Los Gatos Weekly-TimesLettersLet wilderness types move even further out It was unbelievable that Los Gatos would be denied a golf course, but here we are. Pete Denevi should be allowed to follow his American dream and bring in some commerce, to areas that are out of downtown action. Golf teaches inner strength and fairness, it is character building and more than a little fun. As development comes back after the quake and sluggish economy, the folks who bought out "in the wilderness" could consider moving further out! Allow the dream of having an American dream in our backyard. Fore!
Dina Jane Cotton The planning staff ignored neighbors As a 12-year resident of this town, I am grateful for the Planning Commission's decision of May 28 to defeat the staff's recommended plan to install the compressed-natural-gas filling station at Lark Avenue and Winchester Boulevard. I note that the commissioners were aware that staff's May 28 presentation failed on the following points: The plan did not address sufficiently public health and safety concerns with regard to the CNG tank's durability in the long term. An earthquake could have devastating effects. The plan did not address the fact that during low traffic hours, when many nearby residents are sleeping, the CNG pump could exceed the ambient traffic noise. The plan did not address neighborhood character (light industrial and medium-density residential). The gaping entry/egress drives and clear site lines into the station leave much to be desired compared to the surrounding offices, townhomes, Vasona creekside and single-family detached homes. Finally and most importantly, the plan failed to pursue numerous or creative alternate sites. Some existing gas stations were considered, but the utility company preferred the Winchester and Lark site with an existing gas line and limited commercial use. I note further that a Winchester building owner offered to buy the site and install additional parking for his buildings. The staff report ignored the requirements of citizens living adjacent to the site. Why ask little Los Gatos to bear the burden of this big station?
Steve Conway Editorial asks the wrong questions I read with disdain your offensive editorial in the May 28 issue of the Los Gatos Weekly-Times. It seems to me that your "wonderings" prompt you to ask the wrong questions. Is it not more appropriate to ask "If Monte Sereno is so small, why in the world does it need such a large staff?" rather than "Why does it need a sub-layer of government?" as asked in your editorial? The Citizens FOR Monte Sereno is not a special interest group, as you assert, but is, in fact, a template for the majority of residents. I am an elected official. I am not taking any marching orders from any group. Finally, I would point out that I, along with Councilmember Joel Gambord, was elected by a majority of the total electorate of Monte Sereno--which has not always been the case with prior governments of this city, which were frequently populated by appointees. My voting record is in line with my philosophy and objectives as stated in the election campaign, and will continue to be so on future issues.
G. T. Knight Residents support clean air, resent the heavy hand When 50 community members from Charter Oaks, La Rinconada, Courtstyle, Courtside and Newell Avenue attended the May 28 Planning Commission meeting, we presented a petition, signed by more than 200 local residents, requesting that the commission oppose the development of this [a compressed natural gas station at this] site. We were very impressed with the even-handedness of chairwoman Sandy Decker. We pointed out, among other things, that this facility is a service station and that current zoning does not permit the erection of a service station at this site. After hearing all the speakers both for and against the project, the Planning Commission voted 6-0 against it. We were very surprised, therefore, to learn that the town has appealed the Planning Commission's decision. This strikes me as an entrenched public bureaucracy working to its own ends at the expense of the public. Not a single community member spoke in favor of the proposed service station during the Planning Commission meeting. The appeal seems to be based on a single overriding fact: the desire to qualify for the grant money. Why does this project need to be put on a fast track? The town had ample time to hold public hearings, as required by law. Several important issues need to be resolved before the town goes ahead with the construction of any service station. They include traffic and the zoning. Also, the town has never done an environmental impact study of the proposed facility. The town ignored environmental rules and gave itself a negative declaration on this project by deciding--without study--that the environmental impact was minimal. Local residents disagree. The town does not appear to have examined enough alternatives or solutions for the site or for this type of proposed facility. Those of us who live near the proposed service station wholeheartedly support the town's commitment to using alternative energy sources. We believe a natural-gas pumping facility and a natural-gas fleet will benefit the town. We just cannot agree with the current proposal. We are distressed by the town's heavy-handed efforts to push through this unsatisfactory project. And we are disappointed that the town did not involve local residents early in the planning process. We could have avoided the current situation.
Jack Aiello Planning Commission heard the people On May 28, we thought we saw the Los Gatos town government working on behalf of its citizens. We're referring to the Planning Commission's denial of the Planning Department/ PG&E proposal for a compressed-natural-gas service station on the corner of Lark Avenue and Winchester Boulevard, an earshot from our home. It appeared that the Planning Commission, at approximately 1 a.m., made a wise decision in rejecting this dangerous intrusion to our neighborhood. However, we have since learned that the Planning Department, under its director, Lee Bowman, has succumbed to the wishes of PG&E and filed an appeal contrary to the wishes, protests, and wisdom of the neighboring Los Gatos residents. We are appalled and embarrassed by the actions of the Planning Department. The issue here is not "not in my neighborhood," but not in any residential neighborhood. We understand that the Planning Department has known about this project since August of 1995. Why the sudden urgency? All we can figure is that any earlier notification would have brought more citizens "out of the woodwork" to protest this project. God forbid that the citizenry should have a say in this issue. We also wonder what the hidden agenda is. The Planning Department says 12 to 14 Los Gatos vehicles are intended to be serviced, but they want to build a facility to fuel 175 (at least) vehicles per day! Are we missing something here? We don't think so! The purpose is to fuel vehicles from all over the West Valley from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. or around the clock in the case of "emergency vehicles." Would any neighborhood resident want that kind of noise, traffic, and intrusion? We think not! We think it's time that the Planning Department is held accountable. More seems to be at stake than servicing the town's vehicles. Please support us. Your neighborhood could be next.
Aggie and Rick Potter Citizen group should go the way of the dodo Amen to the editorial in the May 28 issue of the Los Gatos Weekly-Times regarding the letter sent to Monte Sereno households by Citizens FOR Monte Sereno. The letter rails at Monte Sereno's staff for its poor performance over the years. We've dealt with the staff several times over the years, and our experience has been quite different. Never has anyone of them been impolite, unwilling to help or unprofessional in any way. We didn't always get our way, but that takes nothing from the professional way they did their job. We are aware of other Monte Sereno citizens who share our views of the staff's performance. There is the possibility that someone who failed to get whatever he or she wanted might view a staff person as unprofessional, as uncooperative, when all the staff person had done was adhere to ordinances and guidelines. It's a shame when this sort of thinking results in such a ludicrous position as to imply that citizens should be free to do whatever they darn well please with their property. The citizens FOR Monte Sereno letter suggests reducing our city's full-time staff of six to four to save money. This suggestion cries for careful research, none of which, apparently, has occurred so far. Monte Sereno residents should read the front-page article in the May 28 issue of the Weekly-Times. Among other interesting bits of information, the article compares Monte Sereno staffing with that of cities similar in size to Monte Sereno. The numbers strongly indicate that the suggested staff reduction is a bad idea. It's time for Monte Sereno residents to speak out in favor of ordinances and guidelines that best serve all residents--not just a vocal few. Residents should tell the City Council and each other to carefully consider proposed changes before bending to a pressure group's agenda. And we can always hope that Citizens FOR Monte Sereno--the organization, not the individual member citizens--somehow manages to go the way of the dodo.
Marie Burr, Bill Burr Noise, disaster threat and the smell of skunks On May 28, the Los Gatos Planning Commission voted 6-0 to reject the proposed natural-gas service station on Lark at Winchester. However, the staff has appealed the decision, and a hearing before the Town Council will be held on Monday, June 17, at 7:30 p.m. to decide the fate of the service station. However, Lee Bowman and the Planning Department continue to get the project ready to send out for bids and even had the gall to place the project on the June 2 Town Council's consent agenda for approval, even though the Planning Commission resoundingly rejected the service station. I urge the Town Council to listen to the residents of the La Rinconada area and place a mobile natural-gas unit similar to the city of San Jose's in a safe location that is zoned for a service station. PG&E is also in the process of trying to obtain approval from the Public Utilities Commission to put up to four transformers, each holding 12,800 gallons of oil, also at the Lark and Winchester intersection. The transformers are extremely noisy and do blow up! The residents of the town have the right to be informed and given the opportunity for a public hearing in order to express concerns over the safety of such projects in a residential area. This was not the case, as Lee Bowman, in concert with PG&E, is trying to ram both projects down the residents' throats in the name of meeting a grant application deadline. If the gas station is approved, both private and public vehicles from all over Santa Clara County who are members of the CNG Coalition, including PG&E, the Postal Service, the Central Fire District and various police departments, qualify to use the service station. At present the plans call for an unmanned facility with three 23-foot gas tanks stacked piggyback above ground and less than 100 feet away from Newell Avenue residences. Any chemistry class teaches the explosive characteristics of natural gas. In addition, the chemical added to the gas in order to identify gas leaks smells like skunk!
Barbara Perlman Reducing air pollution isn't the issue The Planning Commission unanimously voted against installing a compressed-natural-gas station on the corner of Lark and Winchester. All who attended the hearing were in agreement that the use of natural gas will help reduce air pollution. This was not the issue. We were all concerned about the increased traffic in the area, the noise pollution, safety and the general impact on property values by having a "service station" right in our midst. The Planning Commission rightly considered these factors, plus the fact that the Planning Department did not give the Planning Commission or the residents affected sufficient time to study the issues and have proper hearings. Now, the town has the audacity to appeal this decision to the Town Council, admitting they do not have any new evidence and presenting the same arguments they presented to the Planning Commission. They claim that the Planning Commission did not take adequate time to review the project. Whose fault is this? I received information on this project on Friday, May 23, and the hearing was on Wednesday, May 28. The project's use is consistent with the town's development policy for in-fill projects (strong community benefits). Since the opening of Highway 85, we who live on Newell Avenue take our lives in our hands daily to cross Winchester to go north or to Highway 17. With the addition of this "service station," traffic will increase and further increase our risk of crossing Winchester. The project applicant was not given the opportunity to rebut the public's concerns after the close of the public hearing process. Chairwoman Sandy Decker was more than fair in giving the applicant ample time to answer any concerns presented at the hearing. It seems the town of Los Gatos is more interested in not losing the $250,000 grant than working for the betterment of our community. An offer was made by the management of the neighboring property to purchase the site so the town will not lose the grant and still have time to find a suitable location.
Robert Y. Kaneko Planning staff ignores the traffic problem I live on the hill of Newell Avenue overlooking the corner of Lark and Winchester. It is a very congested area now because of the cars going to Highway 85 or to Highway 17, and we have difficulty getting across. Now the town staff wants to put a gas station on that corner that will not only make it dangerous, but make it almost impossible for us to get off the hill. If you think that by telling us that only a few cars will fill up there-- I mean, really, something like that is not built for a few years but for the future. I envision about 2,000 cars there, and the noise and traffic will bring this lovely residential area to a standstill. Something that is in so much controversy should not be railroaded through [the approval process]. I wonder if any of the town planners have been to our neighborhood to see what we are up against? We went to the Planning Commission meeting and hashed this out. It would seem to me that someone better listen to us; something is very wrong; someone is in a big hurry to pass this. Do any of them live in our neighbor-hood? I do not think so.
Helga Eagle
[ Back to Contents Page | Los Gatos Weekly-Times Home Page | Archives ]
This article appeared in the Los Gatos Weekly-Times, June 11, 1997. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||