Attachment 1TOWN OF LOS GATOS ITEM NO: 2
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: October 8, 2014
PREPARED BY: Erwin Ordofiez, Senior Planner
eordonez a,lossatosca. gov
SUMMARY: Receive public testimony and discuss potential changes to the Town
Code for the establishment and use of Planned Development Overlay
Zoning Designations. This discussion may include the Town's
Community Benefit and Infill Policies. This is not a public hearing on
a specific amendment to the Town's Zoning Code.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive public testimony and as appropriate, forward a
recommendation to the Town Council regarding potential changes to
the Planned Development Ordinance and/or Community Benefit and
Infill Policies.
CEQA: A meeting conducted to receive public testimony in advance of a
public hearing is not a project pursuant to Section 15061 (b)(3) of the
adopted Guidelines for the Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
ACTION: Receive public testimony and possible recommendation to Town
Council.
EXHIBITS: 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
BACKGROUND:
Town Council Verbatim Meeting Minutes of June 2, 2014
(30 pages)
Town Council Agenda Report of June 2, 2014 (10 pages)
Town Council Addendum Report of June 2, 2014 (11 pages)
Town Council Desk Item Report of June 2, 2014 (2 pages)
In -Fill Policy (2 pages)
Community Benefit Policy (5 pages)
Excerpt from 2020 Los Gatos General Plan (3 pages)
Town wide postcard
Correspondence
On November 4, 2013, the Town Council initiated a discussion to gauge support for studying the
use of Planned Development Overlay Zoning designations (PD) in the Town's development
process. On a unanimous vote, Council referred the study issue to Town staff with the following
direction:
ATPAcHMENT 1
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 2
Planned Development Ordinance Discussion
October 8, 2014
• Review Zoning Ordinance Section 29.80.080 in terms of specificity, specifically using
the first sentence as guidance and the second sentence as potentially unnecessary
language;
• Review and clarify the Infill Policy;
• Review the wording of the General Plan regarding Planned Developments so that the
language is consistent with the first sentence of the Zoning Ordinance; and
• Consider the use of Planned Developments in specified zones.
In December 2013, a Town Council Planned Development Ad Hoc Committee, consisting of
Council Members Jensen and Spector, was established. The Committee worked on this study
issue with staff for approximately six months which resulted in the preparation of a draft Zoning
Ordinance Amendment with proposed modifications to the Town's Planned Development
Overlay Zoning regulations (see Exhibit 2, Attachment 2).
On June 2, 2014, the Ad Hoc Committee forwarded the draft Zoning Ordinance Amendment to
the Town Council for consideration. Council reviewed the Committee's work and referred the
draft Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the Planning Commission to obtain additional
community input, analyze the prepared draft, and formulate a recommendation as to whether or
not to proceed with the formal consideration of the Ad Hoc Committee's recommended
amendment (see Exhibit 1). Given the Townwide implications of this topic, a Townwide
postcard was mailed to every address (see Exhibit 8). In addition, the development community
and applicants with pending Planned Developments were notified of this Planning Commission
meeting.
DISCUSSION:
A. Existing Planned Development Ordinance
The purpose of the Planned Development (PD) Overlay Zone as noted in the existing Town
Code, is to "...provide for alternative uses and developments more consistent with site
characteristic than are allowed in other zones, and so create an optimum quantity and use of
open space and encourage good design. The PD zone permits establishment of a single use
or the integration of several uses not ordinarily possible only if use and development is in
compliance with a complete development plan showing relationship of the use or uses to
each other, to the district as a whole, and to surrounding areas" (see Exhibit 2, Attachment 1).
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 3
Planned Development Ordinance Discussion
October 8, 2014
The Town Code requires a development site to be at least 40,000 square feet to be eligible for
a PD unless the purpose of the Planned Development is intended for a low income senior
housing development, where no minimum lot size is required.
The Town has a 50 year history of approving Planned Development Overlay Zoning
designations since the first PD application for the Rinconada Hills development was
approved by the Town Council in the 1960's. There are currently 75 approved PD Overlay
Zoning designations in Los Gatos and the associated developments include a wide range of
commercial and residential projects of varying uses, densities, and intensity of development
(see Exhibit 3, Attachment 5).
The Town Council has also requested, through verbal direction to staff at past Council
meetings, that applications to redevelop existing or former automobile dealership sites be
reviewed by the Town as Planned Development applications. Four automobile dealership
sites have been redeveloped with other uses within the last five years and each proposal has
been reviewed by the Town as a Planned Development application (e.g., Los Gatos Auto
Mall, Los Gatos Honda, Mc Hugh Lincoln Mercury, and Swanson Ford).
B. 1993 In -Fill Policv
The Town Council adopted a Development Policy for In -Fill Projects on May 3, 1993, to
ensure that proposed development on the Town's remaining vacant or redeveloping
properties would be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods (see Exhibit 5).
The In -Fill Policy specifically references the Town's Planned Development process and
notes that:
The Planned Development process should only be used to:
• Contribute to the further development of surrounding neighborhoods, eliminate
blight, and not detract from the existing quality of life;
• Be designed in context with the neighborhood and surrounding zoning with
respect to the existing scale and character of surrounding structures, provide
comparable lot sizes and open space, consider garage placement, setbacks,
density, provide adequate circulation and on- street parking to blend rather than
competing with the established character of the area; and
• Demonstrate the benefit of a Planned Development through excellence in design.
Additionally, the Policy requires in -fill projects to demonstrate a "strong community benefit"
and requires that findings of benefit be part of the record for project approval. The Policy
does not define Community Benefit.
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 4
Planned Development Ordinance Discussion
October 8, 2014
The majority of the concepts noted in the adopted In -Fill Policy were incorporated into the
Land Use Goals and Policies of the 2010 General Plan Update as referenced in Section D of
this report.
C. 2002 Community Benefit Policy
The Town Council adopted a Community Benefit Policy on November 4, 2002 to help
clarify the Community Benefits referenced by the Town's Traffic Impact and In -Fill Project
Policies and what types of offerings are acceptable to the Town (see Exhibit 6).
The Policy specifically defines Community Benefit as: "An offering of benefit to the Town
proposed by an applicant, in addition to the standard mitigation measures required by the
Town, that overrides certain negative impacts resulting from an in -fill project or project that
generates more than five (5) peak hour trips." (Note: Town documents spell in -fill both "in-
fill" and "infill" even within the same document. For consistency in this report, in -fill is
spelled with the hyphen.) Community Benefits do not include mitigation measures required
for the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Examples of Community Benefits voluntarily offered by applicants for past projects include:
• Redevelopment of vacant Swanson Ford Site:
- Blossom Hill Road right -of -way dedication for eastbound turn lane
- Bicycle lane improvements
- Relocation of utility poles
- Additional transportation improvements
• Redevelopment of vacant Mc Hugh Lincoln Mercury Site:
- Installation of pedestrian crosswalk across Carlton Avenue
- Installation of traffic calming devices
- Improved landscape median on Gateway Drive
- Installation of new park strip and relocation of sidewalk
- Installation of new 6 -foot sound wall along south property line
The Town's recent revisions to its adopted Traffic Impact Policy removed the requirement
for Community Benefit. The Town Council is considering further modification or removal
of other Community Benefit requirements. .
D. 2020 Los Gatos General Plan
The 2010 update of the 2020 Los Gatos General Plan includes goals and policies relevant to
the review of new PD developments and in -fill projects. These goals and policies are
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 5
Planned Development Ordinance Discussion
October 8, 2014
intended to ensure the compatibility of new development with the Town's character, protect
the existing quality of life, preserve and enhance the Town's sense of place, require
exceptional community design, and protect existing neighborhoods (see Exhibit 7).
E. Council Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation
The intent of the Ad Hoc Committee recommended amendment is to rescind the existing
section of the Town Code (Zoning Regulations) which regulates PD Overlay Zones (Exhibit
2, Attachment 1) and to implement new regulations (Exhibit 2, Attachment 2).
Specific changes in the draft amendment include:
Narrowing the purpose and intent of a PD to protecting and preserving hillsides,
natural and historic resources, ridgelines, trees, creeks, riparian corridors and open
space.
2. Only allowing a PD on properties that meet one of four criteria:
i) A site within the boundaries of the Hillside Development Standards and
Guidelines Area Map (Exhibit 2, Attachment 3);
ii) A site with a Landmark Historic Preservation (LHP) overlay zone designation;
iii) A site which contains a tree or stand of trees that constitutes an important
community resource (to be clarified by a future Heritage Tree Ordinance);
and /or
iv) A site which contains a stream, channel or creek that supports or has
supported riparian vegetation, fish, and/or aquatic life.
Elimination of the existing minimum 40,0000 square foot lot size requirement to
request a PD Overlay Zoning designation.
F. Considerations
The Commission should consider the following items as part of its review of the Ad Hoc
Committee's recommend draft:
Concerns Regarding Recent PD approvals
The appropriateness of using a PD Overlay Zoning to enable specific development
proposals has become an issue for the Town due to high profile development projects that
have been approved within the last four years.
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 6
Planned Development Ordinance Discussion
October 8, 2014
Some residents have expressed concerns that the requirements to qualify for a PD
Overlay Zoning designation are not stringent enough, or are inconsistent with the stated
intended purposes of optimizing open space and encouraging good design. Community
input also suggests that developers may be using the PD Overlay Zoning process to
enable projects that would otherwise not meet Town development standards or would
allow the projects to be economically feasible at the expense of the community. For
example, PD zoning allows applicants to request exceptions to development standards to
allow homes to be built on smaller individual lots with smaller setbacks.
The Ad Hoc Committee's draft amendment proposes to address these community
concerns by limiting the use of PD Overlay Zones in Town to sites that meet one of the
four criteria noted in Section E above.
Housing Element
The Ad Hoc Committee's recommended amendment has been referenced in recent
comments made by representatives of the Building Industry Association (BIA) during
Stakeholder Outreach Meetings as a potential constraint and barrier to the production of
housing because it would limit the use of PD Overlay Zoning to specific locations and
circumstances explained earlier in this report.
The State Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) is currently
reviewing the Town's draft Housing Element Update. HCD is generally interested in
minimizing and eliminating barriers or constraints to housing production in its review of
local housing elements. It is uncertain at this time what effect the Ad Hoc Committee's
proposal could have on the Town's Housing Element certification process, if any,
because the draft PD modifications have not been adopted by the Town Council.
Creation of Non - Conforming Developments and Uses
Adoption of the Ad Hoc Committee's recommended proposal in its present form would
create 75 non - conforming developments with hundreds of non - conforming units and
uses. Specifically, the Town would need to establish protocols to determine how
property improvements could be made within these PD developments, such as
expansions, remodels, or other modifications. There are several mechanisms that could
be employed, including but not limited to Town Code language that would stipulate the
range of appropriate modifications of use and/or new construction.
PD Zoning Ordinance Amendment Process
If the Planning Commission supports the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendations or
recommends a modified Code amendment then staff would provide an update to Council
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 7
Planned Development Ordinance Discussion
October 8, 2014
and begin to prepare associated General Plan amendments, Zoning Ordinance
modifications, and other policy modifications for the Town's formal review.
This review includes the General Plan Committee consideration, Planning Commission
public hearing and recommendation, and Town Council public hearing and final action.
Additionally, the staff would prepare the required environmental review documents
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed
amendment(s).
ALTERNATIVES:
If the Planning Commission is not in favor of the specific Ad Hoc Committee amendments to the
Planned Development Overlay Zoning regulations, it could consider the following or other
alternatives:
Refer the matter back to the Town Council with a recommendation to make no changes
to the existing PD Overlay Zoning regulations.
2. Refer the matter back to the Town Council with specific Commission identified revisions
or additions to the Ad Hoc Committee recommended amendment.
3. Refer the matter back to the Town Council with a recommendation to retain the existing
PD Ordinance and include specific criteria from the General Plan, hi -fill, or Community
Benefit policies to clarify the appropriate circumstances for Planned Developments (such
as combinations of compatible uses, open space preservation, and encouraging good
design, or other factors).
CONCLUSION:
After consideration of public testimony and written materials, the Planning Commission may
consider focusing its discussion on the following questions to assist with formulation of a formal
recommendation to Council:
• How should the PD zone be modified, if at all, to meet the Town's needs and the vision
contained in the General Plan?
How do the Town's In -Fill and Community Benefit Policies work in light of the current
General Plan and PDs? Should these policies be modified (and in what manner) or
rescinded?
Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 8
Planned Development Ordinance Discussion
October 8, 2014
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission take the following actions:
1. Receive public testimony regarding the recommended draft
2. Review and consider the recommended draft, and
3. Formulate a recommendation to the Town Council regarding the draft
Prepared by:
Erwin Ordoiiez, AICP
Senior Planner
LRP:EO:ct
N:\DEV\PC REP0RTS\2014\PD Ordinance referra1.10- 5 -14.dm
Apf5roved by:
Laurel R. Prevetti,
Assistant Town Manager/
Director of Community Development