Attachment 6March 17. 2017
The Honorable Town Council
110 E . Main St.
Dear Town Council ,
REC EN ED
MAR .2 3 20 17
MAYOR 8: TOWN COUNCI L
I am very fortunate to be able to live in this beautiful town we call Los Gatos. For almost 130
years Los Gatos has prospered, tucked away from big companies and establishments. This town
has kept alive the small, quiet, and non-congested community that is unique to Los Gatos.
Recently , the community and I have been concerned about the plans for the Los Gatos North 40 .
These plans have shown to disturb the quaintness of our town. A new establishment by the
already busy highway and nearby medical facilities could propose hazards and congestion. As a
proud member of our community yourself, I am sure you share many of these concerns.
As a small town , we have thrived by supporting our small businesses. The development of the
North 40 threatens to steal business away from our citizens. Many citizens have expressed their
concern about this issue. The Mercury News writes "We need to preserve and honor the
integrity of our downtown" (Peterson 2016) By building new stores and commercial property,
business will be stolen from those who have given their hard work and lives to bettering the
community of Los Gatos. Over the country, small towns have been decimated by huge
corporations that steal business and change the community as a whole. These huge corporations
will change the small-town feel of Los Gatos that many people have come to know and love.
The North 40 development calls for new housing, stores, and retail space. Along with all these
housing units and stores, comes traffic. According to The Mercury News "Grosvenor Americas,
SumrnerHill Homes and Eden Housing are proposing to build 320 homes and approximately
66,000 square feet of commercial/retail space on the last...undeveloped land in town" (Peterson
2016). With the already busy Highway 17, Los Gatos Boulevard and Lark A venue, traveling to
work, school, or even to the store is already hard enough. And out of the 30,391 people living in
Los Gatos, many of them use their cars every day. Adding more cars and trucks on the road
from the development could create a nightmare scenario. This is problematic, not just for
everyday commute, but it also poses a hazard to the citizens of our town. With a higher amount
of cars on the road, a higher number of accidents are prone to happen. Traffic could also
obstruct the way of emergency medical vehicles belonging to the medical facilities just down the
road of the North 40 development. This could endanger lives , and that clearly poses a problem.
Many people may think that widening the Los Gatos Boulevard would solve the traffic issues
that the North 40 may pose. However, this idea is off the table because widening the Los Gatos
Boulevard is not in the Environmental impact report. Also expanding the boulevard would cost
money that the town could use towards school funding and other things o f that sort.
Furthermore, many people believe that the North 40 development would benefit the local
schools. But what people don 't see is if schools have room for any more students that would
come from the housing units on the development. The population of Los Gatos' local school has
been increasing over the years. Adding more students to the already dense schools would not
help. Therefore, the North 40 development would not benefit traffic, schools, nor many other
pressing situations in Los Gatos .
I ask you, city council, to think about the effects that the North 40 development could ensue on
our town and community. We should preserve this beautiful and unique charm of Los Gatos for
as long as we can. And choosing to save the land where the development is planned, can do that.
For the sake of the citizens and wellbeing of this town, I urge you to stop the plans of the Los
Gatos North 40 development. Thank you for your time and effort to protect and serve the
admirable town of Los Gatos.
s~
Karly Ice-Crespo
19195 Fisher Ave
Los Gatos, CA 95032
karlicecre@ lgusd.org
References:
Jpeterson@ bay arcanew sgroup.com, Judy Pete rson. "Laws uit on Los Gatos De ve lopment Proceeding." Santa Cruz Sentinel. Santa
Cruz Sentinel, 11 Dec . 2 016. Web. 19 Mar. 2017.
Peterson, Judy. "Los Gatos: North 40 Controversy Addressed by Ove rflow Crowd ." The Me rcury News. The Mercury News, 24
Aug. 2016. Web. 19 Mar. 2017.
March 21, 2017
The Honorable Marice Sayoc
110 E . Main St
Los Gatos CA 95030
Dear Mayor Sayoc,
RE CE NED
MAR 2 4 2017
MAYO~ & TOWN COUNCIL
The town of Los Gatos is very fortunate to be blessed with all of their beautiful wildlife and
nature . Having people in a town is great in all but having a good amount of wildlife and nature in
a community. Recently, I have reali zed that more and more homes are being built and more and
more wildlife are being destroyed . I am writing to you to request that there will be no work on
the North 40. Los Gatos should maintain the land and stop building home, We need to save the
little bit of wildlife that is still in Los Gatos and the North 40 is a 44 acre lot of nature that the
town in trying to demolish the lot and build apartments and a mall. As a proud member of the
town of Los Gatos I am gravely concerned about the amount of wildlife that needs to be
preserved in my town.
Here in Los Gatos we have a very little amount of wildlife left in the town , and that little bit
needs to be preserved. According http://www.losgatosca.gov "Phase 1 proposes development on
the southern half of the Specific Plan Area. Phase 1 development applications includes 320
residential units , of which 50 units would be affordable senior units ; approximately 66,000
square feet of commercial space with a market hall , as well as on-site and off-site
improvements". The 66,000 square feet is equal to 1.5 acre . That 1.5 acres and so a 44th of the
north 40 will be used or a market but their is a market less than a mile down the road. So it will
be useless to build a market when their is one less than a mile down the road and it is the same
with the 320 apartments that will be built because further down the road near our very own
middle school a ton of apartments were just built and I strongly doubt that they are all occupied .
In conclusion it will be completely useless because their is everything we need already in Los
Gatos we alread y have 3 supermarkets and a ton of unoccupied apartments.
Others may claim that the North 40 will be better for the Los Gatos Union School District and
the homeowners in Los Gatos. According to Los Gatos North 40 The planned apartments will be
more centered towards young couples and older people so the North 40 will have minimal
impact on our school's budget, so the North 40 shouldn 't cause ay school impact "Because the
housing at North 40 will be geared toward singles, young couples and seniors, the new student
impact on local schools will be minimal and once built out, the project will be a net contributor
to local school budgets and help ensure continued educational excellence for Los Gatos
students." Since the North 40 is planned and designed for singles young couples and seniors
there will be no effect on the school budget or community around the school. But for the people
who are young enough to be in school but they will most likely to be in college if they happen to
be in and of the grade levels 12 or below it will only be about 100 students more which won't
cause that much of an issue .
In addition, the North 40 will be beneficial for jobs. By creating a community that can self
sustain jobs. According to The Los Gatos North 40 Official site the North 40 will open up doors
for great jobs that will benefit the community and the schools "Once built, this project will create
hundreds of jobs and generate millions of dollars every year to support Los Gatos' schools, town
services and transportation improvements, as well as provide a variety of residential options".
This will be great wont it? Jobs will be created to better benefit the community doors will open
for better careers and part of the money will go towards programs for the schools like a class that
I personally take called STEM (Science Technology, Engineering, Mathematics). STEM is a
great program it teaches students skills that a normal class period on an average day wouldn't.
However, According to Los Gatos Community Alliance At a town not far from here called
Pleasanton, the town tried to do something similar to the North 40 and this happened "Pleasanton
tried it recently tried that and lost. They ended up paying the legal fees that cost more than
$4,000,000" It does not make sense to try to attempt something that has a lready happened in a
different town. In that different town it still didn't work, so what is the point of wasting all of this
money with we as a town are just going ot have to pay more for it?
In addition, According to Los Gatos Community Alliance building this 44 acre project will cause
way more traffic than needed "We have too much traffic and too many students in a town with an
infrastructure that can 't support the traffic nor the students. The solution to poor planning is not
"NO p lanning". We need "BETTER planning". If this North 40 is ever going to happen we need
to have diligent planning and problem solving because adding 320 homes and apartments will
clog up the traffic for not only on the road but also for the students coming and going from
school or all of the pedestrians will cause over amounts of sidewalk traffic.
The little bit of wildlife that is still here in Los Gatos needs to be preserved. The North 40
Specific Plan Area is approxin1ately 44 acres and is bounded by Highway 85 on the north, Lark
Avenue on the south, Highway 17 on the west, and Los Gatos Boulevard on the east. According
to The Los Gatos North 40 Official site "For more than 125 years , Los Gatos has shown it
knows how to balance the needs of today and tomorrow, without forgetting its historic and
agrarian roots". In the town of Los Gatos 125 years ago there was a thriving wildlife scene, so all
that was in the town were homes and the town and a great wildlife community. This website
seems like it is not telling the truth because 125 years ago private contractors were not trying to
plow over 44 acres of land to make 320 apartments, a mall and a super market.
Therefore, the North 40 shouldn't and never should happen because it will end up costing way
more so we as a town will need to raise taxes and the North 40 will pollute our town with too
many people.
Jake Markowitz
19195 Fisher Ave
Los Gatos CA 95032
apmarko@comcast.net
March 21 , 2017
The Honorable Marico Sayoc
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Dear Mayor Sayoc,
REC EIVE!>
MAR 2 4 2017
MAYOR & TOWN COUiVCIL
At this point, Los Gatos is facing a difficult decision with what to do with the North 40. Los
Gatos is divided with those who want to continue with the plan and those who want to
completely scratch it. Los Gatos has been trying to figure out what to do with the North 40 for
two decades. I believe we should revise the plan for the North 40. The plan currently has around
15 acres of housing and 25 acres of shopping. It would be better to have 1 O acres of housing and
5 acres of orchard. The plan should be revised so that there will be less housing and therefore
fewer kids in the schools and that the land is legally owned by someone else.
If the North 40 is built with a full 15 acres of housing, our schools will become even more full
than they already are. The schools in the Los Gatos school district are much larger than all other
schools in California. "The average number of students for middle schools in California is 737,
so Raymond J. Fisher Middle is enormous"(Connor). The average size of the 6-8 middle school
is 16.1 students to 1 teacher. Our average is 22.1 students to 1 teacher. This was as of2015, and
since then we have gained almost 200 students, so our average is probably around 25 students to
I teacher. Ifwe cut the housing down to 10 acres, we will still meet the low-income housing
quota while putting less stress on our already bulging schools.
The land making up the North 40 is not entirely owned by the town of Los Gatos. Even though
Los Gatos has been working on this project for a long time the town still does not have full
control of The North 40. The North 40 is "approximately 40 acres ofland on the northern edge
of town owned by the Yuki family, long-time Los Gatos residents." Accordin g to
losgatosnorth40 .com, the land is still owned by the Yuki Family, meaning we can't legally build
anything there until the land is sold to the town, so why are all of these plans being drawn up?
Many people may say the North 40 will help solve traffic problems off of H ighway 85 .
However, even though it will help traffic off of Highway 85 , the North 40 is built with more
housing, and that means more people as well as more kids going to the schools. I live about 1
mile from Fisher Middle school, and in the morning it takes me 10 minutes to get to school. To
get to the high school from Fisher during pick up takes almost half an hour. The last thing this
town need is more people going to the same place at the same time . Furthermore, the North 40
developers reached a fmancial agreement with the Los Gatos Union School District that will
March 21 , 2017
The Honorable Marico Sayoc
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA, 95030
Dear Mayor Sayoc,
RECEIVED
MAR 2 4 201 7
MAYOR a TOWN COUNCIL
Instead of adding more housing, more people, and more buildings to Los Gatos we should
appreciate our town for what it is and what it has been for years. The plan for the North 40 is to
tear out the orchard and replace it with housing and retail stores. Many residents are upset by this
plan and hope it will not get approved. Housing will create overpopulation, and big retail stores
· will hurt small businesses in downtown Los Gatos. I strongly believe that if the North 40 gets
approved, it will result in many negative outcomes including overpopulation in Los Gatos and
the fact that our town will no longer be as quaint.
If the North 40 continues to progress our town will become overpopulated. Many residents feel
that our town is already overcrowded and if the North 40 gets approved it will result in problems
like traffic and overpopulation in our schools. The developers plan on building 320 housing units
and 66,000 square feet of retail stores (McSweeney). According to the letter written by
Superintendent Diana Abbati, "The District has evaluated proposed new development within the
Town of Los Gatos ("Town") and has determined that new residential development will continue
to cause overcrowding in its schools, and no other feasible mitigations are available to reduce
overcrowding" (Abbati). Our schools will become overcrowded, and the commute to school will
become a hassle as well. If more and more new students come to our schools, each student will
not have a quality learning experience because of the amount of people in each class.
Overpopulation in our town will create terrible traffic making it harder to commute around town.
Los Gatos will lose its small town feeling if the North 40 gets approved. To me, Los Gatos is
known as a small quiet town. However, if the North 40 passes it will no longer have this
reputation. Many of those who live in Los Gatos believe the plan for the North 40 does not go
with the look and feel of Los Gatos. Small businesses into downtown Los Gatos may lose their
customers to the big retail stores that are planned to be built. Former Los Gatos Mayor Sandy
Decker says, "We can't afford to have 300-400 people a week shop elsewhere when these
downtown businesses are already fighting so hard to hold on" (Favro). These stores downtown
may go out of business because of the new retail stores that are a part of the North 40. These big
stores will cause Los Gatos to lose its quaint feeling because we may lose our small businesses
downtown and these new stores may replace downtown Los Gatos.
Many people may argue that the North 40 will provide shopping centers closer to home.
However, this idea is misleading because this new shopping facility will create more traffic and
take away business from the small shops downtown. Traffic will become even worse because
many people who live outside of Los Gatos may want to visit the new restaurants and retail
stores. According to one letter sent by a resident "We are a small town. We must address these
traffic issues before complicating the situation by adding more housing, more retail, more
traffic .... and more traffic ... and more traffic. Having a Los Gatos version of Santana Row in our
backyard isn't appealing especially if it is at the cost of our smaller-town atmosphere and the
potential decline of downtown Los Gatos" (Field). The North 40 may be helpful for the new
businesses that may come, however, Los Gatos will be drowned in traffic . Furthennore, many
people may also argue that the North 40 will provide housing and jobs for those who need them.
Nevertheless, this claim is misguided because the orchard that is a part of Los Gatos will be tom
down and replaced with buildings. In addition, the new stores and housing will r~sult in
overpopulation and traffic. The only orchard in Los Gatos will be tom down and replaced with
more buildings that are not necessary for our town. Therefore, the North 40 should not be
approved because of the many negative outcomes.
Why don't we build a park, a trail or anything that appreciates and acknowledges the beautiful
orchard that is part of Los Gatos. The North 40 should not be approved because it will result in
traffic, overpopulation, and many more negative outcomes for our town. Thank you for your
time.
Sincerely,
Ariana Ekelund
14515 Clearview Dr
Los Gatos, CA, 95032
References:
Abbati, Diana. "Notice of Findings of Overcrowding for the Los Gatos Union School District School Facilities Act Pursuant to
Government Code Section 65971." (2015): n. pag. 17 Apr. 2015 . Web . 20 Mar. 2-017 .
Favro, Marianne. "Hundreds Speak Out Against Los Gatos North 40 Project" NBC Bay Area. NBC Bay Area, 16 Mar. 2017.
Web. 16 Mar. 2017.
Field, Dave and Karol. "North 40 Specific Plan." N.p., 19 May 2014. Web. 20 Mar. 2017 .
Mcsweeney, Terry. "Los Gatos Leaders Hit the Brakes on Controversial Project." NBC Bay Area. NBC Bay Area, 20 Apr. 2016 .
Web. 20 Mar. 2017 .
March 20, 2017
The Honorable Marico Sayoc
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Dear Mayor Sayoc,
RECEIVED
MAR 2 4 Z017
MAYO R a TOWN COUNCIL
It is clear that there are many disputes over the developing of the Los Gatos North 40, however
approving this would cause more problems than it would benefit the community. Our small
historic town has a great school district that many desire their children to take part in. Although
this project would allow the community to grow, it would ruin what the existing population
loves. I strongly believe that the Los Gatos North 40 should not be developed principally because
it will ruin old Los Gatos feel and will cause a huge increase of students in both elementary and
middle schools.
The North 40 development would put the historic charm of Los Gatos at risk. The setting of Los
Gatos is like no other, especially downtown. It is filled with many small businesses, restaurants,
salons, and boutiques. The Los Gatos North 40 project has proposed to tear out a whole orchard
and and replace it with approximately 320 homes and 66,000 square feet of retail space. The
North 40 claims that, "Exciting new shops and dining options will help to keep local spending
and jobs right here in Los Gatos" ("Benefits"). Despite the fact of residents having more options
of shops and restaurants, businesses downtown that are preexisting could have a decrease in
sales. Furthermore, the North 40 is likely to have a modem edge such as tall, high technology
buildings. This would seem out of place and ruin the Los Gatos feel as it is today.
Additionally the Los Gatos North 40 could potentially create a large increase of students in
schools. As of today, the Los Gatos school district has approximately 3,200 students enrolled. As
district displays on their website, "we are committed to educating all children to their unique
potential by teaching, modeling, and supporting the skills and attitudes that contribute to their
development as globally and socially responsible students"("Los Gatos Union School District").
Although this may be true now, the North 40 development would cause teachers to have to fit the
needs of more students. Teachers would have to alter their attention to a larger class which
would detract from children who have been registered here their whole life.
Others may claim that the Los Gatos North 40 will benefit the Los gatos as a community by
providing housing to fulfill unmet needs. However, this claim has no benefit because it is likely
that someone of any age or family size would want to come into the town of Los Gatos for the
said to be low prices. Many Including myself believe that when it is time for people to move in,
the housing department and coordinator will not continue to reserve the homes for anyone that
they were geared to. For example, the developers were making livable home for the elderly, but
who knows if they will truly be the ones that end up in them. Furthermore, many people may
argue that the North 40 development will not make a large impact on schools because the homes
are not intended for families with children. The North 40's housing plan calls for a variety of
housing options that will meet our community's needs without constructing large homes that
could bring families and additional school impacts. However, despite the hopes and goals of the
plan, the low prices and great school district are going to draw anyone in. Adults and children
that are currently living here are going to be negatively affected if the development continues to
be accepted. Therefore, the Los Gatos North 40 development should not be approved because it
will only harm the existing community.
All in all, I along with many others Los Gatos community members believe that the North 40
development would not benefit our town. We feel nothing wrong with the way it is now and that
adding a great amount of people including students would detract from schools and work.
Additionally the North 40 would change give away the small sweet sense of town.I have faith
that your decision will be within good reason and that our community will benefit from whatever
happens . I just ask you to keep in mind all of the cons that could come along with this project
and keep the existing community in your best interest.
Thank you for all your time and support,
Sincerely,
Lindsey Eberhardt
456 Monterey A venue
Los Gatos, CA 95030
lindseyeberhardt@comcast.net
( 408) 603-5265
References:
"Benefits." The Los Gatos North 40. N .p., n.d. Web. 16 Mar. 2017.
"Los Gatos Union School District." Welcome to LGUSD-About Us-Los Gatos Union School District. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Mar. 2017.
March 21 , 2017
The Honorable Marico Sayoc
110 E. Main St.
Los Gatos California 95032
Dear Mayor Sayoc,
RECE IVED
MAR 2 4 20 17
MAYOR a TOWN COUNCIL
The small town of Los Gatos has a very nice downtown, great neighborhoods and a very well
shaped educational system. Many of the people who live in this town love it just the way it is.
Adding a almost 44 acre housing development to Los Gatos would take away the small town
feeling that so many people ertjoy . The Los Gatos North 40 will only make matters worse. The
town needs to stay the way it is otherwise to many people will come to Los Gatos and the
schools can't take so many kids. Also businesses will fall and become too overwhelmed. I am
asking that you reject any further proposals in favor of the North 40 because it brings too many
people into Los Gatos, and it damages businesses around it.
The North 40 brings too many people into Los Gatos. With traffic bad already the Los Gatos
North 40 will only make matters worse. By adding a ll the houses it will bring more people into
Los Gatos. This can impact the school district and other businesses. In an article by
Mercurynews.com a reporter states that the North 40 plans ''to build 320 homes and more than
66,000 square feet of commercial and retail space"(Peterson). The schools in Los Gatos can not
take all of these people. Also the parents of the kids are going to have a lot of trouble getting
their children to school. From past experience there is a lot of traffic getting to middle school.
With the population rising it will be very hard to get to school.
Second, the North 40 will damage business around it. The North 40 will be built next to the
highway. When it is the week and people are coming back from work the highway is very
backed up. The North 40 will bring more people to that traffic jam.The North 40 is supposed to
be installed right next to the Good Samaritan Hospital. An article by Nbcbayarea.com states "A
nurse at the hospital is worried traffic congestion from the new development making it harder for
emergency vehicles to get to the emergency room"(Favro). Every night the highway is backed up
from people driving back from work, sports and other activities. Now adding the North 40 will
add more people to the highway. Across from the street is the Good Samaritan Hospital. If there
is an emergency it will be very hard to get through the highway. Adding more people will make
that traffic worse and can risk the lives of patients.
Others may claim that it will create less traffic with the large space installed. Nevertheless this
claim is not accurate. Traffic is bad in Los Gatos already . Adding more people to this traffic is
just going to make it worse. Getting to school has traffic. Going downtown has traffic. Almost
everywhere a person can go in Los Gatos will have traffic. Adding 320 more homes is not going
to make it any better. In addition people may claim that the Los Gatos North 40 creates more
business because the complex will build more restaurants and shops. However, this is not all
true. As I stated before the Los Gatos North 40 is being built right next to the Good Samaritan
Hospital. This will cause more traffic on the highway. This can inflict damage upon the hospital .
With more people on the highway it will be harder for emergency vehicles to get through.
Therefore, Los Gatos should not install the North 40 because it brings too many people into Los
Gatos, and it damages businesses around it.
Sincerely,
Brody Cox
15824 Cherry Blossom Ln.
Los Gatos, CA 95032
brodycox070 l@gmail.com
References:
Favro, Marianne. "Residents Oppose New Los Gatos Development." NBC Bay Area. NBC Bay Area , 15 Mar. 2017. Web. 15 Mar.
2017 .
Peterson, Judy. "Los Gatos: Town Council Rejects Proposed North 40 Development." The Mercury News . The Mercury News. 05
Sept. 2016. Web. 15 Mar. 2017.
March 20, 2017
Town Council
110 E . Main Street.
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Dear Town Council,
RECEIVED
MAR 2 4 2017
MAYOR & TOWN COUNCIL
As positive as growth is, this small town is not the right p lace for it You, the Council, along with
the Planning Commission are trying to build a city within a town. I request that you do not go
through with the production. The Los Gatos North 40 should not move forward because the
increase in population will negatively affect the community, and the town infrastructure cannot
accommodate such large growth.
First, anyone living in this small town can see that the increase in population will negatively
affect the community. Not only is the traffic already exceedingly dreadful already, the plan the
developer "includes all 320 units in the first 20 of 44 acres"(A City within a TOWN!). The
increased population will include a large number of kids as well. This proposed development
does not "minimize or mitigate impacts on town infrastructure, schools, and other community
services"(A City within a TOWN!). Schools, streets, and other services will be adversely
affected. In fact , one of you council members, Steve Leonardis, "ticked off a list of items he 'd
like considered, including spreading housing across the North 40 and building 'smaller, more
affordable housing units'(Peterson). That will be one of the many huge problems with building
The North 40. Condensed housing is exactly what this town does not need. That would indicate
even more people moving to Los Gatos, and if the houses are within the first 20 acres, "the
homes would be within the Los Gatos School District"(A city within a TOWN!). Thus creating a
large increase in students which Fisher Middle School, and other close schools do not have the
room for.
Furthermore, the town's infrastructure cannot accommodate such a large growth. It is common
knowledge that a small town such as this one, cannot properly accommodate another 320 cars or
so. With only two to one lane roads in the town itself, it will be near to impossible to have a
proper smooth functioning traffic system. However, you, the council, had a discussion about this
and the "discussion about widening Los Gatos Boulevard is off the table because it was not
required by the environmental impact report"(Peterson). Just because it was not required by the
environmental impact report, does not mean that it is not a sensible idea to make a town function
properly. Also, the plan states that the development should "address the Town's unmet needs"(A
City within a TOWN!). If the growth were to take place the "retail/commercial is likely to
compete with rather than complement what is downtown"(A City within a TOWN!). This will
affect the infrastructure negatively because downtown Los gatos is the heart of the town, and if it
is to lose business, then that means the town will decrease in money.
Others may claim that denying The Los Gatos North 40 application sets the town up for a lawsuit
from developers. However, the claim is irrelevant because the proposed development did not
comply with the North 40 specific plan that was approved by the council last year. The Specific
Plan states the development should "address the Town's unmet needs"(A City within a TOWN!).
"Move-down housing for the Town's seniors and millennial housing is not provided"(A City
within a TOWN!). Also, "only 49 very low income senior apartments are provided. No other
affordable housing will be built"(A City within a TOWN!). Clearly, the lawsuit will fail because
the development does not comply with the specific plan that was approved. Furthermore, many
people may feel that there is a benefit for residents to have more shops and eateries nearby.
However, this claim is misleading because the high density housing that would be in place would
cause traffic, making it extremely hard to get from place to place. While the plan says, "Lower
intensity residential and limited retail/office uses are envisioned ... "(A City within a TOWN!).
The developer has instead has proposed highly intense development---including tall, massive
3-story rowhome complexes and commercial/ residential space. In this case, the bigger larger
housing will increase population, which will ultimately increase the amount of cars. This
increase in cars will not make a lifestyle more active when where this person could live is just a
small version of LA. Therefore, the production of The Los Gatos North 40 is not the direction to
go in for Los Gatos because it will create problems with infrastructure, and cause large
population issues.
In conclusion, The Los Gatos North 40 should not be built because the town is not prepared for
that large of growth which will eventually cause problems with the Town itself. Thank you for
your time and hope you, The Town Council, will take into consideration these points.
Sincerely,
er~?
Danielle Prawat
48 Mariposa Ave
Los Gatos, CA, 95030
daprawat@icloud.com
'References:
"A City within a TOWN!" Los Gatos: n.p., 2016. Print.
Peterson, Judy. "Lawsuit on Los Gatos Development Proceeding." Santa Cruz Sentinel. Santa Cruz Sentinel, 11
Dec. 2016 . Web. 17 Mar. 2017.
Peterson, Judy. "North 40: Back to the Drawing Board." The Mercury News. The Mercury News, 04 Oct. 2016.
Web. 17 Mar. 2017.
March 20, 2017
Los Gatos Town Council
110 E. Main Street,
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Dear Town Council,
RECEIVED
MAR 2 4 201 7
MAYOR a TOWN COUNCIL
Los Gatos is known for being charming and old fashioned , and the installation of the North 40
will not fit in with the feel of this town. I am writing to you to influence your opinion of why the
North 40 is not beneficial in the long run. Los Gatos is already is a wonderful town, and we
should continue to do what is best for it. The proposal of the North 40 should continue to be
denied because of the increase of people within schools and the effects of the new competition
between businesses in Los Gatos.
If the North 40 attracts more families to our school district the number of students within schools
will increase. In our district, within both elementary and middle school, there are around 3,200
students (Abbati). In Fisher, there were 1,246 students enrolled in the 2014-2015 school year
(Abbati). Since then, many more families have enrolled their children in the school. The increase
of student population causes the problem of too many kids per teachers in each class. According
to the Fisher School Accountability Report Card, an average class size is twenty-seven children.
Class sizes are a twenty-seven to one ratio between students and teachers. To elaborate, this
means less individual instruction for each student as the class sizes increase. To summarize, the
new housing unit will cause a growth of students in Los Gatos schools which will be damaging
to the learning environment.
Downtown Los Gatos is filled with a plethora of shops and restaurants and the addition of more
is unnecessary and will cause more traffic . Whether the new stores sell the same things as the
small stores downtown, it will still harm the amount of business they will receive. Newer or
better stores could potentially put the self-owned stores out of business. Also , the idea of adding
more chain restaurants lowers the probability of someone choosing a particular restaurant to dine
in. The new houses are "geared toward singles, young couples, and seniors"(Paulson). However,
all these groups of people can drive and will create more traffic within the town. Another effect
of adding more shops is people from outside the town may desire to shop in Los Gatos . The least
beneficial outcome of more shops is that more people, not necessarily from Los Gatos, create
traffic in town which makes it hard to get around and for residents who live downtown to get
home. Overall, the proposal of the newer shopping center may put the small businesses in danger
and will cause more traffic on the streets of Los Gatos.
Many people may believe that the North 40 housing units will be geared toward singles, young
couples, and seniors; therefore barely affecting the number of students within our schools.
However, this claim is irrelevant because it won't stop the sellers from selling the houses to
families that have the money to pay the asking price. The sellers hope to sell to these groups of
people although they won't refuse to sell to those who are interested and can afford them. The
units will be priced at approximately $900,000 to $1.5(Peterson). To afford the housing people
would have to be making "$130,000 to $250,000 if they have a 20 percent down
payment"(Peterson). Two out of the three specific groups they plan to sell these houses to are
either just beginning their careers or just finishing. Furthermore, one could easily think that a
variety of new shops and dining will benefit the Los Gatos economy . However, this idea is
misleading because as a whole it may boost our town's economy but with be hurtful to
individually owned businesses. Shops and restaurants will be in competition for customers . Local
businesses are already struggling to stay in business as it is. Therefore, the North 40 will increase
the size of schools and will make it tough on small owned businesses.
The North 40 plan has been a debatable topic for those in Los Gatos; however, I strongly believe
that the town is already unique and beautiful the way it is. Adding the new housing units and
shopping centers will detract from the quaint feel of the Los Gatos town. Overall, the North 40
will have more negative impacts on our community than benefits. With that, I ask that you
continue denying the proposal to ensure that the town maintains that same feel that all of its
residents fell in love with.
Thank you for your time and effort to maintain our wonderful town.
Sincerely ,
Sydney Peterson
500 Nino Av.
Los Gatos, CA, 95032
Sydneyshaypeterson@gmail.com
References:
Abbati, Diana G. Ed.D., Superintendent. Los Gatos Union SD 2014-15 Sch ool Accountability Report Card (n.d .): n.
pag.rjfisher.lgusd.org School lrmovations & Achievement. Web . 16 Mar . 2017.
Paulson, Joe l. "North40SpecificPlan." losgato sca.gov, 17 June 2015 . Web .16Mar. 2017 .
Peterson, Judy. "Los Gatos: Town Council Rej ects Proposed North 40 Development." The Me rcury News. The Mercury News,
05 Sept. 2016. Web. 16 Mar. 201 7.
March 21 , 2017 RECENED
Mayor Sayoc MAR 2 4 2017
110 E. Main Street MAYOR & TOWN coUNC \l
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Dear Mayor Sayoc,
Los Gatos is a town where you can shop, dine and just have fun, but as traffic increases and
population rises , building the Los Gatos North would not be a good idea for local residents .
Many are furious due to the plan to build on this property and with local schools already being as
full as they are, adding 320 residential units would only add to the problem. I strongly believe
that carrying on with building on this great piece of land would not only do nothing for this
town, but it would diminish it.
Parents and school officials say that district schools -among the best in the region -are
already overcrowded . Even if Summerhill Homes are not targeting big famil y demographics ,
School District Superintendent Diana Abbati told council members that, "the plan would lead to
more students being produced than earlier anticipated." Parents are extremely protective of their
district's quality and with an incoming rush of new students, the schools will lose that quickly.
One solution proposed was to build a new school in the area, but the idea has been said to be
completely unworkable in previous meetings.
The other issue on the traffic side? Of particular concern is a new Campbe ll planning process
that is contemplating increased development on the Dell A venue corridor. Los Gatos is known as
being a peaceful town where you can relax , shop, and dine, but what happens when all those
things become distant just because you were stuck in traffic for an hour ? It's worth noting that
such specific plans to fix the traffic plans are common and can take years to process -and
decades to actually build out, if they ever get built out at all.
The developers of the Los Gatos North 40 say the houses will be geared towards small fami li es
and young incoming citizens a long with the $1.9 million that will be generated annually towards
local schools. Adding on, school authorities say they are , "expecting many incoming students
they have minimal space for,"(Donato-Weinstein) and the only solution so far is building another
school which is already off the table. In addition , the plan also includes state-of-the-art
alternative transportation solutions and a layout built to addres s the needs of bicyclists and
pedestrians, safely connecting them from the North 40 to downtown. In response, many people
would prefer using their own car rather than sitting on a public bus for minutes upon minutes and
developing a certain plan to solve or even help traffic problems would take years.
I ask that you support my cause to prevent the Los Gatos North 40 from happening. In
supporting this, it will help keep Los Gatos a town, not a city. If the following plan is approved
Los Gatos will quickly tum into the traffic-locked, overcrowded city many people fear it will
become.
Sincerely ,
-;fzOMa S-CbMe~
Thomas Comeau
112 Albert Court
Los Gatos, CA 95032
thomcomeau@lgusd.org
References:
"Benefits." The Los Gatos North 40. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Mar. 2017.
Donato-Weinstein, Nathan. "Los Gatos Throws a Wrench in North 40 Area Development Plan."
Bizjournals.com. Silicon Valley Business Journals, 19 Sept. 2014. Web. 20 Mar. 2017.
"Eden Housing, Grosvenor and SummerHill Sue Los Gatos Over Proposed North 40
Development Rejection." The Registry. N.p., 08 Oct. 2016 . Web. 16 Mar. 2017.
"North 40 Specific Plan Area The Los Gatos CA Official Site!" North 40 Specific Plan Area
The Los Gatos CA Official Site! N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Mar. 2017.
Peterson, Judy. "Los Gatos: Town Council Rejects Proposed North 40 Development." The
Mercury News. The Mercury News , 05 Sept. 2016. Web. 16 Mar. 2017.
Sally Za rnowitz
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hello Ms. Zamowitz,
Tia Marciel <tia.marciel@gmail.com>
Tuesday, March 28, 2017 8:14 PM
Sally Zarnowitz
North 40 -Supporting Possible Community Garden
My name is Tia Marciel, a long-time neighbor in Saratoga and now Los Gatos.
It's come to my attention that there is an opportunity to provide a community garden in the North 40 and I
wanted to be sure to express my support of it, especially as a possible outreach for the Los Gatos High School
community garden .. .if at all possible.
Thank you so much for the work you do to serve our community. It is so very appreciated!
Wishing you well in all of your endeavors,
Tia Marciel
Food as Medicine Advocate, Technical Writer, Mom of 8th Grader at Fisher, Woman, Human, New to
Gardening
408.348.6708 mobile
ti a. mar c i el@ gm ai 1. com
1
\tJarch 21, 2017
The Honorable Marcia Jensen
1 l 0 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Dear Mayor Jensen.
RECEIV ED
MAR 3 0 2017
MAYOR & TOWN COUNCIL
The North 40 is a plot of land tak ing up 44 acres of Los Gatos and is mostly owned by the Yuki
family. The big issue around this topi c is that the people of los gatos are arguing that rhe North
40 will make the town more crowded with increased traffic and people. Furthermore, people
believe that the Los Gatos schools will become even more overpopulated.
There will be up to 364 housing units and 580.000 square feet of commercial uses. T he small
tO\"-'TI of Los Gatos is a lready packed with its population at 30.705 and wi ll only increase with the
addition ofthe new residents brought in by the North 40. The average amount of people living in
a household is three, three people for every one of the 364 units brought in by this proposition
\\'Ould mean over 1,000 new residents to the already crowded town of Los Gatos . Additionally,
the construction of the North 40 will bring m ajor damage to tratlic conditions. For example, if
traffic i ncreases everyone in the town will be affected. Kids and teachers will be late for school.
parents late for work. and people are overall behind schedule.
The Los Gatos Union School district schools are already at an al l time high. with 1,068 students
at Raymond J. Fisher and 1.828 at Los Gatos High . The average student to reacher ratio in public
schools in 16: l , however the student ro teacher ratio at Raymond J. Fisher Middle School is 18: l.
Tbis p iece of evidence s hows that even with the current population in the to\vn of Los Gatos, the
school district is still having a hard time keeping up with the high demand for increns ing
amounts of students per classroom. When the North 40 is built, the Los Gatos School Di strict 's
schools will be eYen more tlooded wit h new students from the new housing units. With the
overa ll expansion of th e new students. the North 40 will bring the need for new materials such as
computers, ipads, lockers. and desks.
The l\011h 40 developers propose $1.9 million annually for local sch ools. Schools in the area
generally have families and members of the community who are able to make s izable d onations
so the proposed amount from the No rth 40 developers is not necessary. Attracting people vv ith
the promise of cash is a common way to grab people's attention. but is money really the answer?
The damage thm the North 40 will cause is too big of a problem for m oney to solve. The North
40 promises to generate millions of dollars in annual new re venue once the construction has been
complet ed. They say th ey will g i ve money to the town , but the t own of L os Gatos has thrived for
decades.
The town of Los Gatos has be come a very special place for the many p eople who live there. The
N orth 40 \Vi ii definitely make the t own and sc hools more crowd ed, incr ease traffic density. and
increase numbers of kids at schools . In conclusion. the North 4 0 will haw a negative impact on
Los Gatos throughout the sc hools and roads of the to~n .
Thank you fo r your time and efforts to protect and serve California!
Sincere Iv, ~+t ~Uwtr
Jake Perry
16841 Leroy Avenue
Los Gatos. CA. 95032
jake l 684 l @.outlook.com
(408) 656-3301
Sources:
• "Meeting the Needs of Today and Tomorrow -Without Forgetting Yesterday." The Los Gatos
North 40. Http:l/losgatosnorth40.com/, n.d . Web. 21 Mar. 2017.
• Peterson , Judy. "Los Gatos: North 40 Lawsuit Filed ." The Mercury News. The Mercury News.
11 Oct. 2016. Web. 21 Mar. 2017.
Angelia Doerner SaveOurHood@yahoo.com
August 31, 2016
To: Town Council
The following consolidates my comments concerning the "Lega l Requirement to Replace Units" in rebuttal to points
and assert ions made in letters made by Goldfarb Lipman (dated August 22 '16) and by Remy Moose Manley (dated
August 26 '16). I stand firm in my comments and interpretations as discussed in detail in my letters to you dated Aug
8 '16, Aug 10 '16 (emphasis added reg intent of the law) and Aug 15 '16.
Legal Cites and
References
"Paragraph (3) of
subdivision (c) [the
replacement
housing provision]
does not apply to
an applicant
seeking a density
bonus fora
proposed housing
development if his
or her application
was submitted to,
or processed by, a
city, ... before
January 1, 2015."
What is the
"maximum
allowable
residential
density" applicable
to the Current
Proposal?
Responses a la Responses a la Rebuttals a la Doerner
Goldman Lipman Remy Moose Manley SaveOurHood@vahoo.com
"Application Date" and Applicability of Legal "Replacement Requirement"
"There is no doubt that
the application for the
Project was submitted to,
and processed by, the
Town before January 1,
2015. The applicants
submitted the A&S and
VTM to the Town on Nov
14 '13. The Town ..... .
processed ... and requested
more info on Dec 18 '13. 11
'The term "application" ...
referring to the date of
the initial application for
the Project ... 11
"In fact, an important
earlier provision ...
supports this broader
view. Section 65915,
.. .(b}{l}, provides that a
city shall grant one
density bonus ... when an
applicant ... seeks and
agrees to construct a
housing development "
that will contain some %s
of units of ... low income
persons or families or
senior housing. From this
early context in the
statute, it is reasonable
to interpret subdivision
(c)(3}{C) as referring to
the original application
for a housing
development ... ".
Obviously, the facts as to the "Application Filing Date"
(Nov '13) and the date the Town requested more
information (Dec '13) in an effort to comp lete the
Application are not in question. So, let us simply concede
to th ese facts -that the exclusionary condition
concerning the "Requirement to Replace Existing Units"
applies to this Application and that, where used
elsewhere in 65915, we have a clear understanding of
the definition of "the date of application".
"Application Date" and Definition of "Maximum Allowable Residential Density"
" ... a "de nsity bonus" is:
"A den sity increase over
the otherwise maximum
allowable residential
density as of the date of
application by the
applicant to the city."
"Maximum allowable
residential density" ... is
defined as: "The density
allowed under the zoning
ordinance and land use
element of the general
plan ... "
Both the ... land use
element ... as amended ...
on June 17, 2015, and the
Specific Plan, which acts
as the zoning for the site,
state that the maximum
capacity of the ... s ite is
270 units.
'The law states that the
starting point for
determining a density
bonus is the "maximum
allowable residential
density as of the date of
the application .... 11
"Here, the Town General
Plan states that the
maximum capacity of this
project site within the
North 40 Specific Plan is
270 units."
I have conceded to the fact that the "date of the
application" is Nov/Dec 2013. However, both Goldfarb
and Remy are using "maximum allowab le residential
density" as of June 2015. From Feb '93 until June 17
'15 -the Town's zoning ordinance and land use element
of th e Genera l Plan was as follows:
In February 1993. the Town adopted the Highway 85Nasona
Light Rail Element of the General Plan. This General Plan
amerdment changed the land use designation along both sides
of Los Gatos Boui eva•d be twee n Lark Avenue and Samaritan
Drive fro'l'I residential and agricultural to mixed use commercial.
Add11Jonally, lhe Ge!ler al Plan amendment staled that the area
west of Los Gatos Boulevard bordered by Highways 85 and 17
and Lark Avenue (Sub-area 4.1) should be developed with mixed
used commercial. comprised of destination retail with limited
neighborhood commercial and other uses that would supplement
the primary use.
Allowable land uses included: Destination reta il ,
neighborhood commercial, lodging, high -turnover and
quality res taurants, o ffice (other than medical),
entertainment and rec r eation, public/civic us es, and
transportation related development.
"Maximum allowable residential density"= "O"
Page 1of3
Angelia Doerner SaveOurHood@yahoo.com
August 31 , 2016
The Definition of "Application Date" is NOT Arbitrary-It Must be Consistently Applied
IF Dec 2013 -AB 2222 Does Not Apply+ Max Allowable Residential Density is "O" ==+ DENY PROJECT
IF June 2015 -Max A ll owabl e Residential Density is "270 (with Adjs)" ==+ AB 2222 APPLIES
Legal Cites and
References
659159(c)(3) -
Amendments
made Pursuant t o
AB 2222-
Req uirements to
Rep lac e Ex isting
Units
Th e Following Ass umes the Applicants Will Opt for June 2015
Responses a la
Goldman Li pm an
The Applicants ..
comp leted a .. survey -..
20 un its are on the site.
One h as been used for
storage for > 10 .... A
se co nd unit was owner-
occ up ied before being
purchased by the
Applicants and has not
been lease d since. Th is
leave s 18 units that m ay
have been available for
rent in th e la st five years.
"Currently ... AB2556, a
'clean up' bill ... provides
that " 'e quivalent size'
means that the
replacement units contain
at least t he sam e total
number of bedrooms as
the un its being r ep la ced."
The affordable senior
units co ntained in the
Project meet the standard
in AB2556 : they provide
more t otal bedrooms than
do the existing 18
pot en tial re ntal units : 49
bedrooms will be
provided, while 39 exist."
Re sp onses a la
Remy Moose Manley
"The applicant's counsel's
Jetter dated Aug 22 '16
notes that th ere is a bill
(AB 2556) ... to clarify the
replacement housing
provisions. If that bill
passes and is signed, then
according to the
applicant's counsel, t he
proposed project would
me et and exceed that
requirem en t for bed roams
Disappo inti ng th at the
only "concl usio n
r endered" was to re fer to
the App li ca nt's Coun se l.
Rebuttals a la Doerner
SaveOurHood@yahoo.com
My direct, on-site observations and in spections yielded
19 units. In addition, Figure 4 in the EIR (dated Apr '14)
shows 2 add itional units (one on Lark and one on LGB
that I could not personally observe (located in "No
Trespa ssing" zone) but cars were present at each -for a
total of 21 units.
The entirety of (c)(3)(B)(i) is included in the Goldfarb
letter -Ms Kautz's statements reg units currently
vacant are irrelevant -replacement units are still
requ i red . BTW, the "long-time" vacant unit is still listed
on Metro-sca n as bein g a 2Bd/1Bth and is current on
ta xes paid; t he other un it continued to be rented by th e
prior owner until hi s death in Feb '16.
To my knowledge, 20 units were occupied as of June '15
and one was vacant -yielding a total of 21 units
requiring replacement .
There is no legal weight to proposed legislation.
However, th ere is am bi guity in the curr ent Sta t e law
t ext. In add ition, I find that Ms. Kautz ha s bee n
ex tremely dismissive in h er inte rpretation of the
propose d "clean-up" text . The "cle an-up" t ext (verbatim
an d red-li ned) is:
"(BJ For the purposes of this paragraph, replace" sh oll mean ... :
(iJ If any dwelling units described in subparagraph (AJ ore
occupied on the date of applica tion, the proposed housing
development shall provide at least the same number of units
of equivalent size er t~'{Je er heth, to be made
available ... "[{iiJhas the some provisions for vacan t units]
"(DJ For purposes of this paragraph, "eq uivalent size" means
that the replacement units contain at least the same total
number of bedroom s as the units being replaced."
"At Least the Same Number of Units"= 21
" ... of equivalent size" (contain at least the same
tota l number of bedrooms):
2 bedrooms 16 Un its
1 bedroom
4 bedroom s
4 Units
1 Uni t
All Proposed affordable units are one bedroom rentals w i t h t h e exception of the Manager's Unit which has 2 bedrooms.
Therefore, the Current Proposal is NOT replacing 16 "existing units of equivalent size".
The Current Proposal does NOT comply with § 65915 as amended by AB 2222 ==+ DENY PROJECT
Pa ge 2 of 3
Angelia Doerner SaveOurHood@yahoo.com
August 31, 201 6
TH E SP I RIT AND INTENT OF THE STATE DENS ITY BONUS LAWS AS AMENDED BY AB 2222
In addition to the prece ding, I firmly believe that utilizing the affordable units co nst ru cted pursuant to t he se
re placem en t requirements in the total numbe r of affordable units used to determine 65915(b) elig i bil ity
req uire me nts and subs equent calculation of available density bonus percentages pursuant to 65915(f) is
contrary to the St ate's co re objective in ON LY REWARDING developers for the construction of NEW
affordable housing. Else , as an extreme example, a developer could 1) demolish 10 affordab le un its, 2) build 10
"new" rep lacem ent affordable units, 3) claim 100% in mee ti ng the 65915(b)(l)(B) eligibility r equ irements of
5%, 4) utilize the remaining "95%" [A] to determine the 659 15(f)(2) 35% bonus percentage, and 5) build an
additional 4 units -with NO ADDITIONAL /NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING BE ING MADE AVAILABLE TO THE
POPULACE . Oh, and like the Current Ap p licants -they w ill be 4 large, at-market "for-sale" units versus small
ren ta l un its.
In the Current Proposa l -assuming co mpli ance with the replacement requirem ents (non -co mpliance of which
already is a foundation for denial) -the actual density bonus should be calculated as follows :
• Total of 49 VU units LE SS the 21 Replacement Units= 28 VU Units
• 28 VU Units vs 237 Base Density= 11.8% th ereby meeting the 65915(b)(l)(B) 5% criteria
• [A] 11.8% LE SS the 5% = 6.8% when applying table at 659 15(f)(2) ~ @6 %=22.5% bonus; @7 %=25 %
bonus. I u nderstand that all fractional units are ro unded up -but do not know where the rounding
rules concerning %s are located. So, bonus units would be between 54 and 60 -not 83 .
[A] Th e las t sen t ence i n 65915(f) BEFORE you loo k at the tab le s to determine the level of density bonus reads:
The amount of density bonus to which the applicant is entitled shall vary according to the amount by w hich
the percentage of affordable housing units exceeds the percentage established in subdivision (b).
Therefore the 5% "criteria percentage" is deducted from the percentage of t otal NEW affordable housing. In
other words, the amount of affordable housing "above and beyond" t he m i nimum expected by the State is
what qualifies for a bonus.
Bill Analysis of Assembly 2222 w hich amended Section 65915 to add the "replace ment requirement" and can
be found at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/asm/ab 2201 -
225 0/ab 2222 eta 20140506 131240 asm comm .html. According to the author:
"Adequate and affordable housing is an issue of statewide concern. Yet, the change made to the
density bonus law by SB 1818 had the reverse effect and has resulted in fewer affordable units.
Buildings that were built pre-SB 1818 that are proposed to be demolished and replaced may now
qualify for a densit y bonus under the new SB 1818 structure. SB 1818 inadvertently created a loophole
whe reby developers that propose to demolish pre-SB 1818 buildings are not required to begin the
new project with the same number of affordable units. As a result, a new project may result in le ss
affordable units than previo usly existed on the parcel. This bill addresses the loophole created by SB
1818 and ensures that affordable units are preserved when a development proposes to demolish a site
and the new proposal is to replace the outdated structure with a new residential structure by ensuring
that the project begins with the same number of affordable units. Additionally, th is bill increases the
classificatio n of affordability from 30 years to 55 years. This change is consistent with o th er s tate and
local programs and ensures that affordable units remain affordable. AB 2222 will preserve and
promote the supply of affordable units for years to come."
• Arguments in suppo rt -None on file.
• Arg u men t s in opposit ion -None on file.
• Doub le-re ferral -This bi ll was heard by the Housing Community Development
Committee on Ap ril 30, 2014, a nd passed w ith a 7-0 vote.
Page 3 of 3
.. .
,,
SPECIFIC PLAN -Figure 1-3
Existing Conditions
(Existing Unit Counts Provided by SaveOurHood@yahoo.com)
Planning
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
May 23, 2017
Kirsten Duggins <kcduggins@gmail.com>
Thursday, June 01, 2017 2:01 PM
Marico Sayoc; Rob Rennie ; Marcia Jensen; Steven Leonardis; BSpector; Planning
North 40
Planning Commission of Los Gatos
1 JOE. Main St.
Los Gatos, CA 95030
To Whom it May Concern,
My name is Kirsten Duggins and I have been a resident of Los Gatos for over 40 years. I have mulled over the
problem of the North 40 and about a year ago I suggested to several people an idea that that would allow the
North 40 to be developed without affecting the schools and limiting the traffic impact at peak times. My
sugges tion has been well received by those that I have discussed it with and I felt compelled to formalize my
idea and forward it to you and the Town Council.
I'd like to suggest the town develop a community modeled after The Villages in San Jose. It is a development
of smaller homes that are for those over the age of 55. By having a community that is over 55 , it wouldn't
impact our schools at all. The traffic at peak commute hours shouldn 't be too affected as most of these
resi dents would be retired or working part-time. Below-market-rate housing could be included to fulfill our
quota and made available to be rented or purchased by teachers , police officers , firefighters and those that serve
this community, but cannot live here due to the cost of housing. Retail space can be built to better serve this
community e.g. restaurants , dry cleaning, pharmacy, urgent care, vet, nail salon or hair dresser.
A community garden can be tended by the residents. A small park or walking trail can be enjoyed by all . This
id ea would allow many of the older existing Los Gatos residents to downsize without leaving their beloved
town , friends and family. It may also be good for those younger families that have parents that live out of town
that want to move closer to be with their kids and grandkids.
1
I know the Yuki family and they have every right to develop their property. It is unfortunate that our
infrastructure does not allow what was at first presented. I am just trying to come to some compromise that can
appease everyone, and this seems to allow for development without burdening our schools and keeps traffic to a
lower capacity. I hope you will consider this suggestion.
Sincerely,
Kirsten Duggins
221 Brooke Acres Dr.
Los Gatos, CA 95032
408-656-9049
2
From: Joan Langholff [mailto:joan lanqholff@yahoo .com ]
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 2:05 PM
To: rrenie @losqatosca.gov; BSpector; Steven Leonardis; Marcia Jensen; Robert Schultz; Laurel Prevetti
Subject: North 40 Development Concerns: Emergency Vehicles
Because of the already backed up traffic on Lark Ave. & Los Gatos Blvd :
What provision is going to be made for emergency vehicles trying to get to Good Samaritan
Hospital from Lark Ave. & Los Gatos Blvd. ?
We have ambulance/fire/police emergency vehicles using these roads dozens of times per
day (we hear the sirens all the time -day & night).
How are you going to address the life & death issues that can be impacted because
emergency vehicles are NOT able to get to Good Samaritan Hospital ?
And furthermore -Doctors who are trying to get to the hospital for emergency surgery?
As you know, these roads are already completely gridlocked from May-Sept. due to the
beach traffic.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Joan Langholff
-----Original Message-----
From: David Maxwell [mailto :dlmax@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 5:57 PM
To: Marice Sayoc; rrenie@losgatosca.gov; BSpector; Steven Leonardis; Marcia Jensen ; Robert
Schultz; Laurel Prevetti
Subject: No To North 40
I am requesting that the Town continue to support the residents, business owners and patrons
of Los Gatos in opposing the current application and that public hearings be held as this is
perhaps the most critical planning & development decision in this Valley's recent history and
merits full disclosure & compliance.
The elected leaders of our Town need to support their constituents and uphold our policies,
plans & guidelines.
Los Gatos is a beautiful town and the invasion of the North 40 project will not bring anything
positive to our town.
/Thank you for your time.
Shirley & David Maxwell
Residents of Los Gatos for 49 yrs.
From: btdodson @aol.com [mailto:btdodson@aol.com ]
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 5:11 PM
To: Attorney; Marcia Jensen; Rob Rennie; Laurel Prevetti; Joel Paulson
Subject: Objective Findings for Denying the North 40 Project
Dear Mr. Schultz, Ms . Jensen, Mr. Rennie, Ms . Prevetti , and Mr. Paulson :
As you may recall , on September 5 , 2016 my lawyer Leila Moncharsh provided Council with objective
findings that could hav e been used as part of the Town's own findings on the North 40 Project. Council
chose not to use any of these finding s. It's possible that if at least some of these findings had been
included in the Council's findings , the court case could have turned out d ifferently.
I'm resending the suggested findings. I think that the material in the attached documents shows that there
are still grounds for rejecting the North 40 proposal, a proposal that the people of this Town clearly wish
to see rejected .
Sincerely,
Barbara Dodson
-----Original Message-----
From : Cathleen Bannon [m ail to:cathleenbannon@gmail.com ]
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 6:52 PM
To : Council
Subject: Re : North 40
Council , to be more specific ....
The purpose of the North 40 Clo sed Session Meeting is to provide the Town Council with a confident ial
attorney/client privileged legal analysis of the Court's decision and for Town Council to de cide whether
to appeal the Court's decision .
If the Town Council decides to appeal the Court decision, the appeal would be based upon the current
administrative record and court documents. Therefore there would not be any further public hearings
on the North 40 at this time.
If the Town Council decides to not file an appeal, the Town Council is required by the Court's decision to
hold a public hearing to set aside the denial of the project and then reconsider the project under the
provisi ons of Government Code §65589.5(j, known as the Housing Accountability Act. The Town Council
will not be di scussi ng and/or deliberating in Closed Session on potential additional facts and evidence to
deny or approve the project under the Housing Accountability Act. Any such discussion and/or
deliberation must occur at an open public hearing.
>On Jun 26, 2017, at 6:50 PM , Cathleen Bannon <cath l ee nbannon@gma il.com> wrote:
>
>
>There are many r easo ns to deny this proje ct on strictly objective grounds. Mayor Sayoc,
Councilwoman Spector and Councilman Leonardis used sound objective analysis (and li stened to over
95% of thousands of emails and hundreds of public comment speeches) to deny thi s application. While
we disagreed with Councilwom an Jensen and Vice Mayor Rennie's reasonin g to support the North 40,
we gently remind them that they took an oath to defend the ma jority decision once it wa s rendered. All
five of you repre sent the townspeople of Los Gatos and an overwhelming majority of u s want this
project denied again . Offering a specia l Council meeting to he ar public comment would be applauded by
your constituents, the judge and is a true expression of democracy. Then hold your closed door session
and decide.
>
>Thank you
From: jvannada @qmail.com [mailto:jvannada@qmail.com ]
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:51 AM
To: BSpector; Rob Rennie; Marica Sayoc; Steven Leonardis; Marcia Jensen
Cc: Janette Judd
Subject: Closed Session -No 40
Please see attached desk item for tonight's meeting.
jak vannada
Los Gatos Community Alliance
I support the North 40 Specific Plan for the following reasons:
1. The town citizenry spent years, thousands of hours and dollars discussing and
debating the perfect plan. There was no "perfect". Comprom ises were made.
2. All of us had the same level playing field during the construction of the Specific
Plan . I believe we had more than 6 years to put it together. It was a
compromise of many values.
3. The Los Gatos Community Alliance does understand and often agrees with the
angst over traffic, schools, over-crowding, etc. During the process of arguing
against this project, we learned about state laws that influence the town's
ultimate decisions. Violating those will increase the legal bills already exceeding
$500,000.
4. Violating those laws will only cost us mo re money with the potential of having
the state take over the planning of the housing, thus losing the $12 million
contributed towards road improvements and $6 Million plus contributed to the
schools .
5. We (the town citizens) have known this was coming for decades. We could
have taxed ourselves, starting long ago, and purchased this property. But we
didn't.
6. The town is under the laws established by the county and the state to supply our
fair share of housing for the entire bay area . The North 40 was a step in this
direction with high density housing put inside the bounds of two freeways and
two major arterial roads. We don't have any glace as well suited to high
density housing.
7 . We are not an island "small town" in a sea of big cities . We are a part of the
most successful metropolitan area in the United States and have to think
regionally instead of just about ourselves.
8. The schools and the developer made a deal acceptable to the schools for
anticipated increases in enrollment. No other developer has come close to such
a large cash or property offer.
9. There are almost no views from inside the current orchard. Trees block the views
of the hills. Landscaping and even small one story buildings will block the view
of anyone within that space. My neighbors planted a tree that now blocks my
view of the mountain. The town has planted trees next to my house that will
totally block my view of the hills. Views may be reduced in some few instances,
but they will not be blocked
10. The relatively new medical build ings along Los Gatos Boulevard, bounding the
edge of the North 40, are taller than anything new that can be bu i lt along the
periphery . And there will be a buffer of orchard trees in front of all buildings.
11. The height restr ictions on the N40 are as strong or stronger than anywhere else
in town .
12 . We have NEVER had so much open space required, and then exceeded that
requirement by a developer. We're at or near 40%. No other developer
provided more than 10%.
13. The town has a pension debt exceeding $53,000,000 and will in the next two
years exceed $65,000,000. Do we have the money or resources to pour into
another law suit?
14. Perversely, building the North 40 will help to pay down this debt. The
alternative may be to tax the citizens of Los Gatos to whom this debt of
$65,000,000+ belongs. If we pa id $12,000,000 in interest alone last year, how
much worse will the interest changes become?
We worked together making compromises to develop the Specific Plan as it stands. For
some it works, for others, not. But this developer and this Specific Plan are, to me, a
much better alternative to the state or a much worse developer who will make Los
Gatos a much worse place to live.
T his developer has worked with the town and the schools. Others may not. I support
Ms Jensen's and Mr. Rennie's positions who both supported this project. The developer
followed your direction with the Specific Plan . This train has pulled out and it's time to
work with this developer and shape the project. They've been very willing up to this
point.
Jak VanNada
Los Gatos Community Alliance
-----Original Message-----
From : Lee Quintana [mail to:leeandpaul@earthlink .net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 10:50 AM
To: Janette Judd
Cc: Robert Schultz
Subject: Special Closed Town Council Meeting June 27, 2017
Please include the following as a desk item for Town Council for the Closed Session Meeting
tonight.
Thank you, Lee Quintana
To the Town Council,
Since the denial ofthe North 40 application by the Town Council staff resources have been
focused on the subsequent law suit and efforts to amend the plan, putting other important
issues on the back burner. In addition the Town has used it limited financial resources to
address the issue through the courts. The court's ruling will have even greater financial impact,
since the Town is now responsible for the cost incurred by the applicants,
More important is how this issue has divided the Town in a very toxic way.
I started out, during the preparation of the 2020 General Plan update as an opponent of the
North 40 Plan. However, during the many years it took to develop and approve the North 40
Specific Plan, I came to support the Plan. Like all Plan it is not perfect, however, I felt its
benefits outweighed it negative. I was also impressed with the applicants willingness to reach
out the community, schools, and town throughout the entire process . I was also glad to see the
incorporation of innovative planning ideas in the Plan.
The Town choose not to include more objective standards within the Plan assuming that would
preserve flexibility in the decision making process as projects came in for
approval. Unfortunately, this was done without a full understanding that lack of objective
criteria would have the opposite effect for applications containing an an affordable housing
component.
Please do not appeal the Court's decision. Please approve the application as submitted. It is
time to move on. It's time to redirect resources to the many other issues or project important
to the Town. Hopefully, that will also begin to heal the divide among the Town's re sidents.
Lee Quintana\
5 Palm Ave
From: Stacy Hatfield [mailto:stacyhatfieldart@qmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 10:57 AM
To: Council
Subject: In Favor of North 40
Dear Council Members
I am writing in favor of the North 40 project.
I spoke at one of the public hearings about the project. At the time I was near to tears because of
the hostile environment with towns people in my opinion bullying tactics to people in favor of
the project. I suspect many people did not speak up because of the hostility in the room. I had a
hard to time getting my thoughts out because of it.
That being said our Valley has a seriouse housing crisis, each city and town must do its part to
create more housing especially low income housing. The plan does include this.
I have to wonder why our community does not want to be a leader in this area.
It is emberrasing that people complain about the look and feel of the plan instead of perhaps lets
include more low income and how can the town of Los Gatos work with the builders to include
subsidies and create even more low income units.
I also am concerned with the traffic safty on Lark Ave . Which the bulider plans to work on with
the turn lanes and lights on both los gatos blvd and Lark. I believe the added traffic in the town
currently has to do with the traffic apps.
I am an avid bike rider. The plan which creates the path ways and interaction with Los Gatos
Creek Trail is fantastic . Currently I do not feel safe riding my bike on Lark Ave.
Thank You
Stacy Hatfield
From: Laverne Nolan [mai lto :lnolan1 2@verizon.net]
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2017 3:06 PM
To : Council
Subject: North 40
??????North 40.
The proposal only addresses 22 acres.
Can you require that the deve loper show the design for the entire parce l (40 acres)?
This would create a much better vis ion of the impact on and appearance of the last piece of
land that enters our Town.
Every senior that I talk to wishes that the parcel would be developed into a Sen ior Village with
small homes, apartments, and progressive care. Also include appropriate retail and
restaurants.
The impact on traffic and schools would be eliminated.
There are so many of us who have lived here for years and are ready to give up our large homes
for this type of senior living, but there isn't anything in our immediate area.
Is thi s a viable solution?
Thanks for listening,
Laverne Nolan
Pi nta Court
-----Original Message-----
From : Gavin Hayes [mailto:gfhayes@ mac.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 11:38 AM
To : Council
Subject: Yes on North 40
Seems like I'm a rarity these days, but as a current Los Gatos resident who was raised here, I
fully support this project.
As someone who is living off Lg Almaden, I look forward to having a new market, retail, and
restaurants. LG Blvd and and east Los Gatos are starved for some quality food options.
Lastly, I support any new housing the town and developers can provide as well. I'm tired of
hearing about good friends having to leave due to being priced out. The more supply the better
in my honest opinion. I can deal with a little more traffic if need be. The pros far outweigh the
cons .
Thank you,
Gavin Hayes
From: noreply@civicplus.com [mailto:noreply@civicplus.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2017 8:24 PM
To: Town Manager
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Customer Feedback Form
Customer Feedback Form
We'd like to hear from you! Please complete the online form to share your
concerns , suggestions, or praise with us .
Contact Information
Name: JIM SMITH
Address: 1268 BRYAN
----------
City: SAN JOSE
State: CA
Zip: 95118
Home Phone Number: 408 264 0439
Daytime Phone Number: Field not completed.
Email Address: SFGIANTPOET@YAHOO.COM
Please let us know how THE NORTH FORTY IS NOT A PRODUCTIVE USE OF WHAT
we are doing or what we IS LEFT OF THE VALLEY OF THE HEARTS DELIGHT .
can do for you! TOWN HISTORY AND IDENTITY IS LOST WITH THIS .
TRAFFIC IS BAD ENOUGH. ONLY THE SUPER RICH AND
THE TECH WILL INFILTRATE AND CLAIM THIS. WHERE
DOES LG AS A QUAINT TOWN COME INTO PLAYH. THIS IS
A LOSING PROPOSITION. REMEMBER TEH VALLEY OF
TEH HEARTS DELIGHT.
From:
Sent:
Sonia Sharma <sonia_sharma@comcast.net>
Saturday, July 15, 2017 1:46 PM
To: North40 Comment
Subject: North Forty Development
>
>Joel Paulson
>Community Development Director
> Town of Los Gatos
>
>At a minimum, please consider doing a new (more current} study on adverse traffic impacts of this development on
Los Gatos Boulevard and Lark Avenue. The latest trend of vehicles traveling on North 17 and merging on to N85 are now
coming to Lark and then rejoining N85 (and visa-a versa in the evening). This give them a faster connection instead of
waiting to directly merge from 17 to 85. The traffic situation is already at its worst in this area and N40 development will
bring irreversible damage!
>
>Thank you for your consideration.
>
>Sonia
> 247 Prince Street
1
Joel Paulson
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Joseph Gemignani <josephthew eatherman@gmail.com >
Saturday, July 15, 2017 7:45 PM
Joel Paulson
North Forty Architecture
Joel as I mentioned at the Planning Commission meeting the Architecture does not meet what the citizens
wanted if you look at the Town survey. The survey went to Suzanne Davis and I quote "The community
gravitates to a more traditional or mission-style buildings". At a minimum the modern buildings should go and
be replaced by mission style. I can't believe that with all those buildings on 22 acres not even one has what
the citizens wanted based on the town survey.
Please forward my comments to the appropriate commissioners
Thanks . Joseph
No worries
1
From: Nick Goddard [mailto:nickjgoddard @gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 9:01 AM
To: Council
Subject: Upcoming North 40 Discussion
I write as a 24 year resident of Los Gatos, a graduate of the Los Gatos Leadership Program, a
former town commissioner and a former President of the Los Gatos Education Foundation. I
provide these credentials as someone who cares deeply about the fabric of our town and our
community.
The North 40 project was a matter of public discussion and meetings for a decade, the developers
worked closely with the study group and the town on meeting all of the required goals. They
reached out to the school district and agreed to a $6m impact fee and also agreed to $ l 2m in
improvements to the disastrous Lark A ve/17 /Los Gatos Boulevard intersection. One assumes
they spent millions of dollars in consulting fees in designing all of the plans and revisions that
were eventually approved by Town Council.
It was only after they were given preliminary approvals that a vocal group formed and put the
pressure on your body, which led essentially to a withdrawal of entitlements and the subsequent
lawsuit. A lawsuit that nobody in the real estate profession though t that Los Gatos could possibly
prevail in. It's time to move on, it's time to lose our reputation as a tony burgh that's hostile to
development of any kind. It's time to lose our reputation as a place where it's difficult to do
business. It's time to green light the North 40 proposal and provide some new vibrant retail to the
"uptown".
The alternatives couldn't be more stark. Our electorate, as you know, recently shot down the
increased parcel tax leaving our school district desperate for funds. Where would we replace this
much needed $6m infusion? You'd need a lot of bake sa les to replace that!
Where would we get the money to carry out the Lark A ve/17 /Los Gatos Boulevard
improvements? These improvements need to be carried out yesterday! If we were to make any
more demands on this developer, it should be that they need to cut this check today, so that we
can start work immediately.
In full disclosure, I am involved in the real estate profession, but have no professional
relationship with any of the developers involved , nor with the project in any way.
I thank you for your consideration of my comments
Nick Goddard
From: Bill Zurn [m ai lto:bzurn@ msn .com ]
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 10 :34 AM
To: Council
Subject: North 40
· Mayor Sayoc, Vice Mayor Rennie, and Co uncil Members,
For the good of this Town, please approve the No rth 40 Application. While we
respect the fight to slow time, we have to recognize that the application and the
special character of our Town are not mutually exclusive. Folks have been
fighting any development within this Town for as long as development has been
proposed in the Town. We have now fought an application with more town
resources than my household would have ever supported . Quite frankly, a good
application that had years and years (and years) of consideration and feedback
from the public and public officials.
Before we make decisions for our household, we have to weigh all the
options. Last summer the Town decided that it would risk a lawsuit and gamb le a
good deal of money on success, or perhaps had the notion that the developers
would come back to the table with a compromise. T hey didn't.
And now you are faced with weighi n g options again. As a part of your decision
making process, we'd li ke to let you know that we do not support the fist-pumping
by some of our Town 's residents to fight this until the bitter end, to find any flaw
to derail what is in fact a pretty decent proposal, a proposal that actually some of us
feel was TOO whittled away at way over t hese years. We support moving
forward, approving this project, and getting on wi th Town business.
We believe this development will be a financial and community asset for the
Town. If nothing e lse, moving forward means we won't all be left pointing fingers
and spending more money to fight this to an end that, from everything we can see
with the way that Sacramento is headed with state regulations, isn't going to bode
well for the Town.
Thanks for your time,
Bill and Debora Zurn
From: Maria Ristow [mailto:ristows@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 10:36 AM
To: Council
Subject: July 24th Special TC meeting : Approval of North 40 Phase 1 application
To the Honorable Mayor Sayoc, Vice Mayor Rennie, and Council Members Jensen, Leonardis
and Spector,
It's time to approve the North 40 Phase 1 application . Los Gatos has spent years creating a
Specific Plan for this site. The developers for the North 40 submitted an application that meets
the objective standards. We've been through a lengthy process where months of meetings held
by the Planning Commission and Town Council could not produce legally acceptable objective
reasons to deny the project. A separate letter submitted to you by LGCA member Jak VanNada
outlines all the reasons the project should be approved . This town needs to move on.
It is impossible to open the newspaper anymore without reading about the impact of the
housing crisis across the Bay Area. As the homeowners in Los Gatos watch our housing values
zoom upward , we complain about the traffic created by the workers across the valley who must
commute from far and wide , as there is not sufficient housing , affordable or otherwise, for our
growing economy. There are crossing guards, school teachers, restaurant workers,
hairdressers, police officers, firefighters , town employees, shop owners, car mechanics, and
even young tech workers who contribute daily to the fantastic environment and livability of Los
Gatos. Yet most of these vital and wonderful people cannot live in our town, nor can they even
live closer than a one-hour commute. All housing , of any affordability level in Los Gatos and
this valley, will help .
This town does not BUILD housing, but we are required to PLAN for it. The Specific Plan ,
coupled with the Housing Element, was meant to provide at least 270 housing units in the North
40. We've spent over two years dragging out hearings over the EIR, the final Specific Plan, and
now the application. There will NEVER be ANY project that truly meets all the needs of the
community OR that makes most of the residents happy. We can strive for the perfect answer
and accomplish nothing at all . Or we can move forward with this proposal , which has gone
through years of planning . Let's accept how it addresses some of our needs and look for all the
ways our town can benefit from this development.
Change is difficult, more so for some people than others. Please show the leadership to
embrace and shape the change that is inevitable for this town and critical for our future.
Thank you,
Maria Ristow, Los Gatos res ident since 1987
Maria Ristow
Los Gatos Community Alliance