Loading...
Attachment 14Jennifer Armer From: 'Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Preston Rutherford < prestonr2@gmail.com > Monday, February 19, 2018 2:47 PM Arn Andrews; BSpector; Joel Paulson; To w n Manager; Ma rcia Jensen ; Marice Sa yoc; Rob Rennie; Steven Leonardis voiceheard@401albertowa y.com I support 401 Alberto . Hi there, my name is Preston Rutherford and I'm 32 years old. My wife and I just bought our home on Fillmer Avenue late last year. We also just had her first baby three months ago. I just found out about this project, and the Town needs it. As a representative of the next generation of the town of Los Gatos, we need to embrace improvements to our town that will allow Los Gatos to continue to be the wonderful place it is today. Unfortunately, especial ly when scanning NextDoor posts, I often feel a pervasive le vel of complacency and nay-saying here that is in conflict with what not only created this town, but in conflict with what created a lot of the wea lth that has allowed this town to become what it is today. This double standard will put our town in jeopardy over the long term. My specific circumstances somewhat relate to this project. I commute 3 hours a day to my job in SF. Ideally, I'd have a job in Los Gatos. But if it's too difficult t o loca t e companies (and therefore jobs) in our town, many of us have to commute. Unfortunately, we commuters end up contributing to the traffic issues many residents of Los Gatos complain about. If there were more jobs on Alberto and around our Town, more of us 'commuters ' would be walking or biking to work. More walkers and bikers would remove cars from the roads and therefore reduce traffic. Of course we do not want to support ignorant over-development. With 3 redesigns and compliance with all relevant guidelines (according to my understanding), this project is not the kind of development we want to fight. I am not saying there will not be drawbacks . Every project includes drawbacks. The presence of drawbacks should not stall a project when the drawbacks pale in comparison to the positives. As a corollary, the commercial vacancies on Main St ./ Santa Cruz Ave , in my opinion, is a microcosm what can happen when we continue to say "no" to opportunity, or make it too difficult to invest capital in ou r Town. As a resident, the quality of my 'downtown Los Gatos' experience is negatively impacted with the vacancie s. I'm driven to con sider spending more time (and money) in other downtowns with my limited leisure time . I doubt I'm the only LG re sident who feels this way . In sum , I sugge st we embra ce improvement and change. Let's find a balance where we can still move forward whi le preserving w h at we love about Los Gatos. Let's get creativ e with addressing the drawbacks, rather than running from them. If we are able to take the persp ectiv e of "let's find a wa y to make this work", rather than "there's no way t h is will work", our town will be able to continue to thrive . If we take the latter approach, I fear for our future. Thank you , Preston Rutherford ATTACHMENT 14 Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Los Gatos Town Council, Lynda Sa yre < lyndasayre@gmail.com > Sunday, March 04, 2018 5:49 PM Jennifer Armer Al berto Way office bldg . I urge you to accept the recommendations of your Planning Commission and reject the current proposa l for a huge office building on Alberto Way . The size of this building is completely incompatible with the residential flavor of th e neighborhood , blocks views and will cause even more traffic. I often v isit Los Gatos to see friends, do a little shopping and hav e dinner in one of the fine restaurants. Even though Los Gatos has grown considerably in the last 20 years , it sti ll retains it's small town charm . Please do not destroy this. Sincerely, Lynda Sayre Carmel , CA Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Town Council : Joanne <jojohnso n 7@aol.com > Monday, March 05 , 2018 3:15 PM Jennifer Armer Highway 9 and Alberto Way I am no longer a resident of Los Gatos, after having lived there for most of my adult life . But I still ha ve many friends there , many of whom are concerned about the negative impact of a proposed building project at Alberto Way and Highway 9. I must agree that the traffic impact alone of such a project would have far reaching negative consequences for the commuters, for the neighborhoods and for those of us coming and going through town or along Highway 17 . I understand that the Planning Commission has already denied the proposal for this building . I would urge you to follow their guidance and do likewise. Your decision will have a long lasting affect on not just local residents , but on folks like me who still love the beauty of Los Gatos and its small-town look and feel. With Warm Regards , Joann e Johnson Aptos , CA Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Jean Barrick <jazzyjean @comcast.net > Tuesday, March 06, 2018 3:31 PM Jennifer Armer Subject: Development at #9 and Alberto Way As a re sident of The Los Gatos Meadows, I am concerned about the large commerc ial building proposed for Highway #9 & Albeto Way. We already have virtual gridlock on weekends at #17 and Santa Cruz Ave. Many of us are concerned with access for our use and even more for EMR v ehicles . I urge you to oppose this large project. Thanks for your consideration Jean T. Barrick, The Meadows, 110 Wood Rd. Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Gerald Hamilton <ghami1ton29@gmail.com > Wednesday, March 07, 20 18 1:35 PM Mayor Rob Rennie ; Steven Leonardis ; Marcia Jensen ; BSpector; Marice Sayoc Jennifer Armer 401 -409 Alberto Way. Los Gatos , CA GEHLtrToLGCouncil3.7.18.pdf Please open and read the attached letter from my wife a me regarding the Appeal of your planning director's unanimous vote to DENY the Application of LP Acquisitions to construct a 74,260 square foot office buil ding on the above site, being the northwesterly corner of Alberto Way and Hwy 9. Respectfully submitted. Gerald E. Hamilton 451 Alberto Way, D153 Los Gatos, CA 95032 March 7, 2018 Rob Rennie, Mayor GERALD E. and SONDRA T. HAMIL TON 451 ALBERTO WAY 0153 LOS GATOS, CA 95032 Steve Leonardis, Vice Mayor Marcia Jensen, Council Member Marico Sayoc Council Barbara Spector, Council Member LOS GATOS TOWN COUNCIL 110 E. MAIN STREET LOS GATOS, CA 95030 Re: 401-409 ALBERTO WAY Dear Mayor Rennie, Vice-Mayor Leonardis and Council Members Jensen, Sayoc & Spector: For the record again, my wife and I are property owners and occupants of unit 0153 within the "Los Gatos Commons" Senior Citizen community at 439-447 Alberto Way. We previously called to your attention the many letters from our co-owners, as there are 110 individual and relatively SAFE condominiums in just OUR project! Please note also Los Gatos Commons has its own on-site parking for approximately 152 vehicles, a ratio unmatched by any or all of the other developments on Alberto Way! Traffic is and must be a MAJOR concern to the Council, as it is to all owners on this very narrow street!!! There has been absolutely NO PROFESSIONAL STUDIES that we have read in the Town's files for this proposed project that adequately evaluates the current DAILY TRAFFIC on Alberto Way from the hours of 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM! A Harvard Graduate Degree is NOT required to readily determine that our NARROW, barely two-lane, "ALBERTO WAY" already HAS extreme traffic and when ANY of the REGULAR delivery, repair and/or emergency vehicles arrive on this one and only almost PURELY RESIDENTIAL avenue and park (sometimes Double-Park) on this narrow residential street, it is DANGEROUSLY congested! To leave a U-turn is required and is dangerous! Letter to the Mayor and Town Council Members RE: 401-409 Alberto Way Proposed Office Project March 7, 2018 Page Two It is UNIMAGINABLE how you five elected representatives and residents of Los Gatos could possibly endure such traffic conditions where YOUR homes are located that would be even COMPARABLE to that which LP Acquisitions, LLP propose to create on Alberto Way, a dead end street! An additional 300+ vehicl es into and out of its proposed office buildings????? Again I say, UNIMAGINABLE!!!! It is perfectly clear, there is still basically only two parties supporting and imminently involved in the project, LP Acquisitions, LLP, the applicant, and the now FORMER owner of the property, CWA Realty! Since CWA Realty acquired the property in 1986, it allowed considerably building decay and ALL former tenants to vacate! Now CWA REAL TY has concluded its sale of the property to LP Acquisitions, LP and received, on or about November 01, 2017, millions of dollars for it. THAT is the real motivating factor for three of the former owners, R. Gregg Carse, Pat Lynch and Dennis Schrader, to individually write and mail letters in support of the proposed project! There is absolutely NO OBJECTIVITY in their letters, only a way to say "thank you" to LP Acquisitions, LLP! One of the former owners of CWA Realty, Pat Lynch, even had the audacity to specifically state in HIS letter, "most of the congestion on A lberto Way HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS SITE"! EXCUSE ME ---but how na·ive and ridiculous is that statement? His site has been 100% vacant; is 100% FENCED prohibiting ANY VEHICLES from using it; and traffic is STILL ABOMINABLE! Just imagine the impact of 300 +/-vehicles entering and exiting the proposed garage, morning, noon and night, and the traffic nightmare resulting! Another of the supporters, Scott Eschen of Seacoast Partners, US, possibly a partner of LP Acquisitions, or other entities thereof, so HIS support is prejudicial and lacks objectivity. HE even includes in his remarks his beliefs that the residents on Alberto Way are nothing more than "squeaky wheel NIMBYs" (not in my backyards), not even recognizing us as concerned citizens and property owners who have documented thoroughly our basis for objection to the currently proposed sized building and it parking needs. Then there is a letter from Donald M. Eaton, President, Argus Financial. It is believed that this person and his company have had pri or business transactions with LP Acquisi tions, LLC and quite obviously hopes to finance the proposed building on Alberto Way or other projects of this developer. He too has little or no objectivity o r fairness in his basis for support of the project as proposed and his letter too lacks objectivity and knowledge of its impact on this residential street. Letter to the Mayor and Town Council Members RE: 401-409 Alberto Way Proposed Office Project March 7, 2018 Page Three Oh yes and finally, once again the Appellant's primary consultant, Buchalter, again states "any Class "A" office project smaller than 74,260 square feet would be "INFEASIBLE"! Economic aspects of a project is subjective and NOT should not be factor to a municipality when considering zoning, granting permits and other approvals. My wife and I respectfully request that the Town Council finally, after two or more years, concur with your Planning Department's unanimous and SECOND denial of the proposed development of LP Acquisitions, LLP and deny its appeal for without further consideration We thank you again for considering all of the opposition to this project, as proposed, including again, this personal letter of ours. Cc: Jennifer Armer Associate Planner, Town of Los Gatos (JArmer@losgatos.gov) Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Mary Jean Gravkin <mjgravkin@gmail.com > Friday, March 09, 2018 2:38 PM Jennifer Armer y project Please keep from adding to the traffic congestion at Hi ghway 9 and Alberto Way by denying the deve lopers appeal t o the City. Jennifer Armer From: Lindsay Catterton [mailto:lcatte5850@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2018 7:51 PM To: Jennifer Armer <JArmer@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Alberto Way Why should we trust anyone who had let the neighborhood live with this mess for two years? He doesn't care about us just his pocketbook!! Lindsay Catterton 439 Alberto Way Sent from my iPhone Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Jennifer, Sall y Paolini <sa llypao @aol.com > Monday, March 12, 2018 12 :26 PM Jen nife r Ar mer 405 Alberto Wa y I have been in Los Gatos since 1947. I've raised my children here and am happy that my grandchildren are being raised here. I have watched the growth of Los Gatos over the years and some of the decisions from the town have been good and some not so good . I still like living here. I feel safe and grateful that I live here. However, I do feel that the proposal for the Alberto Way property will not enhance the town in any way. This type of development would do much better in the area of the North Forty, away from the congestion of Highway 9 and Los Gatos Boulevard. I live on Vista del Campo and have had to endure the summer weekend traffic and I don't look forward to having this same problem during the week. I hope that the town will consider a plan that will complement the Alberto Way area instead of ruining it. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sally Paolini 125 Vista del Campo Los Gatos 408 356 3311 Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Joan K Larson <joanklarson@aol.com > Monday, March 12, 2018 2:42 PM Jennifer Armer 401-409 Alberto Way To the Town Council and Planning Commission, Many thanks to the Planning Commission for their unanimous decision to deny the 401-409 Alberto Way developers designed project. With Alberto Way being a narrow dead end road the traffic and emergency vehicles getting through at times would be a forever problem. The particular design submitted of the building would be a loss of a lo vely view . The exercise our sen ior group enjoys while walking wou ld be less without the view. The size of the proposed building is just too big . There is also plans for improvements for Highway 17 and Highway 9 interchange and adding an auxiliary lane on Highway 17. Since this 401-409 proposed building is toward the back of the property it may be too close to the area needed to widen the highway road and the entrance. Perhaps it would be a good idea to find out what the plan and design to widen Highway 17 are before anything is deve loped on the lot at 401-409 Alberto Way. Certainly something to consider. Thank you . Joan Larson. 441 Alberto Way Sent from my iPhone Rt2c12/\1120 March 9, 2018 MAR 1 3 20/B ,owN PL Or: Lo Dear Council Members, ANNtNG 0 fv GA, , 0 8 IStoN On behalf of the Boards of Directors of the HOAs from Pueblo de Los Gatos (53 homes), Las Casitas (17 homes), The Los Gatos Commons (110 homes), and Bella Vista Villages (47 homes) we submit this response to LP Acquisitions's appeal application challenging the Alberto Way decision of the Planning Commission on 2/14/2018. We support the Planning Commission's 2/14/2018 decision to deny the Third Redesign of the Alberto Way project. We dispute the developer's claim that the Commission abused its discretion by ignoring direction from the Town Council and by failing to provide findings and substantial evidence. The developer argues that the Planning Commission disregarded the Town Council direction to reduce the size of the building to 74,260 square feet and that they improperly dealt with the 405 Alberto Way project "de novo." In point of fact, the council unanimously passed a motion that provided no direction on size.1 Also both Attorney Schultz and Mr. Paulson confirmed to the Commission that they could deal with the case de novo.2 The developer also misrepresents the Planning Commission's motion on 1/10/18, which requested the developer to preserve views on the north side of the site by EITHER a redesign that included single story construction OR by increasing the setback from the north property line.3 The Commission did not instruct the developer to redesign the building to 74,260 square feet. Ultimately, the developer rejected the two story/one story configuration altogether and made no effort whatsoever to increase the setback. Furthermore, the 74,260 square foot design obstructs more than half of the view corridor on the north side of the site. The developer's second reason for maintaining that the Planning Commission abused its discretion is that their denial is not based on CUP Findings and the Findings are not based on substantial evidence. In fact, the Commission put into the record the project's inconsistencies 1 "Under our code section that the Council did receive additional information and that it was information that the Planning Commission did not have the opportunity to consider so we remand this application back to the Planning Commi ssion so that they can consider all the information available ." (1.52.10) Barbara Spector, Town Council Hearing, 10/3/17. Seconded by Leonardis. 2 Planning Commission hearing 1/10/2018-32:30. They al so confirmed that the Comm issi on did not have to consider certifying the EIR if they were going to deny approval of the Architectu ral Site and CUP applications. 3 The motion by Commissioner Janoff: continue the request with guidance to reduce elements of the building to accomplish two plus one story to maximize the views for the neighbors on the northwest, and if by doing that 74,260 sq . ft. would be possible, fine. Otherwise, the size might be in the 60,000s (1 :06:27). C. Burch seconded the motion. The n C. Hudes made an amendment to offer an option of protecting the views with a setback on the north (and he al so wanted to add that the developer should consult the neighbors about the dog park). C. Janoff con sented to the amendment and so did C. Burch . The amended motion passed 4 to 2. (1 :31:17, 1:42 :52), 1 with the General Plan, which was the basis for their findings to deny the CUP application. There is substantial evidence to support these findings in letters from citizens and in the proceedings from the several hearings on this project: expert opinion, as well as citizen testimony based on facts, reasonable assumptions premised on facts, and first hand observations based on specific knowledge of the Project size and its surroundings. See End Notes 1 The Commission's findings as to inconsistencies with General Plan policies focus on the extent to which the proposed project preserves the existing views, blends with the residential neighborhood, exhibits the small town character of Los Gatos, does not impede emergency response, and contributes to traffic problems. Preserve the Views? Four policies are cited that call for the protection and preservation of viewsheds, scenic resources, and ridgelines (Community Design 16.1, 16.2, 16.3, and 17.3). As substantial evidence that the project did not comply with these policies, the Commission drew on photographs submitted by citizens that showed the pre-project views of the mountains from the south side, center, and north side of the site and photographs that showed the post-project (with story poles) obstruction of views (Letter from Commons, 12/14/17) and public comment during the hearing on 12/13/17 (Fowler pp. 44-45). Another citizen made a reasonable assumption based on facts: "In the evening, after you finally leave the ... commercial buildings in San Jose or in Cupertino you want to come home and be able to sit back and relax on your porch , on your balcony, and see the sun set. You want to take a look at the mountains. You want to be able to reflect on that, and that's part of lifestyle. You can't replace that with putting a building in there. If this proposed development goes through, all of that is gone. That's lost, for all of us . We've lost that" (Dunn, Transcript 5/10/17, p. 53). Additional evidence is cited in End Notes 2. Blend with the Scale and Rhythm of the Neighborhood? Land Use and Community Design policies were cited that call for commercial development that preserves and enhances the existing character and sense of place in residential neighborhoods and that directs building elements to be in proportion with those traditionally in the neighborhood (LU 6.2, 6.4, 7.3; CD 1.1, 1.2, 1.4). As substantial evidence that the proposed project was inconsistent with these policies, the Commission drew on comments by an expert, architect Larry Cannon: The project reads "as one large office building without a breakdown in scale related to the neighborhood or the Los Gatos existing small town scale" (3/17/17).4 Also a photograph was submitted that showed how oversi zed the proposed building would be compared to the other commercial and residential structures on the street, and the photograph also contained the comparative square 4 Cannon did not approve the new design but, rather, left the decision to the Commission as to whether there wa s a significant size reduction (to 83 ,000 sq. ft.). The Commission did not approve the redesigned project. 2 footage of the structures, which documented how much larger in scale the proposed building would be compared to the othe r structures (Fowler, Transcript 12/13/17, pp . 43 -44). As ide from these facts, anothe r citizen commented from first hand observation, "The bu i ldings in the neighborhood are all small with meandering grass areas throughout the complexes that not only break up the buildings, but also provide a lovely openness to the complexes. The old buildings are small in density and height. This new building will be one much larger structure in height and size . Separating this into a few smaller buildings will be more consistent and fitting for a residential neighborhood" (Liebthal , Transcript 5/10/2017,p.78). The Commission drew on a letter also giving first hand observation based on knowledge of the Project size and its surroundings : "The proposed oversize development at 74,000 sq. ft. to replace a 31,000 sq . ft. existing commercial building would be the prominent feature of the neighborhood instead of blending in, and would give the appearance of existing residences being hemmed in by the commercial activity. This would be such a significant change to the character of the neighborhood .... "(Lane, 2/4/2018). Add itional evidence is cited in End Notes 3. Commercial Development Shall Be in Keeping with the Small Town Character of Los Gatos? Land Use policy 1.8 was cited. As substantial evidence that the proposed project did not comply with this policy, the Commission drew on architect Larry Cannon's letter which pointed out that the proposed building did not comply with Commercial Design Guidelines 1.4: the proposed building reads "as one large office building without a breakdown in scale related to the neighborhood or the Los Gatos existing small town scale" and it did not have the "careful attention to architectural ... detail simila r to the Town's residential architecture." The Commiss ion learned that the square footage of the proposed bu ilding and the site where it would be built contrasted with other office buildings in Los Gatos south of Lark, the largest of wh ich was at 750 University. Here is a first hand observation : "A reasonable person simply needs to experience the difference between Alberto Way and any other street that houses a building similar to the proposed building. For example, look at 750 University. This is a two story building of less than 70,000 sq. ft. with a similar number of vehicles. This section of Un iversity is a thoroughfare with two lanes plus a middle tun ing lane, a very wide street of commercial establishments as well as res idential apartments. There is no comparison . Alberto Way is a dead end street-one way in and one way out. It is narrow with barely enough street room for two lanes "(McDonald, 1/26/2018). The Commission drew on other first hand observations : "When I moved to Los Gatos, I was drawn to the un ique character and overall ambiance of this charming town . The commercial buildings in and around downtown Los Gatos have rarely struck me as commercial structures as so many blend with the overall scale and quiet arch itectur e of the town .... I feel that this new proposed building does not follow the intent of the Town design guidelines and General Plan 3 regarding aesthetics" (Le ibthal, Transcript 5/10/17, p . 77-78). And, "I actually grew up in Los Gatos back in the 60s so I've seen changes over the decades to a wonderful little town .... I have been pleased that the growth and changes over the years have been kept in check as to not get too out of line and detract or destroy the "small town" atmosphere that has made Los Gatos such a great little town. I can see why the town might be interested in a project such as the Alberto Way commercial building for the future revenue ... , but it simply does not belong in that location . . . . I just think the new Alberto Way Hwy 9 office building is more suited to an area like Winchester Blvd. and Lark, areas where there are already a bunch of office buildings . Shouldn 't the planners be encouraging workplace development closer to public transit?" ( M i lller, 11/30/17). Additional evidence appears in End Note 4 New developments shall not impede the ability of service providers to provide adequate emergency service? SAF 7.4 and LU6.4 were cited. The Commission drew on substantial evidence to support this finding, includi ng public testimony of a citizen reporting on the frequency of emergency and medical assistance going to The Commons, a senior residence; an expert was consulted : "The Los Gatos Commons Condos receive an average of 7.75 calls and responses per month. This statistic is based on the last two years of recorded calls and was provided by Kendra Randolph in Operations at the Santa Clara County Fire Department. Extens ive delays and gridlock at the intersection of Alberto Way and Los Gatos -Saratoga Road will make it difficult for residents to get to medical appointments on time and result in missed monitoring of medical issues" (Riney, Transcript 8/10/2016, pp . 67-68). In her letter, a resident of The Commons discussed how important timely emergency service is : "I want to tell what happened to me so you can understand why I am so frightened of this new Development at 405 Alberto Way and the traffic it will bring .... In 2014 I became very short of breath; a neighbor saw me pass out and called 911 . The EMR was here in five minutes. When I woke up, the ER doctors said I was very lucky that I got in so quickly as two more minutes delay, I would have been dead ! ! .... The traffic and congestion on our once quiet street has me very worried as my chronic problems and those of my neighbors are complicated and often need quick responses" (Figueroa, 12/7 /17). Another resident of Alberto Way commented on the safety hazards to elderly walkers : "Pedestrians crossing driveways to and from 401, and I'm very concerned about things getting worse if a large building is constructed at the corner of Alberto Way, adding 330 cars, maybe more. On the west side of Alberto Way the two driveways that cross the sidewalk in and out of the proposed new building complex will be much busier. I worry about getting hit or having to stand and wait duri ng rush hours .... We strongly urge you to not approve such a huge building. It would, as expla i ned, make walking i n this community a much less pleasant activity and be unsafe, especially for those of us who suffer from conditions of old age " (Vitale Transcript 5/10/2017, pp . 57-58). Additional evidence appears in End Note 5 4 Traffic reports include unusual traffic generation features and infill projects improve traffic circulation? TRA 3.7 and LU7.3 were cited . Many cit izens contributed first hand observati ons that the Commission considered. On the un ique situation near the project: "Alberto Way is a fairly short street with only one way in and one way out. To bring that much traffic onto the street is just too much. The developer will dedicate a portion of the site for the purpose of widening Alberto Way allowing for an extended right turn lane onto HWY 9. That's great and will help get cars out of their building and on their way. Wonderful for their tenant and their employees, but what about the residents who may be stuck behind their cars trying to enter on Alberto Way while they turn left into the property or stuck waiti ng while they exit out of the garage? .... This part of the freeway is and has been a bottleneck for many yea r s and the surface streets from the freeway to the development are also bottlenecked many times of the day. There is not a plan in place to alleviate the traffic pressure to Hwy 17 or Hwy 9 and Los Gatos Blvd any time soon ." (S . Burke, Transcript 12/13/2017, 63-65). Also, cit izens made assumptions based on facts about future traffic: "This project is a small site surrounded by residential units. It's on a corner of a congested intersection. You're adding 400 [330] cars . It will add multiple trucks for deli service deliveries and maintenance. It will add buses . It will create additional air pollution from idling cars and trucks entering and it will add to the summer traffic mess in Los Gatos" (Darrow Transcript 5/10/2017, p. 73). And see End Note 6 One further comment: On p. 12 of the 1/30/18 letter attached to the appeal, there is criticism of the Planning Commission for not considering the "economic infeasibility" of a project smaller than 74,260 square feet. Actually, the Commission spent t i me discussing this and found that it was not and could not be the job of the Commission to decide how much profit a developer should make, and that the developer had not provided the necessary financial data to make his case, according to legal requirement. See End Note 7. To conclude, the developer based his appeal on the grounds that the Commission abused its d iscretion, yet failed to support this appeal with facts. Therefore, the members of the Boards of Directors of the communities located on Alberto Way request that the Town Council support the Planning Comm ission's decision and the General Plan of the Town of Los Gatos and DENY the developer's appeal. 5 Sincerely, The Los Gatos Commons: Board Members Jean Jones, Carol Rosenberg, Rosemary Harper, Harold Vitale Pueblo de Los Gatos: Board Members Janet Prince, Jannette Scott, Cathy Cathey Las Casitas: Board Member Tim Gafney, Kristy Gafney Bella Vista Villages: Board Representative Melanie Kemp END NOTES l. Substantial evidence includes "facts, reasonable assumptions predicated upon facts, and expert opinion supported by facts." (Pub. Res . Code Sec. 21080(e)(1), 21082.2(c). First-hand lay perceptions regarding non-technical impacts meet legislative definitions of substantial evidence and testimony of area residents that are not qualified environmental experts qualifies as substantial evidence when based on relevant personal observations. (City of Carmel By-the-Sea v. Board of Supervisors (1986) 183 Cal. App.3d 229, 246n .8; Oro Fino Gold Mining Corporation v . County of El Dorado (1990} 225 Cal.App.3d872, 882; Citizens Association for Sensible Development of Bishop Area v. County of Inyo (1985) 172 Cal.App.3d 151, 173; Quail Botanical Gardens Foundation, Inc. v. City of Encinitas (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1597, 1604-1605; Arviv Enterprises v. South Valley Planning Commission (2000) 101 Cal.App.4th 1333.) 2. Substantial evidence on obstruction of views: Transcript (hereafter T) 5/10/2017, Leibthal, p. 79, First hand observation based on specific knowledge of the Project size and its surroundings (hereafter First hand observation); T 12/13/2017, 3:09, Rosenberg, First hand observation. 3. Substantial evidence of the proposed building not preserving the existing character and sense of place and not being in proportion with the buildings traditionally in the neighborhood: T 8/10/16, Kemp, p. 63, First hand observation; T 5/10/17 Dunn, p. 52 -53 and Darrow, p. 72 and Bourgeois, 1/10/18-all assumptions based on fact. 4 . Substantial evidence on the proposed building not being in keeping with the small town image of Los Gatos: T8/10/2016, Darrow, p. 65, Assumption premised on facts; T 5/10/2017, Fowler, p. 60, citizen testimony based on facts; Letter, Cathey, 1/10/2018, First hand observation. 5. Substantial evidence on the safety hazard posed by the traffic congestion that will accompany the proposed building was presented to the Commission at public hearings: Assumption s premised on facts (T8/10/2016 Azad, p. 77; Chin, p. 94). 6. Substantial evidence on traffic circulation problems . First hand observation: T8/10/2016, Cahn, p. 54; Vaccarello, p. 60-61; Kemp, p. 61; S. Burke, pp. 85-86; T12/13/2017, Stein, 3:24 :05; and Assumption based on facts : T5/10/2017, S. Burke , p. 40; T12/13/17, McDonald, 3:11 :14; L, G. Hamilton, 12/7/2017. 7. See Planning Commission Hearing 2/14/2018: 41:22 ; 43:47; 44:52; 46:58. And , see Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1988) 197 Cal.App.3d 1167, 1181. 6 _/) ~~ ~~~ 1-oVE~~-~ ~-.~ I~ , ?tn<--1~ ~ ~~~~~~' ~ ~' -~/ t!lo Mott~C?h'?S fl P~. ~~~/!,, ~ ~RIENDS OF LOS GATOS, SARATOGA,~-~ MONTE SERENO, CAMPBELL AND ~~ SOUTHWEST SAN JOSE! Email or letter writing is the most effective way to influence the Los Gatos Town Council members. We are also told that if people other than Alberto Way residents write in about the traffic gridlock problem associated with this huge building at Alberto Way and Highway#9 that the Council will sense how important the traffic gridlock is for the entire region. The huge building proposed for 405 Alberto Way will cause gridlock traffic for highway #17 and Highway#9 and it's connection to Highway. #85. It's too big for the quiet senior community on a dead end street. It will block the views of the Santa Cruz Mountains It will bring in 300 additional cars to ~ narrow, windin9, small street It violates the General Plan for development to blend with neighborhood and to be same scale of exiting properties. Please help us seniors! Please write to address below before MARCH 15 - J ENNIFER T. ARMER, AICP RECEIVED MAR 13 2018 ASSOCIATE PLANNER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TOWN O F LOS GATOS PLANNING DIVISION 110 E. MAIN STREET • Los-GATOS, cA 95030 TELEPHONE: (408) 399 -5706 • FAX : (408) 354-7593 Email: JArmer@LosGatosCA.gov • www.LosGatosCA .gov Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Jennifer, Nancy Cardinet <ncardinet@gmail.com > Tuesday, March 13, 2018 4:42 PM Jennifer Armer Alberto Way Pr oject I'm writing to encourage you to listen to the planning commission with regard to their recommendations to reject the Alberto Way Project. The project will make the traffic situation impossible! I live in Saratoga and like to come to shop and eat at restaurants in down town. With the added traffic this project would incur I think a lot of folks might go else where . Again please listen to the Planning Commission as they have done a lot of work as well as folks who live near Alberto Way. Regards, Nancy Cardinet Sent from my iPhone / To : Jennifer Armer, Senior Planner, jarmer@losgatosca _gov Community Development Department, Los Gatos RECEIVE°i MAR 14 2018 T OWN O F LOS GATOS PLANNI NG DIVISIO N Re : Proposed Development at 401-409 Alberto Way, Los Gatos Recently the Los Gatos Planning Commission unanimously vetoed a development proposal for 40 1-409 Alberto Way, but the developer is appeating this decision to the Town Council. This development will replace a 31,000 sq. ft. office complex and 120-car parking lot with a 74,000 sq. ft building and 200-car underground parking. Meanwhile, it has become a neighborhood blight. We urge the Town Council to reject the appeal for the following reasons: • Traffic/Safety concerns: This corner is adjacent to the Hiway 9/Hiway 17 interchange_ Alberto Way is a dead-end street with 400 residents in 4 condominium projects, one of them an over-55 complex, and all of them with school-age children_ During construction , Alberto Way will be blocked much of the time with heavy construction equipment, entry/exit of residential traffic as well as fire and medical emergency vehicles will be impeded_ After construction , traffic in and out of this complex during commute hours and throughout the day w i ll bring additional congestion to an already congested area _ Traffic congestion in Los Gatos is already terrible : Enough! • Professional engineering reports have questioned the wisdom of underground parkjng based on concerns about the water level in the area-it's next to Los Gatos Creek-and the potential flood/water/structural damage to other buildings in the area_ • NeighboThood compatibility : This large development is not compatible with the neighborhood_ A new smaller office building, a remodeled existing office building , additional housing -any of these are better for the neighborhood and the town than the proposed development. • Views: f>,learby residents w ill see nothing but the walls of this development. We all drive, dine, and shop in Los Gatos; send our kids to Los Gatos schools; and attend movies, plays, and concerts there. We believe this project will have a negative effect on Los Gatos, continuing the overcrowding, congestion , and los~ of small-town character with no positive benefits. You can do better with this site! ~ .... = .,u}'Sf10:l ... ~. ___ :t~-~--------- ~---~-- -~1Ma __ Vt!:~_ .;2a~!!., ~s-G.4.~-__ ............ . ..~ar..~--~ .. >u.'t-;-·4-.s. __ C.tHJ.~.-- ... 1.'f. l. .. /a.L( !IA~ .. _-~.' .... _._ J~. _ .1.' ... __ .4 .. _. __ .... -.. d.; ~2-J:'..3. ~-/n. a-_ ... f?4e. .h _ . .du_ ... L~ .... _. To : Jennifer Armer, Senior Planner, jarmer@losgatosca.gov Community Development Department, Los Gatos Re : Proposed Development at 401-409 Alberto Way, Los Gatos 2 Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Bob Burke < bobburkeat@gmail.com > Wednesday, March 14, 2018 11 :03 AM Jennifer Armer Alberto Way Citizens Proposed Design for 401-409 Alberto 405 Alberto Way Design Changes 3-14 -18 .pptx On behalf of the Alberto way citizens who signe d the Petition for our opposition to the cu r rent Design , attached is our proposed design to preserve: -views -surrounding properties from dama ge -traffic impact on Hw y 9 traffic I'll present these as slides at next week's TC meeting. Re gards, Bob Burke 408-896-7896 "Timely action combined with market know l edge creates excellence and value in the introduction of new technology." Alberto Way Citizens Design March 14, 2018 .L C!.1\C ...,......,,~ ------ ...... '. .... ~l n'lfllr ... ,,~ -----.....,l ..... ~ ... ~ af •ft ,~ II II II II II .. A!"Mo\ ....... '°"'. • '"9--~---• M.O... Iii ~· . -~.... . ... ~,, f<ll ~""-,lt . .., __ .. _ .... ., A • • ,.;11., ,::::=::=::J -······ """''~ ~ .. , ... .......... ,,,. ------ ·-·-·-· ASBRE',]Al]ON:; .. ~-•• ..f1 .... ··•111-1 .. r•n f r\"I r-~-r ,... .. .,.,.., i:W'I t • ...... , rrr~": •N>C:,-,>-,-_ I N .,,,O .......... ;..a'!l f<I.,..• ~ ... ,-w,1..._~ ... , •• __ ,..+ ........ .,., ..... ~ ~, r,,:,r •,1•_....,., W'J V -. , "' "'1 • •fli t • t •! C\,l_ .. ~~tes. ":rrE: ... _..,_.., __ "_""_ ... _,.,.,.. .. ~,. . ~1CWl(,!lo-V .... r•.M:1~~~-__ ,_. __ .,..""°•' .... I .. ••·,.,,._-. • ,.. •• ,,.,. ..... r t"NL /: ........ "::~.e..q ·:.--1, .. ("'41..:.. 'l'lllo.i •1 t1 ... 1r).l.,... .. I ..... UNt -,..,,..,....:ta ,,_ -~.,..,r •~tr..l 11 1:1 .. ., ... "'' -~r....a~.c .... -....... ,._ I "'"~""~ ...... . ... I / I .. ~ ............ . Remains 2 stories "'37K sq ft 4:ll ,>Ui[I!"() \ ~6.~ GLf P•1=32• CFFP.,-:m SC..:;:!•t.!'..! This Area reduced to 1 story -17K sq ft A RC T El' ~r,O,a-----~---~~- Remove UG Garage Here for Las Casitas settlement protection 1- <( h. ~j 5 0 'C" I-. ~ « .. ~w v ~ CD cri M _J 0 .s -< ... }-~ t ~~ < ~ ..J " ... -...... ...... ~A• .... .,.,,. -"' r,rtr1• ................... ~ ............. ·--·--......... ·-~ ·--· ~-M"- ,.,.,~_....,.r.,....., i:-4 -t<Alr'1r C2 .0 ~a,r,~ lt .. 1 401 Earth Settlement caused by De-Watering During Excavation BEFORE EXCAVATION & DE-WATERING (NOW) 405 Alberto 409 0-10 feet Las Casitas Ground Level CD SJWC Bella Vista Village Water Leve\ be\ow groun 10-20 feet CD WVSD DURING EXCAVATION. CONCRE Cracks & pipe breaks occur from difference in settling Caused by de-watering Before De -Watered Ground Level POUR & HARDENING Bella Vista Village ~~~~~:.:------------------------------------------------------ Ground 401-409 Al be rto ._S_u_n..&.ke_n_G_r_o_.un-d~L-e-ve~IL------___;,==-:=.c==~--~~ level 250 Excavation for UG Parking while de-watered for 250 ft \ ft ed Le-ve oe-watet' sun\(en Sunken De-watered Level Earth Settlement caused by De-Watering During Excavation DURING EXCAVATION, CONCRETE POUR & HARDENING Cracks & pipe breaks occur from difference in settling Caused by de-watering Pueblo De Los [ t >'1--!. \ \ Gatos Hwy11 J _______ Before De-Watered Ground Level _____ ll=_~---=-:=;:==--::;:i:~r--~/~ Sunken Ground level 401-409 Alberto Sunken Ground Leve Svnk, for 250 ft Excavation for UG Parking for 250 ft ateteO ~ er, D oe .. \N c?Jfer l e .. &.i,at sun\<.en "e\ eve; ered Sunken De-watered '.Nater \..e Water Level CD SJWC on Hwy-9 DETECTED MOVEMENT OF ADJACENT BUILDINGS, WET UTILITIES,SIDEWALKS OR ROADS DISCOVERED DURING EXCAVATION = PROOF THAT DAMAGE HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE -THE ONLY QUESTION LEFT IS: WHAT IS ITS COST? Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Hello, Karen Szabo <szabokaren420@gmail.com> Wednesday, March 14, 2018 1:33 PM Jennifer Armer Alberto Way development As a life long resident of beautiful Los, Gatos, (1959 on) Please please please do not approve The current plans for the development project n the corner of Alberto Way. There us so much traffic ton the mornings and evening leaving Alberto Way as it stands. This town is grid locked most of the time, we just don't need a development that big among us residents. I currently live directly across the street and we just do not need another huge office building blocking our view and the mess it will cause . Many more people can speak much more elaborate and more elegance than I. I just speak from the heart and I just barely make it to live here in my home town, please do not allow that structure under the present plan. Thank you, Karen Szabo Ruth and Curtis Cook 130 Vasona Oaks Drive Los Gatos, Ca 95032 408-395-6759 Dear Los Gatos Town Council Members: The purpose of this letter is to request that you seriously consider the impact of the huge building project being proposed for construction at 405 Alberto Way in Los Gatos. Just as is true of the project proposed for construction covering the last orchard know as the North 40 property, the Alberto Way project will increase substantially the traffic within Los Gatos. Areas around Highway 17 are already impossible due to those who use alternative routes to get to the Santa Cruz area. In addition, given the scale of these two projects, it is clear that they are not planned in such a way that they will blend in with the surrounding neighborhoods in terms of size and intensity. We realize that there is a housing shortage due to the tech industry. It seems that those creating the jobs could take greater responsibility for developing housing for their employees and/or contributing to the development of affordable hou sing for those being priced out of the market due to the demand for housing that they create. Noticing the vacant store fronts in downtown Los Gatos, it is hard to imagine that more retail space is needed in the North 40 area. There is already plenty of competition for tho se who wish to remain in the retail business in Los Gatos. Instead, there should be more greenery and space between and around houses as is characteristic of most of Los Gatos. The number of dwellings proposed is jus t plain too many and only benefits those trying to make money. We truly applaud and appreciate the work you do as Council Members and are especially grateful to you for being willing to listen to and consider the opinions of those you serve -the residents of Los Gatos. ~~lo{:;~ ~\I~ ~ Co., k_ Curtis W. Cook, DBA Ruth E. Cook, Ph.D Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: CONNIE <cgdailey@comcast.net > Wednesday, March 14, 2018 3:28 PM Jennifer Armer RE : Alberto Way Public Hearting Mar 2018 .docx Public Hearting/Planning Commission March 20, 2018 Architecture and Site Application 5-15-056 The project has been determined to have a significant impact on the environment. Once the project is completed, the developer will no longer be held accountable for any future underground damage to existing property or buildings. This is a serious threat to homeowners who will have to pay for the repair of damage out of their own pockets. This will bankrupt many, as they are seniors on fixed incomes. The underground parking garage is a disaster waiting to happen. Another major concern about this project is the additional traffic it will bring. On any given day, current traffic backs up on Hwy 9 to University Avenue or beyond and makes it almost impossible to get in or out of the neighborhood. In an emergency, first responders will be delayed by the impasse, or those in need of help will not be able to leave due to the congestion. This project is not a good idea for this location and will not be beneficial to the town of Los Gatos. George S. Dailey 441 Alberto Way #111 Los Gatos, CA 95032 4 08-827-4956 cgdailey@comcast.net Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Jennifer: John R Mittelstet <j mitt@comcast.net > Wednesday, March 14, 2018 4:0 9 PM Jennifer Armer Kemp, Melanie; Bob Burke; Roman Rufanov 401 -409 Alberto Wa y -Letter to Town Counci l Mittelstet to TownCouncil 3-14-18 signed .pdf Attached is a two-page letter (pdf) to the Town Council members from four of us residents on Alberto Way, -one each from Los Gatos Commons (me), Bella Vista Village (Melanie Kemp), Pueblo de Los Gatos (Bob Burke) and Las Casitas (Roman Rufanov). This letter urges the Council's support for the Planning Commission's denial of applicant's appeal of the PC 's decision. We appreciate your sending a copy to each Council Member. Please Acknowledge receipt. Thanks , John Mittelstet 408 -460-5446 March 14 ,2018 Rob Rennie, Mayor Steve Leonardis, Vice Mayor Marcia Jensen , Council Member Marice Sayoc, Council Member Barbara Spector, Council Member LOS GATOS TOWN COUNCIL 110 E. MAIN STREET LOS GATOS, CA 95030 John Mittclstct 443 Alberto Way. Uni t 8-123 Los Gatos , CA 95032 jmitt@comcast.net 408-356-5970 Re: 401-409 ALB ERTO WAY -LP Acquisition·s Appeal of the Planning Commission's 2-14-18 unanim o us denial of application Dear Mayor Rennie, Vice-Mayor Leonardis and Co uncil Members Jensen , Sayoc & Spector: Please support the Planning Commission· s unanimou s deci sion to deny the developer's application for 40 1-409 Alberto Way. I ha ve no new infonnation to submit regarding thi s application. I'm sure you will agree that you have had m o re than e nough information from neighbors and the Applicant to make yo ur decision . As a voting re side nt of Los Gatos for the past 40 years. l be li eve there is a deeper issue at stake. Applicants are not following the process outlined by the Town. Applicants arc trying to end-run the Planning Commi ss ion Ex P a rte r ul es, bypass the Planning Commiss ion· s authority on applications, and offer last minute concessions to the Town Co uncil. hoping lo sec ure th~ Co uncil's a pproval for the most profitable development possible ... while disregarding the Town's application process. as well as important c lements of its General Plan, Co mmercial Desi gn Guidelines (''COG'') & Ordinances. The Pl ann in g Commission ("PC .. ) has worked t ir eless ly and thoughtfully on thi s project. spending man y personal hours. and lon g hours in severa l public hearin gs, s ince early January. 2016 -for more than two years. I have attended most of tho se public session s. The PC was very open to the comments and inputs of both the developer and his experts, as well as the affected ne ighbors. The PC clearl y wanted to arrive at a decision that would result in a good us e of the property , while still confonning lo all aspects of the Town·s GP, COG and Ordinances. The PC considered both objective and important subjective clements (having to do with the Town's d esired quality of life for Los Gatans) of th e GP. In the May. 2017. Plannin g Commission public he arin g, after much input fr om both sides over th e co ur se of two sessions, the PC . before voting on a motion for their final deci s ion, point edl y asked the developer "is this you r final /be s t offe r ?" (or words to th a t e ffe c t). Mr. Lamb answered emphatically, i f disingenuously. "yes!'' The PC then made it s moti on and voted to den y the application. John Mittclstct to Town Council (3-14-2018) p 2 of 2 As I understand the process, any in fo rm at ion which is known by any part ic ipant during the Plannin g Comm iss ion proc ess, mus t be presented to the Planning Co mmi ss ion prior to t heir dec is ion. and on ly '·new information not rea so nabl y availab le before'' the PCs dec ision. can be presented to the Town Co uncil during an appeal of the PC's decis ion to the Town Co uncil. I maintain th at Mr . Lamb's re spo nse, that he had nothin g better to o ffer t he Planning Commission, was a disingenuous res po nse. because I believe that he made that response so that he could go to the Town Council. under appeal, with hi s best offer disguised as "new'' information. The onl y new information was that he was now ready to negotiate . At leas t one Co uncil membe r seemed very perturbed that th e T own Co uncil was allowing not ju st thi s deve loper, but many previ o us applicants, to play this ga me. 1 belie ve that tht: Council should have. then and there, de ni ed this appl icant's appeal. Instead. last October the Council dec ided to k ick the ball back to the PC fo r what the Counc il hoped to be a ·'fi nal" decision on the proje ct. with the PC co ns id ering all informati on available to iL You will re<.:all that two motion s fr o m the Co uncil that October ni ght. to give spec ific in s tructi on to the PC re ga rdin g what the Co uncil felt were important deci s ion factors. we re both denied by a 3·2 vote. Instead the unanimou s deci s ion o f the Town Co uncil was to have the PC decide without specifi c instruction fr o m th e T ow n Co uncil. The Planning Co mmi ss ion met in January to consider applicant's most r ecent proposa l, and after nearin g the witching hour, asked th e dev e lo per to cons ider makin g further revisions to bring the project into closer harmony with the Town's GP, COG a nd Ordinances, before voting to co nti nu e the hea rin g at a lat er date. T he dev e lo per sub se quentl y gave noti ce that they would hav e no changes to their proposal. On February 14th , the Plannin g Co mmi ss ion , after la bori ous revi ew of a ll inputs, a nd meticul ous re-review of the Genera l Plan . decided unan imou s ly to once again deny the a pplicant 's proposa l. Council Members. pl ease refrain from allowing the developer to aga in e nter '·new In fo rmat ion'' at you r March 20th meetin g when yo u hear the appeal. In stead, se nd a st rong me ssage to thi s app licant and to all future applicants to play by the rul es. and stay with in th e process. Ple ase s uppott the hard wo rk and de libe rat ions of your Plannin g Commission, and den y appl ic am 's appeal of the PCs unanimous decision. A decision you un anim ous ly return ed to th e PC for final detennination. Thank you again for yo ur ow n efforts on thi s appl icati on \\ s1x.~:u:1.u. W-tl I 'IJ?,j;/11!, l,f, . ~n /;,1.f{jfiflf Bob Bu~ '{,(Janie il!P Los Gatos Commons Pueb lo de Lo s Gatos Bella Vista Village (All Alberto Way r es iden ce complexes) Roman Rufanov Las Casitas Cc : Jennifer Armer, Associate Planner. Town of Los Gatos (JArmer@losgatos.gov) - Jennifer Armer From : Jennifer E Liebthal [mailto:jliebthal@gmail.com] Sent: We d nes d ay, M arch 14, 201 8 5 :47 PM To: jarmer@losgatos.gov; Council <Council@ losgatosca .gov> Subject : Pl ea se DEN Y 401-409 Alberto Wa y App ea l Dear Mayor and Town Council Members, I writing to ask that you support the hard work and deliberations of our Planning Commission and deny the appeal of the Planning Commission's UNANIMOUS D ECISION to deny the deve loper's application for 401-409 Alberto Way. Many of the concerns of myself and other residents have still not been addressed .. • Reducing the size of the building to something more fitting to the neighborhood • Traffic increases (current study does not reflect true impacts) • Loss of views. My unit at 420 Alberto Way will loss all my views of the hills from my unit if this building is put in place at it's current height. • Current size and scale of the building is not compatible with the neighborhood. • Los s of quality of life and negative impacts on this residential neighborhood I am sorry that the town has to go through another threat of lawsuits. It is sad to see these things happening in our town and I am sure it is very hard on the council. Thanks for your time and continued service, Jennifer Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Janet Ehrhardt <janety.ehrhardt96@gmail.com > Wednesday, March 14, 2018 8:30 PM Jennifer Armer 405 Alberto Way The neighbors deserve to have this property be sensitive to the neighborhood . As the proposal is presented there will be heavy traffic and the entire neighborhood will be impacted. This street was not designed for such a large project. The resulting pollution and congestion will affect all residents who travel past this site daily. The proposal does not meet the standards of our town. Uphold the Planning Commission 's unanimous denial. Janet Ehrhardt 62 Fillmer Ave. Los Gatos Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Cheryl Huddleston <c hehud @comcas t.net > Wednesday, March 14, 2018 9:05 PM Jennifer Armer Alberto Way We are so concerned about the dire ction that our town has been going the past years. This increase in development has got to stop! It seems like any time of day you are likely to incur traffic gridlock. Anything higher than 2 story ruins the views. People have a hard time finding parking to shop or dine downtown. Los Gatos is a town not a city. Please do not allow it to be spoi led by developers. Consider "just say no", "enough is enough ". Thank you for your consideration in taking a stand against these kind of projects. Cheryl and Stan Huddleston 55 Church Street Sent from my iPad Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Hi Town Council members, Paulette Sato <surfbudha@gmai l.c om> Wednesday, March 14, 2018 9:13 PM Jennifer Armer 405 Alberto Way project First let me say thank you for your tireless efforts to listen and respect all parties concerned, but especially for listening to the current residents of Los Gatos and hearing our concerns. Just so you know, your work does not go unnoticed and is very much appreciated by me and all of my neighbors. You are our heroes! Now on the subject of the 405 Alberto Way project. I have attended al l but one of the Town Council meetings dealing with Lamb Partners ' construction on Alberto Way. These are my thoughts for the final meeting: 1) The project is still too big . Lamb still insists on building a structure close to 2x the square footage of the size of the building now in place . And it is obvious he doesn't care at all about the town or blending in with the existing landscape . It's all about profit and money to him. Unfortunately for him, he has made no effort to conceal this fact after the niceties of the first meeting. He's very transparent . 2) Since he started his proposal, he has (perhaps deliberately) kept the space in absolute shambles. The place is a mess, pl astic poles all over the lot that have fallen down-detritus and debri s everywhere. It looks like an abandoned space , and I pass by that eyesore every day on my way to and from work. It's like he is saying to the residents, well you can keep your views of the Santa Cruz mountains, but I'm going to trash this fenced in area. It is a disaster. So disrespectful. 3} Lamb has made it crysta l clear that he has zero respect for the residents, the Town Council, or the Planning Committee. Do I want him for my neighbor, of course not. But if he's reasonable and r educes the size to 40,000 sq ft . or something in that ba llpark, well ok then. That's reasonable . Thanks for your continued diligence . Best, Paulette Sato 420 Alberto Way #26 Jennifer Armer From: JOHN FOWLER [mai1to:jawolf3@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 9:17 PM To : Jennifer Armer <JArmer@losgatosca .gov> Subject: Alberto Way development project Jennifer T . Armer, AICP Senior Planner Attention: Los Gatos Town Counci l My wife and I are longtime home-owners and reside nts of Los Gatos. The proposed development at Alberto Way is disturbing in a number of ways. First , as proposed, it is a massive structure out of keeping with other bui ldings in th e immediate area; in fact , there aren't really any existing buildings in the downtown which are comparable. Th e area consists primarily of two story residential and smaller scale retail/commercial structures. Th e proposed structure will be a game-changer as far as the look and feel of the neighborhood bu il dings. Second, there are a great number of retired and elderly residents and families with children in that neighborhood. The increased traffic th at wi ll follow th e addition of the proposed office build i ng raises safety co ncerns for residents . I know th e area well from the perspective of traffic peaks and co nge st ion. For thirteen years I drove my chi ldre n to Van Meter and Fisher schools most days of th e school week. I can attest to the heavy traffic that has become increasingly problematic during the morning commute and afternoon times to the end of the eve ning commute. Getting out of and into Alberto Way will be increasingly diffi cul t and frustrating for drive rs. Th ere are more than enough easily angered and aggressive drivers in town already. Many children use the immediate streets to travel to and from school. Third , Los Gatos was attractive to my wife and I because of the natural surroundings. When I f irst saw Los Gatos in 1992, I told my wife that was where I wanted to purchase our home. The views of trees and mountains so ld both of us on the area. While there are other benefits and amenities to being a Los Gatos resident , the natural beauty of our town was perhaps the most important. Adding massive structures to the town obscures v iews and affects the quality of our lives . Why the t own council cont inues to debate this proposed development is troubling. Recommendations from the Planning Commission have been clear and emphatic that the development as proposed should not be approved. John Fowler 120 Cleland Ave Los Gatos , CA 95030 I am asking the Town Council to deny the project. Over the past 2 years there has been numerous occa s ion where the developer has continually refused to listen to the to the suggestions of the Alberto residents and planning commission and finally has refused to make any changes in Redesign 3, despite direction from the planning commission. Here are my reasons for the request to deny this project There's no evidence that Los Gatos needs a large class A building There are numerous small businesses and professionals in town that would love to have a nice multi -use office at that location. Previous tenants to the property were attorneys, insurance agents, CPA 's, print copy center, financial planners and more and the property was most of the time full. No evidence that this building will bring more revenues to downtown merchants. A lot of the residents on Albertro Way spend mornings, lunchtime, weekends and our money in town because we live here we like it, and understand the importance of supporting our local merchants. The new business model of employees do not have the luxury of long lunches or shopping breaks to go downtown or the need to support our local merchants. Most companies now have their own cafeteria or have lunch catered. Safety for residents, children and the seniors are a major concern. 2 years of dump trucks, trucks with building supplies, Large cranes, heavy duty operating equipment, PGE digging up the roads, Cal trans digging up the streets is not only dangerous to us but makes no sense. The reduction of the building to 74,260 does not protect the existing view corridor to the Santa Cruz Mountains on the north side of the site. The proposed reduction to 74,260 does not address the inconsistencies with the General Plan and Commercial Design Guidelines that were cited by the Planning Commission when they denied the 83,000 sq. ft. project in May 2017. The developer's argument that the 74,260 footage should be approved because a further reduction would be economically infeasible is not relevant, according to two Town Council members and the research our attorney did on case law on the subject. The developer's figures in his justification letter for Redesign 3 show he saved money by r educing the building size and garage size. Presumably, he would save more by a further small reduction. Resident of Pueblo de Los Gatos Thomas Dunn Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Karen Kurtz < kurtzk@comcast.net > Thursday, March 15, 2018 9:38 AM Jen nifer Armer Alberto Way project As a resident of Los Gatos for 52 years I encourage you to support the findings of the planning commission and reject this "too large " project on Alberto Way. I do not believe that the developer has tried his best to work with the residents on Alberto Way or the town in responding to requests to scale the project back or to follow the general plan. The planning commission has done a great job in sticking to the general plan, listening to the town residents and tried to work with the developer. Please honor and support the hard work of the planning commission and the residents of this town and reject this project. Thank you for your serious consideration and work, Karen Kurtz 107 Broadway Los Gatos, CA March 15, 2018 To: Los Gatos Town Council Members c/o: Jennifer Armer, Associate Planner, Town of Los Gatos Re: 401-409 Alberto Way, Los Gatos, CA For more than two years, an alliance of local residents have been working diligently with the Los Gatos Planning Commission and Town Council to limit the size, mass and scale of a newly proposed two-story, 93,000 square foot commercial building at 401-409 Alberto Way from an outside developer and his army of consultants. During this two-year process, the townspeople SUCCESSFULLY ARGUED for a smaller footprint and lower elevation through two hearings with the Planning Commissions and an additional hearing with the Town Council. The Town Council kicked the decision back to the Planning Commission last October, and on February 14, 2018, the Planning Commission UNANIMOUSLY REJECTED the developer's aggressive plan. Now the developer and his consultants have filed a SECOND APPEAL to the Town Council for a final hearing on March 20. SUMMARY REVIEW: The original 30+ year old commercial structure measured approximately 36,000 square feet. The developer is trying to push through approval of a 74,000 square foot building with 285 parking spaces in a two-story, underground parking structure that will significantly block traffic, significantly obscure hillside views and potentially cause settling and water damage to neighboring residents from the underground parking garage. To make matters worse, the developer is now verbal ly THREATENING A LAWSUIT to win approval of his original 93,000 square foot design if his 74,000 square foot plan is not approved. The Town has also been wrestling with increased traffic congestion for several years near downtown Los Gatos without finding any meaningful solution. Thi s Alberto Way building site is at th e intersection of Highway 9 and Alberto Way across from the Los Gatos Lod ge and a major artery for residents traveling to/from downtown Los Gatos, students from our local schools, Highway 17 and residential neighborhoods in east and west Los Gatos. IT'S TIM E to show this developer that the Town of Lo s Gatos and local residents will not succumb to extortion or threats and important that our Town Council let prospective developers know that they will continue to work hard to maintain our charming. small town am bian ce while providing a Class A commercial office space in a mixed-use neighborhood. Th ese co ncepts are not mutually exclusive. A MATIER OF RESPECT FOR THE PROCESS: Developers also need to know that a thoughtful and detailed study and decision by the Planning Commission cannot be circumvented with an automatic appeal to the Town Council. Thi s tactic completely undermines the authority of the Planning Commission who have worked diligently and arduously to review thi s project in great detail including hundreds of pages of reports from experts, personal conversations and meetings with the developer and neighbors, visits to the site and many hours of public testimony. I can't offer enough appreciation for all that the Planning Commission ha s invested for 2+ years on this one project. The residents in the Alberto Way neighborhood including Pueblo de Los Gatos, Las Casitas, The Los Gatos Commons and Bella Vista Village implore the Town Council to support the hard work and deliberations of our Planning Commission and deny the appeal of the Planning Commission's UNANIMOUS DECISION to deny the developer's application. Opponents to the developer's application will be wearing red at the Town Council hearing on March 20 to demonstrate our unity and resolve . Please review comments from our Planning Commissioners during their hearing on February 14, 2018: • Chairman Michael Kane cited a letter from the commercial real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield that said Class A buildings can be smaller than 74,000 square feet. The DEVELOPER even provided a letter from an expert stating that a Class A building can be 50,000 square feet in a suburban setting. • Vice Chairman Matthew Hudes called into doubt the traffic study completed by the Town some time ago which has been challenged by more recent reports on the Alberto Way/Highway 9 intersection from Los Gatos citizens. He asked that the Town's traffic study be revisited before more projects were approved and added that Alberto Way won't be wide enough to accommodate fire trucks and emergency vehicles. He also called out the project's environmental impact report as inadequate. (San Jose Mercury News, February 22 , 2018} • Commissioner Tom O'Donnel voiced grave concern over the predicted increase in traffic on Alberto Way and Highway 9, saying "I've been doing this for 14 or 15 years, and I have never seen a traffic report that didn't tell me things were going to be fine, and they never are." • Commissioner Kathryn Janoff voted no because of "the loss of views, the loss of quality of life and the impact on the neighborhood, which would be negative." • Commissioner Kendra Burch cited neighborhood compatibility and views as reasons to deny the project. "As it stands, the application is not compatible with the neighborhood." • (Commissioner Mary Badame was recused from the hearing.) The developer ha s based his appeal to the Town Council on the grounds that the Planning Commission abused its discretion, but he has failed to support this appeal with facts. As constituents, the Alberto Way Neighborhood Alliance numbers more than 450 voting residents . We will not be assuaged by lack of final and decisive action by the Town Council or the developer's strategy to wear down the townspeople with this application process that has bounced between the Planning Commission and the Town Council for more than two years. Please help us to find a reasonable compromise for a development that will enhance our neighborhood and our town. Thank you, Melanie Kemp 174 Cuesta de Los Gatos Way Bella Vista Village representative to the Alberto Way Neighborhood Alliance 20 year resident of the Alberto Way neighborhood March 15, 2015 Dear Town Council members, During the 2/14/18 Planning Commission meeting, Commissioners Kane and Janoff stated that the behavior of the LP Acquisitions developers was inconsistent with General Plan policy LU 1.1: encourage developers to engage in discussions as early as possible regarding the nature and scope of the project and possible impacts and mitigation requirements. Commissioner Kane commented that it looked like the developers were not "li sten ing" to that when they proposed a building over 93 ,000 square feet for little dead end Alberto Way, which showed a lack of awareness of town requirements and commitment to protecting neighbors in Lo s Gatos (36:00). The developers' lack of interest in talking WITH (NOT TO) neighbors was evident from the beginning. In the 8/10/16 Planning Commission hearing, re sident Vaccarello commented on Mr. Lamb's behavior in the meeting he attended: What he has told you about working with the residents is false. That's the reason why you have so many people here. I asked him if he had made any modifications or changes to this building based on the input of the residents. This is his exact words, and I have witnesses . So I asked him, "Have you had any modifications since the meeting, or talked to the residents in the area"? Randy said, No . I said, "Why don't you work with the residents to get this thing passed? .... He said, " I don't care and I don't give a damn about the residents, and I'm going to build it anyway" (p. 60). Mr. Vaccarello pointed to two witnesses to this, who supported his recollection (pp. 87, 89, 94). Mr. Lamb also told t he neighbors that if they objected to the building, something worse would be built there. These exchanges set the tone for the next two years . The Planning Commission members drew attention to the developers' failure to communicate with the neighbors (e.g., pp. 35-36) and voted to request "significant reduction" in square feet (8/26/16). On 5/10/17 the Planning Commission denied approval for the project after it was reduced only to 83,000 sq uare feet . The developer had met with neighbors prior to the May hearing, bringing with him a completed redesign that he had not discussed with them previously. The neighbors asked for a further reduction in size and he refused. He also said that if the Town Council denied the project, he would sue and the Counci l would not have the will to defend against his suit. On 10/3/17 the Town Council remanded the project back to the Planning Commission, where the developers offered Redesign 3, without any prior discussion with the neighbors. The developers refused to address the issue of the obstructed view on the north side of the site, as the Planning Commission requested on 1/10/18 (in a motion that passed unanimously). The Commission denied approval for Redesign 3 on 2/14/18. Throughout this two year process , the Alberto Way residents have proposed compromises. The developer rejected them all. On the issue of size , the neighbors moved from wanting a 31,000 square foot building to a 64,000 square foot project-a size increase of 33 ,000 square feet. The developer ha s offered a 19,000 square foot reduction from Design 1 to Redesign 3. The neighbors have "bent over backwards" to work with this developer. I support the Boards of Directors of the four developments on Alberto Way, who have requested that the Town Council direct the developer to compromise by working w ith the Planning Commission on view and building size or by giving the developer conditions for approving the project that acknowledge the not unreasonable concerns of the neighbors . We residents gain nothing from this project . We are trying to minimize the negative impact of it on our community and on the town. To indulge this developer in his effort to drag the process out so as to wear down the Town Council and their constituents would damage the relationship between the Town Council and their constituents who rely on the values and policies of the General Plan . Thank you for considering these remarks. Sincerely, Loretta Fowler 451 Alberto Way Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: Jon Shank <Jon@pelio .com > Thursday, March 15 , 2018 10:11 AM BSpector; Steven Leonardis ; Marcia Jensen; Rob Rennie; Marico Sayoc ; Town Manager; Joel Paulson; Jennifer Armer I support 401 Alberto I am writ ing another e-mail in support of the 401 Alberto Way development, which is directly across the street from our property at 53-57 Los Gatos-Saratoga Road (Best Western Inn of Los Gatos and Grill 57 property). The use being pursued seems appropriate for the site, and the architecture appears appealing and fitting of Los Gatos. Class A office space near a major freeway with on/off ramps in all directions makes sense, and it is likely that the developer could attract a solid tenant (or tenants) that brings highly-paid employees to Los Gatos. With this type of tenant typically comes employees that are likely to spend money in the Los Gatos community. This could have the multi-faceted effect of increasing revenues at local businesses and increasing tax revenues . Specifically for us, this development cou ld help increase revenue at our property and thus increase the ta xes we pay to the Town of Los Gatos. It would also be nice to see jobs being brought to an area where there is hou sing. We would greatly look forward to providing serv ices for the new tenants at 401 Alberto Way, and we hope that the community has come to see the project's merits. Pl ease do not hesitate to contact me if you would like to dis cuss this further. Best regard s, Jon Jon Shank Pelio & Associates 14573 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 0 -(408) 872-9500 C -( 408) 497-2887 F -( 408) 872-9505 March 15, 2018 Dear Council members, The Boards of Dire ctors of the Alberto Way communities Las Casitas, Pueblo de Los Gatos, The Los Gatos Commons and Bella Vista Village reque sted in our letter of 3/9/2018 that the Town Council deny the developer's appeal of the Planning Commission's decision on 2/14/2018 We understand that the developer will build on the site, but we believe that the developer did not make a good faith effort to work with the Planning Commission on an appropriate redesign. Therefore, your constituents on Alberto Way, as well as many others in Los Gatos, request that the Council help to engineer a compromise between the de ve loper and the Alberto Way neighbors. Toward that end, we would like you to consider taking one of these two actions: 1) Remand the project back to the Planning Commission with direction to require the developer to submit rough sketches of two redesigns; this is what the Planning Commission requested on 1/10/2018. A. A project that preserves the mountain view on the north side of the site by making part of the building one story. The square feet and the width of the view corridor to be included. B. A project that increases the setback on the north side of the site to 80 feet by removing the part of the propo sed building that obstructs the view. The square footage of the building to be included . The Planning Commission would consider both options and approve one. 2) Approve the project with conditions-preserve the existing view on the north side of the site and reduce the building to 64,000 square feet. And require that the revis ions be brought back to the Council for review. We represe nt the interests of the 400+ re sidents on Alberto Way. We want to compromise with the developer (as did the Planning Commission). We ask for your help in accomplishing this. We realize that someth ing will be built on the 401--409 site. In echoing the comments of the Planning Commission, we are united in our conviction that the building should not fundamentally obstruct our mountain view corridor on the north and not be significa ntly larger and more massive than the neighboring buildings. Board members at Pueblo de Los Gatos: Cathy Cathey, Jannette Scott Board members at The Los Gatos Commons: R. Harper, H. Vitale, J. Jones, K. McDonald Board members at La s Casitas: Tim Gafney, Kristy Gafney Repre sentative to the Board at Bella Vista Village: Melanie Kemp Jennifer Armer From: Sent: To: Subject: sherry <s herryl 7s@prodigy.net > Thursda y, March 15 , 2018 10:58 AM Jennifer Armer 401 -409 Alberto Way Proposed Development Hello Town Council Members I am a resident on Alberto Way and have attended both the Town Council meetings and the Planning Commission meetings, and have spoken at them. I feel this proposed development, due to its proposed size, is inconsistennt with our neighborhood, ruins our beautiful views, and brings too much traffic onto our small dead end street. It would be a bottleneck at the beginning of our street, as well as impeding heavy traffic flow on Highway 9. I ask that you uphold the Planning Commissions denial and turn this proposal down . Thank you, Sherry Burke Resident Pueblo De Los Gatos 40 Alberto Way Jennifer Armer From: J Scott [mailto:gatosbella@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 11:00 AM To: Jennifer Armer <JArmer@losgatosca.gov> Subject: What precedent will you set for our town's future I respectfully request you support the Planning Commission ruling and deny the appeal. I'd like to sec a much smaller scale project that doesn't cause shadowing on surrounding buildings and that will blend with the current sca le of the neighborhood. A very nice building that comes to mind is 100 Los Gatos Saratoga Road ( at University). Should you decide otherwise and ov erturn the PC's decision and side with the developer, plea se include the below requirements in the conditions of approval; 1) Alberto \Vay should be widened the width of one lane of traffic along the entire project site. This will allow room for a designated left turn lane into the project. Without this designated lane, congestion is eminent causing back on Highway 9 and all along Alb erto Way. This will impact the community, emergency vehicles, and residents all Highway 9 and Alberto Way. 2) Speed Humps on Los Gatos/Saratoga Road heading west from Lo s Gatos Bl vd up to 1\lberto Way. Cars pick up speed coming down this hill and often can't stop in time. With the increased traffic (thi s projec t will bring) it's very likel y will see an increase in traffic accidents at this intersection , especially if the traffic is backed up into the intersection. 3) Speed Humps along A lb erto \Va y to calm traffic on an alread y dangerously narrow road where speed is alread y an iss ue. 4) Permit parking along Alberto Way. With the lo ss of 8 parking s paces to th is project it will be necessary. 5) Flashing crosswalk at Alberto Way and Highway 9 intersections, both east /we st and north / south direction s. -\dditionally, crosswalk at on ramp to Highway 17 should be included. 5) Safety review with Police /Fire departments on how they will enter Alberto \Vay during Construction if lanes of traffic are blocked. Require dry run with construction crew. Regard s, Jannette Sc o tt Albertow Wa y