scanner@losgatosca.gov_20100729_162401_~°w" °F
~ TOWN Or LOS GATOS
•~°~~~,
~
~~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
.
~°s~c~A:~°s
Meeting Date: June 23, 2010
PREPARED BY:
APPLICATION NO.:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY OWNERS:
APPLICATION
SUMMARY:
ATTACHMENTS:
RFMARKC~
Wendie Rooney
Community Development Director
Draft 2020 General Plan
N/A
Town of Los Gatos
N/A
ITEM NO: 1
DESK ITEM #2
Los Gatos 2020 General Plan and Final Environmental hnpact
Report on the Los Gatos 2020 General Plan Update
1. Letter from BGF Planning Consultants, dated June 18, 2010 (2
pages)
2. Letter from SILVAR, dated June 22, 2010 (2 Pages)
This desk item contains two letters regarding the General Plan that were received after the
Planning Commission Agenda packet was distributed for the June 23, 2010, Planning
Commission meeting.
repared by:
Wendie R. Rooney
Director of Community Development
WRR:JP:ct
N:\DEV\GENERAL PLAN UPDATE\General Plan Desk Item No. 2.doc
i0I -Attachment 2
PLAN N i IVG
Cf~NSUL,TANTS
~ ~ co~susua`ttly , deve(c,~crcext~ . eicvirryrwce~c~
June 18, 2010
John Bourgeois, Chair
Town Of Los Gatos Planning Commission
110 E. Main Street ~ .
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Re: General Plan 2020 EIR; APN 424-08-074,057,021; Oka Road Properties
Dear Mr. Bourgeois and Planning Commission members:
JUN sw +~ ~~~U
TOWN OF I-4S GAT®S
PLANNING ®IVI~i®N
I am writing on behalf of the Yuki Farms General Partnership, ETPH, LP, and the related Yuki
ownership entities (herein, "Yuki Farms") regarding the referenced property located NW of Oka
Road and NW of Hwy 17, North.of Lark Road• and South of Hwy 85. The properfy~ includes two-
parcelstotaling 9.4 acres;designated:byhath the'2000;and~ 2010 Draft General Plan for'Low Density
;Residential• (R.-1:8) ~and.4.3 acres designated-Medutn'Derisity Residential (RIVI5:12):, and is further
identified onahe map w~i.eh is attached to this~corresporidencee' All three parcels are currently in
Agriculture use. (walnut orchard). ~- ' .
Both the 2000 and 2020 Draft General Plan designate the property as within the Oka Road subarea of
the Vasona Light Rail area. Within this area, Draft 2020 General Plan policies continue to encourage
mixed-use development that coordinate housing in proximity to neighborhood commercial uses
(VLR-3} and development of affordable and rental units (VLR-2.2).
The Transportation and Circulation Element for both the 2000 and the Draft 2010 General Plan
specifies that Oka Road will continue as a neighborhood collector, with through traffic limited to the
areas immediately served.
Yuki Farms supports General Plan policies which provide for flexibility in the use of land through
the Planned Development process and also supports Land Use Element policies that encourage the
provision of goods and services within. walking distance of neighborhoods. Far eicample Policies
under Goal VLR-3 encourage mixed -use developments "that coordinate housing in proximity to ...
neighborhood commercial centers." The Oka Road Sub-area is relatively isolated from commercial
areas along.Los GatosBlvd, and existing recreation and future residential uses would be well served
by a small component of neighborhood}serving commercial land uses within this Sub-area. Such an
approach would be .compatible with a11: proposed Draft 2020 ~GEneral"Plan policies; ~in particular, T,U-
l;(stable: balanced community'with. environmental goals)'LU;3 ('well. planned~careful growth'
consistent with community character); LU-S .(preserve and~~enhance'a sen's'e of place); ~I;U-6 (efficient
114 San Miguel Ave • Salinas. CA 93901 • (8311754-0879 • brian(a,bsfnlannine.com
Attachment 1
use of infill land); and LU-8 (provide adequate commercial services). The provision of community-
pedestrian-andtransft oriented development referenced as the Guiding Principle in the VLR Element
(Section 5.3) is synonymous with mixed-use development. Current and proposed Goals and Policies
strongly suggest that mixed-use development that contains a variety of uses would be appropriate for
the Oka Road property. In fact Policy VLR -3.5 calls for a special evaluation of projects in the VLR
area to "ensure that the Town's desire for mixed use projects. is fulfilled."
Policy VLR 3.3 suggests that a mix of commercial, office, light industrial and recreational uses
should be encouraged where noise levels are unsuitable for residential development. Policies that
call for a mix of uses shoixld, therefore, explicitly mention the Oka Rd properties so that this
flexibility is evident, without the need for interpretation, in the 2020 General Plan.
The 2007 - 2014 Housing Element (Appendix Table 6-1) identifies the Oka Rd. property as a site for
new housing development. Figure 6-1 designates the site as a candidate for the proposed Affordable
Housing Overlay Zone (AHOZ). The Housing Sites Inventory anticipates no constraints to the
development of housing, and projects 248 units. may be developed on the site given 12.4 developable
acres (13.7 total acres). Higher density residential development on portions of this property may
increase the feasibility of an affordable project component and ensure the viability of small scale
neighborhood commercial development of the sort envisioned by the General Plan. Higher densities,
wi1T also be better able to "take advantage of the opportunities provided by mass transit." {Goal VLR
-2) The provision of community-pedestrian-and transit oriented.development referenced as the
Guiding Principle in the VLR Element (Section 5.3) is also synonymous with higher density
development.
To implement these policies, Yuki Farms requests an option be provided allowing the property to be
developed. pursuant to either a Planned Development or a Specific Plan Overlay, as an additional
alternative to the flexibility provided by the Planned Development process.
CEQA Guideline, Section 15126.4(a)(2), states that "Mitigation measures must be fully enforceable
through permit conditions, agreements, or other legally -binding instruments. Where the project
subject to CEQA is a plan... mitigation measures can be incorporated into the plan..." The Draft
2020 General. Plan EIR contains many references to Goals, Policies, and. Actions that mitigate the
effect of additional development. Yuki Farms believes that the addition of policies suggested in this
letter will result in a higher degree of mitigation and internal' consistency than is .represented by
current and proposed Goals, Policies and Actions.
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
%~s~
Brian Foucht, AICP
Principal
114 San Mieuel Ave • Salinas. CA 93901 • (8311754-0879 • brian(a~befnlannine.com
S~l~.on Valley
:Ass4cataii of ~AL;TO)ZS°~
201.0'
John Bourgeois
Chats'., Planning Coxnniiss`oti
Tgwn of has Gatos
Civic Center 1 i0 East Main Street
Los Caatos, CA 9563'i.
Uear:Clair Bourgeos.and C:ammxssloners,
The Silicon Malley Associati6n of REA,LTORS~ (SILVAR) is:a'tt•aae•association representing.
...
nearly'4,ODQ real estate prafessronals in`Saxita,Claira and San Mateo. counties, includlryg pVer. 80'0
members who live and/or~work in Los Gatos. Our association has historically been an• advocate far
lidmeovimei's`andfar publc,poli~y,.
We i+vould like to eciiriinent xegatd'irig agenda item ~1, "Los Gatos 2020 General Plan and the:pinal
Errvtrorimental.:.ixxipact Report on the I,os Gratgs 2U20, Geiietal Marl. Ll~pi~atc".for:the rude. 23-arid. 30
planning commission-meetings,.
~e_are concerned the recommended changes listed under item:.#5 on,page 2 ofthe,gerieral .comment
-matrix:~mtsrepresent the position of our assoeiat'tort.and`t}ie l'33 comtimerits'the"I'ot~tt received
...
opposing Action ENV=~O 2 The comtx~~nts-m opp~sittQr}to..,,4ct}ou EN:'~ 10,x: center an tlie::i1~
`advised. st-ggestton that the TaWt~ study the- implementation of time of sale. mandates on the: ale of
real property,
tin ourletter~tzi the'Tovvri dated April 13, vita suggested t~vo langxaage.a(tertiatvesfot Action ENV-
-10 2, ~rom-the A.ttotney General, Ofi;ice's ciocuniet-t "~ustarnatiil~ity atxd Geiteal Plans: Examples;of
Policies.ta,?-ddress'Climatc `Change":•
1. ~tudy'the feasibil-ty of irrtgrov~ng:`4eiergy- arid-water-a"ffieien"t.buildings and
landscaprrrgthr-ough ordinances, development;fees, ncQnt~ves, project tiitriug
pri~nritization, and:other`implarmeni:fng to6ls" and
2. "Provide education on energy efficiency to residents, customers-anal/or other tenants:"
Instead; .the comment matrix includes the,recommendatxon to study two: addrtiQrrai rim. a of sale
mandates on.real property [fee Action 11NV 10 2::subsection (d) and (~}.] We strongly oppose the
recommended language m tfie camrrrent rrt>ltrix. #5• for Action ENV t 0~2; specr~cally the inclusion of
::. ,.
subsections (a) "Requiring energy and water eff eiency~ audits at time of sale :for:: commercial- and
;: ..
residential properties' ; (d):".RegUiritig ar energy efficiency audit for [riajor. retrofits, new electrical
accounts, reappraisals,, oriental, lease ar othertransfers'r-and. (e) "Developing'a Residential Energy
Conservation (?rdinance, which requires certain t-.t"operty ovViiers°to coiductprescribed energy rind
water°efficiency upgrades;prior ta:the sale of the;propetty':"
..
In ,an attempt to iigt; be misquoted further, we would lilEe to- suggest a third option fox`:alternative
largaage for Action. ENV=l0.2, as intended in our original comments to prevent conflict ~vitih Action
194'00 Stevens'Cieek Btvi:, 5tii'ie 100'Cupertino, CA-250.'14
Phbncs 408,200:0:100 ~ FaX 408':200,.01.0.1 a wiwwsl~aiiog
Attachment 2
ENV-7.1: '"Study possible measures to improve enexgy and water efficiency in existing
buildings-as partpf the development df a Climate Action-Plan."'
Local governmentmandates restricting or prohibiting the: ability of. owners. of real property to sell
their home qr business: are lad. and inequ'tta6le public policy, fiime of sale or;pont of. sale mandates.
are inefficient,, unfair,. and add complications and expensive costs to a real estate transaction. We
believe. there are better alternatives:'avalable:~to the Town other than time o:F sale: mandates,. ~?vlcli
will help the community meet its goals sooner, with less o~ a negative irupact on homeowners..
..
Time of Sale Mandates: A.re )tnef~cient-:Acc'arding to sales trends in Los Gatos, the average'.sales
turnover rate for. residential real. estate is just over 3~percent (five-year average)' a year. ~lVhiLu
calculating ~ozi rep:eat:sales, alb o£ the homes tn` Los Gatos might xiot be impacted': by the': mandate uziti]
2070 (6Q years from now) at the earliest ,~.0 years after AB 32 calls for. 20 percent reduction iii tie
1:990 levels of greenhouse gases. Reducing greenhouse gases: is a major priority;,::=as outlined in the
Draft Cr'eneral P.lan,'6ut the strategy Identified foreexsst~ng:6aildings~~s tiie slgvi%est and: least ef£ecti:ve.
.: .,
Tonne of dale iVlandates Are Unfa.-.r According. to the Town,. climate change liar arid' will impact
-the entire community::: Under dine of sale only a small:.. segment. of the pgpulatori wt.ll, be required to
;update the existiing building stock°to,shoulder the burden of reducng greenhouse .gases.- l?lacing the
burden 9f upgrading the existing building stock of.thc whole community on home buyers and'selleirs=
is•tnequitable.:It is. especially .hard on current residents who unexpectedly~need to move: due td)tfe:
'change: cixcumstances.
Time of Sale 1VIandates.Add Complications to>Sates Transactions -Escrow is an extremely>tn~e=
sens~t~e:process enacting. jur~sd~ction bver~tkie' ale oi~real estate through.this mandate ~vould;add
yet another step, compounding delays to the process,increasmg costs antl stress for residents:, and:
increasing the Likelihood of the transaction iaot being coripletecl: resulting in no` eliange to file
property.
Time of Sale,lVlandafes Create.:Atiother ,+xpenswe Cost The:cost. of mandating retrofiits Arid
additional ~nSpections can cause. the. home sale price to: increase. drastically, leaving tfie potential
home buyer with an~added.. unaffordable expense F'or seniors vvho have lived iri their home fora.-lang.
time; these:iihandates-would create a barrier if they~:decdetQ place thexr;Iome:on the:anarket, The.,re
will also be `riew cxpelisive costs. on businesses,, anil gavernment`~?vill. be i'oreed°to implement and;
administertlie program.
ThanlE;you forgiving me the: opportunity~tq comment Qn the >r.os Gatos"2020 General Plan Update. on
Eiehalf o£the Silicon Valley Association of`REA1"/'I'ORS~ Again, we respectfully request tkiat' ori'e or
all of the abo.'ve altertaatxve_optioris ~e tncluled in-lied of'the original A¢tion ENS-10'.2 Ianguage, and
urge the removal of the recommended. changes to AcEion ENV 10.2 included: on: page 2 of the general
plan corr-menG:matrix.
Sincerely,
~~~C/
Adam:Ivlo~ ornery
Governrrienf Affairs Director
Silicon Valley Association of.REALTORS®