The URL can be used to link to this page

Item 11 - 16212 Los Gatos Blvd. PREPARED BY: Ryan Safty Associate Planner Reviewed by: Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Community Development Director, Town Attorney, and Finance Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 406-354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: 08/06/2019 ITEM NO: 11 DATE: July 30, 2019 TO: Mayor and Town Council FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager SUBJECT: Planned Development Application PD-17-002 and Negative Declaration ND- 19-002. Project Location: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard. Property Owner/ Applicant: 16212 Los Gatos Blvd. LLC. Requesting approval of a Planned Development to re-zone two properties zoned CH to CH:PD to allow for construction of a new commercial building. APN 523-06-010 and -011 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Town Council accept the Planning Commission’s recommendation to deny the Planned Development (PD) application. BACKGROUND: The 0.94-acre site (41,038 square feet) is comprised of two parcels and contains a 2,312-square foot commercial building currently occupied by Artisan Wine Depot. The subject site is a corner lot, fronting on both Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon Road. The site was previously redeveloped in 1997 as the used car sales lot for the Honda Dealership previously located at 16213 Los Gatos Boulevard. On February 24, 2016, the Planning Commission reviewed a PD proposal at the subject site for demolition of the existing 2,312-square foot commercial building and construction of 11 single- family homes on individual lots (Attachment 2, Exhibit 4). On April 19, 2016, the Town Council denied the application, stating that a future application at this site should be for commercial, not residential development. On August 10, 2016, the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) reviewed a revised proposal at the subject site for commercial development with three different conceptual design options. The minutes from that meeting are included in Attachment 2, Exhibit 5. PAGE 2 OF 5 SUBJECT: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-17-002 and ND-19-002 DATE: July 30, 2019 BACKGROUND (continued): On February 24, 2017, the applicant submitted a development application for construction of a new, two-story commercial building. A Negative Declaration (ND) was prepared for the development application and circulated for a 20-day public review period from May 17, 2019 through June 6, 2019 and was previously provided to the Planning Commission and Town Council on May 17, 2019. The Council is the final deciding body for the PD application. The application was considered by the Planning Commission on June 12, 2019. The Commission forwarded a recommendation for denial to the Town Council as discussed in more detail in this report. A future Architecture and Site application (including roadway and right-of-way improvements, and recordation of easements) would be required for the construction of the new commercial building if the PD application is approved. DISCUSSION: A. Project Summary The applicant is requesting approval of a PD overlay which would include the following elements on the 0.94-acre site: • Maintain the existing 2,312-square foot commercial building; • Construct a new two-story commercial building with 7,047 square feet of retail space on the ground floor and 4,270 square feet of office on the second floor; • Provide 58 parking stalls; and • Complete landscaping, parking lot, and other right-of-way improvements. The proposed project would include the removal of 12 protected trees (seven on-site trees and five street trees). Four existing trees will be transplanted elsewhere on the site. A PD application is being requested because the applicant is seeking a reduced front setback. B. Traffic The project is in compliance with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP) adopted by the Town Council on March 7, 2017. The BPMP incorporates the earlier Traffic Study Around Schools (aka Safe Routes to School Plan) as referenced in Attachment 2, Exhibits 6 and 10. Attachments 2, 3, and 4 contain additional information about the proposed project. PAGE 3 OF 5 SUBJECT: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-17-002 and ND-19-002 DATE: July 30, 2019 DISCUSSION (continued): A Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared for the proposed project by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (see Appendix E of the ND), and reviewed by the Town’s traffic engineer, traffic consultant, and environmental consultant. The TIA found that the proposed project would not cause a significant impact in accordance with CEQA and the Town’s Traffic Impact Policy. In addition to the calculation of trip generation and impacts to intersection level of service, the report provides recommendations on frontage improvements. The applicant has incorporated these recommendations into the project description, and Parks and Public Works staff have included the dedication of a public access easement, frontage improvements, upgrades to traffic signals, and traffic impact mitigation fees in the proposed PD performance standards in compliance with the adopted BPMP, as well as a Transportation Demand Management plan. Attachment 7 contains the performance standards and Attachment 8 contains a project information sheet with more details regarding transportation considerations. C. Planning Commission On June 12, 2019, the Planning Commission considered the application and received public comment. Verbatim minutes are included as Attachment 5. Staff recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission because of its compliance with the General Plan, Town Code, Commercial Design Guidelines, Los Gatos Boulevard Plan, and BPMP, with the exception of the front setback and landscaping along Los Gatos Boulevard as requested in the PD application. Following discussion, the Commission recommended denial of the application based on the following concerns: • The minimal front setback along Los Gatos Boulevard; • The loss of hillside views; and • The traffic related to the increased activity at the site and the reduction in traffic lanes. Following the Planning Commission hearing, the applicant submitted an exhibit which identifies existing street setbacks in the neighborhood and highlights how right-of-way improvements per the BPMP have impacted the proposal over the years (Attachment 6). PAGE 4 OF 5 SUBJECT: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-17-002 and ND-19-002 DATE: July 30, 2019 DISCUSSION (continued): D. Environmental Review An ND was prepared for the project. As part of the environmental review process a number of technical reports were prepared, including an Arborist Report, Architectural Design Review, Geotechnical Investigation, and Traffic Impact Analysis. Reports that were prepared by the applicant’s consultants were peer reviewed by Town Consultants. The Notice of Completion and Availability for the ND was distributed on May 17, 2019, with the 20-day public review period ending on June 6, 2019. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Written notice was sent to property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the subject property. Neighborhood outreach completed by the applicant is summarized in Attachment 2, Exhibit 10. Public comments received prior to 11:00 a.m. on June 12, 2019 are included in Attachments 2 through 4. Public comments received between 11:01 a.m., June 12, 2019 and 11:00 a.m., August 1, 2019 are included as Attachment 8. CONCLUSION: Summary A. The project complies with the General Plan, Town Code, Commercial Design Guidelines, Los Gatos Boulevard Plan, and BPMP, except for the front setback and landscaping along Los Gatos Boulevard. The applicant discusses the proposed exceptions and compliance with the General Plan, Town Code, Commercial Design Guidelines, Los Gatos Boulevard Plan, and BPMP in Attachment 2, Exhibits 6, 9, and 10. A draft PD Ordinance has been prepared with performance standards to require the project to adhere to the aforementioned requirements (Attachment 7). B. Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended denial of the application based on concerns related to setbacks, hillside views, and traffic. Therefore, it is recommended that the Town Council accept the Planning Commission’s recommendation and deny the application. PAGE 5 OF 5 SUBJECT: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-17-002 and ND-19-002 DATE: July 30, 2019 CONCLUSION (continued): C. Alternatives Alternatively, the Town Council may: 1. Approve the PD application and adopt the ND by taking the following actions: a. Find that no significant impacts are associated with the application and adopt the ND; b. Make the required finding that the zone change is internally consistent with the General Plan and its elements (Attachment 2, Exhibit 3) and approve the PD application (PD-17-002) subject to the performance standards and development plans included in the Planned Development Ordinance (Attachment 7), or as otherwise modified by the Town Council; c. Waive the reading of the Ordinance and ask the Town Clerk to read the title of the proposed Ordinance; and d. Introduce the Ordinance effecting the zone change; or 2. Approve the PD application with modifications and/or additional performance standards; or 3. Continue the PD application to a date certain with specific direction; or 4. Remand the PD application to the Planning Commission with specific direction. COORDINATION: The Community Development Department coordinated with the Town Attorney’s Office, Parks and Public Works Department, and the Santa Clara County Fire Department in the review of the project. Attachment previously received under separate cover: 1. May 2019 Draft Initial Study and Negative Declaration Attachments received with this Staff Report: 2. June 12, 2019 Planning Commission Staff Report (with Exhibits 2-11, and 13) 3. June 11, 2019 Planning Commission Addendum Report (with Exhibits 14-15) 4. June 12, 2019 Planning Commission Desk Item Report (with Exhibit 16) 5. June 12, 2019 Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes (86 pages) 6. Setback Exhibit from the Applicant, received July 18, 2019 (3 pages) 7. Planned Development Ordinance (31 pages) with Exhibit A Rezone Area (one page) and Exhibit B Development Plans received May 30, 2019 (38 sheets) 8. Project Information Sheet from Engineering Division (4 sheets) 9. Public Comments received 11:01 a.m. Wednesday, June 12, 2019 to 11:00 a.m. Thursday, August 1, 2019 PREPARED BY: JOCELYN SHOOPMAN and RYAN SAFTY ASSOCIATE PLANNER ASSOCIATE PLANNER Reviewed by: Planning Manager and Community Development Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6874 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT MEETING DATE: 06/12/2019 ITEM NO: 2 DATE: JUNE 7, 2019 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: JOEL PAULSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PD-17-002 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION ND-19-002. PROJECT LOCATION: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD. LLC. REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO RE-ZONE TWO PROPERTIES ZONED CH TO CH:PD TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING. APN 523-06-010 AND -011. RECOMMENDATION: Forward a recommendation to Town Council to adopt the Negative Declaration and approve the Planned Development (PD) application, subject to the recommended performance standards. PROJECT DATA: General Plan Designation: Mixed Use Commercial Zoning Designation: Restricted Highway Commercial, CH Applicable Plans & Standards: General Plan; Los Gatos Boulevard Plan; Commercial Design Guidelines Parcel Size: 0.94 acres Surrounding Area: Existing Land Use General Plan Land Use Designation Zoning North Mixed Use and Residential Mixed Use Commercial and Low Density Residential Office (O) and Single- Family Residential (R-1:8) ATTACHMENT 2 PAGE 2 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 7, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19.docx 6/7/2019 12:56 PM CEQA: It has been determined that the project will not have a signification impact on the environment and adoption of the Negative Declaration is recommended. FINDINGS:  That the project will not have a significant impact on the environment and adoption of the Negative Declaration is recommended.  That the PD to rezone the property is consistent with the General Plan.  That the project is consistent with the Los Gatos Boulevard Plan.  That the project is consistent with the Commercial Design Guidelines. ACTION:  Forward a recommendation regarding Negative Declaration ND-19-002 to the Town Council.  Forward a recommendation regarding PD application PD-17-002 to the Town Council. BACKGROUND: The 0.94-acre site (41,038 square feet) is comprised of two parcels and contains a 2,312-square foot commercial building currently occupied by Artisan Wine Depot. The subject site is a corner lot, fronting on both Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon Road. The site was redeveloped in 1997 as the used car sales lot for the Honda Dealership previously located at 16213 Los Gatos Boulevard. The General Plan provides an option for projects on sites larger than 40,000 square feet to be processed as a PD. On February 14, 2016 the Planning Commission reviewed a PD proposal at the subject site for demolition of the existing 2,312-square foot commercial building and construction of 11 single- family homes on individual lots (Exhibit 4). On April 19, 2016 the Town Council denied the application, stating that a future application at this site should be for commercial, not residential development. South Commercial and Residential Mixed Use Commercial and Low Density Residential Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) East Residential Low Density Residential R-1:8 West Commercial and Residential Mixed Use Commercial CH and CH:PD PAGE 3 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 7, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19.docx 6/7/2019 12:56 PM BACKGROUND (continued): On August 10, 2016, the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) reviewed a revised proposal at the subject site for commercial development with three different conceptual design options. The minutes from that meeting are included in Exhibit 5. On February 24, 2017, the applicant submitted a development application for construction of a new, two-story commercial building. A Negative Declaration (ND) was prepared for the development application and circulated for a 20-day public review period from May 17, 2019 through June 6, 2019 and was previously provided to the Planning Commission on May 17, 2019. Future required approvals would include an Architecture and Site application (including roadway and right-of-way improvements, and recordation of easements) for the construction of the new commercial building. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. Project Summary The applicant is requesting approval of a PD overlay which would include the following elements on the 0.94-acre site: • Maintain the existing 2,312-square foot commercial building; • Construction of a new two-story mixed-use commercial building with 7,047 square feet of commercial space on the ground floor and 4,270 square feet of office on the second floor; • 58 parking stalls; and • Landscaping, parking lot, and other right-of-way improvements. The proposed project would include removal of 12 protected trees (seven on-site trees and five street trees). Four existing trees will be transplanted elsewhere on the site. B. Planned Development Application The application is a request to create a PD overlay. A PD application is being requested because the applicant is requesting a reduced front yard setback due to required frontage improvements that would be installed pursuant to the Safe Routes to School Plan. Pursuant to the General Plan, “The PD overlay zone is intended to ensure orderly planning and quality design that will be in harmony with the existing or potential development of the surrounding neighborhood.” PAGE 4 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 7, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19.docx 6/7/2019 12:56 PM PROJECT DESCRIPTION (continued): The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation regarding the merits of the PD application to the Town Council, who will be the final deciding body. If adopted by the Town Council, the proposed PD Ordinance (Exhibit 12) would allow the Development Review Committee to approve a future Architecture and Site application. C. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood The project site is located at the northeast corner of Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon Road. There are mixed-use (office below residential) and single-family residential uses to the north, commercial and single-family residential uses to the west and south, and single- family residential uses to the east. D. Zoning Compliance The CH zoning designation permits both retail and office activities. DISCUSSION: A. Conceptual Development Advisory Committee The CDAC reviewed three conceptual plans for the site on August 5, 2016, each of which proposed some form of a new commercial building located along the Los Gatos Boulevard frontage. The CDAC preferred the smaller of the development options, expressed concern regarding medical and residential uses, and supported the idea of incorporating underground parking. Additional feedback is included in the meeting minutes (Exhibit 5). B. Planned Development The PD application is proposing to rezone the two properties from CH to CH:PD. The CH zoning would be compatible with the General Plan Designation of Mixed Use Commercial and the variety of zoning classifications found on adjacent properties, including O, R-1:8, C- 1, CH, and CH:PD. Approval of the PD application would establish regulations through an ordinance (which would include the development plans) under which the following actions would be allowed: • Lot merger of the two separate parcels; • Removal of protected trees and construction of associated site improvements; and • Construction of a two-story commercial building through a future Architecture and Site application. PAGE 5 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 7, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19.docx 6/7/2019 12:56 PM DISCUSSION (continued): The proposed PD application complies with all provisions of the CH zone and Los Gatos Boulevard Plan, except for the item listed below, which is proposed to be allowed through the PD ordinance: • Reduced front setback along Los Gatos Boulevard of five feet, when Town Code requires 25 feet based on the proposed building height of nearly 30 feet. The applicant discusses the requested exception listed above in Exhibit 10. The PD application is proposing to rezone the property which would provide specific guidance for the future commercial development. The PD Ordinance would define the maximum allowable development, including the maximum floor area and building height. An Architecture and Site application would be required to implement the proposed project if the PD is approved. C. Commercial Design Guidelines The proposed PD application complies with all applicable guidelines of the Commercial Design Guidelines, except for the items listed below: • CDG Section 5.A.1 – Basic Design Principles: o “Projects will maintain a strong landscaped setback along street edges, and will seek to create visual contiguity along the street front,” when minimal landscaping is proposed within the reduced front yard area along Los Gatos Boulevard. • CDG Section 5.A.2.1 – Los Gatos Boulevard setbacks should be substantially landscaped: o “A minimum landscaped setback of 15 feet shall be maintained from fronting sidewalks,” when only five feet of landscaping is proposed along Los Gatos Boulevard. The applicant provides justification for deviating from the items listed above in Exhibit 10. D. Site Layout and Building Size 1. Access Access to the site is currently provided through two driveways: one approximately 25 feet from the northern property line on Los Gatos Boulevard, and the second approximately 20 feet from the eastern property line on Shannon Road. The applicant proposes to reconfigure each driveway to comply with Town standards, maintain the current driveway location along Los Gatos Boulevard, and shift the driveway location along Shannon Road roughly 20 feet to the east, further away from the intersection. PAGE 6 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 7, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19.docx 6/7/2019 12:56 PM DISCUSSION (continued): 2. Coverage The proposed project has a building coverage of 9,359 square feet (22.8 percent). The maximum permitted building coverage for the CH zone is 50 percent. 3. Height The proposed two-story commercial building would be a maximum height of 29 feet, 11 inches. The existing commercial building is 29 feet. The maximum permitted height for the CH zone is 35 feet. 4. Setbacks The CH zone specifies setback requirements for all properties within the zone, as well as increased setback requirements for property lines which abut or across the street from a lot in a residential zone. Additionally, proposals greater than 20 feet in height are required to be setback even further. The proposed building is adjacent to residentially zoned parcels to the east, and the proposed building would be nearly 30 feet tall. The applicant is proposing a reduced front setback from what is required in the CH zone. The following chart is provided for comparison and clarification: Setback Requirements: Zones: Front Side Street Side Rear CH 15' 0' 15' 0' CH (required for proposal) 15’ 0’ 15’ 30’ Proposed Commercial Building: 5’ 51.5’ 15’ 156.5’ Existing Commercial Building: 100’ 22’ 87’ 50’ E. Trees The application was reviewed by the Town’s Consulting Arborist (Exhibit 7). There are 26 protected trees within the project area: 14 on-site, seven street trees within the public right-of-way, and five trees on neighboring properties to the north. The applicant is requesting to remove 12 of these trees: seven of which are on site and five within the public right-of-way. The applicant is also proposing to transplant four of the remaining seven on- site trees elsewhere on the property. PAGE 7 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 7, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19.docx 6/7/2019 12:56 PM DISCUSSION (continued): In accordance with the Town’s Tree Protection Ordinance, the applicant would be required to plant 35, 24-inch box trees to off-set the 12 tree removals. As outlined in Sheet L1.1 of the development plans (Exhibit 12), the applicant is proposing to plant two, 15-gallon trees and 27, 24-inch box trees; six of the new 24-inch box trees would be within the public right- of-way. The applicant will be required to pay in-lieu fees for the eight, 24-inch box trees that are not proposed to be planted on-site. F. Los Gatos Boulevard Plan The project is subject to the Los Gatos Boulevard Plan. The applicant details in their letter of justification (Exhibit 6) how their proposal complies with the plan and the Town’s vision for this portion of Los Gatos Boulevard. G. Architectural Consultant Review The Town’s Architectural Consultant reviewed the plans for the proposed development on December 13, 2017 (Exhibit 8). The consultant identified several concerns with building design and location, as well as consistency with the Town’s Commercial Design Guidelines. The consultant recommended two different design approaches to address his concerns. The applicant has chosen “Approach B,” which recommends pushing the proposed second story back at the corner of Shannon Road and Los Gatos Boulevard, extending the second story area to the north, increasing the glazing along the staircase on the rear elevation, eliminating the ground floor gable, adding awnings and large carriage lights along the ground floor elevation, and carrying the curved façade and awnings around the corner at Shannon Road and Los Gatos Boulevard. The applicant incorporated each of these recommendations in their resubmittal, except the recommendation to carry the curved façade and awning around the corner of the building. The applicant’s response letter and justification for the design is included in Exhibit 9. H. Parking Town Code requires one parking space for each 235 square feet of office or retail floor area. The proposed project includes a total of 13,629 square feet of office and retail floor area, requiring 58 on-site parking spaces. The applicant is proposing 58 parking spaces. These spaces would be substantially screened from view along the street with the new two-story commercial building fronting on Los Gatos Boulevard and landscaping and trees proposed along Shannon Road. PAGE 8 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 7, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19.docx 6/7/2019 12:56 PM DISCUSSION (continued): The site also currently provides additional overflow parking for Yoga Source across Los Gatos Boulevard and Orangetheory Fitness across Shannon Road, and many Fisher Middle School parents use the site as a drop-off and pick-up location. While these are amenities that the property owner has previously permitted, the applicant is not required to provide this in any future development of the site. I. Traffic Pursuant to the Town’s Traffic Impact Policy, a comprehensive traffic study is required to be prepared for projects that generate 20 or more trips in either the AM or PM peak hours. The proposed project is estimated to add 15 AM peak-hour trips and 34 PM peak- hour trips. Therefore, a comprehensive Transportation Impact Analysis was required. The Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. The TIA is included in Appendix E of the ND, available online at http://www.losgatosca.gov/16212LosGatosBoulevard. The TIA was reviewed by the Town’s traffic engineer, traffic consultant, and environmental consultant. The purpose of the TIA was to identify any potential traffic impacts from the additional commercial space proposed. The report found that the proposed project would not cause a significant impact in accordance with CEQA and the Town’s Traffic Impact Policy. In addition to the calculation of trip generation and impacts to intersection level of service, the report provides recommendations on queuing issues, site access and on-site circulation, and impacts to pedestrian, bicycle, and transit circulation. The report provides recommendations on these topics, which the applicant has incorporated into the plans, including: • Frontage improvements to enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety as part of a Safe Routes to School Plan, including: o Moving the curb out ten feet along Los Gatos Boulevard to widen the sidewalk to ten feet with a landscaped strip; and o Adding a protected bike lane with a painted buffer and ground mounted channelizers along the project frontage on Los Gatos Boulevard. • Reducing the number of northbound traffic lanes on Los Gatos Boulevard from three to two; • Construction of a ten-foot sidewalk along the Shannon Road frontage, which ties-in to the future proposed Class 1 bike path on Shannon Road per the Los Gatos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan; • Reducing the pedestrian crossing distance by eliminating the pork-chop island and right turn slip lane on Shannon Road; • Enhancing bicycle safety by adding a bike box on Shannon Road; and • Moving the crosswalk across Los Gatos Boulevard from north of Shannon Road to south of Roberts Road to improve the intersection’s level of service. PAGE 9 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 7, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19.docx 6/7/2019 12:56 PM DISCUSSION (continued): The applicant has agreed to these recommended improvements, as mentioned in the Safe Routes to School Plan section of their Letter of Justification (Exhibit 6). Parks and Public Works staff have included requirements for the dedication of a public access easement along Shannon Road, public improvements along both street frontages, upgrades to traffic signals, traffic impact mitigation fees, and a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan to be prepared by the developer and approved by staff, which are included in the proposed PD performance standards (Exhibit 12). J. General Plan The subject property has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Mixed-Use Commercial. “The Mixed-Use Commercial designation permits a mixture of retail, office, and residential in a mixed-use project, along with lodging, service, auto-related businesses, non- manufacturing industrial uses, recreational uses, and restaurants. Projects developed under this designation shall maintain the small-town, residential scale and natural environments of adjacent residential neighborhoods, as well as provide prime orientation to arterial street frontages and proper transitions and buffers to adjacent residential properties. This designation should never be interpreted to allow development of independent commercial facilities with principal frontage on the side streets.” The applicant addresses compliance with the General Plan in their Letter of Justification (Exhibit 6). K. Story Poles and Neighborhood Notification An exception to the Story Pole Policy was granted by the Town Council on January 16, 2018, allowing the poles to be erected ten days prior to the scheduled public hearing date due to public safety and the use of the site by the existing tenant. The story poles were installed before June 2, 2019 and may be removed following the June 12, 2019 Planning Commission hearing. L. Environmental Review A Negative Declaration (ND) was prepared for the project. As part of the environmental review process a number of technical reports were prepared, including an arborist report, architectural design review, geotechnical investigations, and traffic analyses. Reports that were prepared by outside consultants were peer reviewed by Town Consultants. The Notice of Completion and Availability for the ND was distributed on May 17, 2019, with the 20-day public review period ending on June 6, 2019. PAGE 10 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 7, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19.docx 6/7/2019 12:56 PM PUBLIC COMMENTS: Written notice was sent to property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the subject property. Neighborhood outreach completed by the applicant is included as Exhibit 10. Public comments received by 11:00 A.M. on Friday, June 7, 2019, are included as Exhibit 13. CONCLUSION: A. Summary The project would allow the merger of two lots and construction of a new two-story mixed- use commercial building. This project includes a PD application to rezone the property from CH to CH:PD. Through the PD application the applicant is asking to allow the following exception to the provisions of the CH zone: • Reduced front setback along Los Gatos Boulevard of five feet. With the exception of the item listed above, the project complies with the General Plan, Town Code, and Los Gatos Boulevard Plan. The project also complies with a majority of the Commercial Design Guidelines, except items related to front yard landscaping and front setbacks. The applicant discusses the proposed exceptions and compliance with the General Plan, Town Code, Commercial Design Guidelines, and Los Gatos Boulevard Plan in Exhibits 6, 9, and 10. A draft PD Ordinance has been prepared with performance standards to require the project to adhere to the aforementioned requirements (Exhibit 12). B. Recommendation Based on the summary above, staff recommends the Commission take the following actions to forward the ND and PD applications to the Town Council with a recommendation for approval of the proposed project: 1. Make the required findings (Exhibit 3); 2. Recommend that the Town Council adopt the Negative Declaration (Exhibit 1); and 3. Recommend that the Town Council adopt the Planned Development Ordinance (Exhibit 12) and approve the proposed project. PAGE 11 OF 11 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 7, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19.docx 6/7/2019 12:56 PM CONCLUSION (continued): C. Alternatives Alternatively, if the Commission has concerns with the proposed project, it can: 1. Forward a recommendation for approval of the applications with modified performance standards to the Town Council; or 2. Forward a recommendation of denial of the applications to the Town Council; or 3. Continue the matter to a date certain with specific direction. EXHIBITS: Previously received under separate cover: 1. May 2019 Draft Initial Study and Negative Declaration Received with this Staff Report: 2. Location Map 3. Required Findings (one page) 4. February 24, 2016 Planning Commission Staff Report and minutes (22 pages) 5. August 10, 2016, Conceptual Development Advisory Committee meeting minutes (three pages) 6. Project Overview and Letter of Justification received April 13, 2018 (three pages) 7. Consulting Arborist’s Report dated November 20, 2017 (37 pages) 8. Consulting Architect’s Report dated December 13, 2017 (ten pages) 9. Applicant’s response to Consulting Architect’s Report received June 7, 2019 (two pages) 10. Justification for Exceptions and Response to Comments, received June 7, 2019 (four pages) 11. Color and materials board received May 30, 2019 (one sheet) 12. Planned Development Ordinance (31 pages) with Exhibit A Rezone Area (one page) and Exhibit B Development Plans, received May 30, 2019 (37 sheets) 13. Public comments received by 11:00 a.m. on Friday June 7, 2019 Distribution: Scott Plautz, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard, LLC., 101 S. Santa Cruz Ave #1090, Los Gatos, CA 95030 This Page Intentionally Left Blank MITCH E L L A V M AG NESON SHANNON RD VILLA D E L O S MAG N E S O N L O O P CHERRYSTONE D R MAGNESON L O O P CILK E R C T GRA N T B I S H O P L N RO B I E L N FIS H E R A V GEO R G E S T ENG L E W O O D A V W. L A C H I Q U I T A A V LO S G A T O S B L V D BLOSSOM HILL R D RO B E R T S R D NINO A V TER BLOSSOM HILL R D 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard ° EXHIBIT 2 This Page Intentionally Left Blank PLANNING COMMISSION – June 12, 2019 REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard Planned Development Application PD-17-002 Negative Declaration ND-19-002 Requesting approval of a Planned Development to re-zone two properties zoned CH to CH:PD to allow for construction of a new commercial building. APN 523-06-010 and -011. APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: 16212 Los Gatos Blvd., LLC FINDINGS Required finding for CEQA: ■A Negative Declaration (ND) was prepared for the proposed development. The Planning Commission recommends adoption of the ND. Required consistency with the Town’s General Plan: ■That the proposed Zone Change is consistent with the General Plan and its Elements in that the Planned Development overlay allows commercial use consistent with the property’s zoning district. Required compliance with Commercial Design Guidelines: ■The project is in compliance with the Commercial Design Guidelines with the exception of the following: •The location of the commercial building with minimal landscaping and setbacks along Los Gatos Boulevard, which has been determined to be acceptable as a widened sidewalk is proposed with street trees and bike and pedestrian amenities complying with the Town’s Safe Routes to School Program will be installed. Compliance with Los Gatos Boulevard Plan: ■The project is in compliance with the Los Gatos Boulevard Plan in that the proposal is the development of the lot with a new commercial building with associated site elements to accompany an existing commercial building on the existing parcels. The proposal is consistent with the goals and policies included in the plan. N:\DEV\FINDINGS\2019\LGB 16212 PC 06-12-19.DOCX EXHIBIT 3 This Page Intentionally Left Blank EXHIBIT 4 EXHIBIT 5 This Page Intentionally Left Blank EXHIBIT 6 EXHIBIT 7 This Page Intentionally Left Blank December 13, 2017 Ms. Jocelyn Shoopman Community Development Department Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, C.A 95031 RE: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard Dear Jocelyn: ARCHITECTI.JRE PLANNING URBAN DESIGN I reviewed the drawings, visited the site and prepared a review three years ago for a residential development on this site. My comments and recommendations are as follows: Neighborhood Context The site is located in a transition area along Los Gatos Boulevard containing both residential and commercial structures. The area immediately to the east is largely comprised of single family homes of relatively modest size and traditional architectural styles. Photographs of the neighborhood are shown on the following page. 700 LARKSPUR LANDING CIRCLE. SUITE 199. LARKSPUR. CA. 94939 TEL: 415.331.3795 CDGPLAN@PACBELL.NET EXHIBIT 8 EXHIBIT 9 EXHIBIT 10 EXHIBIT 11 This Page Intentionally Left Blank EXHIBIT 13 PREPARED BY: RYAN SAFTY ASSOCIATE PLANNER Reviewed by: Planning Manager and Community Development Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6874 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT MEETING DATE: 06/12/2019 ITEM NO: 2 ADDENDUM DATE: JUNE 11, 2019 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: JOEL PAULSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PD-17-002 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION ND-19-002. PROJECT LOCATION: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD. LLC. REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO RE-ZONE TWO PROPERTIES ZONED CH TO CH:PD TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING. APN 523-06-010 AND -011. REMARKS: Exhibit 14 includes additional public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Friday, June 7, 2019 and 11:00 a.m., Tuesday, June 11, 2019. Exhibit 15 includes a Project Information Sheet from the Town’s Engineering Division. EXHIBITS: Previously received under separate cover: 1.May 2019 Draft Initial Study and Negative Declaration Previously received with the June 12, 2019 Staff Report: 2.Location Map 3.Required Findings (one page) 4.February 24, 2016 Planning Commission Staff Report and minutes (22 pages) 5.August 10, 2016, Conceptual Development Advisory Committee meeting minutes (three pages) 6.Project Overview and Letter of Justification received April 13, 2018 (three pages) 7.Consulting Arborist’s Report dated November 20, 2017 (37 pages) 8.Consulting Architect’s Report dated December 13, 2017 (ten pages) ATTACHMENT 3 PAGE 2 OF 2 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 11, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\2019 - Scanned PC Rpts & Exhibits\6-12-19\Item 2\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19 - ADD.docx 9. Applicant’s response to Consulting Architect’s Report received June 7, 2019 (two pages) 10. Justification for Exceptions and Response to Comments, received June 7, 2019 (four pages) 11. Color and materials board received May 30, 2019 (one sheet) 12. Planned Development Ordinance (31 pages) with Exhibit A Rezone Area (one page) and Exhibit B Development Plans, received May 30, 2019 (37 sheets) 13. Public comments received by 11:00 a.m. on Friday June 7, 2019 Received with this Addendum Report: 14. Public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Friday, June 7, 2019 and 11:00 a.m., Tuesday, June 11, 2019 15. Project Information Sheet by Engineering Division (four pages) EXHIBIT 14 EXHIBIT 15 PREPARED BY: RYAN SAFTY ASSOCIATE PLANNER Reviewed by: Planning Manager and Community Development Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6874 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT MEETING DATE: 06/12/2019 ITEM NO: 2 DESK ITEM DATE: JUNE 12, 2019 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: JOEL PAULSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PD-17-002 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION ND-19-002. PROJECT LOCATION: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD. LLC. REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO RE-ZONE TWO PROPERTIES ZONED CH TO CH:PD TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING. APN 523-06-010 AND -011. REMARKS: Exhibit 16 includes additional public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Tuesday, June 11, 2019 and 11:00 a.m., Wednesday, June 12, 2019. It should also be noted that the June 12, 2019 staff report contained an error on page five, under the Discussion section. Page five of the staff report should be amended as follows: The proposed PD application complies with all provisions of the CH zone and Los Gatos Boulevard Plan, except for the item listed below, which is proposed to be allowed through the PD ordinance: •Reduced front setback along Los Gatos Boulevard of five feet, when Town Code requires 25 15 feet. based on the proposed building height of nearly 30 feet. EXHIBITS: Previously received under separate cover: 1.May 2019 Draft Initial Study and Negative Declaration ATTACHMENT 4 PAGE 2 OF 2 SUBJECT: 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD/PD-17-002 AND ND-19-002 JUNE 12, 2019 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2019\Los Gatos Blvd 16212 PC - 6-12-19 - DESK.docx Previously received with the June 12, 2019 Staff Report: 2. Location Map 3. Required Findings (one page) 4. February 24, 2016 Planning Commission Staff Report and minutes (22 pages) 5. August 10, 2016, Conceptual Development Advisory Committee meeting minutes (three pages) 6. Project Overview and Letter of Justification received April 13, 2018 (three pages) 7. Consulting Arborist’s Report dated November 20, 2017 (37 pages) 8. Consulting Architect’s Report dated December 13, 2017 (ten pages) 9. Applicant’s response to Consulting Architect’s Report received June 7, 2019 (two pages) 10. Justification for Exceptions and Response to Comments, received June 7, 2019 (four pages) 11. Color and materials board received May 30, 2019 (one sheet) 12. Planned Development Ordinance (31 pages) with Exhibit A Rezone Area (one page) and Exhibit B Development Plans, received May 30, 2019 (37 sheets) 13. Public comments received by 11:00 a.m. on Friday June 7, 2019 Previously received with the June 11, 2019 Addendum Report: 14. Public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Friday, June 7, 2019 and 11:00 a.m., Tuesday, June 11, 2019 15. Project Information Sheet by Engineering Division (four pages) Received with this Desk Item Report: 16. Public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Tuesday, June 11, 2019 and 11:00 a.m., Wednesday, June 12, 2019 EXHIBIT 16 LOS 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. 1730 N. First Street, Suite 600, San Jose, CA 95112 | 408.467.9100 July 18, 2019 Ryan Safty Associate Planner Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos CA 95030 Subject: 16212 Los Gatos Blvd 2017/2019 - Building Setback Exhibits Dear Mr. Safty: BKF prepared two setback exhibits associated with the proposed commercial development at 16212 Los Gatos Blvd. The purpose of the exhibits is to show that the proposed project is consistent with the setbacks of existing buildings along Los Gatos Blvd, in the general vicinity of the proposed project. The term “setback” in these exhibits refers to the dimension measured from the Los Gatos Blvd curb face to the closest ground-floor building face. The measurements were taken from the face of the buildings, excluding minor trim projections and roof eves. I personally performed the measurements June 11, 2019. 2017 EXHIBIT The 2017 exhibit presents setbacks to existing buildings as well as setbacks to the proposed building as presented to the Town in 2017. The setback from Los Gatos Blvd to the proposed commercial building in 2017 was 24’-2”. This exhibit also shows the public sidewalk widths along Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon Road prior to the implementation of the Safe-Routes-To-School initiative. Los Gatos Blvd included an 8’ sidewalk with no landscape strip and Shannon Road included a 10’ sidewalk with no landscape strip. 2019 EXHIBIT The 2019 exhibit presents setbacks to existing buildings as well as setbacks to the proposed building as presented to the Town under the current proposal. The setback from Los Gatos Blvd to the proposed commercial building as presented in 2019 is 24’-8”. This is 6” more than presented with the 2017 proposal. It should be pointed out that the setback along Los Gatos Blvd is measured from the proposed face of curb, which will shift 10’ west (towards the median) due to the elimination of the outside travel lane. The removal of the travel lane is a requirement of the Safe-Routes-To-School initiative. The resultant setback of 24’-8” along Los Gatos Blvd is a greater setback than the three buildings to the north of the proposed project: Edward Jones, Magneson Loop Residential and KFC/Taco Bell as depicted on the exhibit. This 2019 exhibit also shows the public sidewalk widths along Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon Road AFTER the implementation of the Safe-Routes-To-School initiative. Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon Road now include 10’ sidewalks with a 4’ landscape buffer to separate pedestrians from traffic. The sidewalk width along Los Gatos Blvd increased 2’ in width compared to the 2017 proposal. Both Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon Road now include a 4’ landscape buffer which was not part of the 2017 proposal. ATTACHMENT 6 Name Date BKF Job No.: Page 2 of 2 Page 2 of 2 The Safe-Routes-To-School initiative also required reconfiguration of the traffic signal at Shannon Road and Los Gatos Blvd as presented in the 2019 Exhibit. The pork-chop island at the northeast corner of Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon Rd was eliminated as a result of the required lane drop on northbound Los Gatos Blvd. This is a much safer condition for pedestrians attempting to cross Los Gatos Blvd. I hope this letter clarifies the setbacks and identifies the Safe-Routes-To-School improvements/benefits to the community. Sincerely, BKF Engineers Scott R. Schork, P.E. Principal/VP Page 1 of 31 ORDINANCE ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AMENDING THE TOWN CODE EFFECTING A ZONE CHANGE FROM CH TO CH:PD FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD (APNs: 523-06-010 and 523-06-011) THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I The Town Code of the Town of Los Gatos is hereby amended to change the zoning on property located at 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard (Santa Clara County Assessor Parcel Number 523-06-010 and 523-06-011) as shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A, and is part of this Ordinance, from CH (Highway Commercial) to CH:PD (Highway Commercial, Planned Development). SECTION II With respect to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the Town Council finds as follows: A.A Negative Declaration (ND) was completed for the proposed development and no significant impacts are associated with the application. The ND is adopted. SECTION III The PD (Planned Development Overlay) zone established by this Ordinance authorizes the following construction and use of improvements: 1.Lot merger of two adjoining lots into one lot. 2.Construction of a two-story mixed-use commercial building. 3.Landscaping, parking, and right-of-way improvements shown and required on the Official Development Plans. 4.Dedication of easements to the Town of Los Gatos as shown on the Official Development Plans. 5.Uses permitted are those specified in the CH (Highway Commercial) zone by Sections 29.60.420 (Permitted Uses), as it exists at the time of the adoption of this Ordinance, or as they may be amended in the future. Draft Ordinance: subject to modification by Town Council based on deliberations and direction ATTACHMENT 7 Page 2 of 31 SECTION IV COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: All provisions of the Town Code apply, except when the Official Development Plan specifically shows otherwise. SECTION V Architecture and Site Approval is required before construction of the new mixed-use commercial building, whether or not a permit is required for the work and before any permit for construction is issued. Construction permits shall only be in a manner complying with Section 29.80.110 (PD Ordinance) of the Town Code. SECTION VI The attached Exhibit A (Map), and Exhibit B (Official Development Plans), are part of the Official Development Plan. The following performance standards must be complied with before issuance of construction permits: TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Planning Division 1. OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS. The Official Development Plans provided are conceptual in nature. Final building footprints and building designs shall be determined during the Architecture and Site approval process. Colors and building materials shown on the Official Development Plans are not approved and shall be reviewed during the Architecture and Site application approval process. 2. TOWN INDEMNITY. Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.115 requires that any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement from the Town shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Town and its officials in any action brought by a third party to overturn, set aside, or void the permit or entitlement. This requirement is a condition of approval of all such permits and entitlements whether or not expressly set forth in the approval, and may be secured to the satisfaction of the Town Attorney. 3. ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPROVAL REQUIRED. A separate Architecture and Site (A&S) application and approval is required for the mixed-use commercial building. The Architecture and Site applications shall be reviewed by the Development Review Committee. Architectural details shall be refined as part of this process with input from the Town’s Consulting Architect. Page 3 of 31 4. FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN. A final landscape plan shall be reviewed by the Town’s Consulting Landscape Architect and approved as part of the Architecture and Site process. 5. WATER CONSERVATION ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT. The proposed landscaping shall meet the Town of Los Gatos Water Conservation Ordinance or the State Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, whichever is more restrictive. A review fee based on the current fee schedule adopted by the Town Council is required when working landscape and irrigation plans are submitted for review prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. SETBACKS. The minimum setbacks are those specified by the CH zoning district or as otherwise shown on the Conceptual Development Plans. 7. BUILDING HEIGHT. The maximum height of the new mixed-use commercial building shall be 29 feet, 11 inches, as specified on the Conceptual Development Plans. 8. BUILDING FLOOR AREA. The maximum floor area for the project site, including the existing building to be retained, shall be 13,629 square feet, as specified on the Conceptual Development Plans. 9. OUTDOOR LIGHTING. All exterior building and outdoor lighting shall be shielded and directed away from neighboring properties, to shine on the project site only. Lighting shall be the minimum needed for pedestrian safety and security. Lighting specifications shall be reviewed as part of the Architecture and Site process. 10. TREE PRESERVATION: All recommendations of the Town’s Consulting Arborist shall be followed. Refer to the report prepared by Walter Levison, dated November 20, 2017, for additional details. The Arborist Consultant shall reevaluate the plans for the new mixed-use commercial building during Architecture and Site review. 11. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT. A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained for trees approved for removal prior to the issuance of building permits. 12. REPLACEMENT TREES. New trees shall be planted to mitigate the loss of trees being removed. The number of trees shall be determined using the canopy replacement table in the Tree Protection Ordinance. New trees shall be double staked and shall be planted prior to final inspection and issuance of occupancy permits. 13. TREE FENCING. Protective tree fencing shall be placed at the drip line of existing trees and shall remain through all phases of construction. Refer to the report prepared by Walter Levison, dated November 20, 2017, for requirements. Fencing shall be six-foot high cyclone attached to two-inch diameter steel posts drive 18 inches into the ground and spaced no further than 10 feet apart. Include a tree protection fencing plan with the construction plans. 14. NESTING BIRDS: To avoid impacts to nesting birds, the removal of trees and shrubs Page 4 of 31 shall be minimized to the greatest extent feasible. Construction activities that include any tree removal, pruning, grading, grubbing, or demolition shall be conducted outside of the bird nesting season (January 15 through September 15) to the greatest extent feasible. If this type of construction starts, if work is scheduled to start or if work already occurring during the nesting season stops for at least two weeks and is scheduled to resume during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction surveys for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project construction. If project-related work is scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. Two surveys for active nests of such birds shall occur within 14 days prior to start of construction, with the second survey conducted with 48 hours prior to start of construction. Appropriate minimum survey radius surrounding each work area is typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g. defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. 15. SPECIAL-STATUS BATS: Approximately 14 days prior to tree removal or structure demolition activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for bats and potential roosting sites in trees to be removed, in trees within 50 feet of the development footprint, and within and surrounding any structures that may be disturbed by the project. These surveys will include a visual inspection of potential roosting features (bats need not be present) and a search for presence of guano within the project site, construction access routes, and 50 feet around these areas. Cavities, crevices, exfoliating bark, and bark fissures that could provide suitable potential nest or Page 5 of 31 roost habitat for bats shall be surveyed. Assumptions can be made on what species is present due to observed visual characteristics along with habitat use, or the bats can be identified to the species level with the use of a bat echolocation detector such as an “Anabat” unit. Potential roosting features found during the survey shall be flagged or marked. If no roosting sites or bats are found, a letter report confirming absence will be prepared and no further measures are required. If bats or roosting sites are found, a letter report and supplemental documents will be prepared prior to grading permit issuance and the following monitoring, exclusion, and habitat replacement measures will be implemented: a. If bats are found roosting outside of the nursery season (May 1 through October 1), they will be evicted as described under (b) below. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, they will be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. This could occur by either visual inspection of the roost bat pups, if possible, or by monitoring the roost after the adults leave for the night to listen for bat pups. If the roost is determined to not be a maternal roost, then the bats will be evicted as described under (b) below. Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season. Therefore, if a maternal roost is present, a 50-foot buffer zone (or different size if determined in consultation with the CDFW) will be established around the roosting site within which no construction activities including tree removal or structure disturbance will occur until after the nursery season. b. If a non-breeding bat hibernaculum is found in a tree or snag scheduled for removal or on any structures scheduled to be disturbed by project activities, the individuals will be safely evicted, under the direction of a qualified bat biologist. If pre-construction surveys determine that there are bats present in any trees to be removed, exclusion structures (e.g. one-way doors or similar methods) shall be installed by a qualified biologist. The exclusion structures shall not be placed until the time of year in which young are able to fly, outside of the nursery season. Information on placement of exclusion structures shall be provided to the CDFW prior to construction. If needed, other methods conducted under the direction of a qualified bat biologist could include: carefully opening the roosting area in a tree or snag by hand to expose the cavity and opening doors/windows on structures, or creating openings in walls to allow light into the structures. Removal of any trees or Page 6 of 31 snags and disturbance of any structures will be conducted no earlier than the following day (i.e., at least one night will be provided between initial roost eviction disturbance and tree removal/structure disturbance). This action will allow bats to leave during dark hours, which increases their chance of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation. 16. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND HUMAN REMAINS: a. In the event that archaeological traces are encountered, all construction within a 50-meter radius of the find will be halted, the Community Development Director will be notified, and an archaeologist will be retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations. b. If human remains are discovered, the Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified. The Coroner will determine whether or not the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines the remains are not subject to his authority, he will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, who shall attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native Americans. c. If the Community Development Director finds that the archaeological find is not a significant resource, work will resume only after the submittal of a preliminary archaeological report and after provisions for reburial and ongoing monitoring are accepted. Provisions for identifying descendants of a deceased Native American and for reburial will follow the protocol set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5( e). If the site is found to be a significant archaeological site, a mitigation program will be prepared and submitted to the Community Development Director for consideration and approval, in conformance with the protocol set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. d. A final report shall be prepared when a find is determined to be a significant archaeological site, and/or when Native American remains are found on the site. The final report will include background information on the completed work, a description and list of identified resources, the disposition and curation of these resources, any testing, other recovered information, and conclusions. 17. FINAL UTILITY LOCATIONS. The applicant shall submit plans showing the final locations and screening of all exterior utilities, including but not limited to, backflow preventers, Fire Department connections, transformers, utility boxes and utility meters. Utility devices shall be screened to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The plans shall be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits for new construction. Page 7 of 31 18. PLAN INCONSISTENCY. Any inconsistencies between sheets shall be limited to whichever is more restrictive. 19. GENERAL PROVISIONS. This Planned Development shall comply with provisions in Article V of Chapter 29 Town Code, unless more restrictive provisions are required in other performance standards for the subject Planned Development. Building Division 20. PERMITS REQUIRED: A Building Permit is required for the construction of the new two- story commercial building. An additional Building Permit is required for the renovation of the existing single-story commercial building. 21. APPLICABLE CODES: The current codes, as amended and adopted by the Town of Los Gatos as of January 1, 2017, are the 2016 California Building Standards Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Parts 1-12. The Town of Los Gatos will be adopting the updated 2019 California Building Standards Code to be effective January 1, 2020. Any Building Permit application made after January 1, 2020 will be required to comply with the newly updated and adopted codes. 22. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue-lined in full on the cover sheet of the construction plans. A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building permit application detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed. 23. BUILDING & SUITE NUMBERS: Submit requests for new building addresses to the Building Division prior to submitting for the building permit application process. 24. SIZE OF PLANS: Submit four sets of construction plans, minimum size 24” x 36”, maximum size 30” x 42”. 25. REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPLETE DEMOLITION OF STRUCTURE: Obtain a Building Department Demolition Application and a Bay Area Air Quality Management District Application from the Building Department Service Counter. Once the demolition form has been completed, all signatures obtained, and written verification from PG&E that all utilities have been disconnected, return the completed form to the Building Department Service Counter with the Air District’s J# Certificate, PG&E verification, and three (3) sets of site plans showing all existing structures, existing utility service lines such as water, sewer, and PG&E. No demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a permit from the Town. 26. AIR QUALITY: To limit the project’s construction-related dust and criteria pollutant emissions, the following the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)- Page 8 of 31 recommended basic construction measures shall be included in the project’s grading plan, building plans, and contract specifications: a. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 2 minutes. Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. b. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. All non-road diesel construction equipment shall at a minimum meet Tier 3 emission standards listed in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Part 89, Subpart B, §89.112. c. Developer shall designate an on-site field supervisor to provide written notification of construction schedule to adjacent residential property owners and tenants at least one week prior to commencement of demolition and one week prior to commencement of grading with a request that all windows remain closed during demolition, site grading, excavation, and building construction activities in order to minimize exposure to NOx and PM10. The on-site field supervisor shall monitor construction emission levels within five feet of the property line of the adjacent residences for NOx and PM10 using the appropriate air quality and/or particulate monitor. 27. SOILS REPORT: A Soils Report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Official, containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, shall be submitted with the Building Permit Application. This report shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer specializing in soils mechanics. 28. SHORING: Shoring plans and calculations will be required for all excavations which exceed five (5) feet in depth or which remove lateral support from any existing building, adjacent property, or the public right-of-way. Shoring plans and calculations shall be prepared by a California licensed engineer and shall confirm to the Cal/OSHA regulations. 29. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall be submitted to the project Building Inspector at foundation inspection. This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the Soils Report, and that the building pad elevations and on-site retaining wall locations and elevations have been prepared according to the approved plans. Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered Civil Engineer for the following items: Page 9 of 31 a. Building pad elevation b. Finish floor elevation c. Foundation corner locations d. Retaining wall(s) locations and elevations 30. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: All required California Title 24 Energy Compliance Forms must be blue-lined (sticky-backed), i.e. directly printed, onto a plan sheet. 31. SITE ACCESSIBILITY: At least one accessible route within the boundary of the site shall be provided from public transportation stops, accessible parking and accessible passenger loading zones and public streets or sidewalks to the accessible building entrance that they serve. The accessible route shall, to the maximum extent feasible, coincide with the route for the general public. At least one accessible route shall connect all accessible buildings, facilities, elements and spaces that are on the same site. 32. ACCESSIBLE PARKING: The parking lots, as well as the parking structure, where parking is provided for the public as clients, guests or employees, shall provide handicap accessible parking. Accessible parking spaces serving a particular building shall be located on the shortest accessible route of travel from adjacent parking to an accessible entrance. In buildings with multiple accessible entrances with adjacent parking, accessible parking spaces shall be dispersed and located closest to the accessible entrances. 33. BACKWATER VALVE: The scope of this project may require the installation of a sanitary sewer backwater valve per Town Ordinance 6.50.025. Please provide information on the plans if a backwater valve is required and the location of the installation. The Town of Los Gatos Ordinance and West Valley Sanitation District (WVSD) requires backwater valves on drainage piping serving fixtures that have flood level rims less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole. 34. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE: All projects in the Town of Los Gatos require Class A roof assemblies. 35. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is required by CBC Section 1704, the Architect or Engineer of Record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the Building Permit. The Town Special Inspection form must be completely filled-out and signed by all requested parties prior to permit issuance. Special Inspection forms are available from the Building Division Service Counter or online at www.losgatosca.gov/building. 36. BLUE PRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (page size same as submitted drawings) shall be Page 10 of 31 part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division Service Counter for a fee of $2 or at ARC Blue Print for a fee or online at www.losgatosca.gov/building. 37. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following departments and agencies approval before issuing a building permit: a. Community Development – Planning Division: (408) 354-6874 b. Engineering/Parks & Public Works Department: (408) 399-5771 c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010 d. West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-2407 e. Local School District: The Town will forward the paperwork to the appropriate school district(s) for processing. A copy of the paid receipt is required prior to permit issuance. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS: Engineering Division 38. GENERAL: All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted Town Standard Plans, Standard Specifications and Engineering Design Standards. All work shall conform to the applicable Town ordinances. The adjacent public right-of-way shall be kept clear of all job-related mud, silt, concrete, dirt and other construction debris at the end of the day. Dirt and debris shall not be washed into storm drainage facilities. The storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will not be allowed unless an encroachment permit is issued by the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department. The Developer's representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right-of-way according to this condition may result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or stop work orders and the Town performing the required maintenance at the Developer's expense. 39. APPROVAL: This application shall be completed in accordance with all of the conditions of approval listed below and in substantial compliance with the latest reviewed and approved development plans. Any changes or modifications to the approved plans or conditions of approvals shall be approved by the Town Engineer. 40. CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY: Prior to initial occupancy and any subsequent change in use or occupancy of any non-residential condominium space, the buyer or the new or existing occupant shall apply to the Community Development Department and obtain approval for use determination and building permit and obtain inspection approval for Page 11 of 31 any necessary work to establish the use and/or occupancy consistent with that intended. 41. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT: All work in the public right-of-way will require a Construction Encroachment Permit. All work over $5,000 will require construction security. It is the responsibility of the Developer to obtain any necessary encroachment permits from affected agencies and private parties, including but not limited to, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), AT&T, Comcast, Santa Clara Valley Water District, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Copies of any approvals or permits must be submitted to the Town Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department prior to releasing any permit. 42. PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (INDEMNITY AGREEMENT): The property owner shall enter into an agreement with the Town for all existing and proposed private improvements within the Town’s right-of-way. The Owner shall be solely responsible for maintaining the improvements in a good and safe condition at all times and shall indemnify the Town of Los Gatos. The agreement must be completed and accepted by the Director of Parks and Public Works, and subsequently recorded by the Town Clerk at the Santa Clara County Office of the Clerk-Recorder, prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. Please note that this process may take approximately six to eight (6-8) weeks. 43. GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE: The property owner shall provide proof of insurance to the Town on a yearly basis. In addition to general coverage, the policy must cover all elements encroaching into the Town’s right-of-way. 44. PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS: The Developer or their representative shall notify the Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (24) hours before starting any work pertaining to on-site drainage facilities, grading or paving, and all work in the Town's right-of-way. Failure to do so will result in penalties and rejection of work that went on without inspection. 45. RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: The Developer shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because of the Developer's operations. Improvements such as, but not limited to: curbs, gutters, sidewalks, driveways, signs, pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings, etc., shall be repaired and replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original condition. Any new concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. Existing improvement to be repaired or Page 12 of 31 replaced shall be at the direction of the Engineering Construction Inspector, and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. The restoration of all improvements identified by the Engineering Construction Inspector shall be completed before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Developer shall request a walk-through with the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. 46. SITE SUPERVISION: The General Contractor shall provide qualified supervision on the job site at all times during construction. 47. STREET/SIDEWALK CLOSURE: Any proposed blockage or partial closure of the street and/or sidewalk requires an encroachment permit. Special provisions such as limitations on works hours, protective enclosures, or other means to facilitate public access in a safe manner may be required. 48. PLAN CHECK FEES: Plan check fees associated with the Grading Permit shall be deposited with the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department prior to the commencement of plan check review. 49. INSPECTION FEES: Inspection fees shall be deposited with the Town prior to the issuance of any permits. 50. DESIGN CHANGES: Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be subject to the approval of the Town prior to the commencement of any and all altered work. The Developer’s project engineer shall notify, in writing, the Town Engineer at least seventy- two (72) hours in advance of all the proposed changes. Any approved changes shall be incorporated into the final “as-built” plans. 51. PARKING: Any proposed parking restriction must be approved by The Town of Los Gatos, Community Development Department. 52. PLANS AND STUDIES: All required plans and studies shall be prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of California, and submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval. Additionally, any post-project traffic or parking counts, or other studies imposed by the Planning Commission or Town Council shall be funded by the Developer. 53. GRADING PERMIT: A grading permit is required for all site grading and drainage work except for exemptions listed in Section 12.20.015 of The Code of the Town of Los Gatos (Grading Ordinance). After the preceding Architecture and Site Application has been approved by the respective deciding body, the grading permit application (with grading plans and associated required materials and plan check fees) shall be made to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department located at 41 Miles Avenue. The grading plans shall include final grading, drainage, retaining wall Page 13 of 31 location(s), driveway, utilities and interim erosion control. Grading plans shall list earthwork quantities and a table of existing and proposed impervious areas. Unless specifically allowed by the Director of Parks and Public Works, the grading permit will be issued concurrently with the building permit. The grading permit is for work outside the building footprint(s). Prior to Engineering signing off and closing out on the issued grading permit, the Developer’s soils engineer shall verify, with a stamped and signed letter, that the grading activities were completed per plans and per the requirements as noted in the soils report. A separate building permit, issued by the Building Department, located at 110 E. Main Street, is needed for grading within the building footprint. 54. DRIVEWAY: The driveway conforms to existing pavement on both Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon Road shall be constructed in a manner such that the existing drainage patterns will not be obstructed. 55. DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT: Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the Developer shall: a) design provisions for surface drainage; and b) design all necessary storm drain facilities extending to a satisfactory point of disposal for the proper control and disposal of storm runoff; and c) provide a recorded copy of any required easements to the Town. 56. TREE REMOVAL: Copies of all necessary tree removal permits shall be provided prior to the issuance of a grading permit/building permit. 57. PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING: Prior to the commencement of any site work, the general contractor shall: a. Along with the project applicant, attend a pre-construction meeting with the Town Engineer to discuss the project conditions of approval, working hours, site maintenance and other construction matters; b. Acknowledge in writing that they have read and understand the project conditions of approval and will make certain that all project sub-contractors have read and understand them as well prior to commencing any work, and that a copy of the project conditions of approval will be posted on-site at all times during construction. 58. GENERAL: The Developer shall comply with all Town, County, State and Federal laws and regulations applicable to this land division. 59. CERTIFICATE OF LOT MERGER: A Certificate of Lot Merger shall be recorded. Two (2) copies of the legal description for exterior boundary of the merged parcel and a plat map (8-½ in. X 11 in.) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department for review and approval. The submittal shall include closure Page 14 of 31 calculations, title reports less than ninety (90) days old and the appropriate fee. The certificate shall be recorded before any grading or building permits may be issued. 60. DEDICATIONS: The following shall be dedicated by separate instrument. The dedication shall be recorded before any permits are issued: a. Public Utility Easement (PUE): Five (5) feet wide, along to the property’s Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon Road frontages. b. Public Access Easement (PAE): Five (5) feet wide, along the property’s Shannon Road frontage. 61. SOILS REPORT: One copy of the soils and geologic report shall be submitted with the application. The soils report shall include specific criteria and standards governing site grading, drainage, pavement design, retaining wall design, and erosion control. The reports shall be signed and "wet stamped" by the engineer or geologist, in conformance with Section 6735 of the California Business and Professions Code. 62. GEOLOGY AND SOILS MITIGATION MEASURE: A geotechnical investigation shall be conducted for the project to determine the surface and sub-surface conditions at the site and to determine the potential for surface fault rupture on the site. The geotechnical study shall provide recommendations for site grading as well as the design of foundations, concrete slab-on-grade construction, drainage, on-site utility trenching and pavement sections. All recommendations of the investigation shall be incorporated into project plans. 63. SOILS REVIEW: Prior to Town approval of a development application, the Developer’s engineers shall prepare and submit a design-level geotechnical/geological investigation for review by the Town’s consultant, with costs borne by the Owner/Applicant, and subsequent approval by the Town. The Developer’s soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainage plans to ensure that designs for foundations, retaining walls, site grading, and site drainage are in accordance with their recommendations and the peer review comments. The Developer’s soils engineer must review the geotechnical elements of all final Plans and Specifications for conformance with the recommendations in their report and submit a Plan Review Letter which conveys their approval to the Town prior to issuance of grading or building permits. 64. SOILS ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING: The Developer’s soils engineer must provide observation and testing of the geotechnical elements of the project during construction. The results of the construction observation and testing shall be documented in an “as-built” letter/report prepared by the Developer’s soils engineer and submitted to the Town before a certificate of occupancy is granted. Page 15 of 31 65. SOIL RECOMMENDATIONS: The project shall incorporate the geotechnical/geological recommendations contained in the project’s design-level geotechnical/geological investigation as prepared by the Developer’s engineer(s), and any subsequently required report or addendum. Subsequent reports or addendum are subject to peer review by the Town’s consultant and costs shall be borne by the Developer. 66. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT: The Owner/Applicant shall enter into an agreement to construct public improvements in accordance with Town Code Section 24.40.020. The Owner/Applicant shall supply suitable securities for all public improvements that are part of the development in a form acceptable to the Town in the amount of 100% performance and 100% labor and materials prior to the issuance of any encroachment, grading or building permit. The Owner/Applicant shall provide two (2) copies of documents verifying the cost of the public improvements to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department. A copy of the executed agreement shall be submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. 67. WATER METER: The proposed water meters, currently shown within the Shannon Road right-of-way, shall be located within the property in question, directly behind the public right-of-way line. The Owner/Applicant shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any portion of concrete flatwork within said right-of-way that is damaged during this activity prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 68. SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT: A sanitary sewer lateral clean-out shall be installed at the property line, if one does not already exist within one (1) foot of the property line per West Valley Sanitation District Standard Drawing 3, or at a location specified by the Town. The Owner/Applicant shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any portion of concrete flatwork within said right-of-way that is damaged during this activity prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 69. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: The following improvements shall be installed by the Developer. Plans for those improvements shall be prepared by a California registered civil engineer, reviewed and approved by the Town, and guaranteed by contract, Faithful Performance Security and Labor & Materials Security before the issuance of any grading or building permit or the recordation of a map. Plans for the improvements must be approved by the Town prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before the issuance of any grading or building permits unless otherwise allowed by the Town Engineer. a. Shannon Road i. Curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal, storm Page 16 of 31 drainage and sanitary sewers along the property frontage as directed by the Town Engineer. ii. Remove and replace the existing pavement section along the project frontage with a traffic-appropriate engineered structural pavement section from centerline to the lip of gutter on the project (north) side, or alternative pavement rehabilitation measures as approved by the Town Engineer. b. Los Gatos Boulevard i. Curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal, storm drainage and sanitary sewers along the property frontage as directed by the Town Engineer. ii. Remove and replace the existing pavement section along the project frontage with a traffic-appropriate engineered structural pavement section from centerline to the lip of gutter on the project (east) side. 70. SHANNON ROAD SIDEWALK AND PLANTER STRIP: The project will be required to provide a 10-foot sidewalk and 5-foot detached planter strip unless otherwise approved by the Town Engineer along the Shannon Road frontage in accordance with the Town’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. The developer will provide a 5-foot wide Public Access Easement (PAE) along the Shannon Road frontage to include the portion of the public sidewalk that is located on private property. No right-of-way dedication or public street easement will be required. Installation of a vertical curb at the back of walk may be necessary to separate the pedestrian zone from the stormwater treatment area immediately adjacent to the back of walk. Said curb will be located outside the 5-foot PAE. The proposed 5-foot Public Utility Easement (per COA 23) will overlap with the 5- foot PAE. Stormwater treatment will be permitted within 5 feet of the property line provided the bio-retention areas are lined to prevent seepage into the Town’s property. The responsible engineer in charge will provide a stamped and signed letter stating facilities, improvements and infrastructure within the Town’s right-of-way (driveway approach, curb and gutter, sidewalk, etc.) will not be adversely affected. 71. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: The Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department will not sign off on a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy or a Final Certificate of Occupancy until all required improvements within the Town’s right-of-way have been completed and approved by the Town. 72. GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE MEASURES: Projects which propose work within the Town’s right-of-way, including but not limited to pavement restoration, street widening, construction of curb, gutter and/or sidewalk, right-of-way dedication, etc., will be Page 17 of 31 evaluated by Staff to determine its potential for the implementation of Green Infrastructure measures and associated improvements. 73. FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS: The Developer shall be required to improve the project’s public frontage (right-of-way line to centerline and/or to limits per the direction of the Town Engineer) to current Town Standards. These improvements may include but not limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway approach(es), curb ramp(s), signs, pavement, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings, storm drain facilities, traffic signal(s), street lighting (upgrade and/or repaint) etc. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. 74. GREEN BICYCLE FACILITIES: The Developer shall install green bike lanes and bike boxes in all directions of improved streets and intersections as directed by the Town Engineer. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. 75. ADA COMPLIANCE: The Developer shall be required to meet all ADA standards, which must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. This may require additional construction measures as directed by the Town. 76. PARKING LOTS: Parking lots and other impervious areas shall be designed to drain stormwater runoff to vegetated drainage swales, filter strips, and/or other Low Impact Development (LID) treatment devices that can be integrated into required landscaping areas and traffic islands prior to discharge into the storm drain system and/or public right-of-way. The amount of impervious area associated with parking lots shall be minimized by utilizing design features such as providing compact car spaces, reducing stall dimensions, incorporating efficient parking lanes, and using permeable pavement where feasible, and adhering to the Town’s Parking Development Standards. The use of permeable paving for parking surfaces is encouraged to reduce runoff from the site. Such paving shall meet Santa Clara County Fire Department requirements and be structurally appropriate for the location. 77. UTILITIES: The Developer shall install all new, relocated, or temporarily removed utility services, including telephone, electric power and all other communications lines underground, as required by Town Code Section 27.50.015(b). All new utility services shall be placed underground. Underground conduit shall be provided for cable television service. The Developer is required to obtain approval of all proposed utility alignments from any and all utility service providers before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. The Town of Los Gatos does not approve or imply Page 18 of 31 approval for final alignment or design of these facilities. 78. TRENCHING MORATORIUM: Trenching within a newly paved street will be allowed subject to the following requirements: a. The Town standard “T” trench detail shall be used. b. A Town-approved colored controlled density backfill shall be used. c. All necessary utility trenches and related pavement cuts shall be consolidated to minimize the impacted area of the roadway. d. The total asphalt thickness shall be a minimum of three (3) inches, meet Town standards, or shall match the existing thickness, whichever is greater. The final lift shall be 1.5-inches of one-half (½) inch medium asphalt. The initial lift(s) shall be of three-quarter (¾) inch medium asphalt. e. The Contractor shall schedule a pre-paving meeting with the Town Engineering Construction Inspector the day the paving is to take place. f. A slurry seal topping may be required by the construction inspector depending their assessment of the quality of the trench paving. If required, the slurry seal shall extend the full width of the street and shall extend five (5) feet beyond the longitudinal limits of trenching. Slurry seal materials shall be approved by the Town Engineering Construction Inspector prior to placement. Black sand may be required in the slurry mix. All existing striping and pavement markings shall be replaced upon completion of slurry seal operations. All pavement restorations shall be completed and approved by the Inspector before occupancy. 79. SIDEWALK REPAIR: The Developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any sidewalk damaged now or during construction of this project. All new and existing adjacent infrastructure must meet current ADA standards. Sidewalk repair shall match existing color, texture and design, and shall be constructed per Town Standard Details. New concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. The limits of sidewalk repair will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of the project. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. 80. CURB AND GUTTER REPAIR: The Developer shall repair and replace to existing Town standards any curb and gutter damaged now or during construction of this project. All new and existing adjacent infrastructure must meet Town standards. New curb and gutter shall be constructed per Town Standard Details. New concrete shall be free of Page 19 of 31 stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. The limits of curb and gutter repair will be determined by the Engineering Construction Inspector during the construction phase of the project. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. 81. DRIVEWAY APPROACH: The Developer shall install two (2) Town standard commercial driveway approaches. The new driveway approaches shall be constructed per Town Standard Plans and must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. New concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. 82. CURB RAMPS: The Developer shall construct four (4) curb ramps in compliance with ADA Standards and remove an existing curb ramp, all of which must be completed and accepted by the Town before a Certificate of Occupancy for any new building can be issued. New concrete shall be free of stamps, logos, names, graffiti, etc. Any concrete identified that is displaying a stamp or equal shall be removed and replaced at the Contractor’s sole expense and no additional compensation shall be allowed therefore. 83. SIGHT TRIANGLE AND TRAFFIC VIEW AREA: Any proposed improvements, including but not limiting to trees and hedges, will need to abide by Town Code Sections 23.10.080, 26.10.065, and 29.40.030. 84. FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS (TRAFFIC): The Developer shall construct improvements including and may not be limited to signage, striping, curb/gutter/sidewalk, ADA ramps, pedestrian crosswalk, street lights, and traffic signals at the project frontage as directed by the Town Engineer. Plans for the improvements must be approved by the Town prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before the issuance of any grading or building permits unless otherwise allowed by the Town Engineer. 85. FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS (SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION): The Developer shall upgrade existing traffic signals to current Town standards including, and may not be limited to, LED signal indication, ADA pedestrian signal and pushbuttons, video detection system, signal controller, fiber optic traffic communication, Emtrac fire preemption device, LED intersection lighting as directed by the Town Engineer. Plans for the improvements must be approved by the Town prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before the issuance Page 20 of 31 of any grading or building permits unless otherwise allowed by the Town Engineer. 86. TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS (OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENT): Traffic improvements may be required as determined by the required traffic study. Construct off-site improvements as required. Plans shall be prepared by the Developer’s design professionals and submitted to the Town Engineer for approval prior to construction. Plans for the improvements must be approved by the Town prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before the issuance of any grading or building permits unless otherwise allowed by the Town Engineer. 87. TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS (COMPLETE STREET): The Developer shall be required to improve the Los Gatos Boulevard/Shannon Road/Roberts Road intersection as delineated in the Los Gatos Safe Routes to School Plan, Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and General Plan Complete Street elements. These improvements may include but are not limited to: a. Reduction of the northbound travel lanes on Los Gatos Boulevard between Shannon Road and Magneson Loop from three (3) lanes to two (2). b. Widening of the sidewalk along northbound Los Gatos Boulevard to a width of ten (10) feet between Shannon Road and Magneson Loop and installation of separated sidewalk, with the final configuration approved by the Town Engineer. c. Widening of the sidewalk along westbound Shannon frontage to a width of ten (10) feet between Los Gatos Boulevard and eastern project limits and installation of sidewalk as a shared pedestrian/bicycle path, with the final configuration approved by the Town Engineer. d. Removal of the pork chop island at the northeast corner of the Los Gatos Boulevard/Shannon Road intersection. e. Relocation of the crosswalk across Los Gatos Boulevard from the northeast corner of the Los Gatos Boulevard/Shannon Road intersection to the southwest corner of the Los Gatos Boulevard/Roberts Road intersection (as determined by the Traffic Impact Analysis). f. A protected green bike lane along the project’s Los Gatos Boulevard frontage. g. A minimum 40-foot curb to curb street width along the project’s Shannon Road frontage. Plans for the improvements must be approved by the Town prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. The improvements must be completed and accepted by the Town before the issuance of any grading or building permits unless otherwise allowed by the Town Engineer. Page 21 of 31 88. STREET LIGHTS AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSPECTION FEES: The Developer shall pay $3,000.00 for the Town’s inspection of street lights and traffic signal-related work installed by the Developer. The fees shall be due at time of building permit application. 89. TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION PLAN: A Traffic Signal Modification Plan is required and must be submitted and approved prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. This plan shall be prepared by a licensed traffic engineer. 90. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN (TDM): The Developer shall prepare a Transportation Demand Management Plan for the Town of Los Gatos approval prior to the issuance of ant grading or building permits. The TDM shall include measures, including but not limited to, bicycle facility provisions, shower and clothes locker facilities, local shuttle service, transit passes and subsidies, carpool incentive, designated car share parking, and other measures that may be required by the Town Engineer. The TDM shall also include a TDM coordinator and identify the requirement for an annual TDM effectiveness report to the Town of Los Gatos. 91. TRAFFIC STUDY: Any development of land use that generates greater traffic impacts than those assumed in the traffic study report may require an updated traffic study in accordance with the Town’s Traffic Impact Policy. 92. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION FEE: The Developer shall pay the project's proportional share of transportation improvements needed to serve cumulative development within the Town of Los Gatos. The amount based on the current resolution is $311,550.00. The fee shall be paid before issuance of any building permits. The final traffic impact mitigation fee for this project will be based upon the Town Council resolution in effect at the time the building permit is issued, shall be calculated from the final plans using the current fee schedule and rate schedule in effect at the time the building permit is issued (using a comparison between the existing and proposed uses), and shall be paid before issuance of a building permit. 93. CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE PARKING: No construction vehicles, trucks, equipment and worker vehicles shall be allowed to park on the portion of any public (Town) streets without written approval from the Town Engineer. 94. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN: A traffic control plan is required and must be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of an Encroachment, Grading or Building Permit. This plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures: a. Construction activities shall be strategically timed and coordinated to minimize traffic disruption for schools, residents, businesses, special events, and other projects in the area. The schools located on the haul route shall be contacted to help with the coordination of the trucking operation to minimize traffic Page 22 of 31 disruption. b. Flag persons shall be placed at locations necessary to control one-way traffic flow. All flag persons shall have the capability of communicating with each other to coordinate the operation. c. Prior to construction, advance notification of all affected residents and emergency services shall be made regarding one-way operation, specifying dates and hours of operation. 95. CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC CONTROL: All construction traffic and related vehicular routes, traffic control plan, and applicable pedestrian or traffic detour plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Town Engineer prior to the issuance of an Encroachment, Grading or Building Permit. 96. ADVANCE NOTIFICATION: Advance notification of all affected residents and emergency services shall be made regarding parking restriction, lane closure or road closure, with specification of dates and hours of operation. 97. HAULING OF SOIL: Hauling of soil on- or off-site shall not occur during the morning or evening peak periods (between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.), and at other times as specified by the Director of Parks and Public Works. Prior to the issuance of an Encroachment, Grading or Building Permit, the Developer shall work with the Town Building Department and Engineering Division Inspectors to devise a traffic control plan to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow under periods when soil is hauled on or off of the project site. This may include, but is not limited to provisions for the Developer to place construction notification signs noting the dates and time of construction and hauling activities, or providing additional traffic control. Coordination with other significant projects in the area may also be required. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose debris. 98. CONSTRUCTION HOURS: All construction activities, including the delivery of construction materials, labors, heavy equipment, supplies, etc., shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekends and holidays. The Town may authorize, on a case-by-case basis, alternate construction hours. The Developer shall provide written notice twenty-four (24) hours in advance of modified construction hours. Approval of this request is at discretion of the Town. 99. CONSTRUCTION NOISE: Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekends and holidays, construction, alteration or repair activities shall be allowed. No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding eighty-five (85) dBA at twenty-five (25) feet from the source. If the device is located within a structure on the property, the measurement shall be made at distances Page 23 of 31 as close to twenty-five (25) feet from the device as possible. The noise level at any point outside of the property plane shall not exceed eighty-five (85) dBA. 100. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN SHEET: Prior to the issuance of an Encroachment, Grading or Building Permit, the Developer’s design professional shall submit a construction management plan sheet (full-size) within the plan set that shall incorporate at a minimum the Earth Movement Plan, Traffic Control Plan, Project Schedule, site security fencing, employee parking, construction staging area, materials storage area(s), construction trailer(s), concrete washout(s) and proposed outhouse locations. Please refer to the Town’s Construction Management Plan Guidelines document for additional information. In addition, the developer shall submit a construction traffic flow map with estimation of construction vehicle volumes, flow patterns, and schedule of operation. 101. WVSD (West Valley Sanitation District): A Sanitary Sewer Clean-out is required for each property at the property line, within one (1) foot of the property line per West Valley Sanitation District Standard Drawing 3, or at a location specified by the Town. 102. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT: Construction activities including but not limited to clearing, stockpiling, grading or excavation of land, which disturbs one (1) acre or more which are part of a larger common plan of development which disturbs less than one (1) acre are required to obtain coverage under the construction general permit with the State Water Resources Control Board. The Developer is required to provide proof of WDID# and keep a current copy of the storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) on the construction site and shall be made available to the Town of Los Gatos Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department and/or Building Department upon request. 103. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs): The Developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors are aware of all storm water quality measures and that such measures are implemented. Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be maintained and be placed for all areas that have been graded or disturbed and for all material, equipment and/or operations that need protection. Removal of BMPs (temporary removal during construction activities) shall be replaced at the end of each working day. Failure to comply with the construction BMP will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or stop work orders. 104. STORMWATER DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF: All new development and redevelopment projects are subject to the stormwater development runoff requirements. The Developer shall submit a stormwater control plan and implement conditions of approval that reduce stormwater pollutant discharges through the construction, Page 24 of 31 operation and maintenance of treatment measures and other appropriate source control and site design measures. Increases in runoff volume and flows shall be managed in accordance with the development runoff requirements. 105. REGULATED PROJECT: The project is classified as a Regulated Project per Provision C.3.b.ii. and is required to implement LID source control, site design, and stormwater treatment on-site in accordance with Provisions C.3.c. and C.3.d.. 106. SITE DESIGN MEASURES: All projects shall incorporate at least one (1) of the following measures: a. Protect sensitive areas and minimize changes to the natural topography. b. Minimize impervious surface areas. c. Direct roof downspouts to vegetated areas. d. Use permeable pavement surfaces on the driveway, at a minimum. e. Use landscaping to treat stormwater. 107. BIORETENTION SYSTEM: The bioretention systems shall be designed to have a surface area no smaller than what is required to accommodate a 5 inches/hour stormwater runoff surface loading rate, infiltrate runoff through bioretention soil media at a minimum of 5 inches per hour, and maximize infiltration to the native soil during the life of the project. The soil media for bioretention systems shall be designed to sustain healthy, vigorous plant growth and maximize stormwater runoff retention and pollutant removal. Bioretention soil media that meets the minimum specifications set forth in Attachment L of Order No. R2-2009-0074, dated November 28, 2011, shall be used. 108. UNLAWFUL DISCHARGES: It is unlawful to discharge any wastewater, or cause hazardous domestic waste materials to be deposited in such a manner or location as to constitute a threatened discharge, into storm drains, gutters, creeks or the San Francisco Bay. Unlawful discharges to storm drains include, but are not limited to: discharges from toilets, sinks, industrial processes, cooling systems, boilers, fabric cleaning, equipment cleaning or vehicle cleaning. 109. LANDSCAPING: In finalizing the landscape plan for the bioretention basins, it is recommended that the landscape architect ensure that the characteristics of the selected plants are similar to those of the plants listed for use in bioretention areas in Appendix D of the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP) C.3 Stormwater Handbook. 110. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: The Developer shall enter into a Landscape Maintenance Agreement with the Town of Los Gatos in which the Developer agrees to maintain the vegetated areas along the project’s Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon Page 25 of 31 Road frontages located within the public right-of-way. The agreement must be completed and accepted by the Town Attorney prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits unless otherwise allowed by the Town Engineer. 111. EROSION CONTROL: Interim and final erosion control plans shall be prepared and submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department. A maximum of two (2) weeks is allowed between clearing of an area and stabilizing/building on an area if grading is allowed during the rainy season. Interim erosion control measures, to be carried out during construction and before installation of the final landscaping, shall be included. Interim erosion control method shall include, but are not limited to: silt fences, fiber rolls (with locations and details), erosion control blankets, Town standard seeding specification, filter berms, check dams, retention basins, etc. Provide erosion control measures as needed to protect downstream water quality during winter months. The Town of Los Gatos Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department and the Building Department will conduct periodic NPDES inspections of the site throughout the recognized storm season to verify compliance with the Construction General Permit and Stormwater ordinances and regulations. 112. DUST CONTROL: Blowing dust shall be reduced by timing construction activities so that paving and building construction begin as soon as possible after completion of grading, and by landscaping disturbed soils as soon as possible. Further, water trucks shall be present and in use at the construction site. All portions of the site subject to blowing dust shall be watered as often as deemed necessary by the Town, or a minimum of three (3) times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites in order to insure proper control of blowing dust for the duration of the project. Watering on public streets shall not occur. Streets shall be cleaned by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the Town Engineer, or at least once a day. Watering associated with on- site construction activity shall take place between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. and shall include at least one (1) late-afternoon watering to minimize the effects of blowing dust. All public streets soiled or littered due to this construction activity shall be cleaned and swept on a daily basis during the workweek to the satisfaction of the Town. Demolition or earthwork activities shall be halted when wind speeds (instantaneous gusts) exceed twenty (20) miles per hour (MPH). All trucks hauling soil, sand, or other loose debris shall be covered. 113. AIR QUALITY: To limit the project’s construction-related dust and criteria pollutant emissions, the following the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)- Page 26 of 31 recommended basic construction measures shall be included in the project’s grading plan, building plans, and contract specifications: a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day, or otherwise kept dust-free. b. All haul trucks designated for removal of excavated soil and demolition debris from site shall be staged off-site until materials are ready for immediate loading and removal from site. c. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, debris, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. d. As practicable, all haul trucks and other large construction equipment shall be staged in areas away from the adjacent residential homes. e. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day, or as deemed appropriate by Town Engineer. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. An on-site track-out control device is also recommended to minimize mud and dirt-track-out onto adjacent public roads. f. All vehicle speeds on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to fifteen (15) miles per hour. g. All driveways and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within forty-eight (48) hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. i. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed twenty (20) miles per hour. j. Vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast-germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established. 114. DETAILING OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES: Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, all pertinent details of any and all proposed stormwater management facilities, including, but not limited to, ditches, swales, pipes, bubble-ups, dry wells, outfalls, infiltration trenches, detention basins and energy dissipaters, shall be provided on submitted plans, reviewed by the Engineering Division of the Parks and Page 27 of 31 Public Works Department, and approved for implementation. 115. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: All construction shall conform to the latest requirements of the CASQA Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbooks for Construction Activities and New Development and Redevelopment, the Town's grading and erosion control ordinance, and other generally accepted engineering practices for erosion control as required by the Town Engineer when undertaking construction activities. 116. SITE DRAINAGE: Rainwater leaders shall be discharged to splash blocks. No through curb drains will be allowed. Any storm drain inlets (public or private) directly connected to public storm system shall be stenciled/signed with appropriate “NO DUMPING - Flows to Bay” NPDES required language. On-site drainage systems for all projects shall include one of the alternatives included in section C.3.i of the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit. These include storm water reuse via cisterns or rain barrels, directing runoff from impervious surfaces to vegetated areas and use of permeable surfaces. If stormwater treatment facilities are to be used they shall be placed a minimum of ten (10) feet from the adjacent property line and/or right-of-way. Alternatively, the facilities may be located with an offset between 5 and 10 feet from the adjacent property and/or right-of-way line(s) if the responsible engineer in charge provides a stamped and signed letter that addresses infiltration and states how facilities, improvements and infrastructure within the Town’s right-of-way (driveway approach, curb and gutter, etc.) and/or the adjacent property will not be adversely affected. No improvements shall obstruct or divert runoff to the detriment of an adjacent, downstream or down slope property. 117. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN: A storm water management shall be included with the grading permit application. The plan shall delineate source control measures and BMPs together with the sizing calculations. The plan shall be certified by a professional pre-qualified by the Town. In the event that the storm water measures proposed on the Planning approval differ significantly from those certified on the Building/Grading Permit, the Town may require a modification of the Planning approval prior to release of the Building Permit. 118. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN NOTES: The following note shall be added to the storm water management plan: “The biotreatment soil mix used in all stormwater treatment landscapes shall comply with the specifications in Attachment L of the MRP. Proof of compliance shall be submitted by the Contractor to the Town of Los Gatos a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to delivery of the material to the job site using the Biotreatment Soil Mix Supplier Certification Statement.” Page 28 of 31 119. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION: Certification from the biotreatment soils provider is required and shall be given to Engineering Division Inspection staff a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to delivery of the material to the job site. Additionally deliver tags from the soil mix shall also be provided to Engineering Division Inspection staff. Sample Certification can be found here: 120. http://www.scvurppp-w2k.com/nd_wp.shtml?zoom_highlight=BIOTREATMENT+SOIL. 121. AGREEMENT FOR STORMWATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS: The property owner shall enter into an agreement with the Town for maintenance of the stormwater filtration devices required to be installed on this project by the Town’s Stormwater Discharge Permit and all current amendments or modifications. The agreement shall specify that certain routine maintenance shall be performed by the property owner and shall specify device maintenance reporting requirements. The agreement shall also specify routine inspection requirements, permits and payment of fees. The agreement shall be recorded, and a copy of the recorded agreement shall be submitted to the Engineering Division of the Parks and Public Works Department, prior to the release of any occupancy permits. 122. SILT AND MUD IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: It is the responsibility of Contractor to make sure that all dirt tracked into the public right-of-way is cleaned up on a daily basis. Mud, silt, concrete and other construction debris SHALL NOT be washed into the Town’s storm drains. 123. GREASE TRAPS: The Developer shall meet all requirements of the Santa Clara County Health Department and West Valley Sanitation District for the interception, separation or pretreatment of effluent. 124. GREASE INTERCEPTOR: Food service facilities (including restaurants and grocery stores) shall have a sink or other area for cleaning floor mats, containers, hood filters and equipment that is connected to a grease interceptor prior to discharging into the sanitary sewer system. The cleaning area shall be large enough to clean the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned and shall be plumbed to the sanitary sewer whether it is located indoors or is a covered outdoor area. 125. GOOD HOUSEKEEPING: Good housekeeping practices shall be observed at all times during the course of construction. All construction shall be diligently supervised by a person or persons authorized to do so at all times during working hours. The Developer's representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right-of-way according to this condition may result in penalties and/or the Town performing the required maintenance at the Developer's expense. Page 29 of 31 126. NEIGHBORHOOD CONSTRUCTION COMMUNICATION PLAN: Prior to the issuance of an Encroachment, Grading or Building Permit, the Developer shall initiate a weekly neighborhood email notification program to provide project status updates. The email notices shall also be posted on a bulletin board placed in a prominent location along the project perimeter. 127. PERMIT ISSUANCE: Permits for each phase; reclamation, landscape, and grading, shall be issued simultaneously. 128. COVERED TRUCKS: All trucks transporting materials to and from the site shall be covered. TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT: 129. FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED: Noted on page A0.0 of the plans for the new building. Approved automatic sprinkler systems in new and existing buildings and structures shall be provided in the locations described in this Section or in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.19 whichever is the more restrictive. For the purposes of this section, firewalls and fire barriers used to separate building areas shall be constructed in accordance with the California Building Code and shall be without openings or penetrations. In other than residential buildings which require the installation of fire sprinklers for all new buildings according to the California Residential Code, an automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all new buildings and structures. CRC Sec. 903.2 as adopted and amended by LGTC. 130. TURN RADIUS (CIRCULATING): The minimum outside turning radius is 42 feet for required access roadways. Greater radius up to 60 feet may be required where the Fire Department determines that Ladder Truck access is required. Circulating refers to travel along a roadway without dead ends. Identify the above required turn radius entering the site from Shannon and Los Gatos Blvd. 131. TIMING OF INSTALLATION: When fire apparatus access roads or a water supply for fire protection is required to be installed, such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternative methods of protection are provided. Temporary street signs shall be installed at each street intersection when construction of new roadways allows passage by vehicles in accordance with Section 505.2 CFC Sec. 501.4. 132. EMERGENCY RADIO RESPONDER COVERAGE: Emergency responder radio coverage in new buildings. All new buildings shall have approved radio coverage for emergency responders within the building based upon the existing coverage levels of the public Page 30 of 31 safety communication systems of the jurisdiction at the exterior of the building. This section shall not require improvement of the existing public safety communication systems. Refer to CFC Sec. 510 for further requirements. 133. FIRE ALARM REQUIREMENTS: Refer to CFC Sec. 907 and the currently adopted edition of NFPA 72. 134. THIS TWO WAY COMMUNICATION SYSTEM: Two-way communication systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 72 (2016 edition), the California Electrical Code (2013 edition), the California Fire Code (2016 edition), The California Building Code (2016 edition), and the city ordinances where two way system is being installed, policies, and standards. Other standards also contain design/installation criteria for specific life safety related equipment. These other standards are referred to in NFPA 72. 135. CONSTRUCTION SITE FIRE SAFETY: All construction sites must comply with applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and out Standard Detail and Specification SI-7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. CFC Chp. 33. 136. WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS: Potable water supplies shall be protected from contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any water-based fire protection systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the applicant(s). 2016 CFC Sec. 903.3.5 and Health and Safety Code 13114.7. 137. ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION: New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road forting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Where required by the fire code official, address numbers shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches (101.6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm). Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be Page 31 of 31 viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained. CFC Sec. 505.1. SECTION VII This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos on __________, and adopted by the following vote as an ordinance of the Town of Los Gatos at a meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos on __________, and becomes effective 30 days after it is adopted. COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA DATE: ___________________ ATTEST: CLERK ADMINISTRATOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA DATE: ___________________ N:\DEV\ORDS\2019\LGB 16212 PC 06-12-19.doc This Page Intentionally Left Blank MITCH E L L A V SHANNON RD MA G N E S O N L O O P MAGNESON L O O P GR A N T B I S H O P L N RO B I E L N GEO R G E S T LO S G A T O S B L V D TOWN OF LOS GATOS Application No. Change of zoning map amending the Town Zoning Ordinance.Zone ChangePrezoning From: CH To: CH:PD PD-17-002 A.P.N. #523-06-010 and 523-06-011 Forwarded by Planning CommissionApproved by Town CouncilClerk Administrator Date: Mayor Date:Ord: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard § EXHIBIT A This Page Intentionally Left Blank C O V E R S H E E T A 0 . 0 PROJECT NO. REVISIONC S T U D I O S S Q U A R E D A R C H I T E C T U R E , I N C . 13-011 DESCRIPTIONDATE LOS GATOS COMMERCIAL 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC N NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND REMODEL OF EXISTING T R U E "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION" A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT 02.10.2017 PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 06.10.2014 PD PERMIT SUBMITTAL 07.10.2014 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 08.11.2014 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 05.01.2015 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 11.16.2015 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 07.18.2016 COMMERCIAL SCHEME 06 1 0 0 0 S W i n c h e s t e r B l v d S a n J o s e , C A 9 5 1 2 8 P : ( 4 0 8 ) 9 9 8 - 0 9 8 3 F : ( 4 0 8 ) 4 0 4 - 0 1 4 4 08.18.2017 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET DRAWN BY JA JA & HC 11.01.2017 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 HC 02.09.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 HC 05.31.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 HC 10.15.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 HC 01.23.2019 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 6 HC 04.12.2019 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 6--PW COMMENTS HC 16212 LO S G A T O S B L V D . , L O S G A T O S , C A S t u d i o S S q u a r e d A r c h i t e c t u r e , I n c . 1 0 0 0 S W i n c h e s t e r B l v d S a n J o s e , C A 9 5 1 2 8 A t t n : E u g e n e H . S a k a i , A I A , L E E D A P p h : 4 0 8 9 9 8 0 9 8 3 f x : 4 0 8 4 0 4 0 1 4 4 e m a i l : e s a k a i @ s t u d i o s 2 a r c h . c o m d / b / a / 1 6 2 1 2 L o s G a t o s B o u l e v a r d , L L C 1 7 0 6 6 M e l o d y L a n e L o s G a t o s , C A 9 5 0 3 3 p h o n e : 4 0 8 6 5 5 2 3 2 6 e - m a i l : S c o t t P l a u t z @ g m a i l . c o m A R C H I T E C T B K F E n g i n e e r s C i v i l E n g i n e e r s , L a n d S u r v e y o r s , P l a n n e r s 1 6 5 0 T e c h n o l o g y D r i v e , S u i t e 6 5 0 S a n J o s e , C A 9 5 1 1 0 A t t n : I s a a c K o n t o r o v s k y , P E , Q S D / P . P r o j e c t M a n a g e r D i r e c t ( 4 0 8 ) 4 6 7 - 9 1 8 7 F a x ( 4 0 8 ) 4 6 7 - 9 1 9 9 C I V I L E N G I N E E R ARCHITECTURALA0.0A0.3aA0.3bA0.3cA0.4aA0.4bA0.5A0.6A1.0A1.0BA2.0A2.1A3.0A3.1A3.2A3.3A3.4A3.5A3.6A5.0CIVILC-1C-2C-3C-4C-5C-6C-7C-8C-9C-10C-11 FIRE ACCESS EXHIBITLANDSCAPEL1.1L1.2L2.1L2.2L3.1L3.2LIGHTINGE1.1P PHOTOMETRIC PLAN COVER SHEETEXTERIOR PERSPECTIVESEXTERIOR PERSPECTIVESEXTERIOR PERSPECTIVESSOLAR STUDY JUNE 21STSOLAR STUDY DECEMBER 21STEXISTING BUILDING TO BE REMODE L E D HILLSIDE VIEWSSITE PLANOFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLANDEMO PLANFLOOR PLANSSCHEMATIC ELEVATIONS & CROSS S E C T I O N S SCHEMATIC ELEVATIONS & CROSS S E C T I O N S ELEVATIONSELEVATIONSELEVATIONSELEVATIONSEXISTING ELEVATIONSSECTIONSTITLE SHEETDEMOLITION & TREE REMOVAL PLA N SITE PLANPRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAI N A G E P L A N PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLANPRELIMINARY STORMWATER MNG M N T P L A N PRELIMINARY INTERIM EROSION C O N T R O L P L A N EROSION CONTROL DETAILSPOLLUTION PREVENTION--IT'S PART O F T H E P L A N TRUCK VEHICLE CIRCULATIONLANDSCAPE PLANLANDSCAPE PLANLANDSCAPE DETAILSLANDSCAPE DETAILSPLANTING PLANPLANTING PLAN O W N E R D e s i g n F o c u s L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t u r e a n d C o n s t r u c t i o n P O B o x 4 8 5 B e n L o m o n d , C A 9 5 0 0 5 A t t n : R e b e c c a D y e p h : 8 3 1 3 3 6 3 1 0 0 e m a i l : r j d @ d e s i g n f o c u s . c o m L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T M i l s t o n e G e o t e c h n i c a l 1 7 0 2 0 M e l o d y L a n e L o s G a t o s , C A 9 5 0 3 3 A t t n : B a r r y M i l s t o n e p h : 4 0 8 - 3 5 3 - 5 5 2 8 f x : 4 0 8 - 3 5 3 - 9 6 9 0 e m a i l : b s m @ m i l s t o n e g e o . c o m G E O T E C H N I C A L E N G R . LOS G A T O S C O M M E R C I A L REMODEL EXISTING ONE STORY 2,312 S.F. COMMERCIAL BUILDING, ANDNEW CONSTRUCTION OF A 2 STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDING WITH11,317 S.F, TOTALING 13,629 S.F.58 PARKING STALLS ARE PROPOSED IN THE DEVELOPMENT.NEW COMME R C I A L B U I L D I N G A N D R E M O D E L O F E X I S T I N G F I R E S P R I N K L E R S S Y S T E M W I L L B E I N S T A L L E D I N P R O P O S E D N E W B U I L D I N G T O C O M P L Y W I T H C O D E R E Q U I R E M E N T S H e x a g o n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o n s u l t a n t s , I n c . 4 N o r t h S e c o n d S t r e e t , S u i t e 4 0 0 S a n J o s e , C a l i f o r n i a 9 5 1 1 3 A t t n : G a r y B l a c k p h : 4 0 8 9 7 1 6 1 0 0 T R A F F I C C O N S U L T A N T E X H I B I T B N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.2018 EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVES A0.3a 2-EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE1-EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE 3 - EX T E R I O R P E R S P E C T I V E 4 - EX T E R I O R P E R S P E C T I V E N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.2018 EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVES A0.3b 2-EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE1-EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE 3 - EX T E R I O R P E R S P E C T I V E 4 - EX T E R I O R P E R S P E C T I V E N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.2018 EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVES A0.3c 1-EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.2018 SOLAR STUDY JUNE 21ST A0.4a 3-SOLAR STUDY JUNE 21ST, 3:00 PM -- PERSPECTIVE1-SOLAR STUDY JUNE 21ST, 9:00 AM -- PERSPECTIVE 2-SOLAR STUDY JUNE 21ST, 1 2:00 PM -- PERSPECTIVE 6 - SO L A R S T U D Y J U N E 2 1 S T , 3 : 0 0 P M - - P E R S P E C T I V E 4 - SO L A R S T U D Y J U N E 2 1 S T , 9 : 0 0 A M - - P E R S P E C T I V E 5 - SO L A R S T U D Y J U N E 2 1 S T , 1 2: 0 0 P M - - P E R S P E C T I V E N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.2018 SOLAR STUDY DECEMBER 21ST A0.4b 3- SO L A R S T U D Y D E C E M B E R 2 1 S T , 3 : 0 0 P M - - P E R S P E C T I V E 1- SO L A R S T U D Y D E C E M B E R 2 1 S T , 9 : 0 0 A M - - P E R S P E C T I V E 2- SO L A R S T U D Y D E C E M B E R 2 1 S T , 1 2 : 0 0 P M - - P E R S P E C T I V E 6 - SO L A R S T U D Y D E C E M B E R 2 1 S T , 3 : 0 0 P M - - P E R S P E C T I V E 4 - SO L A R S T U D Y D E C E M B E R 2 1 S T , 9 : 0 0 A M - - P E R S P E C T I V E 5 - SO L A R S T U D Y D E C E M B E R 2 1 S T , 1 2 : 0 0 P M - - P E R S P E C T I V E E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G T O B E R E M O D E L E D A 0 . 5 PROJECT NO. REVISIONC S T U D I O S S Q U A R E D A R C H I T E C T U R E , I N C . 13-011 DESCRIPTIONDATE LOS GATOS COMMERCIAL 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC N NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND REMODEL OF EXISTING T R U E "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION" A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT 02.10.2017 PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 06.10.2014 PD PERMIT SUBMITTAL 07.10.2014 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 08.11.2014 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 05.01.2015 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 11.16.2015 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 07.18.2016 COMMERCIAL SCHEME 06 1 0 0 0 S W i n c h e s t e r B l v d S a n J o s e , C A 9 5 1 2 8 P : ( 4 0 8 ) 9 9 8 - 0 9 8 3 F : ( 4 0 8 ) 4 0 4 - 0 1 4 4 08.18.2017 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET DRAWN BY JA JA & HC 11.01.2017 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 HC 02.09.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 HC 05.31.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 HC 10.15.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 HC - - - - - H I L L S I D E V I E W S A 0 . 6 PROJECT NO. REVISIONC S T U D I O S S Q U A R E D A R C H I T E C T U R E , I N C . 13-011 DESCRIPTIONDATE LOS GATOS COMMERCIAL 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC N NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND REMODEL OF EXISTING T R U E "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION" A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT 02.10.2017 PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 06.10.2014 PD PERMIT SUBMITTAL 07.10.2014 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 08.11.2014 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 05.01.2015 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 11.16.2015 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 07.18.2016 COMMERCIAL SCHEME 06 1 0 0 0 S W i n c h e s t e r B l v d S a n J o s e , C A 9 5 1 2 8 P : ( 4 0 8 ) 9 9 8 - 0 9 8 3 F : ( 4 0 8 ) 4 0 4 - 0 1 4 4 08.18.2017 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET DRAWN BY JA JA & HC 11.01.2017 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 HC 02.09.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 HC 05.31.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 HC 10.15.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 HC EXISTING VIEW FROM 16185 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD P R O P O S E D V I E W F R O M 1 6 1 8 5 L O S G A T O S B O U L E V A R D EXISTING VIEW FROM ROBERTS ROAD P R O P O S E D V I E W F R O M R O B E R T S R O A D EXISTING VIEW FROM 16254 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD P R O P O S E D V I E W F R O M 1 6 2 5 4 L O S G A T O S B O U L E V A R D EXISTING VIEWS P R O P O S E D B U I L D I N G LOS GATOS BLVD 15'-0" REQ U I R E D FRONT SET B A C K 15'-0" REQUIRED FRONT SETBACK 1 5 ' - 0 " R E Q U I R E D R I G H T S I D E S E T B A C K 20'-0" REQUIRED REAR SETBACK 2 0 ' - 0 " R E Q U I R E D R E A R S E T B A C K 1 7 8 . 1 2 ' S . 7 8 ° 5 2 ' 1 0 " E . 139'-9" 15'-0" PROPOSED FRONT SETBACK 5'-0" PROPOSED FRONT SETB A C K 157.45'N. 20°40'00"E. 1 1 3 . 1 1 ' S . 7 8 ° 5 2 ' 1 0 " E . 54.71'N.20°40'00"E. 1 1 8 . 2 0 ' S . 7 8 ° 5 2 ' 1 0 " E . 157.45'N.20°40'00"E. 8 ' - 6 " T Y P . 16'-0" TYP. (E) +/- 22'-0 1/ 2 " R E A R S E T B A C K ( E ) + / - 4 9 ' - 1 0 1 / 2 " R I G H T S I D E S E T B A C K (E) +/-87'-2 1/2" FRONT SETBACK ( E ) + / - 1 1 2 ' - 1 " F R O N T S E T B A C K (E) +/-34'-3 1/2 " ( E ) + / - 1 8 ' - 0 1 / 2 " ( E ) + / - 1 8 ' - 0 " ( E ) + / - 2 0 ' - 0 1 / 2 " ( E ) + / - 4 ' - 2 1 / 2 " ( E ) + / - 5 ' - 1 1 " (E) +/-4'-0" (E) +/-4'-0" ( E ) + / - 6 6 ' - 1 " 2 2 ' - 0 " R 3 2 ' - 0 " R 5 4 ' - 0 " 2 5 ' - 0 " 8 ' - 6 " T Y P . (E) +/-12'-4" 2 ' - 1 1 / 2 " 8 ' - 6 " T Y P . 8'-6" TYP. 1 6 ' - 0 " 2 5 ' - 0 " 2 2 ' - 4 " 10'-7 1/2" 1 0 ' - 8 " 5'-0 1/2" 15'-0"1'-6" 5 ' - 0 " ( E ) + / - 1 2 ' - 0 " 5 8 ' - 0 1 / 2 " P R O P O S E D R E A R S E T B A C K 51'-8" PROPOSED LEFT SIDE SETBACK 1 5 6 ' - 7 1 / 2 " P R O P O S E D R I G H T S I D E S E T B A C K 16'-0" TYP.25'-0" 8'-6" TYP. 5 ' - 0 " 9 ' - 0 " 8 ' - 6 " 72'-5 1 / 2 " 5 ' - 0 " 6 ' - 6 " 5'-0" 3 3 ' - 6 " 1 6 ' - 0 " 4'-0" 9'-0"8'-0"9'-0" 8'-6" 1 4 ' - 6 " 8'-6" 30'-0"30'-0"17'-2 1/2" 5'-0" 48 ' - 1 1 1 / 2 " 25'-0" 5 ' - 0 " 5 ' - 0 " 16'-0"2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 1 8 ' - 0 " 8 ' - 6 " 18'-0" 25'-0"17'-1 1/2"10'-2 1/2"10'-0" S I T E P L A N A 1 . 0 - PROJECT NO. REVISIONC S T U D I O S S Q U A R E D A R C H I T E C T U R E , I N C . 13-011 DESCRIPTIONDATE LOS GATOS COMMERCIAL 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC N NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND REMODEL OF EXISTING T R U E "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION" A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT 02.10.2017 PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 06.10.2014 PD PERMIT SUBMITTAL 07.10.2014 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 08.11.2014 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 05.01.2015 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 11.16.2015 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 07.18.2016 COMMERCIAL SCHEME 06 1 0 0 0 S W i n c h e s t e r B l v d S a n J o s e , C A 9 5 1 2 8 P : ( 4 0 8 ) 9 9 8 - 0 9 8 3 F : ( 4 0 8 ) 4 0 4 - 0 1 4 4 08.18.2017 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET DRAWN BY JA JA & HC 11.01.2017 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 HC 02.09.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 HC 05.31.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 HC 10.15.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 HC 01.23.2019 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 6 HC 04.12.2019 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 6--PW COMMENTS HC 1 / 1 6 " # = NUMBER OF KEYNOTE BELOW1. CURB CUT PER PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS--SEE CIVIL PLANS2. WALKWAY--SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS3. EXISTING SIDEWALK4. LANDSCAPING--SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS5. EXISTING 6' FENCE6. EXISTING CMU WALL TO REMAIN7. HARDSCAPE AREAS -- SEE LANDSCAPE AND CIVIL PLANS8. VISION TRIANGLE AREA - 3'-0" MAX. HEIGHT IN THIS AREA9. PROPERTY LINE10. ADJACENT BUILDING 11. (E) TREE TO REMAIN OR PROPOSED NEW TR E E - - S E E LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR SPEC. AND C I V I L D R A W I N G S O N TM-2 FOR EXISTING TREES TO BE REMOVED12. (E) A/C UNIT TO REMAIN13. (N) A/C UNIT CONDENSER PAD(S) TO BE PL A C E D O N R O O F 14. (E) TRASH CONTAINER AREA TO REMAIN15. (E) MONUMENT SIGNAGE TO BE RELOCATE D - - N O T P A R T O F T H I S PERMIT16. BICYCLE PARKING AREA--SEE LANDSCAPE S H E E T S F O R M O R E INFO - P R O P O S E D N E W B U I L D I N G E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G T O B E R E M O D E L E D 1 2 3 2 3 1 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 6 7 7 7 7 7 8 9 1 2 1 4 PR O P O S E D B U I L D I N G 1 1 E . O . ( E ) P A V E M E N T - - S E E C I V I L OUTLINE OF 2ND FLOOR V I S I O N T R I A N G L E A R E A - - 3 ' - 0 " M A X . H E I G H T I N T H I S A R E A E X I S T I N G P O R C H T O B E R E M O V E D E X I S T I N G T R E E T O R E M A I N E X I S T I N G T R E E T O B E R E M O V E D # T R E E N U M B E R 1 3 1 4 1 6 1 8 2 0 21 22 23 24 25 26 3 4 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 - A D A H A N D I C A P P A R K I N G S P A C E E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G T O B E R E M O D E L E D R E T A I L / O F F I C E R E T A I L / O F F I C E 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 8 1 7 1 6 1 5 1 4 1 3 2 0 1 9 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 5 3 4 3 7 3 6 3 8 3 9 4 0 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 6 4 7 4 8 4 9 5 0 5 1 5 2 5 3 5 4 5 5 5 6 5 7 5 8 S H A N N O N R O A D 15 1 3 EX STREET SIGN TO BE RELOCATED"MAGNESON LOOP" 1 6 1 2 5 6 7 ( E ) T R E E # 1 5 T O B E R E L O C A T E D ( E ) T R E E # 1 7 T O B E R E L O C A T E D (E)TREE #19 TO BE RELOCATED (E)TREE #20 TO BE RELOCATED SIDEWALK BENCH(PEDESTRIAN AMENITY) 1 9 17 15 E X T G . B U I L D I N G D E M O P L A N A 2 . 0 PROJECT NO. REVISIONC S T U D I O S S Q U A R E D A R C H I T E C T U R E , I N C . 13-011 DESCRIPTIONDATE LOS GATOS COMMERCIAL 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC N NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND REMODEL OF EXISTING T R U E "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION" A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT 02.10.2017 PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 06.10.2014 PD PERMIT SUBMITTAL 07.10.2014 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 08.11.2014 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 05.01.2015 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 11.16.2015 PD PERMIT RESUBMITTAL 07.18.2016 COMMERCIAL SCHEME 06 1 0 0 0 S W i n c h e s t e r B l v d S a n J o s e , C A 9 5 1 2 8 P : ( 4 0 8 ) 9 9 8 - 0 9 8 3 F : ( 4 0 8 ) 4 0 4 - 0 1 4 4 08.18.2017 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET DRAWN BY JA JA & HC 11.01.2017 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 HC 02.09.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 HC 05.31.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 HC 10.15.2018 PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 HC 3 / 1 6 " E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G T O R E M A I N EXISTING DOORS TO REMAIN E X I S T I N G W I N D O W T O R E M A I N EXISTINGWIND O W T O R E M A I N E X I S T I N G W I N D O W T O B E C O N V E R T E D T O D O O R E X I S T I N G D O O R T O B E C O N V E R T E D T O W I N D O W N O T E : A L L E X I S T I N G W A L L S T O R E M A I N PORCH COLUMNSTO BE DEMOLISHED N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.2018 A3.011/16" SC H E M A T I C E L E V A T I O N - - L O S G A T O S B L V D - - P R O P O S E D P R O J E C T 2 1/16" SC H E M A T I C E L E V A T I O N - - L O S G A T O S B L V D - - O P P O S I T E S I D E O F S T R E E T OF PROPOSED PROJECT 3 1/16" SC H E M A T I C E L E V A T I O N -- SHANNON ROAD -- PROPOSED PROJECT 4 1/16" SC H E M A T I C E L E V A T I O N - - S H A N N O N R O A D - - O P P O S I T E S I D E O F S T R E E T OF PROPOSED PROJECT MA X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T - - 3 5 ' - 0 " MA X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T - - 3 5 ' - 0 " SCHEMATIC ELEVATIONS AND CROSS SECTIONS LO S G A T O S B L V D SH A N N O N R O A D LO S G A T O S B L V D SH A N N O N R O A D LO S G A T O S B L V D SH A N N O N R O A D LO S G A T O S B L V D LO S G A T O S B L V D SH A N N O N R O A D N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.2018 A3.111/16"SCHEMATIC ELEV ATION -- BACK 2 1/16"SCHEMATIC ELEVATION -- LEFT 3 1'=60'LEGEND FOR SCHEMA TIC ELEVATIONSSCHEMATIC ELEVATIONS AND CROSS SECTIONS MA X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T - - 3 5 ' - 0 " MA X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T - - 3 5 ' - 0 " SH A N N O N R O A D LO S G A T O S B L V D 1/ A 3 . 1 1/ A 3 . 1 2/A3.1 2/A3.1 1 /A 3 .0 2 /A 3 .0 1 /A 3 .0 2 /A 3 .0 3/A3.0 4/A3.0 3/A3.0 4/A3.0 N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.20181 1/ 8 " FR O N T E L E V A T I O N 2 1/ 8 " RI G H T E L E V A T I O N A3.2ELEVATIONS1 M A X . H E I G H T A S D E F I N E D B Y J U R I S D I C T I O N 2 A S P H A L T C O M P S H I N G L E S T O M A T C H R O O F I N G A T ( E ) B U I L D I N G - - S E E R O O F P L A N F O R M O R E I N F O 3 I N T E G R A L C O L O R S T E E L T R O W E L E D I G N I T I O N R E S I S T A N T C E M E N T P L A S T E R S Y S T E M ( S M O O T H F I N I S H ) - 7/8" CEMENT PLASTER O/ METAL LATH O/ 2 LAYERS GRADE 'D' OR BETTER BUILDING PAPER, 3 COAT SYSTEM WITH 26 ga. WEEP SCREED AT WALL BASE AT LEAST 4" ABOVE GRADE OR 2" ABOVE HARDSCAPE 4NOT USED 5 A D H E R E D L I G H T W E I G H T S T O N E V E N E E R ( < 1 5 L B S / S F ) 6 " V E R I S T O N E " B E L L Y B A N D T R I M 7 M E T A L T R E L L I S , P O W D E R C O A T E D 8 B R O N Z E A N O D I Z E D A L U M I N U M S T O R E F R O N T W I N D O W S A N D E N T R Y D O O R S , D O U B L E C L E A R GLAZING 9 E X T E R I O R L I G H T , I N S T A L L P E R M A N U F . I N S T R U C T I O N S - - 3 0 " H I G H ; F I N I S H : B R O N Z E ; F I X T U R E T O B E NIGHT SKY COMPLIANT. 10 P I N M O U N T E D L E D I L L U M I N A T E D A D D R E S S S I G N A G E , C L E A R L Y V I S I B L E F R O M A D J A C E N T S T R E E T 11 N O T U S E D 12 P O W D E R C O A T E D M E T A L G U A R D R A I L 13 W A L L - M O U N T E D C A B L E S Y S T E M F O R E S P A L I E R 14 G L A Z I N G S Y S T E M A T S T A I R C A S E 15 F A B R I C A W N I N G B E L O W S T O R E S I G N A G E NOTES:1. EXISTING BUILDING EXTERIOR FINISHES TO REMAIN--PAINT ONLYPAINT SCHEDULE P1 -- BENJAMIN MOORE, YELLOW HAZE COLOR P2 -- BENJAMIN MOORE, VINTAGE PEWTER ELEVATION GRID LINE KEY -- PROPOSED BUILDING A E X I S T I N G / P R O P O S E D A D J A C E N T G R A D E = + / - 3 7 0 . 2 5 ' B 1 S T F L O O R F I N I S H F L O O R = + / - 3 7 0 . 3 3 ' C 1 S T F L O O R C E I L I N G H E I G H T ( U . N . O . ) = + / - 3 8 3 . 8 3 ' D S E C O N D F L O O R F I N I S H F L O O R = + / - 3 8 5 . 0 8 ' E S E C O N D F L O O R C E I L I N G H E I G H T = + / - 3 9 5 . 0 8 ' F M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T P R O P O S E D = + / - 4 0 0 . 1 6 ' G M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T A L L O W E D = 3 5 ' - 0 " + / - 4 0 5 . 2 5 ' = NUMBER OF KEYNOTE BELOW #--KEYNOTES fe e t 18 1 2 4 fe e t 18 1 2 4 F E D C B G A F E D C B G A 1 3 ' - 6 " 1 ' - 3 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 5 ' - 1 " 3 0 ' - 0 " M A X . F R O M G R A D E 2 1 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 12 P R O P O S E D B U I L D I N G H E I G H T - - M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T F R O M E X I S T I N G / P R O P O S E D G R A D E I S 2 9 ' - 1 1 " +/ - 3 6 9 . 5 2 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 0 6 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 3 5 ' N G R A D E +/ - 3 6 9 . 9 4 ' N G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 3 2 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 3 2 ' N G R A D E +/ - 3 6 9 . 3 0 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 6 9 . 9 8 ' N G R A D E 2 ' 6 " 15 P1 P2 2 ' - 0 " N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.20181 1/ 8 " RE A R E L E V A T I O N 2 1/ 8 " LE F T E L E V A T I O N A3.3ELEVATIONS NOTES:1. EXISTING BUILDING EXTERIOR FINISHES TO REMAIN--PAINT ONLYELEVATION GRID LINE KEY -- PROPOSED BUILDING A E X I S T I N G / P R O P O S E D A D J A C E N T G R A D E = + / - 3 7 0 . 2 5 ' B 1 S T F L O O R F I N I S H F L O O R = + / - 3 7 0 . 3 3 ' C 1 S T F L O O R C E I L I N G H E I G H T ( U . N . O . ) = + / - 3 8 3 . 8 3 ' D S E C O N D F L O O R F I N I S H F L O O R = + / - 3 8 5 . 0 8 ' E S E C O N D F L O O R C E I L I N G H E I G H T = + / - 3 9 5 . 0 8 ' F M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T P R O P O S E D = + / - 4 0 0 . 1 6 ' G M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T A L L O W E D = 3 5 ' - 0 " + / - 4 0 5 . 2 5 ' PAINT SCHEDULE P1 -- BENJAMIN MOORE, YELLOW HAZE COLOR P2 -- BENJAMIN MOORE, VINTAGE PEWTER1 M A X . H E I G H T A S D E F I N E D B Y J U R I S D I C T I O N 2 A S P H A L T C O M P S H I N G L E S T O M A T C H R O O F I N G A T ( E ) B U I L D I N G - - S E E R O O F P L A N F O R M O R E I N F O 3 I N T E G R A L C O L O R S T E E L T R O W E L E D I G N I T I O N R E S I S T A N T C E M E N T P L A S T E R S Y S T E M ( S M O O T H F I N I S H ) - 7/8" CEMENT PLASTER O/ METAL LATH O/ 2 LAYERS GRADE 'D' OR BETTER BUILDING PAPER, 3 COAT SYSTEM WITH 26 ga. WEEP SCREED AT WALL BASE AT LEAST 4" ABOVE GRADE OR 2" ABOVE HARDSCAPE 4NOT USED 5 A D H E R E D L I G H T W E I G H T S T O N E V E N E E R ( < 1 5 L B S / S F ) 6 " V E R I S T O N E " B E L L Y B A N D T R I M 7 M E T A L T R E L L I S , P O W D E R C O A T E D 8 B R O N Z E A N O D I Z E D A L U M I N U M S T O R E F R O N T W I N D O W S A N D E N T R Y D O O R S , D O U B L E C L E A R GLAZING 9 E X T E R I O R L I G H T , I N S T A L L P E R M A N U F . I N S T R U C T I O N S - - 3 0 " H I G H ; F I N I S H : B R O N Z E ; F I X T U R E T O B E NIGHT SKY COMPLIANT. 10 P I N M O U N T E D L E D I L L U M I N A T E D A D D R E S S S I G N A G E , C L E A R L Y V I S I B L E F R O M A D J A C E N T S T R E E T 11 N O T U S E D 12 P O W D E R C O A T E D M E T A L G U A R D R A I L 13 W A L L - M O U N T E D C A B L E S Y S T E M F O R E S P A L I E R 14 G L A Z I N G S Y S T E M A T S T A I R C A S E 15 F A B R I C A W N I N G B E L O W S T O R E S I G N A G E --KEYNOTES fe e t 18 1 2 4 fe e t 18 1 2 4 = NUMBER OF KEYNOTE BELOW # F E D C B G A F E D C B G A 13 +/ - 3 6 9 . 7 8 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 2 5 ' N G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 0 4 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 0 4 ' N G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 3 4 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 1 0 ' N G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 2 7 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 6 8 ' N G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 6 2 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 6 9 . 8 7 ' N G R A D E P1 P2 N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.20181 1/ 8 " EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G T O B E R E MO D E L E D - - F R O N T E L E V A T I O N 2 1/ 8 " EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G T O B E R E M O D E L E D - - R I G H T E L E V A T I O N A3.4ELEVATIONS NOTES:1. EXISTING BUILDING EXTERIOR FINISHES TO REMAIN--PAINT ONLYELEVATION GRID LINE KEY -- PROPOSED BUILDING A E X I S T I N G A N D P R O P O S E D A D J A C E N T G R A D E F O R E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G = + / - 3 7 0 . 8 0 ' B E X I S T I N G 1 S T F L O O R F I N I S H F L O O R = + / - 3 7 1 . 1 8 ' C E X I S T I N G M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T = + / - 3 9 9 . 8 0 ' D M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T A L L O W E D = 3 5 ' - 0 " + / - 4 0 5 . 8 0 ' PAINT SCHEDULE P1 -- BENJAMIN MOORE, YELLOW HAZE COLOR P2 -- BENJAMIN MOORE, VINTAGE PEWTER1 M A X . H E I G H T A S D E F I N E D B Y J U R I S D I C T I O N 2 A S P H A L T C O M P S H I N G L E S T O M A T C H R O O F I N G A T ( E ) B U I L D I N G - - S E E R O O F P L A N F O R M O R E I N F O 3 I N T E G R A L C O L O R S T E E L T R O W E L E D I G N I T I O N R E S I S T A N T C E M E N T P L A S T E R S Y S T E M ( S M O O T H F I N I S H ) - 7/8" CEMENT PLASTER O/ METAL LATH O/ 2 LAYERS GRADE 'D' OR BETTER BUILDING PAPER, 3 COAT SYSTEM WITH 26 ga. WEEP SCREED AT WALL BASE AT LEAST 4" ABOVE GRADE OR 2" ABOVE HARDSCAPE 4NOT USED 5 A D H E R E D L I G H T W E I G H T S T O N E V E N E E R ( < 1 5 L B S / S F ) 6 " V E R I S T O N E " B E L L Y B A N D T R I M 7 M E T A L T R E L L I S , P O W D E R C O A T E D 8 B R O N Z E A N O D I Z E D A L U M I N U M S T O R E F R O N T W I N D O W S A N D E N T R Y D O O R S , D O U B L E C L E A R GLAZING 9 E X T E R I O R L I G H T , I N S T A L L P E R M A N U F . I N S T R U C T I O N S - - 3 0 " H I G H ; F I N I S H : B R O N Z E ; F I X T U R E T O B E NIGHT SKY COMPLIANT. 10 P I N M O U N T E D L E D I L L U M I N A T E D A D D R E S S S I G N A G E , C L E A R L Y V I S I B L E F R O M A D J A C E N T S T R E E T 11 N O T U S E D 12 P O W D E R C O A T E D M E T A L G U A R D R A I L 13 W A L L - M O U N T E D C A B L E S Y S T E M F O R E S P A L I E R 14 G L A Z I N G S Y S T E M A T S T A I R C A S E 15 F A B R I C A W N I N G B E L O W S T O R E S I G N A G E --KEYNOTES fe e t 18 1 2 4 fe e t 18 1 2 4 C B D = NUMBER OF KEYNOTE BELOW # AC B D A EX I S T I N G P O R C H AN D C O L U M N S TO B E R E M O V E D E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G - - M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T F R O M E X I S T I N G / P R O P O S E G R A D E O F 2 9 ' - 0 " E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G - - M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T F R O M E X I S T I N G / P R O P O S E G R A D E O F 2 9 ' - 0 " N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.20181 1/ 8 " EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G T O B E R E M O D E L E D - - R E A R E L E V A T I O N 2 1/ 8 " EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G T O B E R E MO D E L E D - - L E FT E L E V A T I O N A3.5ELEVATIONS 3 1/ 8 " (E ) T R A S H - F R O N T 5 1/ 8 " (E ) T R A S H - R I G H T 4 1/ 8 " (E ) T R A S H - R E A R 6 1/ 8 " (E ) T R A S H - L E F T NOTES:1. EXISTING BUILDING EXTERIOR FINISHES TO REMAIN--PAINT ONLYELEVATION GRID LINE KEY -- PROPOSED BUILDING A E X I S T I N G A N D P R O P O S E D A D J A C E N T G R A D E F O R E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G = + / - 3 7 0 . 8 0 ' B E X I S T I N G 1 S T F L O O R F I N I S H F L O O R = + / - 3 7 1 . 1 8 ' C E X I S T I N G M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T = + / - 3 9 9 . 8 0 ' D M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T A L L O W E D = 3 5 ' - 0 " + / - 4 0 5 . 8 0 ' PAINT SCHEDULE P1 -- BENJAMIN MOORE, YELLOW HAZE COLOR P2 -- BENJAMIN MOORE, VINTAGE PEWTER1 M A X . H E I G H T A S D E F I N E D B Y J U R I S D I C T I O N 2 A S P H A L T C O M P S H I N G L E S T O M A T C H R O O F I N G A T ( E ) B U I L D I N G - - S E E R O O F P L A N F O R M O R E I N F O 3 I N T E G R A L C O L O R S T E E L T R O W E L E D I G N I T I O N R E S I S T A N T C E M E N T P L A S T E R S Y S T E M ( S M O O T H F I N I S H ) - 7/8" CEMENT PLASTER O/ METAL LATH O/ 2 LAYERS GRADE 'D' OR BETTER BUILDING PAPER, 3 COAT SYSTEM WITH 26 ga. WEEP SCREED AT WALL BASE AT LEAST 4" ABOVE GRADE OR 2" ABOVE HARDSCAPE 4NOT USED 5 A D H E R E D L I G H T W E I G H T S T O N E V E N E E R ( < 1 5 L B S / S F ) 6 " V E R I S T O N E " B E L L Y B A N D T R I M 7 M E T A L T R E L L I S , P O W D E R C O A T E D 8 B R O N Z E A N O D I Z E D A L U M I N U M S T O R E F R O N T W I N D O W S A N D E N T R Y D O O R S , D O U B L E C L E A R GLAZING 9 E X T E R I O R L I G H T , I N S T A L L P E R M A N U F . I N S T R U C T I O N S - - 3 0 " H I G H ; F I N I S H : B R O N Z E ; F I X T U R E T O B E NIGHT SKY COMPLIANT. 10 P I N M O U N T E D L E D I L L U M I N A T E D A D D R E S S S I G N A G E , C L E A R L Y V I S I B L E F R O M A D J A C E N T S T R E E T 11 N O T U S E D 12 P O W D E R C O A T E D M E T A L G U A R D R A I L 13 W A L L - M O U N T E D C A B L E S Y S T E M F O R E S P A L I E R 14 G L A Z I N G S Y S T E M A T S T A I R C A S E 15 F A B R I C A W N I N G B E L O W S T O R E S I G N A G E --KEYNOTES fe e t 18 1 2 4 fe e t 18 1 2 4 = NUMBER OF KEYNOTE BELOW # C B D A C B D A EX I S T I N G P O R C H AN D C O L U M N S TO B E R E M O V E D ( E ) + / - 5 ' 6 " ( E ) + / - 5 ' 6 " E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G - - M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T F R O M E X I S T I N G / P R O P O S E G R A D E O F 2 9 ' - 0 " E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G - - M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T F R O M E X I S T I N G / P R O P O S E G R A D E O F 2 9 ' - 0 " EX I S T I N G T R A S H A R E A A N D FI N I S H E S T O R E M A I N . P A I N T TO M A T C H N E W B U I L D I N G PA I N T N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.20181 1/ 8 " EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G -- R I G H T E L E V A T I O N 2 1/ 8 " EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G - - L E F T E L E V A T I O N A3.6EXISTING ELEVATIONS NOTES:1. EXISTING BUILDING EXTERIOR FINISHES TO REMAIN--PAINT ONLYELEVATION GRID LINE KEY -- PROPOSED BUILDING A E X I S T I N G A N D P R O P O S E D A D J A C E N T G R A D E F O R E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G = + / - 3 7 0 . 8 0 ' B E X I S T I N G 1 S T F L O O R F I N I S H F L O O R = + / - 3 7 1 . 1 8 ' C E X I S T I N G M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T = + / - 3 9 9 . 8 0 ' D M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T A L L O W E D = 3 5 ' - 0 " + / - 4 0 5 . 8 0 ' -- ELEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED 2 1/ 8 " EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G - - F R O N T E L E V A T I O N PAINT SCHEDULE P1 -- BENJAMIN MOORE, YELLOW HAZE COLOR P2 -- BENJAMIN MOORE, VINTAGE PEWTER --KEYNOTES fe e t 18 1 2 4 fe e t 18 1 2 4 = NUMBER OF KEYNOTE BELOW # C B D AC B D A fe e t 18 1 2 4 fe e t 18 1 2 4 EX I S T I N G P O R C H AN D C O L U M N S TO B E R E M O V E D E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G - - M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T F R O M E X I S T I N G / P R O P O S E G R A D E O F 2 9 ' - 0 " E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G - - M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T F R O M E X I S T I N G / P R O P O S E G R A D E O F 2 9 ' - 0 " EX I S T I N G P O R C H AN D C O L U M N S TO B E R E M O V E D EX I S T I N G P O R C H AN D C O L U M N S TO B E R E M O V E D EX I S T I N G WI N D O W T O B E CO N V E R T E D T O DO O R EX I S T I N G D O O R TO B E CO N V E R T E D T O WI N D O W N PROJECT NO.13-011 REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET 02.10.2017 STUDIO S SQUARED ARCHITECTURE, INC.CLOS GATOS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACES 16212 LOS GATOS BLVD, LOS GATOS, CA 16212 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, LLC A COMMUNITY PROJECT BY STEM DEVELOPMENT "FOR PLANNING APPROVAL ONLY--NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION"TRUE1000 S. Winchester Blvd.San Jose, CA 95113 P : (408 ) 998 - 0983 F : (408 ) 404 - 0144 DRAWN BY JA JA & HC PLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 08.18.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 2 11.01.2017HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 3 02.09.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 4 05.31.2018HCPLANNING RESUBMITTAL SET 5 10.14.20181 1/ 8 " SE C T I O N 1 2 1/ 8 " SE C T I O N 2 A5.0SECTIONS1 R O O F T O P M E C H A N I C A L U N I T S - - T . O . U N I T T O B E B E L O W M A N S A R D P A R A P E T ELEVATION GRID LINE KEY -- PROPOSED BUILDING A E X I S T I N G / P R O P O S E D A D J A C E N T G R A D E = + / - 3 7 0 . 2 5 ' B 1 S T F L O O R F I N I S H F L O O R = + / - 3 7 0 . 3 3 ' C 1 S T F L O O R C E I L I N G H E I G H T ( U . N . O . ) = + / - 3 8 3 . 8 3 ' D S E C O N D F L O O R F I N I S H F L O O R = + / - 3 8 5 . 0 8 ' E S E C O N D F L O O R C E I L I N G H E I G H T = + / - 3 9 5 . 0 8 ' F M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T P R O P O S E D = + / - 4 0 0 . 1 6 ' G M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T A L L O W E D = 3 5 ' - 0 " + / - 4 0 5 . 2 5 ' = NUMBER OF KEYNOTE BELOW #--KEYNOTES fe e t 18 1 2 4 fe e t 18 1 2 4 F E D C B G A F E D C B G A T Y P I C A L O F F I C E C E I L I N G - - 8 ' - 6 " A . F . F . 1 1 3 ' - 6 " 1 ' - 3 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 5 ' - 1 " 3 0 ' - 0 " M A X . F R O M G R A D E P R O P O S E D B U I L D I N G H E I G H T - - M A X . B U I L D I N G H E I G H T F R O M E X I S T I N G / P R O P O S E D G R A D E I S 2 9 ' - 1 1 " T Y P I C A L R E T A I L C E I L I N G - - 1 0 ' - 0 " A . F . F . +/ - 3 7 0 . 3 1 ' E & N G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 3 2 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 3 3 ' N G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 0 1 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 1 1 ' N G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 3 6 ' E & N G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 2 6 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 3 3 ' N G R A D E +/ - 3 7 0 . 2 0 ' E G R A D E +/ - 3 6 9 . 6 0 ' N G R A D E T Y P I C A L O F F I C E C E I L I N G - - 8 ' - 6 " A . F . F . T Y P I C A L R E T A I L C E I L I N G - - 1 0 ' - 0 " A . F . F . TY P . 1 2 ' - 0 " 12-31-19 #1 CEDRUS DEODARA #2 CEDRUS DEODARA #3 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA #4 CEDRUS DEODARA #5 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA #6 CEDRUS DEODARA #7 CEDRUS DEODARA #8 CEDRUS DEODARA #9 CEDRUS DEODARA #10 CEDRUS DEODARA #11 CEDRUS DEODARA #12 QUERCUS ILEX #22 QUERCUS ILEX #23 LAG. X INDICA #24 QUERCUS ILEX #25 LAG. X INDICA #26 QUERCUS ILEX CEDRUS DEODARA EX. MONUMENT SIGN TO BE RELOCATED HERE PROPERTY LINE EX MONUMENT SIGN TO BE RELOCATED EXISTING CONCRETE CURB EX CONCRETE CURB TRENCHLESS OVER-GRADE FLEX TUBING IRRIGATION WITHIN 15' OF EXISTING TREES. NO TRENCHING BETWEEN NEW CURB AND PROPERTY FENCE L2.1 2 TREE PROTECTION FENCING TREE PROTECTION FENCING REQUIRED IF ROOT SYSTEMS EXTEND UNDER THE EXISTING BLOCK WALLL2.1 3-4 TREE PLANTING AND STAKING EX CONCRETE BLOCK WALL TO REMAIN L2.1 5 CAPITOL BIKE RACK FORMS + SURFACES L2.1 6 CHADWICK BENCH OXFORD GARDEN SITE TREES NAME COUNT WUCOLS SIZE NOTES ARBUTUS UNEDO - MULTI 1 L 15G MULTI LAGERSTROEMIA X 'MUSKOGEE'2 L 24" PISTACIA CHINENSIS 'KEITH DAVEY'5 L 24"STANDARD PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA 'COLUMBIA' 15G 1 M 15G STANDARD PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA 'COLUMBIA'18 M 24"STANDARD QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA 1 VL 24"STANDARD QUERCUS ILEX 1 L 24"STANDARD HOLLY OAK EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED EXISTING LAGERSTROEMIA (#15, 19, 17, & 20) TO BE RELOCATED TREE PROTECTION FENCING. SEE ARBORIST REPORT FOR REQUIRED TREE PROTECTION MEASURES PROJECT N O R T H LA N D S C A P E PL A N REVISED: 4/12/2019 DESIGN BY: RJD DRAWN BY: KH SCALE: 1"=10'-0" L1.1 DE S I G N F O C U S LA N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E & C O N S T R U C T I O N DESIGN FOCUS PO BOX 485 BEN LOMOND, CA 95005(831) 336-3100 CO M M E R C I A L B U I L D I N G 16 2 1 2 L O S G A T O S B L V D . LO S G A T O S , C A MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.2 #13 QUERCUS ILEX #14 QUERCUS ILEX #15 LAG. X INDICA #16 QUERCUS ILEX #17 LAG. X INDICA #18 QUERCUS ILEX #19 LAG. X INDICA #20 LAG. X INDICA #21 LAG. X INDICA #22 QUERCUS ILEX #23 LAG. X INDICA BIOTREATMENT AREA, TYP. REPLACE EXISTING TREE WITH 24" HOLLY OAK EX TREE # 15 TO BE RELOCATED HERE PROPERTY LINE EXISTING TREE #17 TO BE RELOCATED HERE. PRUNE SO THAT TRUNKS ARE EXPOSED TO A HEIGHT OF 7 1 2 FEET ABOVE THE CURB PER TOWN CODE SECTION 26.10.065. EX CONCRETE CURB L2.1 1 STORMWATER PLANTER TREE PLANTING L2.1 3-4 TREE PLANTING AND STAKING AVOID ALL CUTS BELOW THE LOWEST ELEVATION OF OLDER BASEROCK BASE SECTION WITHIN 15' OF TREE #16 AND #18 EX TREE #20 TO BE RELOCATED HERE L2.1 5 CAPITOL BIKE RACK FORMS + SURFACES L2.1 6 CHADWICK BENCH OXFORD GARDEN L2.2 1 CONCRETE PAVERS PROMENADE EX TREE # 19 TO BE RELOCATED HERE GRASS MOUNDS 10" TALL MAX.,TYP L2.2 2 SEAT WALL MORTARED STONE SITE TREES NAME COUNT WUCOLS SIZE NOTES ARBUTUS UNEDO - MULTI 1 L 15G MULTI LAGERSTROEMIA X 'MUSKOGEE'2 L 24" PISTACIA CHINENSIS 'KEITH DAVEY'5 L 24"STANDARD PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA 'COLUMBIA' 15G 1 M 15G STANDARD PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA 'COLUMBIA'18 M 24"STANDARD QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA 1 VL 24"STANDARD QUERCUS ILEX 1 L 24"STANDARD HOLLY OAK EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED EXISTING LAGERSTROEMIA (#15, 19, 17, & 20) TO BE RELOCATED TREE PROTECTION FENCING. SEE ARBORIST REPORT FOR REQUIRED TREE PROTECTION MEASURES PROJECT N O R T H LA N D S C A P E PL A N REVISED: 4/12/2018 DESIGN BY: RJD DRAWN BY: KH SCALE: 1"=10'-0" L1.2 DE S I G N F O C U S LA N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E & C O N S T R U C T I O N DESIGN FOCUS PO BOX 485 BEN LOMOND, CA 95005(831) 336-3100 CO M M E R C I A L B U I L D I N G 16 2 1 2 L O S G A T O S B L V D . LO S G A T O S , C A MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.1 DE S I G N F O C U S LA N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E & C O N S T R U C T I O N DESIGN FOCUS PO BOX 485BEN LOMOND, CA 95005 (831) 336-3100 CO M M E R C I A L B U I L D I N G 16 2 1 2 L O S G A T O S B L V D . LO S G A T O S , C A LA N D S C A P E DE T A I L S REVISED: 10/12/2018 DESIGN BY: RJD DRAWN BY: KH SCALE: AS NOTED L2.1 NTS NTSNTS NTS NTS NOTE: ·TREE PROTECTION FENCING AS SPECIFIED BY ARBORIST REPORT ·PRIOR TO DEMOLITION, INSTALL A TRUNK BUFFER WRAP TYPE III PROTECTION AROUND THE LOWERMOST 8-10' OF MAINSTEMS OF TREES #8, 9, 12, 16, AND 18 ·PROTECTION SHALL BE AT THE FARTHEST POSSIBLE OFFSET DISTANCES FROM TREES #1, 2, 8, 9, 12, 16, AND 18 ·NO STORAGE, STAGING, WORK, OR OTHER ACTIVITIES WILL BE ALLOWED INSIDE THE RPZ EXCEPT WITH PA MONITORING ·SIGNAGE AS SPECIFIED IN ARBORIST REPORT NTS MODEL:SKCAP RECESSED MORTAR ± 18" MORTAR STONE ON FOOTING 8" CMU BLOCK #4 REBAR, VERTICAL 16" O.C., MIN FLAT STONE, +/- 18" DEPTH ± 18" WILLOW CREEK FULL VENEER, 6" MIN. DEPTH 1' 2'-6" 11 2" FINISHED GRADE DE S I G N F O C U S LA N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E & C O N S T R U C T I O N DESIGN FOCUS PO BOX 485BEN LOMOND, CA 95005 (831) 336-3100 CO M M E R C I A L B U I L D I N G 16 2 1 2 L O S G A T O S B L V D . LO S G A T O S , C A LA N D S C A P E DE T A I L S REVISED: 10/16/2018 DESIGN BY: RJD DRAWN BY: KH SCALE: AS NOTEDL2.2 NTSNTS #1 CEDRUS DEODARA #2 CEDRUS DEODARA #3 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA #4 CEDRUS DEODARA #5 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA #6 CEDRUS DEODARA #7 CEDRUS DEODARA #8 CEDRUS DEODARA #9 CEDRUS DEODARA #10 CEDRUS DEODARA #11 CEDRUS DEODARA #12 QUERCUS ILEX #23 LAG. X INDICA #24 QUERCUS ILEX #25 LAG. X INDICA #26 QUERCUS ILEX CEDRUS DEODARA           X X X X X X X X X X X PROPERTY LINE EX MONUMENT SIGN TO BE RELOCATED         EX. MONUMENT SIGN TO BE RELOCATED HERE TRENCHLESS OVER-GRADE FLEX TUBING IRRIGATION WITHIN 15' OF EXISTING TREES. NO TRENCHING BETWEEN NEW CURB AND PROPERTY FENCE TREE PROTECTION FENCING REQUIRED IF ROOT SYSTEMS EXTEND UNDER THE EXISTING BLOCK WALL EX CONCRETE BLOCK WALL TO REMAIN PLANTING NAME COUNT SIZE WUCOLS NOTES AGAPANTHUS 'BABY PETE'1169 1G L 18"O.C. LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE ANIGOZANTHOS FLAVIDUS - DARK RED 6 5G L ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA-URSI 'POINT REYES'24 1G VL 4' O.C. BOUGAINVILLEA 'BARBARA KARST-TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES 18 15G/5G L/M 15G BOUGAINVILLEA AND 5GJASMINE STAKED BUDDLEJA DAVIDII 'PETITE PLUM'1 5G L CALANDRINIA 20 1G L SUCCULENT CAREX DIVULSA 208 1G M C. TUMULICOLA, HORT. CHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM 'EL CAMPO'4 5G M LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE CLEMATIS ARMANDII 'HENDERSONII RUBRA'1 5G M LOW WATER ONCE ESTABLISHED CLEMATIS X CARTMANII 'AVALANCHE'12 5G M CLIVIA MINIATA 8 2G M FRAGARIA CHAVAL 131 1G L GERANIUM X CANTABRIGIENSE 'BIOKOVO'24 1G L 15"O.C. LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE GERANIUM X CANTABRIGIENSE 'CAMBRIDGE'36 1G L 18"O.C. LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE GERANIUMS - LAVENDAR IVY 6 1G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE HARDENBERGIA VIOLACEA 'HAPPY WANDERER'1 5G M HELLEBORUS 'SPARKLING DIAMOND'12 1G M 18" O.C. HELLEBORUS X HYBRIDUS 'BRIGHT DANCER 9 1G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA 7 5G VL HYDRANGEA ARBORESCENS 'ANNABELLE'2 5G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE HYDRANGEA MACROPHYLLA 'BAILMER'9 5G M KERRIA JAPONICA 'PLENIFLORA'3 5G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE KNIPHOFIA 'CHRISTMAS CHEER'7 5G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE KNIPHOFIA 'THOMPSONII'19 5G M LIMONIUM PEREZII 12 1G L LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA BREEZE 37 1G L MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM 3 5G M MUHLENBERGIA CAPILLARIS 7 1G L MUHLENBERGIA 'PINK FLAMINGO'3 1G L MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS 3 5G L OSMANTHUS HETEROPHYLLUS 27 15G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE PHORMIUM 'CHOCOLATE BABY'14 5G L  X SITE TREES NAME COUNT WUCOLS SIZE NOTES ARBUTUS UNEDO - MULTI 1 L 15G MULTI LAGERSTROEMIA X 'MUSKOGEE'2 L 24" PISTACIA CHINENSIS 'KEITH DAVEY'5 L 24"STANDARD PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA 'COLUMBIA' 15G 1 M 15G STANDARD PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA 'COLUMBIA'18 M 24"STANDARD QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA 1 VL 24"STANDARD QUERCUS ILEX 1 L 24"STANDARD HOLLY OAK EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED EXISTING LAGERSTROEMIA (#15, 19, 17, & 20) TO BE RELOCATED TREE PROTECTION FENCING. SEE ARBORIST REPORT FOR REQUIRED TREE PROTECTION MEASURES PROJECT N O R T H BIORETENTION PLANTING NAME COUNT SIZE WUCOLS NOTES CHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM 'EL CAMPO' 17 5G M LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE HEMEROCALLIS 'AZTEC CHALICE'16 1G M 2"O.C. HEMEROCALLIS 'CRANBERRY BABY'30 1G M 18" O.C. LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA BREEZE 3 1G L MIMULUS GUTTATUS 24 1G M PENSTEMON X GLOXINIOIDES 'MIDNIGHT'22 1G M LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE MEADOW GRASS - MOW FREE, GRASS TO BE PLANTED BETWEEN ALL BIORETENTION PLANS PHORMIUM 'PLATTS BLACK'2 5G L DO NOT WATER LEAVES RHAMNUS CALIFORNICA 'LEATHERLEAF'3 5G L RHAMNUS CALIFORNICA 'SEAVIEW'4 5G L NOTES RIBES SANGUINEUM 'CLAREMONT'2 5G L SALVIA CHIAPENSIS 1 5G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE SALVIA SPATHACEA 24 1G L SARCOCOCCA RUSCIFOLIA 6 5G L WOODWARDIA FIMBRIATA 3 5G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE PLANTING NAME COUNT SIZE WUCOLS NOTES 18"O.C. LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE PL A N T I N G P L A N REVISED: 4/12/2019 DESIGN BY: RJD DRAWN BY: KH SCALE: 1"=10'-0" L3.1 DE S I G N F O C U S LA N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E & C O N S T R U C T I O N DESIGN FOCUS PO BOX 485 BEN LOMOND, CA 95005(831) 336-3100 CO M M E R C I A L B U I L D I N G 16 2 1 2 L O S G A T O S B L V D . LO S G A T O S , C A MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L3.2 #13 QUERCUS ILEX #14 QUERCUS ILEX #15 LAG. X INDICA #16 QUERCUS ILEX #17 LAG. X INDICA #18 QUERCUS ILEX #19 LAG. X INDICA #20 LAG. X INDICA #21 LAG. X INDICA #22 QUERCUS ILEX                     REPLACE EXISTING TREE WITH 24" HOLLY OAK   X X X X X X X X X X X PROPERTY LINE   X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X EX TREE # 19 TO BE RELOCATED HERE EXISTING TREE #15 TO BE RELOCATED HERE. PRUNE SO THAT TRUNKS ARE EXPOSED TO A HEIGHT OF 7 1 2 FEET ABOVE THE CURB PER TOWN CODE SECTION 26.10.065. EX TREE #20 TO BE RELOCATED HERE PROJECT N O R T H SITE TREES NAME COUNT WUCOLS SIZE NOTES ARBUTUS UNEDO - MULTI 1 L 15G MULTI LAGERSTROEMIA X 'MUSKOGEE'2 L 24" PISTACIA CHINENSIS 'KEITH DAVEY'5 L 24"STANDARD PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA 'COLUMBIA' 15G 1 M 15G STANDARD PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA 'COLUMBIA'18 M 24"STANDARD QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA 1 VL 24"STANDARD QUERCUS ILEX 1 L 24"STANDARD HOLLY OAK EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED EXISTING LAGERSTROEMIA (#15, 19, 17, & 20) TO BE RELOCATED TREE PROTECTION FENCING. SEE ARBORIST REPORT FOR REQUIRED TREE PROTECTION MEASURES PLANTING NAME COUNT SIZE WUCOLS NOTES AGAPANTHUS 'BABY PETE'1169 1G L 18"O.C. LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE ANIGOZANTHOS FLAVIDUS - DARK RED 6 5G L ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA-URSI 'POINT REYES'24 1G VL 4' O.C. BOUGAINVILLEA 'BARBARA KARST-TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES 18 15G/5G L/M 15G BOUGAINVILLEA AND 5GJASMINE STAKED BUDDLEJA DAVIDII 'PETITE PLUM'1 5G L CALANDRINIA 20 1G L SUCCULENT CAREX DIVULSA 208 1G M C. TUMULICOLA, HORT. CHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM 'EL CAMPO'4 5G M LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE CLEMATIS ARMANDII 'HENDERSONII RUBRA'1 5G M LOW WATER ONCE ESTABLISHED CLEMATIS X CARTMANII 'AVALANCHE'12 5G M CLIVIA MINIATA 8 2G M FRAGARIA CHAVAL 131 1G L GERANIUM X CANTABRIGIENSE 'BIOKOVO'24 1G L 15"O.C. LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE GERANIUM X CANTABRIGIENSE 'CAMBRIDGE'36 1G L 18"O.C. LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE GERANIUMS - LAVENDAR IVY 6 1G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE HARDENBERGIA VIOLACEA 'HAPPY WANDERER'1 5G M HELLEBORUS 'SPARKLING DIAMOND'12 1G M 18" O.C. HELLEBORUS X HYBRIDUS 'BRIGHT DANCER 9 1G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA 7 5G VL HYDRANGEA ARBORESCENS 'ANNABELLE'2 5G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE HYDRANGEA MACROPHYLLA 'BAILMER'9 5G M KERRIA JAPONICA 'PLENIFLORA'3 5G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE KNIPHOFIA 'CHRISTMAS CHEER'7 5G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE KNIPHOFIA 'THOMPSONII'19 5G M LIMONIUM PEREZII 12 1G L LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA BREEZE 37 1G L MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM 3 5G M MUHLENBERGIA CAPILLARIS 7 1G L MUHLENBERGIA 'PINK FLAMINGO'3 1G L MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS 3 5G L OSMANTHUS HETEROPHYLLUS 27 15G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE PHORMIUM 'CHOCOLATE BABY'14 5G L  X BIORETENTION PLANTING NAME COUNT SIZE WUCOLS NOTES CHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM 'EL CAMPO' 17 5G M LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE HEMEROCALLIS 'AZTEC CHALICE'16 1G M 2"O.C. HEMEROCALLIS 'CRANBERRY BABY'30 1G M 18" O.C. LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA BREEZE 3 1G L MIMULUS GUTTATUS 24 1G M PENSTEMON X GLOXINIOIDES 'MIDNIGHT'22 1G M LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE MEADOW GRASS - MOW FREE, GRASS TO BE PLANTED BETWEEN ALL BIORETENTION PLANS PHORMIUM 'PLATTS BLACK'2 5G L DO NOT WATER LEAVES RHAMNUS CALIFORNICA 'LEATHERLEAF'3 5G L RHAMNUS CALIFORNICA 'SEAVIEW'4 5G L NOTES RIBES SANGUINEUM 'CLAREMONT'2 5G L SALVIA CHIAPENSIS 1 5G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE SALVIA SPATHACEA 24 1G L SARCOCOCCA RUSCIFOLIA 6 5G L WOODWARDIA FIMBRIATA 3 5G L LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE PLANTING NAME COUNT SIZE WUCOLS NOTES 18"O.C. LOW WATER ACCORDING TO L.A. EXPERIENCE PL A N T I N G P L A N REVISED: 4/12/2019 DESIGN BY: RJD DRAWN BY: KH SCALE: 1"=10'-0" L3.2 DE S I G N F O C U S LA N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R E & C O N S T R U C T I O N DESIGN FOCUS PO BOX 485 BEN LOMOND, CA 95005(831) 336-3100 CO M M E R C I A L B U I L D I N G 16 2 1 2 L O S G A T O S B L V D . LO S G A T O S , C A MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L3.1 Parks and Public Works Department • Engineering Division • 41 Miles Ave, Los Gatos, CA 95030 408.399.5771 • www.losgatosca.gov • www.facebook.com/losgatosca TOWN OF LOS GATOS PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET Engineering Division August 6, 2019 ITEM: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard; APN: 523-06-010 and 523-06-011 Planned Development Application PD-17-002 Requesting approval of a Planned Development to re-zone two properties from CH to CH:PD to allow for construction of a new commercial building. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: 16212 Los Gatos Blvd., LLC Q: Where is the development project? A: The proposed development project is located at the northeastern corner of the intersection of Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon Road. Q: What is the proposed use? A: The proposed development would construct a new two-story mixed-use commercial building with a total of 11,317 square feet of commercial space in addition to the existing commercial building which will remain. Q: How many additional trips will be generated by the project? A: Utilizing data from the Institute of Transportation Engineering’s (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, the project would generate 335 new average daily trips as compared to the current use as vacant land. This number includes 14 new trips during the AM peak hour and 34 new trips during the PM peak hour. Q: Did the proposed project complete a traffic study? A: Yes. In accordance with Town’s Traffic Impact Policy, a traffic impact analysis (TIA) is required for any private development projects that are expected to add 20 or more trips in the AM or PM peak hours. Q: How are AM and PM peak hours selected for any given intersection? A: The Town’s traffic consultants conduct traffic counts between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM and between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM during weekdays when schools are in session for studied intersections. The one-hour duration with the highest traffic concentration (based on traffic counts) during both these morning and evening periods are selected as the peak hours. Q: How is the number of vehicle trips calculated? A: The number of vehicle trips generated by a development project is determined by using the applicable trip generation rate from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual or alternative sources in accordance with the Town’s Traffic Impact ATTACHMENT 8 Parks and Public Works Department • Engineering Division • 41 Miles Ave, Los Gatos, CA 95030 408.399.5771 • www.losgatosca.gov • www.facebook.com/losgatosca TOWN OF LOS GATOS PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS Policy. Use of the ITE trip generation rates for estimating the number of vehicle trips is a standard practice, and is also consistent with the VTA’s traffic impact analysis guidelines. Q: What can be done to reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by the project? A: Even though the project is not expected to cause significant traffic impacts, a TDM (Transportation Demand Management) plan would be required for the development. The TDM plan would include a list of measures for reducing single-occupant vehicle trips and encourage alternative transportation modes such as riding bicycles, carpooling, and riding transit. Q: Is any increase in traffic from a new development considered a significant impact to the nearby traffic intersections and surrounding area? A: No. The Town’s General Plan (GP) and Traffic Impact Policy define a significant traffic impact based on changes to the intersection’s Level of Service (LOS). Q: What is LOS and how does it determine the impacts of project traffic on the Town? A: Traffic engineering standards use LOS (Level of Service) to determine project traffic impacts. LOS represents traffic intersection congestion by a letter scale that ranges from LOS A to LOS F, with LOS A representing the least or no congestion. The Town’s Traffic Impact Policy and General Plan (GP) do not allow for developments to drop the LOS at an intersection by more than one level or below LOS D without requiring the development to mitigate or provide a “fix” for the increased traffic delay. A project TIA analyzes LOS at impacted intersections as a function of the average vehicle delay and determines the impact significance and any required mitigation. The impacts are only considered significant if the LOS drops more than one level or below a LOS D. Q: What are the TIA’s findings of the LOS impact for this project? A: For the currently proposed project, the TIA concluded that the intersections would not drop more than one level or below a LOS D. Therefore, the project would not create a significant impact on traffic. The intersections that were included in the analysis are: Blossom Hill Road and Roberts Road; Los Gatos Boulevard and Blossom Hill Road; Los Gatos Boulevard, Roberts Road and Shannon Road; and Los Gatos Boulevard and Nino Avenue. Q: Does this project trigger traffic impact mitigation fees to be paid to the Town? A: Yes. The Developer is required per Condition of Approval 92 to pay the project's proportional share of transportation improvements needed to serve cumulative development within the Town of Los Gatos as calculated using a comparison between the existing and proposed uses. The current amount based on the project plans is $311,550.00. Q: The plans show extensive changes to the offset intersection of Los Gatos Boulevard (LGB), Shannon Road and Roberts Road – why is that? Parks and Public Works Department • Engineering Division • 41 Miles Ave, Los Gatos, CA 95030 408.399.5771 • www.losgatosca.gov • www.facebook.com/losgatosca TOWN OF LOS GATOS PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS A: The development plans include changes to the intersection recommended by the Town’s 2016 Safe Routes to School (SR2S) Report. These recommendations were included in the Town’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, which was adopted by the Town Council in March of 2017. The goal of the Master Plan improvements is to increase safety for the public and for schoolchildren who are walking and biking to Van Meter and Blossom Hill Elementary, Fisher Middle and Los Gatos High Schools. Town staff has also required added safety improvements where needed. Q: Will the lane removed along the Los Gatos Boulevard (LGB) project frontage, with turn lanes remaining for Magneson Loop and Blossom Hill Road, result in the same functionality of the roadway as currently exists? A: Yes. Los Gatos Boulevard (LGB) has two northbound through lanes coming up to the intersection with Shannon and these two through lanes continue past Blossom Hill Road. The existing lane on LGB next to the project frontage is called a “receiving lane” that effectively acts as an extension of the right turning lanes for both Magneson Loop and Blossom Hill Road. It does not add capacity for through traffic on Los Gatos Boulevard. Q: Will removing the northeast “pork chop” island at Los Gatos Boulevard (LGB) and Shannon Road affect the right turn traffic flow from Shannon Road to Los Gatos Boulevard? A: No. Currently, the right turn lane from Shannon has a “No Right on Red” sign posted so it provides no traffic flow benefits beyond what is proposed with the project. The “No Right Turn on Red” sign will remain after project completion. The project improvements include a new dedicated right turn lane from Shannon to LGB. Q: Why is the crosswalk across Los Gatos Boulevard being moved from Shannon Road north to Roberts Road? A: This change will increase pedestrian safety by moving the crosswalk from a busy crossflow traffic intersection to a higher visibility, lower crossflow intersection. Additionally, the change will reduce the crosswalk’s length, which increases pedestrian safety. The new 10’ sidewalk will provide a safe place for pedestrians to cross the street, with the extra space helping for a.m. school time periods. Q: What additional public improvements will be completed with the project? A: Additional public improvements include the following: • Widening of the sidewalk along northbound Los Gatos Boulevard to a width of ten (10) feet between Shannon Road and Magneson Loop and separating the sidewalk from traffic with a planter strip for safety. • Widening of the sidewalk along the westbound Shannon Road frontage and separating the sidewalk from traffic with a planter strip for safety. • Installing a protected green bike lane along the project’s Los Gatos Boulevard frontage. Parks and Public Works Department • Engineering Division • 41 Miles Ave, Los Gatos, CA 95030 408.399.5771 • www.losgatosca.gov • www.facebook.com/losgatosca TOWN OF LOS GATOS PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS • Installing a bike box on westbound Shannon Road to allow for bicyclists to queue ahead of vehicular traffic for left turns onto southbound Los Gatos Boulevard. • Removing and replacing the existing pavement section along the project’s Shannon Road frontage with a traffic-appropriate engineered structural pavement section from centerline to the lip of gutter on the north side of the street, or alternative pavement rehabilitation measures as approved by the Town Engineer. • Removing and replacing the existing pavement section along the project’s Los Gatos Boulevard frontage with a traffic-appropriate engineered structural pavement section from centerline to the lip of gutter on the east side of the street. The following schematic diagram of the improvements was included in the Town’s 2016 SR2S Report: Figure 1: Concept Plan Line drawing, Safe Routes to School Report; accepted by Council 10/18/2016 Q: Does the Town Engineering staff or the Town's engineering consultants have concerns with the proposed project creating safety issues regarding traffic? A: No. The project analysis for traffic was conducted by the developer’s traffic consultant and subsequently reviewed by Town’s engineering staff and the Town’s traffic consultant. As currently designed, the proposed project meets the Town Code requirements as well as accepted engineering standards. ATTACHMENT 9 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Supplemental Opposition to Planned Development Application for 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard Jeffrey A. Barnett 8.1.19 This Supplemental Opposition to the STEM application for approval of a commercial building at 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard augments the comments made in my opposition dated 6.9.19. I make these comments as a citizen of the Town, and not as a member of any Town committee or commission. •The Five Foot Setback is not justified. The Justification Letter dated May 31, 2019 does not support the reduction of the fifteen- foot setback to five feet. The letter explains that the Safe Routes to School standards required that the developer move the curb ten feet into the northbound lane of Los Gatos Boulevard. However, the sidewalk extension does not logically support a reduction of the required setback which amounts to a two-thirds degradation. See Letter, Page 1, Item a. The actual purpose of the requested five foot setback is to address proposed parking. See Letter, Page 1, Item b. It is the developer’s responsibility to design and build in accordance with the Town’s requirements, and the property/building size and related parking requirements are not an excuse for a dramatic loss of the setback. The justification letter further states that the developer has maintained the required setback from the curb to the building and that it will achieve a greater setback than the minimum. However, the setback must be measured from the property line and not the curb. •The Commercial Design Guidelines The Justification letter acknowledges that under Section 5.A.2.1 of the Commercial Design Guidelines, setbacks should be substantially landscaped, including minimum landscape of fifteen feet from fronting sidewalks and large trees. The proposal does not address this requirement. The letter also does not explain the deviation from the general requirement of the Commercial Design Guidelines that buildings on corner locations should generally be limited to one story in height and that views to the surrounding hill should be maintained, especially at signalized intersections. See Sections 5A.1 and 5.A.2.6(a) on Page 44 of the Guidelines. The minimal setback, two story height, and lack of landscaping in the proper location would create a building mass that is inconsistent with the look and feel of the Boulevard. See Opposition dated 6.9.19, Pages 1-2. •The Standards for Approval of a Planned Development Are Not Met. Section 29.80.075 of the Town Code states that the purpose and intent of a planned development overlay zone is to preserve, enhance, and/or promote: (1) The Town’s natural and historic resources; (2) the production of affordable housing; (3) the maximization for open space; and/or (4) a project that provides a public benefit to the citizens of the Town. None of these justifications apply to the submitted project. See Opposition date 6.9.19, Page 1. •The Los Gatos Boulevard Plan Would Be Violated. As noted, the proposed project is not consistent with the Los Gatos Boulevard Plan because it would conflict with the character of the neighborhood. See Opposition dated 6.9.19, Page 1. •The General Plan Issue: The proposal should be denied because it conflicts with the General Plan. Its architecture is not consistent with the immediate neighborhood. See Opposition dated 6.9.19, Page 2. •The CEQA Issue: A negative declaration should not be granted because of the adverse aesthetic impacts of the proposed building. See Opposition dated 6.9.19, Page 2. In conclusion, it is the duty of the developer to propose construction that conforms to the General Plan, the Commercial Guidelines, the Boulevard Plan, the requirements for a PD overlay and CEQA. The Town should not set an adverse precedent by allowing a two-story building on a corner and particularly by concurrently permitting a PD overlay for the sole purpose of avoiding a reasonable setback requirement. The proposal does not provide a factual basis for the necessary findings by the Council. Thank you for considering these points. Jeffrey A. Barnett .