Loading...
Attachment 16 - Public Comments Addendum• • ... t,i;f:~t,~~ ..... 'SILICON VALLEY -----BICYCLE . -----COALITION.r~ 1 .. 1t ~ ....... ~... • ..... --•l• 96 N. Third Street. Swte 375 Po~t Office Box 1927 San Jose. CA 95109 Te l 408.28? 7259 FaK 408.213 7559 B OA RD OF DIRECTORS H· f. · "Ci G:~ry B~:-. Esq X O.;w<J• Po!E".t tngr n A·)r J .lSf r Sect! Lane .James .... Jim Park.~r /\I} ·-P Kd C r:;.t Rcgcns _,, It ,j; i2't Cr.cl)l S 1 h St.JS!I'l T .vrnan Kroll, MD ADVISORY B OARD Andtl:'N J B:• P•CSinM' >-tor; Region s.~nc./1< Co! ~~r.x-.1 ,J:J Carl Gutird 1 • Pre~:uenr art:l CfO Si'ICO'I 11.1 t.m Lea:.. far sh" Gi uo E ::a F )9G:'S P. 'Sreen! and CF.1.1 s·, Rwd fiA'E<ttea R•ckWoJiacv ~sKk:runnd Cf.O !\LA· ii'P::.Y>f -cm 't.'c·rcr P,~-;; 'Mt and CEO Sv1P:),ye£ CO:].' PR ESIDENT ~'I.N D EXECUTIVE D I RECTOR "llik•r Bull ro SVOC i.; a 501 c :3. r.O!'I·pt':..lfi! OI'Y'Jt J,~fic;. fllv 1i·03~658 hrtpJ/blkosihconvallay.org A ugust4,201 6 Los Gatos Town Cou n c il 11 0 E . Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 RE: No rth 4 0 Devel opment A ppl ication Dear M embers of the Town Council: I am writing as Executive Director of Si licon Valley Bicycle Coalition (SVBC), a membership-based nonprofit that works t o create a healthy community, environment, and economy for people who li ve, work, or play in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. We are writin g in support of the extraordinary bicycling amenities included in the North 40 Development proposal, as well as the extensive outreach conducted by the North 40 development team. O ur organization was first approach ed b y the applicant t eam over two years ago. They w anted to know how to make their proposal more bike-fri endly , in order to both ease potential traffic near the site and to make the development more attractive to young professionals and seniors-two demographics th at, nationwide, a re in creasingly loo ki ng for mobility solutions other than the personal automobi le. To our surprise and delight, the t eam of Eden, S u mmerHill , and Grosvenor repeatedly responded to o ur suggestions w ith interest and enthu siasm . We recommended a connection to the Los Gatos C reek Trail , safer facilities on los Gatos Boulevard and Lark Avenue. and the utilization of a design firm that specialized in b icycling . All these suggestions and more were acted upon, and each iteration was brought to us for vetting and further refinement. We believe the e n d result is a fine example of bicycle- friendly design. We were disappointed w ith the assertion m any have made : th at the applicants have insufficiently engaged the comm unity. Our experi ence has been quite the contrary, and represents only one aspect of the development process. Bicycling is an excellent transportation option, parti cularly when combined with dense housing and m ixed-use development T h e proposed North 40 development makes the most of t his synergy. I u rge you to consider this when making your decision next Tuesday. S incerely , SL u /_, /Q;[! I S hiloh Ballard President and E x ecutive D irect o r Cc: Laurel Prevetti , Town Manager Rob Schultz, Town Attorn ey Joel Paulson, Community Development Director From: Shannon Susick [mai lto :ss usi ck @co mcast.n et] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 1:51 PM To: Matt Morley Cc: Joel Paulson Subject: additional traffic questions No 40 Good Afternoon, I know how extremely busy you both are & appreciate any time you have or can take to answer our questions. I have spent weeks going over the data online & evidently haven't found all the items below: -Please confirm that the most current Traffic Study is the TIA document from March 2014 a. I find more recent memos from Fehr & Peers , the Town , Grosvenor and TJKM, but no other studies or updates? b. If there is a current study; could you provide the link? I know Comm i ssioner Hudes requested this during the PC hearing in July? -Please confirm that the additional projects in particular the Good Samaritan ER Expansion & Samaritan Court Medical office as noted on p2 of the Fehr & Peers memo from 12/05/2014 shows the scope of those projects as Good Sam ER expansion to be 14,796 sf and 9 beds and the Samaritan Court to be SO Samaritan Court and 64,500 sf of medical space . c. If there was additional space or projects considered after 12/05/2014 could you please confirm or provide the link? d. The City of San Jose has records showing notice to our Town on 3/4/2014 and then on 6/24/2015 (with the expanded project of theirs). I am not able to located any studies done after their last notice? -Please advise if the most recent Town study of traffic for the beach o r road closures included counters in the immediate area of the North 40 & if this study corroborated any of the projections from the TIA from March 2014? Thank you so much! Sha nn on Sus ick (qos) 316-9559 From: d.madse n @nm .com [mailto :d .ma dsen @n m.co m] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 2:47 PM To: Council Subject: Regarding the North 40 project Dear council, As a 10 year resident of Los Gatos, I am quite concerned about the impact of the No rth 40 if it goes forward . Commuting to work daily at the Lark Ave entrance to Highway 17 is congested heavily every day. Adding more cars to that would be tough . Having one child now in the school district, with one more joining next year, I appreciate what a great school system we have. But the classrooms are crowded as it is. If I understand , the school district would absorb a large amount of additional students with the North 40. And some/all of the tax revenue would go to san Jose, and not Los Gatos. In the yearly fundraisers for Blossom Hill School , they stres s how we are very underfunded and need contributions from families. And this would only add to that problem. I hope you see your way to not approving this project for the good of our town and its residents. Thank you Dan Madsen 140 Mary way Los Gatos 95032 Dan Madsen, CLU, CL TC, CHFC 1 Wealth Management Advisor 152 N. 3·' Street, Suite 755 San Jose, CA 95112 P: 408.535.5710 I F: 408 .604.8101 I C : 408 .691.6807 W : d .madsen@nm.com LIC . #0831083 NoN h w estern Mutuar From: Mark Beaupre [mailto :markdbeaupre@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 6:08 PM To: BSpector; Marico Sayoc; Rob Rennie; mlensen@losgatosca .gov; Joel Paulson; Planning; Sally Zarnowitz Subject: North 40 Project Feedback Hello , My apologies for the informality of email, but I will not b e able to attend the town council meeting about the North 40 project. I got a flyer today about the North 40 project. I am not sure that the development is as big of a problem as it implies . I live in Blossom Manor and drive b y the North 40 property quite often. The property is bounded by two freeways on two sides, and the Good Sam hospital/medical complex on the other. The size and type of development is consistent with the area. It is my opinion that the character of the North 40 area is more like San Jose and Campbell than it does with Almond Grove or Downtown. I think that the main objection to the project is not about schools, or traffic , but I think that it is more of a NIMBYism that has plagued Los Gatos (see Netflix), downtown merchants wanting to limit competition, and the need to avoid attracting people from San Jose and Campbell from coming into our town. I do not have a problem with the development. The developer fees and any sales taxes generated by the project should be used to improve Los Gatos Boulevard traffic control and traffic safety. Thank you for taking the time to read my email. Very Respectfully, Mark Beaupre forwarded message: From: <jandk356(ii),comcast.n et> Date: August 4, 2016 at 8:29:32 PM PDT To: <j paul son@lo sgatosca.gov> Subject: North 40 To you and all the planning commissioners: Please do not approve the North 40 project as it now stands . The developer did not listen to the people of Los Gatos . They are just trying to maximize their profit at the expense of the town. Kathie and Jeff Gaylord Faith Lutheran Church Los Gatos United Methodist Unitarian Univ ersalist Fellowship Of Los Gatos August 2, 2016 Los Gatos Town Council 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 RE : North 40 Application Dear Los Gatos Town Councilmembers, RECEIVED AUG 5 -2016 iOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING DJVISlON We are writing in support of the North 40 community proposed in the current planning application. We strongly recommend you to approve this project. The project provides many important benefits to the Town of Los Gatos, including much needed housing , public open space , traffic improvements , and support for local schools . As leaders in the community, we know that our Town needs more housing opportunities for all. We see this need directly and up close in our own congregations and we hear stories of this need from residents across our Town and the larger Silicon Valley region . There is a dire lack of housing in our Town, especially housing that is affordable for seniors. We believe that the proposed senior affordable housing at the North 40 will critically fulfill an unmet need in the Town for seniors . The housing will allow senior residents of Los Gatos to continue living in their Town in housing that is safe , high-quality, and affordable for the long term . We also commend the wide-reaching and inclusive community engagement and public process that has taken place around the North 40 . We believe that the proposed project, as a walkable, diverse and sustainable neighborhood , responds appropriately and responsibly to the needs of Los Gatos . Furthermore, the proposed North 40 community, conforms with the Housing Element, Specific Plan, and General Plan designation for this site. Your support of the North 40 community now w ill benefit the entire Town in the long-run, including our residents , schools , businesses, parks, and streets. Please consider the future of our Town and be a part of the solution to the enormous housing crisis in our region by approving this much needed project. StMary's Catholic Church St Luke's Episcop a l Church Sincerely, RcQ_QA \h~v(A a/lv~ \< L'\ ~b\ t\1\ ~,c.\;'\ I J<. A r()(\ ,f(a JdiJ d~~~~~he Church of Jesus Chri s t of Latter Day Saints, Lo s Gatos Ward ~-W.q f-t<<,._..,(J~r Los Gatos Clergy Group CC: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager, Rob Schultz, Town Attorney, Joel Paulson , Community Development Director, Sally Zarnowitz, Planning Manager CONGREGATION SH IR HADASH • 20 Cherry Blossom Lane • Los Gatos , CA 95032 • (408 ) 358-1751 From: Suzanne Cochran [mailto:smb.coch ran @qmail.com] Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 9:52 AM To: Council Cc: Laurel Prevetti Subject: DENY Current North 40 Application Town Council members, Walking into the library recentl y, I saw the model of the proposed first half of the North 40 development. All I could say was "OMG"! I was appalled as were all the others also looking at it. This is NOT Los Gatos. The proposal as it is currently configured is way too dense, too high , generates too much traffic, hugely impacts the schools, and for what? Big profits for the developer! The litany of faults with thi s proposal is included below. I'm sure by now you will have read them many times, but the abso lute disregard for the look and feel of Los Gatos is beyond words (polite ones anyway). It can be said yo u get what you deserve and the residents of Los Gatos de serve MUCH better than thi s proposal. This sh ould NOT be the new look and feel of Los Gatos. DENY this plan. REASONS FOR DENIAL: THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT FULFILL THESE REQUIREMENTS, WHICH THE TOWN HAS MANDATED THROUGH ITS SPECIFIC PLAN 1) The proposed development is required to "look and feel like Los Gato s." P 1.1 The drawings for the Phase 1 proposal show boxy, massive, indu strial style 3 -5 story buildin gs that have nothing in common with the look and feel of Los Gatos . It is designed as a separate city within the Town . 2) The Specific Plan says "Lower in tensity residential and limited retail/office uses are envisioned ... " for the Lark District (Lark/Los Gato s Blvd.) (pp.2 -3 ) The deve loper has instead proposed highly dense development, including massive 6-, 7-, and 8-unit 3-story row house complexes and commercial/residential space up to 51 ft. high . (This is taller than the Albright buildings.) Is 3 stories the new normal building height? I hope not. 3) The proposed development must "embrace h illside views, trees, and open space." P. 1.1 The intensity and height and layout of the buildings block hillside views and provides minimal open space. 4) The proposed development must "inco rporate the site's unique agricultural characteristics." P. 1.1 All the walnut trees will be removed. The si te will be planted with other trees, mostly deciduous, that will take years to grow. There is no amenity that "incorporates the site's unique agricultural characteristics." The developer claims the marketplace, A STORE , will fulfill this requirement . Really? 5) The Specific Plan state s the development shou ld "a ddress the Town's unmet needs ." P 1.1 Move- down housing for the Town's seniors and millennia! housing is not provided. Only 49 very low income se nior apartments are provided . No other afforda bl e hou sing will be built. Additionally, the retail as proposed largely duplicates that already provided elsewhere in town and competes with rather than com plements the downtown commercial space. 6) P2.2 The proposed development doesn't "minimize or mitigate impacts on town infrastructure, schools, and other community services." On the contrary, P 1.1 Schools , street, and other services will be adversely affected. The initial traffic count was so grossly under estimated as to only be considered as an error instead of a gross misrepresentation of realistic traffic estimates. Current tax payers should not be forced to pay for the school and infrastructure improvements this project will require . 7) The Specific Plan states the intent is "to provide a comprehensive framework in which development can occur in a planned, logical fashion rather than a piecemeal approach ." P 1-1 Phase I includes only a portion of the 44 acres. The current application is just part of a piecemeal approach since no information is provided about Phase II. Change and growth are both part of our evolution. However, the full impact of both these phases, when completed based on the current half proposal, will tragically end the consistent look and feel all Los Gatos residents expected from the North 40 development. We will become the City of Los Gatos. As our repre sentatives, do NOT let big developers , big lawyers , and big money ruin our Town. Regards , Suzanne Cochran 60 Rogers Road Los Gatos, CA Resident of Los Gatos for 48 years