Too many developers are using the planned unit designation as a way to avoid meeting certain requirements, according to City staff and Mayor Don Gage. To stem the problem, City Council plans on upping the standards for which planned unit developments it approves, after clarifying what its expectations are at the June 2 meeting.
Since 2012, 91 percent of the residential developments approved by City Council were planned unit developments, according to Planning Manager Sue Martin. Those developments, referred to as PUDs, can skirt the City’s minimum standards and provide less overall benefit to the community, Gage said.
Without bringing up specific PUDs by name, Gage said some prior developers designed their projects as PUDs to circumvent the planning process and ultimately abused the classification.
“We need a higher standard,” Gage said. “In the past, whether by pressure from the person submitting the project or the staff, we let (our standards) go, and this is what we end up with. If we want to have higher standards in this community, we’re going to have to—in some cases—say no.”
If the council turns down projects that don’t provide sufficient quality of life, Gage said the City will be in a better bargaining position to ask developers for more, as the council is the final decision maker in the development process.
Recently, one developer donated $50,000 to the City for future maintenance on Sunrise Park as a trade-off for not providing more open space, Council Member Cat Tucker said.
But when a developer comes to the council for approval of a PUD, Gage said he’d rather see money spent within the development instead.
“(A developer) coming in here who doesn’t do an open space area but donates $30,000 to something doesn’t change the quality of life for the people living there,” he added. “I want to see that money spent there. If they can’t spend the money there, take out a house.”
At the meeting, Martin suggested developers go above and beyond minimum requirements for open space and landscaping to having minimal impact on surrounding natural resources, and City Council ultimately agreed.
Tucker explained her concern stemmed from a typified lack of amenities in some PUDs that came before council. To prevent that, she asked Martin if the City’s planning staff could create a list of what types of amenities council is looking for to refer to.
But, based on her experience in other cities, Martin said developers often will choose amenities from the list that have the least effect on their bottom line.
“I’ve seen it done in other jurisdictions where it becomes a shopping list, and the applicants pick the ones with the least cost,” Martin said. “There is a danger in having a list spelled out; I’ve seen it used the wrong way, and the decision makers are put in a position where they feel obligated to say ‘yes’ but want more. At the same time, they have the ability to ask for more.”
Encouraging open space, amenities for residents
While criticizing some developments approved in the past, Gage pointed to two projects currently in the works as examples of responsible developments the City can be proud of.
Collectively, the Glen Loma Ranch and Hecker Pass Specific Plan Areas will bring thousands of new homes to Gilroy when completed and include “superb open space areas,” Martin said. Within the Hecker Pass development, agricultural lands will be preserved as open space. The Glen Loma Ranch project will set aside wildlife habitat areas, she added.
“When people come to develop in Gilroy, you can say this is the standard we want to adhere to,” Gage said. “It can be done, and here’s living proof.”
If a project is too small to incorporate open or common space, Gage suggests developers—rather than asking for a PUD designation—build based on the existing zoning for the land.
But if a proposed PUD is large enough to incorporate significant shared common areas, Martin suggested developers consider adding everything from play areas for children, a community recreation center with a pool, or barbecue area. According to existing regulations, common areas should be centrally located and accessible to all residents.
“Items that are truly beneficial to the overall community—rather than a single user or property owner—should be encouraged and sought after as community benefit items,” Martin said.
