PresentationSmall Town Service ~ Community Stewardship ~ Future Focus
Albright Ballot Measure
Los Gatos Town Council
March 3, 2014
Small Town Service ~ Community Stewardship ~ Future Focus
BACKGROUND
•Albright approved August 2011; Rescinded
•Modified Albright approved June 2013
•Legal challenges denied; Appeals pending
•Ballot measure petitions circulated, submitted
•Feb. 3 Town Council Meeting:
–Certified sufficient signatures submitted
–Heard settlement offers
–Directed § 9212 Report
–Established Ad Hoc Committee for Town Measure
Small Town Service ~ Community Stewardship ~ Future Focus
§9212 REPORT
•Priority work to be completed by March 3
•Council specified issues and questions
•Proposals solicited from 3 Bay Area firms
•Selected LSA based on:
–Land use experience and prior §9212 work
–Staff capacity and References
–Independence – No prior Los Gatos engagements
•No 3rd party contacts except re: Netflix lease
Summary of Elections Code Section 9212 Report
Albright Specific Plan Initiative
March 3, 2014
LSA Associates, Inc., Berkeley
Judith Malamut, AICP, Principal
Adam Weinstein, AICP, Associate
Agenda
•Report objective
•Research approach
•Project similarities
•Project differences
Report Objective
Provide a fair, impartial, and factual analysis of the planning
policy, fiscal, infrastructure, land use, and other implications
of the Albright Specific Plan Initiative, including:
•Detailed, side-by-side comparison of 2013 Project and
Albright Specific Plan Project
•Answers to questions raised by Town Council on
February 3, 2014
Research Approach
1.Understand all elements of previously-approved (June
2013) Project, as modified by Town Council (including
PD overlay, Architecture and Site Plans, Conditions of
Approval, and Final EIR)
2.Identify physical development and procedural elements
of the Initiative (including ballot measure and Specific
Plan)
3.What is net difference -- in terms of physical
development, fees, and planning procedures?
2013
Project
Specific
Plan
Project
Physical Features
Feature 2013 Project Specific Plan
Net
Change?
Office and R&D Space 485,000 sq. ft. 485,000 sq. ft. No
Permitted Uses Office, light manufacturing,
office-serving uses
Office, light manufacturing,
office-serving uses No
Maximum Number of
Buildings 4 4 No
Building Height
Buildings 1 & 4 = 50 feet
Buildings 2 & 3 = 65 feet
Parking Garage = 35 feet
Buildings 1 & 4 = 50 feet
Buildings 2 & 3 = 65 feet
Parking Garage = 35 feet
No
Maximum Lot Coverage 50% 50% No
Elevated Walkways No Yes, but square footage not
specified YES
Proposed Parking 1,824 spaces 1,835 spaces YES
(+11 spaces)
Signage No signage visible from freeway No signage visible from SR 85 YES
Fees
Fee 2013 Project Specific Plan
Net
Change?
Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee $149,280 $149,280 No
Lark/University Traffic
Signal Payment $184,089.52 $184,089.52 No
School Impact Fees Yes, required
(estimated at $247,350)
Yes, required
(estimated at $247,350)
No
Community Benefit $1 per square foot of new
office/R&D and dirt from the
site for improvements to the
Los Gatos Creek Trail.
Up to $485,000
$1 per square foot of new
office/R&D and dirt from the
site for improvements to the
Los Gatos Creek Trail.
Up to $485,000
No
Entitlements/Approvals
Entitlement/Approval 2013 Project Specific Plan
Net
Change?
Subject to Town Ordinances? Yes Yes No
Authority to make changes to Specific Plan
(except as detailed below)
Town Council Voters until 2021, then
Town Council
YES
Major changes to approved uses
(e.g., the addition of residential uses)
Town Council Voters until 2021, then
Town Council
YES
Significant changes
(e.g., increased height, reduced open space/landscaping,
circulation changes)
Town Council Planning Commission,
appealable to Town
Council
YES
Minor changes consistent with approved project
(e.g., substitution of plant species in Landscape Plan)
Town Staff Town Staff No
Interpretations consistent with approved project
(e.g., interpretation/definition of office uses)
Town Staff Town Staff No
Implementation of approved project Town Staff Town Staff No
Building Permit review and issuance Town Staff Town Staff No
CEQA Review Yes (EIR prepared) None required for voter
initiative
YES
QUESTIONS
Small Town Service ~ Community Stewardship ~ Future Focus
Settlement Agreement
•Agreed to by litigation Plaintiffs and Defendants
•Key Terms:
–Specific Plan conformance to 2013 Council approval
–Elevated walkways/bridges to go through A&S
–Payment of legal and election costs
–Payment of additional $350 k for nearby enhancements
–All lawsuits and pending appeals dismissed
–Limited non-opposition to approved project
–No Town-sponsored ballot measure
•Clarification letter issued by all counsels today
Small Town Service ~ Community Stewardship ~ Future Focus
Town-Initiated Ballot Measure
•Ad Hoc Committee (Leonardis and Spector)
–Met twice with Town Attorney and Town Manager
•Impossible to place 2013 Approval on ballot
•Considered amending Petition Ballot Measure
–Require approval of elevated walkways/bridges
–Ensure no freeway visible signage
–Confirm established administrative review process
–Remove cap on Community Benefit fees
•Any Town ballot measure subject to legal risks
•Settlement precludes Town ballot measure now
Small Town Service ~ Community Stewardship ~ Future Focus
BALLOT ARGUMENTS & POSITIONS
•300 word Statements For/Against due 3/11
250 word Rebuttals For/Against due 3/18
Order of selection specified by State law
•Council may authorize argument submission
–Only 1 or 2 Council members may write
–Any Council member may sign, but may not edit
•Council may take position on ballot measures
•Settlement precludes Town opposition
Small Town Service ~ Community Stewardship ~ Future Focus
RECOMMENDATIONS
1.Accept 9212 Report
2.Adopt resolution calling Special Election
3.Approve Settlement Agreement
ALTERNATIVES:
Reject proposed Settlement Agreement
4.Direct preparation of Town ballot measure
5.Consider ballot arguments and Town positions
Call Special Meeting to consider on March 5