Attachment 3 March 11 Minutes1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
3m
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
a
n
ys
i+9
co
A P P E A R A N C E S:
_Los Gatos Planning
Commissioners:
Community Development
Director:
Planning Manager:
Town Attorney:
Transcribed by:
Mary Badame, Vice Chair
Charles Erekson
Melanie Hanssen
D. Michael Kane
Tom O'Donnell
Joanne Talesfore
Laurel Prevetti
Joel Paulson
Robert Schultz
Vicki L. Blandin
(510) 337 -1558
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P R O C E E D I N G S:
VICE CHAIR BADAME: We will move to Item 1, and
this is the public hearing portion of our agenda to
consider an appeal of the Development Review Committee, the
iecision approving Architecture and Site Application 5 -14-
)72, construction of a single - family residence at 15343
iantella Court on property zoned HR- 2%:PD.
May I have a show of hands from the Commissioners
9ho have visited the site? Are there any disclosures by any
2f the Commissioners for this item? Seeing none, Ms.
4oseley, I understand you'll be giving the Staff Report
MARNI MOSELEY: Yes, good evening, Commissioners.
The subject property is Lot 7 with the development known as
the Highlands of Los Gatos, which is a 19 -lot Planned
Development that was approved by the Town Council in 2005.
All the lots within the development are being completed by
Davidon Homes.
The application for Lot 7 includes a two -story
residence, which is single -story from Santella Court and
two stories at the rear of the residence. The main or upper
floor of the residence contains 4,262 square feet of living
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
2
I floor area and 712 square feet of garage. The lower floor
2 of the residence has 3,009 square feet of cellar and 425
3 square feet of qualifying living floor area.
9
The plans were reviewed by the Town's consulting
5
architect and found to be well designed with high quality
6
materials and details.
7
The plans were also reviewed twice by the Town's
e
consulting arborist, initially prior to the design of the
9
residence and then again during the review of the
10
31 development plans. The majority of the trees within the
12 building envelope are of poor or fair /poor condition and
13 the arborist did not find the trees to be of a quality to
14 consider redesigning the residence to retain.
15 The plans were deemed complete and scheduled for
16 a public hearing on January 13C° of this year through the
17 Development Review Committee. The Appellant, Mr. Weissman,
is was present for the meeting and voiced his concerns
19 regarding the oak trees proposed for removal and the
20
visibility of the residence from the valley floor.
21
After discussing the neighbors' concerns the DRC
22
found that the application was in compliance with the
23
Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines and the
24
approved PD Ordinance, and that the proposed residence was
25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item R1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in the most appropriate location on the site considering
its constraints, and the DRC approved the application.
Later that day Mr. Weissman appealed the DRC's
decision based on his concerns.
The Applicant has provided documentation and
exhibits as to why they cannot relocate the residence; they
are provided in Exhibit A within your Staff Report.
While the Town understands Mr. Weissman's
concerns, the project is in compliance with the Hillside
Development Standards and Guidelines, the Hillside Specific
Plan, and the PD Ordinance. The proposed residence is well
designed and is an appropriate size for the lot and would
be compatible with the surrounding homes in the Highland
development. And while the siting of the house solely to
the western edge of the property is potentially feasible,
the impacts of grading, visibility and architecture would
be significant, and as such, Staff recommends that the
appeal be denied and the application approved, subject to
the attached conditions.
This completes Staff's report. We're here if you
have any questions.
VICE CHAIR EADAME: Thank you, Ms. Moseley. Are
there questions of Staff from the Commissioners at this
time? Commissioner xane.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item M1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
is
16
1!
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER SANE: Thank you for your report. On
page five under Tree Impacts you mention that there are 26
trees on the site. Seven are proposed to be removed, and
eight may be impacted by construction, so that's 15 out of
the 26. Ms. Moseley, how many trees will be replanted on
that site? I don't know what eight are being adversely
impacted. what does it mean that they're being impacted,
the root system will be affected?
MARNI MOSELEY: It means that the arborist
considered the potential impacts and has provided
mitigation to reduce that impact, but obviously there's no
way to fully reduce it and to remove any impacts. They
aren't proposing to remove those additional eight trees at
this time; they are proposing to do everything they can to
save those trees.
COMMISSIONER BANE: So then specific to the
seven, how many trees will be planted on this site to
replace those seven?
MARNI MOSELEY: I'd have to do a little bit of
math based on the canopy replacement, but it would be based
on the Town Code requirements for canopy replacement.
COMMISSIONER BANE: So it would likely be a
number equal to or greater than seven?
MARNI MOSELEY: Correct.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1s
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER SANE: And it will be onsite?
MARNI MOSELEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BANE: And if the other eight trees
were impacted over time and died, we would apply the same
math to the replacement of those trees?
MARNI MOSELEY: I'm not clear as far as whether
or not the Town arborist requires canopy replacement for
dead trees if they were to remove them in the future based
on health, and that the arborist would determine that
they're actually dead. But if they were to be removed as
part of this project or in direct correlation with the
construction work, then they would be required to do canopy
replacement.
COMMISSIONER SANE: Thank you. My last question,
if I may. How do we monitor all of that immediate to the
development and then over time? Do we make visits? How do
we monitor those two questions?
MARNI MOSELEY: Any protected tree is required to
receive a Tree Removal Permit in order to remove it, no
matter the health of it. They would have to go through the
Parks and Public works Department in order to obtain a Tree
Removal Permit.
COMMISSIONER SANE: Thank you.
VICE CHAIR SADAME: Commissioner Hanssen.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
r
1
2
3
4
5
6
e
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
11
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: I had the same concern as
Commissioner Kane, and I just wanted to ask one more
question. Just take for instance the trees that are near
the site that aren't targeted to be removed. I know that if
the tree ends up dying they end up getting a Tree Removal
Permit, but it seems like if that's caused by the
construction, what happens in that circumstance? Wouldn't
they treat that like a tree that they had targeted for
removal, with a required replacement?
MARNI MOSELEY: The Town arborist would review
the condition of the tree based on the time of submittal.
Maybe 15 years down the road, I can't speak to whether the
arboriat would have the same review, but anything in the
next year or two that would be directly associated with
impacts of this development would be associated with the
construction and they would be required to do canopy
replacement.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Related to ¢hat, how often
during the development process is the arborist supposed to
MARNI MOSELEY: The Town arborist gets involved
in the application for the Tree Removal Permit, and then
the Staff planner is responsible for doing a final
inspection to ascertain that all the trees that were
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
7
1 supposed to be retained are retained, and that any required
2 plantings are in place prior to final inspection.
3 COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: So what you're saying is
4
the arborist won't be checking during the construction
s
process?
6
MARNI MOSELEY: The arborist is responsible for
7
checking of health of existing trees.
e
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Even if they're
9
30 potentially going to be damaged by the construction?
11 MARNI MOSELEY: Correct. That is not a role of
12 the Town arborist at this time.
13 VICE CHAIR BADAME: Any further questions from
14 Commissioners? Thank you, Ms. Moseley.
15 We will now open the public portion of the public
16 hearing and allow the Appellant five minutes to address the
19 Commission. Dr. Weissman, you have five minutes, and I need
18 you to fill out a speaker card. Thank you.
19
DAVID WEISSMAN: Dave Weissman, Francis Oaks.
20
To answer your question, Commissioner Kane, the
21
Applicant in his application, those seven trees will be
22
replaced by six new trees, and in lieu fees will be paid
23
for 17 trees. It's not even a one -to -one.
24
I appealed the DEC vote because I find their
25
decision inconsistent with both the Town's Hillside
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
S
1
2
3
4
s
6
7
e
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1!
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Development Standards for visibility and tree protection,
and his application should be rejected in its present form.
To start with the issue of visibility, for
discussions sake let's for the moment put aside those
overreaching objectives stated in various pages of the
Hillside Standards that specifically say, "Maintain the
natural appearance of the hillside from all vantage points,
including the valley floor. Minimize changes to the visual
quality of the hillsides. Ensure that development does not
dominate, but rather visually blends and achieves harmony
between the natural and built environment. visual impacts
of buildings should be mitigated to the greatest extents
reasonable by reducing the height of the building and
noving the structures to another location on the site, and
sustainability."
So the Applicant has now been kind enough to
supply us a visual analysis, something that was
surprisingly not available at the DRC meeting. It appears
to me from the photos in Exhibit 11, Part 2, that the
-alculated visibility of this proposed house, only that
portion visible to someone standing on the exact corner of
Los Gatos Boulevard and Blossom Hill Road was used. Even
then, it involves looking through a narrow visibility
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item M1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
9
1
2
3
4
s
6
7
e
9
30
11
12
13
14
is
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
2s
tunnel created by a palm tree and two redwood trees on the
left side and the Chevron gas station on the right side.
I can only say that this appears to me to be the
case, because there is no explanation as to how these
calculations were done. Seriously, is this what the
Applicant thinks the Hillside Standards Committee intended?
chat one looks between three planted plants and a gas
station building to assess visibility? I think the public,
nyself included, and Staff who spent many, many hours
crafting the Hillside Standards, deserve more credit.
But I can understand trying to put this spin on
:his issue, because if one uses common sense and walks 60
steps to the south along Los Gatos Boulevard, one now has a
:otally unobstructed view of the story poles on Lot 7, and
C add, of the completed, totally visible and occupied house
text door on Lot 6, also for which no visibility analysis
4as done.
The Hillside Development Standards do not say
:hat the view platform is literally and absolutely at the
intersection. Common sense is important.
But there are other issues here. The primary
3hoto was taken on February 2, 2015, well after the
ieciduous oaks on the property started to leaf out and
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
10
I provide more screening. Such an analysis needs to be done
2 in December, when the deciduous oaks are bare.
3 Screening is only considered when accompanied by
4 trees in the immediate neighborhood, not trees a half mile
s
away from the site, and certainly not a gas station. It is
6
impossible to accurately assess what parts of the
7
constructed house would be seen through the nearby trees
8
since only the outline of the orange netting is visible at
9
such a distance. The Hillside Development Standards, page
le
11 13, emphatically say that potential visibility is defined
12 as, "Capable of being seen from a viewing platform if trees
11 or large shrubs are removed, significantly pruned, or
1q impacted by construction."
15 I will have more to say about tree impacts from
16 construction later.
17 Perhaps most importantly, the Hillside
18 Development Standards specifically note on page six that
19 property owners must recognize and respect the constraints
20
associated with hillside development. In other words, fit
21
the house to the lot, and not vice - versa.
22
I am not asking you to deny any house on this
23
lot, because I have a win -win solution. There are some 50'
24
of the same gradual slope, as indicated by the topography
25
lines to the west of the proposed house, into which part of
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
1 a reduced size house could be moved. That area is already
2 treeless.
3 To say, as Mr. Abbe has done in Exhibit 11, that
4 a smaller house is not compatible with the neighborhood is
s
almost Orwellian. Very telling is his comment that such
6
changes as I have proposed would limit the ability to
7
capture views from desired living spaces, but that is the
8
whole point of decreasing visibility.
9
10 Alternatively, the Applicant could leave the
11 house where it is and reduce its height, size, and change
12 its orientation.
13 VICE CHAIR BADAME: Dr. Weissman, your time is
14 up. Thank you. Do any Commissioners have questions of Dr.
15 Weissman? Commissioner Kane.
16 COMMISSIONER KANE: As you were speaking, Dr.
17 Weissman, I turned to the section on visibility, and it
is gives specific viewing platforms. With all due respect, it
19 doesn't say yards south. The
y to g 30 y people who put it
20
together, and you were there at the time, picked out four
21
spots so there was a level playing field, and I went to the
22
spot and I saw the pictures, and they say it's 218. I
23
didn't go 30 yards to the south. In terms of our Standards
24
and Guidelines, what would it mean if I did? It's not one
25
of the view spots that I'm told to pay attention to.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
11 1 1 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
DAVID WEISSMAN: When those viewing platforms
were brought up in the committee, I don't think any of us
certainly in the public went out and actually looked at the
site. I think we accepted that Staff went out, looked at
the visibility and said this looks reasonable. I think when
you've got three trees on the left side and a gas station,
and you're looking through a narrow little area, it makes...
Yes, the visibility from that very point is limited. But if
you walk 30' to the right, or across the street, the whole
houses on Lot 7 and Lot 6 are visible. That only makes
sense to me. It doesn't say that we're within three inches
of that corner.
COMMISSIONER SANE: I do not disagree.
DAVID WEISSMAN: I understand.
COMMISSIONER MANE: Maybe going forward we need
to revisit some of the conditions that could have been
overgrown in fact and ruin visualization sites, but right
now this is what I have. I don't know how the other
Commissioners feel. I feel constrained by what's here. I
understand what you're saying.
DAVID WEISSMAN: Then4go with common sense.
COMMISSIONER SANE: Thank you.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Any further questions? Thank
you, Dr. Weissman.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
13
1 VICE CHAIR 13ADAME: I will now call the
2 Applicant, Steve Abbs, representing Davidon Homes, and you
3 have five minutes.
4
JEFF THAYER: My name is Jeff Thayer and I'm Vice
5
President Of Davidon Homes, Planned Acquisition
6
Development. Steve is coming up next, but I wanted to give
7
just a quick run - through of what we're going to do. I'm
e
going to take about 30 seconds here.
9
Tonight we've got Carl Lagoni of Bessenian
10
11 Lagoni; he's our architect. He's going to give you some
12 comments on the approach to the project and how we go into
13 actually designing these homes. Dennis Razzari, our Vice
14 President of Construction is here, and Steve Abbe, our Vice
15 President of Site Development is going to give you a couple
16 of minutes about some of the technical aspects of what
17 we've done in this analysis for tonight. Teresa Roylan
le (phonetic) is also here, and she is a designer assisting
19 Mr. Lagoni tonight.
20
So having said that, we'll get to some of the
21
more technical parts. We do think it's important that you
22
see the context with which we've done this project, and
23
then we'll go from there.
24
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Thank you.
25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
11
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CARL LAGONI: I'm Carl Lagoni with Bessenian
Lagoni Architects.
Just very quickly, because we have a limited
amount of time, Lot 7 at the Highlands in a lot of respects
is not any different than any of the other lots from the
standpoint that they're very challenging. We're dealing
with topography, we're dealing with healthy plant material
that we're trying to honor, we're dealing with disability
issues, as well as all of the Town overlay in terms of the
criteria. We feel we've crafted a very sensitively placed
home that fits on the lot in a very appropriate fashion.
Architecturally, you can see one of the
renderings behind me here. I don't want to touch a whole
lot on the architecture, but the idea here is this is a
very eclectic community. There are a lot of different
architectural themes out there. Here, this home is
springing from a Craftsman theme from the Arts and Crafts
Movement. I think one of the best ways we can show it, if
we could go ahead and go through the fly- through. It's
coming.
But the visibility is a couple issues. we've
tried to honor the visibility, but where the home is
visible we've tried to create a lot of articulation and
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item K1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
15
1 character, so if you see it, you're actually seeing a piece
2 of architecture that's very well designed.
3 So you can see we're coming in on the lot. You
4
can see Lot 7. This demonstrates the massing and the
5
articulation as we rotate around the home. Obviously, there
6
is no vegetation.
7
Okay, I think that's it, and I'd like to bring
s
Steve up to finish up.
9
SO STEVE ABBS: Good evening, I'm Steve Abbe with
Davidon Homes.
11
12 T just want to first off point out that this
13 application has zero exceptions to the Hillside Guidelines
14 and Standards. The Appellant has brought up some concerns
is on this appeal as far as the removal of trees, site
16 visibility, and the alternate sites to the west.
17 As far as the trees are concerned, Mr. Kane and
18 Ms. Hansen have brought up the fact of tree impacts. First
19 of all, there are only six trees being removed off this
20
application. For that there will be 23 trees required
21
mitigation. We are currently proposing six trees be planted
22
onsite.
23
As far as the impacts of trees, there are
24
25 numerous trees onsite that are in fair to poor condition.
Trees are constantly falling and dying out there; it's a
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
16
I second grown kind of oak tree out there. They were cut down
2 at one point, and now they're regrowing.
3 The other thing to point out is on the tree
4
count, there are more than 26 trees on the entire site. The
5
26 trees are only within the LRDA, so beyond the LRDA
6
Debbie Ellis did not do a full tree survey, because it's
7
something that we didn't impact. We don't have an actual
9
number with that, but it can far exceed an additional 20 or
9
30 trees.
10
11 As far as the visibility, the Hillside Guidelines
13 clearly defined the viewing platform from the corner of
13 Blossom Hill and Los Gatos Boulevard. The picture was taken
14 and the calculation comes out at 21.99. Less then 25%- does
15 not qualify as a visible home for the Hillside Guidelines.
16 And the alternatives; we did do some
17 alternatives.
le VICE CHAIR BADAME: Sir, thank you. Your time is
19
up.
20
STEVE ABBS: I'll be available for questions.
21
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Do we have any questions from
22
the Commissioners? Commissioner O'Donnell.
23
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: One of the comments made
24
25 by the Appellant was that it would be better if you shift
it. Could you address that too for us?
LOS CAMS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
17
1 STEVE ABBS: Sure. If you can bring up the site
2 plan. There is an opening on the site that has no trees;
3 it's kind of on the northern downhill portion of the site.
4
We have done some analysis and I've done four alternatives
s
that would try to shift the house over to that location.
6
The constraints on this site are the four trees that Mr.
7
Weissman wants to preserve, 'which are threes #608 through
6
#611, which two of them are in poor condition, one is in
9
10 fair to poor condition, and one is in fair to good. But the
11 location of them and the health of them was deemed that
12 they would be able to come out, with early on meetings with
13 Staff.
14 But the other constraints are the downhill
15 sloping of the site. There are some height requirements
16 when it comes to the Hillside Guidelines. You're allowed
17 25' vertical at one point, and 35' overall building height.
18 So what I have on these alternatives is I've got four
19 alternatives.
20
The first one, A, is saving all four trees Mr.
21
Weissman wants saved. Placing the site as far as I can over
22
to the west in this clear location. Basically keeping the
23
house at the same elevation as I currently have the
24
as application house, and basically we're condensed to a
little 69'x52' house and that includes a two -car garage. So
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
18
I architecturally, and size -wise aesthetically, that makes it
2 difficult to come up with a house that's compatible from
3 what we've already done in the subdivision.
4 Alternative B did the same thing, but I've
5
removed tree #611 to try to get a little more depth and try
6
to get a little more square footage and architecture to
7
this thing. Again, we're condensed to a 691x73' house.
8
The third, Alternative C, what I did was actually
9
trying to lower that house to try to get less visibility by
10
11 dropping to a maximum 158 grade on the driveway. only
12 dropped the house 1.2', so again, we're in a little minimal
13 rectangular box there as far as architecture is concerned.
14 The last alternative I did was trying to get that
15 house as far down into that open space area to try to be
16 below 25% visibility. what that entailed was basically
17 removing an additional good tree on the site, tree #606,
18 having an 85', 158 driveway downhill, and having a 10'
19 retaining wall on the driveway. That got us to about 238
20
visibility, but feasibility, it added a lot more grading,
21
because you've got to push the house down 7' in the site.
22
If you can look at the renderings there, the house already
23
sits down below the site. If you can envision that house
24
being another 7' down the site in that little rectangular
25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
19
1 box area is just something that wouldn't be compatible with
2 the surrounding houses.
3 But the constraints are the downhill sloping
4 area. As far as heights, that gets you how deep your house
s
can be. The side width is based upon tree constrains. 90
6
hopefully that answered your question.
7
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Thank you.
8
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Any further questions?
9
Commissioner Talesfore.
10
11 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Thank you. Lovely as the
12 home is, all the alternatives were with the original
13 design, is that correct?
14 STEVE ABBS: The alternatives?
15 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: All of the alternatives
16 you were mentioning.
17 STEVE ABBS: was based on taking the existing
1s design and... I mean there was no architecture done for that
19 alternative. This was basically just done on a civil design
20
to evaluate how the house would sit on the site.
21
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: How this house, or any
22
house?
23
STEVE ABBS: A conceptual house would sit on the
24
site. In this case, no, we have not done a design for these
25
alternatives. It's basically a rectangle box footprint that
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
20
1
2
3
4
s
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1e
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
would be able to be built in, is that's what we,
(inaudible).
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Yes, that's what I
wanted to know. Okay, thank you.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMiMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Just let me clarify that
Point. The house that you were playing around with, for
want of a better word to check it, was a smaller house on
footprint?
STEVE ABBS: Yeah, basically I've provided these...
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Yeah, you gave the
iimensions.
STEVE ABBS: So for example, you can see the size
Pf the house. You can see the existing footprint of the
=rent application. This is Alternative D. Well, if you're
3oing to show Alternative A real quick.
You can see the existing location of the house.
Phis alternative is trying to save trees #611, #610, #609
Ind #608. We've come off the edges of these trees to
ievelop a building footprint limit. Also, see the tree out
lere on the front? The back is determined by the sloping
sown of the lot in order to maintain a 25' maximum height
ind 35' overall height.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Maybe I misunderstood
it, but I basically understood you to say you gave us some
length and width dimensions of the house you haven't
designed...
STEVE ABBS: It would be a footprint, a footprint
that
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: ...versus the one you have
gned. Can you just kind of give us generally the
erence? In other words, you gave us length and width,
I'm not sure I got length and width of the present
STEVE ABBS: It's 122' wide in dimension, 63'
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: And that's versus what
was the...
STEVE ABBS: The other ones were 69' wide down to
47' wide on Alternative D.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: All right, thank you
very much
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Any further questions from
the Commissioners? Commissioner Kane.
COMMISSIONER KANE: The comment was made on
Alternative D about the slope, that the driveway would take
on a severe slope, and certainly the property is
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
22
1
z
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
dramatically sloped. But in looking at Lot 8, that seems to
be even more severely sloped. Our project is looking at Lot
7, but I looked at Lot 8 and it's like if you can put a
house there, you can have a driveway sloped on Lot 7.
STEVE ABBS: What we're doing on Lot 8, I believe
we have submitted... Yeah, we have our first submittal then
for Lot 8. There is a current driveway path to Lot 9, which
comes off the end of the cul de sac and straight out to the
knoll there. The intent for Lot 8 was to have a shared
driveway with Lot 9, so it won't be a 15 -18% driveway
coming down to Lot 8. They'll be able to access off the
side, not directly off the cul de sac, so it will be
following down I think it's a 75' or 80' driveway, and
that's how we get down to that point. There's a little more
room on Lot 8 using that access road on Lot 9 to get down
to that point.
COMMISSIONER BANE: Okay, that makes sense. Thank
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Any further questions? Thank
We will now call the Appellant, Dr. Weissman,
back up to the podium. Before you come up here, Dr.
Weissman, I ask if anybody has any public comment? Seeing
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item B1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
23
1 none, you can go ahead and speak, and you have three
2 minutes.
3 DAVID WEISSMAN: All the alternatives that have
4
been presented would fit much better on this lot if their
5
sizes were reduced.
6
ROBERT SCHULTZ: I'm going to interrupt you. The
7
Applicant was actually supposed to have the time after
s
public comment, and since you're the Appellant you'd be
9
10 able to speak last. So since there's no public comment, the
11 Applicant is allowed the three more minutes, and then you
12 have the last say. So if we could have the Applicant speak.
13 VICE CHAIR BADAME: My apologies.
14 ROBERT SCHULTZ: The Applicant might not have
15 anything else to say; there was no other public comment.
16 VICE CHAIR BADAME: We'll call the Applicant back
17 up to the podium.
is STEVE ABBS: Unless
you have other questions
19 again, I just do want to
g j point out that there are zero
20
exceptions to the Hillside Guidelines. We feel this is a
21
beautifully designed house for the site. Again, zero
22
exceptions to the Hillside Guidelines.
23
We have maintained some trees out in front. All
24
as the trees that we are removing will be mitigated properly
onsite. Like I said, we're removing six trees. There are
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
going to be 23 mitigation trees required. We're going to
Plant currently six onsite, and that six does not include
what the homeowner will plant on his landscape scheme. So
lnless you guys have any other questions.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Commissioner Talesfore.
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Thank you. Speaking of
the trees, the trees that are beyond the property, and I'm
lot sure how deep that property goes, who owns those trees,
1r who is in control of those trees that are beyond that
rill where it's all grassy.
STEVE ABBS: Exactly. The additional trees that
are not shown on the arborist's report are beyond the LRDA.
COMMISSIONER TALESFORB: But nonetheless on the
site?
STEVE ABBS: Still on Lot 7. Yeah, it's still on
the site. The actual approximate dimensions further down
beyond the LRDA. Just to give you a rough dimension, from
the LRDA down to the rear property line is almost 200'. So
that 200' of hillside with trees will be maintained by the
homeowner, which by definition of the LRDA, the homeowner
can't do anything down there anyway. There is a scenic
easement also beyond the LRDA.
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: I have one other
question, and that is so in your alternative. structures,
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item N1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
25
I conceptual structures, I know you gave us the widths and
2 all of that, but can you just quickly give me the square
3 footage of each of them, just in general terms?
4
STEVE ABBS: If you're looking at 70'.50' so you
5
can do a 3,500 square foot nice garage, then cellar, it can
6
be 5,000 square feet by the time you're done.
7
COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: So each of them was
8
about 5,000? They were less than what you have presented
9
here?
10
11 STEVE ABBS: Absolutely, yeah, yeah.
12 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Okay, thank you.
13 VICE CHAIR BADAME: Any further questions? Seeing
14 none, thank you. Dr. Weissman, we invite you back up to the
15 podium. You have three minutes.
16 DAVID WEISSMAN: Yes, the project is in complete
17 compliance with the Hillside Standards, except for the
18 visibility issue.
19
I want to address the tree situation, since [hose
20
trees in our hillsides were a major, if not the major
21
stimulus, for both the Blossom Hill Open Space Study and
22
the Hillside Development Standards.
23
As proposed, this house will result in the
24
removal of six or seven trees; in the Staff Report it says
25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1s
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
seven. The arborist also notes that another eight trees may
be significantly impacted, that they will die.
I've also compared the tree report for Lot 7 done
in 2004 by David Babby for a prior owner with Deborah
Ellis' 2014 tree report, and find an additional eight
protected trees have been removed in the interim ten years.
So that is a total of 23 trees either gone or at risk. I
make no guess as to who removed these other eight trees
illegally, but I do ask: Is this proposal consistent with
the lot's constraints?
So is this number of trees removed from Lot 7
unusual for a Highlands project? According to a tally kept
at Engineering, as of February 25th of this year 222 trees
have been removed from the 14 lots now developed. The
previous development proposal estimated only 122 -142 trees.
But this tally does not include an unknown number of trees
removed after construction on a house has started and
therefore not part of the PD process.
So when do these trees ever get a break? Deborah
Ellis notes in her tree reports between January 2013 and
December 2014, a period of 23 months, that materials were
being stored under trees on various lots, including Lot 7,
with heavy equipment and car traffic injuring the trees and
causing root compaction. I have been workmen cleaning their
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
27
1 paintbrushes under two large oak trees on Lot 13. I have
2 seen cars parked under the largest trees on Lot 2 with oil
3 and other fluids staining the ground there. And I don't
4
walk these roads that often.
5
It is this abuse of existing trees that puts them
6
at risk for premature death and emphasizes the importance
9
of considering potential visibility when calculating the
B
visibility of proposed homes, as I discussed earlier.
9
10 But oak trees are not all that make up an oak
11 woodland. The understory is crucial, and Deborah Ellis
12 notes that it is best left alone, poison oak and all. Yet
13 extensive understory grading has been done on Lot 14, far
14 from the house, all without specific grading permits, which
15 are required by the Hillside Standards. Additionally, vast
16 swaths of native scrub and chaparral vegetation have been
17 cleared from Lots 10, 11 and 12.
1s It is not too late to tighten up on these
19
requirements, and I have made some specific suggestions,
20
which Staff has handed out to you.
21
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Thank you, Dr. Weissman. Your
22
time is up. Commissioner O'Donnell.
23
29 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Do you have any
zs knowledge as to who removed the trees and the shrubs? So it
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item kl, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
is not clear then that the developer did it, but perhaps
some subsequent property owners?
DAVID WEISSMAN: It would be a guess. I just know
that they were done between 2004 and 2014. The trees up
there have taken just tremendous hits, and they continue
to.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Thank you.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Any further questions for Dr.
eeissman. Commissioner Kane.
COMMISSIONER KANE: Dr. Weissman, what would you
wave us do with your six points? The item that you just
lave us, I mean I've just been handed this document.
DAVID WEISSMAN: I know.
COMMISSIONER KANE: It seems rather powerful,
some of the points certainly. What is your suggestion for
review implementation? Is this the beginning of a redesign
3f the guidelines?
DAVID WEISSMAN: Yes, but the redesign of the
) uidelines takes a while. These suggestions could be made
wart of any application, this application, and anything
3oing forth on Highlands.
COMMISSIONER KANE: Then we could adopt these as
:onditions to this application?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
29
1 DAVID WEISSMAN: Yes, and future applications on
2 Highlands, and the applications coming up on Greenridge
3 Terrace probably.
4
COMMISSIONER SANE: To do that tonight, isn't
5
that a little bit the horse out of the barn? I Chink for
6
the future there's something here, but
7
DAVID WEISSMAN: Well, look at the pictures that
B
are up on the wall there showing the lawn areas clearly in
9
10 violation of the Hillside Standards. Those are not just
11 pictures for you; those are pictures that are put on the
12 brochures that are put out in front of the houses as
13 they're being developed. That's certainly more than 30'
14 from the house, which is restricted. Lawns are restricted
15 to within 30' of the house by the Hillside Standards. This
16 is false advertising, and I think it shows a total
17 disregard by Davidon for the Hillside Standards. They say
1e one thing, and then they come in and they have repeated
19 instances of cars parked where they shouldn't be parked,
20
and building materials stacked where they shouldn't be
21
stacked. The arborist's report has highlighted these
22
problems for over two years now, and they were corrected
23
maybe last week. So I think the sooner that the Applicant
24
is made aware that the Town is serious about their codes
25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
30
I and enforcing hem, the sooner we're
g going to get some
2 results.
3 COMMISSIONER FANS: Thank you.
4
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Any further questions? Seeing
5
none, thank you, Dr. Weissman.
6
DAVID WEISSMAN: There are also a bunch of
7
pictures in Deborah Ellis' tree reports, and she points it
6
out, showing materials stacked underneath oak trees. This
9
10 is what kills them. It doesn't kill them today; it may kill
11 them in two, three to five years.
12 VICE CHAIR BADAME: Thank you. We will now close
13 the public portion of the public hearing and ask if
14 Commissioners have any questions, comments, or motions?
15 Commissioner O'Donnell.
16 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I just want to make a
17 comment that a number of the comments made by the Appellant
Is relate to enforcement, it seems to me, which is not before
19 us tonight and that's nothing that we have any control
2s
over. But I would agree that perhaps if in fact our present
21
existing laws and guidelines are not being observed, that's
22
an enforcement problem. I'm not sure how you solve that
23
problem by simply passing tonight more of the same things
24
25 if we're not presently enforcing what we have. What I
derive from what is being said here is we could do a better
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
31
1 job in enforcement. On the other hand, I assume the Town is
2 doing the beat it can within the financial constraints. You
3 can't camp somebody out there. But that's at least what I
4
took from the comments. Most of the comments relate to the
5
enforcement of existing guidelines and existing conditions,
6
I think.
7
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Commissioner Kane.
a
9 COMMISSIONER KANE: Well, Commissioner O'Donnell,
la point number two on Dr. Weissman's note. If what's being
11 advertised is a violation, we can adopt that as a condition
12 that even the advertising be in compliance with the
13 guidelines.
14 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I think if he's alleging
15 that the advertising is wrong, the proper body for that is
16 the Department of Real Estate. They have to get a white
17 paper to sell these homes, and if they're in violation, the
1a Department of Real Estate can enforce it. I don't know that
19 the Planning Commission is to enforce brochures or other
20
forms of speech.
21
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Commissioner Hanssen.
22
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: What I'm hearing out of
23
this whole thing is there are a bunch of issues melded
24
25 together. One is are our Hillside Development Design
Guidelines adequate for today's world? That's not an issue
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
32
1 that is in front of us, so we have to use the Hillside
2 Design Guidelines in front of us to make this decision.
3 Then there is also this issue of enforcement. I
4
did wonder if it's reasonable, or even possible, to put in
5
a condition for additional arborist checks during the
6
construction process, so I wanted to ask that question,
7
because that would at least address one of these concerns.
8
9 JOEL PAULSON: In Condition 11 it requires the
10 Applicant comply, and then provide responses on how they're
11 going to comply with the consulting arborist's
12 recommendation. One of those is for periodic visits. Should
13 the Commission feel that they want to put timing on that,
14 then that could be added to that condition, that the
15 periodic review by a certified arborist be done at X
16 intervals.
17 COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: And you said that's
19 Condition 11 in the terms?
19
JOEL PAULSON; Condition 11 references the
20
December 10, 2014 arborist report that contains that
21
recommendation for periodic visits by a certified arborist.
22
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Commissioner Erekson.
23
CHARLES EREKSON: A quick question of Staff, and
24
25 then a comment. The conditions that are here tonight, are
they the same conditions that the DRC approved?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item 81, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
33
1 MARNI MOSELEY: Yes.
2 CHARLES EREKSON: So no changes in the
3 conditions? Okay, thank you.
4
So here would be my comment. We have an appeal in
s
front of us. We do not have an application in front of us,
6
we have an appeal, and as best I can extract, the Appellant
7
has only presented one issue that is material or related to
6
the appeal, and that is whether or not the Architecture and
9
10 Site Application and design of this particular home
11 complies with, or does not comply, with the visibility
12 standards of the Hillside Guidelines. That's the only issue
13 that I believe is related to the appeal. All of the other
14 things are related to enforcement and trees and things.
15 But as I understand, what is in front of us is an
16 appeal, and while we weren't presented anything from the
17 Appellant in Writing before tonight, and actually the only
le thing that potentially is part of the appeal, it's in here,
19
is whether or not the lawn areas that may, or may not, be
20
part of the landscape plan that the Appellant drew a
21
potential conclusion from, the advertising picture, I would
22
want to draw it from the landscape plan.
23
So the best I can figure out, the only issue in
24
25 front of us is whether or not the design is consistent with
the visibility standards of the Hillside Guidelines. All
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item pl, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
34
I the rest of the stuff is irrelevant to the consideration
2 here tonight, I believe.
3 VICE CHAIR BADAME: Amy further gUe6tiOn6?
4
Commissioner Kane.
5
COMMISSIONER KANE: Just to be specific on the
6
height issue —I agree with your framing —on page three of the
7
28 page ordinance that covers the project, "The maximum
s
height for homes shall be 25' unless it is determined that
9
16 a home will be visible from a Town viewing platform, in
11 which case the height shall be reduced to 181." Is the
12 house 18'?
13 JOEL PAULSON: The house is not 18'. Being
14 visible is in reference to what is considered visible in
15 the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines, which is
16 the 25% threshold. That matches the Hillside Development
17 Standards and Guidelines for any parcel in town where 25'
18 is the maximum. If it's visible from a viewing platform,
19 more than 258, then the height should be reduced to 181.
20
COMMISSIONER KANE: And this one is 21- point-
21
something?
22
JOEL PAULSON: Correct.
23
COMMISSIONER KANE: Thank you.
24
25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item M1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
1 VICE CHAIR BADAME: Any further discussion? Any
2 questions? Would anybody like to entertain a motion?
3 Commissioner O'Donnell.
4
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I will make a motion
5
that we find that no further environmental analysis is
6
required; that the project is consistent with PD Ordinance
7
2147; that the project is consistent with Hillside
e
9 nevelopment Standards and Guidelines and Hillside Specific
to Plan; that the project is consistent with the
11 considerations for approval of Architecture and Site
12 Applications, and approve Architecture and Site
13 Applications 5 -14 -072 subject to conditions in Exhibit 4
14 and the development plan's Exhibit 12. So that's the
1s motion.
16 ROBERT SCHULTZ: And along with that motion, the
17 denial of the appeal.
18 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: All right, and along
19 with that motion, the denial of the appeal.
20
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Commissioner Kane.
21
COMMISSIONER KANE: Would the maker of the motion
22
agree to add that we've been discussing the definition of
23
29 periodic? Would the maker of the motion be willing to add
25 that the Town arborist make these periodic visits at the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
35 1 I 36
I approval or direction of the Community Development
2 Director?
3 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Let me first find out if
4
that is not presently the case.
5
COMMISSIONER KANE: The definition is not there.
6
JOEL PAULSON: The recommendation in the
7
arborist's report from the consulting arborist is that a
e
certified arborist goes out there. The Town arborist
9
10 typically does not go out and do the monitoring of these
11 individual sites; it's a certified arborist, so whether
12 that's Ms. Ellis or some other certified arborist.
13 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: The question I have -
14 because I would support that, but I want to understand it-
1s is if this attachment were not made as suggested by
16 Commissioner Kane, what would the Town do by way of
17 periodic inspections during construction?
1s JOEL PAULSON: We require a compliance memo from
19 the Applicant at time of building g permits, and to address
20
how they are planning to address each of those conditions.
21
Then we would review that and determine whether or not we
22
thought that was appropriate.
23
29 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: So you review the plan,
25 but you wouldn't necessarily review the implementation?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item ql, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1e
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JOEL PAULSON: We review the implementation
through that compliance memorandum. The most frequent Town
employees that are out there are building inspectors and
engineering inspectors in this specific development, with
all the grading.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: So if I understand
Commissioner Kane, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, I
think he's suggesting that we have a certified arborist
from time to time during construction inspect to see if
it's in compliance with the plans. Do I understand the
suggestion?
COMMISSIONER KANE: Yes, and I'm not pretending I
know what that periodic definition should be. But if it
were in the condition, if we carried it forward to future
considerations subject to the direction or definition of
the Community Development Director, at least we would have
a number. You decide what that number is, monthly, every
two weeks, because the assertion being made here is that
trees are disappearing, and you have pointed out,
Commissioner O'Donnell, that we don't seem to have any code
enforcement. So I'd just like to get a definition of
periodic and discourage the disappearance of trees.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Commissioner O'Donnell.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
37 1 I 38
I COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I don't have a problem
2 to the suggested amendment and I would incorporate it into
3 the motion.
4
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Do we have a second?
5
COMMISSIONER BANE: I'll second the motion.
6
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Do we have any further
7
discussion before we take a vote? Seeing none, all in
8
favor? Opposed? Passes unanimously.
9
Mr. Paulson, are there appeal rights of the
10
11 actions of the Planning Commission?
12 JOEL PAULSON: There are appeal rights. Anyone
13 who is not satisfied with the decision of the Planning
14 Commission can appeal that decision to the Town Council.
1s The forms are available in the Clerk's Office, there is a
16 fee for filing the appeal, and the appeal must be filed
17 within ten days.
18 VICE CHAIR BADAME: Thank you.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/11/2015
Item #1, 15343 Santella Court (Lot 7)
39