Attachment 22January 17th 2018
Honorable mayor and members of the council,
Last night we heard a great many ideas bantered about regarding how best to utilize what
remains of the Yuki Farm .
Most seemed to agree that a hotel/conference center would be a great addition to the north 20,
while at the same time (unless I misunderstood) Mr. Morimoto suggested he'd like to help the
developer get an additional 40% of total housing (for 400 total units, or an additional 130 units per Don)
on the entire north 40 site, all the while preserving our "quality of life" in Los Gatos. I agree that we
(the Bay Area) are in a critical and affordable housing shortage but I don't see how adding another 130+
units at well over $1 to $2 million each solves that problem. We've been here for 4 generations and
I've only seen the "quality of life" get worse each year in Los Gatos.
Conversely, I heard no mention by council of the Senior/Retirement housing unmet need of our
aging population so eloquently addressed by Grant Sedgewick last year.
It seems you have a difficult job of satisfying all the ideas put forth last night including; a height
variance of 55 feet for a hotel or office per Mr. Ca pa boles, 160K sq. feet of retail space, and/or a hotel
of 160K sq. feet, and/or a commercial building at approximately lOOK sq. feet, and/or some combination
of all of the above . Further, I disagree with Mr. Capaboles about the additional need for a coffee
house, etc. near a hotel or in the proposed office building ... isn't that why he fought to put in the market
hall?
The discussion last night seemed to be full of redundancies and contradictions.
Logically, it seems to me that you should request that the developer (or landowner if not in
contract with him) adhere to a height requirement no higher than the current maximum height that
was allowed for the Albright way /Netflix development to protect the viewshed of our mountains {I 'm
not sure if Netflix is even SS feet); AND show the public concept drawings (i.e. elevations, floor plans
etc .) of all the options discussed last night.
Further, as suggested by Ms. Spector, community meetings should be required for this next
phase of approvals.
Thank you. \r
Respectfully, ~
ATTACHMENT 22
From: John Shepardson [mailto:shepardsonlaw@me.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 1:3 1 PM
To : Council
Subject: N. 40 (Flexibility?)
Dear Mayor and other Council Members:
Why would we provide flexibility for the remaining portion of the property when such an
approach caused so much public angst in the first area subject to project approval?
I urge: Be specific. Assume the developer will max out each standard. Be conservative on traffic.
Projected to expand: Good Sam, Cambrian Park Plaza & Dell. More re si dential over
commercial. Commercial causes more traffic. Bike lanes.
Consider: .
Community gardens or skateboard park
(subject to air quality), community theatre, or a community center (like Cupertino's).
How can we best leverage the resources
of the town?
John Shepardson