Draft Minutes of the November 8, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION
REPORT
MEETING DATE: 12/13/2023
ITEM NO: 2
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
NOVEMBER 8, 2023
The Planning Commission of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Regular Meeting on
Wednesday, November 8, 2023, at 7:00 p.m.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 PM
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Jeffrey Barnett, Commissioner Melanie Hanssen, Commissioner Kathryn Janoff,
and Commissioner Emily Thomas.
Absent: Vice Chair Steve Raspe, Commissioner Susan Burnett.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION)
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.501 Roxbury Lane
Fence Height Exception Application FHE-23-004.
APN 407-31-026
Property Owner/Applicant/Appellant: Jared Susoev
Project Planner: Maria Chavarin
Consider an Appeal of a Community Development Director Decision to Deny a Fence
Height Exception Request to Relocate an Existing Six-Foot Tall Fence Within the
Required Street Side Yard Setback on Property Zoned R-1:8. Categorically Exempt
Pursuant to the Adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303: New Construction or Conversion of Small
Structures, and Section 15301: Existing Facilities.
Maria Chavarin, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report.
PAGE 2 OF 5
MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 8, 2023
Opened Public Comment.
Jared Susoev, Applicant/Appellant
- There is a current six-foot fence at the property, but a remodel forces us to move the
fence, and I understand any addition or fence movement is to be three-feet tall. It is my
back yard that is exposed to the foot traffic, animals, and cars going up and down More
Avenue. Existing neighborhood homes on More Avenue have six-foot tall fences abutted to
their property lines, so my fence will maintain a consistent feel with the neighborhood. My
neighbors are all in favor of me moving the fence and no one has concerns. We are at the
intersection of More Avenue and Roxbury Lane where there is a traffic problem with
teenagers driving through there recklessly. This fence adds protection from kids spinning
donuts in this intersection, which has been happening since long before I bought the
property. Safety for my family and pets is my number one concern.
Jesse Tannenbaum
- I’m the immediate next-door neighbor to the north of the subject site and we share a
property line. A short three-foot fence is not in step with the neighborhood where many
side and back yards face the roadway and have six-foot fences. There is also a safety factor
with respect to the family’s two grade school children who play in the fenced -in yard area.
I fully support the approval of a six-foot fence on the adjacent property with no objection
at all.
Closed Public Comment.
Commissioners discussed the matter.
MOTION: Motion by Commissioner Janoff to grant an appeal of a Community
Development Director decision to deny a fence height exception request
and approve the fence height exception for 501 Roxbury Lane due to
special circumstance. Seconded by Commissioner Thomas.
The maker of the motion clarified that the motion would include the requirement that the
proposed six-foot fence be located starting from the end of the existing fence facing Roxbury
Lane, and then extend along More Avenue toward the rear of the lot and not be located
closer than four feet from the property line/sidewalk.
VOTE: Motion passed 3-1, with Commissioner Hanssen dissenting.
PAGE 3 OF 5
MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 8, 2023
2. 124 Garden Hill Drive
Fence Height Exception Application FHE-23-005
APN 424-23-084
Property Owner: Rushikesh Kulkarni
Applicant/Appellant: Martin Lettunich
Project Planner: Ryan Safty
Consider an Appeal of a Community Development Director Decision to Deny a Fence
Height Exception Request for Construction of a Six-Foot Tall Fence Located Within the
Required Front Yard Setback, Street Side Yard Setback, and Corner Sight Triangle on
Property Zoned R-1:8. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15303: New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, and Section 15301: Existing
Facilities.
Ryan Safty, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.
Opened Public Comment.
Martin Lettunich, Applicant/Appellant
- In the photograph shown on screen the portion of the fence outlined in red along the side
yard was approved and permitted, so I don’t know why all of a sudden that is not
permitted. It used to go all the way around, and then we removed the section just above
the three-foot line. The problem we have is there is absolutely no problem with viewing
any traffic or pedestrians at the site; there is plenty of room on the sidewalk. The main
issue here is there isn’t an intersecting street. Our lot abuts only one street, Garden Hill
Drive, and under most codes that is considered an interior lot, not a corner lot, so the rules
the Town is applying to the street and our property are not appropriate to begin with. As
shown in the video, there is absolutely no vision problems from the vehicle. The concern
regarding the coyote is because the owner has small children that play in the yard. The
required setback would take almost a third of the owner’s yard away . The neighbors are
supportive of the fence height, and they have the support of the definition under what the
streets are and whether or not there needs to be a traffic triangle there.
Michael
- I live on Garden Hill Drive and drive past this corner every day. I very much support the
height of this fence; in fact, when I first saw the shorter fence, I thought that it was a mar in
the vision of the neighborhood and it was strange to look into my neighbor’s back yard. I
have no concerns about visibility as I’m coming around Garden Hill Drive in either direction,
and I’m aware of the coyotes and other wild animals and agree there is a safety risk for his
family.
PAGE 4 OF 5
MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 8, 2023
Himanshu
- I live on Farm Hill Way, the adjoining street. I also cross this street daily and I have had not
one visibility problem on this corner, so I don’t think that’s a concern. I agree with the
concern regarding the coyotes and safety and do feel that a higher fence would be
beneficial.
Niket
- We live just across the street on Green Hill Way. I have no concerns with the height of the
fence being increased. In fact, our kids play in Rushikesh’s back yard and we get worried
with the shorter fence for our kids as well.
Nguyen Luu
- I live on Green Hill Way. I also drive through this road every day on my way to Highway 17.
When I first saw the fence one side was high and one was low, and it looked strange. The
safety concern is my car was broken into on my cul-de-sac, and two of my neighbors have
had people come into their yards and break into their cars at night, so the reality is Los
Gatos is not a safe town and it is important to feel safe living here.
Martin Lettunich, Applicant/Appellant
- One thing I want to point out is when you look at an intersecting street the corner lots are
usually on each side of that street and it forms the area that the triangle applies to; there is
no such thing on this street. There is no shoulder or curb on our side for a triangle to fit on,
and on the other side it’s the two lots that are on either side of Farm Hill Way that would
be considered corner lots. Our lot is not a corner lot.
Closed Public Comment.
Commissioners discussed the matter.
MOTION: Motion by Commissioner Thomas to deny an appeal of a Community
Development Director to deny a fence height exception request for 124
Garden Hill Road. Seconded by Commissioner Hanssen.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS
REPORT FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Jennifer Armer, Planning Manager
• The Town Council met November 7, 2023:
PAGE 5 OF 5
MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 8, 2023
o Continued discussion on and creation of the Housing Element Overlay Zone with
a vote to apply it to all but one of the sites in the Sites Hnventory.
o The discussion on applying the Housing Element Overlay Zone to the site at 101
South Santa Cruz Avenue, also referenced as the post office site, was postponed
to a future meeting when further information is available.
o Adopted the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance updates, choosing to retain the
parking requirements rather than the Planning Commission recommendation to
remove them, but otherwise upheld the Planning Commission’s
recommendations as well as some additional staff-recommended design
standards.
• Discussion of the Story Pole Policy was initiated on August 1 , 2023 and scheduled to
continue to the Town Council on December 5, 2023.
• Planning Commission recruitments remain open until November 10, 2023, due at 4:00
p.m. Applications are available online through the Clerk Department. Interviews are
scheduled for December 6, 2023.
• A special Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for November 15 , 2023, to consider
the updated draft of the Housing Element.
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS/COMMISSION MATTERS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:29 p.m.
This is to certify that the foregoing is a true
and correct copy of the minutes of the
November 8, 2023 meeting as approved by the
Planning Commission.
_____________________________
/s/ Vicki Blandin
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank