Item 2 - Addendum with Attachment
PREPARED BY: JENNIFER ARMER, AICP
Senior Planner
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
MEETING DATE: 03/04/2021
ITEM: 2
ADDENDUM
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
REPORT
REPORT
DATE: March 3, 2021
TO: General Plan Update Advisory Committee
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Review and Discussion of the Revised Initial Draft of the Community Design
Element.
REMARKS:
Attachment 28 contains comments from Committee Members.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachments previously received with the November 5, 2020 Staff Report:
1. June 11, 2020 Community Workshop and Online Survey Summary
2. Initial Draft of Land Use Element
3. Initial Draft of Community Design Element
4. Public Comment received by 11:00 a.m., Friday, October 30, 2020
Attachments previously received with November 5, 2020 Addendum:
5. Committee Member Comments
6. Public Comments received between 11:01 a.m., Friday, October 30, 2020 and 11:00 a.m.,
Wednesday, November 4, 2020
Attachment previously received with the November 5, 2020 Desk Item:
7. Committee Member Comments
Attachments previously received with the November 19, 2020 Staff Report:
8. November 17, 2020 Town Council Staff Report with Attachments 1-7
9. Committee Member Comments
Attachments previously received with the November 19, 2020 Desk Item Report:
10. Committee Member Comments
11. Public Comment
PAGE 2 OF 2
SUBJECT: Revised Initial Drafts of the Land Use and Community Design Elements
March 3, 2021
N:\DEV\GPAC\GPAC Staff Reports\2021\03-04-21\Word-Old Docs\Item 2 - Addendum Report.docx
ATTACHMENTS (continued):
Attachments previously received with the January 7, 2021 Staff Report:
12. Revised Initial Draft of Land Use Element
13. Comment Response Summary Table – Land Use
14. Revised Initial Draft of Community Design Element
15. Comment Response Summary Table – Community Design
16. Updated Potential Housing Production Table
Attachments previously received with the January 7, 2021 Addendum Report:
17. Committee Member Comments
18. Public Comment
Attachments previously received with the January 21, 2021 Staff Report:
19. Maps of the Area Described in a Public Comment
20. Committee Member Comments
Attachment previously received with the January 21, 2021 Addendum Report:
21. Historic Preservation Committee Comments
Attachment previously received with the January 21, 2021 Desk Item Report:
22. Committee Member Comments
Attachments previously received with the February 4, 2021 Staff Report:
23. Updated Comment Response Summary Table – Community Design Element
24. Committee Member Comments
Attachment previously received with the February 4, 2021 Addendum Report:
25. Committee Member Comments
Attachments previously received with the February 18, 2021 Addendum Report:
26. Committee Member Comments
27. Public Comment
Attachment received with this Addendum Report:
28. Committee Member Comments
ATTACHMENT 28
4. Community Design Element
Chair and Vice Chair Edits for:
4.2 Community Form
As stated during the February 18 meeting, this section has too much detail for the
General Plan although all of the objective standards and policies should be
retained in some form in either the Zoning Code, the Commercial Design
Guidelines or the Residential Design Guidelines. What follows is a table reflecting
the guidance for each policy from the Chairs. In addition,
Goal or Policy
Number
Suggested Direction Explanation
CD-2
Goal for section
Re-write to reflect
Vision Statement and
Guiding Principles
Encourage all development in Town
to be designed holistically and
sustainably, towards creating or
evolving welcoming and human-
scale neighborhood communities.
Massing and Articulation
CD-2.1 Building
Setbacks Increase
Move to Zoning Code,
RDG and/or CDG—
rewrite for greater
clarity
Too prescriptive for the General Plan
CD-2.2
Architectural Style
Keep with edits for
clarity—move to 2.1
Promote high quality architectural
styles through the use of minimized
building massing, façade
articulation, fenestration, varied
parapets and other human-scaled
features.
CD-2.3
Blank Walls
Move to Zoning Code,
RDG and/or CDG and
consider increasing
percentages
Too prescriptive for General Plan.
Secondary street frontages with 50%
blank walls seems like too much
CD-2.4
Multi-story Step
Backs
Keep but see
explanation
Is this realistic with Mixed Use? May
need to revise for clarity regarding
use. Suggest having objective
standard in CDG, RDG or Zoning
Code
CD-2.5
Human-Scale
Delete policy—
repetitive with goal
and other policies
Architectural Style and Elements
CD-2.6
360 Architecture
Keep with edits Require that all new and remodeled
structures emphasize 360
Architecture and include where
feasible architectural design
elements such as molding and
cornices as well as roof forms and
materials consistent with
architectural style
CD-2.7
Architectural
Design Elements
Move to Zoning Code,
RDG and/or CDG
Too prescriptive—but see additions
to 2.6
CD-2.8
Roof Forms
Move to Zoning Code,
RDG and/or CDG
Too prescriptive—but see addition
to 2.6
CD-2.9
Roof Design
Move to Zoning Code,
RDG and/or CDG
Too prescriptive—also graphic is not
consistent with current 2.4 setback
policy
CD-2.10
Parking Structure
Design
Covered under
landscaping—delete
from GP. If needed
place in CDG
Too specific and possibly redundant
for General Plan
CD-2.11
Multi-Story
Structures
Keep this policy
CD 2.12
Cellars
Change policy name
to Hidden Square
Footage/Parking
Suggest the following: Encourage
cellars and underground parking to
provide “hidden” square footage
and/or parking in lieu of visible,
above ground mass.
Streetscape
CD-2.13
Pedestrian-
Oriented
Streetscapes
Change title and edit
policy. May want to
consider combining
with CD 2.15
New title: Multi-modal Streetscapes
better captures that we want to
scale for both pedestrians and
bicyclists. Also, change verbiage of
policy to match
CD-2.14
Well-defined
Street Fronts
Keep policy
CD-2.15
Enhanced Walking
and Biking
See comments on CD-
2.13
May wish to combine with CD-2.13
or at least group together
CD-2.16 to CD-
2.20
Way too many tree
policies
Combine into 2 policies at most:
-2.16 could/should be combined
with 2.17 and 2.18—encouraging
the planting of new trees and
maintenance of mature trees to
enhance neighborhood character
and shade coverage
- 2.19 to 2.20 could/should be
combined into one policy about tree
selection and preservation in
accordance with our Tree
Ordinance.
CD-2.21
Protecting Hillside
Views
Keep this policy
CD-2.22
SR 17 On-Ramps
and Overpasses
Keep this policy Keep “Did you know” box below on
page 4-13 and add an image so
people know what might work
conceptually
Street Activation
CD-2.23
Structure
Entrances
Move to second policy
in this grouping
CD-2.24
Outdoor Dining
Replace or delete this
policy as appears to
be in conflict with
permanent parklets. If
replacing, move to
Replace with something like
“Enhance the street experience with
parklets and outdoor dining
opportunities where feasible”
third policy in this
category
CD-2.25
Buildings that
Engage the Street
Keep this policy and
move to 1st in this
section
Adjacent Compatibility NOTE: please replace Compatibility with something that
does not imply things will not change
CD-2.26
Compatibility and
Consistency
Suggest deleting this
policy for reasons
mentioned regarding
title
CD-2.27
Transition in Scale
Keep this policy—
check to see if there is
a better image to
reflect this—maybe
something like the
Missing Middle
Housing?
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
CD-2.28
Eyes on the Street
Please change the
title of this policy—
does not seem to
reflect the intent and
also state the why—
see explanation
Wording of policy: To increase safety
for residents, new development with
a street frontage shall incorporate a
street oriented front entrance.
Where not possible to face the
street, units shall be oriented to
provide visual access to entryways,
pedestrian pathways, recreation
areas, and public spaces.
CD-2.29
Reducing
Vegetation
Overgrowth
Suggest moving this to
RDG and/or CDG
CD-2.30
Adequate
Pedestrian
Lighting
Keep this policy
CD-2.31
Accessible
Structural
Elements
Seems more
appropriate for Design
Guidelines—move this
CD-2.32
Glazing Visibility
Change title and edit
policy to reflect
intent. Move standard
to Zoning code and/or
CDG/RDG
Suggest something like: “Minimize
obstructed viewing into street facing
windows of commercial buildings in
the form of glazing, signage,
advertisements and interior
furnishings that can obstruct such
views.”
Common Open Space—please note that a minimum standard is desirable here.
Ideally something similar to the North 40 with green open space and total open
space
CD-2.33
Community
Gathering Spaces
Keep this policy
CD-2.34
Public Realm
Improvements
Keep this policy
Private Open Space
CD-2.35 and -2.36
Balconies/ground
floor private open
space
Combine into one
policy. Too much
detail although ok to
leave images. Move
the standard to
Zoning Code and/or
CDG/RDG
Suggest: Encourage multi-family
developments to provide each unit
with private open space in the form
of a patio or balcony.
Site Development
CD-2.37
Climate
considerations in
Site Design
Keep this policy
CD-2.38
New Home Siting
Keep this policy but
please clarify
“significant” if
possible—how to
measure?
CD-2.39 and -2.40
Linking within
development and
park and trail
connections
Seems like an
opportunity to
consolidate these two
policies into one
emphasize the need
for systems that
enable multi-modal
movement especially
pedestrian and bike
CD-2.41
Natural Contours
Policy is Ok, but
missing the “why”
CD-2.42 and 2.43 Seems like way too
much detail for the
General Plan—move
to CDG or code
CD-2.44
Solid Fencing
Seems out of context
for intent. The Fence
Ordinance suggests
minimal fencing and
where required that it
be open or lower
especially in front
yards. At a minimum
change title and policy
and possibly delete.
If keeping this, suggest a new policy
called, strategic fencing or limited
fencing or similar and refer to
concepts in the fence ordinance.
CD-2.45
Signage
Perhaps change title
to reflect the Town’s
intent to have subtle
or sophisticated
signage, and then
refer to Sign
Ordinance.
Lighting
CD-2.46 Keep policy
Street and
Structural Lighting
CD-2.47
Specialty Lighting
Suggest changing title
to “Strategic Lighting”
Do we not have a lighting
ordinance? Need to refer to that
here.
Landscaping
CD-2.48
Landscape
Buffering
Keep policy and edit
as there is
disagreement about
the lower noise and
reduction in heat
generations.
Suggest this: Encourage the use of
landscaping such as trees, shrubs,
and trellised vines to mitigate the
effects of building mass and provide
benefits to the environment.
CD-2.49
Visual Continuity
through
Landscaping
This seems like
something for the
CDG and/or RDG.
Remove from GP
CD-2.50
Landscaped
Medians
This policy seems to
lack the intent. There
are other policies for
drought tolerant
plants. Need to edit.
Suggest, “Provide landscaped
medians where there is sufficient
right of way to beautify the
streetscape and benefit the
environment.”
CD-2.51
Sustainable
Landscape Design
Move to before CD-
2.50 and edit to add
after “trees” the
phrase “and drought
tolerant plants”.
CD-2.52
Plant Selection
This seems to be
more appropriate for
CDG/RDG and/or
code. Remove from
GP.
Also, would suggest increasing the
percentage of drought-tolerant
plants. Maybe there should be
separate percentages for native vs.
drought-tolerant. There are local
websites with guidelines.
Public Art
CD-2.53
Highlight Existing
Public Art
Remove the word
“existing” and move
to policy 3 in this
section
CD-2.54
Accessible and
Functional Public
Art
Delete this policy
CD-2.55
Require Public Art
Change to “Encourage
Public Art” and
remove language
about “in lieu
contribution” and
then add a why. Also
move this to policy 1
in this section
CD-2.56
Placement of
Public Art
Keep this and move to
policy 2 in this section
CD-2.57
Murals
Delete this as it is a
subset of public art.
Community Identity and Gateways
CD-2.58
Town
Identification
Keep but edit to be
more generic
“Support the incorporation of
unifying Town identifiers on
community signage, streetlamp
banners, Town gateways and street
furnishings as appropriate.”
CD-2.59
Wayfinding
Program
Since this is already in
progress, change to
something reflecting
the status
Encourage a robust, Town-wide
wayfinding program that
highlights….
CD-2.60
Gateway Sign
Program
Delete this—it might
be decided to do this
but not needed in GP.
Also delete Figure 4-1.
CD-2.61
Enhanced Town
Gateways
Combine with CD-2.63
Landscaped
Gateways. See also
comments below on
CD-2.63
CD-2.62
Freeway
Identification
Keep this policy Please delete second image in first
row on page 4-23. Not in line with
image of Los Gatos. Find something
more appropriate or just delete.
CD-2.63
Landscaped
Gateways
Combine with 2.61
and eliminate
language about
emphasizing the
importance of natural
hillsides and open
space as it is
mentioned multiple
times elsewhere.
If there is a way to refer to our
signage policy/ordinance, might be
worth mentioning here. Do like the
image on 4-21.
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank