Attachment 8 - January 28, 2015 Planning Commission Verbatim minutes1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Los Gatos Planning
Commissioners:
APPEARANCE S:
Kendra Burch, Chair
Mary Badame, Vice Chair
Charles Erekson
Melanie Hanssen
D. Michael Kane
Tom O'Donnell
Community Development Laurel Prevetti
Director:
Planning Manager: Joel Paulson
Town Attorney: Robert Schultz
Transcribed by: Vicki L. Blandin
(510) 337-1558
ATTACHMENT 8
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
PROCEEDINGS:
CHAIR BURCH: We will now move into the public
portion of our agenda and consider Item 11. Item 11 is
Conditional Use Permit Application U-13-012, Subdivision
Application M-13-004, and Architecture and Site Application
S-13-020 through S-13-027. This is located at 258 Union
Avenue. Requesting approval to construct eight residential
condominiums on property zoned C-1. It's APN 527-44-012
through -013.
May I see a show of hands of all the
Commissioners that have had an opportunity to visit the
site? Great, thank you. Are there any disclosures from
anyone on this item? Commissioner Badame.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: For property access I made
incidental contact with Mr. Yeager at 285 Hershner Court
and Ms. Liu at 259 Howes Court.
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you, Commissioner. Mr.
Paulson, I understand you're going to be giving the report
this evening.
JOEL PAULSON: I'll provide a brief overview of
tonight's item. As the Chair mentioned, this is a proposal
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
to construct eight detached condominium units on property
currently zoned C-1.
A previous version of this project came to the
Planning Commission in December 2013. At that time the
Planning Commission adopted the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting
Program, however, they denied the Architecture and Site
Application, the Subdivision Application, and the
Conditional Use Permit for that previous project.
The property owner then appealed the project. It
went to Town Council in March 2014. The Town Council took
action to grant the appeal and remand the project back to
the Planning Commission for further consideration and to
consider the things that were previously considered, which
would be the Architecture and Site considerations,
Conditional Use Permit requirements, Subdivision Map Act,
findings, and also the site layout and the number of units.
In June 2014 the Applicant submitted revised
plans that made some changes. The most significant changes
between the versions that the Planning Commission saw in
December 2013 to this evening are the prior project had
four entry driveways; currently there are two proposed with
this project. The rear setbacks have been increased in an
effort to help pull the houses farther away from the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
3
neighbors who voiced concerns at the previous project, and
the common open space for the project is nearly doubled.
The Town's consulting architect has reviewed this
newest version three times. The Applicant has been able to
accommodate all of the recommendations from the architect,
with one exception, which are the porch steps for the units
on Union Avenue. The Residential Design Guidelines offer
guidance that the porches should be useable and therefore
should be a minimum of 6'. The Applicant has not been
interested in increasing them any more than they already
have through the iterations that went through the Planning
Commission. They provided additional justification in
Exhibit 8 as to why they did not want to do that.
One reason was they could increase that by
pushing units back, but then they would be getting closer
to the neighbors in the rear that they're trying to stay
clear of. The Applicant is here this evening and I'm sure
he can offer any additional comments or answer any
questions relating to that.
The Staff Report contains all the other details,
and compares and contrasts some of the topics for the
Commission's consideration this evening: size of units,
setbacks, square footage, things of that nature.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
We've already mentioned there is a Desk Item. The
Desk Item covers three topics. One is the property owner
provided an email outlining the additional neighborhood
outreach they've done, or neighborhood contacts they've
had, I believe since December of last year. The architect
has also provided two renderings from Union Avenue, which
are behind you as well as in the Desk Item.
Lastly, originally they were only going to remove
one dead Walnut tree along the rear property line. They'd
had consultation with one of the neighbors who had
requested for Ashes to be removed, and so they're proposing
now to remove those and then replace them pursuant to Town
Code.
With that, that concludes Staff's report and
we've available to answer any questions.
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you, Mr. Paulson. Do we have
any questions of Staff? Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I have two questions,
one on the letter from our architect of September 5th and I
think previously. He also had an additional recommendation
to add modular pavers. In a moment I want to circle back to
that and ask you where that is.
Then secondly, to take these two trees down, I
assume the Applicant would have to comply with the Tree
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
5
Ordinance in town, but I see no attempt to do that in the
memorandum they filed today.
When you say there's only one recommendation
left, I count two. If you have some reason not to count the
modulars, please let me know.
And as far as the trees are concerned, is it not
the case that they should explain to us why they would be
complying with the code were they to take the trees out?
JOEL PAULSON: First with the modular pavers, the
Applicant has agreed to accommodate that recommendation, so
that will be part of the proposal, should it get approved.
With relation to the trees, we did not include
the original arborist's report, but I'll go back and look
through it. I believe all those trees back there were
generally in fair to poor condition, so the arborist
actually I think recommended removing more than even just
the one dead tree that they were proposing to remove, so we
can look at that. As part of development the Planning
Commission can authorize the removal of trees as part of a
development project.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Well, my question here
is these trees are not necessary to be removed, nor do I
know —perhaps you can find out —their health condition, but I
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
still think we have to comply with the code, and so I'd
like to have some basis were we to consider doing that.
CHAIR BURCH: Any other questions of Staff?
Commissioner Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: My question is about
public comments. I see that there were many efforts to
reach out to neighbors close by and I imagine that the 300'
is a standard thing, but I'm pretty familiar with that
neighborhood, and if you go beyond the 300' it turns out
that almost all of the houses are single -floor houses, and
I didn't see that addressed in any of the comments. If you
tried to compare this development to what was directly
behind it, there were some two-story houses and one-story
houses, but if you go across the street to, say, Howes or
Kensington, they're all single -story houses.
I just wondered if that was something that we
should consider, to consult more neighbors before making
the final decision, because that's kind of a big decision
in this process.
JOEL PAULSON: As per Town Code the Town notifies
300' for that. As far as compatibility, that's something
that the Commission could certainly take into
consideration. Obviously, as you visited the site there are
two-story units adjacent to it, and then there's a two-
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
7
story office adjacent to it, and as alluded to, there are
some two -stories behind it, so from a compatibility
perspective, that would be something that you could
consider as part of your deliberations.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Then I have a second
question, which is the Applicant many revisions, which was
great. Maybe I missed it in the report, but where is the
proposed height of, especially, those back four units
relative to the two-story units behind it? Are they the
same height or are they higher?
JOEL PAULSON: I don't know if we have that
information. The Applicant may be able to provide that to
you. As well, I'm sure there are some neighbors this
evening that will speak; they might have that more exact
height.
CHAIR BURCH: Any other questions? Commissioner
Erekson.
CHARLES EREKSON: This is one of the first times
since the Council adopted the new traffic impact fees, so
there are traffic impact fees. I guess as a matter of just
informing us, can you walk us through briefly —you don't
have to read us the whole policy —in a circumstance like
this, what's the rationale for assessing traffic impact
fees? Can you just walk us through that, because this is a
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
relatively new policy and one of the first applications of
the policy in front of the Planning Commission, so that we
have a full understanding of what we're approving?
JOEL PAULSON: Typically for a residential unit
there is a set fee that is paid that is outlined in the
Traffic Policy, so they would have to pay that for each
unit that is constructed. There was not a TIA because it
did not hit the threshold of an increase of trips when
compared to that, so the only thing that they would be
obligated to would be the per unit cost. I'll also look
through the conditions to see if there is any more specific
information relating to that.
CHAIR BURCH: Do we have additional questions?
No? All right. We'll now open the public portion of the
public hearing and give the Applicant an opportunity to
address the Commission for up to five minutes.
Mr. Kummerer. For the record we're going to ask
that you please state your name and your address. Speak
directly into the microphone. You have five minutes, and
when that yellow light lights up, you have 30 more seconds.
CHRIS KUMMERER: Thank you, Chair Burch. My name
is Chris Kummerer. Thank you, and I'm happy to be back here
again, and I should state my address. I'm at 2089 Avy
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
9
Avenue in Menlo Park. We're happy to be back here again
with this project at 258 Union.
The property here, as you've seen, is an empty
lot; it's been vacant for 20 years. It used to be O'Shea's
Pub & Grill. As was mentioned, there are two-story homes to
the north here, quite dense, and two-story homes behind us.
This is an R-1 zoning to the east. Then there are duplexes
on Union to the south. This is a two-story counseling
center here adjacent to us. And then on Downing Oak Court
here we've got duplexes, fourplexes and sixplexes that are
also a mix of single- and two-story. And of course the
Safeway development here across the street.
This is a view of the property. There are mature
trees existing between this property and the neighbors on
Howes and Hershner Courts.
The zoning is C-1. You'll see there is quite a
mix of zonings here. You'll notice that Downing Court here,
with those duplexes and fourplexes and sixplexes, is also
zoned C-1.
We are proposing a residential condominium
development through the use permit here, which is a
permitted use in the C-1 zoning. When we say condominium, a
lot of people think of a large building with many people
living under one roof, and that definition was certainly
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
the case in the 1980s when the definition was broadened to
include more types of condominiums. This is where my
grandma lived here in Los Gatos, a big building; a lot of
people under one roof.
The new rules since 1985 allow for freestanding
condos. Our proposal here includes eight freestanding
units. This is commonly owned area, and this is
individually owned area here in the blue.
These types of developments are quite common in
the Bay Area. Here's one in Palo Alto with the same
ownership model. Nice looking homes, definitely
freestanding. This is their ownership map. These are
commonly held areas, and these are individually held areas.
The Town has also gotten behind this type of project in the
past.
Now here's a look at how the project fits in the
neighborhood. The density of the proposal is 9.3 units per
acre, and adjacent to us, Howes and Hershner Courts have a
six unit per acre, and there's a seven unit per acre
density here on Thomas. We think we fit in very well with
this density here. There are 12.3 units per acre on Downing
Oak Court, the duplexes to the south are 11 units per acre,
and 14 units per acres to the north, so we really make a
nice bridge between the lower density residential here and
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
11
higher densities around us as well as the commercial
development, so we're quite happy with the density and
proud that it fits in nicely.
This was the original proposal that we brought to
you almost two years ago and it had a large kind of wall of
development on the back, and this is something that came up
in our hearing. It was not very well articulated, and so we
moved forward with a proposal that articulated the wall
better and moved everything away from the neighbors and
tried to be more sensitive to that side of the development,
and we continue in that vein today. We added an additional
17' to the required setback, so instead of 20' of setback,
we're proposing 37', which I think is great for the
neighbors. We are further away from them than they are from
each other.
Here's our site plan. We've got eight units, two
driveways, common areas at the end of the driveways, and
quite a lot of green space for the occupants to enjoy.
Here's the view of the development from the north, and a
view from the south. We think it's quite a thoughtful
design approach; it's good for the neighbors and it uses
indigenous architectural styles.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
We think it's an appropriate density in bridging
from other uses and other densities to the single-family
density behind.
The ownership model has a solid legal basis.
Jeffrey Wager is here; he's an attorney that's worked on
this type of ownership model. He can answer any questions
you have about the legality of the condominium setup.
Lastly, it's an asset. This development would be
an asset to the community. It helps meet the unmet housing
need, promotes smart growth with housing on the transit
corridor there, and lastly, it improves a blighted piece of
land that sat vacant for 25 years. Thank you.
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you very much, Mr. Kummerer.
Do we have any questions for the Applicant? Commissioner
Badame.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: I'd like to refer to Exhibit
16, A1-3, the shadow study. Can you tell me, looking at it,
how many hours of the day would the property owner at 259
Howes Court be shadowed?
CHRIS KUMMERER: Thank you for asking. I'm happy
to say that my father is a retired engineer, and so he
spent hours trying to figure this out. We took the
declination of the sun throughout the year and we looked at
where Mr. Sui's pool is as a reference, how much sun would
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
13
he lose? We couldn't account for the trees, because it's
hard to model the trees in a calculation. We counted that
he would lose less than 2% of sunlight, and it's mainly
that very low sun on the west, so the setting sun, and it's
so little almost anything shadows it. We calculated less
than 2% at one spot at the pool, neglecting the trees, and
so I think if you control for the trees, it's just
negligible.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: So hour -wise?
CHRIS KUMMERER: Hour -wise, less than 2% of the
hours in the year that sun hits that spot. And again, not
counting for the trees, I would say less than ten minutes a
day in the summer, something like that, less than 5%.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: How about in the winter when
it's more significant?
CHRIS KUMMERER: Yeah, when it's more
significant, and so that's when really it had an impact. It
impacted the pool more in the winter when of course you
wouldn't be out in your yard as much.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: So that would be ten minutes
in the wintertime?
CHRIS KUMMERER: Let's see, what is 2% of the
daylight hours? If we have 12 daylight hours, less than 2%.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Thank you.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
CHAIR BURCH: Do we have any other questions?
Commissioner Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: I'd like to ask you the
question I asked earlier, the height of the highest home
relative to the houses behind it.
CHRIS KUMMERER: Great. I'm not going to be able
to give you the perfect answer because I haven't measured
their homes. We are at 23'10" for the rear units, and they
are two stories. If you have a 9' story, 1' in between, and
an 8' story, they're at 19' plus some roof, so they're
going to be at 22-23' as well.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: I wouldn't imagine there
would be a big difference between a two-story house and a
two-story house, but I did want to ask the question.
I do have an additional question. Who is the
intended market for this? Is it families with children, or
is it seniors, or... Can you comment on that, because I have
a follow up question after that?
CHRIS KUMMERER: Thank you, and maybe I'll get
some help on this from Kim Conner, the real estate agent
that has been working on the property, but we have talked
about it's a good place for seniors to live, because it's
close to Safeway and walkable, and the bus line is on
Union. A thought originally was it would be a nice place to
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
15
retire. I would say it's a nice place for anybody to live,
because it's central and you don't have to own a car
potentially to get around. It could accommodate families as
well.
(Voice from audience.)
CHAIR BURCH: I'm sorry, you'll have to fill out
a card and come and speak. Have you filled out a speaker
card?
CHRIS KUMMERER: You want to grab a card and...
CHAIR BURCH: If you want to do that, I can call
you after, and then we can direct the question to you.
CHRIS KUMMERER: Maybe she can help us a little
later with that. Do you have a particular question?
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: That's fine; I have a
follow up question regardless of the answer.
I come from a background in transportation and
stuff from my previous volunteer work, and I volunteer with
St Francis High School here in Los Gatos. I was trying to
imagine two scenarios as I was viewing the property.
One is a family with children. I saw in the
packet that they would be going to Union schools in San
Jose, which I presume from there would be Alta Vista
Elementary? I don't know for sure about the elementary, but
the Union Middle School. So I was imagining what would be
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
the Safe Route to School if I was a family with children
that lived there. Union Avenue is a very busy street. There
is car parking there, there is no bike lane, and I think
that the sidewalk in front was going to have a buffer, if I
saw the pictures right, with some green maybe, and some
trees, from the street.
(Audio goes silent from 00:31:36 to 00:32:25.)
CHRIS KUMMERER: ...great concern. Not to cut you
off, but it's a great concern. We have spent a lot of time
out there, and you'll notice that the traffic really peters
off after Los Gatos -Almaden, because there's not a lot to
go to on the other side. Unfortunately, I have walked
across the street many times because the traffic just calms
down. Now, it isn't that far to just go to the light and
cross, and so I have ended up doing that as well, and I
would imagine that is the right thing to do and that's a
great way to get across. If there were any way to have a
crosswalk mid -block, it seems like that would be fantastic
for the people that live in the neighborhood.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Right, and I'm not sure if
that's the developer's responsibility or not, but I have to
bring that out as an issue because I'm thinking about the
goals of the Town —we're trying to get more people biking
and walking —and I don't see this in the current state it's
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
17
at as being a viable thing for anyone to be able to walk
across the street.
CHRIS KUMMERER: That's fantastic. We just rode
to school with my daughter this morning, and it's a
challenge, but if there were a way for the Town to get
behind a crosswalk so you wouldn't have to go all the way
down to the end, that would fantastic.
CHAIR BURCH: Commissioner Badame.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Following up on those
concerns, I also share them as well, that being you've got
16' wide driveways and the properties adjacent have 20'
wide driveways, so I'm concerned with the ingress and
egress when you might possibly have two SUVs in the
driveway passing simultaneously, you might have kids on
bicycles, or pedestrians walking through the complex, or
you may have your mailboxes out in front, like the
townhomes to the south, where you might have residents
lingering at the mailbox, and you're going to create a
traffic jam with people coming off of Union, which is
actually a pretty busy thoroughfare, so you could have a
backup there that concerns me as well.
CHRIS KUMMERER: That's a good point. These are
issues that occur all along the street. You'll note the
duplexes down the way, they simply back out of their lots
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
onto Union. Something we were warned against initially in a
technical review was don't propose that. We had units that
did that and we were warned against doing that, so we have
accommodated turnarounds and made it so people can get out
hopefully safely.
CHAIR BURCH: Commissioner Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: After we're done I would
like to hear from the realtor, but getting back to the
comment about the seniors. I don't know of a lot of seniors
that want to buy two-story houses, particularly if they're
thinking about aging and everything, going up stairs. I
know I dealt with my own mother on this thing, so I don't
know if seniors are viable, but maybe I'm not seeing the
whole picture.
CHRIS KUMMERER: I don't mean to speak out of
place, because that hasn't been my role in the project,
finding the target people to buy it, but I should say that
many of the units have a bedroom on the ground floor. We're
in a situation in our family where we're looking for places
for people to live and retire to, and that's exactly what
we're looking for. So hopefully we do make that a
possibility.
CHAIR BURCH: I wanted to ask you one question.
When you were here before us one of the items that we
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
19
focused on was this common space and the usability of it,
and one of the concerns that we had is it seems that this
common space is very much targeted for four units, 2 and 3
a little bit, 6 and 7, and we had some issues on how would
you tie in those outer four units to the common space. I
don't see anything on here that feels like you've tied
those together. I personally can tell you, I would feel
quite odd feeling like I'm in this unit's side yard or
backyard, but perhaps installing some sort of walkways with
additional vegetation or something would make them feel
more tied in. How did you see this working for these outer
four units?
CHRIS KUMMERER: When you say outer four units,
just to clary, are you talking about the front units?
CHAIR BURCH: I'm talking about 1, 5, 4 and 8.
CHRIS KUMMERER: So 5 is adjacent to the common
area. Are we looking at the same plan?
CHAIR BURCH: You know, maybe not.
CHRIS KUMMERER: So here, let's look at it
together. I think you may be looking at the original plan.
CHAIR BURCH: Then I may have pulled up 13.
CHRIS KUMMERER: So this is us here.
CHAIR BURCH: Yeah, I'm sorry, I did say the
wrong numbers.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
CHRIS KUMMERER: So this is a common area here,
and here's another one here. The thinking is that everybody
has equal access to the common area this way, whereas
before we had one that was central...
CHAIR BURCH: Right.
CHRIS KUMMERER: ...and you had to get through or
around or somehow, so I think it was an astute comment that
was brought up here and we tried to address that in this
way.
CHAIR BURCH: This is kind of dovetailing on
Commissioner Badame's question about the driveways. Is
there any of what I would consider for my children to be a
safe path from those front four units to the back common
area that is not what I would think of as riding in the
middle of the little street/driveways there? Are there any
dedicated sidewalks or anything like that for that purpose?
CHRIS KUMMERER: The thinking is that because
it's not going to be that busy here, it would be okay to
walk from here to there. This is a sidewalk to it from this
point, and I understand you would have to pass the mouth of
one garage, and so that is a concern, but I think hopefully
in a community like this, you'd know your neighbors and
everybody would be cautious of children.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
21
CHAIR BURCH: All right, thank you. Do we have
any other questions? Commissioner Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: I just wanted to ask an
additional question about the common area. What is intended
for that? Or is that up to the homeowners association
(inaudible) to put things in there?
CHRIS KUMMERER: The landscape plan has a nice
design for it. Just initially, we've got a trellis here on
each one that is a focus, so visually it looks very nice.
You look down the driveway and it ends in something other
than fence or something hard; that was one of the main
points. Then we've got lawn. Again, maybe if there are
children living here, lawn for children to play on. Picnic
table in each one, and then plantings is surrounding it. So
it's just a casual space, but that has been designed into
the project.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: So the intent is that it
is an area for people to be able to congregate, including
their children if there are children? And there are places
for them to sit that would already be there, or does the
homeowners association...
CHRIS KUMMERER: Yes, that's already designed, so
picnic table... You have sheet L-1. Each one has a picnic
table and it just shows a central... Let's see, I can point
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
it out. This is a picnic table here, and then over here,
this is one. There's a central lawn area, and then it's
just surrounded by plantings and screening on the back.
From my point of view, the hope would be that it was just
casual enough where it could be used for gathering, used
for kids, used for a barbeque, whatever, that we didn't
want to dictate what happened there.
CHAIR BURCH: Any other questions? No? Thank you
very much. At the end you will have an additional three
minutes to come back up and address us after we've heard
public comment.
CHRIS KUMMERER: Would it be helpful to discuss
the real estate question at this moment?
CHAIR BURCH: I am going to pull her up as my
next speaker.
CHRIS KUMMERER: Great, thank you.
CHAIR BURCH: All right, so now we will invite
comments from the members of the public. And again, if you
have not already, please turn in a speaker card and provide
it to Staff at my right. When you are called to speak,
please remember to state your name and address very clearly
for the record. You will have three minutes to address us.
When that yellow light comes on, you have 30 seconds, and
please pause at the end to see if there are any questions.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
23
I will call up Kim Conner. Ms. Conner, please
make sure that that microphone is pulled down to you.
KIM CONNER: Hello.
CHAIR BURCH: Please state your name and address.
KIM CONNER: Kim Conner, 12900 Saratoga Avenue,
Saratoga.
To answer the question about real estate, it's
really hard to gauge who is buying houses these days.
People are downsizing and upsizing. I think originally the
thought is younger families, because the price point when
we started this project was affordable; there is a below
market value in that project as well as one of the mandated
things from the Town. Younger families today also have
diversification in that grandma and grandpa live with them;
that's one of the reasons why we incorporated the
downstairs bedrooms. There are lots of people that are
downsizing from really large homes into two-story homes
just because they want newer, less deferred maintenance
problems that they deal with as they get older, so the
downstairs bedroom gives them that option, whereas a lot of
homes that were two -stories built years ago didn't provide
that.
The other thing I wanted to mention was that each
of the units has their own private yard. The common areas
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
are in addition to that, which allows for those areas
really to be where people come together, where children
would play together, et cetera, whereas if it were just one
child it would probably be playing in their backyard after
school or something like that while their parents were
preparing meals and things. So those units where you have
houses close together, you want to have a party, you're out
in the back with people around, et cetera.
CHAIR BURCH: Great, thank you. Do we have any
questions? No? Thank you very much. Next we have Lee
Quintana.
LEE QUINTANA: I'd like to use the overhead. Lee
Quintana, 5 Palm Avenue.
When I looked through this and relistened to the
tapes from the Council, my understanding of the intent of
the remand was that the Council was asking the Planning
Commission to carefully review the application and find a
way that it could be modified to fit within the Town's
existing standards, both General Plan, Zoning Code and any
other, and I haven't heard much talk about that here. It
sounded to me that the Council was effectively saying look
at it entirely de novo.
But my comments and conclusions have been based
on a large number of documents that I've reviewed and they
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
25
both support and inform my decision. I particularly looked
at the history of Los Gatos' GP map, zoning map, the
existing uses in the 2020 Plan map, and the uses in the
surrounding areas, and I did this asking myself a lot of
questions as I went along: Does this make sense? Is it easy
to understand and therefore comes out as a transparent
process? My conclusions were based on that, all those
things, and I have a list of them if you'd like to see
them, and my conclusions are this.
One, the first step is to determine the most
appropriate General Plan and zoning, and this is what I
have focused on.
Two, the best bet is the General Plan Medium -
Density Residential in the Zoning Ordinance RM-5:12.
Conclusion three, the worst fit is the General
Plan Neighborhood Commercial zoning C-1 and CUP for
Residential Condominium.
Conclusion four, the next step should be to ask
the Applicant to come back with a proposal for amendments
to the General Plan and Zoning Code and a redesign of the
project that fits within those requirements and standards
of the GP and zoning.
Before coming back with the new application and
redesign I would request that the Commission ask for a
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
study session. Not one of our standard study sessions,
which usually turns out to be just another hearing, but one
that asks the Applicant to come back with two or three very
rough conceptual designs and the Planning Commission
responds with what they like and dislike about each, and
then request the Applicant to come back after he's
incorporated all that in.
Conclusion five, the history of San Jose zoning
and the area north of the site, which I'm not going to have
time to explain to you.
Conclusion six, the reference to the examples
that were given by the Staff and the Applicant as examples
supporting their application of projects in town don't
necessarily jibe, and I would like you ask them about them.
And lastly, the average size of all of those
projects was smaller than these projects.
Please ask me questions.
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you, Ms. Quintana. Do we have
any questions? Mr. Kane.
COMMISSIONER KANE: Ms. Quintana, you said you
had a list?
LEE QUINTANA: I have it on my computer. I did
not have a chance to print it out yet. I can give you a
rundown of what it included.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
27
It included reading what I thought were all the
pertinent sections of the Zoning Code, all the pertinent
sections of the General Plan, looking at the intent of the
General Plan designations and the Zoning Code, looking at
the flexibility that the Medium -Density Residential with an
RM zoning gives you in terms of guidance and in terms of
types of buildings, setbacks, relationships between
buildings, and that kind of thing.
One of the things that I thought the Council was
saying pretty much was try to get this so that the zoning,
the General Plan, and the actual use match and that you're
not using the square footage of the medium size lot from
one zoning district and then using the standards for the
buildings and other parts of the Zoning Code with another
Zoning Code, like mixing High -Density Residential and
Medium -Density Residential size with R-1 other standards
and regulations.
COMMISSIONER KANE: Thank you. That's a whole lot
to get into my head. You said you had a list earlier. If
you have extra copies, that might be helpful.
LEE QUINTANA: I could read it to you.
COMMISSIONER KANE: That I don't want to do.
LEE QUINTANA: Yeah, I know you don't.
COMMISSIONER KANE: I want to read it.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
LEE QUINTANA: But I do have... This is a whole
other explanation, which I guess I'm not going to get to
explain about the history.
CHAIR BURCH: Mr. Kane, was that your question? I
do want to keep the responses based on the questions that
have been asked
COMMISSIONER KANE: I thought there might be a
list that I could review.
LEE QUINTANA: If I may, I know that...
CHAIR BURCH: Ms. Quintana, is that the list the
Mr. Kane is asking about?
LEE QUINTANA: I don't have it printed out.
CHAIR BURCH: All right.
LEE QUINTANA: What I was trying to find was,
which I apparently misplaced...
CHAIR BURCH: Well, Ms. Quintana, I'm going to go
ahead and ask if anyone else has any additional questions.
LEE QUINTANA: ...what makes the General Plan and
the Zoning Code work on this.
CHAIR BURCH: Does anyone have any additional
questions? Mr. Erekson.
CHARLES EREKSON: So if we were to follow your
guidance through to the end, and if you've done this, fine,
you can answer this question, but if you have not done
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
29
this, what would not be consistent with what the Applicant
has proposed? They've proposed something. You suggested we
go through another process based on your analysis. So if we
did that, if you then teased out that process in your
analysis, then what with what they have proposed would not
be consistent at that point if we went through the process
you're talking about? I mean for example, I'm not
suggesting this would be the case, but let's say we went
through the process and we end up and we had no
inconsistencies, there would be no point in going through
the process. So if you've gone through the analysis and
could tell us what would be inconsistent, maybe we could
understand the magnitude of the real impact of going
through the process that you're suggesting to us that we
might go through.
LEE QUINTANA: Okay, I think if I understand you
correctly, what you're asking is how does using the current
General Plan and zoning designation combined with their
proposed project differ from the result that would occur if
you were going to change the General Plan designation to
Medium -Density Residential and the zoning to RM. Is that
the question?
CHARLES EREKSON: I suppose. I'm trying to be
very practical. Would the buildings be shorter? Would there
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
be less square footage? Would we have larger setbacks?
Those kind of practical applications. Have you done that
analysis?
LEE QUINTANA: I have.
CHARLES EREKSON: Would we end up with so similar
a project that it wouldn't make any sense for us to go
through the process?
LEE QUINTANA: I have no idea, because I was...
Wait, wait, no, I haven't answered your question yet.
CHARLES EREKSON: No, you said you have no idea.
LEE QUINTANA: No.
CHARLES EREKSON: Because you haven't done the
process. Thank you, you answered my question.
LEE QUINTANA: I have done the process up to a
point, and... Okay, let me answer your question yes.
CHARLES EREKSON: Chair Burch, she answered the
question. She doesn't know what the difference would be.
CHAIR BURCH: All right, do we have any
additional questions? Seeing none...
LEE QUINTANA: Honest to God, don't you people
want to know the information you need to at least think
about making a decision? I'm not saying you're going to
adopt the way I think, but it seems to me that you should
at least want to listen to a different idea.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
31
CHAIR BURCH: And we certainly do, Ms. Quintana,
but we're trying to keep it very specific to the questions.
LEE QUINTANA: I would also say that you gave the
Applicant extra minutes with their presentation. The first
presenter was part of the team; the second presenter was
part of the team. They got extra time and the public
doesn't, and as far as I know I'm the only one who's
speaking, so why not a little bit of leeway here?
CHAIR BURCH: John Yeager. Please make sure that
the microphone is up close, and your name and your address
for the record, please.
JOHN YEAGER: My name is John Yeager; I live at
258 Hershner Court, a single -story home directly behind the
property.
The owner of 258 Union has said that he wants to
claim that he's addressed residents' concerns. The updated
plan moved two houses back a little and moved the whole
project closer to Union Avenue. However, there are still
eight units crammed on the property, all of them two-story,
and it's hard to tell a difference from my side of the
fence.
In the last meeting ValleyOne tried to tell the
City Council that the Planning Commission denied the
project because they didn't understand what a condo meant.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
During that discussion they said a good project to compare
was the nearby development over on Downing Oak Court next
to the Safeway. They've made the comparison again; it's a
great comparison. The project is built on two sides of the
street. On one side, next to the commercial property, there
are two-story duplexes. On the other side, next to existing
single-family homes they built single -story, just like what
we would like single -story next to us. Downing in fact was
built not to impact existing homes.
Here is a picture of the two-story homes next to
Safeway. The first picture is a picture next to Safeway,
and the second picture is next to the existing homes;
single -story.
In the plan trees were used to provide privacy
between our properties, because the houses are too tall and
need to be covered up. There's a website for PG&E that
says, "Tree recommendations next to power lines". I quote,
"Choose a tree and location for the ultimate height and
spread of the tree will remain at least 10' away from power
lines." The existing trees, they were planted in 1964, and
PG&E has asked residents not to plant trees. The trees will
impact the power lines, and there have been power outages
in the past.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
33
During Thanksgiving weekend I measured the impact
of loss of sunlight to my property. I stand to lose over an
hour of sunlight that currently shines into my yard
starting at 3:30pm. The two-story houses in the back will
create shadows for me where I have sunlight now, and it's a
real impact to me. I'll show you.
This is from the PG&E website. I'll give you the
oral, if you'd like it. The red line, it's not as clear
from my photo, but it shows where the scaffolding is. This
is from the back of my property.
That's where the sun is, which is below the
orange.
And this is my property after the sun has gone
down. I get sun in my house now and in my sunroom, which I
won't get.
The last item, we've brought up before that the
lot behind is higher. We measured and it actually is 2'
higher at the fence, and it's the whole lot; it's not just
dumped as the owner claimed.
ValleyOne tried to claim that they need to build
eight units or else they'll lose money, however, then the
owner told me that a house cannot sell for $1.5 million in
this neighborhood. A house on my street sold this summer
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
for $1.5 million. It's older, smaller, with a smaller lot
than the four units that we suggest would be at 258 Union.
In the previous two meetings the Planning
Commission and City Council have said that there were too
many units as planned. As built, they were too high and too
close to the back wall. I hope that the Commission will
again deny this project and ValleyOne will listen and build
four single-family homes that can be subdivided.
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you, Mr. Yeager. Do we have
any questions? Mr. Kane.
COMMISSIONER KANE: Would you repeat that last
remark.
JOHN YEAGER: If you wish. Repeat which?
COMMISSIONER KANE: Your last remark about
subdivision.
JOHN YEAGER: Oh, yes. I hope ValleyOne will
listen and build four single-family homes instead of eight
that can be subdivided instead of having condos.
COMMISSIONER KANE: And can you go back to the
picture where you were discussing shadows and it seemed to
be of your dining room?
JOHN YEAGER: Right. This is the back of my house,
and this is the sun into my house, which would not be
happening.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
COMMISSIONER KANE: Okay, that's the one.
JOHN YEAGER: This is the living room.
COMMISSIONER KANE: The dining room.
JOHN YEAGER: And this is the sunroom outside my
house.
COMMISSIONER KANE: So what's going to happen
there?
JOHN YEAGER: There will be no sun after 3:30pm.
I took these pictures at Thanksgiving weekend, so there's
actually lower sun later, but yeah, so the 20 is not
exactly true here, because 3:30pm is when I measured, a
little before 3:30, that it goes below the scaffolding
lines.
COMMISSIONER KANE: All right. Question of Staff.
We were discussing the shadow pictures earlier. Do those
pictures support this contention of losing light at 3:30,
the shadow studies?
JOEL PAULSON: They do not have a depiction of
3:30, but that is a safe assumption based on the shadow
study that's provided.
COMMISSIONER KANE: All right, thank you.
JOHN YEAGER: The circle there is the sun.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
COMMISSIONER KANE: What, and that's the last
time you'll be able to see it? Am I to presume that it's
about to go below?
JOHN YEAGER: It actually is below the
scaffolding. It kind of bright, because I'm taking a
picture pointed directly at the sun. If I had fancy
photography equipment I'd be able to show... I should have
put red lines there too, that's my mistake, but if you look
from the other picture you might be able to see a similar
view.
COMMISSIONER KANE: All right, thank you.
CHAIR BURCH: Do we have any other questions?
Seeing none, thank you, Mr. Yeager.
JOHN YEAGER: Okay. I'm going to leave my
computer up there, because someone else wants it.
CHAIR BURCH: All right, next we're going to call
Maureen Heberling.
MAUREEN HEBERLING: Maureen Heberling; I'm at 291
Hershner Court.
What we're showing you, this is a picture of the
units directly behind me on Union Avenue; this is San Jose.
These are the 15 units. I'm standing at the back wall of my
house in the middle of my property. This is directly behind
me; it's approximately 40' from the back wall of my house,
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
37
where I'm standing, to the back wall of that house. The
next picture is to the right. Again, I'm standing in the
same place and these are the two-story units. The next
picture is to the left.
I wanted you to see these, because these are an
example of what my neighbors on Hershner Court and Howes
Court will be seeing everyday if the eight two-story homes
are constructed.
When we first met with Planning it was my
understanding that you advised ValleyOne to reduce the
number of units. Then when we met with Town Council they
also said reduce the number of units. We're still at eight
units. None of the neighbors want eight units; we've all
talked about that.
Eight units are too many for several reasons, and
to me a very important reason is that there is no safe
place for children to play. These are family homes; one
would expect that there are children. Union Avenue, as
already stated, is a very busy street.
I personally would like to see three homes there,
there are three lots, or if you would make an exception for
four homes, perhaps make it a cul de sac where each family
owns their home and owns the lot, not the air space within
their home if it was an association, and you wouldn't have
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
to use a Conditional Use Permit. This would allow safety
for the families, for the children, a place for children to
ride their bikes and to play outside, and it would have a
nice yard to enjoy with friends and family.
I would also like to see that homes in the back
of the unit are one-story homes so that it is more
accommodating for the residents on Hershner Court and Howes
Court.
And then, as you are listening to all of these
comments and before you vote I'm asking you to ask yourself
if you would want something like this that I have next to
you in your backyard? So please take into consideration
what I have to look at everyday, and the fact that I didn't
have any help in trying to get this downsized, and protect
my neighbors from the same.
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you. Do we have any
questions? Commissioner Badame.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: What year were those
townhomes built?
MAUREEN HEBERLING: I was trying to remember
that. I think it was the mid- to late -nineties. That is San
Jose.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
39
VICE CHAIR BADAME: I understand that. Did the
City of San Jose requires trees for screening? I see very
little tree canopy or trees?
MAUREEN HEBERLING: They didn't say anything
about trees. Those trees that are there are ones people put
in. I had a problem with trees one year about ten years ago
when we had a bad freeze, and then we had power outages,
and PG&E came in my backyard and they said, "Do not plant
any tall trees, even though you would like it, and for
privacy do not plant them, because the reason the power
lines came down two years in a row is because of friction
from the trees." And then I saw their website.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Thank you.
CHAIR BURCH: Any other questions? Commissioner
Kane.
COMMISSIONER KANE: Ma'am, is your house tangent
to this project?
MAUREEN HEBERLING: I'm right behind it, directly
behind it.
COMMISSIONER KANE: So you have those houses
behind you and the other houses in front of you?
MAUREEN HEBERLING: These houses are behind me
and I have a house next door to me on either side. I'm on
the cul de sac on Hershner Court.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
COMMISSIONER KANE: So I'm trying to get a
picture of it. Are you suggesting you're going to be walled
in on two sides by these projects?
CHAIR BURCH: Mr. Kane, do you mind if I step in
for a moment?
COMMISSIONER KANE: No, I don't.
CHAIR BURCH: Mr. Kummerer, the person speaking
right now is the only one that can be answering these
questions, please.
CHRIS KUMMERER: I'll try not to.
CHAIR BURCH: Okay, thank you.
MAUREEN HEBERLING: I'm just saying that my
neighbors are going to have a view similar to this every
day for the next however many years they live in that home,
and it's a lack of privacy and a lack of quiet enjoyment.
People have complained about the noise from Union Avenue,
the street noise, but I get a lot of unpleasant, unkind
noise from people living so close.
COMMISSIONER KANE: Thank you. One final
question. I appreciate your concerns on density, but do you
understand that this is in compliance with the density
ordinances that we have to rule upon and apply?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
41
MAUREEN HEBERLING: It didn't sound that way when
we were before Town Council, because part of their vote
included something about reducing the number of units.
COMMISSIONER KANE: Well, the density thing is
important to me. I remember I read this was 9.1 and the
limit was 12 point something; it was right in the middle.
Can Staff help me out on this? We went over density
questions and I thought they were in compliance.
JOEL PAULSON: There is no residential density
for commercial property, however, the residential projects
that have been done in Town on commercial property have
been able to go up to as high as 20 dwelling units per
acre. Not that they have all developed to that level, but
that has historically been the limit for commercial
property.
COMMISSIONER KANE: What I was looking at was
actual comparisons to different projects, and this one
seemed to be somewhere in the middle.
JOEL PAULSON: Comparison to different projects.
Some of the newer projects, Laurel Mews and Bluebird Lane,
they're probably a unit or two higher than this per acre.
COMMISSIONER KANE: All right, thank you.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
CHAIR BURCH: I have a question. It appears from
these photos that there is a height differential between
your yard and the people behind you.
MAUREEN HEBERLING: Yes, definitely.
CHAIR BURCH: Could you tell me approximately how
many feet that is?
MAUREEN HEBERLING: The wooden fence is on top of
a 4' high retaining wall. The other more brick -like wall
you see I had to put in because I had water runoff —it was
flooding my backyard from those units —so there is a
drainage system between the two retaining walls that goes
out to the street.
CHAIR BURCH: So to be clear, the difference
between the elevation of your yard and the...
MAUREEN HEBERLING: It's about 4'.
CHAIR BURCH: Four feet. And then one other
follow up question. I know you've probably never measured
this, but how far from that fence to the back of that unit
do you think, how many feet is that?
MAUREEN HEBERLING: I believe Shawn told me it
was supposed to be 12'. From the back of my house, the back
wall, to the fence is 28'. So it would be 10-12' from the
fence to the back wall of that unit, and that's why I'm
telling you it's approximately 40'. That will give you an
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
43
idea as you imagine what will happen on 258 Union for the
people on Howes Court and Hershner Court.
CHAIR BURCH: Great, thank you. Any other
questions? No? Thank you. Mr. Liu. Please state your name
and your address for the record, and you have three
minutes.
SHIGONG LIU: Hello, Shigong Liu; I live in 259
Howes Court, right behind the new building.
First let's take a look at this video I took from
my house, my room. It's not quite clear, but from here I
can see... It looks like it's not clear. This is the new
building, the position, and this is what it will look like
in my room. From this I think Mr. Kummerer was just talking
about only 2%, and I think that's not true. The afternoon,
I think maybe it is from 3:00 o'clock or 2:00 o'clock, the
sunshine will come to my room, but after the building...
Because here is the building, it is right on top of this.
Later I think I can show you a better picture. The whole
afternoon there will be no more sunshine in my room, and in
the morning, definitely not. This is facing west. Okay, so
let's stop this.
I think in the previous meeting we denied this
building application because of many reasons; one of the
reasons is because they block our sunshine and a lot of
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
privacy. Now for the new application I think they tried to
improve it, but before Shawn told me they changed the
poles, I didn't see any difference from my side. When we
walked through the property with Shawn I did talk about it
and I think Shawn agreed with me that with these kinds of
changes there would be no obvious difference we can see,
right?
I think the application is very similar to the
previous one. I think it is not a good (inaudible) that we
approve. For us, we still think that these eight units will
be too many for this site, for this property.
Other than that, as all others said, there are a
lot of things, because we measured the wall between from
different side. They have about 2' higher than our side for
the new property, and so the new building will be much
higher and will block the whole afternoon.
Okay, (inaudible) I think since Mrs. Badame, you
come to our properties to take a look from our side, you
will see how much we are affected, our side. So I think I
will pursuant to our previous what we talk about, we don't
have room for eight units. Thank you very much.
CHAIR BURCH: Do we have any questions for the
speaker? Mr. Erekson.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
45
CHARLES EREKSON: Could I ask the Chair to ask
the Staff to put up Exhibit 1 from the December 10th
materials so we can have this speaker identify —if you don't
have one, I'll loan you mine —so we can see the location of
the speaker's property relative to...
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Use his.
CHAIR BURCH: Hang on. Yeah, I think he has it,
if you want. Okay.
SHIGONG LIU: This is my property. It faces the
new proposed property on Union. From our property we will
see all the four new units. I think our property was
affected the most in this new application.
CHARLES EREKSON: That was my question. Thanks.
CHAIR BURCH: Commissioner Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Could you remind us, do
you have a one-story or a two-story house? There were a
couple of one -stories and there are some two -stories.
SHIGONG LIU: Yeah, actually my house is a two-
story.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Your house is two-story.
SHIGONG LIU: Yeah, before we moved in it's a
two-story house.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: And that picture you took
was from the first floor?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
SHIGONG LIU: First floor, yes.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Okay.
CHAIR BURCH: Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: How far is the back of
your house to your fence?
SHIGONG LIU: Sorry, I don't know exactly. I
think Shawn told me is 20', right? Oh, 15'.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: An approximation is
fine.
SHIGONG LIU: Yeah, about 15', yeah.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Fifteen feet?
SHIGONG LIU: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR BURCH: Any other questions? No? Thank you
very much. Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Kane.
COMMISSIONER KANE: I appreciate what you're
saying, and especially about the sunlight, and I'm a new
Commissioner, so I don't know what you've done previously,
so I'm asking, did you come to the first Planning
Commission meeting, and did you go to the Town Council
meeting to talk to them about these matters?
SHIGONG LIU: Yes. Last time I took a picture,
but I think Shawn later talked about it. I think it's
misleading, because he said that's not taken from my
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
47
bedroom, but this time I took the video, it shows my bed
and the window, and we can see from the window where it
(inaudible), we can see the new building, yeah.
COMMISSIONER KANE: My question is have you shown
these pictures and made this argument before at the
Planning Commission and at Town Council?
SHIGONG LIU: Yeah, last time. Yes.
COMMISSIONER KANE: All right, thank you.
CHAIR BURCH: All right, thank you. Next is Jeff
Wagner.
JEFF WAGNER: My name is Jeff Wagner; I'm an
attorney with Miller Starr Regalia. My office address is
1331 North California, Walnut Creek, and I'm here on behalf
of the Applicant.
There were some concerns, as I understand, at the
last Planning Commission about the condominium concept. I
think Chris Kummerer in his presentation addressed most of
those issues, but I'm happy to answer any continuing
questions or concerns that there are about the legality of
these detached condominiums.
CHAIR BURCH: Do we have any questions? No. I
think we're clear, so thank you. Next is Patricia Scannura.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
PATRICIA SCANNURA: I'm Pat Scannura; I live at
255 Howes Court. I have no technological things to show
you.
This is my property right here. The way my house
is situated on the angle, my rec/family room is sort of
covered up after they have moved it, because it literally
is smashed housing. There is no room on this property.
Literally like it's straight up against the fence on each
side. I believe this property's footprint is too small for
eight units.
I laugh about these condos; these are homes.
These are detached homes, so they're not condos. I believe
there are two too many units on this property. But I'd love
for you to come to my house and see from my vantage point.
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you. Do we have any
questions? Mr. O'Donnell.
PATRICIA SCANNURA: Oh wait, I'm sorry. I have a
two-story home, and I'm not opposed to two-story. Did I
read your mind? There you go.
CHAIR BURCH: Commissioner Erekson.
CHARLES EREKSON: I appreciate you're not an
architect, I assume, but could you give me a general idea
of the footprint of your house and its orientation on your
lot?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
49
PATRICIA SCANNURA: It's so like on an angle. Do
you have a picture map? These guys are very nice, by the
way, and we've all tried to be very cooperative in the
neighborhood.
CHARLES EREKSON: Trying to describe that
answered the question.
PATRICIA SCANNURA: Did that answer for you?
Okay. I would love for you to come and see it though from
my vantage point, because when they moved the story poles
it just seems that, yes, they pushed forward towards Union
Avenue more, but they now encompass more of the width of
the property, which now seems from my vantage point as if
it's closer to my home. Does that make sense?
CHAIR BURCH: Ms. Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Am I allowed to make a
comment versus asking a question to the speaker? Okay. I
just wanted to comment so you didn't think we were being
neglectful. I don't think we're able to find that they're
not qualifying as condominiums, because the condominium law
description says that even detached homes, as long as the
common area is run as a common unit, that qualifies it as a
condominium. I just wanted to make sure you didn't think we
were ignoring you.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
PATRICIA SCANNURA: I know it might be a law, but
it's of my opinion that it...
CHAIR BURCH: Understood. And Ms. Hanssen?
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Yeah?
CHAIR BURCH: Actually the response from Staff
had been no, it's not the time to make a comment yet.
PATRICIA SCANNURA: I've also attended each of
the meetings, because I am concerned about that and about
over building on a smaller piece of property, so like I
said, two too many.
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you. Next Shawn Wang.
SHAWN WANG: My name is Shawn Wang and I'm the
managing member of ValleyOne Investment, LLC and I live on
20553 Montalvo Lane in Saratoga. I just want to take this
opportunity to have three minutes answer some questions
that the neighbors have raised.
Several neighbors wanted us to give up the single
story homes. As you know, at this time of the year,
(inaudible) I don't think there's any one.
CHAIR BURCH: Can I ask you to pause for a
moment? I need to ask Staff a question. I'm going to ask
you to hold on one moment while we wait for Counsel to get
back; I need to ask him a question.
SHAWN WANG: No problem.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
51
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you.
(Pause.)
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you. I just needed to clarify
that. So you do still get your three minutes, even though
you're part of the... Yeah.
SHAWN WANG: So several of the neighbors, they
ask us to give up single -story homes. By considering the
time of the whole real estate market and the value and also
the opportunities of all those things, if we consider
everything, no one at this time would give up a single -
story at that location, so from our perspective it's an
unreasonable request.
Density -wise, as you all see we are proposing 9.3
units per acres, which is in the middle range. We are
nothing in the high end or anything like that. So we're in
the middle range, we're not asking any exception.
A couple other specific issues that neighbors
raised, which are one is the grading, that our side is
about 2' higher than the neighbors, which we cannot do
anything on that, because we have to grade to the same
level as Union, so in the end we have to be higher than
them, but we have the (inaudible) there, we have the
drainage control system, so everything would be in place to
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
control the water, basically not let the water flow into
their side.
The last question that Pat just pointed out,
saying that our revised plan seems to her it's closer, but
Chris actually sent an email to Pat explaining we are not
closer to her after the revised plan setback -wise.
Comparing last year's Planning Commission we are about 17'
farther away, so that is a misunderstanding, I think.
That's all I have.
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you. Do we have any
questions? No? Thank you.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: We'll find out from
Counsel again, if the interpretation is that when the
Applicant speaks, if there are five applicants, one of whom
speaks in the five-minute limit, the other four get three
minutes each?
ROBERT SCHULTZ: Correct. You're still a member
of the public, no matter what. You're able to speak at a
meeting. You can't limit someone just because they're an
applicant or a property owner from speaking their three
minutes.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Okay.
ROBERT SCHULTZ: A good example of that would be
Hillbrook. Every single parent has a property interest in
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
53
that application and we don't limit all the Hillbrook
parents from speaking. It would be the same; they're all
applicants.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: That is not my
experience with other councils, so there seems to be some
diversity of thought on that, but you're our counsel, so
we'll follow your advice.
CHAIR BURCH: All right, we'll now give the
Applicant up to three minutes to add any further comments
based on the public comments you've just heard.
CHRIS KUMMERER: Thank you for your patience with
all these comments.
I'd like to just start with one broad thing is
that we've been working on this now for a long time. We've
been through a process where we went through environmental
review, we worked with Staff, we went through a technical
review, we went through Planning Commission, technical
review again, Town Council, the whole thing, so there's
been a lot of effort, and it may not show here, but there's
been a lot of thought put into this.
So I think it's worth considering that this may
not be the ideal project, but it is a good project, and if
it doesn't happen, then either we're going to have a
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
blighted property that we've had for 25 years, or we make
it something bigger.
The RM-15 rules would allow for 11.25 units, plus
one below market rate, so that's 12 units. That's what Ms.
Quintana was addressing. So if we were to rezone to R-15,
we'd be looking at 12 units.
Joel mentioned that it would be possible to go up
to 20 units per acres. If I do that math right there,
that's 15 units, plus one or two below market rates, so now
we're at 16 or 17 units. So the density issue I think is
we're trying to be thoughtful and we're pushing the limit
on those numbers.
Some of the things that have come up with the
neighbors. This distance. This room is about 32' wide.
We're saying 57' at the closest point, and then as you have
seen, the neighbors are splayed, so hopefully these things
work in their favor.
Mr. Liu, we do abut him with two of our units. We
tried specifically to be further away from him, because he
is taking the brunt of the development, and so there was an
additional 17' added to try to accommodate him.
They've been willing to discuss with us. At the
beginning they weren't willing to discuss, but we're trying
to be... The Council directed us to work things out; we're
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
55
trying from our side to really do it. We've gotten some
good feedback from them, and in other cases we haven't
gotten great feedback.
The 2% I talked about was specifically a question
that Mr. Siu had directed towards us about his pool, so we
didn't calculate a percentage for light loss in everybody's
living room, but when the sun is low in the west you're
certainly going to lose some light. Even the fence will
shadow their rooms, because it gets so low in the west that
it shadows anything.
Thank you again for your patience. We've
considered this project for a long time; it's been through
a lot of hoops. We're not asking for variances, we're not
asking something that doesn't fit in the zoning ordinance,
and we hope that you'll consider that. So thank you.
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you. Any further questions?
Mr. Erekson.
CHARLES EREKSON: Could we ask a favor of you?
The exhibit that you had up a few minutes ago that showed
the neighborhood adjacent to it, could we ask your
indulgence to leave that up after you go back and sit down
so that we have it in front of us? It seemed to me to be a
very useful diagram, and if you don't mind indulging us and
just leaving it behind. Thank you.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
CHAIR BURCH: Ms. Hanssen.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: I had a question about
Unit 2, which is the BMP unit, correct? If I'm reading the
drawing correctly, there's no bedroom on the first floor,
is that correct? I'm looking at Exhibit 16.
CHRIS KUMMERER: I believe the front units,
they're varying. Okay, so I can see it here.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Yeah, I do realize they're
different.
CHRIS KUMMERER: Units 2, 3 and 4 do not have
bedrooms on the first floor, and then the remaining five
do, so you're correct.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR BURCH: Do we have any other questions? I
wanted to clarify something. In your previous comments you
made some reference of the distance in the back being 52'.
When I'm looking at Sheet A-1.0 the closest point is 28.2'
from the fence line to the back of Unit 5, and the farthest
distance is 37', and that's from the back fence to Units 6
and 7, so where did that number come from?
CHRIS KUMMERER: Where did which number?
CHAIR BURCH: Fifty-two.
CHRIS KUMMERER: So from house to house, that's
what we're talking about, and it's worst case. Because
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
57
everything is skewed, it's just hard to give these numbers,
because they change as you go along the wall.
From Mr. Liu's house, really he's the one who
gets the brunt of this, and at this corner it's 52' from
building to building, and then as you go along it's 63' or
something, so we're doing our best to estimate on a skewed...
CHAIR BURCH: Okay, thank you for clarifying. Do
we have any other questions? Okay, none. Thank you.
We're now going to close the public portion of
the public hearing and ask if the Commissioners have any
questions of Staff, want to comment on the application, or
introduce a motion for consideration? Mr. O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I want to ask Staff a
question. I did not attend nor did I watch the Council when
they considered this matter, but I've heard things this
evening that I don't see in the piece of paper we got when
the appeal was sustained. I see nothing in that paper that
suggests the Town Council was unhappy with the number of
units, but since you folks were present, could you let us
know whether the Council did say anything about too many
units?
JOEL PAULSON: Page three of the Staff Report is
discussing the background. The final sentence, "The appeal
was remanded back to the Planning Commission for further
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
consideration for the A&S General Plan Conditional Use
Permit and Subdivision Map Act in terms of site layout and
number of units." So there was some discussion about
whether or not the number of units was too much, but there
wasn't a strict mandate that the number of units be
reduced.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: And you said, if I
recall, that because this is a C-1 property and we're going
through a use permit there is no specified number of units,
which would suggest to me that we have a range of
possibilities then judged by reasonables as opposed to what
we might have were it zoned for residential.
JOEL PAULSON: That's correct.
CHAIR BURCH: Commissioner Badame.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: So following up on that, how
can we control development of detached condominium units in
a commercial zone with the purpose of achieving the goals
of the General Plan and our Town Code?
JOEL PAULSON: The Town Code allows condominium
units in the C-1 with a Conditional Use Permit, so we could
change the Zoning Code and/or modify the General Plan land
use designations for the commercial zones where... In almost
every commercial zone residential uses are allowed in those
General Plan designations. I'm sorry, revise that. In the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
59
Zoning Code, with a Conditional Use Permit residential is
allowed in almost every commercial zone, which if the site
were zoned commercial, then the accompanying General Plan
designation would also be commercial.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: So it seems it almost can be
a free for all.
JOEL PAULSON: That's one way to look at it. That
hasn't been the past practice, but that is on way to look
at it.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Thank you.
CHAIR BURCH: Do I have any other questions of
Staff, comments? Oh sorry, Ms. Prevetti.
LAUREL PREVETTI: Madam Chair, I just wanted to
let you know that we were able to print Ms. Quintana's
statement, so we made copies for Staff as well as for the
Commissioners who are present, so that's being distributed
to you now.
And just because this is a little bit of an
unusual situation with the commercial zoning, I just wanted
to remind the Commission that we are working under the
existing Town Code, so if you have additional suggestions
to the Council, that might be taken up as a separate
matter, but under this circumstance you're role is not to
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
make policy but to apply the current codes and policies in
place.
CHAIR BURCH: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: I had a question for Staff
as well. In Exhibit 3, under the findings under Item 1, it
says the proposed uses of the property are, "Essential or
desirable to the public convenience or welfare," and that,
"the redevelopment of the property will provide new housing
units." What I wondered is I read the Conceptual
Development Advisory Committee report, which was admittedly
a couple of years ago, but in that report it was noted
there was no need for housing in the 2,000 to 2,200 range —I
don't know if I have my numbers exactly right —and that
there was an unidentified need for additional single-family
housing. I wondered why that comment was made in the
findings?
JOEL PAULSON: That's Staff's comment. The
Planning Commission is free to disagree with that.
COMMISSIONER HANSSEN: Okay.
CHAIR BURCH: Ms. Badame.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Well, I will start with a
motion. I move to deny the application. The application
consists of three parts. Conditional Use Permit Application
U-13-012, Subdivision Application M-13-004, and
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
61
Architecture and Site Application S-13-02 through S-13-27.
I will defer to the Chair. Would you like my findings now
or during the discussion period?
CHAIR BURCH: No, I would like to hear them now
for future conversation.
VICE CHAIR BADAME: Under the Conditional Use
Permit I find that the proposed use of the property is not
in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the
General Plan and the purposes of the Town Code as detailed
in the December 10, 2014 Planning Commission report. The
type of design as proposed is not consistent with our
Residential Design Guidelines, Subdivision Application M-
13-004, and that the design as proposed is not consistent
with the General Plan, and that the site is not physically
suitable for the proposed density of development.
Architecture and Site Applications, based on Exhibit 7,
maximizing floor area ratios and reducing porch size, is
not sympathetic to the Los Gatos norm and in blending dense
development with single-family neighborhoods. I see
inconsistencies with the floor area ratios compared to
dwelling units to the east and to the south, the front
setbacks are not consistent with the neighborhood to the
south, and there is a lack of transition with the
neighborhoods to the south and to the east.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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 BURCH: All right, do we have a second? Any
additional comments? Then the motion fails, because there's
no second. Would anyone else like to entertain a motion?
Any additional comments? Thank you, Mr. O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Obviously we're all
struggling. When the Town Council sustained the appeal it
suggested to me that we must have made an error. On the
other hand, they made substantial changes in the plans
after we had turned it down, so I would prefer to think
because of those changes the Town Council said well now
consider these changes. The Town also said apparently
consider, among other things, the number of units.
I think this particular applicant has been very
good and has worked very diligently. I think if you assume
you're going to have eight units, they probably have done a
good job on this. So the only question I guess I've got,
since we don't have much direction here...
Were this zoned residential, I'd have something
to look at on the number of units. Here, I don't. So we're
free to say six units, or five units, or four units, or ten
units, and I think that's causing some problem, because it
seems to me they're entitled to multiple units here, and I
don't care whether they're condominiums or what they are,
the condominium form is fine, but since the motion did not
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
63
get a second, it would seem that perhaps we're all
struggling a bit.
I threw this out only because I suppose if there
were not eight units, there were six units, we'd have a lot
more to play with. On the other hand, we have to recognize
that you just can't lop off two units and expect the
project to go forward. We don't know whether it could go
forward with seven or whatever it is. So if anybody is
inclined to want to make a motion to approve this project,
I would like to hear that, because frankly I'm very
troubled by this.
I've listened to the neighbors. I think the
Applicant has gone a long way to solve the earlier
problems, and perhaps has solved those problems, I don't
know. This development is on Union, and I have to say if I
bought a house where they bought with Union where it is and
with the development along that street, I don't think I'd
be shocked to see a development like this. But if anyone
has any suggestions as to anything they could do, I'd sure
like to hear it.
CHAIR BURCH: Commissioner Kane.
COMMISSIONER KANE: For many years I lived very
close to this area. I remember O'Shea's and lament its
departure, my folks being from County Cork and County Mayo.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
But I've watched the development along Union from Blossom
Hill to Los Gatos -Almaden, and one by one very large quasi -
mansions were put in, and I was dumbfounded because of how
close to the street they were. I was a new resident in
town, and it seems to have gotten more and more developed.
Now, the shame is that here is a giant open lot
that's been just that way for many years, and something is
going to go in there, and if you buy a piece of property
next to a vacant lot, something is going to go in there,
especially in this town.
I wish there was a way I could frame an issue
with the offending houses in the second row that are
creating these shadow issues, and given that the ground is
already at a 2' elevation. We don't design from dais, but
I'm telling you that my concern is yeah, something is going
to go in there, but it just sounds like it's a life changer
to some degree, and I wish I had the genius to say put the
house 6' into the ground, slope the back second floor. I
don't know what to say, but Commissioner O'Donnell, maybe
you do, because you're right, I am struggling. He's got a
right to develop and he's been working on this right for
two years.
What leaves me a little dumbfounded, I asked one
of the speakers, this thing has been going on for a long
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
65
time and why are we now holding this bag without having
given prior direction to do this or else, and it's come
back on appeal and up and down and doesn't seem like the
real issue has been addressed, which is the effect on the
quality of life on the neighbors? I came close to
supporting the motion to deny, but I'm torn with how much
progress the developer has shown in moving and doing this
and doing that, and as far as I can tell, receiving no
revenue for two years, just expenses.
If anybody's got an idea that we could send this
back and hear it again next month, if the Applicant may not
want to. The Applicant may say I'll take it back to Town
Council again. Okay, fine, but they might get a better run
here if they could design or come up with a solution to the
shadow issue. That's my main concern is the shadow issue.
I also want to add that I value and I'm impressed
by the quality of the BMP. Now, we use those initials BMP,
below market price, but we don't really tell everybody
necessarily what it means, and it's one of the things
drawing me toward this CUP. If the neighboring houses in a
given project could sell for like $1 million, then the BMP
might go for as low as $200,000 perhaps. Staff can correct
me if I'm wrong. That means an indigent family can move
into our neighborhoods and we can achieve diversity. We
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
could support people who work here, teachers and police.
They have standards of how people get a BMP, single
parents, that kind of thing. But the fact that this project
has a BMP is a value to me and is pulling me in that
direction, and I'm going to stop, because I don't know what
to do.
CHAIR BURCH: Mr. Erekson.
CHARLES EREKSON: A question for my fellow
commissioners. I'm not proposing this, but if we were to
reduce —I'm back to Commissioner O'Donnell's question about
the number of units —just say as a straw example, from eight
units to six units, what problems that we see would we
think that would solve?
CHAIR BURCH: Do you mind if I reply to that one,
just for the sake of conversation? I actually see that
there's a bit of benefit that we have the opportunity here
to discuss the number of units, however, while people keep
talking about the number of units, the real issue that I'm
hearing from the neighbors is more the line of sight and
the visibility. So I would almost want to know what if we
threw out two options here for a continuance to have it
come back?
One would be if the number of units were reduced,
how does that appease the neighbors' issues? And obviously
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
67
out of that I would want the Applicant to take that idea:
We've moved the units out in this way, we've taken one out,
whatever, does this meet your needs?
The second would be, and we've all seen them do
this, redesigning the units to where the second story is
obviously way more subservient to the first story. Right
now obviously to the front facade, it is, and the back
facade, it is not. In fact, it's overhanging a bit. I think
that there are a couple of different ways that the
Applicant could perhaps appease the issues with the
neighbors. I think at that point we need to give the
Applicant the ability to do what they could do and still
meet their own financial needs. Any thoughts? Mr.
O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I think you're perhaps
onto something. I'm prepared to accept the proposition that
perhaps less than eight units doesn't pencil out. I have no
justification for that. I don't know, and that may be
wrong, but let's just assume that for a moment. What can
you do?
You're suggesting that maybe you can do something
with redesign, for example, maybe you don't have all two -
stories, or maybe you make the second story on some of the
units smaller.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
Perhaps if we had a better shadow study, because
a number of the neighbors are complaining about shadows,
and yet we have a general shadow study, which is fine, but
now we have specific neighbors saying here's what happens
to me. So if I were the Applicant and I were going to look
at that again, I guess I'd want to find out what happens to
that particular homeowner and see if I could design around
that and keep the same number of units.
So one possible thing we could do today, and I
throw this out —it's very easy to sit up here and not easy
to sit out there —would be if we were to send it back, in
other words have a continuance, with the instruction to ask
the Applicant to see if there is anything they could do
with the second stories or by removing some of the second
stories such that a new and different and more refined
shadow study would indicate exactly what we might
anticipate on each of these affected homes. So if you can
do that without taking the second story off, you'd have to
show us. If you can do it by rearranging or redesigning the
second story, fine, show us. If none of that works, then
you have to consider at what point are you willing to
consider some single -story houses or something else? We're
not in the design business, but we're presented today, it
seems to me, with maybe three choices.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
69
We either deny, we reduce the number of units, or
we do this. I realize they worked for a very long time and
this may not be the solution, but simply thinking that
there ought to be a solution to this that allows them to
build I would feel better if we were to continue it for
that purpose, not knowing what the Applicant thinks. He may
think I'm not doing him any favor, but I would like to see
a positive outcome here, and I'd also like to feel
comfortable that we've done everything we can from both
sides.
CHAIR BURCH: Mr. Kane has been waving over
there.
COMMISSIONER KANE: If we could stipulate that
what Commissioner O'Donnell just said is in fact a motion,
I'll second it.
CHAIR BURCH: Well, hang on. Mr. Erekson, do you
have anything to add before we go in that direction?
CHARLES EREKSON: Sure, I have a question in the
interest of providing good direction to the Applicant. If I
understand the issue, some of the issue is the shadowing on
the neighbors, so I'm not sure exactly how to say this, but
what tolerance for some shadowing do we want to allow the
Applicant to cause to happen? None? If you know what I mean
by that question. I assume the only way to not increase
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
shadowing is to not develop the property, because if the
sun gets low enough in the west, you're going to get some
shadowing if you just build a 6' fence.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: (Inaudible) there,
because you've got a 2' retaining wall, got a 6' fence,
you've got an 8' height. I don't know the answer, and I
don't think we need to know the answer to that question.
What we're saying is the back neighbors are saying at 3:30
in the afternoon, and I don't know which months of the
year, I have substantial shadows on the first floor of my
home. If that's true, I think that's a substantial shadow.
So I'm not saying no shadow, I'm merely saying what kind of
shadow will they being getting? And obviously each of these
houses is going to get a different shadow. Somebody may
effectively have no shadow, except from the 8' fence, let's
say.
So no, I don't have preconceived notion about
what is acceptable. All I know is at the moment I've got
neighbors saying gosh, one of the rooms was almost an
adjunct to the house, and that was their sun porch kind of
part of it, if I recall correctly, and that was getting
shadow at 3:30 in the afternoon, and again, I don't know
what month.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
71
So I would like the Applicant to be more specific
and so say look, I think we've got about four houses, maybe
five, I don't know. I would like to know what the shadow
effects are as now designed on those five homes, so that if
in fact there is an appreciable shadow, and I'm not going
to define that, we've got to see what it is. An appreciable
shadow, that's not going to fly.
If, on the other hand, when they look at it and
they say that's a big shadow, they can consider well what
do we do about that? I'm saying we've explored three
possibilities of what they can do about that. So that's
what I'm trying to do, and I don't have a number in my
mind.
CHARLES EREKSON: I'm comfortable with that. I
had a sense we were going down the road of suggest to them
that they might redesign the project to solve the shadow
issue, and if we weren't telling them the tolerance it
wouldn't seem to be fair to the Applicant to require them
to spend additional money to redesign something to fix a
problem that we weren't identifying. So with Commissioner
O'Donnell's explanation, I'm comfortable with that.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: If we want to consider
that a motion, the motion then I guess would be to continue
the matter to a date certain, which we'll get to, for the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
reasons I've just stated, which were amplified in the
conversations I've had with two of the Commissioners. I
would ask Staff to give us a date, and I think they need a
reasonable time, but not too long, to get back to us. So
that would be the date certain.
ROBERT SCHULTZ: There's one cork I'll put in
this. Because of the Permitting Streamlining Act, we do
need to make a decision on this unless the Applicant was
going to waive that time period. We had one continuance,
and he requested that time continuance himself, so that
continued it till this date. But if the Commission were
going to continue this item, we'd have to get the approval
and waiver from the Applicant.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: So no further
continuances are allowed, is that what you're saying?
ROBERT SCHULTZ: Unless the Applicant was willing
to waive that time period.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Well, ask him and find
out.
ROBERT SCHULTZ: You could certainly open it for
that limited purpose only, to ask if he'd be willing to
waive...
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Because it appears to me
that we're either going to continue or turn it down.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
73
ROBERT SCHULTZ: Just for that purpose.
CHAIR BURCH: Then for that purpose I am going to
reopen the public portion of the meeting and ask the
Applicant, Mr. Kummerer, to step forward. Mr. Kummerer,
you've heard the discussion back and forth. Would you be
willing?
CHRIS KUMMERER: Can you just put it to us again?
I don't understand that you're not allowed to continue us
any longer because of we've continued ourselves once, and
so because of the Streamlining Act they've got to make a
decision, is that what we're saying?
JOEL PAULSON: Yes. The Commission is either
bound to make a decision this evening... Specifically it's
the Subdivision Application has a shorter Permitting
Streamlining Act requirement. If you agree to waive that
parameter, then we're free to continue it.
CHRIS KUMMERER: Okay, maybe we need to discuss
amongst ourselves for a minute. This shadow issue is a
little bit nebulous. We're on the west of this property. I
know we're not supposed to deal with this, so can just...
ROBERT SCHULTZ: We weren't opening it up for
that, but we can take a five-minute recess for you to
discuss and come back.
CHRIS KUMMERER: Yeah.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
ROBERT SCHULTZ: But that's the only purpose we
were opening the hearing for was the waiver.
CHRIS KUMMERER: Thank you.
CHAIR BURCH: So we're going to utilize that and
take about a five-minute break up here. Thank you.
(INTERMISSION)
CHAIR BURCH: I'll call the meeting back to
order. Mr. Kummerer, do you have anything you want to
share?
CHRIS KUMMERER: We're going to answer the
question with a question.
CHAIR BURCH: That's great.
CHRIS KUMMERER: So the question is can we rely
on Staff to give us guidance as to what is a goal, or what
is the Town's policy on shadows in somebody's living room?
Our concern is if we're working to...
ROBERT SCHULTZ: The issue is only on...because
we're not opening the public comment back to that issue.
CHRIS KUMMERER: I understand.
ROBERT SCHULTZ: The issue is only... You've heard
the Commission and where they're heading with it. The only
question we have in front of you right now is whether
you're willing to waive the Permitting Streamlining Act. I
believe we could at least say that the Planning Commission
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
75
will schedule this as soon as possible. We can get it on at
a date certain, but we need to have that wavier if you're
willing to do that. If not, then we'll go to the next step.
CHRIS KUMMERER: What does the date certain look
like, just generally? Are we talking a month, or weeks, or
what is that?
JOEL PAULSON: I would suggest the earliest,
because you're going to have to do obviously some work on
your end, and so I would probably say we're looking at
March 11th, so six weeks.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: We have nothing earlier?
CHAIR BURCH: Mr. Erekson.
CHARLES EREKSON: I would offer a suggestion to
the Chair. We just continued two items tonight to February
llth that have, at least from my perspective, less urgency
than this. If the only way we could get it on February llth,
assuming that we could confirm with the Applicant that that
would be sufficient time for them, I would be happy to
postpone at least the tree removal issue further down the
road than February 11th to not place an unreasonable burden
on this applicant.
JOEL PAULSON: And that's perfectly fine; Staff
is comfortable with that. Staff would not be doing any
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
analysis and the Applicant would have to do all their work
by next Wednesday.
CHAIR BURCH: So that being said, is February 25th
then out of the question?
JOEL PAULSON: The 25th is another option. That
would give the Applicant a little more time to pull that
off, and then assuming something isn't able to be pulled
together and they need additional time, we can always
continue it to the March llth at that point, so if the
Planning Commission is comfortable with that, then Staff is
comfortable with that.
CHAIR BURCH: Mr. Erekson.
CHARLES EREKSON: I guess I wouldn't want Mr.
Paulson to presume for the Applicant that they couldn't
have it ready by next Wednesday, so I'd like to ask them to
answer that question. They may be able to. They may be able
to produce it by tomorrow, I don't know.
CHAIR BURCH: I think we understood that. I think
now we need to look to the Applicant to say we've put a
couple of dates out there if you were able to turn around
this type of information.
CHRIS KUMMERER: Can we work with Staff to choose
a date offline, or is this something we need to decide at
this moment?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
77
CHAIR BURCH: Unfortunately we have to do a date
certain during the meeting.
ROBERT SCHULTZ: But if that date is picked as
February 25th per se and that didn't work for you, then we
could bring that to them and continue it to the next
meeting.
CHRIS KUMMERER: We get to have a closed debate
here. So yeah, we will do that. Let's continue to the 25th,
and I'm going to just say something I'm not supposed to
say, but any guidance we could get would be fabulous,
because it's hard to work to just something.
ROBERT SCHULTZ: The Commission now will
deliberate on exactly the motion to give you guidance in
what needs to be done, but you are, again for the record,
waiving any Permitting Streamlining Act requirements.
CHRIS KUMMERER: All right, thank you.
CHAIR BURCH: All right.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Do you want the motion
restated?
CHAIR BURCH: I will, however, based on this, if
there is anyone in the public who would like to speak on
this waiving...
ROBERT SCHULTZ: Just waiving the Permitting
Streamlining Act.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
CHAIR BURCH: Yes, thank you. Only that.
ROBERT SCHULTZ: We'll open it back up for any
comments on that issue alone.
CHAIR BURCH: None? All right, then the public
portion of the hearing is closed again, and now we are open
again for a motion or comments.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: The suggestion, if I
understood Counsel correctly, was perhaps we could make the
motion a little more precise, so I would like to try that.
So the motion is that we continue this matter
until February 25th to allow the Applicant to be able to
address for us the questions raised as to shadows on the
neighboring properties, which we heard this evening; so
that the Applicant will have the opportunity as to each of
those houses, based upon their studies, to show us what
they believe the shadow impacts will be. We're not setting
a standard that they have to accomplish, we're trying to
determine whether there is a shadow, and if there is a
shadow whether that shadow is reasonable in length,
duration, extent; and that the solution to that, if indeed
there is a shadow of some significance, would be up to the
Applicant. The Applicant can suggest anything the Applicant
may wish to suggest as to how to solve a shadowing problem
if the Applicant believes there is a shadowing problem
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
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
after their study, and if after their study they believe
there is no shadowing problem, they will have the right to
explain to us why that would be the case. So I think that
hopefully covers the bases.
CHAIR BURCH: Do we have a second?
COMMISSIONER KANE: I'll second it.
CHAIR BURCH: Commissioner Kane. All right, all
in favor? Opposed? Commissioner Badame opposed. And since
this is continued, there are no appeal rights, correct? All
right, thank you.
COMMISSIONER KANE: Madam Chair?
CHAIR BURCH: Yes?
COMMISSIONER KANE: Commissioner O'Donnell, do we
need to give them anything more specific? I mean I would
encourage them to talk to the neighbors to see if they can
make it a little bit better.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Well, we've already had
the motion, we passed it 5-1, and I think we're past the
matter.
CHAIR BURCH: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER KANE: Okay. I think I just got in
what I wanted to say.
CHAIR BURCH: I thought you might have.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 1/28/2015
Item 1, 258 Union Avenue
80