M05-03-101
MINUTES OF THE TOWN COUNCIL/PARKING
AUTHORITY/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
MAY 3, 2010
The Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Regular Meeting on
Monday, May 3, 2010 at 7:00 P.M.
TOWN COUNCIL/PARKING AUTHORITY/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Diane McNutt, Vice Mayor Joe Pirzynski,
Council Member Steve Rice, Council Member Barbara Spector,
Council Member Mike Wasserman
Absent: None.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Kaitlyn Cook, Blossom Hill Elementary and Kirsten Cook, Fisher Middle
School led the Pledge of Allegiance. The audience was invited to participate.
PRESENTATION
Proclamation - Foster Care Month
Mayor Diane McNutt proclaimed May 2010 as Foster Care month.
Ms. Rapp accepted the proclamation on behalf of the foster families in Town
and thanked the community for their support.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
Mr. Martello stated that there was no Closed Session to report for this
meeting.
2
TOWN COUNCIL
COUNCIL/TOWN MANAGER REPORTS
Council Matters
Council Member Barbara Spector
Reported that she had the opportunity to attend the Santa Clara University
Law Alumni Recognition event honoring alumni who have achieved and
contributed to the community. Two of the honorees were Los Gatans: Court
Federal Judge, Ronald White and Attorney, Gordon Yamate.
Commented that she wanted to acknowledge them because they exemplify
the people in Los Gatos who contribute to the Town and community.
Vice Mayor Joe Pirzynski
Commented that on Friday, April 30, 2010 the Town celebrated Arbor Day by
planting trees at Bel Gatos Park, with another planting ceremony at Fisher
Middle School.
Acknowledged that the Town has been awarded the Tree City USA award for
the 30th year in a row.
Mayor Diane McNutt
Commented that the deadline to submit applications for the Senior of
Distinction Award is coming up.
Manager Matters
Mr. Larson
Commented on the success of the Town’s Volunteer Recognition event.
Commented that the Town has once again won the Cities Association Bocce
Ball tournament.
Commented that the Town and the Chamber of Commerce kicked off a new
program which began with Fashion Week and ended with a Wine W alk. The
event was a tremendous success for both the Town and the Chamber of
Commerce.
Commented that the Los Gatos Parents Co-operative Pre-school held their
annual Fantasy Faire for the first time on the Civic Center main lawn and the
event was attended by many.
Expressed appreciation of support from the Los Gatos Library, Los Gatos-
Monte Sereno Police Department, and Parks and Public Works in helping to
make the event a success.
Commented that the new lights on the expanded parking lot 6 are up and
operating.
Requested applicants for the Town's Boards and Commissions including the
Town's Youth Commission. Deadline to apply to the Youth Commission is
May 14, 2010 and the deadline to apply to the Town's other Boards and
Commissions will be June 11, 2010.
3
Manager Matters – Continued
Mayor Diane McNutt
Commented on the successful Dining for Life event which took place in Town
last Thursday night to support Aids services.
Did You Know…?
Nancy Dawn, Administrative Services Manager
Made a presentation on the Police Department’s On-line Reporting program
which can be used to report crimes where an officer would not need to come
out to take a report, to report lost and found items, to report abandoned
vehicles, to report graffiti, and for vacation house checks.
Commented that more information can be found at www.losgatosca.gov.
CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION)
1. Approve Council/Commission Retreat Minutes of April 19, 2010.
2. Adopt ordinance of the Town of Los Gatos amending Article IX of
Chapter 15 of the Town Code relating to the mitigation of road impacts
caused by construction projects. ORDINANCE 2189
3. Accept informational report on proposed refuse collection rate changes.
TOWN COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
4. Approve Council/Agency minutes of April 19, 2010.
MOTION: Motion by Council Member Steve Rice to approve Consent
Items #1-4.
Seconded by Vice Mayor Joe Pirzynski.
Council Member Mike Wasserman recused from Consent Items #1, #2, and #4
due to the fact that he was absent from the Town Council meeting of April 19, 2010.
VOTE: Consent Item #3 motion passed unanimously.
Consent Items #1, #2, and #4 motion passed 4/0.
4
VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS
Safe Routes to School Committee
Commented that the Committee has made a difference in the community by
working to make the streets safer for pedestrians and bicyclists and
recognized Council, staff and the community for their help and support for the
project.
Closed Verbal Communications
TOWN COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
PUBLIC HEARINGS
5. Library Project
a. Hold a public hearing pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33679
and adopt resolution adopting findings required by California Health and
Safety Code Section 33445 authorizing allocation of Redevelopment
Agency funds to the new library building. RESOLUTION 2010-044
b. Adopt resolution of the Los Gatos Town Council authorizing the
execution, sale and delivery of not to exceed $16,500,000 Certificates of
Participation, authorizing and directing execution of related lease
financing documents and trust agreement, approving official statement,
and authorizing official actions. RESOLUTION 2010-045
c. Adopt resolution of the Los Gatos Redevelopment Agency authorizing
the execution and delivery of not to exceed $16,500,000 Certificates of
Participation, authorizing and directing execution of related lease
financing documents, approving official statement, and authorizing
official actions. RESOLUTION 2010-046
Staff report made by Steve Conway, Finance Director and Emily Wagner, E.
Wagner and Associates.
Council Comments
Questioned if there were pros and cons in considering in which document the
future tax increment wording should be located.
Questioned if the risk is greater with this recommendation verses the
alternative.
5
Public Hearing Item #5 – Continued
Mr. Conway
Clarified that the escrow for future tax increments is currently written into the
re-imbursement agreement which was the recommendation from the Finance
Committee.
Clarified that the wording in the recommended re-imbursement agreement is
extra protection that is probably not found in a typical Certificate of
Participation, but the Town imposed that extra protection to ensure that
money is set aside to pay the debt service obligation over the next 20 ye ars.
Mr. Larson
Clarified that during the Finance Committee meeting it was discussed that
there should not be a determination simply under budget adoption to spend
early received tax increment money for a new project, rather that it be saved
for the lease re-payment.
Commented that the requirement to change the document once approved, is
an extraordinary act by the Council either through an ordinance amendment
or lease amendment which would require a separately noticed public meeting.
Open Public Hearing
Mr. Glickman
Commented that the Town is not being fiscally responsible when borrowing
monies from the Redevelopment Agency.
Expressed concerns that with property taxes dropping the Town might not be
able to repay the debt.
Commented that the Town should not borrow money without tax payer
approval.
Commented that a past survey showed that there would not be voter approval
to support bonds.
Closed Public Hearing
Council Discussions
Questioned if Council has the ability to raise taxes without taxpayer approval
under any circumstances.
Requested clarification on what basis the Finance Committee made their
determination that the 2% property tax increase would occur and therefore
pay for the indebtedness.
6
Public Hearing Item #5 – Continued
Mr. Larson
Clarified that any new tax or tax increase would require a vote of the public
and no action tonight authorizes any future tax increase.
Clarified that the financing mechanism the Town is using is no different from
the financing mechanism used by the Town in 1992 and 2002 and is the most
commonly used mechanism by municipalities across the State.
Mr. Conway
Clarified that the property taxes for the Town’s Redevelopment Agency area
have increased in the last 20 years and staff has used the lowest property t ax
increase on which to base the increment figure.
Commented that based on the Town’s history and the strength of the
downtown, the Town should meet the 2% needed to generate the revenue to
make the debt service payment.
Mr. Larson
Clarified that the basis for the full discussion on the extraordinary act is that
the Town anticipates exceeding the 2% growth rate therefore placing some
restrictions on future staff and even future Council regarding how to spend
that higher than 2% return earlier than it should be spent.
Commented that the additional reality is that the Town has a $250 million
dollar cap of which the Town is allocating all of that basically to pay-off the
bonds for the new Library.
Mr. Martello
Recommended that Council incorporate the full staff report as part of the
motion since it has more extensive information than the resolution.
MOTION: Motion by Vice Mayor Joe Pirzynski to approve a Los Gatos
Town Council/Los Gatos Redevelopment Agency resolution
making the necessary findings and determinations in
accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33445 for the
financing of the new library which will be partially funded by the
Los Gatos Redevelopment Agency and to incorporate the full
staff report as part of the resolution.
Seconded by Council Member Barbara Spector.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
7
Public Hearing Item #5 – Continued
MOTION: Motion by Vice Mayor Joe Pirzynski to approve a Los Gatos
Town Council resolution authorizing the execution and delivery
of not to exceed $16,500,000 Certificates of Participation,
authorizing and directing execution of related lease financing
documents, trust agreement, and certificate purchase
agreement, approving official statement and authorizing official
actions.
Seconded by Council Member Barbara Spector.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
MOTION: Motion by Vice Mayor Joe Pirzynski to approve a Los Gatos
Redevelopment Agency resolution authorizing the execution
and delivery of not to exceed $16,500,000 Certificates of
Participation, authorizing and directing execution of related
lease financing documents, trust agreement, and certificate
purchase agreement, approving official statement and
authorizing official actions.
Seconded by Council Member Barbara Spector.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously.
TOWN COUNCIL
6. General Plan Amendment GP-07-001; Planned Development PD-07-142;
and Negative Declaration ND-07-143. Project Location: Placer Oaks Road.
Property Owner/Applicant: Cupertino Development Corporation.
RESOLUTION 2010-047
a. Consider rescission of Planned Development Ordinances 2081 and 2122
to construct 49 apartment units. APNS: 529-16-042, 026, 073, 529-14-012
and 067. Property Locations: 517 and 615 Blossom Hill Road and Placer
Oaks Road. Property Owners: Greenleaf Associates LLC, Dunn
Properties, LP, Cupertino Development Corporation. Applicant:
Cupertino Development Corporation.
b. Consider approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use
designation from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential.
c. Consider approval of a Planned Development to change the zone from
RM:5-12:PD to R-1:8: PD, to construct ten single family houses. APNS
529-16-073, 529-14-012 and 067.
8
Public Hearings Item #6 – Continued
Staff report made by Sandy Baily, Interim Assistant Director of Community
Development.
Clerk’s Note for the Record
All five Town Council Member’s disclosed visiting the site and meeting with
the applicant.
Council Comments
Commented that the Historic Preservation Committee had recommended that
the Fiesta House was not suitable for the Placer Oaks site.
Questioned if Council could remove the option of locating the Fiesta House at
the site from the Planned Development Ordinance.
Ms. Baily
Clarified that staff could remove the option of locating the Fiesta House at the
site from the Planned Development Ordinance if that was Council’s
preference.
Council Comments
Consensus by Council to remove the Fiesta House site from the Planned
Development Ordinance and all discussions regarding a location for
the Fiesta House at the Placer Oaks Development.
Questioned if the BMP unit for the proposed project is a unit for purchase
only and not to be used as a rental unit.
Ms. Baily
Clarified that the BMP unit is an owner occupied unit only.
Open Public Hearing
Mr. Griffin, Applicant
Commented about the history of the site and why th ey are presenting a new
design.
Commented that the sound wall along Highway 17 has set-back allowances
for landscaping to be installed and maintained by the property owner.
Commented that planting ahead of time will allow the foliage and trees to
mature and help to camouflage the wall as well as help to create a noise
buffer.
9
Public Hearing Item #6 – Continued
Mr. Griffin, Applicant - Continued
Commented that the site plans and Architecture and Site application will be
brought back to the Planning Commission for their approval.
Commented that they are proposing only 9 market rate homes and one BMP
home instead of a 49 unit apartment complex.
Commented that the BMP home is integrated into the neighborhood on lot #3
and is not intended to be a rental.
Commented that the developer is providing $15,000 towards a traffic calming
project of the Town's choice.
Commented that the project is of proper scale, complies with the General
Plan, and is compatible with the existing neighborhood.
Council Comments
Questioned if the size of the BMP unit was increase d to be more compatible
with the other units in the neighborhood.
Mr. Griffin
Clarified that as part of the Architecture and Site process the applicant will be
submitting revised plans for the BMP unit that is more significant in size,
mass, and scale. This will make the BMP unit more compatible with the other
homes in the sub-division.
Mr. Patel
Questioned if studies have been conducted to determine the levels of noise
that could be created by the proposed sound walls for the development.
Expressed concerns about the type of retaining wall that would be
constructed in order to build the road to the development.
Commented that it is unfortunate that the only access to the development is
Placer Oaks Road.
Questioned if the sound wall would change the acoustic patterns at the site.
Expressed concerns that the sound will travel over the sound wall and be
deflected towards his home.
Council Comments
Questioned if Mr. Patel was concerned about the noise from the wall
along Highway 17 or concerned about noise within the development.
Questioned if his concerns were that the noise would travel over the sound
wall.
Mr. Patel
Clarified that his concern was about the noise reverberating off the wall next
to Highway 17 and deflecting towards his home.
10
Public Hearing Item #6 – Continued
Ms. Greene
Expressed concerns about the lack of geophysical studies for the site.
Expressed concerns about the removal of trees that help to retain soil.
Expressed concerns about cracks in the street that follow the hillside and
fears that the ground is moving toward the hillside.
Commented that CEQA guidelines need to be completed prior to approving a
negative declaration; suggested withholding the approval until studies have
been done.
Commented that she feels that the land is unstable because of liquefaction
which may occur during an earthquake.
Council Comments
Questioned if Ms. Greene recollects when the road was last re-paved.
Clarified that cracking does occur on pavements even on flat areas.
Clarified that the geotechnical report has a very standard response for
earthquake zones such as this area.
Ms. Greene
Commented that she thought that it has been at least 15 years since the road
was last repaved.
Council Comments
Questioned if the recommendations from the geotechnical study are being
applied to the proposed project.
Ms. Baily
Clarified that the recommendations are being applied and are incorporated
under the performance standards of the proposed Planned Development
Ordinance.
Mr. Larson
Clarified that these recommendations could be found on Page 14, Item #7 of
the Initial Study and Condition #102 of the Planned Development Ordinance.
Mr. Greene
Expressed concerns that the proposed project will be built on sand and it is
an unsafe area for a development.
Suggested that Council should have more information about the area before
moving forward with an approval.
Expressed concerns about the acoustics for the area and that his studies
show that the levels of noise would be devastating to public health.
11
Public Hearing Item #6 – Continued
Council Comments
Requested clarification on the basis of the studies that Mr. Greene
conducted on acoustics for the area.
Questioned if his analysis took into consideration the future landscaping and
sound walls for the proposed project.
Mr. Greene
Commented that he felt that the sound at those levels would be dangerous
even with any landscape or sound wall.
Commented that he would like to see more studies done before any decisions
are made to approve the project.
Mr. Rong
Expressed concerns about the noise levels being deflected from the proposed
sound walls towards his home.
Expressed concerns about the removal of trees that act as a sound barrier.
Ms. Quintana
Commented on slope stability and stated that a slope analysis study should
be required for the development.
Suggested that a liquefaction study should be done prior to approval.
Expressed concerns about the increased noise levels coming off the
sound walls.
Mr. Griffin, Applicant
Commented that noise is a line of sight issue and Mr. Patel’s property is at
least 60 feet above the Highway. As long as you can see the tires on the
vehicles you would get the noise.
Commented that landscaping is ineffective with regard to noise
continuation and suggested 7lbs. per square feet of wall surface to diminish
noise levels.
Commented that the proposed wall is greater than 7lbs. per square foot and it
will diminish the noise immediately on the site and will have no effect on the
sites above.
Clarified that the environmental review pertaining to the liquefaction and
geological study on the site was prepared by Geoforensics during a peer
review in 2008. At the request of Geomax, which is the consultant for the
Town, they did the peer review which recommended that the developers
conduct more studies for liquefaction.
Commented that a report was written for liquefaction with the suggestion for
ground grouting which is the insertion of concrete pillars at deep levels in the
earth to hold back liquefaction potential at that point.
12
Public Hearing Item #6 – Continued
Mr. Griffin, Applicant - Continued
Commented that when the final report was submitted to Geomax with
recommendations, it was indicated that those pillars may not be required and
that solution was satisfactory to the consultants.
Commented that ten borings were done at the sight and two of those were
done by the road.
Commented that the developers are cleaning up the dead trees and making
the hillside safer.
Commented that high rating windows and treatment to the exterior of the
building would be added to the homes.
Council Comments
Requested clarification on the trees being removed along the north end of the
property.
Mr. Griffin
Clarified that at the Planning Commission’s request to straighten the roadway;
some of the trees would need to be removed along that northside.
Clarified that the large Oak tree would remain as requested by the neighbor.
Clarified that there are no trees being removed from the hillside area.
Closed Public Hearing
Mr. Martello
Commented that all the work/studies that have been done for the site meet
the legal burden and then some and in addition all those requirements that
were identified have been incorporated as mitigation measures within the
project should the project move forward.
Commented that there are approximately a dozen or more Conditions
requiring further soil reports, investigations, and in-field studies while work is
being done. This information is required to come back to the Planning
Commission for review.
Clarified that in respect to the noise issues, the Planning Commission was
concerned about the end users of the project. The applicant has been
conditioned or volunteered to come back to Planning Commission with
information on the mitigation of noise at the development.
Council Discussions
Commented that the site is a challenging site and that they are pleased with
the Planning Commission’s recommendations and the developer’s
cooperation for the proposed project.
Mayor Diane McNutt directed Jackie Rose, Clerk Administrator to waive the
reading of the title of the ordinance.
13
Public Hearing Item #6 – Continued
MOTION: Motion by Vice Mayor Joe Pirzynski to:
1. Accept the Planning Commission’s findings and
recommendations in the form of meeting minutes
(Attachment 2).
2. Adopt the mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibit 5
of Attachment 8) and the Mitigation Monitoring Plan
(Exhibit 6 of Attachment 8).
3. Find that the General Plan Amendment is consistent
with the General Plan (Attachment 11) and adopt a
resolution to change the designation from Medium
Density Residential to Low Density Residential at
Placer Oaks Road (Attachment 12).
4. Adopt findings supporting the zone change
(Attachment 11) and approve the application subject to
the performance standards included in the Planned
Development Ordinance (Attachment 13).
to exclude the Fiesta House from the Planned
Development Ordinance and the Placer Oaks site.
5. Introduce an ordinance of the Town of Los Gatos
rescinding Ordinances 2081 and 2122 (Exhibits 3 and 4
of Attachment 8) and effecting a Zone Change from
RM:5-12:PD to R:1:8:PD, at placer Oaks Road, to be
read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment
13).
Seconded by Council Member Mike Wasserman.
Vote: Motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Martello
Clarified for the record that the motion included staff recommendations #1-5
in the staff report on Pages 1 and 2 and secondly, that anyone wishing to
challenge any of these actions will have as little at 30 days and as much as
90 days to file a challenge.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no Other Business Scheduled for this meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Attest:
_____________________________
Jackie D. Rose, Clerk Administrator