Attachment 1 Exhibit 11February 17, 2015
Marni Moseley
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95031
Re: A &S Application # 5 -14 -072
Response to Appeal
Dear Ms. Moseley,
(via email)
RECEIVED
FEB 18 2015
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DIVISION
After the unanimous approval of A &S Application #5 -14 -072 by DRC on January 13, 2015, an
appeal was filed. Below are Davidon Homes' responses to the appellants listed issues:
1) Four Heritage Oaks Removed near Santella Court
In 2013, prior to commencement of design for this lot, Davidon requested that the Town
provide an Arborist Report of all trees located within the LRDA. Fees were paid and
Debbie Ellis performed the tree survey in January of 2014. The arborist report was
provided on January 16, 2014.
The purpose of our request to get the survey was to evaluate a feasible siting of the
house on this lot. Knowing the size & condition of the trees, helps determine that siting.
This has been something Davidon has been sensitive to throughout the approval of the
previous 14 homes.
Early on in the design process, prior to our initial A &S Application submittal on
September 23, 2014, Davidon met with staff with a preliminary design, as we did for the
previously approved 14 lots, to address any potential concerns regarding all aspects of
the Los Gatos Hillside Standards & Guidelines. Due to the site constraints, the condition
of the trees, and to maintain a consistent design within the subdivision, staff had no
issue with the design presented. As a result, the design was refined, submitted and
ultimately unanimously approved by DRC on January 13, 2015.
EXHIBIT 11
3/11/15 PC Staff Report
The appellant speaks of 4 Heritage Oaks being removed. The proposed plan removes 6
existing trees (Tree #'s 604 & 608 -612). Per the Preliminary Arborist Report dated
January 16, 2013, as prepared by Debbie Ellis, the tree descriptions are as follows:
Tree #
Tree Type
Trunk Dia.
Height*
Vigor/
Preservation
Canopy
Structure
Suitability
#604
Blue Oak
18"
45 *35
75
60
Fair /Good
#608
Coast Live Oak
25"
30 *30
60
20
Poor
#609
Coast Live Oak
20 ",10"
35 *30
60
50
Fair /Poor
#610
Coast Live Oak
21"
45 *40
70
60
Fair /Good
#611
Coast Live Oak
18",19"
22 *35
40
40
Poor
#612
Coast Live Oak
20 ",20"
35 *25
60
50
Fair /Poor
By definition, none of these trees would be categorized as a Heritage Oak. As expressed
in the DRC Hearing on January 13` ", the four trees the appellant is mainly concerned
about are Tree #'s 608, 609, 610 & 611. As can be seen in the above table, 2 trees are in
Poor Condition, 1 in Fair /Poor Condition and 1 in Fair /Good Condition.
Based on the horizontal and vertical locations of these trees being within the most
feasible building footprint, their existing condition as reported by Debbie Ellis, and with
early on concurrence from staff, these trees were deemed necessary for removal. The
design process proceeded based on those facts.
2) Site /House Visible from the Valley Floor.
The house is visible from the Viewing Platform located at the corner of Los Gatos Blvd. &
Blossom Hill. Pictures were taken of the visible story poles from that location and
Bassenian Lagoni Architects performed a visual analysis of the structure. Attached are
the Visual Analysis Exhibits for Lot 7. The percentage of rear elevation visible from the
Viewing Platform is 21.9 %. This visibility complies with the Los Gatos Hillside Standards
& Guidelines.
3) Alternatives exist to locate house to the West.
The appellant is stating that an alternative siting of the house is possible on the West
end of the Lot. Davidon thoroughly studied all alternatives during the preliminary
stages of design. Though it may be true that there is a portion of the lot within the NW
corner of the LRDA that has no trees, the alternative of placing the entire house within
this area was found to be infeasible.
Below are four studied alternatives:
Alternative A - Preserving Trees #s 608 -611
(Still remove Tree #604 & 612 and no impact to any other tree)
The building envelope would be limited to 69' wide by a varying depth up to
52' deep (See Exhibit A). This width is determined by a safe distance from
the trees on the front and sides of the house. The depth is driven by the
topography of the lot. For this analysis, the roof structure is assumed to be
the same as the proposed, with a high point elevation of 740.9. This is a low
profile 3.5:12 roof pitch, which is typical for Craftsman style architecture. The
depth of this alternative is limited to the point on the slope that measures
35' overall height from existing grade, which is at elevation 705.9.. . A
house any deeper would exceed the allowable overall height of the house.
Alternative B - Preserving Trees #'s 608 -610
(Still remove #604, 611 & 612 and no impact to any other tree)
This is similar to Alternative A, except Tree #611 is removed, which allows
structure to be constructed to the front setback line. The building envelope
would be limited to 69' wide by a varying depth up to 63' deep (See Exhibit
B). This width is determined by a safe distance from the trees on the sides
of the house and maintaining the existing front setback. The depth is driven
by the topography of the lot. For this analysis, the roof structure is assumed
to be the same as the proposed, with a high point elevation of 740.9. This is a
low profile 3.5:12 roof pitch. The depth of this alternative is limited to the
point on the slope that measures 35' overall height from existing grade,
which is at elevation 705.9.
Alternative C - Preserving Trees #'s 608 -611, Maintain Front Setback and
Lowering House by Steepening Driveway
(Still remove #604 & 612 and no impact to any other tree)
This Alternative C, studies the maximum 15% driveway to lower the house in
the attempt to add depth to the structure and reduce visibility. This width is
determined by a safe distance from the trees on the sides and front of the
house and maintaining the existing front setback. The depth is driven by the
topography of the lot. For this analysis, a maximum driveway grade of 15 %,
along with necessary reverse vertical curves, is assumed. The roof structure
is assumed to be the same as the proposed, with a 3.5:12 roof pitch. This
analysis places the garage finish floor 1.2' lower than Alternative A & B. The
depth of this alternative is limited to the point on the slope that will measure
35' overall height from existing grade, which is at elevation 704.7. The
building envelope would be limited to 69' wide by a varying depth up to 55'
deep (See Exhibit C). This is only a 3' net gain in depth over Alternative A.
Alternative D - Preserving Trees #'s 608 -611, Push House as Far West As
Possible
(Still remove #604 & 612 and no impact to any other tree)
This Alternate D, studies the maximum 15% driveway to lower the house and
push the house further West in the attempt to add depth to the structure
and reduce visibility. This width is determined by a safe distance from the
trees on the sides and front of the house and maintaining the existing front
setback. The depth is driven by the topography of the lot. For this analysis,
the garage face was assumed at 85' from the street versus 42' in Alternatives
A, B & C. The maximum driveway grade of 15 %, along with necessary reverse
vertical curves, is assumed. The roof structure is assumed to be the same as
the proposed, with a 3.5:12 roof pitch. This analysis places the garage finish
floor at elevation 714.1, which is 7.65' lower than Alternates A & B. The
depth of this alternative is limited to the point on the slope that will measure
35' overall height from existing grade, which is at elevation 699.6. The
building envelope would be limited to 47' wide by a varying depth up to 76'
deep (See Exhibit D). This Alternative would require removal of Tree #606, a
significant amount of excavation, and would add retaining walls along the
driveway in total height of 10 feet.
Summary of Alternatives Analysis:
1) Neighborhood Compatibility
For all alternatives the house size, floor plans and architectural creativity are
limited by the alternative building envelope dimensions. The dimensions
constrain the ability to provide a home that is compatible with the
neighborhood. The width of the house forces an increased portion of the
front elevation to be garage doors. Articulation of the elevations becomes
very difficult while trying to maintain the house size to be consistent with the
neighborhood. The ability to capture views from desired living spaces
becomes limited. Usable rear yard reduces significantly. And finally, the
street scape is impacted because of the house width is not consistent with
the rest of the homes on the street.
2) Visibility from the Viewing Platform.
As can be seen from the Visual Analysis for the current application, the portion
of house that is visible from the viewing platform is the area within this NW
corner of the LRDA. The portion that is not visible is within the vicinity of Tree
#'s 608 -610, because of other elements providing screening.
The visibility of Alternatives A & B does not change from the proposed
application. The same amount of structure will be seen. For Alternative C, the
house sits 1.2' lower, and Alternative D sits 7.65' lower. These are also still
visible from the Viewing Platform.
Because the rear elevation decreases significantly in width from the
proposed application, the percentage visible increases significantly for all
Alternatives. Alternatives A & B are 50% Visible, Alternative C is 35% visible
and Alternative D is 27% Visible. Per the LGHS &G, exceedance of 25% of the
rear elevation requires further height restrictions.
The site has been thoroughly studied through the design process. The current application has
been designed with no exceptions to the Hillside Standard and Guidelines. The impacts to the
trees were deemed insignificant, due to their current condition. Mitigation for the removed
trees will occur onsite. Visibility from the viewing platform is unavoidable, yet the current
application complies with the HS &G more so than the appellants request to locate the house to
the West.
Please let me know if you have any questions or require any additional information.
Sincerely,
DAVIDON HOMES
Steve Abbs
Vice President, Site Development
Cc: Dennis Razzari, Jeff Thayer
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
G
pAN00N H0E5
6 0 ` II b96JfJ9 CKEK CA
(915) 9<SL8040 (915) 168 -01a0 IRM
VISIBILITY STUDY(300MM)
LOT 7
02.09. 15
THE HIGHLANDS OF LOS G A T O S Bassenian I Lagoni
!R[9IIl[TGR[• 1000116•IIIR[I615
TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA:" ®„ �a
081 1 120]
pAVI00N HOMES
W4NU� CPEEK. CnP9a598 -]J9a
VISIBILITY STUDY(300MM)
LOT 7
02.09,15
THE HIGHLANDS OF LOS G A T O S Bassenian I Lagoni
AIi11tf6t91F JpXXl16•IXflR1015
TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
091.1120]
�AVIOON HOMES
s
r -- 1m
W1%NL% CRE[K. GK9�596 -SNO
(9]]J 9K }90.M (93]) 358 -OIaO IR%
VISIBILITY CALCULATIONS
LOT 7
THE HIGHLANDS OF LOS GATOS
TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
r
ti.
T
02.02.15
Bassenian I Lagoni
.1R TECTUIE• R.1KRY9• nrtFm IS
IS - swsr'+eaawnm
cm%•'%artgmr%w�MO •1 ML6W
081.1120]
D
t�
�111 I
'?,.,. 't
I
I
I
LRDA LINE (TYP)
tam � P °;�]ri3S
S A AITGI I A C(1IIRT I
I
i
SECTION
SCALE: 1 " =10
740.9 740
ALTERNATIVE 735
BUILDING BUILDING ENVELOPE
l
W
]25
N
Cl)
MAIN LEVEL FF 719.3 720
CELLARLMBZ14.0 ' 715
_'- I SVf4lE TO
]40
]35
DRIV
-Lit
LOWER LEVEL FF 708.0
1PAM FS 707.. 4
_
730
2:1 MAX SLOFE
710
-- — — — — — — — — — — — — -- — —
-
CONC. rEXISTING
WALKWAY / GROUND
705
25
_ _ ._
705.9
720
-- __.
\
EXIS TING
715
GROUND�____�_
BUILDING
FOUNDATIONWALL
Yi
710
705
s•
—
]00
895
SECTION
SCALE: 1 " =10
740.9 740
ALTERNATIVE 735
BUILDING BUILDING ENVELOPE
l
W
]25
N
Cl)
MAIN LEVEL FF 719.3 720
CELLARLMBZ14.0 ' 715
_'- I SVf4lE TO
❑ o o L o
HIGHLANDS OF LOS GATOS
LOT 7 - ALTERNATIVE A
Scale: NTS
Drawn. 4q Rev ea: ry
norreo.>.m�m�s �asr7u o-wwacrswim�oo.�.werauor..vEwumre Emiwmur.wmumr. w.o
LOWER LEVEL FF 708.0
1PAM FS 707.. 4
_
2:1 MAX SLOFE
710
-- — — — — — — — — — — — — -- — —
-
705
_
FG 703.0
705.9
-- __.
EXIS TING
7W
M
GROUND�____�_
fi95
❑ o o L o
HIGHLANDS OF LOS GATOS
LOT 7 - ALTERNATIVE A
Scale: NTS
Drawn. 4q Rev ea: ry
norreo.>.m�m�s �asr7u o-wwacrswim�oo.�.werauor..vEwumre Emiwmur.wmumr. w.o
BW 598A
LRDA LINE (TYP)
FG ]IX1.0
TF1 703.0
�I�3' iWA F_70.0 ,
i
_ _ _ _ _ I
_rw
FG M.5 HP FG ]CBS XP ]OBA FG )CBS I
LG] 3 1 TG ]06.1/ HP 708.2 TG] ,
1 e I
-.
I � FG ]OTO —F '
1 � - 1 �
f5iT0'i0s _ fs]ms �i FS 707s� FS7W.�' - -f5m] —_�' `,` I/:
]7 Lk. I ♦ AL'1iEF
PATIO PATro
PATIO
'BUILD'.
_ -f_ PATIO
1
�_ Fs ]ozs
II
h4.0 GELLAR LWE-/ - - - - - - - I TA'
1Gyl I CEltA0.LINEJ I
1 1 1 M/�1N I71 4'0j
I M, J19.3 19.3 L
#609 69' 1
1 1 LO LEVEL OEOOTING I
1 s
12. r `� i -• I L 00.0 FonNG
h
GARAGE _
I x � j GS MIS
n I
1 Tty )18 1 1 #610 FS 7193: —. •I
1 -
_' 'FG 18.8 �E TO 721
F 1
FG ]18.8 G ^ DEEPENE
11a -20' F9 ]18B - �` X FOOTING G
1 -
XP )16d TG )78.3 _
- - " -- _ -- - �72 AC
xFG ]18A FG ]IBA � =G MO
____ _________ __ ____
0
F M2.0 GO TG ]1
BW IBA
•• xF6 718.8 FS]IBSx
SW 7I8.6
6 # _ _
1T LIMITS OFGMDWG�
/
/ y
_ / iV
- -�— /
•�� RIGHT OF
C A N T F 1 1 A C 11 1 1 R T
I
I
1
I
L;
1
2
740.9
a6
n
i `
740
EFGR]m11G
�'
ALTERNATIVE
lVELOtE
'35
DRr'
BUILDING
BUILDING ENVELOPE
735
730
]30
CONC. EXISTINI
• �j' I
MS
GRCUNf1
725
Cl)
MAIN LEVEL FF 719.3
;
720
'
715
'
LW
CELLAR'EYt0.0
]15
I�LRMT
BUILDING
_ _
FOUNDATION WALL
�� _ -
S� DRAT
710
710
LOWER LEVEL FF M.0 PATIOF3707"
1
2:1 MAX SLOPE
` - - -- ----
------------ - - - - --
-
705
I
65
F N10
705.9
TOO
EXISTING -
700
GROUND
885
695
SECTION
A
SCALE: V =10
f - - -5_�
❑ • O D ILIOIL'114 -1
HIGHLANDS OF LOS GATOS
LOT 7 - ALTERNATIVE B
Scale: NTS
o-wn: JCI RevlBwfU: N
ROTTED. ma 51124AM sKBDFReuroiattEwNn�O ]NLTEwuIrvFEUNPo]e4LEeEUUBrt BbxE
I
- - -- _
I
• STORM OUT W
•• I I
LRDA LINE (TYP)
— Fc )m.p
G
F
-- -- -
Ip3 —y I I
I
FIG M5 HPe FG )116.5 NP7083 FG ]06.5 1
I -- � -- - -- R&2 MT 1 I I
1 ITT ]11P�( T >O31 TG 1 HP ]1,8.2 TG] 1 1
FG 707,0
-_ r
FS
PATIO FG M7.0 , / LMRSOF GMDIryG
�]a�3LI AL�iERNATIVE
S 707. - FG 7.7
FGioza %BUILDING ENVELOPE
y
PAM M7.
_ �y P5 % 105 1r #6 H FS TQ1 FB IO].5 PAM `v / I S xi
TG �1<O I GELLMONO J = _ _ W wo BW.7.O ",`rJ
I GELLA`7L'NE / I
I� M�N EVEL - J _
M 719.3 69, 6 . ,
#609 f LLJR:
LOL 08.0 FDOrwc I t.
�
G4RRGE I n
Ijlg
� n
-- GS 720.3
y� 1 _ _ _ _ 3
B ]1] • I- MD10 FS 719,2 � L6iMFb
FG 718. _
_
OARAGE 6
I � ry
FG 718.6 { O COTINGO
F
HP]183 1 T 118d Fa 116A /F5 ]2]L/ p.
_ _a__ _ __ ___ _-
aFG ]18A FG )18AV T ]1 0 /
�� FG iNS
TW] • -/� / T]1 F]22.0� I f SB
BW718A T - __ .— _ - -•
____
-- - -_ -_- -7 - - - --
__ ., �-
- - - -- -- -
It'.16',,J:•v��s F571&6
�6r FS )19.Sa ^I
7
BW 718.
2 LIMRSOFGMOING-, 1 ]2
\ \\
-- - - - - -= _ - -
/
_ u0 RIGXT OF WAY
17 /
i
SCALE: 1 " =10
HIGHLANDS OF LOS GATOS
LOT 7 - ALTERNATIVE C
Scale: NTS
Drawn: JCIRa +vim: W
`739.7
M
5
DR
BUILDING
ALTERNATIVE
ro
700
�
BUILDING ENVELOPE
CONC,
WAIXWAV EXISTING
_
_.
725
]25
720
- _.
_
MAIN LEVEL FF
719.3
(7
]20
__CELL,%
715
LINE714.0 . _ _
715
BUILDING
I
S�E TO
FOUNDATION WALL
I' -�
, DRAIN
710
710
LOWER LEVELFF708.0
-PAM FS MO 5
,
21 MAY SLOPE
05
RE
FG ]03A
700
704.7
- - --
00
GROUND)
595
695
SCALE: 1 " =10
HIGHLANDS OF LOS GATOS
LOT 7 - ALTERNATIVE C
Scale: NTS
Drawn: JCIRa +vim: W
i r
• STORM WTF. i
BW
LRDA LINE(TVP)
. F _-__ air
0
.0 _FG 8.0
THU
9 1311 * T NATIVE
W )083 �- - --- --- -- ------------- - --'-- -""
_ _ _ B IL SING ENVE4OPE
FG 7WS XP �) FG .5 1 I
I i
T 1 TG XP MST I I
1 GARAGE
FG 707.0
I I1 i�
I I
PS 707.6 - FG ]0].0 - FG ]0].0 — 1I LIMBS OF GRADIryryI��
GS 714.1 , 70' RETAINId7G ]do 734.6 ALTERNATIVE Tao
B nd0 •iI FS M7s J� — �6fAV.���7
f - PATIO 1 -�— PATIO PATIO 1 WALL I ]B5 - - - BUILDING ENVELOPE
♦ 33
FS)0].5 FS MM FS IO].5 W PAM 3V DRIVEWAY BUILDING r \ \ FS 707.5
I I _
TG V1C.0 j F
CELWtLINl �- - _ — _ ' '... ]M3 I I ]30 CN
01dA _ _ _ _ _ _ ` A ] L EXISTING
WALNAV GROUND
\
MS
Im CEL ,11E / I I
F I I M EVEL ( aAJ ""_ , - MAN LEVEL FF 719.3 ]p
i 4`� M' 719.3 r. \' uMRSOFG ]20 - .
0
• 4T 6
1 #609 Lo _
1 1 DFCOE�T NO I 15 1 M
59,3 "z - 20.1 r.l LL OB.D 715
715 .._ ELLAfLINEL}d.0
LL')GNUGE BUILDING c i SWALE TO
1 ^ z m FOUNDATION WALL 1 -1 GRAN ]10
�aaa ago E y�al - -- I �� ', �5' ]W LOWER �EL FF Moo PATIO FS ]IIS 21 MACS
1 #610 cs 7119 r ) I `• 1 >a
. D5
)' I FS 710.2' - - - • - _ _ FG ]03
IBW
71 .8 FG I188 I ]1 `
1 ]1 B ]1B. __ _]W
{I �Ifa ry GMAGE ryl M721 )00 --- �— �--- �--- � - -���— EXISTING
d _
'/� DEEPENED
FG )18.8 I { m. 4 GROUND
TG 118.0 T ]
FS S. LL D FOOTING B i5R1.( ;' BBB 895
XP],E.S 699.6
) .)
zFG ]18.6 FG 720.5 i
•• a___ •
SECTION
_ _ _____ -10
3 ]BA _
1157113.1 FS 71 #611
BW
i �h i
I
I 7R S �
UNT8 OF OWING
w i
9 M2 �\
i
z F ]
- ��_�•_ RIGHT4_WA�
•a5 zaa��7 sw
SANTELLA COURT
❑ A a o r o
HIGHLANDS OF LOS GATOS
LOT 7 - ALTERNATIVE D
Scale: NTS
Drewn: .IGIRevia : N
1 • %
Visible: 42.67%
(Shown in white)
Nom.
X t` � r 1 Y • 1
+
ItAL &&L i' '-
AV100N'••IOMES ���
j,
f r LAIternative Building
y Envelope
1
VISIBILITY CALCULATIONS
LOT 7- ALTERNATIVES A & B
THE HIGHLANDS OF LOS GATOS
TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
02.23. 15
Bassenian I Lagoni
AALPIIf[NAE•IUXXIY6 Yf[AIEI6
N�, N 6Ai61X�. YA :81-N
081.11207
�]AVIOON HOES
VISIBILITY CALCULATIONS
LOT 7- ALTERNATIVE C
THE HIGHLANDS OF LOS GATOS
TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
02.23.15
Bassenian I Lagoni
WHITMORE • R1OIY6 • IKIUIORS
u�mw mm ms+.o.w s +vv¢e
081.1120]
i
� 4
y
i .
{
i
s
I
4'
• -
-lip
Ail
'-
v
r0a
�
JAVIOON r j
�.mo.sm mn�ssmn...
Visible: 23.58%
(Shown in white)
s
} 3
fir, _ P' ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■.LI1 ■ ■ ■■1 � j
OL
Lf4
i •
1
1
ii
02.23. 15
Bassenian I Lagoni
veonrteoruee • vuvnvs � ivnnovs
o.arm�manwm
r• rnn� w• ram.
�ay..�wrm
081.1120]