Item 22 Staff Report A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment A-91-3 B. Consideration of Amendments to the Town's Traffic ImpactCOUNCIL AGENDA
DATE: 8/5/91
ITEM NO.
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
aa�
DATE: August 1, 1991
TO: MAYOR AND TO COUN IL
FROM: TOWN MANAGER
SUBJECT: A. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT A-91-3
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE TOWN ZONING
ORDINANCE TO MODIFY SECTION 5.20.230 CONCERNING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT MODIFICATIONS.
B. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE TOWN'S TRAFFIC IMPACT
POLICY.
ENVIRONMENTAL The proposed amendments are not considered projects, and therefore, not subject to
ASSESSMENT: the requirements of CEQA pursuant to Section 15378(b) of the State Environmental
Guidelines as adopted by the Town.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Open the public hearing and receive public testimony.
2. Close the public hearing.
3. Find that the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the General Plan.
4. Waive the reading.
5. Introduce the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment. (Attachment 4)
6. Adopt the attached proposed resolution. (Attachment 3).
SUMMARY:
The proposed zoning ordinance amendment would simplify the definition of intensification of use by defining
all increases in peak hour trips of more than five as an intensification of use.
Two changes are proposed to the Town's traffic impact policy. The first would raise the threshold between
minor and major traffic impacts from 5 to 20 trips to reduce the number of traffic studies now being required.
The second wold be to add community economic benefits and additional housing opportunities as findings
for approval for any project that will add 5 or more trips.
PREPARED BY:
LEE E. BOWMAN'
PLANNING DIRECTOR
(Continued on Page 2)
LEB:DRR:lkj 8/1/91 12:38 pm
L13\cnclrpts\A-91-3.zo File #
ATTACHMENTS: (See Page 2 for list of Attachments)
Reviewed by: Attorney Clerk
Finance Treasurer
COUNCIL ACTION/ACTION DIRECTED TO:
f
PAGE 2
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT A-91-3
August 1, 1991
DISCUSSION:
On June 12, 1991 the Planning Commission reviewed proposed amendments to the Town's traffic impact
policy and to the Zoning Ordinance as described in Attachment 1. The policy amendments relate to
redefining the trip threshold between minor and major traffic impacts from 5 to 20, and expanding the
number of categories for which findings of benefit can be made. The ordinance amendment would revise
the Zoning Ordinance to reflect the policy changes contained within. The action of the Commission was to
require some format changes as described in the minutes of the hearing (Attachment 2) and then to forward
the matter to the Council with a recommendation for approval. These changes have been made and are
contained in the revised resolution and policy (Attachment 3).
It was originally intended that this policy change would be accompanied by proposed changes in the
process for accessing traffic impact fees and the amount of these fees. Revisions to the traffic impact fees
are still pending before the General Plan Committee. The Planning Commission will hold its first hearing on
this item on September 25th and it is anticipated that it may take several months to bring this matter to the
Council. It is recommended that the policy changes contained within this report be acted upon at this time,
and that the impact fee increases be considered separately when ready.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There are several projects pending that are being delayed while these policy changes are being considered.
Because of the length of time required to complete traffic reports, approval of these changes would permit
these projects to be completed much sooner. Therefore, property tax and sales tax revenues would begin
much sooner.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission report dated June 7, 1991 with Exhibits A through C attached.
2. Minutes of Planning Commission meeting of June 12, 1991.
3. Revised resolution concerning the traffic impact policy.
4. Draft Ordinance
Date: July 26, 1991
For Agenda Of: June 12, 1991
Agenda Item: 11
REPORT TO: The Planning Commission
FROM: Lee E. Bowman, Planning Director
SUBJECT: a. Zone Ordinance Amendment A-91-3
Public hearing to consider an amendment to the Town Zoning Ordinance
to modify Section 5.20.230 concerning Conditional Use Permit
modifications. This matter will not have a significant impact on the
environment and is, therefore, not subject to the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act.
b. Consideration of amendments to the Town's Traffic Impact Policy.
FINDINGS: The Planning Commission must make a finding that the Zoning Ordinance
Amendment is consistent with the General Plan if their recommendation is for
approval.
ACTION: Recommendation to Town Council.
ENVIRONMENTAL The proposed amendments are not considered a project and, therefore, not
ASSESSMENT: subject to the requirements of CEQA pursuant to Section 15378(b) of the State
Environmental Guidelines as adopted by the Town.
EXHIBITS: A. Current Resolution concerning the Traffic Impact Policy.
B. Proposed Resolution concerning the Traffic Impact Policy.
C. Ordinance amending Section 5.20.230 of the Town Zoning Ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION Recommendation to Town Council for approval, as specified in the draft
SUMMARY: resolution and ordinance.
A. BACKGROUND:
On July 2, 1990, the Town Council adopted the current Traffic Impact Policy. At the last joint meeting
between the Town Council and Planning Commission in January 1991, the need to consider changes to the
traffic policy were discussed. There was general agreement at that meeting that the current threshold of five
trips used to distinguish a minor from major impact was too low, and that other modifications may be
appropriate based on experience using the policy since it adoption. This report sets forth several
recommendations in this regard.
B. SUMMARY OF EXISTING TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICIES:
The current Town policies concerning the relationship of traffic to proposed development are as follows:
• Minor traffic impacts are defined as the addition of one to four additional A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips.
Projects that fall in this category may be approved without the need for a comprehensive traffic study
but subject to the payment of a traffic mitigation fee. In addition, the deciding body must make a
finding that "specific sections of the General plan and, any applicable Specific Plan clearly state that
the type of project will benefit the community. Included in this category would be the construction of
single-family homes and duplexes on existing lots, subdivisions of four lots or less, or minor increases
in floor area to non-residential uses.
• Major traffic impacts are described as the addition of five or more additional A.M. or P.M. peak hour
trips. The deciding body may approve such a project only after the completion of a comprehensive
traffic study, and only after making the same finding as before, that specific sections of the General
Plan and any applicable Specific Plan clearly state Traffic mitigation that the type of project will benefit
the community. In addition, payment of traffic mitigation fees are required.
ATTACHMENT 1
The Planning Commission - Page 2
Traffic Policy Amendments
June 12, 1991
• In -lieu traffic impact fee dollar amounts are described and assessed for each category of use, based
on a unit of measure such as dwelling unit for residential uses, per 1,000 sq. ft. for commercial uses,
or beds provided for hospital uses.
• A proportionate share of construction of intersection and/or roadway improvements to improve traffic
circulation in the immediate vicinity of the project are also required when the appropriate findings can
be made.
C. REMARKS:
In response to the direction provided at the joint meeting, the following modifications are provided for
discussion.
1. The minor/major project traffic impact threshold for the preparation of comprehensive traffic studies
be changed from five to twenty.
When the current traffic policy was being developed, the proposed threshold levels for minor, moderate
and major project categories were 0 to 5 A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips as minor, 5 to 20 as moderate,
and 21 or more as major project categories respectively. However, prior to adoption, the moderate
category was deleted by the Town Council and major projects were defined as 5 or more peak hour
trips. Based on the experience of the last ten months, substantial additional staff time is being spent
on traffic analysis for projects for which there is very little traffic impact, and with almost no resolution
of traffic problems resulting. Therefore, it has been concluded that with the elimination of the moderate
traffic impacts category, there should have been an upward adjustment in the minor/major project
traffic impact threshold from 5 peak hour trips to a higher number. The specific problems identified
with the existing threshold are:
a. The current policy of requiring comprehensive traffic studies for projects where the designated
trips were five or more has resulted in significant amounts of both Planning and Engineering staff
time in administering the traffic report process, preparing and reaching agreement on the scope
of work, and reviewing the excessive amounts of data being provided. With the staff reductions
mandated by the current budget situation, non development assignments are experiencing
extensive delays because of this.
b. Traffic reports are now costing the applicants between $4,000 and $7,000. While this is a cost
to the applicants and not to the Town, the money spent in these consultant studies does nothing
toward solving any traffic problems. While the Town does collect a fee for administering these
traffic studies, it still does nothing to resolve the staffing problems identified in the process.
c. Such comprehensive traffic reports, while prepared by Town approved traffic engineers and with
Town supervision, are extremely difficult for the general public to read and understand, and only
deal with such traffic issues on a piecemeal basis: A more realistic solution to this problem would
be to insure that the traffic reports prepared for the larger projects deal more adequately with the
total area to be impacted.
2. Allow the Planning Commission/Town Council additional discretion to approve a project with major
traffic impacts by adding two more categories of findings - community economic benefits or additional
housing opportunities.
While the existing policy requires a finding of benefit as referenced by a specific section of the general
plan or specific plan to approve a project, projects the Town may want or need to approve may not
fall within these categories. Examples of these deficiencies are:
a. The Town has recently approved the Commercial Specific Plan which contains a number of
policies to promote balanced residential and economic growth based on findings made of
community benefit. However, this plan is not a specific plan under State law and the policies
approved cannot be implemented under the existing traffic policy.
The Planning Commission - Page 3
Traffic Policy Amendments
June 12, 1991
b. There are no provisions for considering projects that are outside the scope of the General Plan
or Hillside Specific Plan. For example, there are several hillside subdivisions in the Shannon
Road/Blossom Hill Road area that will meet the requirements of the Hillside Specific Plan and
Blossom Hill Open Space study, but cannot be approved under the current policy because they
do not meet any specific criteria of community benefit in either the General Plan or the Hillside
Specific Plan.
c. There are still many vacant or underdeveloped parceis in various areas, primarily the LM and CM
zones, but are also found in other non-residential zones that are proposed to be developed with
projects that the Town may want to approve at some time. Examples might be for uses that will
provide additional jobs, or that will generate additional revenues. None of these can be legally
approved under the existing policy.
d. The current policy does not deal with providing market rate housing either with or without the
provision of affordable housing. For example, the deciding body cannot legally permit the
construction of a single-family residence on an existing lot.
3. Revise the Zoning Ordinance provision relating to modifications of Conditional Use Permits.
This modification will simplify the definition of intensification of use by defining all increases in peak
hour trips of more than five as an intensification of the use.
D. RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Commission forward the resolution modifying the current policies (Exhibit B) and
the Zoning Ordinance Amendment (Exhibit C) as described under the remarks section above to the Town
Council for approval. These recommended modifications would change the following:
Define minor traffic impacts as less than twenty A.M. or P.M trips.
Define major traffic impacts as twenty or more A.M or P.M. trips.
Require comprehensive traffic studies only for projects with major traffic impacts.
• Require findings of community benefit for projects with five or more A.M. or P.M. trips.
• Expand Town benefit to include housing or economic.
• Define any increase in peak hour traffic of five trips or more as modification to a use authorized by a
Conditional Use Permit.
it is noted that there are a number of projects pending for which a traffic study would be required under the
current traffic policy, but would not require a traffic study under the proposed policy. These projects have
been allowed to proceed with their processing pending the policy changes proposed here.
In response to Commission concerns with respect to the traffic impact fees, recommended modifications
to the process and schedule will be placed on your agenda within the next sixty days.
Lee E. Bowman, Planning Director GAL
Prepared by: Donald R. Ross, Senior Planner
LEB:DRR:cher
C9\REPORTS\TRAFFIC.4
1
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
Town staff may approve a project with a minor traffic impact (one or more and less than
five additional AM or PM peak hour trips) subject to payment of a traffic mitigation fee,
except mixed use, multi -tenant commercial or industrial or multi -family development
projects that exceed the traffic generation factor assigned to the project at the time of
approval. The Planning Commission and/or Town Council may approve a project with a
minor traffic impact or a major traffic impact (five or more additional AM or PM peak
hour trips) if it is determined that the benefits of the project outweigh the impact of
increased traffic, provided traffic mitigation measures are required and specific sections of
the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan clearly state that the type of project will
benefit the community (See Section 2.5.6 of the General Plan). In order to determine if
a project will generate additional traffic, the Town will use composite trip generation rates
derived from the following sources and updated from time to time:
• Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
• San Diego Association of Governments (San DAG)
■ California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
• Other Municipalities such as the City of San Jose
The specific mitigation measure(s) required would be based on the magnitude of the
project's traffic impact which would also establish the procedure for processing the project
as set forth below.
A. REVIEW PROCESS
1. Staff Review:
a. Staff will initially determine whether a proposed project generates a net
increase in traffic. If the project does not generate a net increase in traffic,
the traffic policy does not apply. Therefore, the project will be recommended
for approval or denial based on the merits of the project.
EXH1T A
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
b. If there is a net increase in traffic, staff will review the applicant's proposal
and determine if the project will create minor traffic impacts or major traffic
impacts.
c. Projects that generate additional traffic may only be recommended for
approval if the project's benefits to the community override the traffic impacts
as determined by specific sections of the General Plan and/or any Specific
Plan. If a project generates additional traffic, the burden is on the applicant
to site specific sections of the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan
that demonstrate the project's benefit to the Community which outweighs the
traffic impact. The deciding body must make specific findings which
demonstrate that the benefit(s) of the project outweigh the impact in order
to approve the project.
2. Mitigation of Traffic Impacts:
If a project with a traffic impact is recommended for approval by staff and/or
subsequently approved by the Planning Commission and/or Town Council, traffic
mitigation measures shall be imposed. The traffic mitigation shall be in the form
of an in -lieu traffic impact fee for projects with minor traffic impacts. The
mitigation for projects with major traffic impacts will be required to payment of
a traffic impact fee and a proportionate share or construction of intersection
and/or roadway improvements within a specified distance from the project.
Minor traffic impact is defined as one or more and less than five additional AM
or PM peak hour trips.
Major traffic impact is defined as five or more additional AM or PM peak hour
pI08\resos\exhibitl.Tra
2
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
trips.
The determination of whether a project has a minor or major traffic impact is
based on a traffic analysis prepared by the Town Engineering Department based
on standardized trip generation rates.
If a project is determined to have a major traffic impact, a traffic report shall be
prepared by a private consultant, hired by the Town at the applicant's expense.
The report will include an analysis of generated trips and any linked trips.
If an applicant does not agree with the results of the Town's traffic analysis or the
traffic report prepared by the Town's consultant, the applicant may have an
independent traffic report prepared at the applicant's expense.
B. FEES
Based on a traffic analysis required in A above, any project which is found to cause a
net increase in traffic shall pay a traffic impact mitigation fee, as established by
separate resolution.
The traffic impact mitigation fee and any proportionate share of intersection
improvements shall be due prior to Final Map approval and/or issuance of a Building
Permit, as applicable. The traffic impact mitigation fee shall be used to construct
capacity enhancing projects (i.e., signals, street widening, etc.) that are listed in the
Capital Improvement Program and transit improvement projects that are identified by
the Town as a means of reducing traffic congestion.
008\resos\exhibi[ 1.Tra
3
RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
CONCERNING THE TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos to
amend the policy requiring developers whose projects are shown to generate additional
traffic in the Town of Los Gatos to establish the community benefits that would result from
the project and to participate in the cost of constructing capacity enhancing and transit
improvement projects to reduce traffic congestion.
RESOLVED, that the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos does hereby adopt
the Policy Statement as shown on the attached Exhibit "A" as the Town of Los Gatos
Traffic Impact Policy.
FURTHER RESOLVED, this Resolution rescinds Resolution No. 1990-147.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos at a
regular meeting held this
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
A 1"1'EST:
day of 1991, by the following vote:
SIGNED:
MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
C9\MISC\TRAFFIC.4
EXHIBIT B
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
A. POLICY STATEMENT
1. The deciding body may approve a project with a minor traffic impact (one or
more and less than five additional AM or PM peak hour trips) subject to
payment of a traffic mitigation fee
2. The deciding body may approve a project with a traffic impact of five to
nineteen additional A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips only if it is determined that
the benefits of the project to the Town outweigh the impact of increased
traffic and subject to payment of a traffic mitigation fee
3. The deciding body may approve a project with twenty or more additional
A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips only if it is determined that the benefits of the
project to the Town outweigh the impact of increased traffic and subject to:
a. preparation of a comprehensive traffic report.
b. Payment of a traffic mitigation fee
c. Payment of a proportionate share of the cost of the construction of
circulation improvements in the immediate area.
4. Where benefits to the Town are required to be shown applicants shall submit
a letter of justification which clearly states housing or economic benefits
and/or specific sections of the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan
which show that the type of project will benefit the community (See Section
2.5.6 of the General Plan). The burden of proof of community benefit is on
the applicant.
5. In order to determine if a project will generate additional traffic, the Town
will use composite trip generation rates derived from the following sources
and updated from time to time:
• Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
• San Diego Association of Governments (San DAG)
• California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
• Other Municipalities such as the City of San Jose
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
The specific mitigation measure(s) required would be based on the magnitude of the
project's traffic impact which would also establish the procedure for processing the
project as set forth below.
B. REVIEW PROCESS
1. Staff Review:
a. Staff will initially determine whether a proposed project generates a
net increase in traffic. If the project does not generate a net increase
in traffic, the traffic policy does not apply. Therefore, the project will
be recommended for approval or denial based on the merits of the
project.
b. If there is a net increase in traffic, staff will review the applicant's
proposal and determine if the project will create minor traffic impacts
or major traffic impacts.
c. Projects that generate additional traffic may only be recommended for
approval if the project's benefits to the community override the traffic
impacts as determined by specific sections of the General Plan and/or
any Specific Plan. If a project generates additional traffic, of less than
five peak hour trips the burden is on the applicant to cite economic
or housing benefits to the Town and/or specific sections of the General
Plan and any applicable Specific Plan that demonstrate the project's
benefit to the Community which outweighs the traffic impact. The
deciding body must make specific findings which demonstrate that the
benefit(s) of the project outweigh the impact in order to approve the
project.
2. Mitigation of Traffic Impacts:
If a project with a traffic impact is recommended for approval by staff and/or
subsequently approved by the Planning Commission and/or Town Council,
C9\MISC\rRAFFIC.4
2
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
C9\MISC\TRAFFIC.4
traffic mitigation measures shall be imposed. The traffic mitigation shall be
in the form of an in -lieu traffic impact fee for projects with minor traffic
impacts. The mitigation for projects with major traffic impacts will be
required to payment of a traffic impact fee and a proportionate share or
construction of intersection and/or roadway improvements within a specified
distance from the project.
Minor traffic impact is defined as one or more and less than five twenty
additional AM or PM peak hour trips.
Major traffic impact is defined as five twenty or more additional AM or PM
peak hour trips.
The determination of whether a project has a minor or major traffic impact
is based on a traffic analysis prepared by the Town Engineering Department
based on standardized trip generation rates.
If a project is determined to have a major traffic impact, a traffic report shall
be prepared by a private consultant, hired by the Town at the applicant's
expense. The report will include an analysis of generated trips and any linked
trips.
If an applicant does not agree with the results of the Town's traffic analysis
or the traffic report prepared by the Town's consultant, the applicant may
have an independent traffic report prepared at the applicant's expense.
3
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
C. FEES
Based on a traffic analysis required in A above, any project which is found to cause
a net increase in traffic shall pay a traffic impact mitigation fee, as established by
separate resolution.
The traffic impact mitigation fee and any proportionate share of intersection
improvements shall be due prior to Final Map approval and/or issuance of a
Building Permit, as applicable. The traffic impact mitigation fee shall be used to
construct capacity enhancing projects (i.e., signals, street widening, etc.) that are
listed in the Capital Improvement Program and transit improvement projects that are
identified by the Town as a means of reducing traffic congestion.
D. RIGHT TO DEVELOP NOT GUARANTEED
Compliance with the provisions of the Traffic Impact Policy is not to be construed
to be a right of development. The Town specifically retains the right of review and
approval (or denial) of each project based on its merits.
C9\MISC\TRAFFIC.4
4
1
ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO TRAFFIC IMPACTS
THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS ORDAINS:
SECTION I
Section 5.20.230 of the Zoning Ordinance is amended to read:
SEC. 5.20.230: CONDITIONAL USE MODIFICATION
A use authorized by Conditional Use Permit shall not be modified unless a
modification to the permit is approved. The following changes in use are modifications:
(1) Intensification of use. (By way of example, intensification of use are
evidenced by additions to seating capacity or gross floor area, ullcrcasc i1i pcak
hour trips frn cial er inustri
Lily d4...vL.1opuiLiit pro;e-trips cxcccd the traffic g,,ircration-factor
al, increase of five or more peak
hour trips, increases in parking required -- other than the requirement of
increases because of ordinance amendment -- use of additional land, or
commencement of new activities.)
(2) Any change that is a substantial departure from plans which were the basis
of the Conditional Use Permit Approval.
EXHIBIT C
SECTION If
This ordinance takes effect 30 days after the date it is adopted. Within 15 days after
this ordinance is adopted, the Town Clerk shall cause it to be published once in a
newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the Town.
This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Los Gatos on , 1991, and adopted by the following vote as an ordinance of
the Town of Los Gatos at a regular meeting of the Town Council on , 1991.
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
A1'1EST:
CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
C9\ORDS\TRAFF 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES --16
June 12, 1991
MOTION
No o - else wished to speak; public portion of hearing dos
Comm. Whit moves, seconded by Comm. Rudolpr, or approval of
Architecture a • ite Application S-91-38 with the -.ndition of a
recommendation as; nst the birch trees. Wo • prefer to see one specimen
sized tree of an evergr-_ variety subjec • the satisfaction of the Director of
Parks, Forestry and Mainte - nce.
Comm. Rudolph: If the appli
another specimen sized t
support the motion.
willing to replace a specimen size tree with
and the - - being replaced is a nuisance, will
Chair Chase. e ordinance does say we are t. .rotect those trees, but in this
case bel - 'e some common sense must be observ-. • will support the motion.
tion passes unanimously, 8-0.
AYES: Commissioners Abkin, Allmand, Chase, Morgan, O'La
Rudolph and Whitney-Hafft
NOES: None
ABSTENTIONS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Grimes
in, Roberts,
ITEM 11
Zoning Ordinance Amendment A-91-3
a. Public hearing to consider an amendment to the Town Zoning
Ordinance to modify Section 5.20.230 concerning Conditional Use
Permit modifications. This matter will not have a significant impact on
the environment and is, therefore, not subject to the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act.
b. Consideration of amendments to the Town's Traffic Impact Policy.
No one was present to speak; public portion of hearing closed.
Comm. Abkin: Am in support of what is in the staff report and that it meets what
we requested be done; have some suggestions for the reorganization of the
traffic impact policy for clarification. On Exhibit B under "A. Review Process'
remove "1. Staff Review" with "a' and "b" becoming "1" and "2". Under Mitigation
of Traffic Impacts, paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 become "a", "b" and "c" under "2" of
Review Process. Delete the word "five" from the new "2(a)" and "2(b)" which
appears to be a typographical error.
Abkin: Continuing on Page 3, the fourth and fifth paragraphs are to become "3"
under "B. Review Process'.
Abkin: On Page 2, 'c' under "B. Review Process" becomes "4". In this
paragraph, modify first sentence to read "Projects that generate additional traffic
of five or more peak hour trips may only be recommended for approval..."
Change second sentence of same paragraph to read "If a project generates
additional traffic..." to read "If a project generates additional traffic of five or more
peak hour trips the burden is on..."
Abkin: Page 2, "2. Mitigation of Traffic Impacts" should become "C.
MITIGATION OF TRAFFIC IMPACTS". Second sentence of paragraph under this
ATTACHMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES --17
June 12, 1991
MOTION
heading to read The traffic mitigation shall be in the form of an in -lieu traffic
impact mitigation fee." Also, insert "traffic impact mitigation fee" in the following
sentence to be consistent with definition of traffic impact mitigation fee on
following page.
Abkin: Under "C", third sentence should read 'The mitigation for projects with
major traffic impacts will be the required payment of a traffic impact mitigation
fee..." On page 4, "C. FEES" becomes "D. FEES" and "D. RIGHT TO DEVELOP
NOT GUARANTEED" becomes "E. RIGHT TO DEVELOP NOT GUARANTEED".
Comm. Abkin moves, seconded by Comm. Morgan for approval of Zoning
Ordinance Amendment A-91-3 with the proposed amendments just stated,
finding that the Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the General Plan in that it
does meet our traffic concerns in allowing development of projects beneficial to
the Town and still meets the traffic concerns with the mitigation fee and with a
recommendation that the Town Council approve the amendment.
Comm. Whitney: We ought to be considering the ability to waive or reduce fees
for lower income housing as an inducement mechanism.
Chair Chase: That is covered in the housing element.
Whitney: This is a discussion of fees; would be appropriate here as well. Would
be a valid inducement; one that would take us a long way in terms of the
Housing Element. It's the kind of thing HCD loves to read.
Chase: Agree that it's a good inducement but believe it's a part of the housing
element.
Whitney: The Housing Element discusses our traffic impact fee.
Lortz: Fees are not being discussed tonight; that's something that could be
added when we bring the issue of fees back for discussion and a
recommendation could be made to Council. In the past Council has not been
too receptive to specific fees being reduced automatically. Council has
preferred that an applicant come before them and request an exemption of fees
on a case by case basis.
Whitney: I'd like to see it added and forwarded to Council so that it can be
considered.
Comm. Abkin: The place to do to that would be with a separate resolution
which establishes the fee schedule. The fee schedule isn't established here; is
to be established by separate resolution. We have directed that an amendment
to the fee schedule be made and part of that recommendation was that there
would be an allowance to certain kinds of projects.
Whitney: We're discussing policy and that's an appropriate place to put it. It
would then be the policy of the Town to waive or reduce fees. It's a policy
question.
Comm. Allmand: Didn't the Commission have an extended discussion regarding
this issue, the waiver and exemption of certain projects over others and legal
discussions as to issues that would be brought up, liability for the Town, other
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -18
June 12, 1991
arguments in terms of State and possibly constitutional law for equal protection?
Lortz: Yes. The attorney at that time said exemption is the term to be used, not
waive. Her concern was that the Council should make that determination.
Whitney: Then you forward the policy to the Council and they can make that
determination. It's done in many jurisdictions.
Whitney: Would maker of motion amend the motion to include this policy
statement?
Abkin: How would you like to amend it?
Whitney: Under new section "D. FEES" add a paragraph to the affect that the
Town by policy may consider the exemption or reduction of traffic impact fees
for lower income affordable housing. Lower income would take the two lowest
categories and exclude the moderate.
Abkin: The problem I have with that is it singles out an admittedly important
group but it's only one of the important benefits that the Town might want to
look for in mitigating traffic impacts. There might be many others but don't want
to try to list all others the Town might want to provide incentives for. The place
to do that is in the resolution where it is rrrore easily amended as time goes on
and different priorities come before the Town and different issues come of
importance. It's still a policy statement.
Whitney: I will concur with that if that motion is brought forth on a resolution.
Chair Chase: Motion remains as initially stated.
Motion passes unanimously, 8-0.
AYES: Commissioners Abkin, Allmand, Chase, Morgan, O'Laughlin, Roberts,
Rudolph and Whitney-Hafft
NOES: None
ABSTENTIONS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Grimes
None
NEW OTHER BUSINESS
None
ADJOURNMENT Chair Chase adjoumed the meeting at 9:45 p.m. The next scheduled Planning
Commission -meeting w+ll-be-held-eR June 26, 1991.
RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
CONCERNING THE TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos to
amend the policy requiring developers whose projects are shown to generate additional
traffic in the Town of Los Gatos to establish the community benefits that would result from
the project and to participate in the cost of constructing capacity enhancing and transit
improvement projects to reduce traffic congestion.
RESOLVED, that the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos does hereby adopt
the Policy Statement as shown on the attached Exhibit "A" as the Town of Los Gatos
Traffic Impact Policy.
FURTHER RESOLVED, this Resolution rescinds Resolution No. 1990-147.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos at a
regular meeting held this day of 1991, by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
Al 'LEST:
CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
C9\MISC\TRAFFIC.4
ATTACHMENT TACHMENT 3 '1
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
A. POLICY STATEMENT
1. The deciding body may approve a project with a minor traffic impact (one or
more and less than five additional AM or PM peak hour trips) subject to
payment of a traffic mitigation fee
2. The deciding body may approve a project with a traffic impact of five to
nineteen additional A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips only if it is determined that
the benefits of the project to the Town outweigh the impact of increased
traffic and subject to payment of a traffic mitigation fee
3. The deciding body may approve a project with twenty or more additional
A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips only if it is determined that the benefits of the
project to the Town outweigh the impact of increased traffic and subject to:
a. preparation of a comprehensive traffic report.
b. Payment of a traffic mitigation fee
c. Payment of a proportionate share of the cost of the construction of
circulation improvements in the immediate area.
4. Where benefits to the Town are required to be shown, applicants shall submit
a letter of justification which clearly states housing or economic benefits
and/or specific sections of the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan
which show that the type of project will benefit the community (See Section
2.5.6 of the General Plan). The burden of proof of community benefit is on
the applicant.
5. In order to determine if a project will generate additional traffic, the Town
will use composite trip generation rates derived from the following sources
and updated from time to time:
■ Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
■ San Diego Association of Governments (San DAG)
■ California Department of Transportation (CalTrans)
■ Other Municipalities such as the City of San Jose
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
The specific mitigation measure(s) required would be based on the magnitude of the
project's traffic impact which would also establish the procedure for processing the
project as set forth below.
B. REVIEW PROCESS
1. Staff will initially determine whether a proposed project generates a net
increase in traffic. If the project does not generate a net increase in traffic,
the traffic policy does not apply. Therefore, the project will be recommended
for approval or denial based on the merits of the project.
2. If there is a net increase in traffic, staff will review the applicant's proposal
and determine if the project will create minor traffic impacts or major traffic
impacts.
a. Minor traffic impact is defined as one or more and less than twenty
additional AM or PM peak hour trips.
b. Major traffic impact is defined as twenty or more additional AM or PM
peak hour trips.
c. The determination of whether a project has a minor or major traffic
impact is based on a traffic analysis prepared by the Town Engineering
Department based on standardized trip generation rates.
3. If a project is determined to have a major traffic impact, a traffic report shall
be prepared by a private consultant, hired by the Town at the applicant's
expense. The report will include an analysis of generated trips and any linked
trips. If an applicant does not agree with the results of the Town's traffic
analysis or the traffic report prepared by the Town's consultant, the applicant
may have an independent traffic report prepared at the applicant's expense.
4. Projects that generate additional traffic of five or more peak hour trips may
only be recommended for approval if the project's benefits to the community
override the traffic impacts as determined by specific sections of the General
Plan and/or any Specific Plan. If a project generates additional traffic of five
C9\MISC\TRAFFIC.4
2
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
or more peak hour trips the burden is on the applicant to cite economic or
housing benefits to the Town and/or specific sections of the General Plan and
any applicable Specific Plan that demonstrate the project's benefit to the
Community which outweighs the traffic impact. The deciding body must make
specific findings which demonstrate that the benefit(s) of the project outweigh
the impact in order to approve the project.
3. If a project is determined to have a major traffic impact, a traffic report shall
be prepared by a private consultant, hired by the Town at the applicant's
expense. The report will include an analysis of generated trips and any linked
trips.
C. MITIGATION OF TRAFFIC IMPACTS
If a project with a traffic impact is recommended for approval by staff and/or
subsequently approved by the Planning Commission and/or Town Council, traffic
mitigation measures shall be imposed. The traffic mitigation shall be in the form
of an in -lieu traffic impact mitigation fee. The mitigation for projects with major
traffic impacts will be the required payment of a traffic impact mitigation fee and
a proportionate share or construction of intersection and/or roadway improvements
within a specified distance from the project.
D. FEES
Based on a traffic analysis required in A above, any project which is found to cause
a net increase in traffic shall pay a traffic impact mitigation fee, as established by
separate resolution.
The traffic impact mitigation fee and any proportionate share of intersection
improvements shall be due prior to Final Map approval, issuance of a Building
Permit, or occupancy permit as applicable. The traffic impact mitigation fee shall
C9\MISC\TRAFFIC.4
3
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
be used to construct capacity enhancing projects (i.e., signals, street widening, etc.)
that are listed in the Capital Improvement Program and transit improvement projects
that are identified by the Town as a means of reducing traffic congestion.
E. RIGHT TO DEVELOP NOT GUARANTEED
Compliance with the provisions of the Traffic Impact Policy is not to be construed
to be a right of development. The Town specifically retains the right of review and
approval (or denial) of each project based on its merits.
C9\MISC\TRAFFIC.4
4
ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO TRAFFIC IMPACTS
THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS ORDAINS:
SECTION I
Section 5.20.230 of the Zoning Ordinance is amended to read:
SEC. 5.20.230: CONDITIONAL USE MODIFICATION
A use authorized by Conditional Use Permit shall not be modified unless a
modification to the permit is approved. The following changes in use are modifications:
(1) Intensification of use. (By way of example, intensification of use are
evidenced by additions to seating capacity or gross floor area, increase in peak
hour trips for mixed use, multi -tenant commercial or industrial or multi-
family development projects if the trips exceed the traffic generation factor
assigned to the project at the time of approval, increase of five or more peak
hour trips, increases in parking required -- other than the requirement of
increases because of ordinance amendment -- use of additional land, or
commencement of new activities.)
(2) Any change that is a substantial departure from plans which were the basis
of the Conditional Use Permit Approval.
ATTACHMENT 4
SECTION II
This ordinance takes effect 30 days after the date it is adopted. Within 15 days after
this ordinance is adopted, the Town Clerk shall cause it to be published once in a
newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the Town.
This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Los Gatos on , 1991, and adopted by the following vote as an ordinance of
the Town of Los Gatos at a regular meeting of the Town Council on , 1991.
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
A'1`1'BST:
MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
C9\ORDS\TRAFF 2
RESOLUTION 1991-174
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
CONCERNING THE TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos to
amend the policy requiring developers whose projects are shown to generate additional
traffic in the Town of Los Gatos to establish the community benefits that would result from
the project and to participate in the cost of constructing capacity enhancing and transit
improvement projects to reduce traffic congestion.
RESOLVED, that the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos does hereby adopt
the Policy Statement as shown on the attached Exhibit "A" as the Town of Los Gatos
Traffic Impact Policy.
FURTHER RESOLVED, this Resolution rescinds Resolution No. 1990-147.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos at a
regular meeting held this 5th day of August 1991, by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES: Randy Attaway, Joanne Benjamin, Steven Blanton
NAYS: Mayor Brent N. Ventura
ABSENT: Eric D. Carlson
ABSTAIN: None
SIGNED: /s/ Brent N. Ventura
MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
/s/ Marian V. Cosgrove
CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
C9\MISC\TRAFFIC.4
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
A. POLICY STATEMENT
I. The deciding body may approve a project with a minor traffic impact (one or
more and less than five additional AM or PM peak hour trips) subject to
payment of a traffic mitigation fee
2. The deciding body may approve a project with a traffic impact of five to
nineteen additional A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips only if it is determined that
the benefits of the project to the Town outweigh the impact of increased
traffic and subject to payment of a traffic mitigation fee
3. The deciding body may approve a project with twenty or more additional
A.M. or P.M. peak hour trips only if it is determined that the benefits of the
project to the Town outweigh the impact of increased traffic and subject to:
a. preparation of a comprehensive traffic report.
b. Payment of a traffic mitigation fee
c. Payment of a proportionate share of the cost of the construction of
circulation improvements in the immediate area.
4. Where benefits to the Town are required to be shown, applicants shall submit
a letter of justification which clearly states housing or economic benefits
and/or specific sections of the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan
which show that the type of project will benefit the community (See Section
2.5.6 of the General Plan). The burden of proof of community benefit is on
the applicant.
5. In order to determine if a project will generate additional traffic, the Town
will use composite trip generation rates derived from the following sources
and updated from time to time:
• Institute of Transportation Engineers (I7'h)
• San Diego Association of Governments (San DAG)
• California Department of Transportation (CalTrans)
• Other Municipalities such as the City of San Jose
EXHIBIT A
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
The specific mitigation measure(s) required would be based on the magnitude of the
project's traffic impact which would also establish the procedure for processing the
project as set forth below.
B. REVIEW PROCESS
1. Staff will initially determine whether a proposed project generates a net
increase in traffic. If the project does not generate a net increase in traffic,
the traffic policy does not apply. Therefore, the project will be recommended
for approval or denial based on the merits of the project.
2. If there is a net increase in traffic, staff will review the applicant's proposal
and determine if the project will create minor traffic impacts or major traffic
impacts.
a. Minor traffic impact is defined as one or more and less than twenty
additional AM or PM peak hour trips.
b. Major traffic impact is defined as twenty or more additional AM or PM
peak hour trips.
c. The determination of whether a project has a minor or major traffic
impact is based on a traffic analysis prepared by the Town Engineering
Department based on standardized trip generation rates.
3. If a project is determined to have a major traffic impact, a traffic report shall
be prepared by a private consultant, hired by the Town at the applicant's
expense. The report will include an analysis of generated trips and any linked
trips. If an applicant does not agree with the results of the Town's traffic
analysis or the traffic report prepared by the Town's consultant, the applicant
may have an independent traffic report prepared at the applicant's expense.
4. Projects that generate additional traffic of five or more peak hour trips may
only be recommended for approval if the project's benefits to the community
override the traffic impacts as determined by specific sections of the General
Plan and/or any Specific Plan. If a project generates additional traffic of five
C9\MISC\TRAFFIC.4
2
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
or more peak hour trips the burden is on the applicant to cite economic or
housing benefits to the Town and/or specific sections of the General Plan and
any applicable Specific Plan that demonstrate the project's benefit to the
Community which outweighs the traffic impact. The deciding body must make
specific findings which demonstrate that the benefit(s) of the project outweigh
the impact in order to approve the project.
3. If a project is determined to have a major traffic impact, a traffic report shall
be prepared by a private consultant, hired by the Town at the applicant's
expense. The report will include an analysis of generated trips and any linked
trips.
C. MITIGATION OF TRAFFIC IMPACTS
If a project with a traffic impact is recommended for approval by staff and/or
subsequently approved by the Planning Commission and/or Town Council, traffic
mitigation measures shall be imposed. The traffic mitigation shall be in the form
of an in -lieu traffic impact mitigation fee. The mitigation for projects with major
traffic impacts will be the required payment of a traffic impact mitigation fee and
a proportionate share or construction of intersection and/or roadway improvements
within a specified distance from the project.
D. FEES
Based on a traffic analysis required in A above, any project which is found to cause
a net increase in traffic shall pay a traffic impact mitigation fee, as established by
separate resolution.
The traffic impact mitigation fee and any proportionate share of intersection
improvements shall be due prior to Final Map approval, issuance of a Building
Permit, or occupancy permit as applicable. The traffic impact mitigation fee shall.
C9\MISC\TRAFFIC.4
3
TRAFFIC IMPACT POLICY
be used to construct capacity enhancing projects (i.e., signals, street widening, etc.)
that are listed in the Capital Improvement Program and transit improvement projects
that are identified by the Town as a means of reducing traffic congestion.
E. RIGHT TO DEVELOP NOT GUARANTEED
Compliance with the provisions of the Traffic Impact Policy is not to be construed
to be a right of development. The Town specifically retains the right of review and
approval (or denial) of each project based on its merits.
C9\MISC\TRAFFIC.4
4
August 5, 1991
Los Gatos, California
HEARINGS CONTINUED
PINE AVE. APPEAL CONT.
Motion by Mr. Attaway, seconded by Mr. Blanton, that Council uphold the decision of the
Planning Commission, and deny Mr. Meyers appeal of 17161 Pine Avenue. Mrs. Benjamin
added her request that the maker and the second send the plans to the Parks Forestry and
Maintenance Department to have them provide additional screening out for the tennis courts,
including evergreen landscaping materials. Carried by a vote of 4 ayes. Mr. Carlson absent.
TRAFFIC IMPACT/ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT A-91-3
INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION 1991-174/HEARING
Mayor Ventura stated that this was the time and the place duly noted for public hearing to
consider an amendment to the Town Zoning Ordinance.
No one from the audience spoke to this issue.
Motion by Mrs. Benjamin, seconded by Mr. Attaway, to close the public hearing of Zoning
Ordinance Amendment A-91-3. Carried by a vote of 4 ayes. Mr. Carlson absent.
Motion by Mrs. Benjamin, seconded by Mr. Attaway, that Council find that the proposed Zoning
Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the General Plan. Carried by a vote of 4 ayes. Mr.
Carlson absent.
Motion by Mrs. Benjamin, seconded by Mr. Blanton, that Council waive the reading of the
proposed Ordinance. Carried by a vote of 4 ayes. Mr. Carlson absent. The Senior Deputy
Clerk read the Title of the proposed Ordinance.
Motion by Mrs Benjamin, seconded by Mr. Attaway, that Council introduce Draft Ordinance
entitled, AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AMENDING THE ZONING
ORDINANCE RELATING TO TRAFFIC IMPACTS. Carried by a vote of 4 ayes. Mr. Carlson
absent.
Motion by Mrs. Benjamin, seconded by Mr. Attaway, that Council adopt Resolution 1991-174
entitled, RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS CONCERNING THE TRAFFIC
IMPACT POLICY. Carried by a vote of 3 ayes. Mayor Ventura voted no because he feels that
by adopting this Resolution the council will loose the ability to regulate, consider, and mitigate
the cumulative impacts of small projects. Mr. Carlson absent.
HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBILITY/GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT/RESOLUTION 1991-175
ENHANCED LIVAB I LITY/RESI DENTIALDEVELO PMENTS/RESOLUTION 1991-176/HEARING
Mayor Ventura stated that this was the time and the place duly noted for public hearing for the
public hearing of an amendment of the Town's Housing Element of the General Plan, (section
GP-91-1), and adaptability and accessibility requirements for enhanced livability features for
residential developments.
TC: D1: MM080591
6