Loading...
Item 3 - Memo and Attachment 1N:\DEV\GPC\GPC-Memos\N40SPAmendment10-27.doc MEMORANDUM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT To: General Plan Committee From: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director Subject: North 40 Specific Plan Amendments Date: October 21, 2016 The overall purpose of the October 27, 2016, General Plan Committee (GPC) meeting is to review the Town Council’s suggestions for amendments to the North 40 Specific Plan and to provide recommendations regarding the suggestions to the Planning Commission. On June 17, 2015, the Town Council adopted the North 40 Specific Plan. The Specific Plan can be found at the following link: http://www.losgatosca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/15472. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified for the Specific Plan in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). On September 6, 2016, the Town Council denied the Phase 1 Architecture and Site and Subdivision applications because they determined that the proposed project is not consistent with the following General Plan and North 40 Specific Plan Policies: a.The proposed project overly concentrates all of the residential units that can be built pursuant to the North 40 Specific Plan and the General Plan Housing Element on the southern portion of the North 40 Specific Plan area and is therefore inconsistent with Specific Plan Section 2.5; Standard 2.7.3; Policy 5.8.2; and the Residential Unit Size Mix and Table set forth on page 6-14. This negatively affects the site layout and disproportionately hurts the chances of better site design in the future. . b. The proposed project is inconsistent with North 40 Specific Plan Section 2.3.1 and its requirements for lower intensity residential uses in the Lark District. c.The proposed project buildings 18 through 27 are inconsistent with North 40 Specific Plan policy requirement that the Lark District consist of lower intensity residential development with office, retail, personal services, and restaurants along Los Gatos Boulevard. d. The proposed project buildings 24 and 25 are inconsistent with North 40 Specific Plan Section 4-2 as it eliminates “a fourth access point off of Los Gatos Boulevard closer to the Lark Avenue intersection;” are inconsistent with North 40 Specific Plan page 3-1, Section 3.1 Architectural and Site Character Goals and Policies, Policy DG5 Residential Siting that requires residential development to be located to minimize traffic, noise, and air quality impacts; and are inconsistent with the Commercial Design Guidelines beginning on page 3-2 which guide site plan development. GPC 10-27-16 Item 3 N:\DEV\GPC\GPC-Memos\N40SPAmendment10-27.doc e.The proposed project is inconsistent with North 40 Specific Plan Policy Section 2.4 and Appendix C of the Specific Plan as it does not address the unmet housing needs for seniors and “Gen Y.” f.The proposed project is inconsistent the Residential Unit Size Mix and Table set forth on page 6-14 of the Specific Plan and the Residential Unit Size Mix should have smaller units to come closer to the income distribution of affordable housing identified in the Town’s certified General Plan Housing Element for 156 very low, 84 low, and 30 moderate income units. g.The proposed project, specifically buildings 18 through 27, would result in an anomaly of residential uses within an existing commercial land use context. h. The only promised Below Market Rate housing is the 49 units above Market Hall and the remainder have home values estimated at $900,000 to $1,500,000 requiring a 20 percent down payment and income of approximately $130,000 to $200,000 per year. Following the Town Council’s denial of the Phase 1 applications, the Mayor requested that a special Town Council meeting be set to identify potential amendments to the adopted Specific Plan. This meeting provided an opportunity for the public and the Town Council to identify specific amendments that would then be considered before the GPC, Planning Commission, and Town Council. On September 27, 2016 the Town Council conducted a special meeting and provided suggestions for potential amendments to the adopted Specific Plan which are included in Attachment 1. Staff organized the suggestions into categories and also references from the Specific Plan for the Town Council suggestions as a starting point for the GPC’s discussion. Following the GPC’s review and recommendation, staff will provide specific language to the Planning Commission for their review and consideration. This opportunity to review the Town council’s suggestions regarding potential amendments is not intended to be a rewrite of the entire Specific Plan. Additionally, staff direction to the Town Council was that the suggested amendments should be specific and require no additional environmental analysis or amendments to the Housing Element. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Town Council Suggestions for North 40 Specific Plan Amendments Town Council Suggestions for Potential Amendments to the Adopted North 40 Specific Plan with Annotations of Relevant Specific Plan Sections (in italics) Residential 1. In the Lark perimeter area we should set a maximum density of eight units per acre. This could be added to section 2.5. 7 on page 2-15 to address this suggestion. 2. Housing units should be spread across all three districts. A minimum or maximum percentage or number of units could be added to section 2. 5. 1 on page 2-10 to address this suggestion. 3. Make sure that you somehow have a vision of how you're spreading these units to make it fit with the other uses and fit in the neighborhood idea. 4. Require smaller, more affordable units. Language could be adde d to section 2. 7.3 on page 2-25 and 2-26 to address this suggestion. Additionally, th e table on page 6-14 in th e D efinitions section could be modified. 5. Only allow smaller units from 900 to 1,500 square feet. Language could be added to section 2. 7.3 on page 2-25 and 2-26 to address this suggestion. Additionally, the table on page 6-14 in th e Definitions section could be modified. 6. Reduce the maximum size of some of the units to 1, 700 square feet maximum to e ncourage less expensive units. Language could be added to section 2. 7.3 on page 2-25 and 2-26 to address this suggestion. Additionally, th e table on page 6-14 in the Definitions section could be modified. 7. Apply the Town's BMP Ordinance requirements. This is r equired in Section 2. 7.3 c. on page 2-26. 8. Don't allow residential on Los Gatos Boulevard. Language could b e added to section 2.5. 7 b. on page 2-15 to address this suggestion. 9. Provide senior housing at the ground level. Language could be added to section 2. 7.3 on page 2 -26 to address this suggestion. l 0. Consider the possibility of moving the houses away from Highway 17 and putting commercial in that area. Section 2.5. 7 on page 2-15 could be mod(fied to increase the buffer size and/or prohibit residential uses in that area . 11. Remove the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) requirement for cottage clusters. Table 2-1 on page 2-7 could be modified to address this suggestion. 12 . Increase the total number of residential units on the North 40. Table 2-2 and section 2.5.1 on page 2-10 could be modified to address this suggestion. ATTACHMENT 1 Suggestions Page 2 13. Is it possible for the Town to allow a developer to have a densi ty bonus if the develo p e r requests it, but not necessarily have those 13 .5 acres in a certain location, i.e., spread throughout the property? Commercial 1. The CUP requirements should be the same as downtown. Table 2 -1 on page 2-7 could be modified to address this suggestion. 2. Only allow commercial or mi xed-use on Los Gatos Boulevard. Language co uld be added to section 2.5. 7 b. on page 2-15 to address th is suggestion. 3. Explore commercial us es in the Lark Di strict. Table 2-1 on page 2 -7 could be modified to address this s uggestion. Additionally, language could be added to section 2.3.1 o n page 2-3 . 4 . Cons ider maximum square footages for commercial uses instead of CUP s. Table 2-2 on page 2-1 0 co uld be modified to address this suggestion. 5. Consider a reduction in the amount of commercial square footage. Table 2-2 and section 2.5.1 on page 2-10 could be modified to address th is suggestion. 6. Address the commercial needs that have been prev ious ly identified: gene r al merchandise, building materials, and resident serving businesses defined as serving the north part of Los Gatos and the North 40. Th e Guiding Principles on page 1-1 could b e modified to address this suggestion. Additionally, Policy L U4, LU6, a nd LUll on page 2-2 could b e modified. 7. Con s ider reducing the total amo unt of commercial square footage w ith the goal of a ddressing o ur unmet n eed s . Table 2-2 and section 2.5.1 on page 2-10 could be modified to address this suggestion. 8 . T he intent of the Specific Plan w as to protect downtown w hile providing neighborhood- serving commercial and reducing retail sal es t ax leakage. The Guiding Principles on page 1-1 could be modified to address this suggestion. Additionally, Policy LU4, LU6, and L U ll on page 2-2 could be modified. 9. How do we make the commercial that's near residential b e trul y neighborhood serving and not s hoe stores and handbag stores that draw people awa y from downtown, and then how do w e get the o ther portion of it to be general m erchandiz ing, again , w itho ut creating a foo d court and a bunch of small s tores with dress shops and so forth? Section 2.6.6 co uld be modified t o address this . Additionally, P olicy LU4, LU6, and LUll on page 2-2 co uld be modified. Suggestions Page 3 Open Space 1. The perimeter district should be larger. Section 2.5. 7 on page 2-15 could be modified to increase the buffer size to address this suggestion. Additionally, see Table 2-5 on page 2-18 and 2-19, 2. More open space should be required. Section 2.5.4 on page 2-12 and Table 2-3 on page 2-12 could be mod(fied to address this suggestion 3. Have real open space. Section 2.5.4 on page 2-12 could be modified to address this suggestion 4. Public access easements shall be required for the open space. Section 2.5.4 d. could be mod(fied to address this suggestion. Parking 1. Underground parking should be exp lored. Language could be added to section 2.5.8 on page 2-15, 3.2.3 on page 3-5, and/or section 4.12 on page 4-10 could be modified to address this suggestion. Height 1. Increase the height to 45 feet, as long as there is more open space. Section 2.5.2 on page 2-11 could be modified to address this suggestion. 2. Reduce the height of the residential to 25 feet. Section 2.5.2 on page 2-11 could be modified to address this suggestion. General/Other 1 . "Shall s " should replace "shoulds." The Specific Plan could be modified to address this issue. However, staff would need to walk through each instance and provide a recommendation on whether some of the "shoulds" should be replaced with "shall. " 2. Confirm that the Guiding Principles in the Specific Plan is mandatory language rather than permissive language. 3. Require a plan for the entire Specific Plan area. Section 6.2 on page 6-1 could be modified to address this suggestion. However, with multiple property owners in th e Specific Plan area it does no t appear to be feasible. 4 . Preserve ex isti ng li ve oak trees. Lang uage could be added to address this s uggestion. Suggestions Page 4 5. Consider the widening Los Gatos Boulevard. There is no nexus for the Town to require a developer to acquire the land to widen Los Gatos Boulevard. The Town would need to acquire the property and install the roadway improvements. Given the Town's limited resources for this type of action this suggestion does not appear to befeasible. 6. Try to acquire some land for a park or community pool. Given the Town's limited resources for this type of action this suggestion does not appear to be feasible. 7. Consider making the Town Council the deciding body for applications. Appendix E could be modified to address this suggestion N:\DEV\N40SPAmendment\TC SuggestionsGPC.docx