2011080105 - Staff Report - Albright (proposed Netflix campus)DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
July 25, 2011
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
GREG LARSON, TOWN MANAGER
MEETING DATE: 08/1/11
ITEM NO: 5,
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PD-10-005; AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION ND-11-004. PROJECT LOCATION: 90-160 ALBRIGHT
WAY AND 14600 WINCHESTER BOULEVARD. PROPERTY OWNER:
LG BUSINESS PARK, LLC. APPLICANT: JOHN R. SHENK.
A. CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO MODIFY THE EXISTING
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW THE POTENTIAL FOR A MIX
OF LAND USES. THE PROJECT MAY CONSIST OF OFFICE ALONE OR
A MIX OF OFFICE AND MULTI -FAMILY AND/OR SENIOR
RESIDENTIAL USES, SUBJECT TO DEFINED TRIGGERS. THE
PROJECT COULD INCLUDE UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 550,000 SQUARE
FEET OF OFFICE SPACE OR A COMBINATION OF LESS OFFICE
SPACE WITH RESIDENTIAL USES. RESIDENTIAL USES COULD
INCLUDE MULTI -FAMILY AND/OR SENIOR UNITS UP TO A
MAXIMUM OF 168 UNITS ON PROPERTY ZONED CM:PD. APNS 424-
31-053, 054, 063, 424-32-038, 045, 049, 054, 059, 060, AND 063.
B. CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT.
C. CONS I I )ER ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT AND MITIGATION MONITORING
AND REPORTING PROGRAM.
RECOMMENDATION:
After opening and closing the public hearing and asking the Clerk to read the titles of the
proposed ordinances, it is recommended that the Town Council move and act on the following:
1. Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment 18), and adopt the
Resolution certifying the environmental document (Attachment 34) (Mitigated Negative
Declaration previously adopted on June 20, 2011).
PREPARED BY: � Wendie R. Rooney, Director of Community Development
Reviewed by: QS‘ Assistant Town Manager Town Attorney
Clerk Administrator Finance ommunity Development
N:\DEV\TC REPORTS \2011 Whright8-] Fi nal.doc
Reformatted: 5/30/02
PAGE2
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
2. Make the required findings supporting the zone change (Attachment 10) and approve the
application subject to the performance standards included in the Planned Development
Ordinance (Attachment 29).
3. Move to waive the reading of the zone change Ordinance.
4. Move to introduce the Ordinance to effectuate the zone change.
5. Make the required findings for approval of the Development Agreement (Attachment 10),
approve the Development Agreement (Attachment 14), and authorize the Town Manager to
execute the Development Agreement on behalf of the Town.
6. Move to waive the reading of the Development Agreement Ordinance.
7. Move to introduce the Ordinance for the Development Agreement (Attachment 32).
BACKGROUND:
On June 20, 2011, the Town Council reviewed the applicant's proposal, accepted the Planning
Commission's meeting minutes, approved the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, and continued the matter to August 1, 2011. While a
consensus was not achieved on all of these items, individual Council members provided the
following comments:
• The proposal should only contain Class A office space with a maximum square footage of
550,000 square feet;
• Maximum height should be 55 feet absent the applicant demonstrating the height of
buildings in excess of 55 feet with story poles or some other mechanism that illustrates
that a height of up to 84 feet 6 inches is appropriate;
• Review the non -traffic community benefit and provide alternatives if an all office project
is ultimately approved;
• Consider shortening the term length of the Development Agreement.
DISCUSSION:
The project applicant has proposed to rezone the property by modifying the existing Planned
Development "CM:PD" (Controlled Manufacturing with a Planned Development overlay zone).
This change would allow for redevelopment of the site for expanded office use (up to 550,000
square feet) or to a mix of less office and residential (senior housing units) land uses.
The developer is requesting the approval of:
• A Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(the Council certified the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
Reporting Program (MMRP) at the June 20, 2011, Council meeting);
• A modification of the existing PD to allow the potential for a mix of land uses and
increased building heights; and
• A Development Agreement.
PAGE 3
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
Following the June 20, 2011, public hearing, the applicant submitted a letter (Attachment 27)
and additional development plans illustrating the proposed architecture and layout for Phase I of
the proposed development (See Attachment 29). The following analysis serves as a supplement
to the original June 20, 2011, staff report and desk item, which outlined the proposed changes to
the number of residential units that was provided at the June 20, 2011, Town Council meeting.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL:
A. Residential
Prior to the June 20, 2011, Town Council meeting, the applicant proposed a modification to
the PD application, which resulted in reducing the number of potential residential units from
516 multi -family units or 600 senior units to 168 multi -family and/or senior units on no more
than seven acres. Considering the revision was a reduction in units, it was determined that
subsequent Planning Commission reconsideration was not necessary. Pursuant to the July
21, 2011, justification letter (Attachment 27), the applicant is now proposing to designate the
potential residential uses to senior -only, and would not apply for a building permit until
2016. The applicant has also proposed to reduce the maximum height of the senior housing
from 70 feet to 50 feet. In addition, the number of units would be reduced to maintain the
same density if the development were to occur on less than seven acres, inclusive of all
affordable housing requirements or density bonuses. Consistent with the Town's definition
of senior, the units would require at least one of the tenants be 55 years or older. Attachment
29 contains a recommended draft PD Ordinance which allows for the 168 senior residential
units as a permitted use after five years from the PD approval. Attachment 30 contains an
alternative draft PD Ordinance which allows for the applicant to apply for a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) for the 168 senior residential units after five years from the PD approval.
While the zoning for the property (as stipulated in the Attachment 30) would include
residential uses as a conditional use, approval of a residential component would be a
discretionary decision of the Town. Generally the Planning Commission has the authority to
approve CUPs for most land uses; however, in the draft PD Ordinance (Attachment 30), this
decision would be vested with the Town Council. Attachment 31 is an alternative draft PD
Ordinance which eliminates all residential use, including senior housing, as either a permitted
or conditional use.
B. Office and R&D
While the applicant is not proposing any changes from the previous application, more
detailed site plans, elevations, and photo simulations of Phase I have been provided. Phase I
contains two office buildings labeled D and E and a parking structure. Building E is an
approximately 156,000 square foot, 84 foot 6 inch tall, five -story building that is located
towards the northwest side of the site and would parallel Winchester Blvd. Building D is an
approximately 128,000 square foot, 75 foot tall, four-story building that is located to the
south of Building E and is situated at an angle from Winchester Blvd. A three-story, 35 foot
PAGE 4
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
tall, parking structure is also proposed for the northern end of the site and adjacent to
Highway 85 (See Sheet Al of Attachment 29). The parking structure may also include
architectural elements on the upper level which could be used to support photo -voltaic
panels. An outside amenity area that contains dining tables, a plaza, pedestrian paths,
landscaping and open space is proposed to be located between Buildings D and E. The
outdoor space would help to create the campus environment and continue the wooded
character of the existing site development. A third -story bridge, similar to the bridge at the
existing Netflix property, would connect Buildings D and E. Finally, a predominately single -
loaded row of surface parking would be provided adjacent to Winchester Blvd. The parking
and drive aisle would be designed to protect the existing redwood tree screen along the
Winchester Blvd. frontage.
As illustrated in View 2 (Sheet A6 of Attachment 29), both buildings would be significantly
buffered from Winchester Blvd. and properties to the west by the existing, predominately
redwood tree screen. All healthy redwoods and other significant trees in the Winchester
Blvd. frontage screen would be retained except for those that would be removed with the
construction of the new Albright Way entry just south of proposed Building D. The
proposed parking structure would also be screened by the existing vegetation along the
northern property line and additional landscaping would be incorporated as needed to
maximize the buffering of the structure from the freeway and properties north. View 1
(Sheet A6 of Attachment 29) illustrates the views from the north (near the existing Netflix
Gateway Buildings at Winchester Circle).
The applicant has sited the Phase I buildings in the proposed locations for two reasons. First
the site is constrained by the existing buildings and lease committed to the tenants in these
buildings. There is one existing building with long -lease tenants directly behind and parallel
to Building E. This precludes constructing Building E at an angle to Winchester. Moreover,
the proposed location of the taller structure, Building E, is further north on the site and
generally sits at the terminus of the Highway 85 Winchester off -ramp. Consequently, the
two most adjacent developments on the west side of Winchester Blvd. (Smith Ranch Court
and Courtside Athletic Club) would be located closer to the lower height structure, Building
D, which is also angled to Winchester Blvd. to reduce its visual mass. Finally, as indicated
in the applicant's letter of justification (Attachment 27), the project architect recommends
siting one building parallel to Winchester and one at an angle to create the campus
enviromnent.
Both buildings incorporate additional setbacks for the upper stories, and, thus, create a
"wedding cake" appearance, which reduces the overall building mass. Pursuant to the
proposed upper story setback development standards in the PD Ordinance, the two buildings
are as follows:
PAGE 5
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
Building D
Building E
Approx. Upper Story Max. Allowable % of
Area Setback 1st Floor Area
Ratios
First Floor 34,010 100%
Second Floor 34,010 100% 100-95%
Third Floor 31,475 93% 95-90%
Fourth Floor 28,538 84% 90-85%
Total 128,033
First 34,680 100%
Second 34,680 100% 100-95%
Third 30,265 87% 95-90%
Fourth 29,336 85% 90-85%
Fifth 27,310 79% 85-80%
Total 156,271
Bldg D 128,033
Bldg E 156,271
Total SF 284,304
The following analysis is based on the applicant's Phase I proposal for one four-story and
one five -story building. All three of the attached PD Ordinances (Attachment 29, 30, and 31)
allow for a maximum height of 85 feet and five stories. Council should provide direction to
staff and the Planning Commission regarding the maximum allowed height and number of
stories for future phases. Should that maximum height be lower than 85 feet and/or that the
maximum number of stories should be less than five, staff will modify the PD Ordinance to
reflect the Council's direction.
C. Office and R&D Architecture
While the applicant is not able to obtain architecture and site approval at this time, the plans
submitted with this report include a conceptual site plan, photo simulations, renderings, and
architecture elevations (Sheets AO through A10 of Attachment 29) which are typical of what
is submitted for architecture and site approval. The proposed architecture reflects many of
the qualities of the existing Netflix Gateway development. While similar to the existing
Gateway project, but not identical, building mass and form is well articulated through the use
of varying window placement and styles, arcades, upper story setbacks, exterior balconies,
varied color palette, and architectural features that frame primary and secondary entryways.
A glass or transparent third -story bridge connects the southern end of building E with the
northern end of Building D.
PAGE 6
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
D. Consulting Architect Conceptual Review
Although the Town does not typically have the Town consulting architect, Larry Cannon,
review conceptual plans, staff felt that a preliminary review may help the Town Council
provide direction to staff and the Planning Commission for subsequent architecture and site
reviews. Larry Cannon's comments are provided in Attachment 28. Overall, Larry Cannon
found the plans to be a good start; and with some changes that he and the project architect
discussed, he believes it would result in a very good project. Larry Cannon identified the
following six issues/points with this conceptual review:
1. Driveway entry to the first two buildings: Requires some further refinement to the
building corner of the southerly building which will be a prominent visual corner.
The same is true for the southwest comer of the northerly building.
2. Building Height: In regards to the proposed building heights, Larry Cannon
suggested the following:
a) Eliminating the two-story bay expression on the third and fourth floors in favor of a
punched opening look to decrease the visual height of the building.
b) Changing the color of the third and fourth floors from the current very light color to
either the same color as the base or another color, but in a darker tone than the very
light color; again to reduce the visual height.
c) Picking up the smaller scale of the top floor trellis element, and carrying a column
and recessed window theme around the top floor. This would give the building a
more distinctive and visually lighter top, and give the building a bit more visual unity.
d) Reducing the bulk of the top of the stair towers by lightening them up, and treating
them as a sort of "Lantern." This would visually lighten up the top floor, and allow
the design to pull a bit from the proposed glass bridge between the two buildings.
e) Simplifying and probably downplaying the building entry from the parking area in the
west side of the structure.
f) Refining the details where the flat arches meet the double supporting columns.
3. Projecting areas with roofs similar to the stair towers: Larry Cannon and the project
architect discussed the need to work on these more, but did not settle on an approach at
this level of review. A more detailed review and recommendations would be
forthcoming during the architecture and site review phase.
4. Site circulation: The driveway works well in some areas where there is a variation of
landscaped edges and parking, but has one area where it feels like driving through a
parking lot. That will need some study at a later time when it is appropriate.
PAGE 7
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
5. Current building size versus the same building area in three-story buildings: Larry
Cannon agrees with the project architect that the four-story building solution is a better
one since the heavy tree screening will mitigate the height substantially, and the large
open space should be a benefit. Larry Cannon suggested that as planning continues, it
might make some sense to see if the end user might be amenable to developing some
public space in the landscaping where there might be periodic "Conceits on the Grass"
or other ways of inviting the public in to enjoy the benefits of the generous and heavily
landscape open space. This might serve as a good public benefit, and there would be lots
of parking to accommodate that type of use.
6. Parking structures: Larry Cannon and the project architect discussed the design
and concluded that the building -like portions of the structures which have pyramidal
roofs similar to the stair towers would also need to be changed to reflect the more glazed
approach discussed with the building architecture. Also, the noiuial walls of the structure
would be broken up with some more solid surfaces so that the scale and proportions of
the openings would relate better to the main buildings.
While the architecture and site plan information contained in this report provides an
illustration of how Phase I could be sited and constructed to meet the overall Class A
corporate campus objective while minimizing visual impacts from surrounding
properties, these materials and analysis are not sufficiently comprehensive to meet the
architecture and site application requirements. Additional details on circulation, parking,
building materials, landscaping, utilities, demolition, drainage, and NPDES would be
required with the architecture and site application that would be considered by the
Planning Commission.
This information, however, does provide context for the development standards contained
in the PD Ordinance. Those standards, including parking ratios, building size, heights,
setbacks, etc.; permitted and conditional uses; and the mitigation measures contained in
the MMRP, would constitute the PD approval unless the Town Council directs those to
be modified.
In addition, this conceptual information, including building height, location, architecture,
materials, upper -story setbacks, outside amenities, etc., can assist the Town Council in
framing direction to the staff and Planning Commission on subsequent architecture and
site applications. Finally, if the PD is approved, additional architecture and site
applications for subsequent phases would be submitted to the Planning Commission.
APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO JUNE 20, 2011, TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS:
The applicant has provided a letter of justification that responds to the comments that were raised
at the June 20, 2011, Town Council meeting. The main points are summarized below, as noted
in the applicant's letter of justification:
PAGE 8
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
The Albright Way site is uniquely situated in the heart of the Vasona Light Rail area, an
area identified within the Town of Los Gatos 2020 General Plan as ideal for intensified
and mixed use development. The proposed PD Overlay Zoning facilitates the
redevelopment of a group of Class C buildings into a vibrant, Class A, sustainable,
energy efficient project that fulfills the Town's goals.
The proposed PD Overlay Zoning also provides adequate building height to meet the
contemporary requirements of today's technology companies. This means taller, more
operationally functional buildings that are efficiently designed, with floor plates that
maximize natural light, and a site plan that preserves large and inviting green space
between buildings as compared to a sprawling low rise campus with the same amount of
building areas.
The applicant further states that the PD Development Standards and Guidelines will ensure that
the architectural approach reduces the apparent massing of the buildings to reflect the quality and
character of Los Gatos. The project will also seek to achieve LEED Silver certification.
Additionally according to the applicant, only with the requested height and intensification will
the retention of an existing corporate user be possible. Los Gatos' own Netflix, Inc., has
identified the Albright Way site as its preferred solution to its need for space and desire for a true
headquarters location.
In regards to the senior housing component, the applicant cites numerous General Vasona Light
Rail Element and Housing Element policies that support the proposal for 168 senior -restricted
units, including the need to:
• Increase the housing supply and the mix of housing types in an equitable manner.
• Promote infill development and socioeconomic equity and protect environmental resources.
• Promote an improved intraregional relationship between jobs and housing.
• Goal VLR-2 - Encourage affordable housing (senior housing, multi -family housing, mixed -
use with housing) in appropriate locations within the Vasona Light Rail area to address the
Town's housing needs and take advantage of the opportunities afforded by mass transit.
The applicant further states that the Albright Way site is an "ideal housing site because it is an
infrll site, has less enviromnental constraints, and is located adjacent to the creek trail, on an
active bus line, across from the Courtside Club, and within the quarter -mile of proposed mass
transit." The PD Overlay will allow "senior housing as a use on only a limited portion of the site
(up to seven acres) meets a substantial number of the Town's goals and policies related to
providing a broad range of housing to meet the diverse socioeconomic population of Los Gatos."
In regards to the Development Agreement, the applicant notes that the "use of a development
agreement is a standard planning tool that demonstrates both the Town and the owner's
commitment that any major project built on the site over a long tern will meet the highest
standards, as outlined within the terms of the agreement. It provides for consistency in the
PAGE 9
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
entitlement process over time in exchange for public benefits that otherwise would not be
realized by the Town." The applicant further states that in order to:
[U]undertake such an ambitious and large-scale redevelopment, certainty on behalf of the
owners and future tenants is required. Prior to malting the commitment to a campus
location (including the associated long term capital investment and implications for
employee recruiting and retention), corporations (and their shareholders) require certainty
that they have the flexibility to grow over time at a rate which may vary, and certainty
that they will in fact be able to build out the anticipated square footage without changes,
surprises or delay. The PD Overlay Zoning and the Development Agreement uniquely
combine to meet these needs. This entitlement package, as submitted, secures the
opportunity to capture the significant benefits of campus development for the Town and
provides the density, height, and flexibility on the land use that any large corporate user
would require to make a commitment to the site.
As a key component of the Development Agreement, the applicant would provide the following
funding in addition to all standard Town impact and processing fees that apply to the project
today, and in addition to the mitigation measures identified in the CEQA documents for the
proj ect:
a $370,000 to the Lark/University Avenue Intersection Improvements, if constructed by the
Town before required for the project;
® Up to $550,000 to a Transportation Improvement Benefit Fund;
® Up to $650,000 to a Community Benefit Fund.
However, the applicant has requested elimination of the previously proposed per unit community
benefit funding for the senior units. Staff would only recommend elimination of that per unit
funding in the Development Agreement if a CUP is required for subsequent approval of any
senior housing. The draft PD Ordinance which provides for senior housing as a permitted use
(Attachment 29) retains the per unit funding while the draft PD Ordinance which provides for
senior housing as a conditional use (Attachment 30) does not.
Finally, the applicant cites other numerous public benefits from the development of the project
including:
® Increased economic development opportunities and tax revenue for the Town. A
substantially higher property tax base and payment of very significant school fees will result
from the Albright Way redevelopment, which benefits not only the Town but also the Los
Gatos School Districts. With the withdrawal of the non -senior housing component from our
application, there is no impact on the schools, so the project represents all benefits and no
costs to the schools.
® Increased incentive for the VTA to prioritize the extension of the Vasona Light Rail.
• Providing senior -housing options.
Please see Attachment 27 for the complete letter.
PAGE 10
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
DRAFT PD ORDINANCES:
As noted, this report includes three PD Ordinances. Attachment 29 is the original ordinance that
has been modified to reduce the residential component to 168 senior units that would be allowed
as a permitted use. The ordinance further requires that the CUP for residential units cannot be
applied for until five years following the approval of the PD Ordinance.
Attachment 30 is the original ordinance that has been modified to reduce the residential
component to 168 senior units that could be allowed if a conditional use permit is approved. The
ordinance further requires that the CUP for residential units cannot be applied for until five years
following the approval of the PD Ordinance.
Attachment 31 contains a revised PD Ordinance that removes residential uses as a permitted or a
conditional use. Should the Town Council approve this ordinance, residential uses would not be
permitted, and if the applicant proposed residential uses in the future, a PD Amendment would
be required.
As previously discussed, Council should provide direction to staff and the Planning Commission
regarding the maximum allowed height and number of stories for future phases. Should that
maximum height be lower than 85 feet and/or that the maximum number of stories should be less
than five, staff will modify the PD Ordinance to reflect the Council's direction.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA):
The DA that was attached to the June 20, 2011, Town Council report has not been modified.
Should the Town Council direct changes to the DA, including, but not limited to removal of
residential uses or inclusion of residential uses as a conditional use permit that cannot be applied
for until five years following the approval of the PD Ordinance, staff would make those changes
and provide a revised copy of the DA in the report for the second reading of the PD Ordinance.
Attachment 32 contains a revised DA Ordinance that reflects the current information and dates.
Attachment 33 contains a list of sections of the proposed DA that would be modified based on
Council's direction to staff concerning the uses on the property.
ARCHITECTURE AND SITE REVIEW
The Council has previously directed final architecture and site review to the staff level
Development Review Committee or the Planning Commission, depending on the nature of the
project approval and the prior submission of architecture and site related materials. Given the
timing demands of the potential primary tenant of the proposed project, the applicant has
requested an accelerated and specified architecture and site review for the first phase of this
project, if approved by the Town Council on August 1, 2011, possibly including simultaneous
review and action by both the Planning Commission and Town Council at a joint study session
that is already scheduled for August 22, 2011. The applicant has indicated they will submit the
PAGE 11
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
balance of information and materials required for final architecture and site review by August 2,
2011.
The Mayor has indicated that he is not inclined to change the agenda for the August 22, 2011,
joint study session unless so requested by Council. Instead, following the normal process, the
architecture and site review would be scheduled for Planning Commission on August 24, 2011,
just two days later than the joint study session. This scheduling would occur contingent on
Council approval of the underlying land use application on August 1, 2011, and the applicant's
submission of all remaining architecture and site application materials by August 2, 2011.
The architecture and site review for subsequent phases would follow the normal process and
schedule.
CONCLUSION:
The proposal before the Town Council is unique in that it proposes flexibility to respond to
future market conditions. Typically the Town has the opportunity to decide on projects that have
already made a commitment to provide a certain land use in a specific layout and design. This
flexibility is balanced against benefits that the Town can expect to receive based on the proposed
Development Agreement and achieving up to 550,000 square feet of Class A office space and the
potential for expansion of quality jobs for the community.
Staff believes that the proposal represents both a commitment to the goals and policies outlined
in the General Plan and an opportunity for Los Gatos to create favorable conditions for both
continued fiscal sustainability and to respond to region -wide housing and transit issues.
The PD Ordinance attached to the staff report (Attachment 29) reflects the applicant's revised
requests and is strongly recommended by staff. Attachments 30 and 31 are alternative draft PD
Ordinances further constraining or eliminating the proposed senior housing and are provided to
ensure actionable documents depending on Council direction and decisions.
ATTACHMENTS:
Received Under Separate Cover
1. Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2. Report to the Planning Commission for the meeting of May 11, 2011
3. Desk Item Report #1 to Planning Commission for the meeting of May 11, 2011
4. Desk Item Report #2 to Planning Corninission for the meeting of May 11, 2011
5. Desk Item Report #3 to Planning Commission for the meeting of May 11, 2011
6. Report to the Planning Commission for the meeting of May 31, 2011
7. Desk Item Report to Planning Commission for the meeting of May 31, 2011
8. Verbatim minutes from the May 11, 2011 Planning Commission hearing (170 pages)
PAGE 12
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
9. Verbatim minutes from the May 31, 2011 Planning Commission hearing (127 pages)
10. Required Findings (2 pages)
11. Written communications received after the Desk Item Report to Planning Cormmission for
the meeting of May 31, 2011 (25 pages)
12. Letter from the applicant (7 pages)
13. Draft Planned Development Ordinance (55 pages) including zone change map (1 page) and
development plans (25 Pages)
14. Draft Development Agreement (81 pages)
15. Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Plan, and
certifying the environmental document (2 pages)
16. Draft Development Agreement Ordinance (3 pages)
17. Revised Errata Sheets (8 pages)
18. Revised Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (11 pages)
19. FAQ (three pages)
20 Revised Errata Sheets for the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
21. Revised Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
22. Written communications received after completion of staff report to Town Council for the
meeting of June 20, 2011 (12 pages)
23. Angle of Height Diagrams
24. Additional communications from the public (32 pages)
25. Letter from John Schenk (one page) received, June 20, 2011
Received with this report
26. Additional communications from the public (20 pages)
27. Letter from the applicant (6 pages)
28. Comments from the Consulting Architect (4 pages)
29. Revised Planned Development Ordinance that Includes Residential as a permitted use (55
pages) including zone change map (1 page, previously submitted) and development plans
(25 pages, previously submitted, and 11 additional pages reflecting the proposed
architecture for Phase I)
30. Revised Planted Development Ordinance that Includes Residential as a conditional use (55
pages) including zone change map (1 page, previously submitted) and development plans
(25 pages, previously submitted, and 11 additional pages reflecting the proposed
architecture for Phase I (from Attachment 29))
31. Revised Planned Development Ordinance that Excludes Residential (55 pages) including
zone change map (1 page, previously submitted) and development plans (25 pages,
previously submitted, and 11 additional pages reflecting the proposed architecture for
Phase I (from Attachment 29))
32. Revised Development Agreement Ordinance (3 pages)
33. List of potential revisions to the Development Agreement (1 page)
34. Revised Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring
Plan, and certifying the environmental document (3 pages)
PAGE 13
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/PD-10-005/ND-11-004
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Boulevard
July 25, 2011
cc: John Shenk, 700 Emerson Street, Palo Alto, CA 94301
David A Kingery, Principal, The Carlyle Group, 4 Orinda Way, Ste.170D, Orinda, CA 94563
WR:JP:ah
N:\DEV\TC REPORTS\2011\Albright8-1 Final.doc
THIS PAGE
INTENTIONALLY
LEFT BLANK