ITEM NO. 11.
109. PRC 4290 REQUEST FOR EXCEPTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
a. A copy of the Alternate Means/Methods application form including approval signature, exhibits, and these comments shall be made part of the building permit drawing set, to be routed to Santa Clara County Fire Department for final approval. b. Sign(s) to be provided:
• At Reservoir St indicating the turnaround is onsite.
• At turnaround indicating the turnaround location and no parking in the turn around.
c. Language and location of these signs to be provided on building permit drawings, and approved prior to building permit issuance.
110. FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED: (As Noted on Sheet A1) Approved automatic sprinkler systems in new and existing buildings and structures shall be provided in the locations described in this Section or in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.12 whichever is the more restrictive and Sections 903.2.14 through 903.2.21. For the purposes of this section, firewalls and fire barriers used to separate building areas shall be constructed in accordance with the California Building Code and shall be without openings or penetrations.
111. REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: (Letter received) The minimum require fireflow for this project is 875 Gallons Per Minute (GPM) at 20 psi residual pressure. This fireflow assumes installation of automatic fire sprinklers per CFC [903.3.1.3] 112. FIRE DEPARTMENT (ENGINE) DRIVEWAY TURNAROUND REQUIRED: (As noted on sheet A4 and sheet 4) 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.
-Approved Request of Exception PC 24-2558. See comment number 108 for conditions of approval.
113. WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE: This project is located within the designated WildlandUrban Interface Fire Area. The building construction shall comply with the provisions of California Building Code (CBC) Chapter 7A. Note that vegetation clearance shall be in compliance with CBC Section 701A.3.2.4 prior to project final approval. Check with the Planning Department for related landscape plan requirements. 114. WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTs: (As Noted on Sheet A1) Potable water supplies shall be protected from contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any waterbased fire protection systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the applicant(s). 2019 CFC Sec. 903.3.5 and Health and Safety Code 13114.7.
ITEM NO. 11.
115. ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION: (As Noted on Sheet A1) New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Where required by the fire code official, address numbers shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches (101.6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm). Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained. CFC Sec. 505.1. 116. CONSTRUCTION SITE FIRE SAFETY: (As Noted on Sheet A1) All construction sites must comply with applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and our Standard Detail and Specification S1-7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. CFC Chp. 33.
117. EMERGENCY GATE/ACCESS GATE REQUIREMENTS: (As Noted on Sheet A1) Gate installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specification G-1 and, when open shall not obstruct any portion of the required width for emergency access roadways or driveways. Locks, if provided, shall be fire department approved prior to installation. Gates across the emergency access roadways shall be equipped with an approved access devices. If the gates are operated electrically, an approved Knox key switch shall be installed; if they are operated manually, then an approved Knox padlock shall be installed.
118. GENERAL: 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].
ITEM NO. 11.
ATTACHMENT 5
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
ITEM NO. 11.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 11.
Draft Resolution Adoption Date
DRAFT RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVAL OF A REQUEST FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENCE WITH REDUCED SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS, SITE IMPROVEMENTS
REQUIRING A GRADING PERMIT, AND REMOVAL OF LARGE PROTECTED TREES ON VACANT PROPERTY ZONED R-1:20 AND UPHOLDING THE APPROVAL.
APN 529-33-054
ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPLICATION: S-22-048
PROPERTY LOCATION: 45 RESERVOIR ROAD
APPELLANT: MARY J. VIDOVICH
PROPERTY OWNER: FARNAZ AGAHIAN
APPLICANT: GARY KOHLSAAT, ARCHITECT
WHEREAS, on January 8, 2025, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered a request to construct a new single-family residence with reduced side and rear yard setbacks, site improvements requiring a Grading Permit, and removal of large protected trees on vacant property zoned R-1:20, located at 45 Reservoir Road. The Planning Commission approved the Architecture and Site application;
WHEREAS, on January 17, 2025, the appellant, an interested person, filed a timely appeal of the decision of the Planning Commission approving the request to construct a new single-family residence with reduced side and rear yard setbacks, site improvements requiring a Grading Permit, and removal of large protected trees on vacant property zoned R-1:20 located at 45 Reservoir Road;
WHEREAS, this matter came before the Town Council for public hearing on March 4, 2025, and was regularly noticed in conformance with State and Town law; WHEREAS, the Town Council received testimony and documentary evidence from the appellant and all interested persons who wished to testify or submit documents. The Town Council considered all testimony and materials submitted, including the record of the Planning Commission proceedings and the packet of materials contained in the Council Agenda Report for their meeting on March 4, 2025, along with any and all subsequent reports and materials prepared concerning this application; and
WHEREAS, Town Code Sections 29.20.275 and 29.20.295 provide that an appellant bears the burden of proof to demonstrate that there was error or abuse of discretion by the Planning Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
In accordance with Town Code section 29.20.275, the Town Council finds that:
1. The appellant has not demonstrated that there was error or abuse of discretion by Draft Resolution to be
modified by Town
Council deliberations
and direction.
ATTACHMENT 6
ITEM NO. 11.
Draft Resolution Adoption Date
the Planning Commission in approving the Architecture and Site application.
2. The Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos does hereby declare, determine, and order that the following findings and considerations were properly made by the Planning Commission:
Finding for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):
The project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction.
Finding required for a setback exception on a non-conforming property:
As required by Section 29.10.265 of the Town Code for modification of zoning rules on nonconforming lots, including setback requirements, driveway/access road width, and driveway depth:
1. The subject property is nonconforming with regard to lot size in that the subject property is 10,000 square feet where 20,000 square feet is required by the R-1:20 zone;
2. The side and rear setbacks would be compatible with three residences in the immediate neighborhood that include setbacks that do not meet the requirements of the zone
3. The driveway/access road includes portions that do not meet the 18-foot requirement and the applicant demonstrated that the plan balances the road widening with private property limitations, fire access, tree preservation, and existing conditions;
4. The driveway depth does not meet the required length of 18 feet and the applicant demonstrated that due to site constraints and the requirement for a firetruck turnaround, a compliant driveway depth is not feasible.
While the proposed driveway is approximately three feet, six inches at its shortest point, the width of the roadway and firetruck turnaround adjacent to the garage is 49 feet, five inches and would provide ample back up distance for vehicles exiting the garage. The private road serves five other properties and vehicular traffic is anticipated to be minimal, limiting potential conflicts with the proposed driveway configuration.
Finding required for exemption to parking requirements:
As required by Section 29.10.150 (h)(2) of the Town Code to allow an exception to parking requirements, due to site constraints, including nonconforming lot size, slopes, and the private road bisecting the lot, the lot does not have adequate area to provide the two required parking spaces within the proposed garage. The applicant has provided parking to the greatest extent feasible with an attached garage in a tandem configuration. Pursuant to Town Code Section 29.10.155 (d)(3), when a garage is used to accommodate the two required parking spaces for single-family dwellings, the garage must have interior clear dimensions of at least 20 feet by 20
ITEM NO. 11.
Draft Resolution Adoption Date
feet, resulting in a side-by-side parking configuration. The applicant proposes an attached two-car garage in a tandem configuration. Of the two provided parking spaces within the garage, one meets the minimum dimensions for a single-car garage parking space of 11 feet by 20 feet, while the second parking space would be reduced to 11 feet by 18 feet.
Finding for compliance with the Zoning Regulations:
The project meets the objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations) except for the side and rear setbacks, driveway/access road width, parking configuration and dimensions, and driveway depth and the findings for these exceptions can be made, as provided above.
Findings for compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines:
The project complies with the Residential Design Guidelines for single-family residences. The Town’s Consulting Architect reviewed the project and provided recommendations for changes to increase compatibility with the Residential Design Guidelines and the immediate neighborhood. In response to these recommendations, the applicant made modifications to the design of the residence and submitted a letter responding to the recommendations.
Findings for compliance with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines:
The project complies with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines except for the exceptions to grading depths, retaining wall heights, and buildings located outside of the least restrictive development area and due to site constraints, including nonconforming lot size, slopes, and the private road bisecting the lot the findings for these exceptions can be made.
Findings for compliance with the Hillside Specific Plan:
As required, the project complies with the Hillside Specific Plan except for the exception to the guest parking requirement. Due to site constraints, including nonconforming lot size, steep slopes, requirement for a firetruck turnaround, and the private road bisecting the lot, there is not adequate room to provide the four required guest parking spaces. The applicant provided one guest parking space, which is to the greatest extent feasible given the site constraints.
Considerations required in review of Architecture and Site applications:
As required by Section 29.20.150 of the Town Code, the considerations in review of an Architecture and Site application were all made in reviewing this project, including but not limited to, neighborhood compatibility, architectural design, site layout, and landscaping.
3. The Planning Commission decision is supported by substantial evidence in the
ITEM NO. 11.
Draft Resolution Adoption Date
record.
4. The appeal of the decision of the Planning Commission approving a request to construct a new single-family residence with reduced side and rear yard setbacks, site improvements requiring a Grading Permit, and removal of large protected trees on vacant property zoned R-1:20, located at 45 Reservoir Road, is denied and the application approval is upheld, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval (Exhibit A).
5. The decision constitutes a final administrative decision pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6 as adopted by section 1.10.085 of the Town Code of the Town of Los Gatos. Any application for judicial relief from this decision must be sought within the time limits and pursuant to the procedures established by Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6, or such shorter time as required by state and federal Law.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, California, held on the 4
th day of March 2025, by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
_______________________________
MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
__________________________________
TOWN CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
ITEM NO. 11.
TOWN COUNCIL – March 4, 2025
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
45 Reservoir Road
Architecture and Site Application S-22-048
Consider a Request for Approval to Construct a New Single-Family Residence with Reduced Side and Rear Yard Setbacks, Site Improvements Requiring a Grading Permit, and Removal of Large Protected Trees on a Nonconforming Vacant Property Zoned R-1:20. APN 529-33-054. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303: New Construction.
Property Owner: Farnaz Agahian
Applicant: Gary Kohlsaat, Architect
Project Planner: Sean Mullin
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR:
Planning Division
1. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions of approval and in substantial compliance with the approved plans. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans and/or business operation shall be approved by the Community Development Director, DRC, or the Planning Commission depending on the scope of the changes.
2. EXPIRATION: The approval will expire two years from the approval date pursuant to Section 29.20.320 of the Town Code, unless the approval has been vested.
3. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Exterior lighting shall be kept to a minimum, and shall be down directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. No flood lights shall be used unless it can be demonstrated that they are needed for safety or security.
4. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT: A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained for any trees to be removed, prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit.
5. EXISTING TREES: All existing trees shown on the plan and trees required to remain or to be planted are specific subjects of approval of this plan, and must remain on the site.
6. ARBORIST REQUIREMENTS: The developer shall implement, at their cost, all recommendations identified in the Arborist’s report for the project, on file in the Community Development Department. These recommendations must be incorporated in the building permit plans and completed prior to issuance of a building permit where applicable.
7. TREE FENCING: Protective tree fencing and other protection measures consistent with Section 29.10.1005 of the Town Code shall be placed at the drip line of existing trees prior to issuance of demolition and building permits and shall remain through all phases of construction. Include a tree protection plan with the construction plans.
8. TREE STAKING: All newly planted trees shall be double-staked using rubber tree ties.
EXHIBIT A
ITEM NO. 11.
9. LANDSCAPE SPECIES: Revise all landscape species to be consistent with the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines.
10. FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE: Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the front yard must be landscaped.
11. WATER EFFICIENCY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE: The final landscape plan shall meet the Town of Los Gatos Water Conservation Ordinance or the State Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, whichever is more restrictive. A review fee based on the current fee schedule adopted by the Town Council is required when working landscape and irrigation plans are submitted for review.
12. STORY POLES/PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGNAGE: Story poles and/or project identification signage on the project site shall be removed within 30 days of approval of the Architecture & Site application.
13. EXTERIOR COLORS: The exterior colors of all structures shall comply with the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines.
14. DEED RESTRICTION: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a deed restriction shall be recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s Office that requires all exterior materials be maintained in conformance with the Town’s Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines.
15. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: Following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the property owner shall execute a five-year maintenance agreement with the Town that the property owner agrees to protect and maintain the trees shown to remain on the approved plans, trees planted as part of the tree replacement requirements, and guarantees that said trees will always be in a healthy condition during the term of the maintenance agreement.
16. TREE DEED RESTRICTION: Prior to issuance of a building permit, a deed restriction shall be recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s Office that identifies the on-site trees that were used to provide screening in the visibility analysis and requires their replacement if they die or are removed.
17. NESTING BIRDS: To avoid impacts to nesting birds, the removal of trees and shrubs shall be minimized to the greatest extent feasible. Construction activities that include any tree removal, pruning, grading, grubbing, or demolition shall be conducted outside of the bird nesting season (January 15 through September 15) to the greatest extent feasible. If this type of construction starts, if work is scheduled to start or if work already occurring during the nesting season stops for at least two weeks and is scheduled to resume during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction surveys for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project construction. If project-related work is scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. Two surveys for active nests of such birds shall occur within 14 days prior to start of construction, with the second survey conducted with 48 hours prior to start of construction. Appropriate minimum survey radius surrounding each work area is typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors.
Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. If
ITEM NO. 11.
the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g. defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active.
18. SPECIAL-STATUS BATS: Approximately 14 days prior to tree removal or structure demolition activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for bats and potential roosting sites in trees to be removed, in trees within 50 feet of the development footprint, and within and surrounding any structures that may be disturbed by the project. These surveys will include a visual inspection of potential roosting features (bats need not be present) and a search for presence of guano within the project site, construction access routes, and 50 feet around these areas. Cavities, crevices, exfoliating bark, and bark fissures that could provide suitable potential nest or roost habitat for bats shall be surveyed. Assumptions can be made on what species is present due to observed visual characteristics along with habitat use, or the bats can be identified to the species level with the use of a bat echolocation detector such as an “Anabat” unit. Potential roosting features found during the survey shall be flagged or marked.
If no roosting sites or bats are found, a letter report confirming absence will be prepared and no further measures are required.
If bats or roosting sites are found, a letter report and supplemental documents will be prepared prior to grading permit issuance and the following monitoring, exclusion, and habitat replacement measures will be implemented:
a. If bats are found roosting outside of the nursery season (May 1 through October 1), they will be evicted as described under (b) below. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, they will be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. This could occur by either visual inspection of the roost bat pups, if possible, or by monitoring the roost after the adults leave for the night to listen for bat pups. If the roost is determined to not be a maternal roost, then the bats will be evicted as described under (b) below. Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season.
Therefore, if a maternal roost is present, a 50-foot buffer zone (or different size if determined in consultation with the CDFW) will be established around the roosting site within which no construction activities including tree removal or structure disturbance will occur until after the nursery season.
ITEM NO. 11.
b. If a non-breeding bat hibernaculum is found in a tree or snag scheduled for removal or on any structures scheduled to be disturbed by project activities, the individuals will be safely evicted, under the direction of a qualified bat biologist. If pre-construction surveys determine that there are bats present in any trees to be removed, exclusion structures (e.g. one-way doors or similar methods) shall be installed by a qualified biologist. The exclusion structures shall not be placed until the time of year in which young are able to fly, outside of the nursery season. Information on placement of exclusion structures shall be provided to the CDFW prior to construction.
If needed, other methods conducted under the direction of a qualified bat biologist could include: carefully opening the roosting area in a tree or snag by hand to expose the cavity and opening doors/windows on structures, or creating openings in walls to allow light into the structures. Removal of any trees or snags and disturbance of any structures will be conducted no earlier than the following day (i.e., at least one night will be provided between initial roost eviction disturbance and tree removal/structure disturbance). This action will allow bats to leave during dark hours, which increases their chance of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation.
19. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND HUMAN REMAINS:
a. In the event that archaeological traces are encountered, all construction within a 50- meter radius of the find will be halted, the Community Development Director will be notified, and an archaeologist will be retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations.
b. If human remains are discovered, the Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified. The Coroner will determine whether or not the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines the remains are not subject to his authority, he will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, who shall attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native Americans.
c. If the Community Development Director finds that the archaeological find is not a significant resource, work will resume only after the submittal of a preliminary archaeological report and after provisions for reburial and ongoing monitoring are accepted. Provisions for identifying descendants of a deceased Native American and for reburial will follow the protocol set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5( e). If the site is found to be a significant archaeological site, a mitigation program will be prepared and submitted to the Community Development Director for consideration and approval, in conformance with the protocol set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2.
d. A final report shall be prepared when a find is determined to be a significant archaeological site, and/or when Native American remains are found on the site. The final report will include background information on the completed work, a description and list of identified resources, the disposition and curation of these resources, any testing, other recovered information, and conclusions.
20. DUSKY-FOOTED WOODRATS: This project will implement the following standard measures to minimize impacts on woodrats and active woodrat nests on the project site.
ITEM NO. 11.
a. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY. A qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat nests within 30 days of the start of work activities. If active woodrat nests are determined to be present in, or within 10 feet of the impact areas, the conditions below (Avoidance and/or Nest Relocation) will be implemented, as appropriate. If no active woodrat nests are present on or within 10 feet of impact areas, no further conditions are warranted. b. AVOIDANCE. Active woodrat nests that are detected within the work area will be avoided to the extend feasible. Ideally, a minimum 10-foot buffer will be maintained between project activities and woodrat nests to avoid disturbance. In some situations, a small buffer may be allowed if, in the opinion of a qualified biologist, nest relocation (below) would represent a greater disturbance to the woodrats than the adjacent work activities.
c. NEST RELOCATION. If avoidance of active woodrat nests within and immediately adjacent to (within 10 feet of) the work areas is not feasible, then nest materials will be relocated to suitable habitat as close to the project site as possible (ideally, within or immediately adjacent to the project site).
Relocation efforts will avoid the peak nesting season (February-July) to the maximum extent feasible. Prior to the start of construction activities, a qualified biologist will disturb the woodrat nest to the degree that all woodrats leave the nest and seek refuge outside of the construction area. Disturbance of the woodrat nest will be initiated no earlier than one hour before dusk to prevent the exposure of woodrats to diurnal predators. Subsequently, the biologist will dismantle and relocate the nest material by hand. During the deconstruction process, the biologist will attempt to assess if there are juveniles in the nest. If immobile juveniles are observed, the deconstruction process will be discontinued until a time when the biologist believes the juveniles will be capable of independent survival (typically after 2 to 3 weeks). A no-disturbance buffer will be established around the nest until the juveniles are mobile. The nest may be dismantled once the biologist has determined that adverse impacts on the juveniles would not occur.
21. TOWN INDEMNITY: Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.115 requires that any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement (“the Project”) from the Town shall defend (with counsel approved by Town), indemnify, and hold harmless the Town, its agents, officers, and employees from and against any claim, action, or proceeding (including without limitation any appeal or petition for review thereof) against the Town or its agents, officers or employees related to an approval of the Project, including without limitation any related application, permit, certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, compliance or failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, and/or processing methods (“Challenge”). Town may (but is not obligated to) defend such Challenge as Town, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all at applicant’s sole cost and expense.
Applicant shall bear any and all losses, damages, injuries, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, staff time and in-house attorney’s fees on a fully-loaded
ITEM NO. 11.
basis, attorney’s fees for outside legal counsel, expert witness fees, court costs, and other litigation expenses) arising out of or related to any Challenge (“Costs”), whether incurred by Applicant, Town, or awarded to any third party, and shall pay to the Town upon demand any Costs incurred by the Town. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in such Challenge as Town, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all the applicant’s sole cost and expense. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in processing methods shall alter the applicant’s indemnity obligation.
22. COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM: A memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building plans detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed.
Building Division
23. PERMITS REQUIRED: A Building Permit is required for the construction of the new singlefamily residence and attached garage. An additional Building Permit will be required for the PV System that is required by the California Energy Code.
24. APPLICABLE CODES: The current codes, as amended and adopted by the Town of Los Gatos as of January 1, 2023, are the 2022 California Building Standards Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Parts 1-12, including locally adopted Reach Codes.
25. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue lined in full on the cover sheet of the construction plans. A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building permit application detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed.
26. BUILDING & SUITE NUMBERS: Submit requests for new building addresses to the Building Division prior to submitting for the building permit application process.
27. SIZE OF PLANS: Minimum size 24” x 36”, maximum size 30” x 42”.
28. SOILS REPORT: A Soils Report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Official, containing foundation, and retaining wall design recommendations, shall be submitted with the Building Permit Application. This report shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer specializing in soils mechanics.
29. SHORING: Shoring plans and calculations will be required for all excavations which exceed five (5) feet in depth, or which remove lateral support from any existing building, adjacent property, or the public right-of-way. Shoring plans and calculations shall be prepared by a California licensed engineer and shall confirm to the Cal/OSHA regulations.
30. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall be submitted to the project Building Inspector at foundation inspection. This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the Soils Report, and that the building pad elevations and on-site retaining wall locations and elevations have been prepared according to the approved plans. Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered Civil Engineer for the following items:
a. Building pad elevation
b. Finish floor elevation
ITEM NO. 11.
c. Foundation corner locations
d. Retaining wall(s) locations and elevations
31. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: All required California Title 24 Energy Compliance Forms must be blue-lined (sticky-backed), i.e., directly printed, onto a plan sheet.
32. TOWN RESIDENTIAL ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS: New residential units shall be designed with adaptability features for single-family residences per Town Resolution 1994-61:
a. Wood backing (2” x 8” minimum) shall be provided in all bathroom walls, at water closets, showers, and bathtubs, located 34 inches from the floor to the center of the backing, suitable for the installation of grab bars if needed in the future. b. All passage doors shall be at least 32-inch-wide doors on the accessible floor level. c. The primary entrance door shall be a 36-inch-wide door including a 5’x 5’ level landing, no more than 1 inch out of plane with the immediate interior floor level and with an 18-inch clearance at interior strike edge.
d. A door buzzer, bell or chime shall be hard wired at primary entrance.
33. BACKWATER VALVE: The scope of this project may require the installation of a sanitary sewer backwater valve per Town Ordinance 6.50.025. Please provide information on the plans if a backwater valve is required and the location of the installation. The Town of Los Gatos Ordinance and West Valley Sanitation District (WVSD) requires backwater valves on drainage piping serving fixtures that have flood level rims less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole.
34. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE: All projects in the Town of Los Gatos require Class A roof assemblies.
35. WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE: This project is located in a Wildland-Urban Interface High Fire Area and must comply with Section R337 of the 2019 California Residential Code, Public Resources Code 4291 and California Government Code Section 51182.
36. PROVIDE DEFENSIBLE SPACE/FIRE BREAK LANDSCAPING PLAN: Prepared by a California licensed Landscape Architect in conformance with California Public Resources Code 4291 and California Government Code Section 51182.
37. PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION: Provide a letter from a California licensed Landscape Architect certifying the landscaping and vegetation clearance requirements have been completed per the California Public Resources Code 4291 and Government Code Section 51182.
38. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is required by CBC Section 1704, the Architect or Engineer of Record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the Building Permit. The Town Special Inspection form must be completely filled-out and signed by all requested parties prior to permit issuance. Special Inspection forms are available online at www.losgatosca.gov/building.
39. BLUEPRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (page size same as submitted drawings) shall be part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available online at www.losgatosca.gov/building.
40. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following departments and agencies approval before issuing a building permit:
ITEM NO. 11.
a. Community Development – Planning Division: (408) 354-6874 b. Engineering/Parks & Public Works Department: (408) 399-5771 c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010
d. West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-2407
e. Local School District: The Town will forward the paperwork to the appropriate school district(s) for processing. A copy of the paid receipt is required prior to permit issuance.
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS:
Engineering Division
41. GENERAL: All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town Standard Plans, Standard Specifications and Engineering Design Standards. All work shall conform to the applicable Town ordinances. The adjacent public right-of-way shall be kept clear of all job-related mud, silt, concrete, dirt and other construction 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 an encroachment permit is issued by the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department. The Owner’s representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right-of-way according to this condition may result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or stop work orders and the Town performing the required maintenance at the Owner’s expense.
42. PAYMENT OPTIONS:
a. All payments regarding fees and deposits can be mailed to:
Town of Los Gatos PPW – Attn: Engineering Dept
41 Miles Avenue
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Or hand deliver/drop off payment in engineering lock box Checks made out to “Town of Los Gatos” and should mention address and application number on memo/note line.
43. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all the conditions of approval listed below and in substantial compliance with the latest reviewed and approved development plans. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans or conditions of approvals shall be approved by the Town Engineer.
44. CONSTRUCTION PLAN REQUIREMENTS: Construction drawings shall comply with Section 1 (Construction Plan Requirements) of the Town’s Engineering Design Standards, which are available for download from the Town’s website.
45. CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY: Prior to initial occupancy and any subsequent change in use or occupancy of any non‐residential condominium space, the buyer or the new or existing occupant shall apply to the Community Development Department and obtain approval for use determination and building permit and obtain inspection approval for any necessary work to establish the use and/or occupancy consistent with that intended.
46. GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE: The property owner shall provide proof of insurance to
ITEM NO. 11.
the Town on a yearly basis. In addition to general coverage, the policy must cover all elements encroaching into the Town’s right‐of‐way.
47. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative shall notify the Engineering Inspector at least twenty‐four (24) hours before starting any work pertaining to on‐site drainage facilities, grading or paving, and all work in the Town's right‐of‐way. Failure to do so will result in penalties and rejection of any work that occurred without inspection.
48. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because of the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative'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. Any new concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed, therefore. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the Engineering Construction Inspector and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. The restoration of all improvements identified by the Engineering Construction Inspector shall be completed before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative shall request a walk‐through with the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions.
49. PLAN CHECK FEES: Plan check fees associated with the Grading Permit shall be deposited with the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department prior to the commencement of plan check review.
50. SITE SUPERVISION: The General Contractor shall provide qualified supervision on the job site at all times during construction.
51. INSPECTION FEES: Inspection fees shall be deposited with the Town prior to the issuance of permits or recordation of maps.
52. DESIGN CHANGES: Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be subject to the approval of the Town prior to the commencement of any and all altered work. The Owner’s project engineer shall notify, in writing, the Town Engineer at least seventy‐two (72) hours in advance of all the proposed changes. Any approved changes shall be incorporated into the final “as‐built” plans.
53. PLANS AND STUDIES: All required plans and studies shall be prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of California and submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval. Additionally, any post‐project traffic or parking counts, or other studies imposed by the Planning Commission or Town Council shall be funded by the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer.
54. GRADING PERMIT DETERMINATION DURING CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS: In the event that, during the production of construction drawings and/or during construction of the plans approved with this application by the Town of Los Gatos, it is determined that a grading permit would be required as described in Chapter 12, Article II (Grading Permit) of
ITEM NO. 11.
the Town Code of the Town of Los Gatos, an Architecture and Site Application would need to be submitted by the Owner for review and approval by the Development Review Committee prior to applying for a grading permit.
55. ILLEGAL GRADING: Per the Town’s Comprehensive Fee Schedule, applications for work unlawfully completed shall be charged double the current fee. As a result, the required grading permit fees associated with an application for grading will be charged accordingly. a. DUST CONTROL: Blowing dust shall be reduced by timing construction activities so that paving and building construction begin as soon as possible after completion of grading, and by landscaping disturbed soils as soon as possible. Further, water trucks shall be present and in use at the construction site. All portions of the site subject to blowing dust shall be watered as often as deemed necessary by the Town, or a minimum of three (3) times daily or apply (non‐toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites in order to insure proper control of blowing dust for the duration of the project. Watering on public streets shall not occur. Streets shall be cleaned by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the Town Engineer, or at least once a day. Watering associated with on‐site construction activity shall take place between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. and shall include at least one (1) late‐afternoon watering to minimize the effects of blowing dust. All public streets soiled or littered due to this construction activity shall be cleaned and swept on a daily basis during the workweek to the satisfaction of the Town. Demolition or earthwork activities shall be halted when wind speeds (instantaneous gusts) exceed twenty (20) miles per hour (MPH). All trucks hauling soil, sand, or other loose debris shall be covered.
56. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: All construction shall conform to the latest requirements of the CASQA Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbooks for Construction Activities and New Development and Redevelopment, the Town's grading and erosion control ordinance, and other generally accepted engineering practices for erosion control as required by the Town Engineer when undertaking construction activities.
57. SILT AND MUD IN PUBLIC RIGHT‐OF‐WAY: It is the responsibility of Contractor and homeowner 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.
58. COVERED TRUCKS: All trucks transporting materials to and from the site shall be covered.
59. GOOD HOUSEKEEPING: Good housekeeping practices shall be observed at all times during the course of construction. All construction shall be diligently supervised by a person, or persons authorized to do so at all times during working hours. The Owner’s representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right‐of‐way according to this condition may result in penalties and/or the Town performing the required maintenance at the Owner’s expense
60. SITE DESIGN MEASURES: This project shall incorporate at least one of the following measures:
a. Protect sensitive areas and minimize changes to the natural topography. b. Minimize impervious surface areas.
c. Direct roof downspouts to vegetated areas.
ITEM NO. 11.
d. Use porous or pervious pavement surfaces on the driveway, at a minimum. e. Use landscaping to treat stormwater.
61. CONSTRUCTION HOURS: All subdivision improvements and site improvements construction activities, including the delivery of construction materials, labors, heavy equipment, supplies, etc., shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Saturdays. The Town may authorize, on a case‐by‐ case basis, alternate construction hours. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall provide written notice twenty‐four (24) hours in advance of modified construction hours.
Approval of this request is at discretion of the Town.
62. CONSTRUCTION NOISE: Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Saturdays, construction, alteration, or repair activities shall be allowed.
No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding eighty‐five (85) dBA at twenty‐five (25) feet from the source. If the device is located within a structure on the property, the measurement shall be made at distances as close to twenty‐five (25) feet from the device as possible. The noise level at any point outside of the property plane shall not exceed eighty‐five (85) dBA.
63. SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT: Sanitary sewer cleanouts shall be relocated within the property in question.
64. PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits or the commencement of any site work, the general contractor shall:
a. Along with the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer, attend a pre‐construction meeting with the Town Inspector to discuss the project conditions of approval, working hours, site maintenance, and other construction matters.
b. Acknowledge in writing that they have read and understand the project conditions of approval and will make certain that all project sub‐contractors have read and understand them as well prior to commencing any work, and that a copy of the project conditions of approval will be posted on‐site at all times during construction.
65. CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE PARKING: Construction vehicle parking within the public right‐ of‐ way will only be allowed if it does not cause access or safety problems as determined by the Town.
66. STREET/SIDEWALK CLOSURE: Any proposed blockage or partial closure of the street and/or sidewalk requires an encroachment permit. Special provisions such as limitations on works hours, protective enclosures, or other means to facilitate public access in a safe manner may be required.
67. GRADING PERMIT: A grading permit is required for all site grading and drainage work except for exemptions listed in Section 12.20.015 of The Code of the Town of Los Gatos (Grading Ordinance). Grading work taking place either simultaneously, on‐site is considered eligible for the grading permit process and could be counted toward quantities, depending on permit status. After the preceding Architecture and Site Application has been approved by the respective deciding body and the appeal period has passed, the grading permit application with grading plans and associated required materials shall be submitted via email to the PPW engineer assigned to the A&S review.
Plan check fees (determined after initial submittal) shall be sent to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works
ITEM NO. 11.
Department located at 41 Miles Avenue. The grading plans shall include topographic map/existing conditions, final grading, drainage, retaining wall location(s), driveway, utility sheet and erosion control. Grading plans shall list earthwork quantities and a table of existing and proposed impervious areas. Unless specifically allowed by the Director of Parks and Public Works, the grading permit will be issued concurrently with the building permit. The grading permit is for work outside the building footprint(s). Prior to Engineering signing off and closing out on the issued grading permit, the Owner’s soils engineer shall verify, with a stamped and signed letter, that the grading activities were completed per plans and per the requirements as noted in the soils report. A separate building permit, issued by the Building Department, located at 110 E. Main Street, is needed for grading within the building footprint.
68. SECURITY OF PERFORMANCE: Prior to approval of the grading permit, the applicant shall provide security for the performance of the work described and delineated on the approved grading plans. The form of security shall be one (1) or a combination of the following to be determined by the Town Engineer and subject to the approval of the Town Attorney
a. Bond or bonds issued by one (1) or more duly authorized corporate sureties on a form approved by the Town.
b. Deposit, with the Town, money, negotiable bonds of the kind approved for securing deposits of public monies, or other instrument of credit from one (1) or more financial institutions subject to regulation by the State or Federal Government wherein such financial institution pledges funds are on deposit and guaranteed for payment.
69. GRADING ACTIVITY RESTRICTIONS: Upon receipt of a grading permit, any and all grading activities and operations shall not occur during the rainy season, as defined by Town Code of the Town of Los Gatos, Sec. 12.10.020, (October 15‐April 15).
70. CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT: Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, it shall be the sole responsibility of the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer to obtain any and all proposed or required easements and/or permissions necessary to perform the grading herein proposed. Proof of agreement/approval is required prior to the issuance of any Permit.
71. DRAINAGE STUDY: Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the following drainage studies shall be submitted to and approved by the Town Engineer: a drainage study of the project including diversions, off‐site areas that drain onto and/or through the project, and justification of any diversions; a drainage study evidencing that the proposed drainage patterns will not overload the existing storm drain facilities; and detailed drainage studies indicating how the project grading, in conjunction with the drainage conveyance systems (including applicable swales, channels, street flows, catch basins, storm drains, and flood water retarding) will allow building pads to be safe from inundation from rainfall runoff which may be expected from all storms up to and including the theoretical 100‐year flood.
72. DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT: Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall: a) design provisions for surface drainage; and b) design all necessary storm drain facilities extending to a satisfactory point of disposal for the
ITEM NO. 11.
proper control and disposal of storm runoff; and c) provide a recorded copy of any required easements to the Town.
73. TREE REMOVAL: Copies of all necessary tree removal permits shall be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit. An arborist report may be necessary.
74. 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.
75. RETAINING WALLS: A building permit, issued by the Building Department, located at 110 E. Main Street, may be required for site retaining walls. Walls are not approved by the Engineering Division of Parks and Public Works during the grading permit plan review process.
76. PROXIMITY OF RETAINING WALLS TO ADJACENT BUILDINGS: Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, structural details for the proposed retaining walls located immediately adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of existing buildings on adjoining lots shall be submitted confirming that said walls will not negatively affect the structural integrity of these buildings.
77. WEST VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT: All sewer connection and treatment plant capacity fees shall be paid either immediately prior to the issuance of a sewer connection permit.
Written confirmation of payment of these fees shall be provided prior to issuance of the Grading Permit.
78. GEOLOGY AND SOILS MITIGATION MEASURE: A geotechnical investigation shall be conducted for the project to determine the surface and sub‐surface conditions at the site and to determine the potential for surface fault rupture on the site. The geotechnical study shall provide recommendations for site grading as well as the design of foundations, retaining walls, concrete slab‐on‐grade construction, excavation, drainage, on‐site utility trenching and pavement sections. All recommendations of the investigation shall be incorporated into project plans.
79. GEOTECHNICAL/GEOLOGICAL ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION: During construction, all excavations and grading shall be inspected by the Owner’s soils engineer prior to placement of concrete and/or backfill so they can verify that the actual conditions are as anticipated in the design‐level geotechnical report and recommend appropriate changes in the recommendations contained in the report, if necessary. The results of the construction observation and testing shall be documented in an “as‐built” letter/report prepared by the Owner’s soils engineer and submitted to the Town before a certificate of occupancy is granted.
80. FENCES: Fences between all adjacent parcels will need to be located on the property lines/boundary lines. Any existing fences that encroach into the neighbor’s property will need to be removed and replaced to the correct location of the boundary lines before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. Waiver of this condition will require signed and notarized letters from all affected neighbors.
81. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION FEE: Prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit, the Owner shall pay the project's proportional share of transportation improvements
ITEM NO. 11.
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 building permit is issued.
82. PRECONSTRUCTION PAVEMENT SURVEY: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit, the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall complete a pavement condition survey documenting the extent of existing pavement defects using a smartphone video (in Landscape orientation only) or digital video camera. The survey shall extend the length of Reservoir Road and the connecting private access driveway. The results shall be documented in a report and submitted to the Town for review.
83. POSTCONSTRUCTION PAVEMENT SURVEY: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall complete a pavement condition survey covering the same sections of roads documented in the Preconstruction Pavement Survey to determine whether road damage occurred as a result of project construction and whether there were changes in pavement strength.
Rehabilitation improvements required to restore the pavement to pre‐construction condition. The results shall be documented in a report and submitted to the Town for review and approval before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued.
The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall be responsible for completing any required road repairs prior to release of the faithful performance bond.
84. ON‐SITE/OFF‐SITE PARKING: Parking spaces shall be paved with a compacted base not less than four (4) inches thick, surfaced with asphaltic concrete or Portland cement concrete pavement or other surfacing (e.g.: permeable paving materials, interlocking pavers and ribbon strip driveways) approved by the Town Engineer.
85. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN: If a traffic control plan is required, it must be submitted and approved by the Town Engineer prior to the issuance of an encroachment, grading or building permit. This plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures:
a. Construction activities shall be strategically timed and coordinated to minimize traffic disruption for schools, residents, businesses, special events, and other projects in the area. The schools located on the haul route shall be contacted to help with the coordination of the trucking operation to minimize traffic disruption. b. Flag persons shall be placed at locations necessary to control one‐way traffic flow. All flag persons shall have the capability of communicating with each other to coordinate the operation.
c. Prior to construction, advance notification of all affected residents and emergency services shall be made regarding one‐way operation, specifying dates and hours of operation.
86. HAULING OF SOIL: Hauling of soil on‐ or off‐site shall not occur during the morning or evening peak periods (between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.), and at other times as specified by the Director of Parks and Public Works. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, the Owner and/or Applicant or their representative shall work with the Town Building Department and Engineering Division Inspectors to devise a traffic control plan to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow under periods when soil is hauled on or off the project site. This may include but is not limited to provisions for the Owner and/or Applicant to place construction notification signs noting the dates and time of construction and hauling activities or providing additional traffic
ITEM NO. 11.
control. Coordination with other significant projects in the area may also be required.
Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose debris.
87. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN SHEET: Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the Owner and/or Applicant’s design consultant shall submit a construction management plan sheet (full‐size) within the plan set that shall incorporate at a minimum the Earth Movement Plan, Traffic Control Plan, Project Schedule, site security fencing, employee parking, construction staging area, materials storage area(s), construction trailer(s), concrete washout(s) and proposed portable restroom locations.
Please refer to the Town’s Construction Management Plan Guidelines document for additional information.
88. SHARED PRIVATE STREET: The private street accessing the Project Site shall be kept open and in a safe, drive‐able condition throughout construction. If temporary closure is needed, then formal written notice shall be provided at least one week in advance of closure.
89. EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS: The Emergency Vehicle Access Easement (EVAE) that traverses the Project Site shall be kept open and in a safe, drive‐able condition throughout construction. If temporary closure is needed, then formal written notice shall be provided at least one week in advance of closure.
90. EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT: Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer shall coordinate with the Santa Clara County Fire Department to ensure that any proposed modifications to the Emergency Vehicle Access Easement that traverses the Project Site are curvilinear, allows for the Department’s equipment to travel across said easement, and meets all Department specifications. Plans shall be submitted to the Santa Clara County Fire Department for approval prior to construction.
91. WVSD (West Valley Sanitation District): Sanitary sewer laterals are televised by West Valley Sanitation District and approved by the Town of Los Gatos before they are used. A Sanitary Sewer Clean‐out is required at the property line, within one (1) foot of the property line, or at a location specified by the Town.
92. SANITARY SEWER BACKWATER VALVE: Drainage piping serving fixtures which have flood level rims less than twelve (12) inches (304.8 mm) above the elevation of the next upstream manhole and/or flushing inlet cover at the public or private sewer system serving such drainage piping shall be protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved backwater valve. Fixtures above such elevation shall not discharge through the backwater valve, unless first approved by the Building Official. The Town shall not incur any liability or responsibility for damage resulting from a sewer overflow where the property owner or other person has failed to install a backwater valve as defined in the Uniform Plumbing Code adopted by the Town and maintain such device in a functional operation condition.
Evidence of West Sanitation District’s decision on whether a backwater device is needed shall be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit.
93. RELOCATION OF TRASH AND RECYCLING COLLECTION LOCATION: Prior to the issuance of any permits, an approval letter from West Valley Collection & Recycling accepting the
ITEM NO. 11.
trash and recycling collection locations shall be provided to the Town.
94. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs): The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors are aware of all storm water quality measures and that such measures are implemented. Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be maintained and be placed for all areas that have been graded or disturbed and for all material, equipment and/or operations that need protection. Removal of BMPs (temporary removal during construction activities) shall be replaced at the end of each working day. Failure to comply with the construction BMP will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or stop work orders.
95. INFILTRATION TRENCHES: The following requirements apply to the proposed infiltration trenches:
a. Prior to completion of the Final Stormwater Control Plan, a geotechnical engineer shall review the design of the infiltration trenches and retaining walls along the portion of the road within the property boundary and determine whether additional structural supports are needed to ensure stability of the road and the adjacent hillside during the wet season.
b. The assumed infiltration rate shall be verified with actual site‐specific soils data prior to the Final Stormwater Control Plan for the development. If the infiltration rate is lower, a hydrologic analysis shall be conducted to ensure that the proposed trench sizes are adequate.
c. The infiltration trench shall be protected from sediment generated during construction of homes on the lots. The proposed source control measures shall be indicated on the project plans.
d. Maintenance of stormwater treatment and the infiltration trenches shall be the responsibility of the property owner and/or future property owners.
96. UNLAWFUL DISCHARGES: It is unlawful to discharge any wastewater or cause hazardous domestic waste materials to be deposited in such a manner or location as to constitute a threatened discharge, into storm drains, gutters, creeks or the San Francisco Bay.
Unlawful discharges to storm drains include, but are not limited to: discharges from toilets, sinks, industrial processes, cooling systems, boilers, fabric cleaning, equipment cleaning, or vehicle cleaning.
97. EROSION CONTROL: Interim and final erosion control plans shall be prepared and submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department during the grading permit application process. A maximum of two (2) weeks is allowed between clearing of an area and stabilizing/building on an area if grading is allowed during the rainy season. Interim erosion control measures, to be carried out during construction and before installation of the final landscaping, shall be included. Interim erosion control method shall include, but are not limited to silt fences, fiber rolls (with locations and details), erosion control blankets,
Town standard seeding specification, filter berms, check dams, retention basins, etc.
Provide erosion control measures as needed to protect downstream water quality during winter months.
98. AIR QUALITY: To limit the project’s construction‐related dust and criteria pollutant
ITEM NO. 11.
emissions, the following the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)‐ recommended basic construction measures shall be included in the project’s grading plan, building plans, and contract specifications:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day, or otherwise kept dust‐ free.
b. All haul trucks designated for removal of excavated soil and demolition debris from site shall be staged off‐site until materials are ready for immediate loading and removal from site.
c. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, debris, or other loose material off‐site shall be covered.
d. As practicable, all haul trucks and other large construction equipment shall be staged in areas away from the adjacent residential homes.
e. All visible mud or dirt track‐out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day, or as deemed appropriate by Town Engineer. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. An on‐site track‐out control device is also recommended to minimize mud and dirt‐track‐out onto adjacent public roads.
f. All vehicle speeds on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to fifteen (15) miles per hour. g. All driveways and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible.
Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within forty‐eight (48) hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Please provide the BAAQMD’s complaint number on the sign: 24‐hour toll‐free hotline at 1‐800‐334‐ ODOR (6367).
i. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed twenty (20) miles per hour.
j. Vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast‐germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established.
99. DETAILING OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES: Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, all pertinent details of any and all proposed stormwater management facilities, including, but not limited to, ditches, swales, pipes, bubble‐ups, dry wells, outfalls, infiltration trenches, detention basins and energy dissipaters, shall be provided on submitted grading and drainage plans, reviewed by the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department, and approved for implementation. 100. WATER FEATURES: New swimming pools, hot tubs, spas and/or fountains shall have a connection to the sanitary sewer system, subject to West Valley Sanitation District’s authority and standards, to facilitate draining events. Discharges from these feature(s) shall be directed to the sanitary sewer and are not allowed into the storm drain system. 101. SITE DRAINAGE: Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. On‐site drainage
ITEM NO. 11.
systems for all projects shall include one of the alternatives included in section C.3.i of the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit. These include storm water reuse via cisterns or rain barrels, directing runoff from impervious surfaces to vegetated areas and use of permeable surfaces. If stormwater treatment facilities are to be used, they shall be placed a minimum of ten (10) feet from the adjacent property line and/or right‐of‐way.
Alternatively, the facility(ies) may be located with an offset between 5 and 10 feet from the adjacent property and/or right‐of‐way line(s) if the responsible engineer in charge provides a stamped and signed letter that addresses infiltration and states how facilities, improvements and infrastructure will not adversely affect the adjacent property. No improvements shall obstruct or divert runoff to the detriment of an adjacent, downstream or down slope property.
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT:
102. GENERAL: 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.
103. 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. 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. All comments below that result from PRC 4290 are identified by **.
104. **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 twoway 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 one-way 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
ITEM NO. 11.
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.
-Approved Request of Exception PC 24-2558. See comment number 108 for conditions of approval.
105. **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. -Approved Request of Exception PC 24-2558. See comment number 108 for conditions of approval.
106. **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.
-Approved Request of Exception PC 24-2558. See comment number 108 for conditions of approval.
107. **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. -Approved Request of Exception PC 24-2558. See comment number 108 for conditions of approval.
108. **TURNAROUND: (As noted on sheet A-4 and sheet 4) (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 Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.05.
-Approved Request of Exception PC 24-2558. See comment number 108 for conditions of approval.
ITEM NO. 11.
109. PRC 4290 REQUEST FOR EXCEPTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
a. A copy of the Alternate Means/Methods application form including approval signature, exhibits, and these comments shall be made part of the building permit drawing set, to be routed to Santa Clara County Fire Department for final approval. b. Sign(s) to be provided:
At Reservoir St indicating the turnaround is onsite.
At turnaround indicating the turnaround location and no parking in the turn around.
c. Language and location of these signs to be provided on building permit drawings, and approved prior to building permit issuance.
110. FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED: (As Noted on Sheet A1) Approved automatic sprinkler systems in new and existing buildings and structures shall be provided in the locations described in this Section or in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.12 whichever is the more restrictive and Sections 903.2.14 through 903.2.21. For the purposes of this section, firewalls and fire barriers used to separate building areas shall be constructed in accordance with the California Building Code and shall be without openings or penetrations.
111. REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: (Letter received) The minimum require fireflow for this project is 875 Gallons Per Minute (GPM) at 20 psi residual pressure. This fireflow assumes installation of automatic fire sprinklers per CFC [903.3.1.3] 112. FIRE DEPARTMENT (ENGINE) DRIVEWAY TURNAROUND REQUIRED: (As noted on sheet A4 and sheet 4) 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.
-Approved Request of Exception PC 24-2558. See comment number 108 for conditions of approval.
113. WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE: This project is located within the designated WildlandUrban Interface Fire Area. The building construction shall comply with the provisions of California Building Code (CBC) Chapter 7A. Note that vegetation clearance shall be in compliance with CBC Section 701A.3.2.4 prior to project final approval. Check with the Planning Department for related landscape plan requirements. 114. WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTs: (As Noted on Sheet A1) Potable water supplies shall be protected from contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any waterbased fire protection systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the applicant(s). 2019 CFC Sec. 903.3.5 and Health and Safety Code 13114.7.
ITEM NO. 11.
115. ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION: (As Noted on Sheet A1) New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Where required by the fire code official, address numbers shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches (101.6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm). Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained. CFC Sec. 505.1. 116. CONSTRUCTION SITE FIRE SAFETY: (As Noted on Sheet A1) All construction sites must comply with applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and our Standard Detail and Specification S1-7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. CFC Chp. 33.
117. EMERGENCY GATE/ACCESS GATE REQUIREMENTS: (As Noted on Sheet A1) Gate installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specification G-1 and, when open shall not obstruct any portion of the required width for emergency access roadways or driveways. Locks, if provided, shall be fire department approved prior to installation. Gates across the emergency access roadways shall be equipped with an approved access devices. If the gates are operated electrically, an approved Knox key switch shall be installed; if they are operated manually, then an approved Knox padlock shall be installed.
118. GENERAL: 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].
ITEM NO. 11.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 11.
ATTACHMENT 7
ITEM NO. 11.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 11.
PREPARED BY: Lance Bayer
Special Counsel
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Town Attorney, 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: 03/4/2025
ITEM NO: 12
DATE: March 4, 2025
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Allen Meyer, Code Compliance Officer
SUBJECT: Conduct a Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building and Adopt a Resolution Upholding the Administrative Citation and Imposing Costs According to Proof
RECOMMENDATION:
Complete the continued public hearing to hear an appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for violations of the Los Gatos Town Code related to grading and building, and adopt a resolution upholding the administrative citation and imposing costs according to proof.
BACKGROUND:
On January 21, 2025, the Town Council held a public hearing for the appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for violations of the Los Gatos Town Code. At the hearing, Allen Meyer, Code Enforcement, Officer, and Lance Bayer, Special Counsel, presented the staff report and gave a presentation on the reasons for the citation. Richard Harris, Appellant Counsel, presented the case on behalf of the Appellant. The Town Council also provided an opportunity for public comment. Scott Watson and Ivy Chang spoke during the period provided for public comment.
The Town Attorney recommended continuing the item to allow the Council to receive and review a December 13, 2024, letter submitted on behalf of the appellant. She also recommended allowing each side to have five minutes to address the letter, together with three minutes rebuttal time, and to allow an opportunity for public comments only on the December 13, 2024, letter. The Town Council voted unanimously to continue the matter to March 4, 2025.
ITEM NO. 12.
PAGE 2 OF 3
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building DATE: February 26, 2025
In their December 13, 2024, letter (Attachment 4), Appellants assert that the Town cannot enforce its ordinances against them in 2023 because it was willing in 2019 to defer a pending code enforcement action until private litigation with a neighbor had concluded. In October of 2023, the Town contacted the appellants to let them know that the Town would be initiating a new code compliance action since three years had elapsed and the private litigation had not concluded. (Attachment 5.) The Town restarted its violation process in October 2023. Due to the extensive amount of time the Deffenbaughs were taking to resolve their civil legal issues as well as failing to obtain a permit for the unpermitted retaining walls and associated grading, the Town determined that it was necessary to restart the enforcement process in order to obtain compliance with the Town’s codes.
The Deffenbaughs submitted an application for a grading permit and an architectural and site approval at the subject property on July 9, 2021. In August 2021, the Town provided the Deffenbaughs with a Staff Technical Review addressing numerous deficiencies in the Deffenbaugh’s application, including the failure to provide a full scope of work, failure to address hillside development standards, and failure to describe the proposed design that will mitigate the unpermitted work. In January 2024, Staff provided additional feedback to the Deffenbaughs regarding their architectural and site application. The Deffenbaughs did not respond to the Staff Technical Review with updated information.
CONCLUSION:
Town staff respectfully requests the Town Council adopt a resolution (Attachment 6) upholding the administrative citation and imposing costs according to proof.
ALTERNATIVES:
The Town Council has the following alternatives:
1. Uphold the administrative citation.
2. Cancel the administrative citation.
3. Impose costs.
4. Not impose costs.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
This is not a project defined under CEQA, and no further action is required.
ITEM NO. 12.
PAGE 3 OF 3
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building DATE: February 26, 2025
Attachments:
1. Staff Report. 16660 Cypress Way Appeal, including Attachments 1-24 as provided in the Town Council agenda for the council meeting scheduled on January 21, 2025.
2. Supplemental Staff Report dated January 17, 2025, including Attachments 25-27, as provided in the Town Council agenda for the council meeting scheduled on January 21, 2025.
3. Supplemental Staff Report dated January 20, 2025, including Attachment 28, as provided in the Town Council agenda for the council meeting scheduled on January 21, 2025.
4. Letter from Appellant’s counsel dated December 13, 2024.
5. Email from Town Attorney to Appellants.
6. Draft Resolution.
ITEM NO. 12.
PREPARED BY: Lance Bayer
Special Counsel
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Town Attorney, 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: 01/21/2025
ITEM NO: 13
DATE: January 15, 2025
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Gabrielle Whelan, Town Attorney
SUBJECT: Conduct a Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building and Adopt a Resolution Upholding the Administrative Citation and Imposing Costs According to Proof
RECOMMENDATION:
Conduct a public hearing to hear an appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for violations of the Los Gatos Town Code related to grading and building, and adopt a resolution upholding the administrative citation and imposing costs according to proof.
BACKGROUND:
At the appellant’s request, this appeal hearing was rescheduled to the January 21, 2025, Town Council meeting from the December 17, 2024, Town Council meeting.
On September 16, 2024, the Town Code Compliance Officer issued an Administrative Citation against Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh, the owners of the property located at 16660 Cypress Way (“subject property”) (Attachment 19). The citation alleged violations of the Los Gatos Town Code (“LGTC”) for unpermitted construction and unpermitted grading. The citation asserted that there were violations of LGTC section 6.150.010, incorporating California Residential Code section R105.1, regarding four buildings and one retaining wall. The citation also asserted that there was a violation of LGTC section 12.20.010 regarding failing to have the required grading permit. The citation imposed an administrative penalty of $9,250.00 for the violations of section 6.150.010 and $1,850.00 for the violation of section 12.20.010. The locations that are the subject of the citation are shown on the aerial photograph in Attachment
4. ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM NO. 12.
PAGE 2 OF 5
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building DATE: January 15, 2025
LGMC section 1.10.040(d) states that every day of violation constitutes a separate offense. The administrative penalties in the citation were calculated from the compliance date on the Administrative Warning dated 7/8/2024.
Mr. and Ms. Deffenbaugh have appealed the citation and are entitled to an appeal hearing. In hearing this appeal, the Town Council is acting both as the Hearing Officer under LGTC section
1.30.040 and as the Board of Appeals under California Residential Code section R112.1.1 The Council shall determine whether to uphold or cancel the citation. The Council also may assess administrative costs against the violator when the Hearing Officer determines that a violation has occurred and that compliance was not achieved. Administrative costs may include any and all costs incurred by the Town (both direct and indirect costs) in investigating and commencing administrative proceedings for the violation as well as any and all costs incurred by the Town in connection with the hearing before the Hearing Officer, including but not limited to costs the Enforcement Officer incurred in preparation for the hearing and for participating in the hearing itself, and costs of the Town to conduct the hearing.
DISCUSSION:
On September 27, 2016, Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh (“the Deffenbaughs”) purchased the property located at 16660 Cypress Way (Attachment 22). Aerial photographs show grading and paving activity taking place without the required permits in May and August of 2018 (Attachments 1,2, and 3).
In the summer of 2019, Town staff became aware of the violations of the LGTC at the subject property. The Town Code Compliance Officer sent an Administrative Warning to the Deffenbaughs on July 17, 2019, describing observed violations consisting of new buildings, retaining walls, grading, interior remodeling, electrical, plumbing, and HVAC (Attachment 8).
The Administrative Warning requested the Deffenbaughs contact Town staff to schedule a meeting to discuss the scope of work. After the Deffenbaughs failed to respond, a second notice was sent on August 22, 2019 (Attachment 9).
The subject property contains a large residential accessory unit that was built with permits. In 2019, several marketing internet sites showed unpermitted construction inside the unit. This construction was done without obtaining the necessary permits (Attachments 5, 6, and 7).
The Deffenbaughs submitted an application for a grading permit and an architectural and site approval at the subject property on July 9, 2021 (Attachment 10). The accompanying letter of justification cited previously unpermitted “emergency” construction and proposed to mitigate the non-conforming installations. The letter of justification did not address the unpermitted construction involving accessory structures.
1 California Health and Safety Code section 17920.5
ITEM NO. 12.
PAGE 3 OF 5
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building DATE: January 15, 2025
Town staff conducted a site inspection on August 24, 2021, and took photographs (Attachment 11). Some photographs show unpermitted retaining walls. The Town provided the Deffenbaughs with a Staff Technical Review addressing numerous deficiencies in the Deffenbaughs’ application, including the failure to provide a full scope of work, failure to address hillside development standards, and failure to describe the proposed design that will mitigate the unpermitted work (Attachment 12).
The Deffenbaughs did not respond to the Staff Technical Review. A pending civil lawsuit between the Deffenbaughs and their neighbors, Deffenbaugh v. Watson, et. al., addressed issues regarding grading and the retaining walls as well as a structure of the Deffenbaughs that purportedly straddled the property line between the two neighbors. The Town’s code enforcement action is independent of the litigation between the Deffenbaughs and their neighbors.
On October 30, 2023, the Town notified the Deffenbaughs and their attorney that the Town would renew its code enforcement efforts at the subject property, beginning with a site inspection (Attachment 13). On December 13, 2023, the Deffenbaughs submitted an updated letter of justification for their July 9, 2021 application (Attachment 14). On January 31, 2024, the Town provided the Deffenbaughs with a Staff Technical Review addressing numerous deficiencies in the Deffenbaughs revised application, including the failure to provide a full scope of work, failure to address hillside development standards, and failure to describe the proposed design that will mitigate the unpermitted work (Attachment 15). The Deffenbaughs have not responded to the Staff Technical Review.
After efforts by Town staff to obtain consent to inspect the subject property were unsuccessful, the Town applied to the superior court and obtained an inspection warrant for the subject property on May 20, 2024 (Attachment 16).
The inspection took place on May 30, 2024. It was conducted by the Town Chief Building Official and included other members of Town staff. During the inspection, staff took photographs and observed: (1) The interior of an ADU above the garage (Attachment 4, #1).
There was an interior remodel of the kitchen and bathroom areas without obtaining the required permits. The sleeping room lacked sufficient emergency egress and the bathroom window was not tempered as required in a wet hazard area. The front entrance deck, stairs, and railings were unstable and appeared unsafe. The railings were far below the minimum requirement and had openings exceeding a 4” diameter sphere; (2) A detached “office structure” beside the ADU (Attachment 4, #2). The structure was constructed without obtaining the required permits. It did not appear to be used for sleeping. It did not appear to have a foundation or seismic restraint. The power was provided via an extension cord (possibly a 12- gauge cord with ground). The structure was approximately 124 square feet with electrical.
Although the building would require a building permit, the Zoning Code does not allow a
ITEM NO. 12.
PAGE 4 OF 5
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building DATE: January 15, 2025
structure at that location; (3) A storage structure behind the ADU (Attachment 4, #3). The structure was constructed without obtaining the required permits. The primary use appears to be storage but is wired for electrical and plumbed for what may be a future restroom. When asked about the electricity to the structure, the property owner stated it was provided via a battery system and is not connected to permanent power. The source or termination of the plumbing was not determined. The structure was approximately 197 sq. ft. with electrical and plumbing. Although the structure would require a building permit, the Zoning Code does not allow a structure at that location; and (4) The garage structure near the second living unit and pool (Attachment 4, #4). The structure was constructed without obtaining the required permits.
This structure appeared to be a garage/storage with electrical provided from the second living unit. The structure was approximately 294 sq. ft. with electrical. The structure would require a building permit; however, the structure crosses a property line boundary and must be demolished (Attachment 17).
The Town Code Compliance Officer sent an Administrative Warning to the Deffenbaughs on July 8, 2024, describing observed code violations (Attachment 18). The warning provided a compliance date of September 8, 2024. The warning advised the Deffenbaughs that failure to comply “may result in daily fines and/or any other available legal remedies.” The Deffenbaughs did not meet the compliance requirements.
On September 16, 2024, the Town Code Compliance Officer issued an Administrative Citation against the Deffenbaughs (Attachment 19). On October 14, 2024, the Deffenbaughs submitted an Administrative Citation Hearing Request Form (Attachment 21). On the same date, attorney Richard M. Harris, representing the Deffenbaughs, submitted a letter to the Town Community Development Department regarding the appeal (Attachment 22). Notice of the Administrative Appeal hearing was sent to the Deffebaughs and their legal counsel on November 7, 2024 (Attachment 23).
Town staff have calculated their costs related to the enforcement of this action as follows:
Employee Amount of
Hours
Hourly Rate
(including benefits)
Total
Town Code Compliance Officer 23.5 $ 140.27 $3296.34
Town Chief Building Official 6 $ 208.88 $1253.28
Senior Planner 8 $ 159.33 $1274.64
TOTAL $5824.26
CONCLUSION:
Town staff respectfully requests the Town Council adopt a resolution (Attachment 24) upholding the administrative citation and imposing costs according to proof.
ITEM NO. 12.
PAGE 5 OF 5
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building DATE: January 15, 2025
ALTERNATIVES:
The Town Council has the following alternatives:
1. Uphold the administrative citation.
2. Cancel the administrative citation.
3. Impose costs.
4. Not impose costs.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
This is not a project defined under CEQA, and no further action is required.
Attachments:
1. Aerial View of Subject Property 9/2017
2. Aerial View of Subject Property 5/2018 Showing Grading in Progress
3. Aerial View of Subject Property 8/2018 Showing Completed Paving
4. Aerial View of Subject Property Showing Locations of Structures in Violation
5. Hotpads Internet Posting, Showing Violations
6. Trulia Internet Posting, Showing Violations
7. Realtor.com Internet Posting, Showing Violations
8. Administrative Warning Dated 7/17/2019
9. Administrative Warning (2nd notice) Dated 8/22/2019
10. Application for Grading Permit and Architecture and Site Approval dated 7/9/2021 and Letter of Justification and Project Description Dated 7/8/2021
11. Photos of Town Inspection on 8/24/2021
12. Staff Technical Review Dated 8/24/2021 and 8/25/2021
13. Email from Town Attorney Dated 10/30/2023
14. Updated Letter of Justification Regarding Application Dated 12/13/2023
15. Staff Technical Review Dated 1/31/2024
16. Letter dated 5/22/2024 and Inspection Warrant Dated 5/20/2024
17. Description and Photos of Site Inspection of Subject Property on May 30, 2024
18. Administrative Warning Dated 7/8/2024
19. Administrative Citation Dated 9/16/2024
20. Property Detail Report
21. Administrative Citation Hearing Request Dated 10/14/2024
22. Letter to Town Community Development Department from Attorney Rogers Joseph Dated 10/14/2024
23. Notice of Appeal Hearing
24. Proposed Resolution
ITEM NO. 12.
ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
May2018
ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
August 2018
ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
https://hotpads.com/ 16664-cypress-way-los-gatos-ca-95030-ltxztsu/pad Accessed 11-13-19 ATTACHMENT 5
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
https://www.trulia.com/p/ ca/los-gatos/16664-cypress-way-los-gatos-ca-9 5030--2345 7 44967 Accessed 11-13-19 Outside parking for your horse or horseless carriage. Up to 120 square foot out-building will be built depending on your desire. While a one year lease is offered, preference will be given to individuals that will sign a 2 year lease, with second year locked in at 5% higher rental rate than first year.
We ore in final stages of the refresh, and are targeting a March 1st move in dote. If you act now. you will be able to help us finalize the window coverings. laundry room sink, washer and dryer combo, and specify what you would like in the outbuilding, which can be a workshop storage or possibly even extra space for a separate office.
ATTACHMENT 6
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
16664 Cypress Way- https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/16664-Cypress-Way LosGatos CA 95030 M19889-26473 ATTACHMENT 7
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ATTACHMENT 15
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
1 of 2
Draft Resolution Adoption Date
DRAFT RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
UPHOLDING AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION ISSUED TO
THEODORE DEFFENBAUGH AND LAURI DEFFENBAUGH
AND IMPOSING ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
WHEREAS, Town staff conducted a site inspection of the property located at 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos, on May 30, 2024.
WHEREAS, During that inspection, Town staff observed four violations of Los Gatos Town Code section 6.150.010 (incorporating California Residential Code section R105.1), regarding unpermitted remodeling of a permitted accessory unit and regarding three unpermitted structures.
WHEREAS, During that inspection, Town staff observed a violation of Los Gatos Town Code section 12.20.010 regarding unpermitted grading associated with retaining walls and roadways.
WHEREAS, Town staff issued an administrative warning notice dated July 8, 2024, which notified Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh, the property owners, of the violations and provided them with an administrative warning and an opportunity to abate the violations.
WHEREAS, Town staff conducted a site inspection of the property located at 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos, on September 13, 2024 and determined that the violations of the Town Code had not been abated.
WHEREAS, Previous unsuccessful efforts by Town staff to abate violations of Town Code sections 6.150.010 (incorporating California Residential Code section R105.1) and 12.20.010 at 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos, included issuing two written administrative warnings to Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh dated July 17, 2019 and August 22, 2019.
WHEREAS, After Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh failed to abate the violations set forth in the abatement warning dated July 8, 2024, Town staff issued an administrative citation on September 16, 2024, imposing daily penalties, as authorized by the Town Code, in the amount of $11,100.00.
WHEREAS, Town staff seek to recover costs of enforcement in the amount of $5,824.26 according to proof as provided by the Town Code. ATTACHMENT 24
ITEM NO. 12.
2 of 2
Draft Resolution Adoption Date
WHEREAS, Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh requested and received a public hearing before the Town Council, on December 17, 2024, to appeal the administrative citation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos does hereby declare, determine, and order as follows:
1. The administrative citation issued to Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh on September 16, 2024 is UPHELD in the amount of $11,100.00.
2. Administrative costs are imposed in the amount of $5,824.26.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, California, held on the day of Month, Year, by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
_______________________________
MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
___________________________________
TOWN CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
ITEM NO. 12.
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 01/21/2025
ITEM NO: 13
ADDENDUM
DATE: January 17, 2025
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Gabrielle Whelan, Town Attorney
SUBJECT: Conduct a Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building and Adopt a Resolution Upholding the Administrative Citation and Imposing Costs According to Proof
REMARKS:
Attachment 25 contains correspondence submitted by appellant, attachment 26 contains public comment, and attachment 27 contains the PowerPoint presentation.
Attachments received with the Staff Report:
1. Aerial View of Subject Property 9/2017
2. Aerial View of Subject Property 5/2018 Showing Grading in Progress
3. Aerial View of Subject Property 8/2018 Showing Completed Paving
4. Aerial View of Subject Property Showing Locations of Structures in Violation
5. Hotpads Internet Posting, Showing Violations
6. Trulia Internet Posting, Showing Violations
7. Realtor.com Internet Posting, Showing Violations
8. Administrative Warning Dated 7/17/2019
9. Administrative Warning (2nd notice) Dated 8/22/2019
10. Application for Grading Permit and Architecture and Site Approval dated 7/9/2021 and Letter of Justification and Project Description Dated 7/8/2021
11. Photos of Town Inspection on 8/24/2021
12. Staff Technical Review Dated 8/24/2021 and 8/25/2021
13. Email from Town Attorney Dated 10/30/2023
14. Updated Letter of Justification Regarding Application Dated 12/13/2023
15. Staff Technical Review Dated 1/31/2024
16. Letter dated 5/22/2024 and Inspection Warrant Dated 5/20/2024
17. Description and Photos of Site Inspection of Subject Property on May 30, 2024 ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM NO. 12.
PAGE 2 OF 2
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building DATE: January 15, 2025
18. Administrative Warning Dated 7/8/2024
19. Administrative Citation Dated 9/16/2024
20. Property Detail Report
21. Administrative Citation Hearing Request Dated 10/14/2024
22. Letter to Town Community Development Department from Attorney Rogers Joseph Dated 10/14/2024
23. Notice of Appeal Hearing
24. Proposed Resolution
Attachment Received with this Addendum:
25. Correspondence Submitted by Appellant
26. Public Comment
27. PowerPoint Presentation
ITEM NO. 12.
From: Sharon C. Ingram
To: Wendy Wood
Cc: Gabrielle Whelan; Richard M. Harris
Subject: Supplemental Administrative Appeal Statement of Theodore and Lauri Date: Thursday, January 16, 2025 11:16:28 AM
Attachments: 2025-01-16; Ltr Town Council.pdf
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Dear Town Clerk,
Please find the attached correspondence sent on behalf of Mr. Harris.
Thank you,
Sharon
Sharon C. Ingram
Assistant
Aaron P. Silberman | Dennis C. Callahan | Dean D. Paik | Aaron M. Scolari | Richard M. Harris ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL | a Professional Law Corporation 311 California Street, 10th fl | San Francisco, CA 94104 415.956.2828 main | 415.365.5327 direct | 415.956.6457 fax [email protected] |www.rjo.com
Notice to recipient: This email is meant for only the intended recipient(s) of the transmission and may be privileged by law. If you receive this email in error, please notify us immediately. Do not print, copy, or disseminate it. Please delete the email from your system. Thank you.
ITEM NO. 12.
580954.1
415.956.2828 (t) Robert Dollar Building
415.956.6457 (f) 311 California Street, 10th Flr.
San Francisco CA 94104
202.777.8950 (t) 1500 K Street, NW, Suite 800
202.347.8429 (f) Washington DC 20005
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com
January 16, 2025
VIA EMAIL
[email protected]
Town Council
Town of Los Gatos
Town Attorney’s Office
110 E Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Re: Supplemental Administrative Appeal Statement of Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh
Dear Town Clerk:
This supplemental statement is provided in response to the Town’s agenda item provided to the Deffenbaughs on December 13, 2024. It incorporates all of the objections and evidence presented in the Deffenbaughs’ previous statement.
Mr. Deffenbaugh first requests a continuance of 180 days to work to resolve outstanding permitting issues. As I wrote to the Town’s attorney, the engineer required for additional submittals is now re-involved in the project. Exhibit A. Mr. Deffenbaugh’s father-in-law was on hospice during the Summer and the Deffenbaughs were the primary care providers. At the same time, Mr. Deffenbaugh was actively involved in planning his daughter’s wedding which occurred in September 2024. With a sufficient continuance, the Deffenbaughs can resubmit to show how all structures can be permitted without requiring demolition.
Should the Town refuse to continue the hearing, then the Deffenbaughs object to this hearing, which is violating Town ordinances and state law. Not only is the Town estopped from litigating this permit issue (as described in our previous statement) and has failed to establish a procedure as required under the building code, but this hearing violates the Deffenbaugh’s substantive and procedural due process rights. The Deffenbaughs has not been granted the right to subpoena witnesses (such as their neighbor); cross examine and directly confront those who will bring evidence on behalf of the Town; or have adverse witnesses placed under oath. Further, the code under which the Town is proceeding (1.30.040) does not even state the burden of proof the Town will be applying. This is the A Professional Law Corporation
Richard M. Harris
415.365.5306 (d)
[email protected]
ITEM NO. 12.
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com
Town Council
January 16, 2025
580954.1
A Professional Law Corporation
consequence when the Town fails to institute a procedure for a hearing as required by the building code.
Even considering the Town’s evidence, it has not shown that the Deffenbaughs have violated the town codes listed in the citation. The Deffenbaughs have received a violation for of 6.150.010 (R105.1) and a violation of 12.20.010. Even if the Deffenbaughs were found liable, the maximum fine would be $600. This prosecution does not stand up to scrutiny. This citation should be dismissed.
A. The Deffenbaughs Are Not Intending to Complete Unpermitted Work, and Therefore Cannot Be Liable Under the Citation.
The Town claims that the Deffenbaughs are violating R105.1 and 12.20.010 because they have not yet secured permits for 5 structures and for some grading done on the property. But these ordinances prohibit constructing without a permit; they do not require securing permits for previously unpermitted work. On this basis alone the citation should be dismissed.
Under R105.1, a property owner violates the statute if they intend to construct on their property and fail to secure a permit. (“Any owner or owner’s authorized agent who intends to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change the occupancy of a building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert, or replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the installation of which is regulated by the this code, or to cause any such work to be performed, shall first make application of the building official and obtain the required permit.")(emphasis added). But at best, the Town has shown that there are allegedly unpermitted structures on the Deffenbaugh’s property. It is not a violation of R105 to have unpermitted structures on your property, only to construct without a permit.
12.20.010 is similar. That ordinance proscribes some grading without first obtaining a permit. But the Deffenbaughs are not intending on completing any grading work, and the Town does not claim otherwise; instead, the Town’s evidence is simply that grading work occurred. There is no evidence that the Deffenbaughs are liable under this code section.
B. The Town’s Evidence Does Not Show Violations That Cannot Be Resolved With Permitting After the Lawsuit Is Complete.
Not only are the Deffenbaughs not liable under the listed ordinances, but they are actively involved in getting all of the structures permitted. Contrary to the Town’s position, the buildings do not need to be demolished.
ITEM NO. 12.
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com
Town Council
January 16, 2025
580954.1
A Professional Law Corporation
As discussed below, Mr. Deffenbaugh should be allowed to get each building permitted under the code. For each building, there is no basis for this citation.
1. ADU remodel
The Town claims that this ADU was permitted on 1981, but there are “unpermitted interior improvements.” But the citation is for failing to secure a permit for construction that the owner intends to complete. R105 does not require that a party secure a permit for work already complete.
The Town also claims that “The sleeping room lacked sufficient emergency egress and the bathroom window was not tempered as required in a wet hazard area. The front entrance deck, stairs, and railings were unstable and appeared unsafe. The railings were far below minimum requirement and have openings exceeding a 4” diameter sphere.” But there is no support for this claim: the Town’s notes from its visit show that none of these issues were actually observed at the time of the inspection (see page 2 of attachment 17).
Without some evidence supporting the Town’s claims, Mr. Deffenbaugh cannot respond except to state that any building code related issues were pre-existing at the time the Deffenbaughs’ purchased the property. As such, they cannot be liable under the Town ordinance for failing to secure a permit.
2. Accessory Structure (“Office” or “Shed”)
The Town claims this structure is an “Office,” but the Deffenbaughs are using it as a storage shed. Sheds need not be permitted if they are at or less than 120 square feet.
The Deffenbaughs were obviously trying to build the shed to this specification, and 4 square feet over is a de minimus error that should not lead to thousands of dollars of fines. Contrary to the Town’s position, the shed has no electricity, and an extension cord is used to light the structure when people enter the structure.
The Town also claims that the Shed does not meet required setbacks because it is too close to the property line. But it also admits that there is a current litigation over the location of those property lines and easements associated with them. Given that the finalize location of the rights to the property line are not yet established, the Town should not attempt to enforce them as the Deffenbaughs’ neighbor understands them.
3. Storage Structure behind ADU
The Town claims that the Storage Structure is wired for “electrical and plumbing.” But there is no plumbing or electrical connected to this structure.
Mr. Deffenbaugh used this building to practice with his children how to install electrical and
ITEM NO. 12.
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com
Town Council
January 16, 2025
580954.1
A Professional Law Corporation
plumbing work, but nothing was completed, and nothing is connected. This is neither “plumbing” nor “electrical” as defined by the code.
The Town also claims that the Storage Structure does not have required setbacks. Again, this is dependent on the rights of the Deffenbaughs and their neighbors related to the property, and cannot be determined until that case is complete.
4. Garage Structure
Whether this building can be constructed in its current location is dependent on the determination of the Superior Court in the Lawsuit. Once determined, the Deffenbaughs will be able to get the structure permitted as to the foundation and electrical work. Tearing down the structure is not required, and the Town should give Mr. Deffenbaugh the opportunity to permit the structure as soon as the lawsuit regarding the underlying property rights is complete.
C. Any Penalties For Failing to Secure a Permit Are Limited to $600, and an $11,100 Fine is Excessive Under the Town Code, California Constitution and the Excessive Fines Clause.
Even if these code sections proscribed past work completed without a permit, the penalties would be limited to that violation (failing to secure a permit), which only occurred once for each construction site. If the Town is to be believed, at the time of the citation, Mr. Deffenbaugh had 5 structures constructed without permits and one grading violation without a permit. Since all the violations occurred on the same day (September 16, 2024), the maximum penalty allowed would be $600 (one for each violation). There is no continuing violation, as the Deffenbaughs are not continuing to construct without a permit.
Further, this fine is excessive. It fifty times more than the Town brought previously against the Deffenbaughs for the same alleged violations, and is completely disconnected from any wrongdoing by the Deffenbaughs. The fine is unreasonably high and should be reduced or eliminated.
D. The Town Ignores Similar Issues with the Deffenbaughs’ Neighbor, and Fails to Resolve its Own Obligations to the Deffenbaughs’ Property.
Additionally, fairness concerns require the dismissal of this citation. First, as stated in my previous statement, the Town agreed to wait until the lawsuit was complete.
This makes sense because the lawsuit will define the property rights between the neighbors and therefore define whether or not the structures could be permitted successfully. As the Town agreed to delaying any enforcement, it cannot go back on that agreement.
ITEM NO. 12.
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com
Town Council
January 16, 2025
580954.1
A Professional Law Corporation
Further, the Town does not typically enforce these types of permitting concerns. One needs only to look at the Deffenbaughs’ neighbors’ property, where an accessory building is built right up against the property line. Exhibit B. Attached is an report from a civil engineer discussing how the wall is unsafe and must be replaced with a safe structure. Exhibit C. The Deffenbaughs informed the Town no later than December 2019 about the dangers of their neighbor’s retaining wall. Exhibit D. Exhibit C and D show this wall, which has not substantially changed since 2019. It is clearly unsafe construction and threatens the Deffenbaughs’ property. And yet the Town has refused to enforce these same permitting concerns against that neighbor; the only enforcement is against the Deffenbaughs.
In contrast, the Deffenbaughs have been good neighbors to the Town. For example, the Town is responsible for upkeep of slopes and embankments along Cypress Way. Exhibit E. The Town is also responsible for the upkeep of Cypress Way, which is the only road access to the Deffenbaughs’ property. Exhibit F. But the Town has failed to keep up its responsibilities, and the embankment is overgrown and may fail. In 2022, a tree fell along the Town’s easement, which should have been the Town’s responsibility to clean.
Exhibit G. The Deffenbaughs cleared this tree at their own expense when requested by the Town because that is the neighborly thing to do. As still, the Town has failed to properly upkeep the road access to the Deffenbaugh’s property, creating a safety concern.
The Town should hold its end of the bargain. The Town should treat the Deffenbaughs similar to their neighbors. The Town should give the Deffenbaughs the time their need to get the structures permitted, which can only occur after the lawsuit is complete.
It is the fair thing to do.
II. CONCLUSION
This hearing violates California law as the Deffenbaughs are entitled to an established procedure to hear their appeal, an ad hoc process because the current procedure does not follow state law. This hearing further violates due process, as the Deffenbaughs are not entitled to call and cross examine witnesses, and the Deffenbaughs are being treated differently that similarly situated landowners. Prosecuting this matter is in conflict with the agreement the Town previously made. The citation’s listed ordinances are not at issue here, as the Deffenbaughs are not constructing anything. And finally, there are no violations that cannot be solved with the permitting process as soon as the lawsuit is complete and the property rights are known.
ITEM NO. 12.
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com
Town Council
January 16, 2025
580954.1
A Professional Law Corporation
The Deffenbaughs request a dismissal of the citation, or a continuance until the lawsuit is complete. The penalty of the citation cannot be more than $600.
Very truly yours,
Richard M. Harris
Attorney for Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh
RMH:nca
Enclosure
cc: Gabrielle Whelan ([email protected])
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT A
ITEM NO. 12.
January 6, 2025
Job No. 21-213
Los Gatos Town Council
Town Hall
110 E. Main St.
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Subject: 16660 Cypress Way - Grading Violation Abatement Architecture and Site Application S-21-024
Dear Town Council Members:
I am writing to address the delays experienced in the Architecture Package S-21-024 project and explain the circumstances that have led to this situation.
Causes of Delay
The primary reasons for the project delay are as follows:
1. Subcontractor Issues: We encountered unforeseen challenges with the documentation of various subcontractors' retaining wall construction details. This has severely impacted our project timeline.
2. Retirement of Key Personnel: Our geotechnical engineer, who played a critical role in the project, unexpectedly retired. This sudden departure created a significant gap in our team. We need a gravity wall specialist who is both a qualified soil & structural engineer.
3. Competing Business Priorities: Other pressing needs within our business temporarily diverted our attention and resources from this project.
Resolution and Path Forward
I want to assure you that we have taken swift action to address these issues:
1. We have identified and implemented solutions to the subcontractor challenges.
2. A replacement for the retired geotechnical engineer has been found and integrated into our team.
3. We have reallocated our resources to ensure this project receives the necessary focus and attention.
Commitment to Completion
With these measures in place, we can refocus our efforts on Architecture Package S-21-024 and continue progressing as we have done with previous projects for the Town. Despite this temporary setback, our team is committed to delivering the high-quality results you expect from us.
Next Steps
We have revised our project timeline and will provide you with an updated schedule in the coming days. We appreciate your understanding and patience during this period. Town staff has been very supportive in detailing the presentation format required for the Planning Commission review.
If you have any questions or require further information, please don't hesitate to contact me.
TS/CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC.
Terence J. Szewczyk, P.E. C35527
Principal Engineer
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT B
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT C
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
Sean O’Neill, Esq.
August 18, 2021
Photo 1 – Over view of retaining wall. Note proximity of roof overhang of residential init.
Photo 2 – Top of wall extended 3 boards (3 feet) to support raised parking pad.
ITEM NO. 12.
Sean O’Neill, Esq.
August 18, 2021
Photo 3 – Dry rot visible on back of lagging. Amount varies by location.
Photo 4 – Excessive deflection of lagging.
ITEM NO. 12.
Sean O’Neill, Esq.
August 18, 2021
Photo 5 – 8” space between lagging and displaced column.
Photo 6 – Leaning column where cable holding top of column failed.
ITEM NO. 12.
Sean O’Neill, Esq.
August 18, 2021
Photo 7 – Rusted end of cable where it failed and pulled out of soil. Inadequate bearing of lagging at steel column repair.
Photo 8 – Photo showing various repairs. Paving at parking now exposed as lagging has slid down.
ITEM NO. 12.
Sean O’Neill, Esq.
August 18, 2021
Photo 9 – Wall failure from degradation of components at right (East) end of wall.
Photo 10 - Wall failure from degradation of components at right (East) end of wall. Excessive deflection of lagging in upper wall is another potential failure mode.
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT D
ITEM NO. 12.
Retaining Wall Concerns
ITEM NO. 12.
Neighbor Has Unfenced Area Over Rotting Retaining Wall
ITEM NO. 12.
Held Together With Cables And Rotting Boards
ITEM NO. 12.
Details Of Sorid State Of Wall
Dry Rot
Dry Rot
Wall hollowed out by
Squirrels
Old Knob and Tube
Indicating 100 Years Old
Car stop: Unanchored tie
Already Collapsed
Cracked pavement,
drains into wall
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT E
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT F
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT G
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
ITEM NO. 12.
Dear Town Councils,
This is Ivy Chang and Scott Watson: the neighbors of the Mr. and Ms. Deffenbaugh in this case.
Town staff have provided a comprehensive investigation report, and we respectfully request the Town Council adopt a resolution (Attachment 24) upholding the administrative citation and imposing costs according to proof. In support of this, we want to highlight the following:
1. In a letter addressed to me in 2017 before the subject construction, Mr. Deffenbaugh said:
“I talked to a architect, and for all practical purposes, he said that getting anything built on my property was going to be a massive undertaking. I can fill you in on the details, but Los Gatos has clamped down on allow us to do stuff with our houses in the hills.” See Exhibit A.
2. 532 cubic yard earthwork
According to Town Civil Engineer Mike Wise’s calculation, after his onsite visit in 2021. There are 532 cubic yard earthwork for asphalt parking area. See Exhibit B.
According to a picture of 2016 March, there is no such wall in front of main house, see Exhibit C, which was found in Los Gatos Library given the main house is registered as historical house.
Further, per Town Code, it is clearly defined 4’ cut and 3’ fill in HDS&G. The evidence shows it is 14’ fill. Can Councils direct staff to confirm what is the resubmitting plan Town is expecting? Are you enforcing fully comply the Town Code to enforcing to cut down to 3’ fill from 14’ fill? or are you ok with as it and only need to pay fine and add engineering to the 14’ wall?
3. Page 559 summarizes the timeline well. On July 9, 2021, the Deffenbaughs submitted an Application for Development Permits; this consisted of a property survey and a 2 page justification letter which verbally described a scope of work.
Staff Technical Review of Aug 24-25, 2021 response included 18 pages of additional information that Deffenbaughs needed to submit for the Town and Santa Clara County Fire review. Applicant did nothing for over 2 years, finally submitting only reedited letter of justification on Dec 13, 2023. Staff Technical Review of Jan 31, 2024 reiterated the deficiencies in the application. Please ask Town Staff how they plan to enforce Town codes in a timely manner and not allow the Deffenbaughs to delay remediation indefinitely.
ITEM NO. 12.
4. Page 677, states “Code enforcement to send a compliance order to resubmit required documents within 60 days or impose fines”. Can Councils’ ask staff to detail the fines to be imposed, and ask staff how to enforce the resubmittal of a completed plan, so this process does not incur another 2 years delay?
5. Also, while staff is waiting for the plan resubmittal, will Town Councils red flag the unpermitted parking area? If no, why not?
6. Drainage – Mudslide
I witnessed the mudslide on Cypress Way in 2023 and it worsened in March 2024.
The mudslide location appears to be the water runoff from the un-permitted parking area, which likely to have caused the mudslide onto Cypress Way. See Exhibit D.
Can Councils direct the staff to prioritize the investigation of the drainage issue because of public safety concern?
7. Town’s Cost
On Page 598, it only shows staff hourly rate. Can Councils direct staff to confirm who should be paying the hourly rate for Town Attorney and Outside Special Counsel Lance Bayer? If it’s not violator, will the town be paying that, which means the town residence is paying it. Please clarify.
Your fair review on this matter is highly appreciated.
Sincerely
Ivy Chang and Scott Watson
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT A
ITEM NO. 12.
12/4/2019 Gmail - Let Me Know When You Are Around
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=4d1b2a54ec&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1566754611178377151&simpl=msg-f%3A1566754611178377151 1/1 Scott Watson <[email protected]>
Let Me Know When You Are Around
TE Deffenbaugh <[email protected]> Sun, May 7, 2017 at 9:13 AM To: Scott Watson <[email protected]>
Scott,
I am still trying to figure out what to do with the property line. I wanted to jot down some brainstorming notes, then maybe we can talk when you have time.
I talked to a architect, and for all practical purposes, he said that getting anything built on my property was going to be a massive undertaking. I can fill you in on the details, but Los Gatos has clamped down on allow us to do stuff with our houses in the hills.
However, I would like an easement for both the road and the shed that is on your property because I want to open the road to my lower property and rebuild the shed.
Los Gatos just passed a weed abatement ordinance which I was reading about (basically they signed up for Santa Clara county version) start here.
Maybe I could trade the easement for keeping your weeds down in the easement area.
Alternatively, I was looking at my property appraisal, which I can send you, and additional land on a house is valued at $100K per acre, but because we can't build, I don't see the value in it! However, if you would rather do this, I would be open to it at about this rate.
However, the easement is really the only thing I would like to take care of now because I would like to get going on the road and the shed.
Ted
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT B
ITEM NO. 12.
DETENMiN1NGEARTHW0RkFoRASPHALTPARk1NGDNE
16660 CYPRESSWM
pp.pe pcoDE EpNTHwoNkGNEATERTHAN
meantone osf E.Yismissidifiifiaimisiitund
Point Ii
t A s 1h6h
Ian s
alt
Itsy
A s the6h
I t
Vo DotAx s osftzm.si x4iPt 2,3o6rscP
2,306.258 x
p
o i 85.4
V Atf L 25sft x84ft 12,075 of
12,0758 x
p
Y z 447 IV Vo it V
85.4cy t 447.2ay
sina SGRADINGPER.MIL 532.6cyssocy
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT C
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT D
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
16660 Cypress Way
Administrative Appeal of Citation
VL-19-362 issued to Theodore
and Lauri Deffenbaugh
Town Council Meeting
January 21, 2025
#1 ATTACHMENT 27
ITEM NO. 12.
In October 2016, the Deffenbaughs acquired title to the property #2
ITEM NO. 12.
September 2017 Google Earth image of the
property
#3
ITEM NO. 12.
May 2018 Google Earth image of the
property
#4
ITEM NO. 12.
August 2018 Google Earth image of the
property
#5
ITEM NO. 12.
Approximate location of unpermitted retaining walls, ADU remodel, and accessory buildings
#6
ITEM NO. 12.
Unpermitted ADU remodel
(Building # 1)
#7
ITEM NO. 12.
Unpermitted ADU remodel
(Building # 1)
#8
ITEM NO. 12.
Unpermitted ADU remodel
(Building # 1)
#9
ITEM NO. 12.
Chapter Title Date
Unpermitted ADU remodel (Building # 1)
#10
ITEM NO. 12.
Unpermitted ADU remodel
(Building # 1)
#11
ITEM NO. 12.
Unpermitted 124 sf office
shed (Building # 2)
#12
ITEM NO. 12.
Unpermitted 197 sf storage
building (Building # 3)
#13
ITEM NO. 12.
Unpermitted 197 sf storage
building (Building # 3)
#14
ITEM NO. 12.
Unpermitted 294 sf garage
(Building # 4)
#15
ITEM NO. 12.
August 24, 2021 Architectural & Site inspection of unpermitted retaining walls and grading #16
ITEM NO. 12.
August 24, 2021
A&S inspection of unpermitted retaining walls
#17
ITEM NO. 12.
August 24, 2021 Architectural & Site inspection of unpermitted retaining walls #18
ITEM NO. 12.
Chapter Title Date
May 30, 2024
Inspection Warrant inspection
#19
ITEM NO. 12.
Chapter Title Date
May 30, 2024
Inspection Warrant inspection
#20
ITEM NO. 12.
Chapter Title Date
May 30, 2024
Inspection Warrant inspection
#21
ITEM NO. 12.
September 13, 2024
Photos prior to citation (Building #2)
#22
ITEM NO. 12.
September 13, 2024
Photos prior to citation (Building #3)
#23
ITEM NO. 12.
September 13, 2024
Photos prior to citation (Building #4)
#24
ITEM NO. 12.
Town Code Section
6.150.010 (R105.1)
Town Code Section
12.20.010
#25
ITEM NO. 12.
September 16, 2024
Administrative Citation
#26
ITEM NO. 12.
PREPARED BY: Lance Bayer
Special Counsel
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Town Attorney, 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: 01/21/2025
ITEM NO: 13
ADDENDUM B
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
January 20, 2025
Mayor and Town Council
Gabrielle Whelan, Town Attorney
Conduct a Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building and Adopt a Resolution Upholding the Administrative Citation and Imposing Costs According to Proof
REMARKS:
Attachment 28 contains correspondence submitted to the appellant.
Attachments received with the Staff Report:
1. Aerial View of Subject Property 9/2017
2. Aerial View of Subject Property 5/2018 Showing Grading in Progress
3. Aerial View of Subject Property 8/2018 Showing Completed Paving
4. Aerial View of Subject Property Showing Locations of Structures in Violation
5. Hotpads Internet Posting, Showing Violations
6. Trulia Internet Posting, Showing Violations
7. Realtor.com Internet Posting, Showing Violations
8. Administrative Warning Dated 7/17/2019
9. Administrative Warning (2nd notice) Dated 8/22/2019
10. Application for Grading Permit and Architecture and Site Approval dated 7/9/2021 and Letter of Justification and Project Description Dated 7/8/2021
11. Photos of Town Inspection on 8/24/2021
12. Staff Technical Review Dated 8/24/2021 and 8/25/2021
13. Email from Town Attorney Dated 10/30/2023
14. Updated Letter of Justification Regarding Application Dated 12/13/2023
15. Staff Technical Review Dated 1/31/2024
16. Letter dated 5/22/2024 and Inspection Warrant Dated 5/20/2024
17. Description and Photos of Site Inspection of Subject Property on May 30, 2024
18. Administrative Warning Dated 7/8/2024
ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM NO. 12.
PAGE 2 OF 2
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Appeal of Administrative Citation VL-19-362 (16660 Cypress Way) for Violations of the Los Gatos Town Code Related to Grading and Building DATE: January 15, 2025
19. Administrative Citation Dated 9/16/2024
20. Property Detail Report
21. Administrative Citation Hearing Request Dated 10/14/2024
22. Letter to Town Community Development Department from Attorney Rogers Joseph Dated 10/14/2024
23. Notice of Appeal Hearing
24. Proposed Resolution
Attachment Received with the Addendum:
25. Correspondence Submitted by Appellant
26. Public Comment
27. PowerPoint Presentation
Attachment Received with this Addendum B:
28. Correspondence Submitted to the Appellant
ITEM NO. 12.
From: Allen Meyer
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2025 10:30 AM
To:
Gabrielle Whelan <[email protected]>
Subject: Breakdown of time spent working on Cypress case Good morning Mr. Harris,
Below is back up information you requested on the hours calculation for Town Employees working on this code enforcement matter. There are no additional timesheets other than what would normally occur. These are conservative time estimates based on scheduled meetings and estimated amounts of time to complete notices/warrants/citations/staff reports. Robert Gray is a salaried employee.
This information will be included in the agenda packet as an addendum.
Allen Meyer
Below is a conservative breakdown of the time I've spend on this case since October 30, 2023:
December 11, 2023 - 1 hour meeting
December 19, 2023 -1 hour meeting
January 12, 2024 - 1 hour meeting
January 31, 2024 -1 hour meeting
April 19, 2024 -½ hour meeting
April 30, 2024-½ hour meeting
May 13, 2024- ½ hour meeting
October 2, 2024-1 hour Teams meeting with Mr. Harris
October 31, 2024-½ hour meeting
November 8, 2024-2 hour meeting
November 20, 2024-2 hour meeting
December 4, 2024-1.5 hour meeting
December 9, 2024 -1.5 hour meeting
May 2024 -Inspection Warrant paperwork, 2 hours
July 2024-Administrative Warning paperwork, 1 hour
September 2024-Administrative Citation paperwork, 2 hours November/December-Appeal paperwork (staff report, attachments, PowerPoint, script) 4.5 hours
= 23.5 hours
Erin Walters
Below is a conservative breakdown of the time I've spend on this case since October 30, 2023:
ATTACHMENT 28
ITEM NO. 12.
December 11, 2023 – 1 hour – Meet with Town Attorney
January 31, 2024 – 1 hour – Meet with Town Attorney
May 30, 2024 – 3 hours – Inspection warrant, debrief, report October 2, 2024 – 1 hour – Teams meeting with Property Owner’s Attorney November 20, 2024 –1 hour – Meeting with outside counsel to prepare for TC Meeting December 4, 2024 – 1 hour - Meeting with outside counsel to prepare for TC Meeting Total 8 hours.
Robert Gray
Estimated hours since October 30, 2023.
December 11, 2023 – 1 hour – Town Attorney’s Office
January 31, 2024 – 1 hour – Town Attorney’s Office
May 30, 2024 – 3 hours – Inspection warrant, debrief, report October 2, 2024 – 1 hour – Teams meeting with Mr. Harris November 20, 2024 – 2 hour – Meeting with outside counsel to prepare for TC Meeting Total 8 hours. Conservatively estimated 6 chargeable hours.
Best,
Allen Meyer ● Code Compliance Officer
Community Development Department ● 110 E. Main Street, Los Gatos CA 95030 Ph: 408.399.5746 ● [email protected]
www.losgatosca.gov ● https://www.facebook.com/losgatosca Regular Code Compliance hours:
7:00 AM – 3:30 PM, Monday – Friday
TOWN CLOSURE NOTICE: Town offices will be closed on Monday, January 20, 2025, in observance of the Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday. Town offices will resume normal business hours on Tuesday, January 21, 2025.
All permit submittals are to be done online via our Citizen’s Portal platform. All other services can be completed at the counter. For more information on permit submittal, resubmittal, and issuance, please visit the Building and Planning webpages.
CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER
This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual(s) named in this e-mail. If you receive this email and are not a named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us at the above e-mail address.
ITEM NO. 12.
580954.1
415.956.2828 (t) Robert Dollar Building
415.956.6457 (f) 311 California Street, 10th Flr.
San Francisco CA 94104
202.777.8950 (t) 1500 K Street, NW, Suite 800
202.347.8429 (f) Washington DC 20005
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com
December 13, 2024
VIA U.S. MAIL
Town Council
Town of Los Gatos
Town Attorney’s Office
110 E Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Re: Administrative Appeal Statement of Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh Dear Town Clerk:
Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh are not liable under the citation that was issued on September 16, 2024. The Town of Los Gatos (“Town”) had previously agreed to work with the Deffenbaughs rather than litigate, and it must be held to that requirement. The hearing set up violates the Town ordinances, state law, due process, and the eighth amendment proscription of excessive fines. And finally, there is no evidence that the Deffenbaughs conducted work without a permit, which is the only action they have been cited for.
Rather than threaten the Deffenbaughs with an unenforceable citation, the Town should be good neighbors and work with the Deffenbaughs as per the Town’s previous agreement.
I. BACKGROUND
The Deffenbaughs are homeowners in the Town of Los Gatos, 16660 Cypress Way (“Property”). In the middle of 2019, the Town first raised concerns about specific structures on the Property, issuing a citation for $200. The Deffenbaughs objected to the citation and requested a hearing. Rather than have a hearing, the Town and the Deffenbaughs entered into an agreement – the Town would hold the citation in abeyance and hold the Deffenbaughs’ citation deposit of citation amount, and the Deffenbaughs would agree to an open extension on the hearing. This extension and abeyance would continue until the Deffenbaughs’ litigation with their neighbor was completed (“Litigation”). The A Professional Law Corporation
Richard M. Harris
415.365.5306 (d)
[email protected]
ATTACHMENT 4
ITEM NO. 12.
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com
Town Council
December 13, 2024
580954.1
A Professional Law Corporation
Agreement between the Town and the Deffenbaughs is attached as Exhibit A (“Agreement”). The Agreement has five main points:
1. The citation process would remain frozen, pending resolution of the remaining matters;
2. The Town could inspect the Property to confirm there was no pressing safety issue (none was found);
3. The Deffenbaughs would proceed with the retaining walls permit;
4. After the Litigation was complete, the parties would work to resolve the structure next to the swimming pool; and
5. All other alleged violations would be resolved after all other issues were resolved.
That Litigation is currently on appeal, and a decision is expected sometime in 2025. Thus, the Agreement is currently on steps 3 and 4.
Since 2019, the Deffenbaughs have worked diligently to secure permits for the retaining walls (as required by the Agreement). This process was delayed both by the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing Litigation, in which Town personnel were witnesses.
At the Town’s request, the Deffenbaughs restarted the retaining wall permitting process in 2023. The Town requested and was granted a technical review of the retaining walls in January 2024. In that technical review, and contrary to the Agreement, Town personnel now required that other structures be included in the permitting process with the retaining wall.
The Deffenbaughs continued to work on their retaining wall permitting, but their civil engineer had become less and less responsive.
In May of 2024, rather than abiding by the Agreement, the Town served a warrant on the Deffenbaughs to inspect the Property. The Deffenbaughs continued to push their civil engineer (as did Town staff), but he had become unresponsive. The Town then further breached the Agreement by beginning a new citation process in July 2024, issuing a warning to secure permits for various structures and to submit additional plans on the retaining wall by July 31, 2024. According to the warning, if an Architecture and Site application for “all unpermitted site improvements including all retaining walls, site drainage, grading, and tree removals…” were not submitted by July 31, then the Town would impose a late fee. Thus, The Deffenbaughs were no longer allowed to submit the retaining wall separately, in violation of the Agreement.
ITEM NO. 12.
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com
Town Council
December 13, 2024
580954.1
A Professional Law Corporation
The Deffenbaughs were unable to meet the Town’s deadline. Since late 2023, Mr. Deffenbaugh’s father was in hospice, passing away on September 17, 2024. At the same time, the Deffenbaughs were planning and putting on their daughter’s wedding (married on September 14, 2024). And the civil engineer was unresponsive to the Deffenbaughs since May 2024.
Rather than inquire about any of these issues, the Town issued a citation for $11,100, far in excess of the “late fee” referenced in the administrative warning, and orders of magnitude larger than the citation the Town previously issued in 2019 ($200). As is their right, the Deffenbaughs disputed the citation and requested a hearing. The Deffenbaughs also requested all documentation from the Town so they can properly respond. The Town committed to providing all hearing materials by December 10, 2024. Exhibit B. To date, no documents but the citation and administrative warning have been provided.
Mr. Meyer, a code compliance officer for the Town (and the one who issued the citation), scheduled an “Administrative Appeal Hearing” in front of the Town Council (“Notice”). According to Mr. Meyer, “The Administrative Appeal Hearing will be heard by the Town Council acting in the combined capacity of hearing office and in the capacity of a board of appeal.” Mr. Meyer cites no authority by which he can make this determination.
The Deffenbaughs request the right to submit additional documentation as it becomes available and relevant based on the Town’s documentation.
II. ARGUMENT
Issuing this citation violates the Town’s agreement with the Deffenbaughs from 2019, and on this basis alone these citations should be dismissed. A town, like any other government body, is bound by its agreements and should be estopped from breaching them. Hughes v. Board of Architectural Examiners, 17 Cal.4th 763, 794 (1998). Here, the Town made an agreement and then breached it by re-issuing the citation it had promised to leave in abeyance.
Further, the Town has failed to meet the requirements under the Building Code for an appeal of a citation. Under the California Building Code (incorporated into the Town Code): “Every city, county, or city and county shall establish a process to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions and determinations made by the enforcing agency relative to the application and interpretation of this code and other regulations governing use, maintenance and change of occupancy.” (Bld. Code § 1.8.8.1)(emphasis added). That process must either establish an appeals board, or have the Town Council act as the appeals board. Id.
ITEM NO. 12.
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com
Town Council
December 13, 2024
580954.1
A Professional Law Corporation
Here, the Town has no process to administer administrative appeals that is in compliance with the Building Code. According to the Notice, this hearing will be consistent with 1.30.040 of the Town Code, but this section only allows for a “hearing officer,” not a group of people like the Town Council. Moreover, the administrative hearing procedure violates the Deffenbaughs’ due process rights under the California and Federal constitutions. Instead of the burden of proof being on the government (where it belongs), the Deffenbaughs are forced to prove that the citation is not true. Further, the Deffenbaughs are not given any tools to defend themselves (such as subpoena power, an opportunity to review evidence against them prior to the hearing, or the power to cross-examine Town personnel).
The Deffenbaughs are only allowed to testify on their behalf and present evidence that they can secure, and are required to submit written evidence on December 10, a full week before the hearing occurs. And the citation is for $11,100, more than 50 times the citation previously given to the Deffenbaughs – this is an exorbitant fine in violation of the constitution.
The Deffenbaughs also have no clear understanding of the evidence that will be presented. Much of the evidence may have been secured through an illegal warrant or a later illegal inspection in September 2024. Whatever the evidence, it cannot show that the Deffenbaughs violated the statutes claimed: Building Code § 105.1 requires a party to secure a permit before starting work; and 12.20.010 requires a party to secure a permit before conducting grading work. But everyone agrees that since the administrative warning, the Deffenbaughs have done none of the requested work. They therefore cannot violate the named statutes.
Moreover, the Property is designated as a historic site. See Exhibit C. The Town is requesting that the Deffenbaughs alter structures which are legal non-conforming items, as they were constructed consistent with law at that time.
III. CONCLUSION
The Deffenbaughs will raise the above defenses, as well as others, at the time of the hearing. They will not allow the Town to fail to establish the procedure for building code violations required by state law, and they will not agree to a hearing that violates their rights, and they will not be held liable under ordinances they clearly did not violate.
ITEM NO. 12.
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com
Town Council
December 13, 2024
580954.1
A Professional Law Corporation
I look forward to speaking with you on December 17.
Very truly yours,
Richard M. Harris
Attorney for Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh
RMH:nca
Enclosure
cc: Gabrielle Whelan ([email protected])
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT A
ITEM NO. 12.
From: Sean O'Neill <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 at 5:28 PM
To: Gabrielle Whelan <[email protected]>
Cc: Info <[email protected]>
Subject: 16660 Cypress Way Outstanding Code Issues
Mrs. Whelan,
In reviewing my communications with the Town of Los Gatos (“TLG”), which are attached for your reference, I think there are some matters that require clarification.
In November of 2019, former TLG counsel Lynn Lampros and myself agreed to stay the citation provided that the Deffenbaughs waived time on the hearing they had requested and that the Deffenbaughs allowed the TLG to come onto their property and inspect the retaining walls built by my clients and bring into compliance with TLG building code these walls.
Essentially, my understanding of the agreement was as follows:
1. The citation process would be frozen and my clients would not seek a hearing.
2. My clients would allow the TLG on the property to make sure there were no pressing safety issues with the walls or the garage
3. My clients would proceed with getting their new retaining walls permitted
4. After our court case was resolved, my clients would resolve the issue with the structure next to the swimming pool
5. Then we would address any alleged violations with the Treehouse area after the other areas had been taken care of
My clients allowed TLG to inspect their property on December 9, 2019. After that inspection, multiple issues were identified that needed to be remedied. Subsequently, the pandemic struck in March of 2020, halting all remediation work. In 2021, communications with TLG resumed; however, the pending trial and the fact that TLG employees would be witnesses in the trial led to prior TLG counsel and myself to agree to put a pause on the process so that the communications would not become evidence in the trial.
The trial was initially set to begin in early December, 2021. However, no court rooms were available and the trial date was continued to July of 2022. Again, there was a continuance of the trial date to late August of 2022. Phase One and Two of the trial lasted from August to December of 2022. The
ITEM NO. 12.
final phase of the trial occurred on September 15, 2023. Currently, we do not have a final judgment, so the trial is still “active.”
When the TLG contacted my clients about resuming the application process, we were happy to comply. However, we find the “reopening” of TLG’s code enforcement investigation to be most troubling and contrary to the agreement reached with TLG in 2019 and into 2021.
If TLG insists on resuming and/or expanding the scope of their initial code enforcement investigation then we cannot consent to providing the TLG access to the property and we request that the TLG set a hearing date for our appeal that complies with the authority in Lippman v. City of Oakland (2017) 19 Cal.App.5th 750. Given my review of the TLG municipal code, the process for appeal is not compliant. We also cannot agree to having Allan Meyer participate in any of this process as he is biased against my clients and a witness to the matters at issue in the trial.
As such, we request that TLG not pursue their code enforcement action, continue with permitting the retaining walls, and resolve the accessory structures after full resolution of the trial.
Regards,
Sean M. O’Neill, Esq.
O’Neill, P.C.
1879 Lundy Ave., Suite 169
San Jose, CA 95131
Direct (408) 652-8039
Main (510) 933-8321
Fax (510) 259-9622
[email protected]
O’Neill, P.C.
A Professional Law Corporation
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The preceding e-mail message (including any/all enclosures) contains information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client or other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It is intended
ITEM NO. 12.
to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
ITEM NO. 12.
1 of 4
Monday, November 13, 2023 at 12:35:47 Pacific Standard Time Subject: RE: 16660 Cypress Way
Date: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 at 4:47:10PM Pacific Standard Time From: Lynne Lampros
To: Sean O'Neill
CC: Joel Paulson
Attachments: image003.png, image002.png
Dear Sean,
Thank you for speaking on the phone today. To memorialize my understanding, you will check on your and your client’s availability for a site inspection and get back to me by December 2, 2019 with some dates available to conduct this inspection by December 13, 2019. At that inspection the Town will primarily be looking at the grading, paving, retaining walls that were constructed as well as the ‘garage’ structure by the pool. There will be no interior inspection of any other inhabited structure at this time. Cursory exterior observation of the other accessory structures identified in the conversation (structures adjacent to the Treehouse and pool) will take place but any follow up can be done on a different timetable, as can the issue of the scope of any remodel.
Understanding your concerns regarding your ongoing litigation, I think it would be advisable for us both to waive time on the citation that was issued in October 2019. You probably don’t want sworn testimony being required of your clients on this matter at this time. Accordingly the Town will hold that citation proceeding in abeyance, preserving your appeal rights of same, if you waive time on requiring an appeal hearing to be held by December 30, 2019. Please respond and let me know if you agree to that.
If you don’t agree, we can hold the hearing on December 11, 2019. And, although this was not discussed on the phone, appeal hearings are held before a neutral, volunteer hearing officer.
Violations of the Municipal Code (see for example Chapters 12 and 29) do not require Building appeal boards.
I look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
From: Sean O'Neill <[email protected]>
ITEM NO. 12.
2 of 4
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 6:48 PM
To: Lynne Lampros <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 16660 Cypress Way
Ms. Lampros,
I think I have good news but I wish to lay out my analysis of the situation.
I understand Los Gatos’ Concerns to be construction without permits as to the following areas:
1. Grading, paving, and construction of retaining walls.
2. Construction of accessory structures.
3. An interior remodel of an accessory structure without permits Response
1) We are willing to work with the Town on this issue
2) I am informed that the accessory structure is less than 120sf and therefore does not require building permits. However, we are willing to work with the Town on this issue. 3) My client only performed new painting, appliances, tiling, carpeting, cabinets, counter tops and similar finish work which does not require permits.
If the Town wishes to pursue the construction of the accessory structure and remodel issue then we must renew our request a hearing which, as I understand it, is not compliant with Lippman v.
City of Oakland (2017) 19 Cal.App.5th 750, reh'g denied (Feb. 16, 2018), review denied (Apr. 11, 2018). This would expose everyone to substantial litigation costs.
However, we are open to working with Town regarding shed and retaining walls. Since we are in active litigation and the case involves boundaries, structures, prescriptive and equitable easements we need to proceed very carefully so that we do not inadvertently produce evidence the other side can use against us. To that end we wish to restrict communications and any inspection to clearly defined areas, as identified above. Further, I ask that the Town waive the fee for Application for Work Unlawfully Completed.
While we are willing work with the Town, we also request equal treatment and that the Town investigate conditions on Mr. Watson’s property, which are as follows:
· Balcony/Deck support – Within the last couple years he has installed a new post system underneath his balcony that hangs over the Deffenbaugh’s pool area. We are happy to provide photos demonstrating this work was performed.
· Bedroom support post – Since 2012, Watson has added new support posts beneath the master bedroom of the house.
· Retaining wall – A retaining wall that sits on Watson’s property and supports his driveway is collapsing, threatening the Deffenbaughs’ home and property.
A review of the Town’s permit database indicates no permits have been issued for such work. All we ask is that the Town look into these matters, just like they did as to Mr. Deffenbaugh when Mr. Watson was the complaining party.
We hope the Town is amenable to this and will hold in abeyance any further enforcement action while the Deffenbaughs resolve issues 1 and 2 as well as investigating the conditions on Mr.
Watson’s property. Please advise. If this proposal is acceptable then we will contact Mr. Paulson and proceed as you have requested. I am available to discuss over the phone tomorrow.
ITEM NO. 12.
3 of 4
Regards,
Sean M. O’Neill, Esq.
O’Neil & Lian, LLP
1879 Lundy Ave., Suite 169
San Jose, CA 95131
Direct (408) 652-8039
Phone (510) 933-8321
Fax (510) 259-9622
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The preceding e-mail message (including any/all enclosures) contains information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client or other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
On Nov 18, 2019, at 4:07 PM, Lynne Lampros <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Sean,
Thank you for your time on the phone on November 13. As discussed, it appears from photographs, drone footage and other evidence that your clients engaged in grading, paving, construction of retaining walls, construction of accessory structures, and an interior remodel of an accessory structure without permits on the above referenced property. This is a violation of the Los Gatos Town Code, including but not limited to sections 6.150.010 and 12.20.010. The Town requires homeowners to go through the Building, Planning, and Engineering process before work of this nature is conducted. At this time, the Town is requiring the Deffenbaughs to start the Application and Site (A&S) process for review of this work and to obtain after the fact permits if or as needed. Please see the Town’s webpage for further information. (www.losgatosca.gov, click on Town Departments and Services, Community Development, Planning Division, Applications and Information, Community Development Application – scroll down to Applications in brown, then click on Development Review Application Package).
The 10/2/19 citation issued to your clients is not the only remedy sought by the Town. The Town requires all homeowners go through Building, Planning, and Engineering for review of these type of changes. Typically homeowners voluntarily engage in this process, even after the fact, as is the case here. However please note that if the Deffenbaughs refuse to submit an Architecture and Site application and obtain after the fact permits in a timely manner, the Town Attorney and Code Enforcement will cite daily for every day your clients are not in compliance with this requirement. Fines are $100 for the first citation, $250 for the second citation, $500 for the third citation and can escalate to $1,000 per day for knowing and willful violations of the code. All other legal remedies will be preserved as well.
ITEM NO. 12.
4 of 4
Please contact Community Development Director Joel Paulson by the end of this week to request a meeting with him. His contact information is [email protected]. The phone number for the Planning Department is 408-354-6872.
The Town Attorney’s Office is willing to hold in abeyance the code enforcement process if your clients begin and satisfactorily proceed with the Architecture and Site process in a timely manner. Dates certain will be required. Please communicate this position to your clients. We look forward to hearing back from you by the end of this week regarding your contact with Mr. Paulson and your clients’ agreement to begin the A&S process. In the absence of same the Town Attorney’s Office will cite accordingly.
Very truly yours,
Lynne Lampros
<image002.png>
ITEM NO. 12.
1 of 7
Tuesday, November 14, 2023 at 16:33:22 Pacific Standard Time Subject: RE: 16660 Cypress Way - Grading and Retaining Walls - Architecture and Site Application - Status
Date: Thursday, November 12, 2020 at 3:57:32 PM Pacific Standard Time From: Lynne Lampros <[email protected]>
To: Sean O'Neill <[email protected]>
CC: Erin Walters <[email protected]>, Joel Paulson <[email protected]>
Attachments: image001.png, image002.png
That’s great Sean. Thank you to you and your clients for continuing to advance this.
Best regards,
Lynne
From: Sean O'Neill <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 3:51 PM
To: Lynne Lampros <[email protected]>
Cc: Erin Walters <[email protected]>; Joel Paulson <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 16660 Cypress Way - Grading and Retaining Walls - Architecture and Site Application - Status
Lynne,
Once again, I thank the Town for the courtesy extended to my clients. The Deffenbaughs inform me that they will attempt to get the necessary bids and paperwork done. As long as the threat level stays at orange, and they can socially distance and zoom the potential contractors, we should be able to make forward progress.
My clients have submitted a request to 811 to help scope the existing powerlines and infrastructure, which was requested by some of the original contacts, and they should be able to contact Erin with their general plans next week in terms of getting some additional bids, if they have not already contacted you.
Regards,
Sean M. O’Neill, Esq.
O’Neill & Lian, LLP
1879 Lundy Ave., Suite 169
San Jose, CA 95131
Direct (408) 652-8039
Main (510) 933-8321
Fax (510) 259-9622
ITEM NO. 12.
2 of 7
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The preceding e-mail message (including any/all enclosures) contains information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client or other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
On Oct 29, 2020, at 5:10 PM, Sean O'Neill <[email protected]> wrote:
Lynnne,
I thank you and the Town for the courtesy they have extended to my clients. I will pass this on.
Regards,
Sean M. O’Neill, Esq.
O’Neill & Lian, LLP
1879 Lundy Ave., Suite 169
San Jose, CA 95131
Direct (408) 652-8039
Main (510) 933-8321
Fax (510) 259-9622
<1449030948.png>
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The preceding e-mail message (including any/all enclosures) contains information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client or other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
On Oct 29, 2020, at 4:06 PM, Lynne Lampros
<[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Sean,
Thank you for your patience waiting for my reply. The Deffenbaughs
ITEM NO. 12.
3 of 7
request was discussed with CDD, Building, Code Enforcement and Town Attorney. The Town is in a difficult position with this request. The Town hears your clients’ assertion of the pandemic as the proffered reason for an almost open-ended extension of time to continue with the Architectural and Site (A&S) Application process. However, the Town sees construction and permitting processes in full swing town-wide, able to be accomplished with Covid-safe protocols. The Town has received further information regarding the recent construction of steps on your clients’ property. Whether you will tell me that is the tenants engaging contractors to perform that work or not, your clients are allowing contractors on the property during Covid. Your clients can similarly remotely engage engineers and have them work on the premises outdoors in a socially distanced way. The grading and retaining wall work at issue is fundamentally a health and safety concern. Excavation and retention of that many cubic yards of dirt, if not done to code, can pose a danger. The Town will continue to require the A&S application process be completed.
That said, the Town wants to strike a balance on timing, in light of the stated pandemic complications. The Town will remove a hard due date for the A&S application submittal –at this time. However the Town requests that your clients continue the process of engaging design professionals to complete the A&S application in a timely manner, and continue to update Project Planner Erin Walters on their progress.
The Town will reevaluate the situation as necessary.
Regards,
<image002.png>
From: Sean O'Neill <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2020 2:19 PM
To: Lynne Lampros <[email protected]>
Cc: Theodore Ted Deffenbaugh <[email protected]>; Erin Walters <[email protected]>; Joel Paulson <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 16660 Cypress Way - Grading and Retaining Walls - Architecture and Site Application - Status
Hello Lynne,
I hope this email finds you and the rest of the Town staff both safe and well.
I am following up on the email.
Please respond when convenient.
Regards,
Sean M. O’Neill, Esq.
ITEM NO. 12.
4 of 7
O’Neill & Lian, LLP
1879 Lundy Ave., Suite 169
San Jose, CA 95131
Direct (408) 652-8039
Main (510) 933-8321
Fax (510) 259-9622
<image001.png>
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The preceding e-mail message (including any/all enclosures) contains information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client or other applicable privileges, or constitute nonpublic information. It is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
On Oct 14, 2020, at 5:00 PM, Sean O'Neill
<[email protected]> wrote:
Lynn,
Thank you for your response, I am glad to see the Town
handling this in an impartial manner.
I have discussed your email with my clients.
Essentially, I and my clients request that they be allowed to defer filing the A&S Application until 60 days after Santa Clara County Health Officer or the Governor declares an end to the local emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
That way, they can be sure they are interacting with
contractors and Town staff in a safe manner.
My clients have demonstrated their intention to fully
cooperate with the Town and interviewed three contractors and obtained one bid before shelter in place, all of which they notified Erin Walters.
I think deferring any action on this is reasonable given the County’s current shelter in place order and rising infection rates. Also, my clients tell me just getting a survey can take over a month, let alone drawing and soils testing, meaning they will not be able to comply by November 5th. Last, there is no imminent risk to life and limb posed by the construction at issue, further supporting the reasonableness of this request.
ITEM NO. 12.
5 of 7
In sum, I ask for the Town’s continued patience and deferral on any action by the Town in regards to this matter.
Regards,
Sean M. O’Neill, Esq.
O’Neill & Lian, LLP
1879 Lundy Ave., Suite 169
San Jose, CA 95131
Direct (408) 652-8039
Main (510) 933-8321
Fax (510) 259-9622
<1449030948.png>
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The preceding e-mail message (including any/all enclosures) contains information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client or other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
On Oct 8, 2020, at 11:49 AM, Lynne Lampros
<[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Mr. O’Neill,
I will respond to your letter in this email, as I am
having home computer difficulties and cannot
attach a word document to a work email at this
time.
Thank you for your letter dated October 1, 2020.
Please note that the Town does not wish to be
‘weaponized’ by either party to the litigation you
reference. I have informed Mr. Watson that the
Town does not intend to take Code Compliance
action regarding his allegations of a property line
dispute, as that is properly a private civil cause
of action. However it is the Town’s province to
look into reports of unpermitted work, especially
regarding health and safety violations. Toward
that end I have forwarded your letter and
presentation about the Watson/Chang property
and Mr. Watson’s complaints about the
Deffenbaugh property to the Building
Department for their review and handling.
ITEM NO. 12.
6 of 7
With regard to the unpermitted grading and
retaining wall work that has been the subject of
Ms. Walters’ interaction with your clients, the
Town is requesting that your clients proceed with
an Architecture and Site application for site work
requiring a grading permit. The Town requests
that the Deffenbaughs submit their A&S
application to the Town’s online permitting
system by November 13, 2020.
Please note that the Town’s online permitting
system is fully functional and the Town is
receiving many permit applications at this time
through that system. The Deffenbaughs should
work directly with Planner Erin Walters on this
application.
Thank you,
<image002.png>
From: Sean O'Neill <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2020 12:19 PM
To: Lynne Lampros
<[email protected]>
Cc: Theodore Ted Deffenbaugh
<[email protected]>; Erin Walters
<[email protected]>; Allen Meyer
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 16660 Cypress Way - Grading and
Retaining Walls - Architecture and Site
Application - Status
Lynne,
Attached is our response to your letter.
Sean M. O’Neill, Esq.
O’Neill & Lian, LLP
1879 Lundy Ave., Suite 169
San Jose, CA 95131
Direct (408) 652-8039
Main (510) 933-8321
Fax (510) 259-9622
<image001.png>
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The preceding e-mail message (including any/all enclosures)
ITEM NO. 12.
7 of 7
contains information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney-client or other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public information. It is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying to this
message and then delete it from your system. Use,
dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
On Sep 17, 2020, at 10:30 AM,
Lynne Lampros
<[email protected]> wrote:
Please see attached.
<image001.png>
<200917 letter to owner.doc>
ITEM NO. 12.
1 of 6
Tuesday, November 14, 2023 at 16:34:57 Pacific Standard Time Subject: Re: S-21-024- 16660 Cypress Avenue - Site Visit Date: Monday, August 23, 2021 at 1:38:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time From: TE Deffenbaugh <[email protected]>
To: Erin Walters <[email protected]>
CC: Terence J. Szewczyk <[email protected]>, Lauri Deffenbaugh <[email protected]>, Robert Schultz
<[email protected]>, Robert Gray
<[email protected]>, Mike Weisz
<[email protected]>, Sean O'Neill
<[email protected]>
Attachments: image003.jpg, image004.jpg, image005.jpg, image006.jpg Erin,
We look forward to your visit.
Ted
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 1:22 PM Erin Walters <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello Ted,
Let’s go with Option B. and we will keep the appointment tomorrow ahead of the Staff Technical Review Meeting on Wednesday August 25th at 9 a.m.. Allen Meyer, Code Enforcement, will not be in attendance at tomorrow’s site visit.
Thank you,
Erin
Erin Walters ● Associate Planner
Community Development Department ● 110 E. Main Street, Los Gatos CA 95030 Ph: 408.354.6867 ● 408-354-6872
www.losgatosca.gov ● [email protected]
ITEM NO. 12.
2 of 6
Erin’s Office Hours – M-F – 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
In accordance with the Santa Clara County Public Health Office Order, Town Offices are closed until further notice. No in-person counter services are currently available, but the Town is open for business and we are working towards full reopening for in-person services. Inspections that can be completed via video are being scheduled and other on-site inspection services are evaluated on a case by case basis. Staff resources are available to perform work on permits remotely and meet with the public via Zoom, Microsoft Teams, or phone. Electronic permit submittal, resubmittal, and issuance is available. Please visit the Building and Planning webpages for further information on electronic permit submittal.
General Plan update, learn more at www.losgatos2040.com
CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER
This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual(s) named in this e-mail. If you receive this e-mail and are not a named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us at the above e-mail address.
From: TE Deffenbaugh <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 1:05 PM
To: Erin Walters <[email protected]>
Cc: Terence J. Szewczyk <[email protected]>; Lauri Deffenbaugh <[email protected]>; Robert Schultz <[email protected]>; Robert Gray <[email protected]>; Mike Weisz <[email protected]>; Sean O'Neill <[email protected]> Subject: Re: S-21-024- 16660 Cypress Avenue - Site Visit Hi Erin,
Thank you for your prompt response, and I also copied my attorney. I did get to him, and he told me that he realized Lynne's departure and had already reached out to Robert.
ITEM NO. 12.
3 of 6
I think we have two options:
a. Push out the onsite visit until our Robert can confer with Sean. b. Sean has also told me that he is comfortable with the town visiting and keeping the schedule, but he is requesting an alternative to Allen be sent.
Details of our concern is attorney-client privileged and therefore I am unable to discuss, and unfortunately needs to be solved by our respective legal representation.
Thanks,
Ted
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 11:13 AM Erin Walters <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello Ted,
Lynne Lampros no longer works at the Town. Please contact Robert Schultz, Town Attorney, if you have any legal questions. I have cc’d him in this email.
Per Lauri’s email sent Wednesday, July 28th, staff will be on site on Tuesday, August 24 at 1:00 p.m. for a site visit to review the submitted Architecture and Site application (S-21- 024).
The Town staff and Town consultants invited to tomorrow’s site visit include:
Erin Walters, Associate Planner
Robert Gray, Chief Building Official
Mike Weisz, Senior Civil Engineer
Rob Campbell, Sr. Fire Protection Engineer, Santa Clara County Fire Department Kenny Ip, Deputy Fire Marshal, Santa Clara County Fire Department Allen Mayer, Code Enforcement
Richard Gessner, Town’s Consulting Town Arborist
ITEM NO. 12.
4 of 6
We understand parking at the site is limited so we will coordinate a carpooling as much as possible.
Thank you,
Erin
Erin Walters ● Associate Planner
Community Development Department ● 110 E. Main Street, Los Gatos CA 95030 Ph: 408.354.6867 ● 408-354-6872
www.losgatosca.gov ● [email protected]
Erin’s Office Hours – M-F – 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
In accordance with the Santa Clara County Public Health Office Order, Town Offices are closed until further notice. No in-person counter services are currently available, but the Town is open for business and we are working towards full reopening for in-person services. Inspections that can be completed via video are being scheduled and other on-site inspection services are evaluated on a case by case basis. Staff resources are available to perform work on permits remotely and meet with the public via Zoom, Microsoft Teams, or phone. Electronic permit submittal, resubmittal, and issuance is available. Please visit the Building and Planning webpages for further information on electronic permit submittal.
General Plan update, learn more at www.losgatos2040.com
CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER
This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual(s) named in this e-mail. If you receive this e-mail and are not a named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us at the above e-mail address.
ITEM NO. 12.
5 of 6
From: TE Deffenbaugh <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 9:46 AM
To: Erin Walters <[email protected]>
Cc: Terence J. Szewczyk <[email protected]>; Lauri Deffenbaugh <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: S-21-024- 16660 Cypress Avenue - Site Visit Hi Erin,
I would like to confirm attendees for tomorrow, as my attorney contacted Lynne with a concern because of ongoing litigation in our civil lawsuit.
Ted
On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 3:33 PM Erin Walters <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello Terry and Lauri,
Staff would like to access the project site for a site visit on Wednesday, August 18th from 2:30pm to 3:30pm or Friday, August 20, 2021 from 11:30am to 12:30pm.
Please advise which date and time works best for you.
Thank you,
Erin
Erin Walters ● Associate Planner
ITEM NO. 12.
6 of 6
Community Development Department ● 110 E. Main Street, Los Gatos CA 95030
Ph: 408.354.6867 ● 408-354-6872
www.losgatosca.gov ● [email protected]
In accordance with the Santa Clara County Public Health Office Order, Town Offices are closed until further notice. No in-person counter services are currently available, but the Town is open for business and we are working towards full reopening for in-person services. Inspections that can be completed via video are being scheduled and other on-site inspection services are evaluated on a case by case basis. Staff resources are available to perform work on permits remotely and meet with the public via Zoom, Microsoft Teams, or phone. Electronic permit submittal, resubmittal, and issuance is available. Please visit the Building and Planning webpages for further information on electronic permit submittal.
General Plan update, learn more at www.losgatos2040.com
CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER
This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual(s) named in this e-mail. If you receive this e-mail and are not a named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us at the above e-mail address.
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT B
ITEM NO. 12.
From: Gabrielle Whelan
To: Richard M. Harris
Cc: Robert Gray; Erin Walters; Lance Bayer; Bridgette Falconio; [email protected]; Allen Meyer Subject: RE: 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos
Date: Friday, November 15, 2024 10:20:26 AM
Attachments: image006.png
Hello, Mr. Harris. The Town can continue the hearing to the Town Council’s December 17th meeting. Could you first send me an email waiving the 60-day time limit and confirming that you and the Deffenbaughs have requested the new hearing date and agree to the December 17th date?
The Town can commit to sending you the hearing materials one week prior to the hearing. The materials will be much the same as the correspondence that the Town has had with the Deffenbaughs to date.
Thank you.
Gabrielle Whelan ● Town Attorney
Town Attorney’s Office ● 110 E Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95030 Desk: 408.354.6818 ● [email protected]
www.losgatosca.gov ● https://www.facebook.com/losgatosca From: Richard M. Harris <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2024 2:09 PM
To: Allen Meyer <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Gray <[email protected]>; Erin Walters <[email protected]>; Gabrielle Whelan <[email protected]>; Lance Bayer <[email protected]>; Bridgette Falconio <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: RE: 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Mr. Meyer:
Thank you and received. I have a previously scheduled mediation on December 3 that conflicts with this date. Would the Town be willing to continue the hearing to a hearing date in January? Mr. Deffenbaugh would obviously waive his right to have the hearing within 60 days.
In addition, would the Town be willing to provide any additional documents I requested in my letter, and/or documents it intends to present at the hearing a couple of weeks before the hearing?
Thanks,
Richard M. Harris |
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL | a Professional Law Corporation 311 California Street, 10th fl | San Francisco, CA 94104 415.956.2828 main | 415.956.6457 fax
[email protected] | www.rjo.com
ITEM NO. 12.
Notice to recipient: This email is meant for only the intended recipient(s) of the transmission and may be privileged by law. If you receive this email in error, please notify us immediately. Do not print, copy, or disseminate it. Please delete the email from your system. Thank you.
From: Allen Meyer <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2024 11:26 AM
To: Richard M. Harris <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Gray <[email protected]>; Erin Walters <[email protected]>; Gabrielle Whelan <[email protected]>; Lance Bayer <[email protected]>; Bridgette Falconio <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: RE: 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos
Good morning Mr. Harris,
Attached you will find a Notice of Administrative Appeal Hearing notification. The hearing has been scheduled for December 3, 2024, at 7:00 pm. A copy of this notice will be placed in today’s mail. Please reach out to us if you should have any questions.
Best,
Allen Meyer ● Code Compliance Officer
Community Development Department ● 110 E. Main Street, Los Gatos CA 95030 Ph: 408.399.5746 ● [email protected]
www.losgatosca.gov ● https://www.facebook.com/losgatosca Regular Code Compliance hours:
7:00 AM – 3:30 PM, Monday – Friday
TOWN CLOSURE NOTICE: Town offices will be closed Monday, November 11, 2024, in observance of the Vetern’s Day Holiday. We will resume normal business hours on Tuesday, November 12, 2024.
All permit submittals are to be done online via our Citizen’s Portal platform. All other services can be completed at the counter. For more information on permit submittal, resubmittal, and issuance, please visit the Building and Planning webpages.
CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER
This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual(s) named in this e-mail. If you receive this e-mail and are not a named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us at the above e-mail address.
From: Richard M. Harris <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 1:44 PM
To: Gabrielle Whelan <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Gray <[email protected]>; Erin Walters <[email protected]>; Lance Bayer
ITEM NO. 12.
<[email protected]>; Allen Meyer <[email protected]>; Bridgette Falconio <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Ms. Whelan:
Thank you for your email. I am available the afternoon 10/1 or 10/2, between 12:30 and 3:30.
Let me know a good time and who will be attending, and I can send a TEAMS invite.
I understand that the Town is proceeding under a separate citation, but I don’t think that means the previous arrangement isn’t still workable. I am hopeful we can find a way forward that will meet everyone’s needs.
Thanks,
Richard M. Harris |
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL | a Professional Law Corporation 311 California Street, 10th fl | San Francisco, CA 94104 415.956.2828 main | 415.956.6457 fax
[email protected] | www.rjo.com
Notice to recipient: This email is meant for only the intended recipient(s) of the transmission and may be privileged by law. If you receive this email in error, please notify us immediately. Do not print, copy, or disseminate it. Please delete the email from your system. Thank you.
From: Gabrielle Whelan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 1:36 PM
To: Richard M. Harris <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Gray <[email protected]>; Erin Walters <[email protected]>; Lance Bayer <[email protected]>; Allen Meyer <[email protected]>; Bridgette Falconio <[email protected]>
Subject: 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos
Hello, Mr. Harris. Thank you for your email. I would be happy to meet with you. I will include special counsel, Lance Bayer, who is handling this matter for the Town and the Town’s code enforcement officer, Allen Meyer. Please send us some good dates/times starting 9/30 for you to meet with us. Please also let us know if you have a preference for a Zoom meeting or in person.
In the interim, if the Deffenbaughs wish to appeal the citations, they will need to submit an appeal following the instructions on the back of the citation form.
I wanted to make sure you knew that this is a new, separate code enforcement action from the one that was initiated in July of 2019. Since five years had elapsed since the initial citations were issued, the Town dismissed the original citation, refunded the original appeal hearing fee to the Deffenbaughs in July of this year, and initiated a new code enforcement action.
Gabrielle Whelan ● Town Attorney
ITEM NO. 12.
Town Attorney’s Office ● 110 E Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95030 Desk: 408.354.6818 ● [email protected]
www.losgatosca.gov ● https://www.facebook.com/losgatosca From: Richard M. Harris <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2024 8:16 AM
To: Gabrielle Whelan <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Gray <[email protected]>; Erin Walters <[email protected]>; Lance Bayer <[email protected]>; Allen Meyer <[email protected]> Subject: RE: FW: Administrative Warning, 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos [EXTERNAL SENDER]
Ms. Whelan:
I have been retained by the Deffenbaughs to represent them related to alleged violation of Building Permits within the Town of Los Gatos. After reviewing the record and the Town Code, I believe the Town is making significant mistakes in moving forward with this citation. I would appreciate a few minutes of your time to discuss the matter and see if we can avoid litigation.
As I am sure you are aware, the Town brought a previous citation in 2019. Even though my clients immediately requested a hearing and submitted the fine the Town was requesting, the Town was unwilling to move forward with the hearing. Instead, the Deffenbaughs and the Town came to an agreement that the Deffenbaughs are continuing to honor. The Town continued to hold the fine amount until August 2024, even without a hearing. Issuing a new citation is a violation of this agreement.
Further, the citation is deficient. The citation states that my clients must obtain building permits, demolition permits, and grading permits, claiming this is a violation of the building code R105.1 and
12.20.010. But R105.1 only requires building permits when an owner “intends to” construct something new, which is not the case here. Similarly, 12.20.010 requires a permit before grading is done – but my clients are not intending on doing any grading. Even if my clients obtained the requested permits, they would not be able to complete the construction as the Architecture and Site Application S-21-024 has not yet been approved. Further, A fine of $11,100 is excessive and likely unconstitutional, especially given that my clients had no notice that the Town intended to levy such a fine.
Mr. Deffenbaugh has been a good civic citizen, and the subject property is the location of the broadcast equipment for KPRC, Los Gatos's only public access radio station. We find it disturbing that the staff of Los Gatos has chosen to suddenly change their approach to Mr. Deffenbaugh shortly after this Federally Approved Radio station was set up in Los Gatos. Mr. Deffenbaugh worked cooperatively with the previous administration and would hope to work cooperatively to resolve this dispute in the most amicable manner possible.
To this end, I would like a few moments of your time to help frame these issues. The Town has gone through a tremendous turnover in both legal staff and now Town Management. Based on my review of the Los Gatos Town Council meeting notes and formal statements, I have concerns that this turnover in staff has created confusion and lack of a hand off. I am requesting that both the current town Manager and the new Town Manager attend this meeting to make sure that the town can agree to an approach. I am hopeful that the Town and my clients can agree on a path forward. If litigation is inevitable, then perhaps we can agree on a more appropriate fine to litigate over for the alleged violations, and we can have clarity about the appropriate appeals process, as the Town code conflicts with the Building Code.
I would like to remind the Town that under CCP 1021.5 and under other federal and state rulings, the Town will be liable for Mr. Deffenbaugh's legal fees should we not head off litigation.
ITEM NO. 12.
I look forward to working with you to resolve this matter.
Richard M. Harris |
ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL | a Professional Law Corporation 311 California Street, 10th fl | San Francisco, CA 94104 415.956.2828 main | 415.956.6457 fax
[email protected] | www.rjo.com
Notice to recipient: This email is meant for only the intended recipient(s) of the transmission and may be privileged by law. If you receive this email in error, please notify us immediately. Do not print, copy, or disseminate it. Please delete the email from your system. Thank you.
From: Allen Meyer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 2:58 PM
To: Lauri Deffenbaugh <[email protected]>
Cc: Gabrielle Whelan <[email protected]>; Robert Gray <[email protected]>; Erin Walters <[email protected]>; Lance Bayer <[email protected]>; Richard M. Harris <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: FW: Administrative Warning, 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos Good afternoon Lauri,
Attached is the Administrative Citation Hearing request form. The advance deposit of the total penalty amount ($11,100) or an Advance Deposit Hardship Waiver is required with the hearing request.
You received an Administrative Warning on July 8, 2024, via email (see July 8th email below) and a copy was also sent via US Mail. Attached is a copy of this notice.
Best,
Allen Meyer ● Code Compliance Officer
Community Development Department ● 110 E. Main Street, Los Gatos CA 95030 Ph: 408.399.5746 ● [email protected]
www.losgatosca.gov ● https://www.facebook.com/losgatosca Regular Code Compliance hours:
7:00 AM – 3:30 PM, Monday – Friday
All permit submittals are to be done online via our Citizen’s Portal platform. All other services can be completed at the counter. For more information on permit submittal, resubmittal, and issuance, please visit the Building and Planning webpages.
CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER
This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual(s) named in this e-mail. If you receive this e-mail and are not a named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us at the above e-mail address.
ITEM NO. 12.
From: Lauri Deffenbaugh <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 11:05 AM
To: Allen Meyer <[email protected]>
Cc: Gabrielle Whelan <[email protected]>; Robert Gray <[email protected]>; Erin Walters <[email protected]>; Lance Bayer <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: FW: Administrative Warning, 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos [EXTERNAL SENDER]
Hi Allen and Gabrielle,
Please copy Richard Harris on all email as he will be taking over resolving the issue with the town of Los Gatos.
We plan to ask for a hearing, but to do so we will need to fill out the form and pay the fine. I want to make sure that I am clear about the amount of monies that the Town of Los Gatos feels that we need to receive a hearing.
Is it the $11,100 that you currently have said has been accumulating since Sept 8th, even though this is the first time we have received any notification of a fine? Or is it some other amount?
Thank you.
On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 10:20 AM Allen Meyer <[email protected]> wrote:
Good morning Laurie,
Attached you will find an updated Administrative Citation for failure to obtain the required permits for the ADU remodel, three accessory building demolitions, retaining walls, and grading. The Administrative Cite box was not checked on the previously send notice. A paper copy will go out in today’s mail. Please reach out if you should have any questions.
Sincerely,
Allen Meyer ● Code Compliance Officer
Community Development Department ● 110 E. Main Street, Los Gatos CA 95030 Ph: 408.399.5746 ● [email protected]
www.losgatosca.gov ● https://www.facebook.com/losgatosca Regular Code Compliance hours:
7:00 AM – 3:30 PM, Monday – Friday
All permit submittals are to be done online via our Citizen’s Portal platform. All other services
ITEM NO. 12.
can be completed at the counter. For more information on permit submittal, resubmittal, and issuance, please visit the Building and Planning webpages.
CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER
This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual(s) named in this e-mail. If you receive this e-mail and are not a named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us at the above e-mail address.
From: Allen Meyer
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 12:49 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Gabrielle Whelan <[email protected]>; Robert Gray <[email protected]>; Erin Walters <[email protected]>; Lance Bayer <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: Administrative Warning, 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos Good afternoon,
Attached you will find an Administrative Warning regarding violations observed on the property during the Town’s site inspection on May 30, 2024. Please reach out if you should have any questions.
Sincerely,
Allen Meyer ● Code Compliance Officer
Community Development Department ● 110 E. Main Street, Los Gatos CA 95030 Ph: 408.399.5746 ● [email protected]
www.losgatosca.gov ● https://www.facebook.com/losgatosca Regular Code Compliance hours:
7:00 AM – 3:30 PM, Monday – Friday
All permit submittals are to be done online via our Citizen’s Portal platform. All other services can be completed at the counter. For more information on permit submittal, resubmittal, and issuance, please visit the Building and Planning webpages.
CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER
This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual(s) named in this e-mail. If you receive this e-mail and are not a named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us at the above e-mail address.
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
EXHIBIT C
ITEM NO. 12.
ITEM NO. 12.
Gabrielle Whelan
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subjed:
Gabrielle Whelan
Monday, October 30, 2023 1 :36 PM
Lauri Deffenbaugh; Sean O'Neill
Erin Walters; Lance Bayer; Robert Gray; Allen Meyer
RE: 16660 Cypress Way, outstanding code violations
Hello, Ms. Deffenbaugh and Mr. O'Neill.
Since over three years have elapsed and conditions may have changed since 2020, the Town is starting its code enforcement procedures at the beginning with a site inspection.
Thank you .
• Gabrielle Whelan • Town Attorney
"" Town Attorney's Office• 110 E Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95030 '
Desk: 408.354.6818 • [email protected]
www.losgatosca.gov • https://www.facebook.com/losgatosca From: Lauri Deffenbaugh<
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2023 1:56 PM
To: Allen Meyer <[email protected]>
Cc: Gabrielle Whelan <[email protected]>; Sean O'Neill <[email protected]>; Erin Walters <[email protected]>; lance Bayer <[email protected]>; Robert Gray <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 16660 Cypress Way, outstanding code violations I [EXTERNAL SENDER}
Hi Allen,
In 2020, we agreed with Lynne Lampros that we would get the walls permitted, then we would discuss what other areas need to get permitted.
Your request is a change of what we agreed to.
I will ask that our lawyer give the background on this also Thank you.
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 12:49 PM Allen Meyer <[email protected]> wrote:
Good afternoon Mrs. Deffenbaugh,
The Town of Los Gatos Code Compliance Division is restarting its investigation into the many code violations observed on your property in 2019. As stated in the July 17, 2019 Administrative Warning, the violations consist of new buildings, retaining walls, grading, interior remodeling, electrical, plumbing, and HVAC on the property without the benefit of a 1 ATTACHMENT 5
ITEM NO. 12.
permit. At this time, we are asking for your permission to conduct an exterior and interior inspection of the property as Code Compliance has not been permitted on the property to inspect. The interior inspection will consist in inspecting the treehouse ADU, the two accessory structures adjacent to the treehouse ADU, and the garage. Additional staff from the Building, Planning, and Engineering Departments shall accompar:'Y me on this inspection so we can be as thorough as possible. The exterior inspection with consist of the exterior property area.
Additionally, it has been recently brought to our attention that a crack has formed in your driveway. Accordingly, we would like to have a Public· Works Engineer inspect the crack to get an understanding of what might be causing it.
Please contact me no later than November 10, 2023, with a few possible dates/times for the Town to visit the property for inspection. I can be reached at [email protected] or 408-399-5746.
Respectfully yours,
• Allen Meyer • Code Compliance Officer
Community Development Department • 110 E Main Street, Los Gatos CA 95030 Ph: 408.399.5746 • [email protected]
www.losgatosca.gov • https:l/www.facebook.com/losgatosca Regular Code Compliance hours:
7:00 AM - 3:30 PM, Monday - Friday
All permit submittals are to be done online via our Citizen's Portal platform. All other services can be completed at the counter. For more information on permit submittal, resubmittal, and issuance, please visit the Building and Planning webpages.
CONFIDENTIALITY DISCLAIMER
ITEM NO. 12.
1 of 3
Draft Resolution Adoption Date
DRAFT RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
UPHOLDING AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION ISSUED TO
THEODORE DEFFENBAUGH AND LAURI DEFFENBAUGH
AND IMPOSING ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
WHEREAS, Town staff conducted a site inspection of the property located at 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos, on May 30, 2024.
WHEREAS, During that inspection, Town staff observed four violations of Los Gatos Town Code section 6.150.010 (incorporating California Residential Code section R105.1), regarding unpermitted remodeling of a permitted accessory unit and regarding three unpermitted structures.
WHEREAS, During that inspection, Town staff observed a violation of Los Gatos Town Code section 12.20.010 regarding unpermitted grading associated with retaining walls and roadways.
WHEREAS, Town staff issued an administrative warning notice dated July 8, 2024, which notified Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh, the property owners, of the violations and provided them with an administrative warning and an opportunity to abate the violations.
WHEREAS, Town staff conducted a site inspection of the property located at 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos, on September 13, 2024 and determined that the violations of the Town Code had not been abated.
WHEREAS, Previous unsuccessful efforts by Town staff to abate violations of Town Code sections 6.150.010 (incorporating California Residential Code section R105.1) and 12.20.010 at 16660 Cypress Way, Los Gatos, included issuing two written administrative warnings to Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh dated July 17, 2019 and August 22, 2019.
WHEREAS, After Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh failed to abate the violations set forth in the abatement warning dated July 8, 2024, Town staff issued an administrative citation on September 16, 2024, imposing daily penalties, as authorized by the Town Code, in the amount of $11,100.00.
WHEREAS, Town staff seek to recover costs of enforcement in the amount of $5,824.26 according to proof as provided by the Town Code.
ATTACHMENT 6
ITEM NO. 12.
2 of 3
Draft Resolution Adoption Date
WHEREAS, Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh requested and received a public hearing before the Town Council, on December 17, 2024, to appeal the administrative citation.
WHEREAS, an appeal hearing was conducted on January 21, 2025.
WHEREAS, the appeal hearing was continued to March 4 2025, to allow the Town Council to review December 13, 2024, correspondence from the appellant.
WHEREAS, the continued appeal hearing was held on March 4, 2025.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos does hereby declare, determine, and order as follows:
1. The administrative citation issued to Theodore and Lauri Deffenbaugh on September 16, 2024 is UPHELD in the amount of $11,100.00.
2. Administrative costs are imposed in the amount of $5,824.26.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, California, held on the 4
th day of March, 2025, by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
_______________________________
MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
___________________________________
ITEM NO. 12.
3 of 3
Draft Resolution Adoption Date
TOWN CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
ITEM NO. 12.