Loading...
Attachment 08PREPARED BY: SALLY ZARNOWITZ Planning Manager Reviewed by: Community Development Department Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6874 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT MEETING DATE: 1/11/2017 ITEM NO: 3 ADDENDUM DATE: JANUARY 11, 2017 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: JOEL PAULSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION U-16-005. PROJECT LOCATION: 140 S. SANTA CRUZ AVENUE. PROPERTY OWNER: MICHAEL MOHR – COO METWEST PROPERTIES, LLC. APPLICANT: LG HOTEL LLC D.B.A. TOLL HOUSE. CONSIDER A REQUEST TO MODIFY AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW ENTERTAINMENT BEFORE 10:00 P.M. ON PROPERTY ZONED C-2:PD. APN 510-45-064 AND -065. DEEMED COMPLETE: AUGUST 19, 2016 FINAL DATE TO TAKE ACTION: FEBRUARY 19, 2017 REMARKS: The Noise Assessment Memorandum clarifying the methodology used in the analysis, dated November 7, 2016, was inadvertently omitted from the January 11, 2017 Staff Report list of exhibits. As a result, the Noise Assessment Memorandum (previously received as Exhibit 14 in the November 9, 2016 Addendum) is now attached to this Addendum as Exhibit 17. Exhibit 18 includes public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Friday, January 6, 2017 and 11:00 a.m., Tuesday, January 10, 2017. EXHIBITS: Previously received with September 14, 2016 Staff Report: 1.Location Map 2.Findings (one page) 3.Recommended Conditions of Approval (one page) 4.Existing Conditions of Approval (two pages) ATTACHMENT 8 PAGE 2 OF 2 SUBJECT: 140 S. SANTA CRUZ AVENUE/U-16-005 DATE: JANUARY 11, 2017 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2017\SSC Ave 140 01.11.17 CUP - Add.docx 1/10/2017 12:41 PM 5.Project Description and Letter of Justification, received June 30, 2016 (two pages) 6.Plans and photos, received June 30, 2016 (seven sheets) 7.Policy Number 1-03 Regulating Late Night Entertainment, dated June 22, 2016 and Council Agenda Report, dated June 13, 2016 (seven pages) 8.Public comment received by 11:00 a.m., Thursday, September 8, 2016 Previously received with September 14, 2016 Addendum: 9. Public comment received between 11:01 a.m., Thursday, September 8, 2016 and 11:00 a.m., Tuesday, September 13, 2016 Previously received with November 9, 2016 Staff Report: 10. Entertainment Noise Assessment, dated October 4, 2016 (four pages) 11. Toll House public outreach and invitation (two pages) 12.Revised Recommended Conditions of Approval (one page) 13. Public comment received between 11:01 a.m., Tuesday, September 13, 2016 and 11:00 a.m., Thursday, November 3, 2016 Previously received with November 9, 2016 Addendum: 14. Noise Assessment Memorandum, dated November 7, 2016 (Reassigned as Exhibit 17 to the January 11, 2016 Addendum) Previously received with January 11, 2017 Staff Report: 14. Revised Recommended Conditions of Approval (one page) 15. Applicant correspondence 16. Public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Thursday, November 9, 2016 and 11:00 a.m., Friday, January 6, 2017 Received with this Addendum: 17. Noise Assessment Memorandum, dated November 7, 2016 (originally Exhibit 14 – renumbered due to inadvertently being omitted from the January 11, 2017 Staff Report) 18. Public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Friday, January 6, 2017 and 11:00 a.m., Tuesday, January 10, 2017 Distribution: LG Hotel, LLC, D.B.A. Toll House, 140 S. Santa Cruz Avenue, Los Gatos, CA 95030 MEMORANDUM date: 7 November 2016 n ame: c ompany: e mail: Sally Zarnowitz Town of Los Gatos szarnowitz@losgatosca.gov f rom: Blake Wells, LEED® Green Associate – Consultant Alexander Salter, PE – Principal Consultant s ubject: Toll House Hotel salter p roject n umber: 16-0588 Dear Sally: We conducted entertainment noise measurements at the Toll House Hotel on 27 September 2016. Our analysis was based on the Noise Zone Map provided in Chapter 16 of the Town of Los Gatos Code of Ordinances. Although the Toll House Hotel is in a different Noise Zone than the adjacent residences, we understand that Hotel-generated noise would still be subject to the noise limits identified for each receiving property (i.e., the residential noise limits on residential property). The Toll House Hotel has agreed to this methodology as a “good neighbor” policy. The music noise levels measured in the courtyard, shown in Table 2 of our letter, vary from 67 to 73 dBA. The reason for the variation in noise levels is because music noise was raised for some of the measurements to represent a desired maximum level, and to give Toll House Hotel management and nearby residents an opportunity to qualitatively assess future noise levels. Slight variations in level are also due to the dynamic nature of music across genres and within individual songs. Regardless of the variances, our analysis looks at the attenuation of noise from the source (courtyard) to each receiver location. Maximum allowable noise levels (Table 3) are based on the receiver with the lowest amount of attenuation. The assumption is that if the Noise Zone limits are met at this location, they will be met all other locations, as well. Please feel free to call or write with any further questions or comments about the entertainment noise analysis for the Toll House Hotel project. EXHIBIT 17 This Page Intentionally Left Blank From: Gillian Verga [mailto:gillianverga@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2017 9 :24 AM To: Sally Zarnowitz Cc: Joel Paulson Subject: Re: letter for Planning Commission agenda item for next week Hi Sally, I see on the agenda and minutes that I did not send the most current version of our letter -it's not a huge deal because the only thing that's really different is the opening and closing, but if you have a chance to update the attachment so that it looks a little more professional I would appreciate it. Thank you, Gillian EXHIBIT 18 Letter to the Planning Commission and Town Council , January 3rd. 2017 After meeting with the Tollhouse and many hours and many meetings amongst ourselves the Broadway residents have come to the conclusion that the only way to protect ourselves and our neighborhood is to keep the Tollhouse CUP as it is . We have come to this conclusion based on a number of facts and reasons . 1. The Tollhouse had many opportunities to reach out to the neighborhood and initiate an open discussion with us. They did this only after being required to do so by the Planning Commission, and even then they waited a month to reach out, finally arranging a meeting just before the holidays. At this meeting, they had no suggestions that take our major concerns into consideration . 2. The primary responsibility for enforcing the noise ordinance or any permitted entertainment is the Town Staff, who cannot be trusted to adequately enforce the noise ordinance. There are numerous examples of this; here are a few: Town Staff permitted violation of the CUP without recourse for an entire summer in 2012 Town Staff recommended approval of the current CUP change without even bringing up the history of resident's concerns Town Staff currently claims that the Tollhouse is allowed to hold wedding receptions and other events in their outdoor patio despite the fact that such events are clearly prohibited in the CUP 3. Just to be clear about the intentions of the current CUP, since there seems to be some debate, we contacted Randy Attaway and Joanne Benjamin, two members of the town council when the original CUP was put into place. They both confirmed that the CUP restrictions apply to the entire outdoor area, whether it's called the courtyard, patio, or whatever. They confirmed this applies to the Tollhouse Restaurant AND the Hotel. This includes the seating restriction to 36 and the restriction on banquets , receptions, and conferences . 4 . While the Tollhouse themselves claim that they wish to work w ith the neighbor s, some of the ir actions also make it difficult to trust them. The fact is that they only engaged w ith the neighbors after essentially being forced to by the Planning Commission . In addition, they presented a party invitation to the Planning Commission as evidence of "neighborhood outreach" even though that party really had noth ing to do with this issue and was not intended for a discussion of the CUP. 5 . The Tollhouse claims they can "self-monitor" their noise levels with decibel meters in their courtyard . However, as we all know, it's extremely difficult to control the volume ofa crowd of people , a live band , or a DJ at a thriving party. The Tollhouse courtyard is unique for Los Gatos, as it can accommodate hundreds of people in an outdoor venue, right in the middle of a neighborhood. Even in a controlled sound test, the decibel level was exceeded in one location. How can we ex pect the Tollhouse to be able to stay below the requ ired decibel levels when you cannot control crowd noise volume, the sound engineer confirmed this . 6. The Tollhouse claims it needs outdoor entertainment to have a "level playing field ". However, no other hotel in town has an outdoor patio the size of the one at the Tollhouse. Allowing the Tollhouse to continue to have indoor entertainment gives them a fair competitive environment w ith other hotels in town . · 7. The Tollhouse CUP was put in place originally because the Town Council at the time knew entertainment on the patio, courtyard , outdoor seating area would disturb the neighbors. The neighbors had to fight a gain five years ago because entertainment in the patio was extremely d isruptive in the neighborhood. How many times do the neighbors need to raise this issue? Nothing has changed; entertainment on the Tollhouse patio /courtyard will be disruptive again . Residents at 25 Broadway have asserted that the outdoor non amplified sound from the many banquets, receptions etc ... in the courtyard are MORE disruptive than the indoor sound coming from live music at Number 1 Broadway. Adding amplification to a non-CUP complying reception will only be more problematic for residents . 8. Each of the residents on Broadway has chosen to live here because we appreciate the amazing character of this historic neighborhood. To enjoy this , we have to abide by certain restrictions, such as approval by the Historic Preservation Committee for any changes to the exterior of our homes. The Tollhouse also enjoys the advantages of being situated in this charming neighborhood , with the beauty of the historic area and so close to down town . There are tradeoffs involved , though , and one of those is that it's just not an appropriate area for outdoor entertainment. The town enforces the rules for the residents , and should equally enforce them for businesses in this neighborhood . 9. Does it make sense for the town to jeopardize the peace and quiet of the oldest street and neighborhood in town for a few extra dollars in income from one business . Is the town so determined to bring in extra revenue that they are willing to forgo the rule of law, ignore a CUP , and risk the integrity of its enforcement policies? The role of the Planning Commission is to protect the residents of our town. The residents have spoken clearly that amplified outdoor entertainment at the Tollhouse is not welcome. Many of us will be attending our third Planning Commission meeting in January to support our points . We are tired of having to spend hours defending our peace and quiet. We need the planning commission to enforce the rule of law and protect our neighborhood . PLEASE DO NOT CHANGE THE CUP!!!!! Sincerely, The Residents of Broadway 42 Broadway Los Gatos, CA 95030 1.5.17 Dear Planning Commission, RECEI V ED @, 9:21 A.M. JAN 9 -2017 T OWN OF LOS GATOS PLANN ING DIVISION I support and have signed the Broadway neighborhood letter. I want to share another thought as well. I've been here on Broadway, and active ly involved, from the pre-selection of the hotel project until now . I've written a comprehensive history of the Toll House choice and establishment , Conditional Use Permit, challenges, my present position and why. It does not seem useful to summarize all of that again. As I look at the big picture, all of this was carefully thought out in the beginning, to accept a hotel for this location, and to have some restrictions because of the proximity to this neighborhood. What has not changed is the proximity to the neighborhood and the neighborhood itself. There is nothing new about this neighborhood that makes it more accep t able to have outdoor entertainment now, just over the wall from some residents. Sound carries beyond the wall, according varying weather cond itions. This pattern is also the same .