Attachment 1
ATTACHMENT 1
From: Vlado Herman
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2018 3:00 PM
To: Town Manager <Manager@losgatosca.gov>
Subject: Bachman Park Proposed Improvements
Hi Laurel-
We live directly in front of Bachman Park at 235/237 Glen Ridge Avenue. While we generally are quite
supportive of Los Gatos Town improvements to our community we recently became aware of the
proposed improvements to Bachman Park.
We currently live very near to playground and pathway and deal with the summers filled with kids
laughter but unfortunately also of late night drinking and partying by our local teenagers. Personally it
really feels that some of the "improvements" are really unnecessary and the Town could utilize those
resources in a much better fashion, say in redirecting beach traffic from the Almond Grove to Highway
17.
It would be great if we can re-start the process to get more folks from around the park to attend a
brainstorming session to get more of our input. I realize this was tried originally but we really did not
understand the true scope of proposed improvements.
Many thanks for your time.
Vlado
From: Timi Sobrato
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 4:16 PM
To: Town Manager <Manager@losgatosca.gov>
Subject: Bachman Park
Dear Ms Prevetti,
There are concerns amongst those who live around the Bachman Park community regarding proposed
changes to the park.
While we do hope to learn what the real changes are, it is rumored that there will be quite a bit of
construction going on that will have great impact on the park.
It is said that several oak trees will be planted in one of the large grassy areas. This poses a problem
because where there are large trees the ground below turns to dirt, dusty brown leaves and prickly
things rendering it largely unusable. People always congregate, play, sunbathe, read, etc. in the grassy
areas, while the areas under the trees go unused. We love our grassy areas.
We also love the little trail through the park as it gives a rural/foresty feel and if it were replaced with a
sidewalk and LED lights were added, the entire ambience of the park would shift from a peaceful natural
setting to a cold urban space. Furthermore, the bright lights from the park (which is closed at dusk
anyway) would flood into our windows, disturbing our homes and interfering with our sleep.
Should some of the changes be positive, there remains the fact that all of us in this Bachman Park area
have been dealing with heavy construction for the last couple of years due to the neighborhood roads,
sidewalks, and trees being dug up and revised. That has meant a lot of noise from dawn til dusk and it
takes it’s toll on the peace of our homes and lives. After months and months of jack hammers and
heavy equipment grinding away all day (sometimes at 7 a.m. or into the night due to weather forecast),
we all breathe a sigh of relief when one road is finished and try to enjoy the reprieve before the next bit
of street ripping begins. Therefore, it would be ideal to at the very least wait until all the roads in the
area are redone so we will still have a place to escape the chaos or walk our dogs when the
neighborhood is under construction.
The changes to the park would be hard for John and I indeed both because we chose this location to
build our home because it backs on to this lovely, natural, grassy park and I work in my studio in the
backyard abutting it. We also have some elderly neighbors who are undergoing cancer treatments and it
would be so sad for them to have their last years of life listening to bulldozers and jack hammers. We
would love to be able to continue the peace and keep the rural feel by leaving the lights as they are, and
keeping the grassy areas and small trail intact.
We look forward to learning more about what is planned and how we might be involved in the process
as community members.
Sincerely,
John and Timi Sobrato
From: Sara Walker
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2018 4:22 PM
To: Matt Morley <MMorley@losgatosca.gov>; Lisa Petersen <LPetersen@losgatosca.gov>
Subject: Fwd: Bachman Park Town Proposed Changes: Destruction or Improvements?
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Sara Walker
Date: March 9, 2018 at 4:09:51 PM PST
To: townmanager@losgatosca.gov, Barbara Spector <bspector@losgatosca.gov>, Steve Leonardis
<sleonardis@losgatosca.gov>, mjensen@losgatosca.gov, msayoc@losgatosca.gov, lucia@lucia4.com,
rrennie@losgatosca.gov, mmorley@losgatos.gov, lpetersen@losgatos.gov, sregan@losgatos.gov, Sara E
Walker <handrsi@aol.com>, maryflucia@gmail.com, Gary Walker <bonjourgary@aol.com>,
jpeterson@bayareanewsgroup.com
Subject: Fwd: Bachman Park Town Proposed Changes: Destruction or Improvements?
Sent from my iPhone
Date: March 8, 2018 at 4:34:56 PM
Subject: Bachman Park Town Proposed Changes: Destruction or Improvements
Hi my name is Sara Walker Ellenwood Ave, Los Gatos Ca 95030.
First I will give you a little history from my prospective. I bought our home next to this park in 1979 and
have lived here 38 years. I bought a home bordering the park because of the beauty of the park and
environment. We rebuilt after the 1989 Earthquake with most windows facing the park. I feel this park
has been under threat now for several year by a misguided Town Park and Public Works Dept. In about
2011, hearings were held trying to convert the park in front of my living room windows into a dog
park. In 2015, in response to the drought the Park staff turned off the water to the Ellenwood end of
the park without public notice. When I found out that they hadn't just cut back water ,but intended to
let the grass die, I lead a neighborhood door to door campaign to alert residents . Many of the
residents wrote to the town. I went to the Council on more that one occasion. After about 2.5 months
without water the city council finally told the staff to turn on the water to this area of the park. This has
saved the lawn and the very big trees for public use. At that time 2015, the "improvement plan " for
the park was in the works for about $500,000 , but the PPW had not told the public what was
planned. I went before city council thanked them for turning the water on, but requested that they
meet with residents in the park or elsewhere so residents could give input on the plan. I was told in
front of the council by Park and Public works staff, that a meeting would occur before Fall of 2015. It
was not even attempted. The park commission regularly meets in various parks during the summer, I
asked PPW to move one meeting to Bachman Park in 2015,they did not. Some of us who had issues
with park maintenance attended a Parks commission meeting at the Post office Plaza. It was evident
they did not expect or welcome residents as there was no extra seating only space for staff. One elderly
neighbor fell requiring hospitalization as the meeting was held at dusk with boulders designed the path
leading to the meeting. In November 2017, a week before Thanksgiving, I received a paper hanger on
my door that a meeting would be held in one week to get neighborhood opinion. I was scheduled for
Cancer surgery that week, but immediately went to the town to inquire about the plan. I asked to look
at the plan which had been listed in 2015 as changes to the path and lighting in town records. I was told
there "was no plan" yet but they wanted to get resident input. However the staff member said they
would widen the path for ADA, and replace and add lighting. The staff engineer indicated that they
would only be getting resident input for items that might have priority if any funds were left over after
they executed their plan. I asked the staff to widen the notice about the meeting to the entire town like
in the paper or otherwise. The response was they state they notified residents up to 300 feet from the
park which takes in 1-2 blocks maximum. I told staff the park is used by many town wide residents who
deserve notice. The Nov 16,2017 meeting was held at a city site within a week of the Thanksgiving
Holiday and at least 16 locals made it to the meeting. I sent my comments by email. The residents were
not given a choice about whether lighting or path replacement was an option, but only given a chances
to voice concerns other than these for "left over funds" See town PPW website Nov 16 note.
Finally about 2 weeks ago, a plan was put on the town website. Even though I signed up for "Notify me"
it did not come through to me. I was concerned and sought out the information at the town website. I
went to the PPW department and spoke again to Lisa Peterson the town engineer. There are several
important pieces of information that are not published or discussed in the 3 diagrams on the web. I
asked the town engineer to make sure the Bachman Project be published in the Los Gatos Town
Weekly since the initial notice only went 300 feet from the park. " I was told they couldn't publicize
everything" The reasons that they are proposing an ADA upgrade of the existing path in the center of
the park is because they want to qualify for a grant to match funds for other parts of the
project. However, according to Ms. Peterson the current path is "a trail " according to ADA
standards. I looked up ADA trail requirements for the federal and State of CA , it appears the path does
not need to be wider than it already is, 32-36 inches is required . The proposal is for 4.5 feet of cement
path. If the town does not try to upgrade the path and only repairs it no ADA rules must be met. The
trail is asphalt and could easily be repaired for far under $500,000 or $250,000, the towns share. The
proposed changes to make a sidewalk at the Bachman end of the park will provide one block of ADA
sidewalk within the park, but leaves it impossible to get to the park from the Bachman or Ellenwood
End of the Park as there is not a sidewalk. To approach on the Ellenwood End of the park everyone
must walk in the street from Glenridge to the park as there is no sidewalk. On the Bachman end, the
ADA sidewalk ends at Glenridge and most people walk in the street including mothers with baby buggies
going to the play area because the only sidewalk on the right side of Bachman is Brick with curves and
slopes not safe for wheelchairs or baby buggies/strollers ( I am not sure if this is public or private land).
What do I think should happen:
1. Leave what is working alone. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" The beauty of this park is that it has
rolling green lawns and trees and is not a cement filled urban park like all the others. It is one of the
main attractions of Los Gatos residents and the reason people but homes here. Repair , do not replace
. Save dollars for needed maintenance . In a town that needs money to balance the budget the
$250,000 town contribution would fund 1/4 of the amount of the proposed new sales tax. Or it could
help fund the badly needed traffic light at Massol and Highway 9 where a life was lost this year ( see
residents posting on Next door who favor this), or it could pay for a sidewalk so all people could reach
the park safely either from Bachman or Ellenwood instead walking in the street. The current park has
been the same virtually 40 years and just needs maintenance so future generations can enjoy its green
environment
2. Repair Asphalt Path ( trail per Town staff) . The current path is 36" or more wide, current federal
and state law for ADA wheelchair access trails is 32-36 inch and meets ADA. JUST REPAIR IT( see
state and federal guidelines for ADA trails) The proposal to replace this with cement at 4.5 feet or 54" is
unnecessary and expensive when the current path could be repaired or replaced at the same width with
asphalt. Currently, the dark color of the path blends in with nature and should be repaired for
safety. The cement will be nearly white a a reminder of our urban sprawl not of peace and
tranquility. Expanding the path width also takes away green lawns. I was in the park during the after
shocks of Loma Prieta Earthquake and watched the lawns and path move like the ocean waves. The
current path held up. Cement would likely buckle and be expensive to replace. In my nearly 40 years ,I
have never seen a wheelchair on this path, the picnic area is already accessible with accessible parking
for 1 van. Again this park is less than one city block not requiring a large access. Widening the path is
likely to encourage driving into the park by teens and others including park vehicles, this should be
discouraged. Finally the existing path should just be made safe by repairing the existing asphalt ( the
edge next to the creek which may need retaining wall which is not proposed to
keep children,bicycles or wheelchairs from falling off the edge.)
3. KEEP THE FULL LAWN, ELIMINATE NEW OAK TREES . Plan as proposed will cause Loss
of Functional Open Space Recreation at the Ellenwood end of the park . The current proposal
diagram reduces the lawn on the Ellenwood end another 15-20 feet from the current lawn line and
adds 4 Oak Trees in the lawn. The line appears to be just beyond the park owned tree line , there are
no measurements or scale on the diagram. This area is used daily by people tossing balls and frisbees
to pets and children . Adding 4 Oaks will require water andtrimming and eventually kill the lawn
below as they grow. This lawn is scheduled for reseeding on the plan. Obstructions in the lawn
will be dangerous for running play as well as limit functional public use of the area for lawn picnics. I
have seen weddings and graduation parties and prom dinners held here. This is the area in 2011 that
the town pushed for a dog park; it is used frequently for neighbors to walk their dogs. This is the area
the water was turned off and left to die in 2015. The lawn needs to be maintained and improved
with seed as promised by PPW in 2015 . The current power lawn mower travels in straight lines
across this area adding trees will impair the power lawn mover requiring circles with more time for
workers. We do not new trees. KEEP THE FULL LAWN, ELIMINATE THE 4 OAK TREES ON THE PLAN.
4. KEEP THE LAWN AS A FIRE BREAK : The current lawn provides a firebreak for homes. Given last
years Los Gatos Mountain Wild Fire and Santa Rosa and Santa Barbara ,we would be wise to keep
the moisture in the grass and not add trees. In Santa Rosa, people survived by going to moist City
parks as the flames passed over Coffee Park. Adding more dry areas to this park increases our risks.
The town already stopped irrigation of the lawn that was behind our property and has not replaced it
with anything. The current trees (5 large) need the water from the irrigation system to
survive. Simply reducing the lawn reduces water to these trees. Both Saratoga and Campbell lost
Large town Historical oaks and evergreens when they stopped water in the name of Conservation.
4. CONTROL THE RODENTS/IVY: The current lawn helps control rodents/rats The project planned
area for lawn reduction and new oak trees already has 25 feet of Ivy from our property line before the
lawn starts. Along the property line are 3 large redwoods and two large Oaks. The current proposal has
no plants to be added on the upper slope where they would be reducing the grass another 15-20 feet.
This will be unstable mud limiting walking. Gradually the ivy will take over and be 40-50 feet wide, We
do not need more ivy. This overgrowth attracts and harbors rats , gophers and rodents of all
types. Adding another 15-20 feet of nothing by removing the lawn will increase this problem. The
towns plan has been subtle in not defining the plan for this area where grass would be removed. The
current plan is to remove 4 feet of Ivy off our fence line which runs about 175 feet on the side and back
of our property. This leaves at least another 20 feet of ivy and more will grow into the new 15-20 area
where the grass will be reduced by this plan. I think the total area of the current lawn should be
maintained and Ivy minimized. Baltimore spent several hundred thousand dollars to mitigate and
remove ivy down town due to rodents/rats affecting business about 10 years ago. Their
documentation as well as SC County suggests that the rodents love the shelter of the Ivy and feed of
dog waste as well as park food. The town needs to do all possible to control the spread of the rodent
problem. Lawn is better than ivy for health and safety.
5. RESTORE USE TO THE AREA ABOVE THE BENCH MARKED FOR TOYON BUSHEs/Eliminate the Toyon
Berry Bushes: In the last 8 years the town spent money on a "new irrigation system" in Bachman
Park. Part of that remodel killed the approximately 50x50 foot flat lawn behind our home because the
Town failed to put in new irrigation when they replaced the old. Up until that time, this area was used
as a picnic spot by the public as a small private area within the larger park. Since that time, it has been
left to become weeds and Ivy. The weeds cause a fire hazard and the Ivy brought rodents . The citizen
of the town lost a nice spot for recreation. The simplest and cheapest ground cover with the most
public use would probably be lawn. Instead the town proposal is suggesting the planting of Toyon
bushes that have poisonous berries for a park heavily used by families with small children. This area
could have been improved to provide a lawn bowling or Bocce Ball , horseshoes or a neighborhood
garden. This would give something back to the community instead of removing
function. If something is going to be planted other than lawn , I would suggest the town consider
either Flowering Apricot Trees for their beauty
and summer shade or real Apricot Fruit Trees in honor of the original land which was an Apricot
orchard before it was a park. This area could even function for town children as history and biology
lessons and could possibly be maintained by seniors or town volunteers if needed. Perhaps this is a
good project for the beautification committee. Planting something is needed to help keep the soil on
the hill as heavy rains cause mud to streak down the hill where lawn was removed.
6. REVIEW THE LIGHTING NEEDS: The current proposal according to the town is to replace not added
lights. The change is to LED lights which are brighter and whiter. The new poles will be shorter with
cement base. I am grateful there will not be more new lights to increase the number already shining in
my windows ( bedroom, living and kitchen face the park). The current amber lighting is not obnoxious
and blocked by trees along our property. If the new lights are too bright, I was assured by the town
Engineer that the new lights will be adjustable ( I am not sure if all lights will lower at the same time).
I would urge residents with concern to speak up. My neighbor has a new LED light on the street light
near her home requiring she use a eye mask to sleep. I am hoping that will not be the case with the
new park lights. Currently, the park lights are on all night. Is this energy efficient in a park that is
closed from 7 pm to daylight? Why not turn off the lights at night 11 pm to 6 am. If safety is the
concern, I am more concerned that light brings people into the park after hours. Light encourages
humans to be in the park after closing and this should be discouraged for safety of
residents. Homeless have been sleeping in the ivy along the fence in the past. If the concept of LED
lights is to save money, just turn the lights off.
7.DELAY PROJECT TO FALL EVEN IF WE LOOSE FEDERAL FUNDS. The current plan requires
construction from late May/June to September to meet Federal Grant Deadlines ( which the town has
been aware off for 3 years plus. Timing of the project will 1) eliminate the use by the town residents
including families with children using the play area for the entire summer when they need it most
2) be in the summer ,the time that the lawns and shrubs need the most water as the water will be
turned off to "upgrade the irrigation system previously upgraded less than 10 years ago " and 3) the
prolonged loss of water may lead to permanent loss of lawns and big trees when the sprinklers are
off again. 4) a dry Park is more of a fire hazard .
8. CHANGE THE CONTRACTOR PLAN FOR GUARANTEED RESULT. I asked staff about the multiple
contractor plan. The plan is to bid several contractors : one for the path, another for lights, and
landscape. I expressed my concerned about the bulldozer damage to the lawns required to rip up the
existing path. I was told that " we are putting in language that if they ruin the lawns with
the bulldozers they will be required to "fix it" . Vasona Park is currently experiencing Bulldozer mania
with a path out of use from November to May. My experience says when you have multiple
contractors , one will blame the other. This is when you hire a general contractor ,so someone is
responsible for the overall outcome. In this case multiple contractors are likely to result in "no
one being responsible" or litigation. This may be the ruin of the beautiful lawns in our beloved park
. There is no guarantee that a change in the irrigation will be better than the last. Nor is there a
guarantee that these "improvements" will lead to better maintenance or function of the activities of
the park. The proposal is a lot of money at a time when other projects are screaming: like a traffic
light at Massol and highway 9, or street lights on Glenridge or other parts of town. ( see next door).
Many residents complain in Almond grove there are no street lights.
Finally, Keep it simple. It is a good motto ,don't try to do to much to something that is already a
great asset to the community. If it means we loose federal funds , but park changes to meet the
desire of resident / tax payers thats okay.
Please publish park plan to the entire town in the weekly.
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2018 6:04 PM
To: Brett Stollenwerk
Subject: Bachman Park - Sidewalks are needed.
Hello, My mom has a house across the street from Bachman park and I am a block away. Question.
Is there any way to have a side walk about Bachman park? There are a lot of kids walking to school and
2 sides of the park there are no sidewalks at all. I thought there was state funding to install sidewalks
for such projects. Please advise?
Annette Seaborn
From: Beth Jendricks
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 7:37 PM
To: Brett Stollenwerk
Subject: 4 Proposed oak trees Bachman Park
Dear Brett,
Thank you for taking the time to talk with me this morning. The proposed improvements all look great
and I know the neighborhood looks forward to them. As mentioned, I was unable to attend the public
meetings on this, but one of my neighbors did and reported back to us. I thought his report would be
sufficient until I had the opportunity to go over your plan today.
As a frequent and long-time user of the park (28 years), my observation is that is would be better not to
plant the four oak trees in the south lawn area. This area, while it appears to be not used much, is quite
valuable as open space. It completes a section of open green that runs through the whole park and
should not be divided up by the four proposed trees. The slope provides a feeling of amphitheater
seating and many use it to picnic there more quietly away from the playground. It is also acts as
opening to those who chose to enter the park from the upper corner and park goers look across and call
out to each other when their friends and family arrive on foot. Therefore, it is my hope that the four
trees are deleted from the plan.
Sincerely,
Beth Jendricks
Hernandez Ave