06-10-20 Minutes - CDAC
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
CONCEPTUAL
DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY
COMMITTEE REPORT
MINUTES OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
JUNE 10, 2020
The Conceptual Development Advisory Committee of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a
Regular Meeting via teleconference on June 10, 2020, at 4:30 p.m.
This meeting was conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with
State of California Executive Order N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID-19
pandemic and was conducted via Zoom. All committee members and staff participated from
remote locations and all voting was conducted via roll call vote.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 4:30 PM
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Mary Badame, Planning Commissioner Jeffrey Barnett, Planning Commissioner
Melanie Hanssen, Council Member Rob Rennie, and Council Member Marico Sayoc
Absent: None.
VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS
- None.
CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION)
- None.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
Conceptual Development Application CD-20-002
Requesting preliminary review for construction of an assisted living and memory care
facility; or a multi-family dwelling in a mixed-use project on property zoned O. APNs:
529-11-13, 38, 39, and 40.
Property Owner/Applicant: Green Valley Corp. d.b.a Swenson Builders
Project Planner: Jocelyn Shoopman
Jocelyn Shoopman, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.
PAGE 2 OF 3
MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF
JUNE 10, 2020
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2020\6-10-20 Mins.docx
Questions from committee members of Staff:
• Is this site a proposed Opportunity Area in the current General Plan update?
A: No, it is not an Opportunity Area in the Preferred Land Use Alternative recently
adopted by the Town Council.
• The car lifts would not count towards required parking for the units, is that correct?
A: Correct. A Variance would need to be requested.
• If 100 units were permitted, how many affordable units would be provided?
A: 100 units would provide 20 BMP units. However, at a density of 20 units per acre, the
maximum allowable number of units for the site is 26.
• Memory care units do not count towards housing units or density, correct?
A: Correct.
Opened Public Comment.
The applicant presented two concepts: Concept A for a memory care facility, or a less
developed Concept B for a multi-family dwelling with 100 units in a mixed-use building.
Dylan Parker
- Commented that both proposals would be more impactful than the approved project for
the site. The bulk and mass do not integrate well into the one- and two-story community.
Critical data is missing, as are recommendations made at the community meeting in March.
He asks that the Committee reject the proposals and encourage submittal of a project that
conforms with Town policies and reflects community desires.
Georgina Van Horn
- She lives in a townhouse in the existing complex adjacent to the property, with a narrow
driveway and landscape strip as separation. Privacy is very important. The townhouse
complex is small, so style and design, as well as size and height need to be addressed. The
project needs to fit into the neighborhood with trees and a nearby elementary school.
Closed Public Comment.
Committee members discussed the matter and provided the following questions and
comments:
• Concerns about the three-story height, and the straight wall on Winchester Boulevard.
The massing could be shifted to the rear, away from the frontage and the townhouse
complex.
• Concerns about compatibility and privacy issues with the residential neighbors.
PAGE 3 OF 3
MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF
JUNE 10, 2020
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2020\6-10-20 Mins.docx
• 100 units would be a lot if the area is not designated an Opportunity Area in the General
Plan.
• Could be an issue with the view down the Shelburne side of the project with a tall
building.
• Several Committee members stated a preference for Concept A.
• Architectural style would not be as important as functionality and saving trees.
• Concerns about the coverage.
• There is a senior housing shortage in Town. Memory care facility beds are not housing
units and would not be subject to density standards.
• The senior facility would also rely more on shuttles than cars, making Concept A less
impactful from a traffic perspective than Concept B.
• The senior facility approved on Blossom Hill Road will not be seen from the street, so
that project presents less of a challenge for bulk and mass than this project. Work with
the neighbors to address massing and privacy.
• Mediterranean style architecture is soft and conducive to compatibility with the Town.
OTHER BUSINESS
- None.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned by 5:30 p.m.
This is to certify that the foregoing is a true
and correct copy of the minutes of the
June 10, 2020 meeting as approved by the
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee.
/s/Sally Zarnowitz, Planning Manager