Attachment 1ATOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
fO8'c�T s
Meeting Date: September 23, 2015
PREPARED BY: Mami F. Moseley, Associate Planner
MMoselev(a-)los atg osca.gov
APPLICATION NO.: Architecture and Site Application S -14 -027
ITEM NO: 4
LOCATION: 15925 Quail Hill Road (South side of Shady Lane just west of
Drysdale Drive, accessed through a driveway easement at the
end of Quail Hill Road)
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY OWNER:
CONTACT PERSON:
APPELLANT:
Kevin Hwang and Sabrina Dong
Sabrina Dong
Brad Krouskup
APPLICATION SUMMARY: Consider an appeal of a decision of the Development Review
Committee approving an Architecture and Site application to
demolish and construct a new single - family residence on
property zoned HR -1. APN 527 -02 -007
RECOMMENDATION: Deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Development
Review Committee to approve the application.
PROJECT DATA: General Plan Designation: Hillside Residential, 0 -1 dwelling
units /acre
Zoning Designation: HR -1 -Hillside Residential
Applicable Plans & Standards: General Plan; Hillside
Development Standards &
Guidelines
Parcel Size: 42,525
Surrounding Area:
-- -- Existing Land Use
- General Plan
Zoning
North Single Family
-- - --
Hillside Residential
- _ ----- .
HR -1
East Single- Family
-
- -. ...... .... .. .. .... .. ...
Hillside Residential
........ ... ... ................. ...
HR -1
South Single Family
---
Hillside Residential
HR -1
West Single-Family
-_
;Hillside Residential
HR -1
ATTACHMENT 1
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 2
15925 Quail Hill Road /5 -14 -027
September 23, 2015
CEQA: The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted
Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental
Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction or Conversion of Small
Structures.
FINDINGS: ■ As required, pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the
implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, this
project is Categorically Exempt, Section 15303: New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.
■ As required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the Town Code for
the demolition of a single - family residence.
■ As required by the Hillside Development Standards &
Guidelines that the project complies with the Hillside
Development Standards & Guidelines.
■ That the project is consistent with the Hillside Specific Plan.
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 Planting Commission is final unless appealed
within
ten days.
EXHIBITS: 1.
Location map
2.
Required Findings and Considerations
3.
Conditions of Approval (eight pages)
4.
Project data sheet (one page)
5.
Letter of justification and project description (two pages)
received January 6, 2015
6.
Consulting Architect report (four pages), received June 5, 2015
7.
Development Review Committee meeting minutes for July 21,
August 11, and August 18., 2015 (13 pages)
8.
Easement documents provided by Appellant
9.
Easement documents provided by Applicant
10.
Letter from Applicant's attorney, received August 18, 2015
11.
Correspondence from Appellant's consultant, John Livingstone,
and staff's responses (15 pages)
12.
Appeal letter (one page), received August 20, 2015
13.
Additional materials submitted by the Appellant, received
August 15, 2015 (82 pages)
14.
Development Plans (nine sheets), received June 26, 2015
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 3
15925 Quail Hill Road/5 -14 -027
September 23, 2015
BACKGROUND:
The applicant began working with the Town regarding redeveloping their property prior to
purchasing it in late 2013. The project scope and design changed several rimes due to
undocumented utility easements and input from neighbors. The applicant has worked with her
neighbors and staff to try to address site and design issues.
The current application scope is to remodel and add to the existing residence to the extent that
the proposed project would be considered a demolition. The proposed residence is
predominantly a single story home with a daylighted cellar at the rear of the residence.
Staff began meeting with a neighbor (now the appellant) and his consultant in May of 2015.
Staff provided information to the appellant regarding appropriate access and development of the
property based on the Town's Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines. Staff
encouraged the appellant to provide his concerns to staff in writing to allow the applicant to
consider ways to address their concerns. Such a letter was not submitted. Instead staff received
two letters from the appellant's consultant requesting information regarding staff's review of the
application on August 11 and August 18, 2015. The consultant's letters along with staff's
responses are included in Exhibit 11.
The application was considered by the Development Review Committee over the course of three
meetings: July 21, August 11, and August 18, 2015 (Exhibit 7). The Committee continued the
item from the July 21, 2015 meeting to provide the applicant time to have her surveyor further
document the location of the existing easements to access the site. The Committee considered
the application again on August 11, 2015 and continued the item based on a title report provided
by the appellant at the meeting which provided different easement information from the two title
reports provided by the applicant. The continuance was granted to allow the applicant's title
companies to review the discrepancies in the reports.
The Town Attorney determined that despite the discrepancies in the reports, the property has
legal ingress and egress. The application was complete and could be considered for approval
with a condition that prior to occupancy the improved driveway be located within an
appropriately defined access easement.
The application was approved by the Development Review Committee on August 18, 2015. The
application was appealed on August 20, 2015.
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 4
15925 Quail Hill Road/S -14 -027
September 23, 2015
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
A. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood
The project site is located on the south side of Shady Lane just west of Drysdale Drive and
is accessed through a driveway easement at the end of Quail Hill Road (Exhibit 1). The
property is surrounded by single - family residential uses.
B. Architecture and Site Approval
Architecture and Site approval is required for construction of a new residence.
C. Zoning Compliance
The total proposed floor area for the residence and garage is within the allowable floor area
for the property and the proposed residence complies with the setback and height
requirements of the HR -1 zone. While the Town Code allows a maximum height of 30 feet
in the HR zone, the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (HDS &G) is more
restrictive with a 25 -foot height maximum. A single - family residence is a permitted use in
the HR zone. The site also contains a legal second unit located to the rear of the residence.
ANALYSIS:
A. Architecture and Site
The proposed residence appears one story from the street and steps down to two stories at
the rear elevation. The proposed 641 square foot cellar is exempt and is not included in the
floor area total. The residence was designed taking into consideration the neighborhood
and the constraints of the site. As discussed below the proposed residence would be
compatible with the immediate neighborhood in regards to size and floor area. A color and
material board will be displayed at the meeting.
The Town's Architectural Consultant reviewed the plans and visited the site. The
consultant recommended several detail changes (Exhibit 6) which the applicant
implemented in the final development plans (Exhibit 14). Story poles were placed on the
site prior to the Development Review Committee meeting to aid in the review of the
project.
The project is in compliance with the HDS &G inclusive of grading and drainage criteria,
allowable floor area and architectural and landscape design. General project data are
included in Exhibit 4.
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 5
15925 Quail Hill Road/S -14 -027
September 23, 2015
B. Neighborhood Compatibility
Based on Town and County records, the residences in the immediate neighborhood range
in size from 1,812 square feet to 6,243 square feet. The FAR ranges from 0.02 to 0.11. The
applicant is proposing a 4,577- square foot home (Including garage but not cellar) on a
42,525- square foot parcel (0.10 FAR). The maximum allowed square footage for the lot is
4,900 square feet (including garage).
The Neighborhood Analysis table below reflects the current conditions in the immediate
neighborhood.
ADDRESS
House
Garage
House
and garage
Lot size
FAR
15951 Quail Hill Road
4,075
470
4,545
50,094
0.08
15941 Quail Hill Road
4,393
557
4,950
43,273
0.11
15925 Quail Hill Road (E)
2,766
602
3,368
42,525
0.07
15925 Quail Hill Road (P )
3,870
707
4,577
42,525
0.10
15921 Quail Hill Road
4,166
583
4,749
41,382
0.11
15920 Quail Hill Road
2,784
1 517
3,301
40,120
0.07
15930 Quail Hill Road
2,074
528
2,602
45,738
0.05
15970 Quail Hill Road
5,107
811
5,918
57,064
0.10
15971 Quail Hill Road
2,985
1,436
4,421
57,065
0.07
100 Drysdale Drive
2,472
816
3,288
41,382
0.07
110 Drysdale Drive
3,990
910
4,900
42,680
0.11
130 Drysdale Drive
4,483
666
5,149
57,064
0.08
107 Drysdale Drive
4,711
712
5,423
79,279
0.06
15820 Shady Lane
1,428
384
1,812
60,113
0.02
104 Angel Court
5,043
1200
6,243
105,489
0.06
C. Tree Imyacts
The applicant is proposing to remove six protected trees, all except one of the trees are less
than 10 inches in diameter, and all are of low to poor health according to the Town
Arborist, Rob Moulden, who visited the site and reviewed the proposed development plans.
The applicant will provide the required canopy replacement per Town Code standards.
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 6
15925 Quail Hill Road/S -14 -027
September 23, 2015
D. Environmental Review
The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the
Implementation of California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.
E. Development Review Committee
The Development Review Committee (DRC) held three public hearings for the proposed
application on July 21, August 11, and August 18, 2015 (Exhibit 7). Written public hearing
notices were sent to surrounding property owners and tenants (minimum of 30) prior to the
July 21, 2015 meeting.
Mr. Krouskup and his wife Dana were present at the DRC hearings along with their
consultant Mr. Livingstone. The concerns raised by the neighbors were primarily in
regards to the ingress /egress easement over their property. Two additional concerns were
mentioned in regards to the proximity of the residence to their home and the height of the
proposed residence. Staff and the applicant discussed changes that had already been
considered and or implemented to reduce the impact of the proposed residence on the
adjacent neighbors including keeping the home as a single story. The applicant was unable
to offer any additional solutions to increase the setback from the neighbor's property or to
further reduce the 19 -foot tall proposed residence.
On August 18, 2015, the DRC found that the application was complete and in compliance
with the HDS &G. The DRC approved the application subject to the conditions provided in
Exhibit 3.
F. Appeal
The application was appealed by Mr. Krouskup (Exhibit 12). The appellant's reasons for
the appeal are:
1) Significant negative impact on their adjoining property;
2) The proposed new development does not comply with the Hillside Development
Standards;
3) The new development does not comply with Los Gatos Hillside Specific Plan; and
4) The proposed new development relies on ingress /egress across their adjoining property,
of which there is no legal easement supporting the required access.
No specifics were given as to how the application does not comply with the HDS &G or the
Hillside Specific Plan. Staff has discussed with the appellant and the applicant the standard
conditions regarding construction management and how the applicant could agree to reduce
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 7
15925 Quail Hill Road/5 -14 -027
September 23, 2015
their construction hours and address additional construction concerns the neighbor had, but
no specifics were requested by the appellant. The site has contained a single family
residence since 1957, and the second unit was legalized in 1986. The proposed
modifications would improve but retain the single family residence, no modifications are
proposed to the legal second unit. As discussed in the background section of the report, the
site has legal ingress /egress rights over Mr. Krouskup's property; however, the easement
lacks a defined width. Current Town standards would require a 20 -foot easement for this
type of access. The existing paved access varies from approximately 15 feet to 30 feet in
width. The Santa Clara County Fire Department has reviewed the existing access and
approved its continued use for the proposed project.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION:
A. Conclusion
The project is in compliance with the HDS &G and the Hillside Specific Plan. The
proposed residence is appropriately designed for the neighborhood and site constraints and
would be compatible with the surrounding homes. While the language within the easement
may need to be defined, according to the Town Attorney, this is a civil matter and not a
sufficient reason for denying or delaying the application. According to all documents
provided by the applicant and the appellant, the site has legal ingress /egress rights. Staff
recommends that the application be approved as outlined in the recommendation section
below.
B. Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions to deny the
appeal, uphold the decision of the DRC and approve the Architecture and Site application:
I. Find that the project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures (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 Hillside Development Standards
and Guidelines (Exhibit 2); and
4. Make the finding that the project complies with the Hillside Specific Plan (Exhibit 2);
and
5. 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
6. Approve Architecture and Site Application S -14 -027 with the conditions contained in
Exhibit 3 and development plans attached as Exhibit 14.
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 8
15925 Quail Hill Road/S -14 -027
September 23, 2015
Alternatively, the Commission may take one of the following actions:
1. Grant the appeal and remand the application to the DRC with direction for revisions; or
2. Modify the conditions of approval in Exhibit 3 as deemed appropriate; or
3. Continue the application to a date certain with direction to staff and the applicant for
desired revisions; or
4. Grant the appeal and deny the Architecture and Site application.
Prepared by:
Mari F. Moseley, AICP
Associate Planner
LRP:MFM:cg
of
pproved by:
aurel R. Prevetti
Town Manager/ Community Development
Director
cc: Sabrina Dong, 15925 Quail Hill Road, Los Gatos CA 95032
Brad Krouskup, 15921 Quail Hill Road, Los Gatos CA 95032
N: \DEV \PC REPORTS\2015 \Quail Hill- 15925 - appeal.doc
15925 Quail Hill Road
EXHIBIT I
9/23/15 PC Staff Report
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
REQUIRED FINDINGS & CONSIDERATIONS FOR: September 23, 2015
15925 Ouail Hill Road
Architecture and Site Application 5 -14 -027
Requesting approval to demolish an existing single -family residence and to construct a new
single - family residence on property zoned HR -1. APN 527 -02 -007.
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Kevin Hwang and Sabrina Dong
FINDINGS
Required finding for CEQA:
The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of
the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction or Conversion of Small
Structures.
Required findings for demolition:
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 house will be replaced.
2. The structure has no historic significance.
3. The property owner does not desire to maintain the structure due to its current
condition; and
4. The economic utility of the structure is limited due to its condition.
Required Compliance with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines:
The project is in compliance with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines.
Compliance with Hillside Specific Plan:
The project is in compliance with the Hillside Specific Plan in that the site is developed as a single
family residence on an existing parcel. The proposal is consistent with the development criteria
included in the plan.
CONSIDERATIONS
Required considerations in review of applications:
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.
kxkUHIT 2
N: oav�wowcszoisQuaan;u 5925.ao 9/23/15 PC Staff Report
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — September 23, 2015
15925 Ouail Hill Road
Architecture and Site Application S -14 -027
Requesting approval to demolish an existing single - family residence and to construct a
new single -family dwelling on property zoned HR -1. APN 527 -02 -007.
Property Owner /Applicant: Kevin Hwang and Sabrina Dong
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 and in substantial compliance with the approved plans. Any
changes or modifications to the approved plans shall be approved by the Community
Development Director or the Planning Commission/Town Council, depending on the
scope of the changes.
2. EXPIRATION OF APPROVAL: The Architecture and Site application will expire two
years from the date of approval (September 23, 2017) unless the approval is used before
expiration. Section 29.20.335 defines what constitutes the use of an approval granted
under the Zoning Ordinance.
3. STORY POLES: The story poles on the project site shall be removed within 30 days of
approval of the Architecture & Site application.
4. EXTERIOR COLORS: The exterior colors of all structures shall comply with the
Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines (earthtone colors with a light reflectivity
value of 30 or less).
5. 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
requires all exterior materials be maintained in conformance with the Town's Hillside
Development Standards & Guidelines.
6. SALVAGE OF BUILDING MATERIALS: Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit,
the developer shall provide the Planning 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.
7. 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.
8. TREE STAKING: All newly planted trees shall be double - staked using rubber tree ties.
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. Fencing shall be six foot high cyclone attached to two -inch
diameter steel posts driven 18 inches into the ground and spaced no further than 10 feet
apart. Include a tree protection fencing plan with the construction plans.
10. 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 first approved by the Planning Division. The outdoor
lighting plan can be reviewed during building plan check. Any changes to the lighting
plan shall be approved by the Planning Division prior to installation. EXHIBIT a
9/23/15 PC Staff Report
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.
Building Division
12. PERMITS REQUIRED: A building permit shall be required for the demolition of
portions of the existing single family residence and the construction of new single -
family residence alterations and additions to the existing 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. 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. As an alternate, the necessary foundation
elements can be designed by a licensed Civil Engineer to the minimum requirements of
Chapter 4 of the 2013 California Residential Code.
16. 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 any 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
17. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: All required California Title 24 Energy
Compliance Forms must be blue - lined, i.e. directly printed onto a plan sheet.
18. 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.
19. 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.
20. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE: The project requires a Class A Roof assembly.
21. WILDLAND -URBAN INTERFACE: This project is located in a Wildland -Urban
Interface Fire Area, however only new buildings must comply with Section R327 of the
2010 California Residential Code. Additions and Remodels are not required to comply
with Section R327 at this time.
22. PROVIDE DEFENSIBLE SPACE/FIRE BREAK LANDSCAPING PLAN: Prepared
by a California licensed Landscape Architect in conformance with California Public
Resources Code 4291 and California Government Code Section 51182.
23. PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION: Provide a letter from a California licensed
Landscape Architect certifying the landscaping and vegetation clearance requirements
have been completed per the California Public Resources Code 4291 and Government
Code Section 51182.
24. 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.losgatosca.gov/buildin
25. BLUE PRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara County
Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (2406) 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.losgatosca.gov/buildin .
26. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following departments and
agencies approval before issuing a building permit:
a. Community Development — Planning Division
b. Engineering/Parks & Public Works Department
c. Santa Clara County Fire Department
d. West Valley Sanitation District
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.
TO THE SATFISFATION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS &PUBLIC WORKS:
Engineering Division
27. 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.
28. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all the conditions
of approvals listed below and in substantial compliance with the latest reviewed and
approved development plans. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans or
conditions of approvals shall be approved by the Town Engineer.
29. 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), AT &T, Comcast, 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.
30. 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.
31. 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.
32. SITE SUPERVISION: The General Contractor shall provide qualified supervision on
the job site at all times during construction
33. 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
34. INSPECTION FEES. Inspection fees shall be deposited with the Town prior to issuance
of any Permit or recordation of the Final Map.
35. DESIGN CHANGES: Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be subject to
the approval of the Town prior to alter 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.
36. GRADING PERMIT: Grading permit may be /is required for all site grading and
drainage work except for exemptions listed in Section 12.20.015 of the Town Grading
Ordinance. The grading permit application (with grading plans) shall be made to the
Engineering Division of the Parks & Public Works Department located at 41 Miles
Avenue. The grading plans shall include final grading, drainage, retaining wall location,
driveway, utilities and interim erosion control. Grading plans shall list earthwork
quantities and a table of existing and proposed impervious areas. Unless specifically
allowed by the Director of Parks and Public Works, the grading permit will be issued
concurrently with the building permit. The grading permit is for work outside the
building footprint(s). A separate building permit, issued by the Building Department on
E. Main Street is needed for grading within the building footprint.
37. CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, it shall be
the sole responsibility of the owner /applicant to obtain any and all proposed or required
easements and /or permissions necessary to perform the grading herein proposed. Proof
of agreement/approval is required prior to issuance of any Permit.
38. TREE REMOVAL: Copies of all necessary tree removal permits shall be provided prior
to issuance of a grading permitibuilding permit.
39. SURVEYING CONTROLS: Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified
by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer qualified to practice land surveying,
for the following items:
a. Retaining wall - -top of wall elevations and locations
b. Toe and top of cut and fill slopes
40. 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.
41. SOILS REPORT: One copy of the soils and geologic 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.
42. GEOLOGY AND SOILS MITIGATION MEASURE. A geotechnical investigation
shall be conducted for the project to determine the surface and sub - surface conditions at
the site and to determine the potential for surface fault rupture on the site. The
geotechnical study shall provide recommendations for site grading as well as the design
of foundations, retaining walls, concrete slab -on -grade construction, excavation,
drainage, on -site utility trenching and pavement sections. All recommendations of the
investigation shall be incorporated into project plans
43. SOILS REVIEW: Prior to issuance of any permit, the applicant's engineers shall prepare
and submit a design -level geotechnical /geological investigation for review and approval
by the Town. The applicant's soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainage
plans to ensure that designs for foundations, retaining walls, site grading, and site
drainage are in accordance with their recommendations and the peer review comments.
The applicant's soils engineer's approval shall then be conveyed to the Town either by
letter or by signing the plans.
44. 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 backfill 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.
45. 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.
46. EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT: Prior to the issuing of a certificate of
occupancy, the applicant shall perform one of the following:
a. Record a new emergency access /ingress- egress easement to encompass the
existing driveway between the public right -of -way at Short Road and the
subject property (APN 527 -02 -007). The existing access easement shall be
vacated;
b. Construct new roadway improvements within the existing emergency
access /ingress- egress easement. New improvements shall conform to Santa
Clara County Fire Department Standards.
47. FENCING: Any fencing proposed within 200 -feet of an intersection shall comply with
Town Code Section §23.10.080.
48. SIGHT TRIANGLE AND TRAFFIC VIEW AREA: Any proposed improvements,
including but not limiting to trees and hedges, will need to abide by Town Code Section
23.10.080, 26.10.065, 29.40.030.
49. FENCES: Fences between all adjacent parcels will need to be located on the property
lines/boundary lines. Any existing fences encroached into the neighbors will need to be
removed and replaced to the correct location of the boundary lines. Waiver of this
condition will require signed and notarized letters from all affected neighbors.
50. 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.
51. 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.
52. 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.
53. 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.
54. 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.
55. 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.
56. 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.
57. 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.
58. 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.
59. 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.
60. 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:
61. AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM REQUIRED. An approved automatic fire
sprinkler system is required for the new residence and barn, hydraulically designed per
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard #13D. A State of California
licensed 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 work.
62. PREMISE IDENTIFICATION. Approved addresses shall be placed on all new
buildings so they are clearly visible and legible from the street. Numbers shall be a
minimum of four inches high and shall contrast with their background.
N:ADEVAC0NDITNS\2015 \Quai1 Hill 15925.doc
_<iY� l w. as � � f�..Y .`b` S � ,• `R' � �
P.REV1OUS
PROJECT
�y+ sS.. �f
PROPOSED.
PROJECT
� i' 3S.h �II ". p ��"q �y.'.
REQUMEfi/
PER1WI77ED
Zoning district
HR -1
same
Land use
Single family Home
same
General Plan Designation
hillside residential
same
Lot size
$ square feet
42,525
same
40,000 sq. ft. minimum
$ acres
1
same
.92 acres minimum
Exterior materials:
$ siding
Wood plank
Stucco and stone
veneer
$ trim
wood
wood
$ windows
Aluminum single pane
Clad dual pane
$ roofing
Roll roofing asphalt
concrete tile
Building floor area.
$ main floor
1992
3210
4,500 sq. ft. maximum
$ lower floor
0
385
$ carport
423
2201464
400 sq. ft. exemption
$ cellar
0
380
exempt
$ accessory structure(s)
774
774
included in FAR
$ total (excluding cellar)
2766
4833
4,900 sq. ft. maximum
Setbacks (ft.):
$ front
41.9
. 39.5
30 feet minimum
$ rear
200+
200+
25 feet minimum
$ side
18,8
20
20 feet minimum
$ side
25,9
23.6
20 feet minimum
Average slope (%)
>30
>30
Maximum height (ft.)
14feet
21 feet
25 feet maximum
Building coverage (%)
7.5%
11%
no maximum
Parking
garage spaces 1
2 1
3
four spaces minimum in
addition to two in garage
uncovered spaces
3
4
Sewer or septic
sewer
sewer
NADEpM.,..AM5115925Qiall Hilh,,.jccr&a ,Id
9/23/15 PC Staff Report
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
LETTER OF JUSTIFICATION
15925 quail Hill Road, Los Gatos, CA
RECEIVED
JAN -b ?n,5
TOWN OF LOS GAT ^S
PLANNING D7VjSjuN
12/10/2014
I carefully reviewed my client's objectives and town hillside guidelines. I worked closely with my clients,
and planning staff to be sure the home satisfies everyone's objectives.
Client Design Guidelines and Obiectives
• Efficient floor plan design.
• Specify durable, low maintenance and fire resistive exterior materials.
• Incorporate Feng Shui design principles.
• Utilize passive solar design principles for natural light, heating and cooling.
Town Design Guidelines and Obiectives
A.Desion Objective
• This home maintains the existing foundation to minimize the impact to hillside.
• The design is primarily single story with small lower floor built under the extended portion of
the home to maintain a one story appearance.
• The existing detached guest house will be preserved to maintain the Towns affordable housing
objectives.
• Add covered and guest parking and improve vehicle backout and turnaround.
B. Neighbor Friendly
• Impact on adjacent neighbors:
North : no neighbor (two story elevation)
South : minimal impact because proposed home and carport location and width is the same as
existing.
East :minimal impact because proposed home and carport locations are similar to existing.
West : minimal impact because proposed home and carport locations are similar to existing.
C. Sustainable Design
• Doors and windows take advantage of summer and winter breezes and provide excellent cross
ventilation.
• Sustainable building materials and practices that are cost effective and suitable to the style of
this home will be incorporated. EXFIIBIT 5
9/23/15 PC Staff Report
D. Fire Safety
s This project will comply with all the strictest hillside fire protection standards and guidelines.
E. Height
• This project is in compliance with all height limits of the Town Hillside Zoning Ordinance.
F. Bulk & Mass.
The proposed small lower floor minimizes the bulk and mass and avoids the appearance of a
two story home from adjacent properties.
G. Roofs
The simple roof design reflects the craftsman style which is my client preferred style and an
appropriate architecture for this setting.
H. Architectural Elements
• Architectural detailing will be consistent on all sides.
• No massive, tall or prominent features are proposed for the downhill fagade.
1. Materials & Colors
• Fire resistive materials and earth tone colors are proposed for the exterior.
Conclusion
This project will improve owners quality of life, vehicle access, fire conditions and hillside stability, and
enhance the overall neighborhood character.
Sincerely
Mike Vierhus,
Project Architect
Lic. #C19155
CDG
CANNON
DESIGN
GROUP
June 5, 2015
Ms. Marni Mosley
Community Development Department
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95031
RE: 15925 Quail Hill Road
Dear Marni:
ARCHITECTURE PLANNING URBAN DESIGN
I reviewed the drawings, and visited the site. My comments and recommendations are as follows:
Neighborhood Context
The site is accessed by a long driveway which is shared by one other house located immediately adjacent to the existing
house. Other nearby homes are either located at some distance from the site or are sited well below this parcel. The site
is shown on the aerial photo below, and photos of the site and its surroundings are on the following page.
EXHW f 6
700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR. CA. 94939 9/23/15 PC Staff Report
View to the west
View to the east
15925 Quzil Hill Road
Design Review Commens
Jone 5, 2015 Page 2
Existing house on the site and interface with adjd-
r Ent house to the south
Immediately adjacent house to the south
View to the south
View to the north
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
15925 Quail Hill Road
Design Review Commenu
June 5, 2015 Page 3
Issues and Concerns
The proposed renovation and expansion of the existing house on the site will result in a rather eclectic structure with
a multitude of roof forms and orientations. There are some details that suggest a Craftsman Style home, but they are
limited, and not very consistent with the forms and details that are included on many good examples in the Town of
Los Gatos. Some specific issues and recommendations are as follows:
1. The detailing shown on the drawings for gable ends and the entry fall short of what has become the norm for
other homes of this style in Los Gatos.
2. The termination of the stone base at the right side of the front facade without continuing it to the east facade
is not consistent with Residential Design Guidelines 3.2.2 and 3.8.4 which provide guidance on extending front
facade materials around all sides of the house and making material and color changes at inside comers.
Detailing is very sparse for the
architectural style
Termination of stone at the end of the front
facade is not consistent with Residential
Design Guidelines 3.2.2 and 3.6.4
(extend stone to an inside corner on the east elevation)
3. The overall design would benefit from the extension of the stone base to the wall and column bases at the cov-
ered porch on the west side of the house. This would be increase consistency with Residential Design Guideline
3.2.2.
4. There are areas on the rear facade of the house that would have two -story high walls with no articulation to
break up the walls. This is not consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.3.3.
5. There is a rather chaotic mix of roof forms toward the rear of the house which is not consistent with Residential
Design Guideline 3.3.1.
Recommendations
1. Add additional brackets and detailing appropriate to the architectural style. Carry these details to the roof gable
ends on other sides of the house.
2. Refine the design and detailing of the entry to more closely match the architectural style.
3. Extend the stone base around to the east elevation and carry it to a termination point at an inside corner.
4. Extend the stone base around to the walls and column bases of the covered porch.
Add brackets and gable detail
appropriate to the architectural style
Wrap stone around �n
side to wall end -s9i
column bases for y
p..m
design continuity
and compliance with --- - I
Residential design --
Guideline 3.2.2 Refine entry details to more closely
match the architectural style
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
15915 Quail Hill Road
Design Review Comments
June5,2015 Page4
5. Simplify the roof forms consistent with the architectural style.
6. Add a trellis or other projecting element on the rear elevation to break up the two -story wall.
Simplify the roof forms consistent
with the architectural style
Add brackets and gable detail
appropriate to the architectural style
Repeat on side elevation cables -- -----
lip Use columns to match
ltlusl IntlBwa - the architectural style
l -
--Add stone column bases
element to break up two -story wall
See Residential Design Guideline 3.3.3
Marni, please let me know if you have any questions, or if there are other issues that I did not address.
Sincerely,
CANNON DESIGN GROUP
Larry L. Cannon
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE . SUITE 199 . LARKSPUR . CA . 94939
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 354 -6874
SUMMARY MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS FOR JULY 21, 2015 HELD IN THE TOWN COUNCIL
CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER, 110 EAST MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA.
The meeting was called to order at 10_05 a.m. by Chair Machado.
ATTENDANCE
Members Present:
Jennifer Savage, Senior Planner
Marni Moseley, Associate Planner
Doug Harding, Fire Department
Michael Machado, Building Official
Mark Glendinning, Building Inspector
Ryan Fong,- Assistant Civil Engineer
Mike Weisz, Associate Civil Engineer
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM 1: 14325 Mulberry Drive
Architecture and Site Application S -15 -002
Requesting approval to demolish an existing pre -1941 single - family residence and to
construct anew single - family residence on property zoned R -1:8, APN 409 -15 -020.
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Far Creek Properties, INC.
PROJECT PLANNER: Jennifer Savage
1. Chair Machado opened the public hearing.
2. Staff gave report on proposed project.
3. Applicant was introduced.
4. Members of the public were present:
Jess and Val Guy, Mulberry Drive, stated that they feel the project will improve the
neighborhood.
5. Public hearing closed.
6. Ryan Fong moved to approve the application subject to the conditions presented with the
following findings and considerations:
FINDINGS
Required finding for CEQA;
The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.
EXHIBIT 7
9/23/15 PC Staff Report
DRC Minutes
July 21, 2015
Page 2
Required finding for the demolition of a single -family residence:
• As required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the Town Code for the demolition of a single -
family residence:
a. The Town's housing stock will be maintained as the single - family residence will be replaced.
b. The existing structures have no architectural or historical significance, and are in poor
condition.
c. The property owner does not desire to maintain the structures as they exist; and
d. The economic utility of the structures was not considered.
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:
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.
7. Mark Glendinning seconded, motion passed unanimously.
8. Appeal rights were cited.
ITEM 2: 15925 Ouail Hill Road
Architecture and Site Application S -14 -027
Requesting approval to demolish an existing single - family residence and to
construct a new single - family residence on property zoned HR -1. APN 527 -02-
007.
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Kevin Hwang and Sabrina Dong
PROJECT PLANNER: Marni Moseley
1. Chair Machado opened the public hearing.
2. Staff gave report on proposed project.
3. Applicant was introduced.
4. Members of the public were present:
Bernard and Marcia, 100 Drysdale Drive, had no objection to the project.
Brad and Dana Krouskup, Quail Hill Road stated that the project entrance driveway is 30 feet
from their front door and the construction noise will be overwhelming. Brad Krouskup
presented some parcel maps and stated that the access easements are not clear and that this
should be resolved prior to approval of the project. He continued that the condition of the road
is not able to support construction traffic, that the applicant is not in compliance with the Road
Maintenance Agreement, and that construction traffic will be forced to turn around onto their
property.
DRC Minutes
July 21, 2015
Page 3
John Livingstone, the Krouskup's Land Use Consultant, made the contention that he felt that
the project was not consistent with the General Plan and that the home will be assessed as a
new house when in reality it is a remodeled house. He mentioned that legal access can and
should be resolved prior to project approval. He questioned whether the secondary dwelling
unit had the proper permits.
Brad Krouskup added that they are most concerned about parking and safety during
construction.
Ryan Fong, Town Assistant Civil Engineer, stated that the title Report shows that there is legal
access.
Brad Krouskup countered that there is conflicting information.
Ryan Fong suggested that the easements be more clearly plotted by a Civil Engineer.
Dana Krouskup is very concerned about the quality of the road.
Ryan Fong also suggested that a Condition of Approval could be added requiring pre -
construction and post - construction surveys of the road condition be provided by the applicant.
Doug Harding, Deputy Fire Marshal, added that emergency access on private roads are always
problematic and that the Fire Department can only regulate the minimum width and maximum
grade of new private roads or driveways, not existing ones.
Ryan Fong added that a Construction Management Plan will be required prior to issuance of
the building permits and that verification of access rights is not in the purview of the Town.
5. Public hearing closed.
6. Doug Hai-ding moved to continue the application to a date certain, August 11, 2015, in order to
allow the applicant`s surveyor to more clearly plot the easements and existing access
improvements.
7. Ryan Fong seconded, motion passed unanimously.
NONE
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 10_55 a.m. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Development Review
Committee is the following Tuesday.
-Cr-
Michael Machado, Building Official
WDEV\DRC \Min 2015 \7- 21 -15,dm
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 354 -6874
SUMMARY MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS FOR AUGUST 11, 2015 HELD IN THE TOWN
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER, 110 EAST MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA.
The meeting was called to order at 10_02 a.m. by Chair Machado.
ATTENDANCE
Members Present:
Jennifer Savage, Senior Planner
Marni Moseley, Associate Planner
Doug Harding, Fire Department
Michael Machado, Building Official
Mark Glendinning, Building Inspector
Mike Weisz, Associate Civil Engineer
Fletcher Parson, Contract Civil Engineer
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM 1: 15925 Quail Hill Road
Architecture and Site Application S -14 -027
Requesting approval to demolish an existing single - family residence and to
construct a new single - family residence on property zoned HR -1. APN 527 -02-
007.
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Kevin Hwang and Sabrina Dong
PROJECT PLANNER: Marni Moseley
(Continued from 712 112 0 1 5)
1. Chair Machado opened the public hearing.
2. Staff gave report on proposed project.
3. Applicant was introduced.
4. Members of the public were present:
Doug Harding, Deputy Fire Marshal, summarized the Fire Department Conditions of
Approval.
Michael Vierhus, Architect, questioned if the conditions will also include a requirement for
turnaround.
Doug Harding responded that a fire truck turnaround will be required within 40 to 50 feet of
the project site.
Michael Vierhus mentioned that he would like to meet with the Fire Department at the site to
work an acceptable location for the turnaround.
DRC Minutes
August 11, 2015
Page 2
Mike Weisz, Associate Civil Engineer, presented amap showing where the actual access road is
out of the described easements and read an additional condition to address this situation.
Brad Krouskup stated that he had hoped that the 20 -foot easement location would have been
resolved since the last meeting. He submitted a 1958 Grant Deed with a description of an
ingress /egress easement. He went on to state that the project as proposed does not serve his
and Dana Krouskup's best interest.
Sabrina Dong said that her surveyor has plotted the easement description.
Doug Harding questioned if the easement description includes the width. He said ifnot then it
is an easement with an undetermined width.
Brad Krouskup said that Chicago Title needs to explain where their other description originally
came from.
Fletcher Parson, Contract Civil Engineer, questioned if either Title Report describe the
easement width.
Brad Krouskup said the Title Report that he has does not. He suggested that Sabrina have her
Title Company review his document.
Marni Moseley, Associate Planner, stated that even though the description is incomplete, the
applicants do have legal access.
Fletcher Parson added that the applicants may have a prescriptive easement which would take
legal action to prove.
Brad Krouskup questioned whether access could be achieved from Drysdale Drive.
Michael Vierhus said that he and their Civil Engineer tried to design an access driveway but the
hill is just too steep.
Brad Krouskup believes it could be done and would like to leave that access as an option for
the development of the property.
Marni Mosely asked what revision would make the proposal acceptable to the Krouskups.
Development outside the LRDA would need to go to the Planning Commission for approval.
Brad Krouskup responded that his home directly faces the proposed project. The front doors
will be 60 feet from each other. As proposed, the applicants will have to use his property to
turnaround. A further front setback to 35 feet would allow the applicants to turnaround on
their own property.
DRC Minutes
August 11, 2015
Page 3
Marni Moseley explained that staff has reviewed the project for neighborhood compatibility
and compliance with the Town Code and Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines, in
addition, the Town's Architectural Consultant has reviewed the project and the applicants have
incorporated his suggestions into their design.
Brad Kroskup replied that the location is the biggest issue and he will have an Architect review
the proposal.
Michael Vierhus commented, "Do neighbors now design their adjacent neighbor's house ?"
Brad Kroskup continued that the access easements have still not been resolved and does not
comply with the road maintenance agreement in place.
John Livingstone, Consultant, questioned the off street parking in the front yard.
Marni Moseley replied that the off street parking shown in the front yard are not required
parking spaces and are therefore permitted in the front setback.
Fletcher Parsons added that Engineering did not know that there were still discrepancies
between the two Title Reports from Chicago Title and First American Title. He felt the
application should be continued for one more week to see if they can be reconciled.
Marni Moseley suggested that she could put a placeholder for a future Planning Commission
Agenda item while the access easement descriptions are being resolved. She also suggested
that the Krouskups put their concerns in writing and that it might be possible to modify the
Conditions of Approval to address some of those concerns.
5. Public hearing closed.
6. Doug Harding moved to continue the application for one more week.
7. Mike Weisz seconded, motion passed unanimously.
ITEM 2: 17101 Los Robles Way (Heard out of order)
Architecture and Site Application 5 -15 -051
Requesting approval of a time extension for a previous approval for a grading permit
for anew deck and retaining walls on property zoned R -1:20. APN 532 -36 -072.
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Karen Evenden
PROJECT PLANNER: Jennifer Savage
1. Chair Machado opened the public hearing.
2. Staff gave report on proposed project.
3. Applicant was introduced.
4. Members of the public were not present:
5. Public hearing closed.
6. Doug Harding moved to approve the application subject to the conditions presented with the
following findings and considerations:
DRC Minutes
August 11, 2015
Page 4
FINDINGS
■ As required by Section 29.20.325 of the Town Code for time extension requests:
(b) (1) There would be no legal impediment to granting a new application for the same approval.
(2) The conditions originally applied or new conditions to be applied as a part of the
extension approval are adopted to any new facts concerning the proposed project.
7. Mark Glendinning seconded, motion passed unanimously.
8. Appeal rights were cited.
OTHER BUSINESS — NONE
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 11_20 a.m. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Development Review
Committee is the following Tuesday.
Michael Machado, Building Official
N:ADEV\DRC\Min 2015 \8- 11- 15.doc
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 354 -6874
SUMMARY MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS FOR AUGUST 18, 2015 HELD IN THE TOWN
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER, 110 EAST MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA.
The meeting was called to order at 10_00 a.m. by Chair Machado.
ATTENDANCE
Members Present:
Jennifer Savage, Senior Planner
Marni Moseley, Associate Planner
Jocelyn Puga, Assistant Planner
Doug Harding, Fire Department
Michael Machado, Building Official
Mark Glendinning, Building Inspector
Mike Weisz, Associate Civil Engineer
Fletcher Parsons, Contract Town Civil Engineer
Robert Schultz, Town Attorney
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM 1: 15925 Quail Hill Road
Architecture and Site Application S -14 -027
Requesting approval to demolish an existing single - family residence and to
construct a new single - family residence on property zoned HR -1. APN 527 -02-
007.
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Kevin Hwang and Sabrina Dong
PROJECT PLANNER: Mami Moseley
(Continued from 712112015 and 811112015)
1. Chair Machado opened the public hearing.
2. Staff gave report on proposed project.
3. Applicant was introduced.
Sabrina Dong, Applicant, presented a Deed of Trust from Frist Republic title Company
descripting the ingress and egress easement and added that a real estate attorney is of the
opinion that she has a prescriptive easement.
4. Members of the public were present:
Brad Krouskup asked if they could continue to do more research. He stated that he and Dana
Krouskup are not opposed to the applicants developing their property. They are opposed to the
current proposal and want to offer positive not negative input. John Livingstone's letter lists
their issues of concern. He said their primary issue is the project's impact on their house. He
stated that an easement exists with no defined width. He said that access from Drysdale Drive
would be preferred. He would like to present some options.
DRC Minutes
August 18, 2015
Page 2
Marni Moseley, Associate Planner, stated that the Development Review Committee (DRC)
hearing is to take comments on a proposed project. It would not be appropriate for the DRC to
review plans that are not part of a proposed project. She added that when they met in May,
staff suggested they put their concerns in writing and no comments were received.
Robert Schultz, Town Attorney, stated that the Town does not represent any individual interest
but simply reviews and proposals for compliance with the Town Code Standards.
John Livingstone, Consultant, presented a response letter to Marni Moseley, in response to his
first letter of concerns. He is most concerned about the Fire Department conditions. He also
questioned the lack of Building permit for the secondary unit and the safe condition of the unit.
Marni Moseley state that when the secondary unit permit was approved in 1986, a safety
inspection was performed.
Sabrina Dong stated that she was also concerned about the safety of the unit and had two
separate structural engineers assess the structural integrity of the unit and that they both
independently concluded that the unit is structurally sound.
Dana Krouskup commented that she is most concerned about construction traffic access.
Brad Krouskup added that he feels that the proposal is not consistent with the Hillside Specific
Plan.
Marni Moseley read Condition of Approval No. 46, which addresses the emergency access
easement.
5. Public hearing closed.
6. Marni Moseley moved to approve the application subject to the conditions presented with the
following findings and considerations:
FINDINGS
Required finding for CEQA:
The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of
the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction or Conversion of Small
Structures.
Required findings for demolition:
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 house will be replaced.
2. The structure has no historic significance.
DRC Minutes
August 18, 2015
Page 3
3. The property owner does not desire to maintain the structure due to its current
condition; and
4. The economic utility of the structure is limited due to its condition.
Required Compliance with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines:
The project is in compliance with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines.
Compliance with Hillside Specific Plan:
The project is in compliance with the Hillside Specific Plan in that the site is developed as a single
family residence on an existing parcel. The proposal is consistent with the development criteria
included in the plan.
CONSIDERATIONS
Required considerations in review of applications:
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.
7. Doug Harding seconded, motion passed unanimously.
8. Appeal rights were cited.
ITEM 2: 17061 Wild Way
Architecture and Site Application S -15 -055
Requesting approval to demolish a single - family residence, remove large protected
trees, and construct a new single - family residence with reduced setbacks on a non-
conforming property zoned R -1:20. APN 424 -30 -087.
PROPERTY OWNER: Wild Way LLC
APPLICANT: Tony Jeans
PROJECT PLANNER: Jennifer Savage
1. Chair Machado opened the public hearing.
2. Staff gave report on proposed project.
3. Applicant was introduced.
Tony Jeans first went to the Planning Commission requesting a reduced front setback of 25
feet. The Planning Commission wanted him to hold to the required 30 feet setback. He
redesigned the house to move it back, reduced the footprint in order to save trees, retained the
architectural style but reduced the mass by lowering the plate lines a little. He worked with the
neighbor to address her concerns and offered the option of providing a gate in the common
fence due to tight access conditions.
DRC Minutes
August 18, 2015
Page 4
As a result of these modifications, the Planning Division was able to place the application on
the Development Review Committee agenda and the proposal was now in compliance with the
Town Code and the Residential Design Guidelines.
4. Members of the public were not present:
5. Public hearing closed.
6. Doug Harding moved to approve the application subject to the conditions presented with the
following findings and considerations:
FINDINGS
Required finding for CEQA:
■ The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction or Conversion of
Small Structures.
Required finding for the demolition of a single- family residence:
■ 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 not considered.
Required Compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines:
n The project is in compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines for single- fatnilyhornes not
in hillside residential areas.
CONSIDERATIONS
Required considerations in review of Architecture & Site applications:
■ 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.
Required considerations in review of requests for reduced setbacks on non - conforming lots:
■ As required by Section 29.10.265 of the Town Code, it is determined that the reduced side
setbacks are compatible with the neighborhood.
DRC Minutes
August 18,2015
Page 5
7. Mark Glendinning seconded, motion passed unanimously.
8. Appeal rights were cited.
ITEM 3: 202 Lu Ray Drive
Architecture and Site Application 5 -15 -024
Requesting approval of a technical demolition of an existing single - family
residence and construction of a new single - family residence on property zoned R-
1:10. APN 523 -24 -034.
PROPERTY OWNER: Joseph Calvey
APPLICANT: Jessica Aviles
PROJECT PLANNER: Jocelyn Puga
1. Chair Machado opened the public hearing.
2. Staff gave report on proposed project.
3. Applicant was introduced.
4. Members of the public were not present:
Doug Harding, Deputy Fire Marshal, clarified that since the addition resulted in a house less
than 3600 square feet, fire sprinklers were not required.
5. Public hearing closed.
6. Mike Weisz moved to approve the application subject to the conditions presented with the
following findings and considerations:
FINDINGS
Required finding for CEQA:
■ The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction or Conversion of
Small Structures.
Required finding for the demolition of a single -family residence:
■ 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 structure has no architectural or historical significance.
3. The property owner does not desire to maintain the structure as it exists; and
4. While the majority of the structure will be maintained, the scope of the proposed remodel
requires removal of more than 50% of the existing wall area; which will result in a technical
demolition.
DRC Minutes
August 18, 2015
Page 6
Required Compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines:
a 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:
■ 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.
7. Doug Harding seconded, motion passed unanimously.
8. Appeal rights were cited.
OTHER BUSINESS
NONE
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Development Review
Committee is the following Tuesday.
Michael Machado, Building Official
N:ADEV\DRC\Min 2015 \8- 18- 15.doc
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
Old Republic Title Company
Order No.: 0631011561 -LN
APN: 527 -02 -001
When Recorded Mail Document and Tax Statements to:
Brad Krouskup & Dana Krouskup
15921 Quail Hill Road
Los Patos, Ca., 95032
DOCUMENT: 26 ,8580
REGINA ALCOMENDRAS
SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDER
Recorded at the request of
Old Republic Title Company
Grant Deed
The undersigned grantor(s) declare(s):
Documentary Transfer Tax is $3,080.06
(X) computed on full value of property conveyed, or
( ) computed on full value less of liens and encumbrances remaining at time of sale.
d (X) City of Los Gatos
Pages
Fees.... 25.00
Taxes... 3080.00
Copies..
AMT PAID 3105.00
FOR RECORDERS USE
i1 Mum
-d ED
AUG 112015
( ) Unincorporate area. TOWN OF LOS GAT^
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, PLANNING DIVISIO,a
Joni I. Curtis, as Trustee of the JC 2007 Residence Trust, dated January 31, 2007 and Eric B. Curds, as Trustee of the EC 2007
Residence Trust, dated January 31, 2007
hereby GRANT(S) to
Brad W. and Dana B. Krouskup, Trustees of The Krouskup 2001 Living Trust
that property in City of Los Gatos, Santa Clara County, State of California, described as:
cy See "Exhibit A" attached hereto and made a part hereof.
c^
Date: January 20 2009
IC 2007 Residence Trust, dated January 31, 2007
By:
tjor
A I. Curtis, Trustee
State of California
EC 2007 7ide ru , dated 1, 2007
By:
Curtis, Trustee
County of Santa Clara G
On [ Ll` / before me, �A�j 10 ✓! T
,a
Notary Public, personally appeared Eric B. Curtis and Joni I. Curtis, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the
person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same
in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his /her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon
behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALT[[[[Y OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand an o icial seal.
�a eaaaa aseee aceaaoeeaaxsaeoaeeneeeoaosce�
• DAVID M. ZIEL Se
Signature ro t ,' COMM NO 1780801 M
Name David M. Ziel ; .NUiAer ruo�iC CAUFORNiA s
(typed or printed) (Areag!e °�' cia"M Ai&% TA CLARA r
R U PIflES N V 18, 2011
ti7tlfl9tlta6aaaG ®a03 tlfl203 §Bt1U43EJdtl�.3ilii ililJJetlO(
- EXHIBIT 8
Grant Deed MAIL TAX STATEMENTS AS DIRECTED ABOVE 9/23/15 PC Staff Report
ORDER NO.: 0631011561 -LN
EXHIBIT R
The land referred to is situated in the County of Santa Clara, City of Los Gatos, State Of
California, and is described as follows:
PARCEL ONE:
shown on that certain Map entitled "Map of the M.S. Gardner Estate,
A portion N Lot 1, as
being p of Record of Survey, which Map was filed for
art of the Rancho Rinconada De Los Gatos", filed November 23, 1887, in Book "C" o
Maps, Page 39 and also being Parcel B, Mai of Santa Clara, State of California, on June
he Office of the Recorder of the County
record in t
13, 1956 in Book 70 of Maps at Page 29, described as follows:
page 568; thence North
Beginning at the most Southerly corner inrBook 3064 of Offic adl 'Records, d age 568; t Payne, a ux,
by Deed recorded January 21,
75° Ol' West along the Southwesterly line of said Parcel 340.st feet to the most Westerly
corner thereof; thence North 170 08' East along the Northwesterly line n said Parcel Claude M
feet to an iron pipe at the most Westerly comer of the parcel of land conveyed to Claude h
Walk, et ux, by Deed recorded March 4, 1957 in Book 3743 of Official Records,
Page 60; thence
along the Southerly line of said Walk parcel of land the following courses and distances,
South
alo 52' East Southerly feet North 6W Walk
East 21.60 feet; North 27° 10' East 35.53 feet;
South 75°
01' East 97.03 feet t the Southeaster) South 75° 01' East 70.00 parcel;
eet t thence
n ronspipe on the
East 58.53 feet to an iron pipe; thence
Easterly line of the said Payne parcel of land; thence South 7° 02' Wei along said Easterly me
to the point of beginning.
PARCEL TWO:
and egress and t M he installation and maintenance of
ap of the M.S. Gardner Estate, being part of the Rancho
A non - exclusive easements for ingress
public utilities over a portion of Lot 1,
Rinconada De Los Gatos, described as follows:
(a) A strip of 12 t a4 point on he Easterly line ofrhe 0.617 of'an'acre parbcell of land conveyed
Beginning P
2 1924 in Book 86 of Official Records, Page 63;
to F.C. Cushman by Deed recorded May
arcel of land described in the Deed o Gino A. Pasquali, et ux, recorded
t t from the Westerly corner o the
distant thereon South 180 18' 30" West 20.00 fee
1.4384 acre p
May 25, 1948 in Book 1621 of Official Records, Page 47; thence South 72° 55' East
parallel with the Southwesterly line of said 1.4384 acre parcel of land 437.61 feet to a
point in a line drawn South 170 05' West from the Southeasterly corner of said 1.4384
acre parcel.
(b) Beginning at the true point of beginning of the parcel k land described R the Deed to
195 -7 in Cl hence Walk, 17° 05' corded march
feet, thence North 180 33f Off West feet;
thence South 72° 55' East 56.49 feet; thence South 17° O5' West 53.00 feet; and thence
North 73° 55' West 40.00 feet to said true opoint
iof beginning.
(c) The most Northwesterly 40 feet of the parcel of land conveyed to Claude M. Walk, et ux,
recorded March 41 1957, Book 3743 of Official Records, Page 60, being the most
Northwesterly 40 feet of Parcel "C" as shown on Map of Record of Survey recorded
June 13, 1956, Book 70 of Maps, Page 29.
PARCEL THREE:
An easement for the installation and apipe oniada De within
Los Gat's,,bei g that
Map of the M.S. Gardner Estate, being g part of the Rancho R
portion of the following described 10 foot strip of land lying within the lands of the grantors in
the Deed from Mogens Olesen, et ux, to Claude M. Walk, et al, recorded May 9, 1957 in Book
3794 of Official Records, Page 196.
A strip of land 10 feet wide the centerline of which is described as follows:
Commencing at the intersection of the center line of Short Road and Shannon Road; thence
Northeasterly along the center line of Short Road, North 18° 16' East (said bearing taken for
purposes of this description) a distance of 272.50 feet; thence South 72° 17' 30" East 20.00
feet to the actual point of beginning on the Westerly line of the lands of John P. Urzi, acquired
by Deed recorded December 30, 1954 in Book 3050 of Official Records, Page 340; thence South
720 17' 30" East 465.00 feet; thence South 740 49' 30" East 170.00 feet to the end of the
aforementioned center line.
APN: 527 -02 -001
A525 -15 -022
Page 2 of 2
i
O
a
.tooa
J ^b
a
Y
Q
J
U
Y
a
o a.
ue
a n
m �4
J
U
rN+ V
o ° w
<4
A
o �
�e
ql C•d '^I e
� � W
a 1 �
I U
p I
O , p
�oSx91 u � W
e I s
j 1%!
m
d dl
'0 nl
m, 1
1
I
s2 f
. gy9e U
(1Ctt£I U J n� 61 x.1 �Q1�
sn Q r
_ 1 1
bt �
bl O
/ P4
,lit
z r 7
^ W v
Z 5-
M
M
O
N
r
°
� a
�
P
r
b
o �
�e
ql C•d '^I e
� � W
a 1 �
I U
p I
O , p
�oSx91 u � W
e I s
j 1%!
m
d dl
'0 nl
m, 1
1
I
s2 f
. gy9e U
(1Ctt£I U J n� 61 x.1 �Q1�
sn Q r
_ 1 1
bt �
bl O
/ P4
,lit
z r 7
^ W v
Z 5-
N
XM
!➢
`S
j'l o
r
11. N
{ 2�' p w
J O
m �
e Ci
o 4
J vi
�
O C
y 'y
'r
291
J-OVS
a d �
�
N
XM
!➢
`S
j'l o
r
11. N
{ 2�' p w
J O
m �
e Ci
o 4
J vi
.a.0 , t b33 3�721i7 "—
qAIAMT r Aram, Mcea yofnt eenancp Y Liz FO:: rtco: a
_ -
AT ri t-j r: _
I Parley _B, "Pegne, and D1ana1H, 'Payne, WiMM tt 71111 6UpraoirGOmj30) '
hie wife./ -- _ "
— . 19:3 MAY t "5 . Pit: 4 a 27,'
'an - hen,GRAkiTO Har "veq,D.Rose and
IN
'.JyAlia:P,eye Ross, his'Nife, C26CIALFECCLUi.
ySA!IIA CLAD MINY
ASIOWTtivelriS Jl_d tralp,opeg11mi1einaK
cm-ty of SmtA Clan, SMe of GIi7o+rii,,"aca.'hrd .. relbn:._ . .
g0 'K.wnF «R�aa
.Beginning at the most, Southerly- "corner -of that certain parcel "of. land
conveyed-by Harris, et ux,to Parley P,Payne,. at ux, by Deed dated .
'January 21, 1955'and.reoorded January 21, "1955 in "Book 3064 -.6f Official
:. Records; 'page :568;. thence li. 750:011 W. along the Southwesterly livid " -- — .
of- "said parcel of ": :land 340:82 feet to the most Westerly corner thereof;..:'
thence 11._ 170'081*E. along the Northwesterly line of. said "parcel of _
land 102 ;51 feet to an iron pipe.at"the most Westerly corner of that
certain " parcel' of land 'conveyed by Pak-lay B.Payne, at ux to @laude_"-. .
M,. Walk, at ux,:by :Deed. dated.Karch.4; 1957 and recorded.Harch 4, 1957 -..
In Book, 3_743 of. Offlcinb. Records , page 60; thence along the Southerly
. line of said Walk parcel of land the following courses and distances,.
720 591 E. 80:00 feet; 11..61° 421'E. 21:60 feet;.N. 270.101 -'E. 35.53
'feet;: S, 750 -011, E. 97;03 feet to�the Southeasterly. corner of.the.said.:.
Stalk p6r-cel" of land,- thence S.- 440 �011-E.- 8_;. -53 feet to. ah�.; iron- pipe,.
'_thence .S; 730 611 E_70.60 feet to, an - iron pipe on the Easterly line of .
the said .Payne parcel -of eland; thends- 3. :70.02!'W. along-said £ssterly.
line to the "point of- beginning -and being a ".portion. Of 1Lot l as shown on —"
that certain HaD entitled . "Nap -of .theSubalvision of -the.H.S.Gardner Estate,
being part "o£ "the: Rancho."hinconads" de Los GgfOo , and which Hap was
filed for record: In the-office of�the: Reoorder . of the .County of -8anta Clara,
State of California,"on.November 23, 1887 In Hook OCO'of K,aps, page 39, .
and a portion of-the land described in the Deed from Bob Harris, at ux,
to Perley. B. Pa_ yne; "et".vx;...he_reinabove mentioned and shopls as. Parcel; -B
on•the-'1•lan:of record- ,of- surxey reeor -dad in,:.
"�O of ?laps; pad_ 29- Santa
Clara "County Records: :
Together - with-and ":di-appurtenant to the above, descr_l ed -pa- -reel of land,
non- exclusiveeasesiants for.ingresa and- egreseand for the inetallatioa'
and maintenance " :of ' public. utilities ever-and "along the following$esoribed
parcel of -tend: -
Ta'strip of ,.land 4Yfeet.wiae" the - SouthwsstArly "line',of ;which At .
described, -as,fbllows: Beginning at.a point' On the- Easterly - line "'of that
certain 0:617.of an acre par @el -of land- "conveyed by - Fay :Tupper "arid - Sarah
Tunpe" , husband 'and wife";- to . C.Cushmaw by :Deed dated-April 300 1924,
and- tecorded- Hay -2 °1924- 1n,.3ook.86rof _Official Recordej. page 63,'Sants-
Clara County Records; .distant, thereon- S. -18018130.0 W, 20;00.-feet froti the:
.a:ost• westerly corner *of `that- certain 1,4384 acre-parcel" of. land: described -
. -'in the-Dsed from ,L:A:. =Reidy et.ux,, to Gino"A.Pasquall, et ux, _dated,HaYY'17;
1948 -an8 -. recorded Hay -25"; 1948 in Book. 1621 of Off icial. Records,
.Santa Clara County RecorAa; thence parallel with the- Southwester?y- line of "
-se3d 7,4384 :acre `parcel of land S. 720 55'.. E. 437:61 " feet- to a� point "!n -
.. -,a line. drawn 5.170 OS''$, fr3m the Soiitheptsterly corner" of. said 1.4384.." --
scre.:onreel Of land;:: -
"(b' IBeginning at. the true point rof beginning =of the parcel of land.-
described in,the.Deed. from Perley B.PAyne,.-at. ux to-Claude-M. Walk,. -et ux,
dated Aarch 4, -1957. anA recorded Haroh - 4;._1957 -in Zook 3743 of Official - Records::
at pale 6o;'thence H: 170" OS` E. 36.00 feat;.thenc6 ?I, 180 33' 500 W,_28.30
feet; thence S. 720 .55' E.; 56,49 feet; "thence 'S, 17?_OS1 W- 12200 feet; aid' -.
=- -- thenco. 37.`72° 551 W,. 40.00'feet to -'said true point "'of . beginning.:; Ac), The most - 41orthwesterly -40 feet of that certain.pareel of land:
conveyed by Perley•B.Payne it uIr "to `Claude H Walk at ux dated Farah 4, ..
,3957, ;reeo•rded Hareli 4, 1957 Snr1101: 3743.:Of£icial- Reenrds, page..60.:
"Also together, »�th an""appurtenant, eadeient for`the instAllation an i
"malntenance, of- a water pipeline over, elong -and under that portion of the
fellow Sng deroritad'10 font strip lying xithln the lands of. the Grantors.
in the Deed from'' "Yogens Olesen at ux., tq,Claude"H.Wpik, et ux and Parley N.
Payne, at u7, dated May 5,,1957
'and recorded. Nay 9,t195.7'in Book 3794 i
- Official Records,' page 196; �( - - ,
eston each slow o
. In width, 5 f ' ad and, o
° A•strip of -land lO,fe-.- _ line of Short Road Road
described .as followeae,iter .line 1; -Short r
mcre.pai•ticuiarly rsaotion of th tion) co
nairg at ;the ante theaeterly along the center d0 feet ..�
Comore. thence Nor ses;of this- Lhe.
$haxuionHoad;._ 'taken .fQrP ., t..'20. A0
carpe feet
(Zs 2id0 %eeta;gthenae -.s. 7 ? °"ift lands of .John Palrzi,..
p of .
di -the - 7 you the.W®6ter3v -1 n @.19f4 in BOOk:3o5 �0 171 3p^ Sr
._poinb +of- •baginn�'ng December 3�r -'. ..the afore- .
. gpqulra :by •Deed. recorded Aeeorde;. thence S. 7
a a 34pr santa.Olari.Cp E :.,7 feet to end of
- Reoordsi P.g Lhenas S. 740 49 3 *the CouptY- °��ta Clara,,. tate of Y
065.00 feet;. all within
mentioned - center. line, described - ruts Of. "-Y —
California: .: - - herein . ce -of- public utiliti °s
:- Reserving from the P�'cel of -Sand f.116ti. ascribed -
end e�ess,end for 1nstPOler tynher3lraf ternd articiilarly
'for inre'ss d across the P P of ich are.. more P
_.over, alonst- ad.Scutheasterly lines,
.�Ttie Southwesterly ttie Southwesterly line of that certain, _
-ux Lo Farley
.described as follows: oint'on. 21 1955
(a) Beginning at a p Deed from Hob. Harris; :et.. r
parcel Of land described in thevary' 2-1 1955 o?d recorded County Records, .
Fayneiet �?u' YOffialaltHeco der.P 68 Seta Clara .County
b Off . Ol a„e along •desterly *linear at
in 2ook,3064 of; Y , E• yp -, feet from the southwesterly line direct
eoa; d. thence ruV -130 thence running 1n .a .direct
distant _thee. line, inffihe
of s81d pgel..0f nd , , 011 Ee 130.00 feet that diLtance
Payne parcel cf land S. 75 terminus ,Of. a, course and _
-- line NOrtheasterly. to the ein above des
cel.of land firstly. herein above described having
line - of.which
P'. o r E, .70.00 feet. lend 40.feet wide, the 22 or thwesterly
of�s.(b) O1 strip et the Qb6t westerly:cornar ' of the.'
. Also a' Beginning the .1401 thweeter1Y.14ne'of said
llows: thence .along line of
-said lands: -
is described as fo_ Northeasterly -
lands'first. her�inlO s5lifeet to the urtenant to the re¢ain
lands N. 17 OB • -_ _. be app . .
hts herein�re served are to run with snd .
The rigds of Grantor :.'- conditions- -
ing len. - -. '- act to: the following
'This. bonveYce'[is made and accepted, subs -
erected shall contain shall- be6kept. LOtUre esldertiaT- sterea (2). -that. no.l#.oe stoop ets in a
(1)Ttiat enYT living eyed `except; houaehold,p
then X1500 square. feet ro perty hareia convey r. - -- _
Or Qaintalned on the prop
reasonable number _ -. --
IFS o us:na s m.. .25th
Aaril i9l . 8.
.view• -
S Ts OF CALIFORNIA S° " -�_ p r!.}IS llong.-
COUNTY of SANTA. -. ,19)8 �Fe ley Diana lame- ,
a,,,t Aoril - - e and
.. as *i 5th . aid sure, w=°1nl `P°°"a r-3 P8yI1 T,}a, -,t; to
•Na.9 R+Nu mead lw n.a Cwv4 _ they e.KVxa ue i,me
Icdscdw me.L.. - .
b<uKa .route are.. .�m,»ra,.a•ma'un�l �. -. _
t
i