10 Attachment 9 - Public CommentFrom:Nicole Ricci
To:Clerk
Subject:Architecture and Site Application S-21-008
Date:Monday, September 18, 2023 10:26:30 PM
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Dear Los Gatos Town Council Members,
This email concerns Architecture and Site Application S-21-008 and the Appeal of a Planning
Commission decision for the property located at the corner of Shelburne Way and WinchesterBlvd.
Please deny the variances for coverage and height for the reasons listed here:
- The variances are not minor adjustments to existing rules, but rather are tantamount totripling the scope and size of what was intended to be built on a lot of this size. Instead of a
building of 30,000 sq ft, this project will be 81,000 + sq ft! And that's not a typo! The samegoes for the height. It allows three stories when there are no three story buildings in existence
in the entire area. It allows for 50 ft high structures where only 35 ft should be allowed.Furthermore, there is no meaningful setback from the busy Winchester Blvd or surrounding
neighbors, who have lived in the community for many years.
- Many members of the surrounding community that will be impacted have not received noticeeither in the mail or in the form of being able to view accurate story poles or other
physical markers. Instead, a video that few in the community are even aware of, was created inlieu of redoing the existing inaccurate story poles. People incorrectly believe that the current
story poles are accurate when, in fact, they are not. Using the weather as an excuse is notappropriate. We live in an area with great weather, and the poles can be put up during a time
of the year when there is less wind and rain. The developers simply want to obscure theobscene enormity of their project from the community to avoid mobilizing dissent.
- The road that passes this site was recently reduced from two lanes to one lane to widen
bicycle lanes to encourage slower driving and more bicycle riding. The reduced roadconfiguration is incompatible with an enormous assisted living and memory care facility. Such
facilities require wide roads with multiple lanes where ambulances and other medicalpersonnel can swiftly transport residents to doctors and hospitals as medical needs arise. To
impose a large number of medical transport emergencies into an already congested, one laneroad, neighborhood with a great deal of elementary school traffic during the week and beach
traffic on the weekend is extremely unsafe for everyone involved, including the futureresidents of this proposed enormous facility.
- The project callously removes many trees that are deemed protected such as Coastal Oaks.
-The project thoughtlessly blots out the ridgeline from view with its unprecedented demands
for three stories in a neighborhood that does not have any three story buildings.
-The developer is clearly trying to maximize his own profits without thought or care about theimpact to the future residents of the assisted living community or the current residents that live
in the area. He seeks to maximize profit and density at the expense of quality of life foreveryone else that will live in and around this project.
ATTACHMENT 17
My name is Nicole Ricci, and I have lived in the community since 2008. Although I couldhave lived anywhere, one of the main reasons that I chose to live and raise a family here was
the open and rural feeling of the area. When I bought a home here, it was with theunderstanding that the town of Los Gatos had consistent rules for development that were
fairly applied to all developers. It is understandable that developers want to maximize theirprofits in a project by pushing the envelope and requesting variances, but what is requested
here goes far beyond pushing the envelope. To call it a variance is misleading. A varianceimplies a slight deviation from the existing rules. What has been requested and approved by
the planning commission is a tripling of the original project! To call it a variance is amisleading euphemism. It really is outrageous and beyond the bounds of reasonable land
development for the area.
Sincerely,Nicole Ricci
Monte Sereno, CA. 95030
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
From:Mike McNelly
To:Clerk
Subject:Architecture and Site Application S-21-008
Date:Tuesday, September 19, 2023 8:35:59 AM
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Dear Los Gatos Council Members,
This email is regarding Architecture and Site Application S-21-008 (Shelburne Way and
Winchester Blvd). I strongly urge you to deny the unprecedented variances for height and sizeof the proposed structure.
The plot of land in question is old, run-down and seems under utilized, so there is considerable
community support for allowing developers to build there. However, there are two significantimpediments to the proposed building.
First, recent changes to Winchester Blvd were implemented to punish those who drive cars by
reducing this critical street down to one lane of traffic. I'm sure this was part of some sort ofgreen initiative, but the result has not been any sort of boon to public transit (the buses are all
still empty), nor to bicyclists (there are no more bikes on the road now than before). The onlyresult is that traffic is now a snarled mess and kids can't get to school on time. While the
Planning Division might not care about that, they should care if they're trying to authorize aHUGE new structure in the area. In addition to a significant increase in regular traffic, this
senior living home is going to need quick access to ambulance services, but the city has madethe road impassable during parts of the day. One cannot mandate choking off a main road
AND then add a huge new user of that road at the same time. Some senior is going to diebecause of this, and the city will get sued for millions.
Second, the Planning Division in this matter have acted in a deceitful (and possibly criminal)
manner by intentionally misleading the public about the proposed changes. The developer putup short story poles (35' ... that's still tall, as tall as the city allows). Later, in the dead of night,
the Planning Division granted a 40% height increase - and since they KNEW the communitywould hate the idea, they also granted the developer the right to conceal the change. They
knew very well that the community would see the OLD story poles, and not bother seeking outand watching some long, boring, difficult to locate video (a video that does not even paint an
accurate picture). Citizens in this community count on those orange poles to paint an accuratepicture of proposed changes. When the Planning Division chose to use the poles to deceive the
community, they set a new precedent of uncertainty and distrust.
I would love to see some sort of new structure built at this location, but the PlanningDivision's blatant disregard for traffic, existing resident view changes and safety - combined
with their ham-fisted attempt to deceive the community that they are supposed to serve is anabomination of governance. Everyone associated with approving the variance should be
ashamed of themselves.
I urge you again to deny the variances for coverage and height and to send a strong message tothe Planning Division to never try to pull a stunt like this again.
Michael McNelly