08 Staff Report.14225 Walker St
PREPARED BY: JOCELYN SHOOPMAN
Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Town Attorney, and Community Development
Director
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 10/20/2020
ITEM NO: 8
DATE: October 15, 2020
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Consider an Appeal of a Planning Commission Decision Denying a Request for
a Modification to an Existing Architecture and Site Application (S-13-090) to
Remove Underground Parking for Construction of a Commercial Building
(Market Hall) in the North 40 Specific Plan Area. Located at 14225 Walker
Street. APN 424-07-114. Architecture and Site Application S-20-012.
Property Owners/Applicant/Appellant: Summerhill N40, LLC. Project Planner:
Jocelyn Shoopman.
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider an appeal of a Planning Commission decision denying a request for a modification to
an existing Architecture and Site application (S-13-090) to remove underground parking for
construction of a commercial building (Market Hall) in the North 40 Specific Plan Area
(S-20-012) located at 14225 Walker Street.
BACKGROUND:
The subject parcel is approximately 1.77 acres, located within the North 40 Specific Plan area
west of Los Gatos Boulevard, and is currently vacant (Attachment 1, Exhibit 1). The entire
North 40 Specific Plan area is approximately 40 acres bounded by Highway 17, Highway 85, Los
Gatos Boulevard, and Lark Avenue.
On June 17, 2015, the Town Council adopted the North 40 Specific Plan, providing more
detailed land use and development requirements and guidance for the subject area than occurs
in the General Plan. The approval of the North 40 Specific Plan also amended the zoning of the
entire area to North 40 Specific Plan.
PAGE 2 OF 7
SUBJECT: 14225 Walker Street/S-20-012
DATE: October 15, 2020
BACKGROUND (continued):
On August 1, 2017, the Town Council adopted a resolution to approve the Phase I Architecture
and Site application (S-13-090) and Vesting Tentative Map application (M-13-014) for the
construction of a new multi-use, multi-story mixed use development, which includes residential
units, a market hall, and on-site and off-site improvements on the southern 20.7 acres of the
North 40 Specific Plan area.
On September 4, 2018, the Town Council adopted a resolution to approve a minor amendment
to the North 40 Specific Plan to provide the opportunity for Development Agreements as an
additional mechanism to achieve the desired community for the North 40 area.
The application for a modification to the existing Architecture and Site application to remove
underground parking for construction of the market hall (S-20-012) was considered by the
Planning Commission on August 26, 2020, September 9, 2020, September 23, 2020, and
September 28, 2020. On September 28, 2020, the Planning Commission denied Architecture
and Site application S-20-012. The record associated with the Planning Commission can be
found in Attachments 1 through 16 and Attachment 21. On October 1, 2020, the decision of
the Planning Commission was appealed to the Town Council by the applicant, Michael Keaney
with Summerhill Homes (Attachment 17).
Pursuant to Town Code Section 29.20.280, the appeal must be heard within 56 days of the
Planning Commission hearing and in this case by November 23, 2020. The Council must at least
open the public hearing for the item, and it may continue the matter to a date certain if the
Council does not complete its work on the item.
Pursuant to Town Code Section 29.10.020, any person or persons or entity or entities who
can demonstrate that their property will be injured by the decision may appeal to the Town
Council any decision of the Planning Commission regarding non-residential and mixed-use
projects. Pursuant to Town Code Section 29.20.295, in the appeal, and based on the record,
the appellant bears the burden to prove that there was an error or abuse of discretion by the
Planning Commission or wherein its decision is not based on substantial evidence in the record
as required by Section 29.20.275. If neither is proved, the appeal should be denied. If the
appellant meets the burden, the Town Council shall grant the appeal and may modify, in whole
or in part, the determination from which the appeal was taken or, at its discretion, return the
matter to Planning Commission. If the basis for granting the appeal is, in whole or in part,
information not presented to or considered by the Planning Commission, the matter shall be
returned to the Planning Commission for review.
PAGE 3 OF 7
SUBJECT: 14225 Walker Street/S-20-012
DATE: October 15, 2020
DISCUSSION:
A. Project Summary
Architecture and Site application S-13-090 included approval of a multi-story, mixed-use
Market Hall with 50 affordable apartments for seniors, 20,700 square feet of retail space, a
2,722-square foot community room, and a four-story parking garage with 303 parking
spaces.
The parking garage for the Market Hall consisted of three above grade levels and one below
grade level. A total of 303 parking spaces were approved, resulting in an excess of 179
parking spaces over the number required by the North 40 Specific Plan development
regulations (Attachment 1, Exhibit 5). The parking requirement is consistent with current
commercial parking requirements for the downtown at one parking space per 300 square
feet of gross floor area. 129 of the proposed 303 parking spaces were to be located on the
below grade level. The applicant is proposing to remove the below grade level and modify
the remaining three above grade levels resulting in a total of 176 parking spaces proposed,
meeting and exceeding by 52 parking spaces the number required by the North 40 Specific
Plan regulations for the Market Hall building.
B. Planning Commission
On August 26, 2020, the Planning Commission considered the application and continued the
matter to September 9, 2020 to allow Commissioners to complete a site visit and to allow
for additional public comments to be provided. On September 9, 2020, the Commission
considered the application and continued the matter to September 23, 2020 to allow the
Commissioners and the public additional time to review the project’s compliance with the
Town’s objective standards pursuant to the Housing Accountability Act (HAA).
The issue of the applicability of the HAA and other housing laws became one of the
discussion considerations by the Planning Commission. Town Attorney Rob Schultz advised
the Commission that because the entirety of the application involves a housing
development, housing laws did apply to a modification of the application. As such, the HAA
requires housing developments to be approved if they meet all objective standards (see
Attachment 8, Exhibit 13).
On September 23, 2020 the Commission continued the matter to a special meeting on
September 28, 2020 due to technical errors with the teleconference meeting. On
September 28, 2020 the Commission received the staff report, opened the public hearing,
and considered testimony from the applicant and the public. After asking questions, the
Planning Commission closed the public hearing and discussed the project. After completing its
PAGE 4 OF 7
SUBJECT: 14225 Walker Street/S-20-012
DATE: October 15, 2020
DISCUSSION (continued):
deliberations, the Commission denied the application (4-2-1, Hanssen and Janoff opposed and
Burch recused). Attachments 4, 7, 11, and 16 contain the verbatim minutes.
C. Appeal to Town Council
The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed on October 1, 2020 by the
applicant, Michael Keaney with Summerhill Homes (Attachment 17). The appellant
provided the reasons for the appeal to the Town Council, wherein the Planning
Commission’s decision was an error or abuse of discretion and was not supported by
substantial evidence in the record, as noted below (verbatim) followed by staff analysis in
italic font.
In addition, the applicant provided a supplemental letter, as well as the applicant’s
attorney, concurring with the Town Attorney’s analysis of the applicability of State housing
laws (see Attachments 22 and 23).
The denial of the requested modification by the Planning Commission was in error and
was an abuse of discretion, and their decision is not supported by substantial evidence
in the record. The Planning Commission was properly advised by the City Attorney and
by staff but ignored this advice in denying the requested modification. They were
advised that the application had to be evaluated in accordance with objective standards
of review, the definition of which was read to them, and that their discretion was
circumscribed by State laws, including the Housing Accountability Act and the Housing
Element law. They were further advised that the modification complied with all
objective parking and other standards of the Town. The motion for denial was stated to
be based upon an erroneous analysis of the parking requirements that had been
prepared by a Commissioner. It was not based on the applicable City Zoning Code or
any other application objective standards. As such the denial is not based on objective
standards and is also not supported by substantial evidence in the record. Additional
reasons for denial were stated that are irrelevant to the scope of permissible analysis by
the Planning Commission. Thus, the Planning Commission erred, abused its discretion,
and failed to base its decision upon substantial evidence in the record. Its denial was an
arbitrary and capricious act, lacking in legal or factual support and should be overturned
by the City Council.
As detailed in the Planning Commission minutes for the September 28, 2020 meeting
(Attachment 16), the motion to deny the application was based on the analysis of the
parking requirements that had been created by a Commissioner and shared at the
meeting (see Attachment 21). The analysis detailed that the modified project would not
be in compliance with the total number of parking spaces required for the Transition
PAGE 5 OF 7
SUBJECT: 14225 Walker Street/S-20-012
DATE: October 15, 2020
DISCUSSION (continued):
District by the North 40 Specific Plan development regulations consistent with
commercial parking requirements for the downtown at the time the original Architecture
and Site application (S-13-090) was approved on August 1, 2017.
Based on staff’s review of the information created by a Commissioner and shared at the
September 28th Planning Commission meeting, staff does not concur with the findings of
the analysis. Since the approval of the original Architecture and Site application (S-13-
090) by the Council on August 1, 2017, Ordinance 2272 was adopted by the Council on
April 3, 2018 to amend Section 29.10.150 of the Town Code to revise the required
parking requirements for restaurants. Section 2.5.8 (a) of the North 40 Specific Plan
states that the number of off-street parking spaces required for a non-residential use
shall be consistent with the parking required in the downtown as required within Division
4 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 29.10.150 (b) (1) of Division 4 of the Zoning
Ordinance requires one parking space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area for
retail and commercial stores, shops, restaurants, bars, taverns, and nightclubs.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Written notice of the Town Council hearing was sent to property owners and tenants within
300 feet of the subject property. Notice was also published in the Los Gatos Weekly. Given the
large amount of public interest, social media messages also welcomed the public to participate
in this hearing. Public comments received between 11:01 a.m., September 28, 2020 and 11:00
a.m., October 15, 2020 are included in Attachments 24 and 25.
CONCLUSION:
A. Recommendation
Staff originally recommended approval of the application to the Planning Commission
because the proposal is consistent with the objective standards of the North 40 Specific
Plan. As Secretary to the Commission, staff would typically recommend that the Town
Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and adopt a resolution denying the
appeal and denying the application (Attachment 18). However, given the applicability of
the HAA and Housing Element Law requirements to rely on objective standards and by-right
findings respectively, staff recommends that the Town Council take the following action:
Adopt a resolution granting the appeal and approving the application with the required
Findings and Considerations (Attachment 20, Exhibit A) and recommended Conditions of
Approval (Attachment 20, Exhibit B), determining that the Planning Commission’s
PAGE 6 OF 7
SUBJECT: 14225 Walker Street/S-20-012
DATE: October 15, 2020
CONCLUSION (continued):
decision should be reversed or modified, and finding one or more of the following in
accordance with Town Code Section 29.20.275:
a. There was an error or abuse of discretion by the Planning Commission; or
b. The Planning Commission’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence in the
record.
B. Alternatives
Alternatively, the Town Council could:
1. Adopt a resolution denying the appeal and denying the application (Attachment 18).
2. Adopt a resolution to grant the appeal and remand the application back to the Planning
Commission for its review and decision (Attachment 19) particularly if the basis for
granting the appeal is, in whole or in part, due to information not presented to or
considered by the Planning Commission, and finding one or more of the following in
accordance with Town Code Section 29.20.275:
a. There was an error or abuse of discretion by the Planning Commission; or
b. The Planning Commission’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence in the
record.
3. Continue the application to a date certain with specific direction.
COORDINATION:
The Community Development Department coordinated with the Town Attorney, Parks and
Public Works Department, and the Santa Clara County Fire Department in the review of the
proposed project.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified for the North 40 Specific Plan
on January 5, 2015. No further environmental analysis is required for the proposed removal of
the underground parking.
Attachments:
1. August 26, 2020 Planning Commission Staff Report, with Exhibits 1-7
2. August 26, 2020 Planning Commission Addendum, with Exhibit 8
3. August 26, 2020 Planning Commission Desk Item, with Exhibit 9
PAGE 7 OF 7
SUBJECT: 14225 Walker Street/S-20-012
DATE: October 15, 2020
Attachments (continued):
4. August 26, 2020 Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes
5. September 9, 2020 Planning Commission Staff Report, with Exhibit 10
6. September 9, 2020 Planning Commission Desk Item, with Exhibit 11
7. September 9, 2020 Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes
8. September 23, 2020 Planning Commission Staff Report, with Exhibits 12-14
9. September 23, 2020 Planning Commission Addendum, with Exhibits 15-16
10. September 23, 2020 Planning Commission Desk Item, with Exhibit 17
11. September 23, 2020 Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes
12. September 28, 2020 Planning Commission Staff Report, with Exhibits 12-14
13. September 28, 2020 Planning Commission Addendum, with Exhibits 15-16
14. September 28, 2020 Planning Commission Desk Item, with Exhibit 17
15. September 28, 2020 Planning Commission Desk Item B, with Exhibit 18
16. September 28, 2020 Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes
17. Appeal of Planning Commission decision, received October 1, 2020
18. Draft Resolution to Deny Appeal and Deny Project
19. Draft Resolution to Grant Appeal and Remand Project to Planning Commission
20. Draft Resolution to Grant Appeal and Approve Project, with Exhibits A and B
21. Parking Summary Table Provided by Commissioner Hudes at the September 28, 2020
Planning Commission meeting
22. Letter from the Applicant, received October 14, 2020
23. Letter from Applicant’s Attorney Dated October 8, 2020
24. Letter from the Planning Commission Chair and Vice Chair, received October 13, 2020
25. Public Comments received between 11:01 a.m., September 28, 2020 and 11:00 a.m.
October 15, 2020