10 Attachment 4 - August 9, 2023, Planning Commission Verbatim MinutesLOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A P P E A R A N C E S:
Los Gatos Planning
Commissioners:
Jeffrey Barnett, Chair
Steve Raspe, Vice Chair
Susan Burnett
Kylie Clark
Melanie Hanssen
Kathryn Janoff
Emily Thomas
Town Manager: Laurel Prevetti
Community Development
Director:
Joel Paulson
Town Attorney: Gabrielle Whelan
Transcribed by: Vicki L. Blandin
(619) 541-3405
ATTACHMENT 4
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P R O C E E D I N G S:
CHAIR BARNETT: We’ll now move on to Item 3 on the
agenda, which is a request for approval of demolition of
one existing office and four residential buildings,
construction of an assisted living and memory care
facility, Variances for the maximum height and lot coverage
of the zone, merger of four lots into one, and removal of
large protected trees on property zone O located at 15860-
15894 Winchester Boulevard and 17484 Shelburne Way. The
APNs are 529-11-013, -038, -039, and -040. Architecture and
Site Application S-21-008, Conditional Use Permit
Application U-21-010, Variance Application V-21-003,
Subdivision Application N-22-008, and Mitigated Negative
Declaration ND-22-001.
Staff has noted that an additional study and
Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared for the
project, and stuff has recommended denial of the
application. We’ll hear from Ms. Armer on that issue. The
property owner is Green Valley Corporation, dba Swenson.
May I see a show of hands from Commissioners who
have visited the property? It’s unanimous, and are there
any disclosures?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I have one. In my law practice I at one time
represented University Oaks Condominium Association, which
has submitted opposition to the proposed project, as well
as some of its members. Per staff in my office the last
work was performed in 2008, but I believe there may have
been other services closer to my retirement in 2020. I’ve
given the matter significant thought and I believe that I
can act without prejudice in this matter.
Having said that, Ms. Armer, you will be giving
the Staff Report tonight?
JENNIFER ARMER: Yes, thank you. Good evening,
Chair, Vice Chair, and Commissioners.
The item before you this evening is a proposal
for a new assisted living facility at the corner of
Winchester Boulevard and Shelburne Way. As just stated by
the Chair, the request includes demolition of the existing
buildings, a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed use, a
Variance from the maximum height limit of 35’, a Variance
from the maximum lot coverage of 40%, and merger of the
four lots into one, including also removal of large
protected trees.
An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration has been prepared as part of the required CEQA
environmental review.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
The proposed project would create a new three-
story assisted living and memory care facility consisting
of 107 assisted living units and 18 memory care units with
54 parking spaces, most of which would be provided in a
below-grade parking garage with access off of Shelburne
Way.
As part of the process a Story Pole Exception was
granted by Town Council, which required larger signage, and
a video simulation is available online. The project
complies with zoning with the exception of the two
Variances previously mentioned for heights up to 50’ and
lot coverage of 50%. The proposed use is permitted if
approved through a Conditional Use Permit.
The Town’s Consulting Architect reviewed and was
in support of the building design with no recommended
changes.
Environmental review, as I stated, was an Initial
Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. The appendices
did include transportation and arborist reports among other
reports.
Some of you will remember the previous office
project that was approved on the site in 2017. The proposed
project does take into consideration the feedback and
conditions that were applied to that project as well as
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
feedback received from the Conceptual Development Advisory
Committee (CDAC) meeting in 2020 in designing this project.
In addition, the Applicant has worked with Staff
to provide required information and modify their proposal
to address Staff comments and reduce the extent of the
variance request for height. Staff does not recommend
approval of the Variances currently requested, but if
Planning Commission finds merit in the request we would
point you towards the required findings in Exhibit 3 and
Draft Conditions of Approval in Exhibits 4 and 5.
Public comments were received and provided to you
in the Staff Report in an addendum and in a Desk Item. They
have been a mix of supportive comments and concerns about
the proposed project.
This evening we have Town Staff from Planning and
Public Works as well as the Town’s Transportation
Consultant, the Town’s Environmental Consultant, and the
Town Attorney all available to support your discussion.
This concludes Staff’s presentation, but we’d be
happy to answer any questions.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you very much, Ms. Armer.
Do Commissioners have questions? Commissioner Clark.
COMMISSIONER CLARK: Thank you. I just have a
quick question. I know that this is part of the policy and
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
not something we would be changing or anything, but what is
the reasoning for the 40%-50% lot coverage? I felt like
that’s so little of the lot. What’s expected to be done
with the rest of it, if that makes sense?
JENNIFER ARMER: Thank you for that question.
This is an interesting situation where the Office land use
designation in the General Plan actually does list maximum
lot coverage of 50%, but in this case the zoning is more
restrictive for the Office zone; it is 40%. In general, the
other areas of the lot are used for landscaping, access,
driveways, and required setbacks. As you can see, that is
what is proposed in this site for the area that isn’t
considered lot coverage.
COMMISSIONER CLARK: And is the reasoning for the
limitation just massing overall?
JENNIFER ARMER: Generally in zoning, yes, but
that has to do with making sure that there is a certain
amount of spacing between buildings, and green space, and
other kinds of open space in terms of the feel of the
community.
COMMISSIONER CLARK: Thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Commissioner Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: We recently went through
the process of updating our General Plan, and the land use
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
portion of that as well as community design are on hold as
the 2020 plan for the time being. My recollection is in the
2020 General Plan the highest height we have for any zone
is 45’, is that correct?
JENNIFER ARMER: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: And is there any building
on Winchester Boulevard that’s more than 35’?
JENNIFER ARMER: We do have some buildings that
exceed that. I’m trying to remember what the height of the
Netflix building is. I don't know that number off the top
of my head, but I believe that is the tallest building in
that area.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: But Netflix was a Planned
Development at the northern part of Winchester?
JENNIFER ARMER: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Vice Chair Raspe.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Thank you, Chair, and thank
you, Ms. Armer, for your excellent presentation. Two quick
questions.
First, I think you indicated we are getting 107
proposed assisted living units, and then 18 units for
memory care, is that correct?
JENNIFER ARMER: Correct.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Do some or all of these count
toward our housing numbers for the Town?
JENNIFER ARMER: Thank you. The proposed project
is considered Commercial in terms of the use on an Office
zone, however, because of the way that these units are
proposed with individual kitchens I believe, based on
current State law we do believe that the 107 would count
towards our housing production required by the Town’s
Housing Element.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Thank you, and one follow up
question, if I may, Chair? I noticed some of the comments
referenced driving studies and I think indicated that
perhaps we had relied on an older dated study. Can you
respond to that?
JENNIFER ARMER: Thank you. If there are more
detailed questions in the future, we do have the
consultants who prepared the 2021 study, but the study that
was the basis for the environmental review and our analysis
of the project was conducted in 2021, not the 2016. The
2016 report was mentioned because it was previously
conducted for development on the site, but that was the
basis for the previous office proposal approval.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Thanks so much.
CHAIR BARNETT: Commissioner Janoff.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: I have two questions.
When I looked at Exhibit 1 it was dated 2022, and
that’s the current traffic study that was brought to our
attention in the addendum. The addendum comment in summary
was that the 2022 report used was based on a 2016 ITE
versus when there was a 2021 ITE guideline available. Can
you comment on that?
JENNIFER ARMER: Thank you for that question. I
actually will pass that off to Mike Vroman, our Senior
Traffic Engineer who is with us on Zoom. Mike, if you want
to go ahead and unmute yourself and answer that question if
you are able, or pass it on to our consultants from TJKM;
that’s up to you.
MIKE VROMAN: Good evening, Commissioners. The
report looked at the ITE Trip Generation Manual, the 10th
edition, which I believe was replaced by the 11th edition in
the fall of 2021, so at the time of report I believe it was
current; it was the 10th edition. Now there is a new one,
but TJKM did a quick analysis earlier today and the 11th
edition actually has a reduction in the AM. In the 10th
edition there were 16 trips into the site, 10 trips out,
for a total of 26 trips in the morning peak hour. In the PM
peak hour there were 13 in and 22 out, for a total of 35,
compared to the 11th edition ITE Trip Generation Manual
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
there are 14 in the AM going in and 10 coming out, for a
total of 24, so there is a net reduction of two fewer trips
based on the ITE 11th edition, and in the PM it’s 12 in, 20
out, and 32 total, so that’s actually a reduction of three,
so materially it doesn’t make any difference at all in the
analysis report. If anything, it might reduce it a very
slight amount, because there are slightly fewer trips both
in the AM and the PM, but once again, that was the current
edition at the time the report was done. Now we’re using
the 11th edition.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Thank you. I have one other
question for Staff. Ms. Armer, you said you believe that
the 107 units would be counted toward the RHNA numbers.
Either through further explanation, or perhaps the Town
Attorney could clarify if they actually will. The reason I
pursue this question is it seems to me that when we are
considering a senior community, not in the distant past the
answer was no, that they did not count toward our RHNA, so
I want to be absolutely sure rather than maybe.
JENNIFER ARMER: Thank you for that question and
the opportunity to clarify. Yes, we are counting these
towards our RHNA allocation. They are actually currently
listed as pending project units in the Draft Housing
Element and we do expect to be able to count them.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Over the last few years this has been a question
as to whether this type of unit does get counted, but the
most recent information that we have received is that they
would. The Town Attorney is available on Zoom in case she’d
like to add something to this.
ATTORNEY WHELAN: That’s correct. I do recall
that there was also a discussion as to whether or not the
Town could impose its below market rate (BMR) requirement
on these residential units, and I recall that we concluded
that the Town could not do that.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other questions for Staff?
Commissioner Burnett.
COMMISSIONER BURNETT: Thank you. One of the
letters was wondering should this area be changed and zoned
from an Office zone to an RN zone based on the fact that
it’s no longer office space but residential? It was brought
up in one of the comments from a neighbor.
JENNIFER ARMER: Thank you for that question. The
use that is being considered here is allowed with a
Conditional Use Permit. Whether this lot is zoned Office or
if it’s zoned Multi-Family, there are actually, I believe,
at least five different zones in which this is allowed, but
in all cases it requires a Conditional Use Permit, so a
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
change in zoning does not actually affect the use, the
process for approving this use on this site.
COMMISSIONER BURNETT: Thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other questions? There will be
further opportunity later. Commissioner Clark.
COMMISSIONER CLARK: Thank you. I have a follow
up question for the Town Attorney. I was wondering if you
could say why the Town is unable to impose the BMR
requirements on this?
ATTORNEY WHELAN: I’d have to get back to the
Commission with that information, because it was research
that we did about a year ago and I don’t remember the
details about the BMR requirement, but I can provide that
to the Commission in the future.
JENNIFER ARMER: Through the Chair, I could add
that I believe that that was based on the fact that this is
not considered a Residential use, it is considered
Commercial, and the BMR requirement is based on Residential
uses. We can confirm that if needed, but that is my memory
of those conversations.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you for that. I think we’re
ready to open the public portion of the public hearing and
give the Applicant an opportunity to address the Commission
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
for up to five minutes. We have a card from the Applicant,
Mr. Bristow.
JESSIE BRISTOW: Good evening, my name is Jessie
Bristow of Swenson Builders; I’m the Development Project
Manager for this project. Along with me is my colleague
David Meades, who is our Senior VP of Architecture, and
he’s here for any questions after the presentation.
First of all, I do want to say thank you for
allowing us to be here tonight. I just want to thank Staff
for getting us to this point.
On this slide I’d just like to highlight that we
reached out to the Town Council, University Oaks neighbors,
and we went to the CDAC when we first thought about this
project in 2020, and asked the same question of all three
parties. We asked would you prefer a mixed-use or 100%
apartment project, or would you prefer a senior care
facility, and the consensus was a senior care facility; and
the University Oaks residents actually expressed that they
didn’t want to be next to an apartment building, so that’s
the direction we took. The CDAC also said that they would
like to see Mediterranean architecture. There was other
outreach, but I can go into detail later.
I want to highlight we first submitted in April
2021 after all the feedback that we got. We were deemed
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
complete in July 2022 and all of that, as Staff said, was
making adjustments to the project to try to make it as
conforming as possible.
We already discussed the reason we’re going for
that 50% lot coverage Variance; that is the General Plan.
The General Plan is a progressive document, it’s what you
want to see your town build out to in the next 15-20 years,
and it is a better efficiency of the site for our proposed
use.
The height request, we do have a sloping lot and
so it makes this challenging for our project to meet this
height at 35 feet. If you look at the building at the top
of plate, not including the mansard roof, the building is
actually trying to meet as much as possible. On the
frontage of Winchester we are, but on Shelburne we’re not;
and we can highlight that later. We also have the mansard
roof to shield mechanical equipment and solar equipment.
When we first presented this project we had three
wings, and all three wings were three stories, and the
south wing that was closest to the University Oaks
neighbors was three stories, and after meeting with them
they asked can you step it down, can you scoot it back, and
can you provide more vegetation? So we went from three
stories to 20 stories and we lost about ten units on that
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
floor, actually I think it was 15, and we went from a 10-
foot setback to 15-foot setback, and we added vegetation;
we made sure there would be plenty of that for privacy on
both sides.
In here, this is in the plan set, the highlighted
yellow is the area and Variance that we’re asking for, and
there’s a blue line—it’s in the plans, I apologize, it’s
hard to see on the screen. Originally we had the back of
the building on the top floor where those umbrellas area,
those actually went all the way back, so we stepped in that
building and we went from a double corridor to a single
corridor and we lost ten units there. So we really tried to
step in the building to try to meet this Variance as much
as possible; we know we’re not meeting it all the way, but
we did make a concerted effort.
Just quickly, if I could highlight, this is the
south elevation for University Oaks. On the left side, that
frontage of that two-story building on the building top
place, not including the mansard roof, is now 23’. All the
way back is 33’, so if we eliminate the mansard roof and
expose the equipment this project is conforming of what
would be next to the neighbors.
One thing I really want to highlight, there was a
comment in the University Oaks letter that says there’s no
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
middle ground, that the developer isn’t providing a middle
ground, and I think that’s the confusion. This project is
the middle ground. We’re proposing something that we think
is low intensive use, the users are self-contained and they
have everything they need. They’re of an older age; they’re
not going to be disturbing. There are less traffic impacts
as discussed, and we’re really trying to propose a project
that the Town can be proud of and is higher end.
The alternative is SB 6 or AB 2011. Those went
into effect in July 2023, and anything that is zoned Office
or Commercial can be 100% residential. So based on where
Los Gatos is in the metropolitan area of Santa Clara you
can build up to 60 units per acre. We have 1.31 acres, so
that’s 78 units; round it up to 80. That’s not including a
density bonus where we can get a 50% increase; that would
be 120 units, and when you apply a density bonus you can
break the height.
So we would pursue another path if we don’t have
this option. We would build something bigger, we would
build something taller, we would build bigger apartment
units that would be more impactful, and the neighbors
specifically said they didn’t want to be next to an
apartment unit.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
With that, those are the final points I’d like to
make. I appreciate your time and I can answer any
questions.
CHAIR BARNETT: Can you stand by for questions
for Commissioners, which I’m sure we’ll have? Commissioner
Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: We have a good number of
letters of opposition. There are a few in support, but I
would say the preponderance are letters of opposition from
the very neighbors that you said that you’ve spoken to, so
I was wondering if you could comment on what kind of
discussions you had and why are we seeing this much
opposition?
I will preface, after doing this for a number of
years, that it is very common with large developments that
at the very end after people realize that it might be
approved that people will be making comments, but since you
just met with them in August, what was discussed with them
at that meeting and what was the outcome of that? Because
here we’re sitting with all these letters of we don’t want
this.
JESSIE BRISTOW: I think the frustration with the
neighbors is that we met with them at the end of 2020, and
from then we started to design our project, and that’s when
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we submitted to Staff. So we met with them initially before
the CDAC. We met with them with that proposal and they said
could you step it in, step it back? And that’s what we did.
Now, if they approve of that we wanted to keep
moving forward with the Town and Planning Staff and make
sure we can keep our application going and still be able to
hopefully meet the standards of what the neighbors
expected.
We had an individual meeting with one member of
the University Oaks with Staff on the call where after we
submitted our first submittal they basically went through
line-by-line what they did not like about the project, so
it just felt kind of regardless of what we did they weren’t
going to be happy with the project. There are some letters
that say we would be okay with a one-story building or a
two-story building. Well, the section that is next to them
is two stories, but still it’s the other part of the
project to have a functional facility I think they’re going
to find challenging.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Did you share with them in
this most recent meeting that the part of the building that
is closest to them is actually two stories?
JESSIE BRISTOW: Yes. It has been a long road,
and when we originally were going to come to the Planning
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commission in October or November of 2002, and when we put
up those story poles we didn’t get any feedback regarding
those story poles. I understand that there was an
expectation to have more outreach, but again, no one
reached out to us, and so we went over the completed
package with what we were proposing and I said just wanted
to let you guys know we’re going to the Planning
Commission, did you have any questions, any concerns?
I think some people that live farther south on
University Oaks away from the project aren’t as concerned
about it, but I think people that live a little bit closer
in their development are very concerned about it, and
rightfully so; we are going to be neighbors.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: A follow up question. The
specific comment about people looking into windows, you
mentioned that you had increased the setback and there
would be screening trees, so is there a way that you are
able to demonstrate to them that… Is it going to be
possible for people to look into each other’s windows?
JESSIE BRISTOW: I think as much as any neighbor
in a two-story home if you’re next to your neighbor, but
people have landscaping, people have trees, people have
blinds, and mind you, the average age in these facilities
are 83, so even if they do want to look out the window I’m
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
not sure if they’re going to be able to see very far, but
again, there can be privacy effects that can calm some
people’s nerves.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: And you’re committed to
putting in those privacy screenings like plantings and that
kind of thing to make sure that there aren’t people looking
into each other’s windows?
JESSIE BRISTOW: Yes, absolutely. I believe the
request was to have evergreen trees so when the seasons
change they are still full. If there’s a need to add
lattices or something of that nature along the separation
wall, I think we could adjust our landscaping plan.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other questions for Mr. Bristow?
Commissioner Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: A couple of questions.
Although we’ve received a number of comments and concerns
from University Oaks, we also received concerns from other
neighbors. Can you describe the extent of your neighborhood
outreach in talking to not just University Oaks, but to the
broader neighborhood about the project?
JESSIE BRISTOW: I think directly across
Winchester is actually an office building; I think Stanford
had a medical office out there right across the street, so
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
they didn’t have any concerns. There was no communication,
so we assumed that was okay. Directly next to us is a
veterinarian and we reached out to them, and they were
excited to see a new change. They are backed up to an older
portion of the property. We didn’t have any communication
with anyone directly across on the corner. We did have
communication from the adjacent neighbor, who I think
you’re all familiar with, and he expressed his concerns and
that he would only support our project if it were the same
size as the original office that was approved in 2017. That
was the extent of our outreach for the neighbors.
CHAIR BARNETT: Something further, Commissioner
Janoff?
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: If I could just follow up.
Just to confirm, you did not do any outreach to the
neighbors? Not the business across the street, but the
neighbors next to that and on the other corners, on the
northern (inaudible)?
JESSIE BRISTOW: No, we didn’t. We spoke with the
Senior Services Commission, the Los Gatos Recreation, and
Los Gatos-Saratoga Senior Services.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Right, but not the people
who would be directly impacted by looking at the building
in their daily lives, right?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JESSIE BRISTOW: Right. We were specifically told
to reach out to University Oaks.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Another question on a
different topic. You mentioned a couple of times that you
would meet the height requirements without the mansard
roof. What would you do if you didn’t have the mansard
roof?
JESSIE BRISTOW: That’s the thing; I think the
architecture that we were requested to pursue, that it
calls for that type of architecture. If we had a true roof
and not the mansard rood it would be much taller. It just
would be kind of out of balance, unfortunately, and it
would take a lot of articulation away from the structure.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other questions? Commissioner
Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Thank you for your
presentation and coming here tonight. I do have two
questions.
This whole application is coming right in between
our General Plan situation, so which General Plan were you
working off of essentially for a majority of this project?
Even though I know the 2020 is what applies, but briefly we
thought that the 2021 was there.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JESSIE BRISTOW: At the time I believe we just
had the 2020 information. We were deemed complete in 2022
and I don’t believe the 2040 process had those draft
documents ready, so we were sticking with what we knew.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Okay, thank you. Then my
second question is just related to the information on your
last slide. First of all, have you been involved in any
other projects where you have gone through these other
routes, and would you maybe be able to elaborate a little
bit more on what these development alternatives would look
like?
JESSIE BRISTOW: I have not personally submitted
an SB 6 or AB 2011. They did just go into effect, but we
were aware of them, that they were passing a law for 2023.
I have submitted an application for Builder’s Remedy; that
is also another option we that we could pursue, but again,
it’s not something that we want to pursue.
When it comes to these two laws, the AB 2011 does
require 15% affordable, so that would part of the project
as well, but again, to get a density bonus you have to have
that affordability anyway. I think for efficiency’s sake
and maybe cost we probably wouldn’t do a basement, it would
probably be a project that would be a podium. Right now I
think the average size of our units are 400 square feet to
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
700 square feet is the biggest, so to have an apartment in
Los Gatos most likely it would make sense to have two
bedrooms, so even though the units would be 120 units
versus 125 for the current proposed project, you could have
120 units of at least two people, so that would mean more
parking challenges, more traffic challenges. AB 2011 and SB
6, I believe, are ministerial, so we would not come to the
Planning Commission to get approval.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: May I follow up?
CHAIR BARNETT: Please do, Commissioner Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: This might be a question
for Staff, so if you don’t know, that’s fine. With regard
to going through those pathways, do you know what the
parking minimum looks like for that, or would you not have
to follow that?
JESSIE BRISTOW: I think the State law
supersedes. I think it’s one space per unit. I think it
depends on the size.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: We can follow up and ask
the Town Attorney. Okay, thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Anyone else at this time?
Commissioner Clark.
COMMISSIONER CLARK: Thank you. I wanted to ask
about affordability. What income level are you targeting,
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and are there any affordable units incorporated, or did you
consider incorporating affordable units?
JESSIE BRISTOW: The challenge with these
facilities, and again, this is based on the knowledge I
know from the operators that we work on, at Swenson we’re
not targeting a certain group, but again, we’re trying to
provide a high-end facility for the Town of Los Gatos.
When it comes to the affordability, the challenge
of that is these facilities have a requirement that in
order for them to be licensed they have to have three hot
meals a day, there needs to be medication management,
they’re legally responsible for the people onsite, so there
are a lot of factors as part of that certification and
there’s a fixed cost to that. It’s hard to subsidize a
fixed cost, and our operators have found that challenging,
and so when it comes to municipalities that do have an in
lieu option, that tends to be the solution.
CHAIR BARNETT: Did that answer your question?
Okay, Commissioner Burnett.
COMMISSIONER BURNETT: Yes, thank you. Thank you
for coming tonight. A question on the traffic. It says that
there would be 351 daily trips at the facility. So since
it’s memory care and assisted living, is that 351 trips
workers, nurses, or caregivers?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JESSIE BRISTOW: The majority of the trips will
be staff. The study that we referenced, I think it
referenced like 28 trips per peak hour in the AM and then
for lunch and then the leaving. How we understand it from
operators is there are three rounds, so you have your
morning shift, the mid shift, and then the night shift; you
have to have someone onsite 24/7, and they’ve expressed
there is probably about 14-18 staff members, and there
would be a doctor there, I think that would include the
doctor, so you’re looking at about 19 people per shift.
The majority of these residents, the reason why
they’re there is either them or their partner need
assistance, so more often than not the cars that are there
don’t move a lot, and not many of them actually own cars.
The memory care is contained, and memory care does require
more staffing, so that’s why you’re only seeing about 18
memory care units and more assisted living; it’s a
different class, so memory care is more hands on.
COMMISSIONER BURNETT: Thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Any further questions? I have one
for you, sir. A couple of the letters that were submitted
by neighbors indicated that the meeting was not conducted
in an open manner and that it was sort of a fait accompli
that was presented to them. Can you give me some idea of
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
how long the meeting lasted and was there a free exchange
of ideas?
JESSIE BRISTOW: In our previous meetings I don’t
think everyone was there. Then this last final meeting,
because it is a very real project that’s going to be heard,
every member was there, so there were a lot of people and
there were a few people that had never seen the project
before and shared their initial concerns from seeing it at
the very beginning and expecting further change, so I think
last week when we spoke with the residents essentially the
frustration is that the project was already deemed complete
and that there wouldn’t be any further change. And the
reason why there wouldn’t be any further change is we were
deemed complete and we’ve been trying to get to the
Planning Commission, so it wouldn’t make sense for us to
try to adjust the project and go through that. Every time
we change something all of the reports have to be updated,
so it was our goal to get deemed complete and continue to
move the project forward.
We were deemed complete in 2022, and since then I
don’t believe anyone had reached out to us; maybe one
resident, the one in particular that we had an individual
meeting with along with Planning Staff, so I think the
frustration was that there was nothing further to be
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
augmented on our project and our project is being proposed
as such.
CHAIR BARNETT: I see. Thank you for that, and if
there are no further questions from Commissioners, thank
you very much.
JESSIE BRISTOW: Thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Appreciate it. We now have a
request for an opportunity to speak from Joseph Gimagioni
(phonetic). Please come forward.
JOSEPH GIMAGIONI: I would only come up here if
I’m in favor of a project, and I’ve seen many proposals for
this particular site over the years, there have been three
or four, and actually I didn’t like any of them, but when I
saw this one I went this is a beautiful project, and I’m
glad the Town Architect must agree.
I think the architecture is timeless, I think it
will fit in with Los Gatos from a historical perspective,
yet it does have the pizzazz that is kind of forward
looking too. I just think it’s beautiful.
What worries me is I’ve heard things about taking
off the roof, and I would not be in favor of if you took
off the roof. It would just start looking like so many
buildings in the Bay Area and across the country as I
travel that are just flat, boxy looking buildings. People
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
are starting to get really feed up with that. We’re getting
tired of this boxy look. Please do not take off the roof
part of it. I think that’s actually a pretty component of
the building itself.
Along with that, is there any way we can have a
height limitation—I’m not an architect so I don’t know the
word—that would just consider the wall part that I think is
called the plane, and not include roof articulation?
Because what I’m afraid of is builders are just going to
build up. Let’s say you say it’s 35’. They’re going to
build up to the 35’ and just forget about the roof, get as
much square footage as they can, so is there any way
somebody can kind of look at that and say don’t include the
roof articulation?
Otherwise, please don’t change this project just
for a few feet, and keep the roof; I think it makes the
project look a lot better. So that’s about all I can say.
And if you can address the height and exclude maybe the
roof portion, if someone could look at that.
CHAIR BARNETT: Before you go, we have questions
from the Commissioners potentially. I don’t see any. Can I
ask you for your address?
JOSEPH GIMAGIONI: Yes, 4860 National Avenue. I’m
in San Jose, but if I look across the street it’s Los
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Gatos, so that one whole side is Los Gatos and our side is
San Jose; I’m not sure why. It’s right near Carlton and
National.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you. Our next speaker will
be Chris Sullivan.
CHRIS SULLIVAN: Good evening, Commissioners. I’m
Chris Sullivan and I’m the property manager for Park Hill
View Apartments. It’s between University and Santa Cruz
Avenue, right where we go into Blossom Hill.
Right now it is very interesting that we learn
that there is a slope involved with the proposed building.
What you may not know is that Park Hill View has a pump
that drains off the water table that comes down off Bruce
Avenue and that whole sector of property above us across
the street from Santa Cruz Avenue. We even had an event
during this atmospheric river that we all experienced where
a sinkhole presented itself, and you could check the Water
Department because they came out and looked at it. Rushing
water was coming down in between us and the condominium
that is our next door neighbor, and created a sinkhole, and
the water was raging coming through there.
So I have two concerns: One, about maybe
shoehorning this project into the corner. I’m curious if
anybody has done any studies on the land as far as the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
water table and where that runs. Number two, I have 30
units in our apartment complex and our parking is
exhausted. My tenants walk from Bruce up the street and all
along University Avenue just to find a parking space, even
down by the auto body stores down there.
Putting a complex that has 107 people and then
the 18 people and then the employees that go with it, even
with underground parking you’re going to have a problem. I
don't know if you guys have been on the weekends on
Winchester to Santa Cruz Avenue and University; it’s a
parking lot. From 10:00am to 2:30 in the afternoon it’s a
parking lot. Our people even struggle when we have the City
of Lights that comes on in the wintertime. We can’t even
get in and out of our parking garage, because the traffic
is backed up almost all the way to Lark Avenue, so we
really have an issue here that I think we may be premature
in wanting to do it.
We love the concept, but no one has talked to us
about the impact that this is going to have, not to mention
the construction. If you’re going to cut all that and do
the civil and all the sewer and all the water, it’s going
to be a mess for awhile for everybody that lives in the
area, and we don’t want that to happen.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
We hope you guys don’t pass this in its form now,
because it’s not going to work for us. Thanks. Any
questions?
CHAIR BARNETT: Oh, yes. Mr. Sullivan, thanks for
standing by. Commissioner Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I do have a question. Thank
you for coming and speaking tonight. Since you’re
representing this community, what sort of development would
have less of an impact for you in this location, or would
any development have an impact?
CHRIS SULLIVAN: It’s a complicated answer,
because you’ve got an auto shop, and veterinarian facility,
then you’re got four homes, and then you’ve got trees there
that need to stay being trees. Something that a contractor
could come up with, or someone to purchase the property
that would build homes that would be consistent with the
neighborhood look of the area I think would be helpful.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: So you’re saying that you
would want single-family homes to go in there?
CHRIS SULLIVAN: Something to that effect.
Duplexes would be fine, but residential, not commercial.
You start going in the commercial and we start getting
scared, because oh my, what’s going to happen next? But I
would say something like duplexes, residential.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: So how would that address
the parking issue for you?
CHRIS SULLIVAN: Well, you wouldn’t have 107
people. I heard it’s called residential, but it’s
commercial. Do each one of these 107 units have kitchens?
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I’m sorry; we’re not
answering questions.
CHRIS SULLIVAN: Because I’m curious about that.
CHAIR BARNETT: The developer will have another
opportunity to speak and he can address that.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other questions for Mr. Sullivan?
If not, thank you, sir. Next would be Mary McCloy. Could
you please come forward?
MARY McCLOY: Good evening, Commissioners. Thank
you very much. My name is Mary McCloy and I live at 698
North Santa Cruz Avenue at Park Hill View Apartments, where
Mr. Sullivan also lives. There are about 40 of us there at
Park Hill View. We’re two doors down from the proposed
construction. We live next door to University Oaks; we’re
the next building down.
I attended the Planning Commission a few weeks
ago when there was a mix up on dates to talk about this
property, but I’d never been to a Planning Commission
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
meeting before, and I want you to know how impressed I am
with the way this commission handles its business.
I’ve been a resident of Los Gatos for almost 30
years living in the same place. I walk by the proposed
construction site often and have been concerned since the
signage went up describing the building of the assisted
care and memory care structure. These are my concerns.
The signage in the QR code video describing the
building and what it would look like, it seemed like a
chalet type structure with no other buildings around and
multiple trees with an unobstructed view of the Santa Cruz
Mountains. In reality this is an existing neighborhood with
homes and small businesses that fit the style of current
architecture that are mostly one-story or two stories.
Winchester is a very busy traffic corridor, not a
nice quiet street with cars occasionally passing by, and
often is quite crowded at commute times and on summer
weekends, and especially at times for school. We’ve got
Daves School up the street right across the street from
where this construction is, and Bruce is quite congested at
the beginning and end of the school day. This is not a
quiet site for an assisted living facility.
The proposed building takes up many lots and
trees and is three stories tall. This is way out of
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
proportion for this neighborhood of homes and trees. The
proposed building exceeds the height size and limit size
and would set a precedent for the future development of the
same types of larger structures in our neighborhood. There
are regulations for a reason: to keep our community in some
type of uniformity and the same type of character of our
neighborhoods.
We need housing for older adults. I think I can
qualify for that. But not here on this street taking up the
height and space of this proposed building. It is out of
place in our neighborhood. Places like the Belmont Village
on Union Street in Los Gatos found an empty lot in a
neighborhood for its location. Other places like Belmont
Village on South Winchester found an existing neighborhood
where their building fit fine. We do need assisted living,
we do need memory care units, but we just don’t need one
located on this property.
I just have another side. When I heard this
gentleman speak about talking to neighbors, I have no
knowledge of any meeting, no flyers. This is the first I
ever heard that there were meetings of people that live in
the neighborhood. At least where we live there was nothing
proposed. All the signage went up and it said it was
tonight.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
36
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR BARNETT: You’re out of time, but
Commissioners may have questions for you. And thank you for
your comments so far. Commissioner Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Hi, thank you for coming. I
just have the same question as the last speaker. Just what
type of development would you be supportive of seeing here?
MARY McCLOY: I would see something on a much
smaller scale, kind of like that office building, the one
that was going to go up there before; it kind of fit and
they weren’t taking down everything around it to make it.
They weren’t really changing the whole look of the area; it
was something that fit in. This just does not fit in.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other questions? I don’t see any.
Thank you very much for coming tonight and for your
comments. Do we have anyone on Zoom, Ms. Armer?
JENNIFER ARMER: We do, thank you. We’ve got at
least a couple of people who have raised their hands to
speak on Zoom, so we will start with Georgina. You should
be able to unmute yourself.
GEORGINA VAN HORN: I’m Georgina Van Horn at 706
Winchester Boulevard here at the University Oaks.
First of all, I knew there was going to be a
building at that site. My concern is this building that’s
proposed is absolutely enormous. It comes almost to our
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
wall that separates the two properties. It will overwhelm
this area, as the speaker just said.
Winchester is a way into town from Lark, from 85,
and it becomes North Santa Cruz right here at this point,
so it will drastically affect this area. It would also
affect me personally. I am one of the two closest
townhouses to the property, and our front doors are not on
Winchester; the two closest are not on Winchester. They
would be facing a whole side of the property, our front
doors. They’re townhouses, they’re two stories, so again I
am concerned about looking and seeing into those windows
seeing into mine.
When I walk over to my window here, I’m upstairs,
and I look out and I see the poles, the flags have been
gone, and I have to look and raise my head so far to see
the top of those poles, and the thing is I know how close
they will be to us.
We just have a little driveway here in front of
our two townhouses that are the closest, because it’s not a
regular driveway, it doesn’t even go through to University,
and then we have just a small like 2’ of dirt with some
bushes and a few trees, and then almost here past the wall
there will be this absolutely gigantic building.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
We’ve tried here at the University Oaks to keep
the woodsy feel of our town, and the fact that just across
University there are two big parks, and this building does
not fit with our small town feel.
As I say, I know there will be a building there,
but first of all, we need more room here with our front
doors and not to have this wall, and just maybe you can
picture your house, where you front door is, if it’s two
stories, and you have this building so close to you it
would drastically impact your house.
CHAIR BARNETT: You’re out of time; I apologize
for that. There may be question for you from the
Commissioners. I’m looking; I don’t see any. Thank you for
participating tonight. We have another Zoom caller?
JENNIFER ARMER: We do; we still have two hands
raised. The next is Dillon. You should be able to unmute
and speak.
DILLON PARKER: Dillon Parker, 702 Winchester
Boulevard, and I am also the person apparently the
Applicant has identified as the person that they met with
that went line-by-line item, and is apparently disagreeable
to any aspect of this project.
I just wanted to kind of start the conversation
by letting you know that I am also a planner for another
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
jurisdiction, so I’m acutely aware of what happens on your
side of the dais.
I think one thing that’s particularly interesting
that the Applicant has brought up in this conversation is
essentially their true intention. Now, the applicant would
say that they’ve met with us extensively and they’ve met
our concerns through modifying the project, but I want to
point back toward the end of the conversation where
essentially they were saying this is a foregone conclusion,
that if we don’t get what we want as designed with a
Variance that we’re going to apply for a Builder’s Remedy,
we’re going to apply for an SB 6 or an AB 2011.
So I want you to consider that the true
intentions of the applicant were not to collaborate and
outreach to the neighbors. The true intentions of the
Applicant are to build what they want, how they want, with
complete disregard to not only our concerns, but to the
Town’s concerns and to the Town’s development standards.
Now, switching gears, discussing in terms of the
Town’s Staff has noted that the use is commercial but it
counts towards the RHNA allocation for affordable units, if
you will, but the interesting component of that is this
site is zoned Office. Office is considered a transitional
zone from Commercial uses to Residential uses, so in other
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
words, the development standards are intended to minimize
the development impacts of a Commercial use next to a
Residential use.
Now, the Town Staff’s statement, if you carry
that forward a little bit and say this is considered
housing but it’s a commercial use, then it would make
better sense to have development standards similar to the
Multi-Residential zoning district where there are
additional requirements with regard to setback, distance
between buildings, etc., so this sounds like kind of a
mixing of two development standards to get the benefit of
the best.
CHAIR BARNETT: You are out of time. We did
receive your comments in writing, but I’ll ask at this time
if Commissioners have questions for you. I do not see any,
so thank you for your comments.
JENNIFER ARMER: Next up is Demian. You should be
able to unmute and speak.
DEMIAN RASPALL: Good evening, my name is Demian
Raspall at 713 University Avenue. I am also serving as the
president of the HOA for University Oaks. I really
appreciate your time tending to our concerns on this
matter.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I acknowledge that we actually understand and
agree that the architecture on the building as well as the
proposed (inaudible) that Swenson consulted with us and is
bringing something that our community is agreeable to.
However, we disagree, as stated before, in two arguments.
One is that the building is too large, as it was
mentioned, and it is too close to our community, and it’s
too tall on our community. It is true that it’s a two-story
building, but as the pictures presented by Swenson showed,
it’s actually a three-story building because of the slope
when it is in front of, for example, Georgina’s house.
I want to use the majority of the time since
there is enough technical and detailed discussion on the
merits of the project to actually address the points raised
by the Commission, because I see that the Commission really
cares about the outreach and how conversations went with
our HOA. As is shown on Slide 2 I believe, it was very
clear that between basically June of 2021 until August 2023
there was no outreach of any kind, and that’s 26 months in
which Swenson continued to develop and fine tune the
project, however, we were never invited to have any type of
conversation.
One of the Commissioners asked about how the
meeting was conducted last week, and we were appreciative
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that Swenson reached out. It is our understanding that
Swenson reached out at the request of the Staff members. In
fact, Mr. Bristow said, “We were told to reach out to
University Avenue,” so it didn’t even come from them, they
were told to reach out to us, but as it was stated in our
letter, this is a done deal, this is a done project. If you
have any issues with the project you should come to this
meeting and present the issues, because we are not going to
change the project, and if you don’t like the project and
if the Commission does not approve the project, then
they’re going to build something that you would like even
less, and that is the attitude that the developer has had
with us.
CHAIR BARNETT: Your time is up. I appreciate
your comments, and let’s see if Commissioners have
questions for you. I don’t see any, so thank you for
calling in and presenting your views. Anyone else on Zoom?
JENNIFER ARMER: We don’t have any other hands
raised, so if anyone on Zoom would like to speak, please
raise your hand now. I don’t see any more hands, Chair.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you. Oh, we do have a
speaker.
BRYAN MEKECHUK: Hi, Bryan Mekechuk, 17509 Via
Sereno, Monte Sereno.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I live directly across the street from the
proposed property, and I submitted quite a lengthy letter
explaining my position and our family’s position. Several
people on Via Sereno asked me to represent them, but I
can’t do that. I am an elected official in Monte Sereno;
I’m the mayor, and I believe we are your single biggest
partner with Los Gatos.
One thing that I really want to point out other
than the information in here, and I’ll read the line in the
third paragraph that says, “My wife and family welcome the
development of the proposed site provided it is an
attractive and sustainable development that fits with Los
Gatos.” A number of the Commissioners have asked speakers
what would you see there? We see a project similar to what
was designed and approved by Town Council before. This
project is a multiple of the size of that. I would
wholeheartedly support a project that was of the size and
nature of what was there before.
To deal with the applicant—and I don’t say this
lightly—he’s being disingenuous in terms of outreach to the
community. Disingenuous. I spoke with the gentleman, Mr.
Bristow, immediately after the Town Council meeting. I gave
him my card and I said, “I would like to speak with you.
I’d like to understand the project and so you hear my
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
concern.” What did I hear from him? Crickets. Nothing. In
fact, I felt dissed.
If you go down Winchester Boulevard you’ll see
the side of the building. The building will be massive. It
won’t be at the back. I raise a number of points in here,
including the outdated and stale plans and reports, the
things that if you were to approve it you have to rely on
those findings, and I don’t think that you can do that with
those stale plans.
I mention the high-pressure natural gas
transmission line. That’s kind of a secret, because PG&E
doesn’t say where their infrastructure is. The single
biggest high-pressure transmission natural gas pipeline
going into Los Gatos is right by this.
CHAIR BARNETT: I’m sorry, I do have to interrupt
you since your time is up, but I’ll ask Commissioners if
they have questions of you. And we do have your extensive
communications to the Planning Commission and Staff in
advance, so that’s appreciated and is considered. Thank
you. So Mr. Hulser, I believe you wanted to come forward
and make a presentation.
ERIC HULSER: Yes, thank you. Good evening. Thank
you for listing to me. My name is Eric Hulser. I am the
neighbor to Georgina, who you heard earlier, and I live at
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
708 Winchester Boulevard, the closest property to this
development.
I have a number of objections to this project. It
sounds like you guys have read a number of them already,
but I wanted to focus my attention today on this part right
here, the south-facing wall.
A lot of these renderings that have been
presented are very misleading to the Commission and public.
That is not a road; that is my driveway. Where that line
is, that is our wall. This property scoots right up to the
end of our property here. This would be the view that we
would see coming out our front door if we were about 100
yards back and there were no buildings there. Again, these
cars would be in our driveway. Oftentimes I hear that is
presented as a two-story building. That may be true up at
the Winchester side, but it quickly goes into a three-story
building, and that is what we look at.
This is what you would see out of our windows. On
the left, that’s my daughter’s bedroom window; on the
right, that’s my bedroom window. If you were down in our
living room you would not even be able to see the sky. So
this is taking that same rendering that you just saw, but
putting it in proper context. This is mapped up to the tent
poles that are poorly approximating this project.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
One of the reasons I think this is quite
misleading is because of the size and scale of this project
they were unable to do proper netting; they were unable to
do proper flags. Even the billboard that is up does not
draw your attention the way it should.
This is also another misrepresentation. This is
showing that same Variance, and we are arguing that the
roof should not be included, however, you can see here that
the height line is drawn to the natural grade that is
closest to us, and if you look at the closest building
here, that would be what we look at; it’s saying the entire
thing is below that line. As you go farther back, that’s
the actual amount that would be over this variance; that is
over 50 feet high for that central building, so that was
not properly reflected in really any of the slides that the
developer presented.
Again, if I remove that wall you can see pretty
clearly this is a three-story building that we stare at,
not a two-story building as has been referenced multiple
times. In addition, the yellow would be what is above the
35-foot limit. As has also been brought up, we would
recommend that this is not office space. Those are living
rooms and those are bedrooms and they are right up against
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the wall in an RN that would be 20 feet back, not 10 feet
back.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you. Stand by for
questions. Commissioner Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Thank you for submitting
this information and preparing these slides. I have two
questions for you.
The first is the type of development that you
would want to see in this location and what sort of setback
or screening would make you more comfortable with a
building being built here?
ERIC HULSER: As the developer mentioned, in 2020
we said we be okay with an assisted living facility. I
think we are still okay with that. We were given the choice
of you get either apartment complexes or assisted living.
Given that choice, we choose assisted living. We don’t get
much say in that choice. All I ask is that it be built
according to code.
As far as what goes there, it looks beautiful. I
have no objections to the look or feel of the project, but
the size and scale and scope is immense, so what we would
be okay with, or at least I personally would be okay with,
is a building built according to code.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
As far as the zoning, you’re asking setback
requirements. Again, this project is using up 50% versus
40%. You could take that wall back, you could cut down on
that over-usage, and if you were to adhere to an RM, then
that building, what we would see out of our front door,
would be totally acceptable and the people who live there
would have a building that would be built according to code
for the residents of the building.
It may be said that it’s going to be a Commercial
project, but the people who live there will be people.
That’s not an office space. That’s people living in their
homes, in their living rooms staring into mine.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: All right, thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you. Are there any other
questions for the speaker? I don’t see any. Thank you very
much for coming. We don’t have any other members of the
public on Zoom or who have submitted cards, so we’ll now
give the Applicant an additional three minutes to make a
presentation. Thank you.
JESSIE BRISTOW: Thank you. I’ll try to address
the comments as much as possible.
For Mr. Sullivan, the comments regarding the cut
and the study done on the soil, we do have a geotechnical
report. There are kitchens in the assisted living, there
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
are no kitchens in memory care for obvious reasons, and
it’s zoned Office, so we can’t do single-family homes; we
can’t do estates. I know people want a lesser impact use,
but we’re dealing with what it’s zoned for.
Again, same with the next speaker, Mary McCloy.
One- or two-story single-family homes are not feasible for
this site. We did reach out to Safe Routes to School. I’m
sorry I forgot to mention that, but we did reach out to
them early on in the process and they never got back to us,
but basically our position was this would be less traffic
trips than an office building, so we hope you’re in favor
of something like this.
There was a discussion a little bit about the
office. I know it’s a smaller building, but in our opinion
it is a higher impact use, and the office building was
proposing to remove 31 trees and our project is proposing
to remove 29, if it makes any difference.
Regarding some of the comments from Mr. Parker on
how it’s a foregone conclusion, AB 2011 and SB 6 wasn’t a
draft law until 2022, and we were deemed complete in 2022,
so it was never our intention to go this route and just
build multi-family if we don’t get our way. That wasn’t our
intention, but as you know, the State does want more
housing and bigger projects, which I think is difficult for
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
people to get used to, but we have to build vertically
because we’re also going to run out of land. With that
said, it’s something that is an option today, and again,
we’re trying to build something of use that was the
direction we got originally in 2020.
I do understand Demian’s comments that they feel
it’s too large, too tall, too big. During the call I did
not express that if you guys don’t like this we’re going to
build something bigger, I did not express that; it is an
option that we could go down. It wasn’t presented in that
manner at that meeting, so I’d just like to clarify that.
Regarding Mr. Mekechuk’s comments, he said
sustainable building. This will be a LEED Silver building;
it’s required by the General Plan. We’ll have solar and
California Green Building standards.
Regarding outreach, if I recall correctly, Mr.
Mekechuk called me and left a voice mail, and I think we
might have spoke on the phone once where he basically said
essentially what he said today, I’ll support it if it stays
within the height of the office building. And then at the
story pole meeting when we did converse out back and it was
clear that he was frustrated, and again, our project was
already deemed complete, so there is nothing that I could
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
have adjusted at that time, so I do apologize for not
getting back to you, but it wasn’t in a malicious manner.
CHAIR BARNETT: You are out of time.
JESSIE BRISTOW: Yes, sorry. If you have any
questions.
CHAIR BARNETT: I’ll just see if Planning
Commissioners have any questions. Vice Chair Raspe.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Thank you, Chair. One quick
question following up to Mr. Hulser’s comments essentially
indicating he would be satisfied with the project if it
didn’t seek a Variance, if you were at the .40 lot coverage
and the 35’ height limit throughout. My question to you is
did you analyze the project in that sense, and is it
possible to do that project within those parameters?
JESSIE BRISTOW: By going 40% we lose a lot of
amenity space for the residents. Additionally, if we do 40%
the design I think would actually shorten at the back. It
wouldn’t shorten as far as the width in the proximity to
the University Oaks neighbors, so 40% is nice, but again, I
don’t think it’s going to accomplish what Eric spoke to,
and he spoke to a conforming project, so the façade that he
views. I do acknowledge it is close to his property. Even
if you eliminate that roof and we just do some type of
mechanical equipment shielding on top, you’re still going
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to have that building conforming in height, so that two-
story building that we have is conforming, and even if you
dropped it lower, even if they wanted one-story at that
point, looking past it you’re going to see a two-story
building, and again, you’re going to alter the balance of
the building and how it looks overall.
Currently right now the top floor is, I want to
say, 30 units, so if the entire top floor goes away we
would have 30 units less, and that would be 30 units that
would not be towards the regional housing numbers.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Follow up question, please.
Assuming just for the sake of argument 30 units less on the
top floor, of course it would hurt the Town on our numbers.
Does it still remain a viable project for you and/or the
developer?
JESSIE BRISTOW: When it comes to operations they
try to have over 100 units when it comes to the assisted
living. The memory care, again, usually stays roughly that,
so it would be substandard from an operating standpoint.
I’m sure there might be some operators that would be
interested, but the ones we’ve worked with and the one we
have consulted, they are attracted to the project as it is
proposed today.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
VICE CHAIR RASPE: I appreciate that. Thanks very
much.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other questions from
Commissioners? Commissioner Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: My question is about the
height. My view of this is there is probably a trade-off;
if you had less height you’re going to need more lot
coverage to provide the amenities that you want. Are there
assisted living/memory care facilities out there that are
only 35’ tall?
JESSIE BRISTOW: Yes, but they would have a very
low amount of units, and it gets to a point of is it worth
even building the project? So there’s a balancing act
there.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Well, if there was more
land, let’s just say instead of 1.3 acres it was 2 acres or
2.5 acres?
JESSIE BRISTOW: Oh, yes, absolutely. If we had
two acres we could probably fit the whole building on two
stories, but we don’t; we have a finite amount of land.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Okay, thanks.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other questions? I have a
question for you, sir. As I understand, to make the
Variances that are requested for height and lot coverage we
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
have to determine that there are special circumstances
applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography,
location, or surroundings that justify that deviation from
the standard. Can you speak to that?
JESSIE BRISTOW: To have a functioning facility
the way we’ve designed it and with the topography, the
challenge is we’re trying to meet that height as much as
possible on Winchester, but it’s because of the sloping lot
and the way the code reads that it has to be a set height I
believe averaged across the lot, it’s not at the frontage,
and so because we have that sloping challenge we’re not
able to meet that for this proposed project.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you for those comments.
Commissioner Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: I’m confused by the height.
You say that it’s conforming without the mansard roof, but
we’re not doing away with the roof just in case anybody out
there thought that that was the direction you were going.
The question is to the developer. When I read these plans,
which need a magnifying glass at best for us, I see a 39’
height for the lower portion of the building increasing to
a 50’ height for the higher portions of the building. So
could you explain how 39’ feet is conforming to 35’?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JESSIE BRISTOW: Would it be possible to see
slide 5 of the presentation? Thank you. The blue line you
could probably see a little better, that is the average
sloping height, so that is 35’ with the topography as you
go down. So, yes, if you measure from the straight point up
you have different heights at the depth of the back of the
property, but when you read the building, that’s where
we’re trying to meet that height as much as possible. So
the center of the building where you see just past the
garage, it peaks up just a little bit over, but that’s
because of the way the property slopes and we can’t have a
slanted building.
Those are corridors, we have to have elevator
access, there are all these challenges, and if you try to
move one elevator only and shorten it, then you’re going to
have an access issue for basically what is a medical
facility, and so we have to have a central elevator point,
and that’s essentially where the elevator house would be in
the middle lane of the project.
If you look at the frontage on Winchester to the
right, you can see part of our mansard roof is just
floating under that blue line, but because the property
slopes we’re having challenges meeting it, and even if you
took off that top floor the mansard roof would still be
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
impacting the height restriction, and so I think maybe the
question is to Staff. I understood that the building top
plate is what was being measured and the mansard roof would
not be counted because it’s really just shielding
mechanical equipment, but maybe I’m incorrect.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: I would defer to Staff, but
it’s my understanding that it’s the actual top height of
the structure, including the roof. Essentially what’s being
obscured visually is the height of the building, and that’s
why I’m confused when you say you’re meeting a 35’
requirement, when in fact there’s very little except a
little bit of the eave that’s on the Winchester side that
looks like it might be below, and the balance of the
building looks like it’s well above the 35’. I would defer
to Staff if that interpretation is not correct, but what
I’m hearing you say is different from my understanding of
how height requirements are calculated or read.
Number one, given that, would it be possible for
you to even meet the 35’ requirement? I understand that the
slope of the lot will give us a higher height at the rear
of the lot; that’s understood. We knew that before when it
was the previous project and understood that, which is why
we asked for the building to be shifted back as far as
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
57
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
possible on the lot so you had a lower elevation at the
front.
I don’t see any of this proposal meeting our 35’
requirement, let alone where it slopes to 50’. I understand
that part, but I’m at a loss at how we could approve it
this way when it’s nearly 100% above Town requirements.
JESSIE BRISTOW: In reference to where it is
conforming, it would be the two-story component that’s on
the other side. This side is challenged, and so I think in
order to meet it you would have to remove the top floor,
which would be a challenge for us from an operational
standpoint, and it’s not something we really want to do.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you. Other questions?
Commissioner Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Does the slope allow for
more belowground parking than typically you would be able
to have with less digging?
JESSIE BRISTOW: So that’s why we have a
basement. If you actually take the garage and call that the
basement and treated that as the lowest point, we’d be
meeting the height. If that garage entrance point were your
measuring stick, then we would be meeting the height, but
the Town reads garages as part of the building, and even
though it’s half in/half out, we’re being dinged for that.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
So the office building actually did a bunch of
fill and had surface parking, and actually when we met with
the neighbors their concern was all the cars were parked
and their lights would be in their windows, so we actually
enclosed the garage and we built on top of it.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other Commissioners? Vice Chair
Raspe.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Just a quick follow up
question. What are your floor plate heights?
JESSIE BRISTOW: They’re close to 10’.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Is that standard? Is it above
average? I guess my question is, is there any play there?
JESSIE BRISTOW: For assisted living it’s
standard. I think the smallest you could go for residential
is 8’, but it’s really tight, but for this type of facility
close to 10’ is pretty standard.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Is that a requirement because
of its specific use, the medical equipment, or it’s just
standard?
JESSIE BRISTOW: I’m going to consult with my
architect.
CHAIR BARNETT: State your name, please.
DAVID MEADS: David Meads with Swenson,
architect. The plate height would be 10’ floor-to-floor,
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
but then hanging it back down into that space would be the
floor structure and a drop ceiling for mechanical and
whatnot, and so you’re looking at right around a 9’
ceiling, which is current market standards at this point.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: My question I guess, what I’m
trying to get at, is there a way to shrink the mass just by
shrinking the floor plate?
DAVID MEADS: Oh, by dropping the floor plates?
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Yes.
DAVID MEADS: Right now that would put you kind
of subpar with what current market is offering. That’s more
something you’d see back in the seventies and early
eighties with an 8’ ceiling height.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Okay. I just want to make sure
we’re examining all our options. I appreciate that.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other questions or comments? If
not, we don’t have anyone further on Zoom.
JENNIFER ARMER: We had closed the general public
comment, so once you are done with questions with the
Applicant, then that would be the end of comments.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you for that reminder. So
at this point we’ll close the public portion of the public
meeting and ask Commissioners if they wish to comment, ask
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
questions of Staff, or present a motion? Commissioner
Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: I have a question for
Staff. Under construction off of Blossom Hill is an
assisted living/memory care facility that we looked at a
couple of years ago. What is the height of that? Do you
have that information handy?
JENNIFER ARMER: Thank you for that question.
Yes, that was able to comply with the required height
limits of 35’.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: My recollection of the
hearing was it was easy; it met a need and there weren’t
any Variances. Okay, thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other question or comments?
Commissioner Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Thank you. It’s a beautiful
building. The architecture is wonderful and I think the
articulation of the building mass is well done, but in my
opinion it’s just too high.
With regard to the neighborhood outreach, to go
from 30,000 square feet to 81,000 square feet is a huge
jump without any conversation about what and why; we’re
talking about the project that was previously approved as
the office building compared to what we’re looking at now.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I really appreciate however that this is an
assisted living facility; I think that’s a need in town.
I’ve moved my mother to two different assisted living
facilities in the last several months. There is no need for
a 9-10’ interior plate height. I’m in agreement with where
Vice Chair Raspe is perhaps going in suggesting that the
plate heights be reduced to get a little bit of relief on
the overall height of the building, but if you can take it
and we can get three stories in 35’, let’s get three
stories in 35’, and if you have to run to the back and we
need more height in the back, I don’t have any issue with
giving that height Variance.
Having said all of that, I actually don’t have an
issue with the Variance on the 40% or 50% lot coverage. In
fact, I would say if you can get the height down you could
have more lot coverage, because we want these units, but we
want them to reasonably fit within the visual element of
town, so I’m struggling with both requests for Variance;
it’s like too much, too much. If you could have one, if you
could get the height down to the 35’ and take the back
higher, I wouldn’t have any issue with that, but even
better to get the whole thing down even lower and take more
lot coverage, but I’m not suggesting this be a roofless
building. Thank you.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR BARNETT: Commissioner Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: I agree with Commissioner
Janoff. It’s a beautifully designed building.
I was on the Planning Commission when we heard
the office building. Because the office building wasn’t
going to work out, they couldn’t find a tenant and we all
know what has happened to the office market, so that’s not
been a good scene.
When I was looking at this, I think the CDAC
didn’t put our minutes in there, but I recall the CDAC was
generally favorable to the idea, but it’s a concept, it’s
not a design. When I saw this the first thing I thought of
was the height, and it’s not that it’s unreasonable to have
a 50’ tall building in town, but is this the thing that we
would do it for, and if this the right place to do it?
That’s why I asked the question at the beginning about the
heights of buildings on Winchester. Way at the north end of
town we have Netflix and that’s taller, but it’s at the
very north end of town and it’s not approximated by lots
and lots of single-family residential or the kind of units
that you’ll see in the part of Winchester you’re on.
I think that the concept makes a lot of sense,
but what I’m hearing is that because of the requirements
for an assisted living facility it has to be more than
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
really might be appropriate for the site. It’s 1.3 acres
and it’s in a residential neighborhood with just single
stories. The push back coming from residents is that it
doesn’t fit well into the neighborhood.
Getting back to whether the project is approvable
or not, certainly the Town desires more housing units,
certainly there is a need for assisted living, we have an
aging population, but this seems like it’s too much. I can
imagine a scenario where if it met the height limit it
might be possible to see this fitting in, but then it
sounds like it won’t pencil out for the operators that need
that, so maybe there is another site that would be more
appropriate for assisted living, but as it stands right now
I couldn’t make the findings for the Variance for the
height.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you for those comments.
Commissioner Clark.
COMMISSIONER CLARK: Thank you. I will share a
few of my thoughts. I think it’s really important to go
into this with the mindset that opportunities like this
don’t come up all the time and we only get one shot at this
really, that probably whatever happens with this property
is what it will look like for our entire lives, so I just
think it’s really important to think about that.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I’m hearing a lot of people saying that we need
this, but not here, that this is definitely something
important, but we need it somewhere else, but I believe we
would hear that pretty much anywhere that we put it, and so
the way I see it is it is being proposed here.
During my site visit I felt like it fit in pretty
well actually and the properties that it would be replacing
aren’t any major loss or anything, which is great. The
slope to me is pretty unique, and so I would be able to
make the finding that they’re facing unique topographical
challenges.
Also I think it’s important to remember that more
height is more units, so to lower the height and lose 30
units, that is 30 people who would not have this place to
go, and something important with an older adult living
community is that each of those units could mean an entire
single-family home that’s opening up because somebody would
otherwise be staying in their home because they didn’t have
somewhere like this to go, because it is something that
we’re lacking.
I also think the North Forty taught us an
important lesson about height, which is that 5’ can make a
really big difference aesthetically in the sense that
essentially we kept the height so low that when they got to
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
65
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the max they just flattened it and it looks horrible to
many people—I kind of like it—but if we had allowed even 3-
5’ more they would have been able to do an aesthetically
pleasing roof and it would look better without impeding
people’s views more, so I also think when we talk about the
height in numbers we need to think about what we’re really
getting for what we might be losing.
I like Commissioner Janoff’s idea for more lot
coverage and less height; I think that would be something
worth looking at.
Something else I wanted to mention is I’ve rarely
seen the Consulting Architect have no changes, so I think
that says a lot about this project in that they’re at least
doing it in the best way possible probably.
I’m personally in favor of the project. I think
that they did it really tastefully, I felt like it fit in
well, and I think I would be able to make the findings
necessary to grant the two Variances.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you for your comments,
Commissioner Clark. Other Commissioners? Commissioner
Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I want to echo some of what
Commissioner Clark just said and what all the Commissioners
have said so far.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
It is really well designed architecturally, and I
was also surprised to see no changes recommended. I do
think that the pictures that we’ve seen do a good job of
showing what the building will actually look like, maybe
not how it will really sit in the entire neighborhood—that
requires a little bit more imagination—but I do think that
it is really well designed and I do agree that the
topography provides a challenge.
I think that the reality is moving forward we
know that the State is going to continue to require us to
allow for more density, and so I agree that if the height
can be brought down a little tiny bit without compromising
the integrity of the structure looking proportioned and
nice, and we would not want the roof to be gone.
I do agree that having more lot coverage would be
ideal. This is a facility that 50% even just seems like not
that much for a memory care or assisted living facility. I
know outdoor and green spaces are important, and I
understand the neighbors want some barrier and buffer and
allowance for a lot of vegetation, which I understand, but
50% or even a little bit more than that if we could figure
out how to get the height down just like a tiny bit to
appease people, that this is something that I would be
comfortable with, and I do think, like Commissioner Clark
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
just said, because of the topography that I could make the
findings to grant the Variances.
Lastly, I want to say that I think that we should
try really hard to come to a compromise and make this
project work, because similar to North Forty and there are
just so many alternative pathways now for getting
development done, and I think this is a good place for this
facility.
Maybe it is a little bit too high and maybe
that’s what Commissioner Hanssen was really just mentioning
more than the type of facility it is, because I do think
that the vet is there and it’s kind of a mix; it’s not
quite fully residential even though there are a lot of
people that live near there and it is near the school, but
it’s also a little bit of business, so I think it’s a good
location for this type of facility.
I do think that the neighbors said that they
would rather have something like this than apartments, and
I do think that having an apartment complex would make a
much larger impact with regard to traffic, with regard to
the parking issues, with regard to just a lot of the noise,
having people in and out in general.
I think that I really want this to work because
we don’t get a lot of opportunities to do this and we need
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
68
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to try to attempt to help with housing getting built in
town for RHNA requirements and numbers, so I think that
this is a really good opportunity and I hope that we can
get somewhere, because we don’t want to be that place where
developers are coming in and using Builder’s Remedy and
stuff. We’ve talked about that here, we’ve talked about
that when we’ve been in our General Plan meetings and our
Housing Element meetings and all of that, and I know we
really want to avoid going down that path, so I hope that
we can come to a compromise.
CHAIR BARNETT: Commissioner Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Thank you. I would hope
that the Planning Commission is not making a decision
tonight based on a fear of what a different project might
look like. I think we need to evaluate this on its face
value and its benefit to this area. Builder’s Remedies are
going to happen, and these bills that builders are going to
try to use are going to happen, but I don’t want to
compromise a project for fear that that would happen, so I
just want to make that point.
The other thing I would like to add, again having
had more experience with senior communities than I ever
really wanted to, independent living is not a part of this
project. Independent living in my view would want to
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
accommodate much more open space. When you are talking
about assisted living individuals, it’s people who don’t
have a lot of mobility to start and then it gets worse.
Providing as many units as we can I think is a priority, so
I wouldn’t want to lose 30 units. I would want the height
reduced, but if you can put more units on the ground and
take 50%-60% more land to do it, I’d like to know whether
the developer would be open to rethinking the layout if we
provide the opportunity to take up more space. I think
that’s a reasonable place to go.
I’m not going to suggest any reengineering or
architecting of this building, which is quite beautiful, as
we’ve said, but I think it could be done—and this isn’t
going to sound fair to the future residents perhaps—in not
so luxurious a fashion. It can be a practical and
beautiful, caring, and welcoming environment. It doesn’t
need to have 9’ ceilings, and you could have smaller
spaces. See how we could rethink the overall layout to get
you the numbers you want, but in a more compact, maybe
lower slung configuration.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you for that. Other
comments? Commissioner Burnett.
COMMISSIONER BURNETT: Yes, thank you. This is a
confusing one, because I think your project is beautiful. I
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
mean, it really is. I think the design architecture is
really great, the way the building moves, and it’s really
what you want.
I’m having issues at where it is. Somehow I don’t
think it’s appropriate there coming into Los Gatos. I have
a member over at the Terraces. There are a lot of
ambulances coming and going all the time; someone is coming
in and going out. I mean there are a lot of transportation
issues.
You’re by the school. You’re talking about 351
daily trips, a lot of traffic right in that area, and I
know the peak numbers in the morning and the evening are
lower than the office building before that was approved,
but it just seems too big, too massive, too tall, and I
don’t think it works there. If you can make a smaller
version of it, maybe it would work better for me, but I
really think it is a beautiful project and I commend you
for that, but coming into Los Gatos and seeing this massive
project there, I just don’t think it’s right for Los Gatos,
our General Plan, and what we’re trying to achieve for our
town.
And it’s getting so hard now that we have to be
really cautious on what we move forward, because then you
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
71
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
set a precedent for the next project and the next project,
so it’s very complex and sort of difficult. Thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Commissioner Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: I would just like to
clarify one point. We hear each project de novo. These
project decisions are not setting a precedent. It should
not be setting a precedent. Each site is unique, each set
of plans is unique, and so I don’t want Commissioners to
feel like approving this project sets an unfortunate
precedent. We hear each and every item on our agendas as a
brand new, without precedent, item. So I just want to be
clear that in my view the Planning Commission doesn’t set
precedent with decisions, it considers each project on its
own merits and makes a determination.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you for that reminder.
Commissioner Burnett and then Commissioner Thomas.
COMMISSIONER BURNETT: I don’t think I was saying
that how you describe it, that a precedent is setting, I’m
saying that it seems to open a door for more and more
people to come in, or more developers to bring in their
projects for more density or intensity, just to clarify.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Just a quick response. We
know from the General Plan, we know from the Housing
Element, that we are going to be seeing more and more of
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
72
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
these large developments, and as I think Commissioner Clark
indicated, there are always going to be issues with these.
These are unique projects in terms of density and height
and we’ll see more and more of those going forward, as we
must if we’re going to meet our RHNA numbers. It’s
uncomfortable for the Town, it’s uncomfortable for the
residents, we understand that, but that’s the fact of
needing to create more housing in a pretty compact area
such as Los Gatos, so I think we’re going to see more of
these difficult decisions.
CHAIR BARNETT: Commissioner Thomas, you were
next, and then Commissioner Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I have a question for
Staff. I know that we are using the 2020 General Plan, I
understand that, but what would have been the lot coverage
for the 2040? I’m just wondering percentage-wise just
because that did go through some scrutiny and everything,
so it might give an indicator of what some of the public
might think about a change in lot coverage.
JENNIFER ARMER: Thank you for that question. I
can look that up, though as you said, at this time and
based on our evaluation the rules that do apply to this
project is the 2020 Land Use Element, and so that is what
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
governs, but I can take a quick look and find that number
for you.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Okay, thank you. Then my
other question was a follow up to Commissioner Hanssen’s
mention of the facility that’s being built on Blossom Hill.
Where is that?
JENNIFER ARMER: It’s 400 Blossom Hill Road. It’s
the construction that you see as you’re going north on
Highway 17 on the right; that is the project that she was
referring to.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: So the lot is bigger?
JENNIFER ARMER: Yes, it was a different
configuration.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: And also topography-wise
it’s different, so okay.
JENNIFER ARMER: And I can answer your other
question as well. In the 2040 General Plan Land Use Element
we actually switched. Instead of a lot coverage it was
floor area, and so the maximum height in the Office zone
was still at 35’ and the FAR was 1.0.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you. Still open for
discussion. Commissioner Hanssen, you had your hand raised.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: I wanted to echo what
Commissioner Janoff said earlier. I would certainly hope
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that no Planning Commission in the Town of Los Gatos or
anywhere would bow to pressure from a developer to threaten
SB 30 or any other law in California in terms of when we
have a discretionary decision sitting in front of us and we
have zoning codes to deal with that we would be intimidated
by that, and I personally will not.
That being said, I did want to reiterate what I
said earlier, which is that when we saw this at CDAC back
in 2020 I was in favor, and I still am in favor, of the
idea of the senior assisted living project that’s here, but
this comes with having to take pretty big Variances against
our building standards, and as I said, I don’t know that we
have much of any buildings in Los Gatos that are 50’, and
we may have to go there for the Housing Element. I chaired
the Housing Element and I’ve been sitting on the General
Plan Committee for years. We may have to go there with the
developers, but is this the building where we’re doing it
for the first time, and is this the right location to do
that?
I asked Staff about the property of the senior
facility that’s being constructed on Blossom Hill. That is
sort of down in a hole, it’s next to an apartment building
complex, but as you’re driving down there were other
commercial buildings in that area, so that was an easy
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
thing because there weren’t a lot of impacts to the nearby
neighbors, they weren’t going to be looking at people’s
windows looking at them.
I’ll go back also to what Commissioner Janoff
said. I think that it would be a good idea if we can try to
make this project work, because if you compare it to the
alternatives for residential, this is going to be less
impact to traffic, because people will be spending more
time in their units versus a traditional apartment
building, and I personally would be willing to go there on
trading off the lot coverage for the height, because I
think the height is a big deal and people do value their
views of the surrounding mountains and all that, and like I
said, we haven’t been going there with 50’ heights.
CHAIR BARNETT: Commissioner Janoff, and
Commissioner Thomas afterwards.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Just to clarify that the
way I read the plans the 50’ height is only because the
back side of the lot drops off, and that affords the
opportunity for more units, so that’s a unique feature of
the topography. I think calling it a 50’ height building is
probably not accurate. I mean, it is.
But my question overall is I guess what I’m
hearing are some votes in favor of approving this as is,
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
76
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and some votes in favor of asking the Applicant if they
would be willing to go back and reconsider more lot
coverage for a reduced height. Can we ask the Applicant?
JENNIFER ARMER: Thank you for that question. If
you have a specific question for the Applicant, the Chair
could choose to open just for a specific question.
CHAIR BARNETT: I would be amenable to opening
the public hearing just for that purpose.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: So to just clarify what
that question would be, and it’s generally a yes or no
question, would the Applicant be willing to go back and
reconsider their plans, keeping the senior facility as
envisioned but with a larger footprint and a reduced height
to get it under the 35’, would they be willing to consider
that?
CHAIR BARNETT: Does the representative of
Swenson want to deal with that question?
JESSIE BRISTOW: Good evening, Jessie Bristow,
Swenson Builders. I was discussing with my colleague about
where maybe we could fit some of that lot coverage if we
were granted additional space. There are two portions, the
north wing and the south wing, but unfortunately that’s
where we have our C-3, which is our storm water control, so
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that would be a significant redesign and I’m not sure if
we’d actually be able to capture all that water runoff.
In discussing potentially the height, at this
juncture I don't know if we could accommodate the 35’ a
hundred percent. The first floor has all the amenities, it
has a full kitchen, so dropping that plate would be really
challenging, because that’s where everyone would exist, so
to speak, when they’re not in the room. But the second
floor and the third floor we believe we could drop that
floor plate about a foot. I know it’s not much, but that
would go from the highest point 2’ lower, and then we might
be able to adjust the mansard roof by 0.5’. Again, I know
it’s not much, but that’s 2.5’ potential reduction just
speaking on it off the cuff today. Thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you, sir. Appreciate the
clarification. Other questions or comments? Commissioner
Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Do you feel like your
question was answered?
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: No. Thank you for asking.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I kind of have a follow up
question to that, because I understand that you can’t say
yes, we could totally move a few things around and
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
78
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
reconfigure, but I think the question was would you
consider do that?
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: The essence of the question
is would the Applicant be interested in a continuance on
the part of the Planning Commission to allow them to try to
achieve some of the objectives the Planning Commission has
obviously voiced?
CHAIR BARNETT: The public portion has been
extended.
JESSIE BRISTOW: Thank you. Jessie Bristow,
again. Unfortunately at this time I don’t have authority to
say that we can do that, but essentially losing that whole
floor would be 30 units, and that would be a challenge for
us. They are valuable units to us and to the Town, so that
would be difficult at this juncture.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: So I’m hearing the answer
is no. Thank you.
JESSIE BRISTOW: Sorry.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you. Vice Chair Raspe.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Thanks, Chair. I’m going to
join in some respects with my fellow commissioners and
depart in others.
First of all, I’ll join in saying this town needs
assisted living facilities, as I think all cities in our
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
79
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
country. We’re an aging population; we need these. We also
need significant numbers to reach our RHNA allocations, and
this project satisfied both those goals.
Some Commissioners have indicated that they think
it’s a difficult location. I would argue to the contrary. I
think one of the speakers on Zoom indicated that these
facilities should be placed in transitional zones. To me,
this feels like a transitional zone. You’re coming down
Winchester and it’s changing, you’re coming into town, and
it feels like a great location for exactly this type of
facility. You’re going to have, I imagine, rescue units
coming here from time to time. Winchester is exactly the
type of street you want those types of vehicles and
facilities to use as opposed to quieter residential
streets.
So for me the location, the type of project, the
number of units all make sense for a variety of reasons,
and as everybody agrees, the architecture is beautiful.
Now, there are a couple of things I don’t love about this
project.
First of all, I think the public outreach was
probably not handled as well as it could have been, and I
would hope that on a going forward basis the developer and
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the neighbors would develop a more insightful, helpful
discourse.
The height for me is the most problematic, and
it’s the most problematic on the Winchester side, not on
the downslope side. I agree this is a unique lot situation,
although I guess technically it’s four lots, but the
falling away of the street creates the 50’ issue, so I
think it’s less of an issue more so on the Winchester side.
I’m very happy to hear that by my calculations
we’ve captured perhaps 2.5’ of reduction in height just in
our discussion here tonight by reducing one floor plate and
the roof alignment, so while I would have hoped for, again,
a better discourse at the first instance and a smaller
building currently, I’m satisfied with what we’ve discussed
here tonight and I would be willing to allow this project
to go as we’ve discussed tonight with the minor changes
we’ve discussed.
CHAIR BARNETT: Sounds like a possible motion,
but we’ll see what Commissioner Clark has.
COMMISSIONER CLARK: Thank you. I agree. I just
want to add that I would appreciate it if my fellow
commissioners can really consider approving this project. I
feel like this is about the best we’re going to get. Like
Vice Chair Raspe said, it’s in a transitional zone, which
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
is exactly where you might want a project like this to go,
because its zoning is more Commercial but it will have
people living in it, and the location makes a lot of sense
to me.
I think when people are saying it’s too tall, or
this isn’t what we want in Los Gatos, I would like to hear
that taken one step further as to what is so bad about it
being however many feet too tall versus us getting more
units, or getting this much needed older adult assisted
living, and I feel like we’ve been needing something like
this for a long time and we have it right here before us,
and I don’t feel like the reasons that we are finding to
deny it outweigh the benefits of this project that is
sitting in front of us, and so those are my thoughts.
CHAIR BARNETT: And we appreciate those. Other
comments? Commissioner Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Thank you. I like where
Vice Chair Raspe is going with his potential motion
perhaps, and I do appreciate the quick calculations and
willingness to drop the 2.5’, and I agree with Commissioner
Janoff about the backside down Shelburne height is not as
much of a concern as the Winchester side, and especially
for part of that because of the neighbors that live there.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
82
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I do want to follow up and say that I also want
to echo what Commissioners Hanssen and Janoff said about
we’re not a town and we’re definitely not a Commission
that… I do not feel like I can be bullied by developers
with the threats of these State laws that are coming down
and with Builder’s Remedy and everything. I know that
sometimes residents, like everyone here is working and
doing a job, and the reason that we know about these
possibilities is because we have volunteered our time and
energy to being here, and I know that I talk to a lot of
residents that don’t know about these possibilities, and I
know that people don’t want us to become a town that is
known for those things to possibly happen because of any
situation.
My comments more are related to the fact that I
want the public to know that we’re not in a place where we
can just say we don’t want buildings to be built in town
anymore and we don’t want development to happen anymore.
That time is gone, and I know that it’s upsetting to a lot
of people, so I hope that we can agree to all participate
in the process to cooperate, and our job as the Commission
is not to be bullied by developers but to try to meet
everyone’s needs, the community’s needs, our RHNA goals,
all of our everything, and so I do think that, as
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commissioner Clark said, this is a really great opportunity
for us to meet a lot of our goals and appease a lot of the
concerns with the neighbors, and I really think that it
could be a great project for our community, and so I hope
that we can try to come to an agreement tonight also.
CHAIR BARNETT: We’ve had a lot of discussion.
Perhaps we should have a motion and see how that goes. Do
we have a motion from the Commissioners on this Item 3?
Commissioner Thomas.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I just have a question I
guess about some of the motion. So Vice Chair Raspe, you
are thinking that if we say you can drop 2.5’ that’s what
you want to meet? Do we want to say you have to meet the
35’ at least for the very front of the building along
Winchester? I’m curious to see what kind of conditions we
would suggest putting on this before we go through with the
motion.
CHAIR BARNETT: My comment is that we should get
a motion on the table and then discuss it. Commissioner
Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: I’ll defer to the motion
maker.
ATTORNEY WHELAN: I’ll pop in. This is Gabrielle
Whelan, Town Attorney. I recommend confirming with the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Applicant that they can accept a condition that would
reduce the structure by 2.5’, and I recommend that the
Applicant specify exactly where that reduction would occur.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you for that input, and
we’ll ask for the response.
JESSIE BRISTOW: Thank you. Jessie Bristow,
Swenson Builders, again.
So to clarify, we can drop 1’ on the second
floor, we can drop 1’ on the third floor, and then we can
drop 0.5’ on the mansard roof, so it would be the 2.5’.
CHAIR BARNETT: Does that satisfy the concern of
the Town Attorney?
ATTORNEY WHELAN: Yes, thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: All right, so Vice Chair Raspe.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Okay, let me try. I move that
we approve the demolition of one existing office and four
residential buildings for the construction of an assisted
living and memory care facility, Variance for maximum
height and lot coverage of the zone, merger of four lots
into one, and removal of large protected trees on property
zoned O located 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard and 17484
Shelburne Way, APNs 529-11-013, -038, -039, and -040,
Architecture and Site Applications S-21-008, Conditional
Use Permit Application U-21-010, Variance Application V-21-
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
003, Subdivision Application M-22-008, and Mitigated
Negative Declaration ND-22-001.
I can make the required findings for CEQA that an
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been
prepared for this project, that it has been determined that
the project will not have a significant impact on the
environment with the adoption of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting program
to mitigate potential impacts.
I can make the finding that the project meets the
objective standards of Chapter 29 of the Town Code except
for the height and lot coverage Variance requested.
I make the finding for the demolition of existing
structures as required by Section 29.10.09030(e) of the
Town Code.
I can make the required findings for granting of
a Variance Application as required by 29.20.070 of the Town
Code for granting a Variance Application specifically that
because of the special circumstances applicable to the
property, including its topography.
I can make the required findings for a
Conditional Use Permit as required by 29.20.190 of the Town
Code for granting a Conditional Use Permit.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I can make the required findings to deny a
Subdivision Application as required by Section 66474 of the
State Subdivision Map Act.
I can make the finding that the proposed building
is consistent with applicable provisions of the Commercial
Design Guidelines.
I can make the finding as required by Section
29.20.150 of the Town Code that consideration in review of
an Architecture and Site Application were all made in
reviewing this project.
The motion is subject to the following
alterations as to the plans submitted by the Applicant in
that the second floor and third floors will each be reduced
by 1’ each in floor plate height, and that the roof will be
reduced 6” such that the overall height of the project will
be reduced by 2.5’.
JENNIFER ARMER: Through the Chair, I just wanted
to clarify the findings for the lot merger as slightly
unique. It’s that none of the findings for denial can be
made. I just wanted to clarify for the record that that was
your intent.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: The motion is modified to
reflect so.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
87
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you. We’ll look for a
second. Commissioner Clark.
COMMISSIONER CLARK: I second the motion.
CHAIR BARNETT: Any discussion on the motion?
JENNIFER ARMER: First, Chair, just additional
clarification that the motion does include the Conditions
of Approval in Attachments 3 and 4 and the plans provided.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: So amended.
JENNIFER ARMER: Thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: So now we’ll move on to
discussion. We’ve had quite a bit already, and we may know
the general feelings of the Commissioners, but I’ll give
you another opportunity, should you wish.
I just want to add that I think the concerns of
the neighbors are serious in consideration. I think the
building does have a very large presence; I was somewhat
overwhelmed when I saw it. I considered the fact that the
architectural consultant, Mr. Cannon, did not actually make
a determination of neighborhood compatibility, which he
usually does, but I’ve been persuaded by my fellow
commissioners that the project overall meets appropriate
needs for the community, and RHNA needs, in addition to
serving the aging population of our town, and so I am going
to support the motion. Commissioner Thomas.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
88
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I know it’s only 6” for the
roof, but can we include in the motion that the Town
Consulting Architect approves that everything will still be
within balance with the changes proposed, or would that
require a whole new thing?
CHAIR BARNETT: That’s a proposed amendment to
the motion.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Well, let’s see what she
says.
JENNIFER ARMER: I could provide clarification;
it sounded like a question for Staff.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Yes.
JENNIFER ARMER: That is something that could be
provided, but on a building of this size I don’t expect
that that will significantly modify the appearance of the
roof. One of the things that we do look at for this
particular roof is that it is screening the mechanical
equipment and 6” is unlikely to make a significant change
to how well that is screened, though the mechanical
equipment is still going to be the same height, which is
part of the height of the building.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Okay, then that’s fine with
me. I just want to make sure we’re not messing up the…too
much.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
89
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
My other question was if we wanted to just ensure
that there is significant screening. In the pictures we got
it didn’t really seem like it, but making sure that in the
Conditions of Approval that they specified it to be an
evergreen screen for the neighbors.
CHAIR BARNETT: We’ll ask the maker of the
motion.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Question for Staff. Is that
part of the submitted plans? Was it evergreen screening?
JENNIFER ARMER: I would have to take a look at
what the species are in the landscape plan. We could
specify.
VICE CHAIR RASPE: If not, the Conditions of
Approval would be appropriate evergreen screening.
JENNIFER ARMER: On the south elevation in
particular?
VICE CHAIR RASPE: Correct, yes.
CHAIR BARNETT: Other discussion? If not, I’ll
call the question and ask for a raising of hands for those
who are in support of the motion.
JENNIFER ARMER: I’m sorry, Chair. We did just
add a condition for evergreen screening along the south
side. I wanted to make sure the seconder accepted.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you for that.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 8/9/2023
Item #3, 15860-15894 Winchester Boulevard
and 17484 Shelburne Way
90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER CLARK: Yes, thank you.
CHAIR BARNETT: So now we’ll proceed and ask
those in favor of the motion to raise their hand. And those
opposed? So it passes 5-2. Are there appeal rights on this
matter?
JENNIFER ARMER: There is, thank you, Chair. The
decision of the Commission can be appealed to Town Council
by any interested person as defined by Town Code Section
29.10.020 within ten days on forms available online with
fees paid. Final deadline is 4:00pm on the tenth day.
CHAIR BARNETT: Thank you for that.
(END)