Desk Item CMEETING DATE: 06/03/13
ITEM NO: I
DESK ITEM C
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE: June 3, 2013
TO: MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
FROM: GREG LARSON, TOWN MANAGER
SUBJECT: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PD-12-001; ARCHITECTURE
AND SITE APPLICATION S-12-078; AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT EIR-12-003. PROJECT LOCATION: 90-160 ALBRIGHT WAY AND
14600 WINCHESTER BOULEVARD. PROPERTY OWNER: LG BUSINESS
PARK, LLC. APPLICANT: JOHN R. SHENK.
A. CONSIDER A REQUEST TO MODIFY THE EXISTING PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE
EXISTING SITE WITH UP TO 550,000 SQUARE FEET OF NEW
OFFICE/R&D BUILDINGS AND APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT THE
IMPROVEMENTS REPRESENTED IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
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 ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPROVAL
FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
C. CONSIDER CERTIFICATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM.
Continued from May 20, 2013, Item 7
REMARKS:
On May 20, 2013, the Town Council held a public hearing on this item. However, the public
input portion for this item was not completed and the agenda item was continued to June 3, 2013.
PREPARED BY: Todd Capurso, Acting Director of Community Development
Reviewed by: Assistant Town Manager N Town Attorney Finance
N:1DEV\TC REPORTS\20I3Vune 3 Albright DESK C.doc Reformatted: 5/30/02
PAGE 2
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Blvd./PD-12-001/S-12-078/EIR-12-003
June 3, 2013
Public Comments
After the staff report, Addendum, Desk Item A, Desk Item B, Addendum 2, and Addendum 3
were prepared and distributed, additional correspondence was received for the period from 4:31
p.m. Friday, May 31, 2013, through 9:30 a.m. Monday, June 3, 2013 (Attachment 22).
Additional information from the applicant
Additionally, the applicant has submitted a letter from EPS regarding project feasibility
considerations (Attachment 23) and additional information regarding the Planned Development
Overlay Zone (Attachment 24).
Council questions
Staff has received a number of questions from Council members. The following are the
questions received with staff responses in italics:
How many Planned Developments do we have in Town and how many of them have exceptions?
There are approximately 75 existing PD 's in Town. At least 75% of the existing PD's have
received at least one exception to the underlying zone requirements. The percentage is likely
higher; however, extensive staff time would be needed to research this matter further. The
existing PD on the subject site and the other adjacent PD's all received exceptions.
Can a condition be included that would require all leases to include a requirement that tenants
have a TDM plan developed that could include such programs as shuttles, carpooling, public
transit discounts flex time, telecommuting or other activities that would reduce peak hour traffic?
A Performance Standard can be added to the PD to require this provision. Staff would suggest
that a minimum tenant size be considered if a Performance Standard is added. Staff will have
such a draft condition available at the meeting if requested.
How many stories and what height did the applicant request?
Per both the PD and the A&S, the applicant has submitted plans for and requested four stories
and 65' maximum height (all inclusive). The Council may modify the number of stories or height
for one or more buildings as part of the PD and/or A&S. For modifications to the A&S,
subsequent review by the Consulting Architect, Planning Commission and/or Council may be
specified.
Why isn't the extension of the southbound Winchester left turn lane onto eastbound Lark being
done as referenced in the EIR?
This is addressed in Performance Standard 1070 which requires the restriping of southbound
Winchester between the Courtside entrance and Lark Avenue to provide a dedicated southbound
left -turn lane to eastbound Lark Avenue.
Can "Keep Clear" or similar markings be installed at the Charter Oaks/Lark Avenue
intersection?
"Keep Clear" striping can be installed at the direction of the Council.
PAGE 3
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Blvd./PD-12-001/S-12-078/EIR-12-003
June 3, 2013
What is the height of the useable space for the proposed buildings?
The maximum internal ceiling height of the fourth floor is 54' 6", the same height as the
proposed exterior sunshade. The maximum height to the top of the roof is 60', and to the top of
all mechanical screening the height is 65'.
Will all mitigation measures recommended in the EIR be built and/or funded with Phase
1/Building 1 of the proposed project?
Almost all of the measures apply to all phases of construction, so they would be implemented
starting with Phase 1, but continue to be required in all phases. The only exceptions are
Mitigation Measures 4.3-3 (bat survey only required prior to demolition of 90 Albright Way),
4.8-lb (architectural coatings limits only apply to later phases of construction), and 4.8-1c
(VMT limits are specified by phase).
In addition to the required Mitigation Measures there are also performance standards in the PD
and conditions of approval in the A&S that require the perimeter landscaping to be installed and
traffic improvements and fees to be provided with Phase 1.
Is it within the Council's discretion to require mitigation measures in addition to those contained
in the EIR (assuming, of course, that there are facts/public record/testimony to support the
imposition of such measures)?
The TC can add mitigation measures, just not eliminate or reduce the level of mitigation
specified in the EIR or alternatively, can add project conditions or performance standards to the
PD.
DEIR page 2-2 assumes that the proposed project will generate 857 new jobs. Where did this
come from?
It is anticipated that the project will generate 990 new jobs, not 857. As explained in the Final
EIR (p. 8.2-1), the reference on page 2-2 was a typo and was corrected to 990. The 990
employee estimate is based on ITE rates. ITE has two trip generation rates - one based on
square footage and one based on population. The traffic analysis utilized the more conservative
trip generation/1,000 square feet, while the population based rate was used to derive the
population estimate (1 employee per 303 s.. ; 300,000/303 = 990). This is explained in Table
4.9-3 of the DEIR (p. 4.9-23, footnote d).
From Table of Environmental Impacts, page 2-4, Land Use Element 4.1-2. The EIR says "The
project would not conflict with any applicable land use policy ..." Does this assumes that if a
PD overlay zone is approved it would supersede the 35 ft. height limit imposed by Town policy
for the zone? (See DEIR p. 4.1-6)
Yes, if approved, the PD overlay zone would specify a specific height for the PD zone.
PAGE 4
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Blvd./PD-12-001/S-12-078/EIR-12-003
June 3, 2013
DEIR page 4.2-8 regarding production of light and glare by proposed project. In the "Project
Consistency Analysis," the DEIR states "proposed indoor lighting has been reviewed by Town
Staff and determined to have no significant effect on adjacent residents." Who reviewed this and
where is the support for the conclusion stated?
Staff reviewed the photometric study provided by the applicant for the proposed lighting which
shows that no lighting is proposed to impact adjacent residents.
DEIR page 4.6-13 analyzing TRA-3.1 re mitigating traffic impacts. The DEIR identifies 5
intersections which will be significantly impacted by the proposed project, but then concludes
that payment of Traffic Impact Fees to the Town will mitigate the impact to less than significant.
Two questions:
a. Is the payment of fees to a general fund recognized in CEQA or somewhere else as a valid
mitigation measure?
Yes, the discussion under TRA-3.1 identifies a significant project -related contribution to
cumulative traffic impacts and there is an in-depth discussion of the needed improvements at
these intersections in the Cumulative Impacts discussion under Transportation and Traffic on
DEIR pp, 5-17 and s-18. Tt is " «pion —specifically demonstrates --how the - needed
improvements will get completed and how fees will reduce the project's contribution. Please
note that the DEIR presents Mitigation Measure 5-1, but since this measure was duplicative of
the TIF Ordinance requirement (a condition of project approval), the mitigation measure was
not necessary in the Final EIR (seep. 8.2-16 in the Final EIR).
b. How much would be paid to the Town if the project were approved as proposed?
The TIF is $192, 000 if the project is approved as proposed.
c. Will the amount paid to the fund vary if the project is changed?
If square footage is reduced then the amount required to be paid into the TIF would be
reduced because the fee is based on trip generation which would be lower.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachments 1-6 (previously received under separate cover, prior to the staff report):
1. Draft Environmental Impact Report
2. Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
3. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
4. Report to the Planning Commission for the meeting of April 24, 2013
5. Addendum to the Planning Commission for the meeting of April 24, 2013
6. Desk Item Report to Planning Commission for the meeting of April 24, 2013
PAGE 5
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Blvd./PD-12-001/S-12-078/EIR-12-003
June 3, 2013
Attachments 7-15 (previously received with the staff report):
7. Verbatim minutes from the April 24, 2013 Planning Commission hearing (173 pages)
8. Public comments received from 1:00 PM on Apri124, 2013, through 12.00 PM on **March
16, 2013 (281 pages)
**Please note — the original staff report incorrectly listed "March 16". This should be
"May 16".
9. Additional Letter of Justification from the applicant (14 pages)
10. Errata Sheets (2 pages)
11. Resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report (6 pages), Exhibits A & B received
under separate cover
12. Fiscal Impact Analysis from the applicant (28 pages)
13. Additional information from the applicant (38 pages)
14. Comparison table (1 page)
15. Revised plan sheets (3 pages)
Attachments previously received with Addendum:
16. Public comments received from 12:01 p.m. on May 16, 2013, through 12:00 p.m. on
**March 17, 2013 (19 pages)
**Please note — the original staff report incorrectly listed "March 17". This should be
"May 16".
Attachments previously received with Desk Item A:
17. Public comments received from 2:01 p.m. May 17, 2013, through 9:00 a.m. May 20, 2013
(43 pages)
Attachments previously received with Desk Item B:
18. Public comments received from 9:01 a.m. May 20, 2013, through 3:00 p.m. May 20, 2013
(28 pages)
Attachments previously received with Addendum 2
19. Public comments received from 3:01 p.m. May 20, 2013, through 12:00 p.m. May 30, 2013
(101 pages)
Attachments previously received with Addendum 3
20. Public comments received from 12:01 p.m. May 30, 2013, through 4:30 p.m. May 31, 2013
21. Letter dated May 30 from the Town's traffic consultant TJKM (2 pages)
PAGE 6
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: 90-160 Albright Way and 14600 Winchester Blvd./PD-12-001/S-12-078/EIR-12-003
June 3, 2013
Attachments received with this Desk Item C
22. Public comments received from 4:31 p.m. May 31, 2013, through 9:30 a.m. June 3, 2013
23. Memorandum from the applicant regarding feasibility considerations (2 pages)
24. Additional information from the applicant (7 pages)
TC:JP:ct