A Los Gatos resident seeking city approval to chop down a tree because it litters acorns on her car may not sound like a pressing issue, unless it's your car and your tree. A retailer's plans to build a 30-foot-tall superstore in town may seem uninteresting, unless the structure is intended for a lot in front of your home. And a neighbor's plans to raze an old house, then replicate it with modern materials, may mean little to you, unless you're a preservationist or worried that the construction will disrupt your otherwise quiet street.
But issues like these drive the work of the 10 individuals who make up the Los Gatos Planning Commission and the Historic Preservation Committee. Some representatives serve on several committees because of their particular interests. Leonard Pacheco and Kathryn Morgan, for example, serve on the Historic Preservation Committee. Morgan also serves on the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee, and Pacheco serves on the Architectural Standards and Hillside Standards committees.
Commissioners and committee members admit that, in some ways, serving the town helps compensate for what may be lacking in their own lives. Some say that their own ethics help them maintain and enforce public policy.
"There is a sense of anxiety as you get older," Planning Commissioner Sandy Decker said. "You realize that there isn't quite as much time to do what you hoped you could. But I feel I can make up for some of that time on the commission."
Michael Abkin has served on the Planning Commission for seven years. He said that resolving conflicts at the commission level is slowly teaching him not to skirt conflicts within his own life.
"In my personal life I've tended to try to avoid conflict," he said. "In my public life, I can't avoid it. . . . It's difficult when it finally comes to a vote at the commission level. Sometimes you don't want to say yes or no [to an applicant], but you have to. Sometimes, I just talk myself into [a vote]."
Commission Chairwoman Marcia Jensen, a federal prosecutor, said she looks for balance when deciding yea or nay on a proposal.
"I think a lot of times people come into what seems like a pretty sterile process, which ends up being very personal and very emotional for them, and we have to appreciate that," she said. "We do try to balance competing interests. But if a project has not come out ahead in the balancing test, then you have to say no."
Depending on their plans, applicants in the town's planning process may have one to five tiers of government to work through before gaining approval for their projects.
The first step, the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee, is optional. The committee gives applicants initial feedback on proposals at a cost of $434.34. This is an economic way to find out if a proposal is likely to fly. Once the process begins, it gets costly. Typically, the filing fee for an office building is $4,000; the environmental assessment fee is $2,900, and traffic studies are running from $6,000 to $9,000. And these are only the costs for beginning the process. Revising architectural plans can be a major cost.
Before applicants appear before the commission, they must have their proposals deemed complete by the Development Review Committee, which is composed of town staff members.
Senior Planner Don Ross described the DRC as a technical review body created by the Town Council to perform three primary tasks. "We ensure that the plans submitted are complete, that they meet all Town Code police requirements, and that they meet all the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act," Ross said.
The DRC recommends approval or denial of applications based on technical aspects only. "We don't deal at all with policy," Ross said. "The council and commission don't want us creating policy. That's what the elected bodies do."
If an applicant's property lies within a historic district, the applicant must go before the Historic Preservation Committee. The committee, which acts as an adviser to the commission, recommends that the commission approve or deny the project. If an applicant's proposal involves a zone change or general plan change, final approval must come from the Town Council.
The commission does not always heed advisory recommendations. Recently, the commission sent Darin and Dean Devincenzi back to the DRC to draft new plans for a facelift of Fiorillo's building at 354 N. Santa Cruz Ave.
"It's misleading because the Development Review Committee recommended [approval of] one of our designs, but the commission didn't like it," Darin Devincenzi said. The commission just last week approved the Devincenzis' revised plans.
Jensen said the term "misleading" is not an unreasonable one. "If an application has gotten to the point of the DRC and has received approval, then you understandably assume you're going to [get the commission's approval]," she said. "But the commission is looking at things [such as policy] that the DRC isn't looking at."
When it comes to historic preservation, Commissioner Pacheco explained, he might vote one way as a member of the Historic Preservation Committee, then vote differently when the same project comes before the Planning Commission.
"The committee only bases its recommendations on the proposed exterior changes to a structure," Pacheco said. "As a committee member, I don't study the proposed plan. I look at the proposed changes to the building."
Last summer, Starbucks Coffee Co. applied to occupy 196 W. Main St. Pacheco said that, as a committee member, he liked the coffee conglomerate's plans for the building. But as a commissioner, he could not approve the project.
"Starbucks was very willing to work with the committee and bring the building back to its art deco period, when it was built," he said. "They would have done a real nice job. But after we on the commission heard public testimony and looked at Starbucks' plan in its entirety, the commission turned Starbucks down."
The Historic Preservation Committee's charge, according to its members, is to make recommendations to the commission that support preserving historic structures. Anything built before 1941 is considered historic in Los Gatos.
Bones of contention between planners and the committee include demolishing historic structures and the preservation of original materials.
In March 1995, the committee turned down Diane Ogilivie's request to raze the Montgomery house at 262 E. Main St. and replicate it with modern materials. The committee insisted that Ogilvie lift the house to begin the remodeling and reuse every salvageable scrap of historic material.
Ogilvie's architect insisted that he didn't want to be liable for any accidents, should the unstable structure collapse on a construction worker.
"Through working with the architect, we were able to convince him that it was worth going a little extra to find someone who would raise the house and build the new foundation," Pacheco said.
Instances such as this have given the Historic Preservation Committee a reputation for being hard-nosed. "It's our job to try to preserve what's important in the town's past," said Commissioner Morgan, who also sits on the preservation committee. "Sometimes that contrasts with what's easy and convenient and what would make money. But we have to stick to what's important."
Committee member Leslie Dill's term expired last year, and she reapplied for a seat. At the time of her reappointment, she said, she worried that the Town Council had been hearing a lot of "adverse stories" about the committee.
"I went back and looked at some data," she said. "We passed 98 percent of the applications that came before us in 1994. I think that people are afraid of us without reason."
According to Pacheco, historic materials contribute to what the community is. "Stucco over original shingle house is not sympathetic to the original design that the past allowed," he said.
Committee members insist that, despite the committee's reputation for being rigid, preserving the town's past is essential to its future.
Historic Preservation Committee member Nicole Clapp helped designate the Almond Grove Historic District, the area adjacent to N. Santa Cruz Avenue between Bean and Saratoga avenues, and she's been on the committee since 1981. "I think everybody innately has the desire to know about what [existed] before they did," she said.
Clapp said many of the people who come in are very "financially oriented."
"The bottom line [for them] is how much is it going to cost and how much is it going to make," she said. "But we really can't concern ourselves with that. When we do, we lose sight of the real meaning of preservation."
Committee member Greg Seidenberg believes Los Gatos' charm stems from its older buildings. "Victorian homes are more detailed, they have more gingerbread, and are just cute, for lack of a better word," he said. "I think they give the town a sense of community, and they give the residents of the town memories of their childhood."
Wes Peyton, the Planning Commission's newest member, said the town's infrastructure--preservation included--helps maintain Los Gatos' small-town charm.
"Los Gatos is a reasonably efficient small town now, and we want to preserve this unique situation," he said.
Peyton, former political editor of the Weekly-Times, added that the town is wise to focus on economic development, as state resources continue to dwindle.
In November 1995, the commission made what many Los Gatans called a proactive move toward economic development when it approved Office Depot's plans for an office superstore at 15166 Los Gatos Blvd. The office-supply store is one of the first major additions to the boulevard since the town decided to develop a comprehensive plan for it in 1994. But that plan wasn't--and still isn't--complete.
Without guidelines for development along the boulevard, the commission approved an approximately 30-foot-tall Office Depot at the site that many people identify as "the gateway" to the boulevard.
Commissioner Abkin said he thinks that the process went relatively smoothly, even though it was complicated. "The guidelines are not in place yet, and at the time we were deciding on Office Depot's application, we were not even sure of what a gateway or node should look like, or what we want it to be," he said.
The Los Gatos Boulevard Community Alliance fought the project because it argued that the intent of the design forum that produced the guidelines was that the site of the office-supply store was to have been the gateway to the boulevard.
Commissioner Laura Nachison said that the Office Depot application was a good example of the commission's intent to "balance competing interests."
"We take into account public testimony on each project," she said. "In the end, we do have to balance the competing interests along the lines of what is best for the town."
Before anyone starts in on the town's planning process, Decker and Clapp advise that they do some relatively low-cost homework.
"If people have historic structures, or want to buy one, then they should find out what sort of restrictions there may be on potential changes to the structures," Clapp said. "People should be aware of those restrictions before they consider investing in the structures."
Decker, also a member of the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee, said that the $434.34 CDAC fee could save applicants from spending time and money on proposals that will not get the town's approval.
"A lot of times, applicants will bypass the CDAC because they know they will get a negative response, and to me that is foolhardy," she said. "The next step is very expensive, and, at the CDAC, applicants get to explain their ideas, and they get feedback from us."
DRC fees may range from about $500 to more than $3,000. Additional town costs are environmental impact reviews. "The state has a checklist of requirements that projects are supposed to meet," Town Planner Ross said. "The town has a consultant check the projects against those requirements, and if the project meets them, then the consultant recommends a negative declaration for the project."
A negative declaration, which runs just shy of $3,000, says that projects do not require an environmental impact report. Such a report is more costly and determines the impacts projects will have on the environment, including noise, traffic and wildlife, when applicable.
The EIR for Old Town, at 50 University Ave., for example, will cost owners Deke Hunter and Ed Storm approximately $100,000. Although property and business owners might think they've thoroughly researched associated costs and restrictions on renovating or adding onto their buildings and homes, what they often don't anticipate is negative response from their neighbors. Some proposals, such as Eastfield Ming Quong's 1994 proposal to add a conference center onto its Los Gatos facility, spawned a great deal of adversity.
For several months, EMQ attempted to address concerns its neighbors had. But after continuous misunderstandings, a battle between the nonprofit and its neighbors raged at two Planning Commission hearings.
Neighbors bantered accusations, complaints or supportive comments with each other and commissioners, until the commission approved EMQ's conference center in February.
"Sometimes people complain that the process takes so long," Abkin said. "But public input is often what delays projects. That input is what makes the process interesting and intriguing.
"One of our charges is to take into account all of the public testimony," he added. "After all, that's who we're serving, you--the public."
This article appeared in the Los Gatos Weekly-Times, January 17, 1996.
©1996 Metro Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved