have been remodeled while others have been demolished and
replaced by larger two -story homes. These two -story homes are located to the south on El Gato Lane and on other par-
cels fronting on streets to the east and west which are outside of the Town's boundary. Photos of the site and surrounding
neighborhood are shown on the following page. Two -story home examples are shown on page 3.
1T 8
700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199. LARKSPUR . CA , 94939 5/28/14 PC Report
House to the immediate left
Nearby one -story house
15540 El Gato Lane
Design Review Comments
March 19, 2014 Page 2
Existing house on the site
House to the immediate right
Nearby one -story homes
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
15540 El Gato Lene
Design Review Comments
March 19, 2014 Page 3
TWO -STORY HOMES LOCATED SOUTH ON EL GATO LANE
CANNON DESIGN CROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
15540 El Gat, Lave
Design Review Comments
March 19, 2014 Page 4
ISSUES AND CONCERNS
The proposed home is well designed in terms of its design and detailing.
Proposed Front Elevation
However, there are two issues that need to be addressed as follows:
1. The two -story design and the architectural form and style are very different from the existing homes in the imme-
diate neighborhood
2. The second floor addition seems too small relative to the first floor building mass (see side elevation below).
Proposed Right Side Elevation
RECOMMENDATIONS
Residential Design Guidelines Context
The Town's Single and Two Family Residential Design Guidelines (RDG), adopted in 2008, were prepared to provide guid-
ance to applicants, Town staff, and deciding bodies regarding community expectations, and to establish some consistency
to the formal review and approval process. Although this design proposal is more unusual in its site context than most
others that I have reviewed in Los Gatos over the past dozen years, I refer to the residential design guidelines to support
my review. The relevant guidelines include the following:
1. The Town's residential design guidelines state in the introduction:
The Town recognises and welcomes the need for change, but desires that change occur in a man-
ner that is respectful of the scale, texture, and character ofthe community's individual neighbor-
hoods and unique natural setting.
2. Guideline 1.6 Neighborhood
The greatest attention will be given to the immediate neighborhood where nearby home owners
are most likely to be confronted with the new house or addition on a daily bans, and where other
residents driving by are most likely to see the new structure in the context of the nearby homes.
3. General Design Principles
• Encourage a diversity of architectural styles consistent with the neighborbood contest.
• Design to blend into the neighborhood rather than stand out.
• Relate a structure's ntie and bulk to those in the immediate neighborhood.
• Utili .Ze roof forms and pitcbes similar to those in the immediate neigbborbaod.
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
15540 M Gain lane
Design Review Comments
March 19, 2014 Page 5
4. Guideline 2.1
• Residential development shall be similar in mass, bulk and scale to the immediate neighborhood Consid-
eration will be given to the existing FAZ [Floor Area Ratios], residential square footages and lot size in the
neighborhood
5. Guideline 2.3.1
2.3.1 Design two story houses in predominantly one story neighborhoods to blend with the
smaller homes.
Two -story houses may not be appropriate for every neighborhood For neighborhoods dominated
by one -story homes, an effort should be made to limit the house to one -story in height or to ac-
commodated second floor space within the existing roof. Ifa two -story house is proposed in this
type ofa neighborhood the house shall be designed to blend with the smaller homes.
6. Guideline 2.3.6
2.3.6Locate second floor mass to minimize impacts on the streetscape and adjacent neighbors
• In one story mighborboodr, place additions atgmcle level behind the existing house wbenever possible.
7. Chapter 3 Building Design
New Homes should be adapted to the scale ofthe surrounding neighborhood.
While some larger new homes may be acceptable in established neighborhoods, they will be expected to be designed to
mitigate their visual size and bulk.
8. Guideline 3.1 General Building Design Principles
The following principler have been used as toucbstones for the development of these design guide-
lines. In the event that specific guidelines do not clearly address a given condition, these principles,
along with the Basic Design Principles on page II should be consulted for direction.
Selected architectural styles shall be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, acknowl-
edging that some neighborhoods have a variety ofarchitectural styles and that diversity contrib-
utes to the Towni unique character.
Guideline 3.3.2
3.3.2 Height and bulk at front and side setbacks
• Two story houses may not be appropriate for every neighborhood For neighborhoods domi-
nated by one story homes, an effort should be made to limit the house to one story in height or to
accommodate second floor space within the roofform as is common in the Craftsman Style.
In neighborhoods with small homes, try to place more of thefloor area on the first floor with
less area on the second floor.
This proposed house design is a difficult one to evaluate. Reasonable people could likely find support in the Town's
Residential Design Guidelines for either denial of the application . or for its approval with some modifications. Looking
strictly at the "immediate neighborhood" emphasis in the residential design guidelines, it would appear that only a one -
story home with a more modern design to relate to the nearby mid - century modern homes would be acceptable. I would
not have a problem with a conclusion that the new house should be limited to one story. That has been the case in some
past reviews. And, I have in the past recommended a substantially different architectural style than proposed by the ap-
plicant. In those cases, however, the recommended architectural style was usually one that was a closely related traditional
architectural style. -
If the nearby homes were mid - century Eichler Homes which are considered by many to be of historic significance, I
don't think that there would be any question about the direction that would be required. However, the majority of the
one -story homes nearby are what are often referred to as LikEichlers - homes with flat and low- sloped roofs and minimal
detail that were influenced by the Eichler Homes of the time, but did not approach the level of design quality and sophis-
tication of the originals.
In the end, I believe this project requires a broader judgment as to whether the importance here lies in continuing the
pattern and look of the immediate neighborhood, or in figuring out a way to allow infill diversity over time in a manner
that is sympathetic to the scale of the neighborhood. I offer the following thoughts on two -story design, architectural
style, and second story design approaches.
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199. LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
15540 El Gato Lane
Design Review Comments
March 19, 2014 Page 6
Two -Story Design and Architectural Style
The immediate neighborhood contains mid - century modern homes. "There are a number of newer homes with more
contemporary forms and details along the southerly portion of El Gato Lane. These newer two -story homes are located
outside of the Town's boundary, and the subject project's immediate neighborhood. Overall, this appears to be a neigh-
borhood which, left to long term market forces alone, would likely go through a gradual transition to two -story homes or
new one -story homes of a more contemporary style.
The applicant's current traditional design is well done. The
first floor portion of the house, while not of the architectural
style of the immediate neighborhood, is respectful of the small
scale of those nearby homes. However, it should not be thought
of as acceptable without changes to reduce the visual impact of
the second floor mass.
A more modern design might provide a better complement
to the immediate neighborhood. However, the integration of
the second floor with a more modern design would still be a
challenge. In preparing design guidelines for the Eichler Home
Neighborhoods in the City of Sunnyvale, I visited many Eichler
and Eichler -like neighborhoods in search of good two story examples, and found very few. The photo above shows one
two -story example with a relatively small second floor area. I would, not judge this an appropriate example to emulate
because of the disproportionately small second floor. To be successful in this immediate neighborhood context, I believe
that a new home in the modern style should probably be limited to one story in height.
Second Floor Sin and Integration
I strongly believe the second floor design, as currently proposed, is not appropriate. It appears too tall, and very awkward
since views along the driveway will make the disparity in size and scale fully visible from the street. My recommendation,
if the deciding body should decide to proceed with the proposed architectural style and second floor Master Bedroom
Suite, is to modify the design to fit the second floor within an expanded roof form consistent with the Residential Design
Guidelines. There are many examples of this, both historically and within the Town of Los Gatos. However, this is still
a challenge because of the relatively small size of the second floor area. I studied several approaches, but found only one
that I thought would be workable in the all single story immediate neighborhood. This approach would involve the addi-
tion of a cross roof within which the second floor would be integrated, and is shown in the front elevation diagram below
and in the side elevation on the following page. This approach would be similar in style to the contemporary homes
further south on El Gato Lane, but would be a better fit on this lot than those full two -story houses.
phesize
V height
single pitch
sr porch
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
Root slope may be
or broken pitch
15540 El Gan lane
Design Review Comments
March 19, 2014 Page 7
Similar examples of second floor space integrated into the roof forms are shown in the photos below.
Conclusion
The Town's Residential Design Guidelines emphasize neighborhood compatibility while allowing for design diversity and
the integration of two -story homes with nearby one -story homes. They do not, however, provide a definitive direction for
a specific situation such as this site and proposal presents.
I have found that in neighborhoods in other cities in which I have encountered similar issues of rwo -story homes in
predominantly one -story neighborhoods, the attitudes of neighboring residents can vary widely. Some may wish to pre-
serve she existing fabric of height and style while others welcome changes to allow, two -story homes which they feel will
leave them more personal options in the future.
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
15540 El Gat. Lane
Design Review Co— -ts
March 19, 2014 Page 8
If you believe that the majority of property owners in the adjacent one -story neighborhood have strong sentiments to
retain the look and style of their one -story Mid - Century Modern Style enclave, then limiting changes on this property to
a one -story house of similar form and style would be a reasonable decision.
If on the other hand, there is sentiment among the residents and the Town's deciding bodies that a gradual transi-
tion over time in scale and style to one and two -story homes in other traditional styles is an acceptable process, then the
proposed house, as modified with the above suggestion for containing the second floor space within the roof form, would
be a reasonable decision that would be consistent with the Residential Design Guidelines, and would allow for a graceful
transition to between the new house and the nearby one -story homes.
Jennifer, please let me know if you have any questions, or if there are specific issues of concern that I did not address.
Sincerely,
CANNON DESIGN GROUP
Larry Cannon
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
May 12, 2014
Ms. Jennifer Savage
Community Development Department
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95031
RE: 15540 El Gato Lane
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING
URBAN DESIGN
> •
MAY 13 2014
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
Dear Jennifer:
I reviewed the project drawings, and visited the site. My comments and recommendations are as follows:
NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT
The site is contained within a neighborhood that contains many one -story Eichler -like homes with flat and low sloped
roofs. Some homes outside of the immediate neighborhood have been remodeled while others have been demolished and
replaced by larger two -story homes. "These two -story homes are located to the south on EI Gato Lane and on other par-
cels fronting on streets to the east and west which are outside of the Town's boundary. Photos of the site and surrounding
neighborhood are shown on the following page. Two -story home examples are shown on page 3.
EXMyr 9
700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199. LARKSPUR . CA . 94939 5/28/14 PC Report
15540 El Gato lane
Design Review Comments
May 12, 2014 Page 2
House to the imme
Nearby one -story house
Existing house on the site
House to the immediate right
Nearby one -story homes
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA. 94939
15540 El Gat, Lane
Design Review Comments
May 12, 2014 Page 3
TWO -STORY HOMES LOCATED SOUTH ON EL GATO LANE
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
15540 El Gato t.anc
Dmgn Review Comments
May 12, 2014 Page 4
ISSUES AND CONCERNS
This is my second review of the project. The first review, completed in March, focused on the issue of a two -story, Crafts-
man Style structure in an immediate neighborhood of one -story, Mid - century Modern homes. My feeling was, and is,
that if the nearby homes were true Eichler Homes which are considered by many to be of historic significance, I dons
think that there would be any question but that the direction required would be one that was closely aligned in scale and
style with those Eichler Homes. However, the majority of the one -story homes nearby are what are often referred to as
LikEiehlerr - homes with flat and low - sloped roofs and minimal detail that were influenced by the Eichler Homes of the
time, but did not approach the level of design quality and sophistication of the originals.
In the end, I believe this project requires a judgment as to whether the importance here lies in continuing the pattern
and look of the immediate neighborhood, or in figuring out a way to allow infil] diversity over time in a manner that is
sympathetic to the small scale of the immediate neighborhood.
I strongly believed the second floor design, as originally proposed, was not appropriate (see elevations below). "Ihe design
appeared too tall, and very awkward since views along the driveway would make the disparity in size and scale with adja-
cent homes fully visible from the street.
Originally proposed Right Side Elevation
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
15540 El Gam lane
Desig. Review Comments
May 12, 2014 Pace 5
My recommendation in March was that, if the deciding body should decide to proceed with the proposed architectural style
and second floor Master Bedroom Suite, the design be modified to fit the second floor within an expanded roof form to
more strongly emphasis the first floor eave line and minimize the second floor bulk(see elevation recommendations below).
March Recommendation: Front Elevation
Roof slope may
or broken pi
emphasize
otory height
be side phoh
over porch
March Recommendation: Right Side Elevation
The applicant has responded with a design that I believe is an improvement on the earlier recommendations. The design
further emphasizes the first floor mve line and minimizes the second floor building mass (see elevations below).
Currently Proposed Front Elevation
a s" I.
Ml.,11e h.iz
soma m� "��
Currently Proposed Right Side Elevation
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
15540 El Gato Line
Design Review Comment,
May 12, 2014 Page G
RECOMMENDATIONS
I believe that the currently proposed design is very well done, and is sympathetic to the smaller scale of the immediate
neighborhood. If one believes that the majority of property owners in the adjacent one -story neighborhood have strong
sentiments to retain the look and style of their one -story Mid - Century Modern Style enclave, then limiting changes on
this property to a one -story house of similar form and style would be a reasonable decision. However, if on the other
hand, there is sentiment among the residents and the Town's deciding bodies that a gradual transition over time in scale
and style to one and two -story homes in other traditional styles is an acceptable process, then the currently proposed
house would be a reasonable decision that would be consistent with the Residential Design Guidelines, and would allow
for a graceful transition to between the new house and the nearby one -story homes.
I have only one minor suggestion for change. the front dormer seems just a bit too small with the windows overly
large for the amount of wall surface, and it is not quite aligned with the entry below. Consideration should be given to
enlarging the gable dormer slightly, and centering it over the entry door below. Consideration could also be given to
utilizing a shed dormer similar to the one shown at the rear of the cross gable roof to further minimize the visual mass at
the second floor. Both options are shown in the elevation diagrams and photo examples below.
Jennifer, please let me know if you have any questions, or if there are specific issues of concern that I did not address.
Sincerely,
CANNON DESIGN GROUP
C5f,� 6"A/1w ---
Larry Cannon
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
Deborah Ellis, MS
ff"Mit
May 1, 2014
MAY -22014
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
15540 EL GATO LANE ARBORIST REPORT PLANNING DIVISION
Dear Jennifer:
I evaluated the protected trees on this property last week on April 25. There are 12 protected trees
on the property. The existing one -story, single - family house on this lot will be demolished and
replaced with another new home. None of the trees are in good condition, but glossy privet trees
#b - 12 do provide good screening between properties and are proposed to be saved. The Tree
MaD on the next page shows the locations of these trees, as well as the other trees on the site. Trees
#1 through #7 need to be removed due to proposed construction, but none of them are in good
condition. It would be much better to remove these trees now, and relandscape the property
(including new trees where appropriate) than to revise the design in order to try to save them. A
summary of the trees is provided in Table 1 below. A more detailed description of each tree is
included in the Complete Tree Table on pages 5 and 6. Photos of the trees are on pages 3 and 4.
The Town of Los Gatos General Tree Protection Directions are included on pages 7 and 8. These
protection directions will also need to be applied to the North neighbor's large black walnut tree
which overhangs the site.
i PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408 - 725 -1357. decah@pacbell.net. httpJ/www decoh com
EXHIBIT 1 s
5/28/14 pC Report
Rrenove
IXISTIwc -�-
{ 1 N
2.
i
IJt�T.S, 6Ji "JIB e —
u(
1
I
M1 i
rM , ^"`53.35
r
EL
Deborah Ellis, MS jj�
Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
Service since 1984
Tree Map
PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408 - 725 -1357. decoh @pacbell.net. http: / /www.decoh.com.
Page 2 of 9
Deborah Ellis, MS
Consulting Arborist & Horticulturis
TREE PHOTOS
Service
Upper photo: #1 Chinese elm and #2 - 5 Italian cypress, from El 6ato Lane.
Lower photo: #2 - 5 Italian cypress.
All trees to be removed.
Page 3 of 9
Deborah Ellis, MS
tree #6 glossy privet,
Upper Right: trees #8 - 12 glossy privets,
to remain. At far left is the North
neighbor's large walnut tree (also see
photo at lower left).
Lower Left: North neighbor's large block
walnut tree; canopy of which slightly
overhangs the project site. This
neighboring tree requires tree protection
as well as all protected trees that will
remain on the project site.
PO Box 3714 Saratoga CA 95070 408 - 725 -1357. decah@pocbell.net. http: / /www.decah.com,
Page 4 of 9
Terms highlighted at their first occurrence in this report are explained in the Glossary on page
PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408 =725 -1357. decoh@pacbell.net. http: / /www.decoh.com.
Page 5 of 9
Deborah Ellis, MS
Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
Service since 1984
North Neighbor's black walnut tree: Due to the narrow space between the fence /property line
and the new house (only 8 feet) it will not be practical to fence off the dripline of the tree, as is
recommended in the Tree Protection Directions. I do recommend that any grading for drainage in
this area, beneath the dripline of the tree, be as minimal as possible, and be done manually without
power equipment.
Pa Box 3714, Soratoga, CA 95070. 408 - 725 -1357. decah @pocbell.net. http://www.decah.com. I
Page 6 of 9
Deborah Ellis, MS
Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
LOS GATOS GENERAL TREE PROTECTION DIRECTIONS
Note that the following is excerpted from Division 2 (Tree Protection) of the Los Gatos Town Code
and does not constitute the complete Division 2 text. The owner /applicant is responsible for
implementing all pertinent requirements of the Code relative to tree protection.
A separate copy of these Directions is enclosed as o .PDF and Word document. These Directions
must be incorporated into the final project plans.
Sec. 29.10.1000 New Property Development
11) The final approved Tree Preservation Report shall be included in the building permit set of
development plans and printed on a sheets titled: Tree Preservation Instruction (Sheet T-1, T-2,
etc.. These Sheets shall be referenced on all relevant sheets (civil, demolition, utility, landscape,
irrigation) where tree impacts from improvements may be shown to occur.
(3.b.) The site or landscape plans shall indicate which trees are to be removed However, the
plans do not constitute approval to remove a tree until a separate permit is granted The property
owner or applicant shall obtain a protected tree removal permit, as outlined in section 29.10.0980
for each tree to be removed to satisfy the purpose of this definition.
(3.e.) Protective fencing inspection: Prior to issuance of any demolition, grading or building permit,
the applicant or contractor shall submit to the building department a written statement verifying
that the required tree protection fence is installed around street trees and protected trees in
accordance with the tree Preservation Report.
(3.a.) An applicant with a proposed development which requires underground utilities shall avoid
the Installation of said utilities within the drip line of existing trees whenever possible In the event
that this Is unavoidable, all trenching shall be done using directional boring, air -spade excavation
or by hand, taking extreme caution to avoid damage to the root structure. Work within the
dripline of existing trees shall be supervised at all times by a certified or consulting arborist.
Section 29.10.1005 Protection of Trees During Construction
a) Protective tree fencing shall specify the followina•
1) Size and materials: A five (5) or six (6) foot high chain link fencing, mounted on two -inch
diameter galvanized iron posts, shall be driven into the ground to a depth of at least two (2)
feet at no more than 10 -foot spacing. For paving area that will not be demolished and when
stipulated in a tree preservation plan, posts may be supported by a concrete base.
2) Area type to be fenced.. Type I: Enclosure with chain link fencing of either the entire dripline
area or at the tree protection zone (TPZ), when specified by a certified or consulting arborist2.
Type II: Enclosure for street trees located in a planter strip: chain link fence around the entire
2 If it is not possible to place Type 1 or Type 2 tree protection fencing at the dripline due to the construction, then
place the fencing as far from the trunk as possible, including as much of the dripline as possible, while still allowing for
enough room to build improvements. If this happens to be within all or some of the dripline, then so be it. But the
contractor must try to fence off as much area under the canopy as possible, do not be irresponsible about this.
I PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408 - 725 -1357. decah @pacbell.net. http: / /www.decoh.com.
Page 7 of 9
Deborah Ellis, MS
Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
planter strip to the outer branches. Type III: Protection for a tree located in a small planter
cutout only (such as downtown): orange plastic fencing shall be wrapped around the trunk
from the ground to the first branch with 2 -inch wooden boards bound securely on the outside.
Caution shall be used to avoid damaging any bark or branches.
3) Duration of Type 1, II, III fencing. Fencing shall be erected before demolition, grading or
construction begins and remain in place until final landscaping is required. Contractor shall first
obtain the approval of the project arborist on record prior to removing a tree protection fence.
4) Warning sign. Each tree fence shall have prominently displayed an 8.5 x 11 -inch sign stating:
"Warning —Tree Protection Zone -this fence shall not be removed and is subject to penalty
according to Town Code 29.10.1025".
b) Allpersons shall comply with the following precautions:
1) Prior to the commencement of construction, install the fence at the dripline, or tree
protection zone (TPZ) when specified in an approved arborist report, around any tree and /or
vegetation to be retained which could be affected by the construction and prohibit any
storage of construction materials or other materials or vehicles inside the fence. The dripline
shall not be altered in any way so as to increase the encroachment of the construction.
2) Prohibit excavation, grading, drainage and leveling within the dripline of the tree unless
approved by the director.
3) Prohibit disposal or depositing of oil, gasoline, chemicals or other harmful materials within the
dripline of or in drainage channels, swales or areas that may lead to the dripline of a protected
tree
4) Prohibit the attachment of wires, signs or ropes to any protected tree.
5) Design utility services and irrigation lines to be located outside of the dripline when feasible.
6) Retain the services of the certified or consulting arborist for periodic monitoring of the project
site and the health of those trees to be preserved. The certified or consulting arborist shall be
present whenever activities occur that pose a potential threat to the health of the trees to be
preserved.
7) The director and project arborist shall be notified of any damage that occurs to a protected
tree during construction so that proper treatment may be administered.
Section 29 10 1010 Pruning and Maintenance
All pruning of protected trees shall be consistent with the current edition of Best Management
Practices - Tree Pruning, established by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and any
special conditions as determined by the Director. For developments, which require a tree
preservation report, a certified or consulting arborist shall be in reasonable charge of all activities
involving protected trees including cabling, and fertilizing if specified.
1) Any public utility installing or maintaining any overhead wires or underground pies or conduits in
the vicinity of a protected tree shall obtain permission from the Director before performing any
work, including pruning, which may cause injury to a protected tree (e.g. cable TV /fiber optic
trenching, gas, water, sewer trench, etc.)
2) Pruning for clearance of utility lines and energized conductors shall be performed in compliance
with the current version of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 (Part 1) -
Pruning, Section 5.9 utility Pruning. Using spikes or gaffs when pruning is prohibited.
PO Box 3714 Saratoga CA 95070 408 - 725 -1357_ decah @pacbell.net. http: / /www.decoh.com.
Page 8 of 9
Deborah Ellis, IVIS
Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist
GLOSSARY
x�a "e
1. Scaffold branch: a primary structural branch arising from the trunk of a tree. Usually the largest and
often the lowest branches of the tree.
2. Stump sprout trees are the result of a tree trunk being cut down to a short stump close to the ground. If
the tree survives, it sends out many small shoots (suckers) from around the cut stump. Some of these
suckers may survive and grow to become significant trunks. These trunks are spaced very close together
and usually have included bark between them, which reduces the strength of their union. Such trunks are
prone to failure. Stump sprout trees can be very structurally unsound, particularly as they become large
and old. There is often a great deal of decay associated with the mother stump, which can also reduce
mechanical stability.
3. Topping is the practice of indiscriminately cutting back large diameter branches of a mature tree to some
predetermined lower height; to reduce the overall height of the tree, Cuts are made to buds, stubs or
lateral branches not large enough to assume the terminal role. Reputable arborists no longer recommend
topping because it is a particularly destructive pruning practice. It is stressful to mature trees and may
result in reduced vigor, decline and even death of trees. In addition, branches that regrow from topping
cuts are weakly attached to the tree and are in danger of splitting out. Large topping cuts may have
significant decay associated with them, which weakens the branch as well as the attachment of any
secondary branches attached nearby. Topping is useful however, for immediately reducing the risk of a
very hazardous tree that will soon be removed.
I certify that the information contained in this report is correct to the best of my knowledge, and that
this report was prepared in good faith. Thank you for the opportunity to provide service again.
Please call me if you have questions or if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
&vt�+1
Deborah Ellis, MS.
Consulting Arborist & Horticulturist`?
Certified Professional Horticulturist #30022.'
ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #305
LS.A. Board Certified Master Arborist WE -457B
Enclosure: Los Gatos General Tree Protection Directions (as .PDF and Word documents)
E PO Box 3714, Saratoga, CA 95070. 408 -725 -1357. decah@pacbell.net. http: / /www.decoh.com-
Page 9 of 9
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
C 15545 El
Gato
Lane
- Mr
& Mrs
Egan - 2/2/14 -
form
enclosed
s 15525 E1
Gato
Lane
- Mr
Finch
- 2/2/14 - form
enclosed
® 15555 El
Gato
Lane
- Mr
& Mrs
Hoyer - 2/2/14 -
form
enclosed
15565 E1
Gato
Lane
- Mr
& Mrs
Romero - 2/2/14
- form
enclosed
b 15560 E1
Gato
Lane
- Mr
Marcum
- 2/4/14 - form
enclosed
15550 E1
Gato
Lane
- Mr
Guilardi
- 2/10114 - left
message
15530 E1
Gato
Lane -
Mrs. Far
- 2/10/14 - left
message
t 15520 E1
Gato
Lane -
Mr.
Fife
(property is vacant)
sent letter 2/8/14
15535 E1
Gato
Lane -
Mr
& Mrs.
Ortiz - 2/8/14-
had a
conversation
MAR 2 7 2014
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
E)UMIT 1 1
5/28/14 PC Report
A
Regarding: 15540 El Gato Lane, Los Gatos
I am aware of the proposed construction project at the Sullivan residence and am fully supportive of this
project.
Name: � - �
&ri® b11a /Anyr�".
Address: le -7 ,5 � E1�Q"
Owner: nn❑ yes an $no
twflo lkunt-) MOuY+ &5ibetker "Vi vrrices
333 W. soy? c.or405 'St, 5vA-e 1650 Sari m5i; CA, 95110
Phone:
Email:
Date:
Comments:
Signature:
WOM
MAR 2 7 2014
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
Regarding: 15540 El Gato Lane, Los Gatos
i am aware of the proposed construction project at the Sullivan residence and am fully supportive of this
project.
Name:
L0 LA —z-- 6, (-t --?-- PC) ViA e (- C)
Address: a !� �" L,
r
Owner; ❑ yes RIO
Phone:
Date:
0 --'-. p 2/ LI
Regarding: 15540 El Gato Lane, Los Gatos
I am aware of the proposed construction project at the Sullivan residence and am fully supportive of this
project.
Name:
Address: n <1,
Owner: e-A yes 0 no
Phone:
Email: '
Date: '�' — 2 s !)-Cj (
� cry ex G r - -ecD
Comments: '+ \') bc- - "-Q�
Pr��3ea—
Signature:
Regarding: 15540 El Gato Lane, Los Gatos
I am aware of the proposed construction project at the Sullivan residence and am fully supportive of this project.
Name: Gary Marcum
Address: 15560 El Gato Lane, Los Gatos, CA 35032
Phone:
Signature:
Date: 2/3/2014
Comments: We welcome the plans for the Sullivan's. It will help improve the appeal of our neighborhood. I have lived here
for 18 years and have welcomed all the homes on El Gato that have been re- modeled of which several are two stories and
much larger than what the Sullivan's have planned.
Regarding: 15540 El Gato Lane, Los Gatos
I am aware of the proposed construction project at the Sullivan residence and am fully supportive of this
project.
Name: 6q;,l 4 c-1 L--, -- - e -x
Address: 1 54& El i 4- C > ` )C �
Owner: ❑ yes X no
Phone:
Email
Date: z/'7/ (4
Comments: 3es--A�m1FU-I FIGnl. L-UGk( 1
f
Signature: <C� —�� �q�� c}-