Attachment 5 - June 12, 2019 Planning Commission Verbatim MinutesLOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019
Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A P P E A R A N C E S:
Los Gatos Planning
Commissioners:
Matthew Hudes, Chair
Melanie Hanssen, Vice Chair Mary Badame
Kendra Burch Tom O'Donnell
Town Manager:Laurel Prevetti
Community Development Director:Joel Paulson
Town Attorney:Robert Schultz
Transcribed by: Vicki L. Blandin (619) 541-3405
ATTACHMENT 5
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P R O C E E D I N G S:
CHAIR HUDES: Now we get to the new public
hearings and the first item is Item 2 on our agenda, which
is 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard. Planned Development
Application PD-17-002 and Negative Declaration ND-19-002.
Requesting approval of a Planned Development to rezone two
properties zoned CH to CH:PD to allow for construction of a
new commercial building. APNs 523-06-010 and 523-06-011.
Property Owner/Applicant 16212 Los Gatos Blvd., LLC, and
the project planner is Ryan Safty.
May I have a show of hands from Commissioners who
visited the property under consideration? Are there any
disclosures? Okay. Mr. Safty, I understand you'll be giving
the Staff Report this evening.
RYAN SAFTY: Good evening, Commissioners. Before
you tonight is a proposal for a Planned Development
application to rezone the subject property from Highway
Commercial to Highway Commercial with a Planned Development
Overlay, and this is to allow construction of a new
commercial building with reduced front yard setbacks to
provide right of way improvements in compliance with the
Safe Routes to School program.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
The Applicant originally submitted in 2011 and
the project has an extensive background, which is
summarized in the Staff Report.
The subject site is a corner lot fronting on both
Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon Road and contains an
existing commercial building occupied by Artisan Wine
Depot, which is proposed to remain. The PD application
would provide specific guidance for the future commercial
development and an Architecture and Site Application would
be required to implement the proposed project.
The current proposal is for a two-story
commercial building with retail space on the first floor
and office space on the second floor.
A Negative Declaration was prepared for the
project.
The proposed PD Application is consistent with
the Mixed-Use Commercial General Plan designation, Los
Gatos Boulevard Plan, Commercial Design Guidelines, and
underlining Highway Commercial Zoning District minus the
front setback and landscaping requirement of 15' on Los
Gatos Boulevard.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Council.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
This concludes staff's presentation and we are
happy to answer any questions.
CHAIR HUDES: Very good, thank you. Are there
questions? Yes.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: As it is currently written
with it being partially Office, are there any limitations
to the use of that, such as is there anything limiting
medical offices or anything of the sort on this project?
SALLY ZARNOWITZ: That can be added as a
performance standard that medical office is prohibited,
given that that's a different parking and traffic ratio.
CHAIR HUDES: Other questions? I have a couple of
questions. I have actually many questions about traffic,
but I'm going to hold those until after the public hearing,
but I had a couple about the process.
I understand that the review of the PD is an
opportunity for the Planning Commission to review the
architectural compatibility, style, and details, is that
correct? Is it the purview of the Planning Commission to
review the architecture at this point?
SALLY ZARNOWITZ: Yeah, the Planning Commission
can provide input on, again, the performance standards. and
that can include guidance for the architecture. So, there
will be an Architecture and Site Application later, but
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that will not come to the Planning Commission, is that
correct?
RYAN SAFTY: That's correct.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. I had another question about
the setbacks. I think there were some questions. What is
the allowable setback there? Is it 25' or is it 15'? Maybe
you need to explain a little more to me than just that.
RYAN SAFTY: It is a 15' setback requirement
along Los Gatos Boulevard. There was an error or
discrepancy in the Staff Report, so that latest Desk Item
should have addressed that.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. So, it seemed like that
attracted quite a bit of public comment, but just to be
clear, the required setback is 15', it's not 25'.
RYAN SAFTY: That's correct.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. And what is the proposed
setback?
RYAN SAFTY: Five feet.
CHAIR HUDES: Five feet. So, there's a 10'
variance then, is that correct?
RYAN SAFTY: It's not a variance, but it would be
an allowance for a 10' exception, basically.
CHAIR HUDES: Exception, I'm sorry. Other
questions? Okay, so we'll now open the public portion of
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the public hearing and give the Applicant an opportunity to
address the Commission for up to ten minutes, and that
includes the Applicant's team. I have Kevin Ebrahimi. I
don't know if there are others that have submitted cards as
part of the Applicant's team. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay, I'm
sorry. To be clear, we're on Item 2, which is 16212 Los
Gatos Boulevard. Do I have a card from the Applicant?
EUGENE SAKAI: No.
CHAIR HUDES: You can submit one later. If you'd
just please state your name and address for the record.
EUGENE SAKAI: Absolutely. Eugene Sakai, Studio S
Squared Architecture. We're at 1000 South Winchester
Boulevard in San Jose. Do you mind if I just test out the
technology here really quick?
Just for the record, I'd like to note that I
handed Ms. Zarnowitz 11 copies of ten letters of support
that Staff received as a Desk Item for the Chair.
So, good evening, Planning Commissioners. On
behalf of my client Scott Plautz of STEM Development I'd
like to thank you in advance for taking the time to review
and hear our application for 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard.
Projects in beautiful areas like Los Gatos
invariably take a very long time to work their way through
the entitlement process and our project is certainly no
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
exception to that. Experienced developers and architects
are aware of this; we accept it as part of the process of
crafting a thoughtful project that is one that works from
all sides, both public and private.
Our team has been working on this project since
2013, and during that time the proposal has taken on many
different forms. I'd like to take a few minutes to show you
some of what has been explored during that time and how our
project has improved through the community feedback
process.
From 2013 to 2016 we worked on a variety of
housing-only proposals of various density. Though we felt
as if our residential project fit well into its context,
ultimately the community and the Town Council did not agree
and at a Town Council meeting in March 2016 advised us to
explore a purely commercial option that was conforming with
all aspects of the Town's Zoning Ordinance. This was
actually the final design that we presented to Town Council
back in 2016.
Based on that recommendation we regrouped and
began to consider a fully commercial project and presented
a few different conforming alternatives at a well-attended
community meeting at Town Hall hosted by Planning in July
2016.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Among these options were a full underground
parking garage with additional surface parking, a two-story
retail and office building of 31,500 square feet, a mixed-
use project proposing seven one-bedroom apartments—they're
on the right—above 8,600 square feet of retail, an all new
retail building of approximately 11,000 square feet, and
finally a retail proposal that preserved and renovated the
existing one-story dealership building while adding a
retail building at the corner with a partial second floor
setback to reduce the scale of the building as seen from
the boulevard.
That concept proposal was then developed further
and formally submitted for review to the Town in February
2017 largely as depicted in these few slides here. During
the Town's initial review Staff advised us that the
recently adopted Safe Routes to School program would impact
our application. Here to talk about our team's response to
that requirement is Scott Schork of BKF Engineers.
SCOTT SCHORK: Scott Schork, BKF Engineers.
The Safe Routes to School program was implemented
in mid-stream of the development and what it requires us to
do is actually narrow Los Gatos Boulevard by a lane, and
the green markings is the new bike lane. The porkchop
island at the intersection of Shannon in Los Gatos, which
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
is a pretty unusual situation where it has a sign that
says, "No Right Turn on Red," but that typically
people…that's not normal. So, non-residents, there is
probably a percentage of people that blow through there.
So, this is very safe for the kids going to school, and it
moved the crosswalk up to Roberts, which makes it a more
efficient intersection that will probably be addressed
later.
Today just for purposes of clarity I went out and
made these measurements, and the new project is proposed to
be just under 25' setback from the face of building to face
of curb, and then you see the Yoga Source is around 27.5',
the Robson homes are 26.6', Compass is set back a little
bit farther, and these are all two-story buildings. And
then Edward Jones is 25'. I just went back out there. It's
really 23' to 25', so it's about an average of 24'-ish. And
there's a resident, Magnuson Loop, that's also two stories,
18.5', and then Taco Bell is the only one-story at 24.5'.
The other thing that's critical to point out is
the second floor of this proposed building is setback an
additional 11', so it's closer to I think about 36', of
which these two stories are not set back additional, the
point being that we're pretty consistent with the
neighborhood.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
EUGENE SAKAI: We have a little graphic here to
illustrate how that 24'-8" and change is divided here. On
the far left we have the bike lane shown in the green
strip, and then from face to curb working our way to the
right a 4'-6" planter strip, 10' sidewalk, and then about
another 10'-plus to the building. So, that's just kind of
an idea of what that will look like.
In working with Town Planning Staff on the
initial application and the Town's Consulting Architect
we've made a number of revisions to the building which we
feel have improved the design and made it more compatible
with the look and feel of Los Gatos.
A little hard to see on these images, but among
these include reducing the mass of the second floor at the
corner as to provide a reduced scale with the intersection
and better views of the mountains.
On the parking lot side, we broke up the
rooflines to architecturally express the stair tower
between the two floors. We also refined the second floor
roof massing. Another slide of that.
Another suggestion that we implemented was to
simplify the rooflines along the boulevard; namely we
removed a gable form to basically create a continuous eaves
line.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
This last slide most significantly I think shows
that we've chosen to break up the glass that we initially
proposed at the corner by adding a stone portal feature. We
feel that this adds a nice focal point for the
intersection, further enhances the pedestrian scale and
pedestrian oriented nature of the whole intersection
improvements that Scott Schork just talked about.
Here are a couple of photo-sims that we put
together from a distance showing how the building will sit
relative to its surroundings and relative to the views of
the ridgeline beyond.
And this is a view that we put together of the
existing condition on top showing only the dealership
building, and then our building overlaid on the same
perspective.
And just another image of a similar vantage
point.
In conclusion, our project proposes a fairly
modestly sized development on what is currently an
extremely under-utilized site. The existing dealership
building, as mentioned in the Staff Report, is only 2,300
square feet and change on a nearly one-acre lot on a
heavily trafficked site.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I'd like to emphasize that our project
intentionally does not max out the development potential of
the site. Under the height limit and setbacks and coverage
ratios we could have proposed a three-floor building of
nearly 60,000 square feet that would have required two
levels of underground parking but would still have been
compliant with current zoning, at least numerically. Based
on feedback from the Council, community, and Staff we've
obviously opted not to pursue such a large project.
I think also I wanted to reemphasize what Scott
Schork was touching on earlier in that our project also
offers a very large community benefit in that we will be
one of the first projects to build out a significant
portion of the adopted Safe Routes to School program at our
own expense. It should be noted that this program was
adopted into law in 2016, which is three years after our
initial development application had been filed.
Finally, in the last two seconds, I know there's
been a lot of concern about the installed story poles and
how close they sit to the existing sidewalk. Just to
further touch on what was discussed earlier by our civil
engineer, the face of curb now is not the future face of
curb. The future face of curb is actually 10' farther into
Los Gatos Boulevard, and our intent with the building
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
design is to match the setback that otherwise would have
been required by ordinance had the face of curb not
changed, and as we pointed out, that is consistent with
face of curb setbacks from other nearby properties, two-
story buildings at that.
That's all I have for now, and again, we're here
to answer any questions. Thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Are there questions?
Yes, Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Thank you for reaching out
to the community, to the CDAC, to the Council, and coming
before the Planning Commission back in 2016 and listening
to input.
But you received quite a bit of significant
input, and you may hear it tonight from speakers, about the
blocking of the mountain views, which is important. What
did you do to address that, other than just taking out a
small portion of the mass at the corner on the second
floor?
EUGENE SAKAI: We did a number of gestures. The
allowable height limit at this parcel is 35'; we're more
than 5' below that. There's really no limit as to how big
the second floor could have been relative to the first
floor, but we chose to make it a significantly smaller
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
footprint and step it back nearly 12' from the street
frontages. I think as you're walking along the boulevard,
or even driving along, you really won't perceive that
second floor because of that setback. Like I said, I think
we didn't go quite nearly as big as we could have with the
project overall.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: If it would be okay with
Staff, if we could put something on the projector, and that
would be Exhibit 12-B, page A-0.6, and that would be the
views with the proposed building with the hillside views.
CHAIR HUDES: What's the callout on that document
again, Commissioner Badame?
COMMISSIONER BADAME: It's Exhibit 12-B, page A-
0.6, and it's titled Hillside Views.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: If it's too difficult I can
just ask the Applicant directly, because I'm sure he's
aware of the page.
EUGENE SAKAI: Yeah, we drew that.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: I'm just looking at this
picture and I'm trying to reconcile how that second story
does not significantly block the view of the mountains, if
you could just comment on that. And I'm looking at the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
upper right picture and it's the view from Los Gatos
Boulevard.
EUGENE SAKAI: Right.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: And it looks like the
vantage point from where that photo was taken is at an
extreme angle and taken from the sidewalk.
EUGENE SAKAI: Sure. Well, our firm does a fair
amount of work in Los Gatos. We do projects up in the
Hillside Zoning District as well. In certain cases, there
are codified percentages of views that can't be blocked or
portions of an elevation of a house that have to be
obstructed by tree screening from vantage points on the
valley floor; those are hard and fast numbers that trigger
certain additional requirements or even prevent you from
doing projects of a certain scope or mass or whatever.
As I mentioned, we worked very closely with Town
Staff and the Town's Consulting Architect on the project
that sort of met all the different parameters of a good
retail project, among which is addressing kind of a more
pedestrian-friendlier environment by bringing the building
closer to the street. In working with the Consulting
Architect his only recommendation to improve the project
from the standpoint of hillside view projection was the
change that I mentioned in notching back that second floor,
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
which we gladly did. Upon doing that essentially he signed
off on that particular aspect of this design and ultimately
gave Planning Staff the ability to recommend your approval
of the project as well.
I'm not as expert as you folks on the Commission
nor Staff or the Consulting Architect on what makes a good
project in Los Gatos. I think that's partly why an approval
process takes years, because it's part of that discovery of
finding what is uniquely right for this site, and all I can
say is we worked with the appropriate people and got their
recommendation of approval.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: I appreciate your answer.
I'm just looking at the Town Architect's report and he did
say to eliminate the second floor development at the
corner.
EUGENE SAKAI: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: And I've got a picture that
looks differently from what you did, but you answered my
question, so thanks.
EUGENE SAKAI: He gave us two options, actually.
We followed one of them to the letter, and so that was our
response.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Thank you.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Anybody else? Okay, I had a couple
questions, if I may. I had the same reaction about the
corner treatment. It seems to me that further views are not
being revealed by making a notch into the building, because
you still have the same elevation whether you curve or
angle at that corner or whether you notch in, is that
correct?
EUGENE SAKAI: If I'm understanding you correctly
you're saying reducing the floor area there had no net
impacts on the benefit to the hillside view?
CHAIR HUDES: Because of the angle that is taken
toward the hillside that follows along roughly the angle of
that front, by turning that angle into a 90-degree notch
you don't reveal more views of the hillside, is that
correct?
EUGENE SAKAI: I can't speak for why the Town
Architect recommended what he did, but all I can say is
that we followed his recommendation to the letter and that
satisfied him with regard to this one issue.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. I had another question, if I
may. If the project were compliant with the Town's setback
requirements, what would it look like? Did you attempt to
design to the Town's setback requirements?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
EUGENE SAKAI: Fifteen foot setback from property
line?
CHAIR HUDES: I believe that's what Staff stated.
EUGENE SAKAI: Yeah, we actually have a full
blown application that did not make its way up to this
level that we submitted—it was actually the initial
submittal that I showed you halfway through my
presentation—that was our attempt to submit a fully code-
compliant, setback-compliant project prior to the
introduction of the Safe Routes to School requirement,
which imposed significant financial burden on the project.
It was in that process of discussing that burden with Town
Planning Staff that a concession was made whereby we could
potentially compensate for our financial hardship by
bringing the building closer to the street, picking up a
bit more parking, etc.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. I will have another question
for Staff on this. Is it your understanding that the Safe
Routes to School is a requirement?
EUGENE SAKAI: Absolutely. It was adopted by
ordinance I believe in December or November of 2016 just
before we applied for the commercial project, and I don't
believe we were given an option to opt out. I think had we,
I don't know. We haven't had the discussion with my client,
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
but it certainly imposed a significant delay in our
application because we had to do a full redesign not only
offsite but onsite to accommodate it, and there's a
significant financial expense to implement the rebuilding
of that whole intersection.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, because in your letter of May
31st you state that you've agreed to comply with that for
the safety of the community, and that you comply with the
request but you still maintain the required setback, and
you said, "I believe we've complied with the intent when
you take into consideration those requirements." So, I just
wanted to understand whether you consider the Safe Routes
to be a requirement for an application at this time?
EUGENE SAKAI: I haven't been led to believe
otherwise. Furthermore, I believe that the whole notion of
intent is an important one for the Commission to consider.
As we pointed out with our measurements that we took of
other two-story buildings from their face of respective
curb, we're right in line with that, and I believe that's
what gave Staff the comfort to recommend approval of this
reduced setback because our setback to curb, not property
line, is very much in line with other nearby properties.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thanks. I'm sure I'll have
some other questions after we hear from the public. Does
anyone have further questions? Yes, Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I want to find out
whether you're reserving… The next question was what Staff
thinks whether it was required, or is that going to come up
later?
CHAIR HUDES: I plan to ask Staff that later when
we're in deliberation.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Yeah, that's fine.
CHAIR HUDES: So, we’re now where the rest of the
public speaks, and since there are a number of people, I'm
going to read three names so that you can plan for your
turn. The first card I have is Kathryn Parker followed by
Jeffrey Barnett and then Barbara Dodson, so Ms. Parker,
could you come forward please? Thank you.
KATHRYN PARKER: Kathryn Parker. I live at 16475
Ferris Avenue very near the proposed building.
I'm very much against this building. It doesn't
conform with many of the basic design principles regarding
setbacks, views, and reflection of Los Gatos qualities of
small scale and pedestrian friendliness. A 30' wall looming
up again the sidewalk is neither small scale nor friendly.
This may be appropriate for the downtown part of Los Gatos,
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
but not Los Gatos Boulevard, especially as this is a corner
where the guidelines say that the buildings should be
limited to one story.
Many of the neighboring buildings are two-story,
but most of them are set well back from the sidewalk. This
is right up next to the sidewalk and if you're walking down
this sidewalk there's a wall right there, and most of the
other buildings, I believe, other than maybe the Yoga
Source building, have extensive landscaping between the
sidewalk and the building. This looks like it's just going
to have some sort of little planter things.
Also, the north end facing their driveway is a
big, blank wall. The architect recommended covering it with
a trellis, which I believe they did do, or a series of
trellises, but that's just going to make it a big, green
blank wall instead of a brown blank wall.
As for restricting the views, this afternoon I
drove south on Los Gatos Boulevard, checking out where the
story poles are. Once I got near that building I could see—
assuming the story poles are where they're going to be—the
total view of the mountains is totally blocked out until
you get pretty much up to the corner of Shannon and Los
Gatos Boulevard. Putting the second story back is not going
to open up the view at all, if that is a consideration.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Anyway, as I say, I'm very much against this. I
think it would be a great building for downtown, but not
Los Gatos Boulevard; this is not going to fit in at all
with any of the surroundings building. Thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Other questions? Okay.
Jeffrey Barnett followed by Barbara Dodson and then Paul
Grams.
JEFFREY BARNETT: Good evening, Chair Hudes and
members of the Commission. Jeffrey Barnett, 101 Mullen Way.
I'm here tonight speaking on my own behalf, but
also on behalf of a number of my neighbors, many of whom
are here: the Durham's at 100 Mullen Way, the Arendts at
108 Ann Arbor Court, the Lawrences of 16140 Shannon, the
Highstreets at 104 Ann Arbor Court, and the Moores at 107
Mullen Way.
The focus of our concern is the setback. We
assert that the PD Overlay Zone that would allow the
minimal setback, the deviation from the standard setback,
should be based on findings of harmony with the surrounding
neighborhood. The building under construction has only a
nominal 5' setback, which is not consistent with other
buildings on the boulevard, which has been pointed out.
By the way, I submitted a Desk Item and I'm
hoping that you have that. Good.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
It's our further position that the project is not
in compliance with the Los Gatos Boulevard Plan. The Vision
Statement in the Boulevard Plan has a goal of preserving
the character of the Town. The limited setback modifies the
character of the boulevard. There are generous setbacks on
most of the other buildings on the boulevard that create a
relaxed appearance. The proposal is for a large structure
that makes for a cramped streetscape and we would state
that it's more appropriate on El Camino Real in Mountain
View or Sunnyvale.
The Commercial Guidelines should be followed.
They stress the importance of a strong landscape setback.
The guidelines generally require a 15' landscape setback
and the plan obviously does not do that.
It's our further position that the General Plan
must be complied with. The project is inconsistent with it
because it is not of the type and intensity of land use
that's required to be consistent with the immediate
neighborhood, and the other buildings on the corner and
throughout the boulevard have generous setbacks, as noted,
so the proposed building is incongruous.
Finally, we suggest that there be no Negative
Declaration. The aesthetic detriment to the project, or a
ground floor finding that there is adverse impacts on the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
environment, and the community opposition to the proposal
based on aesthetic grounds is a basis for denial of the
Negative Declaration.
I have a summary but I can't do it in three
seconds, so I'll pass. Thank you very much.
CHAIR HUDES: There may be some questions. Are
there questions of Mr. Barnett? I had a question. We had
testimony earlier from the Applicant, and he cited several
buildings on the boulevard, all of which had around a 25'
or so setback, and then showed that the project had a 24'-
8" setback or something like that, approximately 25' as
well. Did you see that testimony and do you have any
reaction to that? Do you think that it's accurate that this
project, the setback will be the same as those other
buildings?
JEFFREY BARNETT: My thought on that would be to
rely on the Staff Report that says the PD proposal is
necessary because of the reduction of at least 10' in the
setback, so I'm not clear how the Applicant can state that
it's equivalent to others. I assume maybe there's a
difference between the property line and the curb.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. We can follow up with
the Applicant later.
JEFFREY BARNETT: Thank you.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Other questions? Commissioner
O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: When you thought you had
three seconds, you had 30 seconds, so was there something
that you wanted to get out in a short period of time? I
think you misunderstood how much time you had left.
JEFFREY BARNETT: Oh, I saw three seconds. Thirty
seconds?
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Well, now you have 30.
JEFFREY BARNETT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: If you had something
important you wanted to say, I just wanted to invite you to
say it.
JEFFREY BARNETT: Well, I just wanted to
summarize that it's the developer's obligation to propose
construction that conforms with the General Plan and the
Commercial Guidelines and the Boulevard Plan. Cost
considerations were mentioned as a factor in the
developer's decision to move closer to Los Gatos Boulevard,
and it seems to me the priority should be for the Town to
enforce its own policies and ordinances rather than the
developer's pocketbook.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Thank you.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. I have a card for
Barbara Dodson followed by Paul Grams, and those are the
only cards that I have on this topic, so if anyone else
would like to speak please just fill out a card and provide
it to our Staff. Thank you.
BARBARA DODSON: Good evening, my name is Barbara
Dodson and I live on Marchmont Drive in Los Gatos.
I ask you to reject the current plan for the
following reasons:
First, the setback from the sidewalk is
insufficient. The 5' setback being proposed along Los Gatos
Boulevard is too small to create an attractive green space
between the sidewalk and the building. Please require a
wider setback, at least 15'.
Second, the two-story building blocks residents'
view of the mountains. A one-story building would be much
more appropriate for this site. There is little reason for
the second story in the current Los Gatos market in any
case since we don't seem to have much need for new office
space.
On the other hand, we have the continuing need to
retain the beauty of our town. The beauty of our town is
largely created by being able to see the mountains from all
viewpoints.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I'm also concerned about the loss of a dedicated
right turn lane on Shannon and the loss of the third lane
on Los Gatos Boulevard. I believe this will create new
traffic congestion at the corner of Shannon and Los Gatos
Boulevard and is a bad idea. I understand this is a
proposal of Safe Routes to School, but I really believe it
is a bad idea. And I wonder if I can get clarification on
this requirement, the Safe Routes to School to requirement,
if that's just something we have to live with because it's
been adjudicated, it's been passed, what it means? So,
thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: We will have opportunity to ask
Staff questions later as the Commission deliberates, so
thank you. Paul Grams and then Roy Moses.
PAUL GRAMS: Planning Commission, thank you. Just
have a few comments here.
First of all, this huge 30' high building in a
residential area, which is occupied on two-and-a-half sides
by residents, is opposed by all the residents and it's just
only to generate more profit for the developer. I don't
know why this is being done. I looked at these very biased
reports. I presume these reports were paid for by the
developer, is that true, all these studies?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: We don't have the ability to
respond to you at this point in the hearing. We can take
notes and we can ask Staff questions later.
PAUL GRAMS: There reports are very biased. I was
very surprised to see that they have four pictures of the
dumpster behind the quaint one-story wine shop and other
very disparaging photographs just to make things look bad.
Right now, that nice wine shop looks very nice, one-story,
it fits in very well, and just had these really awful
photos.
The setback of 5' is just outrageous and it seems
the only purpose is to increase rich developers' profits at
the expense of the residents. And I actually stepped that
off, went from the sidewalk in, and I couldn't see another
structure along Los Gatos Boulevard that had such a short
distance from the curb of the sidewalk, and this once
again, just to increase developer profits.
If he had a subterranean garage he could allow
parking underneath and maybe set back more and have the
same structure size. Subterranean garages are somewhat
expensive, but still, we're not here to generate rich
developer profits. Also, it would add value to the future.
I don't know who put that traffic study together.
Can I show something on this projector?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Yes, if you have a page. No, it's
not working. Unfortunately, it's not working. Is it
something that was in any submission that you made to us
earlier?
PAUL GRAMS: Well, no. Let me just show you
briefly. This is Los Gatos Boulevard and this is Roberts.
Under the proposed plan it shows the students now only have
to cross one way to reach Van Meter and Los Gatos High and
even Fisher. Under the proposal plan they're going to have
to cross… It's going to be moved over here at the crosswalk
so they had to cross Los Gatos Boulevard, and then to go
south they have to cross Roberts, and that's a major
congestion, so it exposes the students to one, two
significant traffic highways, so I don't see the benefit of
moving the crosswalk over here.
CHAIR HUDES: If you'd like to provide me the
document I can pass it down to the commissioners. Thank
you. Okay, Roy Moses, and that is the last card that I have
on this.
ROY MOSES: Good evening, Commission. Thank you
for allowing us to come and speak. I live at 16529 La Croix
Court, which is up Shannon Road a little ways. I've lived
in Los Gatos a long time. I've worked in Los Gatos, so I go
through that intersection many times during the day, and
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
especially during the time when the kids are going to
school and coming back from school. I try not to time that
because it's pretty congested.
I do respect the rights of developers to develop
their properties and to build something significant and to
make money at it; they have to be profitable. But at the
same time, we've got to take into consideration all the
people who live around that; it is right next to a
residential district.
The thing that I don't understand, to me common
sense is the most important thing, so to me it's like the
building is right out front, right on the sidewalk. That's
like the butt of the building and all the parking is going
to be on the interior. Now, maybe that's the way it has to
be built to be economical, I don't know, but at the same
time, all these considerations about the scenery here in
Los Gatos, the Town of Los Gatos has always tried to take
that into consideration, so why can't the building be put
back—it has underground parking or whatever—and make it
more aesthetic? You can see the mountains that way; you
won't have a problem.
The other big issue right now is taking out that
right lane. I don't know if you go by there, if the
developers have gone by there in the morning. Kids are
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
kids. I like to call them children, but we call them kids.
They're not very responsible or thinking about getting hit
or whatever. They walk right on the edge of the road, and a
lot of people drive through there. They don't have the
consideration maybe that the neighbors have because they're
coming out of the Shannon Road mountains, they're coming
from Almaden Valley, coming through Shannon Road, which is
the main corridor. They don't come down Kennedy Road, they
come down Shannon from Almaden, come through here. It's a
cut-through going to their work, wherever it may be, past
Los Gatos, I don't know, but you cannot jeopardize those
kids by taking out that lane.
And the point was just made about where they're
going to move the crosswalk; that is a double crossing for
those kids. Come there during the day when the kids are
there and take a look for yourself. It's not a very good
situation and it's going to get worse just by the proposals
that are being made here.
So, I'm for the developers, but I think you've
got to go back, put the building back in the back of the
lot, put your parking, figure it out. Architects are
magicians; they do wonderful things.
But there are going to be a lot of objections
here, and if it wasn't the end of the school year and if it
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
wasn't vacation time… I love the way the developers plan
all these meetings where we can't get everybody here.
Again, I saw the story poles go up; I'm here.
So anyway, go to work. Do your job for the Town,
for the citizens of the Town, do it for the developers. Put
their heads together. Maybe they ought to go talk to
neighbors, maybe we got some good suggestions for them, I
don't know. Thanks for the opportunity.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Any questions? Okay,
that's the last card I have from the public, so we will now
move back to the applicant to address any questions that
have been raised or anything actually that the applicant
would like to speak about, and there are five minutes to
add further comments. So, Mr. Sakai or whoever would like
to speak for the applicant, you have an additional five
minutes.
SCOTT SCHORK: Okay, I'll start with the
setbacks. It's probably not clear to the community but when
you walk out there the curb has not been moved 10', so it
looks pretty extreme relative to the existing story poles
and the netting. The dimensions that I pulled from the
field were measured from face of curb to building. Just
forgetting the term "setback to property line," at the end
of the day the property line where it sits isn't super
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
critical, it's what distance you have from building to
curb.
I'll give you an example. This project has about,
I think, a 7' property line to face of curb currently, so
once it's done the glazing of the building is like another
17.5' behind that property line. I'm sorry, that's not
true. I'm sorry, the curb moves out 10' from there, so from
face of curb to property line, that's going to be your 17',
and so then the building is closer to property line and you
end up with your 25'-ish. If you go down north to Edwards,
that has only about an 8' from face of curb to property
line and there is setback. The code required 15' to get
them to the 23' minimum but they're still at 23' and we're
closer to 25', so the property line is what is confusing
matters here.
The other thing that I think is important to
note, unlike most of the other buildings that are two-story
this one is set back considerably. When we first looked at
this project and it was in conformance we were at a 15'
setback with a two-story building coming pretty much
vertical at 15', and that was deemed in conformance. What
we have now, we've moved the first floor 10' forward with
the curb, so we didn't change that situation, and actually
we only moved it 9.5', so we're 6" farther set back from
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the future curb than we were in the prior proposed
development, and the second story actually moved back about
1.5", so with that offset the views are actually better
than had we build straight up and down at the 15' with the
existing streets. It's a little confusing but the point
being is it's extremely consistent with the neighborhood,
and I'm just going to stop on that for now.
The removal of the pork chop islands and the
narrowing of the lanes, that's all a Safe Routes to School
requirement, so it's not… It's actually a very good thing.
The traffic consultant can speak to it, but it improves the
traffic flow, it reduces the length that the kids are in
the crosswalk, it purposely moves the crosswalk to align
with Roberts where there is a larger vehicle flow, so it
makes the whole intersection more efficient. But it's also
very expensive. When I priced it, it was about $750,000 and
construction has gone up like 20-percent; I'm not
exaggerating. So, now it's more like $900,000, and that's a
very small building he's proposing. He could put a 60,000
square foot building there but he's putting a—I don't know
the number committed to memory—but it's like 11,000, so
it's pretty much the smallest project he could afford to
build with those new $900,000 add-ons.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
So, yes, all the Safe Routes to School items are
not in our control, they have to be done and they're
actually improvements, and we can't move the building to
the back and put the parking up front, it's just not
current kind of planning that staff would support; that's
kind of an old school approach. It's more about bringing
the building forward and enlivening the streets.
And I think geometrically, when we were talking
about the building corner and does it improve the views of
the mountains, well, it used to wrap around two-story
vertically, and to your point, pulling it back wouldn't
have done much to that angle but with the building stepped
back and pulled back it definitely improves that view of
the mountains there.
And the building on the north end was reduced
significantly at the second level as well, so it's not the
box it used to be. I mean, it's dramatically reduced in all
dimensions to improve the views and the aesthetics.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. Anything else? I'm afraid
not. We've closed that portion of the hearing. We will ask
questions of the Applicant, and I think there may be some,
so Commissioner Badame.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 36
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BADAME: If you could come back. I
heard you say that you could not consider moving it back,
correct? Is that what I heard?
SCOTT SCHORK: Moving what back?
COMMISSIONER BADAME: The building back. It's got
to be in the front, placed in that property?
SCOTT SCHORK: Economically, if we move it back
any more than it is now we lose parking, which loses square
footage of the building, which kills the project because of
the $900,000 add at kind of the eleventh hour.
Alternatively, you would have to go to the mega-building
and go underground parking. You can't afford to do
underground parking on an 11,000 square foot building, it's
just not feasible, so you'd have to go big or without the
underground.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: With that being said, could
you consider a one-story building?
SCOTT SCHORK: You could. I would have to say at
some point there's an economic involved, because I'm
obviously not the owner, but the land was purchased and
it's valued based on what they could put there, and this is
definitely the smallest building they can build without
getting into a lot of trouble with what they paid for the
land, and if they were asked to put a one-story building
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
there I'm sure they would have to come back and just go
big, and no PD; just be within the Town's requirements for
setbacks, floor area ratio, height; they would park it
underground and they'd have to max it out, and that's not
what they want to do. This is kind of the tradeoff, moving
it forward 10' with the curb moving 10', with the issue
that the property line didn't move. Had the Town moved the
property line with the curb face, which they could do, we
wouldn't have a problem, but that wasn't the case.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Burch.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I know you guys have run
through a lot of scenarios but I want to just ask some
questions to make sure I'm clear on where we're at today
and how we got here.
In some previous, I believe, CDAC meetings it was
discussed that underground parking would be approved, or
not approved but would be beneficially looked upon, and in
looking… Because I understand what you're saying. If you
lose parking spaces you lose square footage, but in taking
a look at the overall plan, if you did integrate even
partial…a smaller underground lot, you technically could
move the building back but probably have a larger
footprint, therefore square footage, and perhaps if it was
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
pushed to the back, a well-designed second story. So, I'm
wondering, when you ran the numbers how that offset in that
decision making?
SCOTT SCHORK: Yeah, I think the misconception is
that underground parking, it's…
COMMISSIONER BURCH: No, it's expensive. It's
about $150 a square foot.
SCOTT SCHORK: Yeah, it's generally about… This
is the number I have from a year ago, so it's probably
more, but I usually say $50,000 per stall, so it doesn't
pay for itself unless you go multiple stories above that
footprint, so it's really difficult.
And the other thing you'll never see is an
underground parking structure that's fully depressed—I know
there are some that are semi-depressed in the Town—with
ramp and underneath the building that's 15-20 stalls, it's
just so expensive. At that point it's $120,000 a stall or
something, so it's just extremely cost prohibitive, and
then when you're doing the numbers you start to look at it
and say well, we have to go big.
It's either the building you see now that's more
efficient to construct with surface parking, and then you
jump over to let's underground park the whole thing and go
big. The in-between is very difficult to pencil.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Okay. Can I ask a follow up
question?
CHAIR HUDES: Of course.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: And in that same vein,
you're keeping the existing building. Was there any look at
maybe modifying that building to include a second story or
add some size to that to then keep the building at the
street single story for the most part?
SCOTT SCHORK: I'm not an architect, but I'm just
going to guess that that building would be easier just to
tear down.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: That was probably going to
be my next question.
SCOTT SCHORK: It would be so expensive to go
second story and it's pretty small, and it's new code/old
code, no fire sprinklers, etc.
EUGENE SAKAI: I'd like to speak to that a little
bit. I think there are two things at play with regard to
how the building is sited. I think first of all is the
Boulevard Plan itself talks about trying to enhance a
pedestrian realm. The Safe Routes to School I think is part
of that whole general movement.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I'm very specifically trying
to understand…
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
EUGENE SAKAI: And I'm speaking to that as well.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: …the process that you went
through different steps to get here.
EUGENE SAKAI: I'm speaking to that.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I know all those, I read
them all the time.
EUGENE SAKAI: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I just want to understand
that.
EUGENE SAKAI: All right, I'm trying to address
that.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Okay.
EUGENE SAKAI: So, with regard to the siting of
the building, which I believe was your question… Is that
your question, why is the building sited the way it is?
COMMISSIONER BURCH: More I want to understand
the different avenues of making this project work for you
and maybe different options you looked at. So, for example,
let's say you have a building on this corner but you're
keeping the existing building, so I wanted to understand if
you guys did an analysis on either rebuilding that building
and adding on it, making it the second story component and
keeping the building at the street single story, probably
not a win-win for everyone, but it gives you that, keeps
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the views that people are worried about, like would there
be a tradeoff there, but did you run those numbers and do
that analysis?
EUGENE SAKAI: I mean, that building is 2,300
square feet; it's the size of an average single-family
home. It has a sloping roof; still it slopes in pretty
severely. I would imagine if we tried to develop a second
floor there that second floor might be somewhere in the
range of about 600-700 square feet. Is that what you're
referring to?
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Yeah, okay.
EUGENE SAKAI: So, that was one factor. I think
the other factor was, as was mentioned by some of the
community members, we were trying to lessen the impacts
along the interior property lines where we have a
residential single-family interface, and so by pulling the
building away from those houses, reducing the amount of
commercial activity, or limiting it to really what has been
historically there in just that 2,300 square foot building,
we felt that was the best way to be a good neighbor, as
well as tying into the Boulevard Plan, which I mentioned at
the outset.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: That makes sense. Thank you.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: I had some questions about
architecture. Could you maybe describe the architecture of
the building, the style, and discuss how it is compatible
with other Los Gatos Boulevard development in the vicinity,
and maybe specifically what are some cohesive design
elements so that this fits with other buildings that are in
the proximity?
EUGENE SAKAI: Sure. Well, we look pretty closely
at the adjacent properties, the overall context. There are
a variety of projects that were built over a variety of
years in a variety of styles. There is just a lot of
diversity.
I think probably our strongest cue that we took
was the existing building onsite. It has a bit of a
Craftsman feel to it, it has stucco, it has some stone on
it, and so as part of the decision to keep that building as
part of this overall development, I would say that that
informed some of the design thinking. Our building has a
pitched roof on it kind of as a nod to that existing quasi-
residential/commercial building that's there, and then some
of the same materials, yet at the same token we didn't want
to fully mimic or ape that building's architecture, so
there is some consistency and yet some differences.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
We looked at the overall heights of the buildings
in the area, and as was pointed out we've also looked at
the setbacks from curb. So, there are a lot of two-story
buildings around, some of them don't have a second floor
setback as ours does, so we didn't mimic any one building
in particular; it was more of a holistic look.
CHAIR HUDES: Where did you come down on the
awning suggestion from Mr. Cannon? Is that included or not?
EUGENE SAKAI: I'd say we met him half way. The
suggestion there was really to do a 360-degree awning
approach on all sides of the building pretty much,
including at the glass corner, which we opted out of that
because we felt as opposed to putting some easily
destructible, readily fade-able canvas material right there
on the corner, why not do something more substantial and
long lasting like a stone portal as an architectural
feature as opposed to some curving fabric, so we chose to
put awnings on I'd say maybe half of the locations that he
suggested.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. Yes, Commissioner
O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: In listening to the
conversation, when the Safe Routes to School came down it
took a big chunk of the front of the property. As I
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
understand it, it was your understanding that that was
mandatory, is that right?
EUGENE SAKAI: I believe so.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Quantify for me, how
much of what you would have otherwise been able to use was
taken from you?
SCOTT SCHORK: Actually, there was no property
taken, because the property line didn't move, so we have
the same property. What did move was just the curb, so now
the City has eliminated a lane and in place of it we've put
a landscape strip, a 10' sidewalk, and then another strip
up to the building.
So, what I was explaining earlier was the Safe
Routes to School requires replacement of traffic signals,
building the new curb and gutter, and doing some
significant improvements to the public right of way to the
tune of about $900,000. So, the take there was for this
project to get to pencil we needed to add like three
parking stalls to get some more… Well, that's all we really
could. By moving the building, a little I was able to get
like three more parking stalls, which enabled the building
to grow a little bit, and it's clearly well below what it
could be. But that was how the owner/developer was able to
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
move forward with the project, because if we couldn't do
that, it was probably a dead project.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I'm being obtuse, I
suppose, but I would like to understand this and I still
don't. The Safe Routes to School obviously was a change of
pace for you; it came down sort of at the last minute, or
past last minute.
SCOTT SCHORK: Correct.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: It had an effect on you
and you're telling us it cost essentially another $900,000,
right? But that's for improvements, but I'm wondering what,
if any, of the property, your property, was impacted so
that you could not otherwise use it as you would have
planned. Are you saying none?
SCOTT SCHORK: The only impact to the property
would be the wider sidewalks onto the property on Shannon;
there was a 10' walk there. Originally we were an attached
10' walk on Shannon with tree wells, and in the end we
ended up with a 5' planter strip and a 10' walk pushing
into the project. Did it move the parking? Did it change
the building shape? No, it just kind of constricted it.
To answer your original question, the developable
property has not changed because of the Safe Routes to
School. It was an improvement on Los Gatos Boulevard and at
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the pork chop islands, the front corner. I mean, it did a
lot of different things to the public view of the project
itself, but it didn't take any land per se.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I think I understand.
Just to summarize it then, you're saying that it's the
cost, and that certainly is a lot of money, $900,000. The
project ended up costing $900,000 more than it otherwise
would have…
SCOTT SCHORK: Correct.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: …but as far as the size
of the land is concerned, usable land, that was not
impacted?
SCOTT SCHORK: Correct.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: If I might follow up on that, is
that because the Town has allowed another 10' to be used of
the boulevard?
SCOTT SCHORK: I'm sorry, could you clarify that?
CHAIR HUDES: My understanding is that the curb
moves out 10' into the boulevard. Is that why you were able
to do that without changing the developable area, because
you're getting that 10'?
SCOTT SCHORK: Yeah. We wouldn't have been able
to move the building 10' forward and go through the PD
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
process if the curb hadn't moved also, so we haven't
changed the dimension from the glazing of the building to
the face of curb. It's actually like 6" farther than it
used to be, but the building has followed the new curb line
out as the lane dropped.
CHAIR HUDES: I see. Okay. That's very helpful to
me. You provided some slides at the beginning of the
presentation that I frankly couldn't read from here, and I
think the public may have had difficulty. Were those
included in the packet in your application?
SCOTT SCHORK: The previous versions that we
looked at?
CHAIR HUDES: No, the first several slides of
your presentation where you showed the setbacks.
EUGENE SAKAI: The first ones.
CHAIR HUDES: Keep going. Where you had
dimensions on a drawing.
SCOTT SCHORK: (Inaudible).
EUGENE SAKAI: Okay, yeah, that's actually quite
a way in, but I'll get that.
CHAIR HUDES: They are quite small. I could not
read the numbers.
EUGENE SAKAI: Yeah, I'm used to a bigger
projector.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Are those documents that you
provided us that you could point us to that we could see?
EUGENE SAKAI: Not that particular graphic, but
certainly our site plan has all this information. This is
not a new design, this is the design that is reflected on
the plans before you.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, so we can find that
information on the site plan itself? That's the one I'm
talking about.
EUGENE SAKAI: Right. I did this because I felt
it would be more illustrative for the Commission as to what
that's going to really look like as opposed to just looking
at a black and white drawing.
CHAIR HUDES: Sure.
EUGENE SAKAI: But what you see is reflective of
the black and white site plans behind you and at your desk.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you.
SCOTT SCHORK: To clarify, the property line is
somewhere, let's see, back here. Yeah, it's somewhere back
here, so it didn't move, and the curb used to be here, and
when the curb moved 10' the property line remained back
here. That's why the setback of 5' is actually measured
from this furr out and it's really a couple more feet to
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the real building, so that's kind of the history of the
property line.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. That's helpful. I can get it
without seeing the numbers. Thank you. Are there other
questions? Okay, let me just check my list here.
So, on the corner issue, you feel that you
complied with Mr. Cannon's suggestion to increase the
visibility of the hillside by the way you've designed the
corner of that building? I think he stated that the corner
should be one story, and do you feel that you've complied
with that?
EUGENE SAKAI: I don't specifically remember him
saying the corner should be one story.
CHAIR HUDES: I believe that's in the Hillside
Design Guidelines.
EUGENE SAKAI: Sure. What Mr. Cannon provided us,
and I neglected to include it in my presentation, but he
provided a suggested floor plan for the second floor. He
went so far as to recommend an outline of the second floor
at the corner, and we followed that drawing that he
provided.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. I will be having
some questions on the traffic and the traffic impact for
Staff, but there was one point that I wanted to ask. In the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
TDM document, which is Appendix E, the consultants say
that, "A provision of a free local shuttle service similar
to the one being offered by the office development at 401
Alberto Way can also be considered as part of the TDM
plan." Did you consider providing or supporting an existing
shuttle service?
SCOTT SCHORK: I don't think so. I'm not familiar
with… I don't recall that being something that we agreed
to, but…
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. It was a suggestion in the
TDM.
SCOTT SCHORK: Yeah, we're compliant with
parking, so it wasn't like we were against it, but the
project is compliant; it self-parks.
CHAIR HUDES: I understand it's not a parking
issue, it's a traffic issue, which I will have some
questions about traffic (inaudible) TDM.
SCOTT SCHORK: But I think we also reduced
traffic with this development relative to what was
previously approved on the project, being the dealership,
the historical uses.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. That's all the questions I
have. Anyone else? Okay. Thank you very much. We will now
close the public portion of the hearing and ask if
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commissioners have any questions of Staff or wish to
comment? Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: I'll comment, and I'm going
back to this Town Architect's report because there seems to
be some discrepancy or some misunderstanding about the
blocking of the views.
So, he provided Approach A, which meant
eliminating the second floor development at the corner.
Approach B stated, "Should Staff decide," blah-blah-blah-
blah, "that the blockage of views to the hills would be
minor, you could make these modifications," which is
holding the second floor back at the corner. I don't know
what Staff decided, but ultimately it comes to us and we
make our decisions, and I don't see that the blocking of
the hills, the views, is minor by any means.
To the Applicant's credit, he came back with a
commercial project as opposed to a residential project.
That's more befitting for this location, however, we can't
make our decisions based upon economic feasibility, so for
me I'm just having a real problem with the blocking of the
views. I mean, we look at the Vision Statement in the
General Plan and it says what makes Los Gatos special.
Well, it's a strong sense of place, and what makes a strong
sense of place? Well, a major component of that is the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
backdrop of the mountains. We all hate being stuck in
traffic. When you're traveling southbound as a lot of us go
home the one palatable thing you have about being stuck in
traffic is you can look at the backdrop of the mountains
and you know that you're almost home, and there is some
comfort in viewing that, and that's what makes us a special
place. So, I'm having a difficult time with the blocking of
views; it's a major thing for me at this point.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I'm concerned with the
traffic, and it seems to me what's being done there,
removing the pork chop there and that kind of thing and
removing one lane of traffic, traffic is already awful
everywhere and how it gets better by removing a lane eludes
me; it gets worse.
So, I guess I go back to a fundamental issue.
There is some ambiguity now as to whether this is
mandatory, that this route affects not only this project
but I suppose other projects. Their understanding is they
had no discretion here, they had to comply with a mandatory
requirement, so I'd like to ask you, was this a mandatory
requirement? Or is it a requirement? In other words,
requirements are mandatory.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MIKE WEISS: Mike Weiss, Associate Engineer. In
reviewing the video from the October 18, 2016 Town Council
meeting there was specific discussion about this very
project and this very intersection. The question was asked
if these improvements would be required with a future
development project. The answer is, and was, yes. The
improvements it listed in this report improve the safety of
school children who bike and walk to school. The removal of
the pork chop island, the widening of the sidewalk, the
relocation of the crosswalk, those all helped to improve
the safety. It shortens the crossing distance for children,
as it was mentioned previously. It was noted in different
reports that there are clusters of students who walk along
both Shannon and Los Gatos Boulevard, so the widening of
the sidewalk for both those (inaudible) will help with
that. I believe there was discussion during that same
Council meeting that the current pork chop island
configuration doesn't allow for enough of a safe zone for
large portions of students who cross the street to reside
without being in the vehicular traffic areas.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: To me it's a form of a
taking, because you're saying we don't care what it costs,
this is what you're doing to do. In this case, it's
$900,000 at some point in time, and depending on how long
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it takes it could go up. So, there is an ordinance and
someplace it says what you're saying, is that correct?
MIKE WEISS: The Council reviewed and approved
the report. I don't believe there's an ordinance, but there
was during their discussion direction to implement these
for future development projects.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Well, I guess I'll defer
to Counsel. I don't understand how you could make something
mandatory that there's no ordinance and the Council says it
will be a great idea, let's do it, so what is it that we
rely on to be able to enforce this?
LYNNE LAMPROS: I'm going to answer, and then I'm
also going to ask Mr. Paulson to weigh in, but it's my
understanding that the Safe Routes concept was accepted by
the Council and is contemplated as being part of the Bike
Pedestrian Master Plan. There is not an ordinance on it.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: We all know we can have
all kinds of master plans but it doesn't make it an
ordinance, it doesn't make it enforceable, and yet we have
a certain ambiguity here. The Applicant believes it was
mandatory, and apparently you do too, but I'm asking a
lawyer what is it we rely on for that, and so far I have
not gotten an answer that I would go to court with, but
perhaps I will.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JOEL PAULSON: I would say I'm not a lawyer, and
you probably won't get an answer that you'll want to take
to court, but the Town Council did in fact, as Ms. Lampros
mentioned, adopt a Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan which
does include a number of improvements from the Safe Routes
to School project. What I would say is if there is a
concern on the part of the Planning Commission that maybe
in this instance those improvements should be required,
then that can always be part of any recommendation that
moves forward.
Regarding the nexus and whether it's tied to an
ordinance, it is not tied to an ordinance and we can get
further clarification on that as well.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I think it's a great
idea and I'd like to see it everywhere. All I'm saying is
it's driving this project, and we've got a lot of people
who don't like this project, and yet we're hearing from the
Applicant part of the reason the project is the way it is
is because we are forced to spend $900,000 on something
that we have decided is not in an ordinance; it was a good
idea that the Council thought was a good idea. I'm just
saying someday somebody may raise that question, is it
enforceable? In fact, it might be sooner than later, and so
no, I'm not against the Safe Routes, in fact I'm in favor
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of it, but to the extent that it now sandwiches what we're
talking with this requirement, I get very nervous about it.
If we were to say we don't like your project because of
what the Safe Routes does to it and they said fine, we'll
save the $900,000 and spend it on something else, we might
have an answer here that would help the citizen sitting
right here, but then people would become unglued because a
lot of effort has gone into Safe Routes. So, I ask what's
the law here, and I'm getting an answer of beats me.
LYNNE LAMPROS: It's a nexus requirement. The
answer is that there would be a nexus requirement analysis.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: But there's no finding
here that the nexus of this is what is being required of
this Applicant. We know that. To me it's a great lawsuit.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. So, it sounds like we may
need some more information from the Town Attorney before
you would be comfortable supporting something like this?
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I mean, I'm representing
the Town, it's just that (inaudible) there's something we
don't like about this project, but on the other hand,
$900,000 is something that the Applicant could say gosh,
we're doing all these things and you're laying all these
costs on us, so we get torn between trying to make
everybody happy, and so I just want to make sure if I shake
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 57
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
something it's going to withstand that, and very frankly,
what I've heard tonight, not shake-proof.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Burch.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I'm going to add onto that,
and then I have a couple comments.
I think on that same vein however, and
understanding that as much is it impacting we would need to
understand how many parking spaces could go away and how
much square footage could go away to offset that and how
would that aesthetically look? We may be making this
statement, and I think just opened up a can of worms, for a
minimal difference in the overall project. It's possible,
we don't know. So, I'm saying that we have one value, we
don't have the offsetting value, and I think that that is…
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: We're not going to get
it either.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I know.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: That's the problem I
have.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I'm just putting it out
there. And I have a couple more comments to make.
CHAIR HUDES: Please, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: These corner lots on Los
Gatos Boulevard are incredibly difficult. What we wind up
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
with is… You know, I think we've gone back and forth on
other projects. Is it the back of the property? Is it the
front of the property? But what we do ultimately have here,
we do not measure from the curb, we measure from the
property line.
We have a request here for a PD that allows for a
lesser setback. I understand that aesthetically that
probably won't look like what we think it will, because we
do have this additional curb and bike lane, however, that
instance of creating this extra depth isn't going all the
way up and down the boulevard. This is a one-off, unique
situation and I think we need to be careful as we as a
planning commission look at this and say do we want to
start allowing these really reduced setbacks down the
boulevard? Because by having that we're basically going
against a list of design principles that have been spelled
out for us, somebody spent a lot of time with what the
setbacks should be, that buildings located on corners
should generally be limited to one story, the requirements
for landscaping to soften between the buildings.
So, that's my worry here. I'm not even going to
get into like architectural or anything, because I think
the overreaching thing we have to decide is are we
comfortable with starting down that path, and I'm not. I
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
mean, obviously I'm not going to speak about the views, I
think everyone else can speak about the views, but I just
think ultimately we've been given a list that we're
supposed to look at, and we're not hitting a number of
those.
CHAIR HUDES: I had a question, if I may, of
Staff, relating to traffic. The first area I wanted to
cover on traffic is the land change. My understanding, and
tell me if I'm correct, the curb will move 10' to the west
into an existing lane of Los Gatos Boulevard, is that
correct?
MIKE WEISS: Approximately, yes.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. So, do we expect that to help
traffic on Los Gatos Boulevard to have this one property
with a curb that's 10' and eliminating a lane?
MIKE WEISS: Again, this is something that came
from the Safe Routes to School report that we all have
already mentioned, but with us here today is our traffic
peer review consultant, Chris Kinzel from TJKM, and he can
speak to that.
CHRIS KINZEL: Good evening, nice to be here.
Chris Kinzel at KJKM.
We did a peer review of the Applicant's traffic
study in conjunction with the Town Staff. That was our role
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in the project. I wasn't involved with or knew about this
Safe Routes to School project before I worked on this
project, but in my opinion it's a very positive thing for
the Town, not only for pedestrians, but also for vehicular
traffic along the street. That lane that's being eliminated
is a lane that just started at that point. On the approach
to that intersection there are two lanes. On the far side
it's three lanes, now one of which is being taken away. I
think the reason that third lane was there is because
there's a free right turn lane coming from Shannon onto Los
Gatos Boulevard, and so that's a natural place for traffic
coming from Shannon to go.
On the other hand, that apparently has created
some problems, because the Town has installed a sign that
says, "No Right Turn on Red," so in effect there's no
function of that free right turn lane anymore. You can only
go when you have a green light, and when you have a green
light the other street has a red light, so you've got an
empty street of traffic going through there, so from a
traffic standpoint it's probably better, but from a
pedestrian standpoint it's dramatically better. The
pedestrians now—and there are about 100 school-age
pedestrians in the morning having to cross the street there
and the first 12-15' is unprotected—there's nothing there
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to keep them from traffic other than one sign that says,
"No Turn on Red," and people's natural inclination to not
run into pedestrians.
But now in the after condition the crosswalk will
slide toward Roberts about 50' or 60' and be sort of
connected with that signal, that intersection, rather than
the Shannon signal. There's less going on there, so it's a
better situation. It doesn't require, as was reported
earlier, pedestrians to cross any more streets or anything;
they're just sliding down closer to where they want to be
anyway. So, that's an improvement by creating that, and
that lane that's been eliminated, the third lane that just
starts right there, only goes another couple of blocks and
then it stops, it becomes a mandatory right turn lane, so
there's no traffic capacity reduced as a result of that
lane being taken away; it reduces the confusion at the
intersection, in my opinion.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, but there is a lane that is
continuous from Shannon until the next large intersection.
CHRIS KINZEL: That's right, it's about three
blocks.
CHAIR HUDES: So, for a portion of that, whatever
the frontage is of this property, that lane will be
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
eliminated and then it will come back again, is that
correct?
CHRIS KINZEL: That's correct, yes.
CHAIR HUDES: And is that a good practice for
traffic flow, to eliminate a lane and then bring it back
again?
CHRIS KINZEL: Well, in once sense it's not
eliminating a lane, it's just extending the two lane
section one more block.
CHAIR HUDES: But it's three lanes.
CHRIS KINZEL: No, I mean it's only two lanes
approaching the intersection and three lanes beyond, and
it's that third lane that's just been added that's being
taken away, so through traffic just is unaffected by that.
The only people that are affected by that are the people
coming from Shannon and they still have the same number of
lanes, one right and one left.
CHAIR HUDES: But there are several hundred feet
of capacity on the boulevard that's being eliminated,
correct?
CHRIS KINZEL: There's several hundred feet of
pavement, yes, and you can call it capacity.
CHAIR HUDES: And have you seen the traffic
there? Do you know whether that lane is actually used or
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
not, or are you saying that lane is not used, it doesn't
matter?
CHRIS KINZEL: It's not heavily used, because
there's nobody that would be using it other than the people
that are coming from Shannon, and so when you're coming
from Shannon and the lane is not there, there are still two
lanes to turn into.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. And when did you make that
observation? Is that in the February 2018 part of the TIA,
or was that in the October? I believe there were two…
CHRIS KINZEL: Our role was a peer review of the
report itself.
CHAIR HUDES: Oh, okay, okay. So, again, my
question is when did you observe that lack of traffic in
that lane, that that lane was being…
CHRIS KINZEL: I personally… It was a staff
person, person on my Staff, that did the field observation
on it, so I did not observe it.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. Yes, Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I would just like the
record to reflect that I've lived in this town, I don't
know, 50 years. I drive that road all the time, and I use
that third lane all the time whether I'm going to go
straight ahead or whether I'm going to go right, so I will
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
not use that lane if it's not there, but if you remove part
of it people will be moving over very quickly, because then
they come to the right turn. So, what it's going to do is
it's going cause a real problem with the right turn, and if
you observe that and drive it every day, to say that taking
that stretch of the road out will not have any impact
except on the people turning right is not what is my
observation for years.
CHAIR HUDES: I had a number of questions related
to the TIA and the traffic study. Are you the right person
to answer some of those questions?
CHRIS KINZEL: I could. The author of that study
is here as well, Mr. Black.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. Well, why don't I start with
a couple of questions, then…
CHRIS KINZEL: See how far I can get.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. When you do a traffic study,
if there is a phenomenon that occurs on a periodic basis
that's somewhat predictable but you don't know exactly what
day, should you attempt to understand that traffic
condition when you do the study?
CHRIS KINZEL: Yes.
CHAIR HUDES: Are you aware of the gridlock
situation that occurs on some good weather days in the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 65
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
summer and weekends that causes a backup that can extend
from the downtown to approximately two miles away?
CHRIS KINZEL: I'm aware of that, yes.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. If you included events like
that in that traffic study could the LOS, which is I
believe rated a C, be actually more like a D or an F if an
event like that were included?
CHRIS KINZEL: It probably would. Most traffic
studies, including the Town's requirements for a traffic
study, are done during sort of standard, normal, everyday
weekday time periods in order to not judge the absolute
worst condition but to judge a more typical situation, so
yes, there are times when conditions are worse than the
typical weekday.
CHAIR HUDES: What's the right sample size for a
traffic study? Is it one? Is it two? Is it five? What's the
right sample size?
CHRIS KINZEL: Sample size in what sense?
CHAIR HUDES: Days that you evaluate the traffic
as part of the study.
CHRIS KINZEL: Most traffic studies, when we do
peak hour counts done during the cumulative periods a.m.
and p.m., they're done on a single day, and that's a single
weekday, and in fact usually a Tuesday, a Wednesday, or a
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Thursday and not a Monday or a Friday or a weekend. The
reason why one is typically acceptable is because the
commute periods are somewhat repetitive, they're pretty
similar from day to day. When we do weeklong counts with
hoses and so on we can show that there's not much variation
from day to day typically.
CHAIR HUDES: But would that also be the case if
there are somewhat predictable events that are related to
the weather and traffic routing? If you took it on a day
that wasn't that particular day would you catch that fact
that there's a gridlock situation going on?
CHRIS KINZEL: If you did it on one of those
days, you certainly would. Again, the Town requirements say
don't count when it's raining, and the main reason for
that, I think, is because we only count during times when
schools are in session, and school operations are affected
by rainy weather. Traffic seems to be increased because
more parents are dropping their kids off than typically,
and they're moving more slowly because of the weather. So,
if we did measure on those days, the conditions would be
worse. If we used that as a guideline, that means we'd have
a lower level of service and to correct that you'd do
things that you might not want to do as a Town.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Right. My concern with this is that
we have a situation that is somewhat predictable but is
never captured in the traffic studies that we see, and my
concern is that this isn't just an academic exercise but in
fact a serious safety issue for the Town. If a gridlock
occurs and is coincident with a fire or a personal safety
emergency, we're going to have something that is much
different than simply an academic exercise or a convenience
factor. My understanding is that the methodology that was
used is probably standard and adequate, but the sampling
doesn't account for the kind of gridlock situations that we
regularly have in town, and so unless I'm incorrect I think
that the study misses that event that's occurring where the
LOS may in fact be worse than what is reported in the
report based on a sampling issue. Any reaction to that?
MIKE WEISS: The Traffic Impact Policy and the
traffic impact analysis requires analysis of the traffic as
generated by the project, and so what you're referring to
is a regional issue. The traffic generated on warm weekends
in the summer is not generated by the project, and the TIA
studies what effect on traffic the project will have. When
in compliance with the traffic impact policies it's been
determined that this project does not create a significant
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 68
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
impact as defined by the Traffic Impact Policy in the
General Plan.
CHAIR HUDES: But my understanding, and correct
me if I'm wrong, is that under current ordinances there
must be mitigation or a development cannot proceed if there
is already an unacceptable level of service.
MIKE WEISS: The level of service as tabled in
the traffic impact analysis shows that the project does not
lessen the level of service below more than one level or
below a D, and that's the measure by which we determine if
there's a significant impact, and so by that, and by the
General Plan, and by the Traffic Impact Policy, it's not a
significant impact for the traffic that's generated by this
specific project.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. But we did hear testimony
that the type of events that occur may not be reflected in
the baseline that's being captured to start.
JOEL PAULSON: That's a hundred percent accurate,
and if you're interested in that data, then we need to have
the Town Council modify the Traffic Impact Policy.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. I'm having trouble
accepting a report with a sampling error like that. So, are
there other comments or questions of Staff?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: A comment. We're putting
ourselves in, I think, a very difficult position because we
have this matter before us and we're dealing with, as
perhaps we should, other problems too. But simply dealing
with their issues, which is what I came here tonight to do,
some of the things I don't like about the project I balance
against them telling me, gee whiz, we had to pay $900,000
because of something that I find out is questionable.
So, if we focus merely on… Merely is the wrong
word. If we focus on their project tonight, which I think
unless enough of us feel you can't do that, I'd kind of
like to get back to just this project and to see if we
could either approve it, or disapprove it, or approve it
with some conditions, and I guess my concern is that I
don't like the changes that we're making, i.e. the Town, to
this project. For example, getting rid of that right turn
and getting rid of that lane and moving the kids so they're
going to… If you want to go to Fisher, you're going to go
across the street, then go across another street, and then
you're going to go to Fisher. That's what this is doing to
it. I don't know that that's a good idea.
So, I would just simply invite my fellow
Commissioners, if we can deal with this project how would
we do it? And let's do it, or to say we can't do it because
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
something, and that will then bounce it up to the Council
and they can figure out what they want to do.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. I believe the Town
Attorney would like to speak.
LYNNE LAMPROS: Commissioner O'Donnell, you
brought up some good questions and I wanted to try to
address them a little bit better. As you know, Town Council
doesn't sit in every meeting between an applicant and the
Planning Department, and Town Council is not an applicant's
attorney, it's the Town's attorney.
So, notwithstanding the characterization that
came across tonight, I look to the evidence that's
contained in Exhibit 6, which is the May 31, 2019 letter
from STEM. In the last paragraph of the first page, the
very last sentence, they note, "We have agreed to conform
to the proposed offsite improvements for Safe Routes to
School." It goes on to say they believe the cost will be
higher than the Town's proposal, "However, if the Town of
Los Gatos approves our project we will complete the work
identified for the offsite improvements pertaining to Safe
Routes. This is a major commitment and cost for a project
this small," however they are doing it basically for the
good of the community, safety of the children and families,
and are willing to support the effort. So, there's a
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 71
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
voluntariness in this document that maybe didn't come
across in the presentation.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I heard a quid pro quo.
If you approve our project, we will pay you this. I mean,
that could be called something else, but it isn't we'll do
this for the community good, it is if you approve our
project we will do it, if you don't approve our project we
won't do it. Now, let me tell you, if it's mandatory, under
what circumstances is it mandatory? I think we're hearing
that it's kind of mandatory if you have a project. If you
don't have a project, then it's not mandatory because
you're not doing anything. So that's a classic, but usually
that arises out of an ordinance where something is imposed.
We don't have that, at least from what you've said. I don't
disagree with what you've read and there it is, but it says
if you approve this project we will do that, and that's a
quid pro quo, and that's fine; that's the way I would read
it too. (Inaudible) we get back to the question.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: I'll make a comment. I
can't design this for the Applicant, and there appears to
be some major siting issues and some financial parameters
that what I'm hearing from the Applicant is they might not
agree to what we might ask of them because it wouldn't
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 72
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
pencil out. So, for us trying to do a continuance and say
do this, X, Y, and Z, which there might be a lot of X, Y,
and Zs, the whole alphabet, that we might be better off
denying it, but I'll look to my Commissioners for their
comments.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner O'Donnell. Maybe one
second.
SALLY ZARNOWITZ: Yes, I'd just like to remind
the Commission that this is a recommendation to Council, so
Council has the designation on this and the Planning
Commission would make a recommendation. Thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Thanks.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: All I was going to say
was it's conceivable to me to approve the project were it
changed, right? I think that's sort of a simple statement,
because obviously if something is changed it depends how
it's changed, and if we could focus on what we would want
changed then we could determine whether that's something
likely to occur or not to occur or whether it's reasonable
or not.
The project itself, under the zoning and
everything else, they have a certain right to develop that
property and they have a certain density that they can
have. I believe they're coming within both of those things.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
On the other hand, we have a right to ameliorate
problems that would otherwise arise; that we're going to
do. But if we believe that they're not putting in any more
square footage that they would be allowed to put in, all
those things, then we probably have to… Well, somebody will
have to approve it. We have an opportunity now to condition
it to make it better than it would otherwise be, or as you
say, we can just say we recommend to the Council they deny
it, but if I were the Council I'd say thank you very much
and then I would deal with the problem. I wonder if we're
avoiding the problem by saying oh goody, we can deny it and
let the Council worry about it. It's a really tough
problem. These people, I believe, have rights, but so does
everybody else in town have rights, and our job I think is
to see if we can balance those rights, and I kind of feel
at the moment we're not doing that.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Burch.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: That is part of why I was
asking through different scenarios of what they researched
to understand perhaps what we could ask for or where we
could look at going. If you were going to ask me
specifically if I were going to recommend denial it would
be because of the setback issue very specifically, and the
views, but I think those two maybe go a bit hand in hand
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
also, but I'm not sure. I don't think I can recommend how
they fix it because I'm hearing also the conundrum they're
in of it's a confined spot, we're on a corner, we've got
parking spaces to square footage, so I don't know, having
asked through some different scenario questions and
understanding they had looked at them, and I don't know
what else to recommend beyond that unless you've got a
better way to word it.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: One thought I guess I
have is if the Safe Routes didn't exist, and I realize it
does, a lot of good work and it's a good thing, but let's
just assume for the moment it didn't exist and they came in
and said this is the project we want. I think we'd say we
want a 15' setback and if you do the 15' setback that's
moving towards approval, right? But, we're very concerned
about visual. And then we could talk about how it would
like to limit the visual. At the moment we're not getting
past anything, and I think because we're in a conundrum
because we don't know what to do with the Safe Routes. The
Safe Routes will only be accepted by these people if the
project is approved. That's going to cost them $900,000 and
it will move the goalposts on the setback.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
We're almost in an impossible situation. If we
were to say we'd approve the project but for this problem
with the setback, which is caused by what they've agreed to
do, I mean, it gets very, very confusing. So maybe if we're
unable to decide tonight, and it sure sounds like that,
maybe what we ought to say is—and I'll defer to Counsel—you
have to deny, or do you say we cannot reach a decision for
the reasons we've stated, we just can't reach a decision.
Some of those decisions are solely within the Council's
purview. For example, is this a requirement? Isn't this a
requirement? Why is it a requirement? I'm in no position to
second guess them on that.
CHAIR HUDES: I would just maybe add a comment to
that, that the elimination of a lane on the boulevard as a
result of this project is something that may be an
unintended consequence of the Safe Routes to School that
maybe hasn't been fully thought through, but I would be
very uncomfortable as a member of the Planning Commission
with saying that we need to start doing this to implement
this throughout the Town as well, and the reason for the
10', from what I can see, is to allow a reasonable setback
to the building by moving that curb forward.
The issue that I have with that is that it's
going to impact people way beyond the neighbors who have
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 76
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
been notified about this project, and I don't know whether
there has been notification of everyone in Town who is
going to be affected by the elimination of a lane there,
and I haven't heard compelling evidence that says that that
will improve traffic. I've heard some statement that it
won't make it worse, but I'm not sure that that meets with
my own personal experience, which is very frequent on that
boulevard and on that corner.
So, I would be very uncomfortable with approving
a project, and I don't know that there's a way to do that,
but the one thing that does strike me is that one of the
constraints on this is that the developer seems to be
unwilling to do anything with that building in the back as
part of the development, and perhaps there are
configurations of a two-story, one-story building on that
lot that might incorporate that space, because that stands
alone and it has space around it. If that were part of a
bigger building perhaps the parking wouldn't be as
challenging, because there is some sort of dead space there
that isn't being used for parking or anything else.
So, I'm not convinced that all of the scenarios
have been explored and that we have one before us that's an
alternative that we could even discuss. Commissioner
O'Donnell.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Well, that would argue
for sending it back, and I would not be in favor of sending
it back. I empathize that if I were sitting out there I
would have no clue what I'm being asked to do, and on the
other hand, sitting where I'm sitting we have serious
problems that we cannot solve, so I guess the question I
have, there are four of us I guess if I counted correctly,
so we need three votes that either says send it up and tell
the Council we cannot make a decision for the reasons
stated, turn it down, or send it back, which is somewhat
suggested by what you're saying. I don't favor sending it
back to them, because I don't think they've got enough
guidance to do anything, so I personally would like to see
us get a motion now, because I don't think we're getting
anywhere. I personally think the things we've said have
been very good and helpful, but I think we're now at a
point where we ought to either send it on or redo it, and I
am not in favor of asking them to redo anything.
So, is anybody inclined to make a motion? I mean,
I will if…
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I will.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Well, I think Matthew
(inaudible).
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 78
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: No, I would just say that I am not
inclined to send it back because although I think the issue
about the views and the boulevard are the big issues, I
don't know as any suggestions that I could make to the
Applicant would then result in something better.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Going to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Yeah. I'm going to make a
motion, but I'm going to ask my fellow commissioners to
weigh in with some of these, because I have not been able
to capture…there are some very good points.
First off, I'm going to say we're definitely not
going to ask you to come back, because I agree, I don't
know what we'd ask you to come back with and I think that
there are circumstances outside of your control that are
driving some of the decisions that you're making, so for
the sake of moving us on and potentially getting some
answers from Council, I'm going to recommend denial of
Planned Development Application PD-17-002 and Negative
Declaration ND-19-002 located at 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard.
I'm recommending denial based on concerns for the
setbacks, based on concerns for the hillside views, based
on concerns that seem to stem around whether there is a
requirement for the modifications that are being made based
on Safe Routes to School, and then attached to those
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 79
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
requirements serious concerns about how that's going to
impact traffic on Los Gatos Boulevard by losing a lane.
Have I mostly captured what we've said here? Anybody have
anything else?
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I suppose we should
first find out if there's a second, it just occurred to me.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Oh, sorry.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Is there a second? I'm
not going to second.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Second.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: My feeling was that I
could support a motion to send it up to Council without a
decision being made, because I personally cannot make a
decision. I think the Safe Routes to School is a very big
issue here and we have no control over that. I don't even
really understand it as applied here.
On the other hand, I don't see anything
intrinsically wrong with the proposal to develop the
property; there's nothing wrong with developing their
property. They're troubled by the fact that they have to
spend all this money and whatever. A simple thing would be
to say build whatever you're going to build, have a 15'
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
setback, work it out. I mean, if you did that, you could do
that, but we can't ignore the Safe Routes to School.
So, we can't say 50' setback, forget the Safe
Routes to School, and come back. That doesn't fly.
Therefore, I don't have enough information… I would not
want to say to their project I want to deny your project, I
want to say to the project I don't know how I can either
intelligently deny it or approve it until we figure out
what we're doing. Is the die cast with the Safe Routes to
School so that we know there it is, you can't do anything
about it, now we can decide do you want an additional
setback in addition? It's a crazy setback, because
depending on where you run the setback from, the property
line or wherever it is, it gets very confusing. So, I
personally would sure like some guidance from the Council
as to what they want us to do with the Safe Routes to
School, and as the Chair says, this probably won't be the
last time we run into this problem.
I know a lot of work went into this, and a lot of
good work went into it, but until you apply it in a factual
situation like ours, you probably weren't able to deal with
that problem.
CHAIR HUDES: Maybe just ask a question of Staff
quickly. Is one of the options that's available the one
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
described by Commissioner O'Donnell, that is to send it
forward with being unable to reach a recommendation?
LYNNE LAMPROS: I think that the effect of saying
we're sending it forward with neither a yea or a nay is
tantamount to a nay, and I think that the clean option is
to simply recommend denial, the Council will review the
minutes and will understand your concerns and reasons
behind it, that it's not necessarily an outright no, it's
more we cannot proceed.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Would it be possible to
simply say, "I make a motion we deny the project," period,
without stating a…and to say the reasons stated in the
record? The problem I have with the motion before us is it
states a very limited concept that I don't totally agree
with because of my inability to deal with the Safe Routes
to School, because no matter what people do after your
motion, they can't rectify and satisfy, whereas if we get
the Council to say you must observe that, or we see what
the problem is, then something might be able to be done. In
any event, I could support a motion that says, "We move to
deny this matter on the basis stated in the record,"
period, and let them look at it.
LYNNE LAMPROS: I understand what you're saying,
and again, the language would be that you recommend a
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 82
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
denial of the application, and you could say, "for the
matters stated in the hearing". I think what you're
articulating is that to attach any explanation almost
limits the universe of the reason to that explanation; it
might have missed something.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Right.
LYNNE LAMPROS: And I don't think you need it.
It's not like you're attaching Conditions of Approval, but
I'll defer to Staff on that also, if they have anything
else to say.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: I have a question. So,
would an alternative be, if that doesn't get approved by
the Maker of the Motion to amend it, is just looking at
Exhibit 3 we have to make a certain number of findings
here, and just say we cannot make the findings for Exhibit
3, which is CEQA, consistency with the Town's General Plan,
required compliance with Commercial Design Guidelines,
compliance with the Los Gatos Boulevard Plan? I would also
add in that you cannot make the finding for a Planned
Development Overlay Zone, which wasn't included. That's
just a thought and a question.
JOEL PAULSON: So, through the Chair, yes,
obviously that is an option. Typically, we want to have,
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and the Council will get verbatim minutes of the meeting
tonight, whether it's in the motion or whether you just
state because you can't make any of the findings without
any supporting facts.
Those are definitely options. Obviously it's
typically helpful to have some of those facts. I think
Commissioner Burch has laid out a number of items that she
has concerns. Commissioner O'Donnell doesn't feel that's
encompassing enough for what his thoughts are, and so yes,
there are many iterations of that, but the number three
that you just mentioned is also an option.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Well, I guess I feel like
what I said did include that there is a domino effect based
on the Safe Routes. I just highlighted a couple of them
that have been brought up specifically in this meeting that
dealt with the setback and the height, so I feel like if I
was Council I would get that there may be a catalyst to the
other points, and that catalyst being is the Safe Routes
required or not? If they don't do it, what would the impact
to the project be? I think I'm going to leave it that way
because I have heard repeatedly from people two things as I
was writing it down, and those seem to be the major
components that got driven by this decision, maybe—and
again, we don't really know how much that impacted the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
project, we're assuming it's a massive change, we don't
know—so that those two points are heard by the Council as
some of the main concerns of what happened with this. I
think I would leave it because I actually feel like I've
covered that.
SALLY ZARNOWITZ: So, a question would be would
the motion be including these things? Versus on the basis
only of these, is the motion including these?
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Including the comments that
we are unable to make a determination based on how the Safe
Routes…
SALLY ZARNOWITZ: Sorry, as I heard the motion it
was recommend denial on the basis of concerns for setbacks,
hillside views, that stem on the question of Safe Routes to
School, so is it on that basis or is it including?
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Yeah, including.
SALLY ZARNOWITZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Yeah, I don't want it to be
limited to that basis. I understand.
SALLY ZARNOWITZ: Thank you.
LYNNE LAMPROS: Including but not limited to, as
we attorneys like to say.
CHAIR HUDES: And I want to be careful here that
we're not involved in a punt to Council situation that
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
actually came up, I think, two years ago where there
actually I thought were guidelines and standards that could
have been followed, but we decided it was best just to go
directly to Council. This one is different, and it's
different because of the Safe Routes to School, and the
implication of closing a lane of Los Gatos Boulevard for a
single development without thinking through the rest of
that concerns me that an issue that really needs to be
looked at is the interaction of Safe Routes to School and
the curb situation and the lane size of Los Gatos Boulevard
that I think is beyond the purview of the Planning
Commission. I'm differentiating in that situation, so I
would be in support of a motion that includes but not
limited to.
And the other reason I would state that is if
there were things that were mentioned as well, such as the
Applicant treating the rear building as a given and a
constraint where maybe they could have ameliorated some of
the other issues with the views and the setbacks if they
had reconfigured the property as well. So, there were a
number of other things in the record that I think can be
brought in if it's an include type of a thing.
We need the seconder, I think, to accept that
language.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 6/12/2019 Item #2, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard 86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Yes, I accept the language.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. Further discussion? Okay,
I'll call the question. All in favor. Opposed? So, it
passes 4-0. Are there appeal rights regarding this item?
SALLY ZARNOWITZ: Thank you. No, there are not as
this is a recommendation to Council.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you very much.