Appellant claims Planning Commission erred or abused its discretion because " it misinterpreted

Transcription

1 April 8, 2015 Marni Moseley Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA Re: A&5 Application # Response to Appeal Dear Ms. Moseley, A &S Application # was approved unanimously by DRC on January 13, An appeal was filed and subsequently the application was unanimously approved by Planning Commission on March 11, The appellant now has appealed this decision to Town Council. Below are Davidon Homes' responses to the Appellant' s listed issues: Appeal of Planning Commission Decision Appellant claims Planning Commission erred or abused its discretion because " it misinterpreted the meaning and intention of the viewing platform for the Hillside DS &G." The Los Gatos Hillside Development Standard & Guidelines very clearly identifies the viewing platforms. Of the four designated viewing platforms, the only one that this project is potentially visible from is at the SW Southwest corner of Los Gatos Blvd. & Blossom Hill Road. The HDS &G also defines a Visible Home as " a single family residence where 25% or more of an elevation can be seen from any of the Town' s established viewing platforms." Davidon performed a visual analysis from the platform at the SW corner of Los Gatos Blvd. & Blossom Hill Road. Pictures were taken, in both JPEG format and RAW data format with 50 mm and 300 mm lens, at the most visible position from the public sidewalk. The 50 mm is most representative of what the naked eye can see. The 300 mm allows a close up to identify the layout of the story poles so they can be appropriately overlaid with the house graphics. The results of the visual analysis show that only 21. 9% of rear elevation is visible from the Viewing Platform. As defined by the Los Gatos Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines, this does not qualify as a visible house SOUTH MAIN STREET, SUITE 150, WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE (925) FACSIMILE (925) ATTACHMENT 5

2 The following are additional statements regarding visibility made verbally by the Appellant at the Planning Commission Hearing on March 11th' followed by Davidon' s response to each: The Appellant claims that the existing vegetation should not be used as screening in the Visual Analysis Calculations. The oak trees that exist below the project, according to staff, can be used in determining visibility. The trees in the Visual Analysis for Lot 7 are oak trees that exist below the project, either outside the construction limits, outside the LRDA and /or within the Scenic Easement of the lot. These trees cannot be removed without a tree removal permit issued by the Town of Los Gatos. The Visual Analysis assumes these as permanent features. The Appellant claims the photos should be taken in the winter months when the deciduous trees have lost their leaves. The photos for the Visual Analysis were taken on January 22, At this time deciduous trees had already lost their leaves. As can be seen in the photos, even with no leaves on the deciduous trees, the existing trees provide effective screening. The Appellant claims the house is visible 60feet to the south. The valley floor covers many square miles, with many miles of public roadway and space. The Appellant has identified one location that the story poles are visible. It is very possible, that the house may be seen from various angles and vantage points throughout the valley floor. But it also can be said that the house has zero visibility from most of the valley floor, including the other three viewing platforms. Scanning the valley floor along every public space and providing visual analysis for every location that the story poles are visible is not practical. I assume the intent of the establishment of the viewing platforms was to identify practical locations that have significant visibility to all of the hillsides within Los Gatos. For the Appellant to have identified and demand a visual analysis from a location, which is a mid -block location where the public would have to make an unusual effort to turn and look, is unreasonable and unwarranted, particularly after Davidon has fully complied with the HDS &G.

3 Appeal of Design Review Committee Decision The Appellant listed three reasons for appealing the DRC approval of the project. Attached is Davidon' s response as submitted for the Planning Commission Hearing. Below is brief summary of each response: Four Heritage Oaks Removed near Sontello Court In 2013, prior to commencement of design for this lot, Davidon requested that the Town provide an Arborist Report of all trees located within the LRDA. The purpose of our request was to evaluate a feasible siting of the house on this lot. Early on in the design process, prior to our initial A &S Application submittal on September 23, 2014, Davidon met with staff with a preliminary design, as we did for the previously approved 14 lots, to address any potential concerns regarding all aspects of the Los Gatos Hillside Standards & Guidelines. Due to the site constraints, the location and condition of the trees, and to maintain a consistent design within the subdivision, staff had agreed that these trees can be removed. As a result, the design was refined, submitted and ultimately unanimously approved by DRC on January 13, Additionally, the Appellant categorizes the 4 trees as " Heritage Oaks ". I believe at this point the definition of "Heritage Oak" has not yet been defined by the Town of Los Gatos. Based on the condition and size of these 4 trees, I believe it would be difficult for a certified arborist to categorize these as " Heritage Oaks ". Site /House Visible from the Valley Floor. Please see response in Appeal of Planning Commission Decision section above. Alternatives exist to locate house to the West. Davidon thoroughly studied numerous alternatives during the preliminary stages of design. Based on the the appeal, four additional alternatives were studied specifically to save the trees. The results of the alternative analysis indicated that not only did the limited size footprint prohibit a home to be designed compatibly with the other homes in the subdivision, but they had significant noncompliance with the HDS &G. Alternatives A, B & C all exceeded 25% visibility from the viewing platform. Alternative D complied regarding visibility, but required removal of Tree # 606(fair /good condition), excessive grading, and installation of a 10' high retaining wall. Based on this, any alternative to locate the house to North West area of the lot, would not only be inferior to the current application, but also would very unlikely be supported by staff and approved by DRC due to the noncompliance with the HDS & G.

4 Other Items Raised by Appellant During Planning Commission Hearing Inadequate Tree Protection Exists Though tree protection is installed on every lot under construction, Davidon agrees additional steps are required to insure that the health of preserved trees are not impacted. We met with Town staff on March 18v' and identified areas of concern that required correction. Davidon immediately corrected the deficiencies. Additionally, Davidon has created a staging area on Lot 13 to allow for storage of materials, storage bins and equipment away from lots with trees. We have also implemented a weekly inspection of all tree fencing. Davidon supports & welcomes periodic site inspections by a certified arborist. Accusation of Davidon removing trees without a permit. To date, every tree removed from the site, dead or alive, has been properly permitted through the Town of Los Gatos. The Appellant specifically points out the cleared area on Lot 7 as once being covered in oak trees. This area was clear prior to the purchase by Davidon, as can be evidenced by aerial photos taken immediately after the purchase of the property by Davidon. Accusation of Davidon grading areas without a permit. All grading on site date has been authorized by grading permits issued by the Town of Los Gatos. No grading has been done beyond what has been approved. The Appellant claims a significant amount of grading has been done on the hillside behind Lot 14. What the Appellant is referring to is a pathway of disturbed ground from equipment necessary to access the removal of a dead tree. The tree removal permit was acquired. The ground vegetation was disturbed, but no dirt moving took place. The disturbed area was hydroseeded immediately afterwards. Accusation of Davidon clearing brush illegally. Due to the fact that the project exists within the Wildland /Urban Interface, Davidon retained a fire consultant to provide a Wildland Fire Protection Plan. Very similar as stated in the HDS &G ( pages 24-26), the Protection Plan prescribes solutions to create a defensible space to minimize a structure' s exposure to wildfire. To date, clearing has only occured around lots with building permits and under construction. Advertising brochures show extensive lawn areas for these houses certainly not restricted to within the 30' from the house perimeter as required or "limited to locations immediately adjacent to the house such as entry ways or small gardens of the rear" ( HDS &G, page 51).

5 Davidon is fully aware of the landscape requirements within the HDS & G. A conceptual landscape plan is included with this application for approval. We also clearly understand and completely disclose to our home buyers, that any proposed landscape improvements on this project, needs to comply with the HDS & G and be approved by the HOA and the Town of Los Gatos. The brochures are produced as a sales tool only that is intended to provide a rendering of the structure, not showing what landscaping can or will be installed. There is no intent of false advertisement or fraud, as the Appellant verbally accused at the Planning Commission hearing. Other Important Facts The arborist report for Lot 7, dated 12/ 10/ 14, only surveyed the 26 trees located within the LRDA of the lot. The lot extends an additional +/ -200 feet downslope to the property line. Most of this area is encumbered by a Scenic Easement. I personally walked the entire property and counted an additional 73 trees located on Lot 7. This would equal 99 trees total on the site. It is very common in areas within this subdivision where no construction has ever taken place that trees completely fall over or drop significantly size limbs. This can be seen throughout the project within the undisturbed areas, including Lot 7. Conclusion The subject project has been thoroughly studied through the design process. Working closely with staff and our consultants, a design has been provided with no exceptions to the Hillside Standard and Guidelines, including complying with the very clear language regarding the viewing platforms. The house is well designed and compatible with the neighborhood. Davidon requests that Town Council deny the appeal and approve A &S Application Please let me know if you have any questions or require any additional information. Sincerely, DA ON HO Vice President, Site Development Cc: Dennis Razzari, Jeff Thayer

6 This Page Intentionally Left Blank