Staff Reporttawp oo MEETING DATE: 03/17/15
ITEM NO:
�OSGASOg COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE: MARCH 12, 2015
TO: MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL /
FROM: GREG LARSON, TOWN MANAGER
SUBJECT: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PD -14 -003. PROJECT
LOCATION: 15574, 15588, 15602, 15615, 15630, 15644, 15657, 15672, 15685
SHADY LANE AND 15315, 15310, 15330, 15343, 15358, 15365 15371
SANTELLA COURT AND 15415 SANTELLA DRIVE AND 15675, 15685
GUM TREE LANE (LOCATED IN THE HIGHLANDS OF LOS GATOS
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON SHADY LANE EAST OF SHORT ROAD).
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: DAVIDON HOMES.
CONSIDER A REQUEST TO MODIFY THE EXISTING PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT (ORDINANCE 2147) TO MODIFY THE REQUIREMENT
FOR EXTERIOR COLORS ON PROPERTY ZONED HR- 2 %z:PD. APNS 527-
09 -010 THROUGH 024 AND 030 THROUGH 033.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Town Council consider the Commission's additional comments and
rationale to approve the proposed Planned Development modification and take the following
actions:
A. Waive the reading of the title of the zone change Ordinance by the Town Clerk;
B. Make the required findings that: no further environmental analysis is required for the
proposed Planned Development modification; the zone change is internally consistent
with the General Plan and its elements; and the proposed Planned Development
modification is consistent with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines
(HDS &G) (Attachment 3) and approve the Planned Development modification
application (PD -14 -003) subject to the performance standards included in the revised
Planned Development Ordinance (Attachment 12), or as otherwise modified by the Town
Council;
C. Waive the reading of the zone change Ordinance; and
D. Introduce the Ordinance effecting the zone change.
PREPARED BY: LAUREL R. PREVETTI!/!7�
Assistant Town Manager /Director of Community Development
Reviewed by: N/A Assistant Town Manager Town Attorney Finance
N: \DEV \TC REPORTS\ 2015 \HighlandsPDModification.doc Reformatted: 580102
PAGE 2
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: HIGHLANDS /PD -14 -003
March 12, 2015
BACKGROUND:
On December 19, 2005, the Town Council considered a Planned Development (PD) for
subdivision of a 66 -acre property at the terminus of Shady Lane into 19 single- family residential
lots. At that meeting the Council certified the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and introduced
the PD Ordinance for the project. PD Ordinance 2147 was adopted by the Council on January 17,
2006 (see Exhibit 2).
In 2011 the property was purchased by Davidon Homes. The Planning Commission has reviewed
and approved Architecture and Site (A &S) applications for homes on lots 3 (required by
Ordinance 2147) and 12 [required by HDS &G because the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) was over
5,400 square feet]. A &S applications for homes on lots 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19
have been approved by the Development Review Committee (DRC) because the home sizes were
less than 5,000 square feet and compliant with the HDS &Q the Hillside Specific Plan, and PD
Ordinance 2147.
PD Ordinance 2147 and all A &S applications that have been approved require the homes to have
paint colors with a Light Reflective Value (LRV) of 30 or less pursuant to the HDS &G (page 41).
On August 27, 2014, the Planning Commission considered the subject application (Attachment 2
contains the verbatim minutes of the August meeting).
After discussing the proposed project, the Commission forwarded a recommendation of denial of
the PD modification application on a 5 -1 vote (Erekson opposed and Talesfore absent). The
Commission believed that the Town's regulatory framework gave them no choice but to deny the
request; however, they recognized that the Town Council has the authority to consider the issue
more broadly. In that context, the Commission offered the following rationale and suggestions to
the Town Council:
• Consider the option of averaging the color schemes specific to this PD based on the
architectural merit of the design of the homes, topography, location, uniqueness of the site,
and given how remote it is from Town viewing platforms; and
• Provide further guidance to the Planning Commission for future applications and /or the
consideration of LRV for home colors.
On October 7, 2014, the Town Council reviewed the applicant's request and continued the matter
with the following direction:
• Return the application to staff to look at all exterior colors pursuant to the HDS &G using
pictures, paint chips, etc., and obtain input from Mr. Cannon;
• Bring analysis back to Council indicating which sites are visible and to what extent; and
• Identify how the process to evaluate exterior colors might be changed and memorialized
for future developments.
PAGE
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: HIGHLANDS /PD -14 -003
March 12, 2015
See Attachment 8 for additional information from the applicant regarding the proposed LRV
averaging option and Attachment 9 for the applicant's response to the first two bullets above. The
applicant has also provided revised exhibits (Attachment 10) showing all four elevations for 14 of
the 19 lots (previous exhibits only showed front and rear elevations). Please note that the exhibits
for lots 4, 11, 12, and 18 references that they are LRV Compliant, however, the homes include
trim, precast, and /or cut stone tile elements that exceed a LRV of 30. Attachment 10 also includes
an LRV compliant exhibit for lot 16 for information purposes only (lot 16 is proposed to use the
LRV averaging method). Finally, the applicant has provided exhibits (Attachment 11) that include
the front elevation, color samples, and a separate sheet with material details for 14 of the 19 lots.
DISCUSSION:
A. Revised Proiect Summary
Originally the applicant was proposing three options to address the Light Reflective Value
(LRV) requirement. The three options that were requested to be considered were: the
originally submitted color; a LRV compliant color; and a LRV averaging color.
The applicant has modified their proposal and is no longer requesting approval of the
originally submitted color option (lots 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 14, 16, and 19). The applicant is now
requesting to be allowed to use the LRV averaging option for all lots except lot 3 (see
Attachment 10). All exterior colors for lot 3 would have an LRV of 30 or less.
The proposal requires modifications to performance standard 15 of Ordinance 2147. Staff
has included the following modified performance standard 15 in Attachment 12 as a starting
point for Council consideration (additions underlined/deleted wording StfflEe thFOUO):
COLOR REFLECTIVITY DEED RESTRICTION. Prior to the issuance of a building
permit, a deed restriction shall be recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County
Recorder's Office that states that all exterior paM4 colors.for all lots, with the exception
of lot 3 or lots that have any elevation that is more than 25 percent visible from the
viewing platforms, may use the color averaging approach detailed in Attachment 5 of the
October 7, 2014 Town Council report to comply with the shau not °*°__a ° light
reflectivity value requirement of 30 or less shall blend with the natural color of the
vegetation that surrounds the site, and shall be maintained in conformance with the
Town's Hillside Development Standards as may be amended by the Town.
B. Council Direction
Council direction followed by staff responses is provided below.
Return the application to staff to look at all exterior colors pursuant to the HDS &G using
pictures, paint chips, etc., and obtain input from Mr. Cannon.
PAGE 4
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: HIGHLANDS /PD -14 -003
March 12, 2015
See Attachments 8 through 11 for additional information on this topic from the applicant.
Staff determined that additional input from Mr. Cannon (the Town's Consulting Architect)
was not necessary because the applicant revised their proposal and removed the request for
originally submitted colors. This determination was based on the following statement from
Mr. Cannon, "The applicant's proposal to consider the overall weighted averaging of the
LRV values appears to have merit." Exhibit 4 of Attachment 1 also contained Mr. Cannon's
additional comments on lots 1, 2, 6, 14, and 19 which were in reference to the request for the
originally submitted colors which are no longer part of the applicant's request.
Bring analysis back to Council indicating which sites are visible and to what extent.
The applicant has done this analysis during the Architecture and Site application process for
14 of the 19 lots and it has been determined that none of those homes will have more than 25
percent of any elevation visible from the viewing platforms established in the HDS &G. This
same analysis will be performed when the plans for the remaining five lots are submitted. If
any of the homes have an elevation that is more than 25 percent visible, staff proposes that
they would not be permitted to use the LRV averaging option. Attachment 9 also states that
their analysis shows that four of the 19 lots will not be visible from outside the boundaries of
the project and an additional eight of the 19 lots will only be visible from the streets
immediately adjacent to the boundaries of the subdivision.
Identify how the process to evaluate exterior colors might be changed and memorialized.for
future developments.
Based on Council input from October 7, 2014, staff is modifying its evaluation of exterior
colors to include all exterior colors when considering compliance with the LRV requirement.
Staff believes that there is merit to use the LRV averaging option for other properties in the
Hillside Area following appropriate analysis and justification. However, homes that are
visible from the viewing platforms would not be able to use the LRV averaging option unless
approved by the Planning Commission or Town Council following appropriate analysis and
justification.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the Planned Development and was certified
by the Town Council on December 19, 2005. No further environmental analysis is required for
the proposed Planned Development modification.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
PAGE 5
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: HIGHLANDS /PD -14 -003
March 12, 2015
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that the Town Council consider the Planning Commission's comments and
rationale to approve the proposed Planned Development modification application. The
averaging requires revisions to performance standard 15 as suggested by staff or as determined
by Town Council.
Attachments (Previously received with the Staff Report for the October 7. 2014 meeting):
I. Report to the Planning Commission for the meeting of August 27, 2014 with Exhibits 1 -5
2. Verbatim minutes from the August 27, 2014 Planning Commission hearing (43 transcribed
pages)
3. Required findings (one page)
4. Revised Planned Development Ordinance (includes Exhibit A, but not Exhibit B, which are
the Official Development Plans) (29 pages)
5. Front Elevation Color Schemes (14 sheets), received August 20, 2014
6. LRV Averaging Example (three sheets), received August 20, 2014
7. Existing lots with the exterior color method proposed (one page)
Attachments received with this Staff Report:
8. Additional information regarding LRV averaging (three pages)
9. Information regarding Council direction (two page)
10. LRV Exhibits (30 pages)
11. Front Elevation Color Schemes and exterior material details (28 pages)
12. Draft Planned Development Ordinance with initial language, to be modified by the Council
(includes Exhibit A, but not Exhibit B, which are the Official Development Plans) (29 pages)
Distribution
cc: Steve Abbs, Davidon Homes, 1600 S. Main Street, Suite 150, Walnut Creek, CA 94596
LRP:JSP:cg