Los Gatos Weekly-Times Letters Miles Avenue site not safe for housing Apparently there are a number of people and organizations (within and outside of Los Gatos), including the Los Gatos Weekly-Times, who believe that affordable housing should be built in our town, no matter what the cost or effects on the prospective residents. Those of us who have testified against the project at 71 Miles Ave. have apparently been categorized as espousing some sort of anti-affordable-housing, NIMBY opposition. I would like to clarify my real opposition to this project. I support safe affordable housing; the operative word being safe. The 71 Miles Ave. site does not meet this test. According to the consulting firm that prepared the environmental checklist, the site's southern boundary is within 32 feet of underground diesel and gasoline storage tanks. Additionally, it is located within 100 feet of a shed (along the western boundary) that is used for the storage of Class II and Class III hazardous materials, including pesticides and herbicides. All of these wonderful neighborly accouterments can be found at the town's corporation yard, the project's next-door neighbor. The report went on to say that the town is planning to construct a compressed, natural gas station, approximately 200 feet from the project's southern boundary. This is all very interesting, considering the fact that if you or I were running an industrial operation, such as the corporation yard, the town's zoning ordinance would prohibit the storage of hazardous materials in the "front, side, or rear yard setbacks" located adjacent to a residential use or zone. I assume that such a zoning requirement would be utilized for the safety of adjacent residents. Even the Town Council came to the conclusion (as stated in the report) "that the site was not conducive to raising children, primarily due to its location adjacent to the town corporation yard." However, our town has exempted itself from its own requirements by allowing itself to operate an industrial operation in a residential zone. Because of this, what was originally designed by the developer as one-bedroom and junior one-bedroom units, has been reduced to 12 studio apartments. Are we getting the maximum amount of affordable housing for the dollars spent? The answer is no, because the site is too restrictive. Let's take a look at the other next-door neighbor, the PG&E substation. Although electromagnetic field (EMF) studies have not provided conclusive evidence of harmful or the lack of harmful effects on humans, the report stated that the "buildings were located as far from the adjacent PG&E substation as possible to reduce EMF and noise-exposure levels to the extent possible." The study recommended an 8-foot-high noise wall along the northern property boundary, but admits it "did not specifically address the effects of pure tone noise from transformers at the adjacent PG&E substation." The report added that these uses typically add 5 dB to an already measured 60 dB noise level--10 dBs above the town's own dB noise standards for residential use. The proposed mitigation suggests noise walls along the project's northern and southern boundaries, effectively giving us a walled community. Finally, the report cites the Santa Clara Valley Water District as saying that the adjacent Los Gatos Creek's 100-year flood elevation is 341 feet. The report states that the site elevations run from "340 to 343 feet" on the west side of the levee (the project side), requiring that the Water District review the project to ensure that the finished-floor-elevations of the project buildings "are constructed at an elevation adequate to protect them from the 100-year flood level of the Los Gatos Creek." My question is, what effect will the adjacent hazardous materials stored in the corporation yard have on the development should such a flood occur? The problem that we are having today is of the town's own making. Their failure to either rezone the area to industrial, or move the corporation yard out of the residential zoned area has set the stage for the problems associated with this proposed development. Under the current zoning, I believe that this site does not provide safe housing, nor are we getting the maximum amount of affordable-housing units for the dollars spent. The developer is a fine nonprofit organization, which has brought quality affordable housing to other communities as well as ours. However, because of the amount of money they have already spent on the design and application process of this project, they refuse to stop and look for better alternatives. It's easy to bring in well-respected organizations and individuals to speak in favor of affordable housing, especially when the need is so clearly documented. The hard part is to recognize that we also have a duty to make it safe. The time to do that is now. Paul A. Dubois Los Gatos Letter supporting Tom Campbell was great I just received the Los Gatos Weekly-Times. There is an article that makes reference to Rep. Tom Campbell's vote to impeach. I am not able to attend his Town Meeting on Jan. 30. I am proud to be a Republican and I applaud Tom Campbell's decision to impeach the President. I read the letter to the editor by Ronald and Patricia Knapp in the Jan. 27 issue. Great! Evelyn M. Lecznar Los Gatos [ Back to Contents Page | Los Gatos Weekly-Times Home Page | Archives ] This article appeared in the Los Gatos Weekly-Times, February 3, 1999. ©1999 Metro Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved.