HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD 3463~------~------~-~--·-----------------------.. • •
ORDINANCE NO. 3463
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OFTHE-CITY OP PAI~ ALTO
AMENDING PC ORDINANCE NO. 2637 APPLYING TO PROPERTY
KNOWN AS 625 EL CAMINO REAL
WHEREAS, on November 22,. 1972, by Ordinance No. 2637, the City
Council of the City of Palo Alto approved a Planned Community (PC) zone
for certain property known as 625 El Camino Rea} to allow construction
of a hotel developmentJ and
WHEREAS, the PC zone for· 625 Bl Ca:ninr.) Rt.>Jl w:4s ,1f:f.i.rmed by a
referendum vote on May 6, 1973; and
WHEREASF the property owner has applied for rnod:i.fications +-.o t.he
Development P 1 an est.:tbl ished by Ord ina nee 26 3 7 to permit the expans~ion
of the exiwt.ing hot!~l lobby, cocktail lounge, offices and laundry
facilities by a total of 2120 square feet and to permit th~.:? c.'Onver:sion
of 2500 square fer:t of storage area to a ·,.,e,:1d i ng reception hall .: and
WHEREAS, the location and desi·gn for the construction has been
reviewed by the Planning Commis.s ion and the Architectural Review Board
and has been found to be ~ompatible with the appearancr~ and f.unct ion of
the development;
NOW, THEREFOREr the Council of the City of Palo F>.1to does ORDAIN
as follows:
SECTION 1 ~ Ordinance 2637 is hereby amended to include e~pansion
of the-lobby; cocktail lounge and laund:cy faci 1 it ies and conversion of
existing storage to a wedding reception hall, as shown on Exhibit r.Aw
attached hereto and incorpor~ted herein by reference.
SECTION 2. Development Schedule. Constr·uct ion of the improve-
ments sfiai1· begin within-"tfiree-mon·tns of the effective date of this
ord inan<.:'!e and shell be completed with in nine months of the beginning
date of construction.
g:.£!LOJ!.l" Specialw!equire_I\l~~·
a. Use of th~ proposed wedding reception hall shall be
limited to weddings and similar religious/s(>cial functions and shall
not be used for meetings or similar business ass~mbly functionsQ
b. If, in the future, the City should require access from
the parking area to a roadway, the applicant shall remove the four
pat·king spaces and landscaping now shown occupying the two previously
proposed acc~ss points and shall regain four parking spaces elsewhere
on-site Ly restriping existing parking areas for additiona.l compact
spaces.
• •
c. The wedding pavilion, to be loca.ted in the new enclosed
p~ t io a. rea F is approved in concept only. The spec it i c des i 9n, alorHJ
·wl.th a report on the condition o.t the patio c1ak tree shall be rebaned
to the Architectural Review Board as a minor amendment to the PC zone.
If the oak tree must be removed, a replacement tree prO() ram shall be
proposed dL that tim~.
SECTION 4. The Council finds that this project will have no·
s igni ticant. adverse ~nvi r:onmer.ta l impact.
SECT ION ~. This or.·d ina nee sha J 1 become ef teet t ve upon the com
menceinent-o:ftlie thirty-·first da:{ attet: the ~iate of its pa.~;sa;;e.
INTH0Dt.;CED: August 15, 1983
pAs ~-m v : S s p t em be r 1 2 ~ 1 9 8 3
AYf~S; Bechtel, Cobb» Eyet'1y, Faz.t)no, Fl~tcher, f\lein~
Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon
None
ABSTENTIONS: None
ABSENT: None
Al?Pf\OVc~D:
1;TZ ~.ae.JtL ___ _ ~
2.
..
. ;
TO~ PALO ALTO PlANk-lNG COt4WilSSION
FILE NO. 83~ZC~11
• I •,;
Prepared by: Bob Brown
Date: May 20, 1983
GENERAL IHFORMATION ---------~--------~--------------------------------
Location:
~erty ~:
Ex1st~~ Zoning:
Parcel Size: ·-
Assessor 1 s Parcel H~r: . ~-~.,-
~xfst1ng Land U~:
~'!'Oundi ng Lan.d. ~!e:
625 El Ca~1no Real (Ho1fdly
lnnl
Cl~nt Chen and Associat2s
5~0 Montgomery Str~t
San Franci~co) CA 94133
Pacific Hotel Dc-t~e1opment
V~nture
6~5 El Camino Reai
Palo Alto. CA 94:301
Modi ficatian of PC Zon~;; 2637
To expand ~xisting hotel 1obby,
cocktail lounge~ ~ffices and
laundry fac11ties by a total of
2120 sq.ft. and convert
2500 sq. ft. of storage area to
a wedding reception halL
PC (Plann~d C~nity)
6.6+ acre$
120 ... S2-6
281 guest·."'*' hotel .,.~
·..es taurant, · -coffee shop,
ec.: tan 1oo11ge, aeet1ng rooa.s
•nd adllinfstrttion services
North: ·.Southern Pet;f ff c
. al1lf"oad tight-of-way and
County Transit p1rkfng area
East:· Southern PiSci fie ri~t ...
of-way
South: Warehouse aJJd
restaurant
I ·.·I .. , I
I I
I
• •
~ompreh~sfve Plan ~!~1gnat~~.: Service Conaet·c·t a1
H1st\!rt_!
November 22t 1972: Cit¥ Council approved PC Ordinance 2367 permitting hotel
dev~lopment.
May 6, 1972: PC zone affirmed by referendum vote.
July 23, 1973: C1t:t Council approved sign program for hotel.
March 20, 1977: City Council adopts Ordinance 5530 amending PC to include
planter boxes~ kitchen shed, canvas awning, new fencir;g and gates.
December 26, 1980: Minor PC am~ndment &pp~·oved by the 0 ·J rector of Planning for
fencing along the rear pr·operty line.· ARB recor.menderi approval of minor change
at Oecemberr 18" 1980 rneetfng.
~£JJ.Eable ResuJ.!~!:
18.68.110 Action by comnrfssion. In addition to the requirements of Chapter
18.98,. the planning conwn1ssion shall review and contider all materials
submitted by the app1ica~tt pursuant to this chapter, and shall prep~r~ and
recommend to the city counc1l o as appropriatet the specific regu1at1ons to t;)
applied w1ith1n the proposed planned coanunit,!J district. The specific
regulations may modify those· regulations contained 1n Chapters 18.83 to l8.99,
inclusive, as is appropriate to maet the individual dht~"ict, and shaH 1nclude ··
the fo1l owing:
(a) Pem1tted Uses. A listing ()f a11 uses to be pent~itted generally within
the distr1 ct, or the uses to be pemftted 1n specific locations within the
district &s sho"m on t;t1e developMent plan.
{b) ConditfQnal Us~: A listing of all uses to be conditionally allowed
withi.n the district.. or the uses. to be permitted fn specific locations within
the d1 s trf ct as shown on the deve 1 opMOnt p 1 an;
(c) Site Develcpmnt Regul~tfons" Maximum or mioiMUII regulations. «S
appropriate, go~Jerni1lg si.te di~~ens,ons, rtqufred yardS and dfst.tnees between
buildings. site coverage, building he1ghte residential ~ns1ey, a"d floor area
ratio, open !pace requir~ntfi, acces$Ory f•ciHties and u$es, antJ otherr
aspects of the propos.ed ~ve1opmeo·t w1th1n the d1strfct.· The regy1attons < II&,Y
be in text, or by .-.ference to .the develo~nt plan, or bottt. IH no event
shall the maximulil h~ight exceed 15.2 meters (fifty feet) except as provided· in
Chapter 18.90; · )
(d) Parking and loadingRequfr~nts. Regulations establishing off-street
park1ng and loading reGuiretaents for the diStrict. and governing des1gnw
5/20/83
2
locatfon, screening~ landscaping and operation of parking and loading
acth1ties. The regulathms ~ be by reference to Chapter 18.83, or in text
if the regulations of Chapter 18.83 are modiffed for the 1ndh1dua1 distrfc:t, or both;
(e) Special Requirements. Additional regulations. as may be appropriate to
assure a hannon1ous relationship between uses within the district, and a
compatible relationship with ex1$tfng or potential uses within adjoining
d'ls trf cts, may be rec01m1ended by the canrniss f on. Such regu1ati ons ~ii\Y i nc1 ude
additfonai height limttations. yard requirements, landscaping and screening.
provisions governing outdoor activities, and other requ1r~~nts;
{ f) Oeve 1 opment P 1 an .and Deve 1 up men t Schedu 1 e. The deve 1 opmen t p 1 an submit ted
pursuant to Sectio:1 18.68.090 and the development schedule submitted pursuant
to Section 18.68.100, as amended or approved by the planning cc~m~fss1on, shall
be rer.o.m:~~'!lded for im:1usion in the regulations app1icb1e to the PC planned
community d1strict;
{g) Definition~. Oefi~rit1ons (i.pp11cable specifically to the regulations
recommended fo the dis tr1 ct :l'ldy oe 1 nc 1 uded.
SPECIAL INfORMATXON
Envir·onment~_Ippact Assessment~
B~ilding Cov~a~~
Public Ut111ties:
Light and Power: ---"'-----
Water-Gas-Sewer: --
Public Services:
fl~X En~fneer~
Jns~ec~1~na1 Services:
.Fire De2_artmen!:
Park1n9:
A11 emd ronmental assessment
recommendfng a negative
dec'laratian 'ls atta.::hed.
~~;fsting
15~9 tt
No problems
No problems
No c~nts
Mo coonents
No problems
Exist1.fti
283 spaces
P;o.£.o.sed
16.6 $
f.!OPO!!oed
334 spaces
{30' compact)
5/20/83
3
•
DeveloP!!nt_Schedule: Construction to begin within 3 months from the date of City
Council approval and to be
completed within 9 110nths of
beginning construction.
ANALYSlS
Proposed Changes
Transportation impacts f~r thfs
r~roject are difficult to
!!Stimate s~nce there is no data
;tvailable for the various
proposed uses. At any rate the
a.ddi tions are smal'l in area and
accesses for the s 1 te are on El
Camino Real (arterial} and
University Circle (c~rcial
use only), so 1mpact sh~n1 d ba
negligible.
·--------·--~----
The applicant. Clement Chen~ has requested approval of modifications to the
Holiday Inn at 62& El Cam1n.o Relll which 1s zoned PC (Planned CormlUnity}. The
mod1f1cations requested include the following:
1. Main lobby: A~ditfQn of 467 square feet of lobby are~ by moving existing
glazing outward towards both the entry drive and the swimming
pooJ. The additions would both be located un.dgr the existing
roof.
2.. Cocktail Lounge: .. Addition of 280 square feet towards the north. The
bUildfng addition wfl1 be located behind an existing walkway
trellis~ ·
3. Administrative Office Expansion: Addition of 749 !iquare feet to the north
a"d east of e,rhting adlrfn1$trat1on area. A portion of this
addition will likewise be located behind an exist.ing trellis.
4. Wedding Reception tiall: Conversion of existing 2500 square f :at buf1d1ng
used f<lr 5torage to a new wedding recaption halL This change
also 1n.vo1v~ creation of a 840. sq. ft. brick patio with
awn1ng~;co'fer, new fenc.1ng ·surroo:ldittg an existing turf area
and a future wrought fron weqding pavilion. ·
5. Outdoor Garbage Area: Replacement of an ex'lsting wood and chafn link fenced ga~ge enclosure w1 th new stucco/masonry wall. This
revision. wi11 be a s1gn1ffcarit aesthetic iMprovement to the
current condition.
6 ~ laundry Ex~ans 1 em: Addi t 1 on of 624 square feet to existing 1 aundry
fac1l1tfy. 5/20/83
4
•
The proposed additions total 2120 square feet of floor area, increasing site
coverage from 15.91 to 16.6,. The additions will displace 505 square feet of
1andscaJl1ng (1005 square feet of exfst1ng landscaping to be removed, less
500 square feet of new 1 andscapf ng proposed) • Both oak trees in the area of
the wedding reception hall patio w111 be preserved.
Traffi_c an.~ P,!r.king
The proposed addit·fons may resu1t in a maximum additional trafffc generation of
79 daily trips. The traffic generation from conversion of storage area to a
~eddf ng receptfon hall is more di ff1cu1 t to ca1cu1 ~te si nee standarhed trip
senerat.i on figures do nt>t exht for such a speci fie use. Parking requirements
for C'lss.em~1y or m2eting rooms~ which are the same for a sit-down restaurant or
bar, would requ1re 42 parking spaces. Traffic patterns for a wedding reception
ha11 diffe~ fr~n restaurant generation in that the turnover of patrons is not
as rapfd~ ~r.ost g~ee5ts arrive in carpools, and reception hall usaga would be
concentrated on weekends. Due to the wtekend nature of th use, traffic impacts
snou1d not be significant since traffic volumes on surt~ounding artt!riats (El
Camino Real and University Avenue) are 'ow on Saturday and Sunday.
Ti1e tJdditfons and ne-n wedding reception hall win~ however, result in an
i r.c:: reased ~ r-k 'f ng demand. A park f ng survey has been submit ted by the
ap.pHci1nt fOl~" & two w~et.: pedod in October, 1982. Parkfng counts were done in
the morning, early evening and late evening and during periods of varying hotel
occMpancy. The survey 1 ndicates that the exht1ng park1 ng is m·11y one-third to
one-half utilized on weekd~s and weeknights, but that the parking is almost
fully utfl f zed durf ng afternoon and evenf ng hours on weekends. particularly
when occupancy at the hotel 1s high. Staff therefore conc1uded that the
wedding reception hall, which will be fn use on weekends, sho~ld provide ample
addftional parking.
CurreVltly 283 parking sp~ces are provided on-site, 280 of which were required
by FC Ordinance 2637. The revised pa~fng. plan ·rndicates a total of 334
spaces, for a gain of 51 spacfls. 'f'hh. increase is accomplished by ~striping
of exsting parking areas for co.pact spaces (102 c;om,act spa.ces are prQposed
for a total of 301) and by converting 3676 squ.lr~ feet of turf area to parking~
· The turf area. to be replaced by partf'ng is located on the north-west portioJt Qf
the sf te. A 1 andsca~ buffer of at l~ast 35 feet wou1 d remain between t.t,e new
parking area and University Circle. No maj9r trees will be rM.lved for tt,e ·
addftional parking area.
Using the cu.rrent zoning ordinance regulations as a gufde, c;-taff has calculated
that the hotel as presently developed would be requited to provide 286 spaces.
The proposed !ddftions would require 48 spaces, fe-r a total of 334 spaces,
whf ch 1s the .amount proposed by ·the appHcant. ··
The site plan subRI1tted by the applicant shows four parking spaces occupying
what have been referred to 1n sowte previously approv(t(( p1~ns .ts access points
to a possible future Urban Lane. An unpaved access road to the o1d anflft&,
services bui1 ding existed on thfs sfte prior to the hoteL This roadwaq was
eliminated by the approved parking plan for the hotel. Sfnce the or1gfna1 PC
5/20/83
5
• •
approval in 1972, the City ha.s t.ice included the extension of Urbart Lane in
tt"le Cap1 U1 lmprovew:nt Progr• and Mr. Chent the. appHc111~t. has offered h1s
assistance fn negotiations regarding land aequfs1t1ons with' Stanfof"d Untv~rs1ty
ar~d the Southern Pacff1c. Rec~tly, the County Transit District has
constructed sCR parking behind the hotel for the new bus transfer station.
The pattfng is provided on either side of a standard roadway which inter-sects
w1th University C1M:1e. S~ould extension of this new roadway/parking arEa be
nec~ssary in the futurl! to serve the needs of the Urban Lane/Wens Avenue
industrial area or future need! of the hotel, ft is conce,1vab1e that easements
i>r land acquisition from Stanford and Southern Pacific could be accomplished
for this purpose. To mainta.1n the possible connections of the hotel parking
lot wtt.n a possible future roadway to the rear~ staff W<IU1d sugges.t that a
condition of approval st~te that should the Ci~ requfre $Uch connection 1n the
future~ that the applicant would remove the four J)d>·ting spaces and landscaping
and regain four spaces on-site by restripfng for more compact spaces {a maximum
of 50$ compacts is permftted by the zoning ordinance, the applicant proposes
on1y 30'h}.
E~ l OY!!!_nt
The applicant has indicated to staff that. the proposed additions and the
conveMion of s.torage area to acthe use as a wedding ~eception ha11 wf·11 not
inc ~ease the nullbe r of hotP.l emp 1 oyees • Accordf ng to Mr. Chen, the e~ h tf ng
s ta~f 1 n the cock tan ·1 ounge are underut11 i ze<J and the offi.ce personnel are
pr~ently confined within too restrictive a work area. Hr. Chen states that
the hotel currently has 80 part-ttme employees who are on ca11 for meetings. and
banquets and that a new wedding ~eptfOR hall would increue the hours of
their eaplo;,-.ent during weekend hours when meet1"9 functions are infrequent.
S~!)'_
Staff does not believe that the pt'"OpO$ed add1 tions and con11ersfon of storage
area are unredsonable requests sfnee they will ha~ lrin·fMal fmpa.cts of traff'h~
or increased splcyaewt. The on,y foreseeaJ)1e faJPACt,i ~at of addittonal
parking, 1s beirtg lritfgated by t.~. addition of f1~..y-one part.ing spaces. The
building expansioos.are in keeping with the character. of ttte· existing
architecture, and 1n NAY ease$ 11fll be loca~. ~.tnder existing architecture.
end f~ •ttt cases will be l~ated under "'isting r'OOi!s. or behind ex1stfng
~re11fs structures.. The pr-oposed expusion of piTting neat the Un1¥enfty
Cfrcle wHt not disrwpt existing '1an<isc;l91ng to. a sf.gn1f1cflnt degree·. and will
leave. a mture landteape buffer of at 1eut thfrty .. five feet between the
partci ng area artd Un1versi ty Circle.. · ·
. '
Staff do.fl have tw -'nor COII!Il!iltmts. regarding tt-' proposed ~sign of the wedding
reception patio. ~· applicant proposes a wood fence with fiberglass panels
surrounding the pati<l. The Arc:hftectural Review Board should carefully review
the propc>se-d ffbc!V*glass 11aterfa1 to ~:ture that fts visual quality will be' fn
keeping with the firi~· .. desfgn of the hotel. The applt'cant .also proposes· that a
wrou~t iron ~dding pavilion be placed ~n the patio·, but a specffit design has
5/20/83
6
•
not yet heen proposed. St~ff wou1 d suggest that the pavilion ci~s f gn r?tur·n to
thP ARn for fu tu rP c()n!; i rl~ra t ion a$ " mf nor PC ~mf:'nrlmen t.
RECOMMlHOAT ION --.~..---,..__..;-·.,_.... __ .. ···--·
That the Planning C~ission find that the proposed amendment to Planned
c,onrunity District NUMber 2637 1s consistent with the Comprehtmshe Plan and
win not have a significant 'lwtpact on the environment and forward the
application to the Architectura.l Revie« Board for design review with the
fo11(i<tlling conditions:
1. Use of the propos~d w~dding reception hall shall be 1fm1ted to weddings and
similar religious/social functions and shall not be used for meetings or
sim11ar business assembly functions.
2. Should tht:? Ctty require access from the pa1·king area to a possible future
roadway, the applfcant shail remove the fout• parking spaces and 1andscapi ng
now :.hown occupying the t\'!i'O previous1y pr•,posed access points and shall
r~gain four p.H·king spac~s elsewhere on-site by restriping existing parking
cn·eas for addi ti ona1 compact spaces.
3. The wedding pdvi11ion fs approved fn concept only, to be located within the
new enclosed patio area. The specific design sha11 return to the
At•chitectl.:ra1 Review Board as a minor amendment to the PC zone.
EIA
Park 1 ng Survey
Pla~ (COMmission end Council ~er~ only}
Location ~ap
COPIES SENT TO
Applicant
5/20/83
7
II
I)
~
~1
\
I
.. EHV lRCIHMEMl AL ooctJiif. ~0 t!TY Of PA!U AUO
EMVlRONMENTAl ~SS£$SMCNT •
Pn",jett De script ion/Tit 1 e Palo Altq_ Holiday Inn __ ReYii icm.s: ..
I_ncr(.>ase, Lobb,.l.• Cocktail Loung~, Adrninistratigo, li,.J.aunrjry Areas. ~is~ -Ftn!~~& Furnish.unused existin~ building for Wedding Rcceetion
l.oca.tion/Address 625 El .~ai:lno: piio Ait , r:A-: = : : : = Hall. -
Sponsoring Agency/Appl ica:nt Clement s;ben & AsscciA.t.es
Address. and '!!!~ephone of Applicant 820.HontllQ~<r~.B:L, S....E. (.1JL.'1) 392l."·8260
.~ppl icaticm for Amendme!U of ~.G~~E 2631 _ __. _, __ ,. __ .. , -·-·
(e.g., zaning c:liange, $Ubdi¥isHm of property~ ardntectura'f. J·evlewll use
p..errnH)
Zoning ~t Project Location P-C ___ ·fee Receipt No. ________ _
The project is ~n ~rgency project, mh'rhter-ial pro,it~ct, u~der CEQA
guide1 ines and proc~dut·es adopted by the City of Palo Alto, .. \'\;-~ th.erefore ·
1s exempt from enllironmental 1u·sessment,
ThE project qualifies for· a categorical Exer.ption (Class_} under CEQA
guidelines and procedures adopted by the City Of Palo Alto, and no further
environmental &ssessment i$ r~es~ary.
City Officia1 _________ Departement. ______ Dat~_
NOTICE Of OETERMl'fATI~
Based upon the infonat1on of the erwironaental worksheets 11 the Uhdersigned
IIC!Ilber of t.be Plim1ing De~rt:l.w!nt has ~ade an in1t1&1 study of the proJKt
and has com::luded:
0 Nei!thre Declar'i.tiorn n.e ~jec;:t his no significant envin»WM!ntal iiiiPi'Ct.-tJO ti\viroiiie:trul lllpfa.tt Report Is required •. The reasons for a Ne91tive ~bratioo tare: _________________ _
----------------------------~~----._-------------~----
-~~--------------Dlte ______ . _________ ~
•
.·
.. ..
l.
IH.
--~----.....,.........--
-------------·-~·~---·-·-·-~---··----------
--·~~--·~~··~ -------~
-----~----~------·-·----------
------------------------------------------~
~. ~nst~ble earth ccndi!t:"s ar :tJ~~es tn SE~l09lC !~bstrutt~res? ., .
·b. Oisrt.~ptio-ns, disp1ac<''ilnti, r,.;;<:;~cl;.ion or
OV!te~verN9 of t~e ~c!l?
c. Chang.e ~" tc~griilphy or grc~~1 surhte
relfef feature$?
d. The destr..~r;tfon, cov~:-~!"~ ~~· ::--:~1 'i,~t~oll
of tny 11nique ~c1o1ic 'lr ;:r.ysi.:l~ fe~t,tr•es?
e. Any increase fn wind or water ~f'esion of
soils, eit~tr on or off t~~ site!
f. Expo~urt> M ~o~·1e (1r t>r~:;.:~:-:_. to <;!01~~-=
hazards ~uch as ~~r:~Q~~~ts, ~~-~slide~.
~utlsl fees. gr~und f•llur~, N s~ ~.n~r huard$?
g. c~~r.ges 1n siltatfor., de~~sit~~~. ~r c~osion
wnlch ~Y ~1fy tht channe1 ~f • ri~er ~~ tht
bt:d of a baY qr fct)et?
ns
"'·· X
1:-_.
~ .t..<l/l!pted fr()(ll App~ndh I~ C•llfornia Ci:;'::e1ir.H for Ir~~~1~~-..:nt4t1on of ~EQA,
il"e-:::ber 14, 19?6.
2 Upda t~d 1'14,Y, !982
3. £ubltantla1 air o~fssions or deterlgratlon of
~~hlent Jlr ~~ality1
c. Ai I;,U.).t1on of air mo·1~nt, u-:>fs.ture or
t~~·erati.\Nt, or any char.ge in c1ir:1ate,
either lo:a11y or reglo~ally?
:.L -~J.ter. \iill the prnJ)o;;a1 resuH in:
4.
~. Chan~s in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
cr the r~te llild f.i'l{lUnt of syrface water runoff?
b. ~1t~rations t~ tne cours~ or flow of flood w~ters?
c. m scharge In tN ~ur f.!ce w~ter$, or 1 n MY alter~tior; of SYrface water qua11ty, includir1g
bvt not limHell U> ~p~rature. d1 ssol veli oxygen
or turbidity?
d. Alt~ratil)n of tM d'irt"<:t!on nr r.ttt tlf now of
~.rcr;rz.d wJt<!ri>?
e. £.xposure of Pf'O~l ~ or property to water r~·l Hed
)lazarcs S1.lch as nr.-c<~;"'S. or tldal waves?
r. (.?1~1\~ in ~~ c:uanti\.)' of ~jt'OI.I!ld waters. ~tthtt
ttoNijgh di ~t add1 tions or w1 th,:trawals, or
tllr01.19h 1f'l~rceptioP'!$ of an aquHer by cuts or .
•xcavations?
lli~'t Life. wn I ~".e prcP<Jsal resu1 t i 11:
•• thaftge tn tr.! diYers;ty of spectu, or IIYI'Iber of
any specie~ of ~lants {fnc1uding tr~s. ~hr~~s.
grass, crops,.atcroflora t~nd .•qul.rt1c pl&nts)?
b. P,educt.for~ af the 1M::bers of any unique. r~re or
endan9~red species o~ plants?
(:, t~trod~t1'n of new species of ?lants fnto an
ara. ~r fn a b•rr1er to t~ oo~1 rep1ellhll·
~t of •~1sttng s~its?
d. ~d:tetfM in .creag~ of any agritu1;ural crop?
'((:} H:)
)(
X
_.,'Y:::_
-e
~
y.
X
..,.._
.. ·----
5, ~_!!!!· ~t11 t~ pro~osa1 result in:
~. Ct1~r.ge i~l th<! dhe!rs1ty of S!:~C'i!$, Ol' n~"''i:li\rs
of ~~;y ~Pi?d~s o~ ard:":!.h ~;ir.H, 14r.d anf~:~.ah 1n~ludl~g re~tilcs, fis~ a~: s~e:lfish, benthic
organt~ns, ~nsects cr mtcrcfl~~~;?
b. ~du~:tloll \)f the r.u:1:bers C~f ar.y l.iniqv~. Nr~ Ot'
endangeree sp~cl.~s of anfr~1$7
c. ll\troduct~on of fiN $~Ci!!> cf >l•·i?lals 1t1U:· ill
area, or 'f£-~101t ~n a b4rder t.1 t~f: 111fgratton
or rr.ove~er.t cf an1ma'1 ~·1
d. ~ter1oNt1on In ellisting fis~ or wiht1He
!labit~t?
.s. ~· J11'il the pro~n1 rt'~u1t 1n:
•· Increases in utstin~ noi$e 1e,•e1s7
b. E~vo~ure ~r ptople to severe ~1se lt,~t.l$1
1. liJht !nO Gia~~. Will tht propos&1 product AfW light
'jTire?
$. !.and Use •. Will tht pr~:~poul res.o~t iM ~ subst.tnU1l
:i1ter!lt.1on of tM l)restnt or J)hr.~~! ~;sad use of an
irta?
9. ~n.trqy/li~fvral ~esooi·te$._. Vili ~ :»"rillO~l result in:
•· Use of substa~tf&l .~~~~ of fut1 or ~ergy?
b. Subsun~1~1 i~reue in de'M~e \l~n ~~~hting
sovn:es of <!nergy, or ~.11 rt t.";e · me 1 OPIItJ't
of new solir-.;t~ cf er.ergy't
c. tt~crtue in tM. r.att .of ust 0! &ny n•t4.trtl
!'UO\II"t~$?
d. Sub\tantitl dtplttion Qf tny ~~~-~~able
naturtl rt~curc~?
10. 111lt of \Jpset. Does the ~rcpcu~ ~o:¥ohe a rhk of iilexp1osfcm Clr tnt relfiU of rlUlrC:oys sllbs.u~ts
(11'K;Iud1ng, but not 1hlfte4 ca~ (In.· putichtes, ~h..rtca1s or raoi•tton) In the ~went of.~ .ccf~t
or ~.et cond!tfOft$?
··~ ,. -
lt.
... "..!H1 t-~ p•·~P"QHl aH~r ~h~ le-cetie-n, d; ~~·i~~
t~cr~, d~n,;,itY.c c.r groNth ratt cf tli~ h1;r·~~
~~pulatlon of an area?
b, ',liP tl"«! pNJXiSA1 aff,.ct ulsting ~vo.!r;g, \)t
Ff~U • d-.l'ld ~or •ddft!onal MIJ$lrig?
a. GeMi'o!ti"'~· :.7 !2l'f~~ 4~6H1t.Hl31 'i~t:•::,.:olt
N1'~11t.?
b. tff~h 01'1 vht1<"1g po~n11'19 f4dlities, or
d~<J~ ftlr MW ~rk i r.g?
,:; . .l.1 terot.t1ons to pnsent pattern~ oi circul ~~~c:'l
cr ~~~¢·;~nt of pevl)i~ <lr.ll/cr gQoas?
d. !1\r.r-n~ ~l\ tr~Hfc r:a.Ur"d! tc mtQt "'f:.!',l~~H.
bi~lc11st$ or ptd«~tri&n$?
13. Ps$Hc s.t·•icE". WH1 the pt'090U1 MH .Ill tfftct uj)M, or nn\IH in a ntcd fCf' n-ew l>r l1ter'>.td gowtr"'•
Ml'l~1 s.trvi'-.s h1 &'l'i1 of ~ foll~i ~g ~rt.:.t.:
~. nre p;rotect1o•7
&. NH'oe ,rot:ectt.w~?
c. Settoolsf
d. ~irt~ or otbtr recreatio.al fac111t1es?
e.· Mliftt4l!~m~Ct of ptllbt1c f"t.Htfts. 1nclu<!:o;;
~'
f. ~r JDCCIItltllttoll MM~f~?
14. Ut~lities. ~l~1 tha propos~l ~~lt fQ J ne~ ~,r ''"* ~st.s, or 'itlbsuttthl lil~r~t1C}r·£ tv trf
following utllitfn:
1 , fu'.;:e f Q.l" Nturtl tU?
b. ~~1"tiOM IY'~'? --
..
. ..
c. h'at~r7
d. ~~'fer or ~eptlc tanks?
e. Storn: l'l~ter drainage'?
f, Solid wast~ and dlsposa'?
~. ~~~~· '.1111 tlie propoBl result in:
& ; Creation of any he a 1 th hazard O!' potent1 a!
health hazard lexc1ud1ng Mental ha~lth)?
b. Exposure of people t[l potential rreaH.tl
ha.eards?
6, Aesthetics. ~i11 the proposal re~u1t in tne obstrucM tfon or-ar~ scenic ~i$td or view open to t~e pub1fc,
or •.>~in the propi)SIIl rel;u1t in tha crettirm ~f -!1,
a<lsth~tically offensio;e site open to pub1~c view?
·1. Rl'cr.:-;t1on. Will th<: pl"opo~al resu1t 1n iHl i:r.pa~t
uj.l:lr. tt>~eq;.Hil !ty or quantity of existing recre;:t!onal
op~.:lrtuni tit-s?
.a. Cultural ?.asources.
'i
a. Wil' ::he pro~osa1 result 1n the alteration of
Ol' th.:! destruction of a prehistoric or l'.istodc
arc~3eo1ogical site?
b, '!!ill tha proposal result in !ldv~rse physical
or aesthetic eff~ts .to a prehi~ttoric or hhtor1c
building, structure, or object?
c. Does :Me proposal have the ?Otenti~l to cau$e
a !)t.ys1ca1 clunge llh1ch 'l«lul~ aHeo::t ~omiqu~
cultural va1ut~?
d. ;;;n the pt·oposal N!str1ct e:o~'lst!~g teHg10IIS
or sacred uses within· t:M pote"tial il$4<:t aret7
.,,
YES .,~.
'X.
" ·--'t<:
:X
:X
X
X
X
X v.
X
X.
~ ~ • > ' ; ,. • ' '• • J I • ,._ ~ ·~ ' : • ' • ' ~ :• ; ,'" • L • ',_ ,o. ' , ' ; '• I
....... ,I('
•· C~ts th~ :::•·oj!!.;t ha'<'e tl':e ~t~rtt!a1 to 1e·~l"<~::!e th~ ~.)1 I ty of the endro·.Nr.t, '5'-'!\star,tiol !;r
r~<lucf.' thfl 1\,!tlt.&t of~ fish ,~r ,..;11lilfe ~pf'Cf~$,
C<:•Jse (i fl.sh Q<' ...-llcllfe ';")!)>ih~lO!'i to orcp
t~:,~ self"s~st~(~i~l le~els, t~riat~n t~
~ ~ ~ 1'"': ~ (d t ~:: ~1 p 1 ~ :1 t l"P' .:~ i\: ~.-,~ i •; ··.Y:"' ~ .. ~ t~~ 1 r (' ~ "..i ·.: €'
~h.; rn.~,:~,er Ol' r~:.tr~ct. ti"'~ r<.r;P. o: ~ t2r-e (1r
H•da•;gered Dl~'lt or ;,nk·~1 or el i'<if"Jte i·~?rt~r;t
e~~~~les of the ~Jjor p~rtcds ~r Callfor~l~
history or pre~istory?
b. CN!!-t.fl;: ;r.)j~(t 11ne t~e ;:•:.-t~ntl~l t•) ~::~le..-e
$h~rt ... ·~er,..,~ t·.) ttr ~1s(.~·.:J'1t.:.-:~ ;;f ~or.g,.t~r:"':1
l$:·r,.·;-tror-::-'1£~fl~O~ gc·e:1s.. {~ ~t,c.rt ... t•.:l-;-1 i~~~ct en
v·,~ ;,nvi rl)(;,o:-nt i:; ~"\" lo<!'d~~ o~·:~;rs ~'1 <. r<>h:ln1y
br!d, definitfve ;·.f:r1~il c,f ti~~ ~hile lo~g-km
l!l:;l·Jcts will endwre ,...,p -~,1~ tr~ future.)
c. IX.les tht< ~r oj ect han lr.il~Cf~ '>tilth arE>:
individually liT.itt>d, ovt CU'l!Uhtiv<.>iy -c<ln•
~iderable? (;l. prc-Jcct. "'J.'f lr-~;Ja~t on P<;·) or mre
sO;oante r::-~0.\Jrc.<~s ~.~:e:-e t.h~ it"';l3d or: t>ach "lie~
scurce it rel.Jti·(eiy ,. .. ,~11, t·~t lo'h~··e til~ effc:ct
of the total of tllose lrr'ijlac;t~ l)fl ~~e .:r.vfro~nt
is slgnff~cant.l
d. ~i!1. tl!e proje<:t !!.Ill/~ t!t\'i~l"'ll\!!'1~) effects
wnictl will c&use Slii:lsur.th) •dver~e efftcts
l)n hloi!Nn ~1ngs, eitl'ier ~i1"~tly or 1;;Q!re-ctiy'1
EAplir.ltion of "yes• an$•er$ in ~nv!r~r~nta1 ch!cklist.
X
x:
...
.... . ... ,
l{f) Eat•th. This project is fn the moderate risk zone of the City of Palo Alto
anawoi.iTCfbe subject to very strong shak. i ng in the event of a l!lajor earthqUlke
along the San Andreas fault. Provisions in the 1979 Uniform lhrilding Code are
designed to reduce building failure in the event of a rn~1o~ earthquake.
3(o, e) Water. The total amount of paving i'i'i e)(pccted to increase from 152,728
square feet to 162,096 square feet. This increase in p~.ving .,..,.n1 resu1t in an
a1te,·ut.ion to the existing drainage pcittern. A site draint'1ge plan wili he
submitted to und approved by the City En9i nee1· prior to the issuance of a
building p~t·mit.
12(a, b) Ttansportation/Cit·culation. Expansion of the cocktan lounge, 1obby,
and office areacould resurt----:ri1s"(m:.e i ncr·eased trip generation from this s i.te.
lt is anticipated that a maximum of 79 vehicle tt'ips per day cou1d b-e g-€'net'ated
from these expansions. The potential trip generation from the proposed wedding
reception hall is difficult to calculate because of the absence of specific
f1gures for this type of use. The c1osest available category is restaurant
which if used to calculate tdp generation rates for the proposed weddin:t
reception hall would result in an estimated 375 'lef1jcle trips/day. Turnover
from a restaurant~ however, is substantial1y nigher than that from a wedding
reception area. Assuming that the wedding reception use would generate half
the trips per day an estimate of 185 vehicle trips could be arrived at. Tnese
trips would most likely occur primarily durtng the weekend when general traffic
'levels are light. An increase of this amount would not substantiaily impact
the existing street networks.
The app11cant has ~dded 51 parking spaces inorder to accommodate the proposed
additions and new use (wedding reception}. No new cmp1oyees are expected to be
necessary in order to service the expanded cocktail lounge, 1obby, and
restaurant area. Rather, existing fu11-time employees are ~onsidered
sufficient tohandle the cocktafl expansion. Existing part-time staff wfll
serve wedding receptions. Therefore the 51 parking spaces should be sufficient
to handle any increased customer parking demands.. ·
..
• •
>at.e
LW
EtL. J0/15
b.t....
• • falo £1~ Hp11day Inn
• AUCXIS Rf l&.tk1DI lltiJ.,•.z.ati~D
Spacea Ocoup1td
1~-mA ~ Jlp.m.
Hotel
ps,YPiiDr..l
162
21'L.
..-_.l.,Oj)_.o....,!SL-. .. -·--··---.,----.. -"""'. -· ______ ,....:z,g
... 50
·19 1QO
w !! ... !" ,_..._ ___ ..~r~~l~3.&.~e OII!.Jlt------------.-:L.---
'~~ ··-·
23,9 • m
!t 15 78,2£1--------~~---·-~-------~--~~
91 • OS-~ ... ~--. lp JQS
' • %Q U.Q
1Ptt6 _ 231 271 16.01 m ,126
-%5 AO·PI .. -., A'fiiP"Q!!)d:5 ..... '
.. .. .. as.u_ •• "' ~~~~-------9.2.----ly§~t~-·~~~•~--------~~L-....... --------...... --~ ...... ---IJw 1Pll9 ·= 1 !J! 1%2 -13 0 AJ_ ..
189 ...
'S .,
4
I
Z5
• .,lS
REVIS~D ~L~QL83
l .I I Ui ... #\J .. .-J .. EatER 8 .
-~--·)~~~ p ;85 teo!~~·= 1-1110 ~L! ~~. () :;;.t'4~0 't ' l,i e \ ~ .-. •· ~ II t.J ' 0 ~~'4~ ~~ !Ill!" Lj 17 , c-~ ~~~"'· ... :* ;:: :\' ~ :: .... G • • ~~--171-"11 0 nd Itt .... ~"'""" " PF --~.... !""" f(s,!f' >-1..
[.,.,. ~ 1!;/. ---f---~ i-''2. "' 16+ .~:_s . -~k \!J PF 1---~~ -~~[ ~~r ~.,. I--. ~ ~0 .. -lSI s~-z ~ '•J:: '-" I ..,¢1'-'t-"" !" _,-v; .. -t .q;. ~'' ~~j t-IN~~;l~ f'"' !S7 IL_~ 0 !30 ["'" ~-..9 l!;~ ._*-" 1,. !J 0 HJGH ct: f! -~. ~· :::: ~r~~ $~••' ~~----'iii~~ ~~~ -l54t ~ tc :~ p l,~l.ij:f" ~ ;2.4 ;in 2 IU.&\il ... p \i) c n.o ~~ \; ~ (14° " I ~ 1 ~ wj ~ ~· % ~ N? :J!iZ 115 ;~r.
fiT I l r~ ~ ... PF ·om ~~ PF ~ ~ ~ lfl ~ ~~ ~~I .....,
g ..:. 0 <'i .~Oo<l 12 & J. ~ j ' ~~. 'It\ ~ 1..") ~ " l I 1 t'· lr-. r--
400 ~, JLW~,. 500 600 ·roo ALMA t::::::: :: !!!J c.· . .,.::::1 e=;;:;! --mgyy 1 7 •n ..... ~ / .
R.R. STATION ~
a• .
• PC-3266° l
' ' ' ,· ' · e: n:¥taue • . a
' •.. <: •
•• c ' • • • • ~. ' • ' ~ ~ • • ' ~ ( \.. •• ..... • •
"' . ., . • •
July 22, 1983
TO: Palo Alto Plannhlg COMission
FROM: Bob Srm«'!
SUBJECT: ~2f{~e~~ormat1on -Planned Community Zone Modifications for --~ ~r,· ~5'" E1 camTno Real ---~--
A.t ·!t~ rooeting of May 25, 1983, the Planning Comiss1on granted conc~ptuai
approval of medi f1cat1 ons to Pl ann~d COMmUnity Zone 2637 for the Hol1 d~y Inn
located at 625 El Camioo Real. The proposed tmd'i ficat1ons include the
fell owing changes:
1. ~'ai n Lobby: Addition of 467 square feet of lobby area by moving existing
glazing outward towards both the entry drive and the swimMi.ng
pool. The additions would both be 1oca·ted under the existing
roof~
2~ Cocktail Lounge~ Addition of 280 square f~et towards the north~ The
building addition will be locat~d behind an existing walkway
tt<>ell h.
3. Adlrf nistrative Office Expansion: Addi t1on of 149 square feet to the north
~nd east of existing adMinistration ar.ea. A portion of this
addition will likewise be located behine an existing trellis.
4 .. Wedding ~ecept1on Han: C~111version of exhthg 2500 square foot building
used for storage to a r101 wedding reception t"MilL This change
also invol~~· creation o·f a 840 square feet brick patio-with
awning CO'I•r~ .new. ffnclng $U~rounding an existing turf area
and I futUre wroUght tron .wedding. payf lion.
5. Outdoor Garbage Area: Replac:~>>of an existing wood and chain lfr~ .·
fenced garbage erw:losure with .• ,. s'tuceo/aasonry wall. Thh
revision w111 ~ 1 signfficaRt aesthetic 1-.rov~nt to the current condition. ·
6. Liundry Expansion~ Addition of 624 1quare feet to existing laundry
facility. ·
The Planning Ca.f ssion suggestt<l ct.angf:s tc the lands.cape p·lan to protect the
dr1p Hr.es of two existing trees .. a .twenty..,four fnctl df.-ur o-. trae near
the n!fuse serv1 ce yard and ~ 'b(e 1 ve 1 nch ctf a.eter sprvce t,.-.e 1 n the 'M!W
parking area. The applicant red sftd the l~ndsea~ plafl prior to ttle ,
Architectural Review Board's re"'iew indicating a ten foot dtMJeter circle of
stones surrounding the oak tree and a tl!n foot diaMeter circle of. turf and
br1ctw9rk w1th sand separation ~.round the spruce t~-ee.
7/22/83 . 1
'l I
• •
The Architectural Rev1ew Board (ARB) considered the modifications at their
meeting of June 2, 1983 (minutes attached). The ARB found ms t of the proposed
changes acceptable, but requested redesign of the fiberglass and wood enclosure
around the new wedding receipt'ion patio, reconsideration of the canvas awning
on the wedding receiption ha11 building, and redesign of the trash enclosure
fencing which was originally proposed to be t;hain link fenciog with redwood
slats. The applicant returned to the ARB on July 7, 1983, with revised plans
sh~i ng a stucco and tile wa'll with 11 ght1ng fixtures incorporated around. the
weddfng pavilion patio, a trellis structure replacing the proposed awning, and
redwood fencing fn tha refuse service yard. The ARB recommended approval of
the revised plans (per attached minutes).
RtCm~ENOATlON ----·-·-----~------------
That the Planning Commission find that the proposed amendment to Planned
Community District Number 2637 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
will not have a signfffcant impact on the environment and recommend approval of
the applicattan wtth the following condit1ons:
1. Use of the proposed wedding receiption hall shall be limited to weddings
and similar re1igious/socia1 f~HlCtfons and shall not be used for meetings
or similar business assembly functions.
2. Should the City require access from the parking area to a possible future
roadway, the applicant shall ren~ve the four parking spaces and landscaping
now shown occupying t~e two p·reviously proposed access points and $ha11
regain four parking spaces elsewhrere on-site by r(!Strip~ng existing parking
ar~as for additional compact spaces.
3. The wedding pav111ion 1s approved 1n concept only, to be located within the
new enclosed patio area. The specific design sha11 return to the
Architectural ReYiew Board as a minor amendment to tha PC zona.
ATTACHMENTS
---------------------~----------------------
June 2, 1983 and July 7, 1983 Architectural Review Soard Minutes
Revised Plans (COII'Iftission and Council members oniy~
Location Map
COPIES SENT TO -----------------------
Applicant
7/2,2/83
2
...
3. 625 EL CAMINO ~AL 'HolTaayi vm " .. -
Remooelin9 of the e~ist1ng f~eilities
•
Thursdl.Y~ June 2, 1983
8:00 A.M. council Conference Ro~
83-ARB-75 s3 ... zc-u
The project w~s COHTINli:D in «)rder for the appl ici.Olnt to i!lddress ·the
following concerns~ --
-Service yard gates should be of .oro substantial material~ chain
11 nk fence wi 11 not be ace:~~;.:!! 1 e.
-The applfctnt ;hall res~ the de$1gn of ttte outside recreation
area. 1M Board had reservat10M regarding the configuration and the
t.ateria1s proposed for MW fence and ewnfngJ. The Board found the
existing t.-e111s ta be one of the best fetures of :the project •nd
encouraged the app11eal'it to el«teM the trelH s over the new acldi tion.
·I
I
i
•
Ar£111tec;tcral
lte\'le\Y lenni
•
Thursday. July 7, 1983
8:00 A.M. Council Conf~rencP. Room
·-----~~---·-
83~ARB-75
83-ZC-11 Stan.ford approval obtai ned
The project "as APPROVED~ with ti'le Bo&rd col'Mlnnd1 ng the applicant for·
responding so weTf to tneir comments.
....