Attachment 02Planning Commission Staff Report-Page 2
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-14-00 1/ND-14-002
February 24, 2016
CEQA:
FINDINGS:
ACTION:
EXHIBITS:
It has been determined that this project will not have a significant
impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration
has been prepared and is recommended.
• That the project will not have a significant impact on the
environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been
prepared and is recommended.
• Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
• That the Zone Change (Planned Development) is consistent
with the General Plan.
• That the project is consistent with the Los Gatos Boulevard
Plan.
• That the project is consistent with the Residential Design
Guidelines.
1. Forward a recommendation regarding Planned Development
Application PD-14-001 to the Town Council.
2 . Forward a recommendation regarding the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program to the Town Council.
Previously received under separate cover:
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (received
January 22, 2016)
Received with this Report:
1. Location Map
2. Response to Comments received regarding the Mitigated
Negative Declaration
3 . Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (six pages)
4 . Required Findings
5 . August 10, 2011 and August 14 ,2013 CDAC Minutes
6. Project Overview and Letter of Justification (seven pages),
received February 3, 2016
7. Architectural Consultant Report (seven pages), received
August 26, 2014
8. Consulting Arborist Report (32 pages), received July 30,
2014
9. Public Comments received by 1:00 p.m. February 18,2016
10 . Planned Development Ordinance (23 pages) with Exhibit A
Rezone Area (one page) and Exhibit B Development Plans
(41 pages)
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 3
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-14-00 1/N D-14-002
February 24, 2016
BACKGROUND:
The 0.94 acre site is comprised of two parcels and contains a 2,300-square foot single-story
commercial building currently occupied by Artisan Wine Depot. The site was redeveloped in
1997 as the used car sales lot for the Honda Dealership previously located at 16213 Los Gatos
Boulevard. The General Plan and Town Code provide an option for projects on sites larger than
40,000 square feet to be processed as a Planned Development (PD). The Town is currently
reviewing potential changes to the Planned Development Ordinance.
Similar projects for the subject site were considered by the Conceptual Development Advisory
Committee (CDAC) on August 10, 2011 and August 14,2013. The minutes from those meetings
are included in Exhibit 5.
While the applicant's plans do not address the issues regarding the architecture of the proposed
site di scussed by the Consulting Architect or staffs concerns regarding compatibility of the
development with the surrounding neighborhood; the applicant is pursuing the zone change with
the intent of receiving additional feedback on the proposed project. The applicant is requesting
approval of the application with direction that can be incorporated into the required Architecture
and Site application and subdivision process.
Staff has forwarded the application to the Commission with a recommendation of denial. In
order to obtain relevant feedback from the Town Council in addition to the Planning
Commission, the applicant is requesting that the application be forwarded to the Town Council
with the Commission's recommendation(s) rather than continued for additional re-design.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
A. Project Summary
The applicant is requesting approval of a PD overlay which would include the following
elements on the 0.94-acre site:
• Removal of existing site improvements;
• Construction of 10 market rate single-family detached residences;
• Construction of one low income BMP unit; and
• Landscaping, private street, parking, and other improvements.
All of the homes would include two-car garages and eight additional guest parking spots
would be provided on-site. Acce ss to the site would be provided from Shannon Road .
The proposed project would include demolition of the existing building and removal of up
to 18 protected trees (15 on-site trees and three street trees).
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 4
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-14-00 1/ND-14-002
February 24, 2016
B. Planned Development Application
The application is a request for a PD overlay. A PD application is being requested because
the application requires a number of exceptions (see section Bin the analysis section below
for requested exceptions).
Town Code states that the purpose of a PD is to provide for alternative uses and
developments that are more consistent with site characteristics, to create an optimum
quantity and use of open space, and to encourage good design. If adopted by the Town
Council, the proposed PD ordinance (Exhibit 1 0) would allow the Development Review
Committee to approve the necessary subdivision and Architecture and Site applications for
the new residences . The Planning Commission will make a recommendation for the PD
application to the Town Council, who is the final deciding body.
C. Location and Surrounding Neighborhood
The project site is located at the northeast comer of Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon
Road. There are mixed-use (office below residential) and single-family residential uses to
the north, commercial and single-family residential uses to the west and south, and single-
family residential uses to the east.
D. Zoning Compliance
The CH zoning designation permits residential uses subject to approval of a Conditional
Use Permit (CUP) or as allowed by a PD. Town Code allows a PD overlay on sites with a
minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet.
ANALYSIS :
A. Conceptual Development Advisory Committee
The CDAC reviewed a similar proposal on August 10, 2011 by a different property owner
and developer, which included 11 single family homes ranging in size from 1,600 square
feet to 2,300 square feet.
The applicant presented the CDAC with a 12 unit proposal on August 14, 2013. The
feedback from each proposal was similar in regards to their concerns on the density and
compatibility of the project. Additional feedback is included in the minutes for each of the
meetings (Exhibit 5).
Planning Commission StaffReport-Page 5
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-14-00 1/ND-14-002
February 24, 2016
B. Planned Development
The applicant is proposing to rezone the properties from CH to CH:PD. Through the PD
application, the applicant is proposing to create 11 single-family homes on separate lots
and one common lot for the required storm water improvements and open space. The
applicant is requesting the following exceptions through the PD process:
• Reduced setbacks along Los Gatos Boulevard from 15 feet (required) to 7 feet , 4
inches for the residences and 2 feet, 1 inch for the porches (proposed);
• Reduced setbacks along Shannon Road from 25 feet (required) to 10 feet
(proposed);
• Reduced rear setbacks for units C-1 thru C-3 from 30 feet (required) to 10 feet
(proposed);
• Reduced side setback for unit C-3 from 24 feet (required) to 4 feet , 5 inches
(proposed);
• Exception to the maximum permitted Floor Area Ratio (FAR), maximum FAR for
each lot ranges from 827 square feet to 2,182 square feet (if the shared access is
included in the lot area); proposed floor areas range from 1,744 to 3,299 (excluding
cellar);
• Project signage proposed is not permitted by Town Code (Section 29.1 0.135).
While the units along Los Gatos Boulevard may appear as multi-family units, the
residences have one foot of separation between them and would be considered single-
family units pursuant to Town Code and the Uniform Building Code. If the units were to
be attached, the attached units would be required to comply with the Americans with
Disability Act (ADA) requirements in regards to access, parking, and interior
improvements.
C. Site Layout and Improvements
1. Access
Access to the site is currently provided through two driveways : one being
approximately 25 feet from the northern property line on Los Gatos Boulevard, and the
second being approximately 20 feet from the eastern property line on Shannon Road.
The proposed project would eliminate the Los Gatos Boulevard driveway and relocate
the Shannon Road entrance to five feet from the eastern property line. Based on the
applicant's pursuit of a single access point to the site, staff recommended the Shannon
Road frontage based on concerns with the proximity to the Roberts Road intersection
on Los Gatos Boulevard . The driveway along Shannon Road was relocated to the
eastern edge of the site to provide:
Planning Commission Staff Report-Page 6
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-14-00 1/ND-14-002
February 24, 2016
• A lengthened right tum lane from Shannon Road to Los Gatos Boulevard (north
bound)
• A lengthened left tum pocket from Shannon Road to Los Gatos Boulevard (south
bound)
• A storage pocket for those turning left into the site heading east on Shannon Road
Additionally, the proposed design incorporates a shared access by way of an easement
over the lots for units C1 , C2, C3, D1 and D2 . The setbacks for these lots are provided
from the property lines at the centerline of the shared access . While this is permitted,
the FAR and setbacks include lot area associated with the shared access for the
property. As a comparison, the private street provided within Laurel Mews was not
used to determine setbacks and was not included in lot area calculations.
2. Coverage
The proposed project has a building coverage of 16,127 square feet (39 .5 percent). The
maximum permitted building coverage for the CH zone is 50 percent.
3. Height
The proposed project includes structures of varying heights. The units proposed along
Los Gatos Boulevard have a maximum height of 29 feet, 11 inches while the single-
family residences range in height from 28 feet, 7 inches to 29 feet, 2 inches. The
maximum permitted height for the CH zone is 35 feet.
4. Below Market Price Unit
The proposed development requires the applicant to provide one below market price
(BMP) unit on-site. The applicant is proposing the northern most unit located along
Los Gatos Boulevard as the BMP unit (Unit A 1 ). As currently designed the unit would
comply with the Town's BMP requirements. If approved , the unit will be required to
be constructed and sold in compliance with the Town's BMP Guidelines.
5. Density
The density of the proposed development is calculated by dividing the number of units
(minus the BMP unit) by the acreage of the site. The proposed application has a
density of 10.6 units/acre. The Laurel Mews development across the street has a
density of 11 units/acre.
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 7
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-14-00 1/ND-14-002
February 24, 2016
6. Setbacks
The CH zone does not specify minimum required setbacks between structures on a
project site. The applicant is proposing reduced setbacks from what is required in the
CH zone and what would traditionally be required in single family residential zones.
The following chart is prov ided for comparison:
Setback Requirements
Zones: Front Side Street Side Rear
R-1:8 25' 8' 15' 20'
R-ID 15 ' 5' 10 ' 20'
CH 15' 0' 15 ' 0'
CH* 25' 15' 15' 20'
Proposed Project:
Townhouse style 2' 1 II 6" to 5' 10' 22'3"
Traditional detached 10' 3' to 16' N IA 10'
* additional setback requirements apply when adjacent to residentially zoned properties
(Section 29 .60.435).
7. Open Space
As discussed above , one of the main purposes ofPD 's is to create an optimum quantity
and use of open space, and to encourage good design. The proposed project includes
11 single-family residences, as such the Town Code requirements for community and
private open space do not apply. However, due to the nature of the design, staff has
included the following comparison chart:
Open Space
Town Code Minimums Proposed Project
Community Open Space 100 sq. ft ./unit 855 ~-ft.
Private Open Space 200 sq. ft. 213-1 ,124 sq. ft.
D. Trees
The application was reviewed by the Town's Consulting Arborist (Exhibit 8). The site
contains 15 protected trees ; additionally there are six protected trees on adjacent properties,
and six street trees of protected size within the adjacent Town right-of-way. The
application would require the removal of all 15 on-site trees and at least one street tree
(three are shown for removal at this time).
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 8
162 I 2 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-14-00 1/ND-14-002
February 24, 2016
With the exception of five Deodar Cedars and one Coast Live Oak, the remaining trees are
ornamental and their removal would conform to the Town Code for removal and
replacement on-site. The proposed tree removals would require canopy replacement
subject to Town Code requirements.
Please note that the location of the project driveway was relocated on the development
plans after the arborist review in 2014 in order to address traffic concerns, discussed below.
The relocation would require the removal of tree number 14 rather than tree number 12.
E. Traffic
A traffic study was prepared by the applicant even though the proposed project did not
trigger a traffic study. As stated within the traffic study (Appendix E of the Initial Study),
the proposed project would result in a decrease of I 71 average daily trips (ADT) six fewer
AM and 11 fewer PM peak hour trips as compared to the previous auto dealership use.
The traffic study concluded that the single point of ingress/egress from the site may make
turning into the site difficult during peak hours due to the queuing length of the right-tum
from Shannon Road onto Los Gatos Boulevard. The PD performance standards include a
requirement tore-stripe Shannon Road within the project frontage to create a left tum
pocket for those entering the project site. Additional improvements will be required in
regards to the bike lane and the pedestrian cross walk at the southwest comer of the project.
F . Parking
Each single-family residence has a parking requirement of two spaces. The development
will include two-car garages for each unit. Additionally, the development proposes eight
on-site guest parking spaces.
The site also currently provides additional overflow parking for Yoga Source and many
Fisher Middle School parents use the site as a drop-off and pick-up location. While these
are amenities that the property owner has permitted, the applicant is not required to provide
this in any future development of the site.
G. Architectural Consultant Review
The project was reviewed by the Town's Consulting Architect (Exhibit 7). The consultant
found the proposal to be inconsistent with the Town's Residential Design Guidelines.
With the exception of relocating the proposed project signage, the applicant has chosen not
to make any changes to the proposed architecture with the intent of receiving feedback on
the type and scale of development before proceeding with detailed drawing changes.
Planning Commission StaffReport-Page 9
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-14-00 1/ND-14-002
February 24, 2016
H . Los Gatos Boulevard Plan
I.
The project is subject to the Los Gatos Boulevard Plan. The goals and policies of the Los
Gatos Boulevard Plan applicable to this project include, but are not limited to:
• Policy:
• Goal:
• Goal :
• Goal:
• Goal:
• Policy:
• Goal:
• Goal:
• Goal:
• Policy:
• Policy:
• Policy:
• Policy:
General Plan
Neighborhood commercial, multi-family residential and office uses shall be
concentrated south of Los Gatos Almaden Road.
To encourage pedestrian activity at and movement across Los Gatos
Boulevard at key points along the Boulevard.
To establish the perception of Los Gatos Boulevard as people friendly.
To establish activity focal points on private and public property along Los
Gatos Boulevard.
To promote commercial activity that complements the whole Town.
New development must be designed in order to minimize adverse impacts
upon adjacent residential areas.
To preserve and protect the Town's scenic beauty through careful planning
To encourage site and building design that is particularly suited to the site
and contributes to the Town's unique character, natural beauty and
openness .
To ensure new development will enhance the use , enjoyment and value of
neighboring residential and commercial property.
Proposals shall be designed to fit the natural conditions of a site and respect
scenic corridors
Proposals should be designed to enhance the Boulevard through excellence
in architectural design .
Building and site design shall reflect the historic, natural and architectural
setting unique to Los Gatos.
Pedestrian access to buildings and sites shall be encouraged .
The goals and policies of the 2020 General Plan applicable to this project include, but are
not limited to:
• CD-1 Preserve and enhance Los Gatos 's character through exceptional community
design.
• CD-1.4 Development on all elevations shall be of high quality design and
construction, a positive addition to and compatible with the Town 's
ambiance. Development shall enhance the character and unique identity of
existing commercial and/or residential neighborhoods.
Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 10
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-14-00 1/ND-14-002
February 24, 2016
• CD-4.3 Trees that are protected under the Town's Tree Preservation Ordinance, as
well as existing native, heritage, and specimen trees should be preserved and
protected as part of any development proposal.
• U-12.3 New landscaping, streetscape improvements and new development along
Los Gatos Boulevard shall incorporate pedestrian amenities, scale, and
design.
• LU-1.4 Infill projects shall be designed in context with the neighborhood and
surrounding zoning with respect to existing scale and character of
surrounding structures, and should blend rather than compete with the
established character of the area.
• LU-6.5 The type, density, and intensity of new land use shall be consistent with that
of the immediate neighborhood .
• LU-6 .7 Continue to encourage a variety ofhousing types and sizes that is balanced
throughout the Town and within neighborhoods, and that is also compatible
with the character of the surrounding neighborhood .
• LU-6 .8 New construction shall be compatible and blend with the existing
neighborhood.
• LU-7.3 Infill projects shall contribute to the further development of the surrounding
neighborhood (e.g. improve circulation, contribute to or provide
neighborhood unity, eliminate a blighted area) and shall not detract from the
existing quality of life.
• LU-7.4 Infill projects shall be designed in context with the neighborhood and
surrounding zoning with respect to existing scale and character of
surrounding structures, and should blend rather than compete with the
established character of the area.
• LU-13 To promote appropriate and compatible development along Los Gatos
Boulevard that complements the whole Town and serves residents and
families.
• LU-13 .3 New projects along Los Gatos Boulevard shall incorporate a family and
resident orientation.
• TRA-2.6 Street improvements such as curb cuts , sidewalks, bus stop turnouts , bus
shelters, light poles, traffic signals, benches, and trash containers shall be
planned as an integral part of development projects to ensure safe movement
of people and vehicles and minimize disruption to the streetscape.
• TRA-3.11 Roadway improvements and dedications shall be required for any
development proposal with an associated traffic impact.
• TRA-9.6 Require development proposals to include amenities that encourage
alternate forms of transportation that reduce pollution or traffic congestion
as a benefit to the community.
• NOI-5.1 Protect residential areas from noise by requiring appropriate site and
building design, sounds walls, and landscaping and by the use of noise
attenuating construction techniques and materials.
Planning Commission StaffReport-Page 11
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-14-00 1/N D-14-002
February 24, 2016
Additionally, the Commission may choose to discuss and provide direction to the applicant
in regards to whether a General Plan (GP) Amendment should be applied for. The Town
Code allows residential uses in the CH zone subject to approval of a Conditional Use
Permit and similar applications within the CH zone have been processed without a GP
Amendment. However, the Commission could direct the applicant to apply for a GP and
Zoning Code amendment if it is determined that there is merit to the applicant's proposal.
J. CEQA Determination
An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) were prepared for the project
by the Town 's Environmental Consultant, EMC. The 20-day public review period began
on January 22, 2016 and ended on February 11,2016. Mitigation measures are required for
Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological, Cultural Resources , Geology and Soils, Hazardous
Materials, Noise, and Traffic. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is
provided in Exhibit 4. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the performance
standards within the PD Ordinance (Exhibit 1 0).
K. Story Poles and Neighborhood Notification
On December 1, 2015, the Town Council approved an exception to the required story pole
installation timeframe. Based on public safety concerns and impact on existing usage of
the site, the story poles viewing period was limited to 10 days to occur during the February
school break (February 15-19, 2016). The story poles were installed during the week
before the break (February 8-12 , 2016), and completed on Friday, February 12 , 2016. The
required on-site signage was installed on February 12 ,2016 and will remain on-site after
removal of the story poles, which is scheduled to start on February 23 , 2016. Staff
provided the following additional neighborhood and community notification in addition to
the standard 300-foot notification:
• Newspaper advertisement providing specific viewing dates was published in the
Los Gatos Weekly Times paper on February 5, 12, and 19, 2016.
• Story Pole and project information was posted on What's New on the Town website
starting February 11, 2016 .
• Story Pole and project information was posted on Next Door on February 11 , 2016.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
The Town has received public comments. All comments received by 1 :00 p.m. on Thursday
February 18 , 2016 are included in Exhibit 9. Any additional comments received will be included
in a Desk Item report.
Planning Commission Staff Report-Page I2
162I2 Los Gatos Boulevard/PD-14-00 I /ND-14-002
February 24, 2016
COORDINATION:
The preparation of this report was coordinated with the Engineering Division of Parks and Public
Works Department, Community Development Department, and the Santa Clara County Fire
Department.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
A . Summary
The applicant has investigated the potential to redevelop the site with a commercial and/or
office use, but has concerns in regards to the limited si ze based on the required parking and
the additional traffic associated with a commercial user. As a result, the applicant believes
the proposed development is the highest and best use for the site.
The proposed project does not address the concerns regarding density and massing in
relation to the adjacent neighborhoods as discussed by the CDAC. The applicant has
worked with staff to address the technical concerns of the project in order to proceed to
public hearing without making any changes to the architecture, massing, or density of the
development. Staffs concerns pertain to: whether the site is better suited to residential
development; if the proposed massing along Los Gatos Boulevard is appropriate; if the
diversity of unit types and architecture is appropriate; and if the proposed intensity of
development is appropriate for the site.
If the Commission determines that the proposed type of development is appropriate then
any concerns relating to architecture and specific siting of the units can be addressed
through the Subdivision and Architecture and Site application process. However, if the
Commission shares staffs concerns regarding the above mentioned items, specific
direction should be given to the applicant.
B. Recommendation
Based on the summary above, staff recommends the Commission forward a
recommendation of denial to the Town Council with direction.
ALTERNATIVES:
Alternatively, if the Commission finds merit with the proposal it should take the following
actions to forward the Mitigated Negative Declaration and PD application to the Town Council
with a recommendation for approval :
I . Make the required findings (see Exhibit 4);
2. Recommend that the Town Council make the Mitigated Negative Declaration and adopt the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit 3); and,
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard
EXHIBIT 1
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
February 19, 2016
Marni Moseley
Community Development Department
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Re: Response to Public Comments Received on Il Vicinato Planned Development Initial
Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
DearMarni,
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines section 15074, the
Town is required to "consider" comments received on 11 Vicinato Planned Development
Mitigated N egative Declaration (MND) prior to making a decision on the proposed project.
During the public review period for the MND, three (3) comment letters /emails were
received. Each is included as an attachment to this letter. Commenters included (dates
indicate receipt by Town):
1. Barbara Dodson (Resident), January 30 , 2016
2 . Jeffrey A. Barnett (Jeffrey A . Barnett APC), February 9, 2016
3. Molly Sauter (Resident), February 11, 2016
Three major themes were recurrent in the comments received from local residents . Each of
these is identified below, and for each theme, a summary of comments is provided as is a
discussion of the relationship of the theme to the content and analysis contained in the
MND. These themes of concern represent the predominant comments on topics that are
within the scope of the CEQA review . The comment letters were also reviewed to identify
comments on the specific technical content of the MND.
EXHIBIT 2
Mami M oseley
Town of Los Gatos
February 19, 2016, Page 2
1. Aesthetics
Scenic vistaslviewshed negatively altered. Several commenters noted that new homes in 11
Vicinato Planned Development would affect public views along Los Gatos Boulevard,
creating a "wall-like fa~ade" that would block views of the Sierra Azul ridge and conflict
with the General Plan Goal DC-16: "Promote and protect viewsheds and scenic resources."
The proposed front wall setback of 7' -4" along Los Gatos Boulevard, combined with the
approximately 28-to 30-foot height of those west-facing units, would prevent pedestrians or
motorists on Los Gatos Boulevard from accessing views of the Sierra Azul ridgeline that are
currently available.
Although the project as proposed would alter or eliminate scenic views , the proposed heights
of the buildings' facades are in keeping with zoning requirements , and are actually five or
more feet lower than the upper limit of 35 feet for the Mixed Use Commercial district. The
initial study identified aesthetic impacts related to degradation of visual character.
Mitigation Measure AES-1 requires modifications to the proposed buildings consistent with
the findings of the Cannon Design Group report, which was attached to the initial study as
Appendix B. Recommendations in that report included reductions in bulk and height, and
increased setbacks , especially along Los Gatos Boulevard. Development on the project site
will obscure views to some extent, but implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-1 will
reduce that effect.
Frontage. One commenter noted that the narrow setback allows minimal frontage
landscaping , and the "lack of greenery degrades this entry to the neighborhood."
Refer to the response above regarding recommendations in the Cannon Design Group
review, and incorporated by reference in Mitigation Measure AES-1.
Harmony of architectural style and neighborhood context. The comment is acknowledged.
Architectural consistency and harmony is not an environmental issue. However, this is sue is
addressed in the Cannon Design Group review , and incorporated by reference in Mitigation
Measure AES-1.
2. Transportation/Traffic
One commenter expressed concern about a number of elements related to traffic, circulation,
and parking.
Traffic.
Re-striping of Shannon Road for turn lanes. One commenter questioned the feasibility of re-
striping of Shannon Road at the proposed access. Town staff has determined that the
available right-of-way on Shannon Road will be sufficient to accommodate the required
restriping. This will be further refined through design level plans prior to issuance of
building permits.
Marni M oseley
Town of Los Gatos
February 19, 2016, Page 3
School Traffic Study. It is acknowledged that a school traffic study may be upcoming.
However, the Town has received a development application and is processing that
application in a timely manner.
Parking. One commenter stated that the project site provides parking for nearby off-site uses.
The proposed project does have any obligation to provide parking for un-related off-site
uses.
One commenter stated that there was insuffient parking for guests. The proposed project
includes 10 guest spaces for the 11 houses. Los Gatos Municipal Code Section 29.10.150.-
Number of off-street spaces required, lists a requirement for two spaces per unit for single
family residential; there is no requirement for guest spaces. Each unit includes two garage
spaces.
3. Public Services
Schools and Student Generation Rate. One commenter suggested that the estimated student
generation rate of "eight to 12 new students" for the proposed project with 11 units was
unlikely to be accurate, with the proposed project likely to require additional classrooms.
The initial study provided analysis using the General Plan Final EIR generation factors and
more recent information from the Los Gatos Union School District. The Los Gatos Union
School District bases its estimates on calculations generated by a demographics contractor
hired by the Los Gatos Union School District to make projections based on the 2014-2015
school year.
The estimated number of new housing units is multiplied by the appropriate Student Yield
Factor (SYF), which determines how many additional students will be generated from new
construction within the Los Gatos Union School District. The proposed project most closely
resembles Thrash House and Brookside projects with SYFs of 0. 789 and 0.833, respectively
for K-8 students (email communication, November 7, 2014). Multiplying the 11 proposed
units of the proposed project by 0.833 gives an estimate of approximately nine (9.13)
additional K-8 students introduced to the kindergarten through eighth grade age group by
the project. The initial study conservatively estimated 10 K-8 students based on the most
recent generation data.
Senate Bill 50 ( 1998) established standard fees for mitigation of schools impacts . The
payment of the development fees authorized by Education Code section 17620 is full and
complete mitigation of the impacts on the provision of adequate school facilities resulting
from any legislative or adjudicative act.
4. Other Comments
Planned Development. One commenter questioned the use of a planned development process
for the project. The comment is acknowledged. The type of development permit requested is
not an environmental issue .
M am i M oseley
Town of Los Gatos
February /9,2016, Page 4
Open Space. The original plans included 12 units; the revised plans reduced the number of
units to 11, providing additional open space within the proposed project.
Sincerely,
Richard James, AICP
Principal
Ms. Marni Moseley
Community Development Department
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MND FOR "ll VICINATO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT," 16212 los Gatos
Boulevard
I am writing to raise concerns about the proposed "II Vicinato" development and about the MND that
discusses it.
Here are my main concerns:
1 . LACK OF PARKING (1). The MND does not discuss the current parking problems at the Los Gatos
Boulevard/Shannon/Roberts Road intersection. Both Orange Theory and Yoga Source opened
for business on Los Gatos Boulevard without adequate parking. As a result, many clients for
both studios use the wine shop's parking lot. Where will Orange Theory and Yoga Source
patrons park in the future? At the very least, traffic will be increased by patrons of these studios
circling around looking for parking. The MND should have addressed this issue.
A further problem is that many Fisher parents use the wine shop parking lot during drop-off and
pick-up. The parking lot is always full at pick-up time in particular. The MND should have
included some consideration of what Fisher parents will do at drop-off and pick-up times if there
is no longer a parking lot.
I am assuming that the 10 guest parking spots in the new housing development will not be open
to the public.
If this project goes forward, is it possible to require the developer to provide underground
parking for the public?
2. LACK OF PARKING (2). The hou.sing development has only 10 guest parking spots. This seems
completely inadequate for an 11-home development. This complicates an already difficult
parking situation since there is not adequate street parking for current uses . The MND does not
address the adequacy of this number of parking spaces.
3. LACK OF CURRENT TRAFFIC DATA. Hexagon in its traffic analysis relies on the traffic analysis
used for Laurel Mews. It discusses a situation in which there are car dealerships, not houses, in
the area . Much has happened since Laurel Mews was built. Here are just a few things that have
changed the traffic situation since the Laurel Mews study was done:
a. Orange Theory has opened as has Yoga Source . Other traffic-generating businesses in
the vicinity have opened as well.
b. Other new business have opened in close proximity to the site.
c. Hillbrook School has begun operating shuttle service with a shuttle stop at Blossom Hill
Park and Shannon and parent pickups at the church on Shannon as well as Shir Hadash .
This has changed the traffic patterns on Shannon, particularly during peak periods.
d. Students from the 100 homes in the Guadalupe housing development will be using
Shannon Road to reach Van Meter School.
e. The student populations of Fisher School, Van Meter, Blossom Hill School, and Lo s Gatos
High School have increased.
f. The student population at Hill brook School will be increasi ng.
g . The Albright (Netflix) project is partially open .
h. Specifics have been added to the North Forty Plan.
Furthermore, on page 26 we see this statement: "Because the net trip generation association
with the proposed project is a slight reduction in the number of AM and PM peak-hour trips
these cumulative levels of service would not be expected to change as a result of the proposed
project." I question the accuracy of this statement as it pertains to current traffic levels. Again,
the Laurel Mews study is out-of-date; conclusions for the current project should not be based on
this out-of-date study.
A new traffic study should be done for a potentially highly impactful development like "II
Vicinato," particularly since the situation is now different from what it was when Laurel Mews
was studied.
4. A FOCUSED LOOK AT PEAK PERIOD TRAFFIC IS NEEDED. Hexagon Transportation Consultants
state in their report (p. 3) that "The weekday morning commute and school drop-off peak hours
both typically fall within the 7 :00 to 9:00A.M period and need not be studied separately." No
explanation is given for why this peak period AND the afternoon peak period should not be
studied separately. It is likely that during these peak periods, the level of traffic far exceeds the C
level of service. Further, the intersection at Shannon and Los Gatos Boulevard is heavily used by
school children during these periods and should be analyzed as being hazardous even under
current conditions.
5 . A MORE REALISTIC EVALUATION OF STUDENT GENERATION AND IMPACT ON SCHOOLS
SHOULD BE PROVIDED. It is common knowledge that people pay the high prices for Los Gato s
homes because they believe the schools provide an excellent education . Therefore, it is unlikely
that the estimate of new students given in the report is accurate . Page 22 of the MND states
that "New student generation by the proposed project would range from eight to 12 new
students total for grades K-12." It is very likely that this estimate is off by more than 100% and
that the number of school children in the development would add to the need for new
classrooms .
6. AESTHETICS . The townhouses facing Los Gatos Boulevard have almost no frontage and reduce
the attractiveness of our neighborhood. The lack of greenery degrades this entry to the
neighborhood.
7 . WHY A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT? It is not clear why the Town is voiding its building standards
to allow thi s kind of crowded development. Why is the Town not requiri ng that homes on this
site occupy no more than 40% oftheir land area as presented in the Town Plan?
8. TIMING. The Town will be doing a school traffic study this spring . Since school traffic has such an
impact on the Los Gatos Boulevard/Shannon/Roberts Road intersection, why not wait for the
up-to-date information that this study will provide before considering this new project?
9. MITIGATION THAT IS SUGGESTED IS PROBABLY NOT POSSIBLE. On page 25, the MND states
that to mitigate the probable increased queuing to travel east or make a right turn, 11The
applicant shall re-stripe a portion of Shannon Road at the driveway access point for the
proposed project to add a two-way turn l ane to provide storage space for vehicles
intending to turn left from eastbound Shannon Road into the project driveway." I hope
that reviewers ofthe MND will look at the point on Shannon for which this restriping is
proposed. Even if the bike lane is eliminated, which I believe would be against general
Town policy, I don't believe there is enough space for the proposed restriping.
I believe a high-density development like "II Vicinato" is not appropriate for this site . However, if the
Town wants to consider moving forward with it, I believe the Town should provide residents with an up-
to-date traffic analysis and more accurate information about the proposed development. If necessary,
this should be done through an EIR.
Sincerely,
Barbara Dodson
239 March mont Drive, Los Gatos, CA
This Page
· IntentionaJly
Left Blank
February 9 , 2016
L A W O F FIC E S OF
JEFFREY A. BARNETT
A PRO F ESSIONAL CORPORATIO N
7 18 UNIVER SI T Y A VEN UE , SU ITE 2 13
LOS GATOS . CALIFORNIA 9 5 032
TEL.E P H ONE (4 051 527 -9730
F"A C SIMI L.E (4 05 ) 57 2-4 02 4
E-MAIL JE~F'"R E Y@HO A ·LAW .COM
R ECEIVE D
FEB 11 2016
TOWN OF L O S GATOS
PLAN NING DI V IS ION
By Electronic Mail and First Class Mail
Mr. Joel Paulson,
Interim Community Development Director
Town ofLos Gatos
11 0 East Main Street
Los Gatos, California 95030
Re: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard-Initial Study and Mitigated N egative Declaration
Dear Mr. Paulson:
My wife and I reside on Wollin Way, approximately 811 O's of a mile from thi s project. I have been
a resident of the Town of Los Gatos for about 40 years, including approximately 35 years in our
present home . I pas s by the subject site at least two times pe r day. I am writing to express m y
concerns regarding the density and lack of open space in the referenced application. In particular,
the five attached res idences facing Los Gato s Boule vard cre ate an unacceptable w all-like facade .
There is no s imi lar residential construction on Lo s Gatos Boulev ard.
The de nsity of the project violates the v ision statement ofthe General Plan (VIS -3), which requires
that new developments be meas ured against the abi li ty of the developme nt and its archite ctural sty le
to harmoniz e with existing development. The vision statement i s made concrete in Policy LU -1.4
of the General Plan, requiring that infill projects be designed with respect to the existing scale and
character of s urrounding structures, and to blend, rather than compete, with the establi shed character
of the area. The improv ements east of Los Gatos Boulevard are predominantly single famil y homes
with setbacks.
Policy LU-6.8 requires that new construction be compatible and blend w ith the exis ting
neighborhood . Likewise, Policy CD-1.1 of the General Plan requires that building elements be in
proportion with those traditionally in the neighborhood . Poli cy C D-6 .1 specifi es tha t design shall
promote and protect the physical and other distinctive qualities of residential nei ghborhoods, and
requires that construction reduce the visual impact on the Town a nd it s nei ghborhoo ds .
The inte ri or three hom es a nd the two f a cing Shanno n should be a m o del fo r the p orti o n of the p roject
facing Los G atos Boulevard .
Mr. Joel Paulson
February 9, 2016
Page 2
The nominal open space proposed for the subdivision is totally inadequate for the number of families
that can reasonably be assumed to occupy the homes. It is foreseeable that children will play in the
private street area and be subject to traffic hazards from cars entering and exiting the garages onto
the narrow streets with limited site lines. Policy CD-7 .1 of the General Plan requires the
maximization of quality useful open space in all new developments .
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Very truly yours,
Jeffrey A Barnett
A Professional Corporation
y
Jeffrey A . Barnett
JAB:blh
o.'•ISers\20 16\Paulson lener wpd
From: Molly Sauter <sauter ca@comcast.net>
Date: February 11,2016 at 3:59:30 PM PST
To: <mmoseley@ losgatosca.gov>
Subject: Comments on the II Vicinato Development
Ms. Moesely,
I am a resident of Los Gatos and would like to provide an observation regarding the accuracy
and completeness of the environmental document prepared for the 11 Vicinato Development
project.
The environmental document states that the development would not have a substantial inverse
impact on a scenic vista because the Town of Los Gatos 2020 General Plan does not identify
scenic vistas in or from the vicinity of the project site.
I disagree with this statement. The General Plan states that "Los Gatos is located at the base of
the Santa Cruz Mountains and is surrounded by view of the these mountains, particularly the
Sierra Azul ridge. Major streets heading north-south in Los Gatos have views of the ridge to the
south. The General Plan also states that scenic resources are an important part of Los Gatos '
identity, the Town sets forth policies that are intended to preserve and protect them.
Now that the story polls are being erected, it is very clear t~at the 11 Vicinato Development will
substantially block the view of the Sierra Azul ridge when driving into town on Los Gatos Blvd
(major street heading south in Los Gatos). I believe the the Town of Los Gatos 2020 General
Plan is clearly against any such development that does not preserve and protect the view of the
Sierra Azul ridge, which has been identified in the General Plan as a scenic vista.
Regards,
Molly Sauter
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
t'l!
I
<»
M ITIGATI O N M O NITORIN G PLAN
DATE : Fe bruary 2, 2016
PROJE CT: II Vicina t o Planne d Dev elop ment , 16212 Los Gatos Bo ulevard /PD -14-0 01, ND-14-002
Mitigation
AESTHETICS
Monitoring
Action
AES -1 Required as a
a. Prior to approval of the Planned Development, the applicant shall condition of
review the design review comments prepared by Canon Design approval
Group and revise the project plans to comply with the Town's
Residential Design Guidelines and General Plan goals and policies.
Revised project plans will be subject to the Town's design review
process.
AIR QUALITY
AQ-1 Required as a
To limit the project's construction-related dust, criteria pollutant, and condition of
precursor emi ssions, the following BAAQMD -recommended Basic approval
Construction Mitigation Measures shall be implemented :
a. All exposed surfaces (e .g., parking areas , stag ing areas, soil pile s,
graded areas , and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times
per day.
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand , or other loose material off-site
shall be covered.
c. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be
removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per
day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited .
d . All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be lim ited to 15 mph.
e . All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be pav ed shall be
completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as
possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
f. Idl ing times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off
when not in use or reducing the ma ximum idling time to 5 minutes
(as requ ired by the California ai r borne taxies control measure Title
13, Sect ion 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear
signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access
points.
1
Responsibility
Building Division,
Community
Development
Department (COD)
Building Division,
Community
Development
Department (COD)
Timing
Prior to approval of
the Planned
Development
Monitoring: Durin g
the approval proce ss
Prior to issuance of
any Grading Permit,
Demolition Permit, or
Building Pe rmit
Ensure these
mea sure s are
incorporated into
project plans
Monitoring:
During construction
MITIGATION MONITORI NG PLAN
DATE : February 2, 2016
PROJECT : II Vicinato Planned Development, 16212 Lo s Gatos Boulevard /PD-14-001, ND -14-002
Mitigation
g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned
in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall
be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in
proper condition prior to operation.
h. A publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to
contact at the Lead Agency regarding du st complaints shall be
posted at the site. This person shall respond and take corrective
action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be
visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations .
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Monitoring
Action
BI0-1 Required as a
If noise generation, ground disturbance, vegetation removal, or condition of
other construction activities begin during the nesting bird season approval
(February 1 to August 31), or if construction activities are
suspended for at least two weeks and recommence during the
nesting bird season, then the project developer shall retain a
qualified biologist to conduct a pre-construction survey for nesting
birds. The survey shall be performed within suitable nesting areas
on and adjacent to the site to ensure that no active nest s would be
disturbed during project implementation. This survey shall be
conducted no more than two weeks prior to the initiation of
construction activities. A report documenting survey results and
plan for active bird ne st avoidance (if needed) shall be completed
by the qualified biologist and submitted to the Town of Lo s Gatos
for approval prior to initiation of con struction activities.
If no active bird nests are detected during the su rvey, then constr uctio n Required as a
activities can proceed as sc hedul ed . However, if an active bird ne st of a co ndition of
native spe cie s i s detected during the survey, then a plan for active bird approval
nest avoidance shall be prepared to determine and clearly delineate a
temporary prote ctive buffer area around each active nest, wi t h buffer
2
Responsibility
Planning Division,
Community
Development
Department (CDD)
Planning Div isio n
Community
Development
Department (COD)
Timing
Prior to start of
construction
Prio r to sta rt of
construction
MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN
DATE: February 2, 2016
PROJECT: II Vicinato Planned Development, 16212 Lo s Gatos Boulevard /PD-14-001, ND-14-002
Mitigation
area size depending on the nesting bird species, existing site conditions,
and type of proposed construction activities. The protective buffer area
around an active bird nest is typically 75-250 feet, determined at the
discretion of the qualified biologist and in compliance with any
applicable project permits.
To ensure that no inadvertent impacts to an active bird nest will occur,
no construction activities shall occur within the protective buffer area(s)
until the juvenile birds have fledged (left the nest), and there is no
evidence of a second attempt at nesting, as determined by the qualified
biologist.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
CR-1
In the event that any potentially significant archaeological resources (i.e .,
potential historical resources or unique archaeological resources) are
discovered, the contractor shall stop work within SO meters (about 160
feet) of the find until the find can be evaluated by a qualified
archaeologist. If the find is determined to be significant, notification shall
be made and appropriate mitigation measures shall be developed and
implemented with the concurrence of the lead agency.
CR -2
If human remains are found during construction activities, no further
excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably
suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the archeological
monitor and the coroner of Santa Clara County are contacted . If it is
determined that the remains are Native American, the coroner shall
contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The
Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or
persons it believes to be the most likely descendent (MLD) from the
deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations
to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for
means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human
3
Monitoring
Action
Required as a
condition of
approval
Language included
on permits
Required as a
condition of
approval
Required as a
condition of
approval
Responsibility
Planning Division,
Community
Development
Department {COD)
Planning Division
Community
Development
Department (COD)
Planning Division,
Community
Development
Department (COD)
Timing
During construction
During construction
During construction
MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN
DATE: Feb ruary 2, 2016
PROJECT: II Vic inato Planned Development, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard /PD -14-001, ND-14-002
Mitigation
remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources
Code section 5097.98 . The landowner or his authorized representative
shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave
goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject
to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is
unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendat io n
within 24 hours after being notified by the commission; b) the
descendent identified fa ils to make a re commendation; or c) the
landowner or hi s authorized representative rejects the recommendation
of the de sc endent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage
Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Monitoring
Action
GE0-1 Required as a
The applicant shall have a final geotechnical investigation prepared for condition of
the proposed project prior to the issuance of build ing permits. The approv al
recommendations of the final geotechnical investigation shall be
incorporated in the final construction plans fo r the propose d project.
These recommendations address site preparation, earthwork operations,
drainage, and foundation s.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
HA Z-1 Required as a
T he applicant shall retain a qualified contractor to cond uct a visual condition of
inspection/pre -demolition survey, and sa mpling if determined necessary approval
by the qualified contractor, prior to the demolition of the st ru cture, to
determine the pre se nce of asbestos-containing materials. All potentially
friable asbestos-containing materials, if present, shall be removed under
4
Responsibility
Bu ilding Division,
Community
Dev elopment
De partment (COD)
Building Division,
Community
Development
Department (COD)
Timing
Pri o r to issuance of
Building Permit
En sure these
measures are
inc orporated into
project plan s
Monitoring:
Prior to an d during
cons t ruction
Prior to issuance of
Building Permit
Ensure these
measures are
incorporated into
MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN
DATE : February 2, 2016
PROJECT : II Vicinato Planned Development, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard /PD -14-001, ND-14-002
Mitigation
a permit from the Bay Area Air Quality Management Di strict in
accordance with National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants guidelines prior to building demolition or renovation that may
disturb the materials. All demolition activities shall be undertaken in
accordance with Cai/OSHA standards, contained in Title 8 of the
California Code of Regulations , Section 1529. Materials containing more
than one percent asbestos are also subject to air district regulations
contained in air district Regulation 11, Rule 2.
Implementation of this mitigation measure is the responsibility of the
project appli cant.
NOISE
N-1
The applicant shall have an acoustical consultant review the construction
design details and materials to ensure that appropriate noise control
measures are incorporated into the project so noise levels in exterior
living areas and interiors of all proposed residences would be reduced to
"normally acceptable" levels, as determined by the Town's Noise
Element. The aco ustical consultant shall review the construction plans,
building elevations, and floor plans prior to construction to calculate
expected interior and exterior noise levels and ensure compliance with
Town policies and state noise regulations.
If dete r mined nece ssa ry by the construction-level acoustical analysis,
appropriate building co nstruction techniques including sound-ra ted
windows, doors, and building fac;:ad e treatments including sound rat ed
wall construction, acoustical caulking, etc., shall be required for
re sidential units facin g public streets. Building sound in sul at ion
requirements shall include the provision of forced -air mechani ca l
ventilation for all re sidential units, so that windows could be kept clo sed
at the occupant's disc retion to control noise.
5
Monitoring
Action
Requ i red as a
condition of
approval
Required as a
con ditio n of
approval
Responsibility
Building Division,
Community
Development
Department (COD)
Building Division,
Community
Development
Department (COD)
Timing
project plans
Monitoring:
Prio r to and during
construction
Prior to iss uan ce of a
Build i ng Perm it
Ensure these
measures are
inco r porated into
project plan s
Prior to issua nce of a
Bu ilding Permit
Ensure t hese
measures are
inco rporated i nto
project plans
MIT IGATION MONITORING PLAN
DATE : Februa ry 2, 2016
PROJECT : II Vic inato Planned De v elo pment, 16212 Lo s Gatos Boulevard /PD -14-001, ND-14-002
Mitigation Monitoring
Action
N-2 Required as a
The following language shall be included on any permits issued for the Condition of
project site. Approval
a. Noise-generating construction activities shall be limited to weekdays
between 8 AM and 8 PM and weekends and holidays between 9 AM
and 7 PM;
b. Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with
mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the
equipment;
c. Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines; and
d. Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise
sources where feasible technology exists.
Mitigation Monitoring
Action
TRAFFIC AND C/RCULA T/ON
T-1 Required as a
The applicant shall re-stripe a portion of Shannon Road at the driveway condition of
access po int fo r the proposed project to add a two-way turn lane to app r oval
provide storage space for a vehicle intending to turn left from eastbound
Shannon Road into the project driveway. Re-striping shall be subject to
the review and approval of the Town Engineer, and shall be completed
prior to occupancy of the first residentia l unit.
-· --
6
Responsibility Timing
Building Division, Prior to issuance of
Community any Grading Permit,
Development Demolition Permit, or
Department (CDD) Building Permit
Ensure these
measures are
incorporated into
project plans
Monitoring:
During construction
Responsibility Timing
Planning Division, Ensure these
Community measures are
Development incorporated into
Department (CDD) project plans
and Parks and Public
Works Monitoring:
Prior to occupancy of
the first residential
unit
PLANNING COMMISSION-February 24,2016
REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR:
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard
Planned Development Application PD-14-001
Mitigated Negative Declaration ND -1 4-002
Requesting approval of a Planned Development to rezone the property from CH to CH:PD,
demolish an existing commercial building, and construct 11 single-family residences on
property zoned CU. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared. APNs 523-06-010
and 523-06-011.
PROPERTY OWNER: 16212 Los Gatos Blvd., LLC
APPLICANT: Scott Plautz, Stem Development
FINDINGS:
Required finding for CEQA:
• No significant impacts have been identified and a Mitigated Negative Declaration was
prepared and is recommended for the proposed project.
• Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Required consistency with the Town's General Plan:
• That the proposed Zone Change is consistent with the General Plan and it s Elements.
Required finding for the Los Gatos Boulevard Plan:
• That the proposed project is consistent with the Los Gatos Boulevard Plan.
Required Compliance with Residential Design Guidelines:
• The project is in compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines for single-family homes.
N:,DEY IFINDI NG S 2016 ,LG BI6212.DOCX
EXHIBIT 4
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 354-6874
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION OF A REGULAR :MEETING OF THE CONCEPTUAL
DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF 1HE TOWN OF LOS · GATOS FOR
AUGUST 10,2011, HELD IN THE TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CMC CENTER, 110 EAST
MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA.
The meeting was called to order at 4:30P.M. by Barbara Spector.
ATIENDANCE
Members Present: Barbara Spector, Diane McNutt (attending for Steve Rice), Tom O'Donnell,
Joanne Talesfore
Members Absent: Charles Erekson, Steve Rice
Staff Present: Suzanne Davis, Senior Planner; Jennifer Savage, Associate Planner
Others present: Eric Morley, Scott Ward, Bill Hirschman, Tom Spilsbury, Todd Trekell,
Michael Bordoni, Aaron Barger, Dan Sell, Kim Nguyen, Sandy Decker,
Susan Buxton
ITEM 1: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard
Conceptual Development Application CD-11-00 1
Requesting review of conceptual plans for a Planned Development to rezone a .96
acre property from CH to RM:5-12:PD and to construct 11 new single family
residences. APNs 523-06-010 and 011.
PROPERTY OWNER: Elizabeth K. Dodson & William F. Hirschman
APPLICANT: Morley Bros. Investments, LLC and Classic Communities, Inc.
PROJECT PLANNER: Suzanne Davis
Eric Morley and Scott Ward were present for this item.
Eric Morley commented that they tried to be comprehensive in outlining the proposed project in the
letter that was submitted. The site is just under an acre and has been commercially operated,
although not very successfully in recent years . The General Plan calls for residential use in this area.
The proposal is for a series of high qual ity boutique homes , ranging in size from 1,600 to 2,300
square feet, all two-stories. Surrounding homes are both one· and two-stories. The homes along
Shannon Road are oriented to maintain the lot pattern and provide a street presence. New residences
will be designed to be compatible with existing homes and proposed homes across the street on the
forme r Honda site. There is a capital improvement project for the Shannon Road/Los Gatos
Boulevard intersection and they are working with Parks and Public Works on that.
EXHIBIT 5
CDAC Meeting
August 10, 2011
Page 2 o/5
Tom 0 'Donnell asked about consistency with the Robson Homes project that has not yet been
reviewed by the Town. Eric Morley noted that they have been following the application that is
currently in the process.
Joanne Tales/ore clarified that the solid line on the plans represents fencing.
Tom O'Donnell asked about existing landscaping and the street setback.
Comments:
• There is a need for this type of housing product.
• Two private streets within the project a concern.
• Location of driveway closest to the intersection of Los Gatos Blvd. and Shannon Road could
be an issue.
• Corner house is a concern due to its proximity to a very busy intersection (quality of life).
• Full retail may not be feasible on this site and could impact neighbors.
• The intersection of Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon Road needs to be revisited and
possibly redesigned.
• Concerned about giving up commercial use; site could be developed with both residential
and commercial .
• Project is too dense.
• Fence along Los Gatos Boulevard not desirable.
• Problematic to have one house developed by itself (home fronting on Los Gatos Blvd.)
• Encourage a sense of neighborhood; too much hardscape.
• Yards are relatively small.
• Not happy with the site layout; one unit by itself on Los Gatos Blvd. is not desirable.
• Two roadways coming out on Shannon not desirable.
• Should be more of a self-contained neighborhood.
• Question whether this site should be residential.
• Address adding traffic to Los Gatos Boulevard.
• Address the vtat>itity of the site for commercial.
• Not convinced that this site cannot be developed with a successfully commercial use.
• Small lots, larger F ARs problematic
• Residential Design Guidelines discourage garages fronting on street and so much
pavement within the front yards.
• Proximity of driveway to right turn lane a concern.
• Project should fit in with Magneson Loop.
• A number of higher density housing developments in the area with a similar look and
feel.
Eric Morley commented that the site has not been successful because it does not have critical mass.
They will study traffic and circulation. He thanked the Committee members for their time and input.
CDAC Meeting
August 10,2011
Page3 of5
ITEM2: 400-420 Blossom Hill Road
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee CD-11-002
Requesting review of conceptual plans for a Planned Development to rezone a 2.9
acre property from 0 to RM:5-12:PD , to demolish existing office buildings, and
construct approximately 37 three-story rental units. APN 529-16-071.
PROPERTY OWNER: Higgins Business Park, LLC
APPLICANT: Green Valley Corporation
Todd Trekell, Michael Bordoni, Aaron Barger, Tom Spilsbury, DanSell, Pete McMorrow and Kim
Nguyen were present for this item.
Todd Trekell commented that the vision for the site is similar to the development on Maggi Court.
They are proposing 36 townhomes, three bedroom, two-story units. Duet style units will fit well
with the trees on the site (134). The project wi11 conform with the BMP policy. ·He would like
feedback on off-site units and payment of in-lieu fees. Currently this is an island of office
development surrounded by RM:S-12 development. A residential development gives greater
flexibility in working with the existing trees on the site. Many people in Town m·e interested in
downsizing. There is a lack of product in Town that sells for less than $1 million and this project
will fill that need. A sound attenuation report will be done, and a tree inventory has already been
prepared. Some trees will need to be removed; they will follow the Town's policy to mitigate that.
Diane McNutt asked for further clarification addressing why residential is a better use for the site.
Todd Trekell commented that the existing structures are not ADA compliant and are in need of a lot
of work. This has been a difficult property to lease in the past. Office users typically want to be
located around other office users . Tom Spilsbury commented that the miginal project was built to
accommodate a single-use office. If was built in the 1960s and are not longer attractive to the office
market. Michael Bordoni commented that it is difficult to lease and obtaining financing for an office
development is also a challenge. Tom Spilsbury commented that the office market and environment
has changed.
Diane McNutt asked about the target market for the proposed project. Todd Trekell clarified that the
intent is to have for-sale housing. Tom Spilsbury noted that the occupants of the Maggi Court
development are the target market. Todd Treke/l commented that it would be couples, small
families; people who want to live in Town and cannot afford housing priced over $1 million.
Tom 0 'Donnell commented that the impact of the freeway on Placer Oaks has not been seen since
the project is not yet built. He believes that office use is appropriate on this site. The site is isolated
from other residential. The offices could be upgraded or replaced.
Kim Nguyen, Grubb & Ellis, commented that the site is difficult to lease due to the isolation of the
site and the age and condition of the buildings . One building is only partially occupied (2,500 square
feet) and the lease rates are low. Building 400 is 6,800 and building 420 is 11,000 square feet .
CDAC Meeting
August 10, 2011
Page 4 of5
Barbara Spector commented that the Town has prepared a Market Study that addresses leakage
and the need for high-end office. She asked where parking would be located (at the front, under
the unit) and yards.
Barbara Spector commented that the term "empty nester" is used a lot. She wondered if a three-
story 2,000 square foot home is really attractive to that category of buyer.
Comments:
• Intensity and density are concerns (higher FAR's, height, size ofunits).
• Concerned about three-stories/building height.
• BMP units should be provided on-site and should be integrated into the project.
• Payment of in-lieu fees rather than providing the BMP units also not desirable.
• BMP units should be the same as market rate units.
• Concerned about changing the land use from office to residential. Would like more
conversation and evidence on the issue.
• Just because something exists in Town does not mean it should be repeated; three stories
with garage underneath not desirable.
• Lack of open space.
• Not sure this is an empty nester type project.
• T he intensity of the development will be high because of the proposed density.
• Exiting from the site onto Blossom Hill Road can be difficult.
• Site entrance is in a location with blind comers.
• The problem seems to be that no one has maintained the site.
• The buildings could be brought up-to-date.
• Incubator office space needed.
• Design is old school; does not encourage community feeling.
• School impact needs to be considered.
• Change from office versus residential needs to be justified (burden of proof on the
applicant).
• Three-story units may not attractive to empty nesters.
• Consider upgrading the offices.
• If families will Jive there, open space and play areas are needed.
• If the site will be developed with residential, it needs to more user friendly.
• A better site design is needed.
• Architecture is important.
• This is a beautiful piece of property that lends itself to great potential office space.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 354-6874
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CONCEPTUAL
DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS FOR
AUGUST 14,2013 , HELD IN THE TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER, 110 EAST
MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA.
The meeting was called to order at 4 :30p.m.
ATTENDANCE
Members Present: Barbara Spector, Marcia Jensen, Charles Erekson, Joanne Talesfore
Members Absent: Margaret Smith
Staff Present: Planning Manager Joel Paulson, Senior Planner Suzanne Avila
Others Present: Scott Plautz, Eugene Sakai, Sean Rinde, Gary Kohlsaat, Dr. Sayed Jovkar
ITEM 1: 16212 Los Gatos Blvd.
Conceptual Development Application CD-13-002
Requesting review of conceptual development plans for construction of a 12-unit
residential Planned Development on property zoned CH. APNs 523-06-010 and
523-06-011.
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard LLC
PROJECT PLANNER: Suzanne Avila
Joanne Talesfore clarified that the General Plan designation for the property is Mixed Use
Commercial.
Scott Plautz commented that he is part of a local development group. They reviewed the previous
submittal when considering the purchase of this property. The development group primarily does
infill projects, typically custom high-end homes, and is part of the local community. There are a
number of challenges with the site including access.
Joanne Tales fore asked about the stated buyer profile and if there is any guarantee that children will
not be allowed. Scott Plautz indicated that there will not be any restrictions on who can purchase the
units; however, as someone with s chool-aged children, this is not a product that would appeal to him.
He noted that if a family were to move in, Blossom Hill Park is nearby and would provide an area for
children to play.
Joanne Talesfore asked about provision of open space within the project. Eugene Sakai responded
that the single-family detached units have open space around them and courtyards in the back. The
units along Los Gatos Boulevard are more urban and have balconies. S cott Plautz said that small
sitting areas could be provided with a half-wall .
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee
August 14, 2013
Page2
Marcia Jensen commented that a Planned Development should maximize open space and she does
not see that this has been done. Eugene Sakai said that getting enough development intensity on the
site to make the project viable is being balanced with providing open space.
Charles Ere kson asked ifthere are target price ranges for the two products. Scott Plautz said that the
town houses are a unique product that is not common in Los Gatos. The project would also provide
a buffer between Los Gatos Boulevard and the neighborhood behind. The prices would be in line
with current Los Gatos home prices. He also noted that one of the row houses would be a BMP unit.
Charles Erekson asked how the look of the project would fit with the swTOunding area. Euge ne
Sakai said that the exterior elevations for the detached homes will be styles that are conunon in the
area, such as Craftsman or Tudor. The exterior of the row houses is open for discussion. His firm
has done a number of projects with this product and a number of styles can work. Previous
proposals for the site were faced inward rather than toward the street.
Committee comments:
• The existing intersection at Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon Road is hazardous, and adding
density with only one access point is a concern.
• Residents with children are a possibility, which is a concern in this location since there is not
much usable green space.
• The site may be better suited for resident-serving business(es).
• The row house concept is very urban and vertical in appearance, which may not be appropriate
for this location.
• A small neighborhood is being created and there are two architectural styles that are in conflict
with one another, as well as with the Residential Design Guidelines.
• The project is too dense.
• Planned Development Ordinance requires excellence in design and provision of open space,
which is not included.
• Like the row houses, although there is a disconnect with the single-family homes.
• Ingress and egress that close to Los Gatos Boulevard is a concern and a challenge.
• School impact is a challenge.
• Loss of commercial property is a concern.
• Have a fundamental problem with changing the zoning.
• This is a commercial property and may not be suitable for residential.
• Challenging site for development and what it should be developed for.
• Access is in the best location.
• Mixed residential products are acceptable, although there may be too many single-family units.
• Like the concept of having a transition from the boulevard to the neighborhood.
• Need to provide some common open space, particularly for the row houses.
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee
August 14, 2013
Page3
• Developing an architectural style that will fit in while still working for a row house product is a
challenge.
ITEM2: 233 Oak Meadow Drive
Conceptual Development Application CD-13-003
Requesting review of conceptual plans for a Planned Development amendment for
demolition of an existing office building and construction of six residential
condominiums on property zoned O:PD. APN 529-10-132.
PROPERlY OWNER: Sayed Jovkar
APPLICANT: Gary Kohlsaat, Architect
PROJECT PLANNER: Suzanne Avila
Marcia Jensen commented that residential is already allowed on the site and why the Planned
Development (PD) would need to be amended.
Barbara Spector asked ifthe PD allows both office and residential. Staff commented that it does.
Gary Kohlsaat commented that the office building was there at the time the PD was approved.
There is existing parking on the site that would be retained and additional parking would be provided
under the units. A variety of unit sizes is proposed. There are some fourplexes on upper Oak
Meadow Drive, and the upper area has medical office buildings. The medical buildings are having
difficulty surviving in this area. These would be for-sale units. The style is flexible. Flats over the
two-story units are a more modem style.
Dr. Sayed Jovkar commented that there are residences on three sides of the property. The character
of the area is more residential. The new development will reduce traffic in the area. The design and
layout will fit with the existing residences. They intend to work with the neighbors, but wanted to
have the Committee's input first.
Joanne Talesfore commented that the site sits by itself. She asked if the site layout fits the contours
of the site. Gary Kohlsaat confirmed that it has been sited with the topography, and confirmed that
the height would be increased over that of the existing office building.
Joanne Talesfore asked if trees would be impacted. Gary Kohlsaat said that one tree would need to
be removed.
Marcia Jensen asked what the view of the project would be from Oak Meadow Park. Gary Kohlsaat
said that the site is not visible from the park.
Project Overview
Town of los Gatos Planning Commission : 16212los Gatos BoulevafiECEIVED
January 21, 2016
Project Address: 16212 Los Gatos Blvd @ Shannon Rd
FEB - 3 2016
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING DI VISION
Property Owner: 16212 Los Gatos Blvd, LLC, A Community Planned Development Project managed by STEM
Development
Project Name: IL VICINATO ; Italian to English Translation, "The Friendly Neighborhood"
Dear Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission,
We appreciate the Planning Commissions time and effort to review our project on the above referenced site.
The intent of this letter is to provide a comprehensive overview of our proposed project, as well as history of
previous considerations for the site from past owners and developers . Many of our design concepts in this
submittal are proposed based on feedback from the minutes of the Conceptual Development Advisory
Committee (CDAC) from the committee's August 10, 2011 review, which was submitted by the prior owner.
We submitted a version of our project to the CDAC which was reviewed on August 14, 2013 . We have
updated our project plans to address the issues committee members identified in our CDAC review and look
forward to feedback from the Planning Commission.
We are a local, high -en d custom real estate development group headquartered out of Los Gatos and primarily
focus on infill commercial a nd r es id enti al deve lopm ent projects in the Bay Area. W e be lieve thi s project has
many unique positive attributes, as well as se vera l challenge s sp eci fic to the site location . In order to produce
the be st poss ible developm e nt f or our com munity, we clo se ly an alyze land use, sustainable development
concepts, traffic impact and economic va ri abl es as well as many other mea surable co ncepts in the
deve lopm e nt proce ss .
The proposed project site is .94 acre and is best known for being the previous location of the Used Honda Auto
Dealership . In 2006, policy direction from Town Council indicated that a change of land use from Auto
Dealerships to another use should go through the PD Process, we are following that direction from Town
Council. Since the Used Honda Auto Dealership closed , the site has been vacant for years, with a few short
term retail tenants unable to make the site work for their commercial businesses. We believe there are many
negative iss ues with this site as a commercial location, the two primary issues are;
1. The challenging acce ss to the site for the large quantity of customers a tenant needs to manage a healthy
business, most commercial tenants will choose a site that has better ingress and egress and in a
commercial shopping center or district.
2. The large amount of competing retail space one block away at the corner of Los Gatos Blvd and Blos som
Hill Rd, which makes that intersection a destination one stop shopping option .
After we purcha sed the property in early 2012, we were informed by community leaders they would like to
have an Auto Dealership back on the site. In an effort to comply with the requests, our Commercial Broker
was able to engage in lea se discus sions with one of the largest Auto Dealers in the Bay Area for their Smart Car
Auto Dealership for our location . After seeking approval from the manufacturer, the Auto Dealer wa s told he
cannot open a location on our property due to the fact it is not on a major auto row.
While engaging with potential tenants and unable to come to term s on a fair market value lease , the buildin g
w as vandaliz ed multiple times and home less people w er e di scovered sleep ing on th e property. We d eci ded it
EXHIBIT 6
was in our best interest, the neighbors and the town s to have the building occupied at a d iscounted lease rate
as opposed to leaving it vacant and becoming a potential public nuisance . So we lowered the rate s to find a
tenant that would be a good temporary fit while we went through the development process . We were able to
find a good local tenant who was looking to break into the market in Los Gatos as they expand their business,
that tenant is Artisan Wine Depot, they are on a CUP until early next year when the lease expires. The tenant
is paying approxi mately 25% of the lease rate the Used Honda Auto Dealer was paying and is not a fiscally
viable option for the long term.
In our effort to better understand the development options and be st u se for the site, our team looked at the
Los Gatos Boulevard Plan , the Zon ing Map, and the 2020 General Plan. The following information was helpful
as we determined the best land use strategy for the project.
The Los Gatos Boulevard Plan: It was written in 1997, the plan was approved by both the Planning
Commission and the Town Council. One of the purposes of the plan was to look at Los Gatos Blvd from
Highway 85 as it moves south toward downtown, its land uses and attri butes, and the understanding that
some of the businesses along the boulevard had left town, particularly the Auto Dealersh i ps, leaving vacant
parcels of land . Some of the important details to consider for our project are the following:
1. Buildings : The plan asked for distinctive, pedestrian friendly, orientation of buildings
2. Transportation : Our property is on the VTA Community Bus Route and adjacent to a Community Bus
Stop .
3. Land Use : While the plan speaks to the economic vision of retail and commercial along the boulevard, it
also acknowledges the residential uses along the boulevard . Therefore, our property is a tran sitional piece of
property which borders primarily low density residential homes to the east and north along Magneson Loop,
except for a small residential building with a small office on the ground floor along Lo s Gatos Blvd , to the south
i s primarily low den sity residential, except for the vacant LG Food Store, which is also a fraction of our
property size . West across Los Gatos Blvd is Laurel Mews, a new single family housing project with a density of
12.8 units per acre including BMP un it . Laurel Mews is located on the 1.9 acre lot of which the New Honda
Auto Dealership was previously located. The planning and zoning designation for Laurel Mews directly
correlates to our site as a compatibility measurable, however, Laurel Mews was approved to develop to
Medium Density Res idential (5 to 12 un it s per acre) while allowing the deve lopment to move a BMP off-site to
fulfill the requirement.
4. Land Use in the Los Gatos Blvd @ Blossom Hill Area : Residential Projects two blocks north of our site
have also been recently approved which had the same Planning and Zoning as our site . The D.R. Horton,
Montecito Los Gatos Project has greater density and intensity than Laurel Mews and was approved and sold
out quickly. The se approved projects in similar locations have provided a new type of hous ing for our
community at a lower price than the average home price in Los Gatos expanding our community
demographics and making our community more economically diverse.
5. Section D-Policies; #3 states that neighborhood commercial, multi-family residential and office uses shall
be concentrated south of Los Gatos-Al maden Rd .
The Zon ing Map designates our property as CH-Restricted Commercial Highway, same as Lau rel Mews and
Montecito. As discus sed, the property is a remnant of the Auto Dealerships that once lined the boulevard and
have since departed .
The General Plan Map :
1. Upon review of this map you will notice why a PO Overlay to Residential makes sense, since surrounding
properties, except the vacant LG Food Store, are residential. Therefore, the proposed residential project is
compatible with the existing neighborhood .
2. In the General Plan in the Land Use Section, Figure LU-3 denotes the property as Mixed Use Commercial,
defined in the General Plan as "Up to 50% land coverage with a 35 foot height limit. The Mixed-Use
Commercial designation permits a mixture of retail, office, and residential in a mixed-use setting .... ".
However, this site has too many restrictions and negative concerns from CDAC feedback to make it an
economically viable mixed use development when taking into consideration traffic and trip count is sues along
with noise pollution for the neighbors.
3. Residential use with a Planned Development Overlay is consistent with the General Plan. Quoted from
the General Plan : "The Planned Development Overlay Zone is intended to ensure orderly planning and quality
design that will be in harmony with the existing or potential development of the surrounding neighborhood."
The General Plan calls for residential use as an option in this area and several of the neighborhood recent
developments have proven this concept to be successful and have introduced new homes to our community
in the use of Residential Planned Developments Overlays .
Our proposal is for a unique upscale development focusing on boutique single family residential (SFR) in the
traditional sense along Shannon Rd, as well as a Luxury Brownstone concept of single family homes to activate
the pedestrian friendly Los Gatos Boulevard Plan while addressing the challenges of developing along the high
traffic area of Los Gatos Blvd as it transitions into the traditional single family community. The above ground
traditional SFR are two stories, while the Luxury Brownstone SFR are two and one half story to provide a
buffer from Los Gatos Blvd to the established residents behind the development. The 10 SFR homes and 1
BMP have an above ground square footage ranging from approximately 1,600 to 2,800 sqft; they will al so have
full and/or partial basements/cellars to enhance the quality of living space for the future residence . The
traditional homes along Shannon Rd are oriented to maintain the street presence of the existing residential
community further down Shannon Rd. The Luxury Brownstone concept on Los Gatos Blvd is elevated one-half
story to allow privacy from the busy street for the future residence while providing pedestrian access to the
elegant front entry ways and vehicle acces s through the Planned Development to eliminate traffic concern s
from the site onto Los Gatos Blvd .
The proposed Residential Planned Development Overlay has a unique offering for the town of Lo s Gatos and
ha s proven to be in great demand . We anticipate single and married executives without children, as well as
young, active "empty nesters" will find the Luxury Brownstone concept attractive. While families with
children will enjoy the traditional single family residences and enjoy the sound and light screening the Luxury
Brownstones provide from Los Gatos Blvd. This medium density Planned Development has low impact on the
neighbors and community in comparison to the sites only successful commercial tenant, the previous Auto
Dealership. We have also retained the services of many local leading experts who have found great success in
other recent developments in the community to address the den sity and inten sity is sues . Our team has LEED
and Sustainable Certified members who will be focusing on our Green requirements to include Net Zero Ready
homes, Certified Sustainable Materials and industry best practices for green ratings . Our team's award
winning sustainable de sign s, knowledge ofthe local community and high quality attention to detail
differentiates us from other local builders/developers.
After removing one of the Luxury Brownstone units to comply with CDAC request to expand the Green Space ,
we believe the Luxury Brownstone occupants will enjoy their expanded private outdoor spaces as well as the
redesigned outdoor common area with the Bioswale park like setting to bring "the friendly neighborhood"
together. We also believe the access to the local parks at Blossom Hill and Vasona are an added benefit as
well as the expanded local commercial amenities one block away at the intersection of Los Gatos Blvd and
Blossom Hill Rd.
We hope to receive support on this project from the Planning Commission and Town Council after members
review the information provided and better understand some of the unique challenges of this site. We hope
the Commission recognizes the substantial effort and attention to detail our team has leveraged in
determining the best use for this site . We received positive feedback from the large majority of neighbors and
community members after they reviewed the residential plans and all the information provided. Through our
extensive process, our team believes we have arrived at the best solution with a unique, high-end product to
compliment the Town of Los Gatos while working to conform to the General Plan , Los Gatos Boulevard Plan ,
Zoning and land use issues to enhance the use of this site .
Thanks again for your time and we look forward to your feedback.
Sincerely,
Scott Plautz
16212 Los Gatos Blvd, LLC, Partner
President
STEM Sustainable Development
sc ott@stem-development.com
408-655-2326
A Community Planned Development Project managed by STEM Development
Letter of Justification
Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission: 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard
January 20, 2016
Project Address: 16212 Los Gatos Blvd @ Shannon Rd
Property Owner: 16212 Los Gatos Blvd, LLC, A Commun ity Planned Development Project
managed by STEM Development
Project Name: IL VICINATO; Italian to English Translation, "The Friendly Neighborhood"
Dear Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission,
Please accept this Letter of Justification addressing the following questions from the Planning
Comments dated June 3, 2015 by our project planner, Marni Moseley.
The items addressed in this letter are as follows:
a. Proposed setbacks, how are they compatible with the neighborhood .
Answer: There have been several new developments in Los Gatos in recent years in the
immediate neighborhood with the same zoning as our site. For example, the Honda site across
Los Gatos Blvd which is now Laurel Mews, the Swanson Ford site, which is now Montecito,
which both had our identical zoning and prior use of auto dealerships, as well as Bluebird Lane
and others in the neighborhood. We have modeled our zoning and setbacks to be comparable
to these projects and to meet the unique characteristics and challenges of our site.
b. How the proposed density is appropriate given the neighborhood context.
Answer: Once again, using the precedence established from the previously approved
projects is our best measure of what the Town Council has deemed acceptable for these
historic auto dealership sites based on the 2006 council decision to have dealerships go through
a Planned Development Process . Our Density is actually lower than all the other previously
approved projects . For example, our density is 10 units per acre, with 1 PMB on site. Laurel
Mews was over 12 units per acre with an offsite substitute to meet their BMP requirement.
c. Open space, the proposed private open space is less than that required of residential condos,
while these appear to not be condos, they comparison remains based on the type of units.
Answer: The units are all single family residences, we purposely did not propose condos
based on feedback from council members, community and staff in early planning discussions .
We also removed two units from the original13 which we were able to propose for medium
density requirements, the other approved projects mentioned above had received approval on
medium density as well. Removal of the two units allowed us to increase our open space on
site and use it as a bio swell area and gathering space for the future planned development
residents. The patios and decks on the Single Family Residences also help with the open space
concept, as well as the local neighborhood parks of Blossom Hill and Vasona.
d. Town Code requires additional setback for CH zoned properties wh en the structure is over 20
feet and adjacent to residential zoned properties, plea se review Section 29.60.435 .
Answer: We took this setback concept into consideration from the CH zoned Montecito
project on the historical Swanson Ford site . They had neighbors which were back i ng to front,
side and back yards, we leveraged a similar concept to our plan based on this previously
approved concept . In our discus sion s with ne i ghbors of our site, those who provided feedback,
understood this setback and were supportive of how our project was designed and many
actually provided positive comments on site layout and architectural design . The large majority
of neighbors actually prefer the proposed residential use over the potentia l of a commercial
si te due to the reduction in traffic, noise, transient customers, etc.
e. Driveway length doe s not meet Town minimum standards.
Answer: We have modified the plan in an effort to conform to this requirement and
believe the new plan is greatly improved .
f . FAR of proposed re sidence s.
Answer: We have reviewed the previously approved developments in the immed iate
neighborhood and have leveraged those concepts in justification of our design and FAR and
believe they are comparable.
g. Town Code requires a 6' masonry wall between CH zoned properties and residenti al zoned
properties, this should either be changed on the plans or addressed in the letter as an
exception.
Answer: We are willing to meet the need s and request s of the neighbors and the town
on this code issue. However, as we are planning to build Single Family Residential homes, it is
more traditional to use standard wood fencing backing to the other private re si dences as
opposed to masonry. The neighbor on the Ea st side of the development alon g Shannon Road
has requested we keep the remaining CMU m asonry type wall and we are willing to do so based
on their request .
h. The depicted landscaping on the renderings is not consistent with exi sting retained tree plan,
please provide what the rendering s are based on (initial planting size and time for growth).
Answ er: We have revi sed our plans to reflect the new concept.
i. Type of units proposed along Lo s Gatos Boulevard and the need for the type of separation.
Answ er : Our teams ha s va st experience with both commercial and resid ential
development and has performed exten sive land use review on this site and project and believe
th e re si dential u se is a much bette r fit for this location. Some of the primary goal s were ba sed
on traffic, neighboring land u se, major commercial development north of Blo ss om Hill Road ,
Town of Lo s Gatos General Plan and the Lo s Gatos Boulevard Plan. After many discu ss ions with
th e town st aff, council and ne ig hbors, w e b eli eve a r es identi al u se wa s more in lin e with the
local community plan as well as r ecently approved comparable zoned sites. When site use and
prior approvals lead us to a residential concept, we then had to determine the best type of
homes based upon the site s unique locat ion, neighboring concepts and the community need
for specific types of housing. The high traffic volume and width of lanes on Los Gatos Boulevard
to the immediate West of the site made for many unique challenges to th is location . We
decided to propose a type of smaller square footage home in order to keep the price below the
average home price in the commun ity to appeal to a demographic of young professionals or
"empty nesters" looking to downsize from their larger, more expensive, standa rd Single Family
Residence that is traditional in other parts of town . The Los Gatos Boulevard Plan has an
attempt to "activate" the boulevard for pedestrian use , which is logical as there is a VTA stop
immediately across the street. The "BrownStone" concept we are proposing on the boulevard
is common i n high traffic, medium density areas around the Bay Area and a great solution to
provide privacy to the future residents and allows for a solution for different demographic, as
well as additi onal property tax revenue for schools and town municipalities. The type of
separation we are proposing is also traditional with the BrownStone concept and we believe it
is the best fit for homes with the i mpact from traffic, noise and light pollution inherent to the
site . however, if the town believe s we should adju st this concept, we are willing to do so if
there is a logical reason to do so, as long as we stay with the spirit of the concept. The
BrownStone concept also creates a barrier for the neighbors to the East and North of the
project site for the same traffic, noise and light pollution, which many of the neighbors
appreciated during discussions .
j . Comments from the consulting architects that were not addressed.
Answer: Please see Project Overv iew dated January 21, 2016
k. Comments from the CDAC meetings (minutes attached)
Answer: Please see Project Ove r view dated January 21, 2016
Please let me know if you have any further questions or comments regarding the above
questions from the June Planning Comments .
Sincerely,
Scott Plautz
President
STEM Susta inable Development
scott@stem -development.com
408-655-2326
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
LOS GATOS GENERAL TREE PROTECTION DIRECTIONS
Note that the following Is excerpted from Division 2 (tree Protection) of the Los Gatos Town
Code and does not constitute the complete Division 2 text. The owner/applicant Is responsible
for Implementing all pertinent requirements of the Code relative to tree protection. ·
Sec. 29.10.1 ooo New Property Development
(1) The final approved Tree Preservation Report shall be included in the building permit set of
development plans and printed on a sheets titled: Tree Preservation Instruction (SheetT-1, T-2,
etc.}. These Sheets shall be referenced on all relevant sheets (civil, demolition, utility,
landscape, irrigation) where tree impacts from improvements mciy be shown to occur.
(3.b.l The site or landscape plans shall indicate which trees are to be removed. However. the
plgns do not constitute approval to remove a tree until a separqte permit is aranted. The
property owner or applicant shall obtain a protected tree removal permit, as outlined in
section 29.1 0.0980 for each tree to be removed to satisfy the purpose of this definition.
(3.e.) Protective fencing inspection: Prior to issuance of any demolition, grading or building
permit, the applicant or contractor shall submit to the building department a written statement
verifying that the required tree protection fence is installed around street trees and protected
trees in accordance with the Tree Preservation Report.
(3.g.) An applicant with a proposed developrnen't which requires underground utilities shall
avoid the installation of said utilities within the dripline of existing trees whenever possible. In
the event that this is unavoidable, all trenching shall be done using directional boring, air-
spade excavation or by hand, taking extreme caution to avoid damage to the roofstructure.
Work within the dripline of existing trees shall be supervised at all times by a certified or
consulting arborist.
Section 29.1 0.1005 Protection of Trees During Construction
a) Protective tree fencing shall specify the following:
1) Size and materials: A five (5) or six {6) foot high chain link fencing, mounted on two-inch
diameter galvanized iron posts, shall be driven into the ground to a depth of at least two ·
(2) feet at no more than 1 0-foot spacing. For paving area that will not be demolished and
when stipulated in a tree preservation plan, posts may be supported by a concrete base.
2) Area type to be fenced. ~: Enclosure with chain linlc fencing of either the entire
dripline area or at the tree protection zone (TPZ), when specified by a certified or
consulting arborist1 • ~: Enclosure for street trees located in a planter strip: chain link
fence around the entire planter strip to the outer branches. Type· II I: Protection for a tree
located in a small planter cutout only {such as downtown): orange plastic fencing shall be
wrapped around the trunk from the ground to the first branch with 2-inch wooden boards
bound securely on the outside. Caution shall be used to avoid damaging any bark or
branches.
3) Duration of Type I, II, Ill fencing. Fencing shall be erected before demolition, grading or
construction begins and remain in place until final landscaping is required. Contractor shall
1 if. it is not possible to place Type 1 or Type 2 tree protection fencing at the dripline due to the construction, then
place the fencing as far from the trunk as possible, including as much of the driplinc as possible, while still allowing
for enough room to build improvements. If this hc:;ppcns to_ be within all or some of the dripline, then so be it. But
the contractor must try to fence off c:s much area under the canOP\' as possible, do not be irresponsible about this.
first obtain the approval of the project arborist on record prior to removing a tree
protection fence.
4) Warning sign. Each tree fence shall have prominently displayed an 8.5 x 11-inch sign
stating: "Warning-Tree Protection Zone-this fence shall not be removed and is subject to
penalty according to Town Code 29.10.1025".
b) All persons, shall comply with the following precautions:
1) Prior to the commencement of construction, install the fence at the dripline, or tree
protection zone (TPZ) when specified in an approved arborist report, around any tree
and/or vegetation to be retained which could be affected by the construction and
prohibit any storage of construction materials or other materials or vehicles inside the
fence. The dripline shall not be altered in any way so as to increase the encroachment of
the construction.
2) Prohibit excavaflon, grading, drainage and leveling within the dripline of the tree unless
approved by the director.
3) Prohibit disposal or depositing of oil, gasoline, chemicals or other harmful materials within
the dripline of or In drainage channels, swales or areas that may lead to the dripline of a
protected tree
4) Prohibit the attachment of wires, signs or ropes to any protected tree.
5) Design utility services and irrfgaflon lines to be located outside of the dripline when
feasible.
6) Retain the services of the certified or consulting arborlst for periodic monitoring of the
project site and the health of those trees to be preserved. The certified or consulting
arborist shall be present whenever activities occur that pose a potential threat to the
health of the trees to be preserved.
7) The director and project arborfst shall be notHied of any damage that occurs to a
protected tree during construction so that proper treatment may be administered.
Section 29.10.1010 Pruning and Maintenance
All pruning of protected trees shall be consistent with the current edition of Best Management
Practices-Tree Pruning, established by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and any
special conditions as determined by the Director. For developments, which require a tree
preservation report, a certified or consulting arborist shall be in reasonable charge of all
activities involving protected trees including cabling, and fertilizing if specified.
1) Any public utility installing or maintaining any overhead wires or underground pies or
conduits in the vicinity of a protected tree shall obtain permission from the Director before
performing any work, including pruning, which may cause injury to a protected tree (e.g.
cable TV /fiber optic trenching, gas, water, sewer trench, etc.)
2) Pruning for clearance of utility lines and energized conductors shall be performed in
compliance with the current versbn of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300
(Part 1) -Pruning, Section 5.9 Utility Pruning. Using spikes or gaffs when pruning is prohibited.
2
From: Wallerstein, Donna [mailto:Donna.Wall erstein@hhs.sccgov.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2016 12:40 PM
To: Council
(
Subject: proposed development on the corner of Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon Road
The proposed development of 11 homes perched on less than one acre of
land, 2 blocks from Fisher Middle School and Van Meter Elementary
School is nothing short of ludicrous. That very busy commercial street
continues to add more businesses and more housing with no concern for
the safety of our children. Traffic at that corner has been absolutely
horrendous ever since the Honda dealership closed and multiple· homes
were built on the site. And the additional housing and commercial
development at the corner of Blossom Hill and LG Blvd is equally to
blame. At school beginning and end and at rush hour, one can barely
navigate the traffic light and OFTEN there is no crossing guard to help
children get across safely.
If you agree to this proposal , then it should be the Town Council 's
responsibility to guarantee that there will be a crossing guard at that point
AND at Van Meter daily, morning and afternoon for at least 30 minutes
before school begins and 45 minutes after the school day ends. I would
challenge each of you to take a turn at the job at least once before signing
off on any further development so near to the schools.
Los Gatos is rapidly becoming an undesirable place to live due to the
congestion and traffic and blatant overdevelopment.
Sincerely,
Donna Wallerstein
Los Gatos
EXHIBIT 9
r
On Jan 28, 2016, at 1:26PM, Geoff LaMotte <geoff.lamotte@ gmail.com> wrote:
Barbara, Marico, Marcia, Steven and Rob,
After reviewing the II Vicinato housing development MND, our family and neighbors are very
concerned with the apparent attempt to justify a revenue-grossing development while
underestimating the actual impact it has on the community. We ask the Town Council to reject
the proposal in the good interest of Los Gatos residents who have been patient with many other
recent constructions.
Personally, my wife and I live on Shannon Road, and previously lived on Nino. We experienced
the pains of construction from the LG I Grant Bishop townhouse developments and the impact
on the neighborhood traffic so can attest to how much it statistically changes the surrounding
area when high density housing is introduced. This is coming after the Caldwell development
and preceding completion of the project at the old Swanson Ford property (LG Boulevard and
LG-Almaden Road).
We are unequivocally opposed to the ll Vicinato development for the following reasons:
-The Laurel Mews study is clearly outdated. Anyone that lives in this area and tries to get
anywhere during key times (7 -1 Oam, 4-7pm -again, the study minimizes the extended commute
hours reflective of Silicon Valley and documented in length by several commissions -example
news release here) understands that we have serious gridlock on Los Gatos Boulevard and in
particular this intersection with Shannon. During an already overwhelming morning commute, it
can take us 5 minutes to exit onto Los Gatos Boulevard from Shannon Road from our house on
Amanda Lane.
-This continues an alarming trend of approved high density housing (Caldwell/Kennedy, Grant
Bishop, Swanson Ford) in an already heavily congested area that contains 2 elementary schools
and a middle school. School class sizes are already increasing and over capacity.
-It changes the zoning of the Wine Shop property from commercial to residential without
explanation.
-Safety: With the introduction of Orange Theory fitness , Yoga Source, and the new townhomes
diagonally across the street from the Wine Shop, there is significant risk in this area as cars park
in the Wine Shop parking lot while others are commuting through and children are walking to
school. This congestion is already a problem, so why compound it and not fix it instead?
I grew up in Saratoga, where the town council did an excellent job over the years protecting lot
sizes and minimizing developments that would hurt the integrity and quality of life of its citizens.
I am hopeful that Los Gatos will reject the 11 Vicinato project that compounds existing problems
with traffic flow and safety at the intersection of Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon Road.
Thanks, Geoff LaMotte
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hi Mami-
Tamara Bodner <tbodner@gmail.com >
Monday, February 01, 2016 12:07 PM
Marni Mose le y
New Housing Development at Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon
I hope all is well. I am reaching out to you in regard s to the new proposed deve lopment which I think is called
II Vicinato to replace the Wine Depot . Can you please add my letter in to the pile of residents NOT supporting
it. The parcel is too small for the proposed number of units. In addition, traffic, parking and congestion in that
area is already way to high . Kids traveling to Fisher and Van Meter are already at risk to accidents . We have
had so many kids on bikes already hit by cars this year. (Unfortunately most go unreported because there is no
need to get the police involved .) Thankfully no major injuries or deaths have occured but it is only a matter of
time if we continue to add more traffic into these already congested areas . I would rather see wider streets,
sidewalks and highly visible bike lanes in this intersection to encourage kids to walk to school safely. Not
more cars and traffic and congestions.
Lastly, the numbers used to calculate the new students in the schools is underestimated. In the Linda Avenue
development, in the 6 completed homes, we have 9 students in the school. Not sure how they calculated only
8-12 for this development. People move to Los Gatos for the schools . They do not care about their home size.
Thank you for li stening and adding my letter to the nonsupporters.
Tam ara
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hello Ms. Moseley,
Tiffany Papageorge <tiffany@papageorge.com >
Tuesday, February 02, 2016 4:41 PM
Marni Moseley
II Vicinato
The new proposed development "II Vicinato" has come to our attention. I am writing you on my behalf and also on
behalf of my husband, Paul. We are astounded by the high impact building that is going on in Los Gatos. It seems as
though the city planners aren't driving the same streets as we are or that their children aren't in the same public
schools. The other day, before rush hour, it took me nearly a half an hour to get down town from lower Kennedy Road .
We don't have the infrastructure in our little town to handle the amount of cars these high-density housing projects are
burdening our town with. Our schools are beyond full capacity. Why are these projects allowed through? Why is an acre
of land on an already busy corner where school four schools will be impacted by the additional population and traffic
even being considered? We are saddened by what is happening here. We respectfully ask you and the city planners to
think of the bigger picture. When can we go on a building moratorium and stop building tens of houses 4-5 bedroom
houses on no lot. It isn't good for any of us .
Thanks for your consideration,
Tiffany Papageorge
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tony Nanez <tnanez@gmail.com>
Wednesday, February 03, 2016 4:40 PM
Marni Moseley
town vs city
being a resident of LG since 1975 ,there's been a lot of changes and mostly for the good but;
as oflate the addition of so many new residents for the obvious tax revenue, has transformed our town
into a CITY(not good.)congestion in and around our schools is dangerous to our students and to add to this
by building on shannon and los gatos blvd will only add to the frustration of leaving our home to shop in LG .
were not even shopping downtown unless we can go at day time and many of our friends feel the same way!
we think the small businesses downtown will eventually suffer .its actually more convenient shopping at the
malls
per our out of town friends that were shopping here.please reconsider the amount or residents proposed for that
less than acre property.
thanks for your understanding and consideration
tony nanez
Tony Nanez
tnanez@gmail.com
1
From: Johanes Swenberg [mailto:johanes swenberg@yahoo.com]
Sent : Saturday, February 06, 2016 3:02 PM
To: Council
Subject: Ill Vicinato
Dear town council
I am writing about the ill Vicinato development planned on Los Gatos Blvd.
unfortunately I can not attend the town meeting this month where this development will be discussed .
My input is simply that the current plan for 11 homes on one acre at this specific location should not be
approved . I very much approve of development for the town. However the plan for this location will
add to an already congested area and may put students, and other members of our community at risk.
I strongly encourage additional studies to pursue other options for this location . I believe the traffic
study done for the site is outdated and should be questioned to its current validity.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Johanes swenberg
Resident on Mary way
Los Gatos
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Tanya Lattner <tonic@nondot.org >
Friday, Feb ruary 05, 2016 2:03 PM
Counci l; Planning
Marni Moseley
IL Vicinity Feedback from resident in the neighborhood
Town Council & Planning Commission,
My name is Tanya Lattner and I live on W Chiquita Ave . I am very concerned about the proposed development, IL
Vicinato, at the current location of the Artisan Wine Depot . I am not sure I can attend the town meeting so I hope that
my comments may be taken into consideration through email. I hope I have addressed this email to the right people.
First, I feel the density of the housing and style do not fit in with the look and feel of our wonderful town. Because of this
density the setback from the road will be decreased . I strongly feel that at the bare minimum, the number of housing
units should be reduced . There are also no row housing on this side of LG Blvd and it is surrounded by single family
homes. I believe that it should stay single family housing with adequate space between the homes for a good quality of
life for residents. For a 1 acre sized lot, 4-5 single family homes should be the maximum. This would allow for 10,000 sqft
lots and that is in line with the lot sizes in the neighborhood .
The traffic study that was done for this development seems outdated. This lot is currently used for parking by Yoga
Source and they have a large and growing client base. Removing their use of the lot would cause a drastic increase in
parking in the neighborhood. Orange Theory also has recently opened and because their parking lot is also small which
forces clients to park in the neighborhood. So you have 2 strong and growing businesses with no real parking options. In
addition, this lot is used by parents when picking up their children from school. If you force them out, they will be
looking for street parking as well and traffic around the schools will be even worse . The traffic study does not address.
these concerns or the actual increase from the Laurel Mews development.
This is also a strange intersection and heavily used by children walking to/from school. There needs to be a plan in place
to handle this pedestrian traffic during construction so all children are safe. Shannon Rd is already a potentially
dangerous road with no clear sidewalks and many speeders. We should avoid making it any more unsafe.
I strongly feel that the development is the wrong fit for our community but I understand that some development will
probably happen . I would much rather see the lot broken into 2 single family homes on the Shannon Rd side, and the LG
Blvd side remain some commercial property (maybe the wine store could even stay). Something that doesn't increase
the population of our schools , doesn't drastically increase traffic to the business, and doesn't change the parki ng
situation too much from how it currently is. Ideally it would be a business that the local residents would want to walk to
and shop at. Solutions to the parking problems need to be addressed. Perhaps an underground parking structure could
be done to keep Yoga Source still parking there and also allow a business on top that doesn't require much parking.
However, if a residential development is the only route. Please reduce the density and allow something that is in line
with what the neighborhood currently has and looks like.
Thank you,
Tanya Lattner
1
16212 Los Gatos Blvd.
From: lazykrancho <lazykrancho@aol.com>
To: mmoseley <mmoseley@losgatosca.gov>; lazykrancho <lazykrancho@aol.com>
Subject: 16212 Los Gatos Blvd.
Date: Fri. Feb 5, 201611:03 am
Attachments: LG-16 Shannon Realignment.pdf (2757K)
Dear Marni Moseley,
I hope all is well!
Page 1 of2
For what it is worth, I have lived off of Shannon Road, and in an adjacent
neighborhood, for over twenty years . I have always thought the town of Los
Gatos would correct the Los Gatos Blvd/Shannon Road intersection.
When the new development was proposed at Roberts and Los Gatos Blvd (at
the old Honda site), I thought for sure the Town would fix this intersection . The
Public Works D irector (at that time) stated that the i ntersection worked
normally . I was quite flabbergasted by that statement.
Anyway, my point is th is : Every day I see violations at that intersection. Cars
turning right from Shannon Road onto Northbound Los Gatos Blvd do not stop.
People unfamiliar with the intersection do not know where to turn, and often go
through the red light at Roberts that is only a very short distance from the
Shannon Road light (both Southbound & Northbound Los Gatos Blvd .) Cars
run the "No Right Turn On Red" at Roberts Road onto Southbound Los Gatos
Blvd . Cars from the Yoga Source drive the wrong way to get to the opening at
·Magnesson Loop to go Northbound on Los Gatos Blvd. Pedestrians crossing ,
on the East side of Los Gatos Blvd at Shannon, heading Southbound , are
continually running for their lives as cars turn Left from Southbound Los Gatos
Blvd onto Shannon Road .
I won't even get into the number of pedestrians I see jaywalking/running across
Los Gatos Blvd to get to either s ide (the cross walk at Shannon and Los Gatos
Blvd does not serve the Yoga Source and automobile businesses on the West
side of Los Gatos Blvd).
Please see the attached document above. It shows a rough outline of how this
intersection can be improved before we start building homes on the last piece
of land that would give us all a chance to fix this area and to actually make it
shine.
https://mail.aol.com/webmail -std/en-us/PrintMessage 02/05/2016
162 12 Los Gatos Blvd. Page 2 of2
I noticed the date to respond to the MND has changed t o February 4th, 2016 at
5pm. However, the mailing I received and the notice at the Library stated it was
to be February 11th, 20 16. Could you please confirm that my co rrespondence
will be accepted (the attached document and this email) ??
Thank you for your time and assistance.
I dislike bothering developers and other folks about their projects, but this
intersection needs to be fixed for the benefit and safety of the whole community
as well as visitors to this area . Changing the zoning from C to R is a major
concession.
https://mail.aol.com/webmail-std/en-us/PrintMessage 02/05/2016
J
·I·
'
I
I
I
I
I .
I
I
l
I
l
I
I
i
I
I
On Feb 7, 2016, at 10 :4 1 AM, Ken Hoffman <kenlhoffman@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Mayor Spector and town council members,
As home owners on Robie Lane we are writing to support our adamant opposition to II
Vicinato, the proposed new housing development on the northeast corner of Shannon
Rd and Los Gatos Blvd.
The proposed eleven single family residences on less than an acre would detrimentally
impact the already fraught traffic and safety conditions that already exist in the
immediate area.
At present there is a high volume of traffic with peaks at at school arrival and departure
times as well as during the weekday commuting hours. The high volume of cars
presently on the road already negatively impacts progress thru the already long lights at
the corners of Shannon and Roberts Roads. We are often forced to turn right onto
Shannon and cut over to Blossom Hill on Cherry Avenue, impacting our neighbors in
the opposite direction.
In addition there is a very high volume of pedestrian and bicycle traffic from Fisher
students primarily. More cars puts those environmentally friendly commuters at even
greater risk.
According to Hexagon Consultants "The site plan for the proposed
residential development indicates that vehicular access to alltt dwelling
units would be provided from Shannon Road. The existing driveway on Los
Gatos Boulevard would be eliminated. The existing driveway on Shannon
Road, which is close to the eastern edge of the parcel, would be replaced by
a new driveway that would be farther from Los Gatos Boulevard." As we
have stated there are kids walking and riding to school each day along this stretch of
Shannon Road. Additional cars coming out of this driveway onto Shannon is not adding
to the safety of our children. In addition, residents can scarcely get out of Robie Lane
onto Shannon Road (West) at certain times due to the long line of cars already waiting
on Shannon to turn onto Los Gatos Blvd or go through to Roberts. The proposal would
make this stretch even more miserable. Shannon Road is terribly dangerous for our
children as it is without adding any new negative factors (It is a long stretch of road
without speed bumps that cars speed on constantly; It is overused and not kept in good
condition; Major parts of it have no sidewalks). Los Gatos Blvd. is painfully congested
already at commute times.
In reading the traffic analysis report, we are unsure as to why Hexagon Consultants is
comparing trip generation for the housing development using a site utilized for auto
sales. That isn't currently what is at the site so why utilize it to say that a housing
development would generate less daily trips?
There are two businesses (Orange Theory and Yoga Source) that require more parking
than their lots can handle. The current lot that the II Vicinato development is proposed
for is partially utilized as parking for Yoga Source. Where are the Yoga Source cars
going to park when this development 'goes up? If rules are changed so parking is
allowed on Shannon where currently parking isn't allowed during the day it would be
quite dangerous. It is difficult enough when cars are parked on the Robie Lane side of
Shannon to ease out to get a good enough line of site to safely continue on Shannon to
Los Gatos Blvd. If cars were allowed to par}c on the dpposite,sjde of Shannon it would
be dangerous to the children riding bikes to school each day. At present, residents of
Robie Lane are fed up with Orange Theory business clients parking on the street and are
applying for a residents only parking sign.
We have to think of all of these variables when considering these proposals.
We have overburdened schools as it is. Our local schools are at or over capacity. P.26 of
the Mitigated Negative Declaration says "New student g~neratiori by the
proposed project wo1,l].d range from eight t~ 12 new students total for grades
K-l~· ~e propos~d pr;oject would be required t;o pay e;l~velopment impact
fees to cover, its increw~g.tal share of future cla~sroom ~evelopment.
The,re(or.e, a\tlt~ugh. soll).e of the sc~ools to which the proposed pr9ject
would send students are at or over capacity, the proposed .p~oj~ct's payment
of the school development impact fees would reduce the impacts to schools
to a le.ss th~ ~·gnifi~t level." Th~s~ ar.e e.le.vep. four and five bedroom homes
... We're not .~ure how,th~.ntnnber-of 8-.12 children was d~rived fr9m this study. These
numbers don't add up. How we can keep saying that each new development doesn't
significantly impact our schools when we obviously have a problem? The solution is not
as easy as developj~g fu,~r.e classrooms either as can pe ~videnced by the rebuilding and
additions to our elem~Q.t~uy schopls in. the r,ecentyears. We.would still need an
adequ~te plan to increase ~pacitY at the schools with th~ development impact fees .
Please cpnsider our cm;nments and views about how this inappropriately located
development affects O\lr Los Gatos town qualizy of life.
Any comments would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Nicole Cushing and Ken Hoffman
16322.Robie Lane, Los Gatos, CA
95032
408 402 3645
Marni Mosel ey
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mami:
Scott Sumner <e inmaligss@gmail.com>
Wednesday, February 10, 2016 1:05 PM
Marni Moseley
Initial Study and Mitigate Negative Declaration for 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard
The public comment period for the proposed Negative Declaration for 16212 LGB expires today at 5:00
pm . According to town.los-gatos.ca.us , written comments should be submitted to the Community Development
Department, and they list your email address for questions. I hope that emailing you before 5:00pm today counts as
having submitted written comments to the Community Development Department; please forward my message to the
appropriate inbox.
I have lived at 16696 Magneson Loop since April 2004 and love our neighborhood (my home is on the same block
as this proposed development). Our environs are slowly turning into dense-pack ho using , as already evidenced by
the 22 homes on a small city block at Laurel Mews , directly across the street. 11 more dense-pack homes at 16212
LGB would only further this trend . As lucrative as this would be for the developer (an d as Laurel Mews surely was),
I am opposed to smashing so many new residences into such a small area.
I know Bay Area land is extremely valuable; I also know that many nearby communities are permitting development
that is very reminiscent of this proposal. I'm hoping that Los Gatos can buck this trend and keep some semblance
of charm and beauty within the Town limits.
I hope to attend the 24-Feb-16 Town Council meeting where this will be discussed .
Many thanks ,
Scott Sumner
16696 Magneson Loop
From: Elke Billingsley [mailto:elke.billingsley@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 4:28 PM
To: Marni Moseley; Council
Subject: "II Vicinato" proposed development
To Whom It May Concern:
As a neighbor in the Kennedy North area, I am disappointed to learn of the high-density housing
proposal at the comer of Shannon Road and Los Gatos Boulevard, currently named "II Vicinato ".
My concerns are several if the development is built as proposed: additional students at
already-full nearby schools, an increase in already-heavy traffic and the scale of the houses
does not fit with the character of the town of Los Gatos.
Van Meter and Blossom Hill Elementary along with Fisher Middle School, are currently at a
peak in the number of students being served. Where will additional students attend? I believe
the number of residents is underestimated for the 11 homes proposed. To say some houses
would have no children in them seems inaccurate as many new residents are moving specifically
to attend local schools.
The intersection is currently very busy with traffic and pedestrian and bicycle use on a daily
basis. The height and setback of the buildings looks imposing on a comer and I think would
greatly impact the traffic flow and safety especially for pedestrians (adults and middle-schoolers
alike). Using a traffic study from before the Laurel Mew project was built is not an accurate
view of the current traffic in the area. The parking lot is currently used heavily between Yoga
Source overflow parking and middle school parents using it as a nearby drop-off and pick-up
point twice a day. It is unclear where these vehicles would go with the loss of this lot. Shannon
Road does not currently allow parking on weekdays, so the new residents in the development
would likely have difficulty fitting their own vehicles within the limited spaces, much less those
of visitors.
After looking at the proposed plans, the scale of the project seems too big for the property. The
Cannon Group's review of the plans seems critical of the current design -in size, style and
space. I would love to see a development proposal that is smaller in scale or perhaps not
residential at all. A retail store or other commercial development might be less of an impact to
the area but provide needed services or goods that we don't currently have nearby.
1 appreciate your work on behalf of the town and hope a modified version can be attained to
please more residents. I realize it is not to the scale of the "North 40" but I think we have had
plenty of "in-fill" on the east side of town in the last few years. ·
Sincerely,
Elke Billingsley
Marni Mosel ey
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
To whom it may concern,
Linda Toeniskoetter < lindatoeniskoetter@gmail.com >
Wednesday, February 10, 2016 5:21 PM
Marni Moseley; remodel@theclublg .com
In support of The Club at Los Gatos remodel
As a resident of the town of Los Gatos and a member ofThe Club at Los Gatos , I would like to officially voice
my support for The Club remodel project moving forward quickly and seamlessly. This health club has been
around for quite some time, and new ownership's desire to update and remodel is welcomed by all. The
renovation will be a beautiful addition to downtown Los Gatos which will have positive impact on the town as a
whole.
Sincerely,
Linda Toeniskoetter
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Ms. Moseley,
sgilmour@gemed.com
Thursday, February 11, 2016 3:37 PM
Marni Moseley
Comments re: "II Vicinato" housing project (Shannon/Los Gatos Blvd .)
I wanted to submit a comment regarding the above referenced proposed housing project as I will be unable to
attend the meeting scheduled for February 24th. While I understand that Los Gatos is required to add housing
units, I don 't believe this is the ideal location for such dense housing. With the townhouses front doors
directly facing Los Gatos Blvd., with no shoulder at that location, exactly where do expect delivery trucks to
park? If they were to stop right there it will create a major hazard as vehicles try to turn right off of Shannon
onto Los Gatos Blvd . With all the school children walking in that area, it is simply not worth the risk.
Thank you for reading my comment,
Susan Gilmour
16460 E. La Chiquita Ave .
Los Gatos
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms. Moesely,
Molly Sauter <sauter_ca@comcast.net>
Thursday, February 11, 2016 4:00 PM
Marni Moseley
Comments on the II Vicinato Development
I am a resident of Los Gatos and would like to provide an observation regarding the accuracy and completeness
of the environmental document prepared for the II Vicinato Development project.
The environmental document states that the development would not have a substantial inverse impact on a
scenic vista because the Town of Los Gatos 2020 General Plan does not identify scenic vistas in or from the
vicinity of the project site.
I disagree with this statement. The General Plan states that "Los Gatos is located at the base of the Santa Cruz
Mountains and is surrounded by view of the these mountains, particularly the Sierra Azul ridge. Major streets
heading north-south in Los Gatos have views of the ridge to the south. The General Plan also states that scenic
resources are an important part of Los Gatos ' identity, the Town sets forth policies that are intended to preserve
and protect them.
Now that the story polls are being erected, it is very clear that the II Vicinato Development will substantially
block the view of the Sierra Azul ridge when driving into town on Los Gatos Blvd (major street heading south
in Los Gatos). I believe the the Town of Los Gatos 2020 General Plan is clearly against any such development
that does not preserve and protect the view of the Sierra Azul ridge, which has been identified in the General
Plan as a scenic vista.
Regards,
Molly Sauter
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tricia Blue <trb@bluesroof.com>
Friday, February 12, 2016 10:19 AM
Marni Moseley
16212 Los Gatos Blvd
I would like to voice my objection to the proposed residential project for this corner. There is already very congested
traffic at that corner which is tricky in its own right. The before school and after school traffic is very bad, both vehicles
and pedestrians. Please do not add to it by putting in more residences on the corner which will add cars trying to get in
and out of the traffic.
Tricia Blue
16456 Englewood Ave
Los Gatos, CA 95032
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Ms. Moseley,
Amir Segev <s_amir_@hotmail.com >
Friday, February 12, 2016 11 :07 AM
Marni Moseley
Planned Development Project at lG Blvd and Shannon
My name is Amir Segev and I am a los Gatos resident. I am writing to you this morning regarding the apparent planned
development at the lot on the Shannon and lG Blvd intersection and would like to take the opportunity to express my
feelings about it. I will say right away that I'm not against development -I am not an extremist that opposes natural
development of our great town and I am not automatically opposing land owners and developers from coming together
in new initiatives. That said-my kids live here . My son rides his bikes every day along Shannon Rd on his way to school,
and this ride is already terribly dangerous . The thought of that junction and the way it will look like when additional
home are added to it, with the traffic and the hazards that come with it makes me cringe. Driving through this junction
every morning on the way to work is already feeling like a scene from a big city traffic jam, which is so frustrating to
everybody. They have just erected posts on the lot to mark things up , which did exactly what it's supposed to do-it
drove home how crowded, out-of-proportion, and misplaced this type of project will be . I'm sure you are well aware
that our schools are exploding and unfortunately the property taxes we are paying are not really making their way back
to them. Adding so many families to this area will only worsen the situation.
We all came to live in los Gatos for the very simple and obvious reason-it offers a good quality of life that affords
spacious and flowing atmosphere. I am absolutely certain that approving such a crowded and elaborate development
will betray everything the town stands for in terms of what it claims to be. I looked at the los Gatos official website and
found a very telling description of the town: "Situated within the largest metropolitan area of northern California and
closely tied to Silicon Valley, Los Gatos con tinues to retain its small town image ... ". 1 hope you will agree with me that
approving a plan to crowd 11 units into a lot that is smaller than one acre is an ultimate example for turning away from the town's
own view of itself and betrays the best interests of existing resident s.
M s. Moseley-your role carries a great responsibility and I'm sure you feel that weight on your shoulders. I'm also sure it's hard to
be between a rock and a hard place when development and potential taxes and revenue collide with the need to maintain the
town's spirit and quality of living. I hope you and your team will have the best interests of your neighbors and make sure Lo s Gatos is
not changing while moving forward.
Thank you for your consideration, I hope you will do the right thing,
Best Regards,
Amir Segev
(415) 515-6657
1
From : Jessica Richter [mailto :jessbri cht@gm ai l.com ]
Sent : Friday, February 12, 2016 3 :33 PM
To : Planning
Subject: Proposed Development: II Vicinato" 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard
on the corner of Shannon Road
Dear Planning Commission,
I am a Los Gatos resident and live on the corner of Hilow Court and Shannon Rd , at 101 Hi low Court. I
wholeheartedly object to the proposed development "II Vicinito" at 16212 Los Gatos Blvd. I ag ree with
the concerns and objections voiced by many on the NextDoor Website for this neighborhood:
1. We do NOT need another high density housing development literally across the street from Laurel
Mews (Laurel Too-Ciose-to-Yous).
2 . The current plan is overly dense , unattractive, provides inadequate green space from the street to
the structures, and limits visibility.
* Height of proposed plan is too high
*only one below market "home" does not justify this development!
2. We do NOT want the traffic, congestion, and extra pressure on our
already crowded schools that even more high density residential
housing will create
3 . It is not fair to concentrate so much of this kind of housing between Shannon and Kennedy Rd. There
are already two similar developments on this corridor. That is enough!
4. Increased traffic on LG Blvd increases cut through traffic in neighborhoods. Do residents want more
of that?.
5 . ANY development on that corner MUST be accompanied by street improvements at the intersection
and a clearly marked bike lane along Shannon Rd . The intersection is not bike friendly-it is bike
dangerous. Anyone making any decisions about this intersection should bike through it at 8 :00a.m . and
2:45pm.
I urge that this area should be zoned for a quiet commercial building such as a law office that minimizes
impact on traffic and schools. Or, less dense housing for seniors. It is the wrong corner for dense family
housing and should not be rezoned as residential.
I hope to make the planning meeting 2/24 but if I am unable, this letter will show the extent of my
objection to this project. I know I am not alone .
Best Regards,
Jessica Richter
From : Cathleen Bannon [mailto :cathleen murray@yahoo .com]
Sent : Friday, February 12, 2016 3 :47 PM
To : Council
Cc : Grant Bannon
Subject : Los Gatos Blvd & Shannon development
As a neighbor and Van Meter, I am extremely concern with the current development going through
approvals at the corner of Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon. We are already dealing with tremendous
congestion on LG Blvd and at VM school , with another 11 homes densely packed into that lot, the town
would only be increasing the problem rather than so lving. At most there should be only 5 or 6 homes
that are single story, with front lawns to help blend into the neighborhood and match other homes on
the Blvd . we need LG Blvd to be more like the walkable neighborhood it is vs high density
thoroughfare. Our schools currently have great reputation that makes LG a highly coveted town ... with
increasing the number of homes and number of students at our schools, this will change. We MUST
slow down development and build another school in town.
Please listen to your residents NOT the developers. Best Cathleen Bannon
16828 Kennedy Rd
415-819-1238
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
From: Kristin Zanni [ma ilto :kzanni @live.c om]
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2016 4:23 PM
To: Planning
Su bject: Comments re: II Vicinato Planning Development
Hello,
I live in the town of Los Gatos on Robie Lane, just off of Shannon Road and near Los Gatos
Boulevard .
I recently became aware of the proposed planning development called II Vicinato, which is
proposed to be located at 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard in Los Gatos .
This week, I have reviewed the related documents on the town's website and have watched the
story poles being erected, which continues today.
I am adamantly opposed to this housing development.
Having lived on Rob i e Lane since 2009, I am familiar with the traffic patterns and the overall
feel of the neighborhood.
I cannot support this housing development for a number of reasons, that I would appreciate
taken under consideration .
1. The look and congestion of the proposed 11 units does not fit with the neighborhood, and
certainly not Los Gatos Boulevard .
2 . The impact on traffic would be detrimental to this neighborhood . This is not just due to the
addition of 11 homes but due to shutting off access to and from the Boulevard . This parking lot
is used for Yoga Source parking, which is already bursting at the seams .
3 . Parking on sides streets would increase exponentially (due to overflow Yoga Source parking
and parking from the newly opened Orange Theory). This is a safety is sue to the ch i ldren who
live near the proposed II Vicinato and to the junior high children who walk to and from school.
This is a very serious matter.
4. The schools cannot accommodate an increase in the number of students that would arrive
due to the proposed development. I do not believe the estimated 8 -12 additional students is
reasonable or accurate. Understandably so , families are doing whatever they can to get into the
reputable Los Gatos schools . I believe each of these 11 homes would have school age children .
Overall, I do not believe thi s is the location for 1 1 homes. This neighborhood recently absorbed
the impact of 22 new homes at Laurel Mews on Los Gatos Boulevard and Roberts Road , which
is just across the street from the proposed II Vicinato. This is not the location or neighborhood
to pile on another 11 homes, in addition to two flourishing exercise facilities.
I hope you take my comments under consideration in denying the application to build any new
homes on this acre. The existing businesses, Yoga Source and Artisan Wine, are proving to be
good neighbors and serving the community to the happiness of our residents.
Thank you for your time.
Kristin Zanni
M arni M ose ley
Fr om:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hi Marni ,
Mark Dav ies <ma rk_da vies_8@ yah oo.com >
Frida y, Februa ry 12, 2016 4:23 PM
Marni Moseley
II Vicinato
I am a Blossom Hill and Fisher parent and a Los Gatos resident. We live on Shady View Ln. The
traffic for us leaving Shannon , and the amount of activity involving my son when he has to cross Los
Gatos Blvd where it intersects with Shannon Rd have both grown substantially s ince the new homes
were built off of Roberts Rd .
I have grave concerns about allowing so many new homes to be built at that same
intersection. There are real safety concerns here as a lot of Fisher students ride their bikes,
skateboards and walk down Shannon to get to school. A purposeful effort to increase the complexity
of that intersection with so many homes seems ill advised .
I have not even mentioned how c rowded the eleme ntary and mi d dle sc hoo ls have become.
Please do not move forward with this housing project II Vicinato .
Sincerely ,
Ma rk Davies
1
From: Tessa Arguijo [mallto:tessaarguijo@gmail.com]
Sent : Friday, February 12, 2016 4:26 PM
To: Council; Marcia Jensen; BSpector; Steven Leonardis; Marico Sayoc; Rob Rennie
Subject: Proposed II Vicinato subdivision
Dear Los Gatos City Council Members-I'm writing to express my objections to the proposed 11 home
subdivision at the Artisan Wine Depot on the corner of Shannon and Los Gatos Blvd . called "II Vicinato". I
know you've heard it all before about the impact that these high density housing developments are
having on the traffic, the schools, and the general quality of life in Los Gatos -so why do these
developments keep getting approved? Haven't enough of us spoken up about the issue? Does every
square inch of Los Gatos need to be developed? You all live in this town-aren't these things bothering
YOU too? This is a particularly bad site for more development, but you all know that. Please shut it
down!
Thank you,
Tessa Arguijo
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kay Maurer <kayathome@yahoo.com>
Friday, February 12, 2016 8:27 PM
Marni Moseley
housing proposed at corner of Shannon and Los Gatos Blvd
I am completely dumbfounded that the city would even consider allowing another group of homes to
be built on small lots on this commercial location. We do not need more housing . We need
construction that will enhance the town, not pack it with more people and cars . Whatever could be
the positive outcome from such a project?
I am totally against having this lot converted to residential zoning, especially multiple homes on such
a small lot. What is the planning department thinking. Please stop this project for the good of the
town and people already living and working here.
Kay Maurer
112 Stacia St
Los Gatos, ca
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms. Mosley,
Mary Patterson < mmpmitzi@comcast.net >
Friday, February 12, 2016 9:40 PM
Marni Moseley
Artisan Project
The eleven house project proposed on Los Gatos Blvd . is too tall, too dense, will further impact our schools and will
add to the traffic disaster that already exits on Los Gatos Blvd. Please decline approval!!!
Thank you,
M. Patterson
119 Vista Del Campo
Los Gatos
Sent from my iPad
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
K Pool <kirby_pool@yahoo.com >
Friday, February 12, 2016 10:36 PM
Marni Moseley
Proposed development at Shannon and Los Gatos blvd -opposed
I have heard about the 11 unit development proposal for this property and I am opposed to it on the grounds that is too
high of a density and it will negatively impact the character of the neighborhood. I understand that studies were
submitted to the contrary, but with all of the new high density housing already in that area (Laurel Mews And bluebird
lane), I believe the dust has not yet settled enough to get valid data on new traffic patterns and the combined impact.
And regardless of any study results, that kind of density project just does not fit my ideal of what Los Gatos should
support. Please pass my no vote along to the powers that be-since I likely will not be able to attend the commission
meeting on this.
I understand the current building on that site was designed to be a car showroom and it is out of place because of the
enormous setbacks all around the building. Perhaps for a lower cost, it could be moved to reduce the setbacks and
another building or two could be built to share the lot. Personally, I think there is room for a nice furniture store or
design center ... Something high-end would be appreciated .
Best regards, Kirby Pool
16849 Placer Oaks Rd
Phone : 408-218-3221
Sent from my iPad
1
From: K Pool [mailto:kirby pool@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2016 10:48 PM
To: Planning
Subject: New Dense Housing planned for corner LG Blvd and Shannon Rd -I'm opposed!
Hello Los Gatos Planning Commission,
I have heard about the 11 unit development proposal for this property and, as a neighbor, I am
opposed to it on the grounds that it is too high of a density and it will negatively impact the
character of the neighborhood. I understand that studies were submitted to the contrary, but with
all of the new high density housing already in that area (Laurel Mews And Bluebird lane), I
believe the dust has not yet settled enough to get valid data on new traffic patterns and the
combined impact. And regardless of any study results, that kind of density project just does not
fit my ideal of what Los Gatos should support. Please pass my no vote along to the powers that
be-since I likely will not be able to attend the commission meeting on this .
I understand the current building on that site was designed to be a car showroom and it is out of
place because of the enormous setbacks all around the building. Perhaps for a lower cost, it could
be moved to reduce the setbacks and another building or two could be built to share the
lot. Personally, I think there is room for a nice furniture store or design center ... Something
high-end would be appreciated.
Best regards, Kirby Pool
16849 Placer Oaks Rd
Phone: 408-218-3221
Sent from my iPad
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc :
Subject:
Dear Los Gatos leaders,
harry motro <harrymotro@gmail.com >
Friday, February 12, 2016 11:05 PM
BSpector; Planning ; Marni Mose ley; Town Manager
ICE Carol Motro; Harry Motro
Stop II Vicinato
My wife and I live at 17161 Pine Ave in Los Gatos, very close to "II Vicinato", the new
residential development being proposed for the corner of LG Blvd and Shannon Rd. We
have examined the plans in detail and have viewed the story poles. In our opinion, the
proposed structure is excessively massive, too close to the street (insufficient setbacks),
and does not fit with the feel of the surrounding homes and structures.
Also, traffic on LG Blvd is already unbearable, such that exiting Pine Ave is very difficult.
Adding additional cars from this development will severely compound this problem .
We urge you to NOT let this move forward .
Sincerely,
Harry and Carol Motro
Mobile: +1 408 823 2822 ::: www.harrvmotro.com
1
On Feb 13, 2016, at 9:39AM, Jeff King <kingjeff2@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Marico,
I can't understand that this is the density we want to allow in our neighborhood. What study says that
this is good for Los Gatos, schools, traffic, parking, etc? That corner is a nightmare already.
Does the town have any authority to stop this? What would have to happen to decrease the
density? How do make this illegal?
Thanks for any insight,
Jeff and Kathy
Marni M ose l ey
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
M s. Moseley,
James Lyon <jim@lyonfamily.tv >
Saturday, February 13, 2016 12:19 PM
Marni Moseley
Kathy Romero
16212 Los Gatos Boulevard
I apologize for my late submission of written comments, but please do your best to include them in your staff report. My
interest in the project is based on my family ownership in a single family home across the street on Shannon Road .
As a former Planning Commissi oner for the Town, I find that this project is completely out of character with the land use of
the General Plan . The conversion of retail to residential is mis-use of the PO process. The area remains a vibrant retail and
commercial section of the Boulevard. To the south of Shannon is commercial space up to Calvary Church . And the the north
of the site is mixed use . Across the street is also retail. The introduction of more residential is not in character the the
surrounding land use .
The applicant is disingenuous in their narrat ive, "We anticipate single and married executives without children, as well as
young active "empty nesters" will find the Lu xury Brownstone concept attractive". The mere fact that they are proposing
units with more than 2,100 sqft. living space indicates they are targeting families-not execs or empty nesters. Thi s row
house design is completely inappropriate for the Boulevard with soaring 35' flat facade s over street grade, no separation
between buildings and minimal 5' front setback. Further, the proposed single family homes in the rear of the project are out
of character with the surrounding residences on Shannon -they are too big and have too small a set ba ck from the street or
adj~cent properties. The COG report captures the essence of the design flaws.
I also find the basi s of the traffic study flawed . The use of the SANDAG manual for trip general for an auto dealer is not an
appropriate reference. Ever since the site was the Dodge dealership, it has always been an overflow site for the opposite
dealerships. The site has never been a primary auto dealership that can be comparable to the references in the SANDAG
manual. The addition of 11 homes se verely complicates an already challenging traffic situation. There are a great number of
children that use the bike lane to school daily -this use is in direct conflict with the 11 homes dumping traffic onto Shannon
from a single driveway at peak hours. Further, the re-striping proposed results in the elimination of the parking strip in front
of my property, this putting an active traffic lane against the curb. It is already difficult for the residents to pull out with the
parking strip in place-it would be impossible with an active traffic lane.
The addition of 11 more homes also will add more over-crowding to an already bad situation in the Los Gatos schools . While I
know this is not within the prevue of the Planning Department, it is a relevant topic when looking at land use conversion . I
would expect the Planning Commission and Town Council to address this conce rn.
While the project applicant references laurel Mews as a precedent, 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard needs to stand on its own
merits. It does not. The project as proposed is the wrong land use, the density is too high and out of character with its
surroundings. I reco mmend that the Planning Commiss ion and the Town Council deny the application and se nd the applicant
back to the drawing board .
Regards,
Jim Lyon
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Hi Marni,
ppdmf@yahoo.com
Saturday, February 13, 2016 4:45 AM
Marni Moseley
Regarding the 11+ homes project on Los Gatos Blvd , what the hell are they th inking! Do they have any brains to realize
how bad the congestion is in that area, especially during the morning and late afternoon and even the weekends . What
are their guidelines to decide enough is enough for ridiculous traffic congest ion. My vote and well as many others is to
not even consider building homes there or for any new construction homes in that area . The streets do not allow for the
added traffic. I thought Los Gatos planning department had more intelligence than to approve this kind of development.
How much more are they going to cram into Los Gatos before the ruin the whole area!!!! They are coming from a greedy
way of thinking. They sneaky in their approach by not announcing it publicly!!! Why not have all the info on a giant
board explaining the new project plan including renderings and post it in the parking lot w ith contact info anyone's to
write i n their comments on what they think about the project. I'm sure they will be overwhelmed w ith negative
responses . This town has become something like Los Angeles congested traffic. Way to go plann ing group of Los Gatos!
Sent from my iPhone
1
M arni Mose ley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Follow Up Flag:
Fl ag Status:
to whom it may concern,
Albr ight Karla M. <kmalbright @gmail.com >
Sunday, February 14, 2016 2:08 PM
Council
hous ing at Artisan W ine depot
Follow up
Flagged
I am concerned about the increase of housing un its having been built over the last few years with the associa t ed
significantly increased traffic and our schools busting at the seams . The lot that currently houses the Artisan Wine De pot
has an awkward intersection and increasing traffic there will make matters worse .
I live up Kennedy road.
Friday at 3:50pm I tried to leave Kennedy road to cross over Los Gatos Blvd onto Caldwell. I was the 5th car in lin e and
had to wait for THREE light cycles . There was so much traffic on LG Blvd coup led with selfish drivers that whe n the LG
Blvd light turned red the drivers cont inued to scoot into the intersection 1-2 past the limit of the intersection such that
when my light got green only one car managed to make a left hand turn. Increased traffic makes everyone more selfish
and there is a resultant breakdown in the system . I was nearly boxed out of progressi ng across the street when the light
allowed me to proceed.
Additionally it looks to me like the Artisan Wine Depot lot is a commercial lot. How is it being allowed to be zoned as
residential?
It looks like short term gains wins out over long term reasonablene ss .
Please reconsider your decision .
Karla Albright
1
From: Dena Crawford [mailto:dnadance@earthlink .net]
Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 4:54PM
To: Planning
Cc: rod@ardbeg.net
Subject: Corner housing project LG Blvd & Shannon
Dear Planning Commission,
We are not in favor ofthe new housing on comer ofLG Blvd and Shannon Road. The schools
can not hold more students. All are at capacity. Please do not approve more housing when
already our schools don't get more money for adding pupils. It stretches the pot that we have and
we already receive less money per pupil than all other school districts in Santa Clara
County. Further, traffic will be awful on this comer, and the traffic is already awful getting
anywhere past this intersection heading toward Fisher and LGHS .
Sincerely,
Dena Crawford, 15534 Longwood Drive
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Barnaby James <bajames@gmail.com>
Sunday, February 14, 2016 8:25 PM
Marni Moseley; Linda Linda
II Vincanto MND
Hi I am a Los Gatos Resident and am reviewing the II Yin canto MND in advance of the planning commission
meeting. The design review by the Cannon group seemed to highlight numerous issues with the design.
However the proposed design doesn't seem to have been modified to reflect this feedback and in the MND there
is the following mitigation:
Mitigation Measure AES-1. Prior to approval of the Planned Development, the applicant shall revise the
project plans to comply with the Town 's Residential Design Guidelines and General Plan goals and policies as
noted in the design review comments prepared by Canon Design Group. Revised project plans will be subject to
the Town's design review process.
When in the process would ll Vincanto provide a mitigation? I worry that current story poles doesn't reflect the
reality of the project and I found the design review highlighted a lot of similar concerns that I have with the
project-namely that "Brownstown" units (as the developer refers to them) along Los Gatos Blvd doesn't match
the rest of the area, the buildings are too high for residential units with no setback and no gap between the units.
Thanks!
Barnaby James
1
From: Kathleen Barry [mailto :kathleenabarry7@yahoo .com]
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 9:59 AM
To: Planning
Subject: Corner of Shannon and LG Blvd (II Vicinato)
Attn : Planning Department
I have been born and raised in Los Gatos . I have watched the houses take over the
orchards I played in as a child (I even worked as an intern at the planning commission as
my first job in high school). I have lived here and seen the town change from little local
mom and pop shops (that you wanted to shop at), to larger cha i n stores. I can no longe r
just "run downtown" and pick something up because with all the new housing , there is no
parking and no quick trip downtown. Nor in the small town I grew up in, do I want to go
downtown and park in some high rise parking garage like at Santana Row . I live here. Not
there. If I wanted that, I would move there.
I live in Blossom Hill Manor and it can take me at least 20 minutes to get downtown-and
that depends on which road you take. If you try going downtown around 3-Spm -forget
it. Los Gatos Boulevard is bumper to bumper, as is University and North Santa Cruz
Avenue . It is GRIDLOCK. Are you at your desks or driving in i t at these hours or in the am
when school is in session?
How do you possibly think there can be room for any more houses (not to mention on one
of the busiest street corners in town (as people are going to Fisher, Van Meter, Los Gatos
High and Blossom Hill School the other direction). It's a recipe for disaster. Not to mention
the North 40. Have you tried getti ng down to Hwy 85 on Los Gatos Boulevard (at various
times during the day). Not to mention adding more kids to the schools that are already
crowded . How is any of this a good idea? I just don 't see it.
I'm not sure what is driving the build, build, build mentality. But, it is ruining our town. I
know none of my neighbors are ex cited about either the North 40 or II Vivinato (The
Friendly Neighborhood). Our neighborhood is NOT feeling friendly about the new addition
and problems it poses .
Sincerely,
Kathleen Barry
948 Cherrystone Drive
Los Gatos, CA 95032
From: Siegel, Jeffrey [mailto:jeffrey.siegel@us .panasonic .com]
Sent : Friday, February 12, 2016 4 :15PM
To : Marni Moseley; Laurel Prevetti; BSpector; Town Manager
Cc : planning@losgatos.ca.gov; Jes sica Richter
Subject: Re: Proposed Development: II Vicinato" 16212 Los Gatos Boulevard on the corner of Shannon
Road
I second Ms. Richter's assessment below.
The town of LG has a dismal track record in allowing problematic high-density housing situations. This is
not news to anyone.
This new housing proposal should be part of the North40 section of Los Gatos , not the existing
residential area for all the reasons noted below.
Lauren -please respond with what we can expect from the town planning department.
In the process of trying to solve a state mandated housing factor, you are created a bigger one for the
town of Los Gatos . Not a great legacy to create.
Jeffrey
From: d.madsen@nm .com [mailto :d.madsen@nm.com]
Sent : Monday, February 15, 2016 5:03 PM
To : Planning
Subject: 11 houses at Shannon and LG Blvd
We don't need 11 more houses in this already h ighly congested area . The new houses near green hills
preschool a few years ago plus everything else is incredibly tough to navigate especially during school
hours. Please consider the impact on our wonderful community by "jamming" more houses in. And the
impact on our already highly impacted schools . We don't need to stretch these limited resources any
further. Thank you
Dan Madsen
4086916807
M arni M ose ley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear sirs,
Johane s Swenberg <j o hanes_swenberg @yahoo.co m >
Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:46 AM
Marn i Moseley; Planning
Planning input
I am writing in opposition to the current planned development for the site at the corner of Shannon and Los Gatos Blvd .
I feel the plan to allow 11 homes is too crowded for a one acre lot.
Thank you
Johanes swenberg
1
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
RECEIVED
FEB 1 6 2016
d h f b · d '!;OWN O F LOS GATO Stan on t e corner o Ro erts R . and L.G. Blvd. anq:,L ANNIN G o 1 v 151 0 ~
look at the view of the hills. Then imagine the view
once these two story structures are built. The view is
gone!!!
Including this site, there will be three similar home
developments within a four-block area on Los Gatos
Blvd. Not one of these is suitable for the gateway to Los
Gatos and its residential neighborhoods.
This Shannon site plan is a prime example of a
developer summiting plans that in no way fit into our
unique Los Gatos setting. The structures block
whatever view of the hills we have left and their
closeness to the sidewalk is imposing to say the least.
This project is in need of re-configuring with homes
located on alternate locations on the lot. This alone
would preserve the view of the hills.
You do not have to be reminded that your
responsibility is to the residents and not the developer.
Don't let residents down on this. Help in keeping Los
Gatos Beautiful. Turn this back to the developer and
see to it that they do not simply mirror the two other
sites. Enough is enough!! One story homes are clearly
an option and should be looked into. To accept this plan
is to downgrade the appeal of our unique Town.
Other~ will definitely w .eigh in pp tbe other crucial
issue: TRAFFIC. Both issues should be enough for the
Planning Commission to stand up for the residents and
deny the current p lan for this project.
Robb and Nancy Walker
16791 Lorna St.
Los Gatos
From: TRICIA L. CAPRI [mailto:tricia cap ri @yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 2 :12 PM
To: Council
Cc: TRICIA L. CAPRI
Subject: ANOTHER development?
Los Gatos Council -
I'm astounded to hear that yet another development (11 houses?) will be
built on Los Gatos Blvd in an already crowded area!
My home is on LG Blvd and can barely get out of my driveway as it is. This
is ridiculous!! I just learned about this development and saw the drawings.
Those homes are WAY too large for that space and should be single story at
the maximum! There are no yards or parking area either!
There are at least twice as many homes planned for that space than should
be allowed .
What is the plan for parking? I find it infuriating that I cannot park in front
of my own home due to the large number of houses that were broken up
into multiple (4 or more) units per building. There doesn't seem to be much
monitoring of this situation, either. Unfortunately, I can't get to town
meetings to voice my opinion because I work too late ... but this is why we
vote for you all --to PROTECT our town from these types of
overdevelopment.
Why on Earth are you all allowing a development of this size in that
tiny location??
Anxiously awaiting your response,
Tricia Capri
Homeowner
Los Gatos Blvd .
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mary < maryl1998413@aol.com >
Tuesday, February 16, 2016 6:08 PM
Marn i Moseley
Object to new development on Shannon I 1gb
I personally object to another commercial lot in our town converting to residential ---at all.
1) w_e need to keep the few remaining commercial sites for restaurants etc .... to support the population growth from
the huge quantity of additional houses recently added and currently congesting LGB .
2) New homes will negatively affect the already impacted schools.
3) New homes (and probably 2 cars per house) will negatively impact traffic at that corner ... which is already too
congested and very dangerous.
4). The story poles do tell a story ... Anything built that tall and that close to LGB will block views .
Los Gatos Boulevard is becoming a tunnel!
Thank you,
Mary
Sent from my iPhone
1
Marn i M ose ley
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Terry McBriarty <tmcbriarty@gmail.com >
Tuesday, February 16, 2016 6:09 PM
Marni Moseley
tmcbriarty.l560f@m.evernote.com Evernote Upload
Story Poles at Los Gatos Blvd -Artisan Wine Depot LG Blvd.
I am writing to express my concern regarding the project planned by the developer indicated by the story poles present
at the Artisan Wine depot. First off I fine the proposed density to be totally absurd and inappropriate for our town. We
cannot sustain this type of density and continuing to allow it at such proximity to our school is putting children in
danger. I am thankful that no one has been seriously injured or killed but I see close calls on a daily basis as I take my
son to school or pick him up. To have two story buildings pressed up aga inst the sidewalk as if Los Gatos is some kind of
city is totally absurd and if this were approved would set yet another frightening precedent. It is bad enough to think
about the kinds of things that are going to be build in the North 40 and the kind of pressure that building is going to put
on the towns infrastructure we simply cannot take 11 homes on that tiny little corner. Parents and children park in that
parking lot. People from Orange Theory park in that parking lot. People from Yoga Source park in that parking lot.
construction in and of itself will be a danger to students who need to cross the street several times a day to and from
Fisher Middle School , Van Meter, Los Gatos High School and some kids going to Blossom Hill. There is a constant flow of
pedestrians and to leave only a sliver of sidewalk, which would of course be taking out completely during the course of
construction along with several lanes of traffic as is always the case -bringing traffic and all of our lives to a standstill -
why can't they cut into their profits and do the work outside of rush hour at night? I would love to see something for
youth there. Another restaurant. Was it the stupid town plan that said we wanted houses there? No one wants houses
there ! That's just stupid! The kids are all around that place-give them some place to go and hang out and buy stuff
from! Instead of turning every car dealership into housing which makes our school situation worse why don't we turn it
into some kind of sales tax generator and make it better? This plan sucks. If the developer insists on build ing more
housing-which we need like we need a hole in our head then he can build 4 houses-that is how much would nicely fit
on that lot -why can he stick so many houses on there? Because he is a developer? Why? It's ugly. It's dangerous . It's
wrong for our town. It's wrong for that location . No. No. No .
Thanks
Terry McBriarty
15075 Garden Hill Drive
los Gatos CA 95032
1
Dear Planning Commissioners:
I am concerned that I will not be able to get to the February 24 meeting {brand new grandchi ld), so am
submitting the remarks I planned to make.
Sincerely,
Barbara Dodson , 239 Marchmont Drive, Los Gatos
PLANNED TALK
Perhaps you know the story of The Mitten. One cold snowy day, a boy loses one of his mittens in the
forest. A mole burrows into the mitten to get warm. Then a rabbit hops in to get warm. Next a frog
jumps in. Soon an owl and a mouse and a cricket move in, all because the mitten is such a nice cozy
place . But the mitten is getting a little crowded . Finally an ant tries to move in. And what happens? The
mitten splits apart, dumping all the animals out into the cold snow.
Is our town becoming like the mitten? Bit by bit, new developments add to overcrowding on our streets
and in our schools. The II Vicinato project supposedly will bring roughly 100 new car trips to our streets.
But this is just part of the drip, drip, drip of development that is ruining our small town.
I would like to see our Town follow the rules of its own code. Either this site should be used for homes
on lots no smaller than 8,000 sq . ft . that occupy no more than 40% of t hat space, or the site should
continue to be a commercial zone . I object to the continued used of Planning Development Overlay
zones to create too-dense housing. According to the General Plan , "The PD overlay zone is intended to
ensure orderly planning and quality design that will be in harmony with the exi sting or potential
development of the surrounding neighborhood."
We do not see good planning in this project. There is not adequate frontage o n Lo s Gatos Boulevard
with the town homes specified at no more than 7 feet from the sidewalk. The townhomes and other
homes are bulky and massive, making them completely incompatible with the surrounding
neighborhood. With their bulk and lack of frontage, these homes are not what is expect ed in a small
town and will visually degrade our community.
With j ust 8 guest spaces, there is not enough parking. Suppose just three residents hold Superbowl
parties, and each invites 4 friends. That already gives us 12 guest cars . And suppose two teenage
residents already use the parking spots for the third family car on a re gular basis . With this insufficient
amount of parking, people searching for parking will add to traffic at an already difficult intersection.
I hope you will seriously con sider the issues and concerns the Cannon Design Group raised. Staff had thi s
study done, and , among others, it mentions these problems with the project : limited landscape buffer to
bu sy streets; lack of separat ion between units; and lack of integration among units and with the
neighborhood . The report concludes that the concept and design of the project are of great concern.
I hope that you will reject this project.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
February 16,2016
Planning Commission
110 E . Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Dear Members of the Planning Commission:
I am opposed to the 11 Vicinato development and hope that you will vote against it.
PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED BY THE CANNON DESIGN GROUP AND NOT
MITIGATED BY THE DEVELOPER. Many of the problems with the development are
described in the review by the Cannon Design Group from August 2014. The developer does not
appear to have addressed any of these problems. Among other issues that the review raises, the
development has setbacks that are very small; has townhouse units that are repetitive and
degrade the look of our Town along a major street; has a comer unit that is particularly bulky in
design and contains elements that are "quite foreign to the Town of Los Gatos"; has detached
homes that are considerably bulkier and larger in scale than nearby homes; and lacks visual
integration as a total planned community. The development diminishes rather than adds to our
neighborhood and community.
ABUSE OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE. It seems that, of late ,
developers have been abusing the Planned Development Overlay Zone, using it as an excuse to
create housing that is too dense for our Town. You should not permit this to continue. I would
like to live in a town that follows its own code and Town Plan. As I'm sure you know, the Town
Code states that single family residences should occupy no more than 40% of their lot. The
minimum zoning for a single family residence is 8,000 sq. ft. Based on this , the 11 Vicinato lot
should contain no more than 4-5 homes.
Since these are single-family residences, what is the justification for not using the Town Code
requirements for single-family residential zones?
11 Vicinato certainly does not conform to what is described in the General Plan. I have added my
own emphases below.
LU-16 General Plan. Planned Development (PD) Overlay Zone.
The PD overlay zone is intended to e ns ure orderly planning and quality d esign that will
be in harmony with th e existing or potential d evelopment of th e surrounding
ne ighborhood. The Planned Development Overlay is a specially tailored development
plan and ordinance which designates the zoning regulations for the accompanying
project, sets specific development standards, and ensures that zoning and the General
Plan are consistent. Commercial, residential or industrial property or a mixture of these
uses may be considered for a Planned Development Overlay.
I agree with the Cannon Des ign Group that II Vicinato is NOT "in harmony with the existing
or potential development of the surrounding neighborhood." It certainly does not represe nt
"quality design," particularly in regard to the townhouses. These townhouses hide the view
of the hills and do not blend in any way with the surrounding neighborhoods.
OTHER VIOLATIONS OF THE TOWN PLAN. II Vicinato also violates additional
policies form the Town Plan.
Policy LU-6.4. Prohibit uses that may lead to the deterioration of residential
neighborhoods, or adversely impact the public safety or the residential character of a
residential neighborhood .
This development, with its la c k of adequate setbacks, will c rea te safety hazards in an
area used by children as they walk or bike to school. It will add to traffic proble ms at an
already hazardous intersection.
Policy LU-6.5. The type , density, and intensity of new land use shall be consistent with
that of the immediate neighborhood .
As noted by the Cannon D esign Group, the development has units that are significantly
taller than any nearby units and, thus, are out of sync with the look of the n eighborhood.
Th e townhome idea do es not match the look of nearby homes in any way and creates an
unattractive and bulky mass along a major Los Gatos street. The intensity ofuse--11
home on less than an acre-is out of sync with the Town Code .
INSUFFICIENT SETBACKS . The lack of sufficient setbacks at II Vicinato is a major
problem. They add to the unsightliness of the townhomes and create an uncomfortable walking
area in front of these townhomes. I believe the Town should follow its own Town Code
particularly in regard to setbacks. The minimum front yard for a single-family home is 25 feet;
minimum side yard is 8 feet ; and minimum rear yard is 20 feet. The minimum frontage for a cul-
de-sac is 30 feet and the minimum width is 60 feet.
TRAFFIC AND PARKING. 11 Vicinato is at a very busy comer. During morning and
afternoon school dropoff and pickup periods, serious congestion and queuing occurs. The
morning dropoff also coincides with the morning commute, making this particular
intersection a nightmare. Children are walking and biking to schools in an area of heavy and
dangerous traffic, made all the more dangerous by the narrowing of Los Gatos Boulevard
nearby and the jogging of the roadway to cross from Shannon to Roberts Road. The
development itself supposedly will generate roughly 100 car trips, which does not seem like
a lot. But coupled with the lack of setbacks, I believe this additional traffic will create
problems , particularly during peak periods.
The project also has insufficient parking. If just three home owners invite three friends to
their homes at the same times, all eight parking spots will be used. And suppose a teenager
who lives in the development needs to use a parking space for his/her third family vehicle on
a permanent basis. This lack of parking, coupled with the fact that Orange Theory and Yoga
Source patrons will no longer be able to use the lot , will just add to the traffic as people circle
looking for places to leave their cars.
PROBABLE SCHOOL IMP ACT. The MND claims that the development will generate no
more than 13 new schoolchildren. Since the homes are all four or five bedrooms , I highly
doubt that this is accurate. Coupled with the fact that previous estimates of how many
schoolchildren will come from Laurel Mews and Blueberry Lane were off by roughly 100%,
I think you should assume that at least 22-28 new school spots will be required to
accommodate the residents of II Vicinato. This is the equivalent of a new classroom. The
likelihood of many new students living in this 11-residence development points to the need
to reduce the density of the development-to a more reasonable 4 or 5 homes or to no homes
at all but rather a commercial development.
BLOCKING THE IDLLS. Finally, the development-with some buildings reaching as
high as the maximum allowable 30 feet-blocks the view of our hills from Los Gatos
Boulevard. Hill views are part of what makes living in Los Gatos a pleasure. Why would you
allow a development to block them?
I encourage you to reject this project.
Sincerely,
Barbara Dodson
239 Marchmont Drive, Los Gatos
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kay Maurer <kayathome@yahoo.com>
Tuesday, February 16, 2016 9:54 PM
Marni Moseley
11 home project on corner of Shannon and LG Blvd
Please do not consider changing zoning on this property from commercial to SF or PD. We have
enough housing in the area with the 300 plus homes being considered at the north end of the
town. The owner is asking for the change to zoning so they can maximize their profit on a lot that is
not even 1 acre. At the most, two homes should be allowed if any.
We do need additional businesses that enrich the lives of those who live here, not more people, cars,
pollution, crowded classrooms and noise.
Please take this as a vote of NO to both aspects of this development. I have lived here for over 30
years and am very sad to see the town I love changed into a dense housing area with more traffic
than ever, more pollution, and greedy developers getting their way at the expense of the residents .
Sincerely,
Kay Maurer
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
sgies1217@aol.com
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 8:40AM
Marni Moseley
II Vicinato Project
I have lived on Magneson Loop for 46 years. I would like to see residential on the corner of Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon
Road, but am opposed to the current proposed project there for many reasons:
Too much additional traffic at an already impacted corner. .. go by here in the morning or the afternoon when school is in
session .
The individual units are excessive in size square foot wise . What happened to the concept of minimal living space?
The density is too high ... too many houses for less than an acre of land .
Too imposing in size for the corner and for the two houses on Magneson Loop to which it backs up ... less heighth .
The entry road is too close to the corner. If the density were less , it would be possible to put it further away from Los
Gatos Blvd and still have fire truck access .
I hope that the voice of the community will be heard. In the past the town has been very open to listening to us. I hope
that is true in this case.
Sincerely,
Sharon Gies
16720 Magneson Loop
Los Gatos, CA 95032
February 17, 2016
1
From : Jeannie_hair [mailto:je annie ha ir@yahoo .com]
Sent : Wednesday, February 17, 2016 6:37AM
To : Planning
Subject : 16212 Los Gatos Blvd
NO NO NO
I'm a resident of Magneson Loop .
The proposed clump of homes has no place on the busy corner. It is too much building for the site
(come on), will increase the already congested area , and does not have any kind of harmony with Los
Gatos architecture .
Please reconsider.
Jeann ie Ellis
16630 Magneson loop
los Gatos, Ca 95032
From: Lydia Norcia [mailto:lmnorcia@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 8:57PM
To: Planning
Subject: Subject -Wine Depot Project and North 40 Project
To Whom it May Concern . Due to a work conflict we were unable to
get to the meeting at the Town Hall today .
Please be advised that the planned development for the former
Wine Depot lot on Los Gatos Blvd is not acceptable. In Addition,
we do not think it is in line with the goal to preserve the
"TOWN" of Los Gatos .
Los Gatos is a "Town" not a City. The East Los Gatos area has
been overwhelmed by over development with too many single family
houses, town homes and large commercial buildings on tiny spaced
lots that obscure the view of our beautiful Los Gatos Hillside.
I recommend that the Town of Los Gatos adopt a plan to preserve
the history and "Town" Atmosphere in all areas of Los Gatos not
just the Downtown Historic areas.
The Town of Los Gatos should have one unified goal for all areas
of Los Gatos. That unified plan should include density and
architectural style.
In, Addition I do not agree with any and all requests for
exceptions for the building contractors at the North 40 Project.
This is a very important addition to our town and it needs to be
done with the utmost care and concern for all residents of Los
Gatos . The builders and contractors who are going to profit the
mos t from this project should be held to the letter of law and
all must comply to the town's requirements in all ways.
Thank you for your consideration for the above comments.
Kind Regards,
Lydia and Dom Norcia
124 Regent Drive
Los Gatos, CA 95032
Best Regards, Lydia Norcia
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Mr. Moseley,
n ilgun bordbar <nilgunbordbar@yahoo.com >
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 9:12AM
Marni Moseley /
Housing Development
I am the owner on Hilow Court. and have some concerns about the housing of 11 new homes at Los
Gatos Blvd. and Shannon Rd .
To begin with, the little commercial space with the orange Theory across the site is already very
congested. There are plenty of times when we want to turn left into Shannon Rd . from Los Gatos Blv.
and we have to wait since there are numerous cars who want to turn into the full parking lot and block
the entrance to Shannon Rd . So with this development there will be even more traffic congestion right
so close at an intersection.
Secondly this is a commercial site and it should stay that way.
Third, there will be more kids who have to attend the already congested Los Gatos Schools.
Thank you for your consideration about these matters.
Sincerely
Bordbar
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Los Gatos Planning Department,
Kathy Murtfeldt <kmurtfeldt@aol.com>
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 9:37AM
Marni Moseley
New proposed housing development on Los Gatos Blvd
As an eleven year resident of Los Gatos, I want to take this opportunity to voice my opinion on the project for 11 new
homes on Los Gatos Blvd.
We purchased here in Los Gatos in 2005 in a very strong real estate market. We appreciated that homes were on larger
lots than other areas in the
Silicone Valley. As time has progressed we see that changing and not in a way we like.
Eleven homes on .92 areas is too dense for Los Gatos. That property is commercial and should remain so. It is on a very
busy intersection near two schools. Traffic is that area is already congested
during school drop off and pick up times.
It is important to keep within the character of the town . These proposed homes are not planned with that in mind .
Regards,
Kathy Murtfeldt
226 Bella Vista Ave
Los Gatos, CA 95030
408 384 2571
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
ppd mf@yahoo.com
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 9:39AM
Marni Moseley
II Vincanto development at 16212 Los Gatos Blvd
Re : II Vincanto development at 16212 Los Gatos Blvd (currently Artisan Wine Depot)
I hope you hear the voices of the residents who care about the history and beauty of Los Gatos.
We are long time residents of Los Gatos and we are completely against the II Vincanto development! It does not make
sense to cram more homes into an already congested area. STOP over developing the town of Los Gatos!!!
Regards,
Dana Frediani
Eric Johnson
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Sirs,
Nancy Toombs < nancy@toombs.net>
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 10:24 AM
Marni Moseley
Marge Rice
ll Vincanto Proposed Development
I live off of Shannon Rd and drive Shannon/Los Gatos Blvd. everyday. The congestion at the comer of
Shannon and LG Blvd. is already very heavy, especially when school is beginning and ending, also weekends
because beach goers have decided to use LG. Blvd to miss Hyw 17. That interaction is a real
boondoggle. Adding 11 homes to that comer will be a disaster for those of us that need to get to the High
School, library and downtown, not to mention the freeway for work. The developers that you are allowing to
build housing of late are taking advantage of you, and of the residents, to the detriment of all.
5 homes on that property might be acceptable, although 3 middle sized homes would be better. I know--then
they will be overpriced, but I predict that even the row homes will still be too expensive for the middle income
first time buyer, because "this is Los Gatos", people will pay anything to live in Los Gatos, even when squeezed
together like sardines. Please don't allow this!
I have lived here for over 30 years and have loved being here, until lately, when traffic is aways at a standstill,
and parking is impossible. I don't want to keep people out, but cramming a bunch of houses into a small space
where there is already major congestion is not a solution.
Also, what happened to "Tree City", removing at least 15 trees! My house is built around the trees so that they
could be accommodated, what happened to that concept?
I'll be at the planning commission meeting. I hope that you have not already given tacit agreement to this and
the hearing is just a formality.
Nancy Toombs
1 00 Hill Top Dr.
LG
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Keo King <keofking@yahoo.com>
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 11:26 AM
Marni Moseley
Shannon and LG . Blvd
HUH? Again??? The Morley boys asked the neighborhood very nicely if they could do something similar
several years ago. We all told them it doesn't fit and it didn't go through. So now we have to go through it all
again??? This time with the most defiant and ugly story poles imaginable. The hubris of this! --it's true that it
hasn't even been approved??? This time with "a developer" from out of town--the country, even, ifl read the
sign correctly, with only its interests to consider.
That intersection is problematic at every time of day. Right turns against the red light; red light running
rampant, particularly L.G. Blvd. onto Shannon. I live on the comer east of the iqtersection and have for twenty
odd years. I have watched traffic wax and wane with the economy. To put eleven houses with the attendant car
and foot traffic is so terribly dangerous for the Van Meter and Fisher kids. It seems every time there is a change
in ownership of a property in the area more houses are squeezed into one family property.
Dangerous, not to mention view blocking and inappropriate and too crowded for the site. Please! Don't do this
to us. We live here and you want us to live with this? Look across the street to where the other car dealership
used to be and you'll see what I mean.
Respectfully, (I guess),
Keo F . King
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
To whom it concerns,
bsagin@aol.com
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 11:45 AM
Marni Moseley
16212 Los Gatos Bl
Bad idea for this parcel. I live on Los Gatos Bl and have for 11 years . I understand developers making money and the
Town getting their taxes ... but this area is already choked with people . Keep it commerciai. .. Restaurants ...
S incerely,
Bret Sagin
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Marni,
les@les -thomas .com
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 11 :37 AM
Marni Moseley
Planning ; Les Thoma s
Proposed Development @ Shannon/LG Blvd
I'm a long time Los Gatos residence, living on Magneson Loop for the last 30+ years. I would like to
communicate that I'm very concerned about the proposal to put 11 homes, in a 3 story structure, on the
corner on Shannon Road and Los Gatos Blvd.
I do not support this proposal for the following reasons:
-Structure is too large for similar structures in the area
-Traffic is a major concern for our town, this will just increase the already unacceptable level of traffic
congestion.
-Intersection is currently difficult to cross between Roberts Road, Shannon Road and Los Gatos
Blvd. That intersection needs some re-architecting with regards to traffic flow and safety before adding
more homes right on the corner.
Thanks for listening to my concerns.
Regards,
Les Thomas
16730 Magneson Loop
Los Gatos, CA 95032
1
Marni M ose ley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
cmbjlb@ comcast.net
Wednesday, February 17, 201611:03 AM
Marni Moseley
Vincanto development at 16212 Los Gatos Blvd
Please do not approve this construction. It is unsightly, not in keeping with the neighborhood or the town of Los Gatos .
I won't even get into the traffic issues on thi s side of 17. I live less than a 1/4 m ile to Lunard is and it too k me 20 minutes
to get home in my car on Sunday. I could have walked home quicker ..... and would have if I did not have bags of
groceries. As a neighbor in the area , I am not in favor of the Vincanto development.
Thanks,
Carolyn Benson
300 Templeton Lane
Los Gatos, CA
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hi-
Jen Marcum <jenmarcum@comcast.net>
Wednesday, February 17, 201612:56 PM
Marni Moseley
No more homes to be built in Los Gatos PLEASE
My family and I have lived in Los Gatos since 1996 when my first son was born here. I had lived here for several years
prior to that after I graduated from college . My husband has worked for a local business in downtown Los Gatos for last
25 years. We have watched our wonderful town become completely over built and the schools become so crowded . My
sons were bussed to another school in San Jose while Daves Avenue got remodeled . The school was remodeled to
accommodate more students for the future but, my understanding is that the school is already filled to the maximum.
We live on Bruce Avenue, which is a feeder street to Daves Avenue , and during school drop off and pick up, it is
extremely difficult for us and our neighbors to even back out of our driveway. The traffic has become so horrible and at
times, grid lock . We cannot even turn off of our street onto Winchester on the weekends. The fact that Los Gatos would
actually consider building more homes with more kids for the already over crowded schools and more cars on the
already congested roads is unbelievable. At some point, the education for our children will be impacted due to too many
kids per classroom . There is no room for the kids to park at the high school currently and as a result more
neighborhoods are impacted by students parking on the neighborhood streets. It is SO sad . It can take over 25 minutes
to get home from the high school which is only 1+ miles away. I am not sure why we are ruining such a great little
community by over building? I can only imagine how awful it will be once the North 40 gets built. So many of us are
dreading that development!! There is also a large housing development being built where the nuns used to live that will
completely back up the intersection at Main near Purple Onion . We have friends and relatives who live locally who no
longer bother to come to Los Gatos to shop or dine because it's too hard to get here and there is nowhere to pa r k. We
usually meet up with them in Campbell now.
Please reconsider the building of the homes proposed for Los Gatos Boulevard and Shannon . That is a bad intersection
with the Fisher traffic and Van Meter traffic anyways. I cannot believe that 11 more homes could even fit on that
commercial property lot. It is really an awful proposal. Please preserve what is left of our TOWN not city and don't
consider anymore home developments being built here .
Thanks for your consideration!
Jennifer Marcum
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
To whom it may concern ,
Warren <warra@comcast.net >
Thursday, February 18, 2016 8:10AM
Marni Moseley
II Vincanto development at 162 12 Los Gatos Blvd
My name is Warren Te issier and I live on 16889 Mitchell Ave . across the corner fro m the proposed new development
called II Vicinato .
I write to you to express my concern regarding :
-the height of the "Brownstone" home on Los Gatos Blvd.
As you drive South on the Blvd this new construction would completely block any views of the mountains and will dwarf
all other nearby constructions. It is taller than anything else in its surrounding area. In addition the very small space {1
foot) between these "Brownstones" will in fact give the impression of a continuous building rather than separate units.
The so-called Brownstone style, is just not a style that fits with the California architecture, much Jess with the Los Gatos
architecture, it seems to be a way to cram more units together, under the guise of an architectural style .
In addition we are concerned about the closeness of these buildings to the sidewalk, if I remember correctly, there will
be a couple of feet distance from the building to the sidewalk. This is very uncharacteristic to the current construction
around town. Again, this is more a "big City'' style, and not typical quaint image that Lo s Gatos is known and loved by its
current residents. Thi s is not what people like and ex pect in Lo s Gatos.
-the traffic and parking problem that high density construction will create during and after construction.
Adding 11 more homes will impact the traffic of the already very bu sy Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon intersection, as well
as increase the already exis ting parking problem of the surrounding neighborhood, school s and bu sinesses .
To many bu sinesses were already approved to open without considering the parking needs of all of them and adding
more people density without creating parking for the existing and future need s will aggravate the existing problem.
I appreciate your taking into consideration this opinion. Should you have any questions, please feel free to reach me at
408 202 0376
Be st Regards ,
Warren Tei ss ier
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Good Morning,
Stephanie < sfigeira@yahoo.com >
Thursday, February 18, 2016 8:00 AM
Marni Moseley
Stephanie Figeira
16212 Los Gatos Blvd
I'm reaching out to express three of my concerns regarding the proposed project located at, 16212 Los Gatos
Blvd .
1. The project has too many homes for the land available.
2. This is a mixed commercial residential section of the boulevard and this property should be encouraged
to be the same, if it is going to change from its current commercial use.
3. The mass of the project facing Los Gatos Boulevard and extending around the comer of Shannon Road
closes in this all ready challenging intersection, which is a major road way for funneling traffic to and from this
side of town.
In closing, when story polls have to be installed in such a manner that they don 't overly impact current traffic
issues, this is a red flag, that even the proposed development of this site has negative impact on the area.
Thank you,
Stephanie R Figeira
Certified Nutrition Consultant
+1(408)499.2766
sfigeira@yahoo.com
"Got your health! Got it all!"-R. Rodman
Stephanie R Figeira
16345 Los Gatos Blvd., Unit 15
Los Gatos, CA 95032
(408) 356-0560
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Planning Commission,
Philip Shanker <pjshanker@comcast.net>
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 11:22 PM
Marni Moseley
II Vincanto development
The "odd" intersection of Shannon, LG Blvd and Fisher is already busy. To add 11 houses to the intersection would make
the site gridlock. The town's record of choosing tax revenue projects over town beautification is at issue. Los Gatos Blvd
is becoming un -drivable thanks to the new businesses and adding 11 houses to LG Blvd would only make matters worse .
Phil Shanker
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mr. Moseley;
Gail Boddy <s.and.s@verizon.net >
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 6:38PM
Marni Moseley
II Vincanto development at 16212 Los Gatos Blvd
Please do not approve this high density housing development. We see that life in Los Gatos has been deteriorating
with each new development. The impact to the schools is never what the developers state, the traffic is unbearable
and dangerous for emergency vehicles to get to folks in time. With two schools so close to the development and
one already high density housing development there I don't know how any one in their right mind can approve this
unless they don't care about injuries or death to children. I won't be voting in future elections for anyone associated
with this approval in future elections. Our property values will decline as again quality of life is declining in our lovely
city. Please do not approve. Two homes on this lot should be plenty, no more.
Best,
Martin & Gail Boddy
512 Nino Ave
LG
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms . Moseley
MARLENE <mjbggordon@com cast.net >
Wednesd ay, February 17, 201 6 6:3 0 PM
Marni M ose ley
16212 Lo s Gatos Bl vd
As residents (annexed 2008) of the East Los Gatos neighborhood near the proposed project at 16212
Los Gatos Blvd we would like to voice our concern regarding this project.
The developer states in their project narrative that there would be 11 single family residences on less
than 1 acre of land . Of the total , six would be "Luxury Brownstone" units that would appeal to single
and married executives without children and active "empty nesters". Clearly this is not the goal of the
developer as all the units are 4 bedrooms and none have masters on the ground floor. Instead, this
project is geared toward attracting famil ies which would add additional students to the schools and
a probable result of a minimum of 2 2 more vehicles . The plan provides access to the project on
Shannon Rd . This burdens all traffic on Shannon Road and adds to an already crowded intersection
at the corner of Shannon Road and Los Gatos Blvd. Any access to the project should be relocated to
Los Gatos Blvd . as is the main entrance for the Artisan Wine Depot currently. In addition, there are
only 8 additional parking spaces for the development which would result in more street
parking. Currently there are times when Shannon Road is lined with parked vehicles for Orange
Theory Fitness and some from The Yoga Source . Add to that the number of elementary and junior
high school students navigating the intersection by foot, bike, scooter and skateboard and this will
become a real problem for an already congested area along Los Gatos Blvd.
Now that the story poles are up, it apparent that the impact of the Brownstones will be massive
and will appear as one giant until as they are higher than surrounding residences, is so little
separation and their proximity to the sidewalk so close. The impact will be to dwarf all structures in
the surrounding area . It is surprising that the planning department would allow another high density
project like this so close to the Laurel Mews development. I would have thought a lesson would have
been learned with Laurel Mews . There should be some sort of set backs for all residential projects
regardless whether the zoning was commercial in the past. In addition , the architecture seems to be
so out of touch with the surrounding neighborhood. At least, Laurel Mews has a pleasing look.
Imagine how nice it would have been if homes were on larger lots! The architecture of the
Brownstones (II Vicinato) would seem better suited near a development like the project on Almaden
Expressway near the Bass Pro Sporting shopping center.
In their August 26 , 2014 letter to the town, the Cannon Design Group states: "There is a wide range
of issues and concerns with this proposal. .. it does not seem to be consistent with the Town's
Residential Design Guidelines, and there are a number of specific design concerns . In terms of the
residential design guidelines , the site plan and building designs do not seem to be sympathetic to the
following principles ... " The outside architecture firm also agrees that the scope, design , and overall
look of the Brownstones are not in keeping with the plan of the town .
In addition to design concerns, the high density involves safety issue s for all those who frequently use
this intersection . W e would like to urge the planning commission to fully reject this proj ect. There are
1
so many other business opportunities that would be suitable for the location: din ing establishment
(Aquis), a small nursery or garden store, a bakery and rotisserie similar to Gayle's in Capitola, just to
name a few. This type of business would be a positive addition to the community and not another
crammed together housing development that adds to the already existing traffic problem and crowded
schools.
William & Marlene Gordon
16357 E. La Chiquita
Los Gatos, CA
2
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Christine Russell <crussell@unipixel.com >
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 5:33 PM
Marni Moseley
Comment on More Compressed Housing on Los Gatos Blvd at Artisan Wine Depot
Location
Dear Planning Commission Members-I was stunned to see the orange marker posts go up in the Artisan Wine Depot
location! I was heartbroken . High quality venues like Artisan are a big part of what makes Los Gatos a great place to
live. Having lived on Pine Street off LG Boulevard for 32 years it has been discouraging to deal with the increasing and
increasing traffic on Los Gatos Boulevard. So now we are going to lose Artisan and gain a Boston-like collection of
brownstones at zero lot lines? Sounds like Santana Row rather than Los Gatos. We are already going to add massive
amount of housing in the North Forty. Enough! Please reconsider.
Best Regards,
Christine Russell
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Shamshoian, Peter < Peter.Shamshoian@kla-tencor.com>
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 5:22 PM
Marni Moseley
Regarding the planned development on Los Gatos BLVD
Regarding the LG BLVD property formerly the Artisan Wine shop. I could have told you the wine place wasn't there for long. It was
overpriced . But to put up more high density housing is criminal along this strip. It is already way too crowded. I line on Lorna Alta
and it's painful to get to Lunardi's now. What have you guys done with the town? I moved here because it was a unique respite
from Silicon Valley. This development looks like it's plucked right out of North San Jose. There will be twice the amount of cars
accessing this property than is shown in the plan because that's what these types of housing attract. I work in Milpitas and they've
built these exact houses all around the area . It's grid lock with the young families anchored by young professionals, their Parents,
Aunts and Uncle s with three cars for every two bdrm condo . Don't wreck the town. Please .
Pete Shamshoian
1
From: Amy White Hockenbrock [mailto:amywhite@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 4 :30 PM
To: Planning
Subject: Lg Blvd and Shannon
I recently saw the story poles on LG Blvd and think that it is crazy. We already have impacted
houses across the street and schools that cannot accommodate more.
Unfortunately, It feels as if these developments go in on this side of town without any regard for
the number of cars and people it adds .
Please do not do this. We are on winter break at school so cannot make the planning meeting. I
disagree completely with the development.
Amy
Amy White Hockenbrock
amvwhite@ gmail.com
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Gwen Pinkston <gpinkston@comcast.net>
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 1:52PM
Marni Moseley
gpinkston@comcast.net
11 home project on the corner of Shannon and lG Blvd .
Most of the recent residential projects in town have been too dense, but this is beyond
reason.
I live on Calfhill Ct. behind Van Meter School and getting in and out of our street while
children are
entering or exiting Van Meter and Fisher is very difficult. Should an emergency vehicle
need to get in or out
there is a very good possibility that it could not do so because of the parked cars along
Nino Avenue,
yes, right under the uNo Parking" signs. Nino is not a wide street with cars parked along
both sides it is
very narrow.
Please issue a negative declaration for this project.
Thanks for your assistance,
Gwen Pinkston
107 Calfhill Ct
Los Gatos, CA 95032
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
sharonturzo <calicat8@comcast.net >
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 1:55 PM
Marni Moseley
Los Gatos Blvd/Shannon
This idea is obscene, inane, INSANE! Additional traffic, noise, possible speeders trying to make light/intersection
Shannon/LG Blvd asking for problems. Residing on Magneson Loop, residents already experience drivers cutting through
to avoid light. School traffic horrific; travel time .. disgusting. Considering/allowing change to residential is terrible.
Greedy owner of property benefits from commercial zoning ..... DO NOT ALLOW THIS! Mrs. Sharon Brunner Turzo
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hi Marni,
Alexandra Sung <alexandra.sung@gmail.com >
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 2 :18 PM
Marni Moseley
Concerns with II Vicinato (16212 Los Gatos Blvd)
I am writing to express my family's concerns with the proposed development at 16212 Los Gatos Blvd . We live in the
Laurel Mews development across the street, and our house (16860 Roberts Rd) has a direct view of the property. We
are not opposed to residential construction -even high -density development -assuming good architecture I site layout
and any impacts to schools and traffic are mitigated . (After all , if our own neighborhood was not built, we would not be
able to enjoy Los Gatos as we do.) Rather, our concerns relate to this specific proposal.
We often walk along Los Gatos Blvd, in front of the property, and the proposed project would shove the sidewalk
dangerously close to the street. We like that the w i dth of the existing parkstrip provides a buffer from the vehicle
traffic. Moreover, a lot of children pass in front of that property while headed to the nearby schools in the morning, and
given where the sun rises, the row of "brownstones" would cast a giant shadow on the sidewalk and intersection. I think
that creates a safety hazard for the children and other pedestrians.
In addition, we do not think that the architecture of the front row of homes is consistent with the surrounding
development, and the vertical post element at the corner of Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon Rd is especially inconsistent
and unattractive.
I also have some questions about the distance between the front units-mere inches, it appears. It seems as though
that would create the perfect place for pests and rodents to populate (and how is that in-line with fire code?).
Lastly, my assumption is that the developer is meeting FAR requirements, but the mass is not evenly distributed across
the site. Rather, the density is all pushed along Los Gatos Blvd , where it is most impactful to surrounding residents,
pedestrians, and anyone driving by the property. The second floors do not step back, and the height I bulk of the
individual homes is very overwhelming.
Please give my concerns consideration. Thank you .
Regards,
Alexandra Sung
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms. Moseley;
brad clawsie <b rad@b7j0c.org >
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 4:15PM
Marni Moseley .
regarding proposal at current Wine Depot location
I am writing in reference to the proposal for homes on the lot currently occupied by the Wine Depot. My name
is Brad Clawsie, I am a resident at 130 College along with my family .
I fully understand the desire of the current owner to realize a gain by developing homes. The lot is currently
being exploited by Fisher parents filling the lot once a day to pick up students starting around 2:30pm. No
business owner should have to deal with that.
That said, I feel the current proposal is simply too dense. My assumption is that the developer probably also
understands this but is hoping to negotiate down to a lower density ... achieving their goal while appearing to be
conciliatory.
I am fine with a zoning change at this location as long as the density can be reduced while preserving viable
trees and hill views.
Thanks
Brad
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms . Moseley
Robert Dunne <dunnelaw6383@ gmail.com >
Thu rs day, February 18 , 2016 9:45 AM
M arni M oseley
RE: I I Vi ci n at o development
I am writing to express my very strong objection to the planned
development of 11 Vicinato at the comer of Shannon and Los Gatos Blvd.
I live on Hilow Ct., just up Shannon from Los Gatos Blvd. I commute
that intersection a minimum of 30-50 times per week-ifyou include all of
the dr ive rs in my home, th at number goes to probably 100 times per week.
It it ou r access to the businesses in Los Gatos.
The increase in traffic alone will severely impact this intersection,
which is difficult enough with the no tum on red, the off-set from Roberts,
and the Fisher Middle School and Van Meter School traffic. The
addition of eleven families needing to use the intersection and/ or accessing
the devel opment from Los Gatos Blvd. will be untenabl e.
Significantly, if the development is approved, many of us up Shannon
and the numerous adjoining streets will likely use Cherry Blossom and
create a severe issue for B l ossom Hill School, which is already difficult
with parents dropp ing their kids off and picking them up, resulting in
traffic currently backing up both toward Shannon and LG/ Almaden Rd.
That back up and dense traffic will only become worse i f Cherry Blossom
needs to be used to avoid the impact of this development at the Shannon
and LG Blvd. intersection.
In addition, the development will completely obstruct the view of cars
on Shannon approaching LG Blvd., creating an even more dangerous
intersection.
And then there is the aesthetics of this deve l opment-jamtning eleven
houses on less than one acre is even n1ore ridiculous than the development
across Los Gatos B lvd.
T hank you for your consideration.
1
Rob Dunne
H ilow Ct.
Robert E. Dunne, Esq.
Robert E . Dunne Law Offices
16450 Los Gatos Blvd #110
Los Gatos, CA 95032
ph-408-357-7730
dunnelaw6383@gmail.com
May the road rise up to meet you
May the wind be always at your back
May the sun shine warm upon your face
And the rain fall soft upon your fields
And until we meet again
May God hold you in the palm of his hands
(Irish proverb)
2
The brownstones fronting Los Gatos have <1' gap between each unit, ra ising significant health,
safety and environmental concerns. No mitigations provided to prevent rodents, critters, garbage
and mold from collecting and growing i n the narrow passages. Potential risk for small children
and pets to get stuck between units. Front of buildings set too close to the sidewalk/street
contrasts with all other residential and commercial buildings in the area.
II Vicinato: Big city brownstone styles will creates a massive wall, dwarf
surrounding homes, erode Los Gatos small town character. The units are set too
close to the sidewalk/street and blocks the remaining hillside views a long the Los
Gatos Blvd corridor.
The scope of the construction's impacts is not accurately reported in the MND. The MND
reports on 4 schools within a 'l4 mile (page 18) but there are actually 7 schools within this
distance -Van Meter, Fischer, Shir Hadesh , Shannon Parent Nursery, Growing
Footprints, Cavalry Preschool and Jr K, Green Hills. Also , there are more schools within
2 miles -Mariposa Montessori , Hillbrook, Blossom Hill, Grace Preschool , Los Gatos
High, and Yavneh Day School. Each of these well regarded schools are at all time high
enrollment capacities, and the development area is a cross-section that leads to all of
these schools. Why does the Traffic Report ignore these realities with real potential
negative impacts to the community?
In summary, the Applicant's proposal is an example of an ambitious plan to squeeze 11 single
family houses into a small lot-creates a development that is not compatible with the
surrounding area , brings New York City style buildings into town , and the Applicant's MND lacks
solutions to adequately address safety, environmental and hazardous impacts , among other
negative affects. Furthermore the Applicant has not made a strong case for the zoning change.
We strongly urge the Planning Commission to reject the proposal and thank you for your time
and considerations.
Sincerely,
Barnaby James and Linda Yung
16500 Grant Bishop Lane
Brownhomes is jarring and will set a precedent for others to develop bulky and massive
Big City type of homes. II Vicinato's brownstones borrow from commercial building
design by having a flat roof for Air Conditioning I HVAC with a very boxy design. The
units along Los Gatos Blvd are very repetitive with only minor color variations. Why did
the Applicant have his architect and designer deviate so drastically from the single-family
and two-story residential home style guide?
(See Los_Gatos_Residentiai_Design_Guidelines_FINAL_rev_030911.pdf for single-family and
two-story homes).
3. Every other building in the immediate area (including commercial buildings) are set back
10-15 feet from the sidewalk with significant landscaping from the edge of sidewalk to
the front doors. The set back for the II Vicinato homes fronting Los Gatos Blvd is a mere
2-3 feet from the edge of the sidewalk to the front door. With the building fronts being so
close to the sidewalk and Los Gatos Blvd , there is not enough rea l estate left to
incorporate significant landscaping to soften the concrete wall created by II Vicinato's 5
brownstones and 1 corner unit.
4 . Even within II Vicianto's community, the design of the development is inconsistent. The
homes facing Los Gatos Blvd . are modern looking brownstones that look like commercial
buildings with no yard , set back and significant landscaping . The homes at the rear are
more in the American Craftsman style common in Los Gatos.
5. Based on the Arborist's Report, the plan will require eliminating 15 protected trees with 6
more listed as "debatable", including a giant cedar tree. The development only provides
minimal landscaping throughout the community, and we believe this is a bad trade-off for
the town . In regards to scenic views , the Applicant's Mitigation Report (see MND Dec.
2015) claims that the development has minimal to no impact on any hillside views, but
this is not true . The current lot provide plentiful views and angles of the hillside and tall
cedar trees for the community to enjoy, from pedestrians on the sidewalk to the
commuters on the road from various directions. Please see our supporting pictures
enclosed.
6. Regarding impacts to construction traffic, we believe the Traffic Report by Hexagon and
the Applicant's MND does not take into consideration how heavily travelled and utilized
the area is currently , and is providing insufficient noise, pollutant and overall safety
mitigations. When construction begins at Bam on a weekday, will children and families
be forced to cover their ears as an excavator roars at the intersection? Where will the
construction machines and other vehicles park? With no detailed mitigation about where
construction machines and crew will be allowed to park or store their equipment, we fear
there will be a increased chance for children , joggers, dog walkers, parents and their
strollers, to get hit by a vehicle because they have to tiptoe around construction
machines and trucks.
As for the proposed residential project outlined in the site plan , we would echo many of the
concerns from the design review (htt p://www.losgatosca.g ov/DocumentCenterNiew/15759)
conducted by the Cannon Group:
1. The II Vicinato homes along Los Gatos Blvd are taller than any nearby res idential house
and will dwarf the corridor and block the last significant hillside views leading into
downtown from this direction , and the small gaps between the 6 units facing Los Gatos
Boulevard will pose a health , environment and safety hazard as outlined below.
-The II Vicinato houses fronting Los Gatos Blvd have heights of 29' 8" and
29' 11". In comparison , the Laurel Mews homes across the street have a height
variance from 20' to 25', with the majority in the low 20' range , and each unit
facing Los Gatos Blvd . have at least 16' courtyards between them , front doors
that do not face Los Gatos Blvd , and 10-15 feet of landscaping from the sidewalk
to where the houses begin .
-The II Vicinato houses fronting Los Gatos Blvd are also ALL boxy/rectangular
shaped with little design variance and have only a few inches gap in between the
units (See Cannon Design Report). The small gaps between the brownstone
units raises several safety, environmental and health concerns . First, the gaps
will receive little sunlight, causing a dark and damp environment that breeds mold
and rodents. The brownstone units have no significant set back from the sidewalk
and street and can easily become a depostiory for garbage and other debris that
is blown from the street. More hazardous , what is there to mitigate concerns
about a small toddler/child or pet getting trapped in the gaps that run the entire
depth of the brownstone units since the buildings are only a few feet from the
sidewalk?
-Given the need for a garage/basement the homes are pushed % a floor above
grade and have HVAC on the roof so they are more like 3 floor buildings, and will
cast long shadows and darken the street making this section more dangerous for
cyclists , walkers and other commuters, especially school children and families
who walk this intersection for school.
-The Applicant calls these units "Brownstone" in reference to a type of raised
townhome common in Manhattan. The net effect of this des ign creates a wall that
will cast long shadows, and blocks the serene views of the hillside I cedar trees
that currently exists at this stretch of Los Gatos Blvd, Roberts Rd ., and Shannon
Rd . intersections . The brownstone look is incompatible with surrounding
development, and we are concerned that the long shadows can heighten the
chances for traffic collisions, pedestrian to get hit by a car, or worst.
2. From a design perspective these home are a poor fit for the town of Los Gatos -many of
the homes in the area are American Craftsman and a block of New York City
February 18, 2015
Dear Members of the Los Gatos Planning Commission ,
We believe the Applicant has not provided sufficient support for the need to rezone the site to
CH:PD; and furthermore, the proposed development of 11 single-family homes will have
profound negative impacts to the surrounding area -erodes Los Gatos small town character and
sets a precedent that the town finds Manhattan style residential designs acceptable .
In the site plan Project Narrative (http://www.losgatosca .goviDocumentCenterNiewl15763) the
Applicant argues that the site has been unsuccessful as a commercial zoned location since
2006 and cannot support a commercial enterprise for two primary reasons:
1. Access to the site is "challenging" and a business that needs a lot of customers requires
better ingress I egress
2. Competition from nearby shopping malls at the Los Gatos Blvd I Blossom Hill Rd
intersection
To refute these claims, we point out the following :
1. There are at least three successful businesses started since 2006 directly adjacent and
across from the site:
a. YogaSource at 16185 Los Gatos Blvd
b. OrangeTheory Fitness at 16250 Los Gatos Blvd
c. AJ Tutoring at 16275 Los Gatos Blvd
2. The above mentioned businesses are not struggling -in fact the large number of
customers they attract have exhausted all of their parking , in addition has placed parking
pressures on nearby public streets. Customers frequently park on the street and
surrounding businesses on Roberts Rd, Mitchell St, George St, to name a few. The
Laurel Mews HOA has even filed a request in August 2015 for a Neighborhood Parking
Permit because of the large number of customers from these nearby business . Many
other nearby businesses such as Autobahn LLC have "No YogaSource parking " signs .
These examples prove that a commercial business can do well at 16212 Los Gatos Blvd.
3. The Applicant rents parking spaces from the site to YogaSource for their customers to
park -clearly ingress I egress is not an issue for these customers.
4 . The site is served by entrances on Los Gatos Blvd and Shannon Road -access to the
site is not an issue. Most nearby businesses, including YogaSource , Orange Theory
Fitness , AJ Tutoring, and NC Boardshop have very limited access (single entrance only)
and still manage to attract a large number of customers.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tom Lackovic <tom@lackovicandassociates.com>
Wednesday, February 17 , 2016 4:21 PM
Marni Moseley
Proposed development at 16212 Los Gatos Blvd., Los Gatos .
I was terrified last evening when I stopped at the intersection of Roberts Road and los Gatos Blvd., looked across the
street, and saw the elevation poles that had been erected on the Artisan Wine Depot location.
If structures are built to the height of the poles and as close to the street as indicated, the density and sheer bulk of the
proposed construction w ill present an overwhelming negative visual'shock to the senses' to anyone approaching the
intersection.
A revised site plan must be developed to increase the setback of structures, minimize elevations and (unfortunately for
the developer) decrease the number of permitted dwellings.
Please , do not permit this development to further diminish the quality and ambience ofthe Town of los Gatos.
A resident living at 135 Hillbrook Drive, Respectfully, Thomas lackovic
Sent from my iPad
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Liz Dillon <liz.dillon@comcast.net >
Wednesday, February 17, 2016 1:25PM
Marni Moseley
Mike Dillon
16212 Los Gatos Blvd
Dear Los Gatos Planning Commission,
As a Los Gatos home-owner for 15 years, I have watched traffic increase exponentially along Los Gatos Blvd . The traffic
study for the new development compares the 11 new houses to the former used car dealership. This is highly
misleading, as the dealership space has not been in the location for many years . Since then, two exercise studios
(Orange Theory and YogaSource) and a dense housing development have been constructed . Traffic is so bad during
school and commute hours, that I am reluctant to leave my home to shop in the local stores.
I urge you to reject this plan . If you wish to change the zoning from commercial to mixed use, then limit the density to
2-4 houses. Better yet, build a park.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Dillon
105 Highland Ave
Los Gatos, CA 95030
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To :
Subject:
Tony Nanez <tonynanez@me.com >
Tuesday, February 16, 2016 8:04AM
Marni Moseley
artisan wine lot development
Ms Moseley,our fine town is rapidly becoming the (CITY) of los gatos.
as a resident of LG since 1975,1ately the planning commission has done an injustice to this community by allowing
overbuilding on small lots and have created eye soars and congestion that will be irreversible to the future of our kids
and grandkids.what use to take 5 minutes to get to downtown LG is now 10-15 minutes from the blossom hi ll area.
please reconsider not building 11monster homes on the corner of shannon and lg blvd.
Tony Nanez
tonynanez@me.com
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hi Marni,
Kippkramer@aol .com
Thursday, February 18, 2016 11:52 AM
Marni Moseley
kipp.kramer@oracle.com
(no subject)
I just wanted to write to the Planning Commission about the development on the corner of Shannon
and Los Gatos Blvd. I live on Cherrystone Drive.
I am currently in the Sierra's and we just got our power back after being off most of the
night...that's why I am writing you so late.
This development along with many others on the Blvd. is changing the character of it's nice wide
open and welcoming image. The town seems to walling off the street and creating a tunnel
effect. If the story lines are any indication of what is to come, these high density houses are way
too tall and way too close to the street and blocks one of the prettiest views of our mountains as we
approach town. Please, please don't let this happen! In addition, the traffic on the Blvd. is already
so bad and adding 11 more families to the mix will only bring more kids going to school, more
adults pulling out to go to work ... and we have had enough.
We know people love Los Gatos and we welcome new residents ... but not at the cost of the quality
of life to those of us already here. Please, please reconsider this development.
Thank you!
Carolyn and Kipp Kramer
842 Cherrystone Drive
408-375-7905
1
Marni Moseley
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Bill Posada <bill@cainterpreters.com>
Thursday, February 18, 2016 12:48 PM
Marni Moseley
Comments on development on Shannon and los gatos Blvd
This high density homes is totally unacceptable. Too many homes on lot, too high-blocks mountain views, cause traffic
congestion and negative impact on schools.
Cut number of homes by 80%.
Bill Posada
Sent from my iPhone
1
EXHIBIT 10
This Exhibit is now ATTACHMENT 11
of the 4/19/16 Town Council Report.
EXHIBIT 10