20090217 Study Seesion Staff Report
DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEETING DATE: 2/17/09 ITEM NO: STUDY SESSION COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT February 5, 2009 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL GREG LARSON, TOWN MANAGERy---. STUDY SESSION REGARDING
POLICY ISSUES FOR THE POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT OF THE LOS GATOS MEADOWS LOCATED AT 110 WOOD ROAD. RECOMMENDATION: Council should review the prospective applicant's request and take the
following actions: 1. Support redevelopment and reuse of the site for senior housing (see noted limitation below*); 2. Reaffirm that the subject parcel(s) are not within or subject to
the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines; 3. Require full applicability of the Town's affordable housing requirements, including consideration oHulfilling those requirements
through potential equivalent otf-site housing; 4. Encomage sustainable and green building practices, although not required bcyond existing State and local standards; 5. Allow staff flexibility
to recommend appropriate alternative approaches to address conflicting planning and design standards; and 6. Reqllire a comprehensive current resident relocation strategy, including
a guaranteed right to return to a unit at currcnt costs plus standard alU1Ual adjustments; and * Note that the Council may not provide direction or action on associated land use matters
(including zoning, design, mass and scale) in advance ofthe legally required environmental and Planning Commission review. PREPARED BY: BUDN.LOR;RJV Director of Conununity Development
N:\DEV\CNCLRPTS\2009\MeadowsSS.doc Reviewed by: iJiSAssistant Town Manager _._._Town Attorney__Clerk Administrator ___F.inance ----"'-Community Development
PAGE 2 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION February 17, 2009 DISCUSSION: The current owner of Los Gatos Meadows, Episcopal Senior Communities, is seeking Council direction
and/or comments on the redevelopment of the Continuing Care Retirement Facility. TIle owner is specifically seeking direction and/or comments on' the consistency of the redevelopment
project with numerous Town policies prior to submitting a formal application. The applicant met with the Conceptual Development Review Committee (CDAC) on April 9, 2008, and the staff
report is included as Attachment I. The minutes of that meeting are included as Attachment 2. Staff has determined that this is a unique and significant project that warrants Council
direction and/or comments for the following reasons: • The owner is seeking to redevelop the existing Continuing Care Retirement Facility; • The unique setting; • The numerous policy
implications; and • The scope of the potential project. The owner is specifically seeking Council direction direction and/or comments on the following policy Issues: a. Reuse ofthe subject
site for a Continuing Care Retirement Facility; b. Applicability ofthe Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines; c. Applicability ofAffordable Housing; d. Expectations regarding
sustainability and green building; and e. Planning and design issues. The owner has provided extensive background information for Council consideration (Attachments 3 and 4). The policy
issues identified by the applicant are not intended to be all-. inclusive and additional issues have been identified by staff and the CDAC during preliminary review of the potential
project (Attachment 1). Additional issues will be identified during the development review process should the applicant choose to submit a formal application. The property owner understands
that the Council's direction and/or comments are not binding on the Town and in no way are they intended to indicate whether the project will be received favorably by the various review
bodies that are charged with evaluating and deciding any environmental documents and subsequent application. If the owner files a formal application, it will initiate an extensive technical
review process and significant community input will be solicited. The Council will carefully consider all public input and input from advisory bodies as well as the technical documents
and consistency with State and Town regnlations before it renders a final decision on the application(s).
PAGE 3 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION February 17,2009 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Input regarding the applicability of Town policy by Council is not a project defined under
CEQA, and no further action is required. If the property owner files an application, enviromnental review will be completed as required by CEQA. Attachments: 1. CDAC Memorandum dated
April 9, 2008 2. Letter from Bud N. Lortz to Episcopal Senior Communities dated April 23, 2008 transmitting April 9,2008 CDAC Minutes (attached) 3. Information provided by Episcopal
Senior Conmmnities, received January 30, 2009 4. Information provided by Episcopal Senior Communities, received February 9, 2009 N:\DEV\CNCLRPTS\2009\McadowsSS.doc
To: From: Subject: Date: MEMORANDUM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Bud Lortz, Community Development Director Los Gatos Meadows-ll 0 Wood Road
April 9, 2008 Project Description: Episcopal Senior Communities has submitted a conceptual site plan for redevelopment of the Los Gatos Meadows site at 110 Wood Road. The site contains
10.6 acres. Thc applicant proposcs to demolish the existing scnior conU11wuty to construct a larger facility with 256 unitslbeds as follows: • 192 Independent Living • 48 Assisted Living
• 16 Memory Assisted Living Thc project will range in height 11-om two to five stories above a multi· level parking garagc. The following chart compares the existing and proposcd projects:
" -------Existing Projcct ProJ:l.(jscd Project Total Units/Beds 222 256 Independent Living Units 184 192 Assisted Living Units/Beds 39 48 Memory Care Units/Beds 0 16 .. Stories I to
4 2 to 5 Building Square Footagc 163,825 454,815 Parking Spaces 111 350 The applicant's letter (Attachment I) states that the existing Planned Development allows for
39 skilled nursing beds. Givcn the age of the files, stafrhas not been able to confirm this number to date. The applicant has provided a packet of illustrative drawings and photomontages
for the Committee's consideration (Attachment 2). General Plan and Zoning: The Gcneral Plan designation is Mcdium Density Residcntial (5-12 du/ae). The current zoning designation is
R:PD (Residential-Planned Development). Rcdevelopment of the site will require an amendment to the Planned Development zoning. ATTACHMENT 1
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee April 9, 2008 110 Wood Road Page 2 The site abuts Wood Road, west of South Santa Cruz Avenue (Sheet I ofAttachment 2). Primary access to the
site is from Wood Road. A secondary driveway provides access to Broadway. The site primarily abuts residential uses except to the east, where commercial uses exist. The propelty has
a substantial topography. The site rises roughly 180 feet in elevation from the southeast to the northwest and rises roughly 90 feet across the p01iion ofthe site where the new buildings
are proposed. Background: Thc Town Council approved the Planned Development Ordinance for the existing project in January 1968. The Meadows opened in 1971. Data on the existing projcct
is contained in the chali on Page 1. l'otential Issues: The applicant has submitted a conceptual site plan, sections, and elevations to illusn'ate their development proposal (Sheets
3-5 of Attaclul1ent 2). The following is a brief list of issues and topics for CDAC. Staff has not reached conclusions on these topics but provides them to help fi'al11e the discussion
al1d to solicit input. I. General Plan Density: a. The General Plan currently designates the site for residential uses with a density range of 5-12 dwelling unit per aere (dulac), which
would permit a maximum of 127 units on the site. A General Plan Amendment to High Dcnsity Residential (12-20 dulac) will be required. b. With the General Plan Amendment. the maximum
number of units would be 212. The applicant proposes 256 units; however, 192 units are for fully independent living and the remainder have some level of assistance. Is this consistent
with the General Plan density range? c. The General Plal1 Housing Element does allow for up to a 100% density bonus for senior housing projects. 2. Scale of Development: a. Height of
buildings is a concern. 1. Buildings of up to five stories are proposed (the applicant states the section drawing on Sheet 4 showing six stories is an elTor). ll. The buildings are on
top of the parking structure, portions of which may be above grade, thereby increasing the height.
Conceptual Development Advisory Committce April 9,2008 110 Wood Road Page 3 b. Scale of project: I. The existing Meadows complex contains 163,000 square feet of space; roughly 455,000
square feet are proposed. 11. The overall footprint of the proposal is similar to the existing complex with two exceptions. First, structures are now setback farther from the eastern
propeliy line. Second, a building is proposed toward the western portion of the site which is higher in elevation than the curreht complex. c. Visibility of project: 1. The existing
complex has minimal visibility to the Town as a whole despite its size. The applicant has submitted a photomontage of the existing and proposed views fi'om East Main Strcet (Sheets 10
and II). The proposed project would be significantly more visible. 11. Additional study will be needed to determine if it will be visible from other areas of Town. 3. Hillside Setting:
a. Although the site is located in a hillside setting, the site is not within the Towndesignated Hillside Area to which the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (I-IDS&G) apply.
The Hillside Area begins at the centerline ofWood Road and extends to the south and west of the site. This site was specifically not included in the Hillside Area because the HDS&G were
developed to address single family homes. b. Should the HDS&G be used as a reference in evaluating tllis project? The Guidelincs were not developed to address a project such as this,
but could used as guidance to ensure the project is designed in a maru1er that is sensitive to thc hillsidc environmcnt and reflects the Town's values. 4. Architectural Character: a.
The applicant letter states the project will be designed in a Craftsman style. The buildings will step with the topography and will have a variety ofroof elements and wall planes to
break-up the mass of the structures. b. In addition to the elevations, the applicant has provided sheets with arcllitectural images that reflect the design theme of the project. CDAC
should provide input to to the applicant Oi1 the architectural character of the project. 5. Green Building: The applicant states the project will include numerous green building and
sustainability measures. Will LEED certification be pursued?
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee April 9, 2008 110 Wood Road Page 4 6. Environmental Impacts: The following potential impacts will be evaluated in detail through the development
and enviromnental review processes: • Traffic • Parking • Grading • Trees • Aesthetics and Visibility • Biologic 7. BMP Units: BMP units will need to be provided with the project. Thc
Town Code requires that 20% of the units be affordable to low and vcry low incomes. 8. Phasing/Relocation: a. Will redevelopment of the site (and relocation of current rcsidcnce) occur
in phases" b. What are the applicant's plans on relocation of the residents? Role of the CDAC: The Conceptual Development Advisory Committee was formed to advise a prospective applicant
on the consistency of a project with Town policies prior to submitting a formal application and initiating an expensive and time-consuming development review process. The Committee also
endeavors to identify and list the problems and issues that will need to be addressed during the development review process should the applicant wish to submit an application. The issues
and problems identified by the Committee are not intended to be all-inclusive and many additional issues may be identified during the formal development review process. None of the Committee's
comments are binding on the Town and in no way are intended to indicate whether the project will be received favorably by the various review bodies that are charged with evaluating and
deciding the application. Public input is a required and essential component in considering and deciding an application and that input will strongly influence the outcome of the application.
All applicants are strongly encouraged to hold neighborhood meetings to receive input as the design of the project is evolved should they decide to proceed with the development review
process.
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee April 9, 2008 110 Wood Road Page 5 Attachments: I. Location Map 2. Applicant's Letter 3. Project Information Distribution: Kevin J. Gerber,
Episcopal Senior Commtmities, 3650 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Suite 100, Lafayette, CA 94549 Cynthia James, Morley Bros., LLC, 99 Almaden Blvd., Suitc 720, San Jose, CA 95113 N:IDEVIRANDYICDACICDAC
LG MEADOWS 040908.DOC
TOWN OF Los GATOS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division (408) 354-6872 Fax (408) 354-7593 CMCCENTER 110E. MAw STREIIT p.o. Box 949 Los GATOS, CA 95031 April 23, 2008 Episcopal
Senior Communities Attn: Kevin Gerber 3650 Mt. Diablo Blvd, Ste 100 Lafayette, CA 94549 RE: 110 Wood Road Conceptual Development Application CD-08-002 Requesting preliminary review of
an amendment to a Planned Developmeut to demolish an existing senior complex (Los Gatos Meadows) to construct a new 455,000 square foot senior continuing care complex with a total of
256 units ou a property zoned R:PD. APN 510-47-038 PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Episcopal Senior Communities On April 9, 2008, the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee reviewed your
application. The Committee identified concerns or deficiencies with your proposal which are outlined in the attached meeting minutes. If you wish to proceed with this project, you should
work with Town staff toward the submission of a formal proposal to the Development Review Committee responding to these issues and any additional issues that may be identified as part
of the more extensive staff review. It is recommended that you meet with staff before you submit a formal application to the Town. There are various application fees for the submittal
of a development application to the Town that must be paid at the time the application is submitted. A summary ofthese fees is available from the Community Development Department. ud
N. Lortz Director of Community Development BNL:RT:mdc Attachment cc: Morley Bros., LLC, Attn: Cynthia James, 99 Almaden Blvd, Ste 720, San Jose, CA 95113 N·.\DEV\CDACILETTERS\IIOWoodRd.docINCORPORATE
D AUGUST 10, 1887 ATTACHMENT 2
TOWN OFLOS GATOS 110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 354-6872 SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE TOWN OF LOS
GATOS FOR APRIL 9,2008, HELD IN THE TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER, IlO EAST MAIN STREET, LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA. The meeting was called to order at 4:30 P.M. ATTENDANCE Members
Present: Barbara Spector Diane McNutt Stephen Rice Joanne Talesfore Absences: Diane McNutt (replaced Mike Wassennan) Marico Sayoc Staff Present: Bud Lortz, Director of Community Development;
Randy Tsuda, Assistant Director of Community Development ITEM 1: Comments: 110 Wood Road Conceptual Development Application CD-08-002 Requesting preliminary review of an amendment to
a Planned Development to demolish an existing senior complex (Los Gatos Meadows) to construct a new 455,000 square foot senior continuing care complex with a total of256 units on a property
zoned R:PD. APN 510-47-038 PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Episcopal Senior Communities General Comments: • There is clearly a need to modernize and improve the Los Gatos Meadows complex.
The Committee believes it is possible to design a successful project. • Senior housing should be regarded as an essential service to the Town. There is a . great need for this type of
project. • The challenge will be how to evaluate a unique project such as this. • The walkability of the Farwell Lane connection should be improved. The current connection is overly
steep for seniors. • The applicant should clarify how the project will be phased and how existing residents will be accommodated. Applicant should provide a narrative explaining their
relocation strategy. Residents should not be displaced unless it is supported by the residents. • Below Market Price units should be provided. • Project should obtain LEED certification.
n. , Conceptual Development Advisory Comrnittee--Summary of Discussion Meeting of April 9, 2008 Page 2 Height and Visibility: .. ... The Coffiinittee expressed signiflcallt concerns
with ihehelghi,Vfsibility and mass of the project. Do not want the project to loom over Downtown. • Four stories may be acceptable is visibility is addressed. • The existing project,
while large, is hidden from the Town. • Consolidation of the buildings is good. • Buildings should be stepped with the hillside. • The garages should be pushed below grade. • The use
of technology to illustrate the visibility of the project was appreciated. It will be necessary to clearly illustrate the visibility of the project. Architecture: • Not sure if the architecture
fits with the Town. • Design theme is attractive but does not trump concerns with height and mass. Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines: • The Hillside Development Standards &
Guidelines (HDS&G) cannot be directly applied; the Guidelines were developed for single family homes. • The spirit and intent of the Guidelines should be applied. Impacts: • Concerns
with traffic, both from the project and construction-related traffic. • Concerns with grading and tree impacts. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m. The next regular meeting of
the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee is Wednesday, May 14, 2008. Prepared by: unity Development cc: Planning Commission Chair N:IDEV\CDAC\MINUTES\2008\4-9-08.cdacrnin.doc