HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/03/2019 Planning Commission - Regular Meeting Agenda Packet
Regular Planning Commission Meeting Agenda
October 3, 2019
6:30 P.M.
City Council Chambers, City Hall
7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS
Chair: Tom Fischer: tom.fischer@cityofgilroy.org Sam Kim: sam.kim@cityofgilroy.org
Vice Chair: Casey Estorga:
casey.estorga@cityofgilroy.org
Sue Rodriguez: sue.rodriguez@cityofgilroy.org
Rebeca Armendariz: rebeca.armendariz@cityofgilroy.org Peter Fleming: peter.fleming@cityofgilroy.org
Amanda Rudeen: Amanda.rudeen@cityofgilroy.org
Comments by the public will be taken on any agenda item before action is taken by the Planning Commission.
Persons speaking on any matter are asked to state their name and address for the record. Public testimony is
subject to reasonable regulations, including but not limited to time restrictions on particular issues and for each
individual speaker. A minimum of 12 copies of materials should be provided to the Clerk for distribution to the
Commission and Staff. Public comments are limited to no more than 3-minutes, at the Chair’s discretion.
In compliance with the American Disabilities Act (ADA), the City will make reasonable arrangements to ensure
accessibility to this meeting. If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the
City Clerk 72 hours prior to the meeting at (408) 846-0491. A sound enhancement system is available in the
City Council Chambers.
If you challenge any planning or land use decision made at this meeting in court, you may be limited to raising
only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing held at this meeting, or in written
correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. Please take notice
that the time within which to seek judicial review of any final administrative determination reached at this
meeting is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.
Persons who wish to speak on matters set for Public Hearing will be heard when the presiding officer calls for
comments from those persons who are in support of or in opposition thereto. After persons have spoken, the
hearing is closed and brought to the Planning Commission level for discussion and action. There is no further
comment permitted from the audience unless requested by the Planning Commission.
A Closed Session may be called during this meeting pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1) if a
point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the City on the advice of its legal
counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City.
Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Planning Commission after distribution of the
agenda packet are available for public inspection with the agenda packet in the lobby of Administration at City
Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street during normal business hours. These materials are also available with the agenda
packet on the City website at www.cityofgilroy.org
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. REPORT ON POSTING THE AGENDA AND ROLL CALL
III. PUBLIC COMMENTS: (Three-minute time limit). This portion of the meeting is reserved for
persons desiring to address the Planning Commission on matters not on the agenda. The
law does not permit the Planning Commission action or extended discussion of any item
not on the agenda except under special circumstances. If Planning Commission action is
requested, the Planning Commission may place the matter on a future agenda. All
statements that require a response will be referred to staff for reply in writing.
PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR RELATED PROJECT APPLICATIONS WILL BE HEARD CONCURRENTLY AND
ACTION WILL BE TAKEN INDIVIDUALLY. COMPANION PROJECTS UNDER NEW BUSINESS WILL BE
TAKEN UP FOR ACTION PRIOR TO, OR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE RELATED PUBLIC HEARING.
THIS REQUIRES DEVIATION IN THE ORDER OF BUSINESS AS NOTED WITHIN THE AGENDA.
IV. CONSENT AGENDA
1. September 5, 2019 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Consideration and Recommendation on Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land
Use Alternative
1. Staff Report: Stan Ketchum, Senior Planner
2. Public Comment
3. Planning Commission Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications
4. Possible Action:
Motion to adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approve the GPAC proposed-
Preferred Land Use Alternative for the Gilroy 2040 General Plan. (Roll Call Vote)
B. M 19-13 appeal of Planning Division Determination (#19080037). Tan Truong is
appealing the City of Gilroy Planning Division’s determination to withhold Final
Clearance, for a new 3,410-square foot one-story dwelling with an attached 887-
square foot garage on a hillside lot, as approved on Architectural and Site Review
approval AS 16-26. Condition #2 of AS 16-26 specifies that the project shall
conform to the plans as approved. The applicant has deviated from the approved
plans by not including significant architectural features. These features include
stone veneer detailing and window trim, and were originally submitted in both the
AS application and the Building Permits. The property is located at 2261 Mantelli
Dr. in the Residential Hillside (RH) zone (APN 783-72-067). This appeal is exempt
from environmental review under Section 15061.b.3 of the State CEQA Guidelines
which applies to projects involving “common sense” where it can be seen with
certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a
significant effect on the environment. Appeal filed by Tan Truong, 2261 Mantelli
Dr., Gilroy CA.
1. Staff Report: Miguel Contreras, Planner I
2. Public Comment
3. Planning Commission Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications
4. Possible Action:
Motion to deny the appeal of M 19-16 (#19080037) subject to certain findings. (Roll
Call Vote)
VI. NEW BUSINESS
VII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
A. Current Planning Projects
B. Planning Staff Approvals
VIII. PRESENTATION BY MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
IX. REPORTS BY COMMISSION MEMBERS
Chair Tom Fischer - General Plan Advisory Committee and Historic Heritage Committee
Vice Chair Casey Estorga - Street Naming
Commissioner Armendariz - Housing Advisory Committee; City Council Meetings for
September 9, 2019 and September 16, 2019
Commissioner Sue Rodriguez - South County Joint Planning Advisory Committee
Commissioner Peter Fleming - Gilroy Downtown Business Association
Commissioner Amanda Rudeen - Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and High Speed Rail
Authority
Commissioner Sam Kim - General Plan Advisory Committee
X. PLANNING MANAGER REPORT
XI. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
XII. ADJOURNMENT to the Next Meeting of October 17, 2019 at 6:30 P.M.
Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
of
SEPTEMBER 5, 2019
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. REPORT ON POSTING THE AGENDA AND ROLL CALL
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Rebeca Armendariz Planning Commissioner Present 6:34 PM
Peter Fleming Planning Commissioner Absent
Amanda Rudeen Planning Commissioner Present 6:11 PM
Casey Estorga Vice Chair Present 6:27 PM
Sam Kim Planning Commissioner Present 7:19 PM
Susan Rodriguez Planning Commissioner Present 6:24 PM
Tom Fischer Chair Present 6:20 PM
III. PUBLIC COMMENTS
IV. CONSENT AGENDA
1. June 20, 2019 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Motion to adopt a resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Gilroy
approving variance application V 19-01, allowing a rooftop sign located on a building
within the C-1 zone district at 591 First Street (assessor’s parcel number 790 -32-013).
Filed by Mike Torres, 591 First Street, Gilroy, CA.
1. Staff Report: Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner
2. Public Comment
3. Planning Commission Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications
4. Possible Action:
Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner presented the report.
Chair Fischer opened public comment.
Project contractor Ralph Zertuche and applicant Mike Torres spoke.
Chair closed public comment.
Disclosure Ex-Parte Communication:
None.
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Rebeca Armendariz, Planning Commissioner
SECONDER: Susan Rodriguez, Planning Commissioner
AYES: Armendariz, Rudeen, Estorga, Rodriguez, Fischer
ABSENT: Fleming, Kim
VI. NEW BUSINESS
4.1
Packet Pg. 4 Communication: September 5, 2019 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes (CONSENT AGENDA)
A. Discuss content of Annual Report.
1. Staff Report: Julie Wyrick, Planning Manager
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Julie Wyrick, Planning Manager and Chair Fischer presented the content of the Annual
Report.
Chair Fischer asked the commission to comment.
The commission did ask Chair Fischer to add the cannabis ordinance discussion to this
year's annual report.
Consensus was received by all commissioners to add this item to the annual report.
B. Cannabis Ordinance Discussion
1. Staff Report: Julie Wyrick, Planning Manager
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Vice Chair Estorga began the discussion about the City's regulations on cannabis and
the City procedures for the Planning Commission to initiate review and discussion of
land use policy.
Comments were received by the Commission.
Jolie Houston, Assistant City Attorney provided direction to the present this item during
the annual Planning Commission report to City Council and receive direction from
Council to further explore this topic. Julie Wyrick, Planning Mana ger also suggested to
the Commission that she will report back to the Interim Community Development
Director, Greg Larson and communicate with the City Administrator to agenize this topic
for a future meeting topic at City Council. Staff explained that policy direction comes
from the City Council.
Vice Chair Estorga proposed that the Planning Commission direct staff to prepare a
comprehensive report analyzing cannabis regulations in the Zoning Ordinance and
bring this item back to a future Planning Commission meeting date.
Consensus was received by all Planning Commissioners.
VII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
A. Current Planning Projects
B. Planning Staff Approvals
VIII. PRESENTATION BY MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
IX. REPORTS BY COMMISSION MEMBERS
Chair Tom Fischer - Provided a brief report on the City Council Meetings for July 1, 2019,
General Plan Advisory Committee and Historic Heritage Committee.
4.1
Packet Pg. 5 Communication: September 5, 2019 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes (CONSENT AGENDA)
Vice Chair Casey Estorga - Provided a brief report on the City Council Meetings for
August 5, 2019 and August 19, 2019. Street Naming; no meeting, no report.
Commissioner Armendariz - Provided a brief report on the Housing Advisory Committee.
Commissioner Sue Rodriguez - South County Joint Planning Advisory Committee; no
meeting, no report.
Commissioner Peter Fleming - Gilroy Downtown Business Association; City Council
Meetings for June 3, 2019 and June 17, 2019; absent.
Commissioner Amanda Rudeen - Provided a brief report on the High Speed Rail
Authority and Bicycle Pedestrian Commission.
Commissioner Sam Kim - General Plan Advisory Committee; not present during this past
meeting.
X. PLANNING MANAGER REPORT
Julie Wyrick, Planning Manager provided a personnel update.
XI. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
No report.
XII. ADJOURNMENT to the Next Meeting of October 3, 2019 at 6:30 P.M.
Christina Ruiz, Management Assistant
4.1
Packet Pg. 6 Communication: September 5, 2019 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes (CONSENT AGENDA)
Greg Larson
INTERIM DIRECTOR
Community Development
Department
7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, California 95020-61197
Telephone: (408) 846-0451 Fax (408) 846-0429
http://www.cityofgilroy.org
DATE: October 3, 2019
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Stan Ketchum, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Consideration and Recommendation on Gilroy 2040 General Plan
Preferred Land Use Alternative
Request: Motion to adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approve the
GPAC proposed-Preferred Land Use Alternative for the Gilroy 2040 General Plan. (Roll
Call Vote)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City of Gilroy is in the process of creating the Gilroy 2040 General Plan. The
General Plan expresses the community’s long-term vision for the growth and
development of the city of Gilroy. The plan establishes public policy for the distribution
of future land uses, both public and private, and addresses a wide range of policies,
including economic development, transportation, safety, infrastructure, housing, parks,
recreation and open space, historic preservation and the environment.
The General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) has selected a Preferred Land Use
Alternative for recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. At this
meeting, city staff and consultants will present the Preferred Land Use Alternative to the
Planning Commission for their consideration and recommendation to the City Council.
The City Council will then be asked to approve, or approve as amended, the Preferred
Land Use Alternative for analysis in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report.
This action does not represent the final approval of the General Plan but is an interim
step in the process of adoption of the new General Plan. Subsequent to this action, city
staff, consultants, and the GPAC will review the draft General Plan policy document and
the GPAC will make a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council.
Finally, city staff and consultants will prepare the General Plan Environmental Impact
Report and present the 2040 General Plan to the Planning Commission and City
Council for adoption, scheduled for late 2020.
BACKGROUND:
5.A
Packet Pg. 7
2
The Gilroy 2040 General Plan Update process originated in September, 2013. The City
Council appointed a General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), comprised of citizens
and business representatives from a wide variety of interests and organizations, to work
with staff and consultants to develop the Gilroy 2040 General Plan.
One of the biggest decisions the City will make in the General Plan process is the type
and location of new land uses. The land use alternatives process guides the community
toward the selection of a preferred land use alternative to be incorporated into the new
General Plan. The City originally conducted an alternatives analysis in 2015, resulting
in City Council selection of a Preferred Land Use Alternative. However, in 2016, Gilroy
voters approved Measure H, which enacted an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and
reduced the area eligible for future urban development by 450 acres for residential uses
and 333 acres for non-residential uses. The City Council directed staff to initiate a new
land use alternatives process to allow the community and decision-makers to consider
land use alternatives for the area within the new UGB .
The GPAC met four times between June and October, 2017, and selected three revised
land use alternatives for analysis. In March, 2018 the GPAC reviewed the draft Land
Use Alternatives Analysis in preparation for presentation of the results at a Communi ty
Workshop, scheduled for April, 2018. Prior to that meeting, the City Council postponed
the General Plan Update process, again, to await the completion of the Gilroy Place -
Based Economic Development Report, subsequently completed in January, 2019, and
presented to the GPAC in March, 2019. The GPAC recently concluded the selection of
a preferred land use alternative for presentation to the Planning Commission and City
Council. This report presents the GPAC recommendation. Attachment 1 contains the
General Plan Alternatives Report, utilized by the GPAC to select the three proposed
land use alternatives.
Public Outreach and Engagement:
The public outreach and engagement program for the General Plan Update has
consisted of multiple forms of outreach, all conducted in both English and Spanish.
They include: community workshops; presentations to city commissions, community
organizations, and interest groups; project and city newsletters; posting community
meeting flyers in businesses; e-mail blasts; press releases to print, radio and television
media; notices in the city water bill; the Gilroy2040.com website and the interactive on -
line Townhall and Your Voice Forum components of the City and project website s.
On July 22 and 23, 2019, General Plan Community workshops were held at Eliot and
Luigi Aprea Schools (respectively) to present the results of the General Plan
Alternatives Report and seek community input. Over 100 individuals attended the two
workshops. The Community Workshops Engagement Summary Rep ort is included as
Attachment 2. The workshops included two exercises designed to collect information
on the community’s preference among the three land use alternatives, and also which of
the alternatives analysis criteria were considered the most important.
Vision and Guiding Principles:
5.A
Packet Pg. 8
3
Based on community input, the GPAC prepared a Vision Statement and set of Guiding
Principles for the new General Plan. A vision is a description of an ideal future toward
which the community can develop. Guiding principles express the key values and
aspirations for Gilroy’s future and serve as guideposts for the goals, policies and
implementation measures contained in the General Plan. The Planning Commission
and City Council endorsed these principles to form the foundation for the new General
Plan.
The Vision Statement
In 2040, Gilroy is a diverse and culturally rich community with a small-town feel.
Gilroy’s economy is thriving, with a healthy business environment and ample job
opportunities for residents. Visitors come to Gilroy for its wineries, shopping,
festivals and recreational opportunities. It is well -known throughout the region for its
excellent schools, agriculture and downtown.
Guiding Principles
As part of the land use alternatives process, the GPAC prioritized Guiding Principles
for reference in the development of a preferred land use alternative. The GPAC's
top five guiding principles are:
1. Foster Economic Growth
2. Cultivate a Downtown Renaissance
3. Balance Growth and Open Space
4. Promote Fiscal Strength
5. Foster a Sustainable Community
These priorities should be considered by the Planning Commission and City Council in
their review of the GPAC-proposed preferred land use alternative.
ANALYSIS:
General Plan Alternatives Report:
The selection of the preferred land use alternative was based on information contained
in the General Plan Alternatives Report. GPAC members and Community Workshop
participants reviewed and considered this information as part of their recommendation
process. The following are highlights from the main topic areas of the report.
Section 2: Population, Housing and Employment
The report provides population projections from the Association of Bay Area
Governments, and from the General Plan Economic Consultant , Applied Development
Economics (ADE). The ABAG projection is based on a slow growth rate, resulting in a
population of 61,000 in 2040. In January, 2019, the population of Gilroy was 58,756.
ADE prepared a range of low-to-high growth scenarios based on analysis of market
trends and demand analysis. They estimate Gilroy’s population to fall within the range
of 72,800 to 84,400 by 2040.
5.A
Packet Pg. 9
4
The number of housing units needed to accommodate the range of population
projections is based on assumptions of a constant household size of 3.5 persons and a
5% vacancy rate. Based on this, the number of new dwelling units required to meet the
range of ADE population projections is between 5,620 and 9,090 units.
ADE also prepared an employment projection for 2040, base d on consideration of
historic economic trends, resulting in an estimated additional 9,920 jobs in Gilroy by
2040.
Section 3: Land Use Designations
This section presents a description of each land use designation proposed in the 2040
General Plan, including the density range, floor area ratio, and allowed uses. The
report provides an expanded description of the Neighborhood District designation,
intended to encourage compact, complete, neighborhood-style development that
provides a variety of housing types, and a neighborhood commercial center, together
with schools, parks and open space. The Alternatives Report contains two different
mixes of density, as shown in Table 1, below, and described in more detail on page 11
in the Alternatives Report.
Table1
Neighborhood District Designations
Districts
Housing Types
0-7 dwelling
units/acre
7-9 dwelling
units/acre
9-16 dwelling
units/acre
16-30 dwelling
units/acre
Single-family Duplex
Small-lot single
family, attached
single-family,
apartments
Attached
single-family,
apartments
Neighborhood
District Low 82% max. 5% min. 10% min. 3% min.
Neighborhood
District High 60% max. 5% min. 25% min. 10% min.
The Neighborhood District designation is in the current 2020 General Plan, and applies
to the two large new growth areas within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), Focus
Areas 1 and 2.
Focus Areas
5.A
Packet Pg. 10
5
A majority of the land use designations and existing community in Gilroy will not change
between 2015 and 2040. At the beginning of the alternatives phase, the GPAC
identified five focus areas where future changes in land use are anticipated to occur
over the next twenty years or more. These are described in Section 4, page 13 of the
General Plan Alternatives Report. This section also describes multiple land use
concepts for each focus area considered by the GPAC in the development of the three
land use alternatives.
• Focus Area 1 is the Northern Neighborhood District, comprising 277 acres, primarily
located south of Day Road. This area previously extended north to Fitzgerald/Masten
Avenue, but was reduced by the adoption of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).
Four land use concepts are identified for consideration in this area. Concepts 1 and
2 reflect the different mixes of density, as shown in Table 1, above. Concepts 3 and 4
comprise the alternate levels of density, together with the Employment Center
designation applied to the eastern portion of the area. Employment Center is a new
land use designation providing for both a wider range of employment land uses and
more intense development, including manufacturing, light industrial, research and
development, office and regional retail commercial.
• Focus Area 2, the Southern Neighborhood District, comprises 193 acres located east
of Santa Teresa Boulevard, predominantly south of Luchessa Avenue, adjacent to
the Gilroy Sports Park. The two land use concepts described in Focus Area 1,
above, apply in Focus Area two, as well.
• Focus Area 3 is the First Street Corridor, extending from Santa Teresa Boulevard t o
Monterey Street. This area is proposed for conversion to a new Mixed Use
designation, allowing a combination of commercial uses and multi-family residential,
in either horizontal or vertical mixed use configuration. Three land use concepts are
identified, two with variations of high density residential, and one that retains a portion
of the existing General Services Commercial designation.
• Focus Area 4 reflects the greater Downtown area, incorporating the boundary of the
current Downtown Specific Plan and the adjacent area to the east, southerly of Old
Gilroy Street. The two land use concepts considered are: 1) the existing Downtown
Specific Plan and existing General Plan designations outside the specific plan area,
and 2) the Downtown Station Area Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative prepared in
conjunction with planning for the proposed High Speed Rail project.
• Focus Area 5 comprises the northeast quadrant of the city, between Monterey Road
and Highway 101, southerly of Buena Vista Avenue. Thre e concepts are identified,
the first of which reflects the existing General Plan designations, primarily Industrial
Park. Concepts 2 and 3 propose changes to the northern portion of the focus area to
include either Neighborhood District High residential or Employment Center.
Development and Evaluation of the Land Use Alternatives
The process to develop the three land use alternatives is explained in Section 5 of the
report, beginning on page 27, and describes the mix of land uses in each alternative,
5.A
Packet Pg. 11
6
and the resulting population, employment and housing capacity. The three alternatives
selected by the GPAC, together with the GPAC Preferred Alternative, are described
below and summarized in Table 2.
Table 2
Citywide Alternatives Holding Capacity
Dwelling Units Jobs* Population* Single- family Multi-family Total
Alternative A 3,950 3,340 7,290 16,290 22,240
Alternative B 4,720 6,170 10,890 22,360 33,020
Alternative C 3,900 2,440 6,330 21,440 19,290
GPAC Preferred
Alternative 3,590 3,680 7,290 21,440 22,210
*Reflects citywide development capacity of land within/outside focus areas
Alternative A is consistent with the Preferred Land Use Alternative selected at the end
of the original alternatives phase in 2015, but has been modified to reflect t he UGB
Initiative. It contains a balance of single-family and multi-family housing, largely due to
the inclusion of Neighborhood District Low in the south and High in the north. Alternative
A reflects the currently-adopted Downtown Specific Plan. The First Street Corridor
includes the lower-density (20 – 30 du/ac) mixed-use designation, which has the
potential for multi-story housing, office, and retail development. Focus Area 5 reflects
the existing predominantly Industrial Park designation.
Alternative B includes all of the focus area concepts that maximize Gilroy’s housing and
employment holding capacity. In comparison to the two other alternatives, this scenario
includes a higher ratio of multi-family dwellings that are spread throughout the
community. This is largely due to the use of the Neighborhood District High designation
in both the northern and southern areas of the city, Mixed-Use High (20 – 40 du/ac)
along the First Street corridor, and the Downtown Station Area Plan Preferred
Alternative incorporating new office and mixed-use multi-family housing centered
around the future high-speed rail station. The higher amount of employment reflects the
significantly more intense job capacity of the Downtown Station Area Plan.
Alternative C contains the lowest amount of new residential, reflected by inclusion of the
Neighborhood District Low designation in both Focus Areas 1 and 2, Mixed Use Low in
the First Street corridor and the existing Downtown Specific Plan. Alternative C provides
substantial new employment capacity due to the reduction of Neighborhood District and
Industrial Park in Focus Area 5 to accommodate the Employment Center designation,
which is meant to yield higher-intensity job types.
5.A
Packet Pg. 12
7
GPAC Preferred Land Use Alternative
Attachment 3 displays the map of the GPAC Preferred Land Use Alternative. This
alternative strikes a balance of increased housing and job growth, relative to the three
alternatives. The Neighborhood District High designation is incorporated in Focus
Areas 1 and 2, increasing both the share of multi-family residential and the overall total
housing potential in those areas. The Mixed Use Low concept was chosen for the First
Street corridor, reflecting the GPAC’s concern with potential building heights possible if
the Mixed Use High maximum density of 40 du/ac was developed. The existing
Downtown Specific Plan concept is included for Focus Area 4, reflecting the unanimous
GPAC position that it is premature to incorporate the Downtown Station Area Plan
intensified land use plan into the General Plan until there is more clarity and certainty
regarding the timing of the High Speed Rail project. In terms of future employment
growth, the Downtown Specific Plan concept included in the Preferred Alternative
contains far less future job growth than the Downtown Station Area Plan, however, the
expansion of the Employment Center designation in the eastern portion of Focus Area 1
and the northern half of Focus Area 5 contributes significantly increased job capacity.
Land Use Alternatives Evaluation
Section 6, Evaluation of Citywide Alternatives begins on page 31 of the General Plan
Alternatives Report. This section provides a comprehensive analysis of the three
alternatives across 10 different criteria. A summary table of the results of the analysis is
shown on pages 32 and 33. As shown in Table 1, the GPAC Preferred Land Use
Alternative most closely matches Alternative A in total new dwelling units and future
population growth. Significantly more job potential is included due to the expansive
area changed to Employment Center in the northern part of the city. In order to
compare the Preferred Alternative to the evaluation of the three alternatives, Alternative
A can be used as a proxy in most of the evaluation categories.
Community Workshop Results
The General Plan Community Workshops Engagement Summary report (Attachment 2)
includes a complete description of the presentation and the resulting feedback from
participants. This information was considered by the GPAC in their selection of the
Preferred Land Use Alternative. The workshop included two exercises designed to
collect information on the community’s preference among the three land use
alternatives, and also which of the alternatives analysis criteria were considered the
most important. The results of the ranking of the alternatives found 25% favoring
Alternative B and 22% favoring Alternative C. In contrast, 35% favored a hybrid
alternative of some form, with a different combination of land uses than those included
in any of the three GPAC alternatives.
Based on the most frequently selected concepts in each focus area, the hybrid
alternative favored by the majority of workshop participants would contain 8,900
dwelling units and capacity for 28,840 new jobs, which is significantly more housing and
jobs than the GPAC Preferred Land Use Alternative. See the results of the workshop
5.A
Packet Pg. 13
8
alternatives evaluation beginning on page 24 of the Workshops Engagement Summary
Report.
The second workshop exercise asked respondents to identify which criteria from the
alternatives analysis they considered the most important. The Housing Affordability
criterion was deemed most important by 65% of respondents, followed by Land Use
Efficiency, chosen by 59%. The next three most frequently ch osen criteria were Mix of
Housing Types (49%), Employment Mix and Average Wages (45%), and Roadway
Congestion (43%).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the Preferred Land Use
Alternative from the GPAC, and forward the Preferred Land Use Alternative as is, or as
amended, to the City Council for review and adoption.
Attachments:
1. GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1]
2. GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG
3. GilGP_GPAC Preferred Alternative_2019 09 23 BG
4. Planning Commission Resolution
5.A
Packet Pg. 14
City of Gilroy
General Plan
Alternatives Report
Public Review Draft
July 2019
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
2
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Contents
Section 1: Introduction ............................................3
Section 2: Population, Housing, and Employment .....7
Section 3: Land Use Designations ............................9
Section 4: Focus Area Concepts .............................13
Focus Area 1: Neighborhood District North .........14
Focus Area 2: Neighborhood District South .........16
Focus Area 3: First Street Corridor ......................18
Focus Area 4: Downtown Gilroy .........................20
Focus Area 5: Northeast Gilroy ..........................24
Section 5: Citywide Land Use Alternatives ..............27
Section 6: Evaluation of Citywide Alternatives ........31
Section 7: Citywide Land Use Maps .......................45
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Section 1: Introduction
The Gilroy General Plan process gives the community
an opportunity to refine the City’s “constitution” for future
growth and development. This is an opportunity to
reaffirm the existing attitudes and direction for growth
or chart a new course. One of the biggest decisions
the City will make about growth in the General Plan
process is the type and location of new land uses. The
Alternatives process guides the community toward the
selection of a preferred land use alternative.
The City originally conducted an alternatives process
in 2015, resulting in the City Council selection of
a Preferred Land Use Alternative. However, soon
after in 2016, Gilroy voters approved a new Urban
Growth Boundary (UGB), reducing the footprint of
future development (see discussion on page 5). The
City Council directed staff to initiate a new alternatives
process to allow the community and decision makers to
consider land use alternatives for the area within the new
UGB.
This report describes a range of land use concepts for
five Focus Areas within Gilroy’s urban growth boundary.
The report then provides a detailed comparison of three
citywide alternatives, one of which reflects the Preferred
Land Use Alternative selected by the City Council in
2015, amended to remove lands outside the UGB
(referred to as the 2015 Preferred Land Use Alternative).
About the General Plan
The General Plan is a foundational City document that sets the
course for Gilroy’s land use decisions. The process to develop the
General Plan will integrate input from hundreds of Gilroyans and
address an extensive array of issues (including growth, traffic,
sustainability, health, and fiscal stability).
3
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
4
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
The General Plan Process
After the passage of the UGB initiative, the City Council weighed several options for moving
forward with the General Plan process, and ultimately directed City staff to work with the
General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) and the community to develop a new set of land use
alternatives that reflect the new UGB. As part of the revised General Plan, City staff and the
consultants prepared new projections and holding capacity that consider the new urban growth
boundary. The community’s preference for a growth alternative may be different based on the new
projections and holding capacity information.
Project
Initiation
Economic
Development
Strategic Plan
Background
Report
Vision and
Guiding
Principles
Land Use
Alternatives
Draft General
Plan
Re-evaluation
of Land Use
Alternatives
Review and
Revise General
Plan
Prepare
Environmental
Impact Report
Adoption
Oct. 2013 Feb. 2014 Apr. 2014 June 2014
June 2014 to May 2015 May 2015 Dec. 2015 Nov. 2016
Jul. 2019 to Aug. 2019 Sept. 2019 to Feb. 2020 Sept. 2019 to Oct. 2020 Oct. 2020 to Dec. 2020
*We are here:
Voters
Approve
Urban Growth
Boundary
City Council
Selection of
Preferred
Alternative
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
5
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Measure H and the Urban Growth Boundary
In November 2016, Gilroy voters approved an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) by initiative,
with a goal of protecting Gilroy’s agriculture and open space while encouraging more compact
future development. The UGB is a line beyond which urban development is not allowed through
the year 2040. The UGB complements General Plan policies encouraging infill development and
supporting a thriving downtown. The UGB has an impact on the General Plan, particularly since
the 2015 Preferred Land Use Alternative designated land for development outside of the UGB.
The City is revisiting the land use alternatives, which are now constrained by the new UGB.
FIGURE 1: 2018 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
6
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
6
This page is intentionally left blank.
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
7
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Population
In 2015, Gilroy’s population was 53,008. Figure 1, below, shows
a range of population projections for 2040. The Association of
Bay Area Governments (ABAG), which produces projections for all
cities within the Bay Area, projects Gilroy to have a slower growth
rate (0.8 percent), resulting in approximately 61,000 residents in
2040. However, ABAG projections are not based on a market
demand projection. They reflect regional policy that directs growth
to larger cities and major employment areas. The City’s economic
consultant, ADE, produced a range of low-to-high scenarios based
on the market demand projections. These projections estimate
Gilroy’s population to fall within the range of 72,800 and 84,400
by 2040.
FIGURE 2: POPULATION PROJECTIONS (2015-2040)
Population and employment projections
can be a useful tool for long-range
planning. Projections offer a range of
possible growth outcomes. Projections
should not be regarded as inevitable,
since external market forces and City
policies can dramatically change the
rate and type of growth that occurs.
The decisions made as part of the
General Plan process will be a critical
determinant of Gilroy’s future job and
housing growth. These projections are
used later in this report to compare the
holding capacity of each of the citywide
alternatives.
Section 2: Population,
Housing, and Employment
40,000
45,000
50,000
55,000
60,000
65,000
70,000
75,000
80,000
85,000
90,000
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
ABAG ADE Low ADE Medium ADE High
2.2% gr
o
wt
h r
at
e
1.9% growt
h
r
at
e
1.5% growth ra
t
e
0.8% growth rate
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
8
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Housing
The number of housing units
needed to accommodate the range
of population projections is a
function of the household size and
the vacancy rate for housing. For
purposes of this analysis, a constant
household size of 3.5 persons and a
standard vacancy rate of 5 percent
are assumed. Based on these
factors, the population projections
would result in the following housing
unit projections shown in Figure 3.
Employment
When planners project employment
numbers, they look at historic trends,
consider the cyclical nature of the
economy, and try to anticipate
future trends. ADE prepared an
employment projection for Gilroy
that anticipates an additional 9,920
jobs by 2040 shown in Figure 4.
In comparison, ABAG projected
3,170 new jobs by 2040.
FIGURE 3: HOUSING UNIT PROJECTIONS (2015-2040)
12,000
9,000
6,000
3,000
0New Housing UnitsABAG ADE Low ADE HighADE Medium
3,210 5,620 7,350 9,090
FIGURE 4: EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS (2015-2040)
15,000
10,000
5,000
0New JobsABAG ADE
3,170 9,920
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
9
Public Review Draft | July 2019Section 3:
Land Use Designations
Land Use Designation
Density Range
(Dwelling Units
Per Gross Acre)
Maximum
Floor Area
Ratio
Allowed Uses
General Plan Designations
Hillside
Residential 1.0 - 4.0 N/A Single-family detached
Low-Density
Residential 3.0 - 8.0 N/A Single-family detached
Medium-Density
Residential 8.0 - 20.0 N/A Duplexes, townhomes, apartments
High-Density
Residential 0 - 20.0+N/A Townhomes, apartments
Neighborhood
District High
Varies
(see Page 11)N/A Variety of residential densities
Neighborhood commercial
Neighborhood
District Low
Varies
(see Page 11)N/A Variety of residential densities
Neighborhood commercial
State planning law requires general plans to establish “standards of population density and building intensity,”
as well as allowed uses for the various land use designations in the plan. As a part of the General Plan Update
process, residents, business owners, and interested parties are given the opportunity to evaluate and weigh in on the
appropriate land use types, densities, and intensities for different areas of the community, as well as on the form and
design of new development.
To support the description of each alternative, this section is written as a guide for understanding the different land
uses presented in the alternatives. Each land use included in Table 1 is described in terms of development standards
and allowable uses.
TABLE 1: GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
10
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Land Use Designation
Density Range
(Dwelling Units
Per Gross Acre)
Maximum
Floor Area
Ratio
Allowed Uses
General Services
Commercial N/A 2.0
Retail, service, low-intensity commercial
operations with light industrial nature,
automobile sales
City Gateway N/A 2.0 Retail, service, office, visitor-serving
uses (hotels)
Mixed-Use
Low 20.0 - 30.0 2.5 Retail, service, office, residential
Mixed-Use
High 20.0 - 40.0 4.0 Retail, service, office, residential
General
Industrial N/A 3.0 Large scale manufacturing,
warehousing, distribution
Employment
Center N/A 3.0
Office campuses, research and
development, medical, high-tech, light
industrial
Industrial Park N/A 1.0 Light manufacturing, office, assembly
plants, warehouses
Open Space N/A N/A Open space, agricultural uses
Parks and
Recreation N/A N/A Parks and golf courses
Public and
Quasi-Public N/A N/A
Schools, civic centers, government
buildings, and similar public/quasi-
public uses
Rural County N/A N/A Rural residential, open space,
agriculture
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
11
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Neighborhood District Low and High
The Neighborhood District designation encourages
compact, complete, neighborhood-style
development that provides a variety of housing
types, neighborhood commercial center, schools,
parks, and open space. The goal is to create
neighborhoods that are predominantly single
family in character, but which integrate different
types and prices of housing to meet the full range
of housing needs. When possible, high-density
housing and commercial uses can be combined
to create vibrant mixed-use neighborhood centers.
To achieve a cohesive neighborhood character, a
specific plan is required prior to approval of new
development within the Neighborhood District.
The Neighborhood District designation is in the
currently-adopted General Plan, and applies to the
two large new growth areas within the UGB (Focus
Areas 1 and 2).
The question for this alternatives process is what mix
of housing densities is most appropriate for the new
growth areas designated Neighborhood District.
The Alternatives Report includes two Neighborhood
District designations: Neighborhood District Low
and Neighborhood District High. Neighborhood
District Low allows a greater percentage of low-
density single family units (up to 82 percent).
Neighborhood District High allows fewer low-
density single-family units (up to 60 percent) and
requires a greater variety of housing types.
Districts
0-7 dwelling units/acre 7-9 dwelling units/acre 9-16 dwelling units/acre 16-30 dwelling units/acre
Single-family Duplex
Small-lot Single-family,
Attached Single-family,
Apartments
Attached Single-family,
Apartments
Neighborhood District Low 82% max 5% min 10% min 3% min
Neighborhood District High 60% max 5% min 25% min 10% min
Note: Neighborhood District percentages are based on land area.
TABLE 2: NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTS DENSITY BREAKDOWN
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
12
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
12
This page is intentionally left blank.
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
13
Public Review Draft | July 2019
FIGURE 5: FOCUS AREA MAP
Most of Gilroy is not expected to change much
between 2015 and 2040. The five focus areas
shown below are places in and around Gilroy
where development and change is anticipated.
The land use alternatives process allows the
community to express opinions about the type
of development that should be planned for
those areas. This section of the report presents
different land use concepts for each of the
five focus areas. For each of the focus areas,
Concept 1 represents the 2015 Preferred Land
Use Alternative, amended to reflect the UGB.
Focus Area 1: Neighborhood District North
Focus Area 2: Neighborhood District South
Focus Area 4: Downtown Gilroy
Focus Area 3: First Street Corridor
Focus Area 5: Northeast Gilroy
Section 4:
Focus Area Concepts
Urban Growth Boundary
City Limits
Focus Areas
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
14
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Focus Area 1: Neighborhood District North
Neighborhood District North is a 277-acre area
located on the west side of the city, bound by
Santa Teresa Boulevard to the west, Day Road
to the north, Mantelli Drive to the south, and
Monterey Road to the east. The 2015 Preferred
Alternative for this area was Neighborhood District
High, which prior to the UGB Initiative extended
as far north as Fitzgerald Avenue. Almost all of the
land in Focus Area 1 is outside city limits, but is
within the UGB.
The four concepts below show two different Neighborhood
District Designations: Neighborhood District High, which allows
a maximum 60 percent low-density single-family units (i.e., 7
units per acre or less) and requires a greater variety of housing
types; or Neighborhood District Low, which allows a greater
percentage (up to 82 percent) of low-density single-family units.
Both designations require neighborhood commercial centers,
parks, and schools. Concepts 3 and 4 are similar to Concepts
1 and 2, but introduce an area for an employment center.
Concept 1
Neighborhood District High
(2015 Preferred Alternative)
The 2015 Preferred Alternative (amended by the
UGB) designates the entire focus area Neighborhood
District High (i.e., up to 60 percent low-density single-
family). Neighborhood District High also requires a
neighborhood commercial center, parks, and possibly
one or more schools.
Concept 2
Neighborhood District Low
Concept 2 designates the entire area Neighborhood
District Low (i.e., up to 82 percent low-density single-
family). Similar to Concept 1, Concept 2 also
requires a neighborhood commercial center, parks,
and possibly one or more schools.
7,590
Residents
1,190
SF Units
1,260
MF Units
240
Jobs
5,660
Residents
1,390
SF Units
440 MF
Units
240
Jobs
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multifamily
City Limits
Urban Growth
Boundary
City Limits
Urban Growth
Boundary
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
15
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Concept 3
Neighborhood District High with
Employment at Monterey Road
Concept 3 designates the area Neighborhood District
High (i.e., up to 60 percent low-density single-family),
and introduces an Employment Center along Monterey
Road.
Concept 4
Neighborhood District Low with
Employment at Monterey Road
Concept 4 designates the area Neighborhood District
Low (i.e., up to 82 percent low-density single-family), and
introduces an Employment Center along Monterey Road.
Districts
0-7 dwelling units/acre 7-9 dwelling units/acre 9-16 dwelling units/acre 16-30 dwelling units/acre
Single-family Duplex
Small-lot Single-family,
Attached Single-family,
Apartments
Attached Single-family,
Apartments
Neighborhood District
Low 82% max 5% min 10% min 3% min
Neighborhood District
High 60% max 5% min 25% min 10% min
Note: Neighborhood District percentages are based on land area.
6,220
Residents
970 SF
Units
1,030
MF Units
1,270
Jobs
4,640
Residents
1,140
SF Units
360 MF
Units
1,270
Jobs
City Limits
Urban Growth
Boundary
City Limits
Urban Growth
Boundary
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
16
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Focus Area 2: Neighborhood District South
Neighborhood District South is a 193-acre
area located in south Gilroy, bound by
Luchessa Avenue to the north, Thomas Road to
the west, Santa Teresa Boulevard to the south,
and the Uvas Park Trail and Gilroy Sports
Park to the east. A majority of Focus Area 2 is
outside the city limits, but is within the UGB.
The 2015 Preferred Alternative for this area
was Neighborhood District Low (i.e., up to
82 percent low-density single-family), which
is consistent with the adopted General Plan.
Concept 2 designates the area Neighborhood
District High, which would require a greater
variety of housing types.
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
17
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Concept 1
Neighborhood District Low
(2015 Preferred Alternative)
The 2015 Preferred Alternative designates the entire
focus area Neighborhood District Low (i.e., up to
82 percent low-density single-family). Neighborhood
District Low also requires a neighborhood commercial
center, parks, and possibly one or more schools.
Concept 2
Neighborhood District High
Concept 2 designates the entire area Neighborhood
District High (i.e., up to 60 percent low-density single-
family). Similar to Concept 1, Concept 2 also requires
a neighborhood commercial center, parks, and possibly
one or more schools.
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multifamily
3,960
Residents
970 SF
Units
310 MF
Units
170
Jobs
5,300
Residents
830 SF
Units
880 MF
Units
170
Jobs
City Limits
Urban Growth
Boundary
City Limits
Urban Growth
Boundary
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
18
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Focus Area 3: First Street Corridor
First Street Corridor is one of the primary
east-west routes through the city. This 76-
acre Focus Area includes the properties
fronting First Street between Santa Teresa
Boulevard to the west and Monterey
Road to the east. The 2015 Preferred
Alternative for this area was Mixed-Use,
which allows housing at 20-30 units per
acre and non-residential development at
an FAR of up to 2.5.
Concept 2 designates the area Mixed-Use High, which allows flexibility
for higher densities of 20-40 units per acre and a floor area ratio
of up to 4.0. Concept 3 retains a portion of the General Services
Commercial designation from the currently-adopted General Plan, and
introduces Mixed-Use High to some areas along the corridor. All three
concepts include a number of high-density residential sites, designated
by the Housing Element. Given the limited amount of vacant land and
the complexity of redeveloping the corridor, the housing unit and job
estimates are based on an assumption that only 25 percent of the
corridor redevelops by 2040.
Concept 1 Mixed-Use Low (2015 Preferred Alternative)
The 2015 Preferred Alternative designates most of this area Mixed-Use (i.e.,
20-30 dwelling units per acre and FAR of up to 2.5). Mixed-Use encourages
a mix of retail, office, high-density housing, plazas, and parks. Development
should be concentrated at major intersections and be pedestrian-oriented.
1,250
Residents
0 SF
Units
450
MF Units
580
Jobs
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multifamily
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
19
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Concept 2 Mixed-Use High
Concept 2 designates most of this area Mixed-Use High, which would
increase the allowable densities to 20-40 dwelling units per acre and
FAR of up to 4.0.
1,470
Residents
0 SF
Units
530
MF Units
750
Jobs
Concept 3 Commercial Focus
Concept 3 retains the existing General Services Commercial at the intersection
of Wren Avenue, which allows for a broad range of commercial uses (e.g.,
grocery stores, restaurants, banks, big box stores) and uses with “commercial
and industrial” characteristics, such as small welding shops and automobile
sales and services. This Concept designates the remainder of First Street
Mixed-Use High (i.e., 20-40 dwelling units per acre and FAR of up to 4.0).
1,140
Residents
0 SF
Units
430
Units
420
Jobs
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
20
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Focus Area 4: Downtown Gilroy
Significant change is anticipated for Downtown Gilroy. The
City adopted the Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan in 2005,
and is currently preparing a Station Area Plan, which will
update the Downtown Specific Plan and integrate the future
High Speed Rail (HSR) Station. The Station Area planning
process is still underway, and the steering committee has
selected a preferred land use alternative. This alternative has
not been adopted by the City Council and changes to the
preferred alternative may occur.
This General Plan alternatives process examines two different
concepts for Downtown Gilroy to provide a comparative
analysis of the potential citywide impacts of different land use
alternatives; however, the community is not being asked to
select a preferred alternative for the Station Area through this
General Plan process. The Station Area planning process is
the appropriate avenue for establishing the land use plan for
the Downtown and Station Area.
Concept 1 assumes no changes to the existing Downtown
Gilroy Specific Plan. Concept 2 reflects the current preferred
alternative for the Downtown Gilroy Station Area Plan.
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
21
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Concept 2
Station Area Plan
Preferred Alternative
Concept 2 reflects the Station Area Plan Preferred
Alternative, which proposes new land use designations
inside and outside the Downtown Specific Plan area,
including up to six stories of mixed-use housing and
office. See page 23 for information on the Downtown
Gilroy Station Area Plan.
10,210
Jobs
120
SF Units
2,330
MF Units
6,800
Residents
Concept 1
Existing General Plan
and Downtown Specific Plan
Concept 1 retains the land use designations from
the existing General Plan and reflects the existing
Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan. This concept
assumes that a high-speed rail station will not be
located Downtown. See page 22 for information
on the Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan.
3,110
Jobs
170 SF
Units
1,170
MF Units
3,720
Residents
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multifamily
Downtown Gilroy
Specific Plan
Boundary
Station Area Plan Land Uses
Mixed-use housing (up to six stories)
Mixed-use housing
(up to six stories)
Mixed-use office or
housing (up to six stories)
Civic/public facility
Office (up to five stories)
Visitor-serving commercial
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
22
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan (2005)
The Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan was adopted in 2005 to create a
unique downtown for the city and increase tourism. The Specific Plan area is
comprised of six land use districts, each with its own character, development
standards, and allowed uses.
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
23
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Station Area Plan (in process)
The Downtown Gilroy Station Area Plan is both an update to the existing
Downtown Sepcific Plan and a continuation of the High Speed Train (HST)
visioning process from 2011 to 2012. The Station Area Plan will act as a tool
to guide private development and public improvements in Downtown over the
next 25 years, with a focus on the area near the future HST station and railroad
tracks. The Station Area Plan process is still underway. In 2016, the project team
evaluated three alternatives for Downtown Gilroy. The community provided input,
and with guidance from the Citizens Advisory Committee, the project team created
a Draft Preferred Alternative. The Draft Preferred Alternative was presented to the
City Council in January 2017 where they reviewed and provided comments.
A decision by the High-Speed Rail Authority on the preferred location of the
Gilroy HSR Station has been delayed and the final commitment to proceed with
the project is still several months away. Due to this uncertainty, the City Council
decided to postpone a vote on a final preferred land use alternative until the High-
Speed Rail Authority finalizes its plans for the Gilroy Station.
The Draft Preferred Alternative for the Station Area
includes the following land use designations:
• Mixed-Use Housing: The mixed-use
designation encourages mixed-use style
development with ground floor retail and
high-density multi-family housing on the upper
floors. This designation is located along
Monterey Road and Old Gilroy Street and
allows development up to six stories.
• Mixed-Use Office or Housing: The mixed-
use housing and office designation provides
flexibility for mixed-use development to
incorporate office, housing, and retail uses.
This designation is in the core of the Station
Area adjacent to the future station site and
allows development up to six stories.
• Office: The office designation provides Class
A office space for research and development
and campus style projects. This designation is
located adjacent to the auto mall and allows
development up to five stories.
• Visitor-Serving: This designation provides
for visitor-serving uses, such as a hotel and
conference center.
SARAFIN
A
W
A
Y
MONTEREY ST
LEAVE
S
L
E
Y
R
D
OLD GILROY ST
W TENTH
S
T
W LUCHESSA AV
LEWIS S
T
CHURCH STMURRAY AVSWANSTON LNHANNA STFOREST ST
W NINTH
S
T
W SEVEN
T
H
S
T
FIFTH ST
FOURTH
S
T
THIRD ST
SECOND
S
T
FIRST ST
SIXTH ST IOOF A
V
ELEVENT
H
S
T
MARTIN S
T
EIGLEBERRY
STRAILROAD
ST
HOWSON
S
T
ALEXANDER ST
South ValleyMiddle SchoolSt MarySchoolSt MarySchool
CHESTNUT STALEXANDER ST
potential HSR platform and station location
historic
station
REGIONAL
RETAIL
+AUTO MALL
HOTEL/
CONF. CTR.
AUTO
RELATED
SERVICES
VS
potential HSR or public
facility location (Requires
agreement between city,
chsra, and/or school district)
0 1,000 2,000 Feet
Draft Preferred Alternative - Land Uses (11-21-2016)
City limit
Station Area Plan boundary
UP railway
HSR alignment (modified at-grade)
Proposed Land Use Change
HSR station and parking
Mixed use housing (up to 6 stories)
Mixed use office or housing (up to 6 stories)
Office (up to 5 stories)
Civic/public facility
Visitor serving
Large format retail
Heavy commercial/light industrial
Existing land use designation
Station building footprints
Expanded Arts Center
Park
Plaza
Gateway to Downtown
Gateway to Downtown Core
HSR alignment (aerial)SWANSTON LN
St MarySchoolSt MarySchool
H OWSON
S
T
FIRST ST
LEAVES
L
E
Y
R
D
Aerial Vertical Alignment
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
24
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Focus Area 5: Northeast Gilroy
Northeast Gilroy is a 349-acre area in the far
northeast corner of the city, bound by Monterey
Road to the west, Buena Vista Avenue to the north,
Leavesley Road to the south, and the UGB to the
east. A majority of Focus Area 5 is in the city limits,
excluding the far northwest and northeast corners
which are not in city limits, but are within the UGB.
Most of this focus area is designated Industrial Park
in the existing General Plan and includes St. Louise
Regional Hospital and the Gilroy Premium Outlets. The
2015 Preferred Alternative continued to emphasize
industrial development west of U.S. Highway 101
and north of the hospital, with General Services
Commercial proposed around the future Buena Vista
interchange and remainder of the outlet center. The
existing rural residential development and fragmented
ownership make this area less likely to develop in the
short term.
Concept 1
Industrial Park Emphasis
(2015 Preferred Alternative)
Concept 1 designates much of the focus area as
Industrial Park, with an area of Public and Quasi-Public
Facility for St. Louise Hospital and an area of General
Services Commercial for regional shopping, including
the Gilroy Premium Outlets.
0
Residents
0 SF
Units
0 MF
Units
2,960
Jobs
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multifamily
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
25
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Concept 2
Neighborhood District High
North of Las Animas Avenue
Concept 2 designates the land north of Las Animas
Avenue and west of Highway 101 as Neighborhood
District High, consistent with the Neighborhood District
designation on the west side of Monterey Road.
6,120
Residents
960 SF
Units
1,020
MF Units
1,780
Jobs
Concept 3
Employment Center
North of Las Animas Avenue
Concept 3 designates a significant portion of land
previously designated Industrial Park as Employment
Center. The Employment Center designation allows
for employment development at a higher intensity than
Industrial Park.
0
Residents
0 SF
Units
0 MF
Units
7,090
Jobs
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
26
This page is intentionally left blank.
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
27
Public Review Draft | July 2019Section 5: Citywide
Land Use Alternatives
This section organizes the Focus Area
concepts within the greater context of
the city to create three citywide land use
alternatives. Each citywide alternative
reflects a variety of outcomes from
increased commercial development, and
more diverse housing stock, to additional
employment capacity, and a greater
emphasis of mixed use along corridors and
around transit. Since the Focus Areas are
the only areas of change, other areas in
Gilroy are assumed to retain their existing
General Plan land use designations. There
is, however, some assumed population and
job growth attributed to areas outside of
the Focus Areas through development of
vacant sites and redevelopment of some
underutilized sites.
Each Citywide alternative includes a map
showing the Focus Area concepts that
comprise the Citywide alternative and
depict proposed land use designations,
and a summary of the population, housing,
and jobs that each alternative would
support (i.e., the holding capacity).
It should be noted that not all Focus Area
concepts are reflected in a citywide
alternative. These options are equally
important to consider, however, as they
provide additional points of comparison.
As community members review the
alternatives, they are encouraged to
provide feedback on each Focus Area as
well as the citywide alternatives.
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
28
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Citywide Alternative A
Alternative A is consistent with the 2015 Preferred Land Use Alternative selected at the end of the
original alternatives phase in 2015, but has been modified to reflect the UGB Initiative. Alternative
A contains a balance of single-family and multi-family housing, largely due to the alternative
including both Neighborhood District Low in the south and High in the north. Alternative A reflects
the currently-adopted Downtown Specific Plan. First Street includes a lower-density mixed-use
designation, which has the potential for multi-story housing, office, and retail development.
A
22,240
Residents
3,950
SF Units
3,340
MF Units
16,290
Jobs
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multifamily
Focus Area 1: Concept 1
Focus Area 2: Concept 1
Focus Area 3: Concept 1
Focus Area 4: Concept 1
Focus Area 5: Concept 1
Focus Area Selection
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Low-Density Residential
Medium-Density Residential
High-Density Residential
Neighborhood District High
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Mixed-Use Low
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Public and Quasi-Public
Downtown Specific Plan
Neighborhood District Low
City Limits
Urban Growth Boundary
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Visitor-Serving Commercial
Focus Area Land Use Designations
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
29
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Citywide Alternative B
Alternative B includes all of the focus area concepts that maximize Gilroy’s housing and employment
holding capacity, including the Downtown Gilroy Station Area Preferred Alternative. In comparison
to the two other alternatives, this scenario includes a higher ratio of multi-family dwellings that are
spread throughout the community. This is largely due to the use of the Neighborhood District High
designation in both the northern and southern areas of the city, mixed-use high along the First Street
corridor, and mixed-use multi-family housing centered around the future high-speed rail station
downtown.
B
33,020
Residents
4,720
SF Units
6,170
MF Units
22,360
Jobs
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multifamily
Focus Area 1: Concept 1
Focus Area 2: Concept 2
Focus Area 3: Concept 2
Focus Area 4: Concept 3
Focus Area 5: Concept 2
Focus Area Selection
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Medium-Density Residential
High-Density Residential
Neighborhood District High
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Mixed-Use High
Industrial Park
Public and Quasi-Public
Downtown Specific Plan
City Limits
Urban Growth Boundary
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office Visitor-Serving Commercial
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Mixed-Housing
Mixed-Use Office/Housing
Office
Station Area Plan
Focus Area Land Use Designations
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
30
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Citywide Alternative C
Alternative C retains the single-family character of Gilroy, while maintaining a dense downtown
core focused on infill and mixed-use development. Other large corridors such as First Street include
a lower-density mixed-use designation, which has the potential for multi-story housing, office, and
retail development. The sharp increase in employment in Alternative C is linked to the reduction
of Neighborhood District and Industrial Park in the north to accommodate the Employment Center
designation, which is meant to yield higher-intensity job types.
C
19,290
Residents
3,900
SF Units
2,440
MF Units
21,440
Jobs
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multifamily
Focus Area 1: Concept 4
Focus Area 2: Concept 1
Focus Area 3: Concept 1
Focus Area 4: Concept 1
Focus Area 5: Concept 3
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Focus Area Selection
Low-Density Residential
Medium-Density Residential
High-Density Residential
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Public and Quasi-Public
Mixed-Use Low
Downtown Specific Plan
City Limits
Urban Growth Boundary
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Visitor-Serving Commercial
Focus Area Land Use Designations
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
31
Public Review Draft | July 2019
The goal of the land use alternatives process is for the community to express a preference and the City
Council to adopt a preferred land use alternative that is the basis for the 2040 General Plan Land Use
Diagram. To provide the community and decision makers with information on which to base their preferences
and decisions, this report includes an evaluation of each citywide alternative using a variety of criteria.
This section starts with an “at-a-glance” summary, a snapshot of the results of the evaluation of the three
citywide alternatives. A more in-depth discussion follows, and a detailed description of the methodology used
in each of the evaluation criteria can be found in the Technical Appendix (under separate cover).
Section 6: Evaluation of
Citywide Alternatives
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
32
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Summary of Evaluation
Range of Housing Types
Percentage of single-family (SF)
and multi-family (MF) housing units
Job Capacity
Number of new jobs that can be
accommodated
Land Use Efficiency
Average residential density and
employment intensity of new
development
Housing Affordability
Relative housing affordability, ranked
from least affordable ($$$) to most
affordable ($)
Average Wages
Combined average wages for all
new jobs
$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
54% MF
46% SF
56% MF
44% SF
39% MF
61% SF
16,290 22,365 21,440
5.25 8.0 6.34 10.5 4.73 10.6
Housing Jobs Housing Jobs Housing JobsUnits per Acre:
$$$$$$
$125,000 $124,800 $130,000
A B C
$72,000-$75,250-$76,300-
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
33
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Fiscal Health
The net fiscal benefit to the City
(total revenue minus cost to
provide services)
Commute Patterns
Commute patterns for work trips
to and from Gilroy, including
internal trips
Vehicle Miles Traveled
Total vehicle miles traveled
Road Congestion
Percentage of total lane miles
operating at LOS D or worse during
PM Peak periods (considered
congested conditions)
2.1%2.8%2.1%
$15,418,000 $15,509,000
$18,834,000
Internal:
Outbound:
Inbound:
35%
32%
33%
37%
32%
31%
36%
26%
38%
A B C
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Annual per capita GHG emissions,
measured in metric tons of carbon
dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e)
2.86
MT CO2e
2.75
MT CO2e
3.04
MT CO2e
2,669,017
Miles
2,879,149
Miles 2,713,505
Miles
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
34
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Range of Housing
Single-family homes are the
predominant housing type in Gilroy.
In 2015, there were 15,774
housing units in the city, of which 76
percent were single-family (including
mobile homes) and 24 percent were
multifamily. All three of the citywide
alternatives provide capacity for
a greater variety of housing types
compared to the current housing
stock. This is largely because of the
infill opportunities in the Downtown
and along First Street, as well as the
City’s Neighborhood District policy
that encourages a variety of housing
types.
As noted earlier, all three alternatives
provide more than enough housing
to meet the low market population
projection, and only Alternative B
has capacity that exceeds the high
market projection at full buildout.
Figure 7 shows that Alternative B
provides capacity for the greatest
amount and the greatest variety of
housing. It has capacity for 4,720
new single-family homes and 6,170
multi-family units. At full buildout,
this would result in a total of about
26,665 units in Gilroy, of which
about 63 percent would be single
family and 37 percent would be
multifamily.
FIGURE 6: NEW HOUSING UNIT CAPACITY VS. 2015-2040 PROJECTION
9,090 High
Market Projection
7,350 Medium
Market Projection
5,620 Low
Market Projection
A B C
12,000
9,000
6,000
3,000
0
7,290
3,340
3,950
10,890
6,170
4,720
6,330
2,440
3,890
Single-Family Units
Multi-Family UnitsNew Housing UnitsFIGURE 7: TOTAL HOUSING UNITS BY TYPE (2040)
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
16,015 16,790
15,962
7,046
9,874
6,147
3,948
12,067 3,339
3,707
12,067
4,723
3,707
6,167
12,067
3,895
3,707
2,440
A B C
Single-
Family
Multi-
Family
Single-
Family
Multi-
Family
Single-
Family
Multi-
FamilyHousing UnitsExisting Housing UnitsNew Housing Units
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
35
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Land Use Efficiency
Land use efficiency is a measure of the average number of units and jobs
per acre of land developed. At full buildout, Alternative B: Housing Focus
averages 6.34 housing units per acre, higher than Alternatives A and C.
Alternative C: Low Residential Growth has the lowest average residential
density, but a higher average employment intensity (jobs/acre) with the
addition of the Employment Center to Focus Areas 1 and 5. The employment
intensity of Alternative B is higher than Alternative A because of the intense
job development associated with the Downtown Station Area Preferred
Alternative.
TABLE 3: HOUSING AND JOBS PER ACRE
Average Housing Units/Acre Average Jobs/Acre
Alternative A 5.25 8.0
Alternative B 6.34 10.5
Alternative C 4.73 10.6
Jobs Capacity
This criteria measures the projected number of new jobs that each alternative
can accommodate, assuming the full buildout of all land designated
for employment. Alternative B provides the greatest capacity for new
jobs because it designates the greatest amount of land for employment,
specifically in the Station Area. All three alternatives include more land than
required to support the market-based projection of job growth by 2040.
Job Capacity Per AlternativeA16,290 B 22,360 C 21,440
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
36
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
FIGURE 8:
ALTERNATIVE A:
JOBS PER LAND
USE DESIGNATION
FIGURE 9:
ALTERNATIVE B:
JOBS PER LAND
USE DESIGNATION
FIGURE 10:
ALTERNATIVE C:
JOBS PER LAND
USE DESIGNATION
A
B
C
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
Public-Quasi-Public
Employment Center
Industrial Park
General Industrial
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan
Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan
City Gateway District
Visitor-Serving Commercial
General Services Commercial
Mixed-Use Corridor Low
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low 168
241
584
1,594
131
1,068
2,843
254
3,821
2,071
3,295
217
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
Public-Quasi-Public
Employment Center
Industrial Park
General Industrial
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan
Downtown Gilroy Station Area Plan
Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan
City Gateway District
Visitor-Serving Commercial
General Services Commercial
Mixed-Use Corridor High
Neighborhood District High 604
748
1,594
298
1,068
2,843
6,932
254
3,821
691
3,295
217
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
Public-Quasi-Public
Employment Center
Industrial Park
General Industrial
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan
Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan
City Gateway District
Visitor-Serving Commercial
General Services Commercial
Mixed-Use Corridor Low
Neighborhood District Low 366
584
1,594
131
1,068
2,843
254
3,821
373
10,188
217
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
Public-Quasi-Public
Employment Center
Industrial Park
General Industrial
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan
Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan
City Gateway District
Visitor-Serving Commercial
General Services Commercial
Mixed-Use Corridor Low
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low 168
241
584
1,594
131
1,068
2,843
254
3,821
2,071
3,295
217
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
Public-Quasi-Public
Employment Center
Industrial Park
General Industrial
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan
Downtown Gilroy Station Area Plan
Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan
City Gateway District
Visitor-Serving Commercial
General Services Commercial
Mixed-Use Corridor High
Neighborhood District High 604
748
1,594
298
1,068
2,843
6,932
254
3,821
691
3,295
217
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
Public-Quasi-Public
Employment Center
Industrial Park
General Industrial
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan
Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan
City Gateway District
Visitor-Serving Commercial
General Services Commercial
Mixed-Use Corridor Low
Neighborhood District Low 366
584
1,594
131
1,068
2,843
254
3,821
373
10,188
217
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
Public-Quasi-Public
Employment Center
Industrial Park
General Industrial
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan
Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan
City Gateway District
Visitor-Serving Commercial
General Services Commercial
Mixed-Use Corridor Low
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low 168
241
584
1,594
131
1,068
2,843
254
3,821
2,071
3,295
217
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
Public-Quasi-Public
Employment Center
Industrial Park
General Industrial
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan
Downtown Gilroy Station Area Plan
Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan
City Gateway District
Visitor-Serving Commercial
General Services Commercial
Mixed-Use Corridor High
Neighborhood District High 604
748
1,594
298
1,068
2,843
6,932
254
3,821
691
3,295
217
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000
Public-Quasi-Public
Employment Center
Industrial Park
General Industrial
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan
Downtown Gilroy Specific Plan
City Gateway District
Visitor-Serving Commercial
General Services Commercial
Mixed-Use Corridor Low
Neighborhood District Low 366
584
1,594
131
1,068
2,843
254
3,821
373
10,188
217
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
37
Public Review Draft | July 2019
This criteria measures the percentage of jobs and average wages by industry.
Figure 11 shows the percentages of jobs in Manufacturing/Wholesale (Industrial),
Retail/Services (Commercial), and Office-based businesses for each alternative.
Alternative A has more industrial and commercial jobs, but fewer office jobs than
the other alternatives. Alternative B is more focused on office jobs while Alternative
C has a balance of office and industrial jobs but fewer commercial jobs.
These broad land use categories can support many different kinds of businesses,
depending on the future economic development market in Gilroy. For example,
the industrial market in Gilroy is currently largely centered on the food processing
sector, whereas in Santa Clara County manufacturing and wholesale is more
technology-oriented. Similarly, the office space market in Gilroy currently supports
professions such as civil engineering, architecture, accounting, and legal practices,
while elsewhere in Santa Clara County the office business mix is more associated
with internet and software companies. These differences affect the wages than can
be expected from new job growth in the General Plan Alternatives. Using Santa
Clara County average wages, the categories are estimated to pay the following
average annual wages, depending on the future job mix:
City Job Mix:County Job Mix:
Manufacturing/Wholesale (MW)$90,600 $179,700
Retail/Services (RS)$40,600 $58,300
Office (O)$98,800 $156,900
Using the weighted average wages for jobs in each land use category, Figure 12
shows the combined average wage produced by each alternative. The differences
are not major among the alternatives, but Alternative C offers an average wage
of $76,300 to $130,300 compared to $72,000 to $125,000 for Alternative A
and $75,250 to $124,800 for Alternatives A and B, respectively. This is due to
the balance of industrial and office jobs in Alternative C, compared to the higher
levels of retail/services jobs in the other alternatives.
Employment Mix and Average Wages FIGURE 11: PERCENT OF
JOBS BY CATEGORY
FIGURE 12: COMBINED WEIGHTED
AVERAGE ANNUAL WAGES
A B C
$125,000$140,000
$120,000
$100,000
$80,000
$60,000
$40,000
$20,000
0
$124,800 $130,300
County Job MixCity Job MixCounty Job MixCity Job MixCounty Job MixCity Job Mix$72,000 $75,250 $76,300
MW
RS
O
C
B
A
53%
19%
28%
30%
18%
52%
43%
15%
42%
MW
RS
O
MW
RS
O
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
38
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
This criteria measures housing affordability for low-
density (LDR), medium-density (MDR), and high-density
(HDR) housing. Table 4 shows the estimated average
sales prices for each residential category based on
recent market activity in Gilroy. The table also shows
the estimated monthly payment required for homes at
these prices. Assuming housing costs are 30 percent
of household income, the table shows what annual
household income and individual salary would be
required to purchase the homes. Many homes have more
than one worker and in Gilroy on average it is estimated
there are 1.8 workers per household. Two or more
workers in the same household would combine incomes
to qualify to purchase a home. The figures in the right
hand column of the table indicate the average salary
that each worker in the household would need to earn to
make the required household income. These salary levels
can be compared with the average salaries for the jobs
in each alternative shown in the section above.
Housing Affordability
In order to purchase the average low-density single-
family house at $682,000, a household would need to
make $142,400 per year. This could be accomplished
with two workers earning average industrial or office
wages in Gilroy, or with one worker in an industrial or
office-based technology job. The medium-density houses
could be purchased with one worker making industrial
or office wages in Gilroy and an additional worker in
retail or services. The higher-density houses would be
affordable to households with two workers in retail/
services.
TABLE 4: PROJECTED PRICES AND REQUIRED INCOMES FOR MAJOR HOUSING TYPES BY ALTERNATIVE
Housing
Type
Alternatives
Housing AffordabilityABC
Units %Units %Units %
Purchase
Price
Monthly
Payment
Household
Income
Individual
Salary
LDR 3,511 48.2%4,073 37.4%3,599 56.8%$682,000 $3,560 $142,400 $79,111
MDR 1,219 16.7%2,250 20.7%653 10.3%$520,800 $2,719 $108,700 $60,389
HDR 2,557 35.1%4,568 41.9%2,081 32.9%$367,000 $1,916 $76,600 $42,556
LDR = Low-Density Residential
MDR = Medium-Density Residential
HDR = High-Density Residential
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
39
Public Review Draft | July 2019
In terms of how the Alternatives compare overall for
average salary and average housing cost, Alternative
C has a higher percentage of more expensive units
and also offers the highest average wage among the
alternatives. Alternative B has the highest percentage of
lower-priced housing and also provides a slightly lower
average wage than do Alternatives A or C.
The biggest housing affordability issue is for workers
in retail and services. Comparing the numbers of low-
wage retail/service jobs in each alternative to the
number of housing units planned in the more affordable
residential categories, there is some potential for
housing affordability issues. As shown in the analysis
of average wages, retail/services jobs generally pay
$40,600 to $58,000 per year. This would allow most
workers in the commercial sector to afford housing in
the high- and medium-density residential categories. As
shown in Table 2, all of the alternatives provide more
jobs in the retail/services categories than housing in
the high- and medium-density categories. The deficit is
greatest for Alternative C and lowest for Alternative B.
However, the market projection for 2040 suggests that
more realistic retail/services job growth would be about
4,700 jobs. Alternative B provides more than enough
affordable housing under this market-based scenario
while Alternative A and Alternative C are about 1,000
and 2,000 units short, respectively.
TABLE 5: RETAIL/SERVICES JOBS VS. MEDIUM- AND HIGH-DENSITY HOUSING BY ALTERNATIVE
Alternative Retail/Service Jobs Medium- and High=Density
Housing
Market Projection of
Retail/Service Jobs
Alternative A 6,758 3,776 4,741
Alternative B 8,465 6,818 4,741
Alternative C 7,413 2,734 4,741
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
40
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Fiscal Health
Fiscal health is measured as the ratio of City revenues
generated by each alternative to the costs to provide
services and infrastructure to support projected
development, and expressed as the net fiscal impact.
The higher the ratio of annual revenues to costs means
there is a better balance between costs for services and
incoming revenues. The figures reflect annual costs and
revenues at full build out of the alternatives.
Overall residential land uses generally create more cost
for the City than the tax revenue they generate. The
City relies on its commercial and industrial land uses
to augment the tax base needed to provide services to
residential neighborhoods.
Alternative B generates the most annual revenue, at
$41.4 million per year, but also would require the
highest cost for services, at $25.9 million. The net
revenue of $15.5 million is just slightly above the net
revenue of Alternative A, at $15.4 million. Alternative C
has the highest net revenue at $18.8 million per year.
For Alternative C, the revenues are 2.2 times higher than
projected service costs, compared to a ratio of 1.9 for
Alternative A and 1.6 for Alternative B. Alternative C
has the most favorable ratio of revenue to costs of the
three alternatives This is mainly due to the mix of land
uses in each alternative.
FIGURE 13: FISCAL IMPACT BY ALTERNATIVE
FIGURE 15: RATIO OF ANNUAL REVENUES
TO COSTS FOR EACH ALTERNATIVEA1.9
B 1.6
C 2.2
FIGURE 14:
FISCAL IMPACT BY MAJOR LAND USE CATEGORY
A B C
$45,000,000
$40,000,000
$35,000,000
$30,000,000
$25,000,000
$20,000,000
$15,000,000
$10,000,000
$5,000,000
$0
Revenue Cost Net
$40,000,000
$35,000,000
$30,000,000
$25,000,000
$20,000,000
$15,000,000
$10,000,000
$5,000,000
$0
-$5,000,000
Residential Non-
Residential Total
Revenue Cost Net
Residential land uses generally create more cost for the
City than tax revenue they generate. The City relies on
its commercial and industrial land uses to augment the
tax base to provide services.
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
41
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Commute Patterns
Currently, more people commute for work to areas outside Gilroy (45 percent) compared to people commuting into
Gilroy (35 percent). In the future, this pattern could become more balanced between inbound and outbound trips with
Alternatives A and B. The reverse would occur with Alternative C shown below, where more people would commute
into than out of Gilroy for work.
Trip Generation
This measure looks at the total estimated number of trips made for all purposes (e.g., work, school, shopping) during
peak morning and evening hours for each of the three alternatives. Alternatives A and C would have roughly the same
total trip generation and Alternative B would have about 11,000 to 12,000 more peak-hour trips than the other two
alternatives.
FIGURE 16: COMMUTE PATTERNS (WORK-RELATED TRIPS)
Existing
(2017)A B C
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,500
10,000
5,000
0
17,849
20,383
17,849
29,476
27,011 26,869
34,508
29,741 28,310
31,195
23,002
32,650
Internal TripsOutbound TripsInbound TripsInternal TripsOutbound TripsInbound TripsInternal TripsOutbound TripsInbound TripsInternal TripsOutbound TripsInbound TripsFIGURE 17: TOTAL PEAK-HOUR TRIP GENERATION
Existing
(2017)
80,530 116,209 128,472 117,553Trips
A B C
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
42
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per Capita
This criteria measures vehicle miles traveled
to determine the effects of proposed land use
changes on traffic patterns within the city. Since
the travel demand model generates traffic
based on population (defined by the number
of housing units) and jobs, for the purpose of
comparison, the definition of “per capita” is
the sum of Gilroy population and Gilroy jobs.
The results show that the VMT per capita would
increase by approximately 0.6 for Alternative
B and by 0.8 miles for Alternative A and C
compared to 2017. Although Alternative B
would have slightly higher overall VMT than
the other two alternatives, it also would have
a slightly higher percentage of internal trips
(trips that start and end in Gilroy) compared
to the other alternatives, which results in lower
VMT per capita. This is likely the result of the
larger increase in the number of multi-family
units assumed in Alternative B and a better
balance between jobs and employed residents
in Gilroy.
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) by Facility Type
This criteria measures the peak-hour VMT on
three transportation facility types (freeways,
arterials, and collectors) within the city for
each of the land use alternatives. The values
in the table represent the sum of the AM
and PM peak-hour VMT results produced by
the model. The VMT analysis indicates that
Alternatives A and C would result in similar
increases in peak-hour VMT (approximately
43 percent) compared to existing (2017).
Alternative B would result in an increase
in peak-hour VMT of approximately 50
percent compared to existing (2017).
FIGURE 18: VMT PER CAPITA BY ALTERNATIVE
TABLE 6: PEAK-HOUR VMT PER ALTERNATIVE
Facility Type
Scenario Freeways Arterials Collectors Total
Existing (2017)99,935 78,182 30,673 208,790
Alternative A 137,154 118,527 41,879 297,560
Alternative B 140,473 127,497 45,592 313,562
Alternative C 137,816 118,523 42,486 298,825
Existing
(2017)A B C
20.4 21.2 21.0 21.2
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
43
Public Review Draft | July 2019
Existing
(2017)A B C
Local Roadways 0.7%1.3%1.7%1.2%
Freeways 7.7%4.1%4.1%4.1%
Roadway Congestion Analysis
This criteria measures traffic congestion on roads in Gilroy using level of service (LOS). Level of service is
a qualitative description of operating conditions (degree of delays at intersections) ranging from LOS A,
or free-flow conditions with little or no delay, to LOS F, or jammed conditions with excessive delays. The
analysis evaluates the percentage of lane-miles within the roadway network system projected to operate
at various LOS grades during the AM and PM peak hours. For this analysis, LOS C or better is considered
acceptable operating conditions; LOS D or worse is considered congested operating conditions. These
tables show that demand on the transportation system would be slightly higher with Alternative B. However,
the results indicate that the anticipated overall level of congestion on local roadways would be relatively
low with all the General Plan alternatives. The results also indicate that the local transportation system would
have roughly the same projected traffic demands with each of the land use alternatives. Therefore, traffic
conditions and the level of transportation infrastructure improvements needed would be about the same with
each of the land use alternatives.
TABLE 7: AM PEAK-HOUR ROADWAY CONGESTION
Existing
(2017)A B C
Local Roadways 0.6%0.6%0.8%0.8%
Freeways 15.4%13.2%17.6%12.0%
TABLE 8: PM PEAK-HOUR ROADWAY CONGESTION
(PERCENTAGE OF LANE MILES OPERATING AT LOS D OR WORSE)
(PERCENTAGE OF LANE MILES OPERATING AT LOS D OR WORSE)
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
44
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
Greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) are generated by a variety of human
activities and natural processes. Those generated by human activity,
primarily through the combustion of fossil fuels used to power vehicles and
to generate electricity, have been identified by the scientific community as
contributing to global climate change. Climate change has the potential to
create widespread impacts that include sea level rise, increased incidence
of disease, reduced water availability, increased fire hazards, extreme heat,
flooding, and more.
A comparison of the per capita1 per year GHG emissions for the three
alternatives provides the most relevant measure for ranking GHG emission
characteristics. Alternative B has the lowest per capita GHG emissions rate
of 2.75, measured in MT CO2e (metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent),
followed by Alternative A with a rate of 2.86, and Alternative C with a rate
of 3.04. This is largely because Alternative B includes a greater percentage
of multifamily units in proximity to transit. However, because Alternative B
has capacity for the greatest population growth at full buildout, it also has an
overall higher level of total GHG emissions.
1 Capita includes both population and jobs for this analysis.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG Emission Per Capita Per Year 2.86
MT CO2e
2.75
MT CO2e
3.04
MT CO2e
A B C
Total GHG Emissions Per Year 112,070
MT CO2e
139,460
MT CO2e
126,080
MT CO2e
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
45
Public Review Draft | July 2019Section 7:
Citywide Land Use Maps
45
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
4646
General Plan Map2020
Hillside Residential
Low-Density Residential
Medium-Density Residential
High-Density Residential
Neighborhood District
General Services Commercial
Visitor-Serving Commercial
Professional Office
General Industry
Industrial Park
Campus Industrial
Open Space
Parks and Recreation
Public and Quasi-Public
Educational Facility
Hecker Pass Special Use District
Downtown Specific PlanRural Residential
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
City Limits
Urban Growth
Boundary Glen Loma Ranch
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
47
Screencheck Draft | March 2018ACitywide Alternative
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residential
Low-Density Residential
Medium-Density Residential
High-Density Residential
Neighborhood District High
General Services Commercial
City Gatewaty District
Mixed-Use Low
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recreation
Public and Quasi-Public
Rural County
Hecker Pass Special Use District
Downtown Specific Plan
Neighborhood District Low
Glen Loma Ranch
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Visitor-Serving CommercialCity Limits
Urban Growth
Boundary
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
4848
B Citywide Alternative
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residential
Low-Density Residential
Medium-Density Residential
High-Density Residential
Neighborhood District High
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Mixed-Use High
Hecker Pass Special Use District
Downtown Specific Plan
Neighborhood District Low
Glen Loma Ranch
Mixed-Use Housing/Office
Mixed-Use Housing
Office
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recreation
Public and Quasi-Public
Rural County
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Visitor-Serving CommercialCity Limits
Urban Growth
Boundary
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
49
Public Review Draft | July 2019Screencheck Draft | March 2018CCitywide Alternative
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residential
Low-Density Residential
Medium-Density Residential
High-Density Residential
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Mixed-Use Low
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recreation
Public and Quasi-Public
Rural County
Hecker Pass Special Use District
Downtown Specific Plan
Neighborhood District Low
Glen Loma Ranch
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Hillside Residen�al
Low Density Residen�al
Medium Density Residen�al
High Density Residen�al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Visitor Serving Commercial
Mixed-Use Low
Mixed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Parks and Recrea�on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Historic District
Downtown Expansion District
Civic/Cultural Arts District
Transi�onal District
Cannery District
Gateway District
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing
Sta�on Area Mixed-Use Housing and Office
Sta�on Area Office
Visitor-Serving CommercialCity Limits
Urban Growth
Boundary
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
50
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
50
This page is intentionally left blank.
5.A.a
Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: GilGP_Alternatives-Report_PRD_July-2019_web[1] (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
August 12, 2019 Page 1
GENERAL PLAN COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS
ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY
JULY 22 AND JULY 23, 2019
INTRODUCTION
The City of Gilroy is currently in the process of updating its General Plan. The updated General Plan will
guide the development and growth of the city for the next two decades. So far, the City has completed
an extensive review of the existing conditions and history of Gilroy, identified issues and opportunities,
and established a vision and guiding principles for the plan. Throughout the process, the City has
reached out to the community, using the feedback to direct the update process.
The next step in the process is selecting a preferred land use alternative. For this step, the GPAC has
created a set of three land use alternatives, which differ on characteristics such as the location and
density of housing and employment intensity. After collecting community feedback, the City will select a
land use alternative that will be included in the updated General Plan.
EVENT DESCRIPTION
The City hosted two community workshops to gather feedback on the land use alternatives process. The
first workshop was held on July 22, 2019, at Eliot Elementary School. The second workshop was held the
following day, July 23, 2019, at Luigi Aprea Elementary School. Both workshops were facilitated in an
open house format and lasted approximately two hours, from 6:30pm to 8:30pm. City staff and
consultants presented the same information at both workshops, in the same format. Combined, more
than 60 residents attended the workshops.
The workshops began with an introduction of the City staff and consultants working on the project.
Next, City staff provided a brief description of the broader General Plan Update process and how the
land use alternatives fit into that process. This was followed by a presentation on the alternatives by the
consultants.
After the introduction and presentation of alternatives, the open house portion of the workshops began.
Attendees were encouraged to visit a number of stations that described the alternatives and presented
the results of a comparative analysis of the alternatives based on 10 criteria. Participants were then
asked to provide feedback on the range of alternatives. All materials were provided in both English and
Spanish. The stations are described below.
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 2
WELCOME STATION
This station had three parts: an area for City Staff to provide check attendees in and provide direction, a
poster that described the General Plan update process, and a table with refreshments.
FIGURE 1: GENERAL PLAN OVERVIEW POSTER
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 3
STATION 1
Station 1 presented the Focus Areas and Citywide Land Use Alternatives. The purpose of this station was
to help attendees understand what areas in the city are likely to grow and change in the future, and
alternative land use plans the City has identified to guide and shape that change. The first two posters in
this section identified the focus areas and described the land use designations that would be used
throughout the workshop.
FIGURE 2: FOCUS AREA MAP
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 4
FIGURE 3: LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 5
The City in collaboration with the GPAC identified five focus areas and provided multiple land use
concepts for each. Information about Focus Areas 1 and 2 was presented together on two boards. Those
posters can be seen on the following pages.
Focus Area 1 is located in the north side of the city, and is primarily outside city limits, but inside the
urban growth boundary. Four concepts were presented for this focus area:
1. Neighborhood District High (max 60 percent single-family residential)
2. Neighborhood District Low (max 82 percent single-family residential)
3. Neighborhood District High (max 60 percent single-family residential) with Employment Center.
4. Neighborhood District Low (max 82 percent single-family residential) with Employment Center.
Focus Area 2 is located in south Gilroy, and is primarily outside of city limits, but inside the urban growth
boundary. Two concepts were presented for this focus area.
1. Neighborhood District Low (max 82 percent single-family residential)
2. Neighborhood District High (max 60 percent single-family residential)
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 6
FIGURE 4: FOCUS AREAS 1 AND 2
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 7
FIGURE 5: FOCUS AREAS 1 AND 2
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 8
Focus Area 3 is the First Street Corridor between Santa Teresa Boulevard and Monterey Road. Three
concepts were presented.
1. Mixed-Use Low (20 – 30 dwelling units per acre)
2. Mixed-Use High (20 – 40 dwelling units per acre)
3. A commercial focused alternative, maintaining General Commercial development at the
intersection of First Street and Wren Avenue.
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 9
FIGURE 6: FOCUS AREA 3
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 10
Focus Area 4 is downtown Gilroy. Two concepts were presented.
1. An alternative that maintains the existing land use designations in the Downtown Gilroy Specific
Plan (does not account for the future high-speed rail station).
2. The Station Area Plan (accounts for the future high-speed rail station).
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 11
FIGURE 7: FOCUS AREA 4
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 12
Focus Area 5 is in the northeast portion of the city. Most, but not all, of the focus area is in the city
limits. Three concepts were presented.
1. Industrial Park
2. Neighborhood District High (max 60 percent single-family residential) with Industrial Park.
3. Employment Center
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 13
FIGURE 8: FOCUS AREA 5
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 14
Station 1 also presented three citywide alternatives developed by the GPAC in late 2017. Each citywide
alternative is comprised of differing combinations of focus area concepts. The three GPAC alternatives
are shown on the following pages.
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 15
FIGURE 9: CITYWIDE ALTERNATIVE A
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 16
FIGURE 10: CITYWIDE ALTERNATIVE B
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 17
FIGURE 11: CITYWIDE ALTERNATIVE C
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 18
STATION 2
Station 2 presented a comparative an analysis of the three GPAC citywide alternatives. Attendees were
able to see how each alternative could impact the city across ten criteria:
1. Range of housing types
2. Jobs capacity
3. Land use efficiency
4. Housing affordability
5. Average wages
6. Fiscal health
7. Commute patterns
8. Vehicle miles traveled
9. Road congestion
10. Greenhouse gas emissions.
The posters presenting this information are on the following pages.
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 19
FIGURE 12: EVALUATION SUMMARY
MF
SF
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 20
FIGURE 13: EVALUATION SUMMARY
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 21
STATION 3
Station 3 provided attendees the opportunity to share their input on the alternatives. The station
included large maps of Gilroy with the focus areas left blank. Attendees could then place cut outs of the
different focus area alternatives on the map to create their own hybrid citywide alternative.
FIGURE 14: INTERACTIVE MAP
Attendees were also provided worksheets on which they could indicate their choice of citywide
alternatives or describe their hybrid alternative. The backside of the worksheet asked attendees to rank
the four most important criteria they used to select or create their preferred alternative. The ten criteria
from which they could choose included:
1. Mix of housing types
2. Jobs capacity
3. Land use efficiency
4. Employment mix and average wages
5. Housing affordability
6. Fiscal health
7. Commute patterns
8. Vehicle miles traveled
9. Roadway congestion
10. Greenhouse gas emissions.
The worksheet is shown on the following pages. Results from the worksheets are examined in the
following section.
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 22
FIGURE 15: WORKSHEET
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 23
FIGURE 16: WORKSHEET
8
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 24
WORKSHOP RESULTS
WORKSHEETS
ALTERNATIVE SELECTION
Of the three GPAC citywide alternatives, “B” was the preferred alternative among workshop attendees,
with 25 percent. Alternative “C” was selected by 22 percent of respondents, while 10 percent chose
Alternative “A” (the City’s preferred Alternative). Just over a third of the respondents created their own
“Hybrid” alternative from the focus area alternatives.
HYBRID OPTIONS
For those that chose “Hybrid” for Focus Area 1, Concept 1, the Neighborhood District High concept, was
the most popular.
10%
25%
22%
35%
8%
Alternative Selection
A B C Hybrid No Response
7%
14%
29%
7%
43%
Hybrid Option - Focus Area 1 1. Neighborhood District High
2. Neighborhood District Low
3. Neighborhood District High
with Employment Center
4. Neighborhood District Low
with Employment Center
Other
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 25
For those that chose “Hybrid” for Focus Area 2, Concept 2, Neighborhood District High, was the most
popular.
For those that chose “Hybrid” for Focus Area 3, Concept 2, Mixed-Use-High, was the most popular.
16%
67%
17%
Hybrid Option - Focus Area 2
9%
55%
27%
9%
Hybrid Option - Focus Area 3
1. Neighborhood District Low
2. Neighborhood District High
Other
1. Mixed Use Low
2. Mixed Use-High
3. Commercial Focused
Other
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 26
For those that chose “Hybrid” for Focus Area 4, Concept 2, the Station Area Plan, was the most popular.
For those that chose “Hybrid” for Focus Area 5, Concept 3, Employment Center, was the most popular.
No respondents chose Concept 1.
36%
57%
7%
Hybrid Option - Focus Area 4
29%
64%
7%
Hybrid Option - Focus Area 5
1. Existing Downtown Specific Plan
2. Station Area Plan
Other
1. Industrial Park
2. Neighborhood District High with
Employment Center
3. Employment Center
Other
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 27
CRITERIA SELECTION
Criteria
1 Mix of Housing Types
2 Land Use Efficiency
3 Jobs Capacity
4 Employment Mix and Average Wages
5 Housing Affordability
6 Fiscal Health
7 Commute Patterns
8 Vehicle Miles Traveled
9 Roadway Congestion
10 Greenhouse Gas
The criteria with the most first choices was Criteria 1, Mix of Housing Types, followed by Criteria 5,
Housing Affordability, and Criteria 2, Land Use Efficiency.
The criteria with the most second choices was Criteria 5, Housing Affordability, followed by Criteria 2,
Land Use Efficiency.
15
8
3 3
10
2 1
4
1 2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Other
Criteria Selection - 1st Choice
1
14
1 3
15
5
3
4
2 1 0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Other
Criteria Selection - 2nd Choice
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 28
The criteria with the most third choices was Criteria 4, Employment Mix and Average Wages, followed
by Criteria 9, Roadway Congestion.
The criteria with the most fourth choices was Criteria 4, Employment Mix and Average Wages, followed
by Criteria 6, Fiscal Health.
5 5
3
10
4
3
5
2
8
1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Other
Criteria Selection - 3rd Choice
3
2 2
6
4
5
0 0
5
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Other
Criteria Selection - 4th Choice
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 29
Overall, the most frequently chosen criteria at any rank was Criteria 5, Housing Affordability, with 65
percent of respondents placing the criteria in their top four most important, followed by Criteria 2, Land
Use Efficiency, at 59 percent.
Responses gathered at each workshop differed, although not greatly. Attendees of the July 22 workshop
at Eliot Elementary School chose Citywide Alternative “B” more frequently than the other choices or the
“Hybrid” option. Attendees of the July 23 workshop at Luigi Aprea Elementary School chose the “Hybrid”
option most often.
Attendees of the July 22 workshop were more concerned with housing affordability and availability, with
79 percent of respondents listing it as one of their top four criteria items that should be addressed in the
General Plan. Only 45 percent of attendees at the July 23 Workshop placed it in their top four most
important criteria, while only 45 percent of respondents from the July 23 workshop did so. Conversely,
more July 23 workshop attendees were concerned about roadway congestion (55 percent) and the fiscal
health of the City (50 percent) than July 22 workshop attendees (34 percent and 17percent,
respectively).
COMMENT CARDS
Workshop attendees also had the opportunity to give feedback on comment cards. The feedback from
those comment cards is shown below.
JULY 22 WORKSHOP
- To whom might care to listen: my primary concern happens to be housing affordability. It seems
that it is no longer possible for many of us. But I believe it is doable if we can put our heads
together and strive to find viable and realistic solutions… if we happen to have the will. We
currently have 2 mobile home parks and might probably be helpful if the City of Gilroy would
consider another one.
- Focus Area 3: Provide a linear park all the way along First Street. There is lots of space for this!
Jobs: Focus on economic development to get more jobs (tech) in Gilroy.
Schools: No more than 28 kids/class!
Criteria Totals (chosen in any order)
1 Mix of Housing Types 49%
2 Land Use Efficiency 59%
3 Jobs Capacity 18%
4 Employment Mix and Average Wages 45%
5 Housing Affordability 65%
6 Fiscal Health 31%
7 Commute Patterns 18%
8 Vehicle Miles Traveled 4%
9 Roadway Congestion 43%
10 Greenhouse Gas 37%
Other 6%
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 30
Jobs/Housing: Mixed land uses in FAs (Jobs + Housing)
- Too much traffic in Gilroy
- Once again, this is a confusing process. A citizen who has not been following this without any
background knowledge is not going to complete this reflective to their opinion. The citizens of
Gilroy have made it clear that the last time we did a workshop, they want infill development.
The citizens further expressed this through Measure H. Any future meetings should have people
walked through each alternative before completing the assignment.
- Re greenhouse gasses: neighborhoods of housing only – NE corner + Glen Loma – force people
to drive for even minor errands.
- I think that the East Side needs more parks and public services. A recreational park for kids. And
more industrial on the Mantelli side.
- It will be formidable to put more parks for families, public services and pool.
- North Murray Avenue needs parks, pools, better lighting and to be re-zoned. There’s a
neighborhood there that needs services.
- Need more housing – one-story or apartments
Must create bypass from West (houses are here) to east where shopping is located. 6th and 10th
Street are horrible.
- It seems that city government has always envisioned more jobs for Gilroy. Now that the region
has very high employment affordable housing is scarce. It seems to me the answer to more
affordable housing is high density to available transportation. Since lower density has a high
profit margin the City should make low density development more difficult vs high density
apartments, etc.
- Would like to see sports park into the city and bike trails continue to Gavilan College.
- Go after LAFCO for turning down sports park it has been too many years.
- Sport Park is a must! Gav trail to downtown would be nice also.
- Option C is better for my vision something that it would mixt. And a balance.
Thank you for working with the community.
- It would be good to add more commercial stores in the area of Santa Teresa or Mantelli in
Gilroy, parks for the Eastern area of Gilroy, and expand our center in the San Ysidro park.
- I’d like a commercial area to be built in the area of Santa Teresa Av.
Construction of Recreational Parks in the Eastern area of Gilroy.
Construction of Community Centers in the East.
Construction of hotels in the area of Santa Teresa.
- The industry and commerce must be equally distributed all around the city, just like parks. There
aren’t enough recreation areas in the Eastern side of Gilroy.
- We want housing for the middle class. People from the bay are coming over. The prices for our
homes are too high and the middle class is no longer able to buy a house.
- We request houses for sale or to be able to purchase more accessible homes economically-
speaking.
- We want houses for low-income people as benefits as they’re the worst affected and the high
housing and basic product prices.
JULY 23 WORKSHOP
- I feel building north of town is not a wise move. Stay near Caltrain and Sports Park. Gav is the
key to bring money to the downtown.
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
City of Gilroy General Plan Update Alternatives Community Workshop
Engagement Summary
August 15, 2019 Page 31
- Gilroy needs high paying jobs equal to San Jose so that we reduce the 18,000! People who
commute elsewhere to work so they can afford to live here! And this would also help reduce
greenhouse gas emissions if transportation was coordinated enough to get people to use is
instead of their car.
- Would like to see Gilroy grow south with housing on Thomas Road. It currently has 4 bus stops,
bike path access, close to the sports park and close to 101, also close to city utilities & has been
on the general plan as housing for 60 years.
- Gilroy needs to finish the home building in the south before it moves to and starts new tracts in
the north. Gavilan needs housing & the trails need to be completed. Much of the south has been
on the general plan for 60 years!
- Relative to the entire plan update, how many parcels will become non-conforming after
adoption? Is there a sunset period for current uses that will no longer conform? How long?
Focus Area 2 is currently open farmland, some of which is in an inundation zone/flood plain for
Uvas Dam (and Anderson Dam) should it breach or fail. See attached SCVWD maps 1973. Where
and how do we establish neighborhood commercial and schools in such an area? Great location
for regional park, however. I realize this is old info, (1973) and most likely things have changed,
but this is the only info online from SCVWD that is generally available. If you can get newer info,
I would like to see it.
I should think that this property is under the Williamson Act, and would take years to bring it
out.
5.A.b
Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: GilGP_Workshop Summary_2019 08 15_BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
28
City of Gilroy | General Plan Alternatives Report
GPAC Preferred Citywide Alternative
The GPAC Preferred Alternative contains slightly more multi-family housing than single-family housing,
largely due to the alternative including Neighborhood District High in both the north and south
Neighborhood Districts. The GPAC Preferred Alternative reflects the currently-adopted Downtown
Specific Plan. First Street includes a lower-density mixed-use designation, which has the potential for
multi-stor y housing, office, and retail development.
G
22,210
Residents
3,590
SF Units
3,680
MF Units
21,440
Jobs
SF= Single-Family
MF= Multifamily
Focus Area 1: Concept 3
Focus Area 2: Concept 2
Focus Area 3: Concept 1
Focus Area 4: Concept 1
Focus Area 5: Concept 3
Focus Area Selection
Hillside Residen al
Low Density Residen al
Medium Density Residen al
High Density Residen al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
Cit y Gateway District
V isitor Serving Commercial
Mix ed-Use Low
Mix ed-Use High
General Industrial
Employ ment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Park s and Recrea on
Public and Quasi
Rural Count y
Dow ntown Historic District
Downtown Ex pansion District
Civ ic/Cultural Arts District
Transi onal DistrictHillside Residen al
Low Density Residen al
Medium Density Residen al
High Density Residen al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General S ervices Commercial
City Gateway District
V isitor S erv ing Commercial
Mix ed-Use Low
Mix ed-Use High
General Indust rial
Employ ment Cent er
Industrial Park
Open S pace
Parks and Recrea on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downt own Historic District
Downt own Ex pansion District
Civ ic/Cultural Art s District
Transi onal District
Cannery District
Gat eway District
Hillside Residen al
Low Density Residen al
Medium Density Residen al
High Density Residen al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
Cit y Gateway District
V isitor Serving Commercial
Mix ed-Use Low
Mix ed-Use High
General Industrial
Employ ment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Park s and Recrea on
Public and Quasi
Rural Count y
Dow ntown Historic District
Downtown Ex pansion District
Civ ic/Cultural Arts District
Transi onal District
Low-Density Residential
Medium-Density Residential
High-Density Residential
Neighborhood District High
General Services Commercial
City Gateway District
Mixed-Use Low
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Public and Quasi-Public
Downtown Specific Plan
City Limits
Urban Growth Boundary
Hillside Residen al
Low Densit y Residen al
Medium Density Residen al
High Density Residen al
Neighborhood Dist rict High
Neighborhood Dist rict Low
General Services Commercial
City Gateway Dist rict
V isitor Serving Commercial
Mix ed-Use Low
Mix ed-Use High
General Industrial
Employment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Park s and Recrea on
Public and Quasi -Public
Rural County
Downtown Hist oric District
Downtown Ex pansion Dist rict
Civic/Cultural A rts Dist rict
Transi onal Dist rict
Cannery Dist rict
Gateway District
Visitor-Ser ving Commercial
Focus Area Land Use Designations
Hillside Residen al
Low Density Residen al
Medium Density Residen al
High Density Residen al
Neighborhood District High
Neighborhood District Low
General Services Commercial
Cit y Gateway District
V isitor Serving Commercial
Mix ed-Use Low
Mix ed-Use High
General Industrial
Employ ment Center
Industrial Park
Open Space
Park s and Recrea on
Public and Quasi
Rural Count y
Dow ntown Historic District
Downtown Ex pansion District
Civ ic/Cultural Arts District
Transi onal District
5.A.c
Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: GilGP_GPAC Preferred Alternative_2019 09 23 BG (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
RESOLUTION NO. 2019 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF GILROY RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF
GILROY 2040 GENERAL PLAN PREFERRED LAND USE
ALTERNATIVE
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65300 mandates that each city and
county adopt “a comprehensive, long-term general plan” for “the physical development
of the county or city, and any land outside its boundaries which bears relation to its
planning”; and
WHEREAS, on May 21, 2012, the City Council authorized the preparation of a
new General Plan for the city of Gilroy; and
WHEREAS, the City Council appointed the General Plan Advisory Committee
(GPAC) to guide the preparation of the new General Plan; and
WHEREAS; on August 22, 2019, the GPAC completed selection of a Preferred
Land Use Alternative for recommendation to the Planning Commission and City
Council; and
WHEREAS; the Preferred Land Use Alternative will form the basis for the Land
Use Plan/Map in the new Gilroy 2040 General Plan;
WHEREAS; on October 3, 2019, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
to receive public testimony regarding the Preferred Land Use Alternative;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the
City of Gilroy recommends to the City Council the approval of General Plan Preferred
Land Use Alternative, as recommended by the General Plan Advisory Committee.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of October, 2019 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
_____________________________ ______________________________
Julie Wyrick, Secretary Tom Fischer, Chairperson
5.A.d
Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Planning Commission Resolution (2407 : Gilroy 2040 General Plan Preferred Land Use Alternative)
Greg Larson
INTERIM DIRECTOR
Community Development
Department
7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, California 95020-61197
Telephone: (408) 846-0451 Fax (408) 846-0429
http://www.cityofgilroy.org
DATE: October 3, 2019
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Miguel Contreras, Planner I
SUBJECT: M 19-13 appeal of Planning Division Determination (#19080037).
Tan Truong is appealing the City of Gilroy Planning Division’s
determination to withhold Final Clearance, for a new 3,410 -square
foot one-story dwelling with an attached 887-square foot garage on
a hillside lot, as approved on Architectural and Site Review
approval AS 16-26. Condition #2 of AS 16-26 specifies that the
project shall conform to the plans as approved. The applicant has
deviated from the approved plans by not including significant
architectural features. These features include stone veneer
detailing and window trim, and were originally submitted in both the
AS application and the Building Permits. The property is located at
2261 Mantelli Dr. in the Residential Hillside (RH) zone (APN 783-
72-067). This appeal is exempt from environmental review under
Section 15061.b.3 of the State CEQA Guidelines which applies to
projects involving “common sense” where it can be seen with
certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may
have a significant effect on the environment. Appeal filed by Tan
Truong, 2261 Mantelli Dr., Gilroy CA.
Request: Motion to deny the appeal of M 19-16 (#19080037) subject to certain
findings. (Roll Call Vote)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff has analyzed the proposed project, and recommends that the Planning
Commission deny the appeal of M 19-16 (#19080037) subject to certain findings.
BACKGROUND:
Subject Property and Surrounding Land Uses: The subject 1.25 acre site is
presently improved with a ± 3,410 square foot single family dwelling with an attached
5.B
Packet Pg. 98
2
887 sq. foot garage and a 464 sq. foot detached accessory dwelling with a 308 sq/ foot
attached garage. The property is located in the RH (residential hillside) zone district and
within a neighborhood comprised of custom -built residential homes representing
Gilroy’s high quality community.
LOCATION EXISTING LAND USE GENERAL PLAN ZONING
Project Site Single Family Residence Hillside Residential Residential
Hillside (RH)
North Single Family Residence Hillside Residential Residential
Hillside (RH)
South Vacant Lot Hillside Residential Residential
Hillside (RH)
East Single Family Residence Hillside Residential Residential
Hillside (RH)
West Single Family Residence Hillside Residential Residential
Hillside (RH)
Environmental Assessment: The “common sense” exemption, section 15061.b.3 of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, exempts this appeal from
environmental review. The activity is covered by the common sense exemption that
CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect
on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that
the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is
not subject to CEQA. Action on this appeal request would involve no expansion of the
allowable uses, and is not anticipated to create or result in any significant environmental
impacts.
On July 11, 2016, Tan Truong submitted Architecture and Site Review application (AS
16-26) for construction of a 3,410 square foot custom home and accessory dwelling in
the RH zoning district. On January 27, 2017, the Planning Divisions approved AS 16 -
26, subject to certain findings and conditions. It should be noted that development
projects are analyzed and considered as proposed by applicants. Conditions are
imposed as part of the approval process only to ensure compliance with regulations,
policies, and otherwise to address and maintain community expectations, as applicable.
For example, a typical requirement would be the provision of elevations that depict high
quality finishes in the context of the setting. The applicant had originally submitted
elevations that depicted high-quality finishes, on all elevations, typical of the
surrounding custom homes in the RH district. And therefore the project was expected
and conditioned to build what was proposed. In the attached approval letter it the project
as proposed by the applicant is described as:
“The residence is designed in a Ranch style with a cement plaster finish and
stone veneer accents at select columns and walls…”
Condition of Approval #2 (Att. 2, pg.3) states:
5.B
Packet Pg. 99
3
“This permit is granted for approved plans (“the plans”) on file with the Planning
Division. The project shall conform to the plans, except as otherwise specified in
these conditions. Any subsequent modification or deviation to the approved
plans shall be considered by the Planning Manager, may require separate
discretionary approval…”
The approved building plans submitted on June 7, 2017 align with those on file with the
Planning Division (see attached plans for AS 16-26). Consistent with the expectation for
high quality design (and Condition #2) these plans both depict stone veneer on all
elevations, with the majority being on the south elevation (facing Mantelli Dr.) and the
western elevation. The northern and eastern elevations depict stone veneer only on
select columns.
On August 8, 2019, Planning Staff conducted a final inspection for building permit
signoff. At that time, it was observed that multiple details of the home and site design
did not match the approved plans on file with both the Building and Planning Divisions.
Most noticeably, deviations were observed to include the lack of completed exterior
finishes per the approved plans. Staff reviewed the construction drawings and
determined that there were discrepancies between the Building Division approved set of
plans, and those approved by the Planning Division. Staff worked with the applicant to
correct some of the deviations, and processed a Minor Modification for changes that
were not determined to be significant, including landscaping details, and the addition of
a guardrail on a balcony. Staff did determine, however, that the missing exterior
detailing was not consistent with the approved plans, nor was the elimination of these
details in alignment with the high quality design style of the surrounding neighborhood.
As this is considered a significant deviation from the approved plans, staff was unable
to give final signoff on the Building Permit. Specifically, key details eliminated from the
building exterior includes:
South elevation: all stone veneer, all window trim.
West elevation: all stone veneer, all window trim.
North elevation: All stone veneer on two columns, all window trim.
East elevation: Stone veneer on one column, all window trim.
On August 26, 2019, the applicant submitted a letter appealing, to the Planning
Commission, the Planning Division's determination to withhold final signoff.
Discussion: To ensure orderly development in the RH zoning district, the Planning
Division takes into consideration the quality of proposed development, architectural
features and compatibility with the established character of the neighborhood.
The home originally proposed and approved as part of AS 16-26 is of high quality,
provides interesting and necessary articulation to break the monotony of wall planes,
and meets the character of the surrounding homes (see attached photos). In contrast,
the home that was built (photos attached) lacks high quality finishes; it has blank,
mundane and imposing walls, and contrasts greatly with the established quality of
architecture and design representative of the neighborhood.
5.B
Packet Pg. 100
4
On August 26, 2019, the applicant submitted a letter from the homeowners association,
or HOA (attached for reference). In this letter, the HOA deemed the as-built home
acceptable and deferred final approval to the City of Gilroy. Given the contrast from the
surrounding neighborhood and the lack of high quality finishes and concerns described
herein, the Planning Division does not support the applicant’s request and believes the
project needs to should be completed as approved through AS 16-26 and the
corresponding approved building plans.
Noticing: Property owner information (i.e. list, labels, and map) within 500 feet of the
subject site were generated by Data Pro Mapping Solutions, LLC, using current
ownership data. On September 11, 2019, notices of this Planning Commission meeting
were mailed to the property owners along within other interested parties. In addition, a
notice was published in the Gilroy Dispatch, and the Planning Commission public
hearing packets are available through the City's webpage.
Appeal Procedure: In accordance with Section 30.51.50 of the Gilroy City Code, the
Planning Commission's decision may be appealed, in writing, to the City Council within
20 days of adoption of the resolution. Appea l forms may be obtained from the City Clerk
and must be submitted with the appropriate fee before the end of the appeal period.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments
3. Approved Project Plans
4. Photographs of Neighborhood Homes
5. Photographs of Existing Home
6. HOA As Built Review Letter
7. Resolution of Denial, M 19-13
5.B
Packet Pg. 101
City of Gilroy
2261 Mantelli Dr.
Location Map
Date:October 3, 2019, Planning CommissionDrawn By:4,000 Checked By:1:Sheet:Scale:
5.B.a
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Location Map (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.b
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: AS 16-26 Final Approval Letter with Attachments (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.c
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Approved Project Plans (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.c
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Approved Project Plans (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.d
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Photographs of Neighborhood Homes (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.d
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Photographs of Neighborhood Homes (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.d
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Photographs of Neighborhood Homes (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.d
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Photographs of Neighborhood Homes (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.dPacket Pg. 128Attachment: Photographs of Neighborhood Homes (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.d
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Photographs of Neighborhood Homes (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.e
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Photographs of Existing Home (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.e
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Photographs of Existing Home (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
5.B.fPacket Pg. 132Attachment: HOA As Built Review Letter (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
Resolution No. 2019-XX
1
M 19-13
Resolution No. 2019-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF GILROY DENYING AN APPEAL (M 19-13)
BY TAN TRUONG, APPEALING THE PLANNING
DIVISION’S DETERMINATION TO WITHHOLD FINAL
SIGNOFF OF A CUSTOM HOME ON THE RESIDENTIAL
HILLSIDE (RH) ZONING DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 2261
MANTELLI DR. APN 783-72-067, PRIOR TO
COMPLETION OF THE CUSTOM HOME AS APPROVED
IN ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE REVIEW APPLICATION
(AS) 16-26.
WHEREAS, on July 11, 2016, Tan Truong submitted application for Architectural
and Site Review Application (AS) 16-26 requesting approval of a 3,410 square foot
custom home in the Residential Hillside (RH) zoning district located at 2261 Mantelli Dr.
APN 783-72-067; and
WHEREAS, on January 27, 2017, the Planning Division approved AS 16 -26 with the
condition, amongst others, that the custom home be built as depicted on the approved
plans on file with the Planning Division; and
WHEREAS, the plans on file with the Planning Division depict stone veneer and
window trim, to some degree, on all elevations of the proposed custom home; and
WHEREAS, on August 8, 2019, upon request Planning Staff conducted a
compliance inspection where it was noted that the custom home was constructed
without the stone veneer or window trim; and
WHEREAS, Planning Staff was unable to give final signoff until all conditions of
approval were met, including the addition of stone veneer as depicted on the approved
plans on file with the Planning Division; and
WHEREAS, on August 26, 2019, Tan Truong submitted a letter appealing, to the
Planning Commission, Planning Staff’s determination; and
WHEREAS, no further environmental analysis is required by the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 1506.b.3 (Common Sense
Exemption) of the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, on October 3, 2019, the City of Gilroy Planning Commission held a duly
noticed public hearing where the application materials, staff report, and public testimony
were considered; and
WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents and other material which
constitute the record of proceedings upon which this Project approval is based is the
official of the Community Development Department; and
5.B.g
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Resolution of Denial, M 19-13 (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
Resolution No. 2019-XX
2
M 19-13
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Gilroy has considered
Appeal M 19-13, in accordance with the Gilroy Zoning Ordinance, and ot her applicable
standards and regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds, after due study, deliberation and public
hearing, the following:
(A) That the appellant must adhere to all conditions of approval for AS 16 -26
including the addition of stone veneer and window trim as depicted on the
approved plans on file with the City Gilroy Planning Division.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Gilroy hereby denies appeal M 19-13:
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
GILROY, this 3rd day of October, 2019, by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________ ___________________________
Sue O’Strander, Secretary Tom Fischer, Chair
5.B.g
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Resolution of Denial, M 19-13 (2420 : Tan Truong Appeal of Planning Division Determination)
DATE
FILED FILE # (PROJECT #)APPLICANT AND CONTACT LOCATION DESCRIPTION STATUS PLANNER CEQA
Proposed
08/05/19 AS 19-15 Darryl Smith
408-799-0558 9005 Mimosa Court Construct a new single story 3,145 square foot single-family
house with a 709 square foot garage in an RH District.Proposed DR
07/03/19 M 19-09 City Historic Resources Evaluations - Various Downton Locations Proposed SO
06/28/19 AS1 19-14 (19060034)
VMD 19-01
Scott Kraus-Oreilly, M Conrotto-
Owner 303 E Tenth St 7KSF O'Reilly Auto Parts Store w reduced sy setback Proposed KT
06/07/19 MM 19-13 (19050039)Avery Cypress Point LC 8200 Kern Fence and gate for apartments Proposed KT X
05/15/19 AS 19-12 (19050022)
HP 17-02 (#17070020)Jonathan Emami First Street and Kern Avenue
(Formerly AS17-24)4-story, 120-unit apartment on approx.148,456 lot Proposed KT
04/19/19 AS 19-11 (19040026)Loret Mussallem 8350 Winter Green Court Single Family Hillside Home Proposed MC (EF)X
03/20/19 AS 19-07 (1903038)Efrain Coria, Applicant 7888 Monterey St.Mixed use 3-story bld. 2 commercial "live/work" units + 16
residential units, ground level parking Proposed KT/MC
03/05/19 AS 19-05 (190030013)Clayton Johnson 8341 Winter Green Ct Single Family Hillside Home Proposed MC / EF X
03/04/19 HP 19-01 (19030003)Habitat Plan Proposed SK
03/01/19 AS 19-03 (#19030002)Terra Ventures LLC 6807 Automall Parkway New car dealership building Proposed JW
01/28/19 M 19-03 City TUP Policy Proposed KT
11/19/18 AS 18-33 (#18110027)Andrew, CA2Homes- Architect
(408)786-4233 9211 Mahogany Ct Single Family Hillside Home Proposed MC X
11/21/18 AS 18-34 (#18110037)Tony Rivellini
(408)607-3248 9025 Mimosa Ct Single Family Hillside Home Proposed MC X
10/08/18 AS 18-24 (#18100017)Hanna & Brunetti, Applicant
(408)842-2173 345 Obata Ct Truck storage and dileveries for Berkeley Farm Milk Proposed KT X
10/04/18 M 17-24 (#17100010)Mark Sanchez, Applicant
(408)842-7000 6970 Camino Arroyo Traffic Sensitivity Analysis for proposed commercial
development at the SE corner of Camino Arroyo and SR 152 Proposed MAD/KT
09/11/18 M 18-25 (#18090009)City Land Management System (LMS) Acquisition Proposed SO X
09/05/18 M 18-23 (#18090007)City Housing Policy C.C. Study Session Proposed SK X
M 18-22(#18080054)High Speed Rail Gilroy Alignment study
08/02/18 M 18-18 (#18080001)City Special Events Permit/Temporary Use Permit Proposed MAD X
07/16/18 M 18-17 (#18070050)City Cities Association RHNA Sub-Region Proposed SK X
X08/21/18 City Proposed KT
7.A
Packet Pg. 135 Communication: Current Planning Projects (INFORMATIONAL ITEMS)
07/03/18 M 18-14 (#18070006)Tenth and Chestnut, Evergreen Tenth and Chestnut Proposed commercial development in C3, CM split zoned 6+
acre site Proposed JW X
06/27/18 M 18-13 (#18060036)City Historical Resource Inventory Proposed JW X
06/14/18 HP 18-09 (#18060019)Gilroy Storage LLC, Developer
530-886-8558 6500 Cameron Blvd.Habitat Plan application for expansion of Gilroy Self-Storage Proposed DJP X
06/11/18 TM 18-02 (#18060015)RJA: Chris Patton
408-848-0300
North of Santa Teresa, east of Syrah
Dr, and west of Miller Ave.
TM for three neighborhoods in GLR: Nebbiolo – 103 SF lots;
Malvasia – 46 compact SF lots; and The Glen – 23 SF lots Proposed MAD
05/04/18 AS 18-09 (#18050017)
Z 18-04 (18050018)
Arroyo Sign, c/o: Richard Luchini
510-715-5488 Automall Pkwy. 80' Freeway electronic message pylon sign Gilroy Auto Mall Proposed JW
05/01/18 CUP 18-01 (#18050004)Godon D. Warner, Applicant 5987 Obata Way Condition use permit for expansion of an existing recycling
facity Proposed KT X
01/24/18 M 18-02 (#18010039)City Parklet policy Proposed SO X
09/01/17 AS 17-28 (#17090001)Jack Huang, Developer
408-423-9138 7151 Monterey Rd URM retrofit and two story addition for a 2-unit
apartment Proposed JW (PW)X
09/04/16 Z 17-02 (#17030053)Tim Filice, Developer
408-847-4224 North of Santa Teresa Blvd Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan update Proposed MAD
9/1/16
8/31/16
CUP 16-04 (#16080006)
AS 16-38 (16080053)
Paul Strom, Applicant
Phone: 734-812-8741 2256 Coral Bell Ct New AT&T wireless antenna facility Proposed SK
09/02/16 M 16-10 (#16090007)City CEQA analysis of 10th Street bridge project Proposed MAD X
08/25/16 AS 16-33 (#16080044)City of Gilroy W. Luchessa Ave and Miller Ave.New Glen Loma Ranch Fire Station Proposed MAD X
12/14/15 Z 15-16 (#15120033)City Zone Text Amendment - Administrative Hearing
Process Proposed SO X
12/02/15 GPA 15-02 (#15120002),
Z 15-12 (#15120004)City High Speed Rail Station Area Plan Proposed KT X
7/31/2014,
7/17/12
USA 14-02 (#14070058),
USA 12-01 (#12070023)
Wren Investors, Developer
408-779-3900 Vickery & Kern Avenues USA of approximate 49 acres Proposed MAD MAD
07/13/13 GPA 13-02 (#13100001)City 2040 General Plan Update Proposed SK X
09/16/19 AS 19-17 95 Farrell Avenue 4 residential lots site improvements Proposed KT
09/24/19 AS 19-18 1500 Southwest SCRWA New Maintenace Facility Upgrades Proposed KT
09/03/19 M 19-14 Pacific West/Caleb Road Town Center BMR Apartments in
Glen Loma Affordable housing policy exception Proposed MAD X
09/24/19 M 19-10 Glen Loma Group Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan Traffic study Proposed MAD IS/MND
Approved
03/04/19 AS 19-04 (19030004)Adolfo Rodriguez 7851 Eigleberry St.New second dwelling Approved KT X
7.A
Packet Pg. 136 Communication: Current Planning Projects (INFORMATIONAL ITEMS)
01/31/19 AS 19-02 (19010038)Irving Tamura 6830 Eagle Ridge Dr New pool and spa Approved KO/KT X
10/19/18 AS 18-29 (#18100050)D&Z Design, Architect (Debra
Mercado), 408-778-7005 2291 Banyan St.Single- Family Hillside Home Approved on 1/18/19 JW (PW)X
10/16/18 AS 18-27 (#18100043)James Vergara, Applicant
408-640-4291 8885 Forest St New 11,796 Sq.Ft Industrial Building Approved KT X
09/11/18 M 18-24 (#18090008)City Review of Planning Agenda and Bylaws Approved SO X
09/06/18 AS 18-20 (#18090005)William J. McClintock, Engineer;
408-779-7381
Southeast corner of Santa Teresa
Blvd and 1st St Architectural modification for 202 townhome units Approved 10/29/18 JW (PW)X
08/20/18 AS 18-18 (#18080051)Lon Davis, Architect
408-778-2525 Mayock Rd (APN: 841-76-031)New 16,340 s.f industrial warehouse building Approved MC X
01/25/18 TM 13-03 ((#13040049)RJA: Chris Patton
408-848-0300
SW of Santa Teresa Blvd, S of the
Ballybunion Dr/Santa Teresa Blvd
TM 13-03 Time Extension for Kroeger Subdivision: Six SFR
lots, three open space parcels, and a private street Approved MAD X
01/16/18
AS 18-03 (#18010024)
Z 18-01 (18010025)
TM 18-01 (18010026)
Hecker Pass North, LLC, Developer
408-836-9290 Hecker Pass (APN:783-04-023) 73 SFR lots, 7 common spaces, and public and private streets
by establishing a new PUD overlay Approved MAD X
01/09/18 AS 18-01 (#18010011)McCarthy Gilroy LLC, Developer
408-356-2300
6503 Cameron Blvd &
1001 Ventura Way Two single-story warehouse buildings totaling 173,740 SF Approved KT X
12/15/17 AS 17-37 (#17120021)Caleb Roope, Applicant
530-906-6967 Santa Teresa Blvd 158-unit apartment project at Glen Loma Ranch Approved on 9/19/18 MAD
07/11/17 AS 17-23 (#17070011)Lon Davis, Architect
408-778-2525 5727 Obata Way A 10,500 SF industrial building with warehouse
and steel fabrication Approved KT X
01/26/17 AS 17-02 (#17010029)Hecker Pass Commercial, LLC,
Developer, 408-836-9290 2475 Hecker Pass Commercial and residential mixed use in HPSD Approved MAD IS/MND
TM 17-01 (#17030052)Tentative Maps for GLR Town Center Multi-Family Area
AS 17-12 (#17030051)125-unit townhomes at GLR Town Center Multi-Family Area
Z 17-03 (#16080006)
AS 16-19 (#16080053)
05/18/16 TM 16-02 (#16050031)R.J. Dyer Real Property Investment,
Inc., 408-847-1553 Thomas Ln TM for subdividing 14 single-family residential lots Approved on
11/5/18 KT MAD
10/26/15 AS 15-37 (#15100042)George Ramstad, Architect
408-842-9942 7320, 7330, 7340 Monterey Renovation of a downtown URM building Approved on
5/26/17 SO X
10/12/15 AS 15-34 (#15100018)Carl Salinas/Hanna & Brunetti/Lon
Davis, 408-842-2173 360-380 Obata Two industrial lots -- construction storage yards Approved KT X
09/19/18 Z 18-07 City Zoning Code Minor Edits 2018 Approved KT X
08/10/19 AS 18-23 (#18100001)
CUP 18-04 (18100002)RJA: John Moniz 7700 Arryo Cr Arch & Site review for truck sales and service
CUP for truck sales and (repair) service Approved JW (PW)X
8/23/2019 V 19-01 Mike Torres 591 First street Sign Variance for rooftop sign Approved KT
04/02/19 AS 19-09 (19040007)Warren Geisert 2281 Banyan Court Single Family Hillside Home Approved MC X
09/04/19 AS19-16 (19090002)Andrew Raymundo 7300 Monterey St TI to convert gas station to cofee shop Approved MC X
8955 Monterey Rd 78-unit apartment complex with new 4,600 commercial space Approved 1/07/19
MADApproved
9/1/2016,
8/31/16
Jan R. Hochhauser, Architect
805-962-2746, Ext. 102
09/04/16
JW (PW)MND
Tim Filice, Developer
408-847-4224 North of Santa Teresa Blvd
7.A
Packet Pg. 137 Communication: Current Planning Projects (INFORMATIONAL ITEMS)
10/25/17 AS 17-34 (#17100048)D & Z Design, Architect
408-778-7005 2282 Gunnera Ct.Single-Family Hillside Home Approved MC X
Plan Check
10/19/18 AS 18-28 (#18100049)D&Z Design, Architect (Scott
Zazueta), 408-778-7005 8955 Mimosa Ct. A&S Remodel for Single- Family Hillside Home Plan Check JW (PW)X
04/19/17 AS 17-18 (#17030040)Oscar Medrano, Developer
831-801-0242 250 Gurries Rd An additional 2,846 SF duplex to an existing
single-family residence Plan Check JW (PW)X
06/27/19 AS 19-13 (19060033)Steve Caspari, Jr 1905 Saffron Court New swimming pool/ retaining walls in Residential Hillside Plan Check KT
03/13/19 AS 19-06 (19030026)D&Z Design, Architect (Debra
Mercado)1975 Saffron Court Single Family Hillside Home Plan Check MC X
AS 18-26 (18100023)Arch & site for building and site improvements Plan Check
CUP 18-05 (#18100024)CUP for Sumano's commercial bakery Plan Check
09/20/18 AS 18-22 (#18090026)Efrain Coria, Owner
408-804-0342 8762 Foxglove Ct.Single-Family Hillside Home Plan Check MC X
09/14/18 AS 18-21 (#18090018)Tony Rivellini, Applicant
408-607-3248 8775 Wild Iris Dr.Single-Family Hillside Home Plan Check KT X
08/27/18 AS 18-19 (#18080070)Jeffrey Eaton, Applicant
408-691-8998 770 First St.New 4,016 s.f. commercial building with drive-through Plan Check KT X
07/30/18 CUP 18-02 (#18070065)Grant Bennett, Applicant
408-847-6000 8455 Wren Ave Conditional use permit for a pre-school at an existing church Plan Check MC X
10/25/17 AS 17-35 (#17100050)Cameron Waston, Developer
408-690-3037 8565 Strawberry Ln Single-Family Hillside Home Plan Check KT X
05/12/17 AS 17-21 (#17050016)Tony Ho, Developer
310-844-6521 8425 Monterey Rd Tenant improvement to convert a warehouse use to an auto
repair use Plan Check KT X
06/28/16 AS 16-25 (#16060050)Vince Rivero, Architect
408-813-2010 6705 Silacci Way 91,045 SF for contractor truck parking and
equipment yard Plan Check KT X
04/05/19 AS 19-10 (#19040011)Joe Magana 6455 Automall Pkwy New 3,250 sq. ft. freestanding metal canopy Plan Check KT X
06/19/18 HP 18-10 (#18060019)D & Z Design, Applicant
408-778-7005 2140 Hollyhock Ln Habitat Plan application for a single-family hillside home Plan Check DJP X
01/18/18 HP 18-02 (#18010034)Christ Patton, Applicant
408-848-0300
Southwest of of Santa Teresa Blvd
(APN: 808-18-003 & 808-19-006)Habitat Plan application for Miller realignment in GLR Plan Check DJP X
Under Construction
10/08/18 AS 18-25 (#18100020)RJA: Chris Patton
408-848-0300 Miller Ave. and Santa Teresa Blvd. Blanc and Noir (formerly the Grove) neighborhood in Glen Loma
Ranch: 113 single-famiy dwelling units Under Construction MAD X
08/16/18 AS 18-17 (#18080045)Sergio Perez, Project manager
925-730-1373
S of Solorsano Middle School; E of
Santa Teresa (APN: 808-18-017)
Margaux (Formerly Montonico) Neighborhood in Glen Loma
Ranch: 84 single-family detached homes Under Construction MAD X
08/16/18 AS 18-16 (#18080044)Sergio Perez, Project manager
925-730-1373 Syrah Ct (APN: 808-43-005)Burgundy (Formerly Home Ranch) Neighborhood in Glen Loma
Ranch: 52 single-family detached homes Under Construction MAD X
08/09/18 AS 18-14 (#18080026)Sergio Perez, Project manager
925-730-1373 Merlot Dr (APN: 808-18-014 & 018)Provence (Formerly Wild Chestnut) Neighborhood in Glen
Loma Ranch: 43 single-family detached homes Under Construction MAD X
10/09/18 Brain Spector, Applicant
831-319-4045 ext. 2 7050 Monterey Rd MC
7.A
Packet Pg. 138 Communication: Current Planning Projects (INFORMATIONAL ITEMS)
02/16/18 AS 18-06 (#18020025)D & Z Design, Architect
408-778-7005 9175 Tea Tree Way Single Family Hillside Home Under Construction KT (KO)X
02/01/18 AS 18-05 (#18020002)RJA: Chris Patton
408-848-0300
E of Miller Ave. btwn Stanta Terasa
Blvd and W of Luchessa Ave A private park: a trail, a dog park, and other amentities in GLR Under Construction MAD X
10/25/17 DUP 17-03 (#17100049)Greg Jaso, Developer 7373 Monterey Rd Lonely Oak Brewery Under Construction KT (KO)X
04/26/17 AS 17-19 (#17040037)Alexander Angkawijaya, Architect
408-431-2952 8735 Wild Iris Dr.Single-Family Hillside Home (BP 18030015 Issued 10/11/18)Under Construction KT X
04/03/17 AS 17-16 (#17040001)D & Z Design, Architect
Phone: 408-778-7005 2140 Hollyhock Ln Single-Family Hillside Home Under Construction KT (KO)X
03/30/17 AS 17-15 (#17030085)D & Z Design, Architect
Phone: 408-778-7005 Eagle Ridge 16-lot single-family hillside residential
development in Eagle Ridge
Under Construction
(Phase I for 4 Lots)JW (PW)X
03/06/17 AS 17-08 (#17030017)Gilroy Storage LLC, Developer
Phone: 530-886-8558 6500 & 6700 Cameron Blvd. 40,125 SF addition to an existing self-storage facility Under Construction KT X
10/25/16 AS 16-47 (#16100026)Walid Nazzal, Architect
Phone: 408-772-6096 8755 Wild Iris Dr.Single Family Hillside Home Under Construction KT (KO)X
10/21/16 AS 16-46 (#16100023)Performance Food Group, LLC
Phone: 415-200-9460 5480 Monterey Road Construction of a grocery and dry goods distribution center that
includes a 347,651 square-foot warehouse Under Construction SO EIR
05/25/16 AS 16-20 (#16050055)Jim Rubnitz, Developer
Phone: 408-813-6416 6901 Cameron Blvd 7,018 SF Chevron carwash, retail and canopy B)18020109, etc
issued8/30/18 Under Construction KT X
6/5/15 AS 15-24 (#15060011)Bridgit Koller, Calatlantic Homes
Phone: 925-315-0366 8450 Wren Ave.70 single-family residence Under Construction MAD IS/MND
12/11/14 AS 14-46 (#14120015)Kevin Nijjar, Developer
Phone: 559-264-5650 5975 Travel Park Circle Hampton Inn 4-story 100 room hotel Under Construction KT IS/MND
10/6/14 AS 14-39 (#14100010)D & Z Design, Architect
Phone: 408-778-7005
Intersection of Anson Ct. and
Evergreen Ct.
6 single-family homes and an 8,600 SF common open space
area Under Construction MAD MND
10/28/14 AS 14-41 (#14100051)Douglas L. Gibson, Applicant
Phone: 208-908-4871 Monterey Rd. and Ervin Ct.Gateway Senior Apartment, 75 units Under Construction JW (PW)MND
06/24/19 M 19-08 (#19060027)Peter Larson 5747 Obata Extension of AS17-23 for M1 Steel Building Under Construction KT X
01/18/19 AS 19-01 (#19010024)Red Roots Landscpaing
408-683-0336 2381 Mantelli Dr New swimming pool/ retaining walls in Residential Hillside Under Construction KT X
12/19/18 AS 18-35 (18120021)Richard/ Holly Hartman
408-995-0496 660 Birdsong St.Addition of 963 sq.ft to exsiting SFR Under Construction MC X
11/07/18 AS 18-32 (#18110014)Jason Guera, Symmetry Design
Build, 408-813-8760 8950 Mimosa Ct.Single Family Hillside Home Under Construction MC X
10/23/18 AS 18-31 (#18100058)Cheryl Hock, applicant
408-203-6162 6870 Eagle Ridge Dr.New Cabana in Residential Hillside Under Construction KT X
10/22/18 AS 18-30 (#18100051)Jose Ontiveros, Contractor/
Designer, 408-202-2131 7170 Lahinch Dr.New Swimming Pool/ Spa in Residential Hillside Under Construction KT X
09/11/16 AS 17-25 (#17070046)
Z18-05 (18080018)
Chris Vanni, Applicant
408-847-9190
Northwest of First Street and Kelton
Avenue 12KSF commercial PUD (Z18-05)Under Construction KT
07/09/18 AS 18-13 (#18070015)D & Z Design, Architect
408-778-7005 2243 Banyan Couty 4,428 SF Single-Family Hillside Home Under Construction KT (KO)X
7.A
Packet Pg. 139 Communication: Current Planning Projects (INFORMATIONAL ITEMS)
05/04/18 AS 18-10 (#18050024)Tony Rivellini, Owner
Phone: 408-607-3248 1981 Lavender Way 3,715 SF Single-Family Hillside Home Under Construction JW (PW)X
03/21/17 AS 17-13 (#17030062)James Baldwin, Architect
408-448-2012 1820 Carob Ct.Single-Family Hillside Home Under Construction KT (KO)X
09/12/16 AS 16-40 (#16090017)Trac N. Vu, Developer
408-506-0739 850 Pacheco Pass Highway New 4,975 SF fueling canopy and underground
tanks replacement Under Construction KT X
On Hold
AS 18-15 (#18060028)Arch & Site review for site improvements
CUP 18-03 (#18080029)Conditional use permit for a concrete recycling facility
A 12-01 (#12110049)
Z 12-09 (#12110052)
Planning Abbreviations
A = Annexation GL = Greg Larson, 408-846-0451
AS = Architectural & Site Greg.Larson@cityofgilroy.org
AHE = Affordable Housing Exemption MAD = Melissa Durkin, 408-846-0451
CUP = Conditional Use Permit Melissa.Durkin@cityofgilroy.org
DSPE = Downtown Specific Plan Exemption SK = Stan Ketchum, 408-846-0451
DTSUP = Downtown Special Use Permit Stan.Ketchum@cityofgilroy.org
GPA = General Plan Amendment MC= Miguel Contreras
HP = Habitat Plan Permit Miguel.Contreras@cityofgilroy.org
M = Miscellaneous
MD = Minor Deviation
RDO = Residential Development Ordinance
SPE = Small Project Exemption TWA = Teri Wissler Adam, EMC Planning Group831-649-1799 #203 or wissler@emcplanning.com
KTHanna & Brunetti, Applicant,
Phone: 408-842-2173 305 Obata Ct On Hold
11/26/12 MNDMADOn HoldUSA Amendment for annexation of 5.46 acres and prezone to
Neighborhood DistrictVickery & Kern AvenuesMark Hewell, Developer
Phone: 408-483-2400
08/10/18
SO = Sue O'Strander, 408-846-0219
Planning Staff
TM = Tentative Map
X = Exempt from CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) or a project
previously
evaluated
408-248-3500 or mlisenbee@davidjpowers.com
Contract Planners
DJP = David J. Powers & Associates
Sue.OStrander@cityofgilroy.org
KT = Kraig Tambornini, 408-846-0214
Kraig.Tambornini@cityofgilroy.org
JW= Julie Wyrick, 408-846-0209
Diego.Romero@ci.gilroy.ca.us
Maddie.Spooner@ci.gilroy.ca.us
Approved = Application approved through Planning review process
Julie.Wyrick@cityofgilroy.org
MD = Maddie Spooner
DR = Diego Romero
EIR = Environmental Impact Report
A-EIR = Environmental Impact Report Addendum
TUP = Temporary Use Permit
USA = Urban Service Area Amendment
V = Variance
Z = Zone Change
IS/MND = Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
7.A
Packet Pg. 140 Communication: Current Planning Projects (INFORMATIONAL ITEMS)
City of Gilroy
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy CA 95020
(408) 846-0451 (408) 846-0429 (fax)
www.cityofgilroy.org
Home Occupations:
Date Applicant Address Project Description
8/13/19 Hong Wang 9740 Sedona Way Math & Chinese eLearning
8/20/19 Omar Lopez 7922 Westwood Dr
#H134 Cleaning Services
8/21/19 Corey Gardner 777 Maria Way Office for Construction
8/22/19 David Reyes 8195 Westwood Drive Apt
3 Handyman Services
8/27/19 Ronald McDee 1028 Fillippelli Drive Cleaning Services
8/28/19 Christina Nellie Martinez 895 Susan Court Management Services
8/28/19 Joe S. Baptisa, Jr. 1082 Clark Way Catering and Cooking Classes
8/28/19 Robert & Letia Fiscalini 1212 Blue Passat Ct Office for Construction
8/28/19 Alonzo Bedolla 8151 Wayland Ln Office for Manufacturing Firm
8/29/19 Deja Lynnea Johnson 8994 Taos Way Office for Online Sales
8/30/19 Victor Lucio 510 Fairview Dr Apt B Janitorial Services
9/3/19 Leo Alvarado 9715 Tapestry Dr Handyman Services
9/9/19 Alec Lockhart 1950 Ballybunion Ct Dog Training
9/16/19 Megan Patzoldt 940 Perrelli St Consulting Services
9/20/19 Ashley Canizal 8195 Westwood Drive #A Online Sales
9/24/19 Manuel Cruz-Sandoval 430 E. 8th Street Apt 3 Auto Part Sales
9/25/19 Laura Lancaster 1400 Briarberry Ln Party Planning
9/26/19 Daniel David Hill 8325 Westwood Dr Personal Chef
7.B
Packet Pg. 141 Communication: Planning Staff Approvals (INFORMATIONAL ITEMS)
City of Gilroy
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy CA 95020
(408) 846-0451 (408) 846-0429 (fax)
www.cityofgilroy.org
Architectural & Site Approvals:
Date Approved
Date
Approved File No. Applicant Address Project Description
7.B
Packet Pg. 142 Communication: Planning Staff Approvals (INFORMATIONAL ITEMS)