Item 04 - 105 Newell Ave - Staff ReportTOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: September 14, 2016
ITEM NO: 4
PREPARED BY: Jennifer Anner , Associate Planne r
ja nner@losgatosca.gov
APPLICATION NO: Planned De velopment Application PD-14-002
Mitigated Negati ve Declaration ND-1 6-002
LOCATION : 105 Newell Avenue (southwest comer of Newell Avenue a nd
Winchester Boulevard)
APPLICANT/
CONT ACT P E RSON: Maurice Cannargo
PROPERTY OWNER: Tango Papa Development Company
APP LI CA TI O N SUMMARY: Requestin g approval of a Planned Development to rezone a
propert y from R-1:1 2 to R-1:12:PD, de molish an existing
building, and construct fo ur single-family resid en ces on property
zoned R-1:1 2. APN 409-24-026.
RECOMMENDATION: Forward a recommendation to Town Council for denial of the
Planned Development application.
PROJ ECT DAT A:
North
East
South
West
CEQA:
General Plan Designatio n:
Zoning Designation:
Applicable Plans & Standards:
Parcel Size:
Surrounding Area:
Existing Land Use
Single-Family Residential
Office
Single-Family Resi dential
Single-Family Resi dential
Low Density R es ide ntial
R-1 :12 -Single Famil y
Residential , 12,000 s quare foot
lot minimum
General Plan; Res id entia l Des i gn
Guidelines; Hill side
Develo pment Standards and
Guidelines
1.4 acres
General Plan Zonin g
Low Density Residential R-1 :12
Light Indu stri a l CM
Low Density R es ide ntial R-1 :12
Low Den sity Resid e ntial R-1 :12
It has b een detennined that this p roject will not hav e a s ignificant
impact o n the e nvironment and a Mitigated Negati ve De cl arati o n
has been prepared and is recommended.
Planning Commi ssion Staff Report -Page 2
105 Newell A venue/PD-14-002
September 14, 2016
FINDINGS:
ACTION:
EXHIBITS:
• That the Zone Change (Planned Development) is consistent
with the General Plan.
• That the project is consistent with the Residential Design
Guidelines.
• That the project is consistent with applicable sections of the
Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines.
• That the project is consistent with the Town's Housing
Element and addresses the Town 's housing needs as
identified in the Housing Element.
• Forward a recommendation regarding Planned Development
Application PD-14-002 to the Town Council.
• Forward a recommendation regarding the Mitigated Negative
Declaration to the Town Council.
Previously received under separate cover:
1. Mitigated Negative Declaration
Received with this Staff Report:
2. Location Map
3. Required Findings
4. December 11 , 2013 , Conceptual Development Advisory
Committee meeting minutes
5. Project Description (one page) received July 2, 2014
6. Letter of Justification (29 pages), received June 17 , 2015
7. Renderings and Exterior Materials ( 16 pages)
8. Project Data Sheet (five pages)
9. Architectural Consultant Report (nine pages), received
February 25 , 2015
10. Response to Architectural Recommendations (two pages),
received June 17, 2015
11. Arborist Consultant Report (34 pages), received February I 9,
2015
12. Public Comments and Responses Regarding the Draft
Mitigated Negative Declaration (eight pages)
13. Final Mitigated Negative Declaration (88 pages)
14. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (seven pages)
15 . Planned Development Ordinance (27 pages) with Exhibit A
Rezone Area (one page) and Exhibit B Development Plans
(25 pages)
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 3
105 Newell Avenue/PD-14-002
September 14 , 2016
BACKGROUND :
Los Gatos Elks Lodge previously occupied the subj ect 1.4-acre site. The site contains a building
and paved parking lot that covers the majority of the site. The site is accessed by a dri veway at
the northeast corner of the site at the Winchester Boulevard and Newell A venue intersection.
The site also contains 38 protected trees.
The applicant prese nted development propos als for the subject site to the Conceptual
Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) on December 11 , 2013. Summary minutes of th e
CDAC meeting are attached (see Exhibit 4).
A Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been
prepared for th e project.
While the applicant's plans do not address the issues regarding the architecture of the propo sed
site discusse d by the Co nsultin g Architect or staff s concerns regarding compatibility of the
development with the surrounding neighborhood; the applicant is pursuing the z one change with
the intent ofreceiving additional feedback on the proposed project. The applicant is requesting
approval of the application with direction that can b e incorporated into the required Architecture
and Site application and subdivision process.
PROJ ECT DESC RIPTION:
A. Proj ect Summary
The ap plican t is propos in g a Planned Developm ent (PD) to rezone the subject site from R-
1: 12 to R-1 : l 2:PD, de m o li sh an existing building, and construct four single-family
re sidences. The existing lot would be subdi vided into four lots with an eas ement for a
private street. The existing lo t size is approximately 1.4 acres.
Lot 1 has two d esigns, on e with a second unit, and another without. Lot 1 would be
approximate ly 16 ,6 15 square feet with a res idence of 4,244 square feet and a 615-square
foot garage. In the alternative d es ign including a secondary dwe lling unit, the resi dence
would be 4 ,396 square feet (3 ,92 1 square fee t for the main residence; 475 square feet for
the secondary dwelling unit). The res idence wou ld be 27 feet , 11 inches high from
proposed grad e (lower than ex isting grade). Materials would consist o f painted wood
shingle a nd smooth plaster siding, aluminum clad windows, composition shing le roof,
m etal cable railing, and h orizontal board fences (Exhibit 7, pages 1-4).
Lot 2 would be approximately 16,895 square feet with a re side nce of 3,841 square fee t an d
a 695-square fo o t garage. The residence wou ld be 25 feet, three inches high from proposed
grade (l ower than existing grade). Materials wo uld consist of wood batt and board sid in g,
s tone veneer wainscot, a luminum clad windows, composition shin gle roof, meta l cabl e
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 4
105 Newell Avenue/PD-14-002
September 14, 2016
railing, and horizontal board fences (Exhibit 7, pages 5-8).
Lot 3 would be approximately 14,268 square feet with a residence of 4, 199 square feet and
a 664-square foot garage. The residence would be 30 feet high (Sheet A-3.2, Exhibit 15).
Materials would consist of painted wood shingle and smooth plaster siding, aluminum clad
windows, composition shingle roof, and hori zo ntal board fences (Exhibit 7, pages 9-12).
Lot 4 has two design s, one with a second unit , and another without. Lot 4 would be
approximately 13,137 square feet with a residence of 4,19 7 squ are feet and a 601-square
foot garage. In the alternative design including a secondary dwelling unit, the resi dence
would be 4 ,090 square feet (3,410 square feet for the main re sidence; 680 feet square feet
for the secondary dwelling unit). The residence is labeled as 25 feet high (Sheet A-4.3,
Exhibit 15). However, when height is measured per Town Code, to the existing or
proposed grade, whichever is lower, the plan s scale to 32 feet and would exceed the 30-foot
maximum height. Materials would consist of painted wood batt and board and smooth
plaster s iding, aluminum clad windows, composition shingle roof, metal cable railing, and
hori zo ntal board fences (Exhibit 7 , pages 13-16).
The applicant is proposing to construct a private street to access the new lots from Newell
A venue. Co nstruction would include terraced retaining walls between one and a half feet
and six and a half feet along Newell Avenue on Lots 1 and 4. The existing wall along
Winchester would be retained and additional terraced walls would be constructed on Lot 4.
Fences are proposed along Winchester, Newe ll , and the western property line s.
B. Planned Development Application
The application is a request for a PD overlay. A PD application is required because the
applicant is requesting several exceptions to Town Code requirements and applicable
Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines.
Town Code states that the purpose of a PD is to provide for alternative us es and
developments that are more consistent with site characteristics, to create an optimum
quantity and use of open space, and to encourage good design. If adopted b y the Town
Council, the proposed PD ordinance (Exhibit 15) would allow the Development Review
Committee to approve the Architecture and Site applications for the new residences. The
Planning Commission shall make a recommendation for th e PD application to the Town
Council, who will be the final deciding body.
C. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood
The project site is located at 105 Newell Avenue at the southwest corner of Newell Avenue
and Winchester Boul evard . There are si ngle-family residential u ses to the north, south, and
west. Office uses are located across the street to the east.
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 5
105 Newell A venue/PD-14-002
September 14 , 2016
D. Zoning Compliance
The zoning designation permits single-family homes and secondary dwelling units on
confrmning lots. Town Code allows a PD overlay on sites 40,000 square feet or greater.
ANALYSIS:
A. Conceptual Development Advi sory Committee
The Conceptual Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) reviewed the preliminary
proposals on December 11 , 2013. The proposals consisted of either a 5-lot single-family
subdivision or 11 attached residential condominium units. The CDAC presented several
comments (Exhibit 4). The applicant discusses the changes made to the project to address
the CDAC comments in the Project Justification letter included as Exhibit 6.
B. Planned Development
The applicant is proposing to rezone the properties from R-1: 12 to R-1: 12:PD. Through
the PD application, the applicant i s proposing to:
• Demolish the existing commercial building;
• Subdivide one lot into four lots;
• Establish an easement for a private street;
• Construct four new single-family residences ; and
• Construct associated site improvements and landscaping.
The PD application incorporates the zone change, subdivision, and single-family residential
development. T he PD Ordinance defines the maximum allowable development, including
the maximum floor area. Subdivision and Architecture and Site app li cations are required if
the PD is approved.
The applicant is requesting se veral exceptions through the PD application, including lot
siz e and floor area. Planned Development Applications are presented to the deciding body
with a lot of detail including final architectural e levations and grading plans. Although the
subject applicatio n does not contain the level of detail usually presented to the deciding
body, the plans and materials provide the required information to take action on the
Planned Development request. The deciding body should consider the intent of the
Planned Development overlay which is to provide for developments more consistent with
site characteristics than are allowed in other zones, and so create an optimum quantity and
use of open space and encourage good design . While the site characteri stics of the subject
site make a Planned Development application an appropriate application, the project does
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 6
105 Newell A venue/PD-14-002
September 14, 2016
not appear to present optimum open space or good design based on the uniqu e site.
Furthermore, the project as propo sed would require the following exceptions:
• Lots 3 and 4 would be less than the 125-foot minimum lot depth required for
residential properties facing arterial roadways;
• Three of the four homes (Lots 1, 3, and 4) would exceed the maximum allowed
floor area for lots of their net lot size;
• Cut and fill depth would exceed the maximum allowed by the Hillside
Development Standards & Guidelines for lots with greater than 10 percent slope;
• No si dewalks on the pri vate street as is required by the Town's Engineering
Standards;
• Lot 4 currently shows a building height greater than the 30-foot maximum height;
and
• Encroachment of eaves that exceed the projections allowed into yards by Town
Code .
C. Lot Dimensions
The applicant is proposin g a sma ll er lot depth for Lots 3 a nd 4 than required for residenti al
properties facing arterial roadways:
Lot Dimension Analysis
Lot Required Proposed Required Proposed
Depth Depth Frontage Frontage
Lot 1 100 11 5 95 132
Lot2 100 11 5 90 123
Lot3 125 12 1 95 139
Lot4 125 121 90 116
No justifica tion for the lot depth exception (Lots 3 a nd 4) has be en provided by the
applicant.
D. Cuts, Fill s, and Grading
The project is subject to the Residential Design Guidelines which state that properties with
an average slope gr eater than 10 percent are subject to certain provisions of the Hillside
Development Standards and Guidelines. The app licant is proposing c ut and fill d epths
greater than tho se permitted b y the Hill si de Development Standards and Guidelines:
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 7
105 Newell Avenue/PD-14-002
September 14 , 2016
Cut and Fill Requirements
Site Element Maximum Cut
House and attached garage 8 '**
Driveways* 4'
Other (decks , yards)* 4'
Maximum Fill
3 '
3'
3 '
*Combined depths of cut plus fill for development other than the main residence shall
be limited to 6 feet.
**Excludes cellars .
The applicant believes the best development would result from filling Lot 4 and cutting Lot
2 . Although no alternatives were presented or discussed by the applicant, it appears that
the development could design sites that would retain the existing topography to a greater
extent. The applicant provided a Grading Volume Exhibit (Sheet C 1.5, Exhibit 15). This
exhibit shows that, excluding cuts for cellars, cuts would be up to seven and a half feet for
Lot 2. Fills would be up to ten and a half feet. Net grading would require the off haul of
5,88 0 cubic yards.
Although the site has a large slope and cut and fill would likely be required for any new
project, the applicant is creating flat lots which are strongly discouraged in the Hillside
Development Standards and Guidelines and the General Plan.
In the most recent staff review comments Public Works staff recommended denial of the
project because of the retaining wall heights that exceed the maximum of five feet and
cause non-compliance with site triangle requirements on the corner of Newell Avenue and
Winchester. No justification for the wall location and height exceptions has been provided
by the applicant.
E. Floor Area
The following floor area analysis shows the net lot size (reduced based on average lot
slope), maximum allowable house and garage floor areas , and proposed house and garage
floor areas:
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 8
I 05 Newell A venue/PD-14-002
September 14, 2016
F loor Area Analysis
L ot Net Lot Maximum
Size SF H ouse SF
----
Lot 1 11,597 3,447
L ot 1 -with 2nd Unit " "
L ot2 16,895 4,306
L ot3 12,585 3,641
Lot4 8,975 2,856
Lot 4 -with znd Unit " "
Proposed Maximum Proposed
House SF G arage SF G arage SF
Including
znd Unit SF
4,244 945 615
4,396 " "
3,842 1,127 695
4,199 991 664
4,197 798 680
4,090 " "
Of the four houses, only the house on Lot 2 i s within the maximum allowed floor area. Lot
2 h as the largest allowed floor area because no slope reduction is required fo r lots with less
than I 0 percent average slope.
Based on Town and County records , the residences in the immediate n e ighborhood range
in s ize from l ,809 square feet t o 2,523 s quare feet. The floor area ratios (FAR) range fro m
0.15 FAR to 0.22 FAR. Th e p roposed resi dences would be 3,841to4,396 squ are feet with
0.23 to 0 .32 FAR. Based on the lot s izes and averages slopes, the maximum s quare foo t age
fo r the lots are 3 ,447 (0.30 FAR) for Lot 1, 4 ,308 (0.25 FAR) for Lot 2, 3 ,341 (0.29 FAR )
for Lot 3, and 3,199 (0.32 FAR) for Lo t 4.
The following Neighborhood Analysis tabl e reflects current conditions of the immediate
n eighborhood.
Neighborhood Analysis
A ddress House SF --Garage SF Lot Size SF Rouse FAR
10 8 Newell 1,973 399 12,880 0.15
112 Newell 1,8 09 420 12 ,317 0.15
116 Newell 1,885 420 12 ,075 0.16
135 Newell 2,467 528 12,0 19 0.2 1
119 Newell 2,128 468 11 ,445 0.19
115 Newell 2 ,153 576 11 ,6 15 0.19
183 Newell 1,8 90 563 12,600 0.15
100 Brocastle 2 ,523 525 11 ,300 0.22
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 9
105 Newell A venue/PD-14-002
September 14 , 2016
Neighborhood Analysis
Address House SF
105 Newell -Lot l 4,244
Lot 1-with rct Unit 4,396
105 Newell -Lot 2 3,842
105 Newell -Lot 3 4,199
105 Newell -Lot 4 4,197
Lot 4 -with 2"d Unit 4,090
Garage SF Lot Size SF House FAR
615 16,615 0 .26
615 16,615 0 .27
695 16,895 0.23
664 14,268 0.29
680 13,137 0.32
680 13,137 0.31
With proposed square footage between 3 ,842 and 4,396 square feet , the residences would
be the largest homes in the immediate neighborhood in terms of square footage . With
proposed FAR between 0.23 and 0.32 , the residences would also be the largest homes in
the immediate n e ighborhood in terms of FAR.
The Residential Design Guidelines specify that co n sideration will be g iven to the existing
F ARs, residential square footages , and lot sizes in the neighborhood. The proposed lot
sizes are larger than those in the immediate neighborhood. However, the larger F ARs
illustrate that the larger lot sizes do not warrant the extent of the larger square footages
proposed. The largest ex isting residence at 2 ,523 square feet , as compared to the smallest
proposed residence at 3 ,842 square feet, is 1,319 sq uare feet larger. Therefore, the
proposed project d oes not appear to be compatible wit h the immediate neighborhood.
The Residential Design Guidelines also specify that residential development shall be
simi lar in mass, bulk, and scale to the immediate neighborhood. The homes in the
immediate nei ghborhood are one story with low profile architecture. In addition to being
the largest in terms of square footage and FAR, the proposed residences would be the only
two story homes in the immediate neighborhood. Therefore, the project is not simi lar in
mass, bulk, or scale.
The Residential Design Guidelines state that the presence of large scale houses located at a
greater distance from the applicant's site wi ll be given less weight than the immediate
neighborhood. The applicant provides justification for the proposed FAR (Exhibit 6) and
data for homes outside the immediate neighborhood, including homes on La Montagne
Court, accessed from Wimbledon Drive. Of the 69 homes , for which data is provided,
seven are larger than the proposed homes.
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 10
105 Newell Avenue/PD-14-002
September 14, 2016
F. Parking
Each single-family dwelling requires two parking spaces. Each attached secondary
dwelling unit requires one parking space. The project meets the minimum on-site parking
required.
The project proposes three parking spaces within the private street. For each lot, two guest
spaces are shown in the driveways in addition to two spaces in each garage.
G. Sidewalks
The Town's Engineering Standards require concrete sidewalks on one side of the street for
private streets serving three or more residences. Concrete sidewalks are not required for
private streets serving two or fewer res idential lots. The applicant is proposing four
residential lots and is requesting an exception because they are not providing sidewalks for
the private street. No justification for the lack of sidewalks has been pro vi ded by the
applicant.
H. Traffic
The project would result in a decrease of average daily trips (ADT), AM peak hour trips,
and PM peak hour trips. Therefore, the project did not require a traffic study or traffic
mitigation fees.
The project proposes to move site access from the northeastern most comer to
approximately 115 feet from the Newell Avenue/Winchester Boulevard intersection.
I. Architectural Consultant Review
The Planned Development application was reviewed by the Town's Consulting Architect
(Exhibit 9). The consultant made recommendations for site and building design. The
applicant made some changes and provided a written response to the consultant's
recommendations (Exhibit 10).
J. Walls and Fences
Fences are proposed along Winchester, Newell, and the western property lines. Fences up
to 14 feet tall along Winchester Boulevard and nine and a half feet tall along the western
property lines are shown on the Site Sections on Sheet S-1.3 of Exhibit 15 ; the wood fence
detail on Sheet LS-1.0 of Exhibit 15 shows a six-foot maximum fence height. The
maximum height for fences is eight feet. No justification for the fence exception has been
prov ided by the applicant.
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 11
105 Newell A venue/PD-14-002
September 14, 2016
K. Trees
The project was reviewed by the Town 's Consulting Arborist (Exhibit 11 ). The project
would result in the removal of 36 trees (seven Italian stone pines, five deodar cedars, seven
coast live oaks, one silk tree, one black acacia, three carob, one aleppo pine, one european
olive, nine sweet gum, one dwarf mugo pine, and two glossy privets). The condition of
these trees range from poor to good.
The Consulting Arborist states that most of the trees cannot be saved based on the current
design. However, she recommends saving a 31-inch diameter Italian stone pine and a 12-
inch diameter stone pine. The applicant would need to modify the grading plans for the
rear yard of Lot 2 to save the 31-inch Italian stone pine. Performance standard 15
recommends the modification. The applicant will be required to plant replacement trees
on-site pursuant to Town Code.
L. Secondary Dwelling Units
Pursuant to Town Code, second dwelling units are permitted on conforming lots subject to
certain limitations. The applicant is proposing conceptual optional floor plans for second
dwelling units on Lots 1 and 4.
Lot 1 is a conforming lot and has room for the one required parking space for the second
unit. However, the applicant is proposing to exceed the allowed FAR.
Lot 4 is a non-conforming lot but has room for the one required parking space for the
second unit. In addition to the lot being non-conforming, the applicant is proposing to
exceed the allowed FAR. Staff would support the opportunity to add a second unit as it
would expand the options for housing in the Town. The lot is non-conforming because. the
depth is 121 feet, four feet short of the required 125-foot depth.
M. General Plan
The goals and policies of the 2020 General Plan applicable to this project include, but are
not limited to:
• Goal CD-1 -Preserve and enhance Los Gatos 's character through exceptional
community design.
• Policy CD-1.2 -New structures, landscapes, and hardscapes shall be designed to
harmonize and blend with the scale and rhythm of the neighborhood and natural
features in the area.
• Policy CD-1.4 -Development on all elevations shall be of high quality design and
construction, a positive addition to and compatible with the Town's ambiance.
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 12
105 Newell A venue/PD-14-002
September 14, 2016
Development shall enhance the character and unique identity of existing commercial
and/or residential neighborhoods.
• Policy HOU-2.5 -New single-family, multi-family and mixed use development shall
be compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood.
• Goal HOU-8 -Encourage residential construction that promotes green building and
energy conservation practices.
• Policy HOU-8.1 -All approvals of residential developments of three or more units
shall include a finding that the proposed development is consistent with the Town's
Housing Element and addresses the Town's housing needs as identified in the Housing
Element.
• Policy LU-1.4 -Infill projects shall be designed in context with the neighborhood and
surrounding community zoning with respect to the existing scale and character of
surrounding structures, and should blend rather than compete with the established
character of the area.
• Policy LU-6.7 -Continue to encourage a variety of housing types and sizes that is
balanced throughout the Town and within neighborhoods, and that is also compatible
with the character of the surrounding neighborhood.
• Goal LU-7 -To use available land efficiently by encouraging appropriate infill
development.
• Goal LU-6 -To preserve and enhance the existing character and sense of place in
residential neighborhoods.
• Policy LU-6.5 -The type, density , and intensity of new land use shall be consistent
with that of the immediate neighborhood.
• Policy LU-6.8 -New construction shall be compatible and blend with the existing
neighborhood.
• Policy NOI-5 .1 -Protect residential areas from noise by requiring appropriate site and
building design, sound walls , and landscaping and by the use of noise attenuating
construction techniques and materials.
N. Environmental Review
An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) (Exh ibit 1) have been
prepared for the project by the Town 's Environmental Consu ltant, Kimley-Hom and
Associates. The 20-day public review period began on June 10, 2016 and ended on June
30, 2016 . Mitigation measures are required for Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Geology
and Soils, Noise, and Traffic. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is
provided along with the Final MND and response to comments in Exhibits 12 , 13 and 14.
The Final MND was prepared to show minor changes in response to comments and does
not require recirculation. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the
performance standards within the PD Ordinance (Exhibit 15).
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 13
105 Newell A venue/PD-14-002
September 14, 2016
0. Other Exceptions
The applicant is proposing eaves encroaching into the required setbacks by 48 inches where
24 inches is the maximum allowed for side yards (Lots 1, 3, 4) and 30 inches is the
maximum allowed for rear yards (Lot 2) in residential zones [Town Code Section
29.40.070(b)].
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Staff understands from the applicant that the applicant has met with the neighbors . The Town
has not received any public comments at this time.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
A . Summary
The project would allow the redevelopment of the 1.4-acre site previously occupied by the
Los Gatos Elks Lodge with four residential units which complies with the General Plan
designation. The applicant is requesting a PD zone to allow exceptions in the following
areas:
• Reduced lot depth
• Exceeding the maximum allowed floor area
• Exceeding maximum cut and fill depths
• No sidewalks on private street
• Maximum height
• Encroachment of eaves in setbacks
The project does not comply with Town Code, the applicable sections of the Hillside
Development Standards and Guidelines, the Residential Design Guidelines, or the General
Plan. The plans are incomplete and inconsistent. Although staff cannot support the
project, a draft Ordinance was prepared with performance standards to require the project
to adhere with the aforementioned requirements (Exhibit 15).
B. Recommendation
Based on the summary above, staff recommends that the Commission forward the PD
application to the Town Council with a recommendation for denial.
ALTERNATIVES:
Alternatively, if the Planning Commission finds merit with the project, the Commission should
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 14
105 Newell Avenue/PD-14-002
September 14, 2016
take the following actions to forward the PD application to the Town Council with a
recommendation for approval:
1. Make the required findings (see Exhibit 3); and
2. Recommend that the Town Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibit
13) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit 14); and
3 . Recommend that the Town Council adopt the Planned Development Ordinance
(Exhibit 15).
Alternatively, the Commission can:
1. Forward a recommendation for approval of the Planned Development Application with
modified performance standards to the Town Council ; or
2 . Continue the matter to a date certain with specific direction.
~y :·~·
/
f .ennifer Armer, AICP
Associate Planner
JP :JA:cg
1\.pproved by:
Joel Paulson, AICP
Community Development Director
cc: Maurice Camargo, AIA, Architect, 3953 Yolo Dr, San Jose, CA 95136
Tango Papa Development Co., Attn: Michael Freisen, P.O. BOX 1701, Los Altos , CA 94023
N:\DEV\PC REPORTS\2016\Newell l 05.d ocx