Agenda packet — Los Gatos City Council, February 4, 2025 (part 2 of 9)

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 12 Draft – February 2025
Finding
All of the proposed Project specific environmental impacts related to biological resources will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

Mitigation Measures: 7-2, 7-3, 7-4, 7-5a, 7-5b, 7-6, and 7-8 Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.

C. Cultural Resources

1. Potentially Significant Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant Levels Impact 8-2: Potential Destruction of a Unique Paleontological Resource or Site During Construction
While it is possible that unknown unique paleontological resources could be uncovered during site preparation and/or other site disturbance activities, implementation of the following mitigation measure would ensure the impact is less than significant.

Mitigation Measure 8-2 The following measure shall be included in project plans, prior to issuance of a demolition permit:

If paleontological resources are uncovered during demolition, grading or other onsite excavation activities, construction shall stop until appropriate mitigation is implemented, to be approved by the Community Development Director.

Finding
All of the proposed Project specific environmental impacts related to cultural resources will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

Mitigation Measures: 8-2
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.

Page 199 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – February 2025 13
D. Geology and Soils

1. Potentially Significant Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant Levels Impact Geologic impacts associated with fault surface rupture, expansive soils, and land sliding and slope instability.

The geotechnical report noted several potential geologic impacts that are to be addressed through several design recommendations for the proposed project. These recommendations include, but are not limited to, providing a 25-foot setback from a mapped surface trace of a fault along the eastern edge of the property; underlaying the foundation by ground improvement or deepening the foundation to bedrock to avoid soil instability; removing alluvial fan deposits down to bedrock and replacing with engineering fill along the proposed retaining wall along the eastside of Farwell Lane for a minimum of 15 feet; removing and replacing all undocumented fill; and designing for sufficient reinforcement for slabs-on-grade.

Implementation of the following mitigation measures, as articulated in the February 2021 geotechnical peer review conducted by the Town’s geotechnical consultant, would ensure potential geologic impacts are reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure 13-1 The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the development plans, ground improvement plans, shoring design criteria from a geotechnical perspective, and supporting structural details and calculations (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for foundations, etc.,) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The project geotechnical consultant should review and approve appropriate performance testing for proposed ground improvement measures.

The results of the geotechnical plan review should be summarized by the project geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer prior to issuance of building permits.

Mitigation Measures 13-2 The geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections should include, but not necessarily be limited to:
 site preparation and grading;
 ground improvement;
 shoring measures and design;
 site surface and subsurface drainage improvements; and  excavations for foundations prior to placement of steel and concrete.

In addition, the project engineering geologist shall inspect opened excavations to confirm bedrock conditions are consistent with those anticipated.

The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project, including ground improvement measures and placement of engineered fill, should be described by the

Page 200 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 14 Draft – February 2025
geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval prior to final (as-built) project approval.

Specialty/design-build consultants and contractors (shoring, ground improvement, etc.) shall also submit construction reports confirming satisfactory construction of the specific aspects of the project that they are responsible for.

Finding
All of the proposed Project specific environmental impacts related to geology and soils will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

Mitigation Measures: 13-1 and 13-2
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.

E. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

1. Potentially Significant Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant Levels Impact Hazardous materials impacts associated with exposure or release of asbestos and/or lead-based paint associated with demolition of existing structures.

According to the environmental site assessment, lead-based paint was banned in 1978. The existing senior community was constructed prior to 1978; therefore, lead-based paint may be present in the existing structures on the project site. Lead is a known carcinogen and its release during grading or other ground disturbing activities could pose hazards to public health and safety. This is a potentially significant impact.

Implementation of the following mitigation measure would ensure potential impacts from the release of asbestos and lead-based paint into the environment as a result of demolition activities are reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure 13-3 The applicant shall consult with Bay Area Air Quality Management District to determine permit requirements. Removal of asbestos-containing building materials is subject to Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s Regulation 11, Rule 2: Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing. Release of lead into the atmosphere is subject to Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s Regulation 11, Rule 1: Lead.

Prior to the commencement of demolition activities on the site, the applicant shall provide evidence of meeting the permitting requirements of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, to the satisfaction of the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department.

Page 201 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – February 2025 15
Finding
All of the proposed Project specific environmental impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

Mitigation Measures: 13-3
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.

F. Wildfire Hazards

1. Potentially Significant Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant Levels Impact 12-1: Short-Term Construction-Related Traffic Activity That Has The Potential to Impair an Adopted Emergency Response Plan or Emergency Evacuation Plan
As noted previously, the Town of Los Gatos has, in conjunction with the County of Santa Clara and several other neighboring cities, an adopted EOP, which comprises, along with the 2017 Santa Clara County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan, the entirety of emergency planning activities that governs emergency response and evacuation on and around the project site. Implementation of the proposed project would not interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan, but construction activities associated with the proposed project could result in short-term, temporary impacts on street traffic because of roadway improvements and potential extension of construction activities into the right-ofway. This could result in a reduction in the number of lanes or temporary closure of certain roadway segments near the project site. While any such impacts would be limited to the construction period and would affect only adjacent streets or intersections, the impact would be potentially significant. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure 12-1 In order to adequately address any potential conflicts with emergency access or evacuation routes during construction, the applicant shall prepare and implement a site-specific construction traffic management plan for any construction effort that would require work within existing roadways. The traffic management plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Town prior to issuance of demolition permit(s) and shall be prepared to the satisfaction of Town Public Works and County Fire Department staff.

Impact 12-4: Expose People or Structures to Significant Risks, including Downslope or Downstream Flooding or Landslides, as a Result of Runoff, PostFire Slope Instability, or Drainage Changes.

As noted in Section 13.0, Effects Not Addressed Further in this EIR, the 2007 Draft Preliminary Geologic and Geotechnical Evaluation for Los Gatos Meadows prepared by Cornerstone Earth

Page 202 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 16 Draft – February 2025
Group (Appendix F of the Draft EIR), the project site and surrounding areas are moderately steep to steep slope with slope inclination up to 40 degrees and noted that portions of the site are located within a State of California Earthquake-Induced Landslide Hazard Zone.

However, the 2020 Geotechnical Investigation and Geologic Hazards Evaluation (geotechnical report) (Appendix F) also prepared by Cornerstone Earth Group, conducted site-specific subsurface explorations which revealed soil characteristics (alluvial fan deposits underlain by shallow bedrock) that would not suggest the existence of previous landslides through the project site. As noted in the geotechnical report, the proposed project would create relatively deep vertical, retained cuts into the terrace that encompass the developed portion of the site.

Localized groundwater seepage may be encountered where the cuts intersect the bedrock surface and installing a network of subdrains and water proofing would address this. The geotechnical report also found the proposed grading plan for the project to be acceptable from a safety standpoint with the exception of a lower slope (below proposed structures) area that may experience a lack of stability with the existing alluvial fan deposit soils there. The geotechnical report recommends removal of these alluvial fan deposits at this location down to bedrock to be replaced by engineered fill. Compliance with this recommendation as incorporated in Mitigation Measures 13-1 and 13-2 found in Section 13.0 of this EIR (under discussion of “Geology and Soils”) would ensure this potentially significant impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Finding
All of the proposed Project specific environmental impacts related to wildfire hazards will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

Mitigation Measures: 12-1, 13-1, and 13-2
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.

V. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The Final EIR evaluated three alternatives to the proposed Project. These were evaluated based on their ability to (1) reduce the significant impacts of the proposed Project, and (2) attain proposed Project objectives. As described earlier in this findings document, the Project applicant’s objectives are to approve a new/updated Planned Development (PD) to rebuild a state-of-the art senior living community on a 10.84-acre site consistent with the Town of Los Gatos 2020 General Plan, Town of Los Gatos zoning code and in the spirit of the Town of Los Gatos Hillside Design Standards and Guidelines.

The alternatives evaluated were:

1. Alternative 1: No Project – Existing (Closed) Senior Living Community;

Page 203 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – February 2025 17

2. Alternative 2: No Project – Residential Project Consistent with the Project Site’s General Plan Designation; and

3. Alternative 3: Reduced Scale (Removal of Villas B and C from Proposed Site Plan).

A. Alternative 1: No Project Alternative – Existing (Closed) Senior Living Community
This no project alternative investigates if the proposed project were not approved and the existing senior living community facilities were left in place though closed and vacant. The project site is currently developed with 10 residential buildings ranging from one to four stories, which include a total of 205 independent residential apartments and supporting health care units. The existing facility includes a dining and commons building, an infirmary, garage and services building, a multi-purpose building, and two cottages. This alternative does not meet any of the basic project objectives, as it would not allow redevelopment of the project site with a revitalized and enhanced senior living community consistent with the density allowed under the site’s existing PD entitlement.

B. Alternative 2: No Project - Residential Project Consistent with the Project Site’s General Plan Land Use
Designation
This no project alternative investigates what could be reasonably expected to occur on the project site in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services. The project site has a General Plan designation of Medium Density Residential. Under this designation, the project site could be developed with a multi-family, duplex, and/or small single-family residential project with a density range of 5 to 12 dwelling units per net acre with up to 24 persons per acre. Conceivably, such a project could include a range of home product types including townhomes, condominiums, and/or apartments. This alternative project considers the site constraints of the 10.84-acre site, much of which is steep, heavily wooded hillside that could not reasonably accommodate residential buildings. To determine a probable number of Medium Density Residential dwelling units that the site could accommodate, this alternative utilizes approximately 50 percent of the total net acreage or approximately 5.42 acres.

Therefore, a Medium Density Residential project with a maximum of 65 units would be possible. Assuming an average of 2.51 persons per household (U.S. Census 2021), such a project would result in 163 new residents, substantially less than the 233 total residents anticipated as part of the proposed project. This alternative does not meet any of the basic project objectives, as it would not allow redevelopment of the project site with a revitalized and enhanced senior living community consistent with the density allowed under the site’s existing PD entitlement.

C. Alternative 3: Reduced Scale - Removal of Villas B and C from Proposed Site Plan
The reduced scale alternative (“reduced scale alternative”) consists of a reduction in development capacity sufficient to avoid or reduce significant, but mitigable, impacts associated with grading and removal of trees required to accommodate Villas B and C and a

Page 204 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 18 Draft – February 2025
corresponding area of the grade level below on the northwestern corner of the proposed site plan. The reduced scale alternative would reduce the number of living units by 20 units (Villa B) and 29 units (Villa C), for a total reduction of 49 units, and would result in the reduction of approximately 98,374 square feet of floor space in Villas B and C, approximately 26,000 square feet of floor space from the grade level including portions of the health center, and approximately 26,000 square feet of developed area (building footprints). In addition, this alternative could result in removing approximately 62 fewer trees. Removal of Villa B (70.5 feet in height) and Villa C (81.5 feet in height) would also help reduce visual impacts associated with scenic views from downtown Los Gatos towards the project site and scenic hillside areas beyond as these two buildings would be two of the most publicly visible buildings from multiple vantage points.

D. Environmentally Superior Alternative
Based on a comparison of the impacts of each alternative, Alternative 1, the no project alternative is the environmentally superior alternative. It would avoid all of the project’s lessthan-significant impacts, and significant but mitigable impacts. However, this alternative would not meet the project objectives.

CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(e)(2) states that if the environmentally superior alternative is the “no project” alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. Alternative 3, the Reduced Scale alternative, is considered to be the environmentally superior alternative among the remaining alternatives.

It is the only alternative that could accomplish some of the basic project objectives while minimally reducing some of the less-than-significant and/or significant and mitigable environmental impacts identified for the proposed project.

VI. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The Town Council recognizes that any approval of the proposed Project would require concurrent approval of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), which ensures performance of identified mitigation measures. Such an MMRP would need to identify the entity responsible for monitoring and implementation, and the timing of such activities. The Town will use the MMRP to track compliance with proposed Project mitigation measures. The MMRP will remain available for public review during the compliance period.

The MMRP is included as part of the Final EIR, and is hereby incorporated by reference.

VII. RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS
The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which the Council bases the Findings are located at the Community Development Department, 110 East Main Street, Los Gatos, California 95030. The custodian for these documents and materials that constitute the record is the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department.

This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and Title 14 California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines) Section 15091(e).

Page 205 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – February 2025 19
The environmental analysis provided in the EIR and these findings are based on and are supported by the following documents, materials and other evidence, which constitute the administrative record for the approval of the Project:

A. All application materials for the Project and supporting documents submitted by the applicant, including but not limited to those materials constituting the Project and listed in Section III of these findings.

B. The NOP, comments received on the NOP and all other public notices issued by the Town in relation to the EIR (e.g., Notice of Availability).

C. The Draft EIR, the Final EIR, all appendices to any part of the EIR, all technical materials cited in any part of the EIR, comment letters, oral testimony, responses to comments, as well as all of the comments and staff responses entered into the record orally and in writing between May 28, 2021 to July 12, 2021.

D. All non-draft and/or non-confidential reports and memoranda prepared by the Town and consultants related to the EIR, its analysis and findings.

E. Minutes and transcripts of the discussions regarding the Project and/or Project components at public hearings or scoping meetings held by the Planning Commission and the Town Council.

G. Staff reports associated with Planning Commission and Council Meetings on the Project and supporting technical memoranda and any letters or other material submitted into the record by any party.

H. Matters of common knowledge to the Planning Commission and Town Council which they consider, such as the Los Gatos General Plan, any other applicable specific plans or other similar plans, and the Los Gatos Municipal Code.

VII. SUMMARY
A. Based on substantial evidence in the foregoing Findings and in the information contained in the record, the Town Council has made the following findings with respect to each of the significant effects of the proposed Project identified in the Final EIR:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on the environment.

2. Based on the foregoing Findings and the information contained in the record, it is determined that:

Page 206 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 20 Draft – February 2025
All significant effects on the environment due to the approval of the proposed Project have been eliminated or substantially lessened where feasible.

Page 207 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community Final EIR
EMC Planning Group Inc.

Table 5-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Timing and
Monitoring
Air Quality
Mitigation Measure 6-5a. During construction, the project contractor shall implement the following measures to reduce emissions of fugitive dust and engine exhaust DPM, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. These measures shall be included in the project plans, prior to issuance of a demolition permit:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered three (3) times per day and at a frequency adequate to maintain minimum soil moisture of 12 percent. Moisture content can be verified by lab samples or moisture probe;
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered; c. Avoid tracking visible soil material on to public roadways by employing the following measures if necessary: (1) Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from public paved roads shall be treated with a 6 to 12-inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel and (2) washing truck tires and construction equipment prior to leaving the site;
d. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited; e. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to five (5) mph; f. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible.

Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; g. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five (5) minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points; h. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation; i. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph and visible dust extends beyond site boundaries; j. Wind breaks (e.g., trees, fences) shall be installed on the windward side(s) of actively disturbed areas of construction adjacent to sensitive receptors. Wind breaks should have no greater than 50 percent air porosity;
Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Director of Community
Development
Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans, prior to
issuance of a
demolition permit.

Monitoring during
construction.
5-3

EXHIBIT B

Page 208 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

5.1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
5-4 EMC Planning Group Inc.

Mitigation Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Timing and
Monitoring
k. Vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast-germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established; l. The simultaneous occurrence of excavation, grading, and ground-disturbing construction activities on the same area at any one time shall be limited. Activities shall be phased to reduce the amount of disturbed surfaces at any one time; and
m. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Town of Los Gatos regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The air district’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Mitigation Measure 6-5b. Prior to the issuance of the demolition permit, the project developer shall prepare, and the project contractor shall implement, a demolition and construction emissions avoidance and reduction plan demonstrating a 25 percent reduction of infant/child cancer risk and a 60 percent reduction of PM2.5 exposures at the MEI to meet the air district’s risk thresholds.

The plan shall be prepared prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. The plan shall be accompanied by a letter signed by a qualified air quality specialist, verifying the equipment included in the plan meets the standards set forth in this mitigation measure. The plan shall include the following measures:
a. All mobile diesel-powered off-road equipment operating on-site for more than two days and larger than 50 horsepower shall, at a minimum, meet U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) particulate matter emissions standards for Tier III engines or better. Prior to the issuance of any demolition permits, the project applicant shall submit specifications of the equipment to be used during construction and confirmation this requirement is met; b. Use alternatively fueled equipment or equipment with zero emissions (i.e., aerial lifts, forklifts, and air compressors, etc., shall be either electrified or fueled by liquefied natural gas/propane); c. Provide line power to the site during the early phases of construction to minimize the use of dieselpowered stationary equipment, such as generators; and d. Other demonstrable measures identified by the developer that reduce emissions and avoid or minimize exposures to the affected sensitive receptors.

Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Director of Community
Development
Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans, prior to
issuance of a
demolition permit.

Monitoring during
construction.

Biological Resources
Mitigation Measure 7-2. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a qualified biologist shall conduct preconstruction surveys for woodrat middens within the development footprint and fire defensible space.

These surveys shall be conducted no more than 15 days prior to the start of construction. In the event that construction activities are suspended for 15 consecutive days or longer, these surveys shall be repeated. All woodrat middens shall be flagged for avoidance of direct construction impacts and fire defensible space where feasible. If impacts cannot be avoided, woodrat middens shall be dismantled no Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Director of Community
Development
Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans, prior to
issuance of a grading
permit.

Page 209 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community Final EIR
EMC Planning Group Inc. 5-5
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Timing and
Monitoring
more than three days prior to construction activities starting at each midden location. All vegetation and duff materials shall be removed from three feet around the midden prior to dismantling so that the occupants do not attempt to rebuild. Middens are to be slowly dismantled by hand in order to allow any occupants to disperse.

Developers shall be responsible for implementation of this mitigation measure with oversight by the Town of Los Gatos. Compliance with this measure shall be documented by a qualified biologist and submitted to the Town, prior to issuance of a demolition and grading permit.

Monitoring during
construction.

Mitigation Measure 7-3. Within 14 days prior to tree removal or other construction activities such as a demolition, the project developer shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a habitat assessment for bats and potential roosting sites in trees to be removed, within structures proposed for demolition, and in trees and structures within 50 feet of the development footprint. In the event that construction activities are suspended for 15 consecutive days or longer, these surveys shall be repeated. These surveys shall include a visual inspection of potential roosting features (bats need not be present) and a search for presence of guano within and 50 feet around the project site. Cavities, crevices, exfoliating bark, and bark fissures that could provide suitable potential nest or roost habitat for bats shall be surveyed. Assumptions can be made on what species is present due to observed visual characteristics along with habitat use, or the bats can be identified to the species level with the use of a bat echolocation detector such as an “Anabat” unit. Potential roosting features found during the survey shall be flagged or marked. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas.

If no roosting sites or bats are found, a letter report confirming absence shall be submitted by the biologist to the Town of Los Gatos prior to issuance of tree removal and demolition permits and no further mitigation is required.

If bats or roosting sites are found, a letter report and supplemental documents shall be provided by the biologist to the Town of Los Gatos prior to issuance of tree removal and demolition permits and the following monitoring, exclusion, and habitat replacement measures shall be implemented:
a. If bats are found roosting outside of the nursery season (May 1 through October 1), they shall be evicted as described under (b) below. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, they shall be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. This could occur by either visual inspection of the roost bat pups, if possible, or by monitoring the roost after the adults leave for the night to listen for bat pups. If the roost is determined to not be a maternal roost, then the bats shall be evicted as described under (b) below. Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season. Therefore, if a maternal roost is present, a 50-foot buffer zone (or different size if determined in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife) shall be established around the roosting site within Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Director of Community
Development
Within 14 days prior to
tree removal or other
construction activities,
and prior to issuance of
a tree removal permit
and/or grading permit.

Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans.

Monitoring prior to
construction.

Page 210 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

5.1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
5-6 EMC Planning Group Inc.

Mitigation Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Timing and
Monitoring
which no construction activities including tree removal or structure disturbance shall occur until after the nursery season.
b. If a non-breeding bat hibernaculum is found in a tree or snag scheduled for removal or on any structures within 50 feet of project disturbance activities, the individuals shall be safely evicted, under the direction of a qualified bat biologist. If pre-construction surveys determine that there are bats present in any trees or structures to be removed, exclusion structures (e.g. one-way doors or similar methods) shall be installed by a qualified biologist. The exclusion structures shall not be placed until the time of year in which young are able to fly, outside of the nursery season. Information on placement of exclusion structures shall be provided to the CDFW prior to construction. If needed, other removal methods could include: carefully opening the roosting area in a tree or snag by hand to expose the cavity and opening doors/windows on structures, or creating openings in walls to allow light into the structures. Removal of any trees or snags and disturbance within 50 feet of any structures shall be conducted no earlier than the following day (i.e., at least one night shall be provided between initial roost eviction disturbance and tree removal/disturbance activities). This action will allow bats to leave during dark hours, which increases their chance of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation.
c. Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. If roosting habitat is identified, a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring plan will be prepared and implemented to mitigate for the loss of roosting habitat. The plan will include information pertaining to the species of bat and location of the roost, compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts, including specific mitigation ratios and a location of the proposed mitigation area, and monitoring to assess bat use of mitigation areas. The plan will be submitted to CDFW for review and approval prior to the bat eviction activities or the removal of roosting habitat.

Developers shall be responsible for implementation of this mitigation measure with oversight by the Town of Los Gatos. Compliance with this measure shall be documented and submitted to the Town, prior to issuance of grading and demolition permits.

Mitigation Measure 7-4. Prior to issuance of tree removal, demolition, and grading permits, to avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), construction activities within or adjacent to the project site boundary that include any tree or vegetation removal, demolition, or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) shall be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If this type of construction occurs during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project activities.

Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Director of Community
Development
Prior to issuance of tree
removal, demolition,
and grading permits.

Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans.

Monitoring prior to
construction.

Page 211 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community Final EIR
EMC Planning Group Inc. 5-7
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Timing and
Monitoring
a. Two surveys for active bird nests shall occur within 14 days prior to start of construction, with the final survey conducted within 48 hours prior to construction. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas. A report documenting survey results and plan for active bird nest avoidance (if needed) shall be completed by the qualified biologist prior to initiation of construction activities.
b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g. defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active.

Mitigation Measures 7-5a. To avoid impacts to a the potentially jurisdictional drainage feature, a minimum 10-foot setback from the drainage shall be maintained during tree removal, demolition, and construction activities. The drainage and setback area shall be shown on all demolition and construction plans.

Mitigation Measure 7-5b. If disturbance will occur within ten feet of the drainage, prior to issuance of a grading permit within the project boundary, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to determine the extent of potential wetlands and waterways regulated by the USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW. If the USACE claims jurisdiction, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to obtain a Clean Water Act Section 404 Nationwide Permit. If the impacts to the drainage features do not qualify for a Nationwide Permit, the applicant shall proceed with the qualified biologist in obtaining an Individual Permit from the USACE. The applicant shall then retain a qualified biologist to coordinate with the RWQCB to obtain a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification. If necessary, the applicant shall also retain a qualified biologist to coordinate with the CDFW to obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement.

Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Director of Community
Development
Prior to issuance of any
grading permit.

Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans.

Monitoring during
construction.

Page 212 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

5.1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
5-8 EMC Planning Group Inc.

Mitigation Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Timing and
Monitoring
To compensate for temporary and/or permanent impacts to Waters of the U.S. that would be impacted as a result of the proposed project, mitigation shall be provided as required by the regulatory permits.

Mitigation would be provided through one of the following mechanisms:
a. A Wetland Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall be developed that will outline mitigation and monitoring obligations for temporary impacts to wetlands and other waters as a result of construction activities. The Wetland Mitigation and Monitoring Plan would include thresholds of success, monitoring and reporting requirements, and site-specific plans to compensate for wetland losses resulting from the project. The Wetland Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall be submitted to the appropriate regulatory agencies for review and approval during the permit application process. b. To compensate for permanent impacts, the purchase and/or dedication of land to provide suitable wetland restoration or creation shall ensure a no net loss of wetland values or functions. If restoration is available and feasible, a minimum 1:1 mitigation to impact ratio would apply to projects for which mitigation is provided in advance.

Mitigation Measure 7-6. Prior to issuance of a tree removal permit and/or a grading permit, developers shall retain a certified arborist to develop a site-specific tree protection plan for retained trees and supervise the implementation of all proposed tree preservation and protection measures during construction activities, including those measures specified in the 2018 project arborist report and 2020 arborist report update (HortScience Bartlett Consulting). Also, in accordance with the Town’s Tree Protection Ordinance, the developer shall obtain a tree removal permit for proposed tree removals on each development lot prior to tree removals and shall install replacement trees in accordance with all mitigation, maintenance, and monitoring requirements specified in the tree removal permit(s) or otherwise required by the Town for project approvals.

Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Director of Community
Development
Prior to issuance of tree
removal permit and/or
grading permit.

Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans.

Monitoring during
construction.

Mitigation Measure 7-8. On-site landscaping shall be limited to drought-tolerant species, fire-resistant species, and species capable of increasing soil stability; with preference to plant species endemic to Santa Clara County. Species from the California Invasive Plant Council’s (Cal-IPC) Invasive Plant Inventory (Cal-IPC 2020) shall be removed if present and not included in any new landscaping.

The plant palette used for on-site landscaping shall be reviewed and approved by the Town of Los Gatos to confirm no invasive species shall be planted. Evidence of compliance shall be submitted to the Town of Los Gatos prior to occupancy of the residential buildings.

Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Director of Community
Development
Prior to issuance of final
occupancy permit.

Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans.

Monitoring after
construction.

Page 213 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community Final EIR
EMC Planning Group Inc. 5-9
Mitigation Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Timing and
Monitoring
Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure 8-2. The following measure shall be included in project plans, prior to issuance of a demolition permit:

If paleontological resources are uncovered during demolition, grading or other on-site excavation activities, construction shall stop until appropriate mitigation is implemented, to be approved by the Community Development Director.

Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Director of Community
Development
Prior to issuance of
demolition permit.

Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans.

Monitoring during
construction.

Geology and Soils
Mitigation Measure 13-1. The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the development plans, ground improvement plans, shoring design criteria from a geotechnical perspective, and supporting structural details and calculations (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for foundations, etc.,) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The project geotechnical consultant should review and approve appropriate performance testing for proposed ground improvement measures.

The results of the geotechnical plan review should be summarized by the project geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer prior to issuance of building permits.

Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Town Engineer Prior to issuance of
building permits.

Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans.

Monitoring during
construction.

Mitigation Measure 13-2. The geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections should include, but not necessarily be limited to:
 site preparation and grading;
 ground improvement;
 shoring measures and design;
 site surface and subsurface drainage improvements; and  excavations for foundations prior to placement of steel and concrete.

In addition, the project engineering geologist shall inspect opened excavations to confirm bedrock conditions are consistent with those anticipated.

The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project, including ground improvement measures and placement of engineered fill, should be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval prior to final (as-built) project approval.

Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Town Engineer Prior to issuance of
building permits.

Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans.

Monitoring prior during
construction.

Page 214 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

5.1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
5-10 EMC Planning Group Inc.

Mitigation Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility
Timing and
Monitoring
Specialty/design-build consultants and contractors (shoring, ground improvement, etc.) shall also submit construction reports confirming satisfactory construction of the specific aspects of the project that they are responsible for.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Mitigation Measure 13-3. The applicant shall consult with Bay Area Air Quality Management District to determine permit requirements. Removal of asbestos-containing building materials is subject to Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s Regulation 11, Rule 2: Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing. Release of lead into the atmosphere is subject to Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s Regulation 11, Rule 1: Lead.

Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Director of Community
Development
Prior to issuance of
demolition permits.

Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans.

Monitoring prior to and
during construction.

Wildfire Hazards
Mitigation Measure 12-1. In order to adequately address any potential conflicts with emergency access or evacuation routes during construction, the applicant shall prepare and implement a sitespecific construction traffic management plan for any construction effort that would require work within existing roadways. The traffic management plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Town prior to issuance of demolition permit(s) and shall be prepared to the satisfaction of Town Public Works and County Fire Department staff.

Applicant requirement
as a condition of
approval
Director of Public
Works
Prior to issuance of
demolition permits.

Ensure these measures
are incorporated into
project plans.

Monitoring prior to and
during construction.

SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2021

Page 215 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
1 of 4
Draft Ordinance Adoption Date
ATTACHMENT 4

DRAFT ORDINANCE

AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS REPEALING AND REPLACING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE 938 ESTABLISHING

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND ALLOWABLE USES FOR LOTS WITHIN THE

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE

FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
110 WOOD ROAD (APN 510-47-038).

THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION I. Planned Development Overlay Zone
The Town Code of the Town of Los Gatos is hereby amended to change the zoning on property located at 110 Wood Road (APN 510-47-038) as shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A, and is part of this Ordinance, from R:PD (Residential, Planned Development) to R:PD (Residential, Planned Development). Ordinance number 938, passed and adopted by the Town Council of Los Gatos on March 4, 1968, is hereby repealed and replaced with this Ordinance.

SECTION II. Uses and Improvements Authorized.

The PD (Planned Development Overlay) zone established by this Ordinance authorizes the following construction and use of improvements:

1. Demolition of all existing buildings on the site;

2. Construction of a new senior living facility as shown on the Official Development Plans (Exhibit B);

3. Removal of 192 trees, including 8 large protected trees;

4. Site improvements requiring a Grading Permit; and

5. Uses permitted are a senior living facility with independent units and supporting care units.

SECTION III. Compliance with Other Development Standards.

All provisions of the Town Code apply, except when the Official Development Plan specifically shows otherwise.

SECTION IV. Architecture and Site Approval Required.

Architecture and Site Approval is required prior to submitting for Building, Tree Draft Ordinance: subject to
modification by Town Council
based on
deliberations and direction

Page 216 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
2 of 4
Draft Ordinance Adoption Date
Removal, and/or Grading Permits. Construction permits shall only be in a manner complying with Section 29.80.130 (PD Ordinance) of the Town Code.

SECTION V. Official Development Plan.

The attached Exhibit A (Map), and Exhibit B (Official Development Plans), are part of the Official Development Plan.

SECTION VI. Performance Standards.

The performance standards included as Exhibit C, must be complied with before issuance of any grading, or construction permits (mitigation measures are so noted and are flagged with an asterisk).

SECTION VII. Severability.

In the event that a court of competent jurisdiction holds any Section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase in this Ordinance unconstitutional, preempted, or otherwise invalid, the invalid portion shall be severed from this Ordinance and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Town hereby declares that it would have adopted each Section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase in this Ordinance irrespective of the fact that any one or more Sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases in this Ordinance might be declared unconstitutional, preempted, or otherwise invalid.

SECTION VIII. Findings.

With respect to findings required for the Planned Development, the Town Council finds as follows:

Required finding for CEQA:

An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the proposed development. By Resolution, the Town Council made the CEQA Findings of Facts, certified the Final EIR, and adopted the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

Required consistency with the Town’s General Plan:

That the proposed Zone Change is consistent with the General Plan and its Elements in that the proposed development provides much needed senior housing and continuing care services to the Town.

Page 217 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
3 of 4
Draft Ordinance Adoption Date
Compliance with Hillside Specific Plan:

The project is in compliance with the Hillside Specific Plan in that the site has served as a senior living facility since 1971 and would continue to do so under the proposed PD. The project includes: modernization of the facility, circulation system, and safety characteristics; an increase in the open space area; and would include a similar number of living units, staff levels, and traffic generation. The proposal is consistent with the development criteria included in the plan.

Required findings for the adoption of a Planned Development Ordinance:

As required by Section 29.80.095 of the Town Code for adoption of a Planned Development Ordinance:

1. The proposed Planned Development complies with Chapter 29, Article VIII, Division 2 of the Town Code.

2. The proposed Planned Development is consistent with the General Plan in that the

3. development provides much needed senior housing and continuing care services to the Town.

4. The proposed Planned Development is consistent with the Hillside Specific Plan in that the project includes: modernization of the existing facility, circulation system, and safety characteristics; an increase in the open space area; and would include a similar number of living units, staff levels, and traffic generation to the existing facility.

5. The proposal is consistent with the development criteria included in the plan. The Planned Development Ordinance provides a public benefit to the Town by providing much needed senior housing and continuing care services.

SECTION IX. Publication.

In accordance with Section 63937 of the Government Code of the State of California, this Ordinance takes effect 30 days from the date of its passage. The Town Council hereby directs the Town Clerk to cause this Ordinance or a summary thereof to be published or posted in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California.

Page 218 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
4 of 4
Draft Ordinance Adoption Date
SECTION X. Effective Date.

This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos on the 4
th day of February 2025, and adopted by the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos at its regular meeting on the ____ day of _____ 2025, by the following vote:

COUNCIL MEMBERS:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

SIGNED:
_______________________________

MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS

LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
___________________________________

TOWN CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS

LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA

Page 219 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

WOOD RD

BROADWAY

W MAIN ST
SB HIGHWAY 17
NB HIGHWAY 17 S CREEK TRAIL

TAIT AV

VICTORY LN

S SANTA CRUZ AV

FARWELL LN
NB 17 TO S SANTA CRUZ

FAIRVIEW PLZ

BAYVIEW AV

CLIFTON AV

OAK KNOLL RD

TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Application No.

Change of zoning map amending the Town Zoning Ordinance.

Zone Change
Prezoning
From: R:PD To: R:PD
PD-20-001 A.P.N. # 510-47-038
Forwarded by Planning Commission
Approved by Town Council
Clerk Administrator:

Date:

Mayor:

Date:

Ord:
§
Santa Clara
County
Town of
Los Gatos

EXHIBIT A
November 13, 2024

Page 220 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank

Page 221 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

ATTACHMENT 4

EXHIBIT B

Page 222 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 223 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 224 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 225 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 226 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 227 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 228 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 229 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 230 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 231 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 232 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 233 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 234 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 235 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 236 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 237 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 238 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 239 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 240 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 241 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 242 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 243 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 244 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 245 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 246 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 247 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 248 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 249 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 250 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 251 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 252 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 253 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 254 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 255 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 256 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 257 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 258 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 259 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 260 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 261 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 262 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 263 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 264 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 265 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 266 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 267 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 268 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 269 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 270 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 271 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 272 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 273 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 274 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 275 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 276 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 277 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 278 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 279 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 280 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 281 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 282 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 283 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 284 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 285 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 286 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 287 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 288 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 289 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 290 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 291 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 292 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 293 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 294 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 295 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 296 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 297 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 298 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 299 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 300 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 301 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 302 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 303 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 304 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 305 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 306 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 307 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 308 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 309 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 310 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 311 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 312 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 313 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 314 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 315 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 316 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 317 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 318 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 319 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 320 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 321 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 322 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 323 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 324 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 325 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 326 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 327 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 328 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 329 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 330 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 331 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 332 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Page 333 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

ATTACHMENT 4
Exhibit C
TOWN COUNCIL – February 4, 2025
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR:
110 Wood Road
Planned Development Application PD-20-001
Environmental Impact Report EIR-21-002
Consider a Recommendation by the Planning Commission to Approve a Planned Development for Construction of a Senior Living Community, Removal of Large Protected Trees, and Site Improvements Requiring a Grading Permit on Property Zoned R:PD. APN 510-47-038. An Environmental Impact Report has been Prepared for the Project.

Applicant: Rockwood Pacific
Property Owner: Front Porch Communities

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The following performance standards must be complied with before issuance of any grading, or construction permits (mitigation measures are so noted and are flagged with an asterisk):

TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:

Planning Division

1. OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS: The Official Development Plans provided are conceptual in nature. Final building footprints, building designs, colors, and materials shall be determined during the Architecture and Site approval process.

2. ARCHITECTURE AND SITE APPROVAL REQUIRED: A separate Architecture and Site application and approval is required for the project. The Architecture and Site application may be reviewed by the Development Review Committee.

3. WATER EFFICIENCY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE: The final landscape plan shall meet the Town of Los Gatos Water Conservation Ordinance or the State Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, whichever is more restrictive. A review fee based on the current fee schedule adopted by the Town Council is required when working landscape and irrigation plans are submitted for review.

4. ARBORIST REQUIREMENTS: All recommendations of the 2018 project arborist report and 2020 arborist report update (HortScience Bartlett Consulting) shall be followed

5. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT: A Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained for trees approved for removal prior to the issuance of demolition or grading permits.

6. REPLACEMENT TREES: New trees shall be planted to mitigate the loss of trees being removed. The number of trees shall be determined using the canopy replacement table

Page 334 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
in the Tree Protection Ordinance.

7. TREE STAKING: All newly planted trees shall be double-staked using rubber tree ties prior to final inspection and issuance of occupancy permits.

8. TREE FENCING: Protective tree fencing shall be placed at the drip line of existing trees and shall remain through all phases of construction. Refer to the 2018 project arborist report and 2020 arborist report update (HortScience Bartlett Consulting) requirements.

Fencing shall be six-foot high cyclone attached to two-inch diameter steel posts drive 18 inches into the ground and spaced no further than 10 feet apart. Include a tree protection fencing plan with the construction plans.

9. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: Exterior lighting shall be kept to a minimum, and shall be down directed fixtures that will not reflect or encroach onto adjacent properties. No flood lights shall be used unless it can be demonstrated that they are needed for safety or security.

10. FINAL UTILITY LOCATIONS: The applicant shall submit plans showing the final locations and screening of all exterior utilities, including but not limited to, backflow preventers, Fire Department connections, transformers, utility boxes and utility meters. Utility devices shall be screened to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The plans shall be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits for new construction.

11. PLAN INCONSISTENCY: Any inconsistencies between sheets shall be limited to whichever is more restrictive.

12. *AIR QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURE AQ-6-5a: During construction, the project contractor shall implement the following measures to reduce emissions of fugitive dust and engine exhaust DPM, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. These measures shall be included in the project plans, prior to issuance of a demolition permit:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered three (3) times per day and at a frequency adequate to maintain minimum soil moisture of 12 percent. Moisture content can be verified by lab samples or moisture probe; b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered;
c. Avoid tracking visible soil material on to public roadways by employing the following measures if necessary: (1) Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from public paved roads shall be treated with a 6 to 12-inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel and (2) washing truck tires and construction equipment prior to leaving the site;
d. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited;
e. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to five (5) mph; f. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;

Page 335 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
g. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five (5) minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points;
h. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation;
i. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph and visible dust extends beyond site boundaries;
j. Wind breaks (e.g., trees, fences) shall be installed on the windward side(s) of actively disturbed areas of construction adjacent to sensitive receptors. Wind breaks should have no greater than 50 percent air porosity; k. Vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast-germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established;
l. The simultaneous occurrence of excavation, grading, and ground-disturbing construction activities on the same area at any one time shall be limited.

Activities shall be phased to reduce the amount of disturbed surfaces at any one time; and
m. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Town of Los Gatos regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The air district’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

13. *AIR QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURE AQ-6-5b: Prior to the issuance of the demolition permit, the project developer shall prepare, and the project contractor shall implement, a demolition and construction emissions avoidance and reduction plan demonstrating a 25 percent reduction of infant/child cancer risk and a 60 percent reduction of PM2.5 exposures at the MEI to meet the air district’s risk thresholds. The plan shall be prepared prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. The plan shall be accompanied by a letter signed by a qualified air quality specialist, verifying the equipment included in the plan meets the standards set forth in this mitigation measure. The plan shall include the following measures:
a. All mobile diesel-powered off-road equipment operating on-site for more than two days and larger than 50 horsepower shall, at a minimum, meet U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) particulate matter emissions standards for Tier III engines or better. Prior to the issuance of any demolition permits, the project applicant shall submit specifications of the equipment to be used during construction and confirmation this requirement is met;

Page 336 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
b. Use alternatively fueled equipment or equipment with zero emissions (i.e., aerial lifts, forklifts, and air compressors, etc., shall be either electrified or fueled by liquefied natural gas/propane);
c. Provide line power to the site during the early phases of construction to minimize the use of diesel-powered stationary equipment, such as generators; and
d. Other demonstrable measures identified by the developer that reduce emissions and avoid or minimize exposures to the affected sensitive receptors.

14. *BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-7-2: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for woodrat middens within the development footprint and fire defensible space. These surveys shall be conducted no more than 15 days prior to the start of construction. In the event that construction activities are suspended for 15 consecutive days or longer, these surveys shall be repeated. All woodrat middens shall be flagged for avoidance of direct construction impacts and fire defensible space where feasible. If impacts cannot be avoided, woodrat middens shall be dismantled no more than three days prior to construction activities starting at each midden location. All vegetation and duff materials shall be removed from three feet around the midden prior to dismantling so that the occupants do not attempt to rebuild. Middens are to be slowly dismantled by hand in order to allow any occupants to disperse.

15. *BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-7-3: Within 14 days prior to tree removal or other construction activities such as a demolition, the project developer shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a habitat assessment for bats and potential roosting sites in trees to be removed, within structures proposed for demolition, and in trees and structures within 50 feet of the development footprint. In the event that construction activities are suspended for 15 consecutive days or longer, these surveys shall be repeated. These surveys shall include a visual inspection of potential roosting features (bats need not be present) and a search for presence of guano within and 50 feet around the project site. Cavities, crevices, exfoliating bark, and bark fissures that could provide suitable potential nest or roost habitat for bats shall be surveyed.

Assumptions can be made on what species is present due to observed visual characteristics along with habitat use, or the bats can be identified to the species level with the use of a bat echolocation detector such as an “Anabat” unit. Potential roosting features found during the survey shall be flagged or marked. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas.

Page 337 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

If bats or roosting sites are found, a letter report and supplemental documents shall be provided by the biologist to the Town of Los Gatos prior to issuance of tree removal and demolition permits and the following monitoring, exclusion, and habitat replacement measures shall be implemented:
a. If bats are found roosting outside of the nursery season (May 1 through October 1), they shall be evicted as described under (b) below. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, they shall be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. This could occur by either visual inspection of the roost bat pups, if possible, or by monitoring the roost after the adults leave for the night to listen for bat pups. If the roost is determined to not be a maternal roost, then the bats shall be evicted as described under (b) below. Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season. Therefore, if a maternal roost is present, a 50-foot buffer zone (or different size if determined in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife) shall be established around the roosting site within the nursery season.
b. If a non-breeding bat hibernaculum is found in a tree or snag scheduled for removal or on any structures within 50 feet of project disturbance activities, the individuals shall be safely evicted, under the direction of a qualified bat biologist.

If pre-construction surveys determine that there are bats present in any trees or structures to be removed, exclusion structures (e.g. one-way doors or similar methods) shall be installed by a qualified biologist. The exclusion structures shall not be placed until the time of year in which young are able to fly, outside of the nursery season. Information on placement of exclusion structures shall be provided to the CDFW prior to construction. If needed, other removal methods could include: carefully opening the roosting area in a tree or snag by hand to expose the cavity and opening doors/windows on structures, or creating openings in walls to allow light into the structures. Removal of any trees or snags and disturbance within 50 feet of any structures shall be conducted no earlier than the following day (i.e., at least one night shall be provided between initial roost eviction disturbance and tree removal/disturbance activities). This action will allow bats to leave during dark hours, which increases their chance of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation. c. Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. If roosting habitat is identified, a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring plan will be prepared and implemented to mitigate for the loss of roosting habitat. The plan will include information pertaining to the species of bat and location of the roost, compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts, including specific mitigation ratios and a location of the proposed mitigation area, and monitoring to assess bat use of mitigation areas.

The plan will be submitted to CDFW for review and approval prior to the bat eviction activities or the removal of roosting habitat.

Developers shall be responsible for implementation of this mitigation measure with

Page 338 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
oversight by the Town of Los Gatos. Compliance with this measure shall be documented and submitted to the Town, prior to issuance of grading and demolition permits.

16. *BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-7-4: Prior to issuance of tree removal, demolition, and grading permits, to avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), construction activities within or adjacent to the project site boundary that include any tree or vegetation removal, demolition, or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) shall be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If this type of construction occurs during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project activities.

If project-related work is scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), or if construction activities are suspended for at least 14 days and recommence during the nesting season, a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys.
a. Two surveys for active bird nests shall occur within 14 days prior to start of construction, with the final survey conducted within 48 hours prior to construction. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas. A report documenting survey results and plan for active bird nest avoidance (if needed) shall be completed by the qualified biologist prior to initiation of construction activities.
b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g. defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active.

Page 339 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

17. *BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-7-5a: To avoid impacts to a the potentially jurisdictional drainage feature, a minimum 10-foot setback from the drainage shall be maintained during tree removal, demolition, and construction activities. The drainage and setback area shall be shown on all demolition and construction plans.

18. *BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-7-5b: If disturbance will occur within ten feet of the drainage, prior to issuance of a grading permit within the project boundary, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to determine the extent of potential wetlands and waterways regulated by the USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW. If the USACE claims jurisdiction, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to obtain a Clean Water Act Section 404 Nationwide Permit. If the impacts to the drainage features do not qualify for a Nationwide Permit, the applicant shall proceed with the qualified biologist in obtaining an Individual Permit from the USACE. The applicant shall then retain a qualified biologist to coordinate with the RWQCB to obtain a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification. If necessary, the applicant shall also retain a qualified biologist to coordinate with the CDFW to obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement.

To compensate for temporary and/or permanent impacts to Waters of the U.S. that would be impacted as a result of the proposed project, mitigation shall be provided as required by the regulatory permits. Mitigation would be provided through one of the following mechanisms:
a. A Wetland Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall be developed that will outline mitigation and monitoring obligations for temporary impacts to wetlands and other waters as a result of construction activities. The Wetland Mitigation and Monitoring Plan would include thresholds of success, monitoring and reporting requirements, and site-specific plans to compensate for wetland losses resulting from the project. The Wetland Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall be submitted to the appropriate regulatory agencies for review and approval during the permit application process.
b. To compensate for permanent impacts, the purchase and/or dedication of land to provide suitable wetland restoration or creation shall ensure a no net loss of wetland values or functions. If restoration is available and feasible, a minimum 1:1 mitigation to impact ratio would apply to projects for which mitigation is provided in advance.

19. *BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-7-6: Prior to issuance of a tree removal permit and/or a grading permit, developers shall retain a certified arborist to develop a site-specific tree protection plan for retained trees and supervise the implementation of all proposed tree preservation and protection measures during construction activities, including those measures specified in the 2018 project arborist report and 2020 arborist report update (HortScience Bartlett Consulting). Also, in accordance with the Town’s Tree Protection Ordinance, the developer shall obtain a tree removal permit for proposed tree removals on each development lot prior to tree removals and shall install replacement trees in accordance with all mitigation,

Page 340 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
maintenance, and monitoring requirements specified in the tree removal permit(s) or otherwise required by the Town for project approvals.

20. *BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-7-8: On-site landscaping shall be limited to drought-tolerant species, fire-resistant species, and species capable of increasing soil stability; with preference to plant species endemic to Santa Clara County.

Species from the California Invasive Plant Council’s (Cal-IPC) Invasive Plant Inventory (Cal-IPC 2020) shall be removed if present and not included in any new landscaping.

21. *CULTURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE CUL-8-2: The following measure shall be included in project plans, prior to issuance of a demolition permit:

22. *WILDFIRE HAZARDS MITIGATION MEASURE FIRE-12-1: In order to adequately address any potential conflicts with emergency access or evacuation routes during construction, the applicant shall prepare and implement a site-specific construction traffic management plan for any construction effort that would require work within existing roadways. The traffic management plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Town prior to issuance of demolition permit(s) and shall be prepared to the satisfaction of Town Public Works and County Fire Department staff.

23. *GEOLOGY AND SOILS RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE GEO-13-1: The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the development plans, ground improvement plans, shoring design criteria from a geotechnical perspective, and supporting structural details and calculations (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for foundations, etc.,) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The project geotechnical consultant should review and approve appropriate performance testing for proposed ground improvement measures.

The results of the geotechnical plan review should be summarized by the project geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer prior to issuance of building permits.

24. *GEOLOGY AND SOILS RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE GEO-13-2: The geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections should include, but not necessarily be limited to:
 Site preparation and grading;
 Ground improvement;
 Shoring measures and design;
 Site surface and subsurface drainage improvements; and

Page 341 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
 Excavations for foundations prior to placement of steel and concrete.

In addition, the project engineering geologist shall inspect opened excavations to confirm bedrock conditions are consistent with those anticipated.

25. *GEOLOGY AND SOILS RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURE GEO-13-3: The applicant shall consult with Bay Area Air Quality Management District to determine permit requirements. Removal of asbestos-containing building materials is subject to Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s Regulation 11, Rule 2: Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing. Release of lead into the atmosphere is subject to Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s Regulation 11, Rule 1: Lead.

26. TOWN INDEMNITY: Applicants are notified that Town Code Section 1.10.115 requires that any applicant who receives a permit or entitlement (“the Project”) from the Town shall defend (with counsel approved by Town), indemnify, and hold harmless the Town, its agents, officers, and employees from and against any claim, action, or proceeding (including without limitation any appeal or petition for review thereof) against the Town or its agents, officers or employees related to an approval of the Project, including without limitation any related application, permit, certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, compliance or failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, and/or processing methods (“Challenge”). Town may (but is not obligated to) defend such Challenge as Town, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all at applicant’s sole cost and expense.

Applicant shall bear any and all losses, damages, injuries, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, staff time and in-house attorney’s fees on a fully-loaded basis, attorney’s fees for outside legal counsel, expert witness fees, court costs, and other litigation expenses) arising out of or related to any Challenge (“Costs”), whether incurred by Applicant, Town, or awarded to any third party, and shall pay to the Town upon demand any Costs incurred by the Town. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in such Challenge as

Page 342 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town, in its sole discretion, determines appropriate, all the applicant’s sole cost and expense. No modification of the Project, any application, permit certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in processing methods shall alter the applicant’s indemnity obligation.

27. COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM: A memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building plans detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed.

Building Division

28. PERMITS REQUIRED: A Demolition Permit is required for the demolition of each individual building of the existing senior living community. A separate Building Permit is required for the construction of each new building located within the site. An additional Building Permit will be required for the PV system of each building if required by the California Energy Code.

29. APPLICABLE CODES: The current codes, as amended and adopted by the Town of Los Gatos as of January 1, 2023, are the 2022 California Building Standards Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Parts 1-12, including locally adopted Energy Reach Codes.

30. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Conditions of Approval must be blue lined in full on the cover sheet of the construction plans. A Compliance Memorandum shall be prepared and submitted with the building permit application detailing how the Conditions of Approval will be addressed.

31. BUILDING & SUITE NUMBERS: Submit requests for new building addresses to the Building Division prior to submitting for the building permit application process.

32. SIZE OF PLANS: Minimum size 24” x 36”, maximum size 30” x 42”.

33. REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPLETE DEMOLITION OF STRUCTURE: Obtain a Building Department Demolition Application and a Bay Area Air Quality Management District Application from the Building Department Service Counter. Once the demolition form has been completed, all signatures obtained, and written verification from PG&E that all utilities have been disconnected, return the completed form to the Building Department Service Counter with the Air District’s J# Certificate, PG&E verification, and three (3) sets of site plans showing all existing structures, existing utility service lines such as water, sewer, and PG&E. No demolition work shall be done without first obtaining a permit from the Town.

34. AIR QUALITY: To limit the project’s construction-related dust and criteria pollutant emissions, the following the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)- recommended basic construction measures shall be included in the project’s grading plan, building plans, and contract specifications:
a. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 2 minutes. Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. b. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. All non-road diesel construction

Page 343 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
equipment shall at a minimum meet Tier 3 emission standards listed in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Part 89, Subpart B, §89.112. c. Developer shall designate an on-site field supervisor to provide written notification of construction schedule to adjacent residential property owners and tenants at least one week prior to commencement of demolition and one week prior to commencement of grading with a request that all windows remain closed during demolition, site grading, excavation, and building construction activities in order to minimize exposure to NOx and PM10. The on-site field supervisor shall monitor construction emission levels within five feet of the property line of the adjacent residences for NOx and PM10 using the appropriate air quality and/or particulate monitor.

35. SOILS REPORT: A Soils Report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Official, containing foundation and retaining wall design recommendations, shall be submitted with the Building Permit Application. This report shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer specializing in soils mechanics.

36. SHORING: Shoring plans and calculations will be required for all excavations which exceed five (5) feet in depth, or which remove lateral support from any existing building, adjacent property, or the public right-of-way. Shoring plans and calculations shall be prepared by a California licensed engineer and shall confirm to the Cal/OSHA regulations.

37. FOUNDATION INSPECTIONS: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall be submitted to the project Building Inspector at foundation inspection. This certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the Soils Report, and that the building pad elevations and on-site retaining wall locations and elevations have been prepared according to the approved plans.

Horizontal and vertical controls shall be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered Civil Engineer for the following items:
a. Building pad elevation
b. Finish floor elevation
c. Foundation corner locations
d. Retaining wall(s) locations and elevations

38. TITLE 24 ENERGY COMPLIANCE: All required California Title 24 Energy Compliance Forms must be blue-lined (sticky-backed), i.e. directly printed, onto a plan sheet.

39. SITE ACCESSIBILITY: At least one accessible route within the boundary of the site shall be provided from public transportation stops, accessible parking and accessible passenger loading zones and public streets or sidewalks to the accessible building entrance that they serve. The accessible route shall, to the maximum extent feasible, coincide with the route for the general public. At least one accessible route shall connect all accessible buildings, facilities, elements and spaces that are on the same site.

40. ACCESSIBLE PARKING: The parking lots, as well as the parking structure, where parking is provided for the public as clients, guests or employees, shall provide handicap accessible parking. Accessible parking spaces serving a particular building shall be located on the shortest accessible route of travel from adjacent parking to an accessible

Page 344 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
entrance. In buildings with multiple accessible entrances with adjacent parking, accessible parking spaces shall be dispersed and located closest to the accessible entrances.

41. BACKWATER VALVE: The scope of this project may require the installation of a sanitary sewer backwater valve per Town Ordinance 6.50.025. Please provide information on the plans if a backwater valve is required and the location of the installation. The Town of Los Gatos Ordinance and West Valley Sanitation District (WVSD) requires backwater valves on drainage piping serving fixtures that have flood level rims less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole.

42. HAZARDOUS FIRE ZONE: All projects in the Town of Los Gatos require Class A roof assemblies.

43. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS: When a special inspection is required by CBC Section 1704, the Architect or Engineer of Record shall prepare an inspection program that shall be submitted to the Building Official for approval prior to issuance of the Building Permit.

The Town Special Inspection form must be completely filled-out and signed by all requested parties prior to permit issuance. Special Inspection forms are available from the Building Division Service Counter or online at www.losgatosca.gov/building.

44. BLUEPRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY SHEET: The Town standard Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program Sheet (page size same as submitted drawings) shall be part of the plan submittal as the second page. The specification sheet is available at the Building Division Service Counter for a fee of $2 or at ARC Blueprint for a fee or online at www.losgatosca.gov/building.

45. APPROVALS REQUIRED: The project requires the following departments and agencies approval before issuing a building permit:
a. Community Development – Planning Division: (408) 354-6874 b. Engineering/Parks & Public Works Department: (408) 399-5771 c. Santa Clara County Fire Department: (408) 378-4010
d. West Valley Sanitation District: (408) 378-2407
e. Santa Clara County Environmental Health Department: (408) 918-3479 f. Local School District: The Town will forward the paperwork to the appropriate school district(s) for processing. A copy of the paid receipt is required prior to permit issuance.

TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS:

Engineering Division
PPW Performance Standards to be inserted once they are provided.

TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT:

46. GENERAL: Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access, water supply and may include specific additional requirements as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan

Page 345 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
review to determine compliance with adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work, the applicant shall make application to, and receive from, the Building Department all applicable construction permits.

47. NOTE: The subject property is located within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) of the Local Responsibility Area (LRA). Pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) 4290, the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection is required to “…adopt regulations implementing minimum fire safety standards related to defensible space” applicable to “the perimeters and access to all residential, commercial, and industrial building construction.” In 2018, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed SB 901 (Dodd), which expanded the applicability of the regulations promulgated under PRC 4290 to land in the Local Responsibility Area (LRA) Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. All comments below that result from PRC 4290 are identified by **.

Where a conflict exists between local & 4290 requirements, the more stringent requirement shall apply. California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5, § 1273.08.

48. PRC 4290: This project deems compliance with the PRC 4290 requirements.

49. FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED: (As noted on Cover Sheet) In other than residential buildings which require the installation of fire sprinklers for all new buildings according to the California Residential Code, an automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all new buildings and structures. Note: Sprinklers are required for all structures and covered areas such as walkways and gazebos.

50. EMERGENCY RADIO RESPONDER COVERAGE: (As noted on Sheet C108). All new buildings shall have approved radio coverage for emergency responders within the building based upon the existing coverage levels of the public safety communication systems of the jurisdiction at the exterior of the building. This section shall not require improvement of the existing public safety communication systems. Refer to CFC Sec. 510 for further requirements. Emergency Radio Responder Coverage requirements applies to all buildings. [SCCFD Standard Details & Specifications, C-2].

51. STANDPIPES REQUIRED: (AMMR-See note below) Standpipe systems shall be provided in new buildings and structures in accordance with this section. Fire hose threads used in connection with standpipe systems shall be approved and shall be compatible with fire department hose threads. The location of fire department hose connections shall be approved. Standpipes shall be manual wet type. In buildings used for high-piled combustible storage, fire hose protection shall be in accordance with Chapter 32.

Installation standard. Standpipe systems shall be installed in accordance with this section and NFPA 14 as amended in Chapter 80. CFC Sec. 905. Locations of proposed interior standpipes and exterior terrace standpipes to comply with hose pull distances, are noted on Sheet C109.1 of the plans. Terrace hose valves are not allowed to be combined with automatic fire sprinkler systems for SCCFD. This review verified proposed locations. Further determination and validation of these locations will be reviewed upon submittal of the system plans.

Page 346 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

An AMMR request and associated drawings demonstrating terrace level exterior standpipe hose valves within 150-feet of all exterior portions of each structure, in lieu of apparatus access per CFC Sec. 503.1.1 and an associated fire flow letter, provided by San Jose Water (SJW) indicating that they will construct a new looped public 8" water main installation with four new 6" public hydrants to supply the site has been reviewed and approved by Chief Estrada on 09/14/21. SJW has indicated in their analysis that they will be able to provide 1,500 GPM at a minimum 20 psi. throughout the site, including from the most demanding location, approximately 405' N/N Wood Rd. at an elevation of 525'.

52. WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS: (As noted on Sheet C108) Potable water supplies shall be protected from contamination caused by fire protection water supplies. It is the responsibility of the applicant and any contractors and subcontractors to contact the water purveyor supplying the site of such project, and to comply with the requirements of that purveyor. Such requirements shall be incorporated into the design of any waterbased fire protection systems, and/or fire suppression water supply systems or storage containers that may be physically connected in any manner to an appliance capable of causing contamination of the potable water supply of the purveyor of record. Final approval of the system(s) under consideration will not be granted by this office until compliance with the requirements of the water purveyor of record are documented by that purveyor as having been met by the applicant(s). 2019 CFC Sec. 903.3.5 and Health and Safety Code 13114.7.

53. PUBLIC FIRE HYDRANT(S) REQUIRED: (As noted on Sheet C106 and in SJW fire flow letter) Provide public fire hydrant(s) at location(s) to be determined jointly by the Fire Department and San Jose Water Company. Maximum hydrant spacing shall be 500 feet, with a minimum single hydrant flow of 1500 GPM at 20 psi, residual. Fire hydrants shall be provided along required fire apparatus access roads and adjacent public streets. CFC Sec. 507, and Appendix B and associated Tables, and Appendix C. Hydrants are located on the complex side of the roadway and are immediately accessible (at road elevation) from the fire department access road. A fire flow letter, provided by San Jose Water (SJW) indicates that they will construct a new looped public 8" water main installation with four new 6" public hydrants to supply the site. SJW has indicated in their attached analysis that they will be able to provide 1,500 GPM at a minimum 20 psi. throughout the site, including from the most demanding location, approximately 405' N/N Wood Rd. at an elevation of 525'.

54. FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION REQUIRED: (As noted on Sheet C109.1) An FDC is required for each building to support its sprinkler system. They shall not be attached to the buildings. The fire department connection (FDC) shall be installed at the street, on the street address side of the building. It shall not be on the opposite side of a roadway from the structure that it supplies. It shall be located within 100 feet of a public fire hydrant and within ten (10) feet of the main PIV (unless otherwise approved by the Chief due to practical difficulties). FDC's shall be equipped with a minimum of two (2), two-and-one-half (2- 1/2”) inch national standard threaded inlet couplings. FDC's supplying private onsite fire hydrants shall have a minimum four (4) way inlet coupling.

Orientation of the FDC shall be such that hose lines may be readily and conveniently attached to the inlets without interference. FDC's shall be painted safety yellow. [SCCFD,

Page 347 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

SP-2 Standard]. Locations of all FDCs are noted on Sheet C109.1, as reference only.

Construction details of the FDC supply to fire protection systems will be subject to review of design details at time of installation permit submittal. One FDC is required for support of each individual building, as currently noted on the plans. Fire Department Connections are located within 100' from an approved fire hydrant.

55. REQUIRED SECONDARY FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS: (As noted on Sheet C108) Commercial and Industrial Developments 1. Buildings exceeding three stories or 30 feet in height. Buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144 mm) or three stories in height shall have a least two means of fire apparatus access for each structure. 2. Buildings exceeding 62,000 square feet in area. Buildings or facilities having a gross building area of more than 62,000 square feet (5760 mm) shall be provided with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads. Exception: Projects having a gross building area of up to 124,000 square feet (11520 mm) that have a single approved fire apparatus access road when all buildings are equipped throughout with approved automatic sprinkler systems. Multi-Family Residential Developments (R-1 & R-2 occupancies) 1. Multi-family residential projects having more than 100 dwelling units shall be equipped throughout with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads. CFC Sec. Chp. 5. Two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads are required. Aerial access is required for 7 of the 8 buildings. A 26' wide fire lane is shown in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of a building more than 30 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department access.

56. REQUIRED AERIAL ACCESS: Where required: 1. Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144 mm) in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway.

Roadways shall have a paved all weather surface, vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum circulating turning radius of 60 feet outside, a maximum slope of 15% and be able to withstand an imposed load of 75K pounds. 2. Width: Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet (7925) in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet (9144 mm) in height. 3. Proximity to building: At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet (4572mm) and a maximum of 30 feet (9144mm) from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building, as approved by the fire code official. CFC Ch. 5 and SCCFD SD&S A-1.

Aerial access is required for 7 of the 8 buildings. A 26' wide circulating fire lane is shown on the plans. Special consideration shall be taken to support aerial operations.

Aerial access demonstrated to the Villa parapets, and in turn to the roof decks via a structural ledge with permanently attached ladders is acknowledged and accepted. All aerial setup sections are noted to have a cross slope of no more than 2%. Approved AMMR application PC 24-2776 included in this project for Villa A aerial access.

Page 348 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

57. TURN RADIUS (CIRCULATING): (AMMR-See note below) The minimum outside turning radius is 42 feet for required access roadways. Greater radius up to 60 feet may be required where the Fire Department determines that Ladder Truck access is required.

Circulating refers to travel along a roadway without dead ends.

The turn at the entrance to the south of the arrival court has been revised and submitted with a Request for Variance. While this revision does improve the existing condition, and may now be accessible for a shorter wheel-based vehicle such as an ambulance, the cross slope at this location is still impassible for larger fire apparatus.

Conforming turnaround noted in front of Villa B. Appropriate radii and angles of approach and departure are required throughout the fire access roadway. [CFC 503.2.8].

As aerial access is required throughout the site, all turns shall provide a 60' outside radius and all slope transitions and points of approach and departure shall be no greater than 5%. An application for Alternate Materials, Design or Methods of Construction for this turnaround has been submitted per CFC 104.9 for consideration. The alternate has been approved by SCCFD however, the request form requires Building Official signature, architect/engineers signed stamp/seal and subsequent inclusion on the project documents.

58. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS REQUIRED FOR BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES: (As noted on Sheets C102 and C108) Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or with the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. [CFC, Section 503.1.1].

Compliant hose pull access routes leading to all portions of the exterior walls of the first story are shown on Sheet C109. Stair access from the Terrace level to the lowest level within each structure shown on Sheet C108. Proposed accessible paths for patient transfers between each villa and anticipated ambulance staging areas are noted on Sheet C108.

Several locations along the proposed fire department access roadway are within an existing tributary area, draining toward Broadway. Sheet C102 Pavement Design Note indicates that the roadway design shall support:75K pound loading capacity, 2) Point loads for aerial apparatus outriggers, and 3) Drainage design sufficient to prevent roadway erosion.

59. TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION SYSTEM: (As noted on Sheet C108) Two-way communication systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with all current editions of NFPA 72, the California Electrical Code, the California Fire Code, the California Building Code, and the city or town ordinances, policies, and standards where a two-way system is being installed. [SCCFD Standard Details & Specifications, C-1].

Other standards also contain design/installation criteria for specific life safety related equipment. These other standards are referred to in NFPA 72.

Page 349 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

60. ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION: (As noted on Sheet C108) New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Where required by the fire code official, address numbers shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches (101.6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm). Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained. CFC Sec. 505.1.

61. CLOSURE OF FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADWAYS: (As noted on Sheet C108) The installation of gates, or other barricades across required fire department access roads or driveways shall comply with Standard Details & Specifications, G-1. Detailed plans showing the location and method of the closure are required. Due to site access constraints, Broadway will be considered the primary emergency vehicle access route.

Signage shall be provided indicating it is for emergency access only as indicated on Sheet C108 and no obstruction to this access shall be installed or constructed without additional fire department review and approval.

62. FIRE LANE MARKING REQUIRED: (As noted on Sheet C108) Provide marking for all roadways within the project. Markings shall be per fire department specifications.

Installations shall also conform to Local Government Standards and Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications A-6. CFC Sec. 503.3.

63. PARKING: (As noted on Sheet C108) When parking is permitted on streets, in both residential/commercial applications, it shall conform to the following: Parking is permitted both sides of the street with street widths of 36 feet or more; Parking is permitted on one side of the street with street widths of 28 – 35 feet; No parking is permitted when street widths are less than 28 feet. NOTE: Rolled curbs can be part of the curb/sidewalk and used to increase the roadway width with approval from the fire code official. Additional requirements may apply for buildings 30 feet in height or greater. No parking shall be allowed along the access road. Fire Lane markings applied throughout.

64. REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: Previous approved AMMR PC 21-3638 requires minimum fireflow for this project as 1500 Gallons Per Minute (GPM) at 20 psi residual pressure. This fireflow assumes installation of automatic fire sprinklers per CFC [903.3.1.1]

65. GENERAL: This review shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of the California Fire Code or of other laws or regulations of the jurisdiction. A permit presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the Fire Code or other such laws or regulations shall not be valid. Any addition to or alteration of approved construction documents shall be approved in advance. [CFC, Ch.1, 105.3.6]

Page 350 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PREPARED BY: Sean Mullin, AICP
Planning Manager
Reviewed by: Planning Manager and Community Development Director 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 406-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov

TOWN OF LOS GATOS

PLANNING COMMISSION
REPORT
MEETING DATE: 11/13/2024
ITEM NO: 3
DATE: November 8, 2024
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Requesting Approval of a Planned Development for Demolition of a Senior Living Community, Construction of a New Senior Living Community, Removal of Large Protected Trees, and Site Improvements Requiring a Grading Permit on Property Zoned R:PD. Located at 110 Wood Road. APN 510-47-038. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Modified CEQA Checklist have been Prepared for this Project.

Planned Development Application PD-20-001 and Environmental Impact Report EIR-21-002. Applicant: Frank Rockwood. Property Owner: Front Porch Communities. Project Planner: Sean Mullin.

RECOMMENDATION:

Forward a recommendation to the Town Council on a request for approval of a Planned Development (PD) for demolition of an existing senior living community, construction of a new senior living community, removal of large protected trees, and site improvements requiring a Grading Permit on property Zoned R:PD, located at 110 Wood Road.

PROJECT DATA:

General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential: 5-12 dwelling units/acre Zoning Designation: Residential, Planned Development, R:PD Applicable Plans & Standards: General Plan; Hillside Specific Plan Parcel Size: 10.84 acres

Page 171 ends

ATTACHMENT 5

Page 351 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PAGE 2 OF 10
SUBJECT: 110 Wood Road/ PD-20-001 AND EIR-21-002
DATE: November 8, 2024
Surrounding Area:

CEQA:

An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) have been prepared for the project (Exhibits 1 and 2) and are available online at www.losgatosca.gov/110WoodRoad. Additionally, a Modified CEQA Checklist (based on the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist) was prepared that concluded that the revised project is adequately addressed in the EIR (Exhibit 6). Any new or increased environmental impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of the MMRP prepared for the 2021 EIR and standard Town conditions of approval. Additional environmental analysis and/or recirculation of the 2021 EIR is not required.

FINDINGS:
 As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for certifying the Final EIR.  That the PD to rezone the property is consistent with the General Plan.  That the project is in compliance with the Hillside Specific Plan.  As required by Section 29.80.095 of the Town Code for adoption of a Planned Development Ordinance.

ACTION:
 Forward a recommendation regarding Environmental Impact Report EIR-21-002 to the Town Council.
 Forward a recommendation regarding Planned Development application PD-20-001 to the Town Council.

Existing Land Use General Plan Zoning
North Single- and Multi-Family
Residential
Medium Density
Residential
R-1D
East Office-Professional and
Commercial
Central Business District C-2 and
C-2:PD
South Office-Professional and
Single-Family Residential
Hillside Residential and
Central Business District
HR-5
West Single-Family Residential and
Vacant
Hillside Residential HR-5

Page 172 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PAGE 3 OF 10
SUBJECT: 110 Wood Road/ PD-20-001 AND EIR-21-002
DATE: November 8, 2024
BACKGROUND:

The subject site is approximately 10.84-acres consisting of two underlying parcels at the intersection of Wood Road and South Santa Cruz Avenue (Exhibit 3). The property rises east-towest approximately 240 feet, and approximately 95 feet across the area of development. The subject property is characterized by a hillside setting and is in the Hillside Specific Plan area, but it is not located within the hillside area as defined by the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines (HDS&G). The site has been occupied by the Los Gatos Meadows since 1971, a senior living development approved under a PD ordinance in 1968.

On April 9, 2018, the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) reviewed a preliminary proposal for redevelopment of the subject property. The staff report and minutes of the CDAC meeting are available at www.losgatosca.gov/110WoodRoad.

In February 2019, the Los Gatos Meadows facility initiated a month’s long closure and transition process to relocate all residents. By September 2019, the facility was vacant. While the property owner, Front Porch Communities, has completed the closure process, the property continues to be staffed to provide on-going maintenance and to ensure security of the property.

On February 12, 2020, an application was filed by Frank Rockwood of Rockwood Pacific requesting a new PD zoning for the property for the purpose of building a new senior living community. The existing zoning is Residential, Planned Development (R:PD) and the General Plan Land Use designation is Medium Density Residential.

A Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project was prepared and circulated for a 45-day public review period from May 28, 2021, through July 12, 2021. The Final EIR, which includes the Response to Comments, was distributed on September 3, 2021. These environmental documents are available at www.losgatosca.gov/110WoodRoad.

On January 12, 2022, the Planning Commission considered the application and forwarded a recommendation of denial to the Council based on the following concerns:
 Building heights;
 Tree removal;
 Lack of diversity in housing types;
 Concentration of luxury housing units; and
 Ratio of the number of units (fewer than existing) to the overall height (greater than existing).

Additionally, the Planning Commission voted not to certify the Final EIR because it is based on a project that the Planning Commission found to be inappropriate, and environmental review is

Page 173 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PAGE 4 OF 10
SUBJECT: 110 Wood Road/ PD-20-001 AND EIR-21-002
DATE: November 8, 2024
not required for denial of a project. The Planning Commission staff reports and meeting minutes are available at www.losgatosca.gov/110WoodRoad.

On April 5, 2022, The Town Council considered the application and several options presented by the applicant developed to respond to the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission.

Included with these options was relocation of some of the building mass by reducing the height of some villas and increasing the height of other villas. Following public comment and Council discussion, the application was remanded back to the Planning Commission for further discussion with consideration of comments provided by the Town Council, which included but are not limited to, the following:
 Concern with proposed building heights, tall wall plains, and lack of screening;  Appreciative of applicant’s regard for fire safety;
 Preference for Options A and B;
 Support removal of penthouse units;
 Not supportive of removing parking to reduce grading; and  Provide full set of drawings and details of revised project.

The Town Council staff reports and meeting minutes are included as Exhibits 7 through 9 and available at www.losgatosca.gov/110WoodRoad.

On October 25, 2023, the Planning Commission conducted a Study Session on a revised proposal presented in a conceptual fashion to allow the applicant to received initial feedback prior to submitting a full revised project. During the Study Session, the Planning Commission noted the following positive aspects of the revised conceptual project:
 Reduction in grading;
 Elimination of the penthouse units; and
 Potential offsite programming at 142 S. Santa Cruz Avenue as a community benefit.

The Planning Commission also expressed concerns on the following aspects of the revised conceptual project:
 Overall height, consider expanding the development pad to lower height of buildings;  Visibility impacts when viewed from downtown and from neighboring residences on Wood Road; and
 Unit size and targeting of luxury market.

The Planning Commission staff report and meeting minutes are included as Exhibits 10 through 12 and available at www.losgatosca.gov/110WoodRoad.

Page 174 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PAGE 5 OF 10
SUBJECT: 110 Wood Road/ PD-20-001 AND EIR-21-002
DATE: November 8, 2024
DISCUSSION:

The applicant now presents a revised project (Exhibit 16B) for consideration by the Planning Commission and provided a revised Letter of Justification discussing the project changes (Exhibit 13). The Commission’s review should consider whether the revised submittal adequately responds to the comments and concerns expressed by the Planning Commission and Town Council on January 12, 2022, and April 5, 2022, respectively; and the feedback provided at the October 25, 2023, Planning Commission Study Session.

Building Height
The development footprint of the revised project is consistent with the previous iteration. The project revisions are primarily focused on a redistribution of building height and mass amongst the villas above the podium level. The revised project removes upper floors from the front portion of Villa A and adds a sixth floor to the rear portion of Villa A. Moving from the front/downhill portion of the building to the rear/uphill portion, Villa A now steps up from three stories, to four, five, and then six stories. Villa B has been reduced from four stories to three, and Villa H remains at three stories. Villa C has been reduced from five to four stories.

Villas D and E, previously separated, have been combined at the second floor creating a breezeway below. Villa D remains at four stories while Villa E has increased from five to six stories. Similarly, Villas F and G have been combined at the first floor, with Villa F remaining at five stories and Villa G remaining at four stories. These revisions push some of the taller building mass to the rear/uphill portions of the site and reduce building mass at the front/downhill portions of the site. As a result, the maximum building height of Villa A increased at the rear by approximately 11 feet, six inches and decreased at the front by approximately 26 feet; Villa B decreased in height by approximately 11 feet, six inches; Villa C decreased in height by approximately 12 feet; Villa E increased in height by approximately 12 feet, five inches; and Villa F decreased by approximately two feet. Maximum building heights of Villas D, G, and H remain unchanged.

In their Letter of Justification (Exhibit 13), the applicant indicates that they explored options to expand the development pad in order to reduce building heights, as recommended by the Planning Commission during the Study Session. The applicant selected not to expand the building pad, indicating that the overall impacts to the site would be increased.

Visibility Impacts
In their Letter of Justification (Exhibit 13), the applicant indicates that the changes in height and massing are intended to mitigate the visual impacts of the development by relocating height and massing deeper into the uphill portions of the site. Additionally, the revised project no longer includes height increases to Villas F and G, as presented as an option to the Council, to address the concerns of the neighbors along Wood Road. The applicant provided visual

Page 175 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PAGE 6 OF 10
SUBJECT: 110 Wood Road/ PD-20-001 AND EIR-21-002
DATE: November 8, 2024
renderings and a video to demonstrate the visual impacts of the development from several locations in the areas surrounding the project site (Exhibit 14).

Unit Size and Luxury Marketing
The revised project no longer includes any penthouse units, and the average unit size has decreased from 1,493 square feet to 1,414 square feet. The revised submittal also includes changes in the number of units and unit types. Total independent living units would increase from 174 to 187 units through elimination of the penthouse units and redistribution of the oneand two-bedroom units. The independent living unit mix includes four types of units:
one-bedroom, one-bedroom with den, two-bedroom, and two-bedroom with den. Additionally, the number of supporting care units would increase from 17 to 24.

Grading
The revised submittal reduces grading off-haul by approximately 11,500 cubic yards by reducing the size of the parking garages.

Parking
The revised plan shows that total parking spaces, including tandem spaces, would increase from 200 to 214 parking spaces. The parking increase is achieved through a reduction in standard spaces and an increase in tandem spaces. The tandem parking spaces would be managed under a 24/7 valet parking program.

The tables on the following page provide a comparison of the original project from 2021 to the revised project.

Page 176 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PAGE 7 OF 10
SUBJECT: 110 Wood Road/ PD-20-001 AND EIR-21-002
DATE: November 8, 2024
Comparison of Existing Development with 2021 and 2024 Proposals Project Component 1968 PD
(2019 Baseline)
Project Evaluated in
Draft/Final EIR -
2021
Revised Project 2024 Impact of Project Revisions
(2021 to 2024)
Site Coverage (%) 24.6 22.5 23 2.2% increase
Site Coverage (sf) 116,427 106,540 108,640 +2,100 (2% increase) Total Independent
Living Units
184 174 187 +13 (7.5% increase)
Total Supporting
Care Units
38 17 24 +7 (41% increase)
Total Units 205 191 211 +20 (10.5% increase)
Total Gross Square
Footage (SF)
150,475 430,816 438,971 +8,155 (2% increase)
Open Space 75.4% 77.5% 76.7% 1% decrease
Building Setbacks Front: 20’-0”
Side: 15’-0”, 27’-0
Rear: 15’-0”
Front: 34’-10”
Side: 40’-10”, 60’-10
Rear: 32’-11”
Front: 34’-10”
Side: 40’-10”, 60’-10
Rear: 32’-11”
No Change
Parking 111 spaces 78 non-tandem
200 total spaces
40 non-tandem
214 total spaces
-38 non-tandem
+12 total spaces
Height 2 stories
30’9” to 55’-2”
3 to 5 stories
59’-0” to 85’-6”
3 to 6 stories
59’-0” to 97’-0”
+ 1 story
+11’-6” max. height increase
Population and
Employment
205 units
222 residents
120 FTE
191 units
223 residents
120 FTE
211 units
251 residents
120 FTE
+20 (10.5% increase)
+28 (13% increase)
No change in FTEs
Comparison of Villas in 2021 and 2024
Villa
Project Evaluated in Draft/Final EIR – 2021 Revised Project – 2024 Units Residential
Square
Footage
Gross
Square
Footage
Height
from
Ground
Floor (ft)
Stories Units Residential
Square
Footage
Gross
Square
Footage
Height
from
Ground
Floor (ft)
Stories
A 46 63,480 157,054 85.5 5 50 65,479 124,517 59 to 97 3-6 B 20 29,465 41,483 70.5 4 18 20,590 36,510 59 3
C 29 41,887 56,891 82 5 23 32,733 51,150 70 4
D/
E
33 53,082 72,138 70.5
82 3
5 42 65,610 105,550 70
94 4
6 F/
G
31 49,794 72,138 84.5

70.5 3
5 37 57,300 39,595 82

71.5 4
5 H 15 22,076 31,112 59 3 17 22,016 37,573 59 3
Total 174 259,744 430,816
(+ 91,827
structured
parking =
522,643)
-- -- 187 263,728 453,200
(+ 83,330
structured
parking =
536,530)
-- --

Page 177 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PAGE 8 OF 10
SUBJECT: 110 Wood Road/ PD-20-001 AND EIR-21-002
DATE: November 8, 2024
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

An EIR was prepared for the project. As part of the environmental review process a number of technical reports were prepared, including species lists and database reviews, tree evaluations and arborist reports, geotechnical investigations, and traffic analyses. Reports that were prepared by outside consultants were peer reviewed by Town consultants.

The Notice of Preparation (NOP) was distributed on February 1, 2021, for a 30-day comment period. Comments received on the NOP are included as Appendix A to the Draft EIR (Exhibit 1).

The Notice of Completion and Availability for review of the Draft EIR was released on May 28, 2021, with the 45-day public review period ending on July 12, 2021. On June 23, 2021, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to accept comments on the Draft EIR. No comments were received at this meeting. Written comments on the Draft EIR were received from the applicant, one public agency, and three individuals. The Final EIR, with Response to Comments, was completed in August 2021 (Exhibit 2).

Through the Initial Study/EIR process, no significant and unavoidable impacts were identified.

All identified significant impacts that would result from the project can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through implementation of the MMRP that has been prepared for the project as required by CEQA (Exhibit 2). The MMRP includes a list of all mitigation measures and the department(s) responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measures are properly implemented. All mitigation measures are included as performance standards within the draft PD Ordinance (Exhibit 16).

A Modified CEQA Checklist (based on the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist) was prepared to determine if the previously prepared EIR adequately addresses the project as revised or whether the revised project will result in new or substantially increased environmental impacts requiring recirculation of the 2021 draft EIR. The analysis determined that the revised project has been adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR in terms of potential increases in or new environmental resulting from the revised project. Any new or increased environmental impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of the MMRP prepared for the 2021 EIR and standard Town conditions of approval. Therefore, additional environmental analysis and/or recirculation of the 2021 EIR is not required.

PUBLIC COMMENTS:

As detailed in the Letter of Justification, the applicant has been engaged with the surrounding neighborhood, business community, Town officials, and the greater Los Gatos community since 2018 through open house meetings, focus groups, individual in-person and video meetings, and maintenance of a project website (Exhibit 13). The applicant also provided a supplemental

Page 178 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PAGE 9 OF 10
SUBJECT: 110 Wood Road/ PD-20-001 AND EIR-21-002
DATE: November 8, 2024
community engagement letter summarizing their outreach efforts that have taken place since the Letter of Justification was submitted (Exhibit 15).

Written notice was sent to property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the subject property. As approved by the Council, visual renderings were prepared in-place of story poles and made available on the applicant’s website for some time and provided on the Town’s website on November 4, 2024. Project signs were also installed at the primary entrance on Wood Road and at the intersection of Farwell Lane and Broadway. Public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Tuesday, October 24, 2023, and 11:00 a.m., Friday, November 8, 2024, are included as Exhibit 17.

CONCLUSION:

A. Summary
The applicant presents a revised project for consideration by the Planning Commission. The Commission’s review should consider whether the revised submittal adequately responds to the comments and concerns expressed by the Planning Commission and Town Council on January 12, 2022, and April 5, 2022, respectively; and the feedback provided at the October 25, 2023, Planning Commission Study Session.

B. Recommendation
Based on the summary above, if the Commission finds merit in the proposal, the Commission can take the following actions to forward the Final EIR and PD applications to the Town Council, recommending that the Town Council:

1. Make the required findings included in Exhibit 4;

2. Make the required CEQA Findings of Fact (Exhibit 5), certify the Final EIR (Exhibit 2), and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit 2); and

3. Adopt the Planned Development Ordinance (Exhibit 16) and approve the proposed project.

C. Alternatives
Alternatively, if the Commission has concerns with the proposed project, it can:

1. Forward a recommendation for approval of the applications with modified performance standards to the Town Council; or

2. Forward a recommendation of denial of the applications to the Town Council; or

3. Continue the matter to a date certain with specific direction.

Page 179 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PAGE 10 OF 10
SUBJECT: 110 Wood Road/ PD-20-001 AND EIR-21-002
DATE: November 8, 2024
EXHIBITS:

Exhibits previously received under separate cover:

1. May 2021 Draft Environmental Impact Report (available online at www.losgatosca.gov/110WoodRoad)

2. August 2021 Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (available online at www.losgatosca.gov/110WoodRoad) Exhibits received with this Staff Report:

3. Location Map

4. Required Findings

5. Required CEQA Findings of Fact

6. Modified CEQA Checklist, dated September 24, 2024

7. April 5, 2022 Town Council Staff Report (with Attachments)

8. April 5, 2022 Town Council Addendum Report (with Attachments)

9. April 5, 2022 Town Council Minutes

10. October 25, 2023 Planning Commission Study Session Staff Report (with Exhibits)

11. October 25, 2023 Planning Commission Study Session Addendum Report (with Exhibits)

12. October 25, 2023 Planning Commission Study Session Minutes

13. Letter of Justification, dated May 31, 2024

14. Visual Renderings

15. Supplemental Community Engagement Letter, dated October 14, 2024

16. Planned Development Ordinance with Exhibit A Rezone Area and Exhibit B Development Plans, May 31, 2024

17. Public comments received between 11:01 a.m., Tuesday, October 24, 2023, and 11:00 a.m., Friday, November 8, 2024

Page 180 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

WOOD RD

W MAIN ST
SB HIGHWAY 17
NB HIGHWAY 17

S CREEK TRAIL

BROADWAY

COLLEGE AV

TAIT AV

VICTORY LN

PARK AV

S SANTA CRUZ AV

FARWELL LN
SB 17 FROM S SANTA CRUZ

N SANTA CRUZ AV

STATION WY

EUCLID AV

CLIFTON AV
110 Wood Road
0 0.125 0.25
Miles
°
EXHIBIT 3

Page 181 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank

Page 182 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PLANNING COMMISSION – November 13, 2024
REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR:
110 Wood Road
Planned Development Application PD-20-001
Environmental Impact Report EIR-21-002
Requesting Approval of a Planned Development for Demolition of a Senior Living Community, Construction of a New Senior Living Community, Removal of Large Protected Trees, and Site Improvements Requiring a Grading Permit on Property Zoned R:PD. APN 510-47-038. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Modified CEQA Checklist have been Prepared for this Project.

Applicant: Frank Rockwood
Property Owner: Front Porch Communities

FINDINGS
Required finding for CEQA:
■ An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the proposed development. The Planning Commission recommends that the Town Council make the CEQA Findings of Fact, certify the Final EIR, and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

Required consistency with the Town’s General Plan:
■ That the proposed Zone Change is consistent with the General Plan and its Elements in that the proposed development provides much needed senior housing and continuing care services to the Town.

Compliance with Hillside Specific Plan:
■ The project is in compliance with the Hillside Specific Plan in that the site has served as a senior living facility since 1971 and would continue to do so under the proposed PD. The project includes modernization of the facility, circulation system, and safety characteristics; an increase in the open space area; and would include a similar number of living units, staff levels, and traffic generation. The proposal is consistent with the development criteria included in the plan.

Required finding for the adoption of a Planned Development Ordinance:
■ As required by Section 29.80.095 of the Town Code for adoption of a Planned Development Ordinance:

EXHIBIT 4

Page 183 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

1. The proposed Planned Development complies with Chapter 29, Article VIII, Division 2 of the Town Code.

2. The proposed Planned Development is consistent with the General Plan in that the development provides much needed senior housing and continuing care services to the Town.

3. The proposed Planned Development is consistent with the Hillside Specific Plan in that the project includes modernization of the existing facility, circulation system, and safety characteristics; an increase in the open space area; and would include a similar number of living units, staff levels, and traffic generation to the existing facility.

4. The proposal is consistent with the development criteria included in the plan. The Planned Development Ordinance provides a public benefit to the Town by providing much needed senior housing and continuing care services.

N:\DEV\FINDINGS\2022\WOOD ROAD, 110 - 01-12-22 PC.DOCX

Page 184 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

D R A F T

CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT
for
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior
Living Community
Planned Development Application PD-20-001
SCH # 2021020007
Town Council
Town of Los Gatos
October 2021
EXHIBIT 5

Page 185 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR ii Draft – October 2021

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 186 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – October 2021 iii

CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................. 1 II. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS ........................................................... 1 III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION.................................................................................. 3 A. Project Location and Current Use ........................................................................ 3 B. Project Objectives................................................................................................. 3 C. Project Characteristics.......................................................................................... 3 IV. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES................................ 3 A. Air Quality............................................................................................................. 4 B. Biological Resources............................................................................................ 6 C. Cultural Resources ............................................................................................. 12 D. Geology and Soils .............................................................................................. 13 E. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................................................... 14 F. Wildfire Hazards ................................................................................................. 15 V. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES............................................................................. 16 A. Alternative 1: No Project Alternative – Existing (Closed) Senior Living Community.................................................................................... 17 B. Alternative 2: No Project - Residential Project Consistent with the Project Site’s General Plan Land Use Designation ............................................ 17 C. Alternative 3: Reduced Scale - Removal of Villas B and C from Proposed Site Plan............................................................................................. 17 D. Environmentally Superior Alternative.................................................................. 18 VI. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM .......................... 18 VII. RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS................................................................. 18 VII. SUMMARY........................................................................................................ 19

Page 187 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR iv Draft – October 2021

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 188 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – October 2021 1
I. INTRODUCTION
The Draft EIR prepared for the 110 Wood Road - Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community Project (also referred to as the Project or proposed Project) identified several potentially significant environmental effects that the proposed project may cause. All of these significant effects can be fully avoided through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures. Pursuant to Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Section 15090, the Town Council of Los Gatos (Council) hereby certifies that the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the 110 Wood Road - Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community project (proposed Project) has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21000 et seq. (CEQA), that the Final EIR was presented to the Council, and that the Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to approving the proposed Project, as set forth below. As part of this certification, the Council hereby finds that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Council and approves the Final EIR.

II. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
CEQA (PRC Section 21000 et seq.) requires state and local government agencies to consider the environmental consequences of projects for which they have discretionary authority. This document, which has been prepared in compliance with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Title 14 Section 15000 et seq.), sets forth the findings of the Town of Los Gatos (Town), the lead agency under CEQA, regarding the 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community project.

The primary source for this document is the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR; SCH #2021020007) for the proposed Project, and the documents that have been incorporated into the Final EIR directly or by reference. Full descriptions of the proposed Project, associated environmental impacts, mitigation measures, Project alternatives, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the proposed Project, and other features required under CEQA are contained in the Final EIR itself.

To determine the scope of the EIR, the Town prepared a Notice of Preparation. On February 4, 2021, the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the proposed Project were distributed to trustee and responsible agencies, members of the public, other interested parties, and the California Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse. This began the 30-day public review period, which ended on March 8, 2021. These comments were considered during the preparation of the Draft EIR (see below) and are included in their entirety in Appendix A to that document.

The Draft EIR, with an accompanying Notice of Completion (NOC), was circulated to the State Clearinghouse, trustee agencies, responsible agencies, other government agencies, and interested members of the public for a 45-day review period, extending from May 28, 2021 through July 12, 2021. On June 23, 2021, the Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive oral comment on the Draft EIR.

Page 189 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 2 Draft – October 2021
Comments on the Draft EIR, a list of commenters, and the Town’s responses to comments are contained in the Final EIR, dated August 2021. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15088(b), the Final EIR was made available for review by trustee and responsible agencies that provided written comments on the Draft EIR for a 10-day period from September 3, 2021 through September 13, 2021
The Final EIR for the Project consists of the following:

A. Draft Environmental Impact Report (“Draft EIR”), issued May 28, 2021; B. All appendices to the Draft EIR;
C. Final EIR, dated August 2021, containing all written comments and responses on the Draft EIR, refinements and clarifications to the Draft EIR, the MMRP, and technical appendices;
D. All of the comments and staff responses entered into the record orally and in writing, as well as accompanying technical memoranda or evidence entered into the record.

The Final EIR did not provide any significant new information regarding proposed Project or cumulative impacts or mitigation measures beyond that contained in the Draft EIR.

In conformance with CEQA, the Town has taken the following actions in relation to the EIR:

A. On January 12, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a duly and properly noticed public hearing on the Project and the EIR, and recommended that the Town Council certify the EIR and approve the redevelopment of the 10.84-acre site with a senior living community that would replace the existing Los Gatos Meadows senior living community. The project would include 174 independent residential apartments plus 17 supporting care units. The project, a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC), would be licensed as a Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE) under the California Department of Social Services. The project would be restricted to persons age 62 and older and would provide 24/7 assisted living services to the residents. The project would provide coordinated health care services, including 17 supporting care units. These proposed services would be similar to the use offered in the previous community.

B. On DATE TBD, at a duly and properly noticed public hearing, the Town Council certified the EIR and adopted findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program related to the Planned Development application filed by the applicant requesting a “Planned Development” overlay be applied to the site’s existing “Residential Planned Development” zoning designation.

Page 190 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – October 2021 3
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Project Location and Current Use
The project site is located at 110 Wood Road in the Town of Los Gatos. The property is accessed directly off Wood Road (via South Santa Cruz Avenue). The project site’s Assessor’s parcel number is 510-47-038, and is generally located between single family residences along Broadway to the northeast and Wood Road to the south. The site is zoned “Residential Planned Development (R:PD)” and has a General Plan land use designation of Medium Density Residential. The General Plan land use designation of Medium Density Residential allows for a maximum density of 12 dwelling units per acre. A senior living community has been operating on the site since 1971 with 10 residential buildings and other support facilities and amenities. The site has three access points: two from the south off of Wood Road and one from the north via a driveway (referred to as Farwell Lane) connecting with Broadway. The facility has been closed since February 2019, after a rigorous facilities assessment concluded that continuing operations of the facility in its present form presented too great a risk to its residents. Although the facility has completed the closure process, the facility continues to be staffed to provide on-going maintenance and security of the property.

B. Project Objectives
The objective of the proposed project is to approve a new/updated Planned Development (PD) to rebuild a state-of-the art senior living community on a 10.84-acre site consistent with the Town of Los Gatos 2020 General Plan, Town of Los Gatos zoning code and in the spirit of the Town of Los Gatos Hillside Design Standards and Guidelines.

C. Project Characteristics
The Project applicant is requesting approval of the following:
 Planned Development (PD) Overlay permit (PD-20-001)
A Planned Development application has been filed by the applicant requesting a “Planned Development” overlay be applied to the site’s existing “Residential Planned Development” zoning designation. A subsequent Architecture and Site application will be required if the Planned Development application is approved by the Town Council. In accordance with Town Code Section 29.20.140(d), the Architecture and Site approval is required for purposes of approving the development plan for the new senior living community to ensure conformance with Town regulations related to the height, width, shape, proportion, siting, exterior construction and design of buildings and to ensure that they are architecturally compatible with their surroundings.

IV. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The Final EIR analyzed proposed Project impacts in the following six environmental topic areas: Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire Hazards. With implementation of proposed Project-specific

Page 191 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 4 Draft – October 2021
mitigation measures, potentially significant impacts would be reduced to less than significant impacts.

The following discussion elaborates on potentially significant impacts identified in the 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community Final EIR and mitigation measures proposed for those impacts.

A. Air Quality

1. Potentially Significant Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant Levels Impact 6-5: Construction Activity Would Expose Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants
Sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of construction activities would be exposed to construction TAC emissions volumes that exceed the air district significance thresholds for infant/child cancer risks and PM2.5 concentrations. These are significant impacts.

Implementation of the following Mitigation Measures would reduce the impact to a less-thansignificant level.

Mitigation Measures:

Mitigation Measure 6-5a During construction, the project contractor shall implement the following measures to reduce emissions of fugitive dust and engine exhaust DPM, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. These measures shall be included in the project plans, prior to issuance of a demolition permit:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered three (3) times per day and at a frequency adequate to maintain minimum soil moisture of 12 percent. Moisture content can be verified by lab samples or moisture probe;
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered;
c. Avoid tracking visible soil material on to public roadways by employing the following measures if necessary: (1) Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from public paved roads shall be treated with a 6 to 12-inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel and (2) washing truck tires and construction equipment prior to leaving the site;
d. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited;
e. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to five (5) mph; f. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
g. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five (5) minutes (as required by the California

Page 192 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – October 2021 5
airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points;
h. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation; i. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph and visible dust extends beyond site boundaries;
j. Wind breaks (e.g., trees, fences) shall be installed on the windward side(s) of actively disturbed areas of construction adjacent to sensitive receptors. Wind breaks should have no greater than 50 percent air porosity;
k. Vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast-germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established;
l. The simultaneous occurrence of excavation, grading, and ground-disturbing construction activities on the same area at any one time shall be limited. Activities shall be phased to reduce the amount of disturbed surfaces at any one time; and m. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Town of Los Gatos regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The air district’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Mitigation Measure 6-5b Prior to the issuance of the demolition permit, the project developer shall prepare, and the project contractor shall implement, a demolition and construction emissions avoidance and reduction plan demonstrating a 78 percent reduction of DPM emissions and a 60 percent reduction of PM2.5 exposures at the MEI to meet the air district’s risk thresholds.

The plan shall be prepared prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. The plan shall be accompanied by a letter signed by a qualified air quality specialist, verifying the equipment included in the plan meets the standards set forth in this mitigation measure. The plan shall include the following measures:
a. All mobile diesel-powered off-road equipment operating on-site for more than two days and larger than 50 horsepower shall, at a minimum, meet U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) particulate matter emissions standards for Tier III engines or better. Prior to the issuance of any demolition permits, the project applicant shall submit specifications of the equipment to be used during construction and confirmation this requirement is met;
b. Use alternatively fueled equipment or equipment with zero emissions (i.e., aerial lifts, forklifts, and air compressors, etc., shall be either electrified or fueled by liquefied natural gas/propane);
c. Provide line power to the site during the early phases of construction to minimize the use of diesel-powered stationary equipment, such as generators; and d. Other demonstrable measures identified by the developer that reduce emissions and avoid or minimize exposures to the affected sensitive receptors.

Page 193 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 6 Draft – October 2021
Finding
All of the proposed Project specific environmental impacts on air quality will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

Mitigation Measures: 6-5a and 6-5b
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.

B. Biological Resources

1. Potentially Significant Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant Levels Impact 7-2: Potential Effect on Candidate, Sensitive, or Special-Status Species (San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat)
If San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat is present within the 0.3 acres of oak/bay woodland or

5.2 acres of mixed woodland within the proposed project impact area, loss or disturbance of woodrats due to midden removal during construction and fire safety activities would be a significant adverse environmental impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure 7-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for woodrat middens within the development footprint and fire defensible space. These surveys shall be conducted no more than 15 days prior to the start of construction. In the event that construction activities are suspended for 15 consecutive days or longer, these surveys shall be repeated. All woodrat middens shall be flagged for avoidance of direct construction impacts and fire defensible space where feasible.

If impacts cannot be avoided, woodrat middens shall be dismantled no more than three days prior to construction activities starting at each midden location. All vegetation and duff materials shall be removed from three feet around the midden prior to dismantling so that the occupants do not attempt to rebuild. Middens are to be slowly dismantled by hand in order to allow any occupants to disperse.

Impact 7-3. Potential Effect on Candidate, Sensitive, or Special-Status Species (Pallid Bat, Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat)
Potential habitat for pallid bat and Townsend’s big-eared bat occurs in mature, hollow trees and around structures present within the project site. If special-status bats are present on the site, tree removal and other construction activities could result in the loss of individual animals. This would be a significant adverse environmental impact. Implementation of the

Page 194 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – October 2021 7
following mitigation measure would reduce the potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure 7-3 Within 14 days prior to tree removal or other construction activities such as a demolition, the project developer shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a habitat assessment for bats and potential roosting sites in trees to be removed, within structures proposed for demolition, and in trees and structures within 50 feet of the development footprint. In the event that construction activities are suspended for 15 consecutive days or longer, these surveys shall be repeated. These surveys shall include a visual inspection of potential roosting features (bats need not be present) and a search for presence of guano within and 50 feet around the project site. Cavities, crevices, exfoliating bark, and bark fissures that could provide suitable potential nest or roost habitat for bats shall be surveyed. Assumptions can be made on what species is present due to observed visual characteristics along with habitat use, or the bats can be identified to the species level with the use of a bat echolocation detector such as an “Anabat” unit. Potential roosting features found during the survey shall be flagged or marked. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas.

If bats or roosting sites are found, a letter report and supplemental documents shall be provided by the biologist to the Town of Los Gatos prior to issuance of tree removal and demolition permits and the following monitoring, exclusion, and habitat replacement measures shall be implemented:
a. If bats are found roosting outside of the nursery season (May 1 through October 1), they shall be evicted as described under (b) below. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, they shall be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. This could occur by either visual inspection of the roost bat pups, if possible, or by monitoring the roost after the adults leave for the night to listen for bat pups. If the roost is determined to not be a maternal roost, then the bats shall be evicted as described under (b) below. Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season. Therefore, if a maternal roost is present, a 50-foot buffer zone (or different size if determined in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife) shall be established around the roosting site within which no construction activities including tree removal or structure disturbance shall occur until after the nursery season.
b. If a non-breeding bat hibernaculum is found in a tree or snag scheduled for removal or on any structures within 50 feet of project disturbance activities, the individuals shall be safely evicted, under the direction of a qualified bat biologist. If preconstruction surveys determine that there are bats present in any trees or structures to be removed, exclusion structures (e.g. one-way doors or similar methods) shall be installed by a qualified biologist. The exclusion structures shall not be placed until the time of year in which young are able to fly, outside of the nursery

Page 195 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 8 Draft – October 2021
season. Information on placement of exclusion structures shall be provided to the CDFW prior to construction. If needed, other removal methods could include:
carefully opening the roosting area in a tree or snag by hand to expose the cavity and opening doors/windows on structures, or creating openings in walls to allow light into the structures. Removal of any trees or snags and disturbance within 50 feet of any structures shall be conducted no earlier than the following day (i.e., at least one night shall be provided between initial roost eviction disturbance and tree removal/disturbance activities). This action will allow bats to leave during dark hours, which increases their chance of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation.
c. Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. If roosting habitat is identified, a Bat Mitigation and Monitoring plan will be prepared and implemented to mitigate for the loss of roosting habitat. The plan will include information pertaining to the species of bat and location of the roost, compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts, including specific mitigation ratios and a location of the proposed mitigation area, and monitoring to assess bat use of mitigation areas. The plan will be submitted to CDFW for review and approval prior to the bat eviction activities or the removal of roosting habitat.

Impact 7-4: Potential Effect on Candidate, Sensitive, or Special-Status Species (Nesting Raptors and Migratory Birds)
If nesting birds protected by state and federal regulations are present on or adjacent to the site during construction activities including vegetation removal and site preparation including building demolition, the proposed project may directly result in loss of active nests, or indirectly result in nest abandonment and thereby cause loss of fertile eggs or nestlings. This would be a significant adverse environmental impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure 7-4 Prior to issuance of tree removal, demolition, and grading permits, to avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), construction activities within or adjacent to the project site boundary that include any tree or vegetation removal, demolition, or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) shall be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If this type of construction occurs during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project activities.

Page 196 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – October 2021 9
a. Two surveys for active bird nests shall occur within 14 days prior to start of construction, with the final survey conducted within 48 hours prior to construction.

Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors.

Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas. A report documenting survey results and plan for active bird nest avoidance (if needed) shall be completed by the qualified biologist prior to initiation of construction activities. b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g. defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active.

Impact 7-5: Effect on Federally- and State-Protected Wetlands or Waters of the U.S. (Intermittent or Ephemeral Drainage)
The Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2020 requires for all development to “protect wetlands and riparian corridors, including intermittent and ephemeral streams.” The on-site drainage feature may also fall under the jurisdiction of the USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW. Impacts to jurisdictional wetland and waterway features are considered significant adverse environmental impacts. The following mitigation measures would assure that this potentially significant impact is reduced to less than significant.

Mitigation Measures 7-5a To avoid impacts to a the potentially jurisdictional drainage feature, a minimum 10-foot setback from the drainage shall be maintained during tree removal, demolition, and construction activities. The drainage and setback area shall be shown on all demolition and construction plans.

Mitigation Measure 7-5b If disturbance will occur within ten feet of the drainage, prior to issuance of a grading permit within the project boundary, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to determine the extent of potential wetlands and waterways regulated by the USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW. If the USACE claims jurisdiction, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to obtain a Clean Water Act Section 404 Nationwide Permit. If the impacts to the drainage features do not qualify for a Nationwide Permit, the applicant shall proceed

Page 197 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 10 Draft – October 2021
with the qualified biologist in obtaining an Individual Permit from the USACE. The applicant shall then retain a qualified biologist to coordinate with the RWQCB to obtain a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification. If necessary, the applicant shall also retain a qualified biologist to coordinate with the CDFW to obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement.

The Wetland Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall be submitted to the appropriate regulatory agencies for review and approval during the permit application process.  To compensate for permanent impacts, the purchase and/or dedication of land to provide suitable wetland restoration or creation shall ensure a no net loss of wetland values or functions. If restoration is available and feasible, a minimum 1:1 mitigation to impact ratio would apply to projects for which mitigation is provided in advance.

Impact 7-6: Damage or Removal of Regulated Trees
The Arborist Report Update re-evaluated the potential impacts to trees as a result of the project as shown on the Planning Submittal Set (10/8/2020) and the Preliminary Drainage Plan (6/30/2020). The disposition of each tree is shown in the exhibit attached to the Arborist Report Update, and summarized in Table 7-3, Trees Planned for Removal and Preservation, below.

Table 7-3 Trees Planned for Removal and Preservation
Protected Large Protected Total
Trees Planned for
Removal
205 8 213
Trees Planned for
Preservation
109 9 118
Source: HortScience | Bartlett Consulting 2020
The proposed project could remove up to 213 regulated trees. This would be a significant potential adverse environmental impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the potential impact to a less-than significant level.

Page 198 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – October 2021 11
Mitigation Measure 7-6 Prior to issuance of a tree removal permit and/or a grading permit, developers shall retain a certified arborist to develop a site-specific tree protection plan for retained trees and supervise the implementation of all proposed tree preservation and protection measures during construction activities, including those measures specified in the 2018 project arborist report and 2020 arborist report update (HortScience Bartlett Consulting). Also, in accordance with the Town’s Tree Protection Ordinance, the developer shall obtain a tree removal permit for proposed tree removals on each development lot prior to tree removals and shall install replacement trees in accordance with all mitigation, maintenance, and monitoring requirements specified in the tree removal permit(s) or otherwise required by the Town for project approvals.

Impact 7-8: Effect on Sensitive Natural Communities
Sensitive natural communities potentially present on the site are limited to highly impacted drainage channels and oak woodland. Prior mitigation measures require the developer to determine the extent of potentially regulated drainage channels and regulated trees prior to initiation of ground disturbance or construction activities. To compensate for temporary and/or permanent impacts, mitigation shall be provided as required by regulatory permits.

No additional mitigation measures are necessary.

General Plan policies ENV-1.5 and ENV-1.7 prohibit the use of invasive species listed by the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) for all new construction and requires new development to use native plants or other appropriate non-invasive plants to reduce maintenance and irrigation costs and the disturbance of adjacent natural habitat. The spread of invasive species is considered a significant potential impact. The following mitigation measure would assure that this potentially significant impact is reduced to less than significant.

Mitigation Measure 7-8 On-site landscaping shall be limited to drought-tolerant species, fire-resistant species, and species capable of increasing soil stability; with preference to plant species endemic to Santa Clara County. Species from the California Invasive Plant Council’s (Cal-IPC) Invasive Plant Inventory (Cal-IPC 2020) shall be removed if present and not included in any new landscaping.

Page 199 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 12 Draft – October 2021
Finding
All of the proposed Project specific environmental impacts related to biological resources will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

C. Cultural Resources

Mitigation Measure 8-2 The following measure shall be included in project plans, prior to issuance of a demolition permit:

Finding
All of the proposed Project specific environmental impacts related to cultural resources will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

Page 200 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – October 2021 13
D. Geology and Soils

1. Potentially Significant Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant Levels Impact Geologic impacts associated with fault surface rupture, expansive soils, and land sliding and slope instability.

The results of the geotechnical plan review should be summarized by the project geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer prior to issuance of building permits.

In addition, the project engineering geologist shall inspect opened excavations to confirm bedrock conditions are consistent with those anticipated.

The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project, including ground improvement measures and placement of engineered fill, should be described by the

Page 201 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 14 Draft – October 2021
geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review and approval prior to final (as-built) project approval.

Finding
All of the proposed Project specific environmental impacts related to geology and soils will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

E. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Page 202 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – October 2021 15
Finding
All of the proposed Project specific environmental impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

F. Wildfire Hazards

Impact 12-4: Expose People or Structures to Significant Risks, including Downslope or Downstream Flooding or Landslides, as a Result of Runoff, PostFire Slope Instability, or Drainage Changes.

As noted in Section 13.0, Effects Not Addressed Further in this EIR, the 2007 Draft Preliminary Geologic and Geotechnical Evaluation for Los Gatos Meadows prepared by Cornerstone Earth

Page 203 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 16 Draft – October 2021
Group (Appendix F of the Draft EIR), the project site and surrounding areas are moderately steep to steep slope with slope inclination up to 40 degrees and noted that portions of the site are located within a State of California Earthquake-Induced Landslide Hazard Zone.

Finding
All of the proposed Project specific environmental impacts related to wildfire hazards will be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures.

The alternatives evaluated were:

1. Alternative 1: No Project – Existing (Closed) Senior Living Community;

Page 204 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – October 2021 17

2. Alternative 2: No Project – Residential Project Consistent with the Project Site’s General Plan Designation; and

3. Alternative 3: Reduced Scale (Removal of Villas B and C from Proposed Site Plan).

Page 205 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 18 Draft – October 2021
corresponding area of the grade level below on the northwestern corner of the proposed site plan. The reduced scale alternative would reduce the number of living units by 20 units (Villa B) and 29 units (Villa C), for a total reduction of 49 units, and would result in the reduction of approximately 98,374 square feet of floor space in Villas B and C, approximately 26,000 square feet of floor space from the grade level including portions of the health center, and approximately 26,000 square feet of developed area (building footprints). In addition, this alternative could result in removing approximately 62 fewer trees. Removal of Villa B (70.5 feet in height) and Villa C (81.5 feet in height) would also help reduce visual impacts associated with scenic views from downtown Los Gatos towards the project site and scenic hillside areas beyond as these two buildings would be two of the most publicly visible buildings from multiple vantage points.

The MMRP is included as part of the Final EIR, and is hereby incorporated by reference.

This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and Title 14 California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines) Section 15091(e).

Page 206 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community CEQA Findings of Fact Draft – October 2021 19
The environmental analysis provided in the EIR and these findings are based on and are supported by the following documents, materials and other evidence, which constitute the administrative record for the approval of the Project:

B. The NOP, comments received on the NOP and all other public notices issued by the Town in relation to the EIR (e.g., Notice of Availability).

D. All non-draft and/or non-confidential reports and memoranda prepared by the Town and consultants related to the EIR, its analysis and findings.

E. Minutes and transcripts of the discussions regarding the Project and/or Project components at public hearings or scoping meetings held by the Planning Commission and the Town Council.

G. Staff reports associated with Planning Commission and Council Meetings on the Project and supporting technical memoranda and any letters or other material submitted into the record by any party.

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on the environment.

2. Based on the foregoing Findings and the information contained in the record, it is determined that:

Page 207 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

CEQA Findings of Fact Town of Los Gatos I 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community EIR 20 Draft – October 2021
All significant effects on the environment due to the approval of the proposed Project have been eliminated or substantially lessened where feasible.

Page 208 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Final Modified CEQA Checklist
Evaluation of Revised Project Description
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows
Senior Living Community
Planned Development Application PD-20-001
September 10, 2024
Prepared by
EMC Planning Group

Page 209 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

This document was produced on recycled paper.

FINAL MODIFIED CEQA CHECKLIST

EVALUATION OF REVISED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
110 WOOD ROAD – LOS GATOS MEADOWS

SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITY
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PD-20-001

PREPARED FOR
Town of Los Gatos
Sean Mullin, AICP, Senior Planner
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
408.354.6823
[email protected]

PREPARED BY
EMC Planning Group Inc.
601 Abrego Street
Monterey, CA 93940
Tel 831.649.1799
Fax 831.649.8399
Stuart Poulter, AICP, MCRP, Senior Planner
[email protected]
www.emcplanning.com
September 10, 2024

Page 210 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

EMC Planning Group Inc.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................... 1 B. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................................... 9

1. Aesthetics.............................................................................................................................. 11

2. Agriculture and Forest Resources...................................................................................... 19

3. Air Quality............................................................................................................................. 21

4. Biological Resources............................................................................................................ 24

5. Cultural Resources............................................................................................................... 26

6. Energy.................................................................................................................................... 28

7. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................ 29

8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions............................................................................................... 31

9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials..................................................................................... 32

10. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................ 35

11. Land Use and Planning ....................................................................................................... 39

12. Mineral Resources................................................................................................................ 40

13. Noise...................................................................................................................................... 41

14. Population and Housing ..................................................................................................... 43

15. Public Services...................................................................................................................... 44

16. Recreation ............................................................................................................................. 46

17. Transportation...................................................................................................................... 47

18. Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................................... 49

19. Utilities and Service Systems.............................................................................................. 50

20. Wildfire .................................................................................................................................. 53

21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.................................................................................. 55 E. SOURCES............................................................................................................................. 57

Page 211 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

EMC Planning Group Inc.

Appendices
Appendix A Revised Project Plans (prepared by Perkins-Eastman, dated June 26, 2024) Figures
Figure 1 Revised Project Site Plan................................................................................................. 7 Figure 2 View Corridor from East Main Street to Project Site (Original vs. Revised Project) ........................................................................................................................................... 15 Tables
Table 1 Comparison of Planned Development Project Components.................................... 3 Table 2 Comparison of Project Building (Villas) Conditions (2024 vs. 2021)....................... 5

Page 212 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section A Background 1 EMC Planning Group
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 A. BACKGROUND
Description of Original Project (2021 Draft/Final EIR)
The previously prepared 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community (Planned Development Application PD-20-001; SCH# 2021020007) Draft EIR (dated May 14, 2021) and 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community (Planned Development Application PD-20-001; SCH# 2021020007) Final EIR (dated August 26, 2021) (hereafter referred to as “2021 draft EIR” and “2021 final EIR,” respectively) addressed the redevelopment of the 10.84-acre site with a senior living community that would replace the existing Los Gatos Meadows senior living community. The project included 174 independent residential apartments plus 17 supporting care units. The project, a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC), would be licensed as a Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE) under the California Department of Social Services. The project would be restricted to persons age 62 and older and would provide 24/7 assisted living services to the residents. The project would provide coordinated health care services, including 17 supporting care units. These proposed services would be similar to the use offered in the previous community. An estimated 120 full time equivalent (FTE) employees Project Title 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows
Senior Living Community (Planned
Development Application PD-20-001)
Lead Agency Contact Person
and Phone Number
Sean Mullin, AICP, Senior Planner
Town of Los Gatos, 408-354-6823
Date Prepared September 2024
Study Prepared by EMC Planning Group Inc.
601 Abrego Street
Monterey, CA 93940
Project Location 110 Wood Road, Los Gatos, CA 95030
(Assessor’s Parcel Number: 510-47-038)
Project Sponsor Name and Address Rockwood Pacific, Inc. (project applicant) 36 Southwood Drive
Orinda, CA 94563
Front Porch (project sponsor)
800 N. Brand Blvd., 19th Floor
Glendale, CA 91203
General Plan Designation Medium Density Residential (Figure LU-3; Town of Los Gatos 2020 General Plan Land Use
Element)
Zoning Residential Planned Development (R:PD)
(Planned Development Overlay)

Page 213 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section A Background 2 EMC Planning Group
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 would be anticipated with the project; this is commensurate with the number of employees onsite prior to the closure of the facility in late 2019.

A Planned Development application was filed by the applicant requesting a “Planned Development” overlay be applied to the site’s existing “Residential Planned Development” zoning designation. A subsequent Architecture and Site application will be required if the Planned Development application is approved by the Town Council. The site is zoned “Residential Planned Development (R:PD)” and has a General Plan land use designation of Medium Density Residential. The General Plan land use designation of Medium Density Residential allows for a maximum density of 12 dwelling units per acre. However, , General Plan Action HOU-1.3 provides up to a 100 percent density bonus for developments that include housing for the elderly. The project proposes a density of 16 dwelling units per acre, which is within the maximum allowed for the site under the existing PD permit conditions.

Environmental Review of Originally Proposed Project
EMC Planning Group, as the environmental consultant to the Town of Los Gatos (Town), prepared a draft and final environmental impact report (EIR) for the originally proposed project over the period 2020 to 2022.

The proposed project and final EIR were brought to the Town Planning Commission in January 2022 for consideration and recommendation to the Town Council. The Planning Commission considered the application and forwarded a recommendation of denial to the Town Council based on several concerns. The Planning Commission voted not to certify the EIR because it was based on a project that the Planning Commission found to be inappropriate, and environmental review is not required for denial of a project. The application was subsequently reviewed by the Town Council in April 2022. At the meeting, the Town Council remanded the application back to the Planning Commission for further discussion with consideration of comments provided by the Town Council.

Description of Revised Project
Since 2022, the applicant continued community engagement activities and commenced exploration of a range of alternatives, including holding a study session with the Town Planning Commission in October 2023. The applicant has made design revisions and other changes to the proposed project to address some of the prior concerns and submitted a revised application to the Town in March 2024. These project revisions include the following:
 Increased site coverage (0.50 percent) and total site area coverage (increased by 2,100 square feet);
 Increased maximum dwelling unit density (from 16 units per acre to 17 units per acre);  Increased total number of independent residential apartments (from 174 units to 187 units) and increased total number of units in health center (from 17 units to 24 units) for a grand total of 211 units, an increase of 20 units (or a 10.5 percent increase) from the original project;

Page 214 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section A Background 3 EMC Planning Group
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024  An increase in total gross square footage (floor area) of 8,155 square feet;  A net increase in proposed impervious surface area (from a net increase of 8,877 square feet to a new net increase 17,984 square feet); and
 An increase in estimated population – from 223 to 251 residents, an increase of 28 residents or 13 percent more than the original proposed project.

Additionally, the applicant has made design revisions to the senior living complex including making height and massing modifications to several of the proposed buildings (or villas). The previously identified Villas D and E and Villas F and G are now combined into two single villas and at least two villas (Villa A and the now combined Villa D/E) have been increased in height by 8.25 feet and 11.50 feet, respectively. Two villas (B and C) have been decreased in height by

11.5 feet. Figure 1, Revised Project Site Plan, presents the revised overall project site plan. A complete set of revised project plans are provided in Appendix A of this modified checklist.

Comparison of Original Project vs. Revised Project
A comparison of the 2024 revised project to both the 2021 proposed project (evaluated in the 2021 draft/final EIR) and the existing 1968 PD permit conditions is provided in Table 1, Comparison of Planned Development Project Components, below.

Table 2, Comparison of Project Building (Villa) Conditions (2024 vs. 2021), provides a comparison of the modifications to the proposed senior living community villa units, residential square footage, gross square footage, heights, and number of stories.

Table 1 Comparison of Planned Development Project Components Project
Component
Original 1968 PD
Components
(2019 Baseline)
Project
Components
Evaluated in
2021 Draft/Final
EIR
Revised Project
Components
(2024)
Total Project
Components
Increase/Decrease
from 2021 to 2024
(Percentage)
Site Coverage 24.6%5 22.5% 23% +2.2% increase
Total Site Area
Coverage (Square
Footage)
116,427 106,540 108,640 +2,100 (2% increase)
Maximum Dwelling
Unit Density 17 units per acre 16 units per acre 17 units per acre +1 (6.25% increase) Total Number of
Independent
Residential
Apartments1
184 174 187 +13 (7.5% increase)
Total Number of
Units in Health
Center
38 17 24 +7 (41% increase)
Total Units 2052 191 211 +20 (10.5% increase)

Page 215 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section A Background 4 EMC Planning Group
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 Total Gross Square
Footage (Floor
Area)6
150,475 430,816 438,971 +8,155 (2% increase)
Open Space 75.4% 77.5% 76.7% 1.0% decrease
Building Setbacks
from property line4
Front: 20’-0”
Side: 15’-0”, 27’-0”
Rear: 15’-0”
Front: 34’-10”
Side: 40’-10”, 60’-10”
Rear: 32’-11”
Front: 34’-10”
Side: 40’-10”, 60’-10”
Rear: 32’-11”
No Change
Parking 111 parking spaces3 77 parking spaces
40 non-tandem
spaces, 214 total
spaces with
implementation of a
24/7 valet parking
program.
+103 total spaces with
implementation of a
24/7 valet parking
program (+93%
increase)
Height4
Predominantly twostory with some
basement or below
grade space for
infirmary, parking,
storage and
mechanical. Heights
vary between 30’-9”
and 55’-2”.
3-5 stories above
landscaped Terrace
Level. G Level below
contains parking,
storage, mechanical
space, main entry,
and health center.

Heights vary
between 59’-0” and
85’-6” feet.
3-6 stories (Villa A);
3 stories (Villa B);
below grade space
for parking, storage
and mechanical
space. Heights vary
between 59’-0” and

93.75’.
+8.25-foot maximum
height increase
Population &
Employment
205 Units1
222 residents
120 full-time
equivalent
employees
191 units
223 residents
120 full-time
equivalent
employees
211 units
251 residents
120 full-time
equivalent
employees
+20 (10.5% increase)
+28 (13% increase)
No Change in FTEs
SOURCE: Rockwood Pacific 2020; Covia 2020; Rockwood Pacific 2024 NOTE:

1. 184 units is the number of independent residential apartments allowed; total unit count including skilled nursing beds permitted is 222 total units.

2. Total applicable unit count after consolidation/combination of units is 205 (129 independent living units, 27 assisted living units, 10 memory care units and 39 skilled nursing beds).

3. The current number of spaces onsite is 130.

4. Neither minimum building height nor maximum setbacks are specified under the 1968 entitlement. Table 1 includes setback and heights under the current and proposed conditions.

5. Lot Coverage Calculation Method: Only the footprints of the eight buildings were in the initial application. This included balconies but did not include covered walkways connecting between buildings. Covered walkway areas have been added to the totals on the Plan Set Cover Page, and in the resubmitted Project Description and Letter of Justification. The G level area not under bldg. footprints above was not included, as the spaces above are landscaped courtyards. The cooling tower/generator enclosure is open to the sky and was not included. Total site gross square footage is 472,185.

6. Total gross square footage (floor area) excludes parking, balconies (not used for egress), and generator/cooling tower enclosure areas.

Page 216 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section A Background 5 EMC Planning Group
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 Table 2 Comparison of Project Building (Villas) Conditions (2024 vs. 2021) Villa Current (Revised) 2024 Submittal 2021 Submittal (Evaluated in 2021 Draft/Final EIR) Units Residential
Square
Footage
(RSF)
Gross
Square
Footage
(GSF)
Height
(Feet)
Stories Units Residential
Square
Footage
(RSF)
Gross
Square
Footage
(GSF)
Height
(Feet)
Stories
Villa A 50 65,479 124,517 93.75 3-6 46 63,480 157,054 85.5 3-5 Villa B 18 20,590 36,510 59 3 20 29,465 41,483 70.5 3-5 Villa C 23 32,733 51,150 70 4 29 41,887 56,891 81.5 3-5 Villa D/E1 42 65,610 105,550 70.5 4-6 33 53,082 72,1381 82 3-5 Villa F/G2 37 57,300 93,595 93.5 4-5 31 49,794 72,1382 82 3-5 Villa H 17 22,016 37,573 59 3 15 22,076 31,112 59 3-5
Totals 187 263,728
453,200
(plus 83,330
GSF for
Structured
Parking =
536,530
Total GSF)
- - 174 259,744
430,816 (plus
91,827 GSF
for
Structured
Parking =
522,643 Total
GSF)
- -
SOURCE: Rockwood Pacific 2020; Covia 2020; Rockwood Pacific 2024 NOTE: 1. Villa D/E were separate residential buildings in the 2021 submittal (identified as Building D and E). Gross square footage total shown above for the 2021 submittal reflects the combined GSF.

2. Villa F/G were separate residential buildings in the 2021 submittal (identified as Building F and G). Gross square footage total shown above for the 2021 submittal reflects the combined GSF.

Page 217 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section A Background 6 EMC Planning Group
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 Approach
The following document presents a “modified” initial study checklist (based on the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist) to review and evaluate the proposed use and design changes to the originally proposed project to determine the level of additional environmental review that is required.

All potential impacts associated with the originally proposed project, as identified in the draft/final EIR, were determined to be less-than-significant with implementation of mitigation measures and/or Town standard conditions of approval. Potentially significant impacts requiring mitigation were identified for the following issue areas:
 Air Quality;
 Biological Resources;
 Cultural Resources;
 Geology and Soils;
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials; and
 Wildfire Hazards.

This modified CEQA checklist will address all required environmental topics with a particular focus on the issues listed above.

Intent
The intent of this “modified” initial study checklist is to determine if the previously-prepared draft and final EIR adequately address the project as revised or whether the revised project will result in new or substantially increased environmental impacts requiring recirculation of the 2021 draft EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15088.5(a) “a lead agency is required to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the 2021 draft EIR for public review under Section 15087 but before certification.”

Page 218 ends

ITEM NO. 9.
83
A301

A301
A201
1 A202
1 A203
1 A202
2 69' - 3"
9,//$*
9,//$)
9,//$$
9,//$+
9,//$(
9,//$'
9,//$&
9,//$%

FIRE ACCESS ROAD - UPPER

WOOD ROAD

FARWELL LANE

EMERGENCY VEHICLE TURN-AROUND

SECONDARY GARAGE ENTRANCE

MAIN ENTRANCE

GARAGE ENTRANCE

EMERGENCY VEHICLE TURN-AROUND

LOADING / TRASH STORAGE LOCATION

AUTONOMOUS

VEHICLE PARKING
ADJACENT PROPERTY A: MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE
ADJACENT PROPERTY B:

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
ADJACENT PROPERTY D:

DETACHED GARAGE

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
HOTEL
COOLING TOWER / EMERGENCY GENERATOR WITHIN FENCED YARD 30' - 0" 56'
-
0 "

EXTERIOR EXIT PATHS

EXTERIOR EXIT PATH

PUBLIC WAY

TERRACE EGRESS

PUBLIC WAY

TERRACE EGRESS

TERRACE EGRESS
EXIT DISCHARGE: LOWER LEVEL
EXIT DISCHARGE: GRADE
EXIT DISCHARGE: GRADE
EXIT DISCHARGE: GRADE
EXIT DISCHARGE: GRADE
EXIT DISCHARGE: L3
EXIT DISCHARGE: L3
EXIT DISCHARGE: L1
EXIT DISCHARGE: L3 EXIT DISCHARGE: L1
EXIT DISCHARGE: L1
EXIT DISCHARGE: L1
EXIT DISCHARGE: L1
EXIT DISCHARGE: L1
EXIT DISCHARGE: L1
A207
1 -

A003

A003

---

---
1" = 40'-0" 1 SITE PLAN
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community Modified CEQA Checklist Revised Project Site Plan
Figure 1
Source: Perkins - Eastman 2024
0 165 feet

Page 219 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section A Background 8 EMC Planning Group
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 This side intentionally left blank.

Page 220 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 9 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community July 2024 B. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors, as well as general standards (e.g., the project would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.

5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.

Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

Page 221 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 10 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.

Page 222 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 11 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

1. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099 (Modernization of Transportation Analysis for Transit-Oriented Infill Projects), would the project:

Comments:
a. As noted above (see “A. Background, Description of the Revised Project”), the applicant has made design revisions to the proposed senior living complex including making height and massing modifications to several of the proposed buildings (or villas). The previously identified Villas D and E and Villas F and G are now combined into two single villas and at least two villas (Villa A and the now combined Villa D/E) have increased in height by

8.25 feet and 11.5 feet, respectively. Two villas (B and C) have decreased in height by 11.5 feet. The building heights have been shifted to reduce views from public vantage points compared to the site configuration analyzed in the 2021 draft EIR. All buildings in the front of the project site (facing downtown) have been reduced in height by one story (to three and four stories) thereby minimizing the impact from public viewsheds, while the areas less visible from public viewsheds are those where building heights were increased, though modestly. The applicant shifted height to the less visible area of the site based on community feedback received during Planning Commission and Town Council review of the originally proposed project in 2022.

NEW IMPACTS
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐ b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage
points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would
the project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 223 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 12 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 Section 5.0, Aesthetics, of the 2021 draft EIR, reported that views from downtown Los Gatos towards the site (as demonstrated in the 2021 draft EIR Figure 5-1, View Corridor from East Main Street to Project Site), would be limited to the top of new building rooflines and upper floor windows, which is similar to views of the existing facility though at a slightly greater height as viewed from downtown. It was determined that this increased visibility of the previously-proposed buildings would not substantially alter scenic views towards the Town-designated Hillside Area and Santa Cruz Mountains beyond the project site. Therefore, the originally proposed project was determined to have a less-than-significant effect on a scenic vista.

As shown in the revised project plans (see sheets A406 through A408), views from Town-designated View Corridors would not be substantially altered by the increase of proposed building heights by a maximum of 11.50 vertical feet, which is an approximately 14 percent increase in the previously proposed maximum height. Figure 2, View Corridor from East Main Street to Project Site (Original vs. Revised Project), presents a side-byside comparison of a simulated view from East Main Street in downtown Los Gatos of the original proposed project (left) versus the revised proposed project (right). According to the applicant’s design consultant, who prepared both the original and revised project visual simulations, to accurately depict proposed developments, a meticulous process of 3D visualization is employed, integrating high-resolution photographs of existing site conditions with sophisticated 3D models of the proposed architectural design. This approach provides a realistic view of what the new development will look like from specific vantage points in the community, enhancing the public's understanding of how the project will fit within its surroundings. For the proposed project, this process starts with capturing background photographs from predetermined locations around the site, carefully chosen to represent various perspectives from the surrounding neighborhood.

High-resolution digital cameras are used to capture images at eye level from selected points in the community, ensuring that the photos reflect a true-to-life view of the proposed development. These locations are strategically chosen to provide key views towards the development site, allowing stakeholders to assess the visual impact from different areas. The camera placement is carefully documented to ensure accurate alignment within the 3D environment, with special attention paid to matching the height, angle, and field of view. The resulting photographs serve as the backdrop for integrating the proposed design into the real-world setting.

Once the background photos are collected, they are combined with a 3D model that accurately represents the existing conditions, including terrain, buildings, and vegetation.

A detailed 3D model of the proposed development is then added, incorporating all architectural elements, grade changes, and landscaping plans. The model is carefully aligned with the real-world conditions through a process known as camera matching, where the location and orientation of the virtual camera are precisely calibrated to match the position of the physical camera used to capture the background photographs. This ensures that the proposed buildings are accurately placed within the context of the existing environment. The integration process involves rendering the new buildings with realistic scale, color, materials, and shadows, which are then superimposed onto the

Page 224 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 13 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 background images. Proposed landscaping, such as trees, shrubs, and other vegetation, is also included in the 3D model to depict the full scope of the project. The resulting visualizations provide a true-to-life representation of how the new development will appear, highlighting the architectural design within its actual surroundings (Frank Rockwood e-mail message, September 8, 2024).

Because of the increased height of the senior living residential structures (over the originally proposed project), more of the revised project’s structures will be visible to the public. However, the proposed buildings shown in the revised project plans still generally align building roof lines with the contour of the hill and incorporate smaller roof components, and along with the proposed building colors, will minimize the contrast between buildings and the existing environment.

The project site is located within sub-area 6 of the Los Gatos Hillside Specific Plan.

However, the project site is not located within the “Hillside Area” as shown in the “Town of Los Gatos Hillside Area Map” and therefore not subject to the Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines (HDS&G) visibility analysis requirements.

However, as noted in the 2021 draft EIR, in 2008 the Conceptual Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) requested that the site be rebuilt in the spirit of the HDS&G and as noted by the applicant, design components of the originally proposed project were intended to meet this request. With the revised project, the applicant has presented a revised project design that has been independently verified by Town staff and EMC Planning Group to still meet the spirit of the Town’s HDS&G. The revised project accomplishes this by 1) stepping the buildings into the hillside; 2) minimizing the dimensions of the Town-facing buildings; 3) saving the same number of existing trees per the revised “Tree Preservation Removal Plan” (sheet T-1) as the originally proposed project; 4) implementing a landscape and tree-replacement plan; and 5) presenting a carefully developed scale which reflects feedback and concerns received from the Town Planning Commission and Town Council on the original project design. The slightly increased visibility of the proposed (revised) buildings as a result of increasing heights by

8.25 vertical feet (10 percent) would not substantially alter scenic views towards the Town-designated Hillside Area and Santa Cruz Mountains beyond the project site. This increase in the height of the buildings is not a new impact, and does not represent a substantial increase in the severity of the impact. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.
b. The 2021 draft EIR (page 5-5) reported that the project site is not located within the viewshed of either State Route 9 (designated scenic highway) or State Route 17 (eligible scenic highway). Very limited views exist of the project site from State Route 17; however, they are intermittent and largely obscured by existing vegetation and topography. The revised project would not alter this determination. Therefore, the issue was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.
c. The 2021 draft EIR concluded that the originally proposed project, while increasing the overall height and scale of buildings on site as seen from the surrounding area (as

Page 225 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 14 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 compared to the existing structures onsite), would be compatible with the general character of the hillside area and consistent with the visual quality of the existing developed site. Therefore, impacts to the visual character of the project site associated with the originally proposed project were determined be less than significant.

Page 226 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

PROPOSED
ILDING MASSING WITH NEW PLANTINGS ON SITE AND E;ISTING TREES

NG WOOD ROAD
DINGS WITH NEW PLANTINGS ON SITE AND E;ISTING TREES

PROPOSED
Original Revised
110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community Modified CEQA Checklist View Corridor from East Main Street to Project Site (Original vs. Revised Project) Figure 2
Source: Perkins-Eastman 2024

Page 227 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 16 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 This side intentionally left blank.

Page 228 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 17 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 The revised project would still result in the reduction of the overall site development (from 24.6 percent of the site with the existing facility; 22.5 percent with the originally proposed project; and 23 percent with the revised project). In addition, the increase in overall open space (from 75.4 percent of the site with the existing facility; 77.5 percent with the originally proposed project; and 76.7 percent with the revised project), which would generally be consistent with the HDS&G. In addition to this, development of the multi-story senior living community would still be subject to the requirements of the Town’s Architecture and Site application process upon approval of the Planned Development overlay application. As part of this process, the Town would require each structure’s design to be consistent with the Los Gatos Hillside Specific Plan and in the spirit of the HDS&G for site planning, development intensity, architectural design, site elements, and landscape design, as well as for light and glare.

As previously noted in the 2021 draft EIR, the HDS&G also emphasize minimizing grading and preserving natural features (including drainage channels and trees). The revised project still largely adheres to this HDS&G requirement associated with stepping back structures into the hillside and still minimizes site grading and the amount of cut and fill to the extent feasible (see Sheets C103, C103.1, C103.2, and C104 for preliminary grading plans and cut and fill plan). While this revised analysis acknowledges that some of the proposed structures could be visible from adjacent or nearby areas, the Town’s Architecture and Site application process would ensure that tree removal, building design, and landscape planting for proposed buildings would be consistent with the Town’s design standards that guide residential and non-residential development in hillside areas.

The application of these guidelines in evaluating and reviewing the revised project during the Architecture and Site application process would help to reduce any potential degradation of the visual character of the project vicinity.

It is also noted that the revised project does not propose to remove any additional trees (213 trees) as compared to the originally proposed project. Roughly the same amount of open space and landscaped areas are proposed with the revised project. Therefore, the revised project, while slightly increasing the overall height and scale of buildings on site as compared to the originally proposed project, would still be compatible with the general character of the hillside area and consistent with the visual quality of the existing developed site. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR. d. The 2021 draft EIR noted that the existing facility currently has exterior security and surface parking lighting and lighting typical of multifamily residential and senior living communities. The revised project would be the same as the existing use and would continue to have lighting typical to senior living communities. As shown on the “Site Lighting Concept Plan” (see sheet LS-12 of the revised project plans), proposed lighting fixtures for the project include post top lights, bollard lights, and various wall mounted lights all of which are consistent with the previously proposed lighting designs evaluated in the 2021 draft EIR. These lighting fixtures also comply with Town Code Section

29.10.09035 (Performance standards as to glare), which prohibits the generation of direct or reflected light onto any area outside of the project boundaries. In addition, all exterior

Page 229 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 18 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 fixtures would comply with the Town requirements to be downward directed and shielded. The lighting will also be required to comply with the requirements of the California Energy Code set forth in California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 6, which requires reducing wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption in newly constructed and existing buildings including utilizing low intensity lighting designs and devices. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a final exterior lighting plan which shall indicate the location, type, and wattage of all light fixtures and include catalog sheets for each fixture shall be provided to the Town of Los Gatos for review and approval as part of the Architecture and Site Review approval.

Implementation of this condition would reduce the revised project’s lighting impact to a less-than-significant level by requiring lighting design and controls for each building on the project site. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

Page 230 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 19 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts on agricultural resources are significant environmental effects and in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:

Comments:
a-e. The initial study that was prepared to accompany the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the originally proposed project (dated February 4, 2021 and included as part of Appendix A of the 2021 draft EIR) concluded that the proposed project would not

NEW IMPACTS
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 231 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 20 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 convert important farmland; there are properties adjacent to the proposed project that are zoned for agricultural uses, and that there are no properties within or adjacent to the project site that are in a Williamson Act Contract. Additionally, the 2021 draft EIR concluded that the project site and adjacent land uses are not zoned for forestland or timberland uses. None of these conditions have changed since preparation of the draft and final EIR and therefore, agricultural resource impacts were adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

Page 232 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 21 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

3. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Would the project:

Comments:
a-b. The 2021 draft EIR found that the prior project was consistent with the Air Quality Plan because its criteria emissions volumes were below the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (air district) criteria air emissions thresholds of significance. As discussed below, criteria emissions volumes for the current project remain well below the same thresholds of significant. Consequently, like the prior project, the proposed project does not conflict with the Air Quality Plan and would not result in a new significant impact.

The 2021 draft EIR evaluated potential air quality impacts by comparing thresholds identified in the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (air district) 2017 Clean Air Plan to quantified emission values estimated through the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). Neither the construction nor operation of the proposed project were found to generate criteria pollutant emissions volumes that exceed the air district standards. With the exception of ROG emissions, the proposed project was found to generate fewer operational criteria pollutant emissions than the baseline use. ROG emissions would have increased by about 2.14 pounds per day, well below the air district threshold.

NEW IMPACTS
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
nonattainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
d. Result in other emissions, such as those leading to
odors adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 233 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 22 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 To evaluate the increase in criteria emissions that would result from the current proposed project, emissions were quantified using CalEEMod. As shown in Table 1, Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions, the current project would increase in emissions volumes by the volumes and percentages shown relative to the 2021 analysis. None of the emissions volumes exceed air district thresholds. Therefore, the current project would not result in new significant impacts or substantially more severe impacts than identified in the 2021 draft and final EIR.

Table 1 Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Source ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5
Originally Proposed Project1,2 2.14 0.51 0.39 0.12
Revised Project1 2.36 0.56 0.43 0.13
Change +0.22 (10.2%) +0.05 (9.8%) +0.04 (10.2%) +0.01 (8.3%) Air District Thresholds 54 54 82 54
Exceeds Thresholds? No No No No
SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2021; 2024
NOTES:

1. All values are reported in tons per day.

2. Calculated using CalEEMod version 2016.3.2
c. A community health risk assessment was prepared as part of the 2021 draft EIR to evaluate the potential health risk impacts to nearby sensitive receptors from exposure to emissions generated by project demolition and construction activities. The health risk assessment determined that sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of construction activities would be exposed to construction TAC emissions volumes that exceed the air district significance thresholds for infant/child cancer risks and PM2.5 concentrations. The primary project emissions sources were identified as heavy construction equipment.

These potentially significant impacts to sensitive receptors were determined to be less than significant with implementation of construction mitigation measures (6-5a and 6-5b).

The 10.5-percent increase in the number of residential and health care units and the 0.5- percent in the total site area coverage would incrementally increase construction emissions volumes. Grading and excavation activities, which require use of heavy equipment, are typically the main sources of construction TAC emissions as identified in the 2021 draft EIR. It is not anticipated that increasing unit count by 10.5 percent would result in additional heavy equipment use. The proposed project would increase site coverage area by 0.5 percent. It is possible that this change would not require an increase in grading or excavation activities, but if so, the increase would be very minor and not be expected to substantially worsen toxic air contaminant emission exposure. With the same mitigation applied as identified in the 2021 draft EIR, the proposed project would have no new significant impacts or result in substantially more severe impacts than identified in the 2021 draft and final EIR.

Page 234 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 23 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 d. As stated in the 2021 draft EIR, the prior project did not constitute a new odor source.

The current proposed project use is consistent with the proposed 2021 use. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in new or more severe odor impacts than identified in the 2021 draft and final EIR.

Page 235 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 24 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Comments:
a-f. The 2021 draft EIR identified several potential biological impacts associated with the originally proposed project including potential effects on candidate, sensitive, or specialstatus species (San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat; pallid bat; Townsend’s big-eared bat; nesting raptors and migratory birds), potential effects on federally- and state-protected

NEW IMPACTS
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US
Fish and Wildlife Service?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.), through direct
removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 236 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 25 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 wetlands or waters of the U.S. (intermittent or ephemeral drainage), damage or removal of regulated trees, and effects on sensitive natural communities. All of these potentially significant biological impacts were determined to be less-than-significant with implementation of biological mitigation measures (7-2, 7-3, 7-4, 7-5a, 7-5b, 7-6, and 7-8).

Current modification of the redevelopment scope has been compared and analyzed with the original building plans by EMC Planning Group biological staff. While the revised project will increase the overall site coverage and square footage over the previously proposed project, the overall revised project development footprint and building layout is largely consistent with the previously proposed project. It is noted that the overall number of proposed trees to be removed from the project site is not changing with the revised project (213 trees) and potential effects to habitat for special-status species noted above would not be substantially increased as a result of the minimal development footprint changes. Therefore, all changes to the project plans are deemed minimal with regard to potential biological resource impacts and the previously identified mitigation measures are adequate to reduce biological resource impacts to a less-than-significant level.

Therefore, biological resource impacts were adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

Page 237 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 26 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Comments:
a/b. Historic Structures. The 2021 draft EIR concluded that the existing structures on the project site were not historic and therefore, the proposed project would not adversely impact a historic structure. Therefore, this impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

Historic and Unique Archaeological Resources. The 2021 draft EIR concluded that with implementation of a Town standard condition of approval that addressed this potential impact, no mitigation was necessary.

Changes to the redevelopment footprint (i.e., an increase of 2,100 square feet of site coverage from the current 106,540 square feet with the existing facility) with the revised project are minimal. Thus, implementation of the Town’s standard condition of approval noted in 2021 draft EIR is still adequate to address potential impacts to historic resources and/or unique archaeological resources during construction. Therefore, this potential impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR. c. The 2021 draft EIR concluded that the project site is not known to contain Native American remains, but excavation during construction of project improvements could result in disturbance of unknown human remains, should they be buried on site.

However, implementation of the Town’s standard conditions of approval associated with discover of archaeological resources (including human remains) would ensure that this potential impact, if it were to occur, would be less than significant. As the revised project does not substantial increase or alter the originally proposed project’s development footprint, implementation of the Town’s standard condition of approval noted in 2021

NEW IMPACTS
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to section 15064.5?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 238 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 27 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 draft EIR is still adequate to address potential impacts associated with the disturbance of human remains during construction. Therefore, this potential impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

Page 239 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 28 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

6. ENERGY
Would the project:

Comments:
a-b. The 2021 draft EIR evaluated the potential energy impacts of the project’s transportation fuel, electrical energy, and natural gas demand characteristics relative to the baseline condition. It was determined that the proposed project would have similar operational transportation fuel demand and lower natural gas demand than the baseline use.

Furthermore, the proposed project would be required to conform to current California Building Code and Green Building Standards Code (also known as CALGreen), which requires all new buildings in the state to be more energy efficient and environmentally responsible. By incorporating energy efficiency and renewable energy measures per the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, and incorporating green building features per the CALGreen standards, the project would comply with existing state and local energy standards and would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for energy efficiency. The additional residential units proposed in the revised project plans would result in slightly increased energy demand, but this change would be minimal relative to the prior proposed project. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

New Impacts?
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in a potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 240 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 29 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

New Impacts?
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
(1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
(2) Strong seismic ground shaking? ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
(3) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
(4) Landslides? ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐ c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
d. Be located on expansive soil, creating substantial
direct or indirect risks to life or property?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 241 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 30 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 Comments:
a-e. As detailed in Section 13.0, Effects Not Addressed Further in this EIR, found in the 2021 draft EIR, several iterations of an applicant-prepared geotechnical report, along with third-party peer reviews, were prepared between 2017 and 2021 to evaluate geologic hazards and potential project impacts associated with the originally proposed project.

The applicant-prepared geotechnical report prepared for the originally proposed project noted several potential geologic impacts that are to be addressed through several design recommendations for the proposed project. These recommendations include, but are not limited to, providing a 25-foot setback from a mapped surface trace of a fault along the eastern edge of the property; underlaying the foundation by ground improvement or deepening the foundation to bedrock to avoid soil instability; removing alluvial fan deposits down to bedrock and replacing with engineering fill along the proposed retaining wall along the eastside of Farwell Lane for a minimum of 15 feet; removing and replacing all undocumented fill; and designing for sufficient reinforcement for slabs-on-grade. The 2021 draft EIR determined that with implementation of the two previously-identified geologic mitigation measures (13-1 and 13-2), as articulated in the February 2021 geotechnical peer review conducted by the Town’s geotechnical consultant, would ensure potential geologic impacts are reduced to a less-than-significant level.

The revised project does not substantially alter the proposed layout and number of proposed structures and associated infrastructure on the project site. Therefore, the findings of the previously prepared geotechnical reports and peer reviews are still valid and adequate to address the geotechnical conditions of the project site, including the requirement for a 25-foot setback from mapped surface trace of a fault. With implementation of the previously-identified mitigation measures (13-1 and 13-2), geologic hazard impacts would still be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, geological impacts were adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR. f. Mitigation for paleontological resources (mitigation measure 8-2) was adequately addressed in the Section 8.0, Cultural Resources, of the 2021 final EIR. Mitigation measure 8-2 would still apply to the revised project with a slightly larger footprint and mitigate potential impacts to unique paleontological resources associated with the revised project to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

Page 242 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 31 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Comments:
a-b. The 2021 draft EIR provided a qualitative approach for assessing operational project impacts based on comparing GHG emissions from the baseline condition to emissions under proposed project conditions. The analysis concluded that transportation-source GHG emissions from the proposed project would be similar to the baseline use and electricity-source GHG emissions from the proposed project would be substantially lower than the baseline use.

Similarly, annual amortized construction related GHG emissions, which represent nearly the entire annual GHG emissions volume from the project, only accounted for approximately 47 metric tons CO2e/year. A 10.5-percent increase in construction related GHG emission related to the revised project plans would generate approximately 52 metric tons CO2e/year or only five percent of the air district’s CEQA Guidelines bright line operational GHG emissions threshold of significance of 1,100 metric tons CO2e/year.

Despite the minor revisions to the project plans, the proposed project would not result in GHG emissions that exceed the baseline use nor would it generate new GHG emissions that would exceed the bright line operational GHG emissions applied in the 2021 draft EIR. Therefore, the GHG emission impacts associated with the revised project would be less than significant. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

New Impacts?
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 243 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 32 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:

Comments:
a. The 2021 draft EIR concluded that the originally proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The revised project would not alter this determination as the proposed use is only a 10.5 percent increase in number of units and a 13 percent increase in new residents over the originally proposed project. In addition, overall New Impacts?
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result,
create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
e. For a project located within an airport land-use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or a public-use airport,
result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
g. Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 244 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 33 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 construction and operation of the revised project would remain consistent with the originally proposed project. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.
b. As detailed in Section 13.0, Effects Not Addressed Further in this EIR, found in the 2021 draft EIR, potential hazardous materials impacts were identified associated with project demolition activities potentially releasing asbestos and lead-based paint into the environment. Implementation of the identified mitigation measure (13-3) would ensure potential impacts from the release of asbestos and lead-based paint into the environment as a result of demolition activities are reduced to a less-than-significant level.

The revised project does not substantially alter the proposed layout and number of proposed structures and associated infrastructure on the project site. In addition, the level of demolition activities would not be increased as a result of the revised project.

Therefore, the findings of the previously prepared environment site assessment are still valid and adequate to address the hazardous conditions of the project site. With implementation of the previously-identified mitigation measure (13-3), hazardous materials impacts would still be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR. c. The nearest school, the St. Mary’s of the Immaculate Conception Catholic School, is located approximately 0.5 miles north of the project site. Implementation of mitigation measure 13-3 would ensure that impacts related to the possible release of asbestos during demolition activities associated with the revised project would be less than significant.

Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR. d. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires that the Department of Toxic Substances Control compile and regularly update a list of hazardous waste facilities and sites.

A search of the EnviroStor website was completed in 2020 associated with the 2021 draft EIR and determined that the project site is not on the list and there are no listed hazardous sites within one half mile. An updated search of the EnviroStor website (Department of Toxic Substances Control 2024) confirmed that the project site is still not on the list and there are still no listed hazardous sites within one half mile. Therefore, the revised project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment due to location on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.
e. The 2021 draft EIR identified the project site as not within an airport land use plan, within two miles of a public airport, or near a private landing strip. The nearest airports are San Jose International Airport, approximately 12 miles to the north, and ReidHillview Airport, 16 miles to the northeast. The revised project does not change these conditions and would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

Page 245 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 34 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 g. Exposure to wildland fire risk as a result of the proposed project is addressed in D.20, Wildfire, of this modified checklist.

Page 246 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 35 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:

Comments:
a. As noted in Section D.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the initial study attached to the NOP in Appendix A of the 2021 draft EIR, the State Water Resources Control Board has implemented a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program New Impacts?
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
(1) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite; ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
(2) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding onor off-site; ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
(3) Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
(4) Impede or redirect flood flows? ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 247 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 36 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 to control and enforce storm water pollutant discharge reduction per the Clean Water Act. In accordance with the requirements of this program, the project applicant would be required to obtain a State NPDES Construction General Permit for redevelopment of the

10.84-acre project site.

Further, Section 22.30.035 of the Town Municipal Code outlines requirements for storm water management on new development and redevelopment projects. Every new development or redevelopment project is required to identify the potential for stormwater to be discharged from the project site following completion of construction activity and demonstrate that the plans, drawings, or specifications for such project include the installation of management techniques, practices, and control measures designed to mitigate the potential adverse impacts of storm water that may be discharged from the project site on an ongoing basis, including storm water treatment measures.

By complying with the Construction General Stormwater Permit and the Town’s stormwater management requirements, the revised project, with a slightly larger footprint, would not violate any water quality standards or degrade water quality and would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.
b. Groundwater Supplies. As noted in Section D.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the initial study attached to the NOP in Appendix A of the 2021 draft EIR, water service to the project site is provided by San Jose Water, which includes three major sources:
groundwater, imported surface water, and local raw mountain water. Los Gatos is located within the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Subbasin, which is managed by Valley Water.

Valley Water maintains the basin at equilibrium by augmenting natural percolation of rainfall and local stream runoff with imported water. In addition, Valley Water operates a treated groundwater recharge/reinjection program that promotes the reuse of treated groundwater from the clean-up of contaminated sites.

The initial study in the draft EIR concluded that the proposed project would not deplete groundwater supplies because the proposed project consisted of replacing 205 existing senior living units with 191, thereby decreasing the need for additional groundwater supplies.

The revised project proposes to replace the existing 205 units with 211 units, for an increase of six units. It is unknown whether the new 211 units would require more water than was historically used at the facility with 205 units. However, it can be reasonably assumed that due to current water use restrictions and the requirement for low flow water fixtures, the increase in six living units could actually require less than historical water use.

Additionally, in an email dated July 25, 2024 from James Bariteau, Senior Water Services Representative with San Jose Water Company to Mark Falgout with Kimley-Horn, at this time the water company does not foresee any issues with serving the proposed 211 units.

Page 248 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 37 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 Groundwater Recharge. The revised project would result in the replacement of existing structures with fewer, but similar structures, resulting in a net increase of impervious surface area of approximately 17,984 square feet over the originally proposed project (from 183,181 square feet to 201,165 square feet or an approximately two percent increase). While this represents a net increase over existing conditions, the applicant will provide several bioretention areas to ensure adequate groundwater recharge is provided.

Additionally, through implementation of a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and a drainage and grading plan, which shall be reviewed and approved by Town Public Works staff, the revised project would implement standard industry best management practices to control offsite discharges. As such, the revised project would not contribute to a substantial depletion of groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. Therefore, this issue was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.
c. Potential impacts due to increased impervious surfaces on the project site were addressed in the initial study that was included as an attachment to the 2021 draft EIR. The following is a summary of issues associated with increase impervious surfaces as a result of the revised project.
(1) Erosion. The 2021 draft EIR previously noted that the originally proposed project would require grading and excavation, which could result in soil erosion during storms and related sedimentation in downstream storm drains. The 2021 draft EIR determined that with compliance with the NPDES permit requirements and the Town’s standard requirements, the originally proposed project would result in a less-than-significant erosion or sedimentation impacts from on-site grading or excavation activities. While the level of grading and excavation required with the revised project will be less than the originally proposed project (128,800 net cubic yards of cut and fill for the revised project; 140,300 net cubic yards of cut and fill for the originally proposed project), the revised project would also be required to comply with these previously identified requirements.

Therefore, the revised projects impact associated with erosion would continue to be lessthan-significant. Erosion impacts were adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR. (2) Flooding. The 2021 draft EIR previously noted that the originally proposed project would collect stormwater onsite via drain inlets and roof drains and will then be conveyed to the existing public stormwater infrastructure that serves the site, thereby eliminating the potential for flooding on- or off-site. The revised project design also calls for this same stormwater infrastructure system. Therefore, the draft and final EIR adequately addressed this issue.
(3) Runoff. The 2021 draft EIR determined that the originally proposed project would be required to comply with the requirements of the Storm Water NPDES Permit issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). In addition, the originally proposed project would be subject to Section 22.30.035 of the Town Municipal Code, which outlines requirements for storm water management on new

Page 249 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 38 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024 development and redevelopment project. Therefore, the 2021 draft EIR determined that the originally proposed project would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.

The revised project would result in a net increase of impervious surface area of approximately 17,984 square feet (10 percent), resulting in an increased potential for surface water runoff. However, like the originally proposed project, the revised project would still be required to comply with the requirements of the Storm Water NPDES Permit issue by the RWQCB and be subject to the Town’s storm water management requirements which would reduce potential runoff impacts to a less-than-significant level.

Therefore, this impact was adequately address in the draft and final EIR. (4) Flood flows. As discussed under checklist question d) below, the project site is located within an area of minimal flood hazard. Therefore, development of the revised project would not impede or redirect flood flows.

Therefore, these impacts were adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR. d. The 2020 general plan EIR (figure 4.8-1), the project site is located within a 500-year flood zone. Current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood mapping was reviewed and the project site is still located within the 500-year flood zone (FEMA 2024). A 500-year flood zone has a 0.2 percent probability of flooding in a given year; i.e. a 500-year flood zone is likely to flood only under extreme flood conditions. The project site is not located within the Lexington dam failure inundation area, as identified on figure 4.8-2 of the general plan EIR. Additionally, updated flood-zone mapping found in the Town’s 2040 general plan update EIR still shows the project site within a 500-year flood zone (figure 4.10-1) and outside of any dam failure inundation area. The project site is located a significant distance from the coast or any sizeable lakes or ponds, thereby eliminating the risk for a tsunami or seiche. As concluded in the initial study included as an appendix to the 2021 draft EIR, the potential for release of pollutants due to inundation of the project site remains low even with project modifications proposed in the revised project. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.
e. The initial study prepared as an attachment to the 2021 draft EIR determined that the originally proposed project would not conflict with Valley Water’s 2016 Groundwater Management Plan because its onsite retention areas and treatment control measures would detain storm water runoff onsite, thereby allowing for groundwater recharge. Valley Water has since updated the groundwater management plan in 2021 and that plan has been reviewed in relation to the revised project. The revised project would not conflict with the Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) 2021 Groundwater Management Plan because, as with the originally proposed project, its onsite bioretention areas and treatment control measures would detain storm water runoff onsite, thereby allowing for groundwater recharge. Therefore, the impact was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

Page 250 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 39 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

11. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

Comments:
a. The initial study included as Appendix A of the 2021 draft EIR concluded that the originally proposed project, which would have resulted in 191 units, would not result in the physical division of an established community. The revised project would not change this determination. Therefore, this issue was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.
b. The 2021 draft EIR, which evaluated the originally proposed project, included a consistency analysis with applicable policies and regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The revised project would not substantially alter the findings of the previously-prepared policy consistency analysis as the revised project represents a 10.5 percent increase in the number of senior living units and a 13 percent increase in the number of residents over the originally proposed project evaluated in the draft and final EIR.

Therefore, impacts associated with a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect were adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

New Impacts?
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Physically divide an established community? ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
b. Cause any significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 251 ends

ITEM NO. 9.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 40 EMC Planning Group 110 Wood Road – Los Gatos Meadows Senior Living Community September 2024

12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Comments:
a-b. As previously noted in the initial study included as Appendix A of the 2021 draft EIR, the 2020 general plan EIR determined that mineral resources are not significant in the Town (Los Gatos 2020 General Plan EIR, page 4-1). A review of the 2040 general plan EIR notes that while quarries have historically operated within the Los Gatos, no mining occurs within the Town. However, one quarry (Lexington Quarry) is currently in operation at 18500 Limekiln Canyon Road (approximately 1.8 miles to the southeast of the project site). The Lexington Quarry is owned and operated by Vulcan Materials who produce construction aggregate (stone, crushed/broken) from the site. The Lexington Quarry is located in the southern portion of the General Plan Sphere of Influence (SOI) and is designated as “Hillside Residential” in the current General Plan.

The revised project would not result in impacts to known mineral resources or result in the loss of availability of a locally important resource recovery site. Therefore, this issue was adequately addressed in the draft and final EIR.

New Impacts?
Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Not Adequately
Addressed in
Previous EIR
Less-ThanSignificant or
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated in a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land-use plan?
☒ ☐ ☐ ☐

Page 252 ends

Los Gatos City CouncilFebruary 4, 2025

Los Gatos City Council
February 4, 2025