2010080216 - Attachment 1 of the Draft General PlanLand Use:
Page LU-16 -Bullet 3 under J: Discussion on whether we want to be locked into that specific
development pattern.
Page LU-22 -Action LU-1.1 and 1.2: Discussion on these two proposed studies.
Page LU-23 -Goal LU-3: Proposed wording modification - "To provide for well-planned,
careful growth •-~~*'~~-~ *'~~'~~~~~ ^~that respects the Town's existing character and
infrastructure."
Page LU-23 and LU 27 -Policy LU-3.2 and 6.2, 6.3, etc. -Discussion on "community
benefit"
Page LU-24 - PLU-3.4: Discussion regarding Corridor Lots.
Page LU-24 - ALU-4.1: Discussion on whether we need to study this given our current public
participation practices.
Page LU-27 -Action LU-5.3: Should the properties be residential or commercial on
Winchester bet•veen Shelburne and Pleasant View?
Page LU-28 -Policy LU-7.4: Where is this intended to be implemented?
Page LU-33 -Policy LU-10.8: Should "Mitchell" be replaced with "Roberts or Shannon?"
Page LU-33 -Policy LU-10.9: Should we include a southern boundary for commercial?
Potentially Roberts or Shannon?
Community Design:
Page CD-S -PCD-5.1: Should this Policy be removed?
Page CD-9 -Policy CD-6.3: Discussion on basements and cellars.
Page CD-13 -PCD-10.2: Should "Allow" be replaced with "Encourage" and should only be
striken from the first sentence?
Page CD-24 -Action CD-14.2: Discussion on downzoning hillside properties.
Page CD-25 -PCD-15.3: Discussion on this Policy.
Page CD-26 -Policy 15.8: Could the way this is written be interpreted as no development on or
near hillsides? Should it reference the hillside guidelines?
Page CD-27 -Policy CD-16.3: Discussion on views.
Attachment 1
CD-29 -Policy 17.4: Do we want or need to define major development proposals so that PD
is not overused? (We will need to further define "major developments")
CD-29 -Policy 17.5: Discussion regarding the CDAC process.
Page CD-31 -Action 18.6: Discussion on proposed fencing study. Is it necessary since Policy
CD-3.8 seems to be working.
Transportation:
Page TRA-14, E. 2a, First Bullet: Is this done?
Page TRA-16 Bullet 1: What are the impacts of widening?
Page TRA-16 Bullet 3: How
Page TRA-16, Sixth Bullet about LG Blvd and Samaritan: Intersection of National and
Samaritan should be a priority too.
Page TRA-16 Last Bullet: Why and how does this happen?
Page TRA-17 Bullet 1: Why?
Page TRA-17 Bullet 3: Discussion.
Page TRA-18 Lark Avenue improvements and Samaritan intersection: Are we really going to
widen the bridge?
Page TRA-19 v. Bullet 1: What are parking impacts and cost?
Page TRA-19 vii. Bullet 1: Discussion
Page TRA-31 -TRA Policy -6.2: Proposed wording modification - Develop a combined
transit station and bus depot for all the various public transit modes that serve the
$ew-art"To~r•n. This hub should be located ~~ ^° ~~°r +''^ "^~=~~t^•~•-' in a place and manner
that minimizes impacts on neighboring businesses and other activities. (T.P.7.4) (Would
we really want a multi modal station downtown?)
Page TRA-31 -Policy TRA-6.5: Don't want to lose parking.
Page TRA-32 and 33: Clarify need for secondary emergency egress in Policy TRA7.2 and 7.4
Page TRA-33 -Policy TRA-7.8: Should this be removed?
Page TRA-44 -Policy TItA-14.3: Might be too limiting. What if southern lots by the Post
Office are available for parking? Could these potentially be more than one story there?
Page TRA-45 -Action TRA-14.3: Is Action 14.3 necessary? Will it produce new info not in the
Kaku report?
Onen Snace, Parks and Recreation:
Page OSP-14 -Action OSP-4.2: Do vve want to pursue a community pool? Is high school
pool serving our needs? Should this be removed?
Page OSP-14 -Action OSP-4.3: Do vve need a study about a sport complex with Creekside
coming online. Should this be removed?
Page OSP-14 -Action OSP-4.7: This seems problematic. Should it be removed?
Page OSP-15 -Policy OSP-5.3: Is this necessary given our existing gathering places?
Page OSP-16 -Policy OSP-5.9: Should we set a minimum size ofmulti-family project that will
be required to have a tot lot?
OSP-18 -Action OSP-6.2: Do vve want to create a new agency?
Environment and Sustainability:
Page ENV-14 -Policy ENV-4.8: Does this need more clarification given the situation that
occurred on the Union subdivision property?
Page ENV-23 -Policy ENV-6.9: Does there need to be a certain size criteria for projects
before a construction management plan is required?
Page ENV-23 -Policy ENV-6.9 (c): Should this be removed?
Page ENV-29 -Policy 8.4 and 8.5: These seem to be contradictory -Should this be require
or encourage? Do vve need to define the size of development? Should the Town also be
required to do this if vve ask it of others, such as at the sports park?
Page ENV-29 -Policy ENV-8.4, Last Line: Should we change "and" to "and/or?"
Page ENV-30 -Action ENV-8.3: The criteria should be broadened to include more than just
VMT.
Page ENV-31 -Action ENV-9.2: Is it feasible to be a zero waste community?
Page ENV-32 -Policy ENV-10.1: Discussion on this Policy.
Pa~~e ENV-33 -Action ENV-10.1 (b): Is this reasonable?
Page ENS'-3-1-Action ENS'-10.2: Discussion on energy and ~~~ater efficiency audits. ~~'hy
study so mane strict enforcement requirements on energy efficiency ~~~hen ~~•e don't do the
same on health and safety hazards? Emphasis should be on educating, encouraging and
incenti~•izing ~~~hen possible.
Page ENV-3=I -Policy ENV-1 1.4: Discussion on gn-een roofs.
Page Eti~'-36 -Action ENt'-11.2 (a-e): Discussion on this policy. `'hat defines solar access.
Agree with protecting it, but ~~•hat about impacts to urban forest or adjacent properties?
Should ~ti-e change from absolute protection to more broad reference? Should ~~~e change to
"Consider amending?"
Human Services:
Pane HS-6 -Action HS-3.1: How do we know there's a need for town sponsored events for
youth? Action 3.3 is to conduct a study. We should wait for the results before committing town
to sponsorship of events.
Page HS-6 -Policy HS-3.1 and Action 3.2: Should the omit the use of specific names? Does the
word support imply monetary support? We need to be cautious about financial commitments.
Page HS-7 -Policy 4.1: Don't we do this now through Community Unity?
Page HS-7 -Action 4.2: This should be reworded. Supplement with what?
Page HS-7 -Action 4.3: Is this town responsibility or schools? Would it be better handled by
schools, CofC or NPO?
Page HS-8 -Action HS-5.3: Do we want to be this specific in Action HS-5.3, interactive indoor
play facilities?
Pa`~c HS-8 -Action HS-S.G: Theatre need is not just for youth.
Page HS-9 -Policy HS-6.3: How would businesses be involved in school conunutes?
Page HS-9, Background Information, Third Sentence: Confirm that we want to define seniors as
6~+. Los Gatos Saratoga Recreation uses Si+. HUD senior housing is either 55 or 62.
Page HS-4 and 9: Bc sure to encotn-a~e walking as well as bicycling throughout.
Pa;~e HS-l6 -Action HS-7.4: Do we (town) need to do this ~ti•hen Council on Aging and Aging
Sei-~•iccs Collaborative can do a better job'?
HS-17 -Action HS-8.2: Do we need to study requiring transportation at senior housing when
policy 8.2 already encourages it?
Page HS-40 -Policy HS-18.2: Is this realistic?
Page HS-46 - HS Action-21.1: Study the feasibility of constructing a reuse center for
building materials from remodeled and demolished buildings. (what is a reuse center...I
thought a recycling center, and Diane's question is would we really consider building one in
our Town?).
Other:
Why are Fire and Police in Human Services? Shouldn't they be in Safety?
There should be more historical context for police and fire in the Human Services element.
Overall organization -Move water, wastewater and garbage/recycling from Huina-i Services to
environment. Move police and fire to safety from Human Services.
Goals, Policies or Implementing Strategies from the 2000 Los Gatos General Plan not carried
forward into the Draft 2020 General Plan. UPDATED JULY 29, 2010
2000 General
Plan
Numbering
Goal
Policy of Action Language
Reason for Removal '~
, ,
L.P.1.3 Encourage economic and social activity- Redundant «~th Goal LG1.1
consistent with asmall-scale, small town
atmosphere and image.
L.P.1.G Encourage mixed use development consisting Redundant with L.P.7.2 -replaced b5• new
of residential above or behind non-residential policy LL'-10.4 in Dzaft 2020 General Plan
uses in commercial areas.
L.L1.1 Architectural Standards/Design Criteria: Use Redundant with CD.L1.1 -second sentence
adopted architectural standards and design became an action under same Goal
criteria to review development proposals.
Periodically review azchitectural standards and
design guidelines and update as necessary for
completeness, clarity, and effectiveness.
L.L1.5 Traffic Impact Policy: Review development It is not necessary for the General Plan to say
applications for consistency with the required the Town will implement adopted Town
findings for Traffic Impact Policy. policies.
L.L1.11 1~lixed Use Overla}~ Zone: Complete a study Staff direction to remove. The Town has a
to analyze a "mixed use" zone or overlay that ~Iix Use General Plan Land 'Use Designation.
will include a variety of businesses with 'Mixed use is allowed in all commercial zone
differing acti~`ity cycles to :provide interest and districts with a CUP; therefore, a study is not
destination points to the residents. necessary.
L:L1.13 Cornmunitl• Education: Continue to educate Staff direction to remove -Staff meets
the :general community as to quality design and informally with many communit}' groups
,planning ,practices by sponsozing community regarding the Town's Planning Process, which
forums with expert speakers, design charrettes addresses this stzategy.
and seminars.
L.'L1.14 Story Poles: Require the installation of story Redundant with L.!.4.12 -replaced by new
poles prior to the approval of .new ipolicy CD-17.8 in Draft 2D20 General Plan
development as required by Town resolution.
L.L1.18 Planning Information: Place on the Town's Staff direction to remove -Completed
website the General Plan, speufic plans, the
zoning code, the Boulevard Plan, design
guidelines and other planning documents.
L.P.2.1 Review all development applications in light of Combined with CD.I.1.1
the overall mass and scale of the development.
LL2.3 Condu~7 a study to consider amending the B~IIP Completed
Program to set the required number of B~bIPs units
bared on total square footage of a project in addt'tion to
setting the requirements bared on a percentage of the
number of market rate units.
L.I.2.4 1~Ia.Yi.mum House Size: Consider a maximum Staff direction to remove -1laximum house
house size regulation that incozporates variow sizes are in the Hillside Standards and
methods for limiting house size. Guidelines (HSG) and each Zone Districts
limits house sizes through a F_~R.
Attachment 2
2000 General
Plan
Numbering Goal, Policy or Action Language Reason for Removal
L.L3.1 _~rclutectural Stindards;'Design Criteria: L'se Redundant «ith CD.L1.1
adopted architectural standards and design
criteria to review development proposals.
L.1.3.4 Demolition of Historic Structures: Refer Redundant with L.L4.~1-now replaced 65~
zoning approvals with demolition of historic policy CD-12.~ in Draft 2020 General Plan
structures to Historic Preservation Committee.
L.L35 Traffic Impact Policy: Review development Redundant with L.L1.5 - It is not necessary
applications for consistency with the required for the General Plan to say the Tourn will
findings for Traffic Impact Policy. implement adopted Town policies.
L.P.3.8 Discourage corridor lots. Confusing with L.I.3.9; recommended deleting
L.L3.10 Story- Poles: Require the erection of story Redundant with L.L4.12 -now replaced by
poles prior to the approval of new policy CD-17.8 in Draft 2020 General Plan
development.
L.P.~.2 Ensure that new development is a positive Redundant with CD.P.1.7
addition to the Town's environment and does
not detract from the nature and character of
appropriate nearby established development.
L.P.~t.3 ~1•aintain the Town's capacity to meet its Redundant with Housing Element
housing needs as identified in the Housing
Element.
L.P.~.6 Preserve and protect historic structures and Redundant with L.P.1.9
use special care in reviewing new buildings or
remodels in their vicinity to address
compadbilin- issues and potential impacts.
L.L-1.2 Development Review: Review development Redundant with CD.L1.1
proposals against adopted Residential Design
Standards.
L.L~.3 \laintain \eighborhood Character: The The Town will follow adopted Town policies.
deciding body shall use F .-1.R. and adopted
residential design guidelines to mountain
existing neighborhood character.
L.I.~.4 Demolition of Historic Structures: Refer Redundant with L.I.Q.-1
zoning approvals with demolition of historic
structures to Historic Preservation Committee.
L.L4.~ In-fill Findings: Review development It is not necessan• for the General Plan to say
applications for consistency with die required the Town will implement adopted Town
findings for the In-Fill Polio-. policies.
L.L4.6 Traffic Impact Findings: Revie~c development It is not necessan• Eor the General Plan to say
applications for consistent}- with the required the Town will implement adopted Town
findings for the Traffic Impact Polic}-. policies.
2000 General
Plan
Numbering Goal, Policy or Action Language Reason for Removal
L.I.4.8 \eighborhood Specific Design Standards: Staff direction to rzmot-e - 71-iz To~~ n does
Prepare residential design standards that are not have die resources to prepare residential
neighborhood specific to protect the unique design guidelines for each neighborhood
character of various neighborhoods within the Town. The Town utilizes the
tluoughout the Town. 'Residential Design Guidelines and the Town
Consulting architect to provide direction for
neighborhood planning.
L.L4.9 Design Standards: Pre,paxe design standards Staff directioa to remove - _~ecommodated in
for replacement single family dwellings that Policy LU-S.G.
replicates the size, scale and mass of the
original structure.
L:L4.10 New Historic and Conservation Districts: Staff direction to remove - \o new distzicts
Identify, survey and adopt new'historic are contemplated.
districts.
L:L4.13 Update Design Guidelines: Update and revise Staff direction to remove -Completed
the adopted Residential Design Guidelines and
consider incorporating illustrations.
L.L4.1-1 Update the General Plan's Housing Element Town must do this for the next Housing
after the demographic breakouts of the 2000 Element update cycle anyway.
census are available.
L.LS.-I Information Handouts: Develop handouts and Redundant with CD.L1.5
informational materials for use by residents
and businesses.
L.LG.1 Threshold Floor area: Study amending the Staff direction to remove - lvo needed.
Town Code ~to establish a tlueshold floor area Commercial square footage is controlled via
that would require a conditional use permit for F:-iR.
new businesses.
L.T.6.2 Commercial Rent ,mediation: Study whether Staff direction to remove - No interested has
some form of commercial sent mediation been expressed in the last 1~0 dears to pttxsue
would benefit the community by,protecting sut<h a program.
small businesses and locally owned shops.
L.L7.2 Development Review Process: Revise the action completed
development re~dew process for exterior
improvements to existing buildings to allow
approval by staff subject to compliance with
Los Gatos Boulevard Design Standards.
L.P.7.-} auto related uses currently existing shall be Redundant with L.P.7.3
allowed to remain indefinitely.
L.P.7.8 Commercial and mieed use development north This is addressed in the ~`LR Element.
of Lark shall be in keeping with the Vasona
Light Rail and Route 85 Element, the worth
40 Specific Plan (when adopted) and shall
provide/incorporate Boulevard, Downtown
and regional transit access accordingly.
L.L7.4 Land Use Polic}=: Develop land use polity to This is the General Plan and, as such, should
provide clear direction to potential developers. by law provide adequate land use policy to
potential developers.
L.I.7.~ Los Gatos Boulevard Plan: Implement the Los It is not necessan- for the General Plan to sa}=
Gatos Boulevard Plan. the Town will implement adopted Town
policies.
L.L7.8 forth oFLos Gatos-_-llmaden Road: Redundant with L.P.7.3
Encourage new• or relocating auto-related
businesses to relocate to available propem=
north of Los Gatos .~lmaden Road.
LP.2.1 Ertahllth iammunity derigeguideliner that promote Campletzd
mtd proteit the aak~ra! amenities in the TOWIl.
L.P.8.4 Emphasize preserving the natural land forms Combined with CD.P.2.3
by minimizing grading. Grading should be
limited only to the area needed to place the
main house on the propem.
L:P.8.~ :1llow= development that is only Staff direction to remove -Does not make
environmentally suitable to such use. sense.
L.P.8.9 Encourage innovative and efficient This pohry is actually a goal. It is not needed
management of natural resources. since we hate an extensive set of goals focused
on specific natural resources.
L.L8.1 Grading Permits: Require :-lrchitecture and Staff direction to remove. I'he Town requires
Site approval for grading permits. an ~rchitecnue and Site application for
grading over SO cubic yards.
L.L$.3 Story Poles: Require the erection of story Redundant with L.L4.12 -now replaced by
,poles prior to the approval of new policy CD-17.8
.development.
L.L8.5 Limit Size of Hillside Houses: emend the Staff direction to remove -Completed in the
Town Code to limit the size of houses in the Hillside Standards and Guidelines.
hillside area.
L.L8.10 Hillside Design Standard: Houses shall be Combined with CD.P.2.3
designed to step down the contours rather
than be designed Eor flat pads.
L.I:8.12 Grading Moratorium: Prohibit grading in Staff direction to remove - PP`Y/ reviews
hillside areas between October 1 and l~pril 15. grading during this time of the year on a case
Install interim erosion control measures shown by case basis; therefore, a moratorium is not
on die approved interim erosion control plan necessar}'.
b}' October 1.
T.L1.5 Land L'se Patterns: Periodically review die This should happen as part of regular GP
impact that future regional and Town land use Updates.
patterns will have on the Town's circulation
system.
Santa Cruz Interchange: Studs the impacts of Staff direction to remove -This would not be
T.L1.9 closing the Santa Cruz .-lvenue interchange at considered
Hi hwati• 17. .
2000 General
Plan
Numbering Goal, Policy or Action Language Reason for Removal
Staff dirccnon to remove -There is a Mate la~c-
Bic}-cle Loops: Provide bic}-cle sensitive loops regturement for installation of bicycle
T.L1.15 at all future and any retrofitted signalized detection. It's unnecessary to be included in
intersections in accordance with ~~'.~ GP. _~ bicycle sensor could be loops, video
technical guidelines. detection, ar other devices.
T.P.4.7 Encourage development proposals to include Redundant with T.L6.6
amenities that encourage alternate forms of
transportation that reduce pollution or traffic
congestion as a form of Community Benefit
(e.g. bicycle lockers/racks, showers, dedicated
van-pool or car-pool parking areas, dedicated
shuttle ser4ices, innovative bus shelter
designs).
T.P.~F.10 Preserve the Route 85 median for mass transit. Redundant with policies in the ~%asona Light
Rail Element
T.P.~.11 Encourage and support the development of a Redundant with policies in the Vasona Light
mass transit facilin• in the Route 85 comdor. Rail Element
T.L=1.1 Community Benefit: Encourage developers to Conflicts with T.L6.6, which requires this
contribute to or provide nearby improvements action
in pedestrian, bicycle and wheelchair access.
T.PS.1 Encourage the enhancement and development Redundant with T.G.5.2
of multiple use trails within the Town.
T.P.S. Trail System: Complete the Town's trail and Redundant with new.~ction TR_~-11.1
bikeways system as shown in the General and
Hillside Specific Plans.
Staff direction to remove -This is one of
'.Pedestrian Safet}•: Study the possibility of using various pedestrian safer}-/traffic calming tools
'I'.I:~.18 "bulbouts" on arterials to calm traffic and staff regtrlarl}- review and monitor based on
increase pedestrian safety. policy accident reports and traffic engineering
:best practice. It seems unnecessary to be
sin led out for a s ecial study.
Consider new parking facilities and .or other Redundant with policies under Goal TR~'~-14
alternatives (such as developing alternative in Draft 2020 General Plan
T?P.63 modes of transportation and providing
effective incentives to use them) to ease
arkin con estion Downtown.
T.P.75 Develop a methodolog}- and implement a accomplished through the Traffic Impact
review procedure Eor relating future Polic}-
development decisions to the carving capacity
of Town streets.
Traffic Improvements: Traffic improvements Staff duecrion to remove -Completed.
within the downtown area are necessary to
accommodate existing traffic as well as future
T.I-7.1 increases. Among the improvements identified
during the planning process, those to be
implemented are described in the approved
Downtown O erarional Traffic Stud ~.
2000 General
Plan
Numbering
Goal, Policy or Action Language
Reason for Removal
~-.L1.1 ~Ias~ Transit: Cooperate and coordinate with Redundant wide ~-.L1
all appropriate agencies to facilitate
construction of mass transit.
Residential Development applications will be Deleted -this is the purpose of the General
~'.L2.1 reviewed for consistency with the General Plan. _~11 applications should be reviewed for
Plan. consistency with the General Plan.
~'.P.3.1 Sites for recreational open space and placfields Redundant with OSP policies about access and
shall hate convenient access and be designed adjacent residential land uses
with adequate buffers if adjacent to residential
uses.
~'.G.4.2 To encourage the best mixture of residential Redundant with ~'.G.4.1
and nonresidential uses within the area which
achieves the least impact on traffic, noise,
schools, etc.
~-.P.-1.3 Major development projects shall be processed This is a Town-wide policy in the CD
as planned developments. Element.
~'.P.~1.4 The design of structures and open space shall Redundant with Town-wiide policies in CD
be compatible with the small-to~cn character Element.
of Los Gatos.
~'.I5.2 Process major development projects as This is a Town-wide polio- in the CD
planned developments. Element.
~'.IS.6 Evaluate projects as to how the built Redundant with Town-wide policies in CD
environment naturally blends into the Element
surrounding landscape in such areas as: scale,
materials, hardscape, lights and landscape.
~".P.G.3 The maintenance road along the east side of Redundant with ~'.L6.3
Los Gatos Creek shall function for emergency
access.
~".P.6.-1 Develop apedestrian/bicycle bridge across Redundant wide ~-.L35 and ~-.L6.-1
Los Gatos Creek and a continuous trail system
along the east side of Los Gatos Creek from
Lazk eve. to the northern Town limit in
keeping with the Trails and Bikeways Master
Plan.
F.LG1 Orient and site residential units to take Redundant with ~'.P.6.1
advantage of the amenities of the Los Gatos
Creek Trail system and to preserve watersheds,
riparian habitat and wildlife corridors.
t'.P.7.1 The Town shall guide future development in mot necessan- to re-state the legal function of
the sub-area. the General Plan
t'.L7.1 Design standards: Prepare development Redundant with ~'.L-1.1
standards that include criteria and provisions
for comprehensive design review, recognizing
the area as a "gateway" to Los Gatos.
~'.L?.3 Planned developments: Process major Tlus is a Town-wide policy in the CD
,., . ;~ ~pments as planned developments. Element.
2000 General
Plan
Numbering Goal, Policy or Action Language Reason for Removal
~~.I.-.6 Cut-through traffic: Ingress and egress shall be Redundant with Town-wide neighborhood
designed to m;nimi~e opportunities for traffic traffic calming policies in the Transportation
impacts on surrounding residential Element
neighborhoods.
~'.P.8.3 Development shall incorporate features to Redundant with ~".L6.2
buffer dwelling units from noise and other
impacts.
~'.L8.3 Planned developments: Process major This is a Town-wide policy in the CD
development proposals as planned Element.
developments.
~%.L8.~ ~~ldopted Plans: Evaluate proposed uses and It is not necessary for the General Plan to say
designs to ensure they are consistent with the the Town will implement adopted plans.
Los Gatos Boulevard Plan and Design
Standards Plan.
~'.L8.S Noise:.~pplications for projects that front on Redundant with ~".L6.2, which has been
Los Gatos Blvd and/or back up to property revised to require a noise study
on National we. or Camino del Sol shall
include a noise study proposing mitigation
measures to reduce noise impacts on existing
and future residents.
l~ieeds assessment:.-~ssess the geed for
O.L1.5 additional developed parks and playfields in action completed
the Town of Los Gatos.
O.L1.3 Safety: Use the policies and implementation It is not necessary for the General Plan to sap
measures of the Safety Element to restrict the Town will implement adopted Town
development in safety hazard areas. policies.
O.P.3.1 Provide open space in residential areas. Redundant with Goal O.G.3.1
O.P.3.-1 Provide access to natural open space, First part redundant with Goal O.G.2.1,
protecting the safety, privacy, and security of second part combined with O.P.2.1
adjacent residential areas.
O.P.-4.1 Preserve the natural open space character of Redundant with the Goal OP~.3
prominent visible hillside lands.
O.P.-1.-3 Require the provision of permanent open Redundant with O.L4?
space in hillside developments.
O.L=4.1 Ridge Lines: Preservation of ridge lines, trees madded "ridgeline preservation" "tree
and open space along scenic roadways shall be preservation" and "open space preservation"
considered in re~zewing every proposed to list oEreview topics in CD.L1.1
development or circulation system
improvement.
hillside Standards: Expand Hillside
'O..I:4.3 Development Standards to presen-e natural Staff direction to remove -Completed
open space as part of residential development .
standazds.
C.P.2.6 Promote landscaping that is based on Redundant with CD.P.1.1
principles of water conservation.
C.P?.8 Limit land use intensity in areas with Staff direction to remove
inadequate water supply.
2000 General
Plan
Numbering Goal, Polity or Action Language Reason for Removal
~ C.P.~.L Require new• development to demonstrate ho«- Redundant «ith CD.P.I.l~ and adopted
it makes efficient use of water. Ordinance
C.P.2.13 ~~-ork with Town businesses and residents to Redundant with C.G.2.1, C.G.2.4, C.G.2.3 and
encourage water conservation. S.P.3.~
Coordination: Pianning efforts should be
C.L2.3 coordinated with the Santa Clara Valley ~~'ater Redundant with GP.2.9
District.
C.L2.8 Require landscaping in new developments and This is ahead}- required by- the «'ater
remodels that is based on the principles of Efficiency Landscaping Ordinance.
water consen-ation, including the use of
drought tolerant plants, limited turf areas and
water conserving techniques.
C.L2.11 Enforce protection of riparian corridors. Redundant with Goal C.G.2.6 and Police
C.P.2.1 ~+
Encourage reduction oEair pollution by Staff direction to remove. \ot feasible since it
C.P.3.=1 encouraging the use of the Route 83 corridor is in the northern portion of die Town.
for cross-town circulation.
C.P.-1.3 Preserve wetlands. Redundant with Goal C.G.2.6
Require that specific landscaping plans
C.P.4.9 accompan}• development projects in town and Staff direction to remo~xe - ~ll ready required.
hillside areas.
C.P.-1.10 allow no more dean minimal landscaping and Redundant with CD.P.2.3 and CD.P.2.6
turf in hillside areas.
C.P.-1.11 Encourage preservation and use of native plant This is not necessan• since GL4.1 requires
species in hillside areas. native plants throughout the Town, not onh• in
hillside areas.
C.P.-1.12 Enforce the grading standards set forth in die It is not necessary Eor the General Plan to say
Hillside Specific Plan and Hillside the Town will implement adopted plans and
Development Standards and Guidelines. standards.
C.L-1.2 Tree preservation ordinance: Town ordinances Redundant with C.P.-1.2
shall Encourage the maintenance of specimen
or heritage trees and limit dte removal of all
trees.
C.L4S apply- the Hillside Specific Plan and Hillside It is not necessary Eor the General Plan to say
Development Standards and Guidelines to the Town will implement adopted plans.
ensure minimal grading, and to protect native
plants and landscape vistas.
C.P.~.~ Establish sound land management practices This is accomplished through the 2020
that will improve wildlife habitats. General Plan.
GL~.2 Enforcement: Local, state and national It is not necessan Eor the General Plan to say
regulations protecting against the destruction that the Town will enforce local, state and
of wildlife and wildlife habitat shall be strictly- national regulations.
enforced.
C.P.7.3 Design structures to ma.~imize natural heating Redundant wide new PoGcv E\~~-10.6
and cooling (passive solar heating and cooling.)
C.P.?.-1 utilize landscaping Eor passive cooling and Redundant with new Polio- E\~--10.'
protection from prevailing winds.
2000 General
Plan
Numbering Goal, Policy or Action Language Reason for Removal
C.L?? Energt- Rating S}-stem: The Town, in ~ Tlus has been accomplished through the
conjunction with the local board of realtors adoption of the GreenPoint Rating System.
and local developers and architects, shall
participate in the development and
implementation of an energy efficiency rating
system for existing and new residential
structures to assist home buyers in selecting
energy efficient homes.
N.G.1.1 To presen-e the quiet atmosphere of the Redundant with ~.G.1.2
Town.
Pursue reduction oEindi~idual auto use by .ltedund:mt with T.P.~.6
requiring a plan for alternatives to auto use
N.P.1.1Q whenever the traffic generated by any
development would result in an adverse
increase in air and noise ollution.
N.P.1.11 adopt standards or criteria for the review of State standards are used.
noise impacts.
i`;.I.1.1~ Community noise survey: The Town shall Redundant with NI.12
periodically conduct a community noise
survey.
h1.L1.17 Future Study: Studs- a ban on gas-powered
garden and construction tools and equipment Staff direction to remove -Council has not
within the Town. supported this program.
1`i.I1.19 Establish standards that address ongoing fiction completed
operational noise.
S.G.1.1 To reduce the potential for injuries, damage to Redundant with SG1.2
property, economic and social displacement,
and loss of life resulting from earthquakes, and
other various forms of geologic failures
including mud flows and landslides.
S.L2.2 Site design: In areas identified as potentially Redundant with SP 2.3
susceptible to fire hazards, require special
building and site design by ordinance.
The Tourn shall study potential impacts Emergence response plans have been
S I 3:2 associated with Failure of dam facilities and prepared; this action is completed.
shall develop and maintain emergenry
res onse ]ans in the event of such failures.
S.P.6.1 Require and maintain effective circulation in It is not necessary for the General Plan to say
hillsides in accordance with the Hillside the Town w-ill implement adopted plan.
Specific Plan.
S.L65 Include the Town's emergency- plan in this Emergence plan is incorporated by reference,
General Plan by reference. therefore this action is com leted.
Emergenry road design: Design road systems Redundant with T.P.3.1
S.I.6.6 to provide reliable access to remote areas both
for access by emergency vehicles and egress by
residents fleein from a disaster.
CD.P.1.3 .void abmpt changes in scale and densit<-. Redundant wid: (i~.P l
2000 General
Plan
Numbering
Goal, Policy or Action Language
Reason for Removal
CD.P.1.9 Building, landscape and hardscape materials Reduundant Frith CD.P.1.-
shall be used that will reinforce the sense of
unity of a neighborhood and blend with the
natural setting.
CD.P.1.18 Hardscape and formal landscape areas in Redundant with CD.P.2.3 and CD.P.2.6
hillsides shall be minimized.
Design Review: Design standards shall be co,uidered
for every prvjeit. These standards shun be periodiial}~
reviewed and
updated. Sta~reports shall include a design review that
refers to brrt is not limited to the following:
A. Building architeiture (in keeping with the
slN7'otlltdtng
neighborhood)
CD.I.1.1, B. Utilities
C L1117dSCapt,lg
All projects are reviewed using these applicable criteria.
0.1.x.1, and D. Streets mrd sidewal,~r
E. Signing
F. lighting
G. Historical signifrcan~e
H. Disabled accessibi/it}~
L Sitiug /Orientation
1. rbfatenals and color
K Functionality
L Ene e u7eney
CD.L1.4 Adopt design guidelines for landscaping; Staff direction to remove -Completed
includin hardsca e.
Maintenance contracts. ~1 five-year Staff direction to remove -Difficult to
maintenance contract to protect newly planted administer.
CD.L1.9 and existing trees shall be required as a
condition of approval for all development
a lications exce t sin le Tamil ~ dwellin s.
CD.I.1.11 The Los Gatos Boulevard Plan shall be used to It is not necessary to have a General Plan
evaluate projects within the area it covers. polity to follow other adopted Town policies-
CD.L1.12 Evaluate projects against applicable design Redundant with CD.L1.1
guidelines.
Consider amending the zoning ordinance to Staff direction to remove -Completed
CD.L"1.'13 apply hillside standards to sloping lots, even if
zoned other than HR or RC.
CD.L"1.14 Consider amending die zoning ordinance to Staff direction to remove -Completed
define slo in lot.
Adopt and continually update exceptional Staff direction to remove -Completed
hillside design standards and guidelines.
Expand the issues currently addressed by the
Town's Hillside Design Standards to include
~CD.L2.1 siting, orientation, materials, size, fencing,
lighting, wildlife habitats and migration
corridors, and the amount of formal
landscaping and hardscape that may be
installed.
10
2000 General
Plan
Numbering Goal, Policy or Action Language Reason fot Removal
CD.P.3.~ Encourage the presen-ation and restoration of Redundant with L.P.1.9 and CDP.3?'35
historic sites, and structures and architecturally
valuable structures.
CD.L3.4 Historic Codes: Continue to use Town Code It is not necessary for the General Plan to say
provisions to protect and designate historic the Town will implement the Town Code.
sites. Encourage the use of the State Historic The second sentence under this policy is
Building Code for any structural changes to an required ancnvay.
historic building.
CD,P.4.1 Provide for apedestrian-oriented downtown Redundant with T.I'.7.3
core.
CD.P.-1.2 Establish and maintain strong boundaries Same as L.P.6.4 in Land lise
between the commercial area and adjacent
residential neighborhoods.
CD.P.;t.S Provide dlrectlatal;igns to ident~ the downtown area Completed
and togutde residents and visitor; to downtown
de;tinationr.
CD.P.•1.6 Preserve historically, architecturally or socially Redundant with CD.G.3.1, L.P.-+.6, and
significant buildings. L.P.1.9
CD.P.-1.9 Develop and promote pedestrian-, bicycle-, Redundant with numerous other policies that
and transit-oriented supplements to parking. support pedestrians, bicycling and transit
Adopt controls to ensure that new building; built on Completed with the Commercial Deign Guide/cries.
CD.I.~.1 E and etii.rting Uaimtt parcels stren3then the form and image of
C. the CBD and adopt architectural design controlJ-
related to the rehabilitation of buildings within the
CBD.
rtilodiJiiation; and improvements to the Town Platia to Completed
CD.L-1.1 G heighten its role as lbe southern Visual anchor and
atew ~ to the downtown area.
Pedestrians: Specify building designs and site Accomplished through Commercial Design
CDI.4.4 plans that encourage and enhance pedestrian Gtudelines
circulation.
Bicycle Parking: Require bicycle packing in Redundant with T.I:5.15 and T.T:5.16
CD.I:~F.IlO ,private parking lots and pro~7de bic}•cle
arkin in all ublic lots in downtown.
CD.L~F.1-1 Stxeetscape Plan: Implement the Downtown It is not necessary for the General Plan to say
Streetscape and Plaza Master Plans. the Town w-ill implement its adopted plans.
HS.L1.2 Continue to use the local media, Town website Replaced by new policy HS-7.3 in Draft 2020
and Town newsletter to promote senior General Plan
pcograms.
HS.L4.1 Study the feasibilit}' oETowri-supported Staff direction to remove
performing arts events.
HS.P.~.1 Provide the mirurnum library facilit<- standards Removed since this facility is already planned
of the _~merican Library association.
HS.P.~.2 Build a new library facility that will be efficient, Removed since this facility is already planned
flexible and expandable to accommodate the
changing informational and educational needs
of the communin-.
11
HS.L~.1 Proceed «ith planning for a new lihran- Eacilin- Remo~-ed since this facilin- is alreadc planned
that «ill acconunodate changing technology-
and increased inFormation and education
need: of Los Gatos for the next Wrenn- rears.
\-ew Genera/ Development slut!/ not significaraly deplete, Redrutdant. Tbi~ ttate~ the ~~rnfe t{,in3 a~ Poli~_
Plmr Poli}~ damage or alter existing wildlife habitat. E t 1 -1S
E\"I "--1.1 (C.P.4.8 -revised)
12