Loading...
Attachment 06August 16, 2017 Mayor Marico Sayoc Town Council Town of Los Gatos 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, California 95031 RECEIVED AUG 17 2017 TOWN OF LoS GATOS PLANNING DIVISION RE: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 105 NEWELL AVENUE APPLICATION NO.: PD-14-002 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLATION ND-16-002 LOT 26, RINCONADA ESTATES Dear Mayor and Town Council: This letter is written to impart the extremely important reasons why Lot 26 of the Rinconada Estates should be approved as a Planned Development with four (4) single family homes placed on the property. The lot is zoned R-1:12 as are the forty-three homes on Newell Avenue, Newell Court, Elena and. Brocastle. The abandoned Elks Club was under a Conditional Use Permit as are Lots 1, 2. & 3 developed as a Courtside Parking Lot, both of which are zoned R-1:12. The La Montagne Court development, adjacent to Newell Avenue, is also zoned Residential. On August 9, 2017, the Planning Commission by a vote of 4-2 approved the Application with conditions and sent it to the Town Council for final approval. In our letter dated September 21, 2016 (copy enclosed), we addressed the Developer's first attempt to have the Planning Commission approve the project. We included the Exhibits from our 2001 drive to defeat a request for a zone change by the Elk's Club to build a Medical Building on Lots 1, 2, 3 followed by an attempt to change the zone of Lot 26 to build an Elk's Club Retirement Home. Our goal as a neighborhood is to make Rinconada Estates whole. This can only be achieved by the approval of this project to keep the R-I:12 zoning with the building of four (4) single family residential homes as a Planned Development that conforms to the Rinconada Estates zoning requirement. The following reasons are listed in support of the approval of a Planned Development on Lot 26: I. Town of Los Gatos In -fill Policy. The Development Policy for the Town of Los Gatos in -Fill Projects states, "In -Fill projects should contribute to the further development of the surrounding neighborhood...eliminate a blighted area, not detract from the existing quality of life." AT9'AC} MENT 6 AUGUST 16, 2017 PAGE 2 Further it "should be designed in the context of the neighborhood and surrounding zoning. The project, "should blend rather than compete with the established character of the area". The Applicant's Planned Development project certainly complies with those requirements. 2. Spot Zoning, California Real Estate Law. This addresses General Plan and Zoning Consistency Standards. The project application for Lot 26 of Rinconda Estates "will not impair the integrity and character of the zone...or be detrimental to the public health, safety, morals or welfare." 3. Town of Los Gatos General Plan. The Plan was crafted to address the zoning of the area between the west side of Winchester from the 85 exit to south of Daves Avenue. That area, including Rinconada Estates, is zoned residential and shall remain as designated. Section 1.1, General Plan 2000 is absolutely relevant today: "Los Gatos is a truly special place and residents want to protect their community...Residents expect all new development to fit into the fabric of the community...minimizing impacts on existing residential neighborhoods." 4. Safety of Residents. The Town of Los Gatos is responsible to provide a safe environment for its residents. The vacant Elk's Club has become a magnet for the homeless and possible drug dealings. The residents adjacent to this abandon property on Newell Court and Newell Avenue have endured a variety of problems. The recent brush fire on the old Elk's Club property drove home this point. If an alert neighbor had not raced to the Fire Department pleading for help, the adjacent homes could have been destroyed. Any abandoned property in the Town of Los Gatos must be addressed to be assured of the safety of its residents. 5. Neighborhood Support. The neighbors from the initial plans for Lot 26 have played a role with their input. We first met with the Applicant at the Elk's Club to review the initial plans in the spring of 2014. At that meeting, the neighbors were in full support of building four (4) single family homes using the Planned Development process. The Applicant has kept us updated on the progress through a series of e-mails (EXHIBIT 1). In 2001, the neighborhoods of Rinconada Estates, La Montagne Court, and Charter Oaks banded together to prevent a zone change from Residential to Office (EXHIBIT A). We will continue our efforts to insure that Lot 26 remains zoned R-I:12 . 6. Traffic. The traffic in our area has become a nightmare that has effected all residents of the La Rincanada's "quality of life'. It has gotten so bad, that trips out of the immediate area must be planned around the 4 to 6 P.M. commuter traffic and the unbelievable `beach traffic on Saturdays and Sundays. The Netflex complex, Courtside, commuters, and the expansion of Santa Clara County as the nation's hub of technology, all have contributed to an incredible, massive traffic problem. The Town Council must understand that the only development of Lot 26 should be limited to four AUGUST 16, 2017 PAGE 3 single family homes. The suggestion of re -zoning Lot 26 to office, town homes/ condominiums, is not a realistic option. 7. Conforming to the Neighborhood. It was suggested at the Planning Commission Hearing that the proposed homes for Lot 26 were too large for the surrounding neighborhood. We absolutely take offense with this statement. The residents of Rinconada Estates take great pride in their homes. Most all of them have been remodeled to include expansion of square footage of well over 3,000 square feet, which is certainly within the range of the square footage of the Applicant's proposed residences. The homes on La Montagne Court back up to Newell Avenue horns and should be considered part of the neighborhood. In addition, the Applicant has reduced the proposed home size by 2300 square feet to abet the Planning Department's recommendation. 8. Hillside Policy. Rinconada Estates and La Montagne Court are built on a hill as is most of the La Rinconada area. The major issue brought up by the that has limited the approval of this project is the strict interpretation of the Town of Los Gatos Hillside Policy. The Applicant has gone the extra mile to revise the plans in order to reduce the slope allowing the project to be within the Hillside Policy. We request that the Council Members look at Brocastle, La Montagne, and La Rinconada to observe far greater slopes than are on Lot 26. It should be noted that the La Montagne Court homes were constructed without a grading permit (a dark day for the Town of Los Gatos Planning Department). That construction destroyed view lots on Newell Avenue. The Applicant, Camargo & Associates Architects, have spent countless hours working with numerous Project Planners for over three (3) years to redesign the initial plans to conform with the Planning Department's Regulations. It is not fair to the Applicant and Riconada Estate's residents to continue keeping this project in a state of limbo. The Planned Development Application on Lot 26 of Rinconada Estates must be approved. If you have any questions or need additional clarification, we would be more that happy to address those concerns. Sincer ly, William and Ann Burns 140 Newell Avenue Los Gatos Encl. CC: Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission September 21, 2016 Los Gatos Town Council Los Gatos Planning Commission 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, California 95030 RE: PLANNED DEVELOLPMENT APPLICATION NUMBER PD-14-002 LA RINCONADA ESTATES LOT NUMBER 26 105 NEWELL AVENUE Dear Members of the Town Council and Planning Commission: After attending the Planning Commission Hearing on Wednesday, September 14, 2016, it was made clear that after fifteen years of fighting to maintain our neighborhood that nothing in the Town of Los Gatos has changed. We finally got a developer to build four (4) custom homes on the Elks Club property that will be zoned residential and to comply with the surrounding forty-three homes zoned R-1. The Planning Commission Meeting was extremely disturbing. It was obvious that the numerous Project Planners had not done their homework and did not look at the files of Lot 26, 105 Newell Avenue. The final straw that night was when a Commissioner suggested that Offices be placed on that property. We immediately went back to our files and present to you EXHIBIT A. In the year 2001, a proposed Medical Office Building was proposed for Lots 1, 2, and 3. The Town Council rejected that proposal and cited the Spot Zoning provision of the California Real Estate Laws. What was relevant in 2001 remains relevant today. We worked with the Council in an attempt to place custom homes on Lots 2 and 3 with green space proposed for Lot 1. That idea was not accepted and the Elks sold the property to Courtside for an additional parking lot which seemed to be the only alternative. At the Hearing, the Developer was asked to respond to a series of questions. His answers did not meet the pre -conceived expectations of the Commission and the Developer was required to respond at a new Hearing scheduled for December 7, 2016. In the interim, our neighborhood if forced to looks at orange netting and an empty building. SEPTEMBER 21, 2016 PAGE 2 Enclosed in EXHIBIT is an outstanding evaluation of the problems associated with the various attempts to change zoning from R to 0 written by Jack Aiello on May 27, 2001. Mr. Aiello was a developer with the Duc Corporation and recently passed away. Over the years he had been the leader in trying to protect the La Rinconda Estates neighborhood. Protecting our neighbor has been an on going fight. In the late 1990's more that 4,000 residents of the Town of Los Gatos united in order to stop PG&E from building a natural gas service station on the town lot located at Lark and Winchester (Goodwill) lot. The next actions taken by the residence was to stop a Skate Board Park from being built on the town lot (EXHIBIT B). The attempt to underground 230 KV wires through Courtside was blocked by the Town Council and PG&E. Finally, we kept the Elk's Club from placing a Retirement Home on their property. We purchased our home forty-six years ago with the expectation of enjoying a quiet and safe neighbor in which to bring up our two children and enjoy a "Qualify of Life" in the Town of Los Gatos. The approval of the plan for construction of four (4) custom homes in the existing residential neighborhood will in sure this becomes a reality. Your attention to the information that has been presented will hopefully, aid in your decision to approve the project based on the wishes of the La Rinconda residents rather those living outside of the area. Sincerely, William & Ann Burns 140 Newell Avenue Los Gatos EXHIBIT 1 Page 1 of 1 Subj: Elks Development update + more Date: 6/23/2014 8:53:05 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time From: mikefriesen(clive.com To: wwburnslaw©aol.com, ricklpotter@gmail.com, rkCa?.kanekoinsurance.com, bruceaharrison@comcast.net, hy119c@rcomcast.net dalemilierlgacomcast.net, bridgetm19a.comcast.net, bperbst1962(a.hotmail.com, peoa135 c(z7.comcast.net, maxperlmanddimsn.corn, tobv cx.aerosoike.com kfoarsi(agmail.com CC: mauricecamargo.com, mikefriesenc@live.com Hello Neighbors, I thought I would provide you a quick update on where we stand on timing as well as fill you guys in on a conversation we had with our town planner. I looks like we will be submitting our first package, (DRC) Development Review Committee this week which is a substantial milestone for the project. After the advisory committee this will be our fist time to actually receive feedback and instruction on the proposed development. It also turns out to be good timing as it looks like the Council, or at least a few of them, is throwing around the idea of all but abolishing Planned Unit Developments (PUD's). Which brings me to the conversation Maurice had with our planner. The planner has advised us to become more involved in Council & Planning meetings, both developers and surrounding neighbors. We need to voice our concerns regarding changing the PUD process and more specifically how this would effect you and your neighborhood. After speaking with Maurice I have been informed that without this PUD process not much could be developed on this parcel as it is zoned. Maybe 2 large homesite, which would not be consistent to the community or be economical to develop. From what I have been able to find out the Council has created a committee to study and report on PUD's. I believe this committee has reported and the subject has now been handed off to the Planning Commission. I will be attending this Wednesday's Planning Commission meeting. While the agenda does not specifically state they are going to discuss PUD's it does say they are reviewing a Project that is using the PUD process. Maybe I can glean some insight based on their discussion. Please feel free to contact Maurice or myself if you have any questions or need more information on PUD's. Maurice Camargo (408) 489-1077 Regards, Mike Friesen (916) 690-6443 Monday, June 23, 2014 AOL: WWBurnsLaw II A MEMORANDUIVit TO: GENERAL PLAN COMMITTEE TOWN OFF LOS GATOS COUNCIL DIE 6 IlA IFIlGO1, TOWN MANAGER FROM: LA RTh CONADA RESIDENTS RE: RINCGNAI[DA ESTATES LOTS 1, 2, 3, 26 OPOSED1 ZONE CAGE RESIDENTIAL 70'OFFICE' MOThUFIICATION OF THE GENERAL PLAN 2000 & DEVELOPMENT PGLITCI FOR IN -FILL P OJI]IECTS At the last General Plan Committee, the residents were directed to submit plans for residential development of Lots 1 and 3 of Rinconada Estates and to meet with the Elk to reach a compromise that would benefit all parties without changing the General Plan 2000 or In -fill Policy. To that end, we have enclosed two (2) plans for development of Lots 1 and 3 currently owned by the Elk as well as the previously submitted plan for Lot 26 (a cul de sac with 4 or 5 homes facing north/south). On Monday, November 19th, the residents met with Bill Quigley and developer Roger Griffin to discuss residential development. The Elk, however, will not budge on its plan to construct a medical/office building on Lot 3 with parking proposed for Lot 1. Bill Quigley reiterated his goal to aloe the most unto le from his property". In addition, he addressed future plan for rezoning Let 26 from resident" to 'office'. We are particularly concerned with [proposed] plan for Lot 26 which would be the construction of a Managed Care Facility/Retirement Home for Elks residing throughout Northern California (similar to the facility owned by the Elk in the State of Virginia). The packet of material submitted for your review prior to the General Plan Meeting on November 28th in an attempt to present a realistic view of major problems resulting from the approval of a zone change in the established residential neighborhood of Rinconada Estates. The most effective document, is the aerial view of the area which graphically illustrates the General Plan 2000 wherein property on the west side of Winchester from the 85 exit to south of Daves Avenue is zoned `Residential'. The residential area on the east side of Winchester from the Fire Station to Daves is also clearly marked.. The General Plan 2000 was crafted over a period of three (3) years. During that time, the Task Force members designated to evaluate La Rinconda went over the zoning (residential) and made the recommendation that the area remain as designated. It is our strong belief that the General Plan must not be changed in order to accommodate a `special interest group'. The residents or the Town does not have a `duty' to provide comae For the Eik. If that organization is interested in building a Managed Care Facility utilizing income from an medical/office building to pay for such an operation, may we strongly recommend either developing its property with homes which could be sold or rented. The profits from development could then be used to locate in an area with enough acreage to accommodate such a facility. Lark at Winchester Boulevard, in the middle of Silicon Valley, is not that location. The residents of La Rinconda have taken a lot of criticism in our continued effort to protect the neighborhoods. We would respectfully request that the General Plan Committee and Town Council review our concerns before making a decision to accommodate a special interest group or a developer whose only intention is to make a profit. After the developer or special interest group has moved on, the neighborhoods are left to inherit a `quality of life' that has been drastically reduced. We strongly urge you to follow the vision for Los Gatos as expressed in the General Plan 2000: "Los Gatos is a truly special place and residents want to protect their community from the increasing development pressures of the region. Residents expect all new development to fit into the fabric of the community... extreme care must be used in approving all new development applications...minimizing impacts on existing residential neighborhoods. Support of new development from surrounding residents and property owners will be a major consideration during any development review process." Section 1.1- General Plan 2000 We have submitted herewith the signature of residents representing Rinconada Estates, Wimbledorn Estates, Winchester Residential area, and Charter Oaks, stating their strong opposition to a change of zoning/modification of the General Plan 2000. To allow a special interest Group to go against the wishes of the residents will set a very dangerous precedent for the entire Town of Los Gatos. The neighborhoods comprise the heart and soul of this Town. They must be supported and their integrity maintained. Finally, we urge you to review the RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT POLICY FOR IN -FILL PROJECTS dated May 3, 1993: " In -fill projects should contribute to the further development of the surrounding neighborhoods...contribute to or provide neighborhood unity, eliminate a blighted area, not detract from the existing quality of life. An in -fill project should be designed in context with the neighborhood and surrounding zoning..." The in -fill project of Wimbledon Estates (La Montagnc Court) adjacent to the Newell Avenue residential area is an outstanding example of the Town's In -fill Policy wherein custom homes were built rather than offices. The residents of La Rinconada look forward to welcoming another similar in -fill project (homes) to our neighborhood. RESOLUTION I993-62 RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS C•ATOS ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT POLICY FOR IN -FILL PROJECTS WHEREAS, the Town is primarily built out and the balance of undeveloped land consists predominantly of in -fill parcels; and WHEREAS, it is important that these in -fill parcels are development compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. RESOLVED: the Town Council hereby adopts a development policy for in -fill projects attached to this resolution as E.Yhibit A. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council held on the 3rd day of May, 1993, by the following vote: COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: Randy Attaway, Steven Blanton, Linda Lubeck, Patrick O'Laughlin, Mayor Joanne Benjamin NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SIGNED: /s/ Joanne Benjamin MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA ATTEST: /s/ Marian V. Cosgrove CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA C311,RESOSXIN-SILL D LOPMENT POLICY FOR gMU, PROJECTS InfilI projects should contribute to the further development of the surrounding neighborhood (Le. improve circulation, contribute to or provide neighborhood unity, eliminate a blighted area, not detract from the existing quality of fife). 2. An in -fill project should be designed in context with the neighborhood and surrounding zoning with respect to the existing scale and character of surrounding structures, provide comparable lot sizes and open space, consider garage placement, setbacks, density, provide adequate circulation and on -street parking. In -fill development should blend rather than compete with the established character of the area 3. Corridor lots may be considered if it decreases the amount of public street and is consistent with objects #1 and #2. it must be demonstrated that a benefit to surrounding properties is being provided. 4. The Planned Development process should only be used to accomplish objects #i and #2. The applicant shall demonstrate the benefit of a Planned Development through excellence in design. 5. Approval of an in -fill project shall demonstrate a strong community benefit and findings of benefit shall be part of the record. 6. Recommend that any new development proposal be reviewed by the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee. c3riasc\nr-FILL EXHIBIT A * a dig a MI 1 r r rn RINCONADA ESTATES EL1'C5'CI1UB APPLICATION �DIFICATION OF ZONE CHANGE & M GENERAL PLAN LOTS 1, 29 39 & 26- RINCONADA ESTATES ZONED RESIDENT eke l • Cal Z rat. a • TO: MAYOR JOSEPH PIRZYNSKI TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL DEBRA FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: THE RESIDENTS TOWN OF LOS GATOS RE: RINCONADA ESTATES, LOTS 1, 2, 3, & 26 LARK @ WINCHESTER BOULEVARD [PROPOSED/ ZONE CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, STRONGLY OPPOSE THE [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE OF RINCONADA ESTATES' LOTS 1, T, 3, & 26 FROM `R'- RESIDENTIAL TO `O'- OFFICE. TO CHANGE THE ZONING IN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' AND MODIFY THE `GENERAL PLAN' TO ACCOMMODATE A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP [ELKS CLUB] WOULD BE SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT EFFECTING ALL RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF THIS TOWN. THE COUNCIL MUST REALIZE THAT APPROVAL OF AN `OFFICE' ZONING IN RINCONDA ESTATES WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT TRAFFIC, PROPERTY VALUES, SAFETY, PARKING, AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE WITHIN THE AREA. ' REFER TO THE CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LAW REGARDING 'SPOT ZONING' IN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. 9due'1,4rec Q Ci kw- - 4 6-- TO: MAYOR JOSEPH PIRENSKI TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL DEBRA FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: THE RESIDENTS TOWN OF LOS GATOS RE: RINCONADA ESTATES, LOTS 1, 2, 3, & 26 LARK @ WINCHESTER BOULEVARD [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, STRONGLY OPPOSE THE [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE OF RINCONADA ESTATES' LOTS 1, 2, 3, & 26 FROM 'R'- RESIDENTIAL TO `O'- OFFICE. TO CHANGE THE ZONING IN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' AND MODIFY THE `GENERAL PLAN' TO ACCOMMODATE A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP [ELKS CLUB] WOULD BE SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECENDENT EFFECTING ALL RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF THIS TOWN. THE COUNCIL MUST REALIZE THAT APPROVAL OF AN `OFFICE' ZONING IN RINCONDA ESTATES WILL SIGNIFICANTLYIMPACT TRAFFIC, PROPERTY VALUES, SAFETY, PARKING, AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE WITHIN OUR AREA. REFER TO THE CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LAW REGARDING 'SPOT ZONING' IN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. b6 2CCedar 9roi 2_ ! k)o 64Ds ?so3� 131 l`JeloatC+ Los -osgd3 GI 44e14 e 9 f- 71.7. Ale (Ait,,, C17-g if‘ z- 1f c LTUA Z2 75O3. 2 /67 .0er7 Ci.,76s M32 TO: MAYOR JOSEPH PIRENSKI TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL DEBRA FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: THE RESIDENTS TOWN OF LOS GATOS RE: RINCONADA ESTATES, LOTS 1. 2, 3, & 26 LARK @ WINCHESTER .BOULEVARD [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, STRONGLY OPPOSE THE [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE OF RINCONADA ESTATES' LOTS I, 2, 3, & 26 FROM 'R'- RESIDENTIAL TO '0'- OFFICE. TO CHANGE THE ZONING IN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' AND MODIFY THE `GENERAL PLAN' TO ACCOMMODATE A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP [ELKS CLUB] WOULD BE SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT EFFECTING ALL RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF THIS TOWN. THE COUNCIL MUST REALIZE THAT APPROVAL OF AN `OFFICE' ZONING IN RINCONDA ESTATES WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT TRAFFIC, PROPERTY VALUES, SAFETY, PARKING, AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE WITHIN THE AREA. REFER TO THE CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LAW REGARDING 'SPOT ZONING' IN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. 1.51efor 4/7 GeT.7 ILY ,U 46,e, ��k,f. 32'u 136 4E, &L 1"5"..p 'NiEto.t.L,-.4,‘Y 6/503a_ TO: MAYOR JOSEPH PIRENSKI TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL DEBRA FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: THE RESIDENTS TOWN OF LOS GATOS RE: RINCONADA ESTATES, LOTS I, 2, 3, & 26 LARK @ WINCHESTER BOULEVARD [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, STRONGLY OPPOSE THE [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE OF RINCONADA ESTATES' LOTS 1, 2, 3, & 26 FROM `R'- RESIDENTIAL TO 'O'- OFFICE. TO CHANGE THE ZONING IN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' AND MODIFY THE `GENERAL PLAN' TO ACCOMMODATE A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP [ELKS CLUB] WOULD BE SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT EFFECTING ALL RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF THIS TOWN. THE COUNCIL MUST REALIZE THAT APPROVAL OF AN `OFFICE' ZONING IN RINCONDA ESTATES WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT TRAFFIC, PROPERTY VALUES, SAFETY, PARKING, AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE WITHIN THE AREA. REFER TO THE CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LAW REGARDING `SPOT ZONING' IN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. ALI)" 444--t41----- fia Ig3-Nf/ELL E k. 6. 17 r kl L pVE Los 4*-rQ f 43 c QATos /d6 . . )0564 ninfirwir5 (54 iqewett, Ante �Cr TO: MAYOR JOSEPH PIRENSKI TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL DEBRA FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: THE RESIDENTS TOWN OF LOS GATOS RE: RINCONADA ESTATES, LOTS 1, 2. 3,41 26 LARK @a WINCHESTER BOULEVARD [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, STRONGLY OPPOSE THE [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE OF RINCONADA ESTATES' LOTS 1, 2, 3, & 26 FROM `R'- RESIDENTIAL TO '0'- OFFICE. TO CHANGE THE ZONING IN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' AND MODIFY THE `GENERAL PLAN' TO ACCOMMODATE A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP [ELKS CLUB] WOULD BE SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT EFFECTING ALL RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF THIS TOWN. THE COUNCIL MUST REALIZE THAT APPROVAL OF AN `OFFICE' ZONING IN RINCONDA ESTATES WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT TRAFFIC, PROPERTY VALUES, SAFETY, PARKING, AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE WITHIN THE AREA. REFER TO THE CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LAW REGARDING 'SPOT ZONING' IN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. /,te/) 4/Le //g4 ,i Aieuxto ,fie64, 6- / /77 />1 i,c D7e, Af-u<4. netitithL 14(6 NNW {t„ • TO: MAYOR JOSEPH PIRENSKI TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL DEBRA FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: THE RESIDENTS TOWN OF LOS GATOS RE: RINCONADA ESTATES, LOTS 1, 2, 3, & 26 LARK @ WINCHESTER BOULEVARD [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE FROM RESIDENTL4L TO `OFFICE' WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, STRONGLY OPPOSE THE [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE OF RINCONADA ESTATES' LOTS 1, 2, 3, & 26 FROM `R'- RESIDENTIAL TO `O'- OFFICE. TO CHANGE THE ZONING IN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' AND MODIFY THE `GENERAL PLAN' TO ACCOMMODATE A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP [ELKS CLUB] WOULD BE SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT EFFECTING ALL RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF THIS TOWN. THE COUNCIL MUST REALIZE THAT APPROVAL OF AN `OFFICE' ZONING IN RINCONDA ESTATES WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT TRAFFIC, PROPERTY VALUES, SAFETY, PARKING, AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE WITHIN THE AREA. REFER TO THE CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LAW REGARDING 'SPOT ZONING' IN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. c>6)_64.): ciethaitrid oy,epze.ect41, &Law-- /Pit e/i_ 704 It) ma1 *AA - (gad 647*-S. 4,00676.0.4 TO: MAYOR JOSEPH PIRENSKI TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL DEBRA FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: THE RESIDENTS TOWN OF LOS GATOS RE: RINCONADA ESTATES, LOTS 1.2. 3. & 26 LARK WINCHESTER BOULEVARD [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, STRONGLY OPPOSE THE [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE OF RINCONADA ESTATES' LOTS 1, 2, 3, & 26 FROM 'R'- RESIDENTIAL TO `O'- OFFICE. TO CHANGE THE ZONING IN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' AND MODIFY THE `GENERAL PLAN' TO ACCOMMODATE A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP [ELKS CLUB] WOULD BE SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT EFFECTING ALL RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF THIS TOWN. THE COUNCIL MUST REALIZE THAT APPROVAL OF AN `OFFICE' ZONING IN RINCONDA ESTATES WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT TRAFFIC, PROPERTY VALUES, SAFETY, PARKING, AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE WITHIN THE AREA. REFER TO THE CALIFORNL4 REAL ESTATE LAW REGARDING 'SPOT ZONING' IN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. r- ,-/J-J-7 s' ix We -weir ., 1os s ,9-7?lk-Cd --� 6 -7 0 I c) 16,14-1 ( (er (2, gYa_4s1t- /.// ii/ dz,.ededA ' 1 -/P/ g-eiio--c'eseize-e, S21 7-4°7 Zisialf;72-ic6/4" TO: MAYOR JOSEPH PIRZYNSKI TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL DEBRA FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: THE RESIDENTS TOWN OF LOS GATOS RE: RINCONADA ESTATES. LOTS 1, 2.3. & 26 LARK @ WINCHESTER BOULEVARD !PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LPROPOSEDI ZONE CHANGE OF RINCONADA ESTATES' LOTS 1, 2, 3, & 26 FROM 'R'- RESIDENTIAL TO `O'- OFFICE. TO CHANGE THE ZONING IN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' AND MODIFY THE `GENERAL PLAN' TO ACCOMMODATE A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP [ELKS CLUB] WOULD BE SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT EFFECTING ALL RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF THIS TOWN. THE COUNCIL MUST REALIZE THAT APPROVAL OF AN `OFFICE' ZONING IN RINCONDA ESTATES WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT TRAFFIC, PROPERTY VALUES, SAFETY, PARKING, AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE WITHIN THE AREA. REFER TO THE CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LAW REGARDING 'SPOT ZONING' IN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. it (71A,„34 ift4,7 i677 (-4..iile,7,4e-)0,zadd w - acd hed l �' � rici- /( yx/wb 1 i »//4 V/ XJLr7: iM 414,(44t /f 2 A Ate A49, 4v/e- a htroc. -1t3 L4 A cF, zier /15 / ri7 ;; C TO: MAYOR JOSEPH PIRZYNSKI TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL DEBRA FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: THE RESIDENTS TOWN OF'LOS' GATOS RE: RINCONADA ESTATES, LOTS J. Z 3. & 26 LARK® WINCHESTERBOULEVARD [PROPOSED) ZONE CHANGE FROM RESE IN77AL TO `OFFICE' } MAYL4an TOWN OF LOS GATE$ OFi .E OF T!"r N CL X WE, THE UNDERSIGNED RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, STRONGLY OPPOSE THE [PROPOSED] ZONE CHANGE OF RINCONADA ESTATES' LOTS I, 2, 3, & 26 FROM `R'- RESIDENTIAL TO 'O'— OFFICE. TO CHANGE THE ZONING IN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO `OFFICE' AND MODIFY THE `GENERAL `PLAN' TO ACCOMMODATE A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP MKS CLUB' WOULD BE SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT EFFECTING ALL RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF THIS TOWN. THE COUNCIL MUST REALIZE THAT APPROVAL OF AN `OFFICE' ZONING IN RINCONDA ESTATES WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT TRAFFIC, PROPERTY VALUES, SAFETY, PARKING, AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE WITHIN THE AREA. REFER TO THE CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LAW REGARDING 'SPOT ZO. `, ' IN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. -koSS an /galDA- hf i*ixti-- 420oPkwpapptak:sLi-A(1,..tssair-M-Pc //Avader, /c_r.Cft L,s 4 a- 7 rso mn611- nnz 4405,09 gso.a�s 1o2 & Czs s R s3v 5 c , chi -vs Iaa Pn,vr,daL LosU qso?� IZ ,7 0 ON e -ira7 L .rc " l j 2-71 o Plid Qe- caS � 5 A/7w,- Ad.yr,,ii 4t4 /707,0 itien f Van S(tOilq OISADv a 0,14-141v /7 i5-0 Otte - (pi MIGt/C-/.( L6 Ica "\1/4cC5.„ )01 mitivi&I\ -92 1_,-91,0.? Le AA..(Liir 'act:a Rey— 11Y;()viLAN\ 17 ac- T3ul'ico -VC- 015'3O /72 53t I4 jl � al4.04reoeaet4 52‘4 2P / 7 . 21 R*4044 ()) &,. 9'So3 /7/qj ortpicic,daeltafite, 17/i/ itGLAD, sit-/L,Ac W5(-) re) I ns v� l 1 1 b � 5v `k503b Vit LV N s ems' [ sO10 j 5a 8 0 Oki( 'L 9.7D May 16, 2001 Mayor Joseph Pirenski Town of Los Gatos Council 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95031 Dear Mayor Pirenski: The Board of Charter Oaks voted today to oppose rezoning and General Plan - Amendment for the northwest corner of Newell Avenue and Winchester Blvd. Our objections are as follows: • Traffic on Winchester and especially Lark is very heavy particularly during commute hours. Our residents have had difficulty getting out of the complex and making a left turn onto Lark. Because of the downturn in the economy, traffic has lightened, but the egress from the complex is still difficult during certain times of the day. Additional traffic from a commercial building will, in our opinion, only exacerbate our traffic problems_ • Per the application, the property is currently zoned Ra 1:8 and R -1:12. Homeowners in the neighborhood relied on that zoning when they purchased homes in the area. We have had experience with trying to zone down with the P.G. & E. site and know from experience that once land is zoned to commercial or industrial it is nearly impossible to rezone to residential We ask you to retain the current zoning. • We do not believe the General Plan should be modified except under the most unusual circumstances. Accommodation of a property owner does not fit this criteria. Two of our homeowners served on the General Plan committee for a year each. The understanding they had and brought back to the association, was compromises were necessary, but the final General Plan would stand as approved with as few alterations as possible. �+ The surrounding property is residential, the Rinconada Estates, Lost 1,2,3 and 26 should remain residential. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Charter Oaks Board of Directors 135 Newell Corm Los Gatos. CA 95032 May 27, 2001 The Town of Los Gatos is about to engage in a dangerous policy of using "spot zoning" for the benefit of special interests. It's a dangerous action that could set a preoedent that will bead to despoiling the quality of some of the Town's most attractive residential areas. The immediate issue involves a request by the Elks Club to change Residential (R-1) zoning to Office Zoning for two lots adjoining a residential area near the intersection of Lark Avenue and Winchester Avenue. This is not the first time the Elks Club has approached the Town of Los Gatos to request a change in zoning. The property is zoned R-1, but in 1962 the Elks Club received a conditional use permit that allowed it to build a "dub, lodge, hall, or fraternal organization." The last time the Elks Club proposed a change to Office Zoning for this property was in 1982 Their request was rejected because the town council realized that the change in zoning would be destructive to the residential der of the neigh. Nothing has changed since 1982. 1. The Elks Club and its property adjoin an area of single -story housing. It is a quiet family residential neighborhood. 2. The Elks Club has been disruptive to the community, causing congestion and complaints from neighbors. Safety issues raised by this traffic were kept to a minimum by the overflow parking on the two overflow parking lots adjoining its dub. These lots will now be converted into office buildings, so any future events at the dub will create even more congestion, including parking on residential streets, traffic in residential areas with related safety risks, and further complaints from neighbors. 3. The addition of the proposed two-story, 7,700+ square foot office monstrosity with its ongoing higher traffic flaws will increase disruption within the local community. 4. The property the Elks Club proposes to develop currently serves as a buffer zone for the Newell Avenue residential neighborhood. A change to Office Zoning would bring the traffic into the residential area, making it a far less desirable place to five. 5. Traffic on Winchester and Lark is already heavy during peak commuting hours. Adding office facilities will increase this already overwhelming traffic and will encourage travel on residential streets rather than on main streets. A two-story offioeimedical building is inconsistent with the surrounding single -story residential areas and is inconsistent with Town Planning for this area. • Page 2 May 27, 2001 The proposed change from R-1 to Office Zoning for the Elks Club property is inconsistent with the overall development plan for the La Rinconada area and the Town of Los Gatos. Spot zoning is, in general, a mistake. When spot zoning is used to change town development plans, the decision to use spot zoning should be considered within the Town's overall traffic, environmental, and commercial development plan — with particular consideration for the impact on the local neighborhood. Bringing Office Zoning into a residential neighborhood should be done only when the change incrc the welfare of the town and the neighborhood. In this instance, the impact on the local neighborhood would be detrimental. The impact on the Town overall would be detrimental. The Town, for instance, faces unspecified costs related to the traffic generated by the office buildings, as well as declining property values in surrounding residential areas and increased services of all kinds to support the office buildings and their visitors. The only positive impact will be felt by the Elks aub, which will convert its overflow parking Tots into money generating office buildings. We can't see any circumstances under which this change from R-1 to 0 Zoning would benefit the neighborhood and the town as a whole. The proposed change is a mistake that will severely damage the quality of life for Town of Los Gatos citizens, increase service costs for the town, raise local pollution due to increased auto traffic, and cause additional traffic congestion in the Lank AvenueWnchester Avenue area. We think it is a mistake for the Town to approve the proposed zoning change and the relating developments. We think it is also a dangerous precedent for other areas of the Town of Los Gatos, which could face similar spot zoning changes that would reduce the desirability of those areas— should this zoning change pass. Sincerely, Jack Aiello Neighborhood Resident Jennifer Armer On Aug 17, 2017, at 2:34 PM, Dale Miller <DaleMillerLGC comcast.net> wrote: Council Members, I am a neighbor of the old Elks Lodge Property at 105 Newell Ave for the past 19 years. My house abuts lot 1 of the proposed development. I have been informed with regular emails and meetings by the developer and architect of the proposed project for a private road and 4 new homes to built on this site. The developer and architect have taken the time to meet with us several times to hear our neighborhood concerns and make appropriate changes addressing our concerns. I have attended all the planning commission meetings (and voiced my approval of the project) regarding this property and fully support the proposed development of 4 - 2 story houses with a private road on this "difficult to build" hillside property. A concern raised at the Planning Commission meeting was neighborhood compatibility, which isn't an issue for me and the neighbors. My neighborhood was built in the 1960s and when most people wanted a single story ranch style home-2200+/- Sq Ft. Today, people want 2 story homes with a full basement/cellar, as is being done to most single story homes sold in the Rinconada neighborhoods. I fully expect that when my house is sold in the future, the new owner will want to scape the house and build a 2 story house with a full basement/cellar, since the house is as large as possible for the allowable setbacks of this lot today. It has been 3+ years for us to live with this semi -abandoned Elks Building and the issues of homeless people camping in the parking lot, constant littering on the street and on the property, the safety hazard for the general disrepair of the building and property, and most recently a fire from PGE wires, causing damage to a fence from the dead brush/trees burning, but could have been much worse for our neighborhood, if not caught so quickly. I request your approval of this project when it is on the Public Town Council Meeting schedule. Dale Miller 115 Newell Ct Los Gatos 95032 408 399 6955 D al e M i l l er LG (r? cony cast. net Jennifer Armer On Aug 22, 2017, at 1:04 PM, Rick Potter <ricklpotter2012( gmail.com> wrote: Dear Ms. Sayoc, As a neighbor of the dilapidated Elks building at 105 Newell Ave. I would like to request that you approve the development of this property into 4 homesites. Not only would this improve the look of the neighborhood, but it would eliminate the negative issues that the neighbors who back up to the property are currently experiencing. Thank you, Janet and Rick Potter 144 Newell Ave. Rick Potter (408)489-7343-Cell Jennifer Armer On Sep 3, 2017, at 3:48 PM, Liat Perlman <liatperlman@gmail.com> wrote: Members of the Town Council, We've lived at 183 Newell Ave and share a back fence with the above named Elks property for 38 years. We have expressed our support for the development of 4 new homes on this property at two planning commission meetings including August 9 ofthis year and have been waiting for over 3 years for this development to be approved, and thus break ground. At the last planning meeting the approval was 4:2 with some caveats. With this email, I want to RE -confirm my complete support for this development to be approved AS IS. Also joining us in support of the development is Laverne Hardenburgh, 40+ year owner/resident at 179 Newell Ave which shares a fence line with the Elks property. Below, I address the caveats raised by the planning commission. Excess of FAR / differing FAR calculations The residents of this neighborhood are not naive, we understand that exceptions are difficult as they can be precedent setting. However, this situation needs COMMON SENSE mitigation and the mitigation can and should be noted with your approval (thus preventing a precedent for all). The neighborhood as a whole strongly supported the 4 home proposal over a year ago (refer to the outpour of support in the 2016 minutes). We understand that the developer gains by maximizing the structure size, however, the planning commission admitted that the lot is a very difficult lot to build on (due to slope) and accepted the fact that 2 or 3 homes would not economically be viable for a developer, thus a 4 home solution is required. We support the developers FAR calculations (or a FAR exception if you wish to call it that) on the basis of above reason ALONE, however, IF that is not enough, there are a few other means to address the FAR calculations. Early on in the process, the developer worked with the Fire Department to yield a plan that would provide ample access for Fire Safety concerns. We propose that the SQFT turnaround/no park zone for addressing Fire vehicles requirements could (if it has not already) be assigned to the two closest homes and surfaced as a drive -over hardscape with a Town/Fire department easement and/or stipulation that it can not be blocked or parked on. This would mean that the base land calculation could be increased for the two adjacent homes/Lots. Alternatively, WE propose that excess FAR could be addressed by the removal of side -walks and assignment of the corresponding land to the associated four homes, again increasing the base land calculation for each of the 4 lots. While the private street is already narrower than the existing Newell Ave and courts, this would not have impact on the drivable surface area. Additionally the parking spaces could be handled in similar manner, the SQFT could be assigned to the homes and included in the FAR calculation. A dual purpose surface could be required such that the surface could be used for parking. Here is a link to example of how the "turnaround area" and the "sidewalk" area could be landscaped such that they have a dual purpose use while still being calculated within the FAR of each of the 4 homes. https://www. goo gl e. com/search?q=concrete+grass+pavers&tbm=i sch&tbo=u& source=uni v&sa=X &ved=Oahu KEwjiq no4YnWAhViwVQKHV3sBd8QsAQIeA&biw=1280&bih=628 Finally, we ask you to ponder what the FAR calculation would be had the Town NOT built such a high retaining wall on Winchester Ave when the street was widened 20-30+ years ago. We recall my deceased father/husband pleading with the City Planning commission (letters and meetings) not to add the 2+ foot landscaping section at the base of the wall in favor for a lower wall. At that time, the still sour compromise was that Town PROMISED to maintain the landscaping. Even without the 5 year drought and despite some the "beautification" committee planting some Daffodils that appear once a year for about 2 weeks, since the original trees and plants were placed, the town fell dramatically short in maintaining this area. IF you were to ADD this 2+ foot strip to the base land calculation for the two adjacent homes, what would the FAR calculation be?? SIZE of homes vs Neighborhood We propose that the nearest homes selected by the Town Planners is NOT adequate. A much larger sample should have been selected and WOULD yield different calculations when comparing the proposed 4 homes to the adjacent neighborhood. Refer to below as backup for this position. Newell Ave residents have a tight identity as the WHOLE Newell Ave Neighborhood because we are BOUND together by geography a) the shape of our street - a Horseshoe b) being cut off from other residential neighborhoods by the Privately owned lot which has the PG&E easement and which now houses a second Bay Club Courtside parking lot c) the VERY heavily trafficked Winchester Blvd. Despite above, the nearest most compatible neighborhood that Newell can be most closely likened to and associated with is indeed what the developer suggests, Via Montagne. Newell Ave was built in the 60s and while there has been home sales and a handful of additions, overall, residents have been long standing and home sizes have been fairly constant. This is about to change as residents are aging and homes will be sold. New owners WILL be seeking major additions and home sizes WILL increase. The economics of buying these older homes requires it. Its unavoidable that existing Ranch style homes will be expanded, 2nd stories will be added and in some cases basements. In the years to come, Newell Ave look and feel will inevitably be more like Via Montagne. This too must be taken into account when considering the Elks development home size relative to the existing Neighborhood. We will be selling 183 Newell Ave in the next 1 - 3 years, and ahead of that time, we will be investigating with the planning department the maximum allowable expansion/addition when we promote the house for sale. Its simply inevitable that next owners WILL add -on. The planning department should start considering the maximum allowable SQFT on older properties when evaluating new adjacent developments. Greater than 100' Retaining Wall and so called massiveness of the structures. The planning commission raised concerns with a greater than >100 foot retaining wall. Here is our response. a) Given that the city opted to build a retaining wall on. Winchester Blvd much higher and therefore longer than was necessary AND longer than 100', this concern seems to pail by comparison! b) We now enter Los Gatos from highway 85 and have our view of the Mountains completely lost due to the City's approval of the massive Netflix buildings. (We may love Netflix, but it was the town that made this MASSIVE mistake) c) 53 year old 183 Newell home's fence/wall is longer than 100'. If it were not for the mature vegetation, it too would be equally visible (so called massive). d) immediately across Winchester there long standing large size corporate buildings and 2 blocks down the street large size Bay Club. The building of these 4 homes AS IS is NOT out of line with the intersection let alone OUR neighborhood. As an immediate fence sharing neighbors, we assert that this concern is simply not grounded in reality. The ambience of this intersection and this neighborhood WILL be greatly improved from the (AS IS) planned development. For anyone on the planning department or the planning commission to say anything to the contrary is NOT accurate and demonstrates a lack of common sense and aesthetic. Yes, zero common sense - No different than the fools error made when placing 3 handicap parking spaces on the secondary/added Bay Club parking lot rather than adding them immediately next to the Bay Club building where they can be used (or numerous other things we could raise, but won't at this time as we do not want to dilute this message.) City Counsel, it is time for you to listen to your constituents at the North end of town. The time to VOTE YES on the Elks development was last year, let alone NOW. VOTE YES! Liat and Barbara Perlman 183 Newell Ave (831)247-5990