Attachment 10
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A P P E A R A N C E S:
Los Gatos Planning
Commissioners:
Matthew Hudes, Chair
Melanie Hanssen, Vice Chair
Mary Badame
Kendra Burch
Kathryn Janoff
Tom O'Donnell
Reza Tavana
Town Manager: Laurel Prevetti
Community Development
Director:
Joel Paulson
Town Attorney: Robert Schultz
Transcribed by: Vicki L. Blandin
(619) 541-3405
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P R O C E E D I N G S:
CHAIR HUDES: We will now move onto Item 5, which
is 16100 Greenridge Terrace. Planned Development
Application PD-16-002. Environmental Impact Report EIR-17-
001. Requesting approval to rezone a property zoned HR-2½
to HR-2½:PD, to subdivide one lot into eight lots, and
removal of large protected trees on property zoned HR-2½.
APN 527-12-002. Property owner: Emerald Lake Investments
LLC. Applicant: Gary Kohlsaat. Project planner: Sean
Mullin.
May I have a show of hands from commissioners who
have visited the property under consideration? Okay. Any
disclosures? Yes, Commissioner Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: I'd like to disclose that I
live on Greenridge Terrace but I'm outside of the 500'
radius that would prohibit me from hearing these matters.
In addition, Greenridge Terrace has an active neighborhood
association and I've been on email distribution, but when
the subject matter is regarding this topic, I have not read
the emails or the attachments.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you for that. So, Mr.
Mullin, I understand you'll be giving the Staff Report.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SEAN MULLIN: Thank you. Before you tonight is a
request for a recommendation to the Town Council for a
proposed Planned Development rezoning and associated
Environmental Impact Report. The EIR was prepared to
address potential significant impacts and its analysis
concluded that all impacts could be mitigated to a less
than significant level.
The PD would allow for the subdivision of eight
lots ranging in size from 3.36 acres to 7.7 acres, and
additionally 4.5 acres would be preserved through an open
space easement.
Access to the future residential lots would be
provided from Santella Drive for Lots 2-6, a shared
driveway for Lots 7 and 8, and from Greenridge Terrace for
Lot 1.
To minimize new disturbances to the site the
existing graded road is proposed to be used to provide
circulation.
The Town's Consulting Arborist surveyed the
property, which includes thousands of trees, and focused
their review on the impacts to trees resulting from the
site improvements and conceptual home and driveway
locations. The arborist recommends removal of ten trees for
the proposed site improvements. Each future Architecture
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and Site Application will evaluate impacts to protected
trees.
The PD application complies with the HR-2½ zoning
in the Hillside Guidelines except for requested exceptions
for a shared driveway length of 720' for Lots 7 and 8 where
300' is allowed by the Hillside Guidelines, and for an
approximately 1,100' cul de sac road where 800' is allowed
by the Hillside Specific Plan.
Additionally, several exceptions to cut and fill
depths and driveway length that are based on conceptual
single-family home and driveway locations are identified
and discussed in the Staff Report.
Based on the summary provided in the Staff
Report, Staff recommends the Commission forward the Final
EIR and the PD applications to the Town Council with a
recommendation for approval of the proposed project.
That concludes Staff's presentation, and with
that we're happy to answer any questions.
CHAIR HUDES: Any questions of Staff? Yes,
Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: In our packet, and that
would be Exhibit 18, we have a letter from Dr. Weissman
that provides information that counters Staff's
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
measurements and interpretation of the driveway lengths.
So, can you comment on his position?
SEAN MULLIN: Yes, thank you. We looked carefully
at the driveway lengths and how they are measured in the
context of Dr. Weissman's letter, and I'll let him tell us
exactly how he measured the driveways. My interpretation is
that we measure the driveways typically from a property
line along the driveway length to where the driveway starts
to flair out to form the firetruck turnaround, or the
parking area, right adjacent to the residence.
In the case of Lot 1, we identified an
approximately 600' driveway and an additional 35' could be
shown from where that flair occurs—I'll call it a firetruck
turnaround, since it's easier—to basically the conceptual
structure location.
Similarly, with Lot 2 we show the driveway length
at 340' starting from the bottom of the Lot 2 property line
up to that flair at the firetruck turnaround, and his
measurements use an additional piece going to the structure
and the additional piece from the top of the cul de sac
bulb across Lot 3 to the property line between Lot 3 and
Lot 6. I can go through each one of them, if you'd like.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Okay, but I still have a
question, and that is how do we apply the numbers with the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Hillside Design Standards and Guidelines when they don't
make a distinction in that document between a shared
driveway and a non-shared driveway?
SEAN MULLIN: They don't make a distinction. The
shared driveway piece down… Let's take Lot 7 and Lot 8, for
instance. The road leading from Santella Drive out across
Lots 6 and 4 to Lots 7 8, there's a distinction between the
size of the road and the driveways at the end. So, you have
a 20' wide road there that comes up to the boundary between
Lot 6 and Lot 7 where it starts to taper down to a 12' wide
driveway. There it's easy to make the distinction. It's a
little bit less different without a definition of the
shared driveway piece, but we tried to measure these
consistently.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: If I could ask one more
question, Chair? Thank you, and it's unrelated to the
driveways.
The lack of a four-lot alternative in the EIR is
a bone of contention, so my question to you is who
determines the range of alternatives in an EIR?
SALLY ZARNOWITZ: Thank you, Sally Zarnowitz,
Planning Manager. The alternatives in the EIR at the
beginning, I think, addressed the fact that there are no
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
significant impacts in this project, and so the EIR
analyzes potentially significant impacts. But in this case,
there are no significant impacts. Alternatives typically
look at what could be a significant impact and how those
would be avoided in an alternative. In the case when there
are no significant impacts, they look to reduce whatever
potential impact could be there.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Hanssen.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Because we don't always do
EIRs I wanted to just ask the question, even though I know
the answer, a little bit about the EIR process. If I'm
correct, and please correct me if I'm wrong, the EIR
process, it's basically something that the applicant
volunteered to do. It wasn't required by the terms of their
application or the PD, right?
JOEL PAULSON: That's correct. This could have
been done under a Mitigated Negative Declaration, because
there were no significant impacts.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: And then I appreciated Ms.
Zarnowitz's comments about the significant impact, because
it was determined that with mitigation all the significant
impacts can be addressed.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JOEL PAULSON: And I would just offer through the
Chair that this is one of the challenges what we run into
with all projects that decide to do an EIR when they don't
need to. Now, depending on what side of the coin you're on
it's a wise choice from the Applicant's standpoint, because
a Mitigated Negative Declaration has a lower threshold for
contention through the courts, and so folks are choosing to
move to the EIR just to make sure they've covered all those
bases.
The challenge it creates is you're doing EIRs for
projects that do not have significant impact, and so you
end up with a different range of alternatives than you may
otherwise see if there were impacts specifically based on
the number of lots. In this case the density for the
underlying General Plan designation and Zoning Code
designation would allow actually up to nine units on this
site. That's why four units was not studied, because it
wasn't deemed necessary, given that there were no
significant impacts.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Could I ask one follow up
question? The decision that's on the table for this evening
is to certify the EIR and then also to forward a
recommendation for the approval of the Planned Development.
There are a number of people that voiced concerns about the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
potential size of the houses and all that stuff, so if I'm
correct, and I think I am, the actual determination of the
height of the houses and the size of the houses will come
when they make an Architecture and Site application for
those individual houses, so that there will be another
chance to review the size of the houses and the lengths of
their driveway, and at that point they apply to build those
houses?
SEAN MULLIN: Yes, the houses shown in the plans
are conceptual to provide some context of building
envelopes and driveway approaches, and to identify
potential exception that will be required moving forward.
But once the subdivision is processed, which is another
future application, the development of each lot would
require an Architecture and Site application which goes
through another discretionary process. It would be decided
upon by the DRC or the Planning Commission, depending on
the project.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Just to clarify, then. In
the proposed Planned Development Ordinance that we have
before us to confirm, there is one clause that limits the
height of four properties to 18'. That is not negotiable
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
when those properties come before us with a potential
design, is that correct?
SEAN MULLIN: That's correct. That's a
performance standard that's included in the PD, as those
sites have been identified as being visible from a viewing
area.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Burch.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Could you clarify for me
about the cut and fill, the grading? You made a comment
that it was based on conceptual layouts of the homes,
what's included in this application and what will be
included in each Architecture and Site application?
SEAN MULLIN: The specific exceptions that are
identified in this application have to do with the site
improvements, so the roadways, the conceptual driveways and
conceptual building envelopes. The plans in the Staff
Report identify and discuss likely exceptions, and a
decision on this application on the PD would include those,
and then under the Architecture and Site Applications the
Town would look carefully that the proposal, because there
is no requirement for them to use that conceptual building
envelope, is in the spirit of those exceptions, and if
there are significant deviations the exceptions would be
looked at individually.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BURCH: All right, thank you.
KEVIN BAGLEY: If I could add? Kevin Bagley,
Engineering. The grading quantities that are listed on the
site plans only include the roadway, the shared driveway,
as well as the grading required for the trail and the
bioretention ponds. They do not include the grading
required for the conceptual houses or the conceptual
driveways.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Quick question, Mr.
Mullin. With regard to the driveway length, which I think
is going to be an issue of discussion, when we get to Staff
discussion later would you be able to markup maybe that
drawing to show how you've measured it, and we can see how
Dr. Weissman has measured it as well when we come back at
the end of the public hearing?
SEAN MULLIN: Yeah, I have a drawing prepared,
but with a caveat that I'm assuming the measurement
technique of Dr. Weissman.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. We'll look at that later
after we take that testimony. Just another question on the
PD process. Have there been changes to our PD process, and
if so, does this fall under the current or the previous,
and could they withdraw and resubmit under current?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SEAN MULLIN: This application was made in 2016
under the previous PD Ordinance, and it has been processed
for some time under that ordinance, so it would fall under
that ordinance. The Applicant in theory could withdraw or
take a decision and reapply under the current ordinance.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. One other question
for Mr. Schultz. I understand that there were previous
applications and I understand there were also previous
enforcement actions. If illegal actions were taken by
previous owners and they didn't put it back to the original
state, is it proper or legal for a subsequent owner to take
advantage of illegal actions taken by predecessors?
ROBERT SCHULTZ: You might want to reframe that a
little bit, but what you're getting at is there have been
allegations that there's been some illegal grading and
illegal cutting of the trees down there on that property.
We don't have any active code enforcement case that we have
evidence of, and there's nothing within our office that we
have against the property. If in fact we had gone through
that process and liened the property, and I think I've
mentioned a few times on here where we've done that, then
of course its owner would have to take care of those issues
prior to the Applicant being corrected, or it could be a
condition of that. We have no evidence that there was any
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tree cutting or grading done from the owner that's in front
of you, the applicant in front of you, so it's not relevant
to your decision today.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. If there are no
further questions of Staff, let's get to the Applicant. I
believe Mr. Fox will be speaking for the entire ten
minutes, so please go ahead.
DAVID FOX: Good evening, my name is David Fox;
I'm the project landscape architect, 50 University Avenue,
Los Gatos.
Tonight, on behalf of Jim and Nicole Stepanian,
the owners, we're seeking a positive recommendation for the
creation of eight lots on the 36.1-acre parcel. As it was
mentioned, it's located next to the Highlands development
and next to the recently approved Sahadi development and
Greenridge Terrace.
We're looking for the creation of the lots only,
and I want to make that clear. All of the houses, any
houses, that are eventually built on these lots would have
to go through the entire Los Gatos approval process. They'd
be subject to the standards at the time of submittal for
visibility, tree cutting, grading, etc., and they would be
open to public comment.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
In designing this project, we consulted several
documents: The Blossom Hill Open Space Study, the Hillside
Specific Plan, the Town Housing Element, the General Plan,
and of course the Hillside Design Standards and Guidelines.
I'm glad to see that the Commission members were
able to get out on the property, to get out on the land,
and I hope you were able to see the staking of the
conceptual homesites. It may have given you a good idea of
what we're looking at in bringing those homes to the site.
There are several characteristics of the land. It
is 36.1 acres and it has an existing graded road system.
There has been a lot of work done over the years on this
property. It's been owned by many owners over the years and
it's had multiple development proposals; some of them were
just studies and some of them actually made it into the
Town process. There's water and electricity on the land.
There's a San Jose water tank that serves the Highlands
development and several surrounding properties for fire
hydrants. There's access from Santella Drive and from
Greenridge Terrace, and there is substantial tree canopy
that covers the entire lot.
Mr. Mullen went over the zoning; it's HR-2½.
Under the Land Use Element of the General Plan it calls for
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
a density of 0-1 dwelling unit per acre; we have one
dwelling unit per 4.5 acres.
In doing the slope density calculations they did
come up with nine lots, and we're proposing eight. When it
came to analyzing the site the designs team decided that an
eight-lot subdivision made a lot more sense than a nine-lot
subdivision, and that's what we're proposing, and we used
the following criteria:
We use the existing roads for circulation.
There's no development outside the LRDA except for the
driveways that connect to the main road system.
We tried to minimize the grading and the impact
by using areas that had been previously graded or had
previous construction on them, and we tried to minimize the
visibility of the units by moving the building pads off the
highest parts of the lots but still staying within the
LRDA, and we're preserving the majority of the trees on the
site.
All of the proposed lots meet the 2.5-acre net
requirement and seven of the eight lots are in excess of
that requirement. Lots 3-8 have been clustered in a band
that runs south to north along the property, and Lots 1, 2,
and 8 have an LRDA area that was created by previous
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
grading or previous construction on the site, and that's
why we used them.
When the total road system, all of the driveways,
and the conceptual house footprints are taken into account
the lay out yielded a project coverage of 13-percent. If
the conceptual back yards are added in it's 18-percent, so
that means that 82-percent of the 36.1 acres, or 29.6
acres, are being left open with no development whatsoever.
Once the lots were created, conceptual homes
design was done by Gary Kohlsaat, Kohlsaat Architects, with
these criteria: House is completely within the LRDA. Show
that each lot will accommodate maximum size home allowed so
that they could better evaluate the visibility from the
Town viewing platforms. Balance visibility with tree
removal and lower the overall grading by creating
conceptual homes that didn't need any grading exceptions.
If we look at some of the specific design issues,
visibility is always a significant issue in hillside
development and each conceptual home was analyzed for the
visibility standards at the time of submittal. Mr. Paulson,
the Community Development Director, also gave us a set of
policies that were being considered by the Town Policy
Committee, and we incorporated those as well in the
visibility studies.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
The result of those visibility studies shows that
Lots 3, 4, 5, and 8 would have to be 18' in height. The
rest of the lots met the maximum visibility of 25-percent
or less.
On the roads and the driveways, the total length
of the cul de sac at the end of the main road and some of
the driveways are in excess of what is allowed in the
Hillside Standards and Guidelines, but all of the extended
roads have turnouts or turnarounds that are required when a
driveway or road is longer than that which is allowed.
By using longer travels we were able to get to
home sites that are less impactful and the least impactful
on the lots, and overall that reduced the amount of impact
on the property by utilizing those sites, and under the
Hillside Standards and Guidelines the deciding body can
approve an exception to road length with appropriate
conditions.
As noted by the arborist in the Staff Report, and
I'm sure you saw if you walked the property, there are
thousands of trees on the 36 acres, and to the greatest
extent possible we propose to save as many trees as we can.
The existing retaining walls are going to be either rebuilt
in kind or repaired. In this application we're asking for a
total of ten trees to be removed by the main road
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
construction. We are not asking for any trees to be removed
on of the lots with this application.
There's a trail system that's being extended from
the Highlands subdivision and that will go through the
Vistas property. We're including fire hydrants to increase
fire suppression in the area; none exists there right now.
And we've included 4.5 acres of open space.
On the EIR, the agency, the Town, has a choice
whether to require an EIR and Negative Declaration. An EIR
is required when there is substantial evidence in the
record that significant environmental effects may occur and
cannot be mitigated to a less than significant effect, and
while a Negative Declaration may have been sufficient here
the owner chose to do an EIR for full transparency and full
disclosure to the agencies and to the public. The EIR has a
longer public comment period, and an EIR is required to
respond to the comments. The owner didn't have to do this,
but they chose to do this just to be as fully transparent,
as fully informational, as possible.
The Applicants are not asking for a change in
zoning other than the proposed PD as required by the Town.
To the greatest extent possible we've used the existing
roads and areas where there was previous construction or
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
grading to place the homes to be as less impactful as
possible.
The Staff, and if deemed necessary the Planning
Commission, will see each and every home that is proposed
under an A&S application, and you'll have another bite at
the apple to go to those homes and look at issues like
visibility and trees and grading.
We're putting an extension of the Town trail
system in, and the vast, vast majority of the trees on the
property are being saved.
Lastly, at least 82-percent of the 36.1 acres are
being preserved and they'll never be developed.
With all of this in mind we ask the Commission to
follow the recommendations of the Staff Report and forward
a recommendation to the Town Council to certify the Final
EIR for approval of the Planned Development Application.
Thank you for your time, and if you have any
questions at all the entire design team is here, and we'd
be happy to answer them. Thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. Questions? Yes,
Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Mr. Fox, thank you for your
presentation. You mentioned researching the Hillside Design
Standards and Guidelines for the project, correct?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
DAVID FOX: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: So, when I read those
guidelines it states, "Development should not be located on
or adjacent to slopes greater than 30-percent." The average
slope for every single one of these eight lots exceeds 30-
percent, so can you comment on that?
DAVID FOX: I believe the average slope is 37.1
for the entire property. In the civil engineering plans, we
have the LRDAs shown. We have the areas of those lots that
have the areas on each and every lot that are less than 30-
percent. So, there is an LRDA, there is an area, there's a
Least Restrictive Development Area, on each and every lot
where we were able to place the homes. No homes are placed
on lots that are greater than 30-percent.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: I understand that, but I'm
not talking about the LRDA at this point. It's a matter of
the terrain, steep slopes, and the fact that the steep
slopes intensify the speed of a wildfire, so you've got
fire safety dangers us there.
DAVID FOX: In the Highland subdivision next
door, for instance, the average slope was higher than the
average slope is on this property, and yet all of those
homes are built in areas that are less than 30-percent.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
That's what the Town requires. They require homes be built
in those areas, and that's what we have done here.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Other questions? Commissioner
Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: I have a couple of
questions.
CHAIR HUDES: Sure.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: These might kind of wander
a little bit. The visibility study for Lot 1 is included in
the package and maybe it doesn't need to be, because it
can't be seen, but I don't know that, so I would appreciate
knowing what the impact of the visibility study for Lot 1
was.
Then in addition, while you're looking at the
visibility studies, on Sheet A-7.2 and A-8.2, both of the
visibility studies and the middle photograph on those pages
shows story poles off to the right of the designated lot,
and I'd like to know whether those story poles are
associated, because they're quite visible, it's an open
area. Are those associated with this development, and if
so, which lot?
DAVID FOX: I'm going to let Mr. Kohlsaat answer
those questions.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
GARY KOHLSAAT: Commissioner Janoff, could you
repeat your question for me?
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Yes, I'm referring to both
Sheets A-7.2 and A-8.2, which are the visibility
assessments for the Lot 7 and Lot 8.
GARY KOHLSAAT: Yes?
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: The middle photograph on
each of those sheets shows the proposed story pole mockup,
and then to the right and slightly above there's another
set of story poles that I can see on my drawing, and I'd
like to know whether that is associated with this
development, because that is an extremely visible set of
story poles.
GARY KOHLSAAT: I think what you're seeing are
chimneys from a Highlands house, and the picture on the
left…
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: I don't know of a Highlands
house that's painted sky blue, but…I don't believe so.
GARY KOHLSAAT: So, are you looking at the middle
picture?
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Look at Sheet A-7.2…
GARY KOHLSAAT: A-7.2.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: …and off to the right,
midway, there's a flat meadow and I can see story poles,
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and my question is, is that set of story poles affiliated
with your development?
GARY KOHLSAAT: No, those were story poles that
were put in place for Lot 10 of the Highlands.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Okay, so that's not part of
this development?
GARY KOHLSAAT: That's right.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Okay. My second question is
Lots 1 and 2 that have the lengthy driveways, it appeared
to me on Lot 1, for instance, that there's a significant
amount of LRDA all the way along that 600' length of
driveway. Did you give any consideration to sighting that
lot with a less than 300' driveway?
GARY KOHLSAAT: Yes, I'd love to answer that
question. There are multiple locations on Lot 1 where
someone could build a house, we feel, within the LRDA.
There is an existing road that's there that takes you all
the way up to the top and it connects you to the main
graded road, the fire trail.
We looked at both the lower area, which has a
pretty heavy duty swale there, and at the advice of our
civil engineer, she feel that it would be more difficult to
provide drainage down there than it would be near the top.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
At the top portion of Lot 1 you actually get a little bit
better view of the sky and the surroundings.
To answer your previous question, it wasn't
included in the visibility studies because it's completely
not visible due to the terrain of the mountains on either
side of that from any of the viewing platforms and pretty
much from any location in the Town. We had talked to Staff
about that and they agreed that it was not necessary to
include that. So even at the higher elevation there are no
visibility issues.
Any potential developer, whether it's the Emerald
Lake group or if they sell it to an individual buyer, would
have the opportunity to locate the house where they chose,
obviously with approvals from the Town, so yeah, there are
possibilities there and that's really nice to have more
possibilities, and it could be an economic decision that
they don't want to put 600' of driveway, they want to do
300' of driveway. So, we're not saying that this is the
ultimate thing, but we are saying this is the preferred
property location to build and that they would need longer
than 300' of driveway.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: But you are acknowledging
that at least on Lot 1, and perhaps on Lot 2, there's only
a 40' different between the 300' requirement and where the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
length of the driveway is, and it appears that there's
enough space in the LRDA that you might be able to shorten
the driveway? I think you've answered my question, which
was are there alternative sites within the LRDA that would
result in a shorter driveway?
GARY KOHLSAAT: Yeah, there are.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Hanssen.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Could you comment on access?
Because you're depending on access through other roads and
how that plays with neighborhood compatibility, because
we've definitely seen some public comments about not on my
street, not through my street, and we hear this all the
time in hearings, especially within the hillsides,
especially during the construction phase, so could you
comment on what you've done with the neighbors to make them
happy with your plan for access? I know you reduced the
number of people going up Greenridge Terrace from an
earlier version, so if you could just talk about that.
GARY KOHLSAAT: I'll let David speak on that.
DAVID FOX: Thank you. Yes, there is only one
house that comes off of Greenridge Terrace and that house
is not connected to any other part of the development, so
there will only be one house off of Greenridge Terrace.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
In the case of the other seven lots, those come
off of Santella Drive, which is a public street, and the
public street goes through the Highlands development. I was
also the person who was involved with the development of
Highlands subdivision and we tried to make that a private
road and the Town decided that that wasn't the best use of
that road and so it was proposed to be a public road, and
it is, and dedicated as such.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: I understand that, but if
you could comment on to what extent you've talked to the
residents on Santella about this and how it would impact
them and how are they feeling about it?
DAVID FOX: The owners have talked to some of the
residents, I believe. Is Rob Abrams still here? I don't
believe he is. The owners have talked to several of the
residents in the Highland subdivision, and they most
recently have been talking with the president of the HOA at
the Highlands subdivision to see if it makes sense to
perhaps combine the HOAs together so that they would have
shared management of the entire property, and I believe
they're making progress in that area and I wouldn't be
surprised at all if in the future we see a merged HOA.
There are several things that they need to work out, but
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
they are in constant discussions with the people in the
Highlands subdivision.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: And do you think because if
they were to combine their HOAs that they would be able to
collaborate on flow in and out of the… Because it's going
to go through their neighborhood even though it's a public
street.
DAVID FOX: Well, what it does, too, is a
combined HOA would also have architectural review over the
homes that were going to go in in the Vistas project, so
they could also do things like request by it from the Town
in a formal manner more street cleaning, for instance, or a
change in construction hours, but the combined HOAs could
have a powerful effect. There are 19 homes in the Highlands
subdivision, there would be eight more here, so that would
be 27 homes that could have an additional layer of review
and also an additional layer of comment when it came time
to build those individual houses.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Okay, thank you.
DAVID FOX: You're welcome.
CHAIR HUDES: I had one question. I do want to
get to public testimony. I have many questions, actually,
but I have one that I want to ask now and that has to do
with the trees and the preparation of the site.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
It appears, and I think in your application
you've stated that very few trees will be removed, and in
fact you've got areas that appear to have been graded, as
well. Were any of the current owners or anyone associated
with the project, meaning any of the contractors or
professionals, involved when these trees were removed and
when grading may have been done?
DAVID FOX: Grading, certainly not, and on the
trees not to the best of my knowledge. I can give you a
little bit of history if you've like it.
When the Highlands subdivision was done there was
a water tank placed on this property and that road, the
main road that goes up, had to be somewhat improved so that
San Jose Water could get up there, so there was definitely
grading done by San Jose Water to get that tank up there.
But most of the work that has been done out
there, if you looked, for instance, on Lot 2 that's way
out, if you look there, there are a number of fairly tall,
crumbling retaining walls. Most of the work that was done
out there was done long, long ago, probably maybe when
Perry Greiner owned the property, which was quite a good
long time ago, or prior to him. And there are lots of
stories about this land. There have been so many owners.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: So, have the current owners or
contractors or developers or anyone associated with the
project been involved with this project longer than the
last couple of years?
DAVID FOX: No. No, absolutely not.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. The other question I had
about the site is I tried to do it in the rain; it was
really tough.
DAVID FOX: It's very slippery out there in the
rain.
CHAIR HUDES: I came back today and spent some
time out there. I had a very difficult time understanding
the site and understanding where… I could read the map, but
I couldn't… I was using a compass and all kinds of things
to try to figure out where I was. Did you consider marking
with poles or more significant markers where the buildings
would be located, where the road would be located, or
giving tours of the site? The reason I'm asking is we had a
recent application where when we were at this stage, we
were able to conceptualize where these lots were going to
be and where the boundaries were going to be.
DAVID FOX: Well, if we were allowed all three of
us would be happy to take any of you up there, for sure. I
mean, we would walk you around. We've walked it for a long
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
time, and we do know where everything is. And if the Town
allows that sort of thing, we'd certainly meet you up there
and do that.
As far as where the roads are going to be, you
walked on where the roads are going to be. They are the
existing roads.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. I've walked in some strange
places.
DAVID FOX: Well then, you probably didn't walk
on the existing roads and there will be no road there. Do
not get poison oak.
CHAIR HUDES: Probably got some. Thank you.
DAVID FOX: You're welcome, sir.
CHAIR HUDES: Are there any other questions of
the Applicant at this time? Okay, I'm going to open the
hearing for members of the public, and I have quite a few
cards, so I'm going to ask Sarah Chaffin if you'd like to
come forward, and then we'll hear from Dennis Byron.
SARAH CHAFFIN: Good evening, thank you for
having me. I'm sure it's been a long evening, so I
appreciate you listening. I just came to speak in favor of
this project, because right now we have a real shortage of
housing and I think this would be a way to add eight more
housing units to the Town.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I also feel that the Applicants are really
working well with the neighbors.
The other thing that's been a big concern is
actually fire safety. There has been a lot of fire safety
issues around Town, and meetings, because Los Gatos is
actually in a high-risk fire situation and I think one of
the great aspects of this project is it's going to allow
you to leave the Highland area by another access, so if
there is a fire people would not be trapped, so I think
that's a huge benefit to the project.
The other thing is one of the Applicants is a
local from Los Gatos. They're small business people and I
think it's important to take that into consideration when
you consider the application, because I think they're
really working hard to accommodate everyone. They're
working on the project for a business purpose, but they're
also working hard with the neighbors to make everyone
happy.
Thank you for listening to me, and for your time.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Any questions? Okay, Mr.
Byron and then David Rossi.
DENNIS BYRON: Good evening, my name is Dennis
Byron and I've been a member of this Town since about 1962.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I'm in favor of this project. I have been
professionally involved, recreationally involved, and as a
citizen involved in this property for the last 50 years at
least. I actually knew Perry Greiner, I made him a couple
offers way back when; he was a little difficult to work
with, so I was never able achieve my goal, but I'm glad to
see somebody with the character of the developer today
building this project. It's been well vetted. I think it's
going to be a beautiful project and I think it's going to
be a great asset to the Town of Los Gatos. Thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Any questions? Okay, Mr.
Rossi and then Dr. Weissman.
DAVID ROSSI: Hi, good evening. I met the
developer tonight for the first time, and I have to say
that I heard about this project through Jennifer and I'm
here to support this project.
The Town Council should support and praise a
developer of this quality to come in here and go underneath
density requirements and present such a responsible
project. I was so amazed when I heard there was opposition.
I said, "What could the opposition actually be?" and they
said, "Local neighbors." And I realized that there's a
human condition people have that when they think things are
bad, they fight for them. We want to fight for things that
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we think are right or fight for things that we think are
bad. But the same human condition causes us to think that
things are bad when they're only bad for us, and this is
one of those situations where the local opposition thinks
this is bad for the community, because it's simply bad for
them.
I think the politicians and the judicial system
and even historians look at bias with deference, and I
think the Council should definitely look at local
opposition with deference, and because what they want isn't
necessarily good for this community—I've been here since
1977—and this is a responsible project that deserves
responsible praise, I'm in support and I hope Council
supports it as well.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. I did have one question.
I thank you for your comments. I just wanted to make sure
you were aware that this is the Planning Commission, not
the Town Council, and we are appointed volunteers to this
position.
DAVID ROSSI: I'm aware of that.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. Dr. Weissman.
DAVID WEISSMAN: Without analysis of the four-lot
alternative, which we requested at both oral and written
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
testimony back in 2017, and a circulation analysis, this
EIR is simply not ready for certification.
Now, I have expected to deal with fake news in
national politics, but not in Los Gatos. So, in your
packet, Exhibit 17, on page 10, Item C, where the Applicant
repeats an earlier statement that all driveways are less
than 300' long, I say B.S. And where the Staff Report says
that the shared driveway to Lots 7 and 8 is 720' long and
the driveway to Lot 2 is 340', I also say B.S. Because I
can pull out my trusty piece of string, and I have a set of
the Applicant's plans where the driveways are marked, and
all I did was put the string on the blue dots and measured
it out and then put it against a ruler; that's how I got my
numbers.
All four of the driveways to Lots 1, 2, 7, and 8
exceed the 300' limit imposed by the Hillside Guidelines,
which importantly the Hillside Guidelines don't distinguish
between shared and non-shared driveways. So why is Staff
making this distinction if the Hillside Guidelines don't
make it? It is not Staff's function to help the Applicant,
but to provide unbiased information to the Planning
Commission. Shared or not, these excessive driveway lengths
are more dangerous than shorter driveways. And nowhere in
Staff's report do they mention that the cul de sac at
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1,300' exceeds the 800' limit imposed by the Hillside
Specific Plan. As such, it requires another exception.
And why are these excessive distances important?
Because as the Planning Commission you need to know these
facts, given the age of forest fires that we now live in.
Think Santa Rosa and Paradise, California. Plus, these
dangers were clearly front and center and so stated when
the writers of the Hillside Specific Plan and Hillside
Guidelines set these limits. If anything, the fire
situation is now measurably worse compared with when these
documents were written.
A four-house subdivision on Lots 3, 4, 5, and 6
with each lot limited to its LRDA, and all other areas
outside the LRDA protected as unfenced, undeveloped, and
unpaved, dedicated to open space is a reasonable project,
because this achieves the true clustering of the Hillside
Specific Plan. The Applicant is correct that under their
plan 82-percent of the site would be freed of development,
but all that area is over 30-percent, and a lot of it is
over 50%; they're not going to develop it anyway.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Maybe there are some
questions here. Questions? I had a couple of questions.
The first one was about reconfiguring the
property. Have you seen any alternative configurations
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
36
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
either for four-lot or others, not just conceptual four-lot
but actual layout of a four-lot or a six-lot or a seven-lot
or anything else?
DAVID WEISSMAN: Yes, in 2011 a previous owner
commissioned what is called a scoping document, which was
done by Fletcher Parsons. Some of you may know him; he used
to be on the staff here. They came up with three
alternatives. The first two were both four-lot
subdivisions. The third and least favorable alternative was
an eight-lot subdivision. We mentioned that study at the
scoping meeting in 2017. That letter was put in the file by
us twice, because it disappeared from the Town's file. So,
yes.
CHAIR HUDES: Do you know whether those
configurations were provided to either the EIR consultant
or Town Staff?
DAVID WEISSMAN: Well, if they were in the file,
I would assume the EIR consultant would have seen them, and
they certainly could have asked us for them, because we
mentioned them at the scoping meeting in 2017.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. Any other
questions? I had one other one, which was related to your
letter and the previous discussion we just had about
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
fences. What's been proposed, would that in any way
interact with the discussion about fences?
DAVID WEISSMAN: It could. EIR Alternative 3
specifically recommends that the… Right now, the project, I
believe, has 4.6 acres which is designated as open space.
Since they can't use 31 acres of the property, the 82-
percent or something like that, because it's so steep, let
make that, now, you guys could do that, that that area will
be dedicated open, unfenced space that cannot be developed.
And this is a perfect place to segue that into the Fence
Ordinance as it pertains to PD development in the
hillsides, and then we don't have to worry about fences
that are there, fences that are not there, and so forth.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. Yes, Commissioner
O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: You have made a point in
writing and now orally about the four-unit alternative. It
was explained earlier that one didn't have to consider
that, you heard why, and I think legally that is a correct
statement. So, if the Applicant doesn't have to consider
those alternatives, because you could have had a Negative
Declaration on this, you don't need to do the alternatives,
so whether it's a four or a six or a two or anything else,
you don't need to do that.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
So, if you have some other argument as to why we
would have to consider a four-unit alternative, I'd like to
hear it, because at the moment it appears that's not the
case.
DAVID WEISSMAN: My argument would be that when
you take out 170-something trees, when you have a project
that requires numerous exceptions for roads, for cut and
fill, and then everything miraculously has no significant
impact, I, again, say B.S.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: (Inaudible).
CHAIR HUDES: I actually had another question
about the driveway length. Could you explain the
relationship, if there is one, between driveway length and
fire hazard?
DAVID WEISSMAN: Living on a street which is a
dead end street, and we are acutely aware of that, and
looking at what happened in Santa Rosa and Paradise,
California where fires just overwhelmed these communities
and people simply could not get out, having longer
driveways simply increases the risk of people being able to
get out.
So, if you live in the Highlands, you're now
going to have coming from the east potentially five
residences from the Sahadi/Shannon Road development, you're
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
going to have potentially eight residences from this
development, and then all the people that live in the
Highlands. It just makes common sense. You've got people
trying to get out and you've got emergency vehicles trying
to get in, and the shorter the driveways probably the safer
it is. Those visions are put into the Hillside Specific
Plan.
CHAIR HUDES: I understand that, and I believe
that's going to be a key issue as to whether the EIR is
correct or not. Coming back to the driveway length
measurements, I understand you did that with string, and I
understand you've provided that in text form, but I think
it might be helpful at some point to see where you've
measured on the map. Is that something you'd be willing to
provide to us?
DAVID WEISSMAN: May I approach the bench?
CHAIR HUDES: Sure. Maybe on the table there. I
think everyone would want to see it. Maybe you could take
the mike, if you don't mind, Dr. Weissman. If you could
maybe put it on the table, and then everyone can see that.
DAVID WEISSMAN: On this plan there are several
different color codes. The main road is shown in the dark
blue. The driveway, and it is labeled "Driveway" here, is
shown as little blue dots, or turquoise dots, and what I
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
simply did was took my piece of string, laid it carefully
on the dots, got the length, put it against a ruler just
like we did in elementary school, and that's how I got the
lengths.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. Mr. Roman Ormandy
and then Susan Fish.
ROMAN ORMANDY: My name is Roman Ormandy and we
live on 16200 Greenridge Terrace, which is the property
right next to these open spaces. I just have one question,
really.
We appreciate the open spaces, that's good, and
we got about two weeks ago a notice that in fact this
meeting is going to happen, and there is a sign right on
the entrance on the property about what the project is
going to look like. So, I walk down there and took a
picture of the map, and it's not this map, it's actually a
different map. So, it's probably the differences could be
technical, but there is no open space on the map. There is
a line which says…which is roughly the same line, and there
is a legend which is…
I'm referring to an easement, but I was puzzled
and that's why I wrote the letter, and now I see there is
open space again, so presumably open space is there, and
they cannot build anything, which would make me feel safer
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that I will not be watching from my swimming pool some
construction going on.
So, the question is why is this map different?
DAVID FOX: We'll tell you later. We'll tell you
when they let us talk again, but we will tell you.
ROMAN ORMANDY: But the answer is this is the
correct map?
DAVID FOX: Yes, sir.
ROMAN ORMANDY: Thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: (Inaudible) we can take your
question and we can ask the Applicant later, but we can't
(inaudible).
ROMAN ORMANDY: Yeah.
CHAIR HUDES: Are there any questions? Okay,
thank you. Susan Fish and then Gary King, or the next one
after that is Matt McCormick.
SUSAN FISH: Good evening, my name is Susan Fish
and I'm a resident of Greenridge Terrace, but my tribal
memory of my neighborhood and my street goes on since the
1950s.
There is one thing I will agree with the
presentation, that there have been many, many, many owners
and developers of this property. Over the past at least 40
years we've seen projects come and go. Sometimes they got
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
far enough to the Commission, many times not. It wasn't
until the Highlands project brought development to the west
side of this property that it actually became more vital,
some kind of a development.
I think we'd all agree that whether it's
flatlands or hillsides, the easy parcels are all developed.
It's the tough ones that are left, and this probably is up
there with the very toughest. It has access problems,
steep, steep canyons, it's got issues with what an
environmental impact will be to put in services.
It was back in the seventies—I was a planning
commissioner—when the Hillside Plan was created, because
the Commission realized there needed to be rules and
guidelines for developments in the hillsides to make sure
that they were right for the parcel, right for our town,
and right for the people who would live there. In this
project Lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 meet that criteria. Lots 7 and
8 have potential but need to be resited. Lots 1 and 2 do
not meet that criteria; they're not right for our town,
they're not right for those two parcels, and they're really
not right for the people who are going to live there.
The danger that we actually have with this
project is approving eight parcels using, which I've heard
over and over from these folks, "We're just making use of
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the roads that were cut. We're just making use of the roads
that were there," and then leaving to have the people who
are supposed to literally develop each of the parcels be
coming to you with exceptions, particularly for Lots 1 and
2, because they're on steep, steep parts. We hear about
swales, we hear about the steepness of the property, so
that's the danger here of creating something that we can't
fix without making all kinds of exceptions in the future.
This particular project, quite frankly, we hope
something finally is done with this property, because we're
tired of constant, constant proposals and developments. But
I will tell you, a lot of what they are depending on for
roads, and you can check your code enforcement officers,
you can even check the Los Gatos Police Department, we have
called consistently over the years, and the name Perry
Greiner has come up twice. That was probably the worst
owner ever, because he literally graded that place on
weekends and evenings when the Town of Los Gatos was
totally unable to stop it, that's why the Los Gatos Police
Department. And quite frankly, these folks shouldn't be
unjustly enriched. I'll answer any questions that you have.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Questions? Commissioner
Janoff.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Thank you. You mentioned
that Lots 1 and 2 are—I forgot the term you used—but not
suitable is what I heard. Can you explain why Lots 1 and 2
are particularly problematic compared to the others?
SUSAN FISH: Well, as you can see there is
absolutely no cluster concept, and that's what the Hillside
Plan was built on, the fact that by clustering units… When
our neighborhood was built back in the 1940s and 50s eight
of the homes at the top are clustered. I mean, it just
makes sense, the use of the property. It's cheaper to get
services, it makes sense to get services, you don't
completely dig up and tear up the rest of the thing to get
to the services for them.
But those driveways are outrageous. We've seen in
Santa Rosa, we've seen in Paradise, if there is a firestorm
those folks won't be able to get out if they have a fire.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: If I could paraphrase, your
concern is length of driveway and the lack of clustering
for Lots 1 and 2.
SUSAN FISH: Right, and the location that they've
chosen. I get the sense that they're trying to carve out a
place to fit these, and the only measure they meet is
maximization of profits.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Thank you.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Did you attend some of the
community meetings with the Applicant?
SUSAN FISH: Every one.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Okay. So, in reading your
letter you mentioned that maybe Lots 7 and 8 could work if
they're reconfigured. Did you address that with the
Applicant, and what response did you get?
SUSAN FISH: We got that they had talked over
everything with their engineer, over everything with…and
these were the best site locations, as was their
recommendation.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Maybe I could just ask a follow up
on that. When you talk about reconfiguring, does that mean
that you have an idea about what they should look like or
where things should be located? I'm trying to understand,
you know, reconfigure versus don't build, and reconfigure
implies that you have an idea, so do you have an idea about
how those should be done?
SUSAN FISH: I'm not an engineer by trade, but I
do believe that they can be resited so that they can gain
more from the clustering and decrease the length of those
driveways.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. I had one other
question, and that is that since you have a long history
observing that area, are you aware of any projects that got
to the stage where it was permissible to cut down trees and
grade them?
SUSAN FISH: There was a project in 1968 that was
called Puerta del Monte, and they did the initial road that
entered the property, because this property had no roads
prior to that, there were just the steep canyons; it was
not accessible. But they went bankrupt and didn't finish,
didn't do any more than that. It was subsequent owners who
literally carved out trees, took out trees, did illegal
grading, significant amounts that is what we see today as
the driveway or the retaining walls, those were what was
done throughout the years.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you very much.
CHAIR HUDES: It seems Gary King may have left.
Matt McCormick.
MATT McCORMICK: Thank you. Yes, I'm Matt
McCormick. Background is I represent buyers and sellers
throughout the State of California; I've got an office down
in Westlake Village, an office in Los Altos, and in Carmel.
We're in much support of this project. We've
looked at this for over a year-and-a-half and I'm
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
representing a buyer that is very interested to make a
purpose on this property. So, I just want to let you know I
came in to let you know not just the support, I hear what
everyone is saying and their concerns and whatnot, and
we're going to make sure that we pay attention to all, and
very interested in these eight properties.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Any questions? Okay,
thank you. The last card I have is Jennifer Croll. If
anyone else wishes to speak, please come forward with a
card.
JENNIFER CROLL: Good evening. I'm speaking today
on behalf of my daughter who is fourth generation Los
Gatan; my mother, who is a four-decade business owner in
Los Gatos; and myself; I was born and raised here in Los
Gatos. I also own the property adjacent to this parcel and
I am in serious favor of this development.
I think that the end of this property they've
conceded to have only one property adjacent to the
Greenridge Terrace neighborhood, which I'm a part of, and I
like that; I think that's a positive thing.
I think that as far as clustering and the road,
the driveway length, I think that it is a best suit on that
Lot 1 to be out of sight of everybody else in the
neighborhood.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
The driveway issue, the Greenridge Terrace
community wanted only one parcel there. It's quite big
enough to have two and I think they've done a really nice
job with the placement of that. You can't see that property
at all from the neighborhood. I think they've been very
thoughtful.
I've kept myself up to date as it relates to this
eight-lot subdivision with regular communications with the
owners. I have 25 years of experience developing land, and
as a direct neighbor I believe that I can offer a unique
perspective.
Firstly, this application is compliant and
conforming to the zoning of this land and has for many
years.
I'm pleased that the Applicant did not apply for
more lots, as I believe most applicants would have applied
for 12-14 lots on this 36 acres.
Furthermore, the conceptual design for these
homes will add great value to Los Gatos, its immediate
neighbors, and the surrounding area.
As you know, Los Gatos needs to move forward with
calculated expansion of its residential supply. The Vistas
of Los Gatos will supply this area with three- to four-acre
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
high-end lots, which is something Los Gatos doesn't have
enough of a supply for.
On a personal note, I find the owners to be
professional, ethical, and very accommodative to myself and
my family.
In summary, I simply am in strong support of this
application due to its compliant nature, which includes
very little variances. Should you have any questions, you
can feel free to call me. Thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Great, thank you. Any questions?
Okay, now we have opportunity for the Applicant to address
anything they'd like to for up to five minutes, to add
further comments about the application, or take further
questions from the Planning Commission. Would the Applicant
like to take advantage of another five minutes?
DAVID FOX: I'm back. I'd like to address a
couple of things.
In the case of the cul de sac, we could have made
the road shorter there. We could have moved the cul de sac
closer to Lot 5; it would have required more grading on the
site. The reason we put the cul de sac there, we were
thinking about it, we put it in the spot where it would
require the least grading. The water tank is…
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Excuse me, could you show us where
that is? You can take the microphone with you.
DAVID FOX: There we go. This is the water tank.
This area in here was improved by San Jose Water already.
If you walked out there you noticed it's very, very flat
going to the water tank. We could have placed the cul de
sac back here. We could have placed it where it would have
been compliant with the Hillside Standards and Guidelines,
but in this area right here it requires less grading, it
requires less site disturbance to us to put it there, and
that's why we placed it there. It's why we placed most of
the siting of the homes in the places where they would
create the least disturbance.
Dr. Weissman talked about a four-lot alternative.
Fletcher Parsons did a study on that, but it was an
economic study, and the reason they proposed two four-lot
subdivisions was because they could have got it approved
under the Map Act and they wouldn't have had to have gone
through the PD process. In fact, on both of the four-lot
maps that were produced by Fletcher Parsons it says the
remainder parcel is open for future development. There was
absolutely no attempt to limit development on those, they
just wanted to get the subdivisions approved faster, and
that's why they proposed the four lots.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Oh, on Lot 2—that would be this lot here—I don't
know if you made it all the way out there, but there are
existing retaining walls that are made out of railroad ties
that are crumbling; several trees have already fallen down.
That spot on Lot 2 would absolutely be the least impactful
spot to place a home. It has absolutely zero visibility
from anywhere, any of the viewing platforms. It is the
proper spot, and the lot is large, it's huge, so we took a
very small area, here, and placed a home there, and it is
surrounded by a tremendous amount of open space and you
can't see it from anywhere.
We did that with all the homes. That was a
criteria that we used for everything. Where can we put
things that has the least impact? That's why some of the
driveways are longer than the Hillside Standards allow,
because we were trying to get to spots that would have the
least impact.
The services that would come to the property,
responding to Ms. Fish's comment, they'll come up the
existing roads. There is already water and electricity out
there, and anything else would be brought in through the
existing roads. We're not going to be tearing things up to
bring things in, and so any utilities that go to any of the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
lots are going to be drawn down those existing graded
pathways already.
Amanda pointed out to me that this part of the
road is being built right now for the Sahadi subdivision,
so any length of road in this area right here would have to
be counted with that subdivision, because there was an
agreement made between the two that they could use that for
their entry and their exit.
As far as fire escape, this property owns 390' of
Francis Oaks. People could walk out through Francis Oaks,
they could walk out through the Highlands, they could walk
out through the Sahadi subdivision; there are a lot of ways
to get out of this property. Also, the roads are all two-
way. In the event of a fire they could be turned into one-
way roads and everybody could go out there, so there are
multiple ways to get out. I agree, fire is a terrible
thing. The other thing is we're bringing hydrants to this
area. We're bringing fire suppression to an area that
doesn't have it right now.
If there are any other questions, I'd be happy to
answer them.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Would you care to respond
to the comments by Ms. Fish in requesting that perhaps Lots
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
7 and 8 could be better configured to cluster with Lots 3,
4, 5, and 6?
DAVID FOX: I will, thank you. Lot 8 right here,
I don't know if you went out there but it's the area with
the semi-tractor trailers on the one side that Mr. Perry
Greiner left behind. That area, with the exception of a
mound that is kind of in the middle of it, is dead flat.
There would be very, very little grading, if any, that
would be needed for that lot to be built.
The same is true of Lot 7 here as it goes down
into the valley there; there's a flat spot down in there.
In fact, there are no trees down in that area at present;
that's why we chose that site. They're both within the LRDA
of the lot, and that was the purpose of putting those homes
where they are. We wanted to stay within the LRDAs and both
of those achieve that.
As far as Lot 8 goes, there is not a better spot.
You can't get flatter than flat, and that's where we're
going to put that one.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Commissioner Hanssen.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Could you also comment on
the Lot 1 and Lot 2, Ms. Fish's comments? And then in
looking at the circulation plan, and we talked about the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
access through Greenridge Terrace, but Lot 1 doesn't seem
to be part of the neighborhood in terms of circulation,
because it has a road that's going out through Greenridge
Terrace. Is it going to be connected to the other homes?
DAVID FOX: There was a strong desire in the
Greenridge Terrace neighborhood to only have one house
coming off, and they wanted that house to not be connected
to any other houses, and that's what we've done. We also
pushed it way back on the lot so that it couldn't be
visible.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: So, the reverse side of
that, and I just wanted to comment, if you didn't have that
then you would have less road.
DAVID FOX: We could have actually attached this…
There is a road that goes all the way around here. We could
have attached that lot to any of the other lots. That road
already exists, but it was the desire of the neighborhood
not to have it attached, and so we didn't.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Okay.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Is that in the report of
the neighborhood interaction?
DAVID FOX: I perhaps could defer to Mr. Mullin
on that?
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Maybe we could follow up with that.
Other questions? I had a couple of questions. Where is the
access to the trail, and who will maintain the trail?
DAVID FOX: Could you run your finger along the
entire trail? She's not tall enough. It actually goes like
that and it ends at the end of the property.
CHAIR HUDES: And it starts from?
DAVID FOX: It starts from the Highlands
Development. This is the Highlands subdivision right here,
and that was put in as part of the Highlands subdivision;
they have a trail there.
CHAIR HUDES: And who will maintain the trail in
this subdivision?
DAVID FOX: The HOA.
CHAIR HUDES: The HOA, okay. And will it be open
to the public?
DAVID FOX: Yes.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. Question about the driveway
length.
GARY KOHLSAAT: I was just getting ready to answer
that. The exhibit that we've placed up here actually was
created today by Amanda's office and it's using something a
little more accurate than Dr. Weissman's string, although I
think that's a clever way to do it.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
We've actually shown, and we have a copy to Staff,
that this says each individual driveway length at its most
extreme, meaning it that it goes from like the center line
of the cul de sac, this is the shared driveway to where it
splits, 710'. The length from there is 140' all the way to
the garage doors and not where we have the firetruck
turnaround. So, if you want to know the maximum extent of
these proposed driveways, we have this exhibit. This one is
393' from here to here. We have turnouts along the way. Any
time we're over 300' we have the turnout, which is required
by the Fire Department, and that's something that in the
Hillside Standards…
CHAIR HUDES: Could you point out those turnouts?
GARY KOHLSAAT: There's a turnout right here.
There's a turnout right here; you can see it like a snake,
and it's got its rat. There's a turnout right here, and
those are the only three that exceed the 300'.
CHAIR HUDES: So, this is a new drawing, correct?
GARY KOHLSAAT: Correct.
CHAIR HUDES: Would you be willing to provide
that to us with a label of where the turnouts are?
GARY KOHLSAAT: Absolutely. The turnouts are
actually shown on Sheet 4.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
57
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Right, okay. I had another question
about the driveway length. What is your perspective on how
driveway length relates to fire hazard?
GARY KOHLSAAT: I think there are several factors
that go into the fire hazard; the slope of the driveway is
one of them. Whether or not we have turnouts; turnouts are
proven. What it is is the turnouts are for the resident to
pull over while the emergency vehicle is coming past them.
It's not for the emergency vehicle to get out of the way so
I can get out of here; no, it's the other way around. The
turnouts are sized appropriately for that, so it basically
creates a two-way driveway at that one location.
This is very standard practice throughout the Bay
Area and at least in the South Bay where we're working with
Santa Clara County Fire Department. Santa Clara County Fire
has reviewed these plans and has deemed them compliant.
ROBERT SCHULTZ: I can elaborate a little bit
more on that, because I did look up Santa Clara's. It is a
500' requirement, not even 300', and if you're going to go
longer than a 500' requirement you have to have the
turnouts, you have to have the turnaround areas. In every
jurisdiction I've been I've seen no more than 150' and then
you've got to start doing the turnouts and the turnarounds.
The reason isn't not to have long driveways because people
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
aren't going to be able to get out in an emergency, it's
primarily that Fire is able to get in and get around other
cars in an emergency situation. That's why they have it and
that's why they have the turnout requirement. It isn't
listed in our Hillside Guidelines, but the purpose was they
use even a restrictor requirement, 300', but the reason why
it was 300' had nothing to do with whether people could get
in and out, it had to do with making certain that there are
the turnouts and the turnarounds.
GARY KOHLSAAT: And if I may, a factor, too,
would be the slope of the driveway. You've got the shared
driveway along here, which is essentially flat. You've got
the driveway which leads to Lot 2, which is under ten-
percent slope for the majority of that; it's considered
flat. And Lot 8 is flat, so Lot 1 is the only one that
exceeds that, and we've spoken about options for Lot 1 if
that was desirable and of a concern.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. Other questions?
Okay, I had a couple of sort of clean-up questions. You've
referenced a report several times both in your testimony
here and in your letter, a due diligence report and also a
Fletcher Parsons report. I don't know if they're the same
thing. It's difficult for us to consider that without
reading the report. Would you be willing to provide us with
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that since you've made some points about it? It's difficult
to understand those points without the rest of the context
of the report.
DAVID FOX: It was actually provided to the
Staff, and the project attorney actually wrote a letter to
the Town about it.
CHAIR HUDES: Are they the same report or are
they two different things?
DAVID FOX: Just one.
CHAIR HUDES: Fletcher Parsons and due diligence?
DAVID FOX: Fletcher Parsons, former ace engineer
for the Town of Los Gatos, was one of the people who worked
on that report.
CHAIR HUDES: And that's the due diligence report
that's referred to as a financial…I think you referred to
it as a financial report.
DAVID FOX: It was done by Eastern Savings Bank.
It was commissioned by Eastern Savings Bank, and there's a
long history with them and Mr. Perry Greiner, but it was an
economic analysis. It was for length of approval, and what
they were trying to do… At the very end of that document
what they say is that since the four-lot subdivision is an
A&S approval you'd have to consider market timing, in other
words, getting the product to market, but a PD is vested
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and you wouldn't have to consider market timing in that,
and that was one of the things that the developer had to
consider. The A&S can only be vested if there is
significant construction, so what the developer had to look
at was yes, I can get the four lots faster, but I might
have to vest it, I might have to build it.
CHAIR HUDES: My question was very simple. It was
about providing it, and I think you've already provided it.
DAVID FOX: And we have already provided it.
CHAIR HUDES: So, okay, we'll try to get that. I
had another question and that is I think in your report
you've referred to the Blossom Hill Comprehensive Open
Space Study discussion, and let me make sure that's in your
report.
DAVID FOX: It was extensively covered in our
justification letter.
CHAIR HUDES: Right, okay, and so is your
position that the BHOSS should be considered, or that it
should not be considered because it's not wholly referenced
in the 2020 General Plan?
DAVID FOX: You can be of two minds on the
Blossom Hill Open Space Study. It was a 30,000' attempt to
look at the area which includes this parcel, and it made a
number of assumptions that are no longer correct, and if
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
you read our Letter of Justification, we've gone through it
step-by-step to show where the study was lacking and where
it could be applied. The Planning Commission is certainly
allowed to apply anything that they would like, but I think
that there are better documents that have superseded the
BHOSS and that are more accurate and more applicable.
CHAIR HUDES: That's helpful to understand your
position on the applicability of that.
Then last question I had was that there was a… I
can't remember which neighbor, but someone talked about
where the replacement trees are located and that the
replacements were located in order to allow views for the
sites, and that would not serve the purpose of those
replacement trees being a screen from the viewing
platforms. Did you have any opinion or reaction to that
comment that said that the replacement trees should be
located as screens of the homes from the viewing platforms?
DAVID FOX: Well, since there are no homes it
would be difficult to assess where the screening had to be,
however, since the Commission and the Staff is going to see
all of these homes comes back, and there will certainly be
more replacement trees than have to be replaced for the
road construction, they can be placed anywhere that the
Commission or the Staff recommends they be placed and the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
number of which can be put anywhere. So, if a home comes in
to your guys and you take a look at it and you say hey,
we'd like to screen this particular elevation, well, you're
going to have more than one chance to do that, and those
trees can be placed anywhere on any of those eight lots to
provide the amount of screening that you deem necessary.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you.
DAVID FOX: You're welcome.
CHAIR HUDES: Any other questions? Okay, I will
close the public portion of the public hearing and I
suggest that we take a break. We're at 10:30, so let's
reconvene at 10:40.
(INTERMISSION)
CHAIR HUDES: We will now resume the
deliberations. Could folks please have their seats. Thank
you.
Now is the opportunity for the Commission to ask
questions of Staff or initiate discussion. Why don't we
start with questions of Staff? Sure, Commissioner Burch.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I would like to hear from
Staff your interpretation of the amount of work that's
going to be happening on Sheet 5 of the drawings. I want to
make sure that I just clearly understand. This has the
utility plan, and the way it reads it actually shows the
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
proposed joint trench going all the way up to the proposed
house, and I understand that that's proposed. So, let's
take Lot 2, for example. Will the joint trench just be
going to the cul de sac, or do you understand that it will
actually be pulled up to the lot line for Lot 2?
KEVIN BAGLEY: Kevin Bagley, Engineering. Sorry,
my plans did not print very well. The color is a little
off, but my understanding would be the joint trench would
go all the way up to the future house.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Okay.
KEVIN BAGLEY: It does appear that the joint
trenches are shown all the way up to the fire turnaround.
Obviously, the utilities would not end there, they would
service whatever proposed home is put in place.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: But the trenching associated
will be a part of the application for each home? So, when I
see Lot 2 my question is, I'll be seeing the house, the
driveway, and all of the grading and any work associated
with taking the joint trench to that location, correct?
KEVIN BAGLEY: My understanding would be that
during the PD that it would only be up to the property
line. I can't have input at the moment from the Applicant,
but I would think that without knowing the exact siting of
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the house they wouldn't want to extend the joint trench any
farther than the property line.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: That doesn't make any
sense. That drawing, however, shows a manhole. You've got a
proposed trench which is past the property line, and then
here in blue to me it appears that it goes all the way to
what is called the future house, and that would also
explain why they have a manhole, so it looks like their
drawing is such that it would go all the way up to the
house. And when that's the case, I don't know.
JOEL PAULSON: I don't know that we have exactly
the plan for whether that would happen with the Planned
Development or that would happen following approval of the
Subdivision Map or at Architecture and Site. I think what
they were attempting to show here is that generally if
these were the conceptual locations that were future
Architecture and Site, these are the routes that that joint
trench would go to the house. So, we can get more
clarification on that moving forward, that can be some
direction, but ultimately, we can get more clarity
on that.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: And I assume, I mean, it
does say clearly "joint trench" and "proposed joint
trench." I just was trying to understand with whatever
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
65
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
motion we make today that I understand the parameters and
what I expect to see with each future home, because we are
looking at higher grading numbers. I just wanted to know if
it would include those or not. I think that was it for the
moment.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Question for Staff. What
does a circulation analysis entail? I've never seen one. We
see our traffic analysis from time to time. And if the
Commission were to request one, who would provide it, the
Town or the Applicant?
JOEL PAULSON: We're all over here looking at
each other. What time is it? What time is it right now? So,
circulation analysis, we would look at circulation and so
I'm not sure if you're looking at it from a safety
perspective or that type of analysis. For us, if you're
thinking of safety, whether it's fire safety or some other
safety, Santa Clara Fire has reviewed this application,
reviewed these proposals, and determined that this is
adequate. So, they reviewed the Planned Development
application and they would also review future Architecture
and Site applications.
Typically, and I know there have been some
conversations around secondary access, multi access. Santa
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Clara County's threshold actually is 30 parcels, so this is
relatively small in comparison to their typical threshold
for requiring mandatory secondary access, but typically
they would look at the circulation. That's where you have
the turnouts, you have the cul de sacs, you have the
potential turnarounds at the end of these long driveways;
those are all in conformance with Santa Clara County Fire's
requirements.
CHAIR HUDES: I had a follow up question on that,
if I may?
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Sure.
CHAIR HUDES: Are the fire department
requirements a floor or a ceiling? In other words, do the
Hillside Design Standards and Guidelines and our ordinances
not apply if the Fire Department's requirements are met?
JOEL PAULSON: They still apply, and that's why
we have requested exceptions for driveway lengths, but from
a safety perspective I wouldn't consider Santa Clara County
Fire a floor. From a safety perspective I think they take
that very seriously, and so that does not, again, preclude
you from being concerned about our requirements as they
relate to driveway lengths or cul de sac lengths, but from
a fire safety standpoint we consider their input paramount.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Sorry, Commissioner Badame, I
interrupted.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: So, I think I need some
clarification, because I thought I heard earlier from the
Town Attorney that the Santa Clara County Fire Department
regulations were 500', so we are looking at driveway
lengths of, I don't know, we've got different measurements,
so it could be 600', it could be 690', it could be 720', it
could 1,000'.
ROBERT SCHULTZ: I'm sorry if I misspoke. They
don't have a maximum length. Anything over 500' then has to
have the turnouts and the turnarounds. I believe this
development has them at 300', the turnouts and the
turnarounds, so it is actually more restrictive than the
County requires.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Okay, thank you.
JOEL PAULSON: Which gets to the floor versus
ceiling comment where we have a more restrictive turnout
requirement than Santa Clara County Fire does, which this
project meets.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, thank you. Commissioner
Hanssen.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Just following up on
Commissioner Badame's question. When there was a question
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
68
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
asked earlier about certifying the EIR without a
circulation analysis I was thinking about the EIR, and I
was like the fire safety issue isn't one of the things they
generally evaluate in the EIR. It could be like a geologic
hazard or something like that, so it would only be related
to transportation and traffic and with only eight houses, I
mean, we would require a circulation analysis, because the
traffic impacts are not significant.
JOEL PAULSON: That's correct, we definitely
wouldn't require a traffic impact analysis, because it
wouldn't hit our threshold for requiring one. So,
circulation analysis, transportation impact analysis, those
are two different studies theoretically in relation…
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: What would be the
jurisdiction for requiring a circulation analysis? It would
be because of fire safety, and you said that's already
covered by the County Fire Department.
JOEL PAULSON: It could be because of fire safety
or some other specific requirement that isn't triggered by
this project.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Okay, so there's no
underlying…
JOEL PAULSON: A circulation analysis is not
necessary for this project.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: …(inaudible) that would
trigger the need for a circulation analysis?
JOEL PAULSON: Yeah.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Okay, thank you.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Other questions? I had a
couple.
The report that was referred to, now it's been
referred to enough times that I feel like I would like to
read it, and I'm wondering if Staff has possession of this
Fletcher Parsons report and can provide you it to us?
JOEL PAULSON: Apparently, we do somewhere based
on the Applicant's input. We don't have that handy now. We
could definitely look through the files. I think we also
have a little bit of transition. Ms. Shoopman recently had
her child and she has been processing this application up
to about a week-and-a-half ago, so we're trying to pull
together some of that information, but that is definitely
something we could get ahold of for you.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, and does Staff have this
document now?
JOEL PAULSON: Yes.
CHAIR HUDES: That hasn't been provided to us?
JOEL PAULSON: It has not.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Okay. Other questions of Staff? I'd
be interested in Staff's opinion about the BHOSS and
whether it's relevant or applicable, whether the Planning
Commission should be considering that in evaluating the
application.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: I couldn't hear you.
CHAIR HUDES: I was asking about the BHOSS, the
Blossom Hill study and whether it was applicable to this
application and should the Planning Commission be
considering that?
JOEL PAULSON: I would say the Planning
Commission can definitely consider that. I think, as was
stated, that document was done, I believe, in 1990. We've
had a number of General Plan and Hillside Residential
Design Guidelines and other documents that have probably
incorporated much, if not most, of those analysis points
from that document, so you're definitely able to use any
points in that document that you feel are still relevant
and not covered it in some other document, whether that's
the General Plan or the Hillside Guidelines or Hillside
Specific Plan, and if you have any specific things that
you're looking for, then definitely let us know and we can
get you the information.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
71
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: I'm just not familiar with that
report, so I don't know what has been superseded by newer
documents.
JOEL PAULSON: Okay.
CHAIR HUDES: Other questions? Okay, discussion
or consideration? Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: On discussion, and this
is just an opening salvo, so to speak, when I've been
looking at this project my initial reaction wasn't
positive. However, I've spent now some hours on it, and I
guess looking at it and seeing what is permitted and what
is not permitted. Then I was concerned with the alternative
of fewer numbers until I realized again that since this
didn't need mitigate on in that regard then you just
couldn't come up with an alternative for that, so that
came out the window.
So, then when I look at it, it looks like eight
units, or eight houses, (inaudible) correctly with what we
can do, unless things like the length of the driveways and
that kind of thing somehow would not be the right thing.
And I'm saying this so I can hopefully get some input from
all of you.
I'm trying to think what are the things we should
be worried about, if at all? Is there something that we
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
72
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
should be requiring that isn't there, because at the moment
I can't come up with a reason that I'm happy with to deny
the project.
CHAIR HUDES: Thank you. Commissioner Burch.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: To kind of dovetail on that,
I was also concerned a little bit about the length of the
driveways, however, in thinking about a number of the
hillside applications that we've seen lately we have been
strongly encouraging people to redesign to stay within the
LRDA. So, if we now have homes that are situated perfectly
within their LRDA, they're not outside, they're not doing
extra excavating, what's the tradeoff?
Well, the tradeoff is now maybe a longer
driveway, and when I look at the two I'm happier with that
than having people building on steep slopes, cutting down
significantly more trees to get the grading done, so the
longer I've looked at this and thought about it the longer
driveways don't bother me and I appreciate that the homes
are situated within the LRDA, because oftentimes in
hillsides that is hard to do.
I personally feel that this is actually a very
well thought-out application, and I appreciate some of the
steps that they've taken to think through the requirements
that we bring up so often in our discussions.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Hanssen.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: I agree with everything that
was said. Looking at this from the big picture perspective
the density could be more based on our Town regulations and
they chose to go to eight, and as was stated, the houses
can be fit in within the LRDA, and so I don't see this
thing stretching us in too much of a way and I'm pretty
comfortable with the driveway for the reasons that
Commissioner Burch brought up.
The other thing that I thought in thinking this
through is that unlike some other Planned Development
applications we've seen before where everything is kind of
locked and loaded at the time you make the decision on the
Planned Development application, and you can't do anything
about the houses when they're getting built. This is not
that. We're approving basically the idea of doing the eight
lots and the roadway, and then later on we will have
discretion, or some body within Los Gatos will have
discretion over those houses, so if it turns out somehow
that some trees get cut down and something else is visible,
the Hillside Design Guidelines will kick in.
I think this is really a generally well-designed
proposal. I didn't find any issue with the EIR. There are
less than significant impacts, so I don't see any reason to
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tell them they need to do less units, so I'm generally in
favor of going forward and recommending it to Council.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: I'm generally in favor of
approval of the EIR for similar reasons. Regarding the
Planned Development, I, too, am concerned about the length
of the driveways, but specifically regarding not the safety
issue but the development of an actual asphalted road,
which is impact on the land if it's 600' long versus 300'
long.
I don't have any objection to the number of lots,
but I would still be in favor of the developer trying to
find ways to shorten the length of the developed dirt road
so that we are lessening the hardscape impact on these lot
sizes.
You've done a really, really good job of making
sure that almost 100% of your development is within the
LRDA, with the exception of the driveway to I believe it's
Lot 6?
DAVID FOX: The LRDA doesn't touch the road.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: Well, it doesn't touch the
road where you've placed the driveway.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: (Inaudible) you can't do
that.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: I'm just saying that there
is…it's possible that the LRDA could still be met if the
driveway is turned a little bit or the lot line has
changed.
So, I think in general it's a pretty reasonable
approach. The only thing I would want to see as a change or
addition possibly to the Planned Development Ordinance has
to do with the visibility issue that Commissioner Hudes
raised, which goes to if the trees that are currently part
of the visibility studies are removed for providing a view
from the developed homes, then that goes against the
visibility that we're trying to protect from downside of
the homes. I would like to see as one of the clauses of the
ordinance something that says the existing trees, or the
existing visibility, needs to be retained such that if in
the future the tree dies or in the future a homeowner
decides they want a more expansive view of the valley,
that's not permitted, so we protect those downhill views.
That's really the only addition I'd like to see.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Badame.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Actually, I do have an
issue with the steepness of the slopes. These are very
steep slopes and I have to question the number of the lots
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
76
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
given the constraints of the site. I'm very concerned about
fire safety. Twenty-eighteen was a pretty devastating year
for wildfires. I mean, it was the deadliest year for
fatalities on record in the State of California, so I'm
concerned that there's a reason that the Hillside Design
Standards and Guidelines state that development should not
be on or adjacent to slopes greater than 30-percent.
These are steep slopes and I'd like to see an
alternative site design maybe with fewer lots; it would
make me feel better and it might fit in better with our
other controlling documents such as the General Plan and
the Hillside Specific Plan other than just relying on a
slope density calculation to figure out how many lots are
appropriate.
CHAIR HUDES: Maybe I could just respond, and
then Commissioner O'Donnell.
I believe there are a number of sort of loose
ends that we need to get some more information on, and I'm
generally in favor of the development, however, I am very
concerned about granting exceptions, particularly if they
contribute in any way to fire hazard. I mean, we're not
dealing with the same situation that even existed when
these guidelines were written, so whereas it might have
been appropriate to grant exceptions ten or 20 or 30 years
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ago, we're dealing with a different environment in the
hills here and I would be very, very concerned about that.
I'm concerned about driveway length and I'm
concerned about steepness of slope, and so I personally
would like to better understand the driveway length,
because I'm still confused, and I also have not had the
opportunity to absorb some of the documents that were
presented tonight with regard to that, and I also am just
concerned about granting exceptions in an environment that
is much more fire prone than when we previously granted
exceptions.
Commissioner O'Donnell.
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: We're all concerned
about fire, but I will say this: The Fire Department
approved this. I have been up in that country repeatedly
over the last few years. It certainly doesn't compare at
all to the Santa Rosa fire, because the houses were much
closer to together. I think there are factual differences
in those fires compared to here.
I also think that the experts in this are the
Fire Department, not us, so we can sit here and analyze it
till the cows come home, and if Fire Department says it's
okay, I don't feel qualified to say well we appreciate your
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
78
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
help, but we disagree with you. I don't know how I could
disagree with the Fire Department.
I would be prepared to decide this tonight. On
the other hand, if my fellow commissioners or any of them
feel that it is necessary to continue the matter to do
these other things, I respect each of you and I would
certainly not quarrel with that.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Badame and then
Commissioner Janoff.
COMMISSIONER BADAME: I just wanted to add that
the Fire Department might say it's okay, but I can tell you
that I have personal knowledge that insurance companies
won't say it's okay. Major insurance companies will decline
any coverage in that area, or they will not renew policies,
and to me it's not only related to property risk, but it's
public safety. It's a designated…
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Insurance companies are
really worried about public safety and not money, huh?
COMMISSIONER BADAME: Well, a loss of life could
contribute to a pretty hefty liability lawsuit.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Janoff.
COMMISSIONER JANOFF: I just wanted to clarify, I
think that the exceptions that are being requested are
theoretical exceptions based on the lots as conceptualized
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
79
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
on the plans, and so just a point of clarification, in
accepting for recommending approval of the Planned
Development Ordinance are there exceptions that we are
codifying tonight if we were to approve that?
JOEL PAULSON: Well, I wouldn't say you're
codifying them, but given future Architecture and Site
applications, if they're in substantial conformance with
the exceptions that are requested here, obviously when it
comes through for Architecture and Site Staff will work
with any applicant to see if those can be reduced and to
what extent, but if someone came through with those
exceptions, then we would be looking to support those.
CHAIR HUDES: I might just want to weigh in on a
couple of other things that I would like to investigate
more before casting a decision.
The issue that Commissioner Badame raised about
slope and adjacency, I want to understand that language a
little bit better. It wasn't just locating, I think, on a
lot that is not on a slope, but also adjacent, I think I
want to understand how that language works carefully.
I would like to have an exhibit that clearly
shows the driveway length. I understand we've had numbers,
but I don't see it on a chart; I would love to see that. I
would like to do a site visit where I can see where these
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
lots are going to be located. I felt that the marking of
them was not particularly good and it wasn't equivalent to
what we've seen on other developments that we've approved.
I would like more clarity on the joint trench,
and I would like to see something on the visibility issues
that have been raised, and also any documentation of a
fewer lot alternative, including the documents that have
been referenced numerous times; I would like to be able to
read those documents before I would be comfortable with
moving forward.
While I'm generally in favor of the development,
there are some loose ends, and some that relate back to
fire safety, that are important in my mind.
Commissioner Burch.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I think if yourself and
Commissioner Badame feel like there's some more information
you need, I'm comfortable continuing it. I'd like to do it
sooner rather than later, but I guess I'd like to hear what
other people think. I certainly don't want us to move
forward on a hillside development without everybody being
comfortable in what they're going to do. I don't know, what
do you guys think?
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Tavana.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER TAVANA: I would have to say I agree
with Commissioner O'Donnell here. I'm not a fire expert and
from what I've heard tonight I'm confident to say that fire
would not be an issue, and so I can't sit here and say I
would say no to this application because of fire hazards.
CHAIR HUDES: Somebody want to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER O'DONNELL: Let me just ask one more
question before that. I am concerned with all of the
reading that you're talking about. I'm not sure what it has
to do with much, a document which was produced in 1990, and
some of the questions you've asked, I don't know how you
find the answer to those questions. And if you do find the
answer to those questions, I don't know how you share those
answers with the Commission so that we all have the same
answers before we make decisions. But I have great
confidence in you personally, and therefore I'm sure you'll
be able to do it, but I'll be very interested in seeing how
you do it and whether those documents have any relevance.
But it's not something I would do.
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Hanssen.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: I'd like to ask a question
of Staff that I asked before this meeting. The Highlands
development. You might not have the specific numbers, but
the general slope of those properties compared to this.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
82
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JOEL PAULSON: We don't have that information.
We'd have to go back and look at the Staff Reports from the
Planned Development that was done quite a while ago. I
think driving through the Highlands, other than the lot on
the right as you first come in, the single-story house,
most of those homes are built into the hillside and have
fairly steep slopes around them, but I don't have the
objective numbers of their average slope.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: But it's your general sense
that they also have steep slopes?
JOEL PAULSON: Very clear that there were steep
slopes there, I just don't know if they were more of less
than this application.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Okay, and then if I may, I'd
like to make a comment. I agree with Commissioner
O'Donnell. I'm not sure what analyzing a four-lot
alternative is going to do when the EIR says there's no
significant impact from an eight-lot alternative. I'm just
not sure why we need to analyze a four-lot alternative. But
if it's the will of the Commission to do that, then I
understand, but I don't need that to get to a decision. I
generally wasn't thinking we needed to do a continuance,
but if we can't get most of the Commission comfortable with
this, then that's not a good thing, so…
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIR HUDES: Commissioner Burch.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I'm going to venture a
motion. I am going to move that we forward a recommendation
to Town Council to certify the Final EIR and an approval
for the Planned Development application. EIR report EIR-17-
001, and Planned Development Application PD-16-002.
I make the following findings as required by CEQA
for certifying the EIR: That the Planned Development to
rezone the property is consistent with the General Plan,
that the project is consistent with the Hillside
Development Standards and Guidelines, that the project is
in compliance with the Hillside Specific Plan, and that the
project is consistent with the Town's Housing Element and
addresses the Town's housing needs as identified in the
Housing Element.
CHAIR HUDES: Do we have a second? Commissioner
Tavana.
COMMISSIONER TAVANA: I second it.
CHAIR HUDES: Okay, discussion? I would like to
just weigh in that I will not be supporting the motion. I
feel that there are some loose ends that I would prefer to
understand, particularly since we're dealing with an issue
that is potentially dangerous, and the things that I would
like to see, I understand maybe the four-lot alternative is
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
not so important, but I do think that there are some other
things that I think are more important.
I'd like to really understand the driveway
lengths and the location of the turnouts. I'd like to
understand Commissioner Janoff's suggestion about
shortening the length of the developed road, I'd like to
better understand the steepness of slope issue, and I'd
prefer to have some time to absorb some of those things.
This is a critical and large project.
Commissioner Hanssen.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Commissioner Janoff had
brought this up, so I'm guessing that you would want to add
this, but the comment that Commissioner Janoff brought up
about tightening up the view with the trees in the proposal
for the Planned Development Ordinance, I was wondering if
the Maker of the Motion and the Seconder would accept
adding that to the PD condition that we are recommending to
Council?
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Yes, I would accept that
add.
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: I probably would have to
look to Commissioner Janoff to say it better than I did.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: I think we have it on
record.
LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION 3/13/2019
Item #5, 16100 Greenridge Terrace
85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
VICE CHAIR HANSSEN: Yeah, okay.
COMMISSIONER TAVANA: Yeah, I second it.
CHAIR HUDES: Further discussion?
JOEL PAULSON: Through the Chair?
CHAIR HUDES: Yes.
JOEL PAULSON: And I might have missed it, but I
just want to clarify, I know you read the headings that are
in Exhibit 4 that are the findings, but I just want to make
sure that the findings you were referencing were from
Exhibit 4.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: Correct, from Exhibit 4.
JOEL PAULSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BURCH: It's getting late; it's hard
to read.
CHAIR HUDES: Call the question. Those in favor?
Those opposed? We have a 5-2 vote on this.
ROBERT SCHULTZ: With the Chair and Commissioner
Badame opposed.
CHAIR HUDES: Right.