Loading...
Item 3 - Addendum and AttachmentsPREPARED BY: JENNIFER ARMER, AICP Senior Planner 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov MEETING DATE: 10/15/2020 ITEM: 3 ADDENDUM TOWN OF LOS GATOS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT REPORT DATE: October 14, 2020 TO: General Plan Update Advisory Committee FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Review and Discussion of the Revised Initial Draft of the Environment and Sustainability Element. REMARKS: Attachment 5 contains comments from Committee Members. ATTACHMENTS: Attachments previously received with October 15, 2020 Staff Report: 1.Revised Initial Draft of Environment and Sustainability Element 2.Comment Response Summary Table 3.Comments from the Historic Preservation Committee 4.Committee Member Comments Attachment received with this Addendum: 5.Committee Member Comments ATTACHMENT 5 Environmental Element Comments—Marcia Jensen Page 7-3: Key Terms “Noise-Sensitive Land Use” How is it to be determined that “quiet is an essential element of their [sic] intended purpose?” Not every residence needs to be quiet (kids playing?); not every place of worship, hotel, library, needs to be quiet (choir singing, live music in dining area, teen area talking….) This seems extreme. Page 7-4: ENV-1.4: Where are “key corridors and thoroughfares in Town” defined? Do we mean designated Hillside Guidelines viewing points? This is much too vague. Page 7-13 ENV-7.1: How can any new development – or remodel, or e.g., fence replacement – ever be allowed in a wildlife habitat (hillside) that shall not “deplete, damage, or alter existing wildlife habitat? The original language “significantly deplete” is much more practical. Page 7-15 ENV-8,2: As the modified section reads now, it requires increases to vehicle miles traveled. This cannot be the intent – “mitigation” needs to be re-inserted, or “reduction in” be substituted in – e.g. “Require mitigation measures to reduce vehicle miles traveled whenever…” Page 7-22 ENV-13.1 and 13.2: These are inconsistent. The first mandates that historic resources be preserved, and the second allows Town-owned resources to be altered. Why a difference between public and privately owned property? Page 7-32 7.11 Noise While the assertions in the 1st paragraph may be true, where is the support for them? I think Paragraph 2 is incorrect – Los Gatos Noise Ordinances establish decibel ranges for different zones (not limited to construction noise) Page 7-38: The entire page – why is it not sufficient to simply apply existing standards? (Ordinances, etc.) ENV-18.4: What is an “unacceptable noise level?” This is WAY too vague. ENV-19: What is an “existing higher-than-acceptable noise level?” and how is it to be measured? If, for example, someone lives in a house downtown and thinks it’s too noisy – does that mean that NO NEW development can occur downtown? This is an unreasonable result. And also inconsistent with the Land Use Alternatives already adopted by the GPAC, Planning Commission, and Town Council. Page 7-39 ENV-19.1: See comment above. In addition, the Housing Accountability Act, excerpted above, calls for in-fill development. Using the downtown example, this is potentially in conflict with state law. ENV-19.2: Where does this standard come from – and is it legal for the Town to tell you what to do inside your house as long as you are complying with Town noise ordinances? 2 From: Lee Quintana COMMENTS ON THE REVISED DRAFT OF ELEMENT 7 ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY Page 7-1 1st paragraph - Delete 2nd paragraph second sentence - Delete after. 3rd paragraph first sentence - involves addresses 3rd paragraph last sentence - delete or rewrite and move to end of 2nd paragraph ??? Page 7-2 Day/Night (Ldn) - move “the” in front of “addition” Page 7-3 Noise-Sensitive Land Use: Why cemeteries? This appears to be inconsistent with Figure 7-7 both Options. Page 7-3 to 7-4 7.1 Aesthetics: Scenic Views and Other Natural Visual Resources: Not all scenic views are natural. I think this section fits better in the Community Design Element. Move ENV- 1.4 after ENV1.1. ENV1.4. The intent of ENV-1.1 and 1.4 is not clear. There are three ways to consider impacts to hillsides views: 1. Development within the hillside that impacts views of the hillside from the valley floor. Standards to determine this type of impact have been incorporated into theHDS&G by establishing viewing areas around designated intersections. 2. Development within hillside areas that impact views within the hillsides. I think ENV-1.1 is intended to cover the impact of development within the hillside area 3. Development on the valley floor that has the potential to block existing views of the hillside. I think the intent of ENV-1.4 is to address this type of impact by establishing view corridors from around to be identified intersections, similar to what was incorporated in the HDS&G for 1) above. Modify ENV-1.4 heading: View Corridor Protection. ENV-1.2 Scenic Easements: Not clear what this means. ENV-1.3: Encourage Utilities for new development shall be installed utilities underground. … Page 7-5 Goal ENV-2: Maintain and enhance trees and significant natural features . ENV-2.2: Assuming public spaces refers to Town owned public spaces and parking lots over which the Town has control: Delete and replace with: The Town shall maintain existing trees and introduce new trees to enhance streetscapes, public spaces and public parking lots where maximize the beneficial effects of tree canopies. 7.2 Delete the paragraph on Forestry Resources and replace it with a statement that no designated timber resources are located within the Town of Los Gatos or its Sphere of Influence. The rest is covered under 7.3 Biologic Resources. Page 7-7 to 7-11 3 Suggest combining Figures 7-1 and 7-3. What do the designation Prime Farmland and Unique Farmland mean? These areas are not currently under a Williamson Act contract. Are they still in agricultural production? Given that the land east of HY17 is now largely developed should the designation of Unique Farmland be removed? Figure 7-4: Delete? To specific for GP and not explained intext. Page 7-12 ENV-4: Define difference between habitat and ecosystem. ENV-4.2: Maintain and support a network of open space preserves……..Manage access and passive recreational use in the preserves to…… ENV-4.4: Why here? ENV5.1: Why not for new development in hillsides as well? ENV-5-2: Delete to the greatest extent possible Page 7-13 Include a map of riparian areas or watercourses where they are likely to occur. ENV6.1: Delete and replace with: Development shall not damage riparian areas or wetlands , intermittent or ethereal streams. ENV- 6.3: Require setbacks or other protective measures … ENV-7.3: Maintain wildlife habitat open space and native plant communities that provide and movement corridors for native wildlife species. Clarify “native wildlife”. Native to California, Santa Clara Co, Los Gatos?? Page 7-14 ENV-7.2 and 7.3 are similar to other policies but I don’t remember where they are? ENV-7.3 is the only policy under Goal ENV-7. Why? Page 7-15 1st paragraph, last sentence. I know that historically there were oil wells in Los Gatos and the Santa Cruz hillside. And I remember seeing a well on a property along Los Gatos Blvd. Are there still enough petroleum produced in Los Gatos to support this statement? Sensitive Receptors and Land Use 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: These s Sensitive receptors….. 3rd sentence: Some locations are considered sensitive receptors, as well, depending on the people who use them or activities conducted there. Some locations are considered sensitive receptors. Examples include………… ENV-8 Goal: Delete everything after Los Gatos. ENV-8.1: Delete: Suggested wording:Federal, State, and regional air quality goals, policies and standards and requirements shall be addressed during environmental review for local land use and development decisions. Applicable standards or requirements if not already in the proposed plans shall be incorporated as conditions of approval. ENV-8.2: Does this policy still apply since, with the exception of the potential light rail and transit center, there is no “major transportation corridor” within Los Gatos. ENV-8.3: Does multi-family include attached townhomes and condo’s? Should single family detached also be included or, at a minimum, should single family detached be required to be pre-wired? ENV-8.4: Suggest adding - reduce vehicle miles traveled (i.e. encourage linking) and redacted pollution from electric vehicles. 4 ENV-8.6: Delete and replace with: Require developments to incorporate site planning techniques that reduce exposure of people to the impacts of high air pollutants from adjacent roadways. Question: Does the Town have standards or guidelines for this ? If not should an implementation measure be included. Page 7-15 ENV-8.7: There are numerous policies that are education related: For example ENV-8.4 and ENV-8.5. Suggest grouping them together. Page 7-16 ENV-8.8: Suggest moving this up following ENV-8.1. Question: Why isn’t PM2.5 included? ENV-8.8, to ENV-8.12 are repetitive. Suggest they be combined under the heading of Air Pollution Impacts During Construction. Delete ENV-8.8 to ENV-8.12. Replace with the following: ENV-8.8: Require project proponents to prepare and implement a construction management plan that incorporates Best Available Control Measures and all best management practices in accordance with BAAQMD standards to reduce criteria pollutants. 7.6 Energy: Suggest Moving the first paragraph to Element 5. And incorporating the application parts of the second paragraph and Goal 11 into the section on Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases and deleting the rest. Page 7-24 ENV-14.1: Ensure Require consultation with Native American tribes…… Should there be an implementation measure for “....including developing strong consultation protocols …. ENV-14.2: What are appropriate procedures? Page 7-24 7.9 Geology and Soils. First paragraph: What about the soils in the valley soils? 6th sentence: However, some soils iIn the more developed portions of Town…. Start a new paragraph with the 7th sentence 7 and modify as follows: The potential for…………..and in areas where fire or grading the protective soils and/or vegetation has been removed. Last sentence: However,In addition, Delete the last sentence under 7.9 The Town utilizes……. Page 7-25 ENV-15 and ENV-15.2: These are not clear. One is limited to certain areas but the other applies to all construction. They seem to contradict each other. ENV-15-3: Minimize Grading. Does the grading ordinance really do this. That is not my understanding of the Grading Ordinance. The ordinance requires a permit for all grading over 50 cubic yards to insure that the grading is safe. NOISE (pages 7-32 to 7-40) Neither of the figures included in the draft provide a clear understanding of noise limits. Option 1 from the California General Plan Guidelines is for outdoor noise. While Option 2 has attempted to incorporate both indoor and outdoor noise, it is not easy to understand. I suggest doing two tables: one for indoor and one for outdoor noise limits. 5 Env/Sust - Janoff comments No items for discussion. Just a few edits. Pg 7-2: Criteria pollutants, use commas to separate items NOT semi-colons. Pg 7-8: Map, N40 is no longer entirely green, if at all. Pg 7-11: Map, 10-mile buffer is not accurate (it’s more of a 30-mile buffer as drawn) Pg 7-16: ENV-8.9: replace “assure” with “ensure” Pg 7-19: ENV-10.3, by whom? Reflecting on public comments about restaurants not recycling, etc., possibly make this a policy directed toward commercial/restaurant establishments. Have a separate one for grocery/retail if needed. And add an Implementation Program for outreach. Pg 7-21: last paragraph, refer to the museum as NUMU or New Museum Los Gatos Pg 7-27: Combine first and third paragraph, which are nearly duplicates. Pg 7-28: Map, Alamitos is a pink area in the legend, but not shown on map. Noise diagrams are confusing. If the diagrams are meant to show how construction noise is to be managed, or new construction noise mitigation levels, then the table title should say so. Prefer option2 as the legend is more clear as well as the dBl limits in the table Combine ENV-18.2 and 19.2 in 19.2.