Loading...
18 Staff Report.SB 330 Noticing with attachment PREPARED BY: Joel Paulson, AICP Community Development Director Reviewed by: Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Town Attorney, and Community Development Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov TOWN OF LOS GATOS COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: 08/20/2024 ITEM NO: 18 DATE: August 15, 2024 TO: Mayor and Town Council FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager SUBJECT: Discuss and Provide Direction on Modifications to Noticing for Senate Bill (SB) 330 and Builder’s Remedy Projects. RECOMMENDATION: Discuss and provide direction on modifications to noticing for Senate Bill (SB) 330 and Builder’s Remedy projects. BACKGROUND: On May 7, 2024, the Town Council considered outreach and noticing options for preliminary Planning applications that have been submitted for SB 330 projects, which can include projects that reference the Builder’s Remedy. SB 330 amended the Government Code to give development applicants the opportunity to submit preliminary applications. SB 330 preliminary applications vest applicants to the development standards that were in place when the preliminary application was deemed submitted. After a preliminary application has been deemed submitted, applicants then have 90 days in which to submit a formal planning application. The Town already has noticing requirements in place that apply to formal applications. Those requirements require that property owners and tenants within 300 feet of a proposed project receive mailed notice prior to the public hearing on the proposal. Some SB 330 preliminary applications, but not all, have referenced the State Builder’s Remedy, which is codified in Government Code Section 65589.5. Section 65589.5 provides that, if a jurisdiction did not adopt a Housing Element that substantially complied with State law by a specified deadline (which was January 31, 2023, in Los Gatos), applicants can reference the Builder’s Remedy with their Planning applications. When the Builder’s Remedy applies, it limits the circumstances under which jurisdictions can modify or deny Planning applications to those set forth in the statute. PAGE 2 OF 5 SUBJECT: SB 330 Project Outreach and Noticing DATE: August 15, 2024 BACKGROUND (continued): On a unanimous vote, the Town Council provided the following direction to staff regarding noticing for SB 330 preliminary applications, which can include projects for which applicants have referenced the Builder’s Remedy: Whenever a pre-application or formal application for a development of three stories or more, including, but not limited to SB 330 and Builder’s Remedy application, is received or scheduled for a hearing, that neighbors within 1,000 feet will be notified and provided access to information in the visual renderings, signs, and the application itself. Further, if a project changes significantly, there will be re-notification. Fees will be recovered wherever possible. Notice will include a brief explanation of SB 330 and current development process. Following this direction, staff has been providing the early noticing after receipt of a SB 330 preliminary application or formal application for a proposed development of three stories or more. This includes projects that are relying solely on the State density bonus law, which authorizes waivers from development standards when a specified percentage of affordable housing is included in the proposed development. When an application is ready for its public hearing, another mailed notice will be sent. Applicants currently fund the expanded noticing. The cost of the expanded noticing, not including staff time, ranges from $300.00 to $380.00. DISCUSSION: The recent Council direction expanded early noticing requirements for proposed developments that are three stories or more. Following this action, a Town Council member requested that this matter be considered further to determine whether the three-story limitation should be modified. As previously stated in the staff report for the May 7, 2024 Town Council meeting, the Town may legally adopt noticing requirements that are more extensive than the 300 feet required by State law so long as there is a rational basis for doing so. Because adoption of this noticing policy is a legislative action, any distinction in noticing requirements should have a rational basis that serves a legitimate government purpose. Potential bases for imposing increased noticing requirements would be projects over a specified height, number of units, or square footage based on the added visual impact to the neighborhood or other factors. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact, including staff time, depends on the scope of any modifications to the increased noticing requirement determined by the Town Council. PAGE 3 OF 5 SUBJECT: SB 330 Project Outreach and Noticing DATE: August 15, 2024 FISCAL IMPACT (continued): The Town has the option of assuming the cost of the increased noticing. If this is the Council’s preference, a funding source would need to be identified. CONCLUSION: This agenda item allows Town Council to provide direction on modifications to noticing for SB 330 preliminary applications referencing the Builder’s Remedy. Staff recommends consideration of the following question: 1. Does the Town Council wish to modify the noticing requirements for SB 330 preliminary applications which reference the Builder’s Remedy? 2. Does the Town Council wish to modify the noticing requirements for SB 330 preliminary applications which reference State density bonus law? Staff looks forward to the Town Council’s discussion and direction. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Because the Town Council is providing direction only at this time, this is not a project defined under CEQA. Attachment: 1. Public Comment This Page Intentionally Left Blank From: Dene Kankel Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 9:56 PM To: Mary Badame <MBadame@losgatosca.gov>; Matthew Hudes <MHudes@losgatosca.gov>; Rob Moore <RMoore@losgatosca.gov>; Rob Rennie <RRennie@losgatosca.gov>; Maria Ristow <MRistow@losgatosca.gov> Cc: Bryan Matsumoto Subject: Los Gatos Ace Hardware [EXTERNAL SENDER] Councilmembers, My name is Dené Kankel and I am one of the owners of Los Gatos Ace Hardware. My business partner, Bryan Matsumoto, and I watched the meeting on Tuesday June 7th and heard the community speak regarding their concerns about SB330 projects which included our location. One of the speakers voiced their concern about public notification and asked why signage was not posted on the property. It was during this conversation that we learned that signage would be posted on the property because of changes to the related ordinance. That signage was installed last week. Let me say that nothing says "GOING OUT OF BUSINESS" more than three large signs on all sides of the property. Not to mention that these signs will be advertising "going out of business" for at least a year, maybe more. As business owners, we are concerned about signage being installed at this point in time. We have over thirteen years left on our lease, and nothing will be happening with this property for over a decade. This signage will give the impression that we are going out of business for years after it is installed. Currently staff, managers, Bryan and I field questions daily about when we are closing, with a huge uptick since the signage has been installed. This strongly impacts employee morale, they see the signs, hear the questions and wonder if their job is in jeopardy. I encourage you all to Google "Los Gatos Ace Hardware" and one of the top suggestions is "Los Gatos Ace Hardware closing". Most recently, the Mercury News ran a story titled "Proposed Demolition of Ace Hardware in Los Gatos Draws Concern". That being said, we feel it's important to point out that we feel humbled and grateful for all of the community support we receive and appreciate the concern everyone shows on a daily basis. We consider ourselves lucky to be part of this community. We understand that the community needs to be informed, however, we are not sure if the change to the ordinance took these types of situations into consideration. Installing signage (especially in our situation where our property is surrounded by three streets and requires three signs) ten years before it possibly breaks ground jeopardizes the continued success of, and community support of, a beloved Los Gatos business. Our customers travel from further away than you might realize - we have regular customers that don't mind driving 30 minutes or more to shop with us. These signs may, in fact, drive customers away unnecessarily because they will look for other places to shop since, in their mind, we will be closing soon. ATTACHMENT 1 We wanted to make Councilmembers aware of the negative impacts to all businesses that reside on these properties where breaking ground could be over a decade into the future. We urge you to reconsider this new ordinance that requires signage this early in the process. Bryan and I cannot wait for these signs to be removed so that we can continue business as usual for the next thirteen years and possibly beyond. Sincerely, Dené Kankel Bryan Matsumoto Owners Los Gatos Ace Hardware