Loading...
Addendum with Exhibit 13..220 Belgatos Rd PREPARED BY: Jocelyn Shoopman Senior Planner Reviewed by: Planning Manager, Community Development Director, and Town Attorney 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6872 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT MEETING DATE: 01/22/2025 ITEM NO: 3 ADDENDUM DATE: January 21, 2025 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Consider an Appeal of a Development Review Committee Decision Approving a Subdivision of One Lot into Two Lots on Property Zoned R-1:10. Located at 220 Belgatos Road. APN 527-25-005. Subdivision Application M-24-011. Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15315: Minor Land Divisions. Property Owner: Union School District. Applicant: Robson Homes, LLC. Appellant: Mary Cangemi. Project Planner: Jocelyn Shoopman. REMARKS: Exhibit 13 includes additional correspondence from the appellant. EXHIBITS: Previously Received with the January 22, 2025, Staff Report: 1. Location Map 2. Required Findings 3. Conditions of Approval 4. Revised Recommended Conditions of Approval 5. Project Description 6. Summary of Neighborhood Outreach 7. December 10, 2024, Development Review Committee Meeting Minutes 8. Appeal of the Development Review Committee 9. Supplemental Correspondence from the Appellant 10. Applicant’s Response to Appeal 11. Applicant’s Response to Supplemental Correspondence from the Appellant 12. Project Plans Received with this Addendum Report: 13. Additional Correspondence from the Appellant This Page Intentionally Left Blank From: John Shepardson <> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2025 12:54 AM To: Jocelyn Shoopman <jshoopman@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Re: 220 Belgatos Lot Split (Can the PC Consider the Clear Publicly Expressed Intention for the Lot Split?) Jocelyn: I concede the only present request is for a lot split, which apparently doesn’t trigger a GP amendment. It seems to that when the clear intent of the split is to allow a significant residential development to replace open space and recreational fields, that the town should be able consider the clear and publicly expressed intention in evaluating whether to the split is consistent with the GP. It appears the DRC did not consider the intention for the split. Is there a law or policy that allows the PC to consider a clear and expressed intention for a lot split in determining whether to approve it? Particularly on a large development like this one? Perhaps this is a question for Gabrielle. Please include this email in the record. Respectfully, JAS EXHIBIT 13 This Page Intentionally Left Blank