Loading...
2010081806 - Attachment 10:z.: r _;- ~~ ~I ~:~~ _ _ ~~ ,;~' f., : ; yew ~. L S~ F-~ ~/t- l `~~ k.Jl, C~ ` (C~ ~ ~-- ATTACffi~IENT 10 -` 1 t~ U l.«l ~ 9 -~ t o I A Lot Split 15928 Union Ave, Los Gntos. To: Los Gatos Town Council October, 2009. I am a nearby resident of the proposed lot split between Union Ave and Panorama Way- I have had an opportunity to review the plans and have no objections to the project as currently proposed. I believe that a Cul De Sac on Panorama Way similar in size to Leewood & Lasuen Courts would be very much in keeping with the immediate neighborhood. I Address ~ ~ /~~~~j ~~n t C%rt- ~f`''~'~ _ ~r"~'J_ ~_~- ~-7 ~ ~~~` ,~- j Name ( tint) ~ ,~~F f/ ~,4ci~ l~i(~1.% - _- -- Address Name Signatur Address ~ ~:~ ~,.Ct`:i,~G~n !~~_- -- - Narne (print) ~ ~~r ., ~ 1 ,~ ~-~- ~ Signature ~~.+_~ , ,~-- - -- --- -- Address - _1~Q~ L~~~~_ ~~~C~ C~ ~ --- ----- -1 Name (print) ~ j`~~ ~ \ ~^ ~ L~ N s~~P~tx~ Signature ~:-;,-1, _ , rL"-~~ - -- - -- -- Address Name ( Tint) ~ ,~r-1/ ~- Signature i /.ice-, " (Denotes residents lacat~on on attached neighborhood ~.1ap; ~~,t~~1u ~pu~ T" Address * ~ ~ `t _ ~ ~~~ • • • Name (print) ~/~ ~ ~ _ • / S ~~`r µ~ ~ Signature ~ ~ _ -_~ Address I (G~=- __~5,:~ ~ ~ ~ _ __ Name (print) ~ ~~ ~ 1 ~_s~ _ ~~~c~_ _ _ -~ Signature ~ . ~ _' -. -~ ~ -_- - ~--- --- - Address * 11.~ ~__,ir~,c..J ~.~C ~ __ Name ( tint) t~,u - _5~~~ :,L ~ _ __^ _ Signature ~ _ _. __ __ __ Address ~ U ~ ~-C~~-F''h _ Nnme ( tint) ?, "C` .'~f-( ` ~L Signature i ;~ fi~-; rY f `LZ ~~ ~_ Address ~ / G S L~7 s ~:r _-r~ C C Name (print) i F: ~•-~- D ~•. r. < r~ :L. Signature I i~,• .~.~~r-.+./~ •~!~--~,-{-~--- ~ Address * ~ ' ~ ' ~"-~t `~ ~:~'=-^~' ~- ~~-- -J 'Address * 1...~ ~ ~._z. .. ,'~ r .•,\ ------ -- --._ .- . ~ J -- ~ Name ( tint) ~+ ~~~~ ~`.,j ~ ~ , ~ - -- - ~ Address x ~ { <~ ~. L << L - : <` ~ --_ ~ r Name ( tint) ~ '~ A -, i` _ "~ ~ ~ (~ r-, C:, v>- i ~~~_~ ~ Signature '`~^'- ~ ~~= --- -- ~ * (Denotes residents location on attached neighbarhaod ,'~1ap) 2 Address Name (_rint) Signature Address Name ( rint} Signature Address ' Name (print) Signature f ;,~ -.-r--~/' -t-- - 7 ;: r- _-~ T- ~-~ ,- = Fhti~ J ~~- - ., - ~,, _ _ Address ~ __ ~_ Name ( rrnt) Signature _ __ * (denotes residents location on coached neighborhood ;.1ap) 3 I -_~ ~~'I.a~?U~ 1111 ~,fi,i ~ - •. ,~ ..J ~u 1 '~~~'a..~. !~~1~~.111~tI1 , l?r 1.0~ :.,+~TO -~i~li~IliJt~ pIti;ISIOr~ r n Y': :. `~ .,:,:.. ~. '•i-~ ~ ~ "!~~: ~ October 2 ; , 2009 ti Pl~tl~l ~i, ~!,!!iC~~y1t F.i:!UI! !,. til": iii lil7!: The I-Ionorable dike ~~-assernlan, Town itlayor and ~Izmbers of the To~.vn Council 110 E. Llain Street Las Gatos. C_a 95030 Re: \o~~ember 2, 2009 Council Hearin; on appeal of 1S9_'S Lnion A~"e. Subdi~"ision; 1I-OS-13, ~D-09-OZ Dear tilt. Iv~Ia,,or and tilemters of the Council I represent the applicant and appellant in the above matter. 1 wish to address tu~o errors by the Plannin« Commission, which vi ere the sole basis of its decision. `When the Commission «"as advised it must make findings for its intended denial of the subject parcel map under Government Code Section 66-I.7~1, it stated ~E-ithout any faotual suppol-t that the site was not physically suitable for either the type of development or the density of development. The site is over 32,000 sq. ft. after dedications and has no physical impediments to subdivision to three lots. The density is dictated by the R1:8 Zoning District and the General Plan; the lots meet (in fact, exceed) the size requirement of the applicable land use restrictions, Perhaps there .vas some unspoken concern by the Commission reJardi_n~ the ``so-called f7aQ lot." The Commission erred by denying the map on the basis of density and physical suitability, which will be discussed belo«-. Put, having mentione:~i the aj~pellation given to the proposed driveway ]et me addre~, that point. ~~"hen you look at the layout of the three lot parcel map, S-r3 Ti,e Alameda k~ fan Jo_e. (~a 9a13G tas. lUY."9 ~~l~l i Los Gatos To~tn \lavor and ~len?bers of the Town Council October 27, 2009 Pa~7e the desi'Jn of the street was an accon?malation to the prior objection of the nei'~7hbors to a four lot de~~elopment. It meets Fire Department requirzments. The lot second has frontave on the cul-d-sac and the layout of the ]ar.d division providzs the best placenlznt of future houszs on the three hits, to allot.' ~'ie~t:• can~idors to thz adjacent e.~isting neighbors on the north. Therz is no pros?ibition in the To~yn Code or Gerzral Plan to this type of street and drive~~ av. But more to tl?e point of the Commission's fir?dims, a review of the transcript of tl?e hzaring of August 26, 2009; demonstrates that thz Commission did not articulate an}~ facts t~~ support its two critical findings for denial. lnstead, it went to the Subdivision ~Iap statutz ar?d took tr~vo points from it. turnin'7 them into conclusions to make the decision. There «as no support to do so. Subdivision (c) of section 6667-1 simply states that a local a~encv must deny appro~ al it it finds that the site is not physically suitable for the proposed developmznt. Thus, ~yz are conezrnzd with the physical properties of the site. One appellate case gives guidance. It held that thz presence of geological hazards ~~~ould require disapproval Cnrnr~l Y'allet~ L'ie1c~, Lrd., ~- Board afSrrpervisor•s (1976) ~~ C3~d 817. "1'he soils and the Qeologti~ of this site under reviz•tt• present no physical problems. Fur-thzr, eve kt?oty that the cul~-de-sac and driG-e layout ph; sicall~• works. \ext, subdi~~ision (clj of section 66-1; ~l slates that denial cart be based on the site nut being physical(,, suitable t~~r the density. Once the General Plan and zoning designation are recognized (here allo~vinQ 5000 sf lots), a subdivision (d) finding cannot bz made «-hcre the density of the strbdi~'ision exceeds the minimum lot requirement. The To~~'n's land usz element has provided the e~-idcncc to contradict the Commission's conclusion. The proposed map does not Tail the tests of the Subdivision \-lap Act for approval. Very_ truly~},ours, ~~ \ --~~ ~, ,.~.;~ \ORy1:\N E. tii.-~TTI:O~iI cc: Orr}' herb. To~~~n .~~ttorne~.~ ~t~endy Rooney. Toi n Community Development Director Jeff Grant j f ..~1 ,,. ~ ~. ,1. :, .. ~ ~'~ r t : \ i.:. . . _ 1 •tl lt; i! .. ~ c:.~, .:t7:S:ii ~.', ._ ~' __ _ 1''~ .iUC C1vI~'E'~K~ B~CHTE~. AtiD A~~©CIATE~, I'o;C. EtiGI\F.l/RI~iG ~»ll PRt3,JECT ~l_~ti.aC;E~1F`T December 1 1. ?Q49 ~l~l'~ ~ - Itl. Suzanne Darin .-~sso~iat~ Plattner i , ~ ,~ Trn~n of 1_os Gatos ~' 1 'Miles Avenue 1.as Gates. La 9~0= 1 P.F: P.zcordin~ of P.rrcel ~Iap prior to det:telitior. of home I~9.8 L'nion aYeuue Subdivisirtu. Los Gatos Dear ~~1s. Dam is. Over the past fe~ti da: s I have contacted several licensed land sun evors and a Senior Title Officer at OId Republic title to confirm my professional undertandin~T that "~o State Mapping Lams ~rould be violated b~ recordatic,n afa `'Subdivision Parcel flap-' in ~~Mich e~istin~ structtnes are in direct cuntlict with the ne~ti I~ created prupem' lines. :ill purtics. I solicited, contirmed:'noted the toll~)t11nt7: • No State ~lappin~~ Laws would be broken by recording a Parcel tap to ~vhicit ne~~ lv created parcel boundaries are in dir~et conflict with esistirt~~ structures (i.e. houses are built over propern~ lines all the time). o Parcel ~Iap;. ~~hich are recorded «ith Count. do nett shoe anv topo~•aphic infortnati~~€l. • All properties Hoot be wader the same ownership. • An "A~~reements or .=~ Letter of L nd~rstandint7 " is generally recorded with the ~,'ew Parcel iVtap. ~~hich ac(:nc.~~t~led~7zs tlt~ cun~lict. - ti~Iv professional eYperi.:nee and persona! espcrience is that subdiv-isiuns occur afl the time, in lyhlCll all eSl~iln'~ SICLICitu'C I~ 311t~~~°d IO 1'Jm3111 On ~lt~. dln'In~? COilstt'UCl10Tt Of n~R' hOf11ES. There are four ~~enerai sups. wl~i~h I bare bean required to comply «ith on past pr~~jects. ~~hich protect the Town and Ova Her: I. An agreement bem'een the o~~ Her and "I o~tin is ~~ritten and recorded with the County . The a~rrcement «ili list a date or time to ~rhich the home must be removed. 2. The owner ~~~ill place a bond for the cost of the removal of the structure. ~. The buildin`_ permit or permits, fior the ne~~ homes, are "Conditioned'' that "1=final-- of Buildinz Permit shall not be ~7ranted until the ezisiin home hay been removed. ~t. Record a letter of cnmpletiou. that hcau~ has been reriuved. ~~ ith the Cixtnt~.. Rrlcase bond and ~-Hid rec,~rded a~~reetttent. _1~ Laniu~=Drive. ~t'oodside-C:~ 9~Oti~ C~0-~31-01(7; Fas 6~i)-S>1-ib0-1 li i~ m~ r~commendation_ if the To~~n ~~-ill allv.~ dlr. Grant to maintain the r~~ie3ence for a specified time he~.~~nd the rec<~rdin~ of the Par.:el ~iap. that 1 ~~culd prepare a "Dram" ai7r~~ment letter ter }cur rep ic« and ;:ppr<~~ aL In addit;,n. Cor:dition ==1' ~hrntld be amended t<~ "Fsistin~z structures oft propem shall be rcmo~ed prior t~~ r~cardinU of Parcel ~inp or as a~,reed to ~~ith tl,e T<,~~ n Planning, Departrnent•. I hanl. ~. uu f~tr ~nur time and consideration in t}?is matter. Please ~_i~, z me a e:ai if ~ <~u hay e any ilue~tic~ns. Sinccr~l~. Clitl«r~i B.ch~teL P.I.. Pre,i~lc~it ' --, ~~ ~~- l~ Lanin~~ Dt;~,r_ ~l~u~~dsid. C~ r)~;116~ 6~.[)-;;-0lU; Fay 650-5= 1-1n0-1