introduction - amazon web services · larry cannon resume p. rofessional. m. emberships. american...

March 17, 2017

Ms. Sally ZarnowitzPlanning ManagerCommunity Development DepartmentTown of Los Gatos110 E. Main StreetLos Gatos, CA 95030

RE: PEER REviEw DEsign sERvicEs PRoPosal

Dear Sally:

intRoDuction

Statement of IntereSt

I am pleased to submit the following proposal to provide peer review services for the Town of Los Gatos. I have a fifteen year history of continuous service in providing design review services to the Town, and would like to continue in that role.

Introductory InformatIon

I was retained in February 2002 as the Town Consulting Architect, and have to date provided 724 detailed reviews for projects including modest additions to single family homes, new single family homes, multifamily developments, retail stores and shopping centers, and many commercial projects including the two Netfix Campus Complexes. In the course of that time, I have worked closely with 22 individual staff planners in the Community Development Department. When I was selected to provide these peer review services, the Town Council believed that the detailed design review process would benefit from some outside professional design review experience that would streamline the development review and approval process, and would free up time for the Planning Commission to deal with broader policy issues. The process I developed and the review letters that I have provided have resulted in clearly identifying significant issues for planning staff and Planning Commission consideration, and in identifying one or more ways the applicant might address those issues to allow both staff and the Planning Commission to work with the applicant to achieve a project suitable to the applicant’s goals and the Town’s Community Expectations.

In providing design review services to the Town, I bring over forty years of active design review services for a great many Bay Area Communities as well as California Redevelopment Agencies (Pasadena, Los Angeles, Pleasant Hill and others) and U.S. and Canadian institutions of higher education. That experience has been enriched with the preparation of many design guidelines documents as well as the active planning of a great many California Downtowns and Transit-Oriented Developments.

sroussel

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 1

sroussel

Typewritten Text

Peer ReviewDesign Services ProposalMarch 17, 2017

ExEcutivE summaRy Larry Cannon has provided design and planning review consultation services to cities, counties, redevelopment agencies and institutions of higher education for the past forty years. As a registered architect and an active urban planner/de-signer, he has extensive experience in working with planning staff, developers, and architects to arrive a mutually agree-able solutions which reflect community goals while respecting developers’ reasonable expectations. CDG design review experience is enhanced by the firm’s substantial experience in preparing comprehensive design guidelines documents, including signage guidelines, for the expression of community identity goals. He is currently providing on-going design review consultation to the following Bay Area communities:

• Town of Los Gatos (15 years)• City of Brentwood (13 years)• City of Cupertino (15 years)

• City of Milpitas (11 years)• City of Redwood City (2 years)• City of San Mateo (13 years)

• City of Sunnyvale (15 years)• Town of Woodside (2 years)

Other design review clients have included the following:• City of Alameda• City of Albany• City of Campbell • City of Dublin• City of El Cerrito

• City of Lathrop• City of Mountain View• City of Napa• City of Pasadena• City of Pleasanton

• City of Pleasant Hill• University of Victoria, BC• California State University, Hayward

deSIgn revIew experIence

By category

• Single Family Homes• Single Family Additions• Multifamily Complexes• Small Lot Subdivisions• Mixed Use Buildings• Downtown Stores• Retail Pad Buildings• Shopping Centers (New)• Shopping Centers (Remodel)• Markets and Drug Stores

• Restaurants• Fast Food Restaurants• Gas Stations• Automobile Dealerships• Small & Large Office Buildings• Hotels• Cinemas• High Technology Campuses• Home Improvement Centers

• Department Stores• Large Format Retail Buildings• Churches and Synagogues• Libraries and Public Safety Buildings• Parking Structures• Day Care Centers

QualIfIcatIonS

• Register Architect.• Over 40 years of design review and design guidelines experience.• Fifteen years of design review services to the Town of Los Gatos.• Current design review clients have been clients for 11 to 15 years.• Extensive knowledge of the Town of Los Gatos neighborhoods.• Long term experience in working with individual Los Gatos planning staff.• Thousands of digital images of Los Gatos neighborhoods and homes.• Thousands of example images from other communities for use as examples in review letters.• Design review experience in all project and building types.• Experience and history of writing clear and concise review letters.• Extensive experience in identifying design concerns and preparing specific design solutions for addressing them.• Preparation of Los Gatos How to Read Your Neighborhood Workbook.• Multi-year work with staff and the General Plan Committee in preparation of Residential, Multifamily and Com-

mercial Design Guidelines. Having worked with staff and the committee over a period of three plus years on the guidelines, and having written the design guidelines, I have detailed knowledge of each guideline’s intent.


total numBer of Staff provIdIng ServIceS

Larry Cannon personally has provided all design review services to the Town of Los Gatos as well as to all other design review clients throughout his long career. This has provided objectivity and consistency to all reviews, with familiarity and easy access to the thousands of personal digital images of examples to clearly convey recommendations.

aBIlIty to perform on Short notIce and under tIme conStraIntS

I have consistently provided review letters within two to three weeks of receiving drawings and authorization from staff to proceed. When projects are needed sooner. Los Gatos projects are given priority.

Statement of underStandIng The Town of Los Gatos is a very special place with residents and elected and appointed officials who are acutely aware of the Town’s unique scale and character. When I was selected to provide design review services in 2002, I met individu-ally with each member of the Planning Commission and Town Council. Each told me that the two highest review priori-ties were in this order:

• Neighborhood Compatibility• Design Excellence

I have been guided by those two priorities in all reviews since that time.

ServIceS approach

I implement a disciplined and consistent approach for all projects that emphasizes neighborhood compatibility and de-sign excellence. It is a highly graphic approach that utilizes a review and recommendations letter including the following:

• Neighborhood Context Aerial photo with identification of the site location and photos of the site and surrounding structures• Issues and Concerns Annotated applicant drawings with issues and concerns graphically called out• Recommendations Recommended changes over annotated applicant drawings showing recommendations along with photo images illustrating similar solutions

within the Town of Los Gatos and other locations

eStImated hourS and fee eStImateS

$135 per hour for time actually spent plus limited actual expenses at cost plus 15% up to the Town’s authorized maxi-mum deposit.

sroussel

Typewritten Text

EXHIBIT A


ExPERiEncE

deSIgn revIew

Larry Cannon has provided design and planning review consultation to cities, counties, redevelopment agencies and institutions of higher education for the past forty years. As a registered architect and an active urban planner/designer, he has extensive experience in working with planning staff, developers, and architects to arrive a mutually agreeable solu-tions which reflect community goals while respecting developers’ reasonable expectations. CDG design review experi-ence is enhanced by the firm’s substantial experience in preparing comprehensive design guidelines documents, including signage guidelines, for the expression of community identity goals. He is currently providing on-going design review consultation to the following Bay Area communities:

Current Clients• Town of Los Gatos (15 years)• City of Brentwood (13 years)• City of Cupertino (15 years)

• City of Milpitas (11 years)• City of Redwood City (2 years)• City of San Mateo (13 years)

• City of Sunnyvale (15 years)• Town of Woodside (2 years)

Other design review clients• City of Alameda• City of Albany• City of Campbell • City of Dublin• City of El Cerrito

• City of Lathrop• City of Mountain View• City of Napa• City of Pasadena• City of Pleasanton

• City of Pleasant Hill• University of Victoria, BC• California State University, Hayward

deSIgn guIdelIneS

• Residential Design Guidelines Town of Los Gatos

• Commercial Design Guidelines Town of Los Gatos

• AHOZ Design Guidelines Town of Los Gatos

• Downtown Design Guidelines Town of Los Altos

• Residential Design Guidelines City of San Bruno

• Residential Design Guidelines City of East Palo Alto

• Residential Design Guidelines City of Sunnyvale

• Taffee-Frances Neighborhood Design Guidelines

City of Sunnyvale

• Eichler Design Guidelines City of Sunnyvale

• El Camino Real Design Guidelines

City of Sunnyvale

• Residential Design Guidelines City of Brentwood

• Commercial Design Guidelines City of Brentwood

• Small Projects Design Guidelines

City of Oakland

deSIgn revIew experIence

By category

• Single Family Homes• Single Family Home Additions• Multifamily Complexes• Small Lot Subdivisions• Mixed Use Buildings• Downtown Stores• Retail Pad Buildings• Shopping Centers (New)• Shopping Centers (Remodel)

• Markets and Drug Stores• Restaurants• Fast Food Restaurants• Gas Stations• Automobile Dealerships• Small & Large Office Buildings• Hotels• Cinemas• High Technology Campuses

• Home Improvement Centers• Department Stores• Large Format Retail Buildings• Churches and Synagogues• Libraries and Public Safety Buildings• Parking Structures• Day Care Centers


• North Camino Ramon Specific Plan

City of San Ramon

• Bay Point BART Station Area Specific Plan

City of Pittsburg

• Carlsbad Village Downtown Design Plan

City of Carlsbad

• Downtown Design Plan City of Morgan Hill

• Downtown Plan City of Danville

• Downtown Design Plan City of Morgan Hill

• South Beach Redevelopment Plan

City of Miami Beach

• Downtown Historic District Conservation Plan

City of Benicia

• Vision Morgan Hill City of Morgan Hill

• Downtown Specific Plan City of Oakley

comprehenSIve SpecIfIc and area planS (partIal lISt)

Qualifications

contact perSon

Larry CannonCannon Design Group700 Larkspur Landing Circle Site 199Larkspur, CA 94939(415) 331-3795

QualIfIcatIonS

• Register Architect.• Over 40 years of design review and design guidelines experience.• Fifteen years of design review services to the Town of Los Gatos.• Current design review clients have been clients for 11 to 15 years.• Extensive knowledge of the Town of Los Gatos neighborhoods.• Thousands of digital images of Los Gatos neighborhoods and homes.• Long term experience in working with individual Los Gatos planning staff.• Thousands of example images from other communities for use as examples in review letters.• Design review experience in all project and building types.• Experience and history of writing clear and concise review letters.• Extensive experience in identifying design concerns and preparing specific design solutions for addressing them.• Preparation of Los Gatos How to Read Your Neighborhood Workbook.• Multi-year work with staff and the General Plan Committee in preparation of Residential, Multifamily and Com-

mercial Design Guidelines. Having worked with staff and the committee over a period of three plus years on the guidelines, and having written the design guidelines, I have detailed knowledge of each guideline’s intent.

REfEREncEs Ron Munekawa - Planning ChiefCity of San Mateo330 W. 20th AvenueSan Mateo, CA 94403(650) 222-1388

Ms. Trudi Ryan - CDDCity of SunnyvalePOB 3707Sunnyvale, CA 94088(408) 730-7444

Mr. Aaron Aknin - CDDCity of Redwood City1017 Middlefield RoadRedwood City, CA(650) 780-7293

Ms. Aarti Shrivastava - CDDCity of Cupertino10300 Torre AvenueCupertino, CA 95014(408) 777-3218

Mr. David Woltering - CDDCity of San Bruno567 East El Camino RealCity of San Bruno, CA 94066(650) 616-7039

cuRREnt litigation: None


laRRy cannon REsumE

PRofEssional mEmbERshiPs

American Planning AssociationAmerican Institute of Certified Plan-nersUrban Land Institute

PRofEssional lEaDERshiP Northern Section Board, California Chapter of the American Planning Association Development Regulations Council - Urban Land InstituteAwards Committee - Urban Land InstituteSan Francisco Arts CommissionSan Francisco Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board Sausalito Landmarks Preservation BoardChair, San Francisco Parapet Preservation Task ForceAmerican Institute of Architects San Francisco Board of DirectorsAmerican Institute of Architects California Council Board of Directors

REPREsEntativE PRojEcts

Town of Los Gatos Commercial Design Guidelines Los Gatos, CATown of Los Gatos Residential De-sign Guidelines Los Gatos, CACity of Los Altos Downtown Design Guidelines Los Altos, CAResidential Design Guidelines San Bruno, CAResidential Design Guidelines East Palo Alto, CAEichler Residential Design Guide-lines Sunnyvale, CASingle-family Residential Design Guidelines Sunnyvale, CATaaffe-Frances Heritage Neighbor-hood Design Guidelines Sunnyvale, CAEl Camino Real Design Guidelines Sunnyvale, CACity of Brentwood Commercial, Industrial and Residential Design Guidelines Brentwood, CA

Larry Cannon is an architect, plan-ner and urban designer with over forty-years of experience in the fields of city planning, urban design and architectural design. His experience has ranged from revitalization and historic conservation plans for small communities to redevelopment plans for large portions of major cities in both the United States and Asia. Special areas of expertise include design review, design guidelines and transit-oriented development plan-ning.

Larry Cannon is a former Com-missioner on the San Francisco Arts Commission, San Francisco Historic Landmarks Board and the Sausalito Historic Landmarks Board. He served for over 25 years as the Consulting Planner and Architect for the University of Victoria, British Columbia and as a planning and design review consultant to over a dozen San Francisco Bay Area com-munities.

EDucation

Bachelor of Architecture University of Illinois, Champaign-

Urbana, Illinois AIA Scholastic Medal Masters of Architecture

University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana, Illinois Highest Honors Edward Probst Fellow

PREvious Positions

Wurster, Bernardi and Emmons - Architects and Planners

Principal-in-Charge: Planning and Urban Design 1973-1990

Carlsbad Village Master Plan and Design Manual Carlsbad, CASmall Projects Design Guidelines Oakland, CADowntown Plan and Design Guide-lines Morgan Hill, CABay Point/Pittsburg BART Station Area Specific Plan Pittsburg, CADowntown Master Plan Danville, CADowntown Specific Plan Oakley, CASouth Beach Redevelopment Plan Miami Beach, FLRiverwalk Concept Plan The Woodlands, TXIrvine Barclay Performing Arts Theatre Irvine, CA

DEsign guiDElinEs ExPERiEncE

• Brentwood• Daly City• East Palo Alto• Los Altos• Los Gatos• Mill Valley• Oakland• Oakley Redevelopment Area• San Bruno• Sunnyvale• University of Victoria, BC

DEsign REviEw ExPERiEncE

• Brentwood• Campbell• Cupertino• Dublin• Los Gatos• Milpitas• Mountain View• Napa• Pleasanton• Redwood City• San Bruno• San Mateo• Sunnyvale• University of Victoria, BC


oRganization

total numBer of Staff provIdIng ServIceS

Larry Cannon personally has provided all design review services to the Town of Los Gatos as well as to all other design review clients throughout his long career. This has provided objectivity and consistency to all reviews, with familiarity and easy access to the thousands of personal digital images of applicable exampleS to clearly convey recommendations.

aBIlIty to perform on Short notIce and under tIme conStraIntS

I have consistently provided review letters within two to three weeks of receiving drawings and authorization from staff to proceed. When projects are needed sooner. Los Gatos projects are given priority.

PRojEct aPPRoach

Statement of underStandIng The Town of Los Gatos is a very special place with residents and elected and appointed officials who are acutely aware of the Town’s unique scale, character and sense of identity. When I was selected to provide design review services in 2002, I met individually with each member of the Planning Commission and Town Council. Each told me that the two highest review priorities were - in this order:

• Neighborhood Compatibility• Design Excellence

I have been guided by those two priorities in all reviews since that time.My sense of the community’s concerns and priorities were deepened through the preparation of the Towns Residen-

tial and Commercial Design Guidelines. I worked with staff and the General Plan Committee on the Residential Design Guidelines for over two and a half years and with both on the Commercial Design Guidelines for two years. Each process was started with in depth discussions of community expectations - what did the Town expect in terms of the scale and character of new construction and in its relationship to the current urban design and architectural fabric of the Town.

The Residential Design Guidelines were based on a thorough evaluation and discussion of the Town’s existing Neighbor-hood Patterns, Architectural Inventory and Historic Resources. During the course those guidelines, I prepared a How to Read Your Neighborhood Workbook although it was not in the project work scope. That was used in working with the Gen-eral Plan Committee to assist them in seeing the important diverse patterns, styles and details of the Town’s neighbor-hoods through the eyes of an urban design professional, and later to encourage applicants and their design professionals in designing with sensitivity to their adjacent neighbors. I also at that time worked with the General Plan Committee in defining an appropriate definition of Neighborhood for the purpose of design review to discourage applicants from pro-posing inappropriate and/or out-of-scale development by drawing on built examples at some distance from the project site.

The Commercial Design Guidelines went through a similar process with the guidelines carefully tailored to the diverse and unique commercial districts within the Town. An emphasis was placed on maintaining the unique character and small scale of the community when designing commercial structures.

For both sets of guidelines, as well as the AHOZ Design Guidelines (Multifamily), abundant use was made of example photographs to clearly express the design guidelines and the level of design and materials quality expected by the com-munity. Many of the example photos were drawn from the Town of Los Gatos to further emphasize the unique charac-ter and attention to detail that is part of the Town’s fabric.

All of these experiences as well as fifteen years of visiting pretty much every neighborhood within the Town has, I believe, given me a good understanding of the fabric of the community and residents’ attitude toward different types of development.


ServIceS approach

I implement the following approach for all projects:

1. Download the digital project drawings e-mailed by staff.

2. Sign authorization form and return it by e-mail to staff.

3. Print copies of the drawings and convert the digital files to JPEG format for use in the visual identification of concerns and issues and as base drawings for recommendations.

4. Preliminary review of the site context utilizing Google Earth and Google Street View (if I am familiar with the neighborhood and have previously reviewed nearby projects as part of my previous 700+ reviews). Visit the site if it appears that there are special issues related to the site or neighborhood.

5. Conduct a preliminary review of the project to identify potential issues or concerns.

6. Request staff to identify any initial staff concerns with the project.

7. Prepare a contact sheet of images depicting the site and surrounding homes to establish the project context.

8. Crop and import site plan, floor plan, elevation and streetscape drawings into a CorelDraw program file.

9. Prepare diagrams over the base drawings to identify significant issues and concerns.

10. Explore potential alternative design approaches to address the identified issues and concerns.

11. Prepare design diagrams to illustrate my recommendations to staff for discussion with the applicant.

12. Search my extensive digital files of Los Gatos examples and others collected over time to find graphic illustra-tions related to the recommendations. The combination of graphic illustrations over the applicant’s drawings and the use of photo examples has provided clear communications of reasonable solutions to staff, applicant and the Planning Commission for addressing identified concerns.

13. Assemble a review and recommendations letter utilizing Adobe InDesign Create Cloud software with three main sections.

• Neighborhood Context Aerial photo with identification of the site location and photos of the site and surrounding structures

• Issues and Concerns Annotated applicant drawings with issues and concerns graphically called out

• Recommendations Recommended changes over annotated applicant drawing showing recommendations along with photo images illustrating similar

solutions within the Town of Los Gatos and other locations

14. Conversion of the recommendations to a PDF format for e-mail transmittal to staff.

• As necessary, consult by telephone with the staff planner

• As necessary, meet with staff and applicant.

• As necessary and directed by staff, discuss issues by telephone with the applicant and/or their design pro-fessional. ***All communication related to the project are channeled through the staff planner.

15. Review a second submittal to review changes made by the applicant, and prepare a follow up review and recom-mendations letter. Occasionally, more than one follow up review is needed for complex projects.

16. If requested, attend a Planning Commission meeting on the Project. In the past fifteen years, I have never been asked to attend a Planning Commission meeting.


antIcIpated conStraIntS,proBlemS and ISSueS

Over the past fifteen years of providing peer design review services for the Town. I have encountered few problems or issues. I have found that the design professions retained by applicants have often worked in Los Gatos on one or more occasions and are aware of the Town’s expectations. The Residential and Commercial Design Guidelines are clear, and serve as a good road map for getting to a successful project approval. And, staff has been very good in working with the ap-plicants to arrive at a project that they feel will be acceptable.

The only issues that I have encountered have been poor and incomplete drawings prepared by the applicant them-selves or by builders who have not previously completed a project in the Town and are not familiar with the level of professionalism that is normal for Los Gatos. A second issue, which has occurred very rarely, has been an applicant or their design professional who feels that their project is so much better than the norm that they should not be expected to conform to the Town’s design guidelines. In my experience, those rare occasions have been satisfactorily resolved by staff planners’ working with the applicant to educate them regarding the Town’s reliance on the adopted guidelines and insistence on projects fitting within the Town’s existing urban design fabric.

cost

eStImated hourS and fee eStImateS The Town requires a deposit from applicants for the design review process. When I started in 2002, the deposit for my review was $1,500. That continued for 10 years until a new contract was issued five years ago, and the deposit was raised to $2,000.For multi-unit projects and larger projects, that deposit has been larger.

I have been able to complete most reviews within that deposit framework, but there are some where the development of reasonable alternatives to address significant issues has taken more time. Usually, I have written off that additional time.

At staff ’s discretion, I would ask that consideration be given to raising the deposit to $2,500 for the normal project. I would note that the deposit charged by the Town of Los Gatos is smaller than any other jurisdiction for whom I provide design review services. Typically, deposits in the other jurisdictions are $2,500 to $3,500 with special projects at higher rates.

Hourly RateFor all projects, I have billed for the hours actually devoted to the project at an hourly rate of$135/hour

ExpensesI bill for very few direct expenses. Generally, they are limited to travel mileage and bridge tolls for any site visits and

special meetings. Occasionally, there are special delivery charges, but very seldom. Expenses are billed as follows:Actual cost plus 15%

Sally, please let me know if you need anything further. I have included only one commercial and one residential review letter examples since staff is so familiar with them. If you do need additional sample copies, please let me know.

Sincerely,CANNON DESIGN GROUP

Larry L. Cannon


commERcial DEvEloPmEnt

REviEw lEttER ExamPlE

January 21, 2015

Ms. Jennifer SavageCommunity Development DepartmentTown of Los Gatos110 E. Main StreetLos Gatos, CA 95031

RE: 201-225 Los Gatos-Saratoga Road

Dear Jennifer:

I reviewed the drawings, and visited the site. My comments are as follows:

NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXTThe site is located at the corner of North Santa Cruz Avenue and Los Gatos-Saratoga Road (Highway 9), and is at the northern entry to the Downtown C-2B District as defined by the Town of Los Gatos Commercial Design Guidelines. It is cur-rently occupied by one-story structures and surface parking which make up a small shopping center. Photographs of the site and surrounding buildings are shown on the following page.

201-225 Los Gatos-Saratoga RoadDesign Review CommentsJanuary 21, 2015 Page 2

View of the site from Los Gatos-Saratoga Road (Highway 9)

Immediately adjacent commercial structures on North Santa Cruz Avenue

Small scale structures nearby on North Santa Cruz Avenue (east side)

Bank across intersection from the site Two-story building - 1 block to the south on North Santa Cruz Avenue

Commercial structure immediately across North Santa Cruz Avenue

Small scale structures nearby on North Santa Cruz Avenue (west side)


CONCERNS AND ISSUESThere are specific concerns and issues which I will address later in this letter report. However, I believe that there are at least two broad issues that need consideration prior to addressing the building design.

Broad Issues

1. Adaptability of the building.As I currently understand the project, the structures are being designed for an electric vehicle dealership use. This structure is located at a primary entry corner to Downtown Los Gatos. Should the specialized automotive use cease business in this location at some point in the future, this will be a very difficult pair of buildings to re-pur-pose in support of the Downtown. Some difficult elements of the project in this regard include the following:

• The floor levels of both buildings are substantially above the adjacent sidewalk levels making accessible entries unavailable for almost the entirety of the fronting sidewalks. Along the North Santa Cruz Avenue frontage, the floor level is approximately 3 feet above the sidewalk, and the height differential varies from a few inches to 3 feet along the Los Gatos-Saratoga Road frontage. Views into the corner building would be blocked from pass-ing pedestrians and drivers on North Santa Cruz Avenue, as shown on the section diagram below. (Note: The building sections and the architectural rendering of the project from the corner incorrectly show the sidewalk at the same level as the first floor. They do not match the grading plan elevations on sheet C-4.)

• The buildings are largely automobile oriented. Currently, there are no entries shown directly from the fronting sidewalks.

• The second floor parking deck would not be very usable for public parking given its lack of easy circulation to find parking if all of the spaces were found to be occupied. And, the sixteen tandem parking spaces would not be publically accessible. The usability of the second floor parking would depend on the attraction of a tenant who would rely on either valet parking or employee-only parking which would place limitations on the flexibil-ity of tenanting the two structures should the original automotive use leave.

• The large mezzanine space in the corner building might limit new tenants to users larger than currently are common in Downtown Los Gatos.


2. Consistency with the Town of Los Gatos Commercial Design Guidelines.The Commercial Design Guidelines were prepared and adopted after a substantial process that tailored them to the unique conditions and qualities of the Town. Recognizing that the character and buildings within Downtown Los Gatos varied substantially, the guidelines were prepared to included different provisions for the C-1 zoning district (area north of Los Gatos-Saratoga Road) and the C-2 zoning district (area south of Los Gatos-Saratoga Road). The document further recognized that there were substantial differences within the main pedestrian-oriented Downtown C-2 District, and included the creation of three District Subareas.

This project site is located in the C-2B District Subarea, and is at the northern entry to the main pedestrian-oriented portion of Downtown Los Gatos. The guidelines recognized that this area of the Downtown generally had smaller structures within a “village” scale and texture that was different from the more “Main Street” scale and character to the south. One-story structures were encouraged, but taller buildings were allowed provided that they included design elements that strongly emphasized the first floor in order to better relate any bigger buildings to the many smaller scale buildings within the C-2B Subarea.

The proposed building is well designed in a non-site specific context (i.e., it could easily fit comfortably into the Los Gatos Boulevard Commercial Area). While one might argue that the design fits with the tall, curved facade of the Chase Bank Building across the street on the northeast corner of the intersection, it is not very consistent with the design guidelines for the area in which it is located.

The question for staff and the Planning Commission is whether this is a project for which the proposed use and design are beneficial enough to the Town to set aside the Commercial Design Guidelines for this entry to the Downtown area, and view the project as a special downtown entry statement which requires design oversight, but need not conform with the design guidelines document.

The proposed project would seem to be inconsistent with the following elements of the Commercial Design Guidelines:

General• Small scale buildings with a strong pedestrian orientation are emphasized.

• The guidelines call for a strong commitment to landscaping.

• Awnings and canopies are emphasized at elevations that relate to the height of pedestrians and provide a sense of shelter.

C2-B Subarea• Designs are expected to project a village scale and character.

• Sloped roof forms are encouraged.

• Larger structures are expected to be broken up into smaller modules to resemble a collection of small build-ings. A width of twenty-five feet is suggested. This small scale character should be carried around to any facade visible from a public way or nearby property.

• Upper floors should be separated from the first floor with projecting molding or other architectural detail, and incorporate elements that will reduce their visual scale and bulk.


Specific IssuesI do not believe that the proposed design for this project is sympathetic to the Town’s Commercial Design Guidelines for the C-2B Subarea and the small scale structures in the immediate vicinity of the site. However, as noted in the Broad Issues commentary above, I recognize that the Town’s decision makers might wish to revisit the guidelines for this site based on the proposed use and the Downtown Gateway nature of any new structure. Whether the guidelines are largely followed or whether an alternative approach to reviewing the project is taken, the issues below are important to address.

1. The two buildings do not have entries accessible from the fronting sidewalks. (See commentary in the Broad Issues above.)

2. The interior circulation in the parking structure is confusing. Vehicular openings to the parking on the Los Gatos-Saratoga Road frontage allow both ingress and egress, but the main public parking aisle along the south portion of the site is one-way only.

3. The use of the unmarked portion of the parking area adjacent to the proposed entry is unclear.

4. The laco of pedestrian orientation and scale of the structure, including canopy heights and architectural details, is not consistent with the Town’s Commercial Design Guidelines for this subarea. Issues include the placement of the first floor level well above the sidewalk level, the large planter boxes which block views into the corner struc-ture, and placement of the canopy at the windows along North Santa Cruz Avenue at a height of approximately 19 feet above the sidewalk level. (See additional commentary in the Broad Issues above.)


5. The Los Gatos-Saratoga Road elevation would appear as one long building which is not consistent with Commercial Design Guideline 3.7.1.

6. The large light colored panel shown as a signage location on the Los Gatos-Saratoga Road facade would be very large and out of scale and character with the remainder of the Downtown.

RECOMMENDATIONSThe recommendations below are based on using the design guidelines as a basis for modifying the project for better consistency with those guidelines.

1. Lower the first floor levels to allow direct pedestrian access from the fronting sidewalks.

2. Design the corner structure to allow the potential for future modifications to provide separate access to the mez-zanine in the event that future tenancies might require a separation of the first floor and mezzanine.

3. Revise the design to relate better to nearby structures south of Los Gatos-Saratoga Road. One example of a suc-cessful approach is shown below of auto dealership structures that have pedestrian scale trellises added, pitched roofs and modest signage.


Another approach would be to use larger awnings to improve the facade scale relative to the pedestrian on the sidewalk and the smaller height of nearby awnings and entries. A couple of examples are shown in the photos below.

4. Reduce the size of the wall mounted lighting fixtures.

5. Treat the face of the second floor roof parking extension between the two structures differently to separate the two buildings.

6. Eliminate the large sign board on the Los Gatos-Saratoga Road facade, and integrate the signage into the brick wall face.

7. Consider another material and/or color for the secondary building to reduce the feeling of a long single building facade.

Jennifer, please let me know if you have any questions, or if there are other issues that I did not address.


Larry L. Cannon

Peer ReviewDesign Services ProposalMarch 17, 2017 Page 12

multifamily family homEs

REsiDEntial DEvEloPmEnt


December 12, 2013

Ms. Suzanne AvilaCommunity Development DepartmentTown of Los Gatos110 E. Main StreetLos Gatos, CA 95031

RE: 375 Knowles Drive

Dear Suzanne:

I reviewed the drawings, and visited the site. My comments and recommendations are as follows:

Neighborhood ContextThe site is part of a larger site with abandoned former uses. It is surrounded by a wide range of residential and commer-cial uses. Photos of the site and surrounding neighborhood are shown on the following page.

ARCHITECTURE PLANNING URBAN DESIGN

View north from the site

Nearby structure to the north on Knowles Drive

Single family home across Knowles Drive

Nearby duplex complex on Capri DriveAdjacent abandoned courts complex to the east

Nearby medical complex to the west

Nearby multifamily residential on West Parr Avenue

Nearby multifamily residential on West Parr Avenue

375 Knowles DriveDesign Review CommentsDecember 12, 2013 Page 2

Concerns and Issues

OverviewI initially prepared a review letter on this project in March, met with you and the applicant to discuss the project in July, and recently provided feedback comments and diagrams prior to your meeting with the applicant.

Some elements of the project have improved since my first review including a reorientation of units to provide entries facing Knowles Drive and Capri Drive, the elimination of continuous garage door facades along one of the two main internal streets, and the provision of central common open space. However, much of the design has become less sat-isfactory, in my estimation. My feeling is that the project would have significant negative community feedback from the community. The approach to the layout and the design of the units is not all that unusual in some other Bay Area communities, but it would appear much more bulky and dense than any other recent small lot subdivision in Los Gatos. Photos of the two most recent Los Gatos subdivisions that I have reviewed and are far enough along in construction to perceive their visual environment are 371 Los Gatos Blvd. and Laurel Mews, also on Los Gatos Blvd. Photos of those projects with some features noted in the captions are shown below. By contrast, photos are also shown below of a project in Dublin provided by the architect as similar to what is proposed for the Knowles Drive site.

LAUREL MEWS• All home entries face the street frontages• One and two story masses• Significant entry elements (e.g., porches)• Side elevations are articulated• Visual diversity


371 LOS GATOS BLVD.• All home entries face the street frontages• One and two story masses• Significant entry elements (e.g., porches)• Side elevations are articulated• Outdoor private space


DUBLIN PROJECT• All street frontages have home entries• Two stories at street / two and three story behind• Third story setback appears larger than proposed

for the Los Gatos project• Vinyl windows close to exterior wall surface• Limited outdoor private space


Specific Issues

1. Building Height and Mass

The initial design submittal in March seemed to be a two story project with some limited third story elements, as shown on the diagram below.

The project has evolved into a project with 65% of the units with a third story, and the second and third stories are almost as big as the first floor, as shown in the diagram below and the diagram showing a comparison of floor plan sizes for the three floors of Floor Plan 3.

Current Proposed Plan


2. Street Frontages

There will be a strong three story tall perception of the project from both Knowles Drive and Capri Drive (See annotated Capri Drive sketch below) as well as along the L-shaped main internal drives.

Plan 3 Floor Plan Size Comparison

Building Mass and Height perceived from Capri Drive


Section at entry drive from Capri Drive


3. Pedestrian Circulation

There are some discontinuities in the pedestrian network (See diagram below), and the submittal materials show images of Woonerfs - streets designed to slow traffic and allow for combined vehicular and pedestrian circulation. In the plan and landscape materials, however, I do not see any indication of any special design treatment that would make the two main internal streets any different from the normal small subdivision. The only textured paving on the main entry drives is in the guest parking areas, at the project entries, and at one point internally at a parking court intersection. It does not seem that this is enough to make the streets safe for pedestrian traffic. Perhaps the only significant problem will be at the entry drive from Knowles Drive (See diagram below).


4. Building Massing and Materials Changes

Sixty-five percent of the houses, as noted above, are mostly three story masses with some small two story elements attached at the front and back of the structures. This seems inadequate to mitigate the three story building mass and height.

Also, there are some awkward material transitions where stone transitions to stucco in the same plane.


5. Open Space

The project has added more common open space since the original submittal, but one wonders about its adequacy given the limited size and usability of the private open space related to the individual units. The adjacent Open Doors multifamily project provides more private and common open space per unit (See diagram and photo be-low) than this more upscale single family development.

6. Windows

There are two issues. Generally on the residential projects which I have reviewed, applicants have been asked to provide high quality wood or clad wood windows which have a more substantial appearance that vinyl windows. The second issue is detailing. Detailed information was not provided for the windows aside from calling for vinyl windows. However, the project in Dublin referenced above has several conditions where vinyl windows are set very close to the exterior wall surface. (See photo below) Given the limited articulation provided on some elevations, this may result in a elevation with little visual depth. Also, the stucco covered foam trim on the photo below does not project a very high quality appearance.


RecommendationsGenerally, I feel that the extent of three story mass is too great, and the treatment of the masses is too plain given the extent that those facades will be visible from both the surrounding public streets and the main internal streets.

1. Provide home entries facing the internal streets as well as Knowles Drive and Capri Drive.

Where side walls face streets and entries are not possible, substantially increase facade articulation and detail.

2. Eliminate or substantially reduce the extent of third floor space.

Some space could be accommodated within the roof form to reduce building mass. Also, the reduction in third floor area should be studied. The project below, designed by the Dahlin Group for a site in San Mateo, seems like it would provide a better scale for this site. The use of siding, rather that stucco, seems to integrate the overall structure better than the stucco and stone proposed.

Currently proposed floor plans for Los Gatos

THIRD FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN

San Mateo project floor plans and elevations


3. Enhance the facades at the auto courts

The tightness of the site plan, and the visibility of the auto courts from the interior streets make it desirable to en-hance the rear facades of the units. In addition, that would make the outlook from facing units on the auto courts more pleasant. One example in Mountain View below uses substantial articulate bay windows. The other example shown below is from the Dahlin Group’s San Mateo project.

Suzanne, please let me know if you have any specific questions or need any other specific issues addressed.


Larry L. Cannon President


Peer ReviewDesign Services ProposalMarch 17, 2017 Page 11

singlE family homE

REsiDEntial DEvEloPmEnt


February 23, 2017

Mr. Azhar KhanCommunity Development DepartmentTown of Los Gatos110 E. Main StreetLos Gatos, CA 95031

RE: 17050 Wild Way

Dear Azhar:

I reviewed the drawings, and have previously visited the site for the review of a new home immediately across Wild Way from this site. My comments and recommendations on the submitted design are as follows:

Neighborhood Context The site is very large and lightly developed with a Pre-1941 guest cottage. Other nearby homes vary in size and architec-tural style. Photographs of the site and nearby homes are shown on the following page.

17050 Wild WayDesign Review CommentsFebruary 23, 2017 Page 2

The existing house viewed from Wild Way The existing house viewed from Oak Ridge Way

Home immediately adjacent on Oak Ridge WayHome immediately across Oak Ridge Way

Nearby home on Oak Ridge WayNearby Estate-scale home at the terminus of Wild Way


Proposed North Elevation

Design Evaluation and Recommendations

The neighborhood is characterized by a wide variety of parcel and home sizes as well as architectural styles. The pro-posed expanded house will only occupy a relatively small portion of the lot as shown on the site plan which has been superimposed over the aerial photo below.

While the addition to the Pre-1941 existing structure is quite large compared to the existing house on the site, the pro-posed addition is very much in the same Tudor Revival Style as the original, and blends well with the scale and architec-tural details of the existing house. Improvements to the existing structure to remove inappropriate changes to the home in the past is very positive. The proposed elevations are shown below and on the following page.


Proposed East Elevation

Proposed South Elevation

Proposed West Elevation


While some communities seek to maintain a distinct difference between older structures such as this Pre-1941 home and their additions, the Town of Los Gatos has chosen to encourage a full integration of the new and the old so that the resultant structure looks as though it has always been a seamless design. I believe the addition is well designed and integrated with the existing house.

Staff did raise some concerns with the south elevation roof pitch. I looked at that issue, and feel that the design solution is well within the normal range for this rather eclectic architectural style which has a great deal of variation in the use of rather steep roof pitches - see examples below.


However, I do have one concern:

1. The east wing of the structure seems rather large and out of scale with the remainder of the house, as noted on the illustration below.

Recommendation: 1. Reduce the east wing building mass by eliminating the attic space above the Master Bedroom.

2. Consider eliminating the roof over the second floor terrace.

The above change could also assist in addressing staff concerns regarding the roof on the south elevation by reducing the roof peak over the large walk-in closet.

Azhar, please let me know if you have any questions, or if there are other issues that I did not address.


Larry L. Cannon

introduction - amazon web services · larry cannon resume p. rofessional. m. emberships. american...

Documents