How to participate: The Town of Los Gatos strongly encourages your active participation in the public process, which is the cornerstone of democracy. If you wish to speak to an item on the agenda, please follow the participation instructions on page 2 of this agenda. If you wish to speak to an item NOT on the agenda, you may do so during the “Verbal Communications” period, by following the participation instructions on page 2 of this agenda. The time allocated to speakers may change to better facilitate the Town Council meeting.
Effective Proceedings: The purpose of the Town Council meeting is to conduct the business of the community in an effective and efficient manner. For the benefit of the community, the Town of Los Gatos asks that you follow the Town’s meeting guidelines while attending Town Council meetings and treat everyone with respect and dignity. This is done by following meeting guidelines set forth in State law and in the Town Code. Disruptive conduct is not tolerated, including but not limited to: addressing the Town Council without first being recognized; interrupting speakers, Town Council or Town staff; continuing to speak after the allotted time has expired; failing to relinquish the podium when directed to do so; and repetitiously addressing the same subject.
Deadlines for Public Comment and Presentations are as follows:
Persons wishing to make an audio/visual presentation on any agenda item must submit the presentation electronically, either in person or via email, to the Clerk’s Office no later than 3:00 p.m. on the day of the Council meeting.
Persons wishing to submit written comments to be included in the materials provided to Town Council must provide the comments as follows:
o For inclusion in the regular packet: by 11:00 a.m. the Thursday before the Council meeting
o For inclusion in any Addendum: by 11:00 a.m. the Monday before the Council meeting o For inclusion in any Desk Item: by 11:00 a.m. on the day of the Council Meeting
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
MARCH 07, 2023
110 EAST MAIN STREET AND TELECONFERENCE
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
LOS GATOS, CA
7:00 PM
Maria Ristow, Mayor
Mary Badame Vice Mayor
Matthew Hudes, Council Member
Rob Moore, Council Member
Rob Rennie, Council Member
PARTICIPATION IN THE PUBLIC PROCESS
Town Council Meetings Broadcast Live on KCAT, Channel 15 (on Comcast) on the 1st and 3rd Tuesdays at 7:00 p.m.
Rebroadcast of Town Council Meetings on the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays at 7:00 p.m.
Live & Archived Council Meetings can be viewed by going to:
www.LosGatosCA.gov/TownYouTube
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, IF YOU NEED SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT THE CLERK DEPARTMENT AT (408) 354-6834. NOTIFICATION 48 HOURS BEFORE THE MEETING WILL ENABLE THE TOWN TO MAKE REASONABLE ARRANGEMENTS TO ENSURE ACCESSIBILITY TO THIS MEETING [28 CFR §35.102-35.104]
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
MARCH 07, 2023
110 EAST MAIN STREET AND TELECONFERENCE
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 PM
IMPORTANT NOTICE
This is a hybrid meeting and will be held in-person at the Town Council Chambers at 110 E.
Main Street and virtually through the Zoom webinar application (log-in information provided below). Members of the public may provide public comments for agenda items in-person or virtually through the Zoom webinar by following the instructions listed below. The live stream of the meeting may be viewed on television and/or online at www.LosGatosCA.gov/TownYouTube.
PARTICIPATION
To provide oral comments in real-time during the meeting:
Zoom webinar: Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device: Please click this URL to join: https://losgatoscagov.zoom.us/j/88488901492?pwd=aTFYeFplZW90Ly9uZDNheEVXc2UxQT09 Passcode: 729037 You can also type in 884 8890 1492 in the “Join a Meeting” page on the Zoom website at https://zoom.us/join.
o When the Mayor announces the item for which you wish to speak, click the “raise hand” feature in Zoom. If you are participating by phone on the Zoom app, press *9 on your telephone keypad to raise your hand. Join by telephone: Join by Telephone: Dial: USA 877 336 1839 US Toll-free or 636 651 0008 US Toll. Conference code: 686100
o If you are participating by calling in, press #2 on your telephone keypad to raise your hand.
In-Person: If you wish to speak during the meeting, please complete a “speaker’s card” located on the back of the chamber benches and return it to the Town Clerk. If you wish to speak to an item on the agenda, please list the item number. If you wish to speak on an item NOT on the agenda, please list the subject and you may speak during the “Verbal Communications” period. The time allocated to speakers may change to better facilitate the Town Council meeting.
When called to speak, you may be asked to provide your full name and your town/city of residence. This identifying information is optional and not a requirement for participation. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes, or such other time as the Mayor may decide, consistent with the time limit for speakers at a Council meeting. If you wish to speak to an item or items on the Consent Calendar, please state which item number(s) you are commenting on at the beginning of your time.
If you are unable to participate in real-time, you may email to [email protected] the subject line “Public Comment Item #__ ” (insert the item number relevant to your comment) or “Verbal
Communications – Non-Agenda Item.” Comments received by 11:00 a.m. the day of the meeting will be reviewed and distributed before the meeting. All comments received will become part of the record.
RULES OF DECORUM AND CIVILITY
To conduct the business of the community in an effective and efficient manner, please follow the meeting guidelines set forth in the Town Code and State law.
The Town does not tolerate disruptive conduct, which includes but is not limited to:
· Addressing the Town Council without first being recognized; · Interrupting speakers, Town Council, or Town staff;
· Continuing to speak after the allotted time has expired; · Failing to relinquish the microphone when directed to do so; · Repetitiously addressing the same subject.
Town Policy does not allow speakers to cede their commenting time to another speaker. Disruption of the meeting may result in a violation of Penal Code Section 403.
MEETING CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
COUNCIL / MANAGER MATTERS
CONSENT ITEMS (Items appearing on the Consent Items are considered routine Town business and may be approved by one motion. Any member of the Council may request to have an item removed from the Consent Items for comment and action. Members of the public may provide input on any or multiple Consent Item(s) when the Mayor asks for public comments on the Consent Items. If you wish to comment, please follow the Participation Instructions contained on
the item will be heard.)
1. Approve Draft Minutes of the February 21, 2023 Town Council Meeting.
2. Approve the Draft Minutes of the February 23, 2023 Town Council Joint meeting of the Arts and Culture Commission, the Building Board of Appeals, the Community Health And Senior Services Commission, the Complete Streets and Transportation Commission, the Finance Commission, the General Plan Committee, the Historic Preservation Committee, the Housing Element Advisory Board, the Library Board, Parks Commission, the Personnel Board, the Planning Commission, the Senior Services Committee, and the Youth Commission.
3. Approve the Proposed Shannon Road Litigation Settlement and Release Agreements with the County of Santa Clara, Graniterock Construction, and Uretek; and Approve Revenue and Expenditure Budget Adjustments in the Amount of $1,565,000 to
Recognize the Settlement Proceeds and Authorize Spending for the Shannon Road Repair Capital Project (411-811-008)
4. Adopt a Resolution Proclaiming the Termination of the Local Emergency Caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic.
5. Designate the Town’s Agents by Title to Obtain Federal and/or State Financial Assistance Through the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES).
6. Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (CIP No. 811-9901):
a. Approve the Plans and Specifications;
b. Authorize Advertising the Project for Bid;
c. Authorize an Expenditure Budget Transfer in an Amount of $158,590 from Available Funds in CIP #813-0239;
d. Authorize a Revenue and Expenditure Budget Adjustment in the Amount of $143,713 to Recognize Receiving and Expending Funds from San José Water Company; and
e. Authorize a Revenue and Expenditure Budget Adjustment in the Amount of $55,545 to Recognize Receiving and Expending Funds from West Valley Sanitation District.
VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS (Members of the public are welcome to address the Town Council on any matter that is not listed on the agenda. To ensure all agenda items are heard and unless additional time is authorized by the Mayor, this portion of the agenda is limited to 30 minutes and no more than three (3) minutes per speaker. In the event additional speakers were not able to be heard during the initial Verbal Communications portion of the agenda, an additional Verbal Communications will be opened prior to adjournment.)
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Applicants/Appellants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of five minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the public may be allotted up to three minutes to comment on any public hearing item. Applicants/Appellants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of three minutes maximum for closing statements. Items requested/recommended for continuance are subject to Council’s consent at the meeting.)
7. Introduce an Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, by Title Only, Amending Planned Development Ordinance 2172 Relative to the Maximum Residence Size Allowed on Lot 14 and the Maximum Average Residence Size Allowed in the Shannon Valley Ranch Subdivision and Repealing Ordinance 2172 for the Shannon Valley Ranch Subdivision at Shannon and Hicks Roads (Shannon Oaks and Mountain Laurel Lanes) on Property Zoned HR-5:PD. APN: 567-24-023. This Request for Modification of a Planned Development Ordinance is not Considered a Project Under the California Environmental Quality Act. Planned Development Ordinance Application PD-22-001.
Location: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane. PROPERTY OWNER: Bright Smile Dental Office Defined Benefit Plan. APPLICANT: Kunling Wu, Trustee.
8. Discuss and Provide Direction on Possible Modifications to Regulations Adopted in Response to Senate Bill 9 for Urban Lot Split and Two-Unit Housing Development Applications. Location: Town-wide. Applicant: Town of Los Gatos.
OTHER BUSINESS (Up to three minutes may be allotted to each speaker on any of the following items.)
9. Discuss and Provide Direction on the Senior Roadmap, Including:
a. Identify Specific “Core Senior Services” to be Provided by Los Gatos-Saratoga Recreation with the Funding of $225,000 for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/24; b. Focus Community Efforts Towards Establishing a Potential 501c(3) for Fundraising for Ongoing Senior Services Expenditures and/or a Future Renovation/Rebuild of the Adult Recreation Center;
c. Refer the Transportation Year One Action Items to the Complete Streets and Transportation Commission for Consideration and Addition to its Work Plan for 2023;
d. Defer the Housing Year One Action Items for Future Council Discussion and Direction After the Certification of the Housing Element;
e. Recognize the Recent Accomplishments of the Community Health and Senior Services Commission (CHSSC), Discuss the Capacity of CHSSC, and Identify Specific Year One Priorities from the Roadmap for the CHSSC 2023 Work Plan; f. Determine Other Specific One Year Action Items from the Roadmap; and g. Thank the Senior Services Committee (SSC) Members for Their Service to the Town, Encourage the Members to Stay Engaged with Roadmap Implementation as Active Community Members with the CHSSC, and Sunset the SSC.
ADJOURNMENT (Council policy is to adjourn no later than midnight unless a majority of Council votes for an extension of time).
Writings related to an item on the Town Council meeting agenda distributed to members of the Council within 72 hours of the meeting are available for public inspection at the front desk of the Los Gatos Town Library, located at 100 Villa Avenue, and are also available for review on the official Town of Los Gatos website. Copies of desk items distributed to members of the Council at the meeting are available for review in the Town Council Chambers.
Note: In accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6; litigation challenging a quasi-adjudicatory decision of the Town Council must be brought within 90 days after the decision is final unless a shorter time is required by State or Federal law.
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 03/07/2023
ITEM NO: 1
DRAFT
Minutes of the Town Council Meeting
February 21, 2023
The Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a regular meeting in-person and utilizing teleconferencing means on Tuesday, February 21, 2023, at 7:00 p.m.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Maria Ristow, Vice Mayor Mary Badame, Council Member Matthew Hudes, Council Member Rob Moore, Council Member Rob Rennie.
Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Andrew Berg led the Pledge of Allegiance. The audience was invited to participate.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
Gabrielle Whelan, Town Attorney, stated the Town Council met in Closed Session on February 15, 2023 to discuss real estate negotiations with NUMU and Los Gatos Recreation and there was no reportable action.
COUNCIL/TOWN MANAGER REPORTS
Council Matters
- Council Member Moore stated inclement weather is coming and encouraged all to prepare; judged a student speaker contest put on by the Los Gatos Lion’s Club; attended two trainings, one hosted by Working Partnerships for new local elected officials; met with residents; attended the West Valley Sanitation District Authority Board meeting, the Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority Board meeting, the Finance Commission meeting as an observer, and the Housing Element Advisory Board (HEAB) meeting; and commented on Black History Month.
Recess 7:09 p.m. due to a hybrid technology glitch.
Reconvene 7:15 p.m.
- Vice Mayor Badame stated she attended the Finance Commission meeting as an observer; met with NUMU Board Member Barney Davidge and KCAT Board Member Joanne Talisfore. - Council Member Hudes stated he attended the Senior Service Committee Road Map Subcommittee meetings; met with the Mayor of Monte Sereno and met with a Board Member of NUMU; attended the Cities Association City Selection Committee and Board meetings, and Amateur Radio Emergency Services (ARES)/Radio Amateur Civil Emergency
PAGE 2 OF 6
SUBJECT: DRAFT Minutes of the Town Council Meeting of February 21, 2023 DATE: February 24, 2023
Council Matters – continued
Services (RACES) group; observed the Finance Commission meeting; met with a member of the Los Gatos-Monte Sereno Police Foundation; and attended the Senior Service Committee meeting and the Housing Element Advisory Board (HEAB) meeting. - Council Member Rennie stated he attended Finance Commission and Joint Venture Silicon Valley State of the Valley.
- Mayor Ristow stated she attended a Beautification Committee Kick-Off meeting and announced a volunteer beatification project on Saturday, March 4 at 8:30 a.m. gathering at Los Gatos Coffee Roasting Company; met with three faith-based community members with the Town Manager Prevetti regarding services for the unhoused; attended the Housing Element Advisory Board meeting as an observer, the Finance Commission meeting, a Ribbon Cutting at Mancini’s Sleep World, and the Joint Venture Silicon Valley State of the Valley; and met with many residents to discuss a variety of topics.
Manager Matters
- Announced a variety of Library programs are underway and encouraged the public to check the website for the current program offerings.
CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION)
1. Approve the Draft Minutes of the February 7, 2023 Town Council Meeting.
2. Approve the Draft Minutes of the February 15, 2023 Town Council Closed Session Meeting.
3. Approve the Draft Minutes of the February 15, 2023 Special Town Council Meeting.
4. Adopt a Resolution Reaffirming Resolution 2021-044 and Making Findings Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953, as Amended by Assembly Bill 361, and, Due to Health and Safety Concerns for the Public, Authorizing the Use of Hybrid Meetings for the Town Council and the Continued Use of Virtual Meetings for Boards and Commissions While Town Staff Makes the Necessary Arrangements to Transition to In-Person Meetings for All Town Boards, Commissions, and Committees except for the Planning and Finance Commissions.
RESOLUTION 2023-009
5. Adopt an Ordinance Amending Chapter 24 (Subdivision Regulations) and Chapter 29 (Zoning Regulations) of the Town Code Regarding Town-Initiated Parcel Mergers. ORDINANCE 2337
6. Authorize the Town Manager to Execute a Use Agreement with Los Gatos Little League.
7. Authorize the Town Manager to Execute a Use Agreement with West Valley Red Hawks Lacrosse Club.
8. Adopt a Resolution Approving the Request to Change the Name “Terrace Court” to “La Terra Court” and Add the Name to the Town’s Official Street Names List to be Used at the Development Site. RESOLUTION 2023-010
9. Authorize the Town Manager to Execute a Fourth Amendment to Agreement Providing for Implementation of the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program and to Appoint the West Valley Clean Water Authority Executive Director as the Program Representative for the Town.
10. Receive the Monthly Financial and Investment Report for December 2022.
PAGE 3 OF 6
SUBJECT: DRAFT Minutes of the Town Council Meeting of February 21, 2023 DATE: February 24, 2023
Consent Items – continued
11. Authorize the Town Manager to Execute a Certificate of Acceptance and Notice of Completion for the Fiscal Year 2021/22 Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (CIP No. 811- 9901), Completed by Pavement Coatings, and Authorize the Town Clerk to File for Recordation.
12. Approve the Changes to the Town’s Investment Policy as Recommended by the Finance Commission. POLICY 4-02
Opened public comment.
No one spoke.
Closed public comment.
Council Member Hudes pulled item #3.
MOTION: Motion by Vice Mayor Badame to approve items 1-12, exclusive of item 3.
Seconded by Council Member Rennie.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS
Lynley Kerr Hogan
- Commented on abortion rates and fatherlessness in the Black community.
Catherine Somers, Chamber of Commerce
- Announced that the Chamber is holding its annual dinner at Testarossa on March 9, 2023 and invited the public to attend.
OTHER BUSINESS
13. Receive Update on the Community Grant Program and Provide Direction on the Program’s Funding Level for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-24.
Ryan Baker, Library Director, presented the staff report.
Opened public comment.
No one spoke.
Closed public comment.
Council discussed the matter.
PAGE 4 OF 6
SUBJECT: DRAFT Minutes of the Town Council Meeting of February 21, 2023 DATE: February 24, 2023
Other Business Item #13 – continued
MOTION: Motion by Mayor Ristow to continue the grant program as stated in the staff report; set aside funds to continue the grant program; add an equity section to the scoring rubric; prioritize proposals that address the needs of unhoused residents and Council Strategic Priorities; and direct all community members, partners, and organizations to apply to the grant process to request funds barring any extenuating circumstances. Seconded by Council Member Hudes.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
14. Mid-Year Budget Report - July 1 - December 31, 2022:
a. Receive FY 2022/23 Mid-Year Budget Report;
b. Authorize Budget Adjustments as Recommended in the Mid-Year Budget Report; and c. Provide Direction of the Order of Authorized Funding Source to Balance the FY 2022/23 Operating Budget, if Necessary, at the Final Close of the Fiscal Year.
Gitta Ungvari, Finance Director, presented the staff report.
Opened public comment.
Catherine Somers, Chamber of Commerce
- Commended the Finance Commission, requested the 0.2 FTE for the Senior Services Coordinator position to implement the Senior Services Committee Roadmap.
Closed public comment.
Council discussed the matter.
MOTION: Motion by Vice Mayor Badame to authorize the order of funding sources to balance the FY 2022/23 Operating Budget if necessary Measure G, OPEB Pension and Trust Fund, and American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds. Seconded by Council Member Hudes.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
MOTION: Motion by Vice Mayor Badame to authorize budget adjustments as recommended in the Mid-Year Budget Report. Seconded by Council Member Hudes.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
Recess 9:01 p.m.
Reconvene 9:11 p.m.
PAGE 5 OF 6
SUBJECT: DRAFT Minutes of the Town Council Meeting of February 21, 2023 DATE: February 24, 2023
15. Review and Provide Comments Regarding the Five-Year Forecast (FY 2023/24 – 2027/28) and Scenarios and Provide Input for the FY 2023/24 Budget Direction.
Gitta Ungvari, Finance Director, presented the staff report.
Opened public comment.
Nancy Rollett, Los Gatos-Saratoga Recreation Executive Director - Requested an ongoing lease abatement for facilities leased in Los Gatos.
Tom Picraux, Senior Service Committee Chair
- Requested the Council allocate funds for a part-time Age Friendly Coordinator.
Amy Davis, NUMU Executive Director
- Requested the lease fee for NUMU be lowered to $1 a year permanently.
Lee Fagot
- Requested the lease fee be lowered to $1 a year for the Los Gatos-Saratoga Recreation facilities permanently.
Melissa Toren, KCAT
- Requested Council allocate funds to continue The Producer’s Network.
Patrick Dirks
- Requested Council allocate funds for disaster preparedness including a full-time Emergency Services Coordinator, Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) recruitment outreach, Emergency Operations Center (EOC) upgrades, and Incident Command Post (ICP) equipment upgrades.
Closed public comment.
Council discussed the matter.
MOTION: Motion by Council Member Hudes to allocate ARPA funds as follows: $225,000 to Los Gatos-Saratoga Recreation to continue 55+ programing for one year; $150,000 additional funds for community grants; $25,000 for unhoused services to be determined at a later date; and $100,000 for KCAT. Seconded by Council Member Rennie.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
PAGE 6 OF 6
SUBJECT: DRAFT Minutes of the Town Council Meeting of February 21, 2023 DATE: February 24, 2023
Other Business Item #15 – continued
MOTION: Motion by Council Member Hudes to add a 0.2 FTE to Senior Service Age Friendly Coordinator, and an additional 0.5 FTE for the Emergency Services Coordinator.
AMENDMENT: Direct a place holder in the budget once more information is received on the responsibilities of the 0.2 FTE Age Friendly Coordinator. Seconded by Vice Mayor Badame.
VOTE: Motion fails 2-3. Council Member Moore, Council Member Rennie, Mayor Ristow voted no.
MOTION: Motion by Council Member Hudes to direct staff to attempt to find one person as a point of contact for moving forward the Senior Services Roadmap at a level not to exceed one day a week. Seconded by Council Member Rennie.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
Pulled Consent Items
3. Approve the Draft Minutes of the February 15, 2023 Special Town Council Meeting.
Gabrielle Whelan, Town Attorney, answered Council Member questions.
Opened public comment.
No one spoke.
Closed public comment.
Council discussed the matter.
MOTION: Motion by Council Member Hudes to approve the minutes of February 15, 2023.
Seconded by Mayor Ristow.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 11:23 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted:
_____________________________________
Jenna De Long, Deputy Clerk
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 03/07/2023
ITEM NO: 2
DRAFT
Minutes of the Town Council Special Joint Meeting with the Arts and Culture Commission, the Building Board of Appeals, the Community Health And Senior Services Commission, the Complete Streets and Transportation Commission, the Finance Commission, the General Plan Committee, the Historic Preservation Committee, the Housing Element Advisory Board, the Library Board, Parks Commission, the Personnel Board, the Planning Commission, the Senior Services Committee, and the Youth Commission
February 23, 2023
The Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos and other Town Boards, Commission and Committees conducted a special meeting in-person on Tuesday, February 23, 2023, at 7:00 p.m.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:02 P.M.
Mayor Ristow called the meeting to order and welcomed all the Board, Commission, and Committee members to the training session.
VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS
Ron Meyer
- Asked questions about the training.
OTHER BUSINESS
1. Receive Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Training.
Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager, introduced the item.
A representative from SKG Consulting provided the training.
Town Council, Board, Commission, and Committee members participated and completed the two-hour the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Training.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:01 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted:
_____________________________________
Wendy Wood, Town Clerk
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Parks and Public Works Director, and Finance Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 03/07/2023
ITEM NO: 3
DATE: March 3, 2023
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Gabrielle Whelan, Town Attorney
SUBJECT: Approve the Proposed Shannon Road Litigation Settlement and Release Agreements with the County of Santa Clara, Graniterock Construction, and Uretek; and Approve Revenue and Expenditure Budget Adjustments in the Amount of $1,565,000 to Recognize the Settlement Proceeds and Authorize Spending for the Shannon Road Repair Capital Project (411-811-008) RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Town Council approve proposed settlement and release agreements with the County of Santa Clara, Graniterock Construction, and Uretek; and approve revenue and expenditure budget adjustments in the amount of $1,565,000 to recognize the settlement proceeds and authorize spending for the Shannon Road Repair Capital Project (411-811-008).
BACKGROUND:
On January 16, 2018, the Town annexed a portion of Shannon Road (“the Road”) from the County of Santa Clara. After annexation, the Town noticed that necessary repairs to the Road had not been made. On March 3, 2022, the Town sued the County of Santa Clara to seek repairs or funding for repairs to the Road. The Town also sued two County contractors, Graniterock Construction and Uretek.
DISCUSSION:
The parties have reached proposed settlements, which will provide for a County payment of $1.5M to the Town, a payment of $50,000 from Graniterock Construction to the Town, and a payment of $15,000 from Uretek to the Town. These funds will be used to make repairs to Shannon Road. In exchange for these payments, the Town will ask the court to dismiss the Town’s lawsuit.
PAGE 2 OF 2
SUBJECT: Shannon Road Litigation – Proposed Settlement Agreements DATE: March 3, 2023
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Town Council approve the proposed settlement and release agreements, authorize the Town Attorney to approve any minor, non-material changes to the agreements, and authorize the Town Manager to execute the agreements on behalf of the Town.
FISCAL IMPACT:
These funds will assist the Town in making repairs to Shannon Road.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT:
Approval of these settlement and release agreements is not a project subject to CEQA. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, the Town’s repairs to Shannon Road will be categorically exempt from CEQA as improvements to existing facilities.
Attachments:
1. Proposed Settlement Agreement with County of Santa Clara.
2. Proposed Release Agreement with Graniterock Construction
3. Proposed Release Agreement with Uretek
Settlement Agreement and General Release Page 1 of 6 rev 6/22/2020 Plaintiff(s) v. County of Santa Clara ATTACHMENT 1
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE
This Settlement Agreement and General Release (“Agreement”) is made by and between Town of Los Gatos (“Plaintiff”) and the County of Santa Clara (“County”) in recognition of the following facts (collectively, “Parties”):
A. On March 3, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Complaint for Actual Fraud, Breach of Contract, Breach of Implied Warranty, Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, and Negligence concerning its annexation of an unincorporated County roadway designated “Shannon Road No. 27” by the Santa Clara Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”), in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Santa Clara Case No. 22CV395530 (“Action” or “Case No. 22CV395530”) against the County, Harry Freitas, Herbert Naraval, Ron Jackson, Dangkhoa Vo, David Parks, and Steve Wilson. These defendants are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “County Defendants.”
B. In Case No. 22CV395530, Plaintiff also sued Granite Rock Company, Uretek USA,Inc., and the Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Clara County. Granite Rock Company and Uretek USA, Inc. are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Contractor Defendants.”
C. On June 22, 2022, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint in Case No. 22CV395530 alleging Promissory Fraud, Fraud in Inducement, Breach of Contract, Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, and Negligence.
D. On July 11, 2022, Plaintiff dismissed Dangkhoa Vo, Steve Wilson, David Parks, and Ron Jackson without prejudice.
E. On August 16, 222, Plaintiff and LAFCO stipulated to LAFCO’s nonparticipation in Case No. 22CV395530 subject to LAFCO agreeing to be bound to any stipulation between Plaintiff and some or all of the parties to Case No. 22CV395530.
F. On August 17, 2022, the County, Harry Freitas, and Herbert Naraval demurred to the First Amended Complaint in Case No. 22CV395530.
G. Plaintiff and the County Defendants desire now to settle and compromise all claims that were asserted or could have been asserted against each other in Case No. 22CV395530 and all other known and unknown claims that they have or may have against each other on the terms and conditions set forth below.
ACCORDINGLY, THE PARTIES TO THIS AGREEMENT AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Dismissal of Action
Plaintiff will execute a Request for Dismissal with prejudice of its First Amended Complaint as to the County Defendants. Counsel representing Plaintiff will promptly deliver to counsel representing the County the executed Request for Dismissal with prejudice.
2. Payment to Plaintiff
Settlement Agreement and General Release Page 2 of 6 rev 6/22/2020 Plaintiff(s) v. County of Santa Clara ATTACHMENT 1
Upon complete execution of this Agreement, along with delivery of an executed Request for Dismissal with prejudice of Case No. 22CV395530 as to the County Defendants, the County will deliver to counsel representing Plaintiff a check payable to the Town of Los Gatos in the amount of one million, five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000). The County will not file the executed Request for Dismissal until the settlement check is delivered to Plaintiff. The County may issue Form 1099 paperwork or other reporting paperwork for this payment.
3. Mutual Release and Waivers
The County Defendants and Plaintiff each represent and warrant that he, she or it is the sole owner of all rights, claims, damages, actions causes of action, and suits at law or in equity that he, she or it may have against each other, and that he, she or it has not heretofore transferred, or agreed to transfer, any rights claims, damages, actions, causes of action, or suits at law or in equity that form the basis of this Agreement.
Except as to any claims Plaintiff against the Contractor Defendants, who receive no rights, interests or third-party beneficiary status under this Agreement, Plaintiff and County Defendants hereby release and forever discharge each other and all of their respective present and former departments, subdivisions, Board, Council, officers, directors, executives, agents, employees, attorneys, and each and all of their respective predecessors, transferees, successors, assigns, insurers, and sureties, from any and all liability, claims, demands and causes of action, including but not limited to any claims to invalidate Plaintiff’s annexation of Shannon Road No. 27 and/or for attorney fees and costs, forming a part of, or arising of or relating to Case No. 22CV395530 and its subject matter. The mutual release applies to all matters, whether presently known or unknown, and apply to all actual or potential causes of action which may now be available or may discovered at a future date.
4. Waiver of Civil Code Section 1542
THE UNDERSIGNED PARTIES EACH ACKNOWLEDGE
THAT THEIR LEGAL COUNSEL HAS ADVISED THEM OF
AND THEY ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROVISIONS OF
CALIFORNIA CODE SECTION 1542, WHICH A GENERAL
RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS THAT THE
CREDITOR OR RELEASING PARTY DOES NOT KNOW OR
SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME
OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE AND THAT, IF KNOWN BY
HIM OR HER, WOULD HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS
OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR OR THE
RELEASED PARTY.
Each of the undersigned parties acknowledge that they are generally releasing unknown claims and waives all rights they have or may have under Civil Code section 1542 or under any other similar statute or decisional or common law principle of any jurisdiction. Each of the undersigned parties acknowledge that if they have suffered, or in the future suffer, damages arising out of the matters released by this Agreement, they will not be able to make any claims for those damages.
5. No Admissions; General Release of No Evidentiary Effect
Settlement Agreement and General Release Page 3 of 6 rev 6/22/2020 Plaintiff(s) v. County of Santa Clara ATTACHMENT 1
Plaintiff acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement is given and accepted as part of a compromise and settlement of disputed claims. Plaintiff further acknowledges and agrees that the acceptance of this Agreement by any of the County Defendants shall not be construed or deemed to be an admission of any fact, matter, or thing. Neither this Agreement nor any of its terms shall be offered or received as evidence in any proceeding in any forum as an admission of any liability or wrongdoing on the part of any of the County Defendants.
6. Covenant Not to Sue
Plaintiff covenants and agrees that it will forever refrain from instituting any action or proceeding against the County Defendants that arises out of, is or may be, in whole or in part, based upon, related to, or connected with the subject matter of this Agreement. Plaintiff understands that the release contained in this Agreement is a complete defense to any action or other proceeding against the County Released Parties existing at the present time or in the future.
7. Fees and Costs Already Incurred
Each Party shall be responsible for its own costs and attorney fees incurred.
8. Proceedings to Enforce Agreement
In any proceeding at law or in equity to enforce any of the provisions or rights under this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover from the unsuccessful Party all costs, expenses and reasonable attorney fees incurred in the enforcement proceeding by the prevailing Party (including, without limitation, such costs, expenses and fees on any appeals) and if such prevailing Party shall recover judgment in any action or proceeding, such costs, expenses, including those of expert witnesses, and attorney fees shall be included in and as part of the judgment.
9. Representations and Warranties
Each Party hereby represents, warrants, and agrees as follows:
A. None of the Parties have made any statement or representations regarding any fact relied upon in entering into this Agreement, and each Party does not rely upon any statement, representation, or promise of any other Party executing this Agreement, or in making the settlement provided for herein, except as expressly stated in this Agreement.
B. Each Party has made such investigation of the facts pertaining to this settlement and this Agreement, and of all the matters pertaining thereto, as it deems necessary.
C. Each Party has read this Agreement and understands its contents.
D. In entering into this Agreement and the settlement provided for herein, each Party assumes the risk of any misrepresentation, concealment, or mistake. If a Party should subsequently discover that any fact relied upon by it in entering into this Agreement was untrue,
Settlement Agreement and General Release Page 4 of 6 rev 6/22/2020 Plaintiff(s) v. County of Santa Clara ATTACHMENT 1
or that any fact was concealed from it, or that its understanding of the facts or the law was incorrect, the Party shall not be entitled to any relief in connection therewith including, without limitation, any alleged right or claim to set aside or rescind this Agreement. This Agreement is intended to be and is final and binding, regardless of any claims of misrepresentation, concealment of fact, or mistake of law or fact.
E. Each Party has investigated all claims and facts pertaining to this Agreement as it deems necessary. Each Party is aware that it may hereafter discover claims or facts in addition to or different from those it now knows or believes to be true with respect to the matters related herein. Nevertheless, it is its intention to fully, finally, and forever settle and release all such matters and claims that now exist, may exist, or have existed between Plaintiff and the County Defendants. In furtherance of such intention, the Agreement shall be and remain a full and complete release of all such matters, notwithstanding the discovery or existence of any additional or different claims or facts.
F. Each Party hereby acknowledges that it has been represented by counsel of its choice throughout the negotiations that preceded the execution of this Agreement and in connection with the preparation and execution of this Agreement. Each Party acknowledges and agrees that it has executed this Agreement voluntarily, without coercion or duress of any kind, and on the advice of its independent counsel.
G. Plaintiff and/or its attorney cooperated in the drafting and preparation of this Agreement. Hence, in any construction to be made of this Agreement, its provisions shall not be construed for or against either party based on which party drafted them.
10. Integration
Each party covenants and agrees that the terms of this Agreement are contractual, and not mere recital, and constitute a fully binding and complete agreement between Plaintiff and the County Defendants with regard to its subject matter. This Agreement supersedes any and all prior or contemporaneous agreements, representations and understandings of or between the parties, and each Party warrants that it is not relying on any such prior representations. Each Party understands and agrees that the terms of this Agreement may not be altered, amended, modified, or otherwise changed in any respect or particular except by a writing duly executed by an authorized representative of the Plaintiff and an authorized representative of the County.
11. Severability
If any portion or provision of this Agreement is found to be illegal, invalid, unenforceable, nonbinding, or otherwise without legal force or effect, the remaining portion(s) will remain in force and be fully binding.
12. Non-Assignment
Plaintiff warrants and represents that there has been no assignment, sale, or transfer, by operation of law or otherwise, of any claim, right, or interest released herein. Plaintiff agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County Released Parties from any claim, liability, or
Settlement Agreement and General Release Page 5 of 6 rev 6/22/2020 Plaintiff(s) v. County of Santa Clara ATTACHMENT 1
expense that may be incurred as a result of the assertion of any such claim, right, or interest by any person by reason of any such assignment, sale, or transfer.
13. Governing Law and Forum
This Agreement shall be deemed to have been entered into in Santa Clara County, California, and all questions of validity, interpretation, or performance of any of its terms or of any rights or obligations of the parties to this Agreement shall be governed by California law.
The parties agree that the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara shall retain jurisdiction over this matter to enforce this Agreement.
14. Additional Acts
The parties hereto agree to perform such acts and to execute such documents as are necessary to carry out the provisions and purposes of this Agreement.
15. Contract Execution
This Agreement may be executed in counterparts with the same force and effectiveness as though executed in a single document. Unless otherwise prohibited by law or County policy, the parties agree that an electronic copy of a signed agreement, or an electronically signed agreement, has the same force and legal effect as an agreement executed with an original ink signature. The term “electronic copy of a signed agreement” refers to a transmission by facsimile, electronic mail, or other electronic means of a copy of an original signed agreement in a portable document format. The term “electronically signed agreement” means an agreement that is executed by applying an electronic signature using technology approved by the County.
Dated: March , 2023 By __________________________________ Its: _________________________________
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
Dated: March , 2023 By:______________________________
James R. William, County Counsel,
County of Santa Clara
Dated: March , 2023 By:______________________________
Approved as to Form and Legality,
Deputy County Counsel, County of
Santa Clara
Settlement Agreement and General Release Page 6 of 6 rev 6/22/2020 Plaintiff(s) v. County of Santa Clara ATTACHMENT 1
ATTORNEY’S CERTIFICATE
This Agreement was executed under my direction and advice, and I explained the terms and conditions to my clients in a manner it/they could reasonably understand. ______________________________
Attorney for Plaintiff
2737027
ATTACHMENT 2
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE
This Settlement Agreement and General Release (“Agreement”) is made by and between the Plaintiff Town of Los Gatos (“Town”), on the one hand, and Defendant Granite Rock Company (“Graniterock”) on the other hand, in recognition of the following facts (collectively, “Parties” and individually each a “Party”):
A. On March 4, 2022, Plaintiff Town of Los Gatos filed a Complaint for Actual Fraud, Breach of Contract, Breach of Implied Warranty, Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, and Negligence concerning its annexation of an unincorporated County roadway designated “Shannon Road No. 27” by the Santa Clara Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”), in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Santa Clara Case No. 2CV395530 (“Action” or “Case No. 2CV395530”) against the County and Harry Freitas, Herbert Naraval, Ron Jackson, Dangkhoa Vo, David Parks, and Steve Wilson. These defendants are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “County Defendants.” B. In Case No. 2CV395530, Plaintiff Town of Los Gatos also sued Graniterock, Uretek, and the Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Clara County. As alleged in the Action and pursuant to the terms of a written agreement (“Contract”), the County hired Graniterock, as a general contractor, to perform various construction and repair work for Shannon Road No. 27 (“Work”). Graniterock, in turn and pursuant to the terms of a written subcontract agreement (“Subcontract”), hired Uretek to perform various portions of the Work.
C. On June 22, 2022, Plaintiff Town of Los Gatos filed a First Amended Complaint in Case No. 2CV395530 alleging Promissory Fraud, Fraud in Inducement, Breach of Contract, Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, and Negligence.
D. On July 11, 2022, Plaintiff Town of Los Gatos dismissed Dangkhoa Vo, Steve Wilson, David Parks, and Ron Jackson without prejudice.
E. On August 16, 222, Plaintiff Town Los Gatos and LAFCO stipulated to LAFCO’s non-participation in Case No. 2CV395530 subject to LAFCO agreeing to be bound to any stipulation between Plaintiff Town of Los Gatos and some or all of the parties to Case No. 2CV395530.
F. On August 17, 2022, the County, Harry Freitas, and Herbert Naraval demurred to Plaintiff Town of Los Gatos’ First Amended Complaint in Case No. 2CV395530. On October 25, 2022, Graniterock also demurred to Plaintiff Town of Los Gatos’ First Amended Complaint in Case No. 2CV395530. Neither demurrer has yet to be heard and no other responsive pleadings have yet been filed.
G. By and through these pleadings and this Agreement, Graniterock denies any liability to Plaintiff Town of Los Gatos, or any other party whether named in the action or not, and continues to deny any liability to Plaintiff or any other party. The Parties now desire to fully and forever settle each of the claims or disputes which exist between the Parties and which arise out of the matters in controversy in Case No. 2CV395530, and all other known and unknown claims that they have or may have against each other, including all further claims for
ATTACHMENT 2
contribution or indemnity (whether contractual or equitable), on the terms and conditions set forth below.
Wherefore, in consideration of the conditions, covenants and agreements the Parties do hereby agree as follows:
SETTLEMENT TERMS
1. Payment to Town: Graniterock shall pay to Plaintiff FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($50,000.00).
Said Settlement is expressly conditioned on the prior execution of a written agreement by the County of Santa Clara whereby the County on behalf of itself and its respective successors, assigns, insurers, agents, and all others who may claim through them or take any interest in the matters released herein (hereinafter “Related Persons and Entities”), fully and forever release, discharge, acquit and covenant not to sue Graniterock, and each of its current, former or future officers, directors, managers, members, receivers, insurance carriers, reinsurers, joint venturers, sole proprietors, partners, stockholders, sureties, consultants, employees, agents, subcontractors, attorneys, experts, trusts, subsidiaries, parent corporations, affiliated entities and their heirs, spouses, successors and assigns of any such person or entity, from any and all known or unknown claims, obligations, liabilities, representations, warranties, costs, expenses, damages, attorneys’ fees under statute or contract, damages, expert expenses, demands, rights, defense and indemnity claims (whether express, implied, or equitable), and causes of action, whether known or unknown, that arise from or are related in or in any manner connected with the Shannon Road No. 27, any contract, work, or action, which were claimed, stated, or which could have been claimed or stated in Case No. 2CV395530.
The Settlement Payment shall be tendered by check to Plaintiff’s counsel within 30 calendar days after full execution of this Agreement and full execution of the written agreement by the County of Santa Clara, whichever is later. Payment shall be made by check payable to “Town of Los Gatos” and delivered to the Town Attorney at Town Hall, 110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95030.
2. Dismissal of Complaint and Cross-Complaints. Within 10 days of full execution of this Agreement, and payment to Plaintiff, Plaintiff shall cause to be filed a dismissal with prejudice of the complaint against Graniterock. Thereafter, Plaintiff shall provide Graniterock with a copy of the endorsed filed dismissal, in accordance with California Rules of Court, Rule
1.1390.
3. Town’s Release of Claims. In consideration for the settlement to Plaintiff, and in consideration for each Settling Parties’ agreement to bear their own fees and costs in Case No. 2CV395530, Plaintiff hereby fully and forever releases and discharges Graniterock, and each of its respective affiliated and subsidiary companies, all of its respective owners, principals, shareholders, partners, joint venturers, officers, directors, servants, employees, predecessors, heirs, successors, and insurers, of and from each and every claim, demand, action, cause of action, loss, cost, expense or element of damage, of every kind and character, whether known or
ATTACHMENT 2
unknown, contingent or certain, past, present or future, which arises out of, relates to, or in any way concerns any of the following matters:
All claims raised by, alleged by, or made by, or which could have been raised by, alleged by, or made by, Plaintiff in Case No. 2CV395530.
In entering into this Agreement and the release provided for herein, Plaintiff intends to, and hereby does, waive all rights or benefits which Plaintiff may have had under California Civil Code Section 1542, which provides:
A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.
Plaintiff acknowledges that there is a risk that the damages which Plaintiff believes it may have suffered, or will suffer, may later turn out to be other than, or a different character from, or greater than, those damages now known, suspected, or believed to be true. Further, other facts on which the Plaintiff may be relying upon in entering into this Agreement, may later turn out to be other than, or different from, those now known, suspected, or believed to be true.
Plaintiff further acknowledges that in entering into this settlement and the release provided for in this Agreement, Plaintiff have expressly agreed to accept the risk of such possible unknown damages, claims, demands, actions or causes of action. Plaintiff acknowledges, represents, and warrants, that in waiving all rights or benefits which it may have had under California Civil Code Section 1542, Plaintiff have had the advice of counsel, and it further represents, warrants and agrees that this Agreement shall remain in full force, and in effect, notwithstanding the occurrence of any such possible changes or differences in material facts.
4. Authority; No Representations: Each person executing this Agreement represents that he or she has authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the entity for which they are signing. Each of the Parties hereto executes this Agreement, acting upon their independent judgment and/or upon the advice of their respective counsel without any representations or inducements, express or implied, of any kind or nature, from each to the other, except as specifically set forth herein.
5. Covenant Not to Sue: Except to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the Parties agree and represent that they shall not, at any time hereafter, commence, maintain or prosecute any action, suit, proceeding, investigation, claim, grievance or charge with any court, administrative agency, arbitrator or any other body or person, or aid or assist others in prosecuting such action, suit, proceeding, investigation, complaint, claim, grievance, or charge, except in response to governmental agency or court inquiries or as compelled by legal process, against any other Party related to any of the released claims.
ATTACHMENT 2
6. No Admission of Fault, Liability or Wrongdoing. Each Party acknowledges that such Party is entering into this Agreement voluntarily, solely for the purpose of bringing the subject claims to a conclusion, and to avoid further costs, risks and expenses associated with continued litigation. This Agreement is the result of a compromise, and by entering into this Agreement, or by agreeing to pay any sum of money or to provide any other form of consideration for the execution of this Agreement, no Party is admitting any fault, liability or wrongdoing, or any matter of fact, nor shall this Agreement ever be construed as such or as evidence or proof of the existence of any damages at the Subject Property.
7. Enforcement. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6, the Santa Clara County Superior Court shall retain jurisdiction over this Agreement in the event any action at law or in equity is required to enforce any of the provisions or rights under this Agreement.
8. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event of any litigation arising under or concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs from the non-prevailing party in such litigation. Except as expressly stated herein, each Party hereto shall be responsible for its own attorneys’ fees and court costs incurred and/or accrued, and specifically waive any and all claim(s) against any other Party hereto for the recovery of the same.
9. Entire Agreement. This Agreement is the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any and all prior or contemporaneous oral and written agreements and discussions between or among any of them. The Parties hereto acknowledge and agree that there are no conditions, covenants, agreements, or understandings between or among any of them except as set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement may be amended only by a further signed writing.
10. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement is binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of each of the Parties hereto and their respective parent companies, subsidiaries, affiliates, predecessors, successors, divisions, shareholders, directors, officers, employees, attorneys, agents, representatives, heirs, and assigns.
11. Joint Drafting. Each of the Parties hereto has cooperated and participated in the drafting and preparation of this Agreement. Accordingly, the Parties hereby acknowledge and agree that this Agreement shall not be construed or interpreted in favor of or against any Party by virtue of the identity of its preparer.
12. Governing Law. This Agreement is to be executed and delivered within the State of California, and its validity, construction, and performance, as well as the rights and obligations of the Parties hereunder, shall be governed, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without regard to principles of choice of law.
13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and when signed by each of the Parties hereto with signed copies delivered to the other Parties, or their attorney(s), shall be deemed in full force and effect executed as set forth below. Further, a
ATTACHMENT 2
signature received by facsimile or e-mail (in PDF or other electronic form) is as binding as an original signature.
14. Severability. If any provision, or any part of any provision, of this Agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid, unenforceable or contrary to public policy or any law, then the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect.
15. Headings. Paragraphs, titles, or captions contained herein are inserted only as a matter of convenience and for reference, and in no way define, limit, extend or describe the scope of this Agreement or any provision hereof. No provision in this Agreement is to be interpreted for or against any Party because that Party or its legal representative drafted such provision.
Dated: January __, 2023 TOWN OF LOS GATOS
By:
Name: Gabrielle Whelan
Title: Town Attorney,
Town of Los Gatos
Dated: January __, 2023 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY
By:
Name:
Title:
ATTACHMENT 3
RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS
Town of Los Gatos v. County of Santa Clara, et al.
Santa Clara Superior Court, Case No.: 22CV395530
This Release of All Claims (“AGREEMENT”) is entered into by and among the following parties (collectively the “SETTLING PARTIES” or “PARTIES” and individually as “SETTLING PARTY” or “PARTY”):
1. Plaintiff and Petitioner Town of Los Gatos, a public entity (“PLAINTIFF”); and
2. Defendant Uretek, USA, Inc. (“URETEK”);
RECITALS
On March 4, 2022, PLAINTIFF filed a Complaint for Damages, entitled “Town of Los Gatos v. County of Santa Clara; Harry Freitas; Herbert Naraval; Dangkhoa Vo; Ronald Jackson; David Parks; Steve Wilson; Granite Rock, Uretek USA, Inc.; Does 1-25 inclusive as Defendants” in the Superior Court in and for Santa Clara County, case number 22CV395530.
The Complaint alleged five causes of action against the Defendants: 1) Promissory Fraud; 2) Fraud in Inducement; 3) Breach of Contract; 4) Breach of Covenant and Fair Dealing; and 5) Negligence.
On June 6, 2022 PLAINTIFF filed a First Amended Complaint against the same named defendants, but which dismissed Ronald Jackson and added a Petition for Writ of Mandate against Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Clara County as Respondent. The causes of action in the First Amended Complaint were as follows: 1) Promissory Fraud; 2) Fraud in Inducement; 3) Breach of Contract; 4) Breach of Covenant and Fair Dealing; and 5) Negligence and two Petitions for Writ of Mandate: 1) Invalidate Annexation of Shannon Road No. 27 and Compel Compliant with California Public Records Act.
On July 11, 2022, PLAINTIFF dismissed Dangkhoa Vo, Steve Wilson, David Parks, and Ron Jackson without prejudice.
On August 16, 222, PLAINTIFF and LAFCO stipulated to LAFCO’s non-participation in Case No. 22CV395530 subject to LAFCO agreeing to be bound to any stipulation between PLAINTIFF and some or all of the parties to Case No. 22CV395530.
On August 17, 2022, the County, Harry Freitas, and Herbert Naraval demurred to the First Amended Complaint in Case No. 2CV395530. On October 25, 2022, Graniterock also demurred to the First Amended Complaint in Case No. 22CV395530. Neither of the demurrers have been heard yet and per agreement of the parties, no other responsive pleadings have yet been filed.
ATTACHMENT 3
The Complaint, and any amended Complaints, are collectively referred to herein as the SUBJECT ACTION.
By and through these pleadings and this AGREEMENT, URETEK denies any liability to PLAINTIFF, or any other party whether named in the action or not, and continue to deny any liability to PLAINTIFF or any other party. THE PARTIES now desire to fully and forever settle each of the claims or disputes which exist between THE PARTIES and which arise out of the matters in controversy in the SUBJECT ACTION, and to cause the dismissal with prejudice of the claims between them in the SUBJECT ACTION.
Wherefore, in consideration of the conditions, covenants, and agreements contained herein, the SETTLING PARTIES do hereby agree as follows:
SETTLEMENT TERMS
1. PAYMENT TO PLAINTIFF
URETEK, by and through its liability insurance carrier, shall pay to PLAINTIFF FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($15,000.00).
Said Settlement is expressly conditioned on the prior execution of a written agreement by the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA whereby the County on behalf of itself and its respective successors, assigns, insurers, agents, and all others who may claim through them or take any interest in the matters released herein (hereinafter “Related Persons and Entities”), fully and forever release, discharge, acquit and covenant not to sue URETEK, and each of its current, former or future officers, directors, managers, members, receivers, insurance carriers, reinsurers, joint venturers, sole proprietors, partners, stockholders, sureties, consultants, employees, agents, subcontractors, attorneys, experts, trusts, subsidiaries, parent corporations, affiliated entities and their heirs, spouses, successors and assigns of any such person or entity, from any and all known or unknown claims, obligations, liabilities, representations, warranties, costs, expenses, damages, attorneys’ fees under statute or contract, damages, expert expenses, demands, rights, defense and indemnity claims (whether express, implied, or equitable), and causes of action, whether known or unknown, that arise from or are related in or in any manner connected with the Shannon Road No. 27, any contract, work, or action, which were claimed, stated, or which could have been claimed or stated in the SUBJECT ACTION.
The Settlement Payment shall be tendered by check to PLAINTIFF’s counsel within 30 calendar days after full execution of this Agreement and full execution of the written agreement by the County of Santa Clara, whichever is later. Payment shall be made by check payable to “Town of Los Gatos” and delivered to Gabrielle Whelan, Town Attorney, at 110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95030.
2. DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT AND CROSS-COMPLAINTS
Within 10 days of full execution of this Agreement, and payment to PLAINTIFF, PLAINITFF shall cause to be filed a dismissal with prejudice of the complaint against URETEK.
ATTACHMENT 3
Thereafter, PLAINTIFF shall provide URETEK with a copy of the endorsed filed dismissal, in accordance with California Rules of Court, Rule 1.1390.
3. RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS BY PLAINTIFFS
In consideration for the settlement to PLAINTIFF, and in consideration for each Settling Parties’ agreement to bear their own fees and costs in the SUBJECT ACTION, PLAINTIFF hereby fully and forever releases and discharges URETEK, and each of its respective affiliated and subsidiary companies, all of its respective owners, principals, shareholders, partners, joint venturers, officers, directors, servants, employees, predecessors, heirs, successors, and insurers, of and from each and every claim, demand, action, cause of action, loss, cost, expense or element of damage, of every kind and character, whether known or unknown, contingent or certain, past, present or future, which arises out of, relates to, or in any way concerns any of the following matters:
All claims raised by, alleged by, or made by, or which could have been raised by, alleged by, or made by, PLAINTIFF in the SUBJECT ACTION.
In entering into this AGREEMENT and the release provided for herein, PLAINTIFF intends to, and hereby does, waive all rights or benefits which PLAINTIFF may have had under California Civil Code Section 1542, which provides:
A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.
PLAINTIFF acknowledgesthat there is a risk that the damages which PLAINTIFF believes it may have suffered, or will suffer, may later turn out to be other than, or a different character from, or greater than, those damages now known, suspected, or believed to be true. Further, other facts on which the PLAINTIFF may be relying upon in entering into this Agreement, may later turn out to be other than, or different from, those now known, suspected, or believed to be true.
PLAINTIFF further acknowledges that in entering into this settlement and the release provided for in this Agreement, PLAINTIFF have expressly agreed to accept the risk of such possible unknown damages, claims, demands, actions or causes of action. PLAINTIFF acknowledges, represents, and warrants, that in waiving all rights or benefits which it may have had under California Civil Code Section 1542, PLAINTIFF have had the advice of counsel, and it further represents, warrants and agrees that this Agreement shall remain in full force, and in effect, notwithstanding the occurrence of any such possible changes or differences in material facts.
4. PARTIES TO BEAR THEIR OWN FEES AND COSTS
The PARTIES expressly agree to bear their own costs of suit, consultants’ fees, experts’ fees, attorneys’ fees, and other costs and expenses, of any kind or character, arising out of or
ATTACHMENT 3
relating in any way to the Subject Action, or to the claims released by this AGREEMENT. In the event any dispute between the Settling Parties with respect to this AGREEMENT, the prevailing Settling Party shall be reimbursed for its reasonable costs and expenses by the Party not prevailing, including, without reasonable attorneys’ and experts’ fees and costs incurred in connection with such litigation or other proceeding and/or any appeal thereof. Such costs, expenses and fees shall be included in and made a part of any judgment recovered by the prevailing Settling Party.
6. STIPULATION TO JUDICIAL ENFORCEMENT OF AGREEMENT
Each Party to this Agreement acknowledges, stipulates and agrees that the settlement, which is the subject matter of this Agreement and which is reflected herein, is enforceable pursuant to the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. Any motion to compel enforcement, or to enter judgment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, may be heard before any judge of the Superior Court of the State of California.
7. BENEFIT OF COUNSEL AND EXPERTS
PLAINTIFF represents and warrants that during the course of the negotiations leading to the settlement reflected herein, it had the benefit of counsel. PLAINTIFF further represents that this AGREEMENT is executed voluntarily, with full knowledge of its significance.
PLAINTIFF further represents and warrants that during the course of the negotiations leading to the settlement reflected herein, it had the benefit of advice from experts and consultants as it has deemed necessary.
PLAINTIFF further represents and warrants that in entering into this AGREEMENT and the releases reflected herein, it has not relied upon any opinion, conclusion, recommendation or estimate provided by any other Party to this AGREEMENT, nor by any other expert or consultant retained by or on behalf of any other Party.
8. WARRANTY OF CAPACITY AND AUTHORITY
PLAINTIFF represents and warrants that the person who executes this AGREEMENT is competent to execute this AGREEMENT on behalf of PLAINTIFF, or that he or she is competent, and has the express authority of the person or entity on whose behalf he or she is signing, to execute this Agreement on behalf of such other person or entity.
9. GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT STIPULATION
The Parties stipulate that the settlement reflected herein is made in good faith and satisfies all of the requirements of a “good faith settlement” as reflected in California Code of Civil Procedure sections 877 and 877.6.
10. COOPERATION OF PARTIES
Each of the Parties hereto agrees to cooperate with each other to do everything necessary to accomplish the purpose and intent of this AGREEMENT.
ATTACHMENT 3
13. BINDING NATURE OF AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, each Party hereto, each Party’s respective subsidiaries and affiliated companies, and all of their respective owners, principals, shareholders, partners, joint venturers, officers, directors, servants, employees, predecessors, heirs, insurers and sureties.
14. NO ADMISSION OF FAULT, LIABILITY OR WRONGDOING
Each Settling Party acknowledges that such Party is entering into this Agreement voluntarily, solely for the purpose of bringing the subject claims to a conclusion, and to avoid further costs, risks and expenses associated with continued litigation. This Agreement is the result of a compromise, and by entering into this AGREEMENT, or by agreeing to pay any sum of money or to provide any other form of consideration for the execution of this AGREEMENT, no Party is admitting any fault, liability or wrongdoing, or any matter of fact, nor shall this Agreement ever be construed as such or as evidence or proof of the existence of any damages at the Subject Property.
15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT contains the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the matters covered hereby and supersedes any oral or written understandings or agreements between the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this AGREEMENT. No person or Party is authorized to make any representations or warranties except as set forth herein, and no agreement, statement, representation or promise by any Party hereto which is not contained herein shall be valid or binding. Each Party acknowledges that it has not relied upon any warranties, representations, statements or promises by any of the other Parties herein released, or any of their agents or consultants, except as may be expressly set forth herein.
16. CHOICE OF LAWS
This AGREEMENT shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
17. COPIES OF AGREEMENT
A copy, or electronic copy, of a Party’s designated representative(s)’ executed signature page of the Agreement shall be deemed to have the same force and effect as an originally executed signature. A copy, electronic copy such as via email, of the fully executed AGREEMENT shall be deemed to have the same force and effect as the original.
18. SEVERABILITY
If any provision, or any part of any provision, of this AGREEMENT is, for any reason, held to be invalid, unenforceable, or contrary to any public policy, law, statute or regulation, then
ATTACHMENT 3
the remainder of this AGREEMENT shall not be affected thereby, and shall remain valid and fully enforceable.
19. NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES
Except as otherwise specifically provided herein, no persons or entities other than the Parties are intended to be, or should be construed to be, a beneficiary of any of the provisions of this AGREEMENT.
20. AMENDMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS TO AGREEMENT
No modification or amendment to this AGREEMENT shall be of any force or effect unless in writing and executed by all Parties affected thereby or their counsel.
21. CONSTRUCTION OF AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT and each of the provisions hereof, has been reached as the result of negotiations between the Parties and their respective attorneys. The Parties expressly acknowledges and agrees that this AGREEMENT shall not be deemed to have been prepared by, or drafted by, any particular Party or Parties, and that the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party or parties shall not be employed in the interpretation of this AGREEMENT.
22. SETTLEMENT FUNDS AND WAIVER OF STATUTORY NOTICE
REQUIREMENTS
The notice requirements of Business & Professions Code § 6149.5 regarding written notice to claimants upon payment of settlement funds are hereby waived for all purposes and as to all parties herein, and as to their respective liability insurers.
23. EFFECTIVE DATE OF AGREEMENT
The Parties agree that the date of this AGREEMENT is the date that the AGREEMENT is fully executed. The undersigned acknowledges that it has read the foregoing Agreement, understand it, and sign it of their own free will.
Dated: PLAINTIFF TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Reviewed by: Town Manager and Town Attorney
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 03/07/2023
ITEM NO: 4
DATE: March 1, 2023
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution Proclaiming the Termination of the Local Emergency Caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution proclaiming the termination of the local emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
BACKGROUND:
Los Gatos Municipal Code Section No. 8.10.035, Article A-1 empowers the Director of Emergency Services (Town Manager) to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the Town of Los Gatos is affected or likely to be affected by a public calamity and the Town Council is not in session. On March 12, 2020, the Director of Emergency Services issued a proclamation declaring the existence of a local emergency within the Town due to the COVID-19 pandemic. On March 17, 2020, the Town Council adopted Resolution 2020-08 Ratifying and Continuing the Proclamation of Existence of Local Emergency Issued by the Director of Emergency Services (Attachment 1).
DISCUSSION:
The California Emergency Services Act (California Government Code Section 8550, et seq.) provides that once the Town Council determines that there is no need to continue the local emergency, the Council shall proclaim the termination of the local emergency at the earliest possible date. The County of Santa Clara demobilized its remaining COVID-19 mass vaccination and mass testing sites by February 28, 2023 due to the upcoming end of the federal and state emergency declarations related to COVID-19. On February 28, 2023, the Governor of the State of California ended the state emergency declaration related to COVID-19.
PAGE 2 OF 2
SUBJECT: Resolution Proclaiming the Termination of the Local Emergency Caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic
DATE: March 1, 2023
CONCLUSION:
For these reasons, staff recommends that the Town Council adopt a Resolution (Attachment 2) proclaiming the termination of the local emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is the earliest opportunity to terminate this local emergency.
COORDINATION:
This item has been coordinated with the Town Clerk and Town Attorney.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
The consideration of the Resolution is not a project defined under the California Environmental Quality Act, and no further action is required.
Attachments:
1. Resolution 2020-08 Ratifying and Continuing the Proclamation of Existence of Local Emergency Issued by the Director of Emergency Services
2. Draft Resolution Proclaiming the Termination of the Local Emergency Caused by the COVID19 Pandemic
ATTACHMENT 1
WHEREAS, the Town Council does hereby find that the above described conditions of extreme peril did warrant and necessitate the proclamation of the existence of a local emergency in the Town; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code, Title 2, Division 1, Chapter 7. 5 - California Disaster Assistance Act ( CDAA) allows that with the Proclamation of a Local Emergency the Town may seek financial assistance and may request reimbursement of expenses incurred during any response, if approved by the Director of the California Office of Emergency Services or Concurrence or Governor' s Proclamation; and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2020, the Director of Emergency Services issued a proclamation declaring the existence of a local emergency within the Town; and WHEREAS, the associated emergency conditions are on -going and the emergency should not be terminated at this time;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS THAT:
1. The Proclamation of Existence of a Local Emergency ( Exhibit A), as issued by the Director of Emergency Services on March 12, 2020, is hereby ratified and confirmed.
2. The Town Council has reviewed the need for continuing the declaration of local emergency and finds based on substantial threat of continued community spread that the public interest and necessity require the continuance of the proclamation of local emergency related to COVID- 19.
3. Said local emergency shall be deemed to continue to exist until terminated by the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos.
4. The Director of the Office of Emergency Services is hereby directed to report to the Town Council within sixty ( 60) days on the need for further continuing the local emergency.
2of3
Resolution 2020- 008 March 17, 2020
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, California, held on the 17' day of March 2020, by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES: Rob Rennie, Marico Sayoc, Barbara Spector, Mayor Marcia Jensen NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
SIGNED:
MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
DATE:
ATTEST:
A\C
TOWN CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
DATE: a IQ OECD
3of3
Resolution 2020- 008 March 17, 2020
1 of 2
Resolution 2023 - Council Meeting Date
DRAFT RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS PROCLAIMING THE TERMINATION OF THE LOCAL EMERGENCY CAUSED BY THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
WHEREAS, Municipal Code Section No. 8.10.035, Article A-1 of the Los Gatos Municipal Code empowers the Director of Emergency Services, or in the Director's absence the Acting Director, to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the Town of Los Gatos is affected or likely to be affected by a public calamity and the Town Council is not in session; and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2020, the Director of Emergency Services issued a proclamation declaring the existence of a local emergency within the Town; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, the Town Council adopted Resolution 2020-08 Ratifying and Continuing the Proclamation of Existence of Local Emergency Issued by the Director of Emergency Services; and
WHEREAS, the California Emergency Services Act (California Government Code Section 8550, et seq.) provides that once the Town Council determines that there is no need to continue the local emergency, the Council shall proclaim the termination of the local emergency at the earliest possible date; and
WHEREAS, the County of Santa Clara demobilized its remaining COVID-19 mass vaccination and mass testing sites by February 28, 2023 due to the upcoming end of the federal and state emergency declarations related to COVID-19; and WHEREAS, on February 28, 2023, the Governor of the State of California ended the state emergency declaration related to COVID-19.
ATTACHMENT 2
2 of 2
Resolution 2023 - Council Meeting Date
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Town of Los Gatos in the County of Santa Clara, State of California does hereby proclaim the termination of said local emergency.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, California, held on the 7th day of March, 2023, by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
DATE: __________________
ATTEST:
TOWN CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
DATE: __________________
PREPARED BY: Gitta Ungvari
Finance Director
Reviewed by: Town Manager and Town Attorney
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 03/07/2023
ITEM NO: 5
DATE: March 1, 2023
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Designate the Town’s Agents by Title to Obtain Federal and/or State Financial Assistance Through the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES)
RECOMMENDATION:
Designate the Town’s agents by title to obtain Federal and/or State financial assistance through the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES).
BACKGROUND:
When disasters such as fire, flood, and earthquakes occur, cities may be eligible for Federal and/or State financial assistance by means of reimbursement or grant funding. Cal OES requires documentation be kept on file authorizing specific agents to apply for this financial assistance.
The Town last submitted this documentation in 2017, when the Town applied for assistance after multiple winter storms, and does not have current documentation on file at Cal OES. This authorization must be approved by the Town Council and updated every three years.
DISCUSSION:
Pending and future reimbursement and grant applications will only be accepted from an authorized agent whose title appears on the list approved by Council resolution and provided to Cal OES. This list of authorized agents is designated by title to alleviate the need to adopt a new resolution each time one of the designated agents leaves his or her position.
PAGE 2 OF 2
SUBJECT: Designate the Town’s Agents by Title to Obtain Federal and/or State Financial Assistance Through the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES)
DATE: March 1, 2023
DISCUSSION (continued):
Staff recommends that the Town Council authorize the following titles as designated agents to apply for Federal and State disaster financial assistance and make necessary assurances to obtain such assistance: Town Manager and Assistant Town Manager.
CONCLUSION:
Designation of the Town Manager and Assistant Town Manager as agents to apply for Federal and State disaster financial assistance will allow for the Town to take advantage of opportunities for funding should they arise in the future.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact from this project.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
This is not a project defined under CEQA, and no further action is required.
Attachment:
1. Designation of Applicants Agent Resolution for Non-State Agencies
DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION FOR NON-STATE AGENCIES
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE OF THE
(Governing Body) (Name of Applicant)
THAT , OR
(Title of Authorized Agent)
, OR
(Title of Authorized Agent)
(Title of Authorized Agent)
is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the , (Name of Applicant)
a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, this application and to file it with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of obtaining federal financial assistance for any existing or future grant program, including, but not limited to any of the following:
- Federally declared Disaster (DR), Fire Mitigation Assistance Grant (FMAG), California State Only Disaster (CDAA), Immediate Services Program (ISP), Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC), Legislative Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program (LPDM), under - Public Law 93-288 as amended by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988, and/or state financial assistance under the California Disaster Assistance Act.
- Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA), under Section 1366 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968.
- National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) 42 U.S. Code 7704 (b) ((2) (A) (ix) and 42 U.S. Code 7704 (b) (2) (B) National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, and also The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, Div. F, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-141 - California Early Earthquake Warning (CEEW) under CA Gov Code – Gov, Title 2, Div. 1, Chapter 7, Article 5, Sections 8587.8, 8587.11, 8587.12 That the , a public entity established under the
(Name of Applicant)
laws of the State of California, hereby authorizes its agent(s) to provide to the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services for all matters pertaining to such state disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION
NON-STATE AGENCIES
OES-FPD-130 (Rev. 10-2022)
RECOVERY DIRECTORATE
FINANCIAL PROCESSING DIVISION
Cal OES ID No: _____________
Rev. 10-2022 Page 1 of 4 OES-FPD-130
ATTACHMENT 1
Town Council
Town Manager
Assistant Town Manager
Town of Los Gatos
Town of Los Gatos
Town of Los Gatos
Please check the appropriate box below
This is a universal resolution and is effective for all open and future disasters/grants declared up to three (3) years following the date of approval.
This is a disaster/grant specific resolution and is effective for only disaster/grant number(s):
Passed and approved this __day of , 20
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
CERTIFICATION
I, , duly appointed and of
(Name) (Title)
, do hereby certify that the above is a true and
(Name of Applicant)
correct copy of a resolution passed and approved by the (Governing Body)
of the on the day of , 20 .
(Name of Applicant)
(Signature) (Title)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION
NON-STATE AGENCIES
OES-FPD-130 (Rev. 10-2022)
RECOVERY DIRECTORATE
FINANCIAL PROCESSING DIVISION
Rev. 10-2022 Page 2 of 4 OES-FPD-130
Town Council
Town of Los Gatos
Town of Los Gatos
✔
Town Clerk
Town Clerk
23 23
7 March
Wendy Wood
7 March
PREPARED BY: James Watson
Interim Town Engineer
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Town Attorney, Parks and Public Works Director, and Finance Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 03/07/2023
ITEM NO: 6
DATE: February 27, 2023
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (CIP No. 811-9901):
a. Approve the Plans and Specifications;
b. Authorize Advertising the Project for Bid;
c. Authorize an Expenditure Budget Transfer in an Amount of $158,590 from Available Funds in CIP #813-0239;
d. Authorize a Revenue and Expenditure Budget Adjustment in the Amount of $143,713 to Recognize Receiving and Expending Funds from San José Water Company; and
e. Authorize a Revenue and Expenditure Budget Adjustment in the Amount of $55,545 to Recognize Receiving and Expending Funds from West Valley Sanitation District.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Town Council authorize the following actions for the Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (CIP No. 811-9901) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23:
a. Approve the Plans and Specifications;
b. Authorize advertising the Project for bid;
c. Authorize an expenditure budget Transfer in an amount of $158,590 from available funds in CIP #813-0239;
d. Authorize a revenue and expenditure budget adjustment in the amount of $143,713 to recognize receiving and expending funds from San José Water Company; and e. Authorize a revenue and expenditure budget adjustment in the amount of $55,545 to recognize receiving and expending funds from West Valley Sanitation District.
PAGE 2 OF 5
SUBJECT: Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (CIP No. 811-9901) DATE: February 27, 2023
BACKGROUND:
The adopted Five-Year 2023-2027 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget designates funding for the Town’s Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (CIP No. 811-9901). This is an annual project for street rehabilitation activities throughout the Town to enhance safety for all travel modes and maintain the roadway infrastructure. It is important for the Town to perform annual street maintenance projects to improve the Town’s roadways and prevent street pavements from deteriorating to more extensive and costly repair conditions.
Every three years, the Town conducts a full pavement condition assessment of Town public streets through the Pavement Technical Assistance Program (PTAP) led by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). The pavement condition assessment data collected in the field is entered into the MTC’s pavement maintenance application called StreetSaver, which tabulates and stores the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) scores. PCI is a widely accepted industry measure to gauge the pavement condition of roadways. The index is calculated based on the age of the pavement and pavement distress data collected from the field. PCI’s range from 0 to 100, with 0 representing a failed road and 100 representing a brand-new facility.
Street segments for the Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project are identified and prioritized by pavement conditions, roadway types, traffic levels, and safety issues. With the PCI information in the StreetSaver database, staff uses the application to generate a preliminary list of street segments for the annual project within the designated project budget. The application generated list requires validation by staff, field verification, and adjustment to treatment types based upon actual field conditions. Further consideration is given to geographic areas to increase project efficiency and value. In other words, if a roadway is going to require pavement management work within the next few years, but is located near streets that require attention now, that roadway may be included this year.
The Town has focused its resources in balancing the work between arterials, collectors, and residential streets, applying asphalt overlays, rubber cape seal, or slurry seal as pavement rehabilitation and maintenance measures. Crack sealing and slurry seals are generally the first lines of defense against pavement deterioration by sealing cracks in pavement surfaces with asphalt emulsion to prevent and minimize water intrusions into roadway structural sections. A rubber cape seal is a rubber chip seal covered by a slurry seal and is an appropriate treatment for streets that are exhibiting distress cracking and/or have fallen out of the “good” condition category. Residential streets are typically treated with slurry seal or rubber cape seal as preventative measures. Asphalt overlay involves milling of a certain depth of existing asphalt to be over-laid with a new layer of asphalt. In the Town, asphalt overlays are primarily reserved for arterial or collector streets. This year’s Project does not include any asphalt overlay.
PAGE 3 OF 5
SUBJECT: Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (CIP No. 811-9901) DATE: February 27, 2023
DISCUSSION:
For the FY 2022-23 Street Repair and Resurfacing Project, the focus will be on preventive maintenance through rubber cape seal, slurry seal, and crack seal treatments of locations identified in the Proposed Street List (Attachment A).
The engineer’s estimate to complete the proposed work for the Project is $3,279,372. The Project includes 82,000 square yards of recycled rubberized asphalt cape seal work, 70,000 square yards of slurry seal, and 35,000 square feet of asphalt base failure repair work at various project locations. The plans and specifications for the Project can be viewed on the Town’s website at https://www.losgatosca.gov/108/Capital-Improvement-Program.
Once authorized by Town Council to advertise the construction contract for bid, the following is the anticipated schedule for the Annual Street Project:
Milestones Forecast Date
Advertise the Project for Bid March 10, 2023
Bids Due March 29, 2023
Council to Accept Lowest Bidder April 18, 2023
Award and Execute Agreement April 2023
Start Construction June 2023
Anticipated Completion October 2023
CONCLUSION:
Approval of the recommendations allows the Town’s Annual Street Repair and Maintenance Project to move forward for bidding. It is important for the Town to complete its annual street maintenance project each year to prevent Town streets from degrading to more extensive and costly repair categories.
COORDINATION:
This project has been coordinated with the Finance Department.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There are sufficient funds in the FY2022-23 CIP budget for this year’s Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (CIP No. 811-9901) with the proposed budget adjustments and transfer.
On December 6, 2022, the Town Council authorized the Town Manager to execute a costsharing agreement with the City of San José in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000. The actual agreement executed was for $734,099, which is to be funded from the FY 2022-23 Repair and
PAGE 4 OF 5
SUBJECT: Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (CIP No. 811-9901) DATE: February 27, 2023
FISCAL IMPACT (continued):
Resurfacing Project budget. The Town would reimburse the City of San José for the resurfacing related work completed in the Town’s right of way through their project.
Also on December 6, 2022, Council approved the Phase 1 Concept Plan for the Blossom Hill Road Traffic Safety Project. The Council Agenda Report indicated in the Fiscal Impact section that the construction budget for the Blossom Hill Road Traffic Safety Project would be applied to the street repair project. Staff is requesting that Council authorize the transfer of the available construction funding from the Blossom Hill Road Traffic Safety Project (CIP No. 813- 0239) to this Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (CIP No. 811-9901).
FY 2022-23 Street Repair and Resurfacing Project
CIP No. 811-9901
Budget Costs
GFAR $ 2,901,949
Gas Tax $ 1,476,257
Vehicle License Fee - 2010 Measure B Funding $ 180,000
Reimbursement from West Valley Sanitation District
(Approved with this Staff Report) $ 55,545
Reimbursement from San Jose Water (Approved with this Staff Report) $ 83,076
Reimbursement from San Jose Water from Encroachment
Permit (Approved with this Staff Report) $ 60,637
Transfer from CIP #813-0239 (Approved with this Staff Report) $ 158,590 Total Budget $ 4,916,054
FY2022-23 Street Repair and Resurfacing Construction
Estimate $ 3,279,372
10 Percent Contingency $ 327,937
Cost Share with City of San Jose (Approved on 12/5/22) $ 734,099 Material Testing $ 25,000
Staff Cost $ 470,000
Total Expenditures $ 4,836,408
Available Balance After Construction $ 79,646
PAGE 5 OF 5
SUBJECT: Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (CIP No. 811-9901) DATE: February 27, 2023
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
This is a project as defined under CEQA but is Categorically Exempt (Section 15301(c)). A Notice of Exemption will be filed with the County.
Attachment:
1. Work Locations
Attachment 1 - Work Locations
Town of Los Gatos
#22‐811‐9001 FY2023 Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Street Begin Location End Location Type (CS, RC, S)
BASE BID:
ANGEL CT SHORT RD END RC
ATWOOD CT BLOSSOM HILL RD END RC
BELGATOS RD BLOSSOM HILL RD END RC
BELWOOD GATEWAY BLOSSOM HILL RD BACIGALUPI DR RC
BENEDICT LN CHIRCO DR SUNRAY DR RC
CHERRY BLOSSOM LN BLOSSOM HILL RD SHANNON RD RC
CORINNE DR CHIRCO DR SUNRAY DR RC
DOWNING OAK CT UNION AV END RC
DRYSDALE DR SHADY LN END RC
EASTRIDGE DR LANSBERRY CT HILLBROOK DR RC
FAIRMEAD LN HILLBROOK DR END RC
FARLEY RD LOS GATOS BL END RC
GEMINI CT HARWOOD DR END RC
HIGHLAND OAKS DR LARK AV END RC
HILLBROOK DR EASTRIDGE DR BLOSSOM HILL RD RC
LANSBERRY CT SHANNON RD END RC
LASUEN CT UNION AV END RC
LEEWOOD CT UNION AV END RC
LEROY AV LOS GATOS BL IZORAH WY RC
OAK PARK DR HIGHLAND OAKS DR GARDEN LN RC
OAK WOOD WY HIGHLAND OAKS DR END RC
OAKDALE DR HIGHLAND OAKS DR GARDEN LN RC
ROCHIN CT ROCHIN TE/N END END RC
ROCHIN TE LINDA AV END RC
SEBASTIAN CT ALMOND BLOSSOM LN END RC
SHADY LN SHORT RD 15764 SHADY LN RC
VILLA AV LIBRARY JACKSON ST RC
WHEELER AV LOS GATOS BL LOS ROBLES WY RC
WHITNEY AV STACIA ST LOMA ALTA AV RC
WHITNEY AV STACIA ST WHEELER AV RC
BELCREST DR BELHAVEN DR HARWOOD RD S
BELGLEN LN BELGLEN WY BELVIEW DR S
BELGLEN WY BELBLOSSOM WY BELGLEN LN S
BELVALE DR BACIGALUPI DR HARWOOD RD S
BELVUE DR WESTHILL DR BELGATOS RD S
BLOSSOM HILL RD CAMELLIA TE HILLBROOK DR S
BLUEBERRY HILL DR LONGMEADOW DR END S
CAMELLIA TE BLOSSOM HILL RD TOWN LIMIT S
CHERRY BLOSSOM LN BLOSSOM HILL RD TOWN LIMIT S
CHERRYSTONE DR BLOSSOM HILL RD TOWN LIMIT S
CHIRCO CT CHIRCO DR END S
CRIDER CT ALERCHE DR END S
GARDEN LN LOS GATOS BL 120 FT E OF BENEDICT LN S
HIGHLAND OAKS WY HIGHLAND OAKS DR END S
MARY WY OLD BLOSSOM HILL RD END S
MILLRICH DR WINCHESTER BL END S
OAKMONT WY HIGHLAND OAKS DR END S
OLD BLOSSOM HILL RD BLOSSOM HILL RD SHORT RD S
SPRECKLES AV LOMA ALTA AV VISTA DEL MAR S
ATTACHMENT 1
Town of Los Gatos
#22‐811‐9001 FY2023 Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Street Begin Location End Location Type (CS, RC, S)
SUNRAY DR GARDEN LN CORINNE DR S
YOSEMITE WY WHEELER AV END S
BLACKBERRY HILL RD CYPRESS WY PRIVATE LINE CS
BLOSSOM HILL RD LOS GATOS BL CAMELLIA TE CS
BLOSSOM HILL RD UNION AV CITY LIMITS CS
BLOSSOM HILL RD CITY/DISTRICT LIMITS BELGATOS RD CS
BLOSSOM HILL RD BELGATOS RD HARWOOD RD CS
CROSS WY LOMA ALTA AV JOHNSON AV CS
CYPRESS WY TWELVE OAKS WY BLACKBERRY HILL RD CS
EL GATOS LN LOS GATOS‐ALMADEN COUNTY BOUNDARY CS
FORRESTER RD KENNEDY RD RIGHT TURN BEND CS
FORRESTER RD RIGHT TURN BEND END CS
FOSTER RD ALPINE AV JOHNSON AV CS
KENNEDY RD TERESTIA WY DISTRICT BOUNDARY (#15900) CS
KENNEDY RD #15900 #15651 CS
KENNEDY RD #15651 TOP OF THE HILL RD CS
LARK AV WINCHESTER BL ARROYO GRANDE WY CS
LOS GATOS‐ALMADEN LOS GATOS BL AURORA LN CS
LYNN AV PINEHURST AV CITY BOUNDARY CS
MARY ALICE DR CALRTON AV END CS
POTOMAC DR LONGRIDGE RD END CS
SHANNON RD CERRO VISTA CT HAPPY ACRES RD CS
SHANNON RD HAPPY ACRES RD SUVIEW DR CS
SHANNON RD SUVIEW DR COUNTY BOUNDARY (#15215) CS
SHANNON RD COUNTY BOUNDARY HICKS RD CS
SYCAMORE CT END BLOSSOM VALLEY DR CS
ADD. ALTERNATE 1:
LA RINCONADA DR CLEARVIEW DR NATALYE RD RC
CLEARVIEW DR NALOR CT LA RINCONADA DR RC
EASTVIEW DR CLEARVIEW DR LA RINCONADA DR RC
HANCOCK CT EASTVIEW DR END RC
ADD. ALTERNATE 2:
E LA CHIQUITA AV SHANNON RD W LA CHIQUITA AV RC
SHADY VIEW LN SHANNON RD LA CROIX CT RC
W LA CHIQUITA AV SHANNON RD E LA CHIQUITA AV RC
ANN ARBOR CT ANN ARBOR DR END S
ANN ARBOR DR SHANNON RD END S
WOLLIN WY ANN ARBOR DR SHANNON RD S
PEACOCK LN SHANNON RD END S
BONNIE LN SHADY VIEW LN SHANNON RD S
LA CROIX CT SHADY VIEW LN END S
KEY:
RC Rubber Cape Seal
S Slurry Seal
CS Crack Seal
PREPARED BY: Sean Mullin, AICP
Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Community Development Director, Town Attorney, and Finance Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 406-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 03/07/2023
ITEM NO: 7
DATE: March 2, 2023
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Introduce an Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, by Title Only, Amending Planned Development Ordinance 2172 Relative to the Maximum Residence Size Allowed on Lot 14 and the Maximum Average Residence Size Allowed in the Shannon Valley Ranch Subdivision and Repealing Ordinance 2172 for the Shannon Valley Ranch Subdivision at Shannon and Hicks Roads (Shannon Oaks and Mountain Laurel Lanes) on Property Zoned HR-5:PD. APN: 567-24-023. This Request for Modification of a Planned Development Ordinance is not Considered a Project Under the California Environmental Quality Act. Planned Development Ordinance Application PD-22-001. Location: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane. PROPERTY OWNER: Bright Smile Dental Office Defined Benefit Plan. APPLICANT: Kunling Wu, Trustee.
RECOMMENDATION:
Introduce an Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, by title only, amending Planned Development Ordinance 2172 relative to the maximum residence size allowed on Lot 14 and the maximum average residence size allowed in the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision and repealing Ordinance 2172 for the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision at Shannon and Hicks Roads (Shannon Oaks and Mountain Laurel Lanes).
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is approximately 8.14 acres located in the northern portion of the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision (Attachment 2, Exhibit 1). A single-family residence was once located on the property, but was destroyed by fire in 1997, prior to the 2004 subdivision. The property is the last undeveloped residential property in the subdivision.
PAGE 2 OF 6
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: March 2, 2023
BACKGROUND (continued):
In March 2002, the Town Council considered a Planned Development (PD) application at 17101 Hicks Road and 14045 Shannon Road. Town Council approved application DEV-99-02, adopted PD Ordinance 2097; amended the General Plan land use designation from Agricultural to Hillside Residential; and changed the zoning from HR-5:Prezone to HR-5:PD to allow subdivision of the property into 14 single-family lots and three open space lots (Attachment 2, Exhibit 3).
Architecture and Site applications for new residences on Lots 1 through 13 were approved in 2002 and 2003. The subdivision was completed in November 2004 and subsequent Building Permits were issued in December of 2004. In 2006, the Town Council adopted PD Ordinance 2150 amending the original PD with a modified grading plan for Lots 6 through 11. The 13 new residences were completed by 2007. In 2009, the Town Council adopted PD Ordinance 2172 amending the Ordinance 2150 to allow accessory structures on all 14 lots, provided they comply with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (HDS&G) (Attachment 2, Exhibit 4).
The original PD application was considered numerous times by the Development Review Committee and the Planning Commission prior to the Council’s action in March 2002. During the final Planning Commission meeting on January 23, 2002, two members of the public spoke on the project, offering comments specific to the size of the replacement residence on Lot 14 (Attachment 2, Exhibit 5, highlighted text). Both commenters expressed concern on whether developing Lot 14 was appropriate, with one commenter adding that if Lot 14 is to be developed, it should be rebuilt in the original footprint and not turned into a 4,600 or 4,800 square foot home. The motion to forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Council included an additional performance standard that Lot 14 be developed under the guidelines of a replacement structure, similar in square footage, mass, and scale to the original residence that was destroyed by fire. This additional performance standard was forwarded to the Council and included as Performance Standard 8 in Ordinance 2097 and the amended Ordinances 2150 and 2172. The Town Council approved the PD application in March 2002 with the additional performance standard as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Town records for Lot 14 do not provide much detail on the original residence that was destroyed by fire. An April 20, 2016, letter from Greenbriar Homes Communities (applicant under the original PD application) to Mr. Alan Barbie of the Sereno Group indicates that the original home was one story and approximately 2,400 square feet (Attachment 2, Exhibit 6).
Other anecdotal information indicates that the size of the original residence was closer to 3,000 square feet. Given the incomplete nature of the records for Lot 14, staff has communicated that the lot could be developed with a single-story residence with a maximum size of 3,000 square feet to be located in the general area of the previous residence subject to Architecture and Site approval.
PAGE 3 OF 6
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: March 2, 2023
BACKGROUND (continued):
In addition to Lot 14, Performance Standard 8 limits the sizes of the residences on Lots 1 through 13 to a maximum of 4,850 square feet, with an average size of 4,650 square feet (Attachment 2, Exhibit 4, Performance Standard 8). Additionally, two-thirds of the 13 residences are limited to a one-story design. The table below provides a summary of the development on Lots 1 through 13.
Summary of Developed Lots
Lot Address Residence Stories Garage Accessory Structure 1 280 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,656 sf 1 768 sf --
2 282 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,815 sf 2 799 sf --
3 286 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,655 sf 1 811 sf --
4 288 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,612 sf 1 781 sf --
5 290 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,815 sf 2 799 sf --
6 299 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,327 sf 1 806 sf --
7 297 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,635 sf 1 811 sf --
8 293 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,611 sf 1 781 sf --
9 291 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,655 sf 1 811 sf --
10 289 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,315 sf 1 806 sf --
11 287 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,814 sf 2 799 sf 636 sf
12 283 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,605 sf 1 781 sf 960 sf
13 281 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,808 sf 2 799 sf --
AVERAGE RESIDENCE: 4,640 sf 69 percent one-story
On May 11, 2022, the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) reviewed and provided preliminary feedback on the proposed PD amendment (Attachment 2, Exhibits 9 and 10). The feedback of the CDAC is discussed in the January 25, 2023, Planning Commission staff report included as Attachment 2.
DISCUSSION:
A. Project Summary
On August 25, 2022, the property owner submitted an application to amend Planned Development Ordinance 2172 to increase the maximum residence size allowed on Lot 14 from 3,000 square feet to 4,850 square feet and the maximum average residence size allowed in the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision from 4,650 square feet to 4,655 square feet. No construction or site development is proposed with this application. A development proposal for construction of a new residence would be processed and reviewed under a future Architecture and Site application.
PAGE 4 OF 6
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: March 2, 2023
DISCUSSION (continued):
B. Planning Commission
On January 25, 2023, the Planning Commission received the staff report including public comments (Attachment 2) and considered the application. Verbatim minutes are included as Attachment 3. Staff recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission as the findings for approval of a PD Ordinance required by Section 29.80.095 of the Town Code could be made as detailed in the Planning Commission staff report (Attachment 2).
Following discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the application to the Town Council.
C. Environmental Review
The request to modify PD Ordinance 2172 is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Written notice was sent to property owners and tenants within 600 feet of the subject property. The applicant indicated to staff that a letter was sent to their immediate neighbors on Mountain Laurel Lane ahead of the Planning Commission meeting. Following the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant extended their outreach efforts by providing a letter describing the request along with other attachments to all 13 properties within the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision on February 13, 2023 (Attachment 5). Public comments received ahead of the January 25, 2023, Planning Commission meeting are included in Attachment 2, Exhibit 10. Public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Wednesday, January 25, 2023, and 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 2, 2023, are included as Attachment 6.
CONCLUSION:
A. Recommendation
Based on the summary provided above and in the Planning Commission staff report, staff recommends that the Town Council accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and take the following actions:
1. Make the finding that the request for modification of a planned development ordinance is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (Attachment 1);
2. Make the findings required by Section 29.80.095 of the Town Code for approval of a Planned Development Ordinance (Attachment 1); and
PAGE 5 OF 6
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: March 2, 2023
CONCLUSION (continued):
3. Introduce a Planned Development Ordinance, by title only, amending Planned Development Ordinance 2172 to increase the maximum residence size allowed on Lot 14 and the maximum average residence size allowed in the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision on property zoned HR-5:PD located at 300 Mountain Laurel Lane, subject to the performance standards included in Attachment 4, or as otherwise modified by the Town Council.
C. Alternatives
Alternatively, the Town Council may:
1. Approve the application with modifications and/or additional performance standards; or
2. Continue the application to a date certain with specific direction; or
3. Remand the application to the Planning Commission with specific direction; or
4. Deny the application.
Attachments:
1. Required Findings
2. January 25, 2023, Planning Commission Staff Report with Exhibits 1 through 18
3. January 25, 2023, Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes
4. Draft Planned Development Ordinance
5. Applicant’s Neighbor Outreach Letter, dated February 13, 2023
6. Public Comments received between 11:01 a.m., Wednesday, January 25, 2023, and 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 2, 2023
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
C:\USERS\MEETINGSOFFICEUSER4\APPDATA\LOCAL\TEMP\TMP1EF1.TMP TOWN COUNCIL –March 7, 2023
REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR:
300 Mountain Laurel Lane
Planned Development Amendment PD-22-001
Introduce a Planned Development Ordinance, by Title Only, Amending Planned Development Ordinance 2172 Relative to the Maximum Residence Size Allowed on Lot 14 and the Maximum Average Residence Size Allowed in the Shannon Valley Ranch Subdivision and Repealing Ordinance 2172 for the Shannon Valley Ranch Subdivision at Shannon and Hicks Roads (Shannon Oaks and Mountain Laurel Lanes) on Property Zoned HR-5:PD.. APN: 567-24-023. This Request for Modification of a Planned Development Ordinance is not Considered a Project Under the California Environmental Quality Act.
PROPERTY OWNER: Bright Smile Dental Office Defined Benefit Plan APPLICANT: Kunling Wu, Trustee
PROJECT PLANNER: Sean Mullin
CEQA
This request for modification of a planned development ordinance is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act.
FINDINGS
Required compliance with the Town Code:
■ As required by Section 29.80.095 of the Town Code for granting a Planned Development Overlay Zone, the proposed amendment:
Is consistent with Chapter 29, Article VIII, Division 2 of the Town Code in that it meets the purpose and intent of a Planned Development Overlay; Is in conformance with the goals, policies, and applicable land use designations and standards of the Town’s 2040 General Plan and its Elements and with the 2020 Land Use and Community Design Element, including but not limited to Policies LU-1.3, LU-1.4, LU-6.8, and LU-7.3;
Is in conformance with the Town Code, Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines, and the Hillside Specific Plan; and
Does not include an amendment that would deviate from the residence size allowed by the underlying zone.
ATTACHMENT 1
C:\USERS\MEETINGSOFFICEUSER4\APPDATA\LOCAL\TEMP\TMP1EF1.TMP Required consistency with the Town’s General Plan:
■ That the amendment to the Planned Development Overlay is consistent with the 2040 General Plan and its Elements and with the 2020 Land Use and Community Design Element, including but not limited to Policies LU-1.3, LU-1.4, LU-6.8, LU-7.3, and LU-7.4; and that the amendment to the Planned Development Overlay zoning is consistent with the existing General Plan designation.
PREPARED BY: SEAN MULLIN, AICP
Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Planning Manager, Town Attorney, and Community Development Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6872 www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION
REPORT
MEETING DATE: 01/25/2023
ITEM NO: 2
DATE: January 20, 2023
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Requesting Approval for Modification of Planned Development Ordinance 2172 to Increase the Maximum Residence Size Allowed on Lot 14 on Property Zoned HR-5:PD. Located at 300 Mountain Laurel Lane. APN: 567-24-023.
Planned Development Amendment PD-22-001. This Request for Modification of a Planned Development Ordinance is not Considered a Project Under the California Environmental Quality Act. PROPERTY OWNER: Bright Smile Dental Office Defined Benefit Plan. APPLICANT: Kunling Wu, Trustee. PROJECT PLANNER: Sean Mullin.
RECOMMENDATION:
Forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Council on a request for modification of Planned Development Ordinance 2172 to increase the maximum residence size allowed on Lot 14 on property zoned HR-5:PD, located at 300 Mountain Laurel Lane.
PROJECT DATA:
General Plan Designation: Hillside Residential
Zoning Designation: HR-5:PD, Hillside Residential - Planned Development Overlay Applicable Plans & Standards: General Plan, Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines, Hillside Specific Plan
Parcel Size: 354,459 square feet (8.14 acres)
Surrounding Area:
Existing Land Use General Plan Zoning
North Residential Hillside Residential HR-1
South Residential; Institutional Hillside Residential HR-1; HR-5:PD East Residential; Institutional Hillside Residential HR-1 West Residential; Open Space Hillside Residential HR-5:PD ATTACHMENT 2
PAGE 2 OF 12
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: January 20, 2023
\\TLG-File\data\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\Item 2 - 300 Mountain Laurel\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx
CEQA:
The request to modify Planned Development Ordinance 2172 is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act.
REQUIRED FINDINGS:
As required by Section 29.80.095 of the Town Code for granting approval of a Planned Development Overlay Zone; and
That the amendment to the Planned Development Overlay is consistent with the General Plan.
ACTION:
Forward a recommendation regarding Planned Development application PD-22-001 to the Town Council.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is approximately 8.14 acres located in the northern portion of the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision (Exhibit 1). A single-family residence was once located on the property, but was destroyed by fire in 1997, prior to the 2004 subdivision. The property is the last undeveloped residential property in the subdivision.
In March 2002, the Town Council considered a Planned Development (PD) application at 17101 Hicks Road and 14045 Shannon Road. Town Council approved Ordinance 2097; amended the General Plan land use designation from Agricultural to Hillside Residential; and approved a PD to change the zoning from HR-5:Prezone to HR-5:PD to allow subdivision of the property into 14 single-family lots and three open space lots (Exhibit 3). Architecture and Site applications for new residences on Lots 1 through 13 were approved in 2002 and 2003. The subdivision was completed in November 2004 and subsequent Building Permits were issued in December of 2004. The 13 new residences were completed by 2007. In 2009, the Town Council approved PD Ordinance 2172 amending the original PD to allow accessory structures on all 14 lots, provided they comply with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (HDS&G) (Exhibit 4).
The original PD application was considered numerous times by the Development Review Committee and the Planning Commission prior to the Council’s action in March 2002. During the final Planning Commission meeting on January 23, 2002, two members of the public spoke on the project, offering comments specific to the size of the replacement residence on Lot 14 (Exhibit 5, highlighted text). Both commenters expressed concern on whether developing Lot 14 was appropriate, with one commenter adding that if Lot 14 is to be developed, it should be rebuilt in the original footprint and not turned into a 4,600 or 4,800 square foot home. The
PAGE 3 OF 12
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: January 20, 2023
\\TLG-File\data\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\Item 2 - 300 Mountain Laurel\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx
BACKGROUND (continued):
motion to forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Council included an additional performance standard that Lot 14 be developed under the guidelines of a replacement structure, similar in square footage, mass, and scale to the original residence that was destroyed by fire. This additional performance standard was forwarded to the Council and included in Ordinance 2097 and the amended Ordinance 2172 (Exhibits 3 and 4, Performance Standard #8). The Town Council approved the PD application in March 2002 with the additional performance standard as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Town records for Lot 14 do not provide much detail on the original residence that was destroyed by fire. An April 20, 2016, letter from Greenbriar Homes Communities (applicant under the original PD application) to Mr. Alan Barbie of the Sereno Group indicates that the original home was one story and approximately 2,400 square feet (Exhibit 6). Other anecdotal information indicates that the size of the original residence was closer to 3,000 square feet.
Given the incomplete nature of the records for Lot 14, staff has messaged that the lot could be developed with a single-story residence with a maximum size of 3,000 square feet to be located in the general area of the previous residence subject to Architecture and Site approval.
In addition to Lot 14, Performance Standard #8 limits the sizes of the residences on Lots 1 through 13 to a maximum of 4,850 square feet, with an average size of 4,650 square feet (Exhibit 4, Performance Standard #8). Additionally, two-thirds of the 13 residences are limited to a one-story design. The table below provides a summary of the development on Lots 1 through 13.
Summary of Developed Lots
Lot Address Residence Stories Garage Accessory Structure 1 280 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,656 sf 1 768 sf --
2 282 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,815 sf 2 799 sf --
3 286 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,655 sf 1 811 sf --
4 288 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,612 sf 1 781 sf --
5 290 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,815 sf 2 799 sf --
6 299 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,327 sf 1 806 sf --
7 297 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,635 sf 1 811 sf --
8 293 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,611 sf 1 781 sf --
9 291 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,655 sf 1 811 sf --
10 289 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,315 sf 1 806 sf --
11 287 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,814 sf 2 799 sf 636 sf
12 283 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,605 sf 1 781 sf 960 sf
13 281 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,808 sf 2 799 sf --
AVERAGE RESIDENCE: 4,640 sf 69 percent single-story
PAGE 4 OF 12
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: January 20, 2023
\\TLG-File\data\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\Item 2 - 300 Mountain Laurel\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx
BACKGROUND (continued):
On May 11, 2022, the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) reviewed and provided preliminary feedback on the proposed PD amendment. The feedback of the CDAC is detailed below.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
A. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood
The subject property is approximately 8.14 acres located in the northern portion of the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision (Exhibit 1). A single-family residence was once located on the property, but was destroyed by fire in 1997, prior to the 2004 subdivision. The property currently takes access from the east end of Mountain Laurel Lane via a dirt driveway along the western property line accessing the northeastern portion of the property, where the original residence once stood. This portion of the property contains the Least Restrictive Development Area (LRDA), encompassing approximately 131,196 square feet (3.01 acres).
The majority of the remaining portions of the property are steeply sloped and are held in a scenic conservation easement. The property is currently vacant and is the last undeveloped residential property in the subdivision.
B. Project Summary
The property owner is requesting an amendment to Planned Development Ordinance 2172 to increase the maximum residence size allowed on the subject property. No construction or site development is proposed with this application. A development proposal for construction of a new residence would be processed and reviewed under a future Architecture and Site application.
DISCUSSION:
A. Planned Development Amendment
The subject property has a gross lot area of 354,458 square feet (8.14 acres) with an average lot slope of 28 percent (Exhibit 17). When adjusted for slope per the HDS&G, the net lot area is 163,051 square feet (3.74 acres); which would allow for 6,000 square feet of development under the standard floor area calculation from the HDS&G. The existing PD Ordinance 2172 further restricts the maximum allowed floor area to be similar in square footage, mass, and scale to the original residence that was destroyed by fire, which is estimated to be approximately 3,000 square feet. While much of the property is characterized by steep slopes, the northeastern portion of the property contains the LRDA, encompassing approximately 131,196 square feet (3.01 acres).
PAGE 5 OF 12
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: January 20, 2023
\\TLG-File\data\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\Item 2 - 300 Mountain Laurel\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx
DISCUSSION (continued):
The applicant requests an amendment to the PD to allow for construction of a 4,850 square foot, one-story residence (Exhibit 7). This request also requires an increase in the average size of the residences allowed by Performance Standard #8 from 4,650 square feet to 4,655 square feet. The applicant’s letter indicates that they wish to construct a single-story residence of 4,850 square feet. The applicant’s Letter of Justification indicates that the proposed residence size increase would be reasonable for the 8.14-acre property that includes an LRDA of 3.01 acres and would be consistent with the development on Lots 1 through 13 in the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision (Exhibit 8).
The table below summarizes the size of development on properties within the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision and those immediately adjacent to the north. The property sizes range from 2.02 to 8.44 acres. Based on Town and County records, the square footage of the residences in this area range from 4,315 square feet to 5,720 square feet. In terms of square feet, the proposed increase to the allowable residence size on Lot 14 would allow for development of the largest residence within the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision and the third largest when considering the adjacent properties. In terms of FAR, the proposed increase would allow the smallest FAR in the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision and adjacent properties.
FAR Comparison - Neighborhood Analysis
Lot Address Gross Lot
Area SF
Residence
Size
Garage
SF
Total
SF*
FAR No. of
Stories
550 Santa Rosa Dr 91,040 5,720 975 6,695 0.07 2
16767 Hicks Rd 367,646 5,274 748 6,022 0.02 2
1 280 Shannon Oaks Ln 141,968 4,656 768 5,424 0.04 1
2 282 Shannon Oaks Ln 111,124 4,815 799 5,614 0.05 2
3 286 Mountain Laurel Ln 96,576 4,655 811 5,466 0.06 1
4 288 Mountain Laurel Ln 103,879 4,612 781 5,393 0.05 1 5 290 Mountain Laurel Ln 136,865 4,815 799 5,614 0.04 2 6 299 Mountain Laurel Ln 125,092 4,327 806 5,133 0.04 1 7 297 Mountain Laurel Ln 147,556 4,635 811 5,446 0.04 1 8 293 Mountain Laurel Ln 191,693 4,611 781 5,392 0.03 1 9 291 Mountain Laurel Ln 156,824 4,655 811 5,466 0.03 1 10 289 Mountain Laurel Ln 111,783 4,315 806 5,121 0.05 1 11 287 Mountain Laurel Ln 124,583 4,814 799 5,613 0.05 2 12 283 Shannon Oaks Ln 88,045 4,605 781 5,386 0.06 1
13 281 Shannon Oaks Ln 94,082 4,808 799 5,607 0.06 2
14 300 Mountain Laurel Ln 354,458 4,850 400 5,250 0.01 1 Proposed average residence within subdivision: 4,655 sf 71 percent single-story * Does not include accessory structures
PAGE 6 OF 12
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: January 20, 2023
\\TLG-File\data\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\Item 2 - 300 Mountain Laurel\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx
DISCUSSION (continued):
Future development of the site would require an Architecture and Site application, which would be subject to the requirements of the Town Code, PD Ordinance, the Residential Design Guidelines, the HDS&G, and the Hillside Specific Plan. A future Architecture and Site application will require review and preliminary approval by the Planning, Building, Engineering, and Fire Departments. The application would be considered in a public hearing by either the Development Review Committee or Planning Commission based on the merits of the application.
B. Conceptual Development Advisory Committee
On May 11, 2022, the CDAC reviewed and provided preliminary feedback on a proposal to amend the PD to allow for a 6,000 square-foot residence (Exhibits 9 and 10). Committee members discussed the matter and provided feedback to the applicant, including concerns related to:
• Lighting impacts;
• LRDA analysis;
• Placement on a ridge;
• Compatibility of a 6,000 square-foot residence with the residences in the Shannon Valley Ranch development;
• Driveway length, slope, and secondary access; and
• Future development requiring review by the Shannon Valley Ranch Homeowners Association.
In response to the CDAC’s feedback, the applicant revised their request to a 4,850 squarefoot residence and provided a written response to the CDAC’s feedback (Exhibit 11). The applicant’s response to the CDAC’s feedback is summarized below, followed by staff analysis in italic font.
1. Lighting impacts.
The applicant indicates that light impacts from a future residence would not create an impact because the residence would be limited to one-story, and all exterior lighting would be required to meet the Town’s regulations.
Any Architecture and Site application for a future residence will be reviewed to ensure compliance with the Town Code, PD Ordinance, and HDS&G requirements for exterior lighting. Approval of any future residence would include a condition of approval requiring that all exterior light fixtures meet the Town’s requirements to be shielded and directed to the ground surface so that light does not spill onto neighboring parcels or produce a glare when seen from nearby homes.
PAGE 7 OF 12
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: January 20, 2023
\\TLG-File\data\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\Item 2 - 300 Mountain Laurel\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx
DISCUSSION (continued):
2. LRDA analysis.
The applicant indicates that an LRDA analysis was completed prior to submittal of this application.
The LRDA is included on the provided Site Plan (Exhibit 17). Evaluation of the LRDA will be conducted with any future Architecture and Site application.
3. Placement on a ridge.
The applicant indicates that there are many residences located nearby the proposed building site, some larger than the 4,850 square feet being proposed. Additionally, the applicant indicates that any proposed residence would follow Town regulations.
The HDS&G defines a ridgeline as a line connecting the highest points along a ridge and separating drainage basins or small-scale drainage systems from one another. The LRDA of the subject property is located on an outcropping in the northeastern portion of the property located approximately 58 vertical feet below the ridgeline along Santa Rosa Drive. The area of LRDA is not identified by the HDS&G as a significant ridgeline. The applicant is requesting approval to increase the allowable residence size for the subject property and has not requested modification of the existing language in Performance Standard #8 restricting the residence to a single-story and a maximum height of 25 feet.
Full Architecture and Site review would be required for any future residence.
4. Compatibility of a 6,000 square-foot residence with the residences in the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision.
The applicant has revised their request to a 4,850 square-foot residence.
Performance Standard #8 included in PD Ordinance 2172 currently limits the maximum residence size to 4,850 square feet on Lots 1 through 13. The applicant proposes allowing for a residence of 4,850 square feet on Lot 14, consistent with those allowed on other properties in the subdivision. The applicant also requests an increase in the allowed average residence size within the subdivision from 4,650 square feet to 4,655 square feet, which is needed when including Lot 14 in the calculation. The proposed residence size would be the largest residence in terms of floor area by 35 square feet in the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision and the smallest in terms of FAR.
PAGE 8 OF 12
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: January 20, 2023
\\TLG-File\data\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\Item 2 - 300 Mountain Laurel\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx
DISCUSSION (continued):
5. Driveway length, slope, and secondary access.
The applicant indicates that the plans were reviewed and approved by the Santa Clara County Fire Department.
The provided Site Plan shows that an existing dirt road serves as access to the previously developed portion of the property (Exhibit 17). Should the applicant propose to improve this dirt road to provide access to a future residence under an Architecture and Site application, it is probable that exceptions to the HDS&G would be required for driveway length and slope. No secondary access is currently shown at this time.
Project plans and supporting documents for this application were routed to the Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD) for review of the request to modify the PD Ordinance to increase the allowable residence size. As noted in their letter approving the project, SCCFD’s review was limited to the request and did not include a review for construction of a new single-family residence, which would be the subject of a future Architecture and Site application. The SCCFD approved the request at hand and provided some potential requirements that may apply to a proposal for construction of a new residence. These items are provided in as items four through 16 of Exhibit 12. Several of the requirements relate to the Fire Safe Regulations enacted by Public Resources Code 4290. Staff has and will continue to stress to the applicant the importance of consulting with the SCCFD early and often, as well as the potential profound impact that the Fire Safe Regulations can have on proposed development in the hillside area. Any future Architecture and Site application for a new residence will require review by the SCCFD.
6. Future development requiring review by the Shannon Valley Ranch Homeowners Association.
The applicant has provided a letter from the Shannon Valley Ranch Homeowners Association approving the proposed allowable residence size increase (Exhibit 13).
C. Planned Development Analysis
The purpose and intent of the Town’s Planned Development Overlay Zone is to preserve, enhance, and/or promote:
1. The Town’s natural and historic resources;
2. The production of affordable housing;
3. The maximization of open space; and/or
4. A project that provides a public benefit to the citizens of the Town.
PAGE 9 OF 12
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: January 20, 2023
\\TLG-File\data\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\Item 2 - 300 Mountain Laurel\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx
DISCUSSION (continued):
An application for a PD overlay shall only be considered if it meets the purpose and intent of the overlay zone, and meets one of nine criteria listed in the Town Code, including property that is designated within the HDS&G map. The proposed amendment to PD Ordinance 2172 meets these criteria in that it would continue to maximize open space by requesting no change to the existing scenic conservation easements on the subject property and is located within the hillside area.
Section 29.80.095 of the Town Code requires that four findings be made in order to approve a PD overlay. These findings are listed below, followed by staff analysis in italic font.
1. The proposed PD is in compliance with all sections of Chapter 29, Article VIII, Division 2 of the Town Code for a Planned Development Overlay Zone.
As discussed in this report, the proposed PD amendment complies with Chapter 29, Article VIII, Division 2 of the Town Code in that it meets the purpose and intent of a PD overlay zone and is located in the hillside area. Except for the requested increase to allowable residence size on Lot 14 and maximum average square footage, the performance standards included in the previously approved PD Ordinance 2172 would be carried over to an amended ordinance.
2. The proposed PD is in conformance with the goals, policies, and applicable land use designation(s) and standards of the Town's General Plan.
The proposed amendment to PD Ordinance 2172 to allow for an increased residence size on Lot 14 is consistent with the goals and policies of the 2020 General Plan Land Use Element, including, but not limited to:
• Policy LU-1.3 encourages preservation of existing trees, natural vegetation, natural topography, riparian corridors and wildlife habitats, and promote high quality, welldesigned, environmentally sensitive, and diverse landscaping in new and existing developments;
• Policy LU-1.4 states, infill projects shall be designed in context with the neighborhood and surrounding zoning with respect to existing scale and character of surrounding structures, and should blend rather than compete with the established character of the area;
• Policy LU-6.8 states, new construction, remodels, and additions shall be compatible and blend with the existing neighborhood; and
• Policy LU-7.3 states, infill projects shall contribute to the further development of the surrounding neighborhood (e.g. improve circulation, contribute to or provide neighborhood unity, eliminate a blighted area) and shall not detract from the existing quality of life.
PAGE 10 OF 12
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: January 20, 2023
\\TLG-File\data\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\Item 2 - 300 Mountain Laurel\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx
DISCUSSION (continued):
3. The proposed PD is in conformance with all other applicable land use regulations, including but not limited to Town Council adopted guidelines, except as otherwise provided in Section 29.80.095(4).
As discussed in this report, the proposed PD amendment is consistent with the Town Code, HDS&G, and Hillside Specific Plan.
4. Any proposed use or development standards that deviate from the underlying zoning district(s) result in innovative and creative site planning to develop:
a. Housing with a minimum of forty (40) percent of the units affordable to households of very low, low, or moderate income; or
b. Mixed commercial, or mixed residential, or mixed commercial and residential development; or
c. A development designed and sited to protect, preserve and enhance conservation and enrichment of hillsides, natural and/or historic resources, ridgelines, a tree or stand of trees, creek and riparian corridors, geologic hazard or fault zone, and open space; or d. A project that maximizes open space; or
e. The proposed PD provides a public benefit to the citizens of the Town.
The proposed PD amendment to increase the allowable residence size on Lot 14 does not deviate from the underlying zone in that the proposed residence size of 4,850 square feet is less than what would be allowed by the underlying HR-5 zone; therefore, this finding is not applicable. However, the proposal is consistent with items c and d above.
Based on staff analysis, the required findings for amending PD Ordinance 2172 can be made. A draft version of amended Performance Standard #8 is included as Exhibit 14.
D. Neighbor Outreach
Exhibit 15 includes a summary from the applicant of their neighborhood outreach efforts.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Written notice was sent to property owners and tenants within 600 feet of the subject property. Public comments received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, January 20, 2023, are included as Exhibit 18.
PAGE 11 OF 12
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: January 20, 2023
\\TLG-File\data\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\Item 2 - 300 Mountain Laurel\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The request to modify Planned Development Ordinance 2172 is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act.
CONCLUSION:
A. Summary
The property owner is requesting an amendment to PD Ordinance 2172 to increase the maximum residence size allowed on the subject property. No construction or site development is proposed with this application. Any future development proposal for a new residence would be processed and reviewed under an Architecture and Site application.
B. Recommendation
Based on the summary above, staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions to forward the PD amendment application to the Town Council with a recommendation of approval:
1. Recommend that that the Town Council make the findings required by Section
29.80.095 of the Town Code for a Planned Development Ordinance (Exhibit 2); and
2. Recommend that the Town Council adopt the amended Planned Development Ordinance.
C. Alternatives
Alternatively, the Commission can:
1. Forward a recommendation for approval of the application with modified performance standards to the Town Council; or
2. Forward a recommendation of denial of the application to the Town Council; or
3. Continue the matter to a date certain with specific direction.
PAGE 12 OF 12
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/PD-22-001
DATE: January 20, 2023
\\TLG-File\data\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\Item 2 - 300 Mountain Laurel\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx
EXHIBITS:
1. Location Map
2. Required Findings
3. Planned Development Ordinance 2097
4. Planned Development Ordinance 2172
5. Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002
6. Letter from Greenbriar Homes Communities, dated April 20, 2016
7. Project Description
8. Letter of Justification
9. Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Staff Report without Attachments, May 11, 2022
10. Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Minutes, May 11, 2022
11. Applicant’s Response to CDAC Feedback
12. Letter of Approval from the Santa Clara County Fire Department, dated November 7, 2022
13. Letter from the Shannon Valley Ranch Homeowners Association, dated October 18, 2022
14. Amended Performance Standard #8
15. Summary of Neighbor Outreach
16. Site Photos
17. Site Plan
18. Public Comments received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, January 20, 2023
HICKS RD
GUADALUPE MINES RD
COLORADO CT
BURKE RD
MAPLE CREEK
300 Mountain Laurel Lane
0 0.125 0.25
Miles
°
Lot 1
Lot 2
Lot 3
Lot 4
Lot 5
Lot 1
Lot 1
Lot 11 Lot 10
Lot 9
Lot 8
Lot 7
Lot 6
Lot 14
Shannon Valley
Ranch Subdivision
EXHIBIT 1
\\TLG-FILE\DATA\SHARE\PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS\2023\01-25-2023\ITEM 2 - 300 MOUNTAIN LAUREL\EXHIBIT 2 - REQUIRED FINDINGS.DOCX
PLANNING COMMISSION – January 25, 2023
REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR:
300 Mountain Laurel Lane
Planned Development Amendment PD-22-001
Requesting Approval for Modification of Planned Development Ordinance 2172 to Increase the Maximum Residence Size Allowed on Lot 14 on Property Zoned HR-5:PD. This Request for Modification of a Planned Development Ordinance is not Considered a Project Under the California Environmental Quality Act.
PROPERTY OWNER: Bright Smile Dental Office Defined Benefit Plan APPLICANT: Kunling Wu, Trustee
PROJECT PLANNER: Sean Mullin
FINDINGS
Required compliance with the Town Code:
■ As required by Section 29.80.095 of the Town Code for granting a Planned Development Overlay Zone, the proposed amendment:
• Is consistent with Chapter 29, Article VIII, Division 2 of the Town Code in that it meets the purpose and intent of a Planned Development Overlay; • Is in conformance with the goals, policies, and applicable land use designations and standards of the Town’s General Plan, including but not limited to Policies LU-1.3, LU-1.4, LU-6.8, and LU-7.3;
• Is in conformance with the Town Code, Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines, and the Hillside Specific Plan; and
• Does not include an amendment that would deviate from the residence size allowed by the underlying zone.
Required consistency with the Town’s General Plan:
■ That the amendment to the Planned Development Overlay is consistent with the 2020 General Plan and its Elements, including but not limited to Policies LU-1.3, LU-1.4, LU-6.8, LU-7.3, and LU-7.4; and that the amendment to the Planned Development Overlay zoning is consistent with the existing General Plan designation.
EXHIBIT 2
ORDINANCE 2097
ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AMENDING THE TOWN CODE EFFECTING A ZONE CHANGE FROM RC AND HR -5 PREZONE TO HR -5:PD FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 17101 HICKS ROAD AND 14045 SHANNON ROAD
THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I
The Town Code of the Town of Los Gatos is hereby amended to change the zoning on property at 17101 Hicks Road and 14045 Shannon Road (Santa Clara County Assessor Parcel Numbers 537 -18 -001, 567 -24 -008 and 567 -23 -041) as shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A, and is part ofthis Ordinance, from RC (Resource Conservation) and HR -5 (Hillside Residential, 5 Acres per Dwelling Unit) to HR -5:PD (Hillside Residential, 5 Acres per Dwelling Unit, Planned Development).
SECTION II
The PD (Planned Development Overlay) zone established by this Ordinance authorizes the following construction and use of improvements:
1. Demolition oftwo existing pre -1941 and two post -1941 single family residences and one pre -1941 barn.
2. Construction of 13 new single - family dwelling units and reconstruction ofone single - family dwelling that was destroyed by fire.
3. Landscaping, streets, trails, and other improvements shown and required on the Official Development Plan.
4. Dedication of45.4 acres of hillside and riparian open space as shown on the Official Development Plans.
5. Dedication of trail easements to the Town of Los Gatos as shown on the Official Development Plans.
6. Uses permitted are those specified in the HR (Hillside Residential) zone by Sections
29.35 ( 40. Permitted Uses) and 29.20. 185 (Conditional Uses) of the Zoning Ordinance, as those sections exist at the time of the adoption ofthis Ordinance, or as they may be amended in the future. However, no use listed in Section 29. 18520.is
allowed unless specifically authorized by this Ordinance, or by a Conditional Use Permit.
SECTION III
COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
All provisions of the Town Code apply, except when the Official Development Plan specifically shows otherwise.
SECTION IV
Architecture and Site Approval and Subdivision Approval is required before construction work for the dwelling units is performed, whether or not a permit is required for the work and before any permit for construction is issued. Construction permits shall only be in a manner complying with Section 130 29.80.of the Town Code.
SECTION V
The attached Exhibit A (Map), and Exhibit B (Official Development Plans), are part of the Official Development Plan. The following conditions must be complied with before issuance ofany grading, or construction permits:
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
Planning Division
1. EXPIRATION/USE OF APPROVAL. The approval forthe requested zone change from RC Resource Conservation) and HR -5 prezone (Hillside Residential, 5 Acres per Dwelling Unit) to HR -5:PD (Hillside Residential, 5 Acres per Dwelling Unit, Planned Development) shall expire two years from the date of approval unless the application has been vested pursuant to Town Code Section 29.20. 320
2. ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPROVAL REQUIRED. A separate Architecture and Site application and approval is required for the residential units proposed.
3. OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS. The Official Development Plans provided is conceptual in nature. Final footprints and building designs shall be determined during the architecture and site approval process.
4. HOUSE SITING. The siting of the homes shall be determined during the Architecture & Site approval process.
5. RECYCLING. All wood, metal, glass and aluminum materials generated from the demolished structures shall be deposited to a company which will recycle the materials.
Receipts from the company(s) accepting these materials, noting type and weight ofmaterial, shall be submitted to the Town prior to the Town's demolition inspection and the issuance of any building permits.
6. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT. A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained for the removal of any ordinance sized tree prior to the issuance of a Building, Grading or Encroachment Permit.
7. FENCING. Fence locations shall be reviewed and approved during the Architecture & Site review(s), including privacy and yard fencing. Developer will include in the CC &R's for the project a restriction limiting the home owners from replacing the fence type as installed by the Developer and as shown on the Official Development Plans, or as otherwise approved during the Architecture & Site review(s). Any replacement or addition of other fence types shall be restricted to open fence types including wood with wire mesh and wood or concrete split -rail fencing. Solid fencing will be permitted only where installed by the Developer and as shown on the approved development plans. CC &R's shall require fences to be set back a minimum of 10 feet for from property lines.
8. BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE. All proj ect homes will be limited to a maximum size of 4,850 square feet with an average of4,650 square feet, and at least 2/3 ofthe homes shall be limited to a one story design. Final building design and size will be determined during Architecture and Site review. No further expansion ofthe homes will be allowed unless this Ordinance is amended by the Town Council. Lot 14 shall be developed under guidelines of a replacement structure and shall be similar is size, mass and scale to the original home that was destroyed by fire.
9. SETBACKS. The minimum setbacks are those specified by the HR -5 zoning district.
10. HEIGHT. The maximum height for single -story homes shall be 25 feet and the maximum height for two -story homes shall be 30 feet.
11. EXTERIOR LIGHTING. All exterior lighting shall be reviewed and approved as part ofthe Architecture & Site review(s). Lighting shall be down directed, and no street lighting shall be included in the development. If it is determined that lighting is needed for safety reasons at the intersection of Hicks Road and the new road into the development, a street light may be required, but only if there is not alternative safety devices that can adequately delineate the intersection. If it is determined that a new light must be installed, it shall be designed to only illuminate the minimum area necessary for safety.
12. " BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6 -3a. During the design phase, the property owner /developer shall implement the following measures:
a. Any plan affecting trees shall be reviewed by the Consulting Arborist to ensure that improvement plans, utility and drainage plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and demolition plans will not adversely affect the tree to be retained. b. The horizontal and vertical elevations of trees to be preserved within development areas shall be established and included on all plans.
C. The Consulting Arborist shall identify a Tree Protection Zone for trees to be preserved in which no soil disturbance is permitted. For design purposes, the Tree Protection Zone shall be defined by the dripline. Where development must encroach
within the dripline, the Consulting Arborist shall identify an appropriate Tree Protection Zone.
d. No underground services including utilities, sub - drains, water or sewer shall be placed in the Tree Protection Zone.
e. Tree Preservation Notes shall be included on all plans. f. Any herbicides placed under paving materials must be safe for use around trees and labeled for that use.
g. Irrigation systems must be designed so that no trenching will occur within the Tree Protection Zone.
13. " BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6 -3b. During the pre - construction phase, the property owner /developer shall take the following measures:
a. A fence shall be constructed around all trees to be retained and it shall completely enclose the Tree Protection Zone prior to demolition, grubbing, or grading. Fencing shall be 6 -foot chain link or equivalent. Fencing shall be placed at the dripline or as otherwise directed by the Consulting Arborist. Fences are to remain until all grading and construction is completed.
b. All trees to be retained shall be pruned within and adjacent to development areas shall be reviewed by a certified arborist to determine which trees should be pruned to clean the crown, reduce end weight and /or provide clearance. Tree #201 will require pruning to reduce weight throughout the crown. Clearance shall be provided by selectively thinning low - hanging lateral branches.
C. All pruning shall be performed by a Certified Arborist or Tree Worker in accordance with the Tree Pruning Guidelines of the International Society of Arboriculture. d. Prior to the start of any demolition and clearing, the Consulting Arborist will meet with the demolition, grading and other relevant contractors to review limits of construction activity, identify areas requiring fencing, identify trees to be removed and review work procedures.
14. " BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6-3C. Prior to the construction phase of the project, the applicant shall take the following measures:
a. Any grading, construction demolition, or other work within the Tree Protection Zone shall be monitored by the Consulting Arborist.
b. Any root pruning required for construction purposes shall receive the prior approval of, and be supervised by, the Consulting Arborist.
C. If any injury to a tree should occur during construction, it should be evaluated as soon as possible by the Consulting Arborist so that appropriate treatments can be made. d. Root- injured trees have a limited capacity to absorb water. Therefore, it is important to ensure adequate soil moisture in the area of active roots. One to several irrigations may be needed for trees that are at risk of impacts. Irrigations shall be specified by the Consulting Arborist.
e. No excess soil, chemical, debris, equipment or other materials shall be dumped or stored within the Tree Protection Zone.
f. Any additional pruning required to provide clearance during construction shall be performed by a Certified Arborist and not construction personnel.
15. " BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6 -3d. Following construction,
r
a comprehensive management plan for the trees shall be developed that considers the broad objectives of development as well as the needs of the specific species. This management plan shall specify pruning, fertilization, mulch, pest management, replanting and irrigation requirements. In addition, provisions for monitoring both tree health and structural stability following construction must be made a priority. As trees age, the likelihood of failure of branches or entire trees increases. Therefore, the management plan must include an annual inspection for hazard potential.
16. * * BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6 -4. To minimize impacts on nesting raptors, the applicant shall complete necessary pre- construction surveys and monitoring. If it is not possible to schedule construction between August and February, then pre- construction surveys for nesting raptors will be conducted by a qualified ornithologist in order to ensure that no raptor nests will be disturbed during project construction. This survey will be conducted no more than 15 days prior to the initiation of construction activities during the early part of the breeding season (February through April) and no more than 30 days prior to the initiation of these activities during the late part of the breeding season (May through August). During this survey, the biologist will inspect all trees in and immediately adjacent to the impact areas for raptor nests. If an active raptor nest is found close enough to the construction area to be disturbed by these activities, the ornithologist, in consultation with CDFG, will determine the extent of a construction -free buffer zone to be established around the nest.
17. * * BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6 -5a. To minimize impacts on yellow warblers, the property owner /developer shall retain sycamore riparian habitat along Shannon Creek and shall maintain setbacks ofat least 50 feet between proposed development and sycamore riparian habitat. If a small amount of development encroaches into this 50- foot setback, then this encroachment (indirect impact) shall be mitigated by planting riparian habitat at a 1:1 ratio.
18. * * BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6 -5b. The property owner /developer shall implement the following measures to minimize potential impacts on any roosting bats:
a. Surveys shall be conducted up to one year in advance ofbuilding demolition and tree removal, ifpossible, to determine ifactive roosts are present. These surveys shall not substitute for pre - construction/pre - disturbance surveys for nesting raptors, as bats could move on or adjacent to the site between survey periods. If roosting bats are found during these surveys, either avoidance of the maternity roost season, establishment of buffer zones or exclusion of bats shall be implemented as appropriate.
b. Avoidance: Construction activities involving potential roost sites shall be conducted outside the maternity roost season if the project commences after young are volant by July 31 and finished before the formation of maternity roosts begins (as early as March 1).
C. Pre - demolition Surveys and Buffer Zones: Ifthe project schedule does not allow for early detection surveys to occur, a pre - demolition survey for roosting bats shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist 14 days prior to construction as determined by a Memorandum of Understanding with the California Department of Fish & Game
CDFG) prior to any removal of buildings, particularly those with closed areas such as an attic space, or trees 12 inches in diameter. No activities that would result in disturbance to active roosts shall proceed prior to the completed surveys. Ifno active roosts are found, then no further action is warranted. If a maternity roost were present, a qualified bat biologist shall determine the extent ofconstruction -free zones around active nurseries located during surveys. CDFG shall also be notified of any active nurseries within the construction zone.
d. Surveys: Initial surveys can be conducted any time prior to the pre - demolition surveys to establish if a particular location has supported, or supports, roosting bats.
A survey for indications of nursery roosts shall be conducted prior to March 1. If indications of a maternity roost are present, the structure can be removed or modified before a maternity roost becomes reestablished.
e. Exclude Bats Prior to Construction Near Roost: Bats can be excluded after July 31 and before March 1 to prevent the formation of maternity colonies. Such nonbreeding bats can be safely evicted, under the direction of a qualified bat biologist, by sealing crevices and providing them one -way exclusion doors. Such a device should be employed in all expansion joints during dark hours as a temporary device to prevent the formation of a maternity colony. In order not to exclude all potential maternity roost habitat at once, only one -half ofthe expansion j oints should be sealed at any one given time during the maternity colony- nesting season. This should allow bats to leave during dark hours, thus increasing their chance of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation during daylight. After construction, all exclusion devices shall be removed to allow bats to re- establish habitat for colonies.
19. " BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE 6 -6. The property owner /developer shall implement the following protection measures to mitigate impacts to the red - legged frog (see Addendum to the project EIR for additional details):
a. Avoidance to the extent possible.
b. Minimization. The project shall be designed, built and operated in the following ways that will minimize both direct and indirect impacts to these species. Any construction near or adjacent to the Shannon Creek drainage will be preceded by a pre- construction survey. The existing culvert over the Shannon Creek drainage will not be widened and will only be used as an EVA road. The primary egress and ingress for the project will be offof Hicks Road. In addition, impacts relating to the construction of the outfalls for the project are likely to be covered by the Programmatic Section 7 for the red - legged frog. If formal consultation (via Section 7) for the red - legged frog is required, then the project applicant shall implement all of the Minimization measures outlined in the Programmatic Section 7 Biological Opinion.
C. Compensation by Wetland Creation. Any impacts from the project (i.e., outfalls) shall be mitigated by creating habitat on -site at a minimum of 1:1 ratio. d. Compensation by Riparian Restoration. A riparian restoration plan for mitigation shall be developed by a qualified biologist. The mitigation area(s) should be designed to expand existing riparian vegetation and re- create high quality riparian habitat along the Shannon Creek drainage and northern drainage. The mitigation
f °l
goal is to create and enhance riparian habitat with habitat functions and values equal to, or greater than those existing along the Shannon Creek drainage and northern drainage. The final species selection and configuration shall be determined during final mitigation design. The trees and shrubs to be installed should be oflocal origin, preferably contract grown from seed or cuttings from within five miles of the site. e. A detailed monitoring plan including specific success criteria shall be developed and submitted to The Town of Los Gatos for approval. The mitigation area will be monitored in accordance with the plan approved by the Town. The basic components of the monitoring plan are final success criteria, performance criteria, monitoring methods, data analysis, as -built plans, monitoring schedule, contingency /remedial measures and reporting requirements.
f. Specific success criteria and characteristics shall be developed during preparation of the mitigation and monitoring plan. At a minimum, the final success criteria shall include absolute percent cover by native trees and shrubs of 60% and 40 %, respectively. The performance criteria should include tree and shrub survival at three years of 80% ofthe original planting. Ifthe final encroachment estimates exceed 1.0 acre, monitoring of the mitigation site shall be conducted for 10 years. Annual monitoring reports shall be sent to the appropriate agencies. If the required mitigation planting is less than 1.0 acres, monitoring shall be conducted annually for five years.
g. During the development ofthe riparian restoration plan, an appropriate area (or areas) shall be identified to replace encroachment impacts at a 1:1 basis. h. Maintain Water Quality ofthe Watershed. The project shall be designed, constructed and built in such a way as to maintain the water quality in the adjacent drainage channels and ponds. Appropriate best management practices (BMPs) shall be developed for the project.
20. SOLAR WATER SYSTEM. Each residence shall be pre - plumbed for a solar water heater system prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
21. COLOR REFLECTIVITY DEED RESTRICTION. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a deed restriction shall be recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder'sOffice that requires all exterior paint colors to be maintained in conformance with the Town's Hillside Development Standards.
22. SUBDIVISION REQUIRED. A separate tentative map application submittal and approval is required for the proposed project prior to the issuance of building permits.
23. BELOW MARKET PRICE (BMP) IN -LIEU FEE: A Below Market Price (BMP) in -lieu fee shall be paid by the property owner /developer pursuant to Town Code Section 29.10. 3025 and any applicable Town Resolutions. The fee amount shall be based upon the Town Council fee resolution in effect at the time a final or vesting tentative map is approved.
24. FINAL CC &R's. Final CC &R's shall be approved by the Town Attorney prior to the recording of the Final Map. The CC &R's shall include provisions for traffic circulation, vehicle parking enforcement procedures, and landscaping, exterior lighting and fencing restrictions. The approved CC &R's shall become conditions of this Ordinance.
Building Division
25. PERMITS REQUIRED. A building permit application shall be required for each proposed structure. Separate Electrical /Mechanical /Plumbing permit shall be required as necessary.
26. CONSTRUCTION PLANS. The Conditions ofApproval shall be stated in full on the cover sheet of the construction plan submitted for building permit.
27. SIZE OF PLANS. The maximum size of construction plans submitted for building permits shall be 24 inches by 36 inches.
28. PLANS. The construction plans for this project shall be prepared under direct supervision of a licensed architect or engineer (Business and Professionals Code Section 5538).
29. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS. Contact the Bay Area Air Quality Management District at (495) 771 -6000 and complete their process as necessary before obtaining a demolition permit from the Town Building Department. No demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a demolition permit from the Town.
30. SOILS REPORT. Two copies of a soils report, prepared to the satisfaction ofthe 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.
31. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS. A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall be submitted to the project building inspector upon foundation inspection. This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the soils report and the building pad elevation and on -site retaining wall locations and elevations are prepared according to approved plans. Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered civil engineer for the following items:
a. Pad elevation
b. Finish floor elevation
C. Foundation corner locations
32. RESIDENTIAL TOWN ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS. The residences shall be designed with adaptability features for single - family residences per Town Resolution 1994 -61. a. Wooden backing (no smaller than 2- inches by eight- inches) shall be provided in all bathroom walls at water closets, showers and bathtub, located at 34- inches from the floor to the center of the backing, suitable for installation of grab bars. b. All passage doors shall have a 36 -inch wide door including a five foot by five foot level landing no more than one -inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level, with an 18 -inch clearance at interior strike edge.
C. Door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired.
33. SOLAR HOT WATER HEATING. The residences shall be pre- plumbed for solar hot water heating. The plans shall show the location of a stub and valve located in the attics for solar heating use.
34. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE. California Title 24 Energy Compliance forms CRIR and MF -IR shall be printed on the construction plans.
35. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE. This project requires Class A roofing assembly.
36. TOWN FIREPLACE STANDARDS. New fireplaces shall be EPA Phase II approved appliances per Town Ordinance 1905. Tree limbs within 10 feet of chimneys shall be cut.
37. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS. When a special inspection is required by UBC Section 1701, the architect or engineer of record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted
0
to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of any building permits, in accordance with UBC Section 106. 5. 3Please obtain Town Special Inspection form from the Building Division Service Counter. The Town Special Inspection schedule shall be printed on the construction plans.
38. NON -POINT SOURCE POLLUTION STANDARDS. The Town standard Santa Clara Valley Non -point Source Pollution Control Program specification sheet shall be part of plan submittal. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division service counter.
39. ADDITIONAL AGENCY APPROVALS REQUIRED. The project requires the following agencies approval before issuance of a building permit:
a. West Valley Sanitation District 378 -2407
b. Santa Clara County Fire Department: 378 -4010
C. Lots 1 -13: Los Gatos School District: 335 -2000
d. Lot 14: Union School District: 377 -8010
Note: Obtain the school district forms from the Town Building Department, after the Building Department has approved the building plans.
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS:
Engineering Division
40. GRADING. Grading shall be kept to a minimum to construct the roads within the project.
Any future grading will be considered at the time of Architecture & Site review(s).
41. GRADING PERMIT. A grading permit is required for all on -site grading, erosion control and improvements (roadway, storm drainage, utilities, lighting, etc.). A separate application for a grading permit (with grading plans) shall be made to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public Works Department. The grading plans shall include final grading, drainage, retaining wall location, driveway, utilities and interim erosion control. Unless specifically allowed by the Director of Parks & Public Works, the grading permit will be issued concurrently with the building permit.
42. SOILS REPORT. One copy of the soils and geologic report shall be submitted with the grading permit application. The soils report shall include specific criteria and standards governing site grading, drainage, pavement design, retaining wall design, and erosion control. The report shall be signed and "wet stamped" by the engineer or geologist, in conformance with Section 6735 of the California Business and Professions Code.
43. FINAL MAP. A final map shall be recorded. Two copies ofthe final map shall be submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks & Public Works Department for review and approval. The submittal shall include closure calculations, title report and appropriate fees.
The map shall be recorded prior to issuance of any building permits for the project.
44. DEDICATIONS. The following shall be dedicated prior to issuance of any permits:
a. Hicks Road. A 40 -foot half street right -of -way with the chord of a 20 -foot radius at the intersection with the new street.
b. Shannon Road. A 20 -foot half street right -of -way.
C. New interior streets. A 40 -foot street right -of -way with the chord of a 20 -foot radius at all intersections and a standard 42 -foot radius cul -de -sac. d. Public Service Easement (PSE). Ten (10) feet wide, next to the new street right -ofPage 9 of 17 i
ways.
e. Ingress- egress, storm drainage and sanitary sewer easements, as required. f. Trail Easement. Ten (10) to twenty (20) feet wide, as shown on the Official Development Plan.
g. Emergency Access Easement. Twenty (20) feet wide, from the new public road to Shannon Road, as shown on the Official Development Plans.
45. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. The following improvements shall be installed by the developer. Plans for those improvements shall be prepared by a California registered civil engineer, reviewed and approved by the Town, and guaranteed by contract, Faithful Performance Security and Labor & Materials Security before the issuance of a building permit or the recordation of a map. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. a. New Streets. Curb, gutter, new street paving, signing, striping, storm drainage and sanitary sewers, as required. Curbs shall be rolled concrete to the satisfaction ofthe Director of Parks and Public Works.
46. INSURANCE. One million dollars ($1, 000) 000,of liability insurance holding the Town harmless shall be provided in a format acceptable to the Town Attorney before recordation of the map.
47. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION FEE (RESIDENTIAL). The developer shall pay a proportional the project'sshare of transportation improvements needed to serve cumulative development within the Town of Los Gatos. The fee amount will be based upon the Town Council resolution in effect at the time the request of Certificate of Occupancy is made. The fee shall be paid before issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. The traffic impact mitigation fee for each new house in this project using the current fee schedule is $5,730.
The final fee shall be calculated from the final plans using the rate schedule in effect at the time ofthe request for a Certificate of Occupancy. Credit shall be given for the house on Lot 14, where a house was previous located, and for the three residences to be demolished.
48. GENERAL. All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town Standard Drawings and the Town Standard Specifications or as otherwise approved by the Director of Parks and Public Works. 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'srepresentative 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'sexpense.
49. 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.
50. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS. The developer or his representative shall notify the Engineering Inspector at least twenty -four (24) hours before starting an 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 ow work that went on without inspection.
51. GRADING MORATORIUM. No grading or earth- disturbing activities shall be initiated in
1
hillside areas between October 1 and April 15 of each year. For grading operations commenced before October 1, all grading or earth - disturbing activities shall cease October 15 and will not be allowed to restart until April 15. Grading permits will not be issued between September 15 and April 15. These limitations include, but are not limited to these items: driveways, building pads, foundation trenches and drilled piers, retaining walls, swimming pools, tennis courts, outbuildings and utility trenches. Install interim erosion control measures, shown on the approved interim erosion control plan, by October 1, iffinal landscaping is not in place. Maintain the interim erosion control measures throughout the October 1 to April 15 period.
52. GRADING INSPECTIONS. The soils engineer or her /his qualified representative shall continuously inspect all grading operations. The soils engineer shall submit a final grading report before occupancy /Certificate of Completion.
53. 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.
C. Top of future curb along one side of the new street.
54. EROSION CONTROL. Interim and final erosion control plans shall be prepared and submitted to the Engineering Development Division of the Parks & Public Works Department. A Notice of Intent (NOI) shall be submitted to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be submitted to the Town Engineering Division concurrently with the grading permit application. Grading activities shall be limited to the period of least rainfall (April 15 to October 1). A maximum of two weeks is allowed between clearing of an area/building on an area if grading is allowed during the rainy season. In addition, straw bales and plastic sheeting shall be stored on -site for emergency control, if needed. Install fiber berms, check dams, retention basins, silt fences, erosion control blankets and fiber rolls as needed on the project site, to protect down stream water quality during winter months.
55. 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 or creeks.
56. NPDES REQUIREMENTS. All work within the project shall be in conformance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit issued to local agencies within Santa Clara County by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board on October 17, 2001.
57. FISH & GAME REQUIREMENTS. A "1603" permit shall be obtained for the California Department of Fish & Game for proposed improvements in or near riparian areas within that agency'sjurisdiction. A copy of the permit shall be provided to the Parks & Public Works Department before any permits are issued /final map is recorded.
58. UTILITIES. The developer shall install all utility services, including telephone, electric power and all other communications lines underground, as required by Town Code
27.50. 015(b). Cable television capability shall be provided to all new lots.
59. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. The developer shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged orremoved 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 ofthe 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.
60. DRIVEWAY APPROACH. The developer shall install a minimum of one (1) Town standard residential driveway approach for each lot. The new driveway approaches shall be constructed per Town Standard Detail.
61. LOT 14 DRIVEWAY. The driveway to Lot 14 shall be the minimum width required to provide fire access. The intent is to minimize the visibility ofthe driveway.
62. AS -BUILT PLANS. After completion of the construction of all work in the public right -ofway or public easements, the original plans shall have all changes (change orders and field changes) clearly marked. The "as- built" plans shall again be signed and "wet- stamped" by the civil engineer who prepared the plans, attesting to the changes. The original "as- built" plans shall be review and approved the Engineering Construction Inspector. A Mylar ofthe approved "as- built" plans shall be provided to the Town before the Faithful Performance Security is released.
63. SANITARY SEWER LATERAL. Sanitary sewer laterals are televised by West Valley Sanitation District and approved by the Town of Los Gatos before they are used or reused.
Install a sanitary sewer lateral clean -out at the property line of each new lot.
64. SIDEWALK REPAIR. The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any sidewalk damaged now or during construction of this project. Sidewalk repair shall match existing color, texture and design, and shall be constructed per Town Standard Detail.
The limits of sidewalk repair will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of the project.
65. CURB AND GUTTER. The developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any curb and gutter damaged now or during construction ofthis project. New curb and gutter shall be constructed per Town Standard Detail. The limits of curb and gutter repair will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase ofthe proj ect.
66. CURB RAMPS. The developer shall construct curb ramp according to State Standard Drawings at all intersections. The actual "Case" as shown on the standard to be used will be decided by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of the proj ect.
67. " HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURE 7 -3. Energy dissipaters should be provided at the outfalls of proposed storm drains to minimize the increased potential for erosion hazards due to project development.
68. " HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURE 7 -4. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared prior to start of construction.
The SWPPP and project plans shall be reviewed by the Town Engineering staff. The
C.
SWPPP shall be in conformance with the Santa Clara County NPDES Permit as amended by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB) on October 17, 2001. The SWPPP shall be approved concurrently with the grading, drainage and erosion control plans. Reference the Addendum to the EIR for additional details.
69. * * HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURE The proj ect design shall incorporate water quality mitigation measures in accordance with current NPDES requirements. Water quality measures should include use ofbiofilters, drainage swales, and detention facilities to mitigate non -point source impacts. In addition, the SCVWD and RWQCB recommend the incorporation of site planning design measures to help reduce potential contributions of urban pollutants from the project. See the Addendum to the EIR for additional details.
70. * * TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURE 8 -2. In order to minimize potential traffic safety impacts the property owner /developer shall take the following measures:
a. Adequate sight distance shall be provided for the project access road /Hicks Road intersection through removal of vegetation and grading of the embankment. b. A stop sign shall be installed to control traffic on the project access road to Hicks Road. The stop sign for the proposed driveway shall be located along and parallel to the north edge of pavement on Hicks Road.
C. Warning signs shall be installed indicating a "T" intersection along Hicks Road approaching the new driveway. These signs shall be located approximately 300 feet east and west ofthe project entrance /Hicks Road intersection. d. Traffic reflectors shall be installed on the south side of Hicks Road at the intersection with the entrance road to the project.
71. * * TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURE 8 -3. A separate pedestrian trail shall be installed along the north side of Hicks Road.
72. " TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURE 8 -4. Use oftrails by bicyclists, particularly the trail parallel to Hicks Road, shall be considered during Architecture and Site review. In addition, design issues such as the appropriateness of trail widths, pavement versus compacted earth, and trailhead facilities shall be considered during Architecture and Site Review.
73. GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT PLANS. The project geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects ofthe subdivision improvement plans to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated.
The results ofthe plan review shall be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review, prior to issuance ofpermits for construction of subdivision level improvements.
74. GEOTECHNICAL PLAN REVIEW (LOTS 1 THROUGH 13). The project geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project building and grading plans for individual residences on Lots 1 through 13. To ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The consultant shall verify that recommended measures to address potential debris flows on Lot 6, and potential co- seismic ground deformation on Lots 1 and 13 have been incorporated.
75. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION (LOT 14). The project geotechnical consultant shall
0
complete a site specific soil and foundation investigation as a basis for preparing recommended geotechnical design parameters for Lot 14 residential improvements. The results of this investigation shall be submitted to the Town for review by the Town Engineer and Town Geotecbnical Consultant prior to approval of a site specific development plan.
76. GEOTECHNICAL FIELD INVESTIGATION. The project geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction.
The results of these inspections and the as -built conditions of the project shall be described by the project geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior to final inspection.
For further detail on conditions 71 through 74, see the letter from Cotton, Shires & Associates dated February 12, 2002.
Parks Division
77. AERATION TUBES. All impervious surface encroaching under the dripline of existing trees shall have aeration tubes installed and these tube locations shown on the plans.
78. IRRIGATION. All newly planted landscaping shall be irrigated by an in- ground irrigation system. Special care shall be taken to avoid irrigation which will endanger existing native trees and vegetation.
79. BUILDING FOUNDATIONS: Any buildings under the dripline ofexisting trees shall have a foundation built from pier and grade beam to minimize impaction on existing trees.
80. TREE STAKING: All newly planted trees are required to be double staked to Town standards.
81. GENERAL. All existing and newly planted trees shown on the plan are specific subjects of approval of this plan and must remain on site.
82. IRRIGATION SYSTEM. Water efficient irrigation systems shall be utilized to conserve water in all project irrigation of publicly landscaped areas.
83. VEGETATIVE SCREENING. Vegetative screening shall be used along the development edges, where appropriate, to soften views of peripheral buildings and to integrate landscaping and native vegetation.
84. WATER EFFICIENT ORDINANCE. This project is subject to the Town'sWater Efficient Ordinance. A fee of $472 is required when the landscape, irrigation plans, and water calculations are submitted for review.
85. TREE PROTECTION. Tree protection fencing shall be placed at the dripline of existing trees to be saved in the area of construction. Fencing shall be four feet high chain link attached to steel poles driven two feet into the ground when at the dripline ofthe tree. Ifthe fence has to be within eight feet of the trunk of the tree a fence base may be used, as in a typical chain link fence that is rented. The fencing must be inspected and approved by the Parks Superintendent and must be installed prior to issuance of a grading and /or building permit.
86. ORNAMENTAL LANDSCAPING. All formal landscaping shall be within 30 feet ofthe perimeter of the houses. Any planting beyond the 30 -foot perimeter shall be native vegetation that is drought and fire resistant, and planted in natural clusters.
87. LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES. The adopted landscape guidelines and native plant lists shall include the recommendations of the Town consulting arborist, except that lawn areas shall
not exceed 5,000 square feet. The landscape guidelines are attached as Exhibit C.
Cs
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT:
88. WATER SUPPLY. Two water tanks with a capacity of 10,000 Gallons and one wharf style hydrant shall be provided unless the proposed public water system can be extended to provide appropriate lot protection, or other acceptable means of fire protection can provided as authorized by the Fire Department. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications W -1.
89. FIRE APPARATUS(ENGINE) ACCESS. Provide access roadways with apaved all weather surface and a minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum circulating turning radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside, and a maximum slope of 15 %. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications A -1.
90. FIRE APPARATUS (ENGINE) TURN - AROUND REQUIRED. Provide an approved fire department engine roadway turnaround with a minimum radius of 3 6 feet outside and 23 feet inside. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications A -1. Cul -De -Sac Diameters shall be no less than 64 feet.
91. FIRE APPARATUS (HYDRANT). Where buildings exceed 150 feet travel distance from the street either an on -. site (private) hydrant or an approved residential fire sprinkler system shall be provided.
92. PUBLIC FIRE HYDRANT(S) REQUIRED. Provide public fire hydrant(s) at location(s) to be determined jointly by the Fire Department and the San Jose Water Company. Maximum hydrant spacing shall be 500 feet, with a minimum single hydrant flow of 1,750 GPM at 20 psi, residual. Consult with San Jose Water Company relative to main sizing requirements and hydrant spacing. Prior to applying for building permit, provide civil drawings reflecting all fire hydrants proximal to the site. To prevent building permit delays, the developer shall pay all required fees to the water company as soon as possible.
93. TIMING OF REQUIRED WATER SUPPLY INSTALLATIONS. Installations ofrequired fire service(s) and fire hydrants(s) shall be tested and accepted by the Fire Department, prior to the start of framing or delivery of bulk combustible materials. Building permit issuance may be delayed until required installations are completed, tested, and accepted.
94. TIMING OF REQUIRED ROADWAY INSTALLATIONS. Required driveways and /or access roads up through first lift of asphalt shall be inspected and accepted by the Fire Department prior to the start of construction. Bulk combustible materials shall not be delivered to the site until installations are completed as stated above. Building permit issuance may be delayed until installations are completed.
95. FIRE APPARATUS (HYDRANT). Prior to project inspection, the general contractor shall ensure theat a "Blue" dot has been placed in the roadway as directed by the Fire Department.
96. HOUSE NUMBERS. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their background.
SECTION VI
This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting ofthe Town Council ofthe Town ofLos
Gatos on March 4, 2002, and adopted by the following vote as an ordinance of the Town of Los Gatos at a meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos on March 18, 2002 and takes effect 30 days after it is adopted.
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES: Steven Blanton, Sandy Decker, Steve Glickman, Joe Pirzynski, Mayor Randy Attaway.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
SIGNED:
MAYOR OF E TOWN OF OS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
1-7
CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
f 'a
yr
HR-5
Prezone
HR-2 1/2
HR-6
Prezone
RC HR-20
Prezone 1 Prezone
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
LANDS OF THE DAGNEY GROUP. LLC
TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
SHANNON VALLEY RANCH
BY
GREENBRIAR HOMES COMMUNITIES, INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION
1. COVER SHEET
2• CONCEPTUAL LAND USE PLAN
3. CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN / CIRCULATION PLAN
4• LEAST RESTRICTIVE DEVELOPMENT AREA
5• CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN
6. UTILITY PLAN
7. SITE SECTIONS
S. TREE NOTES
9. SCHEMATIC LANDSCAPE PLAN
RECEVED
JAN - 3 2002
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PEV: flM",
MATCH LINE A 575 - 02 - 013 umwx w. R0" 0 Q
SEE BELOW ` \\
LANDS OF
t
Cltt OF SAN JOSE D)
a
GuH ° "
EUPIE...
ce E- N '
r ° i,.•,'\\ °
20S a3 i
M F,y cIII SITE
II Y II N ° II 557- 23 - 040
LANDS OF CHRISTIAN
CHURCH OF LOS GATOS
8. 632 Ac.
VICINITY MAP
567- 2 3- a25: / `. O
Az _. .
i ` I
iii 1- o° U.
w] lo ssuE
LEGEN
LANDS OF BUftx:
Ege \\
i u gc+'JJ'
8. 441
J
F. \ \ 4
1,
1 \
II. p9QO PROPOSED TOWN ZONING
L,
in ; .
1 11 N ;,
f
1 H
1 H q 0
M QI An
CURRENT COUNtt ZONING
II II 11 W ® Y
p
v - _ _ i `\ I 11 1 ZONING _ W CURRENT TOWN ZONING
N ` 1 1 1 A
TOWN PREZONINC
UCM°.. E CBEEN
HR- 5 P 0
BE BE9b1E9 1. EX. lG.
PEx vvsaEE, svx[ +xo
O)
SCG4C LM iMN1 EM1S[ YEMI
y
5 Pd / \\ \ Y
r .' :.
J
J, f _ ^` \-
f _ _ \ R
5\\
ti g \I OxLL9gE PESI]FMUL
AA
1 1
LM }\ \ \\
ApJAVX AESIMfi] IM . xG
PARCEL 557 - M 47a] AREAS OF USES:
11.91E STREET. ( WITH. NM ECrf 3. 1 4
Fow U
56] - 23 - 045 mFN S.
FAZIO
IHCN9 r
1\ j i ___ i \ \\ mrz II I c QW. AY, zszzu
2. 0971
11' * wa .._ I .. \\\ \\\
TxRU qa l1Nlx•] EY •: xesu
wlu 9Twx Lms x s a
fY \ f SUAEIi - - L 1 ' \ \
AREA KBNG GVI fWPE
S
lm B ( PUSICt • Y .t
1 1
1 \ \ \ \`• %/ \ \ \ ] mu OGFN
Ear Plow n mxu u) as. B> u
roru cRss . R
fl \ _ - . vdID6^ Jt.
T ..'.... .... =.;
a i4 :S •v AfW' CNCG' j
F JG
ANT vI L N
1. 872 A
LOT AREAS
1 _ _ \\ - R - O - S 6U AM - 7
EBr
J
1 - ^' _
I Wr 2 zsfi AcnJ
RVICE
EASEMEMZ_
LI\
527 - 56 - 011 aii 1
OF LEUPP URo sis xu11s u. n
r
UB n zes 4m
d" V ® 2® sd mi a iii i.n:
O \\ 527 - 56 -0101
I\ "
Z a , Iti sett K:..
vVA p26, 3. 012 Ac. A/ I /
e °
w Im Es.: Jrn1s
LANDS OF JAHPN
NOTES.
WUQiGE \ \`
537 - 17 - 011 1.
IIU. OiTIMG
OF
NM ISLIS WGG
K\ 527- 56- 009 ti L, .. i
s. OiSilsec BRITB zwx vnnm I. T . ro BE AEMOEB
2. 492 Ac.
P LANDS OF CHITRE C LA3 DSFACEE
v
v
0 PROJECT INFO
sJSwo:'
E,
1. 1
v \\ ` ,_ -
i IALCWr GNQNBAWI MEM COYMINI25. MC.
M'ItOPER: 9MN f/JSTAVZO. J:.
1'{
I NO STFNS CNEEN BLW..
11 \\
i
1. -
E. / ( p1J0515E -
Id
527 -56 - 008
1 HR- 5
1. 672 Ac.
11` I 1 [`
l.
l
sE
ENOIXFFR
LANDS OF CHANG i \ 1 IN slu -
iXFJgeGESIZN afio 1E
E
wsnxc use NEEE 1
11 \ \
tPEE 11 A- 209 C \ ; - PROF69Ep
IR: x — (E . AW, / 9. wmxm AESIOExcEs 1
SP/ CE 1
1 1
J \\ \ 1 P l
I..
MAY S/i xi951T 1
I 1: 1. BEST VMIEY sNNT. M1x ms] nCT 1
j O PoNFA M 1
SYPPLT. TO /
y
1 1 _ p
GBIE SE M, COUPMry f
527- 56- 006 ix, \ iEi£190N: . 31. JBI.°]B] -H - PoB k stiJ - L -Oa: I t HR - 5 pd li o cxoss Pl6A w. sua I\
111 ` LANDS 1OHOLBERi yf
OF SEPA SOUR 537-
17- 012 p
Ai
1 ------------------
952
M- 2 y
Dabs -
c. 527- 56- 00+ F'' ik ] iys level1v .
1- 022 Pc IS \ m4
J;'
Ervr
CONCEPTUAL
LAND USE PLAN E + bF STERANHA s LANDS J / 111 / f\ / o ® o y
sC 7 UE: I'.eo. LANDS OF THE DAGNEY GROUP. L.L. C. z
c pBNMZ .. . / MATCH
LINE A ^, ` I8 y _
I __ .._
1 -003 5 }] Jam/ Las uros cnJECRw.'
i 5ll - 18 - 002 ` y
LAND 25. 1
53± OF
ABOVE - 25.
532
SWEI.
Ac.
LANDS
I ['
OF MCBETH KSi ° SEE
5. 032 Ac. pA
lmB
xIVm &
ENe. 3
11 VII 0 S 4I 20a dH 1 i yi . A ° 2® s SHEET 2 OF 9 sw
1us Brave.
1 Iva
r it _
I \ i'
x
DEVELOPMENT AREA
LANDS OF THE UAGNEY GROUP, L. L. C.
A TCH LINE a _ .__ _
r t - us tyros
SEE asovE _ •
IYu y -
SHEET 4 OF 9
w msc um o, xoe, , xv
w
NNI
s, mF 10 6 "' N" A DM
In I.
Pc PNNNR xl3ilw_'- _
R4N -" i
MROMMATE ENrt MWORK QUANTITIES -^'> \ \ \ ... _ -. - % ossw, INt AOa a s
zsxv CUT FlLL \
I..,
T
LOTS TOTAL 23627 23827 i \ \ ` 575- 02- 013
TYPICAL DRIVEWAY SECTION STREET 3071 2305 ' l LANDS
xls) TRAIL 1970 1394 \\\ M_OF - SAR.
So NOISE— IN Kuss vs.., TOTAL 28868
Is Is Nm MWUEa Mu BNIM' CE oN sn ,
2s /
S
A,
D
SITE rc "
IFNUL zsx_
iROoAIL — L
EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS ROAD
56- g3 - 040
LAND$ OF CHRISTIAN
CHURCH OF L68 GATOF{ :'
1 - 1 \ I\ " \\ \ i VICINITY MAP
0,'!y\
NtlN EM D itl iWL ITM@ Y ,
r• _ '
I
p. ° 1 \ 1'
s \, - }
p
T, a
N. KWP ? 8 K8, xo. iE TME: wemr ro- xx /- r $'• \ Ur
Ei Is1MD Rcs., wD vEC[ r .' c 8' e !,
1 7 po o TREE LEGEND
v \ \: \ ! .,
e . _ . I ,! _
aq ;
IB 1 (( dv I iwMr"inzE` R " E — '.. 1 r:41 i vc 1q 111. S IIIE TO uuNn F ' 0 Y T1EE ID BE REIpuEO A +
t ; as+ EGATO r $, A & S rmociss .\ '. _ E / _,. \ ` \'. \: } EASEMENTExFA [ xGENx)4M KGE.
3J' t'
l3
ryI
1 8\ }. P , } , } X , '.
1'
Y\ .,.
yp •'..'
r .`
p ljLRl \:\\ 1 LLS.ESE WED Sa ESCENK C0.v5CRVn110N yF I 1 " 1
I
li 1C
sl''.
dq 5p4'. DpxM1EVP Cry aCi I ( q.~ . \ S "'/ \ ' S. E. SWaF w . 1 " rte \ \
4l. IR151w0 0.M 1 ' w
PGR dG[ I T
nG at[ i4 :. ,.'/ \
i
S ,• '! 1 ;\ % \\ \ ? \ f.E. E N611L rWN6 SEMU
IS
14 ,
ER
I , / \ ('\ Na 1 \ \ _ .{ j
H , • -' \ $\ \,
D.E % tlVI.2 SiMY oRWI FISflIE 1
RD PI InT / u, l
I } \\,• . / /. : \ . /, ') "
A
r
J , k
v /;
LOi r! wu40B' 9 m E i \
l ` 0 - AI \
11F3
s
mnN EV' E E
M
lu
dTivRNA+ o xo I
rw + ,
IG \` /
Sb; Jd 4t \ \ w
nx'4 c" ip¢'EC°'^'" E — - ' 13 vs.F. sE \ . \ ......
k / ( PRChgf $ TsNipA O I \ '' AEt wr gE REpr° p6 1
JS _ R \ FlREOEPi TURNWi
x _ . "•
ll
1 / 6s \
T
D .•
6 \'~ Y". / n I \ 9Db ' DUPN' rICH 5' • WY
1 •\ \ //
nI
M \ ,
E 5 Sx
p \\ , TRAIL SECTION
GG"
ffAAAA
yMIYp `\\
I _
567- 2
11\
L
LANDS
a
O UN
1 i A
y.
R - O - S
l vo' ESCmP ox e.,.. m w`ro w •. EI
64NM - T
M1D4RlF \ NP ' i , 21
VI ,_ - 1
n,
A
i A < •/
fJ I - c.
s
u 7 1
A /
JI
S OF FEUph v AdovosM mow P.w w ARE,
i
PER
ry, \
I
i
fww m. nx / o,.
I _
1 vl l
1 L 1
ss
CI
iL',. \ \
1 \ •. /
LANDS OF ARAN \\ , . I : _ X \ D'
z.'!
r .
NO EE ISnNO NIURNSA TO 6E RMOUSxM.
2. PREPLoT NO Of Rol! S RIELLwNYM wD
A I - \
y
r
537- 17- 011 " svaFV io cNN16E
A v. Nrx. s
1 527- 56- 009
z
i II x `, A
j
s 9± Pc
1 } DS OF FEE aI. FASFe, usnrwEM.vureRrwN LOdlgxS vmm sx6aM mrPAE e uPPI MxMNre RE, S q
1 V 4 } µ D PAS SURS= r0 .0.VSwEM nl 1XE
DYE Arv05 Oa CHITRE !.- 11AP
oa w\ \ 3
s.
PREPUUmx.
I} ' d 34 IOt
Y
Ac. SSRORI PE.w
C rL cRwwc IIORx_ uwL AS c° NPI .
x 1
1 A II
x R EM1F VNOS OF wwG Nn NNYLTwr c
ENGCO v1A / I
10 d A ' ` ANN r ICNRDNKE MM GEOIEMNMK IXoL°
RR110R 2• 6' 1
1 \ p \ \
U $ P GrJRO[
P
r
1 WEROAY PEA e, soxc wEUS sxaL AE UsUN. [ O . 51 NE,
xoorvw CATKIN of qo XG TO ORRRRR RE° VUlS -' POw1A5RlEO 6Y VEE GUTTER DETAIL \. I \ t
7 1 n3 ENCINEEIS SPIT. c1AV vPLUr wnlLR ° LSwn. c. 0 p° m zcs - zeo° i V : 3TT, ,' a\
N 9 / 91. E. N oN xz ro mNU Ron wsMe: r oesER,. TwN
of
PE• _ \ Pu wcu .
sNmwNExrs. q
Y
J" [. slil
1 I
Zn • L
l i. swx xc NUR rRNLS re BE DnwunM nr m of
Fl.
Is. c/
L - 52z
j 1 I t
I
HI - - J''
I o[ scx co° Imuww° wrx TRE SAR aF Los
tyros PFz —[= E P' S a s.
E 1. 6 ., AL YktPWRyIµ 4 III II1 C ' g e:.' ,
ry` \ 1 }' Ij } 311
II _ G .INE. T aF PMNS AND
FaRESrm. xo• 10'
la 10. LAN' ui ' J CI
4NN \ LOT A PCR CPp E , l' 1 11
1. b Ip' IRNt lllcnYFM NIO EaulM M POINT
ov lF
SuNK[ / I
IINIED U E. 1 \ /( gyp ( r
I
II'
A
r
F
O- \ \
1444'..., 1
I -
plO51M AND °" So.
CPYpIIEC / MESIMSXru 1 .REPORT D F
1 p p
COLREE
EME j}
II I' nl - a RNAI. o[
sloil. ho
F;
1 I 1 N •' 9. CPp SP. V£ KGS fY ^.tPT L° i A s1W1 6E YVMNMO 6Y cuss 2 KO 66E /
I I i
r/ 1 A _ 1 \ II
I
I 7j '
s
O°' i
f ' \ V
I
y -. ( mE roYE ox+rtxs ASSOC. nox ixol rx° /°R
I1(
f
j 1
1 _
b I ' t
fw PMIERS rRNC sX41 AE . R1.[ D 6I ENF xD. A
ir. r \ A\ I\ I/'/ III I
I
y
4 I
I • -
S i '\ I
II
TRA WIMIN LOr C MLL
BE MNRS
M Bf ME
NAA INTERIOR ROADS - ALTERNATE " A 11. TIE siM S el PII. I OF iNE Ex, S.
GROSSxc 1 5z7 % - 005 _ $ , 11 APiorwE mrtEa
NOrtN wRw nwL °
Enw
Rn ( xTSI
a.
F h 73F2 % pc I \ )( I' ll (,
l
i
r 537 - 1] -
012
6 R T M
RI
Ot OF lq REN9 W
SEPAHMANSOUR Rkv. s -W m ' 1 11. 952 Ac REV. 1
m '
y
so ?—
szisooa1,"
r ,
l
l E' lCONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN
1 AU
E' ( 3 LANDS OF THE DAGNEY GROUP, L.L.
C. S DF r$ TERMKA I
HVIJ o O L @° 2 j;
N
1 A \ l ' :
VIII /
T
I
I
1 / /
U
L/ \ . LM
urDS
yy GWfORnu
J S' s'..
ses[/ F M AMM
UM INTERIOR ROADS - ALTERNATE "
B" -- - \ 1 1
s
r / P
I
t *. i
I ® avlLfw. Nueews.
INC. sceASl -
eo•
Ixrsl - L%iAl0S OFUS fz
E /' /. N/ '` \ ! g' I I I ! { AMPS OFBiAIOBEI{ F lA
xoM
IsI& 2531b . AH.':. . \ .:. n' l5.03E Ar// _.,' / / .. ." SA EET 5 OF
575- 02- 013
I
LANDS 4F
CITY 0 —W JOSE z 3 §
II.!) cSITE
NT\ \ r =
w
56] 23 040
LANDS OF CHRISTIAN a/
cH H DH oos ? f Lospnr
VICINITY MAP
REW . aUSr ENr m Tee {
RE REOUPm W irAi•. wu m / Y'
L
NpS {> R 6} 1{ tN
SE R
l
LJ
4n 35FI
L
I, 1 ^. ".`. _
r
I.; \ 11 \ \ 1 \ 2 m
r /
l / w3me v E r. cusroN o f
3 l EASEMENT ND
VEIJEC a ROwxv Ass IFFEE 5 r ' '.`L \ 1
I
I, - \
1'! \
i
09.5<.E9CxG[ ONSSEM MN
4t 1
1 ` -
11111 \
4' "
zo[ wBJEE Co""
EDwvN - J
III FR" E. sE4Ex15 eErwax Lm it .- \
s. E. sLaRE
14 µ D E' IDRMMpT0 PUb. K W1RnR,'
sENER 3 4
1 I.
Lro
DR Q' x r ° a eURRE I '
Ri ^
1\ . c weuc
muLs IPR DEb i 2srSsNwMlac s : ^
g1 \
v.
1 / APPRO% IAMTE LOCAMkE OF
SHE ^ \ \
q1 \
I AfiCe1 M P , JOINT" TAENCd HAS BEEN 6H0 , 3 R E y[ A 11 I A P ft 4
1 _ /.' EXACT OON OF JOINT NCN .'/ /
W
t
1 7 TO
N \
6EE5 HOED BY .L,
PROVIDE T
1FIR O§ TH2''' • IFIRE` DEPi.-: IiM1OUi .- .. II
v \•!
l \.
1`
1 E,
Iv l
v E
Jr —
rI
F
1 \ \
AaQIwN \ - ... WATER NE HAS BEEn
sn0wrv. .
1 ILR
y r E
rauL
iG - __- -__
r 567-
24' APPROIIIqATE LOCAl10N OF THE1'
lv
0 1 1G,ILANDS OF A JOUM(
I
Q -
1 ' iR. ut jry, pl A : LINE ITO BE09kNE0 % By SANAJOS _ II} 1 a/a
1 X/ \'\ \\ WATfR. COMPANY ^ l
I R- 0- 5 641 M
7 i TREET
IGNi
P
FOR. oRNx .
NxDLE t V'! v — PRavosm smnu
cew UBk J
Lt 9 d4 >? i` T' — PRaosm N. o ow
ET j CF LE JP t
B` - /
L
J
L
I ; b., . '(\
F
X\
A'
Oy,
pv2v
y
d
v
vv
I
vv
v
l 527; 56' 0! 0 _ _
III
A
J II'
I //
Uouw
RNET 3.01i
R
Ac oaEO..' SE
4NOS OF
JAPAN
NOTES oxulucE
E FF wu
AAND wLDwcs rD BE
DEOSXED
of 1 i• \ % r
III X \ \ "^
spry 3. giEPLmIME Or RRWM IS MWIRN RT
µD 527- 55-
Irtuwro 1. 2 49i 4a \\ 06J / .\ ` \ ` „ lr I! 1DSo- OF FEE %s' Oo'' cror. I - El — mrwx Lon. Ano BE 1 \ \ 1 \
V _ o ME SUWM tD MARSIFEW Xr THE
ENE R. ENEM LDCUIws I.. µE ANRD% x.
T J 1 ' . or RsROrc. IE , w. w PREPeD.
nox. 1 \ I
1 \ E% .
EULVERT A AA ) t
I'
r ` ' CROSSING s. cwgND wcRr swu BE
m "" F n T6
REMAIN !E.rAWwCE mM' cmrzaw uL
FlNnMmx a FR. uIO XwuFOW 9x ENDED
EVES / IV /
9e. l
D I 1 6- Eb5TX4 NELLS ENRE BE 4NMNNEO OR RMISM I I
C I
1' Q \ - /' I I
I I -.. rnva9 ro o ROF REgR E ro HRRE aEo
er
J Ewer, wufl' IrnrFrt D51Rx' f. cru ( wel : 55
xew ME` 5 Lrsaeirvo AFRAH E MR oman OONDR llax
ar 1 \ 1
1 ` _ % 52] 56 - 006 I1 I II i I I
i _
y T !
T. W F
RO . 0 SRREER
s
M
E
REOal¢ IEn
Ly7r REwxsvum rnwn ro ssuwcE or 1
vcam¢
r
E
9 N F HA^ o \ 1' \ V:, I
I I I HONES . BE caxsiRUCIFD wlTl RRE
IIPRAFRARI vI _ ___
1 I - A
LANDS 01 y . 1
I
Il/
I
III _ el 1 !
I
tI i
i , ' ouior oi[
xiE vx.n on .DCOMaxrROneor mol 1 le I
j': I -(. 0 ARE W m): ) swlA
ROS.
Xro.
E1
a" xmlX
Pe
Io alawm
d NODE ORROX CF It µD .. E. DY r1E
ryM4
e 537- . 17 -
012 REV 9 DS D,
y# LANDS OF SEPAHMANSOUR RM i 12- 01
8 1
I CONCEPTUAL UG' UTILITY
PLAN 027 56
AI_ 1II I
I'. n 1
F
I
I LANDS OF THE DAGNEY GROUP,
LLC YS c I . 111 I
I
dI / -
L F Is E A RA it 1 "
f Los Gras
cwroRxu Ii EACH $
sonrs i
t . \ `.
CINw.bN. umN+
wEsM..
Swu'
INC.
iO'FE/VCU2 &
Tl 50i£ A ' / 8}
4EET 6 OF
9 a
0! ° °
m°
u
4, 4
E' w 1. 00 2. 40 » W 4. 00 5. W 6. 0]
SITE SECTION C - C
SITE SECTION B - B
s
4__
L
EXISTING DRIVE WAY OF LOT 14
w
SEC a — a
KEY MAP - NOT TO SCALE
SITE SECTION A - A
o a4 ® a
scutY - ao•
SHEET 7 OF 9
SITE SECTIONS
LANDS OF DAGENEY GROUP, L. L.C.
om mimm I 0m01 IX No0wi
E' w 1. 00 2. 40 » W 4. 00 5. W 6. 0]
SITE SECTION C - C
SITE SECTION B - B
s
4__
L
EXISTING DRIVE WAY OF LOT 14
w
SEC a — a
KEY MAP - NOT TO SCALE
SITE SECTION A - A
o a4 ® a
scutY - ao•
SHEET 7 OF 9
SITE SECTIONS
LANDS OF DAGENEY GROUP, L. L. C.
I1
i
r
1 1
1 1
1 Ir -'
I1
1 L
IL
L
LOT A
M.) 4s
6 YI
s
6,
LOT0 4S B
Aq
tl
0 4
9 3
19 b
11 E
11 i/
13 LOT C
6. S I[ S
9 RB55W XxL rab
VICINITY MAP
Mtt 10 $ LVE
NOTES: P E.. BUDWBB ro BE aEx01KXE0.
z. PREPLOIONL m MOWS a PRf11xuW( t 4q
CFlSIIXB S SnNG roHRR cX41DF. IOHIf MMW LOi P M BE REtlWEO E11511N0 PRWgYE iMYt Ntllxx LOi > 10 BE .. D
5. DESroBSIICx. w°<
NIaxBE+ MOBBME IxmEMBlaor
i4 OF
Ob/ RINEXI Or PNd6 NN MXESIBI.
1. 11X4. 1RM M AWEM WO LOUIICN Cr PoIM OF
BEMB 10 . 1DlILEBT PROPFAIY IO lxE M51 9W1
BE CflE1XlMD W CWRpe1Xi10. Y NttX ME tOxX OF l0B Gi05
iRNLS nX0 @xEwnn mxxlRE[ PP 1x I.. Or W. DESwx.
i. OPFx SPKE 116 S. E10EPE Wi B . BE .. m B!
1. wuE maa1. S assO u BE u( nmOw) Dr xm0 / Om x.. l l
B. E. Nk mMW LOT C MM BE NNNFNNEO By 1XE X. 9A
y
0 w Bo EO
sufE: l • - aD k
ai'. B - ii ni
i
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
CIRCULATION PLAN a LANDS OF THE DAGNEY GROUP, LLC. _
n[ ciPPe[ 4 fwsEYfMS BLiwE[ N LOi , x
WO 4x05 Oi BVPxE WEX i ON LOt
SIN`
R3 / x00ED ORNEWxv rOP EuEPGFNEV ON 4Y' JS vF EFOrit1E B.U KCL55E SS P[ L
PUPPOSEC
I
1 I1
i
r
1 1
1 1
1 Ir -'
I1
1 L
IL
L
LOT A
M.) 4s
6 YI
s
6,
LOT 0 4S B
Aq
tl
0 4
9 3
19 b
11 E
11 i/
13 LOT C
6. S I[ S
9 RB55W XxL rab
VICINITY MAP
Mtt 10 $ LVE
P NOTES: E.. BUDWBB ro BE aEx01KXE0.
z. PREPLOIONL m MOWS a PRf11xuW( t 4q
S CFlSIIXB SnNG ro HRR cX41DF. IOHIf MMW LOi P M BE REtlWEO E11511N0 PRWgYE iMYt Ntllxx LOi > 10 BE .. D
5. DESroBSIICx. w°<
IaxBE+ MOBBME IxmEMBlaor
i4 OF
Ob/ RINEXI Or PNd6 NN MXESIBI.
1. 11X4. 1RM M AWEM WO LOUIICN Cr PoIM OF
BEMB 10 . 1DlILEBT PROPFAIY IO lxE M51 9W1
BE CflE1XlMD W CWRpe1Xi10. Y NttX ME tOxX OF l0B Gi05
iRNLS nX0 @xEwnn mxxlRE[ PP 1x I.. Or W. DESwx.
i. OPFx SPKE 116 S. E10EPE Wi B . BE .. m B!
1. wuE m aa1. S assO u BE u( nmOw) Dr xm0 / Om x.. l l
B. E. Nk mMW LOT C MM BE NNNFNNEO By 1XE X. 9A
y
0 w Bo EO
sufE: l • - aD k
ai'. B - ii ni
i
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
CIRCULATION PLAN a LANDS OF THE DAGNEY GROUP, LLC. _
n[ ciPPe[ 4 fwsEYfMS BLiwE[ N LOi , x
WO 4x05 Oi BVPxE WEX i ON LOt
SIN`
R3 / x00ED rOPORNEWxv ONEuEPGFNEV 4Y' JS vFEFOr it1EB. BU E KCL55SS P[
PUPPOSEC
I `
14 I1
i
r
1 1
1 1
1 Ir -'
I1
1 L
IL
L
LOT A
M.) 4s
6 YI
s
6,
LOT0 4SB
Aq
tl
0 4
9 3
19 b
11 E
11 i/
13 LOT C
6. S I[ S
9 RB55W XxL rab
VICINITY MAP
Mtt 10 $ LVE
NOTES: P E.. BUDWBB ro BE aEx01KXE0.
z. PREPLOIONL m MOWS a PRf11xuW( t 4q
CFlSIIXB S SnNG roHRRcX41DF. IOHIf MMW LOi P M BE REtlWEO E11511N0 PRWgYE iMYt Ntllxx LOi > 10 BE .. D
5. DESroBSIICx. w°<
NIaxBE+MOBBME IxmEMBlaor
i4 OF
Ob/ RINEXI Or PNd6 NN MXESIBI.
1. 11X4. 1RM M AWEM WO LOUIICN Cr PoIM OF
BEMB 10 . 1DlILEBT PROPFAIY IO lxE M51 9W1
BE CflE1XlMD W CWRpe1Xi10. Y NttX ME tOxX OF l0B Gi05
iRNLS nX0 @xEwnn mxxlRE[ PP 1x I.. Or W. DESwx.
i. OPFx SPKE 116S. E10EPE Wi B . BE .. m B!
1. wuE maa1. S assOu BE u( nmOw) Drxm0 / Om x.. l l
B. E.Nk mMW LOT C MM BE NNNFNNEO By 1XE X. 9A
y
0 w Bo EO
sufE: l • - aD k
ai'. B - iini
i
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
CIRCULATION PLAN a LANDS OF THE DAGNEY GROUP, LLC. _
I
I
14 Op kee
N1
1M__ L
I ` , I
e" J
y
II
Legend
r,
24" Box Tress In InfOrz"'C"' t')
z
Tree Mart" h Rip,
W'. tlan Arad.
CID ' z
ca
L
E. I. tirs Trees to Remain
CID
ca
3 Roll Pon..
cn_
Open Kro F. nl.
Tree Palette
Lagarstroamia x fouriel Crops S4jrtle
Fists.]. ' Kin. nes, aln. se Pl. t.. h.
so
Tipali.
1/
011ay Oak I
0'... . lat' at. Coast Live Oak
Sequoia .. Mp ... Iran$ Coast Redwood
Tree Palette
cormyq spa. Dag ... al va' l. ti. s
F. P. I., F . n, ortll Fr. nnsrt Cottonwood
Ouar.. agqlif. 11. Coast Live Oak
Sall. W. I. I. Pis Arr. p Hills.
Midivriserrg
Note:
open Kra Fr. 0 will to located Individually
on each lot based on the final house
FM Cls le., stlor, Fine I ... tion. . 111 be
daterinlited at a later date.
Op kee
N1
1 M__ L
I ` , I
e" J
y
II
z
CID ' z
ca
L
CID
ca
cn_
0 40 80 so
L1. 0
TREE LIST
ildi REtl6 1RUxx ILGMx PIgFO5D1 CODUfNf
xe. ouxnm w: nox
TREE UST
m¢ SP MOis = sFOx PROPO wilssM
xe. Osss
m ecnOx
F,,, —..
Prmw,
P.—
n ,^ mq. w nw r, awm, nmmr
m , wrye a . 11y rmvn., mm m. ueb rmWN, ntxeu n .
a
orrrrorrrr mr wa.
Filltl
itilli—
Fit—
eem
r. P rr r nrmn.
prww
TREE Summ," IRY
aWFpItWAW NWRER OF OFOES ON ] NE pROFE , 9] 0
1. NUNFER OR iREES SOFYEYE 53
It— ww is.. Ci JFEES ]
O BE RE, MKO'. SO
mmro AvF WPRO % INAK NUY$
A O! TREES TO OE PRMEFvE FIL
sit
is
ww,l
l< 3r,tt, m,mry
Wm•... • m Is. we w. ss
am
tl
M
is
w.a Zr
u+
1. Fuy um. Oarpn 0.
M
L
qm I.
N
mY
Wms
gn
N
Wxm rya I13..
bmn Q1. 43) A11 mr lwi
wrs. earn
Y
vub
33 Ym eew
fwm flmreF Wil
xW Mw
fJ
Y vqhw W2 Rw'
is mqM ynr
Jmenrr Nn qnr M 9. 443,!
3) ill, 35) 0., 9,
na Mm
YP. prrm. µ,
4. 11 till. A ?1. 6.
40 w
w
4Al!
WMWw e'
noWwa W. wa oM 4, 4n.
9u
FM vM0
m. Mnw nxr sen 11 Ili 11
t.
pe 51 O'
lit is L. NR+ IL14M, 9. J.]
n nV.N
OS 11
c
N Olsi,x
wis fv.
11 PmJ eirvw N. 101a. 9Aa J9e fmn i3. 0i 0. 9 Aemm y Po ' wow NR.. bu wM
wu rq.w Wsv w.
a
w Is F—
1 µn A} 1
A 6. SJ M] wb ^
m Q?? eS3A3 p3
fmn Newry 31 xY Cm. 1 r w a.)
ends! 71 44.
M _ is w w. a
w
s its "
s" it, It— ill wb
m w,
a isb
m WY Fiwa MbH 11
A u, 24
w
s 117 wnJ m.
33 Wpm Nn Fit ItL Aew.
ew wW
mm
I
m m15 F.
w
x1 visa mi ! Imw•.
1 wu.J
w
P
Is ws
Dw
n Imm
r Wb 9wf ll3 wq ea 11 Lit
wm aM r4.. F— I, lX w. ym
ls Ill Otlom st, m>
s 1414 4N we. y n
Pis'e.. M.. 335 we
w eb LY
3 anon hn nmu k . Inawn
m Wn
r
e
aw m>
Y
am. .. wee 1zz ais.J
ea J. ss Wrom a. +... ni :
n ryR. moron
Its ma
w 17
m t010 lit CW SA
W wA. M b <mn fn
we 6Y, w1M Mn pn
me bo NRn mroc exN
W Cnn [ v.
e ma
w J)
m o—N a..
a n) emM nr n [
n
r 1. m15 Rwnr a. reav,
Nm mn
pfnewr, wG
r
wrym ewIF v is w ea
wwwv
w
F. 0. fM. Mt,
s
vua 113 Crop en
11r333 U6
w wN ^+ v9J CN
e) s w. aw 3410 1Y
SLIM3
a 1. O' s, 3s I.. ex z.. . Il.laxLiu(.
0U
e
Ill x+
N
Ul a.
mMw
wr:
I zxn.
n wn wv / n l 11 b —ite,
n
1 vw /w
r
u
en 1}6 f4en —
I wub . w. mry
N Bu. eea
i41f I, Y [ o,.ab
NMUr. Ni J., urmmry
I Bin
it 133 ew /
v mueWn J} wb
o
is 133M 9.
m rob Nrwnn JS
iww
P^
A m .Wmw inn
ww ea 0u nee. Wn. uwly. 313 M w 111 m wcn wb . mslur. i7 M Mvn nerv, 1 I.
N lyWw
n
Is l. w/
n uMUn 3Fit
Is Iw ' tis rwisJr r)). 3] I,- am] Mnrn aw rr.
n ervy wMUnw
en
F,,, —..
Prmw,
P.— n ,^ mq. w nw r, awm,
nmmr m , wrye a . 11y rmvn., mm m. ueb rmWN, ntxeu n . a orrrrorrrr mr wa.
Filltl
itilli—
Fit—
eem r. P rr r
nrmn.
prww REV 49 - 05 -
OI RflI: QS - OI -
RIOI
R R.. nm
Rn SHEET8 OF
9 — TREE
NOTES LANDS OF THE DAGNEY GROUP, L. L.
C. TREE Summ,"
IRY aWFpItWAW NWRER OF OFOES ON ] NE pROFE , 9]
0 1. NUNFER OR iREES SOFYEYE 53 It— ww is.. Ci JFEES ] O BE RE, MKO'. mmro SOAv F WPRO % INAK NUY$ A O! TREES TO OE PRMEFvE FIL REV 49 - 05 -
OI RflI: QS - OI -
RIOI
R R.. nm
Rn SHEET8 OF
9 — TREE
NOTES LANDS OF THE DAGNEY GROUP, L. L.
PROPOSED LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES
FOR
SHANNON VALLEY RANCH
1. Use native plants, particularly along property boundaries or in corridors viewed from nearby properties. Select trees from the Town' s List of Approved Trees and shrubs and ground cover from the Suggested and Supplemental native plant lists attached.
2. Use the landscape plan to address the particular needs of the property such as controlling erosion, providing privacy, creating shade, and softening or mitigating the appearance of structures.
3. Create a SIMPLE and elegant planting scheme that is not elaborate.
4. Make use of existing plant material, especially indigenous grasses, chaparral and oaks. Do not replace with incompatible plant materials. Refer to the Town' s List of Approved Trees and the attached Suggested and Supplemental plant lists.
5. Plant in random groupings ( cluster planting) rather than in linear form. Allow plants and shrubs to appear to flow across property lines. Avoid a cultivated, formal appearance.
6. Whenever possible leave large areas in grasses and other indigenous plants.
7. Use appropriate plant material in each location such as Alders and Redwoods in damp, shady locations and Oaks in dry, open areas.
8. Consider the future height of trees and shrubs such that major views on -and off -site will not become obstructed.
9. Avoid the introduction of non - indigenous trees that would dramatically alter the character of the landscape.
10. Planting or building of any types of structures within trail easements or conservation easements is prohibited.
11. Adjacent to street rights -of -way or trail easements avoid plantings that would restrict sight distance, require unusual maintenance to keep easements open, or interfere with already established indigenous plantings.
12. Utilize drip or bubbler irrigation to establish plantings. Minimize the use of spray irrigation.
13. Spray irrigation may be used to water lawn areas and to assist in fire suppression adjacent and /or near structures.
14. Lawns shall be limited to 10% of a lot's area and shall be drought tolerant.
15. Fencing is not allowed at property lines. Any new or replacement fences shall be open and rural, such as a wood, a wood -look polymer, or a concrete 3 or 4 -rail fence, with or without wire mesh backing. Any wire mesh should be of a color that blends into the background and not white.
16. The use of uplighting is prohibited.
17. Fountains and statues are prohibited in front yard spaces.
EXV1lb(e C
The first section of this list describes trees, shrubs, and ground covers which are indigenous to — or living naturally in — Los Gatos. Therefore, not only for their beauty and contribution to the rural aspect of the valley, but also because they are plants most likely to thrive with the least care, they are highly recommended choices for use here.
A supplemental list follows the first and contains plants which, while not indigenous to Los Gatos, are native to other parts of California and will perform well here.
NATIVE TREES
COAST LIVE OAK Quercus agrifolia
BLACK OAK Quercus kelloggii
VALLEY OAK Quercus Lobata
COAST REDWOOD Sequoia sempenrirens, including cultivars DOUGLAS FIR Pseudotsuga menziesii
CALIFORNIA BAY LAUREL Umbellularia californica
BIG LEAF MAPLE Acermacrophyllum
MADRONE Arbutus menziesii
ISLAY OR WILD CHERRY Prunus ilifolia
CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE Aesculus californica
NATIVE SHRUBS
MANZANTA Arctostaphylos ssp., including hybrids
CALIFORNIA WILD LILAC Ceanothus ssp., including hybrids COMMON FLANNEL BUSH Fremontodendro californicum
SILK TASSEL BUSH Garrya elliptica
TOYON, CHRISTMAS BERRY Heteromeles arbutifolia
COFFEEBERRY Rhamnus californica
NATIVE GROUND COVERS
CALIFORNIA WILD LILAC Ceanothus, low growing species
MANZATTA Arctostaphylos, low growing species
DWARF COYOTE BUSH Baccharis pilularis pilularis
NATIVE GRASSES Meadow Fescues — Bromes, Oats, Rye
SUPPLEMENTAL PLANT LIST
CALIFORNIA NATURALIZED
TREES
WHITE ALDER
WESTERN DOGWOOD, PACIFIC DOGWOOD
TANBARK, OR TAN OAK
BISHOP PINE
CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE
CANYON LIVE OAK
BLUE OAK
SHRUBS
CHAMISE
COAST OR CALIFORNIA SAGEBRUSH
SPICE BUSH
BUSH ANEMONE
WESTERN REDBUD
SUMMER HOLLY
CALIFORNIA HAZELNUT
ISLAND BUSH POPPY
BUSH POPPY
CALIFORNIA BUCKWHEAT
ST. CATHERINE' S LACE
FLANNEL BUSH
ISLAND SNAPDRAGON
CREAM BUSH
WHITE PITCHER SAGE
OREGON GRAPE
CALIFORNIA HOLLY GRAPE
BUSH MONKEY FLOWER
PLUMAS MONKEY FLOWER
PACIFIC WAX MYRTLE
LEATHER OAK
REDBERRY
COAST RHODODENDRON
LEMONADE BERRY
SUGARBUSH
ANY CALIFORNIA CURRANT OR GOOSEBERRY
MATILIJA POPPY
CALIFORNIA WILD ROSE
EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY
Alnus rhombifolia
Corpus nuttallii
Lithocarpus densiflorus
Pinus muricata
Platanus racemosa
Quercus chrysolepis
Quercus douglasii
Adenostoma fasciculatum
Artemisia californica
Calycanthus occidentalis
Carpenteria californica
Cercis occidentalis
Comarostaphylis diversifolia var. Planifolia
Corylus cornuta variety californica
Dendromecon harfordii
Dendromecon rigida
Eriogonum fasciculatum
Eriogonum giganleum
Fremontodendron — any are fine
Galvesia speciosa
Holodiscus discolor
Lepechinia calycina
Mahonia aquifolium
Mahonia pinata
Mimulus aurantiacus
Mimulus bifidus
Myrica californica
Quercus durata
Rhamnus crocea
Rhododendron occidentale
Rhus integrifolia
Rhus ovate
Ribes or Grossularia
Romneya coulteri
Rosa californica
Vaccinium ovatum
N
Q30. 0avQ a N
d
y
N
d L
C
OCN
d
U
GRt
y
OJ N O
hO
o
mE
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
g
N
d
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
N
ry
G
N
N@N
N
N
N
N
N
C
C
Y
Y
m
7 J
J
J
7 m
J
J
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
V)
O
O
J
J
J
J
J
C
J
J
J
O
O
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C . .
0 0
A
mu
A
P'
C
C
N
N
7 >>
7 J
J
7 j
0 N
N
m
m
m
m
w
m
m
m
m
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
of - a L
Nm
a
mmnmm°
E
0x
2 5
U
m "'°
Z
Ja
Cd'
W
3 wi31
O
w
cn "
e
EXHIBIT
4
EXHIBIT
5
EXHIBIT 6 Page 145
EXHIBIT 7
PREPARED BY: SEAN MULLIN, AICP
Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Planning Manager and Community Development Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT
ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT
MEETING DATE: 05/11/2022
ITEM NO: 2
DATE: May 6, 2022
TO: Conceptual Development Advisory Committee
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Application CD-22-003. Project Location: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane. APN: 567-24-023. Property Owner: Bright Smile Dental Office Defined Benefit Plan. Applicant: Kunling Wu, Trustee.
Requesting Preliminary Review of a Proposal to Amend the Planned Development Ordinance to Increase the Maximum Residence Size Allowed on Lot 14 on Property Zoned HR-5:PD.
ROLE OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE:
The Conceptual Development Advisory Committee (Committee) advises a prospective applicant on the overall consistency of a project with Town policies prior to submitting a formal application and investing in the development review process. The Committee also endeavors to identify the potential issues that will need to be addressed during the development review process should the applicant wish to submit an application. The issues identified by the Committee are not intended to be all-inclusive and other additional issues may be identified during the formal development review process.
None of the Committee's comments are binding on the Town and in no way are they intended to indicate whether the project will be received favorably by the various review bodies that are charged with evaluating and deciding the application. As noted in this report, if an application is filed, technical analysis would need to be done during the evaluation of the proposal. In addition, public input is a required and essential component in the development review process. Notice has been sent to residents and property owners within 600 feet of the project site and to all properties within the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision. In addition to the public comments received at this meeting, all applicants are strongly encouraged to hold neighborhood meetings to receive input as the design of the project evolves should they decide to proceed with the development review process.
EXHIBIT 9
PAGE 2 OF 6
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/CD-22-003
DATE: May 6, 2022
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC Reports and Attachments\2022\05-11-22\Mountain Laurel Lane 300\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx BACKGROUND:
The subject property is approximately 8.14 acres located in the northern portion of the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision (Attachment 1). A single-family residence was once located on the property, but was destroyed by fire prior to the 2004 subdivision. The property is the last undeveloped residential property in the subdivision.
In March 2002, the Town Council considered a project at 17101 Hicks Road and 14045 Shannon Road and approved Ordinance 2097, amending the General Plan land use designation from Agricultural to Hillside Residential and a Planned Development (PD) to change the zoning from HR-5:Prezone to HR-5:PD to allow subdivision of the property into 14 single-family lots and three open space lots (Attachment 3). Architecture and Site applications for new residences on Lots 1 through 13 were approved in 2002 and 2003. The subdivision was completed in November 2004 and subsequent Building Permits were issued in December of 2004. The 13 new residences were completed by 2007. In 2009, the Town Council approved an amendment to the PD to allow accessory structures on all 14 lots, provided they comply with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (HDS&G) (Attachment 4).
The original PD application was considered numerous times by the Development Review Committee and the Planning Commission prior to the Council’s action in March 2002. During the final Planning Commission meeting on January 23, 2002, two members of the public spoke on the project, offering comments specific to the size of the replacement residence on Lot 14 (Attachment 5, highlighted text). Both commenters expressed concern on whether developing Lot 14 was appropriate, with one commenter adding that if Lot 14 is to be developed, it should be rebuilt in the original footprint and not turned into a 4,600 or 4,800 square foot home. The motion to forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Council included an additional performance standard that Lot 14 be developed under the guidelines of a replacement structure, similar in square footage, mass, and scale to the original residence that was destroyed by fire. This additional performance standard was forwarded to the Council and included in Ordinance 2097 and the amended Ordinance 2172 (Attachments 3 and 4, Performance Standard #8). The Town Council approved the project in March 2002 with the additional performance standard as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Town records for Lot 14 do not provide much detail on the original residence that was destroyed by fire. An April 20, 2016, letter from Greenbriar Homes Communities (applicant under the original PD application) to Mr. Alan Barbie of the Sereno Group indicates that the original home was one story and approximately 2,400 square feet (Attachment 6). Other anecdotal information indicates that the size of the original residence was closer to 3,000 square feet. Given the incomplete nature of the records for Lot 14, staff has messaged that the lot could be developed with a single-story residence with a maximum size of 3,000 square feet to be located in the general area of the previous residence subject to Architecture and Site approval.
PAGE 3 OF 6
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/CD-22-003
DATE: May 6, 2022
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC Reports and Attachments\2022\05-11-22\Mountain Laurel Lane 300\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx BACKGROUND (continued):
In addition to Lot 14, Performance Standard #8 limits the sizes of the residences on Lots 1 through 13 to a maximum of 4,850 square feet, with an average size of 4,650 square feet (Attachment 4, Performance Standard 8). Additionally, two-thirds of the 13 residences are limited to a one-story design. The table below provides a summary of the development on Lots 1 through 13.
Summary of developed lots.
Lot Address Residence Stories Garage Accessory Structure 1 280 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,656 sf 1 768 sf --
2 282 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,815 sf 2 799 sf --
3 286 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,655 sf 1 811 sf --
4 288 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,612 sf 1 781 sf --
5 290 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,815 sf 2 799 sf --
6 299 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,327 sf 1 806 sf --
7 297 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,635 sf 1 811 sf --
8 293 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,611 sf 1 781 sf --
9 291 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,655 sf 1 811 sf --
10 289 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,315 sf 1 806 sf --
11 287 Mountain Laurel Ln 4,814 sf 2 799 sf 636 sf
12 283 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,605 sf 1 781 sf 960 sf
13 281 Shannon Oaks Ln 4,808 sf 2 799 sf --
AVERAGE RESIDENCE: 4,640 sf 69 percent single story
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant has submitted a Conceptual Development Advisory Committee application (Attachment 2) and a project description letter (Attachment 7) requesting preliminary review of a proposal to amend the PD to allow for the construction of a residence larger than what the PD currently permits on the subject property. The applicant’s letter indicates that they wish to construct a single-story residence of 6,000 square feet. The applicant indicates that a larger residence is needed to accommodate a large family and offers the following as justification for the residence size:
• The proposed 6,000 square foot single-story residence would be consistent with the development on neighboring properties;
• The current size limitation is not proportional to the size of the property (8.14 acres) or the developable area (75,000 sf); and
• The high cost to develop a residence on the site is not proportional to the current size limitation for a residence.
PAGE 4 OF 6
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/CD-22-003
DATE: May 6, 2022
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC Reports and Attachments\2022\05-11-22\Mountain Laurel Lane 300\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx PROJECT DESCRIPTION (continued):
The applicant has provided a Site Plan showing a developable area of approximately 75,000 square feet (1.72 acres) served by a proposed 1,483-foot paved driveway with an average slope of 17.1 percent (Attachment 7). The proposed driveway would follow the path of the existing dirt driveway, taking access from the eastern end of Mountain Laurel Lane, rising approximately 250 feet along the western property line to the developable area identified by the applicant.
The slope of the proposed driveway would require an exception to the HDS&G, which limits driveway slopes to a maximum of 15 percent and a maximum length of 300 feet.
Future development of the site as proposed would require an amendment to the PD Ordinance and an Architecture and Site application, which would be subject to the Residential Design Guidelines, HDS&G, and the Hillside Specific Plan.
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN, ZONING, AND PLANNING AREA:
1. General Plan land use designation: Hillside Residential, which provides for very low density (0-1 dwelling units per net acre; up to 3.5 persons per acre), rural, large lot or cluster, single-family residential development. This designation allows for development that is compatible with the unique mountainous terrain and vegetation of parts of the Town.
2. Zoning designation: HR-5:PD, Hillside Residential (five to 40 acres for each dwelling unit) with a Planned Development overlay. The intent and purpose of the HR zone is to provide for an orderly, harmonious development of the foothills and mountains resulting in the minimum amount of disturbance of the natural terrain through existing residential density to the natural slope to encourage and provide incentive for excellence in design principles and engineering techniques, and to provide for a variety of dwelling types where land assembly and a unified development scheme are more appropriate. Slope-density regulations will be utilized to assist in relating the intensity of development to the steepness of terrain in order to minimize grading, removal of vegetation, runoff, erosion, geologic hazards, fire hazards, and to help ensure utilization of land in balance with its natural capabilities to support development.
3. Surrounding zoning designations: HR-1 to the north and east, HR-5 to the west and south.
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The subject property has a gross lot area of 354,458 square feet (8.14 acres) with an average lot slope of 28 percent. When adjusted for slope per the HDS&G, the net lot area is 163,051 square feet (3.74 acres); which would allow for 6,000 square feet of development without the limitations imposed by the existing PD Ordinance. The subject property takes access from the east end of Mountain Laurel Lane via a dirt driveway along the western property line accessing the northeastern portion of the property, where the original residence once stood. This portion of the property is relatively flat encompassing approximately 75,000 square feet (1.72 acres).
PAGE 5 OF 6
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/CD-22-003
DATE: May 6, 2022
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC Reports and Attachments\2022\05-11-22\Mountain Laurel Lane 300\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx EXISTING CONDITIONS (continued):
The majority of the remaining portions of the property are steeply sloped and are held in a scenic conservation easement.
POTENTIAL CONSIDERATIONS AND ISSUES:
The following is a brief list of issues and topics for consideration by the Committee. Staff has not reached conclusions on these topics. Staff is identifying them here to help frame the discussion and to solicit input. The main question for the Committee is whether or not the applicant’s concept for the project creates a high-quality plan appropriate for Los Gatos in this location. If an application is filed, staff would evaluate the technical issues.
1. General Plan
a. Policy LU-1.3 encourages preservation of existing trees, natural vegetation, natural topography, riparian corridors and wildlife habitats, and promote high quality, welldesigned, environmentally sensitive, and diverse landscaping in new and existing developments.
b. Policy LU-1.4 states, infill projects shall be designed in context with the neighborhood and surrounding zoning with respect to existing scale and character of surrounding structures, and should blend rather than compete with the established character of the area.
c. Policy LU-6.8 states, new construction, remodels, and additions shall be compatible and blend with the existing neighborhood.
d. Policy LU-7.3 states, infill projects shall contribute to the further development of the surrounding neighborhood (e.g. improve circulation, contribute to or provide neighborhood unity, eliminate a blighted area) and shall not detract from the existing quality of life.
e. Policy LU-7.4 states, infill projects shall be designed in context with the neighborhood and surrounding zoning with respect to the existing scale and character of surrounding structures, and should blend rather than compete with the established character of the area.
2. Zoning
a. Is the proposed residence size consistent with the PD zoning of the Shannon Valley Ranch subdivision and the development on surrounding properties?
3. Circulation
a. Adequate access, that meets Town roadway and/or driveway requirements. b. Driveway slopes would exceed the 15 percent limit in the HDS&G. c. Driveway length would exceed the 300-foot limit in the HDS&G. d. The Hillside Specific Plan prohibits access roads that result in excessive grading.
Would access and driveways require excessive grading?
e. Is a second means of emergency access/egress available?
PAGE 6 OF 6
SUBJECT: 300 Mountain Laurel Lane/CD-22-003
DATE: May 6, 2022
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC Reports and Attachments\2022\05-11-22\Mountain Laurel Lane 300\Staff Report.300 Mountain Laurel Lane.docx POTENTIAL CONSIDERATIONS AND ISSUES (continued):
4. Visibility
a. The potential visibility of the future single-family residences from the Town’s established viewing areas will need to be analyzed pursuant to the HDS&G. The applicant proposes a single-story residence, which may be more compatible with the limitations for a visible residence.
5. Potential Tree Impacts
a. An arborist report will be required during the development review process to evaluate the potential impacts to trees.
b. Will the proposed driveway be located to avoid tree impacts? c. Do underground electrical and telephone utility lines impact trees? d. Do the water and sanitary sewer lines impact trees?
6. Other
a. The project would be evaluated for utilities, stormwater management, and other engineering considerations.
b. Would the proposed residence be located within the Least Restrictive Development Area (LRDA) as required by the HDS&G?
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Public comments received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, May 6, 2022, are included as Attachment 8.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. CDAC Application
3. Ordinance 2097
4. Ordinance 2172
5. Planning Commission Minutes of January 23, 2002
6. Letter from Greenbriar Homes Communities, dated April 20, 2016
7. Project Description Letter with exhibits
8. Public comments received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, May 6, 2022
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
CONCEPTUAL
DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY
COMMITTEE REPORT
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MAY 11, 2022
The Conceptual Development Advisory Committee of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Regular Meeting on May 11, 2022, at 4:00 p.m.
This meeting is being conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with Government Code Section 54953, as Amended by Assembly Bill 361, in response to the state of emergency relating to COVID-19 and enabling teleconferencing accommodations by suspending or waiving specified provisions in the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code § 54950 et seq.). Consistent with AB 361 and Town of Los Gatos Resolution 2021-044 this meeting will not be physically open to the public and the Council and/or Commissioners will be teleconferencing from remote locations. Members of the public can only participate in the meeting by joining the Zoom webinar.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 4:00 PM
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Jeffrey Barnett, Vice Chair Mary Badame, Vice Mayor Maria Ristow, and Planning Commissioner Kathryn Janoff.
Absent: Planning Commissioner Reza Tavana
VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS
- None.
CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION)
1. Approval of Minutes – March 9, 2022
Amendment: Remove “and if positioned too close to the freeway.” MOTION: Motion by Vice Chair Badame to approve the consent calendar with the amendment proposed by Chair Barnett. Seconded by Vice Mayor Ristow.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
EXHIBIT 10
PAGE 2 OF 4
MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 11, 2022
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2022\05-11-22 Minutes - CDAC.docx
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Application CD-22-003.
Requesting Preliminary Review of a Proposal to Amend a Planned Development Ordinance to Increase the Maximum Residence Size Allowed on Property Zoned HR-5:PD. APN: 567-24-023.
PROPERTY OWNER: Bright Smile Dental Office Defined Benefit Plan APPLICANT: Kunling Wu, Trustee of the Bright Smile Dental Office Defined Benefit Plan PROJECT PLANNER: Sean Mullin
Project Planner presented the staff report.
Committee asked questions of the Staff.
Opened Public Comment.
Applicant presented the proposed project.
Tao Ning, Speaker for the Applicant
- They are applying for a single-story home. They want to be allowed to build up to but not necessarily at 6,000 square feet. The houses on the current lots 1 to 13, range in size from 4,500 to 6,441 square feet in the immediate surroundings. The proposed house will only have a single-story and hopefully lighting will not be a concern. The lot size is 8.1 acres with 7,500 square feet of buildable area. Current development estimates list a land value of $1.7 million and a building cost of $1 million. If a residential house were to be built, the cost would be $2.7 million. If restricted to only 2,400 to 3,000 square feet, that would vastly undervalue what they can develop on this property. SB 9 was passed to promote development.
Committee asked questions of the Applicant.
Tao Ning, Speaker for the Applicant
- The definition of a big family includes the extended family of cousins, grandparent, parents, one unmarried son, and any future grandchildren. Currently there are four adults. - There is a tentative plan for sale to a third-party developer. If the restriction of 2,400 to 3,000 square feet cannot be amended, they would consider selling it to a third party. A third party has not been defined.
PAGE 3 OF 4
MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 11, 2022
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2022\05-11-22 Minutes - CDAC.docx Kim Willingham, Neighbor
- The driveway for lot 14 is adjacent to their driveway. It is a very long steep way up. They are concerned about the driveway speed and noise on the right side of their house. The neighborhood is quiet with mainly retired residents and very few kids. They cannot tell people how many can live in a home, but it does impact them. Does the 6,000 square feet include an accessory structure? They are limited to the amount square feet they can have in the HOA. Lot 14 is a part of the HOA.
Mitch, Secretary of Shannon Valley Ranch HOA
- Some of the house size comps used were part of another subdivision and not part of the Shannon Valley Ranch HOA. The HOA home sizes are limited to 4,800 square feet. The size of a lot 14 home was discussed at their board meeting when lot 14 was sold. They did not object to lot 14 expanding beyond the original 2,500 sf size. But no other home in the HOA is 6,000 square feet. The structure should stay within with the HOA home size limit. The CCRs and board thought lot 14 was part of the HOA restrictions.
Tao Ning, Speaker for the Applicant
- The noise and traffic on the driveway should not be a significant burden to the community.
The grandparent will not be driving, just the other three adults. They work consistently throughout the week and weekend. The traffic level would be nothing equal to a commercial entity such as a preschool. There would be no young children coming in and out.
Closed Public Comment.
Committee members discussed the matter and provided the following questions and comments:
• The title was transferred in October 2020.
• No secondary access is planned at this time. Secondary access was considered from the bottom of the hill at Mount Laurel Lane.
• CDAC is not here to approve, but to bring up what could be potential issues. What can be built is regardless of who might or will live there. Projects might change after approval. People move. Who will be living there, is a secondary consideration. • How does SB 9 tie into this? With the HOA there are restrictions on how many structures, how big a development, etc. For example, FAR vs HOA restriction, which takes precedence?
• According to staff the SB 9 ordinance is not applicable to the PD. The PD is an overlay zone. If there’s a limitation on FAR in the PD it takes precedence over any underlying zone.
• This is a recently established development. It has a cohesive spread out look. The lot should be under the HOA restrictions.
PAGE 4 OF 4
MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 11, 2022
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2022\05-11-22 Minutes - CDAC.docx • The driveway length will probably require an exception for length and grading. • It’s a recently established planned development. There are advantages and disadvantages for living in a planned development. It’s hard for a deciding body to change that.
• Concerned about the lack of secondary access for fire safety. Making an exception is a tough call. Fire safety and the lives of people should be the number one concern. • The driveway seems excessively long. Is it possible to gain secondary access from Santa Rosa or a street closer to the building site?
• According to staff, secondary access from Santa Rosa requires easements from one or two private parties. Staff would check should an application come forward. • If the committee allowed a 6,000 square foot expansion, would that open it up to the other lots? The committee is concerned about creating a problem. • Lighting would double when expanding from a 3,000 to 6,000 square foot structure. • This PD was already looked at by DRC, the Planning Commission, and twice by the Town.
The circumstances have not changed. I am reluctant to see that change. • There is a history of compatibility of the house being at 6,000 square feet to the remaining lots 1 to 13 at 4,850 square feet. The General Plan policy requires compatibility with the scale and character of the surrounding structures. • Placement on the ridge causes concern.
• Concerned about the slope and length of the driveway for fire safety and other reasons. • According to staff, a formal LRDA analysis was probably not done before this meeting.
It was probably identified by just looking at the topo map for the flattest portion of the property and where the former home was located. With an Architecture and Site application, staff would look at the LRDA, etc.
OTHER BUSINESS
- None.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:37 p.m.
This is to certify that the foregoing is a true
and correct copy of the minutes of the
May 11, 2022 meeting as approved by the
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee.
/s/ Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
Kunling Wu
Trustee of the Bright Smile Dental Office Defined Benefit Plan 703 Chatsworth Place
San Jose, CA 95128
Phone: 650-796-1887
November 11, 2022
RE: Proposal Responding to the Issues Involved in Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Meeting of May 11, 2022
Town of Los Gatos
Community Development Department
Civic Center
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Dear Sir and Madam,
The main Issues/concerns involved in Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Meeting of May 11, 2022 are as follows:
THE HOME SIZE TO BE BUILT
ISSUE/CONCERN:
— The structure should stay within with the HOA home size limit.
RESPONSE TO THE ISSUE:
— We are currently applying for building an one story single house with the size of 4850 square feet at 300 Mountain Laurel Lane, Los Gatos, CA 95032 (Lot 14, APN # 567-24-023), NOT 6,000 square feet. The home size of 4850 square feet is the size allowed by the Shannon Valley Ranch Home Owners Association. — The Shannon Valley Ranch Home Owners Association has approved our application of building the house with 4850 square feet (please see the Attachment-1 Letter from the Shannon Valley Ranch Home Owners Association).
— The neighbor (Mr. Kim Willingham) that is the closest our property (Lot 14) has also supported us to build the house with 4850 square feet (please see the Attachment-2 Document Signed by Mr. Kim Willingham and his wife).
THE FORMAL LRDA ANALYSIS
ISSUE/CONCERN:
— A formal LRDA analysis was probably not done before this meeting.
RESPONSE TO THE ISSUE:
— We have completed a formal Least Restricted Building Area (LRBA) (please see the Attachment-3 Formal Least Restricted Building Area drawing).
THE DRIVEWAY SPEED AND NOISE
ISSUE/CONCERN:
— They are concerned about the driveway speed and noise on the right side of their house.
RESPONSE TO THE ISSUE:
— The driveway speed is controlled by related regulations no matter how big the house's size is.
— The driveway noise should NOT have an obvious increase compared to build a house with 3000 square feet because of no big increase of the population living in the house.
THE DRIVEWAY SLOPE AND LENGTH FOR FIRE SAFETY
ISSUE/CONCERN:
— Concerned about the slope and length of the driveway for fire safety.
RESPONSE TO THE ISSUE:
— Plans are Approved as submitted by Santa Clara County Fire Department (please see the Attachment-4 Plan Review No. 22 3293).
THE LIGHTING
ISSUE/CONCERN:
— Lighting would double when expanding from a 3,000 to 6,000 square foot structure.
RESPONSE TO THE ISSUE:
— The lighting should NOT be a issue based on the following reasons: Firstly, the house that we are currently applying to build is an ONE STORY single house with the size of 4850 square feet. Secondly, the house will be built following related regulations.
PLACEMENT ON THE RIDGE
ISSUE/CONCERN:
— Placement on the ridge causes concern.
RESPONSE TO THE ISSUE:
— There are many houses located close by the house that we will build. — Some of the houses are bigger than 4850 square feet and the locations of many houses are higher than the location of our house to be built.
— We'll build the house following related regulations.
Sincerely,
Kunling Wu
Enclosures:
Attachment-1 Letter from the Shannon Valley Ranch Home Owners Association Attachment-2 Document Signed by Mr. Kim Willingham and his wife Attachment-3 Formal Least Restricted Building Area drawing Attachment-4 Plan Review No. 22 3293
BLDG
PERMIT No.
22 4104 PLANREVIEW No.
DEVELOPMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
Plans and Scope of Review:
This project shall comply with the following:
The California Fire (CFC) & Building (CBC) Code, 2019 edition, as adopted by the Town of Los Gatos Town Code (LGTC), California Code of Regulations (CCR) and Health & Safety Code.
The scope of this project includes the following:
Modification to a Planned Development to modify the allowable size of a new single-family residence.
Note: This is not a review for the new single family dwelling construction.
Plan Status:
Plans are APPROVED as submitted.
Plan Review Comments:
1. Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access, water supply and may include specific additional requirements as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work, the applicant shall make application to, and receive from, the Building Department all applicable construction permits.
2. The fire department has no comments or conditions. The plans are approved as submitted.
3. Items #4-#16 are the potiential requirement when constructing the new single family dwelling and for information only at this time.
4. NOTE: The subject property is located within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) of the Local Responsibility Area (LRA). Pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) 4290, the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection is required to “…adopt regulations implementing minimum fire safety standards related to defensible space” applicable to “the perimeters and access to all residential, commercial, and industrial building construction.” In 2018, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed SB 901 (Dodd), which expanded the applicability of the regulations promulgated under PRC 4290 to land in the Local Responsibility Area (LRA) Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. All comments below that result from PRC 4290 are identified by **. Where a conflict exists between local & 4290 requirements, the more stringent requirement shall apply. California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.08.
City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE
SEC/FLOOR
OCCUPANCY
LOAD
4850
AREA
ApplicantName
NEW SFR
NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
1 1
DATE
LGA 11/07/2022
Ip, Kenny
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Development
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI
PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
300 Mountain Laurel Lane Los Gatos
EXHIBIT 12
BLDG
PERMIT No.
22 4104 PLANREVIEW No.
DEVELOPMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
**5. Width: (a) All roads shall be constructed to provide a minimum of two ten (10) foot traffic lanes, not including shoulder and striping. These traffic lanes shall provide for two-way traffic flow to support emergency vehicle and civilian egress, unless other standards are provided in this article or additional requirements are mandated by local jurisdictions or local subdivision requirements. Vertical clearances shall conform to the requirements in California Vehicle Code section 35250. (b) All oneway roads shall be constructed to provide a minimum of one twelve (12) foot traffic lane, not including shoulders. The local jurisdiction may approve one-way roads. (1) All one-way roads shall, at both ends, connect to a road with two traffic lanes providing for travel in different directions, and shall provide access to an area currently zoned for no more than ten (10) residential units. (2) In no case shall a one-way road exceed 2,640 feet in length. A turnout shall be placed and constructed at approximately the midpoint of each one-way road. (c) All driveways shall be constructed to provide a minimum of one (1) ten (10) foot traffic lane, fourteen (14) feet unobstructed horizontal clearance, and unobstructed vertical clearance of thirteen feet, six inches (13' 6”). California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2 Articles 1-5, § 1273.01. **6. Road Surfaces: (a) Roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing at least 75,000 pounds and provide an aggregate base. (b) Driveways and road and driveway structures shall be designed and maintained to support at least 40,000 pounds. (c) Project proponent shall provide engineering specifications to support design, if requested by the local authority having jurisdiction. California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.02.
**7. Grades: (a) At no point shall the grade for all roads and driveways exceed 16 percent. (b) The grade may exceed 16%, not to exceed 20%, with approval from the local authority having jurisdiction and with mitigations to provide for same practical effect. California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.03. **8. Radius: (a) No road or road structure shall have a horizontal inside radius of curvature of less than fifty (50) feet. An additional surface width of four (4) feet shall be added to curves of 50-100 feet radius; two (2) feet to those from 100-200 feet. (b) The length of vertical curves in roadways, exclusive of gutters, ditches, and drainage structures designed to hold or divert water, shall be not less than one hundred (100) feet. California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.04.
City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE
SEC/FLOOR
OCCUPANCY
LOAD
4850
AREA
ApplicantName
NEW SFR
NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
1 2
DATE
LGA 11/07/2022
Ip, Kenny
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Development
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI
PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
300 Mountain Laurel Lane Los Gatos
BLDG
PERMIT No.
22 4104 PLANREVIEW No.
DEVELOPMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
**9. Turnaround: (a) Turnarounds are required on driveways and dead-end roads. (b) The minimum turning radius for a turnaround shall be forty (40) feet, not including parking, in accordance with the figures in 14 CCR §§ 1273.05(e) and 1273.05(f). If a hammerhead/T is used instead, the top of the “T” shall be a minimum of sixty (60) feet in length. (c) Driveways exceeding 150 feet in length, but less than 800 feet in length, shall provide a turnout near the midpoint of the driveway. Where the driveway exceeds 800 feet, turnouts shall be provided no more than 400 feet apart. (d) A turnaround shall be provided on driveways over 300 feet in length and shall be within fifty (50) feet of the building. (d) Each dead-end road shall have a turnaround constructed at its terminus. Where parcels are zoned five (5) acres or larger, turnarounds shall be provided at a maximum of 1,320 foot intervals. (e) Figure A. Turnarounds on roads with two ten-foot traffic lanes. California Code of California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.05.
**10. Turnout: Turnouts shall be a minimum of twelve (12) feet wide and thirty (30) feet long with a minimum twenty-five (25) foot taper on each end. California Code of California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.06. **11. Dead-end Roads: (a) The maximum length of a dead-end road, including all dead-end roads accessed from that dead-end road, shall not exceed the following cumulative lengths, regardless of the number of parcels served: parcels zoned for less than one acre - 800 feet. Parcels zoned for 1 acre to 4.99 acres - 1,320 feet. Parcels zoned for 5 acres to 19.99 acres - 2,640 feet. Parcels zoned for 20 acres or larger - 5,280 feet. All lengths shall be measured from the edge of the road surface at the intersection that begins the road to the end of the road surface at its farthest point. Where a dead-end road crosses areas of differing zoned parcel sizes requiring different length limits, the shortest allowable length shall apply. (b) See 14 CCR § 1273.05 for dead-end road turnaround requirements. California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.08.
12. Fire Hydrant Systems Required: Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, onsite fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official.
Exception: For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3, the City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE
SEC/FLOOR
OCCUPANCY
LOAD
4850
AREA
ApplicantName
NEW SFR
NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
1 3
DATE
LGA 11/07/2022
Ip, Kenny
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Development
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI
PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
300 Mountain Laurel Lane Los Gatos
BLDG
PERMIT No.
22 4104 PLANREVIEW No.
DEVELOPMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
distance requirement shall be not more than 600 feet. [CFC, Section 507.5.1]
13. Fire Department (Engine) Roadway Turnaround Required: Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. Provide an approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside. Maximum grade in any direction shall be 5%. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications D-1. [CFC Section 503.2.5].
14. Fire Apparatus (Engine)Access Driveway Required: An access driveway shall be provided having an all-weather surface of either asphalt, concrete or other engineered surface capable of supporting 75,000 pounds and approved by a civil engineer. It shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 12 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum turning radius of 40 feet outside, and a maximum slope of 15%. Installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet D-1.
15. Fire Department (Engine) Driveway Turnaround Required: Provide an approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside.
Maximum grade in any direction shall be a maximum of 5%. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications D-1. CFC Sec. 503.
16. Full plan review for water and access is still required and is to be completed upon development of the property.
This review shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of the California Fire Code or of other laws or regulations of the jurisdiction. A permit presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the fire code or other such laws or regulations shall not be valid. Any addition to or alteration of approved construction documents shall be approved in advance. [CFC, Ch.1, 105.3.6] City
Y
E
PLANS
Y
E
SPECS
Y
E
NEW
Y
E
RMDL CONST. TYPE
BY
PAGE
SEC/FLOOR
OCCUPANCY
LOAD
4850
AREA
ApplicantName
NEW SFR
NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION
Y
E
AS
4 OF
1 4
DATE
LGA 11/07/2022
Ip, Kenny
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Development
TABULAR FIRE FLOW REDUCTION FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED FIRE FLOW @ 20 PSI
PROJECT TYPE OR SYSTEM
Design Review
300 Mountain Laurel Lane Los Gatos
EXHIBIT 13
Amended Performance Standard #8
BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE. All project homes will be limited to a maximum size of 4,850 square feet with an average of 4,650 4,655 square feet, and at least 2/3 of the homes shall be limited to a one-story design. Final building design and size will be determined during Architecture and Stie review. No further expansion of the homes will be allowed unless this Ordinance is amended by the Town Council.
Lot 14 shall be developed under guidelines of a replacement structure and shall be similar in size, mass, and scale to the original home that weas destroyed by fire. The home on Lot 14 shall be limited to a one-story design.
EXHIBIT 14
EVIDENCE OF SPEAKING WITH OUR NEIGHBOR(S)
EXHIBIT 15
PHOTOS OF PROPERTY
300 MOUNTAIN LAUREL LANE
LOS GATOS, CA 95032 (LOT 14, APN 567-24-023).
300
EXHIBIT 16
TOP OF THE HILL
TOP OF THE HILL
TOP OF THE HILL
TOP OF THE HILL
Δ
ROSENBLUM, INC. civil engineers and surveyors
1630 Oakland Road, Suite A114, San Jose, CA 95131 www.uandr.com
UNDERWOOD&
(408) 453-1222
F:\2022\J22077 Mountain Laurel Lane '300'\Dwg\J22077TOPO.dwg, 7/26/2022 2:08:14 PM EXHIBIT 17 Page 203 From:
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 12:02 AM
To: Planning <[email protected]>
Subject: Modification of Planned Development Ordinance 2172 to increase the Maximum Residence Size Allowed on Lot 14
EXTERNAL SENDER
To: Planning Commission,
As residents of Shannon Valley Ranch, we welcome our new neighbors of Lot 14 and want to be proactive in communicating potential issues and concerns with the development of their new home. We do not oppose the maximum square footage for their home that already exists in the community, as long as it meets the safety standards for the Town of Los Gatos.
Our concerns are listed below:
1) Will the culvert be properly addressed in building their driveway to maintain proper creek drainage?
2) If a shared portion of our driveway is required, will the existing structures be restored (electrical, irrigation, plants, etc.)?
3) Potential creation of a river of rainfall runoff with improper build of driveway and responsibility for damage incurred.
4) Potential safety hazard with intersection of walking trail (walkers/bikers) and driveway. 5) Adherence to HOA CC&Rs on hours and days of work.
6) During construction, storage and placement of machinery not in use and after hours of work. 7) Proper planning and maintenance of fire protection for Lot 14 and community. Access for Fire Department to Lot 14.
8) Who will be our contact person for issues and questions? Again, we welcome our new neighbors to Shannon Valley Ranch.
Thank you,
Lionel Willingham
EXHIBIT 18
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
1 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
A P P E A R A N C E S:
Los Gatos Planning
Commissioners:
Jeffrey Barnett, Chair
Steve Raspe, Vice Chair
Susan Burnett
Kylie Clark
Melanie Hanssen
Kathryn Janoff
Emily Thomas
Town Manager: Laurel Prevetti
Community Development
Director:
Joel Paulson
Town Attorney: Gabrielle Whelan
Transcribed by: Vicki L. Blandin
(619) 541-3405
ATTACHMENT 3
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
2 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
P R O C E E D I N G S:
CHAIR BARNETT: We’ll now move on to Public
Hearings and Item 2 on the agenda. This concerns a request to the Commission for recommendation to the Town Council for approval of modification of Planned Development
Ordinance 2172 to increase the maximum residence size
allowed on Lot 14 on property zoned HR-5:PD, located at 300 Mountain Laurel Lane, APN 567-24-023, and Planned
Development Amendment PD-22-001. The property owner is
Bright Smile Dental Office Defined Benefit Plan, and the Applicant is Kunling Wu, Trustee.
I note that Staff has made a request for a
recommendation of approval of this item, but we’ll now
proceed and ask the Commissioners, by raised hands, if
they’ve had an opportunity to see the property? Thank you.
Are there any disclosures by Commissioners?
Ms. Armer, you had a comment?
JENNIFER ARMER: Yes, I wanted to share that I
believe Commissioner Hanssen needs to be recused because of proximity to the project.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
3 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: I did not know that, but I
do live on Santa Rosa Drive. Am I 1,000 feet from the
property? Then you can take me into the attendees.
CHAIR BARNETT: We’ll now move on and ask Mr.
Mullin if he is going to give a report this evening on this Agenda Item 2?
SEAN MULLIN: Thank you, Chair, and good evening.
Before you this evening is a request to modify
the Shannon Valley Ranch Planned Development overlay to allow an increase in the maximum residence size for Lot 14 and the average residence size allowed within the
subdivision.
The subject property is just over eight acres
located in the northern portion of the subdivision. A
single-family residence once stood on the property but was destroyed by fire in 1997, prior to the 2004 subdivision.
Lot 14 is the last undeveloped residential property in the subdivision.
As detailed in your Staff Report, the PD to allow
subdivisions to 14 lots was considered numerous times by the DRC and the Planning Commission prior to approval by the Council in 2002. During the final review by the
Planning Commission in January 2002 two members of the
public spoke and commented that any residence on Lot 14
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
4 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
should be rebuilt in the original footprint and of similar size. In response, the Commission forwarded the Planned Development to the Council with an added standard that a replacement residence on Lot 14 be similar in square
footage, mass, and scale to the original residence that was destroyed by fire.
In March 2002 the Council adopted the PD
Ordinance adding the Lot 14 limitations, Performance
Standard 8, which other than Lot 14 limits homes in the subdivision to 4,850 square feet with an average size of 4,650 square feet, and at least two-thirds of the homes being single-story.
Town records for Lot 14 did not provide much
detail on the original residence. Included with your Staff Report is a letter from 2016 indicating that the original home was one story and approximately 2,400 square feet.
Other anecdotal information indicates that the size of the original residence may have been closer to 3,000 square feet. Given the incomplete nature of the records for Lot 14, Staff has messaged to the public over time that the lot could be developed with a single-story residence with a maximum size of 3,000 square feet, should be located in the general area of the previous residence, and any new
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
5 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
residence would be subject to an Architecture and Site
approval.
After recently purchasing the property the
Applicant contacted Staff to explore the development
potential of the property. Staff provided guidance on the limitation imposed by the PD and referred the Applicant to the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee to obtain preliminary feedback on increasing the allowed residence to 6,000 square feet.
As detailed in your Staff Report, the CDAC
expressed some concerns with the preliminary proposal and recommending that the maximum residence size be more in line with the development in the subdivision. The Applicant has revised their request in response and now seeks a
maximum residence size of 4,850 square feet. This increase also requires a change to the average residence size from 4,650 square feet to 4,655 square feet. Exhibit 14 includes Revised Performance Standard 8 reflecting the Applicant’s request.
At this time no development is proposed. A future
proposal for a new residence would be subject to
discretionary review under a public hearing under an
Architecture and Site Application.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
6 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
Based on the analysis provided in the Staff
Report, Staff recommends forwarding a recommendation of approval to the Town Council.
This concludes my presentation and Staff is
available for any questions.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you very much, Mr. Mullin.
Are there any questions of Staff from members of the
Commission at this time? Commissioner Clark.
COMMISSIONER CLARK: I have a question about the
request for the 5’ increase in the average size. Is that just because this lot increases the total average to 5’ over what’s currently allowed?
SEAN MULLIN: Thank you for that question. Yes,
that’s the case. Currently the average only considers Lots 1-13, so the addition of Lot 14 at 4,850 would bump the average up by 5’.
COMMISSIONER CLARK: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Any other questions of Staff at
this time? There will be a further opportunity to do so later in the meeting. I don’t see any, so we’ll now open the public portion of the public meeting and give the
Applicant any opportunity to address the Commission for up to five minutes. Ms. Armer, do we have the Applicant ready?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
7 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
JENNIFER ARMER: I see a hand raised, so we will
allow you to speak.
DERRICK: Hi, this is Derrick. I’m speaking on
behalf of Kunling Wu, Trustee for the Bright Smile Dental Trust Fund for this property.
We have gone with Staff recommendations to
communicate with the HOA as well as the neighbors. We
understand that the HOA has given us some feedback
regarding any future site development and the concerns that they have regarding building a driveway, potential drainage issues, etc., however, according to Mr. Mullin as well, this is not an actual proposal for any kind of development on the site yet, simply a change to the size of what is permitted to be built onsite, similar to Lots 1-13, which is within the HOA neighborhood.
I believe we have done our very best as a noncommercial entity to meet the Town’s requests regarding this proposal. If there are any further actions we need to take, we’ll be happy to do so. Thank you very much.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you. Are there any
questions for Derrick at this time? I’m not seeing any, so at this time we’ll invite comments from members of the
public who may wish to speak on this matter, and again
remind them to use the raised feature on Zoom and speak
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
8 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
when you’re called upon. Do we have any members of the
public who wish to speak, Ms. Armer?
JENNIFER ARMER: If we have anyone here this
evening to speak on this item, please raise your hand. I’m not seeing any hands raised, Chair.
CHAIR BARNETT: Then we’ll move on and ask
Derrick if you wish to make any further comments to close, and you have up to three minutes additional if you wish to proceed with that.
DERRICK: Thank you very much for your time. We
will just ask any Commissioners if you guys have any other comments or thoughts regarding an actual building of a
single-story home onsite for future reference in terms of any considerations that we should look into in the planning phase so as to not meet any significant challenges in the future? We already got some feedback from the HOA, which we will take into serious consideration in addressing those concerns. Thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: I appreciate that. Are there any
further questions of the speaker by members of the
Commission?
I had one question, Derrick, about the extent of
the public outreach. In our packet it looked like one of the neighbors had shown approval, but we don’t have
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
9 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
information as to the extent of the distribution of the notice.
DERRICK: I am not 100% regarding which members
within the HOA have received our letters pertaining to this particular request for amending the PD, but I believe it has gone through the HOA. We did get more than one person’s feedback from the HOA regarding potential drainage
concerns, traffic concerns, also considerations with an adjacent hiking trail that is next to the site, so all of those I think are great advice in terms of moving forward.
But there are neighbors that said to talk to the
HOA, from my understanding. I wasn’t personally involved in the discussion, but from what I understand with Kunling Wu is that the neighbors said just refer to the HOA’s feedback and Council, and I believe the HOA has done a great job in terms of reaching out to everybody within the community.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you for the comment, and if
there’s nothing further from Commissioners for the speaker, I’ll close the public portion of the public hearing and ask if Commissioners at this time have any further questions of Staff, wish to comment on the application, or introduce a motion? Commissioner Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I just wanted to confirm
with Staff for this recommended change that 4,850 square
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
10 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
feet would be a maximum. They wouldn’t have to build a
house that size, correct?
SEAN MULLIN: That’s correct.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Vice Chair Raspe.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Thanks, Chair. My initial
thoughts are I find this generally a reasonable request. If the notion was originally considered that the home site could only be as big as the original home, which was 3,000 square feet, that puts it well below the structures which currently exist in Lots 1-13, which generally range from 4,315 square feet to 4,800-and-some-odd square feet, so limiting any kind of future development there, 3,000 seems to be an unreasonable limitation on that lot.
It seems to me that the Applicant in this
location has done a good job of listening to prior comments in downsizing their size from 6,000 square feet to 4,850 square feet. They have the largest lot in the area at eight acres, which would put them at the smallest FAR even at their requested figure. They’ve agreed to limit the story to one-story, even though there is a mix of one- and twostories in that development, so it seems to me that all things considered, the Applicant’s request in this case
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
11 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
seems reasonable and I would be inclined to forward a
recommendation to Council to allow it to proceed.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you very much for those
comments. We’ll move on to Commissioner Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Thank you. I would agree
with Vice Chair Raspe. I find that this request seems
reasonable. I do appreciate that they have reduced their original request from 6,000 square feet down to the maximum for the PD, so that makes sense to me, and it makes sense to increase the average size by 5’ in order to accommodate this additional lot.
I do have a question for Staff. Since this house
will be placed on the ridge, and it may not be a
significant ridge, would the Hillside Design Standards and Guidelines apply with respect to the height of this
proposed structure? I know that’s not before us tonight, but when it comes to Architecture and Site, or down the line to the Planning Commission, I would ask Staff if the 18’ limit for a home that’s visible on a ridge would apply to this potential site?
SEAN MULLIN: Thank you for that question. Under
an Architecture and Site Application the Hillside Standards and Design Guidelines could certainly apply, and you are correct, this ridge is not identified as a significant
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
12 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
ridge in the Hillside Specific Plan. I think evaluation and careful consideration of the visibility impact is needed, and there is one viewing area where there is some potential for visibility over by Leigh High School off of Los Gatos Almaden. If it were found to be visible, obviously it would be limited to a height of 18’.
Staff will have to look at the Architecture and
Site Application, or even some preliminary plans from the Applicant, to definitively determine if that knoll or that outcropping would qualify as, “silhouetting on a ridge” is the language that’s used in the Hillside Guidelines. I
can’t remember the exact figure quoted in the Staff Report, but it does sit some feet below the ridge that Santa Rosa traverses, but looking a little bit more closely today it does have the potential for visibility from that area near Leigh High School, so we’d have to look at that carefully.
I would say that there is a performance standard
that’s not subject to this application that does limit
height in the PD, so it would obviously be subject to that.
The Applicant is proposing a single-story, which would be part of the limitation, and we would continue to look at things as the project details develop.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Thank you for that. I
wanted to confirm, because Performance Standard 9 or 10
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
13 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
does give a limit of 25’ height, but as we know from our item from last meeting’s agenda, we were looking for
something well under that height should it be visible, so thank you for clarifying that Staff will be looking at that closely.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you. We’ll move on to
Commissioner Clark.
COMMISSIONER CLARK: I feel comfortable with this
request, and I’ll just list off a few of my reasons.
I think it having the lowest FAR demonstrates
that this size increase is reasonable, and the fact that any future development would still have to come to us makes me also feel a lot better.
And we don’t even know the size of the original
development, which I think is worth considering, because it’s guesstimating, and it also seems like that rule was in place because of two public comments back in 2002, so it makes sense that things would have changed since then.
I think that the size seems like a really good
neighborhood fit, so all of the aspects of the request seem reasonable to me and I’m comfortable with it.
In terms of the Applicant’s question about
whether there are any considerations that they should take into account during the process of designing this, I would
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/25/2023
Item #2, 300 Mountain Laurel Lane
14 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
say that the Planning Commission really heavily weighs and values neighborhood outreach and engagement, and so if
there are any neighborhood concerns it’s always best to try to work those out with your neighbors beforehand if at all possible; it makes the process a lot easier.
Also, I was looking at the list of the different
guidelines, codes, and standards that will have to be
followed for a property in this location, so I would say just do your best to conform to all of those. Thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Commissioner Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Thank you. I did have one
follow up question for Staff mainly to confirm for the
Applicant that it does say that the application would be considered in a public hearing either by the Development Review Committee or Planning Commission. Is that only true because currently this would be the largest house in the immediate neighborhood? If they decided to build a smaller house, would it need to even go to the DRC or Planning
Commission?
SEAN MULLIN: Thank you for that question. Any
new residence requires an Architecture and Site
Application, and an Architecture and Site Application will be reviewed regardless of the size of the house and
considered by the DRC, which is the streamlined process, or