Commissioners rebuke builders who showed up empty-handed
The Villa Felice developers never turned in new plan
Planners expected changes
By Jeff Kearns
Developers who want to put a housing development at Villa Felice showed up at a hearing empty-handed last week, baffling town officials and angering planning commissioners, who had been expecting a substantial redesign of the project.
Developers Braddock and Logan had already been before the commission on the same project four times, and held open study sessions in January and March. A representative of the company, Jeff Lawrence, asked the commission to continue the application, but commissioners instead opted to deny it.
Lawrence said that a site layout plan had been completed earlier that day, but it was the first time that planning staff or planning commissioners had heard of progress on the revised application.
"You've just managed to waste a lot of our time," said Commissioner Kathryn Morgan.
The consensus of the second study session, held March 31, was that Braddock and Logan should submit a new design that incorporated the input from the meeting.
The consensus that neighbors, planning commissioners, and other residents reached at the second study session was a somewhat rare agreement. All sides seemed to agree that, essentially, the development should keep the houses off the bluff, and that it should have smaller and fewer homes. The plan originally submitted called for 34 homes on the six-acre site, with some houses as big as 3,000 square feet.
In mid-April, project manager Marshall Torre said he would bring in a revised plan, but no plans were submitted to the town, and just before 5 p.m. on the April 19 deadline, a town staffer called Torre, who said he wouldn't be submitting any new plans after all. Commissioners had unusually sharp words for the developers at the April 28 meeting.
"The applicant has turned its back on the public participation process that the town regards so highly," Commissioner Paul Bruno said. "The town sees this as squandering a rare opportunity to work with the community, but actually what it does is hurt the public participation process by dragging it out as a war of attrition, so when the community just gets so tired [of going to meetings] that they just don't show up."
"It's almost a breach of faith on the part of the applicant, and it takes unfair advantage of the staff and town volunteers, as well as the neighbors," said Chairwoman Laura Nachison.
Neighbors who participated in earlier meetings and hearings also blasted the developers.
"In the past, the developer has pulled this same kind of stunt," said Steve Patrick, who lives on Winchester Boulevard. "I talked with Marshall days before they had the new plans, and when we get to the meeting there was nothing new. It's a waste of time and it's very disrespectful to the town."
Torre asked to continue the hearing and have a second study session at the February 24 meeting, when he said that he wanted to keep the lines of communication open and have an opportunity to get more input from the community.
Lawrence, who filled in for Torre at the meeting, told commissioners that he didn't mean any disrespect to the town by not handing in a new design. Lawrence said that his company was trying to come up with a design that incorporates the input from the study sessions.
After the meeting, Lawrence said he wouldn't comment on the application, and that he didn't know if Braddock and Logan would appeal the decision to the Town Council. Torre did not return phone calls for this article.
If the developers do file an appeal, councilmembers may only vote to overturn the Planning Commission's decision if they find that it erred or abused its judgment, didn't have the authority to approve or deny the project, or that there is new information to be considered. When the council does find that there is new information, it usually hands the application back to the commission.
The deadline for Braddock and Logan to file an appeal is May 10.
Los Gatos, California Since 1881
