Loading...
11-09-22 Minutes - CDAC DRAFT 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT MEETING DATE: 04/12/2022 ITEM NO: 1 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING NOVEMBER 9, 2022 The Conceptual Development Advisory Committee of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Regular Meeting on November 9, 2022, at 4:00 p.m. This meeting is being conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with Government Code Section 54953, as Amended by Assembly Bill 361, in response to the state of emergency relating to COVID-19 and enabling teleconferencing accommodations by suspending or waiving specified provisions in the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code § 54950 et seq.). Consistent with AB 361 and Town of Los Gatos Resolution 2021-044 this meeting will not be physically open to the public and the Council and/or Commissioners will be teleconferencing from remote locations. Members of the public can only participate in the meeting by joining the Zoom webinar. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 4:00 PM ROLL CALL Present: Chair Jeffrey Barnett, Vice Chair Mary Badame, Vice Mayor Maria Ristow, and Planning Commissioner Kathryn Janoff. Absent: Planning Commissioner Reza Tavana. VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS - None. CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION) 1. Approval of Minutes – October 12, 2022 MOTION: Motion by Vice Mayor Ristow to approve the consent calendar. Seconded by Commissioner Janoff. VOTE: Motion passed 3-0. Chair Barnett abstained, due to absence from that meeting. PAGE 2 OF 5 MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2022 N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2022\11-09-22 Minutes - CDAC DRAFT.docx PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. 405 Alberto Way Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Application CD-22-004 Requesting Preliminary Review of a Proposal for Construction of Two Multi-Family Buildings in a Mixed-Use Project on Property Zoned CH. APN 529-23-018. PROPERTY OWNER: Randy Lamb, LPG Development APPLICANT: Greg G. Bucilla III, Bucilla Group Architecture PROJECT PLANNER: Jennifer Armer Continued from October 12, 2022. Vice Chair Mary Badame lives within 1,000 feet and is recused. Chair Jeffrey Barnett has a conflict of interest and will be abstaining. Project Planner presented the staff report. Applicant presented the proposed project. Greg Bucilla III, Applicant - The design has on-grade parking with 3 levels of residential flats above. The entry is on Alberto Way with Building 1 on left and Building 2 on the right. They surround a 90-foot by 115-foot central court with amenities for residents. - The building is forced to push in the interior courtyard to allow for fire response with a 20- foot path of travel on three sides of the property. - The design consists of vertical living with 8 to 9-foot deep and 20-foot long verandas. The style is contemporary with traditional touches. Using light and transparent materials. - Common facilities consist of a pool, lounges, fireplaces, community room, fitness center, possible bocce ball court, and dog run. - Each building has 27 units for a total of 54 units. The buildings are varied and stepped back facing Alberto Way. Applicant’s time was extended for 3 minutes by Chair Barnett due to no other projects on the agenda. Applicant - Buildings are plotted to accommodate a fire response lane and common area amenities. - Anticipating that berming up the front and adding landscaping will provide screening along Alberto Way. Opened Public Comment PAGE 3 OF 5 MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2022 N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2022\11-09-22 Minutes - CDAC DRAFT.docx Jeffrey Blum, Neighbor - What is the effect on school enrollment, police activity, and fire department activity? What is the timeline for the construction? When will the construction begin? Will there be sound walls erected while construction going on? How many BMR units? How much will the units sell for? Lisa, Neighbor - Doesn’t someone else own the land? Do you have to buy it? How long is the process? Will the zoning change? Is the retail open to the public? Where will those people park? Staff in response to Committee Member questions: - This is a preliminary review of a conceptual plan. If an application is submitted there will be full technical review. The impact on services is done as part of that technical review. - The design shows 54 units. It does not list individual costs. There are eight affordable/below market rate (BMR) units. - The project needs to undergo a full Architecture and Site review, Conditional Use Permit, and environmental review. A commercial building was previously approved for the site, but it included underground parking, and this project does not. - The timeline depends on application submittal and what review is needed. Martin, Neighbor - What is the height restriction? They are concerned about the 50-foot height. Are there any proposed changes to Alberto Way to accommodate a right turn lane? Currently drivers making a turn, block the road. Staff: - There is a 35-foot height limit in this zone designation. A variance or exception process may be involved. Joanne Krummen, Neighbor - Concerned about the height. A 50-foot tall building will block the scenic view. Concerned about lack of street parking. Will the design provide two parking spots for each unit? Applicant - The impact on school, police, etc., will need to be studied. - The start and finish of the construction is part of the process. - There will be eight BMR units. - Regarding commercial to housing, there will be retail on the ground floor of building one. - Height restrictions from 35 to 50, we are reviewing in the context of zoning. - Right-of-way improvements were drawn in the previous proposal. - There are two parking spaces for each of the units. PAGE 4 OF 5 MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2022 N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2022\11-09-22 Minutes - CDAC DRAFT.docx - This project is fluid. They will respond to comments. Committee members asked questions of the Applicant. Applicant - The former project had certain conditions of approval regarding improvements to Alberto. They are being strongly considered for this project. - Subterranean parking was eliminated due to the high cost in today’s market. - They will need to review the possibility of creating studio and one-bedroom units instead of two- and three-bedroom units to lower the height of the building. - If a housing element site and commercial use is no longer required, we would use that 600- foot retail space for parking. It is useful, functional, and improves circulation. - Retail amenities are important and attractive to the residents. Whether it’s a coffee shop or a small grocery store, they would be useful. - Don’t have the numbers at this time on the cost of the BMR units. - They would need to review their market studies and the market rate to consider the smaller units. Closed Public Comment. Committee members discussed the matter and asked staff questions. Staff - Generally, there would be less traffic impact for residential use rather than commercial use. A traffic analysis would be required as part of a formal submittal. - This is a preliminary plan. Setbacks and height will need to be analyzed in detail during the application. - Zone CH is mixed use commercial. The maximum height in the 2020 General Plan is 35 feet. The maximum height in the 2040 General Plan is 45 feet. The maximum height could change if the 2040 General Plan Land Use Element is applied. - There is no change to parking regulations. The concerns brought up here will be part of the staff review. - There are multiple housing developments in that area. Committee members discussed the matter and provided the following comments: • The Town would need forty of these sites to reach the 2,000 housing unit goal. • Could more BMR units be added? • Setbacks on the north side abut another existing residential development. • Like the central area. • A new project should not be punished for the lack of planning/parking of other existing developments. The new site should be self-parking. PAGE 5 OF 5 MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2022 N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2022\11-09-22 Minutes - CDAC DRAFT.docx • In favor of residential instead of commercial use. • Onsite retail is nice. • Would like them to consider excavated parking. • The balconies are beautiful, but each unit is huge. Possibly include more smaller units instead of the 2- to 3-bedroom units. OTHER BUSINESS - None. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:53 p.m. This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the November 9, 2022 meeting as approved by the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee. Joel Paulson, Community Development Director This Page Intentionally Left Blank