Attachment 5 Applicant ltrApril 8, 2015
Marni Moseley
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95031
Re: A&5 Application # 5 -14 -072
Response to Appeal
Dear Ms. Moseley,
A &S Application #5- 14-072 was approved unanimously by DRC on January 13, 2015. An appeal
was filed and subsequently the application was unanimously approved by Planning Commission
on March 11, 2015. The appellant now has appealed this decision to Town Council. Below are
Davidon Homes' responses to the Appellant's listed issues:
Appeal of Planning Commission Decision
Appellant claims Planning Commission erred or abused its discretion because "it misinterpreted
the meaning and intention of the viewing platform for the Hillside DS &G."
The Los Gatos Hillside Development Standard & Guidelines very clearly identifies the
viewing platforms. Of the four designated viewing platforms, the only one that this
project is potentially visible from is at the SW Southwest corner of Los Gatos Blvd. &
Blossom Hill Road. The HDS &G also defines a Visible Home as "a single family residence
where 25% or more of an elevation can be seen from any of the Town's established
viewing platforms."
Davidon performed a visual analysis from the platform at the SW corner of Los Gatos
Blvd. & Blossom Hill Road. Pictures were taken, in both JPEG format and RAW data
format with 50 mm and 300 mm lens, at the most visible position from the public
sidewalk. The 50 mm is most representative of what the naked eye can see. The 300
mm allows a close up to identify the layout of the story poles so they can be
appropriately overlaid with the house graphics.
The results of the visual analysis show that only 21.9% of rear elevation is visible from
the Viewing Platform. As defined by the Los Gatos Hillside Development Standards &
Guidelines, this does not qualify as a visible house.
ATTACHMENT 5
1600 SOUTH MAIN STREET, SUITE 150, WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 -5394
TELEPHONE (925) 945 -8000 • FACSIMILE (925) 256 -0140
The following are additional statements regarding visibility made verbally by the
Appellant at the Planning Commission Hearing on March 11th' followed by Davidon's
response to each:
The Appellant claims that the existing vegetation should not be used as screening in the
Visual Analysis Calculations.
Response: The oak trees that exist below the project, according to staff, can be used
in determining visibility. The trees in the Visual Analysis for Lot 7 are oak
trees that exist below the project, either outside the construction limits,
outside the LRDA and /or within the Scenic Easement of the lot. These
trees cannot be removed without a tree removal permit issued by the
Town of Los Gatos. The Visual Analysis assumes these as permanent
features.
The Appellant claims the photos should be taken in the winter months when the
deciduous trees have lost their leaves.
Response: The photos for the Visual Analysis were taken on January 22, 2015. At
this time deciduous trees had already lost their leaves. As can be seen in
the photos, even with no leaves on the deciduous trees, the existing trees
provide effective screening.
The Appellant claims the house is visible 60 feet to the south.
Response: The valley floor covers many square miles, with many miles of public
roadway and space. The Appellant has identified one location that the
story poles are visible. It is very possible, that the house may be seen
from various angles and vantage points throughout the valley floor. But
it also can be said that the house has zero visibility from most of the
valley floor, including the other three viewing platforms.
Scanning the valley floor along every public space and providing visual
analysis for every location that the story poles are visible is not practical.
I assume the intent of the establishment of the viewing platforms was to
identify practical locations that have significant visibility to all of the
hillsides within Los Gatos. For the Appellant to have identified and
demand a visual analysis from a location, which is a mid -block location
where the public would have to make an unusual effort to turn and look,
is unreasonable and unwarranted, particularly after Davidon has fully
complied with the HDS &G.
Appeal of Design Review Committee Decision
The Appellant listed three reasons for appealing the DRC approval of the project. Attached is
Davidon's response as submitted for the Planning Commission Hearing. Below is brief summary
of each response:
Four Heritage Oaks Removed near Sontello 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. The purpose of our
request was to evaluate a feasible siting of the house on this lot. 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 location and condition of the
trees, and to maintain a consistent design within the subdivision, staff had agreed that
these trees can be removed. As a result, the design was refined, submitted and
ultimately unanimously approved by DRC on January 13, 2015.
Additionally, the Appellant categorizes the 4 trees as "Heritage Oaks ". I believe at this
point the definition of "Heritage Oak" has not yet been defined by the Town of Los
Gatos. Based on the condition and size of these 4 trees, I believe it would be difficult for
a certified arborist to categorize these as "Heritage Oaks ".
Site /House Visible from the Valley Floor.
Please see response in Appeal of Planning Commission Decision section above.
Alternatives exist to locate house to the West.
Davidon thoroughly studied numerous alternatives during the preliminary stages of
design. Based on the the appeal, four additional alternatives were studied specifically to
save the trees. The results of the alternative analysis indicated that not only did the
limited size footprint prohibit a home to be designed compatibly with the other homes
in the subdivision, but they had significant noncompliance with the HDS &G.
Alternatives A, B & C all exceeded 25% visibility from the viewing platform. Alternative
D complied regarding visibility, but required removal of Tree #606(fair /good condition),
excessive grading, and installation of a 10' high retaining wall. Based on this, any
alternative to locate the house to North West area of the lot, would not only be inferior
to the current application, but also would very unlikely be supported by staff and
approved by DRC due to the noncompliance with the HDS &G.
Other Items Raised by Appellant During Planning Commission Hearing
Inadequate Tree Protection Exists
Response: Though tree protection is installed on every lot under construction, Davidon
agrees additional steps are required to insure that the health of preserved trees
are not impacted. We met with Town staff on March 18v' and identified areas of
concern that required correction. Davidon immediately corrected the
deficiencies. Additionally, Davidon has created a staging area on Lot 13 to allow
for storage of materials, storage bins and equipment away from lots with trees.
We have also implemented a weekly inspection of all tree fencing.
Davidon supports & welcomes periodic site inspections by a certified arborist.
Accusation of Davidon removing trees without a permit.
Response: To date, every tree removed from the site, dead or alive, has been properly
permitted through the Town of Los Gatos. The Appellant specifically points out
the cleared area on Lot 7 as once being covered in oak trees. This area was clear
prior to the purchase by Davidon, as can be evidenced by aerial photos taken
immediately after the purchase of the property by Davidon.
Accusation of Davidon grading areas without a permit.
Response: All grading on site date has been authorized by grading permits issued by the
Town of Los Gatos. No grading has been done beyond what has been approved.
The Appellant claims a significant amount of grading has been done on the
hillside behind Lot 14. What the Appellant is referring to is a pathway of
disturbed ground from equipment necessary to access the removal of a dead
tree. The tree removal permit was acquired. The ground vegetation was
disturbed, but no dirt moving took place. The disturbed area was hydroseeded
immediately afterwards.
Accusation of Davidon clearing brush illegally.
Response: Due to the fact that the project exists within the Wildland /Urban Interface,
Davidon retained a fire consultant to provide a Wildland Fire Protection Plan.
Very similar as stated in the HDS &G (pages 24 -26), the Protection Plan prescribes
solutions to create a defensible space to minimize a structure's exposure to
wildfire. To date, clearing has only occured around lots with building permits and
under construction.
Advertising brochures show extensive lawn areas for these houses — certainly not restricted to
within the 30' from the house perimeter as required or "limited to locations immediately
adjacent to the house such as entry ways or small gardens of the rear" (HDS &G, page 51).
Response: Davidon is fully aware of the landscape requirements within the HDS &G. A
conceptual landscape plan is included with this application for approval. We also
clearly understand and completely disclose to our home buyers, that any
proposed landscape improvements on this project, needs to comply with the
HDS &G and be approved by the HOA and the Town of Los Gatos. The brochures
are produced as a sales tool only that is intended to provide a rendering of the
structure, not showing what landscaping can or will be installed. There is no
intent of false advertisement or fraud, as the Appellant verbally accused at the
Planning Commission hearing.
Other Important Facts
• The arborist report for Lot 7, dated 12/10/14, only surveyed the 26 trees located within
the LRDA of the lot. The lot extends an additional +/ -200 feet downslope to the
property line. Most of this area is encumbered by a Scenic Easement. I personally
walked the entire property and counted an additional 73 trees located on Lot 7. This
would equal 99 trees total on the site.
• It is very common in areas within this subdivision where no construction has ever taken
place that trees completely fall over or drop significantly size limbs. This can be seen
throughout the project within the undisturbed areas, including Lot 7.
Conclusion
The subject project has been thoroughly studied through the design process. Working closely
with staff and our consultants, a design has been provided with no exceptions to the Hillside
Standard and Guidelines, including complying with the very clear language regarding the
viewing platforms. The house is well designed and compatible with the neighborhood.
Davidon requests that Town Council deny the appeal and approve A &S Application 5 -14 -072.
Please let me know if you have any questions or require any additional information.
Sincerely,
DA ON HO
Vice President, Site Development
Cc: Dennis Razzari, Jeff Thayer
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank