18 Staff Report - Zoning Amendment A-03-4
DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEETING DATE: 4/19/04 ITEM NO. lo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT April 12,2004 DEBRA J. FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER CONSIDER AMENDING THE
TOWN CODE TO MODIFY THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TABLE TO ALLOW PARKING LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED R-1 (SINGLE FY RESIDENTIAL) UNDER LIMITEDLANDUSE CONDITIONS. IT HASBEENDETERMINED THAT
THIS PROJECT COULD NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THEREFORE,THEPROJECT ISNOTSUBJECTTO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (SECTION 15061 (B)(3)). ZONING CODEAMENDMENTA-03-4
APPLICANT: WESTERN ATHLETIC CLUBS, INC. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Accept report in the fonn of meeting minutes· from the Planning Commissionregarding Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4. 2. Open and
hold the public hearing and receive public testimony: 3. Close the public hearing. Ifthe Town Council decides to approve the requested Zoning Ordinance Amendment, it should take the
following actions: a. Make required findings (Attachment 1) b. Move to waive the reading ofthe ordinance (Attachment 2) c. Move to introduce the ordinance to effectuate the zoning code
amendment. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Western Athletic Clubs, representing CoUrtside Club, is requesting a Zoning Ordinance amendment as a first step in pursuing a proposal to develop a parking
lot on three properties located on the PREPARED BY: BUD N. LOR'TiS DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Reviewed by: ........... Town Manager --Qll<.L..-Town
Attorney Clerk.__Finance __Community Development Revised: 4/12/04 4:11 pm Reformatted: 5/30/02
Page 2 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL RE: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT A-03-4 April 12, 2004 northwest comer of Winchester Blvd. and Newell Avenue. The proposed parking lot is intended to serve employees
and patrons-of Courtside Club. The three properties are zoned R-I: 12 (Single Family Residential) and will be merged into one lot. When an applicant requests to change the Town Code,
staff offers assistance to ensure that the text, if approved, will the integrity ofthe code and achieve the desired objective. In this case, staff developed a proposed
amendment that would be added to the Table of Conditional Use Permits. The proposed amendment reads as follows: Parking lots that serve a nearby commercial use located on a previously
unimproved property in theR-l :12 zone on an arterial street. Please see Attachment 3, staffreport to the Planning Commission, for a complete summary and analysis ofthe proposed project.
Please see Attachment 15 for project platts. BACKGROUND: In May of2003, the applicant commenced research of the issues and challenges associated with developing a parking lot on the
subject site. As described below, the applicant solicited comments from the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee (CDAC). In addition, meetings have been held with the General Plan
Committee, interested neighbors and most recently the Planning Commission. . Conceptual Development Advisory Committee On May 14, 2003, the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee
(CDAC) reviewed the preliminary plans for a parking lot located on the comer ofWinchester Blvd and Newell Avenue from Courtside Club. In general, the Committee was not opposed to the
parking lot proposal. However, based on the concerns ofthe neighbors, the Committee wanted to ensure that the site would remain a parking lot and not be with. a commercial
structure. Ifthe applicant proposed a parking lot, it will require architectural and site approval and a conditional use permit. The Planning Commission could approve the project with
conditions to to address any issues deemed to be a concern. Please see complete comments from the May 14th meeting (Attachment 3, Exhibit B). General Plan Committee On February 11, 2004,
the General Plan Committee reviewed tp.e proposed text of the zoning ordinance amendment. The Committee recommended approval ofthe Zoning Ordinance Amendment on a 4-3 vote. The Committee
Was respectful ofthe neighborhood concern as well as· the proposal and voiced their concerns about the specific issues that will need to be addressed as the parking lot design is considered
by the Planning Commission. These concerns include
:"::::::':'::7,' Page 3 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL RE: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT A-03-4' April 12, 2004 balancing the needs of Courtside with their neighbors and examining the
design issues associated with a parking lot near a residential neighborhood. The Committee also requested that Courtside consider allowing the parking lot to be used by the neighbors
for special events such as a block party. Please see complete minutes of the February 11, 2004 meeting (Attacfullent 3, EXltUbit C). Seven members ofthe public spoke on the item, representing
the Newell Ave. neighborhood and Wimbledon Place Homeowners Association. Please see the attached letters submitted bythe interested neighbors (Attachment 3, Exhibit D and E). Some ofthe
concerns that were mentioned are as follows: 1. Concern about how the proposed ordinance amendment would affect the entire Town 2. Ingress and egress location and how the parking lot
will work 3. Environmental issues -pollution from the cars 4. Traffic through the Wimbledon Place Neighborhood 5. Concern that a commercial use will be expanding into a residential neighborhood
Planning Commission On February 25,2004, the Planning Commission considered this application and recommended denial on a 5-0 vote with one Commissioner abstaining and one Commissioner
absent. In general, . the Commission was not opposed to the idea ofa parking lot on the project site. However, the Commission was receptive to neighbors concerns about increased traffic,
membership increase and whether a parking lot is an appropriateuse ofthe site. One ofthe concerns that the Planning Commission raised was whether it was appropriate to amend the-Zoning
Ordinance to accommodate a parking lot for one specific use. Since neighbors were opposed to rezoning the parcel to a commercial designation, staffworked with the applicant and the neighbors
to find an alternate approach that would allow for a parking lot in a residential zone. The most conservative approach would be to modify the CUP table to allow parking lots in an R-1:12
zone under very limited circumstances. Initially, the Planning Commission Chair made a motion to recommend approval ofthe project, but the motion only received one other vote of approvaL
Because four votes are needed to forward a recommendation on a zone change to the Town Council, the Commission Chair changed her motion to recommend deniaL As a result, the matter could
move forward to the Town CounciL That motion passed on a 5-0 vote (one Commissioner abstained, one Commissioner absent). Please see Attachment 4 for complete minutes from the February
25, 2004 Planning Commission hearing. On March 1,2004, Courtside submitted a letter to request that the Town Council hold a hearing to consider Ordinance Amendment A-03-4 (Attachment
5). Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 29-20-580, the applicant must request a Council hearing in order to ensure the matter will be considered by CounciL
Page 4 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL RE: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT A-03-4 April 12, 2004 DISCUSSION: Since commercial patkinglots ate not currently allowed in R-l zones, the applicant cannot develop
the project site as a parking lot unless one of the following actions occur : A. Change the General Plan land use and Zoning desigmitions to a commercial designation that allows parking
lots Highway ¢ommercial(eM)·or Central Business District C2)). When this option was suggested, neighbors ofthe site were very concerned that a non-residential zoning designation
could lead to development ofa commercial building in the future. The neighbors opposed this option. B. Modify the Condition UsePenriit (CUP) table to allow parking lots in residential
zones under extremely limited circumstances such as when the property is located on an arterial street and will serve a nearby commercial use. The applicant would then have the ability
to apply for a CUP for a new parking lot. Input from the neighbors during the initial review review ofthe project resulted in a clear message to the applicant that they were not supportive
ofrezoning the site to a commercial designation. In the interest ofworking with the neighborhood and trying to develop a win-win solution, the applicant decided not to pursue a General
Plan and zone change. Instead, the applicant has to propose a zoning code amendment to allow parking lots in the R-l: 12 zone under liIIJ.ited conditions. . Neighborhood
Concern On March 5, 2004, the Town received a: letter from Mr. and Mrs. Bums, residents of i40 Newell Avenue. The first point of the letter states that the Rinconada residents are not
opposed to the proposed parking lot, but would like to ensure that the ingress/egress not be "locatedon Newell Ave and that the parking lot must be designed and operated in a manner
that reflects the Rinconada residents concerns. The applicant has submitted a conceptual plan that shows the ingress/egress on Winchester Blvd. The location of the ingress/egress and
parking parking lot design and operation will be refined as they:proceed through the Architecture and Site and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process. Secondly, Mr. and Mrs. Burns were
interested in whether there was an alterative approach to allow a parking lot in a residential zone. They suggested that the applicant could file a CUP, under the category of"Alternating
use ofoff street parking 'spaces" ofthe CUP table, which they suggest would not require Town Council approval. Staff is aware of this code section but determined that section "7j Alternating
Uses of off street parking spaces" does not allow for the proposed project. Alternating use ofoff street parking spaces is included in the Code to allow two uses which are permitted
in a zone to share parking spaces through a CUP. For example: If a church and a school are located adjacent to one another in a residential zone and want to share their parking lots
and their peak hours ofoperation d.o not overlap, they could apply for a CUP that would allow them to share their parking. An important issue to understand is that both a school and
a church are allowed uses in a residential zone, with a CUP. The "alternating use of off street parking" section allows them to apply for a CUP to share parking. In the case of
Page 5 MAYORAND TOWN COUNCIL RE: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT A-03-4· April]2,2004 the proposed project, the stand-alone parking lot is simply not allowed in a residential zone. Third, Mr and
Mrs. Bums take an opposing view to the Wimbledon Place Homeowners Association. They claim that the impact ofthe project on Wimbledon Blvd would be insignificant. Please see the letter
from Mr. And Mrs. Bums dated March 5, 2004 (Attachment 6). On March 11,2004, the Town received a letter ofconcern from Mr. Jack Aiello. Please see the attached letter (Attachment 7).
Mr. Aiello's concerns are as follows: • Allowance ofcommercial parking lots in residential neighborhoods throughout the Town. • Appropriate in-fill projects that blend with the character
ofthe area. . • Elks club parking on the project site. • Increased membership ofCourtside Club will result in increased traffic and noise. On April 5, 2004, the Town received five letters
from concerned neighbors. The letters from Mr. Kevin Dincher (Attachment 8) and Ms. Mary Rose (Attachment 9) state that they withdraw their previous opposition. The letters from Mr.
Steve Busch(Attachment 10) and Mr. and Mrs. Witchel (Attachment 11) state their support for a parking lot. The letter from Ms. Sofia Poullada (Attachment 12) states her concern for overflow
Elk's parking and traffic. Applicant's Position Following the Planning Commission hearing, the applicant scheduled two meetings with interested neighbors on March 29th and April 1st
to further understand their concerns. The applicant has submitted a letter to the Town explaining the proposed project and offering solutions to the concerns thathave been raised. To
address these concerns, the applicant is willing to incorporate the following items into their project: 1. Constructing a sound wall along the back perimeter ofthe site (adjacent to
residential) 2. Installing taller plant material along Newell Avenue 3. Installing bollards and chain to close the parking lot in the evening 4. Placing signage requesting that employees/patrons
"be courteous ofour neighbors" The applicant is also willing to address parking lot lighting, hours of operation, security, use of parking lot, enforcement, implementation and a good
neighbor agreement. Please see the attached letter from the applicant (Attachment 13). Consistency with the General Plan The proposed zoning code amendment is consistent with the following
goals and policies ofthe General Plan. Please see Attachment 14 for complete General Plan section. L.P.3.2 Consider nonresidential activity in residential areas only when the character
and quality of the neighborhood can be maintained. L.P 3.3 Protect existing residential areas from adjacent nonresid·ential uses by assuring that buffers
Page 6 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL RE: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT A-03-4 April]2,2004 are developed. and maintained. Buffers shall be required asconditions ofapproval and may consist oflandscaping,
sound barriers, building s€ttbacks or open space. L.P.5.3 Require full public review for commercial development to ensure compatibility with . adjacent neighborhoods.and the Town. Environmental
Review An Initial Study and Mitigated !':legative Declaratioll prepared for a previous applica.tion for an office building on the subject site. The environmental review Was
completed by Geier and Geier Consulting in October 2001. The initial study found that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment if certain mitigation
measures were incorporated into the project. The initial study concluded that an environmental impact report is not required. A . . parking lot will have less ofan environmental impact
than an office building and its associated parking lot, consequently the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration will be used in the analysis ofthe parking lot should the text
amendment be approved. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration are available for review in the project file. Communication Staffhas notifi.ed the public and interested neighbors
for all publip hearing on this matter to ensure that all interested parties are informe.d about the proposed project and have an opportunity to provide input. Staff sent out notices
ofpublic meetings I to all interested neighbOl:s for the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee meeting on May 14, 2003 andthe General Plan Committee meeting on February 11, 2004.
The February 25, 2004 Planning Commission and April i9, 2004 Town Council hearings were notIced with an eighth page ad in the local newspaper. In addition, staff sent all interested
neighbors a copy ofthe meeting agenda and a staff report. FISCAL IMPACT: None Attachments: 1. Required Findings (1 page) 2. Draft Zoning Ordinance Amendment (2 pages) 3. Staffreport
and desk item to the Planning Commission for the February 25,2004 hearing, minus plans (13 pages) 4. Verbatim Planning Commission minutes of January 25, 2004 (13 pages) 5. Letter ofrequest
for apuqIic hearing from the applicant dated March 1,2004. (1 page) 6. Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Burns with attachments received March 4,2004 (12 pages) 7. Letter from Mr. Aiello received
March 11, 2004 (3 pages) 8. Letter from Mr. Kevin Dincher dated AprilS, 2004 (2 pages) 9. Letter from Ms. Mary Rose dated AprilS, 2004 (2 pages) 10. Letter from Mr. Steve Busch dated
AprilS, 2004 (1 page) 11. Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Witche1 dated April 6, 2004 (1 page)
Page 7 MAYORAND TOWN COUNCIL RE: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT A-03-4 April 12, 2004 12: Letter from Ms. Sofia Poulladadated April 5, 2004 (1 page) 13. Letter ofjustification from applicant received
March 12,2004 (4 pages) 14. General Plan -Land Use Sectio:n (1 page) 15. Plans from applicant's justification letter (1 page) Distribution: Western Athletic Clubs Inc., 1 Lombard Street,
San Francisco, CA 94111 Rodger Griffin, Paragon Design, 405 Alberto Way, Suite A, Los Gatos, CA 95032 Lisa Graf, Courtside Club, 14675 Winchester Blvd. Los Gatos, CA 95032 Interested
Neighbors List BNL:JSG:mdc N:\DEWudie\projects\Zoning -Parking\TC report.wpd
REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR: Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 Consider amending the Town Code to modify the conditional use permit table to allow parking lots on property zoned R-l (Single Family
Residential) that are located on an arterial street. FINDINGS: a. That Council detennine this Zoning Code Amendment could not possibly have a significant impact on the environment, therefore,
the project is not subject to the , California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15061 (b)(3»; b. That the Town Council find that the Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the General
Plan. Attachment 1
ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AMENDING TOWN CODE SECTION 29.20.185 (TABLE OF CONDITIONAL USES) THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION
I Town Code Section 29.20.185 shall be amended as follows: The text shown in Exhibit A attached hereto shall be added to the Table of Conditional Uses. SECTION II This ordinance was
introduced at a meeting ofthe Town Council ofthe Town ofLas Gatos and adopted by the following vote as an ordinance ofthe Town ofLos Gatos at a regular meeting ofthe Town
Council ofthe Town ofLos Gatos on ,2004. This ordinance takes effect 30 days after it is adopted. COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA ATTEST: CLERK. OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA N:\DEWudie\projects\Zoning -Parking\Parking Ord.wpd Attachment 2
Exhibit "A" 29.20.185 Table of Conditional Uses· RC HR R1 RD RM R-1D RMH 0 C-1 C-2 CH LM CM Parking lots that serve a nearby commercial use located on a previously X unimproved property
in the R-1:12 zone on an arterial street N:\DEV\Judie\projects\Zoning -Parking\The Table.xls
.. REPORT TO: FROM: LOCATION: FINDINGS: ACTION: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: EXHIBITS: A. DISCUSSION:
For Agenda Of: February 25, 2004 Agenda Item: -'1"'--_ The Planning Commission Director of Community Development Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 Consider amending the Town Code to modify
the conditional use permit table to allow parking lots on property zoned (Single Family Residential) that are located on an arterial street. It has been determined that this project
could not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore, the project is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15061 (b)(3)). APPLICANT: Western Athletic
Clubs, Inc. The Planning Commission must make the fmding that the amendment is consistent with the General Plan if the recommendation is for . adoption. Recommendation to the Town Council.
It has been determined that this proj ect c.ould not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore, the project is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Section
15061 (b)(3)). A. Draft Ordinance, Conditional Use Permit Table, Town Code Section 29.20.185 (2 pages) B. Conceptual Development Advisory Committee comments May 14, 2003 (2 pages) C.
General Plan Co:rnmittee comments February 11, 2004 (5 pages) D. Letter from Interested Neighbors and Summary (2 pages) E. Letters from Interested Neighbors (6 pages) F.· Justification
letter dated February 18, 2004 (3 pages) Western Athletic Clubs, representing Courtside Club, has requested the subject Zoning Ordinance amendment as a first step in pursuing a proposal
to develop a parking lot on three properties located on the northwest comer of Winchester Blvd. and Newell Avenue. The proposed parking lot is intended to serve patrons and employees
of Courtside Club. The three .properties are zoned R-l: 12 (Single Family Residential) and will be merged into one lot. Commercial parking lots are not currently allowed in R-l zones.
Attachment 3
The Planning Commission -Page 2 Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 February 25, 2004 In order to develop a parking lot on the site, the applicant has two options: 1. Change the General Plan
land use and Zoning designations to a commercial designation that allows parking lots. When this option was suggested under a previous application, neighbors ofthe site were very concerned
that a non-residential zoning designation could lead to development of a commercial building in the future. 2. Modify the Condition Use Permit (CUP) table to allow parking lots in residential
zones under extremely limited circUmstances such as when the property is located on an arterial street and will serve a nearby commercial use. In the interest ofworking with the neighborhood
and trying to develop a win-win solution, staff and the applicant the matter and the applicant agreed not to pursue a General Plan and Zone change. After receiving
input from the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee the applicant decided to pursue option 2 and filed an application proposing to amend the Zoning Ordinance, Table of Conditional
Uses. A letter from the applicant is attached for background information (Exhibit F). Staffintends to work with the applicant and neighbors ofthe Winchester/Newell property to address
all interests and concerns. The applicant met with neighbors on February 19, 2004 to discuss their concerns. The applicant will present the Tesults ofthat meeting at the Planning Commission
hearing. The most conservative approach would be to modify the CUP table to allow parking lots in an R-l: 12 zone in very limited circumstances. Staff has prepared a draft text amendment
as follows: "Parking lots that serve a nearby commercial use located on a previously unimproved property in the R-1 :12 zone on an arterial street." Please refer to the attached Draft
Ordinance (Exhibit A). The proposed amendment to the CUP tabIe will affect only unimproved property in an R-1 :12 zone that are located on an arterial street. A map will be provided
aUhe hearing to show all the Town's arterial streets and every location where a R-l: 12 zoned property abuts an arterial street. Staffhas studied all the properties that are zoned R-l:12
that are located on an arterial street. Staff concluded that only the subject site will be affected by the proposed amendment. Newell and Winchester Site The three parcerlocated on the
northwest comer of Winchester Blvd. and Newell Ave is the only site that could be affected by the proposed amendment. The applicant is intends to merge the three parcels to create one
parcel and develop a parking lot on this site. Once the parcels are merged, the site will have an approximate 230 feet of frontage on Winchester Blvd. The site is approximately .75 acres
and is located near the Courtside Athletic Club. Courtside is planning to use this parking lot for employee parking and to accommodate the overflow parking. With the approval of this
Zoning Ordinance Amendment the applicant will need to apply for architecture
./'....••. The Planning Commission -Page 3 Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 February 25,2004 and site approval and a conditional use pennit in order to develop a parking lot. The public
will have an opportunity to review and comment on the plans during the public hearing process. Staff and Planning Commission may also incorporate conditions of approval to address any
issues that are raised regarding the use of the parking lot (hours of operation, etc.). The applicant will display a concept parking lot plan at the Planning Commission hearing, but
the parking lot design is not the subject of this hearing. B. CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: On May 14, 2003, the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee
(CDAC) reviewed the preliminary plans for a parking lot located on the comer of Winchester Blvd and Newell Avenue from Courtside Club. In general, the Committee was not opposed the parking
lot proposal. However, they wanted to ensure that the site would remain a parking lot and not developed with a commercial structure. If the applicant proposed a parking lot, it will
require architectural and site approval and a conditional use pennit. The Planning Commission could approve the proj ect with conditions to address any issues deemed to be a concern.
Please see complete comments from the May 14th meeting (Exhibit B). C. GENERAL PLAN COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: On February 11, 2004, the General Plan Committee reviewed the proposed text
of the zoning ordinance amendment. The Committee recommended approval ofthe Zoning Ordinance Amendment on a 4-3 vote. The Committee was respectful of the neighborhood concern as well
as the proposal and voiced their concerns about the specific issues that will need to be addressed as the parking lot design is considered by the Planning Commission. These concerns
include balancing the needs of Courtside with their neighbors and examining the design issues associated with a parking lot near a residential neighborhood. The Committee also requested
that Courtside consider allowing the parking lot to be used by the neighbors for special events such as a block party. Please see complete draft minutes of the February 11, 2004 meeting
(Exhibit C). Seven members of the public spoke on the item, representing the Newell Ave. neighborhood and Wimbledon Place Homeowners Association. Please see the attached letters submitted
by the interested neighbors (Exhibit D and E). Some of the concerns that were mentioned are as follows: 1. Concern about how the broad language would affectthe entire Town 2. Ingress
and egress location and how the parking lot will work 3. Environmental issues -pollution from the cars 4.. Traffic through the Wimbledon Place Neighborhood 5. Concern thata commercial
use will be expanding into a residential neighborhood
The Planning Commission -Page 4 Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 February 25,2004 D. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An mitial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for a previous
applicationfor an office building on the subJect site. The environmental review.was completed by Geier and Geier Consulting on October 2001. The initial study found that the proposed
project would not have a significant effect on the environment if certain mitigation measures were incorporated into the project. The initial study concluded that an environmental impact
report is not required. A parking lot will have less of an environmental impact than an office building and its associated parking lot, consequently the IWtial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration will be used in the analysis ofthe parking lot should the text amendment be approved. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration are available for review in the
project file. E. RECOMMENDATION: Consider the proposed ordinance amendments and forward a reconunendation to the Town Councilor return. the proposed amendments to the staffwith suggested
cha;nges. If the Planning Commission detelTIlines that the Town Council should approve the proposed ordinance amendment, the Commission should recommend the following: a. That Council
determine this Zoning Code Ame1).dment could not possibly have a significant impact on the environment, therefore, the project is not subject to the California Environmental Quality
Act (Section 15Q61 (b)(3)); . b. That the Town Council find that the Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the General Plan; and c. That the Council adopt the Draft Ordinance (Exhibit
A) amending the Town Code. Prepared by: Judie Gilli, Assistant Planner BNL:JG:mdc cc: Western Athletic Clubs me., 1 Lombard Street, San Francisco, CA 94111 Rodger Griffm, Paragon Design,
405 Alberto Way, Suite A, Los Gatos, CA 95032 Lisa Graf, Courtside Club, 14675 Winchester Blvd. Los Gatos, CA 95032 mterested Neighbors List N:\DEV\Judie\projects\Zoning -Parking\Staffreport.wpd
/r--__.. ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AMENDING TOWN CODE SECTION 29.20.185 (TABLE OF CONDITIONAL USES) THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I Town Code Section 29.20.185 shall be amended as follows: The text shown in Exhibit A attached hereto shall be added to the Table of Conditional Uses. SECTION II
This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town
Council ofthe Town ofLos Gatos and adopted by the following vote as an ordinance ofthe Town ofLos Gatos at a regular . meeting of the Towtl Council ofthe Town ofLos Gatos on ,2004. This
ordinance takes effect 30 days after it is adopted. COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS· LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA ATTEST: CLERK OF THE TOWN
OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA N:\DEV\Judie\projects\Zoning -Parking\Parking Ord.wpd Exhibit A
Exhibit "A" 29.20.185 Table of Conditional Uses RC HR R1 RD RM R-1D RMH 0 C-1 C-2 CH LM eM Parking lots that serve a nearby commercial use located on a previously X unimproved property
in the R-1 :12 zone on an arterial street N:\DEV\Judie\projects\Zoning -Parking\The Table.xls
( TOWN OF LOS GATOS no East Main Street,Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 354-6872 -----_._-----------------------------------_.-----------------------------------------------------------------------..._--SU
MMARY OF DISCUSSION OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPIvIENT ADVISORY COIvIl\tIITTEE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS FOR MAY 14,2003 HELD IN THE TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER,
110 EAST MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA. The meeting was called to order at 4:30 P.M. ATTENDANCE Members Present: Sandy Decker Steve Glickman Paul Dubois Jeanne Drexel Joanne Talesfore
Absences: Staff Present: Bud N. Lortz, Director of Community Development, Tom Williams, Asst Community Development Director, Sandy Baily, Associate Planner ITEM 1: Comer of Winchester
Blvd and Newell Avenue Conceptual Development Application CD-03-1 Requesting preliminary review of plans to construct an off-site parking lot for the Courtside Club on properties zoned
R-l:12. APNS 409-24-001, 002, 003 .. PROPERTY OWNER: Elks Lodge, Belt Click APPLICANT: Courtside Club . ,, I Comments: 1. Parking use as proposed is an improvement over existing
conditions and one that seems appropriate for the site. 2. Review ingress/egress issues and try to avoid using Newell Avenue. 3. Would like some type of guarantee, perhaps a deed restriction
that will ensure the site remains as a parking lot and is not developed. 4. Adequate landscaping, including the use of landscape berms abutting the street rightof-way to screen parking
area is strongly recommended. Exhibit B
ADJOURNMENT Meeting at 5:30 P.M.. The next regular meeting of the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee is scheduled for Wednesday, June 11,2003. Prepared by:
mmunity Development cc: Planning Commission Chair N:\DEV\CDAC\MINUTES\2003\5-14-03.cda
DRAFT TOWN OF LOS GATOS 110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95030 (408) 354-6872 SUMMARYMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE GENERALPLAN COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS, FEBRUARY 11,
2004 HELD IN THE TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER, 110 EAST MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA. The meeting was called to order at 5:30 pm by Chair Michael Burke. ATTENDANCE Members
present: Josh Bacigalupi, Michael Burke, Steve Glickrrian, Diane McNutt, Phil Micciche, MOlTis Trevithick, Mark Weiner. Members Absent: Barry Bakken, Mark Sgarlato Staffpresent: Bud
Lortz, Director ofCommunity Development; Suzanne Davis, Associate Planner; Judie Gilli, Assistant Planner. VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS None ITEM 1 . ZONING CODE AMENDMENT A-03-4 Bud Lortz
introduced the item, explaining that the proposed text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance is being pursued after discussions between staff, the applicant and neighbors ofthe site. Suggested
language for the text amendment was presented. Rodger Griffin, Paragon Design Group, representing Courtside, provided some history of the site. The property consists of three parcels.
The only buildable portion ofit fronts on Newell Avenue. The applicant has been searching for a way to benefit the Town by improving the property and providing som.e additional parking.
The proposal is to allow use of it for parking and open space. The applicant has worked with neighbors to accomplish this without a zone change. Jack Aiello, 135 Newell Court, said he
has not talked to anyone regarding the application. He thinks the wording is vague and would allow a parking lot on anyR-1 zoned lot. The property has been for overflow parking for the
Elks Club activities. CUlTently there is parking on the property by Courtside. There have been many previous meetings on this and he thought everything had been resolved. The Elks were
originally going to develop residences on the site. Dale Miller, 115 Newell Court, said he abuts the site and although it sounds ok in principle, he is concerned about the impact it
could have on his property. He wants the property to remain residential. This is a Town-wide amendment and he wondered ifpeople in other areas have been notified. He feels a traffic
analysis should be done. The goal ofthe neighborhood is to keep it R-l so that it remains residential in the event it is development independently from Courtside Exhibit C
General Plan Committee Regular Meeting of February 11, 2004 Page 2 015 DR FT Larry Fried, 112 Newell Avenue, said he has not been asked for input on this proposal. His concern is that
Courtside will continue to sell memberships and even with this lot there will be a parking problem. It is difficult to exit fl.·om the street in the morning. He is concerned about parking
impacts in the neighborhood. Max Perlman, 183 Newell Avenue, noted that his home backs up to the Elks property. He feels that the Elks are in violationoftheir use permit by allQwing
Courtside to park on the site. A parking lot is an impact. Fu.rnes 'from vehicles release pollutants, and there is a noise factor. He also commented that there should be a bike lane
along the Winchester frontage. Mary Rose, 501 C1earview Drive, representing the Wimbledon Homeowners Association, said 25 homeowners have submitted written comments; 15 prior to the
meeting and 10 additional letters that she presented. She was contacted by the applicant regarding access to the subj ect property through the Wimbledon HOA property on the comer ofWimbledon
& Winchester. The Wimbledon HOA Board objected to the use ofthe site as a parking lot at that time. Traffic and parking are concerns to the neighborhood. She read a letter to the Committee
stating her bbjection to the proposed Zoning Code Amendment and submitted a copy ofthe letter for the record. She does not want to see any commercial use ofthe site or any increase in
membership at Courtside Club. Mike Burke asked and received input from Ms. Rose that there are 111 homeowners in the Wimbledon Association. He asked what would be the objection to an
entrance from Wimbledon. Ms. Rose said that parking on Wimbledon is only a problem when there are 'large events such as a . tem1is tdurnament. Ann Burns, 140 Newell Avenue, said when
neighbors and Courtside met, the neighbors were very supportive ofthe Courtside proposal provided that there is not a driveway on Newell Avenue. The amendment can be utilized all over
Town. There has already been a notice that the Planning Commission will be considering this at an upcorping meeting. The Newell neighborhood has been fighting the Town for 10 years over
various projects. The neighborhood will work with the Town and applicant, and feels the proposal will alleviate much ofthe parking issues associated with Courtside Club. Barbara
Perlman, 183 Newell Avenue, said she feels like she is on a slow seesaw going up and down. She asked that the Committee please take the proposed amendment very seriously, and if it has
to pass, please tightenit up so it won't impact neighborhood streets. Rodger Griffin noted that many ofthe items that have been discussed this evening have been worked into the plan.
The Elks Lodge will not be using the site for overflow parking. This is a good neighbor solution and the intent is to protect the neighborhood while keeping a viable business going.
General Plan Committee Regular MeetingofFebruary 11, 2004 Page 3 015 DRAFT Mark Weiner asked for clarification on the·parking problems. Mr. Griffin said that the goal is to get more
people offthe street. Employee parking could be on the site so patrons can park closer to the club. There is limited street parking on Winchester. Steve Glickman asked ifthe parking
lot would be available to the general public. For example, what ifthe neighbors had a large party. Mr. Griffin responded that he would discuss fuat with Courtside and he feels it is
something that can be taken into consideration. Perhaps neighbors could use the lot on request ifit didn't conflict with an event at Courtside. There will not be any ingress or egress
onto or from Newell Avenue. Phil Micciche asked if the property is being used for parking by the Elks. Lisa Graf, General Manager ofCourtside Club said the Club is on a wait list status.
Useage ofthe proposed lot would be for prime time during the day. Phil Micciche asked ifmemberships are frozen. Ms. Grafsaid they don't use that term. The Club is not adding any memberships
at this time, but memberships are filled as others are dropped. Mike Burke asked ifthe memberships would be increased. Ms. Grafclarified that there is not a cap on membership but that
the number is not being increased under her management. This past year . the club has experienced increased usage without an increase in the number ofmemberships. Steve Glickman clarified
that the membership is not driving the memberships, butthat more parking . is being sought for the current membership. Ms. Gralsaid Courtside tracks members carefully. Steve Glickman
said it is important to know ifmemberships will be increased Ms. Grafsaid she has no intention ofincreasing the membership this year. BudLortz noted that there is not a maximum number
ofmemberships for any ofthe sport or athletic clubs in Town. The CUP runs with the land so it is parcel specific. . Phil Micciche asked how the proposal might impact other properties
in the Town. Bud Bud Lortz said when the language was crafted, the intent was to make it as narrow as possible. There are only three undeveloped parcels that are zoned R-1: 12 that are
on an arterial. Mark Weiner asked what the risk ofthe property being converted from R-1 to a commercial zoning. Bud Lortz sais that a General Plan amendment and rezoning would be required
to accomplish that. If the text amendment is approved, the applicant would have to file subsequent applications for a conditional use permit and architeCture and site approval that wouid
be considered by the Planning Commission. Use of the property including lighting, landscaping and hours can be controlled through the use permit process. .
General Plan Committee Regular Meeting ofFebruary 11, 2004 Page 4 0/5 DRAFT Josh Bacigalupi asked ifthe parking lot can be limited to employee use which might help alleviate some ofthe
neighbors' concerns. BudLortz said that it could be a condition, and neighborhood use of the lot could also be considered. Steve Glickman commented on potential impacts such as headlight
intrusion. He would like a mechanism to address future impacts should they arise. Mike Burke asked if the language could be further refmed to state that ingress and egress would be from
an arterial. Bud Lortz noted that the wording has to be legal language and it already limits it to these three parcels. Conditions can be imposed through the CUP process. Diane McNutt
asked for clarification on the process. Bud Lortz said the General Plan Conunittee is an advisory body and the recommendation will be forwarded to the Planning Commission. The recommendation
could be for approval or denial. The Council makes the final decision on whether to approve or deny the proposed amendment. Diane McNutt said the application will go forward,
but she stressed to neighbors not to make any assUIlJ.ptions on how the Council is going to vote. Often, a decision, isn'tmade until the hearing is held. She has some concern about the
proposal as it is unusual ,language that focuses on three specific parcels. BudLortz said that the Town is trying to be respectful to the neighbors. There are some other items in the
CUP table that have been addressed through a narrow perspective. The language is verynarrow because theTown doesn't want to see more parking lots in residential zones. Mike Burke clarified
that General Plan Committee minutes will be provided to the Conunission. BudLortz said that the minutes and all correspondence will be provided to the Commission. When it goes on to
the Council a verbatim transcript is prepared. Steve Glic1anan clarified that commercial parking lots are not desired in residential zones but other parking lots may be
For example, recreational uses might be located in a residential zone. BudLortz agreed and said that other uses such as churches and parks are allowed in residential zones and they have
parking lots. Steve Glic1anan made a motion to recommend favorably. Phil Micciche seconded the motion. Steve Glickman noted that there is already a parking lot there. In this particular
case the Town is trying to achieve the neighborhood's goal and keep the property zoned Josh Bacigalupi said he would speak favorably to this, but that although
the property has been used as a parking lot, it will be intensified under the proposal and that to be considered. Mike Burke said he won't be supporting the motion as he doesn't
like the use of such specific language even though it is tight.
General Plan Committee RegularMeeting ofFebruary 11, 2004 Page 5 015 DR FT Mark Weiner said he doesn't support the usage, but asked that ifit goes forward, the impact on the neighborhood
be minimized through controlling the hours of use of the parking lot. Diane McNutt said that there may need to be some traffic calming and/or parking management in this area. There are
many different aspects ofthis that need to be examined at the Commission and Council levels. She thinks the language is unique and pinpointed and that concerns her. She will be asking
staffto identify other residential property on arterial streets. The motion passed four to three (Mike Burke, Mark Weiner and Diane McNutt dissenting). ITEM 2: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
". / Phil Micciche made a motion to approve the minutes ofJanuary 28, 2004 as submitted. The motion was seconded by Steve Glickman and passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT The
meeting was adjourned at 6:35 pm by Mike Burke. Thenext meeting of the General Plan: Committee is scheduled for Wednesday, February 25, 2004 at 5:00 pm. Prepared By: (}'(
Suzanne Davis, Associate Planner N:IDEv\sUZANNEIGENPLAN\GPCI2004minutesIGPC-2-11-04.wpd
Letters from Interested Neighbors Summary List The following residents submitted a letter of concern to the Planning Department. Since the letters were identical in content, staffhas
included one letter as an example. Carol and Bob Shultz, 112 Greenfield PI.(example attached). Bonnie Virtue, 522 Clearview Dr. Frances Heininger, 409 Clearview Dr. Iris Gin, 207 Lorain
PI. Mary Ruddell, 516 Clearview Dr. Michelle Grandsean, 101 Cedarcrest Place Kevin Carver, 101 Cedarcrest PI. Anthony Schultz, 105 Lancewood PI. Martha Kavanaugh, 108 Greenfield PI.
June Steiner, 101 Baintree PI. Carol Blitz, 103 Strathmore PI. Barbara Lea, 121 Strathmore PI. Ivone Borbas, 424 Clearview Dr. Kalman Borbas, 424 Clearview Dr. Muffy Sanders, 105 Greenfield
PI. Julie Weiss, 101 Lancewood PI. Stephen Busch, 107 Lorain PI. Exhibit D
February 11, 2004 Bud N. Lortz Director of Community Development Town ofLos Gatos -Planning Division P.O. Box 949 Los Gatos, CA 95031 Dear Mr. Lortz, I am a resident ofWimbledon Place
Homeowners Association and wish to assert my objection to the zoning code amendment requested by Western Athletic Clubs Inc. That amendmentwould allow parking lots on property zoned
R-l that is located on an arterial street. My objection is based on how this amendment would negatively affect my daily life and my property values. Speaking to my first point, I do
not want to enable the Courtside Club to expand beyond its current footprint or capacity. In 1996, when Western Athletic Clubs presented their conceptual model to the Planning Department,
parking was deemed adequate to service the members' needs. Wheri the CourtsideClub Conditional Use Permit was granted to allow the service of alcoholic beverages, oUe ofthe conditions
ofthat permit directly spoke to the concerns oftraffic from Courtside exiting onto Wimbleclon drive after special events. The Planning Commission was also concerned about the potential
growth ofthe membership ofthe club. The Courtside Club representatives reassured the commission that their membership numbers were frozen; would not be allowed to grow. In 1999, Courtside
Club converted its indoor tennis court space to a: gymnasium. At that time, our neighborhood objected strongly, raising the concern that this action seemed to allow the Courtside Club
to encourage league play in basketball and could even provide a venue for large functions. We were assured that such concerns were unfounded because adequate designated parking spaces
were not provided for such activities. . Based on this historical context, I must refuse to support any action that would create additional parking capacity for the Courtside Club. This
attempt to secure additional parking appears to be.amove by the Courtside Club to grow the membership ofthe club and to facilitate more income generating functions on the site. Such
actions would increase traffic volume in my neighborhood along with its associated noise and disruption. Further, I see a real potential that these actions would create mote noise disruptions
emanating from the Courtside Club beyond those with which our neighborhood already has to contend. To my second point, I object to the use ofthe property in question for any commercial
purpose. Prior attempts to rezone these lots for commerciaI use have failed. This "zoning code amendment" is merely an attempt by Western Athletics Club to circumvent the process and
prevail where they have previously failed to assert their interests over the rights ofthe residential neighborhood to which they are adjacent. Ifthis amendment is approved by the Council,
our property values will decrease. Instead of looking forward to construction of homes one day that will enhance the area on that site, we will face the reality of looking at parked
cars, and, sometime in the future, the potential of other commercial construction on that site. Such an amendment to zoning carries with it a very real risk of trespassers on our frontage
property that would abut the parking facility and an increase in traffic on Wimbledon Drive-a street that is already virtually unsafe to enter from our side streets or to cross because
oftraffic that is heavier than would be consistent with a residential neighborhood and drivers that routinely fail to stop at the stop signs and drive at speeds in excess of the posted
residential speed of25 mph on a roadway with blind curves. If the current Courtside Club parking facilities are not adequate, then it is due to a lack of complete disclosure on the part
Western Athletic Clubs when they presented their conceptuaI model to the Planning Department in 1996 or a diversion from what was presented to the Planning Department. Such business
must not be rewarded with more concessions. Allowing the club to grow from its current footprint is abhorrent to me and to our Homeowners Association. Signature:
_ Printed Name: (! tLU"eJ I u-l1d 1306 Shu [t -z.-\ Address: J/d Gr--e......f?./J\. CLL.L
Judie Gilli -Objection to Western Athletics Club use of property for parking Pw;' ',,' • 99 From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Hi Judie, "Kristin McCullough (krmccull)"
<krmccull@cisco.com> <jgilli@losgatosca.gov> 02/10/2004 7:57 PM Objection to Western Athletics Club use of additional property for parking <Maryrose@wpha95032.com> I have faxed a letter
to you drafted by my home owner's association opposing Courtside's use of the empty lot on Winchester for additional parking. I would like to add to the contents of that letter by mentioning
the following. I hope this will be read during the town meeting. I am not able to attend due to responsibilities for my children. I would-like to compare this situation to the issues
relative to Hillbrook school on Marchmont. The traffic impact of the Hillbrook school was clearly known before any of the current Marchmont residents purchased their homes as the schobl
has been in it's location for over 80 years. Now, because of the neighborhood uproar, there are severe restrictions on the school both from a commute as well as·
restrictions on providing the campus to the community for recreational use such as basketball, football, and soccer practices, games, and tournaments. The Marchmont situation is a bit
extreme but if the neighbors there can enact such restrictions on an entity having been fully aware at the time of the purchase of their. homes, we should have equal if not greater rights
in our concern for the impact of the proposed parking lot. All of us have owned our home understanding that the lot in question was not to be used as a parking lot. In line with the
Marchmont restrictions, it would be conceivable to request that the property be better maintained until a single family home, for which the property is zoned, is built. I would like
to see this empty gravel lot be planted with grass and/or plants to alleviate the eye sore that is currently there. Thank you for hearing my concerns. ., Regards, . Kristin McCullough
Home owner @209 Lorain Place -cross street to Wimbledon ************************************************ Kristin McCullough Cisco: FP&A /COO Finance -IT krmccull@cisco.com Office (408)
526-5866 Cell (408) 406-8463 Exhibit E
.Page lof2 Gilli -Western Atheletic Club: Zoning Request IN, S • Fr.om: To: Date: Subject: Kevin Dincher <kevin@kevindincher.com> <JGilli@losgatosca.gov> 02/1 0/2004 7:57
PM Western Atheletic Club: Zoning Request Febmary 11, 2004 Bud N. Lortz Director of Community Development Town ofLos Gatos -Planning Division P.O. Box 949 Los Gatos, CA 95031 Dear Mr.
Lortz: I am a homeowner and a Board Member of the Wimbledon Place Homeowners Association. Since I am unable to attend the hearing regarding the request by Western Athletic Clubs, Inc.
fora zoning amendment, I am Writing to assert my objection to this amendment. The proposed amendment would allow parking on property zoned R-I j Passing this amendment would adversely
affect the daily life and values of several residential neighborhoods, including the Wimbledon Place Homeowners AssoCiation. Such action would increase traffic volume, noise,
trespassing and other disturbances in our neighborhood. Wimbledon Dr. is already unsafe. Traffic is heavier than is consistent with a residential neighborhood, while drivers routinely
disregard the posted speed limits. Accidents at the intersection of Wimbledon Dr. and Winchester Blvd. are a common occurrence. Aditionally, instead oflooking forward to the construction
ofhomes on that site that would enhance our neighborhoods, we will face the reality of looking at parked cars and the potential for other commercial construction on that site. If the
Council approves this an1endrrtent, our property values will undoubtedly decrease. In 1996, when Western Athletic Clubs presented their conceptual model to the Planning Department, parking
was deemed adequate. Subsequently, when'the Planning Commission expressed concerns about potential growth of the club's membership, the Courtside Club representative assured the Commission
that membership numbers were frozen and would not be allowed to grow. This issue was specifically addressed when the Courtside Club Condition Use Permit was granted to allow the service
of alcoholic beverages. In 1999 the Courtside Club converted its indoor tennis colirt space into a gymnasium. At that time, out neighborhood objected because of our concern that this
action seemed to allow for league basketball and created a venue of larger functions. We were assured that such concerns were unfounded because parking was adequate for the
functions plmmed. If parking was deemed adequate and membership numbers frozen, then the existing parking should still be adequate m1d there should be no need to secure additional parking.
And yet, this is not the first attempt by Western Athletics Club to obtain additional parking on this site. The Council wisely rejected previous attempts to rezone these lots for commercial
use. All of the reasons for rejecting the rezoning apply to this petition for a zoning amendment. The intended use of the property is exactly the same -with exactly the same negative
impact on our neighborhood and property values. Thank you very much for you consideration. Sincerely, Kevin P. Dincher 105 Strathmore Place Los Gatos, CA 95032 40D zPl5-1D3l Cfyexn pqf'
2)
Judie Gilli -Courtside Club From: To: Date: Subject: <Witchela@aol.com> <JGilli@losgatosca.gov> 02/11/20049:34 AM Courtside Club Dear Ms.Gilli, We are members of the Wimbledon Place
Homeowners Association. Unfortunately we cannot attend the 2/11 meeting of the General Plan Committee. However, we want to voice our objection to the proposal of the Courtside Club to
create a new parking lot on the corner of Winchester & Wimbledon. The impact this would have on traffic is only one of our objections. Another is the "down-zoning" of the land from .
residential use to commercial use. There would seemingly be no financial benefit to the town, yet a new residence would certainly be to the good of the town: its property values, and
its aesthetics. If Courtside needs additional parking, then they must have misrepresented to the planning commission of Los Gatos the number of members they would accept. We urge the
proposal be rejected. Sincerely, . Jason and Alice Witchel 106 Strathmore Place �
�0000l.HTM 02/11/2004
r-age 1 or 1 Judie Gilli . Courtside's Zoning Amendment Request !'S""i'V# me ... ,. " . ..". . From: To: Date: SUbject: CC: <CEKirby@aol.com>
02/10/2004 7:07 PM Courtside's Zoning Amendment Request' <McNuttCo@aol.com>, <mrose@ten90group.com> To: Los Gatos Planning Department Western Athletic Clubs, Inc. request for a zoning
amendment to' allow parking lots on property zoned R-1 located on an arterial street near by should be denied. As a resident of Wimbledon place Homeowner's Associatioll. I have wat<;:hed
the city of Los Gatos accommodate CourtsidelWestern Athletic Club at the expense of our residential life. It's time to stop! Please. Courtsfde is now a looming edifice generating incessant
traffic and noise. Additional parking will only allow them to expand their events and create more traffic and more noise. When is enough....enough? Sincerely, Constance Kirby 509 Clearview
Drive Los Gatos, CA 95032 408-354-7149
February 11,2004 Town of Las Gatos Community Development Department Planning Division Director ofCommunity Development Bud Lortz; ·RECEIVED FEB 1 1 2004 $.'/0 Ph( TOWN OF LOS GATOS I
DIV/S/ON t-"'. I I apologize that 1cannot attend the General Plan Committee meeting scheduled for tonigl1t at 5:30 Pm to discuss Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4.
I am out of town on business otherwise I would be present to voice my very strong objection to the request to modify the permit on property zoned R-l. .We have a great neighbor
on Newell Avenue. Allowing the use ofthe property in question to be permitted for use as a parking lot would destroy our neighbor integrity. Please advise all ofthe members ofthe planningcbmmittee
that having spoke to al ofmy close neighbors that we are in 100% agreement that we do not want a parking lot at the end ofNewell Avenue for essentially all the same reasons that we objected
to the Elks proposal to have zoning changes to allow them to build a medical office building. The added traffic would represent a grave threat to the peaceful condition of our neighbor
hood. It would greatly raise the potential for traffic accidents for the children ofour neighborhood who now frequently play in the street. 'The added traftIc from members of the athletic
dub who are in a rush to get to their club or to leave would create gravc
with regard to safety. I ask the planning committee to vote against any change in the present zoning. Building homes on the available property would better represent the interests of
the community as a whole. In specific, it would also devalue my property at 108 Newell Avenue as I an'1 the closest homeowner to the property in question. I ask you to represent the
interests ofthe citizeB:g Gatos and in particular the citizens and voters ofNewell Avenue and reject this request to change the current zoning $tatus. Sincerely,
Daniel J. Devine, PhD. '0::::7/108 Newell Avenue Los Gatos, CA' 95032
Page 1 of1 Judie Gilli -Courtside Parking -From: To: Date: Subject: CC: <Amharris111 @aol.com> <JGilli@losgatosca.gov> 02/12/2004 4:18 'PM Courtside Parking <maryrose@wpha95032.com>
The mana'ger of our homeowners association suggested that I attend your town meeting last evening. Unfortunately I had a prior committment and couldn't make it. I live at Wimbledon Place
and have done so since it was built and was one of the first to move in. I live at 111 Strathmore Place and my phone number, if you should want it, is 408-395-2937. I am a senior citizen
and continue to enjoy my home and its location and have done so since moving in some 25 years ago. I am not a complainer and really believe that life for everyone would be simplier if
everyone minded their own business and we let people do what they want so long as it doesn't do harm to others. This is a case where it will do harm to others. We moved into this development
understanding that zoning regulations had to be adhered to and that those regUlations where where put in place to benefit all concerned neighbors. To change horses in mid stream, because
the racquet club wishes to expand is no reason to do it. It is zoned residential and should stay residentiaL To change it into a parking lot for Courtside is not what we bargained for
and that was not the agreement. I have no doubt that somewhere dowh the line Courtside would come back to you with. You know we don't need the additional parking after all, but wish
to expand our facilities and build a commercial building. Once its re zoned they can do pretty much what they.want. I strongly oppose this intended use of this particular property. I
have had SO many people visit me and comment on how beautiful it is coming into Wimbledon Place. The trees, the landscaping the winqing road. Don't change the look. It would not be a
change for the better. Allan M. Harris file://C :\Documents%20and%20Settings\j gilli\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW} 00001.HTM 02/13/2004
® COURTSIDE CLUB A SrOR.TS R.ESOR.T February 18,2004' Planning Commission Town of Los Gatos 110 E, Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95032 , Re: Letter ofjustification
for Courtside Club parking lot Courtside Club is requesting your consideration of an amendment to the Town Ordinance that would allow, under very limited circumstances, a parking lot
on a residential zoned property. The Club is proposing to develop the property identified, as parcels 409-24-001, 409-24-002, 40924-003. The parcels are located immediately south of
the Courtside Club and are bordered by Wimbledon Road, Winchester Boulevard and Newell Avenue. The subject property, purchased ,by Western Athletic Clubs (D.B.A. Sp()rts Resort me.)
in September 2003, is currently vacant and is encumbered by alOO-foot wide PG&E high-tension power line easement. The property at this time is undeveloped and covered by gravel and weeds.
It is the Club's intention to develop an attractive, well-landscaped parking lot. The proposed plan will provide additional parking opportunities for Courtside Club as well as esthetically
enhancing Winchester Boulevard. Significant elements of the proposed landscape design are construction of a grass berm and installation ofhedges along the perimeter of the property,
very similar in appearance to the current landscape design of the Courtside Club. Other improvements include new trees, plants and low-level lighting. . The land is comprised of three
irregular shaped small parcels. Due to their size,shape, encumbrance by a PG&E easement and proximity ofhigh-tension power lines, Courtside Club believes a parking lot is a great surface
use ofland on a property encumbered by three parcels. The proposed parking plan will allow for 65 additional parking spaces. These spaces will be used primarily for Courtside Club employee
parking and occasional Club and community event parking. This improvement to the Club's parking facilities enables the Club to: • Provide more convenient parking for Courtside Club Members
Courtside Club, under the ownership of Western Athletic Clubs, is approaching its seventh anniversary. Over the past seven years the Club has been successful in establishing itself as
an important part of the Los Gatos community. Ninety two percent of the current membership is comprised of Los Gatos residents. Club members have come to rely on the Courtside Club not
only as athletic facility but also as a social club. Usage records indicate members use the facility on average three times per week with an average stay of2.15 hours. This type of usage
is not typical of an athletic clubs, therefore has caused parking challenges during our peak hours of operation (8:30am -10:30am and 4:30pm-6:30pm). The proposed parking plan will provide
a significant improvement to the Club's operation and the service it provides to its members. . Exhibit F
• Reduce parking congestion on Winchester Boulevard The Club understands the concern of the Town and the neighbors regarding traffic congestion on Winchester Boulevard. The proposed
par1?ng plan will reduce parking congestion on the street. This proposed plan can benefit Courtside Club, its surrounding neighborhood and the community as a whole. II Respond to neighbor
requests for more parking It is the Club's intention to work with its neighbors to achieve a win-win situation for the neighborhood, the Town and Courtside Club. This proposed project
affords Courtside Club with the chance to respond to neighbor requests to develop more parking. Knowing that past attempts to develop this property have been unsuccessful due to the
differing interests of the business sector and the homeowners who live in the· surrounding neighborhood, Courtside Club has been very methodical in its approach to this project by taking
the following steps: • Prior to the acquisition of the land the Club presented the project to the Los Gatos Conceptual Development Advisory Committee. The feedback to the proposed plan
overall was positive. Any and all comments given by the' committee and neighbors who attended the meeting have been considered and addressed in the proposed design and landscape plan.
• After receiving input from the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee and learning the neighbors were opposed to a Zone change, Courtside Club filed an application proposing to
amend the Zoning Ordinance rather than a General Plan and Zone change. • Courtside Club sent a letter to the homeowners on Newell Avenue and La Montagne Court describing the project
and welcomed any questions or comments. All concerns were responded to directly. • After several months ofnegotiations, Courtside Club secured an agreement with the Elks Club and Courtside
Club Office Plaza, owned by Mr. Burt Click to purchase the three parcels of land identified as 409-24-001, 409-24-002, 409-24-003. • Courtside Club presented the proposed text amendment
A-03-4 to the General Plan Committee on February 11,2004. . • Courtside Club has invited its neighbors to attend a series of informal meetings regarding the project on dates scheduled
at their convenience. At the General Plan Committee meeting on February 11, 2004 Committee Members and neighbors posed questions regarding the size of the Club's membership in relatiotl
to the parking facility. More so than the parking facility, it is the size ofthe Club, approved uses of space, equipment and member usage that dictates the membership level. Courtside
Club's current and future success relies on its ability to provide adequate facilities and exceptional service to its members. This Ordinance change is requested after extensive communication
with both the neighbors and your staff. Courtside Club is a long-standing partner in the community and a good corporate citizen. Courtside Club respectfully requests your positive consideration
of this request. Courtside Club looks forward to presenting this project to you at the Planning Committee Hearing on February 25,2004. In the interim, ifyou have any questions, please
feel free to contact Courtside Club General Manager, Lisa Graf at 408-395-7111. Thank you for your time.
REPORT TO: . FROM: LOCATION: EXHIBITS: REMARKS: Date: --=F.....,e=b=ruarv=-'-'2=5'-!.., For Agenda Of: February 25,2004 Agenda Item: ..-;1::.....-_ DESK ITEM The Planning
Commission Director of Community Development Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 Consider amending the Town Code to modify the conditional use permit table to allow parking lots on property
zoned R-1 (Single Family Residential) that are located on an arterial street. It has been determined that this prqiect could not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore,
the prqiect is not to the California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15061 (b)(3)). APPLICANT: Western Athletic Clubs, Inc. A. -F. Previously provided G. Letter from
interested neighbor dated February 24, 2004 (2 pages) This information was received after the staff report was distributed: Bud N. Lortz, Dire' unity Development Prepared by: Judie Gilli,
Assistant Planner BNL:JG:mdc N:\DEWudie\projects\Zoning -
'r
• f 'FEB-24-2,0C4 04:37PM FROM-MATTSON TECHNOLOGY -HUMAN RESOURCES February 24, 2004 Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission Director of Community Development Mr. B1,Jd Lortz To the Los
Gatos Planning Commission, +15104926279 T-31B P.UUI/UU, RECEIVED FEB 2 4 2004 TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING DIVISION This letter is in regard to the issue of the proposed
Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 for which there is a scheduled hearing before the Planning Commission Meeting on February 25 at 7:15 PM. .' .>.!,;.. My family
and I own the property and home at 108 Newell Avenue. immediately adjacent to the three lots on the comer of Newell Avenue and Winchester Boulevard currently zoned R-1. The General Plan
Committee recommended approval of a zoning ordinance change from R-1 to allow the 3 lots to be consolidated into a single parking lot by a 4/3split decision. I understand that it is
the Planning Commission's responsibility to determine· if this change in the conditional use permit is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Los Gatos. It appears to me and
all of my neighbors that I have spoken to that this decision appears to us to only consider the financial benefit to a sale commercial enterprise and not the citizens and taxpayers of
Los Gatos to whom you have the responsibility and obligation to serve. I wish to voice my very strong objection to the change in the conditional use permit from R.. 1 to a parking lot.
This property has beelnzoned as R-1 for many years and its temporary use as a parking lot for the Elks Club was only a temporary variance for the sale use of the Elks Club. When the
Elks Club was given the temporary variance it was noted at that time that the property would revert to R-1 should the·Elks Club vacate its current location. I ask that the Planning Commission
honor this original agreement.· . The qurrent zoning as R-1 shciuld Allowing Western Athletic Clubs to use this property as a parking lot goes against the original designated
use for this property. When the Elks Club was active. the property in question only served as a parking lot for' occasional events which where normally held in the evening. Even these
occasional events resulted in the overflow of cars onto Newell Avenue, frequently congesting traffic flow on Newell Avenue. As Courtside Club operates from early morning to late in the
evening, this lot will not be used on an occasional basis (as has been the case in the past) but daily and for approximately 18 hours each and every day. . 1 EXlIIBIT G
FeB-24-2004 04:37PM FROM-MATTSON TECHNOLOGY -HUMAN RESOURCES +15104926279 T-318 P.D02/00Z Fu 796 Allowing this property to be used, as a parking lot to serve Courtside Club will result
in a disruption of the tranquility, beauty and safety of our neighborhood in many ways including but not limited to: III Permanently destroying the visual appeal of the Newell Street
neighborhood; • '. Permanently destroying the serenity of the neighborhood through the increase in automobile noise throughout each and every day; • Substantially increasing environmental
contamination from automobile exhaust;, • Distasteful Illumination of adjacent homes fronf lighting from the parking lot; • Devaluation of current single family residences in close proximity
to the proposed lot; II Increasing auto congestion at the.street intersections of Wimbledon/Newell and Winchester; . • Permanent intrusion of a commercial use in a residential neighborhood;
• Potential increase in vandalism/crime that would be associated with a unpatrolled parking lot; . • Impacting the safety of children who play or ride their bicycles near or on the .
streets adjacent to the proposed·parking lot (a survey of the current practice of patrons and staff who rush going to and leaving the athletic club would bear out this statement). The
proposed zoning use change financially benefits only the 'sole Interests of the San Francisco company that operates Courtside Club and not any of the residents ofthe Wimbledon and Newell
neighborhoods. How can the interest of an athletic club outweigh the collective personal.and fInancial interests of the neighborhoods? Why can't Coultside Club build
a parking structurec)n their current·location that has direct access to Winchester Blvd? Yes -a is more expensive than acquiring additional land. The financial
consequences are shifted from a commercial enterprise to the local residents. There are alternative uses for this property, which Will better serve the greater benefit of the communityto
Whom you have an obligation to serve. Allowing this property. to be used for single-family residences and/or open space/neighborhood park would better serve the greater interests of
the adjoining neighborhoods an dprotectour overall quality of life, charm and allure of our neighborhood. For all of the reasons previously rioted, I ask you to represent the interests
of the citizenstaxpayers-voters of the Newell Ave. and Wimbledon Place neighborhoods and reject this request to qhange the ourrent zoning' status. Protect our interests, ourneighborhoods
and our Children. ... Daniel J. Devme, PhD. 108 Newell Avenue Los Gatos, CA 95032 2
APPEARANCES, PRO C E: E DIN G S· Los Gatos Planning Commissioners: Director Of Community Development: Town Attarney: Jean Drexel, Chair Michael Burke Phil Micciche Tom O' Donnell Lee
Quintana JoaIUle Talesfore Morris Trevithick Bud N. Lortz Orry Korb CHA.IR DREXEL: We have written communications. We were given one communication tonight, a desk item, on the zonil?-9
COde Amendment A-03-4. It was a letter from Daniel J. Devine, Ph.D. And SO our only written communication. There are no requested 8 continuances, no consent calendar, no continued
public 9 hearings. So we are going to open the public hearing to lO 10 consider zoning Code Amendment A-03-4. II Tr.anscribed by: Vicki L. Blandin 5500 Van Fleet Avenue Richmond CA 94804·
(510) 526-6049 II I'm a member of Courtside , and so do not have l2 12 an actual conflict of interest. don' t have any financial l3 l3 interest in Courtside or anything, but I am concerned
about l4 lS l6 l. 14 an appearance of conflict. And' so I think I am going to l5 recuse myself, just because I always have before with l6 issues that involve Courtside, because I don't
want anyone l7 out there to think that any part of the public is getting a l. better deal than they deserve because of a bias of a member 20 20 of this committee. So I'm going to ask
Commissioner Burke 2l 21 to come up here and do the honors, if he would? 22 23 22 23 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL, I also (inaudible). CHAIR DREXEL: Are you? So does that leave 24 2-t enough
people here? We've got four. 2S 2S COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:Fivee LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #J.. zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 2 CHAIR DREXEL: I mean weo'd have
four left, right? One, two, three. We'd have four left. So '1 don't know if you feel like you need to recuse yourself too? COMMISSIONER. O'DONNELL: I don' t, however no matter what I
decide, somebody's going to decide it was because I either belong to whatever. So it' B probably better to, recuse myself so it doesn't appear out,of term. CHAIR DREXEL: Yeah, it's just
the appearance. 1: ORRY KORB: My understanding of the situation is 2 that these membershi.ps are not equity memberships; they're customer memberships. My advice, which is entirely within
the discretion ·of the individual cOlllD.isaioner to accept or reject, is that there is no conflict of interest under the Fair Political Practice Act, because Courtside ia not a source
of income or any other provider of gifts or other financial benefit to the member of the COmmission. 11 specific bias in dealing with this application one way or 12 another, then you're
legally free to participate. If you 10 just don I t want any problems with our decision, just 11 because somebody thinks we've got a problem. It's a zoning 12 change, so it's not even
directly involved with the ... 1'3 Yeah, Nike? lO l3 So long as the Commissioner does not have any feel that whether you have a bias or not, that the l4 COMMISSIONER BURKE: Madame Chairman,
a couple of 14 appearance issue is something that concerns you, again, 15 points. One is because this is a zoning change. do we need 16 four votes one way or the other on it, and is
limiting us 15 it'S within your discretion to step down, but you're not 16 required to do so, so long as you don't have a bias. 18 you don' t have a bias either? 17 to four members going
to maybe cause a conflict in that 18 manner? l7 CHAIR DREXEL: I do not: have a bias. And Tom, l' 20 2l 22 ORRY KORB: You do need four votes to approve. COMMISSIONER BURKE: The second
thing is, the two members' membership, is it an equity position, or is it l' 20 2l 22 COMMISSIONER 0' DONNELL: NO, not at all. But again. I am very concerned about the people here who
live i:n the neighborhood_ I don' t know how I will vote, but if 23 24 2S strictly a customer based membership? Because I want to make sure the members would not be recusing themselves.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment I happen to vote in a way they don't like, t.hey're going to 23 be able to say to themselves
he wouldn't have voted that 24 way if he were not a member, and that \.:lOuld be unfortunate. 2S LOS GATOS PLANNING COMr1ISSION r1EETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4
Attachment 4
Los Gatos Planning Commissioners: A P PEA RAN C E S' Jean Drexel, Chair Michael Burke Phil Hicciche Tom 0' Donnell Lee Quintana Joanne Talesfore Morris Trevithick PRO C E E DIN G S;
CHAIR DREXEL: We have written communications. We were 9iven one communication tonight, a desk item, on the Zoning Code Amendment It was a letter from Daniel J. Devine,
Ph.D. And so that's our only Diractor Of Communi ty Development: Town Attorney: Bud N. Lortz Ony Kerb written communication. There are no requested e continuances, no consent calendar,
no continued public 9 hearings. So we are going to open the public hearing to 10 10 consider Zoning Code Amendment. 11 Transcribed by, Vicki L. Blandin 5500 Van Fleet
Avenue Richmond CA 94804 (510) 526-6049 11 I'm a member of Courtside , and so do not have 12 13 12 an actual conflict of interest. I don't have any financial 13 interest in Courtside
or anything, but I am concerned about 14 14 an appearance of conflict. And so I think I am going to 15 "17 ,. ,. 15 ,. 17 ,. ,. recuse myself, just because I always have before with
issues that involve courtside, because I don't want anyone out there to think that any part of the public is getting a better deal than they deserve because of a bias of a member 20
20 of this commit tee. So I'm going to ask COmmissioner Burke 21 22 23 21 22 23 to come up here and do the honors, if he would? COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL, I also (inaudible). CHAIR DREXEL:
Are you? So does that leave 24 24 enough people here? We've got four. 25 LOS GATOS PLl\NNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 CHAIR DREXEL: I mean we'd
have four left, right? one, two, three. We'd have four left. So I don't know if you feel like you need to recuse yourself too? COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I don't, however no matter what
r decide, somebody' B going to decide it was because I either belbng to whatever. So it's probably better to recuse myself so it deeao't appear out of term. CHAIR DREXEL: Yeah, it'S
just the appearance. I 25 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE, Five. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning COde Amendment A-03-4 ORRY KeRB: My understanding of the situation
is that these memberships are not equity memberships; they're customer memberships. My advice, which is entirely within the discretion of the individual commissioner to accept or rej
ect, is that there is no conflict of interest under the Fair Polit.ical Practice Act, because Courtside is not a source of income or any other provider of gifts or other financial benefit
to the member of the commission. 10 just don' t want. any problems with our decision, just 10 So 1.ong as the Commissioner does not have any 11 because somebody thinks we've got a problem.
It's a zoning 11 specific bias in dealing with this application one way or 12 change, so it's not even directly with the ... 13 Yeah, Mike? 12 13 another, then you're
legally free to participate. feel that whether you have a bias or not. that the If you 14 COMMISSIONER BURKE: Madame Chairman, a couple of 14 appearance issue is something that· concerns
you, again, 15 points. One is because this is a zoning change, do we need 16 four votes one way or the other on it, and is limiting us 15 it's within your discretion to step down, but
you're not 16 required to do so, so long as you don't have a bias. 17 to four merilbers going to maybe cause a conflict in that 18 manner? ,. 20 21 22 23 24 25 ORRY' KORB: You do need
four votes to approve. COMMISSIONER BURKE: The second thing is, the two members' membership, is it an equity position, or is it strictly a customer based membership? Because I want to
make sure the members would not be recusing themselves. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1., Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 17 ,. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CHAIR DREXEL:
I do not have a bias. And Tom, you don' t have a bias either? COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: No,. not all. But again, I am very concerned about the people here who live in the neighborhood.
I don't know how I will vote, but if I happen to vote in a way they don' t like, they're going to be able to say t,o themselves he wouldn' t have voted that way if he were not a member,
and that would be unfortunate, LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4
I don't feel I have any bias. but what I'd actually like to 2 do is wait and see. I also don I t want to disadvantage a fair hearing. CHAIR DREXEL: Yeah, it is an issue, I guess. ORRY
KDRB; Let me remind the Commission again. Four votes are required to approve t.he application, but all you're approving is a positive recommendation, because it's a zone change and does
as a matter of course go the Town 1 I'm not a member of Courtside, I'm a member of a different 2 one-is very much of customer relationship with a business, and I would hate to feel
I needed to recuse myself from a business I frequented on a regular basis. CHAIR DREXEL: well thank you, Commissioner Burke. Well maybe I'll stick around then? What do you think? COMMISSIONER
QUINTANA: And I would that. council for its consideration. So one way or another, this ,. 11 will be going to Council, and you need not, I think, 12 concern yourself with
whether the application would die at ,. 11 12 CHAIR DREXEL: What do you think, Joanne? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE : I would support that. I've seen you in act.ion here, ,and r do think that
you know 13 14 this level.CHA.IR DREXEL: Mike? 13 how to step out of issues and look at them rather with 14 perspective. 15 COMMISSIONER BURKE: I'm going to ask that Madame 15 CHAIR
DREXEL, All right. Well. what do you 16 Chairman and, my fellow convnissioner remain on this Boclrd 16 think, Tom? We're in the same boat here. 17 for this. As the neighbors know, I've
been on committees 17 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I am concerned if there 18 are too few people, it won' t be fair to anybody. 19 that have heard applications on this piece of property many
times, and I think that this Body is at its best when it is 18 ,. CHAIR DREXEL: Yeah, that' B the issue. 2. at its full strength or as close to it, and the fact that 21 we are just making
a recorrmendation, I think the more 22 opinions that we generate here is the fairer process for 23 everybody. So I would ask that the two members remain here, because I look at being
a member of an athletic club-25 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 2. 21 22 25 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: And as long as we don' t make
the final decision, more discussion is better t'ban less discussion, a.I14 I certainly ,agree with Counsel that there really is no legal (inaudible). LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 CHAIR DREXEL: Right. Okay, well then here we We'll stick around. We hashed that one through. All right, so we are going to open the public
hearing to hear zoni.Dg Code Amendment A-03-4. Will the applicant please step to the podium and the project. You have five minutes. Please state your name and address
for the record. RODGER GRIFFIN: Yes, good evening Madame Chair 1 good neighbor, and they recognize that it would benefit the 2 neighborhood to reduce the number of cars that are currently
parked along Winchester Boulevard. To accommodate those cars, Courtside is requesting permission to use the new site for parking, primarily for employees. Courtside is not interested
in building a structure on this site, and we can appreciate our neighbors' concerns along with the ramifications of ,. and members of the Planning I'm Rodger Griffin
11 of; Paragon Design Group here in Los Gatos. I'm here 12 tonight representing Courtside Club. Lisa Graff, the Club 10 rezoning the property to commercial. This is why we have 11 opted
to request this additional to the Conditional Use 12 Permi t Table, and therefore allow the si te to be used for 13 Manager, and Jim Gerber, of Athletic Clubs in San 14
Francisco, the parent corporation, are here to supplement 15 my presentation. Following my presentation, Lisa will 16 present a summary of the meetings that we held with the 17 neighbors.
13 parking wi thout rezoning. These three parcels are substantially covered by 15 easements, as indicated on this overhead. The hash area 16 that I have here, this is the outline of
the entire parcel. 17 All of this area is encumbered by easements. And by the 18 I recognize t.hat we are here for the 18 time you take setbacks on the remaining portion of the 19 'consideration
of an to the Zoning Code, and not 19 parcel, the actual building area is quite small. 2. specifically for the plan, as propose?-. However, I believe 2. The site as
we have proposed it has access only 21 22 in this case it's important to know how we got t.o this 21 from winchester .. No access will be proposed from Newell; 22 ; point
in the processing. 23 The Courtside Club is now the owner of all three 24 parcels. The club has continued to ""ork diligently to be a 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING C0I1MISSION MEETING 2/25/2004
. Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 and none is available from Wimbledon. The bus stop will 23 remain, as will the existing no parking along Winchester 24 Boulevard. 25 LOS GATOS
PLANNING C0l1MISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning
Code Amendment
During our meetings with the neighbors, we came to clearly their A number of other considerations have been discussed with the
Buqh as lighting, hours of use, et cetera. We fully expect by the time that we file for the A & S, along wi th the Conditional Use Permit, that we will have addressed each of their concerns.
This site now less than pleasant to look at, and an amendment t.o the ordinance would facilitate a 10 Then last Sunday I met wi th representation from the Newell neighborhood. Eleven
of our neighbors attended that meeting. In ,sunrnary, I think the meetings were direct, honest, and constructive. Similar to tonight's presentation, we reviewed the design layout of
the plan, gave a brief sUnI1\ary of the process the club has gone through to get to this point. and talked aqout the club' s intention to resolve its current crunch during
peak 10 hours of operation. 12 support any project that would require a zone chanQB.., They 13 have concerns about increased traffic to the surrounding 11 solution that will benefit
the surrounding neighborhood. 12 We respectfully request your positive recommendation to the 13 Town Council. And may I save any questions to follow Lisa 11 It was very clear that our
neighbors would not 14 Graff's summary of the neighborhood meetings? 14" hours of operation. We talked in great 18 Manager of the Courtside Club. 15 ,. 17
19 20 21 22 23 CHAIR DREXEL: Thank you. RODGER GRIFFIN: ·Okay, great. Lisa? LISA GRAFF: Good evening. Lisa Graff, General I met with two groups of neighbors, the first two representations
from the Wimbledon Place Homeowner's Association, Carol Shultz, a homeowner and member of that association; and Kevin Dinsure (phonetic), the president of Wimbledon Homeowner's Association.
That was on Friday, the 15 about the security of the lat.. They are very 16 concerned that Courtside take measures and put systems in 17 place that would secure the lot
and and ensure that it would be 18 used for Courtside Club and its guests only, not overflow 19 parking. specifically for the Elks Lodge. 20 Through a Conditional Use Pemit, our neighbors
21 would like to ensure that our busioe.ss does not change the 22 way we do our pusines,9 practice currently, to not include 23 more group events that may cause noise that would interfere
20th of February. 25 LOS GATOS PLl\NNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item lIl. Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 1 very much like to see Courtside Club stop using the Elks for employee parking
as a result of this project. I found the neighbors' requests and concerns to be very reasonable. I feel through our design and with a Condi tional Use permit, we should be able to address
all their concerns and create a win-win solution. Thank you. CHAIR DREXEL: Thank you. Questions? Mike? CoMMISSIONER BURKE: First of all, for you, Mr. 25 with the residential convnunity.
Our Newell neighbors would Leis GATOS PLANNING CalMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 10 1 and there is no construction that can take place under that. We
can plant trees and such, but they have a maximum height, and there is a list of approved trees that we can use with PGGtE's discretion. COMMISSIONER BURKE: Do you know when those easements
were placed on this piece of property? RODGER GRIFFIN: No, I do not know the dates that they were placed on the property. 11 about the terms of how they were placed on the property?
Griffin, you should put a map or a plan up there with these 10 11 restrictions. I know cutting diagonally across I believe 12 there's an underground water main? 10 12 COMMISSIONER BURKE:
And do you know anything RODGER GRIFFIN: The terms? 13 RODGER GRIFFIN: Oh, you want the one wi th the 13 COMMISSIONER BURKE: I mean was the owner of the 14 easements? 14 property at
the time compensated for the easements, or was 15 15 it an imminent domain? ,. CHAIR DREXEL: Yes. COMMISSIONER BURKE: The easement, yes; the ,. RODGER GRIFFIN: That's a history that
I'm not 17 easement plan. I'm just curious, what are.the restricted 17 totally familiar with, and I'd probably be. giving 18 uses that can be done, and what are the easements and what
18 misinformation if I r.eally address that. 19 are the restrictions? " COMMISSIONER BURKE, Okay. 20 21 22 23 24 RODGER GRIFFIN: Okay, this easement right here is a thirty-foot wide
water line easement, and we can only pave on that area; there can be no construction. This remaining area is a hundred-foot easement for the overhead 20 21 22 22 24 RODGER GRIFFIN: The
only thing I do )<;now is that there were two different owners of the properties previously. One property owner was the Elks, who owned this parcel and this parcel. and man named Click
owned this \'lires that go across to the sub-station on the other side, 25 25 parcel in between. And this parcel came up for sale. The LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION
2/25/2004 Item #1. zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 11 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 12
1 Water District used to own the property about thirty-feet" 2 and they sold it to Click, and in turn, .Western Athletic Clubs has p'!J.rchased it from Click. as well as the other two
parcels from the Elks. COMMISSIONER BURKE: Okay, and I have a question for the manager of Courtside . I know at the General Planning Committee one of the concerns was membership, and
would membership expand if you have more parking? will it CHAIR OREXEL; As a follow-up, would you be 2 willing to sign an agreement voluntarily that you wouldn't be increasing the membership
of Courtside, LISA GRAFF: No, we don't think that would be in our best interest business wise, because it may be the case, like some of our clubs in San Francisco that have been around
for twenty-five years, usage patterns will change. It may be the case that members who use the club expand if you have more parking, and what guarantees would 10 11 there be that it
would not expand if there is more parking? 10 11 two to three times per week now wi th an average average stay of two-and-a-quarter hours, which is the case, may use the 12 LISA GRAFF:
Certainly. and I understand that is 12 club once a week with an average stay of an hour. So as B a concern of both the Council members and our neighbors. 14 one that I appreciated the
opportunity to respond. The 15 membership level is a fWlction of club usage, and courtside 13 our business matures and our membership changes, or the 14 usage pattern changes, we'd like
the ability to adjust our 15· membership level according to that. 17 reflective of your current usage patterns, and the number 16 Club, unlike any of the other clubs that I've personally
17 managed, has an unusual mealbership usage pattern in which " CHAIR DREXEL: What about an agreement that was 19 our membership level is based on club usage " We have no 18 members
at our club stay for a longer period of time. So of people that are using it with your current " pattern? I would image there would be some way to draft 20 intention of increasing
the membership level with its 20 something that would reflect that. since that' s your 21 22 23 2. 25 curre.nt state and current usage level by the members. I hope that answers your
question. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1., zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 13 21 22 25 intention already, we don't want to arm-twist you or anything, but if it
would resolve that issue, it might be a LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1., Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 14 LISA GRAFF: Well, as the club manager, I don't 2 know
that I'm in t.he posit.ion to to that. I would have to defer that question to our corporate office. CHAIR DREXEL: All right, thank you'. LISA GRAFF: Okay. CHA.IR DREXEL: Joanne?
COMMISSIONER. TALESFORE: Yeah, I had a question. It'may sound like you've already answered it, however I'd 1 parking lot off of Winchester, and provide them parking at this new proposed
site. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: So it's for the employees then? LISA GRAFF: Primarily for the employees, yes. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Arid the cars that are parked on Winches ter, are
those employee cars? LISA GRAFF: For the most part. I'm sure 10 members, if they can' t find a spot in the lot, they can 11 park on the street and they may be doing that. like you to
one more time explain to me Courtside's allover 10 11 goal with putting this parking lot in. And I know you said 12 parking, but could you elaborate a little· bit? 12 .COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:
And how many employees 14 LISA GRAFF: Certainly. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: And how do you see it as 13 do you have currently? LISA GRAFF: We just got this number for the Town. 15 benefiting
the Town and the situation that you're in now? 15 I believe it was in the range of a hundred-and-eighteen. 16 LISA GRAFF: Certainly. Well, my primary goal is 16 COMM!SSIONER TALESFORE:
A hundred-and-eighteen? 17 to provide my members convenient parking during our peak 17 And how many parking places are proposed? 19 site. But a:gain, those are part-time and full-time
18 hours of operation, and we consider those to be e: 30 to 19 10:30, and 4:30 to 6:30. Those are crunch periods for us. 18 LISA GRAFF: Seventy-three are proposed in this ;7'---_
20 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: 8:30 to 10:30 am or pm? 21 LISA GRAFF: 8:30am to 10:30am. 4:30pm to 22 6:30pm. We've done such things as created a valet parking 23 service and so forth, but
my ultimate goal is to free up 2' 25 the parking lot, take all of ·my employees out of the LOS GATOS PLA1'<'NING COM'HSSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 15
20 employees, so part-time employees have different shifts 21 throughout the day_ 22 CHAIR DREXEL: So how many employees would you 23 have on site at any particular time? 2' 2S LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 16
LISA GRAFF: rt could be as much as fifty-five, COMMISSIONER BURKE: Maybe I asked the question 2 during our sunvner hours. w:rong. You said in the future you may want, to incre'ase OIAIR
DREXEL: All right, thank you. your membership because the membership USf! changes? OIAIR DREXEL: Mike? LISA GRAFF: Mmm-hmm. LISA GRAFF: Correct. COMMISSIONER BURKE: How do you measure
,that, and COMMISSIONER BtJRKE: You about you base your membership on the usage of your members? COMMISSIONER BtJRKE: What would be your indication 6 of that? Would it be
that you had leas members coming in 7 during the week, or would it be that you would walk through the club and there would be more open machines? I'm just 9 trying to get a feel of what
your (inaudible) would say we 10 can add for members. Or it would be how full the parking the maximum number you have during your peak periods? I'm 11 lot is? What w'ould be your indicators?
what I mean is is it member trips per week, per day? Is it 10 11 12 trying to see what is your .canary in the mine that' B saying 12 LISA GRAFF: I it woulp. be all three of
LISA GRAFF: Well, I don' t think we have too many 16 have a check-in system, that every time a· member checks in 13 we've got too many Tt\embers? 15 members. But the way that we measure
it currently is we OIAIR DREXEL: Joanne? 13 those things that you mentioned. There' a really no 14 scientific approach to determining this, but it's not in our 15 best interest to oversell
the club. If members can' t get on 16 equipment, if they can't find a parking apace, they can't get on a lounge chair, it doesn't serve us well. the club So I can break that 17 17 r
their usage is recorded.. 18 down to the hour, which I do. That's how I can come up 19 with thes,e prime times. In addition, if you walk 18 1. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE :
A follow-up on that. Did Courtside ever have a cap on its membership? 20 the fitness center all the equipment may be used, the 20 LISA GRAFF:. The previous owners did. 21 showers are
being used. So there are areas in the club in 21 COMMISSIONER. TALESFORE: The previous owners did. 22 22 That's what I thought. Okay, thank you. 23 24 which, we could feel an impact,
based on the number of members in the club. 23 24 CHAIR DREXEL: Lee? COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: I just wanted to clarify 2S 2S something. You said when you met with the Newell LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment 'A-03-4 l? 18 1 neighborhood
that they did not want the employees parking in that lot, is that correct? The concert;lS that we have about this proj ect ;z frankly are the types of things t.hat have been discussed
LISA GRAFF: In the Elks Lodge. CUrrently now I lease spots from the Elks. COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: Oh, and that's not this 3 tonight reflected in your questions, having
to do wi th what 4 does this really mean and what is the actual goal for the Courtside Club? (inaudible)? LISA GRAFF: That's not part of this project, no. COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: Okay,
that's what I want The concern that we have is that this is about additional parking, which will turn into ultimately additional usage of the club, which will turn intq to clarify. Thank:
you. RODGER GRIFFIN: That's over across the street, 10 across Newell. 10 traffic on our streets, whi,ch will also translate to additional concerns about security.
There has been significant issues around break-ins in cars and that sort of 11 12 CHAIR DREXEL: All right, any other questions? Thank you very much. 11 12 thing I which will bring this
closer to the residents on Newell. 13 LISA GRAFF: You're welcome. 13 And what we would ask for is that these types 15 When it's your turn to speak, please come to the podium and CHAIR
DREXEL: All right. I have speaker cards. 14 16 state your name and address for the record. I'm going to 14 of concerns be carefully considered as you consider this. 15 I'm concerned
as I hear statements being made, but then I'm 16 not seeing commitTtl:e:nt to follpw that. up. 18 help to get rid of traffic on Winchester, the only way that 17 give two speakers' names,
and if one of you will be in the 18 wings waiting, we'll get through you a little faster-. The 17 For example, the fact that this parking lot will 19 first speaker will be Mary Rose,
the second one Max Perlman. 21 resident at 501 Clearview Drive, and I'm also here 22 representing the Homeowner's Association, 23 which has one-hundred,.-and-eleven
homeo\'mers, with streets 20 24 2' MARY ROSE: Hi, my name is Mary Rose. I'm a that flaI)k both sides of Wimbledon Drive. 19 I can see that it will eliminate parking on Winchester is
if 20 the parking on Winchester is turned' into a No Parking zQ,ne_ 21 Otherwise, I have sat for great lengths of time I an hour and 22 two, and watched the traffic patterns and the
parking 23 patterns in the lot. What I have observed is that the 24 parking is at capacity on Winchester Boulevard even when when the 25 lot is half empty. It is much easier for a member
to come LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 LOS GATOS PLANNING COI1MISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #;1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4
19 20
zipping out of the club, hop into their car, immediat.ely turn right and .head right down Winchester, rather than get into queue to get out of the parking lot. think it's far 1 quest.ion
,t.hat and all· that one would have to do to justify increasing membership is to say t:.hat peop}e are staying less. There's no audi t right now i there's no 4 more convenient, so I
don' t believe that the cars are going to go away on Winchester. The other concern that we have with regard to Winchester is the placement of the access in and out of the accountability.
CHAIR DREXEL: Thank you. All right, next Max Pearlman. and next will be Jack Aiello. MAX PER.I..MAN: Max Perlman, 183 Newell Avenue. watched it actually-very closely tonight. That is
not a 13 parking area right nOWi that's a red zone, and it is in fact 10 u12 parking lot and the impact it's going to have on people making right-hand turns from Wimbledon Drive, which
leads out from our property. In fact., it would be along this bottom level. You make a right-hand turn, basically going perpEmdicular to the bottom of the drawing here, and I 10 11 12
13 Similar projects have been requested on this site. Originally about a year-and-a-half ago t:.he request was for a medical building on the corner lot t:.here, and t.wenty-six parking
for the club on this end. That was a project that was started by the Elks Club and has nothing to do with COurtside. But:. for t.he last year-and-a-half cars of the 14 a lane
of traffic. So if there are people queued up to go 14 employees have been parked on the back of my house, and I 15 into a parking lot there, it only would take three cars to lS' only
have a wooden fence between myself and the Elks. And I 16 make it impossible then to make a turn out of 17 Wimbledon ,Drive, thus blocking traffic on Wimbledon Drive.
,. I'd like to provide some other thoughts for you 16 understood from our meetings that the Courtside Club is 17 st:.ill going to need more parking space, but:. t:.hey would make 18
at:.t:.empts t:.t:.o locate it elsewhere other t:.han the Elks Club. 20 codes anyway. "r have written to the Council. I've written 21 to Mr. Bud Lortz, and I have his replies here, that
he says 22 that the Elks can do anything that they wish with that:. 23 parking lot. But I t:.hink that the (inaudible) t:.hing is you 19 with regard to the usage of the club, and encourage
that in 20 some part of this process that there do be a cap reinstated 21 on the ,club as it had-been in the past:., and t:.hat being that 22 where it is right now usage is
stated as X number of 23 visits by people that last X number of hours. I'm also a 24 member of the Courtside club, and I've never had anybody 19 24 But the 8ituation 1s that the City
doesn' t:.enforce cannot lease a park.ing lot, as a .frat:.ernal club, to a 25 time me I've been timed in, but:. not out:.. So I 2S commercial entity and say that:. they
have free use of it. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning'Code Amendment A-03-4 So I think this is not going t:.o stop with the 2 granting of this ordinance,
that there will still bea continual ne.ed for more parking, and t:.he traffic sit:.uation is going to change wit:.h the various other projects of Sobrato and townhouses, which will bring
an extra stream of traffic along Winchester. And in any case, ,the bike lane that should be going from there is being given over to car parking on Winchester out:.side the Court:.side.
And when you have twentyfour townhomes going in, there may be somebody who would 10 LOS GATOS PLlINNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1., Zoning Code AmendmentA-03-4 22 COMMISSIONER
TALESFORE: Where do you live in 2 relationship to this parking lot? MAX PERLMAN: I don't live anywhere near there. I live on the other side of the Elks. Do you know where the Elks Lodge
is? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Right. MAX PERLM:A1'!: You know that pinky wall that goes along? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE : Yes. MAX PERLMAN: I'm behind that wall, and my master 10 like to
cycle to downtown, and they wouldn't:. be able to do 11 it at that juncture. 12 There's an easement:. on my property from when D Winchester was widened to accommodate a three-foot bike
11 12 13 bedroom suite backs onto t:.he area where they park. And this was one of the point:.s that:. I wanted to make, but I lost it. And I don' t know how feasible it is. I'm not entirely
against them parking there, but 14 lane. I lost part of my embankment; they put up this 14 I'm just:. saying if you change an R-l zone and allow a lS massive wall instead, and by that
they also took away the 16 screening of my home from Newell Avenue. 17 And now I have the Winchester traffic and t:.he 18 traffic on Elks Club Lodge, which is a sixteen-hour a
B day car park basically, or fifteen hours. So· whereas with 20 the activities of the Elks it was only mostly an evening 21 t:.hing and an occasional lunchtime t:hing, but with courtside
lS commercial car park lot on it:., you should apply the same 16 rules as are applied to car parks elsewhere, that the 17 residences are screened by a wall, a masonry wall, and not 18
just a loose fence, because I get lights at night shining 19 right into my bedroom when t:.hey open the car, the cars 20 starting up, which are polluting, and I don' t see on the 21
plan that was shown here before t:hat they even intend to. 22 parking there, it's become from 7:00 in the morning, 7:30 in 22 But I know this is not for you, but if when you 23 the am,
through to the late evenings when the Elks use it. CHAIR DREXEL: Thank you very much. Joanne? 23 change a zoning, you could stipulate t:.hat: t:.he general rule, 24 because I underst:.and
that:. if it was a commercial enterprise, -_..- 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING COM>lISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 23 25 they would have to put up a masonry
wall, but because it's LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 24
They, mentioned something about contracting across the road 13 with ICTV to get the eighteen places which they no longer 14 will maybe not use on the Elks parking lot, which is over
15 here. They have a parking ·lot across the road at ICTV, lEi which is a commercial enterprise. But that means that the 17 seventy-three 1'a not enough. And if more members are 18 joined,-then
the employees will still park up there. in an R-l zone ,tl;lere is no law. But there is no enforcement 2 on the part of oU;r Town Planning to enforce it. When I 3 complain, I get letters
like this from Mr. Bud Lortz, which 4 says they are entitled to wha'tever the heck they like. CHAIR DREXEL: All right. well thank you. Are there any other questions? Lee? COMMISSIONER
QUINTANA: Where would you propose that a masonry wall be placed? ,. can submit it. COMMISSIONER TREVITIIICK: And all around on 2 Wimbledon and the others as well? CHAIR DREXEL: That's
all right. Joanne? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: I just have one more their property for commercial usage. And Mr. Bud Lortz didn' t think that was the case. I have a. letter from him saying
they can do what they like. COMMISSIONER TREVITIIICK: Thank you. MAX PERLMAN: If you'd like to Bee this letter, I MAX PERLMAN: well, it" s obviously outside on 4 Winchester maybe. I
can't identify who is parking. S submitted a complaint. to the City about my aspect of it. G which was only the parking on the upper Blks Lodge, where they have by contract leased eighteen
parking spots, as per Ms. Lisa Graff' a own words to ua at the meeting on Sunday. So that was an illegal lease in my opinion, my humble opi.nion, because the Elks Lodge is a fraternity
lodge, and anything they do for their club they can do, but not lease lS 11 10 13 12 17 ,. here. This wall should be a masonry wall. I'll be quite honest with you, I think that eventually
the Elks will still be using it; they will still need the Elks parking lot. MAX PERLMAN: There's a house here and a house 10 11 12 20 your concern. Thank. you. Are there any other questions?
" CHAIR DREXEL: All right. Well, we understand 19 question. I guess J: didn't notice this. Did you say that 20 there's a bikeway right outside? 21 Morris? 21 MAX -PERLMAN: Yea, in front
of the wall below the 23 for us where you think the employee parking is at the 24 present. time? 22 Elks Lodge and my home there is a bike lane, but it stops at 23 Courtside, which is.
over there actually. But now you've got 22 COMMISSIONER TREVITHICK: Could you just say again 24 twenty-four townhouses being built further down on 25 MAX PERLMAN: It's on my back fence.
2S Winchester. They need access into the city, unless Loa LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1., Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 26 that"s the case. 1. Gatos built chose homes so they should go shopping 2 Campbell. CHAIR DREXEL: Interesting. Okay. Before you
leave, Bud, tell us about the Elks Club, the eighteen 5 parking spots, and whether Elks is zoned R-l, and whether it's okay for them to lease space in an R-l zone if 1 very active
business, because it could get far more 2 intensive. The Elks,' activities are fairly low key these 3 days, but they do have special events from time to time. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE:
So a follow-up on that, the eighteen spaces that Mr. Perlman is talking about, 6 employees from Courtside parking along his wall. I guess there's no way we could ask them to shift where
they park so that the low use of the Elks wouldn't bother him as much as a solid eighteen employees? 00 you know what I' m saying? I don't know if we can mitigate any of this, I'm just
curious. DIRECTOR LORTZ: We can ask them to do anything. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE : Could we do something 10 11 DIREc:roR LORTZ: There was another question? COMMIssI;ONER TALESFORE: About
the wall, the screening I guess. DIRECTOR LORTZ: The Elks have a Conditional Use Permit that was issued probably in the 60's. The Use Permit 11 10 14 do. But as I observed the parking'
out there, the people 16 wall-along Winchester, with the car headlights facing 17 Winchester. Now certainly when somebody p_ulls into the 18 parking lot, there may pe some lights that
affect a 19 neighbor, but the reality is that they do park closest to 12 doesn' t have any conditions. It just says a fraternal 13 organization can use it. I've conferred with the Town
14 Attorney and the was that the Elks can allow 15 people to park on their propElrty. And in terms of· any 16 requirements for walls or anything else, it's like
any 17 existing non-conforming situation. We allow it to continue. 18 We don't go out and require people to build a wall when we 19 change the code, so there is no requirement for a
wall. 12 13 lS like that?DIRECTOR LORTZ: We could ask. That's all we can that are parking on that lot are parking along the retaining 21 about that situation? They're locked up by this
old CUP? 20 CHAIR DREXEL: So there's nothing much we can do 20 Courtside. There may be eighteen. people. so so the eighteenth 21 person is closer to Mr. Perlman. 22 DIRECTOR LORTZ: They
are. The best thing that' a 22 CHAIR DREXEL: Mr. perlman, what do you think 23 happening .ia the Elks, are not a very busy organization. If 23 about all this? 24 a fraternal organization
purchased that Use Permit and that 24 MAX PERLMAN: This is not correct. That is just a 2S property from the Elks, it would be unfortunate if it was a 25 fabrication. There is that incline
of their drive\<,ay; it LOS GATOS PLANNING CQI1!HSSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item 1t1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMIHSSION !4EETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code
Amendment A-03-4 27 2B
11 12 10 raised here. My problem is my problem, and it's not Perlman, I'm sorry. Was it for Mr. Perlman, or was it' for COMMISSIONER BUlUCE: But could we cond! tion the Staff? use of
t.his lot to be for an organization that only parking on their own property, such that they could not then park on the Elk's lot? DIRECTOR LORTZ:' I don't know, th,at.'s
a legal question. I'll have to run that one by the Town Attorney. CHAIR DREXEL: Thank' you, Mr. Perlman. Jack Aiello, and then Bridget Miller. Oh, I'm sorry. Lee? Hr_ this parking lot,
we couldn't condition Courtside, because it's a different parcel . . DIRECTOR LORTZ: If I understood you cc:>rrectly, we could not condition the Elks property in any way, shape, or form.
H13 12 10 ,. CHAIR DREXEL: on this site. We hear that. We .1 goes up _ And they do park some cars on there I and that' s 2 preferable because it's less to walk down. I mean, all these
fitness people can't walk, but it's easier to walk from the bottom then the top of t.he car park. Cars are 5 continually parking. I have about a hundred-and-forty feet of fence wi th
the Elks, and they are continually parking. I have photographs,. which I've sent: the City, of the cars parked one next to the other. They like to park there CHAIR DREXEL: okay, you
know what we' 11 do? MAX PERLMAN: But that is not the question because they're shaded by trees. u necessarily a problem that should be discussed here. 13 wanted to avoid that same problem
on this site. lEO
wait if 'you like. 15 hear you, but we were just hoping that maybe if the Town 16 will ask, maybe you will receive, It:. doesn't hurt. 15 COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: It was for staff. It
can 18 twenty-five years asking. 17 MAX PERLMAN: I have asked. live been here for 17 ,. CHAIR DREXEL: NO, that's okay. Go for it. COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: The Elks' Conditional Use 19
CHAIR DREXEL: Well, we're going to ask the Town 19 Permit., did it cover these three parcels as well? 21 Avenue went in twenty years ago. The neighbors that live 22 . out there would
know better than I do, probably almost 20 Staff to also ask on our behalf, and maybe. . . You know, 21 that',s all we can do. But thank. you for your input. We 22 appreciate it. One
more. Mike? 20 DIRECTOR. LORTZ: No, as far as I know. Newell 23 COMMISSIONER BURXE: I know we had the discussion 23 thirty. .And the Elks' Use Permit really runs with the 2,( at the
General Planning Committee that if this 25 were to pass and the Condi tional Use Permi t was granted for 24 property that's improved. It doesn' t run with this property
25 because the property owner's been sold. So it' s our LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 29 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 30 .-. 4 property? 1 interpretation that the Use Permit for the Elks runs wi th 2 the Elks property that is located south
of Newell. CHAIR DREXEL: And it never applied to this JACK AI:ELLO: Am·I to assume that tl:lat's the 2 wording of the Amendment to the zoning? CHAIR. DREXEL: Yes. proposed amendment.
DIRECTOR LORTZ: The one thing I would like to 5 clarify is that the Town Attorney offered a slight modification of that language. The text that is before the JACK AIELLO: Bud, can I
ask you this? Would that street." I' 11. read that again. "Parking lots that a nearby commercial use located on a previously unimproved property in the R-112 Zone on an arterial
street." Planning Commission for consideration reads, "'Parking lots that serve a nearby commercial use located on a previously unimproved property in the R-112 Zone on an arterial 12
10 11 the overflow of traffic when they had events always went to that area, not the easement, but the one closest to Newell DIRECTOR LORTZ: Not to my knowledge. CHAIR DREXEL: Thank
you. All right, Mr. Aiello? JACK AIELLO: My name is Jack Aiello, and I live at 135 Newell Court. I've been a resident t.here for fortyodd years. In that last remark there that Bud made,
in meetings that I held held wi th the previous city managers, there was a strong relationship (inaudible) Use Permit, because 12 10 11 13 ,. 15 Avenue, the overflow parking went,on
all those three lots, and 'that kept it away from the area. And now they don' t own it, because Courtside Club 13 ,. 15 apply only to these three lots and nothing
else in Los Gatos? DIRECTOR LORTZ: Correct. 16 owns it. And so we're pretty worried about that now, 17 because Bud says they're low key, and they are. They have 17 Aiello. Well, actually
it took us a little while to get CHAIR DREXEL: All right. Your time is up Mr. 18 less events, but they still have thei7" events. And they ,. that thing up there. What d? you want to
say? 15' have another one scheduled in March, and they just had one 19 JACK AIELLO: well, I'm worried like the lady from 20 recently. So we're really worried about that. 20 the Wimbledon
Estates, who mentioned about traffic. 21 The other thing I'd like for Bud, to do is put up 21 Seventy-three cars can park in that lot if that is accepted 22 the wording of that amendment
on the board here, because I'd 22 by the Town of LoS Gatos. we, coming down Newell Avenue 23 like to ask questions on it. 23 right next to that parking area to make a right-hand turn,
2' 25 CHAIR DREXEL: We can do that. (Pause while wording is put visual board.) 2. 25 if we get lucky, we look down the road to our left, where that stop light is, where the Courtside
is located; and ...,hen LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 31 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/200' Item #3., Zoning Code
Amendment A-03-4 32
1-2 their ingress and egress on l4inchester. It's great, a good 3 place for it. What I want it put in there for is for other lots. 5 We'll say well this happened, we can use this for
our eight on another lot. So for making it that a parking lot should ingress and egress on the arterial. it' B red, boy, we got a chance to make a right-hand turn so 2 that
we can make a left-hand turn onto Lark. Now we've got to compete with seventy-three cars. It's true, as the manager from Courtside had 5 indicated, that a lot of those are employees,
and so they 6 shouldn' t be moving in and out. But at some time they're going to all be ,moving-in or out, and so that worries us a 1 going to go onto the residential street. Now. they
have put 10 correctly from previous hearings, you're kind of located diagonal from this lot? CHAIR DREXEl.: All right. well thank you. Mike? COMMISSIONER BURKE: Hiss Miller, if I remember
BRIDGET MILLER: Yes. COMMISSIONER BURKE: If the Conditional Use Permit 11 12 great deal, because it's it's tough even now at times to get to the right side on Winchester in order to
make a left-hand turn onto Lark. I hope you' 11 keep that in mind. CHAIR DREXEL: All right, we'11 do that. Are there any questions for Mr. Aiello? Thank you very much. All right, Bridget
Miller, and then Carol Shultz. 11 12 10 14 you be supportive of this? 13 ,. BRIDGET MILLER: Iiva at 115 Newell Court. Hi, my name is Bridget Miller. My concern wi th the amendment 13
Table did ·say ingl;"ess and egress from the arterial, would 19 .And because they are on Newell, there's 09 room for a 20 backing up going forward, because you're waiting for 21 Winchester.
So I' va backed up as many as four cars onto 22 Winchester, trying to get into the Elks Club parking lot, 23 but we're trying to get out. 15 here is that I'd like to have it added that
the ingress and ,. egress be on the arterial. And" Why I bring that up is 17 because when I try to get out on Newell in the morning; 18 Courtside employees are trying to get into .the
Elks Club. BRIDGET MILLER: From my personal point, I moved 15 16 in five years ago, it's been an unofficial parking lot for 17 the Elks Club. I do have concerns that it becomes a 18
Courtside parking lot. If the Elks have their Hotrod 19 Association meetings that show up and they have no place to 20 park, they will be in our neighborhood. I realize that 21 we" re
forfeiting when the Elk,s Club have large events; their 22 I?ancake Breakfasts, they've got parties at night. They've 23 now lost their overflow parking lot. Courtside has a And when
you have the ingress and egress on a 24 parking issue, so when I moved in it was an unofficial 24 25 residential street, if the parking lot is full. they're 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETIN<:l 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 33 LOS GATOS PLIlIINING COHMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 3. 1 parking lot, but I do want the
ingress and egress on the :01 arterial. BRIOOET MILLER: Yeah, but you cannot get two cars 2 and two parked cars On Newell. It is not a wide enough CHAIR DREXEt.: Joanne? COMMISSIONER
Tl\LESFORE: I have a' slightlr 5 different question. It was previously discussed at the 6 General Planning Committee, and suggested by Steve Glickman that perhaps the neighbors could
use this parking lot for an event of their own, whether it was a block party, or I'm not 3 street. CHAIR DREXEL: Thank you, Miss Miller. Carol 5 ShUltz, and then Dan Devine. CAROL SHULTZ:
Carol Shultz at 112 Greenfield Place. My home is right behind the Courtside Tennis Club, near their indoor courts. sure what it was. Do you see that as something feasible, or something
that you would take advantage of if that was the I was very instrumental when Western Athletic bought the courtside Club and they were seeking an alcoholic 10 10 11 anywhere? case, or
is that recommendation or suggestion not to go 14 as much as possible, because it will keep them out of the 15 residential. I don't see anybody in our neighborhood 16 currently having
huge parties that need to use a parking 11 lot. that exactly stated what we needed and what we did not want. And actually it worked out so well, when I met beverage control license.
The process took over three years. It took a lot of time, but one thing we learned was how important it was to get conditions written, conditione 11 14 13 12 15 with Lisa I complimented
her, beca\.\se for the last several 16 years they've been good neighbors as far as the noise and 17 how it impacts Greenfield Court. We even had a condition COMMISSIONER TALESFORE :
And how many cars park on 18 put on there that the lights on Greenfield would be BRIDGET MILLER: From the Newell part, I think Courtside is going to have employee parking
there, we hope 18 11 12 19 Newell at any given time? 190f£ at 10: 00 0' clock on a timer every night. That has been 20 BRIDGET MILLER: Currently right now the residents 20 amazing. 21
park there, and it: is tough because if you park a car on 21 I'm bringing this out because as we're looking at 22 • each side, there's only a lane and a half to get by. 22 this parking
lot, we need to be sure that we think very 23 Somebody has to stop. 2. 2' COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: And it's the residents that park on Ne\'lell? 23 carefully before we put the conditions.
And what I would 24 propose is that these conditions be done with... I believe 25 the process before is the Planning Department came out with LOS GATOS PLANNING
MEETING 2/25/200' Item Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 35 LOS GATOS PIJINNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/200' Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 36
1 some suggested ones. Courtside also added them. We added them. And we came together on an agreement where everybody 3 could live with those conditions, and those have protected CHAIR
DREXEL: Thank you. Any quest1ons? Lee? COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: Just one. When was the 3 gymnasium created? Was that after? 4 us immensely. I'm very concerned when they turned an inside
tennis court into a gymnasium. When I found out about that, I ,was very concerned. because I could see them now. They have lost the revenue from their banquet facilities with the 10
alcohol beverage license and the conditions that we put on that, so when they went and turned this into a gymnasium, then they could go into league basketball play. They could CAROL
SHULTZ: That was since they got the permit, 5 and noW' my years are going t.o be fuzzy. I don' t know if 6 that was like 2000 or 2001, but about a year after they got the Conditional
Use Permit, all of a sudden, just as a fluke I found out: that they were in the process of taking one of their four indoor courts an9-turning it into a gymnasium. I called Natalie Valdez
and I said, -What on earth lO are you doing?-She said, -It's not going to be a venue'.-told then that that would never happen, because they' did not 13 have adequate parking to facilitate
that kind of in 11 12 find other venues where they could generate revenue. I was II 12 13 I said, -Now you have a place to put parties and banquets,because of course,
one of the condi tions on their Conditional Use Permit was if they do have a function with l. tile club. 14 alcohol, all the windows and doors need t.o be closed.. Well, 16 seventy-some
spots, and what I can see is it changing their 17 operation, which has been mentioned before. I would like to '18 see the conditions be very specific. You've 'asked the right 19 questions
tonight and I'm very, very encouraged. We need to l5 I'm very concerned now because they're adding 15 inside an indoor tennis court is a nice place to throw a 16 party too, and I was
told no, I dicln' t have to be concerned 17 with that, because if they wanted any kind of league 18 championship play or ot.her big venues, they don' t have 19 enough parking spaces
to facilitate that. 20 be sure that the membership is controlled, and· the 20 I have the original documentation when Western 25 would endanger the peace and. quiet of our neighbOrhood.
21 activities, the venues that they offer, do stay with what 22 they have right now and they are not expanded. The noise 23 potential is very great on Greenfield place, and we worry
2. that the activity change and the growth of courtside Club 21 Athletic Clubs fj.rst presented their Whole growth to the 22 Planning COIDIIlission in I think it was 1996 or 1997. And
in 23 the City Planners' report it is stated that there were 24 enough parking spaces to support t.he activity of the club, 25 and that documene was signed by Jim Gerber, so that when
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/200. Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 37 1 they came in, they had an idea of what their vetl;ue was going 2 to be, what activities they
would have. And at that point in time they said we have LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEET:tN:l 2/25/200. Item #1, Zoning Code J\JIlendment A-03-4 38 I think that certainly turning this
into Cf:. parking 2 lot has potential to be a disastrous issue for parking for 3 the neighborhood in general, because' if the Elks or someone 4 else takes that area over, where does
the parking go? 5 TIlean there are not alternatives other than the street; our street. I haven' t heard anybody from the Town Council, and certainly from this COmmittee, discuss safety
issues. think the twenty-four townhomes that are being built, the members, this is what we're facing. II CHAIR DREXEL: All right, t.hank. you. We have our l2 last speaker, Dan Devine.
13 DAN DEVINE: Good evening. My name is Dan Devine. 10 II 12 issue of bicycles on the street, or cert.ainly in the. bike lane, becomes a real issue. Certainly turning off of Newell Avenue
ont.o Winchester is a bigger issue. If parking is such an issue for the club, why doesn't. it build a parking garage? I know that's more 14 I live at 108 Newell Avenue. My property is
immediately 14 expensive, but it would certainly cont.ain the parking to lS adj acent. t.o the proposed parking lot. I believe my property 16 would be t.he single most impacted property
by this proj ect. 15 their property. It would relieve the issue of· having a 16 commercial enterprise flow over into a residential 17 I've owned this' home for eighteen years. During
17 neighborhood. I don' t think there's any resolution in terms 18 of what the Elks may do long term with their propert.y". 25 there's concessions being given up, at least it appears
to 20 brought up, whenever it. was several years ago, one of the 21 questions that was posed certainly by your Committee was 22 what's the long term program for development of this 23
property? And I think that still hasil't been ans.....ered. ( 18 that time I have to say that the Elks have been fair 19 neighbors for the most part, because they haven't
had a 20 tremendous number of activities where their parking has 21 become a large issue, but they certainly have had a number 22 of activities where t.heir parking lot. overflowed onto
Newell 23 Avenue and cars parked, at least as far as I can see, up 24 Ne.."ell Avenue. My driveway has been blocked a few times by 25 people who t.hought it was okay to block my driveway.
19 24 And when the issue of the medical buildings were So we're chipping away at this piecemeal, and LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/200' It.em #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4
39 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 40
')I 11 to be impacted the most with whatever happens to this property that wouid have ari. economic value, I mean something 12 ather than a park, that would be acceptable for you as
the 13 ilJ1f\ledlate neighbor? I mean yOu're the' person that's going 15 property. So what do you see in your mind that could go 16 there, given the constraints on the property, that
would 11 have the least impact on you? DAN DEVINE: I beli'eve so. COMMISSIONER BURKE: :Is there any way, being that DAN DEVINE: Certainly there's a lot that can be 12 11 21 DAN DEVINE:
Excuse me? COMMISSIONER BURKE: It's being used, to some 1 That would certainly make me happy. I have a hard time 2 believing that if you put a parking lot there with night 3 lighting
that you can keep that' out of my backyard. Onless 4 you can build a wall about a hundred feet bigh, I think it's 5 impossible.COMMISSIONER BURKE: I was just going to follow" up. It's
being used as a parking lot right now, is that 10 13 it is being used as a parking lot, if it was properly 14 developed as a parking lot with a good wall, and I remember 15 your property
as above that, so I understand the wall issue; 16 but with either lights on a timer and proper landscaping, is 11 there any way that situation could improve from what it is ,. today
by mal<ing this an official parking lot with 19 landscaping, restrictions on lights, restrictions on time of 20 day that it could be used, in your mind? 22 done I think to improve the,
appearance of that property, 23 because "certainly right Iiow it' g' ugly. I don't know how you 24 can call it anything except ugly. I mean it's gravel that's 25 not maintained, there's
weeds that grow and they're probably correct? extent, as a parking lot now, is that correct? DAN DEVINE: I think from what I've seen, the only 1 me, at each step. And without being able
to see the whole 2 picture, I think the Committee may be doing the Town and the 3 residents a very big disservice. CHAIR DREXEL: Thank you very much. Any 5 questions'? Mike? COMMISSIONER
BURKE: You are right behind this parking iot, right above and behind? ':. DAN DEVINE:' Thatf s correct. COMMISSIONER BURKE: Okay. I remember you spoke when we heard the medical building
at the General Planning Committee level. What would you Bee go into this piece of 10 19 opportunity is there may be the opportunity to build one 20 residence, and the rest of the are'a
that you can' t build 21 upon, it woUld certainly be nice to have a small park in our 22 neighbOrhood. I think that would certai.nly add to the 23 ailure of the neighborhood; it WQuldn't
detract from it. 24 Certainly it keep'S the' convnercial enterprise out of the 25 neighborhood. It eliminates the parking issues entirely. ,. LOS GATOS E'LANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004
Item #1., Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 41 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 42 10 CHAIR DREXEL: All right, thank you. Thank you. right
now. CHAIR DREXEL: Okay,then don't. Thank you. DAN DEVINE: Isn't there one lot that can be built 3 on and couldni t basically that have access to Wimbledon? CHAIR "DREXEL: I don't. think
that's an option 5 anymore, because of the "development on Winchester. DAN DEV:INE: There's lot of houses on Winches ter Mr. Davis?RAY DAVIS: Yes, speaking in the public interest, mainly
because I was here for the (inaudible), I stuck 10 1 trimmed 'once a year. It would certainly be nice to see 2 something done with the property to improve it. A pretty parking lot would
-certainly be better 4 what we have now, but it still doesn't anSwer the question 5 of if the Elks basically have ac"tivities, where does that 6 parking go? I, mean there's no place
for it to go. They certainly have had activities in the recent past that have exceeded the parking capacity of the lot riow, because they parked on Newell Avenue. And without that lot,
it's a disaster in the making. CHAIR DREXEL: Thank you. I was just going to say 11 is there any commercial use you can imagine on that lot that 12 would make you happier than a parking
lot? 11 12 around here. I'm very familiar with this because I've been here four years, to all these issues that have come 13 DAN DEVINE: No, I'd like to see it not 13
before you. I have some questions. 14 commercial, because it intrudes into our residence. 14 Number one, Madame Chairman, I know you're new as 11 would you prefer? 16 lot or commercial
use, since it is on a main street, which lS ,. CHAIR DREXEL: Well, if your options are 'a parking DAN DEVINE;" ExcUse me? 15 a chairman, but I think you and Mr. 0' Donnell really should
16 shy away from any perception of impropriety in your 17 discharge of your duties. When you have a membership, and I 18 guess you're located close by, I couldn't quite hear it. 20 that
really isn't particularly suitable for R-l anymore, 21 residential housing, or at least individual residential 22 homes. 21 impossible for you, in my opinion. not to be biased. 22 Impossible.
And both of you, if you care about the 19 CHAIR DREXEL: It is on a very busy main street 19 20 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I'm a member. RAY DAVIS: You have a meriJership too? It is 23 24
2S DAN DEVINE, Why? O!AIR DREXEL: Just take that as a given. DAN DEVINE: Why? 23 24 2S integrity of the Commission, honesty and public domain, you should have recused yourself, because
you leave yourself LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION I<EETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 43 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment
A-03-4 44
maximum membership (inaudible) certainly... You say no? I in front of you, because that' B where the membership is regulated. If I remember correctly, there is. a number, 1 wide open
to crieicism of the wrong kind. So! leave that 2 with you, okay?·' You know, you should have a copy of the Use Permit:. ,. say I remember something. Let's see it in black and white.
Hearsay is not good enough for me, okay? And why you don't have it in front of you, I don't know. So shame on Mr. Lortz, but I've been saying that for four years, and Mr. Lortz smiles,
and smiles, and smiles, and does his normal 1 for these people who are going to live here, and I urge you to do your job. You take the oath of office to uphold t.he laws; do it. Also,
this is amendment is nothing more than... 5 My read it'S special privilege for this one project. That's all it is. How will it affect the rest of the community? This is a total change
to the whole City of Los Gatos, and nobody has said one word about how it will affect the reat. And that's your charge. That'S your main concern. You're ,. not here to issue special
privilege, special benefits to one operation. Thank you. 13 influx of car trips per day, new to the neighborhood on a 11 CHAIR DRElCEL, Thank you, Ray. 11 12 thing. You're talking about
the potential for large a 12 13 RAY DAVIS: I want to leave before Mr. Korb says that I'm over time. regular basis. You've got Sobrato with thirty-five hundred 14 CHAIR DRElCEL, All right,
we have one more card, 20 I'd really rather not see a parking lot there. I' m also a In brief, I too am opposed to this parking lot. 15 Ina Batlnovich? Did I say that right? 18 of Wimbledon.
am at 504 Clearview, which is off INA BATlNOVICH: It's a touch one. It's Ina 17 Batinovich. Thank you'.. 16 15 car trips per day. You've got the townhome thing at twolEi hundred-and-sixty
car trips per day. you've got the new 17 hospital just down the street on thirty· five hundred 18 car trips per day. You've got the Jewish Community Center 19 on Oka with
a four htmdred foot long building, a five 20 hundred student. school. What's that, two-thousand car trips have the responsibility to provide for a decent community 25 21 per day? I mean
two years from now if all that proceeds, 22 who would want to live there? Who in their right mind would 23 want to live there? Nobody. 24 And I know you don't have thEf.final say, but
you 21 member of COurtside, and I respect you guys are members 22 of courtside. But r t.hink being a member of Courtside that 23 I get to see the traffic and the parking situation
at 24 courtside. And also Iiving there I'm ingressing and 25 egressing off of Wimbledon and onto Winchester very LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1., zoning Code
Amendment A-03-4 45 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 . Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03,,:,,4 46 1 frequently, which gives me the abili ty to check out what' s 2 going
on in the parking lot, as well as see the traffic 3 situation on Winchester. RODGER GRIFFIN, I'll be brief. The employee 2 parking,' eighteen spaces that are currently rented or leased
from the Elks, in general they start along Winchester at the this Conditional Use goes through, you need to be very I think Carol Shultz said it perfectly that if Ei specific about what
conditions are placed. I have concerns. as I think everybody. here stated, about the traffic. About two years ago t.here were so many accidents at the northbound left-hand turn lane
onto Wimbledon chat they finally changed the light to a traffic signal to meter, that craffic. along Knowle, and we have no available access along Wimbledon. We do not own contiguous
property on Wimbledon. 12 11 It is not our intention to be requesting access 1. lower end of that ·and move up the line. Some of them might 5 be up adjacent to the higher end there,
but they basically Ei start at the bottom and t.hey move up along Winchester. And Lisa is actively worki.ng at. this time to secure another location for those eighteen parking spaces,
so we hope to. have a· solution eo that by the time we present a specific plan for the A & S. My concern is now that' a really the only way to get to the ingress and egress that's being
proposed if you're heading northbound on Winchester cC?ming off of Lark, 12 11 ,. 13 or coming off of 8BO. So now you"ve increased the U-turn 13 That property is owned by the Courtside
Homeowner's 14 traffic there. I would really like to see a traffic study 14 Association; it'S not a part of this property. 15 done, showing that this is not going to impact the 16 neighborhoods
and how this is going to impact traffic on 17 Winchester overall. Lark Avenue, Knowle Avenue, Wimbledon 18 Place; all of those streets are going to be impacted, 15 16 17 1. We intend
to place a sound attenuation wall along the abutting residential homes. CHAIR DREXEL: All right, thank you. Morris? COMMISSIONER TREVITHICK: I have a question. It's 19 including the
bike lanes, the walkers, the joggers. 19 been raised in the discussion this evening that first of 20 CHAIR DREXEL: All right, thank you. Do we have 20 all, this location .is quote a
disastrous location for 21 parking. And that same person that mentioned that raised 23 had multiple use of parking on its own property, and other 21 any questions? Thank you very much.
All right, any more 22 speaker cards? Anyone else want to speak on the matter? 23 Seeing none, would the applicanc come forward for rebuttal? 24 The applicant has three minutes. 25 22
24 25 the question relat.ed to it, which was why hasn't the club layer of decking or something like that? Has that been considered as an al ternative? LOS GATOS PLANNING COHHISSION '<EETING
2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 .7 LOS GATOS PLANNING COH,HSSION PlEETING 2/25/200' Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A·03-4 48
10 correct one. JIM GERBER: My name is Jim Gerber, I'm President If this zoning amendment is approved, and later CHAIR DREXEL: I think the question is if you have a number
of pal:'king spots, say even inclUding this 13 14 wi th on the .Town? 121 membership to an empirical number. would you agree to limit 2 your membership to that that could be served by
authorized 3 parki,ng that you own, or the parking, you f.ve with the 4. recognition of the Town knOWing you've leased? LISA GRAFF: I'm Borry, I donf t think I understood
G your question. COMMISSIONER BURKE: You said you w0)11dn't think it would be in your best. interest to limit your membership ,t.o all absolute number ..would you be willing to limit
your membershl;p to that which cQuldbe served by the parking that lO you either own or have recorded leases with and approved I'm sorry, I ... 11 15 parking
lot, and tho.se parking spots are always full f then 16 that WOUld. mean that:. you ha(;\ out your membership. 17 Would yOll be willing to make an agreement . .. We can't make
18 you do this, but it would dissolve this issue if you could 19 make an agreement that would say that your membership 20 wouldn't... If your members started slopping over into 21 other
parking areas, that would mean that you had too many 22 members. LISA GRAFF: I havenf t really given much thought the application submitted and, approved foX; this to be a Conditional
Use Permit for the lot, what would be a reasonable
time in your mind for hours of operation of this lot that you would be willing to commit to, b.asically closing it at a certain time at night and not opening it RODGER GRIFFIN: I will
have to let them answer that. I have not discussed that with him. of Western Clubs and we own operate Courtside Club. We proposed a multi-level parking plan and
it was summarily dismissed by the City. CHAIR DREXEL: All right. Mike? COMMISSIONER BURKE: A couple of questions for whomever is appropriate, maybe Me. Graff would be the 20 to the m.orning
hours, because our conversations wi th the 21 neighbors were really more about the evening hours, and we 22 were thinking 9:00pm. 11 "14 15 12 13 16 until a certain time: in the morning,
as well?ls 17 lights on timer and timing it off, just so we get a feel for 18 what you felt that would be. 23 24 COMMISSIONER BqRKE: So yoU'd close the gates at 9: OOpm?
Okay. And the second thing is you stated you 23 24 JIM GERBER: Let me try to answer that. This isn't a science, and if we start a very popular group didn't: feel it was in your best
interest to limit your 25 25 exercise class at 9: OOam that far exceeds its popularity, LOS GATOS PIJ\NNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item fn, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 49 LOS
GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 50 this. CHAIR DREXEL: Maybe Bud can shed some light on 1 been absQlutely off the charts in terms of
people staying 2 extra hours and using the club more than any of our other 3 clubs. 1 suddenly we have more people. We. have more 2 members, we just have a lot more
usage. I f we s tart a tennis program... We try to do our programming when the 4. members can use the club, which is right after the kids go to school, they all come in and use the club.
Now, over the next five or six years, usages and demands may change, and the problem in the united States in the past when membership caps have been agreed to is that usages drop, caps
are the same, and revenues go down in the club, and this is what happened here at Courtside six years 10 ago. lO DIRECTOR LORTZ: Well, the only thing I was going to offer is that the
Zoning Ordinance currently enables the Planning Commission to call up a Use .Permit. So if there is a concern on the part of this Commission, or the neighbors come to us and are concerned
because there's some change in actiVity that has caused "an intensification under our 11 11 CHAIR DREXEL: But I' m not talking a 12 membership cap, and I don't think that's
wha:t Commissioner l3 Burke is talking about. JIM GERBER: He's talking about usage. CHAIR DREXEL: He's talking about a cap based on 15 then we could look at the Use Permit and see if
we needed to 16 make an a9justment as to the level and intensity of use? CHAIR DREXEL: Okay. And if we did that today, DIRECTOR LORTZ: We could do that today. CHAIR DREXEL: So we could
do that with Courtside? code," we can call the Use Permit up. 13 12 ,. the parking. If it appears, and I think that's something l5 l4 "17 that if there were complaints, the Tq\'111 could
send out 18 somebody to see whether people were parking on Winchester in 19 the bike lane or whatever. I don' t know that that' s l7 lB 19 this. DIrtpCTOR LORTZ: Yes. CHAIR DREXEL: So
that would be maybe a way around 20 possible, but maybe ... 20 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL, (Inaudible)? 2l JIM GERBER: I think what we I d have to do is 2l ORRY KORB: Is your concern about
calling up a Use 22 eliminate classes that attracted people that came at those 23 hours. See, it's not necessarily associated with membership 2.2 permit? 23 COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: My
concern is about 2. level at all. courtside CluD, I did sign a letter that said 24 vested (inaudible). 25 we thought we had enough parking, and Courtside Club has 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING
MEETING 2/25/200' Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 51 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/200' Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 52
ORRY KORB: You cannot change a Use permit without finding that there is a violation of the Use Perm! t, and the 3 reason for that again is, as I've said in the past, a Use ... Permit
is a property right, and it is vested in this si tuation. You can take a look at the operations and determine whether those. operations are violating the Use permit, and you've got to
be careful about doing that, 1 up? And actually we can end up probably pretty much with a 2 win-win. I understand your concern, but ... JIM GERBER: Well, one of the people that spoke,
Carol spoke tonight, and she was the most intilnately involved with the Use Permit, and she said that the last few 6 years have been fantastic. We are good neighbors, and we try hard
to do a good job. We're very responsible in the Town of Los Gatos, and ninety-five-percent of our members 14 be a good use. 10 II 12 13 14 15 because you can't approach that observation
as though it's a hearing on the question of whether there is a violation. You're just looking to see whether there is a reason to go further. and actually hold a hearing on that question,
but you are entitled to examine it, but you have to be careful about how you do it. CHAIR DREXEL: We don't have a copy of the Use Permit before us, so it's really hard to know whether
the fact that there seems to be a lot of issues with parking 10 II 12 13 15 are Los Gatos residents. We're here for the long run. We're not trying to pull wool over anybody'8 eyes. I'm
spending a lot of money on this property to take our employees' cars off of Winchester, and we thought we had a good solution here, and for a piece of property that seems to be an orphan,
it might And there is not an issue with the Use Permit at 16 here bears at allan the Us.e Permit. Is that right? 17 ORRY KORB: That's correct. You don' t have the 16 Courtside Club right
now that I'm aware of, and Carol mi'ght 17 agree. 21 to ... 19 ask the Staff, and we're not really speaking to you as bad 20 neighbors or anything. We're just trying to figure out how
U Use Permit before you, and the reason of course is because this application concerns a separate piece of .property and 20 it doesn' t actually open or in any way touch upon the
Use 21 Permit for a separate piece of property. lB . CHAIR DREXEL: All right. That'S something we can 23 anything there, since we're hearing a lot about the use on 22. CHAIR DREXEL:
So maybe Bud c?oJl tell us is 22 23 I guess my concern is that weill end up approving this parking lot, and then we'll end up with al.l those cars 24 25 this piece of property, whether
the issue could be opened LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 53 24 going in and out and we'll still haye the additional cars 25 LOS
GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 54 10 1 from new membership from Courtside spilling onto the streets 2 and byways as wel.l. ORRY KORB:
One addi tional point. I don't have the Use Permit in front of you, as you know, because you 5 don't have it in front of you either. But if courtside is b operating in accordance wit.h
its Use permit, and they have a parking problem, that does not necessarily entitle the Town to reopen their Use Permit and change either their parking requirements or their
mode of operation because of their parking requirements. It just simply means that whatever method was used to determine what the parking ORRY KORB: That'S not a legal question. I think
that is a plarming question, so 1'11 tUrtl that over to Mr. 3 Lortz. COMMISSIONER TREVITH'ICK: well okay, legal, if we 5 can do anything about it, re.open it shall we, say. ORRY KeRB:
You mean can you entertain an application for a multi-level parking' structure on the site? COMMISSIONER TREVITIIICK, Yeah. ORRY KORB: If somebody made an application for it and it was
consistent with our zoning requirements, right 10 now yes, that application could be considered. II 12 n requirement would be for those operations' just didn't work for every situation
under which they and W1fortunately that is not something that we penalize them II COMMISSIONER TREVITHICK: I'm just trying to see 12 if there'S some specific thing that
could be looked at 13 rather than a general. 15 looking at the code and I can't tell you without it in the :1:6 abstract whether a multi-story parking struct.ure would fit 17 within
the zoning requirements and can physically fit on the 18 site. Again, that's a question that Mr. Lortz would have to 14 for, because they have a vested right in that permit, so we 15
can't just willy-nilly reopen it. CHA.IR DREXEL: Okay, so that doesn't sound like 17 something that will work, unless Bup. comes up with something 18 in the Use Permit. Morris? 14 ORRY
KeRB: Yeah, I have. to tell you that I'm not 19 COMMISSIONER TREVITHICK: May I ask the same sort 19 answer for y'ou. 25 wasn' t encouraged, I believe. I ...,asn· t actually directly
22 what was your understanding of why the two-story garage was 23 dismissed as an opti.on? (r-"""" 20 of question if I can? It was mentioned that the idea 21
of a· multi-level on the site itself was "summarily dismissed 22 by the Town. It Can you give me something of the background 23 and when that took place? 24 25 20 21 24 CHAIR DREXEL:
Lee? COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: Two questions. One is JIM GERBER: That multi-level parking in Los Gatos LOS GATOS PLANNING COM'U$SION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4
55 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 56
13 discussion, and I believe that was when Pete was here, involved with that discussion, and we did not prepare plans 2 or spend any money. We really wanted to find out if it was at
all feasible before we spent a significant amount of money to do that. COMMISSlONER TREVITIlICK: Do you recall ••• 17 this is hypothetical since we have Conditional Use permits 18 that
are already in place in other things, but if, big if, 19 if it were possible to have the Conditional Use Permit for 20 courtside to specify a specific membership based on current 21
levels of \1sage and parking availability that could be 22 reviewed every two to three years to adjust that number 23 based on the current situation then, would you be willing to 24
entertain something like that? Do you recall when that application was made to the Town? JIM GERBER: There was no application. It was a COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Is there a percentage
of LISA GRAFF: OUr members have that privilege. LISA GRAFF: A member can only bring the same the building and and for security reasons, safety, et cetera. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: And
besides members, you Since we do operate Wltil 11: Oopm, it would require us to have our employees relocate their cars from the proposed site into our existing site, and obviously at
that time there's certainly not a parking problem, and we would do so. CHAIR DREXEL: All right. Joanne? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Again, the intent of this s extra parking is for the employees?
JIM GERBER: Primarily, yes. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: primarily the employees? JIM GERBER: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE : So how many employees are employed at night, between the
hours of 4.:30 and·9:00? LISA GRAFF: I'm guessing right around thirty. 10 11 14 12 JIM GERBER: No. I've seen it fail too many times 2 around the uni ted States. 20 21 They can bring
a guest to the club, yes. 22 23 guests to members? 13 24 18 also somet!mes encourage your members to bring guests, 15 We'd probably prefer to do that, because they'd be closer to 19
correct? 17 ,. COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: have a second question. CHAIR DREXEL: Yes? Four or five years ago, six. COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: My second question is, and CHAIR DREXEL:
Lee? COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: Unless Commissioner Trevithick'B question is a follow-up on that. then I'll wait for my second question. COMMISSIONER TREVITIlICK: Just a quick question.
10 12 11 14 Natalie. 15 ,.25 2S twice per mont.h. LOS GATOS PLAmlING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 57 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 58 CHAIR DREXEL: I have one question. How do you 2 know when folks leave? Being a member there, I check in, I 3 don't check out. You guys
wave goodbye, but I don't think 1 specific piece of property, and I was one of those people, 2 ana another member, and it troubled both of us. And I' 11 s tate here for the record that
that 10 everyone's gone on vacation. During the summer months when science. We do watch the parking in and out. We time the classes, people in the showers. It's an estimated time. And
that will vary obviously seasonally. You can play football in our parking lot in August and September, because I understand that this is a very difficult piece of property to do anything
with because of the easements 4 concept alone of what's in front of us, which is really just S a General Plan amendment, that it's been very narrowly worded to affect minimal pieces
of property bothers me. It also bothers me that I feel that when you have a conditional Use Permit, that the main concern ought to be is that, use compatible with the underlying zone.
And don' t see how a commercial parking lot can be compatible with a residential zone, no matter where it's located. 12 11 10 kids are out of school and families utilize the club, usage
will change. 12 114 you kno,w who you're waving to. So how do you determine 5 usage from people checking in? LISA GRAFF: As Jim said, it's certainly not a LISA GRAFF: You're welcome.
CHAIR DREXEL: Are there any more questions? think we've sort of beaten the subject pretty much to death 14 grant a Conditional Use Permit. I think we have to look at 15 it and say would
I want a commercial parking lot next to or over it, but I don't think that's necessarily reason to That's my thoughts. That's in the 13 16 behind my house? CHAIR DREXEL: All right, thank
you. 13 15 ,. ,. 17 here. Then I will close the public hearing and open it up 17 abstract of the Zoning Amendment as proposed. 18 to the Commissioners for comments, questions of staff,
or a In the specific, because this application is being 19 motion. Mike? 21 Committee heard this I believe at their last meeting two or 20 22 COMMISSIONER BURKE: The General Planning
three weeks ago, o§lnd one of the things the minutes don't 19 brought up by Courtside , I see it as maybe solving a 20 temporary problem. They need more parking. But as we see, 21 as
their parking, is this just going to be a transitory 22 solution and not a permanent one? 23 reflect, but at least two of the three members who voted 2. against ;i. t expressed a concern
that this was a general plan 23 2. So those are my thoughts on this, and I think you can probably guess on how I \'/ould vote on this at this time. amendment that was being pretty much
applied to a very 25 25 Thank you. LOS GATOS PLAmlING COM'lISSION 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 59 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 11EETING 2/25/200'
Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 60
\! ,. policy it would set up. That's where I have my problem. It CHAIR DREXEL: All right. Lee? COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: I think this is proposed amendment to the zoning Code f would we
entertain it with any seriousness in terms of what it would do and the So either one,of those has their problems. I try to come up with an alternative solution that I am sure must have
a flaw, because it hasn't come up from Staff, but I'ln going to throw it out anyway. A PO zoning would not require a General Plan amendment, but it would be very specific to that particular
use as well. And yeah, one of my Commissioners is whispering to me what I thought might be 4 was rejected because the neighborhood I understand does not 5 a change in the R-l zoning,
however effectively if a COP was 1 ,reduce the impact of parking in their neighborhoods and meet 2 Courtside' s request for more parking. I know that. the General Plan zoning Combination
6 granted, it really does change the use; there's no difference. 11 12 13 ,. does seem to present a case where it· s being done for one particular property, one particular zone classification
within the R-l district. 3 problematic. It's sort" of a conundrum. But what we have " before us is a request for a zoning change I and. the way I' m 5 looking at it is somewhat the way
Commissioner Burke is, that I'm trying to look at it as if the zoning change were not accompanied by a specific proposal that will come to us later. If we were just. looking at the wording
of the 13 11 12 1< Then if I put that. aside and look at the 14 t:.he problem;._ the lot is too small. Because otherwise I 15 specifics, it seems that everybody agrees there's a parking
16 problem. This is a very difficult piece of property to 17 develop as a conmercial· property because of all the 18 easements on it. I believe it equally has constraints as an 19 R-l
residential parcel'. I think' it could really probably 15 think it is the solution, because we do have other 16 properties that have General, Plan designations that are 17 different
different than their zonings, and the underlying zoning does 18 not allow the use that is approved by the PD. So that 'WOuld 19 be a soluti"on, but apparently 'it doesn't work. 21 because
I think it is somewhat of a CODWldrum. 20 only accommodate one residence off Of, Newell, and the rest 21 what would you do with? I donlt know. 2. So I'm leaning toward a no, but I'm
still open 22. What am I leading up to? I' d like to see a win-22 CHAIR DRE:XEL: Anyon.e else have comments? 23 win that the Town puts into a process that doesn't deviate 23 COMMISSIONER
O'DONNELL: I think I (inaudible) I 24 from what the Town has done in the past. but at the 24 am going to abstain. 25 time achieve the goals of the community members who want
to 25 CHAIR DREXEL: You're going to abstain. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 61 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004
.Item #.1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 62 .cOMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Without prejudice .I 1 back to ground zero, but without:. the option of adding 2 happen to agree with (inaudible),.
CHAIR DREXEL: That's not the way you do it. COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I'm not legally required to do it, but I don't think I'm going to help anybody if I don't abstain, so I will abstain
tonight. CHAIR DREXEL: All right. Thank you. Interes ting. Normally we wouldn' t be t:.alking about of this stuff; it would normally come up at A & S. And t.his project ,. did appear
before the CDC, t.he Conceptual Development 11 12 Committee, and we thought that the parking lot was a good idea, because to me ultimately it's what is the most appropriate use for this
sit.e? And it's on a very busy 2 parking. I'm nat. sure that gets us anywhere. So that· s my dilemma. I'm looking at the use. 4, This use was as proposed supposed to be kindest to the
5 neighbors. I think if the neighbors want nothing to happen on this lot, they're dreaming. .I think that it's going to be developed commercially, and if they don' t get the parking
lot tonight, they 'liill get an office bUilding. You can ask and say whatever you want, but iIi my opinion that" is a ,. logic,al use for this site. Mike, what do you think of that?
COMMISSIONER BURKE: Well, the first thing I want to say is we talk about this lot being constrained. I look 12 at these as manmade constraints. At some point in this commercial, even
though it backs up into housing, there are transitional uses of offices often between housing and all, 13 piece of property's ownership history, some decision was 14 made to constrain
this piece of property by the owner at 14 15 street. It has huge constraints, so to me it either looks 15 that time, which in turn devalued its use in the future. At 16 and so I don't
see that a commercial small office or 17 something like that would be inappropriate for this site. 16 some point a decision was made to grant an easement to run a 17 water line under
it, and it could have been imminent domain, ,. When you just look at it, you think parking lot is 18 which I'm sure they were compensated for. Likewise at some 20 there was some form
of compensation for that. 19 point, another easement to grant a power line. and I'm sure 22 piece of property could have. So if we now look. at this 23 piece of property being constrained,
thinking we have to 19 fine, because everyone seemed to think that the neighbors 20 were going to be a lot happier with the parking lot than 21 anything else, that less traffic would
be generated. Nice 22 looking parking lot and all, but if it doesn' t really 23 resolve the parking overflow at Courtside, if we're going to 21 That going forward devalued the uses that
this 24 continue to be subjected to increasing membership at 24 kind of bend the rules or make rules to fit, I think we have 25 Courtside vTho will use the parking lots up and we'll
end up 25 to look at the constraints being put on this property as LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING 2/25/200< Item 1:11, Zoning Code Amendment A· 03-.q 63 64
1 having been wi,th it, not naturally put on, as something that 2 naturaliy devalues the use of this property. So that' s my What can go there properly? I don' t know
1f a small home in the corner with parking. I don't know what Ei could go under the power lines, if a carport or anything could go there, but maybe you could get a duplex there. We like
affordable housing close to transit quarters. I don' t know. 101 does look like a park, and maybe we put grass between 2 pavers. .t donl't know, how creative can we be wit;h this? I
really don' t want to see a two-story parking structure there. I'm not sure what we'd do with it, but I would rather see it as a parking lot I think than anytl)ing 6 else, and especially
leaving it raw land the way it is. It's not being cared for very well. CHAIR DRExEL: r have a question of Bud. How did we lose the membe.rship cap at Courtside? Do you· knowhow that
transpired? DIRECTOR LORTZ: We're back onto membership. wasn' t at the public hearings so I don't know how the 11 CHAIR DREXEL: All right. Joanne? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE : I don I t
know, 1'11 take a stab at this. I agree with what everybody saidi and I guess 10 11 12 that's·where I've' been, on both sides of this. I don't want 13 to see this impact.ing a neighborhood.
At the same time I'm 14 thinking yes but it would solve some parking issues, and I'm 15 all for that. 12 dialogue went, but r know that there is a problem with sport 13 clubs and ·membership
caps. They resist them wholeheartedly. 14 So we worked very hard to provide enough parking on the 1S site. 16 And I also carmot Bee developing a house there or 17 living there. I just
couldn't do that. I donI t think, even 16 17 I did an analysis through the last couple of weeks that compared the parking that's on this site for the uses 18 though it's zoned that way,
just putting a house there. 20 really well aware of that; But I think if we were creativa 21 enough about ingress and egress we could work it out. ,. ·22 think it could cause 80me safety
problems, I'", I don't know,' do we limit the aize of the parking 18 th'at are provided at Courtside against our code, against the 19 codes of numerous o,thar communities, and the parking
is 20 sufficient under all of those analyses. They use different 21 methodology to determine the number of parking spaces, but 22' it turned out to be adequate. 24 Kind. of like the
Coffee Roasting Company, just a popular 2S club, and. consequently having some parking woes, and are now 23 lot? Would that help a little more? .00 we make aure that 24 it' a landscaped
so well that it becomes an asset because it 25 23 So question is, is this club very popular? LOS GATOS PIJ\NNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #J., Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 65 66 1 coming forward to try to remedy that. That seems to be 2 where we're at. 1 and zoning to
perhaps an office zone, which the neighbors of 2 course do not want, and yet· deal with this parking parking issue, Now, we' va talked an awful lot about this parking 4. situation, and
membership, and CUP of Courtside, but clearly that's not what's in front of toe Commission. It's whether or not this zoning text amendment makes some sense for this property, given this
usage atmosphere. W.e'va been dealing with this property for a very 3 and that:' s why we are where we are;. Now, the applicant did go through the CDAC process 5 and asked the questions
early on. They purchased the 6 property based on the input they received through that CDAC process.' They heard the neighbors and they were respectful I think of the neighbors' concerns,
and remain so in terms would lave to weigh in, because we're all solution driven, but those are issues that if this is approved by Council of the this parking lot. Now,
the design of the parking lot and use of the parking lot are not before us tonight. I'm sure everybody 10 11 12 13 l.ong time and we've tried -to be sensitive to the neighbors, sensitive
to their concerns on the parking well as the use of this land issue. And we have come up, as a community, with some very innovative approaches, a little unusual, but innovative.
We rezoned the Macabee Gopher Trap Company wi th an 10 11 12 13 will be the subject of a great deal of input. We've been 14 LHP overlay to allow it to continue to exist. Is that the
14 taking a lot of notes this evening. I'm sure the neighbors 19 has served as overflow parking with the Elks, perhaps the 20 courtside folks would be receptive to a condition that 21
allows this parking lot to be. used four times a year by the 22 Elks for overflow parking. :I'here you've kind of eliminated 15 have been listening carefully to see if there's some 16
addi,tional conditions perhaps that we haven' t disc"ussed that 17 could be imposed here that would wo;rk well. 15 right thing to d(J? Well, some would call it spot zoning, lEi but it'
8 method of dealing with a land use issue that' s 11 unique for the TOwn. We have another sect.ion in the CUP 18 Table that talks about wineries, and we allowed a winery to 19 continue
to, exist, it was an R-C zone and it was 20 going to become and "Ie were 9.oin9 to have to 21 kick them out of town. And the c;:ommunity said
this is the 22 right way to go about this. ,. One that I'm certainly thinking of is. how if this 23 So what we were trying to do is find a unique, 23 the concern that the neighbors raised
about that overflow 24 iIUlovative to dealing with the neighbors' concerns 24 issue. with proper notice and those things. I don't want to about future land use, if it
were to be changed General Plan 25 25 put that condition out there because I'm just thinking off LOS GATOS PLANNING COMllISSION I1EETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMI1ISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 67 68
the top here, but I think there are ways to address some of 2 the concerns that have been raised this evening. CHAIR DREXEL: I frankly don't have any problems 4 with the
of the amendment to the zone, because think that it does solve the solution by the neighbors if they prefer not to have a commercial use put on the site at 1 hearings on that, and I
think we built a relationship 2 between Courtside and the neighbors through some addit.ional conditionS, some clarification of conditions, and: we have not heard complaints from the
neighbors. But if we do, just 5 as we did with Rinconada Count.ry Club, then that on the Commission'S direction could be a topic of discussion. some point in time, so I think the Staff
actually has been very creative with that language and I'm not disturbed by 14 anything that could be put there. That'S what we're told. 15 In reading the reports and all, it
that the traffic 16 impacts there are less with the parking lot than anything 17 else. 15 parking lot in an R-l. zone have its ingress and egress only 16 from an arterial. And you said
that could be part of .the 17 conditions of when it was put in. 10 n12 13 that. I just want to make sure we don' t create more problems ultimately if Courtside should grow in
membership. And
I realize that that's what is before us, but as a practical matter, that is what I'm concerned about. I think that the parking lot probably has the fewest impacts of 10 11 32 13 CHAIR
DREXEL: All right. Mike? COMMISSIONER BURKE: First of all, Mr. Lortz, :I want to acknowledge that yes you tend to have some really creative solutions to difficult problems here and I
appreciate that, even though I'm not one that's thrilled by parking lots. one of the comments that was brought up, and I think I also brought: this up too at the General Planning Committee
meeting is the requirement in general that any 18 DIRECTOR LORTZ: Well, there certainly is no My concern with that is that you might get into a 19 situation where somebody had a lot
on an arterial and they 25 have them ingress and egress from Newell. Is there any way 20 said well it' s really not practical for me to ingress and 21 egress, but it's a legitimate use
and it doesn't specify 22 that anywhere. Or later you get into a situation where the 19 generation of parking demand by some new use. The one thing 20 that I did want to offer, and I'd
mentioned it before in 21 ternui of the conditional Use Permi t and could it be called 22 up, as you recall, we called it up. This Body reviewed the 23 conditional use permit a few years
back, because the 24 neighbors were concerned that they were operating outside 25 the parameters of the Use Permit, and we had numerous public 23 ingress and egress on winchest.er here
is causing problems or safety issues, and' the solution by a traffic engineer is to LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 69 1 that the
condition could be written in the Table requiring 2 the ingress and egress only from the arterial? LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4
70 1 days prior to the date of the hearing." So that's the section that. :I'm re'ferring to. It's the way that the Town DIRECTOR LORTZ: Well, the Town Attorney 4 definitely has an opinion
of the subject, and so do I, but I 5 don't think either of us can support that approach. Orry, 6 would you like to comment? ORRY KORB: wouldn't recommend it. Again, if 3 reviews from
time to zoning approvals that have been <41 granted, and part.icularly Use Permits that have been granted 5 where neighbors have started to raise concerns that perhaps ,the
operation has changed in a way that is outside the parameters of the use permit. 10 11 12 13 this zone amendment was approved, then the next ,step would be a CUP application for this
particular property, and that can certainly be a condition imposed on the CUP. But even though this language may apply only to an individual piece of property, technically
it applies to any other property of a similar description. DIRECTOR LORTZ: I'd like to just read into the 10 11 12 CKAIR DREXEL: If another piece of property turned up and wanted to
use this part of the Code. they would b:e required to hav.e a CUP, and they would have to conform to the General Plan, is that right? DIRECTOR LORTZ: That' B correct, they would be required
to go through the CUP process. CHAIR DREXEL: And being in conformity with the 20 we crafted this language we were just using the R-1 zone, ,. General Plan iB part of their approval?
21 and that blanketed the ,Town. We were using arterial as a 22 way to narrow the number of lots. We subsequently in 14 record the section that I referred to where a Use Permit can 15
be called, and I know this Body has gone through that 16 before. "The l?lanning commission on its own motion, or on 17 the recommendation of the Planning Director may, and if 18 requested
by Council shall, hold a to consider 19 modifying or revoking any zoning approval that's been 20 granted pursuant to this chapter," which is the Zoning Code, 21 "or any
prior ordinance. Notice of the hearing shall be 22 given in the same manner as for the hearing of any 15 ,. 17 ,. " DIRECTOR LORTZ: AbBolutely. CHAIR DREXEL: And so if somebody wanted
to do it some place screwy, we could certainly under the auspices of the General Pla.n prevent it •.I would assume. DIRECTOR LORTZ: That's correct. Originally when 23 application for
zoning approval. Written notice of the 23 discussions with the Toml. Attorney came up with the R-112 24 hearing shall also be mailed to the principals making use of 25 and relying upon
any such zoning approval not less than five LOS PLANNING COMI1ISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment. A-03-4 71 2. 25 language to narrow the focus even
more. LOS GATOS PLANNING COM'USSION l1EETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment 72
10 11 CHAIR DREXEL: All right. Joarme? properties are developed. COJolMISSIONER The neighborhood' s concern is that the property be developed in a commercial use later
on. Now if Courtside wanted to sell it and develop it in a commercial use later on, they would have to come through Planning. Wouldn' t one of the considerations that Planning has be
to look at the effect of the lOBS of parking on the Courtside operation as to whether tha,t proposed office or whatever use would be sui·table: for the site? thinking. ORRY KORB: Well
since they would be a Use Permit on the property, the question probably would be raised as to what's the Use Permi t for and if it was related to this 11 13 10 DIRECTOR LORTZ: Yes, parking
lots allowed in 2 an office zone: for example. if that's what you were 12 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: just want to clari fy again. So if this should get an okay tonight, it doesn't
There is not a lot of property in LOB Gatos zoned 2 R-112, and there's three properties located on an arterial 3 street that .are that could ap,ply for a Use 4
Permi t under this zoning. We have scoured the Town. We' va 5 gone through every arterial. There' B a map that's been 6 developed to look at every arterial. All the zonings along those
arterials, and the area that this relates to is the Newell neighborhood, and then there's another little cul de sac just to the south of this on the other side of Winchester that it
would apply to, but all of those 12 13 14 mean that the ingress and egress is established? 14 parking issue? I can imagine the-Planning Commission asking 18 zone change. CHAIR DREXEL:
All right. Lee? COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: Question of the Staff. OMY KORB: That's correct. DIRECTOR LORTZ: All you're doing is approving· a 17 General Plan and zoning be changed and we
are still able to 18 maintain or achieve what the neighborhood would like, is 19 that correct? Control over eventual development. COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: So it is possible that ohe ORRY
KORB: Let. me try to address that question. that question. 20 15 DIRECTOR LORTZ: That's correct. ,. 20 15 17 ,. ,.21 hypothetical questions. If this were to have a GP change to 22 some
commercial with a zoning for office, would Courtside be 23 able to put a parking lot on that piece of property? 2. 21 What the neighbors are asking for is something that at least 22
presently protects against a commercial development on that 23 site. There was one proposed previously and they fear 24 another one. 25 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004
Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/200' Item #1. Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 73 74 The reality is the General Plan can be amended, 2 and
the zoning in the area can be amended, and any clecision 1 have been good neighbors, they can have their CUP pulled up :z and examined. That's certainly a pretty big stick that we factors
that concern the interests of the Town, whatever 15 looking at the Condi tional Use Table, there I s no other item speculate on until the cows come home. But I will say that both of
those determinations are legislative, and they can take into consideration 3 you make today does not preclude that from occurring any 4 time in the future, so you're never binding· any
future body 5 from making that. change. So there are no guarantees. And what considerations go into that decision-making we can would be supportive of a family home. CHAIR
DREXEL: Well. I think that I personally do not think that that's a particularly good site for a singlefamily home. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: And I would agree with that. 3 hold over their
expansion. The neighbors do not want this to go through a. qeneral Plan amendment and zoning change, 5 and so they would be happier-even though they seem very 6 unhappy-they would probably
be happier with what'S proposed tonight than they would get, which is either a commerciB:lly developed piece of property .or a zone change on the property. Isn't that right?
DIRECTOR LORTZ: Yes, I think the only comment 14 that was offered this evening from the neighbors was that it 15 10 13 12 11 ,. I'd just like to make a Ooe of my concerns about this
is that in COMMISSIONER QUINTANA, in it that has the specificity that this one does. and that reason at all as a matter of fact. they may be, in that discussion, and they are highly
discretionary and can be denied for any good reason, for any 11 10 12 13 ,. comment then. ,. 20 To\'m has to achieve the goals wi thout bending the rules so 17 is a concern to me. And
given the that what orry just lB said, it seems td me that applying for a General Plan change 19 and a zoning change would be within the proce"sses that the 23 Morris, don't
you have anything to say about this? No? 24 Joanne? All right, I guess we've talked it out. Although I am concerned about the future expansion of Courtside , they 25 18 about it, but
I don' t think that we think that that's a 17 CHAIR DREXEL: And I don't know: how everyone feels 19 particularly good use. So we've got options here, and 20 nei ther of them are great
in terms of what the neighbors 21 want, which is a park, that's what we all want. All of the 22 vacant lots in town, it would be great if they were all 23 parks, but it's unlikely that
that'S going to happen. So I 24 would rather see this as a parking lot, making people happy 25 with the language, making Courtside happy \O/ith the use, than CHAIR DREXEL: Does anyone
else have any comments? 22 21 to speak. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/200' Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-D3-4 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMIHSSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1,
Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 75 76
1 dragging this on through another meeting because of 2 language. what' do you think? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE , Well I would hope that what this is do is relieve some of the parking issues.
I mean I cai':L' t think that I would support and think that it's ORRY KORB, Based on my experience with this Body, 2 I' m sure you would be. CHAIR DREXEL: We are pretty much nitpicke,rs,
at least we have that reputation. So Lee, do you have 5 something? 10 12 11 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE : Is that correct? sympathetic to all of that., I believe that what's before us is
a Zoning Code Amendment and we should be looking at it not with the particular perspective. of a particular project, but whether the Zoning Code Amendment would make sense of and by
itself if there wasn't another application that was COMMISSIONER QUINTANA, Last word, While I'm behind it, rather than rationalizing approving it because of the project that's coming
and that we could put conditions on it. 10 11 13 It's not a P.D. You don't put conditions on ORRY KORB: This' is simply a zone change application. 6 not going to re'solvesomething. And
we can look at that at the next... Can we put any condi tions on this now? No, this is A & S, right? CHAIR DREXEL: No. That would be A & S that we would do that. This is really just
deciding whether this is a good means to get this use on this piece of property. 13 14 zone changes of this sort. CHAIR DREXEL: So do you think that we should 16 stuff, because there's
no point in changing the zone if it's 17 not going to satisfy everyone and work. lS recommend to the Council that the applicatiqn is denied, but 16 they come back and approach' us in
a different way? Is that 17 what 'you're suggesti.ng? 15 ,. CHAIR DREXEL: But we have to look at all that ORRY KORB: Right, bu.t then all of those questions ,. COMMISSION'ER QUINTANA:
Yes, I'm suggesting that 19 'can be addressed through the subsequent applications that 20 would be necessary in order to actually put a parking lot 21 there under this zone change if
it were approved. 23 sensitive in those sessions for neighborhoods. I mean I'm 24 fairly confident we would be. 21 one residence on the Newell side would work, but the 22 rest
would not work as residential. So yes, I alii. suggesting 23 that the applicant 100k for a solution that falls within the: 24 established procedures of the Town, not creating a special
think parking on it is think it's possible " this is a difficult piece of land; 20 probably a good soluti.on for now. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE, And I think that we'd be 22 25 25 LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1., Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 77 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code l\menclment A-03-4 78 1. situation
that is designed specifically for one parcel 1 everyone's mind perhaps more than the alternative, which is 2 through a process that usually isn' t used that way. 2 making ita commeroial
piece of property now. CHAIR DREXEL: Orry, yes? ORRY KORB: I certainly understant;:l the point the So having said that, and I know I'm no.t going to 4 get any support, but I'm going
to put it out there anyway. 105 Commissioner Quintana is making. This is an unusual 6 approach in the in which the zone change is designed. But r: will it is an appropriate
procedure. We are following the Zoning Code Amendment procedure, so for the record there'S nothing inappropriate about it. I think there was a comment earlier about the rules being bent.
They're not being bent. It is, again, an appropriate 5 I'm going to move that we recofMlend that this Zoning Code A-03-4, it woul.d not have a significant impact on
the environment, therefore the project is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act, Section lS061B3. We recommend to the Town Council that they find the Amendment is .consistent
with the General Plan. We recommend that the 10 Council adopt the Draft Ordinance Exhibit A amending the 11 11 process. Town Code. Is there a second? 12 13 And it is a legislative change,
and as a legiSlative change, as I referred !=-o previously, the 12 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: I have a question. Is 13 this consistent with the General Plan? 15 about small town character.
I don I t know, is.a parking lot 16 anywhere consistent with small town character? 14 considerations that go into deciding what is in the best lS interest of the community are manifold.
And so we're net lEi stuck with a very clear four corner rigid process here. You 17 get to tak.e a lot into consideration in making a legislative 18 change, and I just leave those thoughts
for your 14 17 ,. CHAIR DREXEL: Yeah, I think it is. We're talk.ing COMMISSIONER TALESFORE : NO, I mean the change. CHAIR DREXEL : The change is consistent. 19 consideration. COMMISSIONER
TALESFORE: I think the change is 20 CHAIR DREXEL: It isn' t as though at some later 20 consistent with us having the ability to legislate a change, 25 21 but it'S not ... 23 whether
this is consistent with the General Plan, and the 2-4 Chair has pointed out the fact that the General Plan '"""'-_/21 date the Courtside could come and try to get a commercial 22 zoning
change or change the zoning to commercial. That 23 could always happen; it'S not like they're being precluded. 2'1 It's just somet.hing that will work for now and ease 2S 22 ORRY KORB:
You get to make the determination of LOS GATOS PLANNING COI1MISSION MEETING 2/25/200' Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 79 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/200' Item #1,
Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 80
inconsistent with the General Plan. ORRY KORB: So if the motion is that this is 13 there than a commercial building or a home. 1 contains a number of different policies that you get
to take 2 into consideration in making that consistency determination. CHAIR DREXEL: I don' t know where it would be one way or the other on this. ORRY KORB: No, I would recommend, and
for the CHAIR DREXEL: Right. So I guess we will just •.• What do we do? We forward it to Council with ... sake of exp.ediency j3ven the would
it denial and then have your vote pn that motion. CHAIR DREXEL: Okay" Well, then I will make a We are trying to balance interests in this community. It's not easy to do. It's something
that we struggle with, and at the end of the day try to make tp,e right decision for this and that's exactly what we're doing this evening. OlAIR DREXEL: All right.
So all those in favor? Okay, two for and three against, and Tom's abstaining. Yes? DIRECTOR .LOR.TZ: We need a minimum of four votes 13 12 11 ,. CHAIR DREXEL: All right, so you're seconding?
do think that howev:er we get there, I think that given all of what I'm hearing tonight, I'd rather see a parking lot 6 consistent, then you get to, voting for yourself, make that decision
whether you think it. is consistent or not. Staff is bringing this., forward and recommending it and has not indicated in its report any belief that this is inconsistent with the General
Plan, if that helps. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: I'll support it because I 11 14 12 ,. 18 give you the other example. As I mentioned before, we put a 19 LHP overlay on an industrial use
in a residential zone and 15 recommendation to deny it, sorry guys, d we will forward it lEi to Council. 15 ,. 17 COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Yes. CHAIR DREXEL: All right. Any comments?
DIRECTOR LORTZ: Jus t for the record too, I'll 17 18 19 COMMISSIONER BURKE: I'll second. CHAIR DREXEL: All right. All those in favor? OaRY KORB: Five to one., one abstention, and that
20 found that consistent with the General Plan. Now, we can 20 was commiss.ioner O'Donnell abstaining. 21 argue about whether it was historic or whatever it was, but 21 For the applicant,
this matter will be forwarded 22 it was non-conforming and it was due to go away. The proper 23 thing to do, if you're a utopian planner, is to kick them out. of the residential zone.
We didn't do that. 2' 25 22 to the Town Council in a report. You have the right to 23 request. a hearing. You can do so any t.ime from today, 24 other warda start.ing tomorrow, until
five days aft.er the 25 report is made to the Town Council. It is my guess, and LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning code Amendment A-03-4 LOS GATOS PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 81 82 1 I'll ask Mr. Lortz to confirm, that this will probably be 2 reported to coun'cil on the of March.
1 would be appropriate. All it was was an interest. We :z didn' t take any action. DIRECTOR LORTZ: Yes. ORRY l<ORB: And that would make your final date 5 for requesting a hearing the
221>4 of March if I'm reading that calendar correctly. DIRECTOR LORTZ: Yes, and our suggestion when there is a zone change of this nature is to provide us with 12 11 else? Okay, you
know we had some little things we were 6 architectural guidelines for commercial, and when we came to the C-l zone, located on North Santa Cruz between Highway 9 and Blossom Hill, the
discus,sion was along the east side whether or not that migllt bean appropriate place to do some mixed use commercial, and there seemed to be a lot of enthusiastic interest
from the Committee on that idea. CHAIR All right, an interest. Pardon me, missed the first. part. COMMISSIONER BURKE: We were discussing the CHAIR DREXEL: All right. That's cool.
Anybody ,. a letter requesting the hearing very soon, and we can work thing we have is continued other business, and there is none, so that gets us to new other business. Are there any
with you on that. CHAIR DREXEL: Thank you. All right, the next 12 11 ,. 15 Committee met today for a special meeting to discuss the 16 commercial design guidelines, working with the
Town's 17 archi teet, and one of the things that came out of there was 18 a strong interest to investigate the possibility of mixed 19 use commercial in the C-1 zone along North Santa
Cruz 20 between Highway 9 and Blossom Hill on. the east side of the COMMISSIONER BURKE: lEi a short meeting, right? Remember? We were going to talk a 18 process that might make us work
better. And we are a team, 19 so maybe there are some things that we can do better. Phil isn't here tonight. I did call him and he little bit about the things that were problems in our
going to talk about and it's getting late, but let's just really quickly. I talked to Phil, because this was supposed to be 2. 13 17 14 15 The General Planning subcommittee reports?
Mike? 14 13 21 street. 21 said that there are two things that bug him. He said he'd 22 CHAIR DREXEL: Highway 9. 22 like everyone to focus on the major aspects of a project and 23 COMIUSSIONER
BURKE: And Blossom Hi II, along the 23 leave the details to the Staff, and that's for 24 east side of the street. The topic came up as we were 2' recommendations. and whatnot. And also
that we should not 25 discussing what the architee.tural should be there and what 25 question peoples' motives for why they are doing things, LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004
Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 LOS GATOS PLANNING COl<MISSION 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 83 B4
1 whether it be profit or not is of no immaterial interest to 2 us. It's only really the 'result of what they're doing. So those are his comments, and I thought they were pretty good
ones' actually. Anybody else? COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Is this recommendations? CHAIR DREXEL: sure. just kind of talking. Yeah, we're talking here. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE : I wondered
in some of our reports-I think this has come up that is there any COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: okay. Those are usually :2 when I call you on the phone and say, ·Could you
...• CHAIR DREXEL: Also, I know we get letters of justification from applicants sometimes who· heavily site the S General Plan, which I find very helpful. So if they can be 6 encouraged
to do that, save your ink and let them use theirs. DIRECTOR LORTZ: Oh, absolutely. CHAIR DREXEL: I think that might be a good requirement. 14 whether it should be higher or lower on
the site. 10 11 12 13 ,. way that sometimes planners might be able to put embedded in our reports the actual policies or guidelines from the General Plan that go along with what the
issues are? DIRECTOR LORTZ: We certainly try to do that. COMMISSIONER TALESFORE: Right. I just wondered if it could be like a ... 10 11 12 13 COMMISSIONER TREVITHICK: I have a question.
When we're being asked to look at plans, sometimes we are asked to ad hoc whether or not this orientation or that should be for this building or some other place,
I don' t 16 continue to do our best and if we're falling short on t.hat 17 one, certainly I apologize. 15 ,. DIRECTOR LORTZ: We'll do our best.. We'll COMMISSIONER TALESFORE : Oh, you
don't' have to 15 think the Planning Commission 'should be in a position of 16 having to make those conrnents in public. I think we should 17 either refer back to the Planners or the
architect to get a 18 decision, so that we're not actually micro-managing' a site 19 apologize. Sometimes it just helps clarify and gets us 20 going in the right direction. 19 plan.
20 DIRECTOR LORTZ: Well I I 'appreciate that, and are 21 DIRECTOR LORTZ: Yes, and if there's sorne specific 21 you referring to a previous application? 22 examples of projects where
we dido' t provide that and you 22 COMMISSIONER TREVIT.HICK: Yes. Well there's 23 thought that would have been useful, if you could let me 23 several, but there' a one at Cypress for
example. We dropped 2S that really were. 24 know and then we'll kind of flag those as types or classes 25 of applications. LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning
Code Amendment A-03-4 85 2. it down two feet and I'm not sure what the consequences of LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIID 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 86 DIRECTOR
LORTZ: Okay, very good. 1. appreciate 2 CHAIR DREXEL: All right. Mike, dO you have 4 :anything you want to add? COMMISSIONER BURKE : well on this subj eat, I was Ei taken
by chance this week to the county of Santa Clara Planning Web site, and that is an incredibly impressive Web DIRECTOR LORTZ: We'll look at that as a model for 2 some future effort in
terms of our web site. COMMISSIONER BURl<E.: Web site, but also just the ideas. I bet that saves their planners a lot of grief and counter time, because you can just point people to
that and 6 say type in the address and you can get all sorts of information. saver for our staff and for the people that would come to us 13 if they had that type of tool for Los Gatos
where they could 14 come and say this is in the HR-l zone, this is what is 15 expected, these are the setbacks I'm required to do, this is ,. we approve a project with conditions, and
the applicant:. may lS not be willing to meet all of those conditions, we're DIRECTOR LORTZ: Excellent idea. Thank you. CHAIR DREXEL: All right. Lee? COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: I think I'm
going to 10 11 12 site. People ought to look at it, because you can pull up all the information you ever wanted t.o know about building, developing, or what.ever in the County, to the
ordinances, you can type in the address or the parcel number find zoning information about it.. And I thought wow, what a work 10 11 12 13 follow-up on what Morris said. He approached
it from a different ang'le than I was going to, but it sort of goes in the same direction. Sometimes I've been a little concerned that when 17 you want to put an accessory structure
or secondary living, lEi the accessory structure regulation. I mean it went into if 16 17 forcing the applicant to appeal, I think. because they only have ten days, and if they don't
appeal within that, they're 18 what the set.backs for it had to be, what the qualifications. 19 And I was just really, really impressed. I know the county 20 has a inuch, much bigger
budget than we do and I'm not 21 faulting us at. all for not being able' to implement it. 18 going to have to meet all of 'those conditions. So I sort of 19 agree t:.hat when we make
those kinds of changes that the 20 planning Department and the archi teet should have a chance 21 to look at them and give input to the applicant and that it 22 DIRECTOR LORTZ: But it's
something to strive 22 come back, so that we can see what the result is, because 2S somebody else's ideas, do it. 23 2. towards. COMMISSIONER BURKE: Well, if you can steal 23 possibly
we'll approve it even if we can't achieve what we 24 were looking for. possibly we would not approve the 2S proj ect. So if· it could come back on the consent calendar. L05 GATOS PLANNING
COM<lISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A·03-4 87 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/200' Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 88
16 construction draWings, we really don't know .. _ C1lAIRDREXEL: I understand that, but that implies that some of these decisions aren' t made until the construction
drawings. conditions directly on ... DIREC1'OR LORTZ: Conditions' .are blue lined on 1 haven't paid any attention. But it seems like don't thOSe 2 do it Jor us? I always worry about
being so precise that if 3 we forget something we're dead. So sometimes it's better to leave things so that yes, the conditions of approval shall s be blue lined in here, but you're
still bound by the ones that created at the Planning Commission meeting. I mean how do you handle that? DIREC1'OR LORTZ: And I apologize, I was up until midnight with the Council last
night,-so I can't track a question that lasts' more than thirty seconds this evening. CHAIR DREXEL: Okay, my question is can we put our 10 15 11 14 13 12 made, and if we don I t want
the applicant to have to go back remember the intent of conditions for a full two years and 1 That's just just one of my concerns. It seems like we're forcing 2 people to appeal. The
other thing with projects that .are approved 4. with conditions, a lot of the times the conditions are that 5 certain changes be made prior to the building permit being issued, and that
could be anywhere from
a month or two or two years. My thought is that it I S hard for people to 11 if those are the conditions that we're approving the project 10 on, would it possible if they are conperned
with actual changes in the project: plan that those determinations be and do a whole new plan set, that at least those changes 13 that are agreed. upon that are architectural or whatever
f and 14 part of theA & S, be blue lined on the approved A &. S lS rather than just on the construction plan, so that. it's very 16 clear what the conditions were and there's less chance
of 11 things getting lost in the shuffle.. 17 DIRECTOR LORTZ: When the construction drawings 19 that, because there' a aome language that I thought was quite 20 lovely in the conditions
of approval for Wednesday, January 21 14Ul , it should be lltA, or whatever it is. It's Conditions ,. CHAIR DREXEL: Bud, I was going to ask you about 18 are approved by Staff, every
issue has been resolved. We 19 don' t leave something loose like where the garage is going 20 to go. Some of these conditions, for example we'll take 21 Greet1l:>riar other night,
and there was a lot of design 22 of Approval Ten, Eleven, and Twelve. It says ·Conditions of 22 issues that had to be addressed. Those have to be addressed 23 ApprC?val. conditions
of approval shall be blue lined 24 and fallon the coversheet of the construction plans." I'd 23 before we'll sign off the construction drawings, if that's 24 what your question was.
25 never noticed those three conditions before. Maybe I just 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment J\-03-4 89 LOS GATOS PLMlNING COMMISSION
MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 90 CHAIR DREXEL: So we don't have to really worry COMMISSIONER. QUINTANA: I probably could pull one 2 about that. Those are taken
care of. If they're on the 2 up from our 11tll meeting. We approve a project with 3 construction drawings ... were from the time of our meeting until construction ...
DIRECTOR LORTZ: Yeah, the reason we use the 5 building pemit as the trigger mechanism is we won' tissue the building until that issue is resolved, and it has to be resolved
before the plarmer will sign off on it. CHAIR DREXEL: Okay. And Lee's concern that people are' going to forget: what the conditions of approval out. Okay, Condition Five for the Greenbriar
has to do accomplish every one of those. COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: Right, but then you we've been working on them for the last two weeks to wi th windows being recessed and tinted and all
that kind of thing. That doesn't need to happen before the building permit stage. That's real clear. DIRECTOR LORTZ: Yes, it certainly does. In fact, conditions. It seems to me that
that project shouldn't actually be considered finally approved until the conditions that relate to changes in the A & S plans are actually worked 13 12 11 10 COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: And
they look at the approved plan set which has a stamp approveq., which may not have those changes in it, and check against" that. CHAIR DREXEL: But they can't (inaudible). 12 13 10 11
14 DIRECTOR LORTZ: The Staff won't sign them off 14 have ... Let's see, there was one that certainly I thought 15 unless the issue is addressed. Okay, that's one thing. If 15 should
be done 'prior, and it said "at building stage.-,. two years have gone by and finally the plans come in for ,. CHAIR DREXEL: But they'll all be resolved, Lee. 17 construction drawings,
and you're concerned about a planner 17 They'll all be resolved. 18 not understanding the conditions, we do one of two things. 19 We'll look at the conditions, and do we understand the
20 condition? And if we have a question about the condition, ,. 19 20 COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: Prior to building stage. c!lAIR DREXEL: All right. Well maybe ••. COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:
No, no. I'm going to find 21 we'll go into the tape and listen to the condition. 21 this. 22 COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: Let me phrase this another 22 OtAIR D'REXEL: Yeah, why don' t you
talk to Staff 23 way. 23 about that. because I feel like I've got a handle on this 24 DIRECTOR LORTZ: And a specific \<lould be really one. Does anyone else ... It's getting late. 25
helpful, if you have a specific example. 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMIHSSION MEETING 2/25/200' Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/200' Item
#1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 91 92
only have one comment to make I and that's the 2 2004 Planners Institute. I've already been to it. It was terrific. has been to it. Joanne's been to it. 4 Actually, if
I'm going to be around, I will pay, even though the Town won' t pay for it. It' s in Monterey. I know this was all in your packets': Do it. It' B wonderful. Does it start on a Wednesday?
Yeah it does, doesn't it? NO, it's .2 COMMISSIONER BURKE: Isn't that good? CHAIR DREXEL, Oh my God. Okay, Lee? COMMISSIONER QUINTANA, As a geographer major, appreciate that example of
bad cartography. Bud, I do have an example that I can give you outright. DIRECTOR LORTZ: I believe you do. COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: Number Six on ... 10 n12 March 31'<'. We don't have
a meeting that night. And it's wonderful. so go. Go. It makes you smarter. Maybe on the weekend. It's really good. We learned a lot. COMMISSIONER BURKE: I just have one last item. OiAIR
DREXEL: Okay, go for it. COMMISSIONER BURKE: I know that sometimes we find 10 11 12 CHAIR DREXEL: Why don't you do it when poor Bud hasn' t been up until midnight, Lee? Corner him tomorrow.
DIRECl'OR LORTZ: Well, I know that Lee has a lot of concerns about these things. and I' d like to hear what she has to say so I can for the rest of the Commission hopefully respond t.o
it. 13 out that mistakes have been made when we read about it in 14 the paper or something like that. Well I was in San 13 CHAIR DREXEL, Okay. COMMISSIONER QUINTANA, Okay, thank you.
Number 22 condition regarding· Greenbriar. lS Francisco for valentine's Day and I'm looking at the area 16 map, and I want to ask Staff how this happened. I looked at. 17 the map. and
the Town of Los Gatos has been moved north of 18 a5. (Inaudible) but I haven't seen any environmental 15 six has to do with the garage relocations? 18 will be and approved
prior to submittal of plans 19 for t.he building plan check.-In this particular case it'S 20 going forward, but in other cases that could be a year from 21 then, and that seems like
something something that should·be addressed 22 immediately after the proj ect. so it's not hanging out DIRECTOR LORTZ: Yes. COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: And it s·ays "Modifications "17 FEMALE:
Is this a General Plan change? DIREC'l'OR LORTZ: That was our interpretation of a 20 21 19 reports. it consistent with the General Plan? 24 COMMISSIONER BURKE, What I want to know is
how is 23 24 there, because it is part of the condition of approval, and it's a change in the plan. 25 CHAIR DREXEL: That's amazing. 25 DIRECTOR LORTZ, I understand. LOS GATOS PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 93 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 94 COMMISSIONER QUINTANA:
Don' t agree with I 1 back to Staff and resolves the issue. But what if it· s DIRECTOR LORTZ: And you're afraid that we're not 4 going to remember what you meant by that. 2 ninety-one
days? What if it's ninety-three days? Within a 3 reasonable period of time, what· 8 the trigger mechanism? And And that' a our concern is that I have failed to be COMMISSIONER
Excuse me? DlREcroR LORTZ: If I understand your concern correctly, you feel that we may not remember perhaps a year from now exactly what the intent of the Commission was? 5 able-and
I'm certainly not going to do it this evening-to 6 come up with an alternative approach, other than the building permit, as the trigger mechanism for resolving that issue. We could bring
it back to the Commission, but I do C9MMISSIONER QUINTANA: Yeah, memories fade, number one, and number two, pla11I1erS on proj ects change, you have real production wise
from that perspective. CHAIR DREXEL: Has it ever been a problem? 10 10 have turnover, et cetera. DIRECTOR LORTZ: I don't believe it' s been a 12 11 problem. CHAIR DREXEL: Okay, there
you go. I think it MALE, move that the meeting is adjourned. works just fine the way it is. 14 13 DIRECTOR LORTZ: Certainly. COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: And it see!?s like if you're makiz:g
a condition of a project that that condition should be incorporated somehow into the plan set, ei ther by 14 13 12 11 15 writing or revised. before the approval. actually becomes 15
FEMALE: I second it. 16 final. " 17 ,. CHAIR DREXEL: Okay, Bud. answer quick. DIRECTOR LORTZ: We're not concerned about it. We 17 1. 19 do have planners that go back into the tape when
there's a 20 concern about a particular condition that they don't quite 21 understand, and they listen to the tape and the discussion 22 of it. 19 20 21 22 25 can think of is that within
ninety days the applicant comes ,,------., (\::'J' 23 24 COMMISSIONER QUINTANA: It would save time. DIRECTOR LORTZ: well okay, the alternative that I 23 24 25 LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 95 LOS GJl..TOS PLANNING COt1MISSION MEETING 2/25/2004 Item #1, Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4 96
® COURTSIDE CLUB -A SPORTS RESORT March 1, 2004 Town Council Town of Los Gatos 110 E, Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95032 Pursuant to the zoning ordinance section 29.20.580 Courtside Club
is requesting a hearing ofthe Town Council. Courtside Club is requesting your consideration on Ordinance Amendment A-03-4. This Ordinance would allow, under very limited circumstances,
a parking lot on a residential zoned property. The Club is proposing to develop the property identified as parcels 409-24-001, 409-24-002, 409-24-003. . A Letter of Justification regarding
the Courtside Club project will follow. Thank you for your consideration. Lisa Graf General Manager, Courtside Club Attachment 5
TO: TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: WILLIAM & ANN BURNS RE: [PROPOSED] CHANGE OF TOWN CODE AMENDMENTA-03-4 LOTS 1, 2, & 3-RINCONADA ESTATES ..t<bC.hlV-hV MAR 042004 TOWNMANAGER
On Wednesday, March 25, 2004, the Planning Commission heard BudLortz, Director of Community Development, proposal for a change in the,Town Code that would , allow Courtside Club/Western
Athletic to build a private parking lot designed to accommodate Courtside employees and overflow membership parking. The [mal vote was 3-2 to reject Mr. Lortz's amendment to the Town
Code. An Appeal to overturn that ruling was expected to be filed within five (5) days ofthe Planning Commission's decision. The final action now rests with the Town Council. POSITION
OF LA RINCONADA RESIDENTS We write this letter to state that we support the plan of Courtside to develop a private parking area on Lots 1, 2, and 3 ofRinconada Estates for the overflow
parking needs of the Courtside employees and members. We have reviewed the plans that have been presented by Paragon and Courtside (EXHIBITA) and can support them as long as the single
entrance/exit for parking remains on Winchester Boulevard. We shall strongly oppose any changes directed by the Town or Courtside which would place the entrance/exit on Newell Avenue.
We believe that we state the opinion of our neighbors in the La Rinconada area. ' The residents first met with.Courtside Manager Lisa Graf and Paragon Developer Roger Griffin over a
year ago at the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee. At that time', the Residents' position was to support Courtside in its efforts to purchase Lots 1,2, and 3 ofRinconada Estates
(EXHIBITB) from the Elks Club. Our demands at that time were: 1) no ingress/egress onto Newell Avenue; 2) a Conditional Use Permit issued by the Town Council granting Courtside's a private
Parking Lot in a residential area which would guarantee the neighbors input as to approval ofthe plans for the ParkingLot as well as future maintenance ofthe property; and 3) construction
of a sound wall between Lot 3 and the residence on 4. During that meeting, Bud Lortz suggested that an Amendment to the Town Code would be necessary but failed. to refer to a
legal precedent to substantiate his opinion. At that time, he dismissed our demand for issuance of a Conditional Use Permit that would not require an amendment to either the Town Code
or General Plan. The residents' position was based on the General Plan and Infill Policy ofthe Town ofLos Gatos regarding 'established residential areas' (EXHIBITS C & D). Developer
Roger Griffin of Paragon assured the residents that the proposed Parking Lot would not have an ingress/egress onto Newell Avenue. Over a year went by and the residents heard nothing
until Bud Lortz's letter datedAttachment 6
PAGE 2 February 2,2004, (EXHIBIT E) was sent to a limited number ofNewell Avenue residents. We obviously were shocked by the [proposed] AmeIidmenttothe Town Code. The Development Review
Committee had already met and approved Lortz's Amendment without input from the Residents. The General PhlltCorhrhittee was the next'step in the approval process. We were told by Lisa
Graf, Courtside's General Manager stated that, "she had been given assurance by Bud Lortz that the amendment wouldpass" and Courtside would then be able to proceed with the construction
ofits Parking Lot. During the General Plan Committee Meeting, Mr. Lortz was challenged as to how his Amendment would affectotherproperty.in town and why it was necessary to change the
Town Code when a simple Conditional Use Pennit could be granted by the CoUIicil. We appreciated theinptit from Council member McNutt when she asked how many othet Residential Lots would
be effected by the amended Town Code. Without thinkiirg, Lortz answered 11 or 12, then realized he had revealed his real motivation for the change to the Town Code (ability to build
parking lots throughout residential areas which are adjacent to an Arterial Street (defmed by Caltrans as "a major thoroughfare, used primarilYforthrough traffic rather than for access
to abutting land, that is characterized by high vehicular capacity'and continuity ofmovement". Realizing his error, Lortz immediately stated the amendment would only effect Lots 1, 2,
and 3 of Riconada Estates. Mr. Lortz has now changed the wording ofhis [Proposed] Amendment to the Town Code 3 or 4 different The final votewas 4-3for approval, [Glickman
voting for and Council Member McNutt voting against]. .The next part ofthis interesting process occurred at the Planning Commission on February 25,2004. Only a limited number ofresidents
in area had received a letter from MrLortz rather than the nonnal "Planning Department Notice". During the meeting, the language ofthe AmyndmentWas again altered in an attempt to insure
passage: However,the final vote was 3-2for rejection. Mr. Lortz became very upset as he had. promised Courtside the Amendinentwould be. approved. He then stated to the Planning Commission
and C0urtsideIWestern Athletic representatives that, "I will help you get the . Appealput together:" and that he would, "make certain the new owner ofthe Elk's Club wouldget the existing
Conditional Use Permit. " We did some research into Lortz's assurance to Lisa Grafregarding the approval ofan Amendment to the Town Code and how it effected purchase of the property
from the Elks Club. On September 30,2004, CourtsidelWestern Athletic pl,lfchases Lotl ($375,000), Lot 2'/$94,000), (EXHIBITS F & G), and we thinlcLot 3($363,000), for a total of $832,000.
No Corp0ration would spend that amount ofmoney for a Parking Lot unless there were a.bsolute guarantees that it co:uld be built. This has put Courtside in a very awkward positio1l,.·
Lisa Graf, Roger Griffin, and the President ofWestern Athletic ' could not believe the decision ofthe Planning Commission to reject Lortz Amendinent. We were also very shocked as the
Newell Avenue Residents had meet with Lisa Graf and Roger Griffin on Sunday, February 22, 2004, to go over the plans and we were willing to accept the plans on the conditions ofno ingress/egress
onto Newell Avenue and the building ofa sound wall between Lots 3 and 4. However, we absolutely wanted a
" . PAGE 3 Conditional Use Pennit issued by the Town Council rather an Amendment to the Town Code which Lortz continues to advocate. In taking with Lisa Graf, she would support the Conditional
Use Pennit as all CourtsidelWestern Athletic wants to do is complete the proje'ct. As a side note, ifLot 3 had a home built on it, the comparable price would be $1.1 Million (EXHIBITH).
Thus, in the future if Courtside should no longer need the entire parking lot, it still could make a nice profit by building a home on that lot. The Residents would never stand for a
Zone Change from Residential to Office as was attempted by the Elks Club in order to build a Medical Building on Lot 3 (EXHIBIT!). The current Elks Club property (LOT 26) is zoned Residential
and has an appraised value of$2.4 Million. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The residents ofthe Newell Avenue area are interested in finding an alternative to Lortz's [Proposed] Amendment to the
Town Code. As part of that effort, a telephone was made to Assistant Planner Judie Gilli in an attempt to solve the problem. She indicated that the new version ofLortz's amendment would
be site specific to Lots 1,2, and 3 of Rinconada Estates. Upon review ofthis new proposal, the residents ofthe Newell Avenue area might support the modified'version ofLortz amendment
provided our original demands will not be compromised. It was also recommended that Lortz refer to the Los Gatos Town Code, Table ofConditional Usesfor property zoned R-l: (2-e) Recreation-Private
Sports Recreation Clubs; and (7-j) Alternating Use of Offstreet' Parking Spaces (EXHIBIT J). Utilizing the existing Town Code would allow Courtside to go directly through the planning
process and not be required to obtain Town Council approval. We have provided copies ofthe January 15,1960 Elk Clubs Use Permit and the October 24, 1983 Ordinance Amending the Zoning
Ordinance for your review (EXHIBITSK and L). WIMBLEDON TOWN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION In regards to the objections ofWimbledon Town Homeowners Association to the building ofa Private Parking
Lot by Courtside, we take an opposing view. The objections seem to be a "knee jerk" response to what has happened to the increase traffic on Wimbledon Drive. By having the LaMontague
Development, Courtstyle, Vasona Ranch, Wedgwood expansion, and the only other exit from La Rinconada residential area and the G6lfCourse traffic as well as the 110 Townhomes offthis
street, Wimbledon Drive has become a majortraffic problem for the residents of that area. This can be Attributed to poor planning by the Town's Community Development Departmentrather
than Courtsides need for parking. As Courtside's proposed parking lot will ingress/egresses onto Winchester Boulevard, t1?-e impact on Wimbledon would be insignificant. The Association
has built a fence and landscaped its 20 foot strip to prevent any access to the Courtside's proposed parking lot which openly faces Newell Avenue not Wimbledon Drive. We feel the Courtside
Parking Lot would be an excellent addition to our neighborhood as it would tum a very ugly "gravel pit" into a nice continuation ofthe Courtside landscaping. Thus, we urge the Town Council
to explore
· PAGE 4 traffic calming measure fOf Wimbledon Drive rather than considering the objections of Wimnledon Town Homeowners Association's in its attempt to .block this project. DATEb: March
2, 2004 CC: bebra Figone, Town Manager Lisa Graf, Courtside Manager Roger Griffin, Paragon
.... .rI) •• l.tl OJ 1 TAA'" UlIIT JOIOlTY" ll. CA '1111 L1.0 '" R 10'-0' r..ul Doll \O/2!l/OJ PLANTING PLAN Onl'lffi R.........t<1 Pnl;ectHo.OJ.:S6 ,l.ppn>w;d P.IR (401)
411.' 0 10 (401) 411.' 0 J 1 P" I COURTSIDE PARKING LOT WINCHESTER BLVD. fit WIMBlEOON LOS GATOS, CA 95032 0:: ozoo w..J CD :2 oo ., 6U: DeTAL HI) tl"'I!:CrtcATIOH Sl-EET6
•• u.u. N: He> MAn:RJA.l& OR I"I...ANT HATERUJ..$ UmcuT APPf'OVA1. Q' Tll2 OJt.Eft OR THE lAI'CbCAFE
l 1'l-e CCffil'UCT0f' e+IAlL VERI"'T ''''l.»n aJAHr/Tl1!6 mor1 nil: 1"LANTt-n I"'\...Nt ClJJoHTlTma 6HOUN N THE: LroEt-D ARE FOR eta..Y. ,. HOTI'""(
llE N1l!OIATa..y IN Tl-E Of,4HT ACT\lAL &In. AND f'\....4lrm r"l.»l I PLANT NOTES:
.. In OFFIce or COUNT'\' A5srSSOil· ••• 'SANTA @. COllHTY. lOr" r 11'.o, t I • I !.! ;1 ogl @II ,"" 100' --[-LENA WAY @"t- 25 "'-:' TRACT N! 3137 CRE'SrVIf:\V
ACRES (" 8AOCASTtE -----la WAY !l !§ 13 I' ... 14 '.. i.!-! 20 II .1 19 105 Il' :..-..... ". II !i aIj zoaw ..J /() :E 3: II BLVD.
-_.. .._---a bJo l<l \-...z..."..........151,!. __......Ir----:.:.LlL'.-----'L... -.-\---..:..:--"=. -.,----..r--WINCHESTER -,
"-" ..2.5 GOALS, POLICIES, . . . STRATE·GIES ISSUE: 1 Los Gatos is distinctive. The small town heritage, natural
setting and architectural diversity omake our town uniquoe. Preserving th.ese attributes is important to this community. N/'"o devetopment should be well-designed to preserve and enhance
these attributes. Histe. bullqings should be preserved. \::It;)""" . POlicies: I:..P.1.1 L.P.1.2 L.G.3.1 Policies:
Development shall be of highquality design and construction, a positive to andcompatible with the Town's ambiance. Development shall enhance the character and unique
identity of existing commercial and/or residential neighborhoods. . . . Encourage developers to engage in early' discussions regarding the nature and scope of .the project possible
impacts and mitigation requirements. These discussions should ocqur as early as possible in the the project planning stage, preferably preceding rand acquisition. To maIntain
existing character of residentfaI neighborhoods by c.onti'oHlngdevelopment. . I :.... L.P.3.1 L.P.3.2 L.P.3.3 L.P.3.4 L.P.3.5 L.P.3.6..", .. . Protect' eXisting residential areas from
pressures for non-residential development. 0 Consider nonresidenti"al activity in residential areas only when the character anc;fquality of the neighborhood can be maintained. . . Protect
exIsting residential areas from adjacent nonresidential uses by assuring that buffers are developed and maintained. Buffers shall be reqUired as conditions of approvai and may.consist
of landscaping, sound barriers, building setbacks or open space. Prohibit uses that may lead to deterioration of residential neighborhoods, or adversely impact the public safety or the
residential character of a residential neighborhood. Assure that the type and intensity of land use shall be consistent with that of the immediate neigh·borho·od. Develop and implement
appmpriate appmpriate traffic controls to protect neighbC!rhoods from the impacts of through traffic such as safety. hazards', speeding, nois-e, and other disturbances.
RESOLUTION i993-62 RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL . OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS ADOPTING A OEVELOPMENT POUCY FOR IN-FILL PROJECTS, None None the Town is primarily built
out and the balance of undeveloped land consists predominantly of-in-fill and W'HEREAS, it is important that these in-filJ parcels are development compatible Mth surrounding
neighborhoods. RESOLVED: Town Council 'hereby adopts a development policy for in-fill projects.attached to'this resolution as Exhibit A. PASSED Ai'lD ADOPTED at a regular' meeting'
of the Town Council held on the .3rd day of May, 1993, by the following vote: COillfCIL MENfBERS: -AYES: Randy Attaway, Steven Blanton,. Linda Lubeck, Patrick O'Laughlin, Mayor Joanne
Benjamin NAYS: None -ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: lsi Joanne Benjamin NfAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA ATTEST: /s/Marian V. Cosgrove . CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
·LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
1. 2. 3. · 4. 5. 6. DEVELOPMENT POLICY FOR IN..FJLL·PROJECTS In-fill projects should contribute. to the further development of the surrounding neighborhCJod (i.e. improve circulation.
contribute!o;>r unity, eli.I'fo1inate a area; not detract from theeXlstlng qualIty of lIfe). An in-fill project should be designed
in context with the neighborhood and surrounding with respect to the scale and character of.sUrrounding structures, . provIde comparable rot sIzes and.
open space. consIder garage placement, setbacks, density. provide adequate circulation and on-street parking: In-fill development should blend rather than compete with the established
character of the area. Corridor'lots may be considered if it decreases' the amount of public street 'and is consistent with objects #1 and #2. It must be demonstrated that a benefit
to surrounding properties is being provided. . The Planned Development process'should only be used td accomplish objects #1 and #2. The applicant shall demonstrate the benefit of a Planned
Development through exceHence in design. . Approval of an in-fill project shall dernonstrate a strong community benefit and findings of benefit shall be part of the record. Recommend
that any new development proposal be reviewed by the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee.· .' EXHIBIT A
TOWN OF Los GATOS COMMUNITY.DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION PHONE (408) 354-6872 FAX (408) 354-7593 CMcCENTER 110 E. MAIN STREET P.O. Box 949 Los GATOS,'CA 95031 Dear Newell
Avenue Neighbors: RE: Zoning Code Am,,endment A-03-4 On February 11, 2004 at 5:30 PM, the General' Plan Committee will discuss the following application: -Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4
. Consider amending the Town Code to modify the conditional use pennit table to' allow parking lots on property zoned R-l -(Single Family that are located on
an arterial street. It been determined that this project could not . have a significant impact on the environment, therefore, the project is not subject to the California Environmental
Quaiity Act (Section 15061 (b)(3)). -APPLICANT: Western Athletic Clubs, Inc You have been notified of this meeting because you have expressed interest in the Winchester Blvd. an.4 Newell
Ave. area applications. The· General Plan Committee will consider an application 'for a zoning code amendment from -Western Athletic Clubs Inc. and fortnulate a recoIDiTIendation that
will be forwarded to the Plmng Commission. Final action will be taken by the Town Council at a date that is yet to be determined. We will inform you of any additional meetings andlor
hearings concerning this matter; Thank you for your interest in this area. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Judie Gilli, Assistant Planner, at (408) 399-5702.
Sincerely, ' ' . ...J Bud N. Lortz, AICP Director of Community Development BNL:JG Cc: Mailing list N:\DEV\Judie\projects\Zoning· Parking\leller2-2-04.doc INCORPORATED
AUGUST 10, 1887
Santa CLara· (CA) ********************************************************************************************** ** * EXHIBIT F < < < OWNERSHIP INFORMATION> > > * :Sports Resorts Inc
**** Owner CoOwner Site Address:14675 Winchester Mail Address:14675 Winchester Phone : Owner: Blvd Los Gatos 95032 Blvd Los Gatos Ca 95032 Tenant: Parcel Number Bldg Id No :409 23 001
:1 ** * < < < SALES AND LOAN INFORMATION > > > < < < ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATION> > > < < < PROPERTY DESCRIPTION > > > Census:Tract:5072.05 Block:3 Map Grid :873 C3 Zoning:Cmpd Land
Use : 64 Rec,Recreational Facilities Sub/Plat Leg.al < < < PROPERTY > > Transferred :04/21/1997 Document # :13679345 Multi-parcel Sale Price :$6,350,000 Full Deed
Type:Grant Deed % Owned :100 Land :$1,473,144 Structure: $29, 237 Other Total :$1,502,381 % Improved : 2 :03020 :$18,924.66 YearBuilt: EffYearBlt Garage Sp: Garage SF: Bldg Cond:Avg
Bldg Class Bldg Shape GarageTyp: WallHgt AddtionSF: Loan Amount Lender . Loan Type Interest Type Vesting Vesting Type:Corporation Exempt Type Exempt Amount Tax Rate Area 03-04 Taxes
Units Patio Porch Elevator Lease SF : Office SF: Sprinkler: 1stFlr SF: 2ndFlr SF: 3rdFlr SF: Rental
SF: Bldg SF Lot SF:84,506 Lot Acres:1.94 Lot Dimen: CntIHt/Ac: Pool Fireplace: Sauna Dishwsher: Tennis Ct: FrameType: Total Rms: Bedrooms Bathrooms: Stories pining Rm: Family Rm: Rec
Room UtilityRm: Water Src: Elect Svc: Gas Svc ** *'**** **** ****** *** *** ** ***** * * *** *. ** * **********************************************************************************************
Information compiledjrom various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness ofinformation contained in this report.
San.ta. (CA) ********************************************************************************************** * * EXHIBIT .G < < < ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFOBMATION> > > < < <
SALES AND LOAN INFOBMATION > > > < < <OWNERSHIP INFOEMATION> > > * *** ** *** * ** **** ** * * .* ***** * * * ** *** * * * * * * * * * * * * * :409 23 002 :1 :03006 : $181, 121. 88 YearBuilt:1977
EffYearBlt :1977 Garage Sp: Garage SF: Bldg Cond:Good Bldg Class :10.5 Bldg Shape GarageTyp: WallHgt : 14 AddtionSF: Parcel Number Bidg Id No > > > Loan Amount Lender Loan Type Interest
TyPe Vesting Type:Corporation Exempt Type Exempt Amount Tax Rate Area 03-04 Taxes Units :1 Patio Porch Elevator :Yes Lease SF :33,983 Office SF: Sprinkler: Yes lstFlr SF: 2ndFlr SF:
3rdFlr SF: Rental SF:33,983 Blvd Los Gatos 95032 Blvd Los Gatos Ca 95032 Tenant: Block:3 -..: -: :Sports Resorts Inc Bldg SF :33,983 Lot SF:314,503 Lot Acres:7.22 . Lot Dimen: CntlHt/Ac:Yes
Pool Fireplace: Sauna Dishwsher: Tennis Ct: FrameType:Special :2 Owner CoOwner Site Address:14675 Winchester Mail Address:14675 Winchester Phone : Owner: Transferred :04/21/1997 Document
# :13679345Multi-parcel Sale Price :$6,350',000 Full Deed Type:Grant Deed % Owned :100 < < < PROPERTY CHA:RACTERISTICS> > > Land : $5,482,'127 Structure:$S,901,239 Other :$1,969,891
Total :$13,353,257 % Improved :52 < < < PROPERfi DESCRIPTION Census:Tract:5072.05 Map Grid :873 C3 Zoning:Cmpd Land Use :64 Rec,Recreational Facilities Sub/Plat Legal Total Rms: Bedrooms
Bathrooms: Stories Dining Rm: Family Rm: Rec Room UtilityRm: Water Src: Elect Svc: Gas Svc **** ** ******* *** *** ** ** **** ** **** ****. *** ****** ** ** **** *************************************
********************************************************* information compiledfrom various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations or warranties as the accuracy
or completeness ofinformation contained in this report.
..*..********************••• *....*********************************•••• .... . _ MBTROSCAN QUICX COMPS .. '* 1860 HaW. AWt:CU., suJ.ce 455
.. ... S.aClramaneo, Cal1£or:1i. 95825 ... FAX (916J 921-6781 .. ... ..... ..... •.... .. •..... .... .... ... •.. •... ... .. •.. *'"*.. ... .. 1t '*..... ;03006 ;$478.63
Tranafer Exempt: Type Exempe Amount Tax :Rate Area 00-01 'I'axes ;alock; PROPERTY I:lESCRIilTION _••• -----------=------_. PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS �
� ASSESSMENT AND 'I'AX INFORMATION •••••••••••_••••__•• ..........• == ._••••••• :409 24 003 :LoS Gatos
Elks Building Corp :Newell Ave Los Gatos 95030 :105 Newell Ave LoS Gatos ca 95032 current Transfer _: OJ./OJ./'l973 :3136577 : . : 873 :63 ;'l'ract: :69 Vacant, Urban parcel No . Owner
CoOwner Site Address Mail ACidreee Telephone OWNERS1iIP IHFORMATIOH Transferred Docwnene # Sale Price Deed Type Loan Amount Lender Loan Type Seller Name •••••••••
Land Structure Other Total t ImprClved Map Grid CenSU:iJ zoning Land Use Sub/Plat Legal ..... *... ..•... ..... *... or• *11 ......... \if .... ... ..... ...*.* .. ... lit .... *.*.
.. * Bathrooms: Stories Lot Acres : .24 Year Built ... ... Bed.rooms ; Fireplace: Lot SqPt : I 400 Units .. ... Dining Rm: Tennis Ct:: Lot nirnen. OfficeSqFt ... .. . Family :Rm:
Pool SqFt Lease SqP't ... ... Util tun Sauna GarageSqFt Sprinkler * * Reo. Room : Diahwsher: Garage Sp. Elevator * * T01;alRms ; Air condo : Addl SqFt WallHeight ;. ..
•• *.**•••••• • _******,.' ••••9'••••••• *** ••,.*•• ItlfonnatimJ COl'ffJ)iledfrom Yartcus 30IUUS.
Firil A.merican Rcal £:stau: SalliliotlS. !-P. mczh::s no D1' WCUTl1lIties tzS lhc ()I' compktell4M o!i,,!omt.lJtioll-
ill tJW r-spcn.
••••**************.*•••***.****.**.*.**••*•••*******.*.W***9***••*•••. PREPARED fOR :06/25/2001 coun:y : Santa Clara (CA.) APN ;Los
Ga.tos Elks Building.· corp :NetAell AvaLos Gatos 515030 fLOS Gacos :409 24 003 COMPARAJaLE PARAM2'I'2RS USED **.******••**••••••••••******* PROXJ:MITr,:1..QOO '1'RANS!'Dt>ATE, 6 tJWI:)US:B
Ac: .28 :-------------------_. : '09 25 021 :02/15/200J. :$1,100,ClOO :15560904 .YB:1900 Pool:No Ket:oScan Cc=parahl. Sal.. Inc Parcel 95030 Ca 95117 Price Doc: # Phone TotRm:
. BldgSP: COMPA,RABLES FOUNO usmG m ABOVE PARAMETERS: A:ODI'1'IONAL SALES Sale #:1. __._.: Owner : Saratoga Palm Development Site :I1a ltinconada Dr Los Gatos
. Mail: 3707 Williams Rc! San Jose Use :69 vacant, Urban Map Pg:B73 :83 Bedrm : 8th:
...... __ ..L., .L:J.lU.L.LJJ.L.L. ". R o·a Ifj J 'TOWN Of LOS GMOS OffiCE Of 10WN Clf:;K ELKS CLUB �
� ._.-'-'-'-._._.-.-" ,-,-,-,-,-,-,-,---,-,-1 -m\mm m En \ II m! I I I
-'-'-'-'-'-'-'- '-'-'---'-'-._.-.-_._.-._._.-._.-.-.-._.-'
-'-'-.-.-'--'j _.-._._.-.-·-V· Ii i j j mmil ._. . ._._._._._._._.__._. ._. .__.__._._._._._.J _._._._._._;-.
.-._._._.-._.-._._._.-._._.-.-._._._.__._._._._.__._._._.-l _.-.-.-.-.-_._._. .. fIIIIII "I·II (" '\ '. ..';' NEWELL AvE' -SQUTH ELEVATION
(PROPOSED] MEDICAL BUILDING' !'-'hI 0' LOT 3-3-RlNCONADA ESTATES ZONED RESIDENTIAL 831 dad d a I dt·td b d • d d a I d 6 b db d d d ··-··-··-··----;-r-··-·..-··---·..-··-··-··-··-:,-·..-··:--.._.._..
_.._..-_.. .•..,.., .... •. ::=::_. t-.._ .._ .._ .._ .._ .. .."-:=::=::=::::::::=:::::::::=:==1 , I I .. I i
IWWW, I I I I , I I .:. : mm . ,
§ 29.20.175 LOS GATOS TOWN CODE (\ the general plan. Such conditions, without limiting the discretion and authority ofthe deciding body, may include time limitations, architecture and.
site approval, street dedication, and street and drainage improvements. (Ord. No. 1316, § 5.20.120, 6-7-76; Ord. No. 1375, 11-21-77) Sec. ·29.20.180. Conditional use permits. The adoption
of this chapter is based on the premise that there are uses which can be specified for each zone which, in practically .all instances, will be mutually compatible. In addition, there
are other uses which might be compatible with ordinarily allowed uses if properly located and regulated. These are called conditional uses. They are listed in section 29.20.185. However,
the listing of a conditional use doe.s not indicate that the use must be allowed. There will be locations or instances where a specified conditional use is inappropriate in a zone regardless
of the extent of regulation. (Ord: No. 1316, § 5.20.200, 6-7-76;Ord. No. 1363, 8-1-77) Sec. 29.20.185. Table of conditional uses. .An "X" indicates that an activity is allowed in a zone
if a conditional.use permit is issued. . Activities listed in this table are only allowed where a. conditional use permit is issued, or where the activity is specifically listed in the
permitted uses for the zone. ( ( .Supp. No. 15 2044
§ 29.20.185 TABLE OF CONDITIONAL USES (1) Commercial a. Banka b. Savinp and loan office e. Drive-up window for anybusine.. d. Supermultet .. Super druptore
I: Department stA!re (. cellter h. Motel i. Hotel j. Reat.aUl'llDt including tho.. with outdoor d.inbI& are.u or t:aJrs. out food 1. Establishment sell. iq alcoholic beverageafor
COJl8lUDption on premi8es RC HR RI RD R·M R·ID RMH o C·I C·:I CH LM eM x x x x x x x x x x x x x. x x x x x ·x x x x x x x x x x x x L In col\iuDction with a restaurant x x x x x 2.
WitbDUtfood l\el'- L Establilhment selliq alcoholic bever· ages for CllDlIIDDption off'premises (thia provision only applies to establishments commenciDi or g. panding ofF.premises
sale. after April 23, 1981) m. Convenience market no Formula retail busi· ness o. Formula retail business greater than 6,000 8.£. (2) Recreation a. Commercial recreation lind amusement
establishment b. Theater e. Outdoor entertainment d. Swimming pool for X X X X X <non··incidental use e. Private sports reae· X X X X X ation club f. Golf course X X X X X (3) CommtpLity
servi""s a. Public building; p0-X X X X X lice, fire. community center. library, art gallely, museum XX X XxX x xxx xxX xx xx xXXXX X x xx xXX X X X X X X Supp. No. 36 2045
ZONING REGULATIONS § 29.20.185 T.4.BLE OF CONDITIONAL USES RC HR Rl RD R·M B·ID 8MB 0 C-I C-2 CH LM CM (6) Transmission Facilitiesl Utilities a. Public utility service X X X X X X X
X X X X X yard. station, trsnsmission lines. storage Wtk. drainage or communicatiOn facil· itiet b. Antenna facilille& opo X X X X X X X X X X X X e:rated by a public or pinate utility
for traJlSmitting and Ieeeivin&' cellular telephone and, other winless communica.... lions c. Radio andlor broad-X X X X X X cast studios (7) Automotive (Vehicle sales, service and related
activities) a-New vehicle sales X X and rent.al b. Used vehicle sales X X only incidental to new Yebicle salesand rental "-Vehicle tires and .... X X cessoriee, sales. serviciIlg, recaping
d. Vehiciebody repair X X and painting e. Vehicle repair and X X service (garage) f. Service station X X X X g. ParkiIlg lots or stor-X X age garages, not. accossoryla another use b.
Car wash X i. Truck terminal X X j. Alternating use of X X X X X X X X X X X offstreet parking parking 5pRc:eti It. Recreational vehicle X X X and equipment storage yard . 1. Temporary
auto stor-X X X X X X X X X X X X age ror automobile dealers (8) Residential Uses a-One-faIllily dwelling. X X X X X b. Two-family dwelling X X X X X Co MuJt.!ple·family X X X X X X
dwelling d. Boardinghouse X X X X e. Apartment hotel X X X f. Mobile home park X Supp. No. 40 2047
;;. =: . 7' ... Application to the . Town Planning Commission of the T,qwn of Los Gatos USE PERMI·T Application No. Date.Received HearJ.ng: . ,,1-.3' '9 Continued
to: APPLICANT NAME Los Gatos Lodge # 1857, B.P.O .Elks Date Janoa.ry 15, 196:> Please type or print 320 ViJ.1.a.ge Lane' Address Los Gatos" Calif. Telephone El.. 4-3771 PROPERTY Address
. Lot Block Subdivision ------------Zone See attached map IMPROVE1ilENTS Old Building Which has been used as rest heme and 'Which will Existing be demolished.
Proposed Construction of a '[)13i1ding to be used as a. lodge for the B.P.O.Elks, o£ Los Gatos area. USE APPLIED FOR •. --, _ APPLICATION: ..,/Date---.......!I;Z
I, the undersigned. owner or owners of the property herein described hereby make application for a Use Permit of the nature .A.set forth above, in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance
No. 392 of the Town of Los Gatos, California, and I hereby certify .." is true and correct to the best . " Ie: submitted, ".-T �
� ff //J ChaO -. ress 32() Village Lane-1iailing address P,OBox 508 _ Irm.. :1 . -. ....�
� I;;. _ ./. .' J'..5:I.a.n.....5""".,....... _ •
of hI'" TcY'"? ."j . NOTES: 1. if needed for more complete explanation of any 2. . Applicants should read attached instruction
sheet T'Information for Persons :Making Application for a Use Permit Tf before filling in this form. /-'" ( . , i "'--...--.----./Attachment 1
=. J EXHIBIT Ii ORDINANCE NO. lS§6 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDING THE RULES FOR CLUBS, LODGES, HALLS, AND FRATERNAL ORGANIZATIONS The Town Council of the Town of Los
Gatos hereby ORDAINS: SECTION 1 • The Table of Conditional Uses in Section 5.20.205 of the Town Zoning Ordinance is amended to·read as follows: . 2.n. Club, Lodge, Hall, Fraternal Organization:
Add an "X" in the .columns headed Rl, RD and R-1D. SECTION 2. This ordinance takes effect .30 days after the date it i sadopted. Within 15.days;after this ordinance is adopted the Town
Clerk shall cause it to be publ ished once in a newspaper of general circul ation published arid circulated in the Town. This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town
Council of the Town of Los Gatos on June 20th, 1983 and adopted by the following vote as an ordinance of the Town of Los Gatos at a continued regular meeting of the Town Council on October
24th, 1983 •. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN :. ABSENT: ATTEST: Attachment 2
i 135 Newell Coon Los Gatos, CA 95032 lack Aiello March 9, 2004 Town Council ofLos Gatos Planning Commission Debra Figone, Town Manager Bud Lortz,
Director ofCommunity Development Town of Los Gatos 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030· Dear Town Official: The Courtside Club presented a plan to the Plannill9 Commission in March
regarding a change to the usage of three vacant lots on Winchester Boulevard between Newell Avenue and Wimbeldon.Way. The club proposed to tum these residentially-zoned areas into a
parking lot with 73 parking spaces. The Commission rejected the proposal: .\ The proposal which shortly will be appealed to the Town Council has taken various forms over the last
several years. The latest is a disturbingly broad proposal tl:1at could affect the quality of life in areas throughout Los Gatos. It clearly will have an immediate
detrimental effect on the residences in the Newell Avenue area and surrounding areas. It increase congestion, noise and traffic risks on Winchester Boulevard. .
More importantly for the Town Council, the Director of Community Development is asking the Council to open a Pandora's Box. The proposal before the Council will allow commercial parking
lots in residential neighborhoods. In fact, without direction from the Town Council, the Director of Community Development has already allowed commercial parking arrangements at the
Elks Club on Newell Avenue. The proposal before the Town Council will extend this opportunity to anyone who wishes to open a commercial parking lot on an arterial street in the Town
of Los Gatos.' Allowing commercial parking in a residential neighborhood is, on its face, a bad idea. ,It increases congestion, invites criminals, adds to noise and pollution. The risk
of traffic accidents increases and the potential exists for. rapid deterioration of the neighborhood and a decline in home values. In the past, the Town Council has recognized the importance
of avoiding avoiding such steps. It has consistently favored development within residential neighborhoods that improve the quality of those neighborhoods. We hope that the current Town
Council will reflect on Resolution 1993-62, passed in May 1993 under Mayor Page I of4 Attachment 7
Joanne Benjamin that spelled out with remarkable clarity the importance of retaining the unity of local residential communities. This resolution established the town's intent to think
carefully about the use of "fillin" parcels in ofadjacent to residential neighborhoods. The Council's key findings were that: /'In-fill projects should contribute to the further development
ofthe sUffounding neighborhood (i.e., improve circulation, contribute to orprovide neighborhood unity, eliminate a blighted area, not detract from the eXisting quality oflife.Y It also
concluded that: "An in-fillproject should be designed in context with the neighborhood and sUffounding zoning with respect to the existing scale and character of sUffounding structures,
provide comparable lot sizes and open space, considergarage placement, setbacks, density, provide'adequate.circulation and on-street parking. In -fill developme/l1 should blend rather
than compete with the established character ofthe area. IJ • The fown Council should realize that the latest proposed change in the Town code is an attempt to circumvent previous decisions
by the General Committee, the Planning Commission and the Town €auncil. The Elks Club until recently owned the three lots at the center of this current proposal. (Lots
1, 2. and 3 in Rinconada Estates are located at the iF'lterseetion of Winchester Blvd. and·Newell Ave.) Overthe years the Elks Club proposed tuming these'lOts into offi.qebuildings or
parking areas and attempted to find ways to allow.commercial activities within and adjacent to a quiet residential neighborh90d.."The consistently
rejected these efforts With the full support of the neiQhbors in. the area. After faifing to obtain permission for Commercial uSage of the property, the Elks Club sold the three lots
to the Courtside Club. Shortly before selling the lots to Courlside Club, the.Elks Club requested a change in zoning to the lots that would allow Courtside CILJb, to use the lots for
commercial parking. When the change in zoning waS proposed,,;t was rejected by the General Planning Committee. So here we are, right back where we were a few months Only now,
the Elks Club has sold the lots to the Courtside Club and Courtside is requesting, not a change in zoning for the property, but a change in the Town code to permit parking lots in R-1zoned
areas. Since they could not win a change in the zoning of their property, they eire requesting a change in the definition of the zoning codes to allow them to do what they want to do.
Moreover, the Elks Club and Courtside are already violated. the zoning. rules in the area by using the Elks Club parking lot for commercial parking. The Elks Club property is zoned .
R-1, yet the: Club is renting out 19 spaces in its parking lot to the Courtside Club.;... and could increase the number of spaces in the future. Page 2 of4
, The Elks Club has also violated past agreements with residents by selling the three lots in question. Those lots were designed as overflow parking for the Elks Club. Their sole
purpose was to ensure that events held at the Elks Club Lodge would not create excessive traffic and congestion within the quiet residential areas behind the club. Residents have pointed
out in the past that the underlying issue is not a lack of parking, but rather a dramatic increase in the membership of the Courtside Club. Because of the increased membership, traffic
on Winchester Boulevard has increased and driving in the area has become more hazardous. Courtside Club members are parking at the Elks Club and on both sides of Winchester Boulevard.
Traffic and noise has increased in the Newell Avenue residential area. The parking on Winchester has increased the dangers for bicyclists and motorists. The bicycle lanes established
by the Town of los Gatos are not accessible and 'cyclists attempting to use the lanes are forced to move into traffic lanes to avoid the parked cars. Looking solely at the usage of the
three lots in the Newell Avenue area'(and ignoring the broader issue of whether commercial parking is an acceptable usage for R-1 zoned lots), we believe the increase in avail,able parking
would solve the problems in our area for only a brief period. The club will continue to grow and traffic conditions, noise and safety are to get worse, not better. We propose
that the Town look for a solution that protects the character of the residential neighborhood. We propose three key steps: 1. Elks Club .'::\ a. Obtain a written agreement with the Town
that will limit the use of the lodge to members and their families only. . b. No further commer-cial use of the property, including the parking lot. c. Elks Club lot 26 will retain its
zoning as a 4 lot, R-1-8000 property. 2. Lot 3 a. Lot 3, the lot closest to Elks Club shalt be used for the construction of a single-family custom home. This usage would be consistent
with with the rest of the neighborhood and would maintain the unity of the area, creating a buffer between the parking area and the existing neighborhood. If properly designed, with
proper sound walls, the lot would provide an attractive residential property. Page 3 of4
b. 3. Lot 1 and 2 a. Allow Lot 1 and 2 to be used for parking for Courtside Club employees only. b. Courtside will limit hours of parking to from 7 AMto 7 PM by installing a time-monitored
access system employees. c. Ingress and egreSs will be from Winchester Boulevard. d. Construct a sound wall between the residential areas and the parking lot. Require
landscaping-with a raised benn in the areas adjacent to Winchester Boulevard. -e. If Courtside chooses to install lighting in the parking lot, it must respect the character of the neighborhood
and in$tall lighting that does not detract from the quality of the area. Lights should be ·-Iess than 6 feet above the ground and should be tumed off after 7 PM. f. Planning Commission
will review the usage of the parking area after six months to determine compliance with the written agreement with the The Planning Commission will also make annual assessments
of Courtside's compliance with the conditions on an on-going -basis. g. Courtside and the. Town will prOVide for neighborhood comment and-to completion
of design phase and prior to beginning of the qonstruction phase. We look forward to working with Courtside and the Planning Department on these very important issues. Sincerely, A7..
1 Court Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 395-2880 Page 4 of4
26:"4 IIIC -...• , I t . I : l _..J.U:1l--...---EXHIBIT E' z '" Jr. t E I{D 'r"-r• :!P' 4 ., iJ<J 1J-< , (f1 26-3 • arS'ItM HCME 26-1
'---' .....: EJ..KS·CL'UlfAPPLICATION U\lE CHANGE & MODIF1CATION OF GENERAL PLAN GOTS 1 ,2,3, & 26-RINCONADA ESTATES {;ONED RESIDENTIAL KINCONADA ESTATES " '" .... -I
BANKER PREVIEWS . ' ...-..---..----.-._...... -._-._.__. -_.._.- March 10, 2004 Jack Aiello 135 Newell Court Los Gatos,California
95032 Dear Jack, The highest and best use for Lot 3 on Newell Avenue is what it is zoned for now. Lot 3 is a residential lot that would sell immediately ifplaced onthe market. A residential
lot with full city improvements, without an old house down and located in the Town ofLos Gatos and within the highly desirable Los Gatos schoo.! district is a rare find.
There can be no better use for this lot than to :finally have a custom home built and thus complete the residential Newell Avenue neighborhood. In today's market with reasonable quality
construction a custom home built on lot #3 could sell between $1,200,000 and $1,500,000. . As a resident ofNewell Avenue I certainly understand the need to keep the residential character
ofour neighborhood. As a Realtor in the Town ofLos Gatos I know on a professional basis the value and desirability ofresidential lots and homes within the Town ofLos Gatos. Yours truly,
Lou Rae Kagel 449 N. Santa Cruz Avenue' Los Gatos, CA 95030 408.355.1500 • Fax 408.355.1599
Judie Gilli -Courtside Club (Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4) From: To: Date: Subject: Kevin Dincher <kevin@kevindincher.com> <JGilli@losgatosca.gov> 04/0512004 11:42 AM Courtside Club
(Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4) Dear Mr. Lortz: I have previously written to you to voice my 0 bjections to Courtside Club's request for a zoning amendment that would allow the Club to
develop the three parcels ofland on Winchester Boulevard between Wimbledon Dr. and Newell Ave, as a parking lot. I joined a significant number ofmy neighbors in expressing our deep concern
that the proposed development did not contain sufficient safeguards to protect both property values and quality oflife. I am aware that the Planning Committee rejected Courtside's request
for a zoning ;:unendment, and that Courtside Club has subsequently appealed the decision of the Planning Committee to the Town Council. Courtside Club will be presenting their proposal
to the Town Council on Monday, April 19, 2004. In preparation for this appeal, Courtside Club representatives have met with neighboring homeowners to listen to their concerns about the
proposed development. Courtside Club General Manager Lisa Graf has reported to homeowners that the Club's proposal-now includes a significant number of conditions for development and
use based upon these concerns. I am, therefore, writing to withdraw my objection to the proposed' development provided Courtside Club's plans for develop and use include the following
conditions: • Use of the developed parking lot is restricted solely to parking. • Design changes include: . 1. Construction of a sound wall along the back perimeter ofthe parking lot.
2. Installation oftaller plant material along Newell Ave. 3. Placement of specific signage to communicate "Be courteous of our neighbors." 4. Installation of timer-controlled lighting
that will be of sufficient power to illuminate and make discernable the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot -but which will also be installed so that it
does not disrupt the normal privacy and use of any neighboring residences. 6. Installation of a security camera to enable Courtside to monitor activity in the parking lot during hours
of operation. 7. Installation of two poles and a chain at the entrance to the lot enabling the lot to be closed. • The Club's existing Conditional Use Permit applies to the use of the
parking lot. • Other conditions of use include: 1. The hours of operation of the parking lot will be limited to 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Mondays through Fridays and 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.
on Saturdays and Sundays. At other times, the lot will be closed. 2. The club uses its reasonable efforts to ensure security of the parking lot. A club representative will check the
parking lot at opening and closing. Any unauthorized vehicles left in the parking lot for longer than 48 hours will be towed at the owner's expense. 3. The use of the parking lot is
limited to parking for employees, club members and club Attachment 8 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\jgilli\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}OOOOI.HIM U4/UbllUU4
.Page 2 012 guests. Upon written request, the club agrees to allow Los· Gatos Elks Lodge, Lodge No 1857, the use of the parking lot up to 4 times per years as overflow parking for their
events during hours that do not impact the Club's normal operation. 4. The Club uses its reasonable best efforts to communicate the above conditions to club personnel. Methods employed
to communicate such conditions include the following: a. Including the conditions in the employee new hire materials; b. Reviewing the conditions in Depattrhent Head meetings c. Including
the conditions in the Manager on Duty book. In addition, club employees will be trained about measure to take if a complaint is made regarding any of the above conditions, including
contacting the Manager on Duty. Ifthe Manager on Duty is not available, the club's General Manger may be called to investigate and/or resolve theisstie. 5. The Club hosts an annual neighborhood
meeting to discuss concerns regarding the parking lot andlor overallcortditions of use. use. The Club shall use its reasonable best efforts to address any concerns of its neighbors.
Thanks you very much. Sincerely, Kevin P. Dincher 105 Strathmore Place Los Gatos, CA 95032 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\jgilli\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}OOOOl.HTM 04/06/2004
Message Judie Gilli -Courtside Club (Zoning Code Amendment A-03'-4) ..t'age 1 or 1. From:
To: Date: Subject: CC: "Mary Rose -WPHA" <maryrose@wpha95032.com> <JGil1i@losgatosca.gov> 04/0512004 11: 18 PM Courtside Club (Zoning Code Amendment A-03-4) "Steve Glickman" <sglickman@losgatosca.gov
>, "Diane McNutt" <dmcnutt@losgatosca.gov>, "Joe Piriynski" <jpirzynski@losgatosca.gov>, "Mike Wasserman" <mwasserman@losgatosca.gov>, "Sandy Decker" <sdecker@losgatosca.gov>
/' " .. Dear Town Council Members and Mr. Lortz: I wrote to you and spoke to you several. weeks ago about my objections to the Courtside Club's request for a zoning
amendment that would make it possible for a parking lot to be placed on the residential lots on Winchester between Newell Avenue and Wimbledon Drive. ' I and several of my neighbors
have met with Lisa Graf, Courtside Club manager, and other representatives from the Courtside Club to discuss concerns and issue related to the proposed parking lot. The Courtside Club
has said that if they are able to prevail in the Town Council hearing on this matter, they will agree to be bound by conditions in the Condional Use Permit (CUP) that will address the
concerns we have about the traffic, quality of life, and safety in our neighborhood. Iwould like to withdraw my objection to the proposed development provided that the Courtside Club's
plans for development includes the list of conditions they have said they would accept which are list below. Regards, Mary Rose Resident on Clearview Drive, Los Gatos Conditions Discussed
at Meetings with Courtside Club Representatives and Neighboring Homeowners Regarding Development of R1 Property as Parking Lot on Winchester Between Newell Avenue and Wimbledon Drive
• Use of the developed parking lot is restricted solely to parking. • Design changes include: 1. Construction of a sound wall along the back perimeter of the parking lot. 2. Installation
of taller plant material along Newell Ave. 3. Placement of specific signage to communicate ""Be courteous of our neighbors," 4. Installation of timer-controlled lighting that will be
of sufficient power to illuminate and make discernable the appearance and conduct of all persons on or abOut the parking lot -but which will also be installed so that it does not disrupt
the normal privacy and use of any neighboring residences. 6. Installation of a security camera to enable Courtside to monitor activity in the parking lot during hours of operation. .
7. Installation of two poles and a chain at the entrance to the lot enabling the lot to be closed. • The Club's existing Conditional Use Permit applies to the use of the parking lot.
• Other conditions of use include: 1. The hours of operation of the parking lot will be limited to 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Mondays through. Fridays and 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturdays
and Sundays. At other times, the lot will be closed. 2. The club its reasonable efforts to ensure security of the parking iot. A club representative will check the parking lot
at opening and closing. Any unauthorized vehicles left in the parking lot for Attachment 9 file:/IC:\Documents%20and%20Settings\jgilli\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}OOOOI.HIM U4/Ubl2UU4
Message Page 2 of2 longer than 48 hours will be towed at the owner's expense. 3. The use of the parking lot is limited to parking for club employees, club mernbers and club guests. Upon
written request, the club agrees to allow Los Gatos Elks Lodge, Lodge No 1857, the use of the parking lot up to 4 times per years as overflow parking for their events during hours that
do not impact the Club's normal operation. ... 4. The Club uses its reasonable best efforts to communicate the above conditions to club personnel. Methods employed to communicate such
conditions include the following: a. Including the conditions in the employee new hire materials; b. Reviewing the conditions in Department Head meetings c. Including the conditions
in the Manager on Duty book. In addition, club employees will be trained about measure to take if a complaint is made regarding any of the above conditions, including contacting the
Manager on Duty. If the Manager on Duty is not available, the club's General Manger may be called to investigate and/or resolve the issue. 5. The Club hosts an annual neighborhood meeting
to discuss concerns regarding the parking lot and/or overall conditions of use. The Club shall use its reasonable best efforts to address arty concerns of its neighbors. file:1Ie:\Documents%20and%20S
ettings\jgilli\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW} 00001.HTM 04/0612004
Page 1 of1 Judie Gilli -Courtside Parking Lot From: To: Date: Subject: "Steve Busch" <Steve.Busch@nsc.com> <JGilli@losgatosca.gov> 04/05/20046:18 PM Courtside Parking Lot
"! Please register my approval of Courtsides amended plans for a parking lot. We appreciate their working with WPHA to address our concerns. Rgds, Steve Busch 107 Lorain Place
Los Gatos, CA 95032 Attachment 10 file:IIC:\Documents%20and%20Settings\j gilli\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW} 00001.HTM 04/06/2004
Page 1 of 1 Judie Gilli • Courtside Proposed Parking Lot From: To: Date: Subject: CC: <Witchela@aol.com> <JGilli@losgatosca.gov> 04/06/2004 10:41 AM Courtside Proposed Parking Lot <info@wpha95032.com
> To: Town of Los Gatos Planning Department We reside at 106 Strathmore PIace, Los Gatos, part of the Wimbledon Homeowners Association. We were present when Ms.Graf attended the recent
board meeting, and subsequently attended a meeting at Courtside to discuss the proposed parking lot on Winchester Blvd. Although we would certainly prefer residential use of the vacant
lot, it is apparent that it will not occur in the near future. We will not be able to attend the Planning Department Meeting later this month. Therefore, we would like to indicate via
this e-mail our approval of the limited use zoning amendment for the lot. Courtside's plans for a parking lot seem to address the concerns of their neighbors. Sincerely, . Alice and
Jason Witchel Attachment 11 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\jgilli\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW} 00001.HTM 04/07/2004
Page 1 ofl Judie GOO -,Re: Courtside Club Parking Lot Proposal-Information Update From: To: Date: Subject: sofia poullada <sofiapmail@yahoo.com> <mrose@ten90group.com> 04/05120047:11
PM Re: Courtside Club Parking Lot Proposal -Information Update " .. hi mary, it doesn't sound to me as though the issue of overflow parking for the elks events has really
been addressed. it looks as tho the overflow parking will end up on the streets in the newell area neighborhood. i don't think it will impact wimbledon place much, but still probably
not a good precedent! the other possible issue i see is the problem ofincreased traffic in the left turn lane on winchester (when heading towards campbell). cars piling up there in order
to make first a u-turn, then a right turn into the new parking lot. that left turn lane can only take five cars before the back-up begins to block the adjoining flow through traffic
lane on winchester. best, sofia poullada Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway -Enter today Attachment 12 file:IIC:\Documents%20and%20Settings\jgilli\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}
00002.HTM 04/06/2004
® COURTSIDECLUB A SPORTS RESORT March 8, 2004 Town Council Town of Los Gatos 110 E, Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95032 Re: Letter ofjustification for Courtside Club parking lot RECEIVED·
MAR 1 2 2004 TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING DIVISION Courtside Club is requesting your consideration of an amendnient to the Town Ordinance that would allow, under very limited circumstances,
a parking lot on a residential zoned property. The Club is proposing to develop the property identified as parcels 409-24-001, 409-24-002, 409-24-003. The parcels are located immediately
south ofthe Courtside Club and are bordered by Wimbledon Road, Winchester Boulevard and Newell Avenue. The subject property, purchased by Western Athletic Clubs (D.B.A. Sports Resort
Inc.) in September 2003, is currently vacant and is encumbered by a 100foot wide PG&E high-tension power line easement. The property at this time is undeveloped and covered by gravel
and weeds. It is the Club's intention to develop an attractive, well-landscaped parking lot. The proposed plan will provide additional parking opportunities for: Courtside Club as well
as esthetically enhancing Winchester Boulevard. Significant elements ofthe proposed landscape design are construction of a grass berm and installation ofhedges along the perimeter of
the property, very similar in appearance to the current landscape design of the Courtside Club. Other improvements include new trees, plants and low-level lighting. The land is comprised
of three irregular shaped small parcels. Due to their size;· shape, encumbrance by a PG&E easement and proximity of high-tension power Courtside Club believes a parking
lot is a great surface use of land on a property encumbered by three parcels. The proposed parking plan will allow for 75 additional parking spaces. These spaces will be used primarily
for Courtside Club employee parking and occasional Club and community event parking. This improvement to the Club's parking facilities enables the Club to: • Provide more convenient
parking for Courtside Club Members Courtside Club, under the ownership ofWestern Athletic Clubs, is approaching its seventh anniversary. Over the past seven years the Club has been successful
in establishing itself as an important part of the Los Gatos community. Ninety two percent of the current membership is comprised of Los Gatos residents. Club members have come to rely
on the Courtside Club not only as an athletic facility but also as a social club. The results of a survey sent to all Club members in January 2004 indicates members use the facility
on average three times per week with an average stay of 2.15 hours. This Attachment 13
.. type of usage is not typical of an athletic Club, therefore has caused parking challenges during our peak hours of operation (8:30am-1O:30am and 4:30pm-6:30pm). The proposed parking
plan will provide a significant improvement to the Club's operation and the service it provides to its members. • Reduce parking congestion on Winchester Boulevard The Club understands
the concern of the Town and the neighbors regarding traffic . congestion on Winchester Boulevard. The proposed parking plan will reduce parking congestion on the street. This proposed
plan can benefit Courtside Club, its surrounding neighborhood and the community as a whole. • Respond to neighbor requests for more parking It is the Club's intention to work with its
neighbors to achieve a win-win situation for the neighborhood, the Town and Courtside Club. This proposed project affords Courtside Club with the chance to respond to neighbor requests
to develop more parking. Knowing that past attempts to develop this property have been unsuccessful unsuccessful due to the differing interests ofthe business sector and the homeowners
who live in the surrounding neighborhood, Courtside Club has been very methodical in its approach to this project by taking the following steps: • Prior to the acquisition ofthe land
the Club presented the project to the Los Gatos Conceptual Development Advisory Committee. The feedback to the proposed plan overall was positive. Any and all comments given by the committee
and neighbors who attended the meeting have been considered and addressed in the proposed design and landscape plan. • After receiving input from the Conceptual Development Advisory
Committee and learning the neighbors were opposed to a Zone change, Courtside Club filed an application proposing to amend the Zoning Ordinance rather than a General Plan and Zone change.
• Courtside Club sent a letter to the homeowners on Newell Avenue and La Montagne Court describing the project and welcomed any questions or co:rrnnents. All COIlcerns were responded
to directly. • After several months ofnegotiations, Courtside Club secured an agreement with the Elks Club and Courtside Club Office Plaza, owned by Mr. Burt Click to purchase the three
parcels ofland identified as 409-24-001, 409-24-002, 409-24-003. • Courtside Club presented the proposed text amendment A-03-4 to the General Plan Committee,on February 11, 2004. • Courtside
Club met with representatives from the Wimbledon Place I10me Owners Association on February 27,2004 • Courtside Club hosted a neighborhood meeting regarding the proj ect on Sunday February
29, 2004 • Courtside Club presented the proposed text amendment A-03-4 to the Planning Commission on February 25,2004 . • Courtside Club has, invited its neighbors to attend one oftwo
scheduled meetings to review possible conditions of use. The meetings are tentatively scheduled for March 29, and April 1, 2004
At both the General Plan Committee meeting and at The Planning Commission meeting, Committee Members and neighbors posed questions regarding the size ofthe Club's membership in relation
to the parking facility. More so than the parking facility, it is the size of the Club, approved uses of space, equipment and member usage that dictates the membership level. Courtside
Club's current and future success relies on its ability to provide adequate facilities and exceptional service to its members. Through town meetings, neighborhood meetings and other
correspondence, the club has come to better understand the concerns of our neighbors. The majority ofthe neighbor's requests are reasonable and the club believes the neighbor's concerns
can be addressed in either the design of the parking lot or through a conditional use permit. Below is a listing of what the club believes to be the major concerns ofour neighbors and
possible solutions. Proposed modifications to the existing plans to satisfy neighbor requests: 1. Constructing a sound wall along the back perimeter of lot 3 2. Installing taller plant
material along Newell Avenue 3. Installing two poles and chain to close the parking lot in the evening 4. Placing specific signage to communicate "be courteous ofour neighbors" NOTE:
The Wimbledon neighbors voiced a concern regarding a possible increase in noise as a result of the new parking facility. The club's existing CUP should satisfy neighbor concerns as it
limits the number of outdoor events with amplified sound, the number ofoutdoor events that serve alcohol a.r1d the locations for consumption of alcohol. Proposed Conditional Uses: Courtside
Club's primary activities or their frequency will not change as a result of the new parking facility. Activities that take place in the club may include the following; • Tennis socials
• Aquatic events including both juniors and master swim meets • Basketball and volleyball in-house tournaments and league play • New member socials • Club employee team-building • :Other
Club member athletic and sporting events The club will not be used as venue for weddings or wedding receptions 1. Parking Lot lighting. The new parking lot shall be equipped with lighting
of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot. Additionally, the position of such lighting shall
not disrupt the normal privacy and use of any neighboring residences. The lighting will be controlled with a timer.
2. Hours of operation. The hours ofoperation of the parking facility shall be limited to: MOJ1day -Friday 5a.I11 -"-9pm Saturday and SUnday 7a.In ---9pm 3. Security. The club shall use
its reasonable best efforts to ensure the security of the parking lot. A club representative will check the parking lot at opening and closing. Any unauthorized vehicles left in the
parking lot for longer than 48 hours will be towed at the owner's expense. 4. Use of the parking facility. The use of the parking lot will shaH be limited to club employees, club members
and guests. Upon written request, the club agrees to allow the Los Gatos Elks Lodge, Lodge No.1857, the use ofthe parking lot up to 4 times per year as overflow parking for their events
during hours that do not effect the club's nonnal operation. 5. Enforcement and implementation. The club shall use its reasonable best efforts to connhunicate the above conditions to
club personnel. Methods employed to communicate such conditions include the following: including the conditions in the employee new hire materials; reviewing the conditions in Department
Head meetings; by including the conditions in the Manager on Duty book. In addition, club employees shall be trained as to measures to take if a complaint is made regarding any ofthe
above conditions, including contacting the Manager on Duty. lithe Manager on Duty is not available, the club's General Manager may be called to investigate and or resolve the issue.
6. Good neighbor agreement. The club will host an annual neighborhood meeting to discuss any concerns regarding the parking lot and or the approved conditions ofuse. The dub shall use
its best efforts to a.ddress any conCerns of .. This Ordinance change is requested after extensIve communication with both the neighbors and your staff.
Courtside Club is a long-standing partner in the community and a good corporate citizen. Courtside Club respectfully requests your positive consideration ofthis request. Courtside Club
looks forward to to presenting this project to you at the Town Council Hearing on AprilS, 2004. In the interitn, ifyou ha.ve any questions, please feel free to contact Courtside Club
General Manager, Lisa Graf at 408395-7111. Thank you for your time.
(FQ'-' JMue I - Goal: L.G.3.1 To maintain the existing character of residential neighborhoods by controlling development.
......"... .. Policies: L.P.3.7
Allow development only with adequate physical infrastructure (e.g., transportation, sewers, ----·-------i=H.J.lW-es,etG..)-af-lG--SGCia+-sePl-fGes (e.g., education, public safety, etc.)
L.P.3.1 L.P.3.2 L.P.3.3 L.P.3.4 L.P.3.5 L.P.3.6 L.P.3.8 Protect existing residential areas from pressures for non-residential development. . Consider nonresidential activity in residential
areas only when the character and quality of the neighborhood can be maintained. Protect existing residential areas from adjacent nonresidential uses by assuring that buffers are developed
and maintained. Buffers shaH be required as conditions of approval and may consist of landscaping, sound barriers, building setbacks or open space. Prohibit uses that may lead to deterioration
of residential neighborhoods, or adversely impact the public safety or the residential character of a residential neighborhood. Assure that the type and intensity of land use shall be
consistent with that of the immediate neighborhood. Develop and implement appropriate traffic controls to protect residential neighborhoods from the impacts of through traffic such as
safety hazards, speeding, noise, and other disturbances. Discourage corridor lots. .:...... {.,, -J L.P.3.9 Allow alternative uses of sites and facilities of schools, subject
to conditions that will protect the surrounding neighborhood. L.P.3.10 Allow redevelopment of unused school sites commensurate with the surrounding residential neighborhood and availability
of services L.P .3.11 Demolitions: In order to reduce land fill, conserve resources, and preserve neighborhood character, demolitions shall be discouraged and and applicants shall submit
structural reports to determine whether the demolition of any principle structure is justified. Attachment 14 Los Gatos General Plan July, 2000 Page L-11
a OJaI1-$eJw.Ice 1()U/.11, ISSUE: 5 It is important to the economic vitality of the Town and to the general benefit. of the
residents that goods and services are readily available to the of Los Gatos. Ifafull range of goods and services are not provided sales tax "leakage" will occur, reducing
the Town's fiscal stability. Policies: t L.P.5.1 L.P.5.2 L.P.5.3 L.P.5.4 L.P.5.5 L.P.5.6 Maintain a variety of commercial uses (a strong downtown commercial area combined with Los Gatos
Boulevard and strong neighborhood commercial centers) to meet the shopping needs of residents and to preserve tl;1e small-town atmosphere. Encourage a mix of retail, office and professional
uses in commercial areas, except in the Central Business District where retail should be emphasized. Require full public review for commercial development to ensure compatibility with
adjacent neighborhoods and the Town. Encourage existing light industry and service commercial uses to remain or replaced with similar uses. Encourage the development and retention
of locally-owned stores and shops. Encourage development that maintains and expands resident-oriented services and/or creates employment opportunities for local residents consistent
with overall land use policies of the Town. ----..::..---11--------------------------------_. L.P.5.? L.P.5.S L.P.5.9 Only allow land uses for which public costs can be justified by
overall community benefit. "Broadening the tax base" shall never be the sole reason for allowing new commercial development or approving a change in a commercial land use. Retail sales
tax "leakage" should be kept to a minimum by providing intown convenience and comparative shopping opportunities. Implementing Strategies: Los Gatos General Plan L.I.5.1 July, 2000 Revise
CUP Table: Study Conditional Use Permit Table to determine if any changes (deletions or additions) need to be made to list of uses. Considerations should include factors such as size
of building and/or floor space occupied, traffic generation and whether the use would dictate a "trademark" style of building. Time Frame: 2000 -2005 Responsible Party: Planning, Town
Manager and the Chamber of Commerce Page L-16
DAlE Approved PJR Drawn PJR/RM Reviewed xx Project No. 03.56 Scale ," = 10'-0" Issue Dote '0/29/03 OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS All Drawings, Specifications ond copies thereof furnished
by Reed Landscape Architecture ore Gnd ,.,011 remain its property. They are to be used only wilh respect to thjs Projact and are not to be u!!cd on ony other project
Submis.sion or distributiOn to meet official n:gulalory requirements or for purposes in connection with the Project is not to be construed as publication in derogotion of Reed Associates
lDncbcope Architecture. common lalI copyrighl or olher reserved tights. L1.0 PLANTING PLAN Attachment 15 ISSUE COURTSIDE PARKING LOT WINCHESTER BLVD. @' WIMBLEDON LOS GATOS, CA 95032
w> 0::: oZoo W-l m:2 3= PLANT NOTES: INDICATES PLAN! KEY PLANT QUANTITY S. SEE DETAIL AND 5PECIFlCATI0N SHEETS FOR ADDITIONAL \NFOf'MATION. lb. THERE WILL BE No
MATERIALS OR PLANT MATERIALS 5UEl6T1TUTI0N5 WITHOUT APPROvAL OF THE OILl-lER OR THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERff PLANT QUANTITIES FROM THE PLANTING PLAN. QUANTITIES
SHoILN IN THE,LEGEND ARE FOR coNVENIENCE ONLY. 2. NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHrIEcr IMHEDIATELY IN THE EVENT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN ACTUAL &lTE CONDITIONS AND THE PLANTING PLAN. 3.
PLANT GROUNDCOYER IN SHRUB AREAS AS NOTED' USE TRIANGULAR SPACING. \" /I h I r"'o\ PLANT LIST: leAL NAME COI1MON NAME Glrf. SIZE REMARKS JACaUEMOW BIRCH IS GAL NA1URAL LONDON PLANE TREE
24H60 STANDARD N.CN. 24"eo STANDARD COAST LIvE OAK 24"130 STANDARD ARCTOSTAP 05 0 'HOWARD MCMINN' MCMINN MilNZANlTA 5 GAL CEANOJl.lJ5 'CONCI-lA' CEANOTHU5' 5 GAL 55 COLEONEHA FULCI-IRllH
PINKS A1HOF' AVEN 32 5c:.AL 20 &4 DI 5 YE6ETA FORlNI6HT LILY' liz> 5 GAL REED ASSOCIATES &5 FIITOSPORLM T. 'VARIEGATA' VARIGATEDT IRA 21z> 5 GAL <El1REE5 &b LAVANDULA A 'HIDCOlE' ENGLl51-l1.AVENDER
23 S6AL LANDSCAPE ARCHITBCTURl! TO REMAN S1 F<AFHIOLEPIS U. 'MINOR' INDIA HAWTHoR-I IS 5 GAL sa ARBUnJ5 u. 'ca1PACTA' STRAUJBE TREE 5 A S9 PHORMIUM T. 't1AIORI 5UNRiSE' HrBRID FLAX liz>
07 TAAFFB STItBBT SUNNYVALE, CA 94016 www.rala.net al 6.4ZANIA 'MITSl.JIl1,O, YELLOll.lIIl.II4ITE NIX' HYBRID G:ALltNIA ATS 11"O.c. G2 HEMEROCALLl5 'EVERGREEN PINK' DAYLll:r wa I
GAL (408) 481.9020 a. AGAPANThU5 Cl-!Ot1Jl.llTE' L T· . • L Wlz> I GAL (408) 481.9022 FAX G4 LANTANA MONTEvlDEN515 TRAILlHGs LANTANA lGAL m"oc. as ROSMARlNU5 O. 'IRENE' RO AR"r" IG 24"OC.
"" VINCA MINOR PERIUJINKLE FLATS 12" o.c. a1 COTONEASTER'LCUFAST' N.cN. I GAL Ga I-IEDERA Iol. 'HAJ-NII' HAHN'S 1Vl" FLAT nil o.c. ,\ POWER \ POLE \ I1AISED
.... "-¢ ¢ \ //G5 0 59 G4 0 56 G4 59 1 5 I 0 /0