HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-01-20 City Council (8)TO:
City
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
City of Palo Alto
Manager’s Report
3
FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
DATE:
SUBJECT:
JANUARY 20, 1998~CMR:113:98
425-435 SHERIDAN AVENUE, 440-460 PAGE MILL ROAD: REVIEW
OF AN APPLICATION FOR A TENTATIVE MAP TO MERGE AND
SUBDIVIDE A 1.06-ACRE PARCEL INTO 35 AIR SPACE
CONDOMINIUMS AT 425-435 SHERIDAN AVENUE, 97-SUB-I, 97-
EIA-10
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached tentative map based on the
attached findings (Planning Commission staff report Attachment 1) and conditions
(Attachment B).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
On October 9, 1997, the applicant submitted an application for a tentative map to merge
underlying four lots and subdivide the resultant 1.06-acre parcel into 35 air space
condominiums. The condommi. "urns would be accessed from a main entry on Sheridan
Avenue and a second entry on Page Mill Road.
Please refer to the attached Planning Commission staff report (Attachment A), subdivider’s
statement (Planmng Commission staff report Attachment 5) and plans for further details
regarding the project. Plans will be presented at the meeting.
The attached conditions have been revised slightly to reflect two minor changes. Condition 8
has been revised to correct the number of years (two) within which the fmal subdivision map
must be filed. Condition 10 has been revised to reflect the renumbering of conditions 9 and
18 since the Planned Community (PC) Zone Change was approved. These two conditions
require improvements (a ten-foot fight-of-way dedication and curb, gutter, and sidewalk
improvements) for which the applicant shall post a bond prior to the recording of the final
subdivision map.
CMR:113:98 Page 1 of 2
BOARD/COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION
At the Planning Commission meeting on December 10, 1997, the Planning Commission
tmanimougly recommended approval of the tentative map. There was some discussion as to
the conditions placed on the PC Zone Change that was approved by the City Council on
October 20, 1997. All conditions of approval of the PC Zone Change are still required of
the applicant, and are referred to in the attached revised conditions of approval (see
Attachment B).
See Planning Commission minutes (included in Council packet) for more detailed discussion
of these issues.
Findings for subdivision approval (Planning Commission staff report Attachment 1) and
revised conditions of project approval (Attachment B) are attached.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Planning Commission staff report
attachments)
Attachment B: Revised Conditions of Approval
Plans (City Council Members only)
dated December 10, 1997 (with
COURTESY COPIES:
Serena Trachta, 1002 Rhode Island Street, San Francisco, CA 94107
Rick Hill, BK Palo Alto LLC, 204 .Franklin Street, Redwood City, CA 94063
Michael Atherton, 300 Third Street, Los Altos, CA 94022
Janet Stone, Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition, 658 Bair Island Road #300, Redwood City,
CA 94063
PREPARED BY: Chandler Lee, Contract Planner
DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW:
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:~. ~~~)
EIV~ILY HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
CMR:113:98 Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT A
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
TO:PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM:¯ Chandler Lee DEPARTMENT: Planning
AGENDA DATE: December 10, 1997
SUBJECT:Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council on a
Tentative Map to merge and subdivide a 1.06-acre parcel into 35
air space condominiums at 425-435 Sheridan Avenue, 97-SUB-I,
97-EIA-10
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council:
1. Approve the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment 4), finding that the
proposed project will not result in any significant environmental impacts, and
2. Approve the attached tentative map based on the attached findings (Attachment 1) and
conditions (Attachment 2).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant has submitted an application for a tentative map to merge underlying lots and
subdivide the resultant 1.06-acre parcel into 35 air space condominiums, The condominiurm
would be accessed from a main entry on Sheridan Avenue and a’second entry on Page Mill
Road.
On October 9, 1997, the current tentative map application was submitted by the applicant
for merger of the underlying four lots and subdivision of the subject site into 35 air space
condominiums.
S:\plan\pladiv\pcsr\pagetmap.pc 12-10-97
Page 1
Site Information
Information regarding the applicant, owner, assessor’s parcel number, Comprehensive
Plan designation, zoning district, existing land use, and parcel size is shown below in
Table 1.
TABLE 1: PROJECT INFORMATION
Applicant:BK Ltd Palo Alto, LLC
Owner:Michael Atherton
Assessor’s Parcel Number:132-36-37, 86, 90 and 91
Comprehensive Plan Designation:
Zoning District:
Multiple Family Residential
PC (Planned Co.mmunity - Multiple Family
Residential)
Surrounding Land Use:North: Multiple Family Residential
South: Single Family Residential
East: Page Mill Court disabled housing
West: Park & Ride lot, Garden Center retail
Parcel Size:46,084 s.f. or 1.06 acres
Project History
The front of the site (the two lots facing Page Mill Road) is currently occupied by an
aging, concrete tilt up building. The rear of the site (the two lots facing Sheridan Avenue)
is currently vacant. The site lies immediately adjacent to the recently approved Page Mill
Court disabled housing project located to the northeast. The site was rezoned to RM-40
in 1978 as part of City efforts to identify additional housing sites. The commercial/researda
uses were declared non-conforming and the time extensions must terminate in 1998. The
applicant received approval from the City Council on October 20, 1997 for a Zone Change
to the Planned Community (PC) Zone to allow the demolition of an existing 26,000 square
foot laboratory building and construction of a new 35 unit three story condominium
complex. The approval included draft subdivision findings and conditions. The current
application for a tentative map is accompanied by the final findings and conditions attached
to this staff report subject to Planning Commission review and approval.
S:\plan\pladiy\pcsr\pagetmap.pc 12-10-97
Page 2
Zoning Ordinance Compliance
The following table compares the project to the existing PC Planned Community District
regulations.
TABLE 2: Project Comparison, With Current Ordinance Requirements
PROPOSED PC
Floor Area (sq.ft.)58,201 s.f.n/a
Floor Area Ratio 1.26:1 n/a
Site Coverage 41%n/a
Setbacks
- Page Mill Road
- Sheridan Avenue
- Interior: North
- Interior: South
25 feet*
10 feet
13-14 feet
10 feet
20**
10
10"**
10"**
* Because the applicant has offered to dedicate a ten foot right-of-way for public improvements, staff is
recommending that an existing 25 foot setback and future 15 foot setback is adequate at this location.
** There is a 20 foot special setback along Page Mill Road. The 10 feet for future widening of Page Mill
Road for a right turn lane onto El Camino Real is included within this setback
*** The site is within 150 feet of a residential zoning district; therefore, the 10 foot setback must be
planted as a landscaped screen with a solid wall.
**** The site is adjacent to a residential zoning district and is subject to daylight plane height restrictions
in addition to height limits of 40 feet for RM-40, 50 feet for PC, 35 feet on Page Mill for RM-40 & PC).
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
The major issues involved in this application are the dedication of ten feet of right of way
for a future right turn lane along Page Mill Road and the preservation of trees on and
S:\plan\pladiv\pcsr\pagetmap.pc 12-10-97
Page 3
adjacent to the parcel. These issues were resolved during the PC zone change review,
process. The right of way dedication and the tree preservation are included as conditions
of project approval and shown on the tentative map.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The project is consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
RESOURCE IMPACTS
There is no fiscal impact to the City .resulting from this application.
ALTERNATIVES
The alternatives available to the Planning Commission include recommending to the City
Council to:
1.Modify and approve the tentative map; or
2.Deny the tentative map application.
TIMELINE
Following Planning Commission review, the application will be heard by the City Council
for decision at a meeting tentatively scheduled for January 20, 1998. If Council approves
the project, the applicant may apply for a final subdivision map. Prior to subdividing the
property, the applicant will be required to submit improvement plans for the design of the
dedicated right-of-way on Page Mill Road and submit an application for approval of a Final
SubdivisionMap. The Final Subdivision Map will be reviewed ~’or compliance by the Public
Works Department and must be approved by the Director of Planning and Community
Environment.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is subject to environmental review under provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared
finding that the project will not have significant environmental impacts provided that
mitigation measures are included in the project. These mitigation measures are included
as conditions of project approval. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was made available
for public review from July 2 through July 30, 1997, as part of the PC Zone Change
review, and is attached to this staff report (see Attachment #6).
S:\plan\pladiv\pcsflpagetmap.pc 12-10-97
Page 4
ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS:
Attachment 1 - Findings
Attachment 2 - Conditions
Attachment 3 - Location Map
Attachment 4 - Below Market Rate Agreement Letter
Attachment 5 - Subdivider’s. Statement
Attachment 6 - Mitigated Negative Declaration
Tentative Map [Commission members only]
COURTESY COPIES:
Serena Trachta, 1002 Rhode Island Street, San Francisco, CA 94107
Rick Hill, BK Palo Alto LLC, 204 Franklin Street, Redwood City, CA 94063
Michael Atherton, 300 Third Street, Los Altos, CA 94022
Janet Stone, Mid-Peninsula Housing Coali.tion, 658 Bait Island Road #300, Redwood
City, CA 94063
Prepared by:Chandler Lee, Contract Planner
Reviewed by:Lisa Grote, Zoning Administrator
S:\plan\pladiv\pcsr\pagetmap.pc ’12-10-97
Page 5
ATTACHMENT #1
DRAFT FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION
425-435 SHERIDAN AVENUE
Recommended Findings for Approval
The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and
programs and the design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, in that the project
would be consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance (PAMC Section 21.20) in that the
proposed subdivision is consistent with neighboring properties, particularly the adjacent Page
Mill Court complex; the project would be consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan
policies: Housing Element Policy #3: "Protect and enhance those qualities which make Palo
Alto’s neighborhoods etpecially desirable" in that the project is located in a unique
neighborhood that features a mix of multiple family residences and commercial activity and
is in close proximity to the California Avenue Business District; Housing Element Policy
# 13: "Increase funding sources used to provide affordable housing, "in that the project will
provide Below Market rate units that will contribute to the supply of affordable housing and
the project recently has been revised to provide 6 three-bedroom units for families as well
as 29 two-bedroom units; Urban Design Element, Objective,’page 42, "Promote the orderly
and harmonious development of the City and the attainment of the most desirable land use
and improvements through the review of new development" in that the site is designated
Multiple Family Residential and is well suited for this use and that the proposed site plan
makes more efficientuse of the site by improving the layout of parking and landscaped areas
compared with the previous use; and Urban Design Element, Policy 6A, Program G,
"Encourage residential use in the commercial areas near California-Cambridge.Avenue
area" in that the proposed replacement of a laboratory building with high density residential
use within walking distance of California Avenue is consistent with this policy;
The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed in that the proposed 35
condominium units are within the density range allowed by existing zoning and compatible
with the scale of neighboring multiple family buildings;
o The design of the condominium complex will not cause significant environmental impacts
in that potential traffic, noise, and biological impacts have been mitigated by the dedication
of a sound wall, and existing trees have been either preserved or replaced on-site.
The design of the condominium complex will. not result in serious public health problems,
would not be detrimental to the existing pattern of the neighborhood and would result in
development of multiple-familyhomes that would be consistent with the adjacent buildings
S:\plan\pladiv\pcsr\pagetmap.pc 12-10-97
Page 6
in the neighborhood in that previously stored hazardous materials have been removed from
the site, the project completes the multiple family pattern established by existing apartments
in the neighborhood and the size and scale of the building is similar to that of adjacent
multiple family buildings on Ash and Sheridan Avenue ; and
The design of the condominium complex will not conflict with public easements for access
through the use of the property in that the resulting lots would have frontage on a public
street for vehicular access and utility service.
S:\plan\pladiv\pcsr\pagetmap.pc 12-10-97
Page 7
ATTACHMENT #2
DRAFT CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION
425-435 SHERIDAN AVENUE
CONDITIONS FOR SUBDIVISION
PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF FINAL MAP
Public Works Engineering
The subdivider shall arrange a meeting with Public Works Engineering, Utilities Engineering,
Planning, Planning Arborist, Fire, and TransportationDepartments after approval of this map
and prior to submitting the improvementplans. These improvementplans must be completed
and approved by the City prior to submittal of a final map.
All construction within the City right-of-way, easements or other property under City’s
jurisdiction shall conform to standard specifications of the Public Works and Utility
Department.
Utilities
The subdivider shall coordinate with the Utilities Department to determine all utility design
and capacity requirements including water, sewer, gas, electric, telephone and cable facilities.
All new construction shall have underground utility, telephone and cable service. The project
shall be limited to single service laterals for each lot for sewer, water and gas. Each parcel shall
have separate electrical service. All utility plans shall be approved by the Utilities Department
before the Parcel map is recorded.
The subdivider shall submit improvement plans and specifications for all utility construction.
The plans must show the proposed alignment of water, gas, and sewer mains and services
within the development and in the public right-of-way.
The subdivider shall submit flow calculations which will show the off-site and on-site water
and sewer mains will provide the domestic water, fire flows and sewer capacity needed to
service the development and adjacent properties during anticipated peak flows.
S:\plan\pladiv\pcsr\pagetmap.pc 12-10-97
Page 8
PRIOR TO THE RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP
Planning
The subdivider shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City of Palo Alto. The
agreement shall be recorded with the approved final map at the office of the Santa Clara
County Recorder and shall include the following agreements:
a)The subdivider shall be responsible for installing any required off-site improvements,
including utilities, to the satisfaction of the Utilities, Public Works, and Planning
Departments. These improvements shall be guaranteed by bond or other form of
guarantee acceptable to the City Attorney.
b)The subdivider shall grant the necessary public utility easements to the City for the
location mad maintenance of required utilities. The required easements shall be shown
on the face of the subdivision map.
c)The subdivider shall preserve all existing trees shown for preservation on the site
plan and shall include all trees in the final landscape plans.
d)The subdivider shall comply with the City’s Below Market Rate requirements as
described in Condition 5.
In compliance with Program 13 of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the
project shall provide two (2) two-bedroomunits and one (1) three bedroom unit to be included
’ in the Below Market Rate program, and subject to the restrictions applicable to for sale units
placed in the BMR program. The units shall be two "K" units on the first floor and unit "H"
on the second floor, as specified on the approved plans. Unit "H" shall be reconfigured as a
three bedroom unit. The exact locations of the units shall be shown on the final subdivision
map prior to consideration by City Council.
The design, construction, materials, finishes, windows, hardware, light fixtures, landscaping,
irrigation, appliances and.like features of the BMR units shall be comparable to all other units
in the project. The owners of the BMR units shall have access to all facilities, amenities,
parking and storage as provided to other owners in the project.
The initial sales price of each of the two-bedroomunits shall be $140,700 and the initial sales
price of the three-bedroomunit shall be $164,800. These prices were determined utilizing the
City of Palo Alto current Housing Price Guidelines (effective May 1, 1996). The price list is
adjusted annually. The greater of the sales price set forth above or the applicable prices in
effect at the time of final map approval shall be the initial sales price of the BMR units.
S:\plan\pladiv\pcsr\pagetmap.pc 12-10-97
Page 9
The provisk;ns of this condition have been negotiated between the City and the project
appl.icant, and are based upon that letter from Ken Schreiber, Director of Planning and
Community Environment to J. David Knudson dated July 21, 1997, and signed by J. David
Knudson on July 28,1 997. In the event of conflict between the letter and the PC Ordinance,
the terms of the Ordinance shall prevail. The provisions were negotiated~ based upon the
understanding that the project will consist of for-sale condominium units. In the event that the
project is to be used for rental purposes a new BMR agreement must be negotiated with the
City prior to occupancy.
The final subdivision map shall be filed with the Planning Division within four years of the
approval of the tentative subdivision map.
Public Works Engineering
A street dedication as offered by the applicant as part of the PC rezoning of the property is
¯ required as follows: Subdivider shall dedicate a ten (10) foot wide strip-along the southerly
side of the property along the entire front, age of Page Mill Road.
10.The subdivider shall post a bond prior to the recording of the final subdivision map to
guarantee the completion of the work specified in condition(s) 68 and 74. The amount of the
bond shall be determined by the Planning and Public Works Departments.
11.The subdivider shall submit to Public Works Engineering one (1) permanent mylar with
reproducible set of "as built" drawings for the work in the City right-of-way.
Utilities
12.
13.
14.
15.
All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto Standard
Specifications and the Utility department Standard Conditions.
The subdivider shall be responsible for installing and upgrading on-site and off-site Water and
sewer utilities as necessary to handle anticipated peak loads. This responsibility includes the
cost of all associated utility installations/upgrades.
The subdivider shall pay all costs associated with the required improvements to off-site gas
mains. All improvements to the gas system shall be installed by the City of Palo Alto.
The subdivider shall be responsible for identification and location of all utilities, both public
and private, within the work area. Prior to any excavation work at the site, the Permittee shall
contact Underground Service Alert at (800) 642-2444, at least 48 hours prior to beginning
work.
S:\plan\pladiv\pcsr\pagetmap.pc 12-10-97
Page 10
16.All on-site and off-site improvements, including the relocation of any existing utilities to
accommodate the project shall be done at the subdivider’s expense. The City will provide one
electric service to the new merged parcel.
17.The subdivider shall submit a storm water pollution protection plan to be included in the
improvement plan submittal.
18.The subdivider shall construct public curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements along the entire
frontage of Page Mill Road. The improvements shall meet the City~’s standard requirements and
shall be to the City’s satisfaction.
19.~ The subdivider shall comply with all the conditions of the PC Zone Change approved by the
City Council on October 20, 1997 and contained in the staff report dated October 20, 1997.
PRIOR TO FINAL OF THE BUILDING PERMIT
20.The subdivider shall install all electric utilities in accordance with Palo Alto Standards,
including underground utilities and street lights, to the satisfaction of the Utilities
Department. Each residence shall have individual electrical service. A new padmount
transformer is required to serve the subdivision. All electrical plans shall be approved by
the Light and Power Division before the final map is approved.
ONGOING (Throughout Processing and Construction)
City staff required time for implementing and monitoring a Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP) shall be subject to cost recovery fees charged to the project
applicant, t
S:\plan\pladiv\pcsr\pagetmap.pc 12-10-97
Page 11
ATTACHMENT
i Iq5-
NOR|H
COUI’iT Y
CT. Iris E,
0
’F
4268
Birch Street
PC-302
41o
Project: 425-435 Sheridan Avenue/
440-460 Page Mill Road
Zone change from High Density
Multi-family Residential (RM-40) to
Planned Community
:: El Camino Real
Pate: July 30, 1997 Scale: 1 inch = 200 F1
North
July21, 1997
Citypf Palo Alto
Departnwnt of Planning a~wl
Community Environment
Planning DMsion
J. David Knudson
24 Bay’ Tree Lane
Los Altos, CA 94022
Sent Via FAX at 415-941-2150
4 UC- 04 1997
Depenmenl of Planning and
Community Environmen~
SUBJECT:Below Market Rate (BMR) Agreement for 35 unit condominium project at
425-435 Sheridan Avenue in Palo Alto
Dear Mr Fmudson:
This letter contains an agreement regarding satisfaction of Program 13 of the Housing
Element of the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, which requires a Below Market
Rate (BMR) component for your proposed 35 unit for sale condominium project at 425-
435 Sheridan Avenue in Palo Alto. Program 13 requires a 10 percent BMR component
or 3.5 units. Your proposed project includes thirty 2-bedroom units and five 3-bedroom
units.
City policy is to require on-site units scattered throughout the project and in the same
proportional mix as other units in the project. We have agreed that you will provide two
2-bedroom units and one 3-be.droom unit. Becausethe project was designed with only 5
of 35 units as 3-bedroom units, the .5 units is being satisfied by the provision.of a 3-
bedroom unit and no additional in-lieu fee is required. Accordingly, the City suggests the
following as specifics to the agreement:
Two on-site 2-bedroom BMR units and one 3-bedroom unit shall be provided.
The.units shall be specified on the plans and shall be located on both floors one
and two. The exact location of the units shall be agreed to by the City and shown
on the Subdivision map prior to consideration by the City Council. The units are
proposed to be the two K units on the first floor and unit H on the second floor as
shown on the "430 Sheridan Plans" as submitted to the City by Fullcircle Design
Group and dated "2 May 1997 PC zone submittal." Unit H shall be reconfigured
as a 3-bedroom unit.
The design, construction, materials, finishes, windows, hardware, light fixtures,
landscaping, irrigation, appliances and like features of the BMR unit shall be
comparable to the design and construction of all other units in the project. The
BMR owners shall have access to all facilities, amenities, parking and storage as
that provided to other owners in the project.
250Hamilton Avenue
P.O. Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
415.329.2441
415.329.2240 Fax
The initial sales price of each of the 2-bedroom units shall be $140,700 and the 3-
bedroom shall be $164,800. These prices were reached utilizing the City of Palo
Alto current Housing Price Guidelines (effective May 1, 1996). The price list is
adjusted annually. The greater of this price or the price in effect at the time of
fina~l map approval shall be the initial sales price of the BMR units.
The terms of this letter of agreement shall be incorporated into the conditions of the
Planned Community Zone and the Condominium Map. The Map must be completed and
signed prior to the final map being considered by the City Council.
Thank you for your cooperation during the planning process on this project. If you agree
with this revised proposal, you may sign this letter indicating that we have reached
agreement regarding the BMR component for your project.
Sincerely,
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
I agree to provide a Below Market Rate component to the project at 425-435 Sheridan
Avenue as described in this letter dated July 21, 1997.
J. David KrT.~dson-- - 7 t"Dat~
CC:Marlene Prendergast, Palo Alto Housing Corporation
Debra Cauble, Assistant City Attorney
Jim Gilliland, Assistant Planning Official
Chandler Lee, Contract Planner
S:\PLAN\PLANDIV\SH ARE\LTBMR430.
Subdivider’s Statement
Section 21.12.050 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code requires that a" Subdivider’s
Statement" shall appear upon, or accompany, tentative or preliminary parcel maps, and shall
contain the following information:
Address of the Subject Property:
(If any of the items below are applicable, so state.)
Zone district (s):
(a) Existing use(s):
(b) Proposed use (s):
(c)Improvements and public utilities proposed and the time at which such improvements are
proposedto be completed:u~’~a_~Z_m~oz~ ~--.’~¯w_J ....-.~- a--
(d)Provisions for sewerage and sewage disposal:
(e)~u~lie ~e~ ~ro~ose~: ~_~tx~k /--" "/ .....
(f)Tree planting proposed, existing tree location, species, size, dripline area (including trees
(2)The exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the petitioner. (Explain)
(3)The granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to other property in the territory in which the property is situated.
(Explain)
The granting of the exception will not .violate the requirements, goals, policies or
spirit of the law. (Explain)
a: h’ubdiv..fi’m
ENVIRONMENTAL CHE CI IS T FORM
o
Project Title"
Lead Agen’cy Name and Address:
Contact Person and Phone Number:
425-435 Sheridan Avenue Condominiums
City of Palo Alto - Planning Division
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Chandler Lee, Contract Planner
41 5-329-2441
o Project Location:
Application Number(s):
440-460 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA
97-ARB-97; 97-EIA-10; 97-ZC-8
Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:BK Palo Alto I, LLC
204 Franklin Street
Redwood City, CA 94063
General Plan Designation:Multiple Family Residential
Zoning:.RM-40 (Multiple Family Residential)
Description of the Project:
Application for a Zone Change to the Planned Community (PC) Zone to allow the
demolition of an existing 26,000 square foot laboratory building and construction of
a new 35 unit three story condominium complex, subterranean parking garage and
related site improvements.
10.Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
The site is an irregular shape and consists of four parcels of land totaling 1.06 acres
(46,084 square feet) with a 200 foot frontage along Page Mill Road, a 165 foot
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/97]Page 1
ENVIRONMENTAL CHE CKLIS T FORM
frontage on Sheridan Avenue, and a 255 foot depth. The site is presently occupied by
a single story laboratory building pf approximately 26,000 square feet and related site
improvements. The existing building was built in the 1960s and is currently vacant
and dilapidated. The existing site slopes from Page Mill Road to Sheridan Avenue at
approximately .5%. The site is surrounded by single family homes (across Page Mill
Road), multiple, family residential (across Sheridan Avenue), vacant parcels (park and
ride lot) to the southwest, a nursery to the south, and the proposed housing for the
disabled to the northeast. The site is about 1,000 feet from the California Avenue
Business District.
11.Other public agencies whose approval is required. None.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
÷The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impac.t" as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
Land Use and Planning
Population and
Housing
Geological Problems
Water
Air Quality
Transportation and
Circulation
B!ological Resources
Energy and Mineral
Resources
Hazards
X Noise
Public Services
Utilities and Service
Systems
Aesthetics
Cultural Resources
Recreation
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
None
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30197]Page 2
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:.
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be p’repared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described
on an attached sheet have been added to the project. ANEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, b~t at
least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant
Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." ~An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects
(1} have been analyzed in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (2) have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures
that are imposed upon the proposed project.
X
Project Planner Date
Director of Planning & Community Environment Date
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/97]Page 3
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1)A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported
by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact"
answer is adequatelY/supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does
not apply to projects like the one involved (e. g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A"No
Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general
standards (e. g. the project will not expose sensitive recap,tots to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).
2)
3)
All answers must take account of the whole action involved, .including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
"Potentially Significant Impact’ is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an e.ffect i~ significant.
If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR
is required.
4)"Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact."
The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect
to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-
referenced).
5)Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect
has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). Earlier
analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist.
6)Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside
document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or p&ges where the statement is
substantiated. A source list should be att.ached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should
be cited in the discussion.
7) This is only a suggested form, and lead agen&ies are free to use different ones.
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/97]Page 4
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
b)Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
d)Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land
uses)?
e)Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)?
1
2
1
3
3
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a)Cumulatively exceed official regional or local-population
projections?
b)Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or major infrastructure?
c)Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing?
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture?4 X
b) Seismic ground shaking?4 X
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?4 X
d) Seiche, tsunami, or ~Jolcanic hazard?4
e) Landslides or mudflows?4
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil 4 X
conditions from excavation, grading or fill?
g) Subsidence of the land?4
h) Expansive soils?4 ,
i)Unique geologic or physical features?4
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/97]Page 5
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incor.porated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
4. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the 3,7,
rate and amount of surface runoff?17
b)Exposure (~f people or prop.erty to water related hazards 4,5
such as flooding?
3,17c)Discharge into surface ’waters or other al:~eration of
surface water quality, including but not limited to
temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity or other
typical storm water pollutants (e.g. sediment and
debris from construction, hydrocarbons and metals
from vehicle use, nutrients and pesticides from
landscape maintenance?
d)Changes in the amount of surface water in any water 3
body or wetland? ~
e)Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water 3,17
movements, in marine or freshwater, or wetlands?
f)3Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
h)Impacts to groundwater quality through infiltration of
reclaimed water or storm water runoff that has
contacted pollutants from urban or industrial activities?
i)Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater 3
otherwise available for public water supplies?
j)Alteration of wetlands in any way?3
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
3
6,17
X
X
X
a)Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
exiting or projected air quality violation?
b) Expose sensitive receptors to poliutants
c)Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate?
6,8,9 X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/97]Page 6
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Significant pa
Impact
d) Create objectionable odors?6,8,9
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?10
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp 10
curves or dangerous in,tersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment))?
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby 10,
uses?1 1,
12
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?3, 10
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?10
f)Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative 10
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?3
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in reduction or interference in:
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats 8, 16 X
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals or birds)? ’
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?8 X
c)Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak 8 X
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?8, 16 X
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?8 X
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?8 X
b)Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and 3 X
inefficient manner?
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 8 X
resource that would be of future value to the region
and the residents of the State?
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/97]Page 7
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
Impact
a)A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? ’
b)Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
c)The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
d)Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards?
e)Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass or trees? -
13
11,
12,
13
3,12,
13
3,12,
13
3, 12
X
X
,X
X
X
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increase in existing noise levels?
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
61 81
14 X
X
11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
8,12
8, 11
8
X
X
x
d)Maintenance of public facilities, including roads or
storm drain facilities?
e) Other governmental services?8 X
12.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas?15 X
b) Communications systems?15 X
c)Local or regional water treatment or distribution 15 X
facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks?15 X
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/97]Page 8
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
e) Storm water drainage or storm water quality control.?.
f) Solid waste disposal? ,
g) Local or regional water supplies?
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or’ scenic highway?
b) Have a demonstrabie negative aesthetic effect?
c) Create light or glare?
14. CULTURAL RESouRCES. Would the proposal:
15
15
15
3
3
3
a) Disturb paleontological resources?
b) Disturb archaeological resources?
c) Affect historical resources?
d)Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e)Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
8
8
8
8
8
X
X
X
X
X
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a)Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks
or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities?
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self-su¢taining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b)Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,
to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
x I
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/97]Page 9
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources P~tentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of the past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
17. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects
have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a
discussion should identify the following items:
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify. earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects
were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the
mitigation measures which were incorporated, or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they
address site-specific conditions of the project.
Authority:- Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 21087.
Reference: Public Resources Code Sections 21080 (c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21.083, 21083.3, 21093,
321094, 21151; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal. App. 3d 296 (1988); Leonofff v. Monterey Board of
Supervisors, 222 Cal. App. 3d 1337 (1990).
18. SOURCE REFERENCES
1 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 1980 - 1995, February 2, 1981 (as amended)
2 City of Palo Alto, Zoning Ordinance, Title 18, Chapter 18.49
3 Planner’s general knowledge of the project and area of proposed development.’
4 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update: Geology and Seismic Technical Background Report, August 1’994
5 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel Number 060348-5, Map Revised September 6, 1989.
6 City of Palo Alto Standard Conditions of Approval
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [.7/30/97]Page 10
issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
~ssues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated .
Less Than
Significant
Impact
City of Palo Alto Public Works Engineering Department
Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update: ,Existing Setting Memorandum, August 1994
Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update: Air Quality Technical Background Report, August 1994
City of Palo Alto Transportation Division
City of Palo Alto ’Police Department
City of Palo Alto Fire Department
City of Palo Alto Fire Department, Hazardous Materials Division
Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update: Noise Technical Background Report, August 1994
City of Palo Alto Utilities Department
Fish & Game Code of California, "Chapter 1.5, Endangered Species", Sections 2050 through 2098
Santa Clara County Water District, Ordinance 83-2, as amended October 11, 1985
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/97]Page 11
19. EXPLANATIONS FOR CHECKLIST RESPONSES
3a,b,
c,f
4a,b,h
The entire state of California is in a seismically active area and the site is located in a strong seismic risk
area, subject to very strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. Seismic ground failure,
including liquefaction and subsidence of the land are possible, but not likely at the site. No known faults
cross the project site, therefore fault rupture at the site is very unlikely, but theoretically possible. AIJ new
construction will be subject to the provisions of the most current Uniform Building Code (UBC) which are
directed at minimizing seismic risk and preventing loss of life and property in the event of an earthquake.
Construction of the project will increase the amount of landscaping on site and slightly increase the
amount of impervious surface area without significant changes to site topography. Site soil modifications
are not expected to result in significant environmental impacts.
The City’s ~’equired standard conditions of approval ensure that potential impacts on erosion and soil will
not be significant. Project conditions of approval will require the applicant to submit a final grading and
drainage plan subject to review by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of any grading and
building permits.
IV]itigation Measures: None required.
This site is in Flood Zone X which is not a special flood hazard zone. It is an area of moderate flooding,
outside the 100 year flood zone but within the 500 year flood zone, Sites within this zone would be
subject to flooding to a depth of less than one foot in the 100 year flood event.
During construction activities, stormwater pollution could result. Runoff from the project site flows to San
Francisco Bay via the local storm drain system. Non point source pollution is a serious problem for wildlife
dependent on waterways ~nd for people Who live near polluted streams or baylands. Construction debris
is a source of this pollution.
With the City’s required conditions of approval, the water impacts of the project will not be significant
and by project completion, there will not be significant additional runoff from the site due to the decrease
in amount of impervious surfaces compared with the existing use. The standard conditions of- approval
will require that a drainage plan be submitted which includes drainage patterns on the site and from
adjacent properties. The construction c6ntractor will be requ.ired to incorporate best management
practices (BMPs) for stormwater pollution prevention in all construction operations, in conformance with
the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. Therefore, the project will not result in
any significant impact on flooding.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
The project is not expected to r~sult in a significant impact on air quality. The new condominium complex
will generate more vehicle trips than the existing commercial uses, although this increase is not
considered a significant impact because it does not exceed thresholds established by the Santa Clara
County CongeStion Management Agency (CMA), the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and the
City of Palo Alto.
The standard conditions of approval will ~equire that dust control measures will be employed at the site to
reduc~ dust emissions to acc.eptable levels during construction.
The proposed condominium complex, therefore, will not have a significant effect on air quality.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/97]Page 12
7b
The project is not expected to result in a significant impact on traffic congestion. The new condominium
complex will generate more vehicle trips than the existing commercial uses, although this increase is not
considered a significant impact because it does not exceed thresholds established by the Santa Clara
County Congestion Management Agency (CMA) an.d the City of Pal0 Alto.
The 1989 Citywid~ Land Use and ,Transportation Study anticipated development of residential use on this
site. The applicant is proposing to dedicate ten feet of right-of-way for a proposed widening of Page Mill
Road in accordance with the 1989 Citywide study.
The City’s required standar~l conditions of approval address sight dist.ance and other normal traffic
requirements. Therefore, no significant traffic impacts would be generated by the project and no
mitigation measures are necessary.
Demolition ’and construction activities could disrupt Pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the area. With
the City’s required standard conditions of approval, construction impacts should not be significant.
Mitigation Measures: None Required.
There are twenty seven trees of various sizes and species on the site that will be removed including four
redwoods, a 14inch Eucalyptus and one 8inch Oak. Alarge Elm tree and large Palm tree will be saved.
No heritage trees will be removed. The American Elm will be pruned and saved and the Date Palm will be
relocated to another site prior to construction’. Over 70 new trees are proposed to be planted as
replacements for those removed including 38 twenty four inch boxed trees and,eight street trees on each
side of Page- Mill Road that are proposed as part of the proposed public benefit package.
There are three street trees in the publicly owned right-of way on Sheridan Avenue, two Coast Redwoods
and an American Elm. Of these, the large mature American Elm (Ulmus americana) is the dominant
landscape feature and is required to be retained within the scope of the project and receive irrigation and
improved softscape area to grow in. Preservation and protection of this Elm tree will be included as a
conditon of project approval. To the west of this tree, there are four Coast Redwoods (Sequoia
sempervirens) two of which, are in the small existing planter strip. There are no other protected trees as
defined in the Palo Alto Municipal Code 8.10 (Chapter 8.10.020.) The two Redwoods in the right of way
are of poor quality and distressed, with the top third of one tree broken off sometime in the past. These
two trees would not be of benefit to be" retained on the property. Since the roots of all four Redwoods .
are grouped together under the crumbling sidewalk and and it is not probable that they can be
Successfully seperated, it is recommended that this grouping of distressed trees be removed. This finding
is also supported in the arb.orist report that they are unlikely to survive the construction impact. The new
landscape and street tree theme will be a positive replacement.
There are other small treesthat are less than significant, and a Silver Dollar Gur6 (Eucalyptus
po/yanthemos) that is not suitable and is also approved for removal. A final landscape plan, irrigation plan
and tree preservation program are required as a condition of approval. With the City’s required standard
conditions of approval, any impacts on trees should not be significant.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/971 Page 1 3
lOa,b
12a,e
13c
Noise generated by traffic on Page Mill Road will have an impact on proposed units facing onto Page Mill
Road. An acoustical study prepared in conjunction with the project indicates that potential noise impacts
can be mitigated to acceptable levels in accordance with the City’s noise standards. In order to reduce
traffic noise to acceptable levels, the noise study includes two mitigation measures including: 1) an eight
foot high acoustica.lly effective barrier located approximately 15 feet from the building facade along the
Page Mill frontage, and 2) installation of windows with an STC rating of 36 in all rooms nearest Page Mill
Road and an STC rating of 30 in the units further north along Page Mill Road. The Noise Study conducted
by Charles Salter & Associates (April 28, 1997) indicates that the mitigations specified on pages 2 and 3
of the report will reduce noise levels in interior and exterior living spaces in compliance with City noise
standards. These mitigations will be in’cluded as conditions of project approval and, therefore, the project
will not have a significant noise impact.
Demolition and construction activities will result in temporary increases in local ambient noise levels. With
the City’s required standard conditions of approval, noise impacts during construction should not be
significant. The standard conditions of approval will require the applicant to comply with the requirements
of the Palo Alto Noise Ordinance, Chapt.er 9.10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
Mitigation Measures: Acoustically effective sound wall and STC rated windows as specified on pages 2
and 3 of the noise study by Charles Salter & Associates (April 28, 1997).
A padmount transformer is required on-site for this project. As a standard condition of approval, a utilities
easement will be required for installing the transformer at this location, installing the existing primary stub
conduit, and extending the primary conduit to the new transformer location. Future access to the
transformer for maintenance may become a problem should any portion of the property that is now used
for parking be developed. Should this occur, the owner of the proposed project would be required to
relocate the transformer when needed. As a condition of project approval, the property owner will be
required to address the situation in writing.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Development of the site may result in a negligible increase in light and glare generated from lighting of the
site and glazing on the building, but will not have an adverse impact on surrounding uses. With the
project’s conditions of approval, the light and glare impacts of the project will not be significant. A
detailed lighting plan which is sensitive’to existing uses wilt be required as a condition of approval. The
condition of approval will require the shielding of lighting such that the light does not extend beyond the
site, the lighting will be directi.onal, and that the source of light is not directly visible.
Therefore, the project will not have a significant aesthetic impact and no mitigation measures are
required.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
(S:\plan\pladiv\eia\page440.eia)
S:\PLAN\PLADIV\EIA\PAGE440.EIA [7/30/97]Page 14
Environmental Noise Study for
430 Sheridan Avenue
Condominiums
Palo Alto, CA
CSA Project No. 95-347
Prepared for:
Rick Hill
BK Palo Alto I, L.L.C.
204 Franklin Street
Redwood City, CA 94063
Prepared by:
Alan T. Rosen
Principal Consultant
Charles M. Salter Associates, Inc.
130 Sutter Street
San Francisco, CA 94104
28 April 1997
1.0 I NTRODUCTION
The I~ (q~osed project is located along Page Mill Road just east of E1 Camino Real in the City of
Pal(~ Aim. Currently the Linus Pauling Institute is located on the site. The proposed project
incl~,les 35 units of.attached housing. The purpose of this study is to determine the noise control
n-~ca,~res needed to me~t City and State noise standards. To complete this analysis, a series of
noise ~casurements was made throughout the project site. Future noise levels were determined
based on the futnre roadway conditions and traffic volume increases. The future noise levels are
co~q~:trt_,d with City and State standards and noise mitigation measures are recommended.
2.0 I,;xISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT
The ~m.i°r noise sgurce affecting the project site is vehicular traffic on Page Mill Road. Traffic
frol~t l il Camino Real is audible but to a lesser extent. To quantify the existing noise
envit ~mme.nt, one continuous 24-hour measurement and two short term (15-minute)
measurements were made at the project site. The short-term measnrements were made at the
appt~ximate setback of the future building facades (see Figure 1). Site 1 is the location of the
24-1~mr measnrement. The Day-Night Average Sound Level~ (DNL) at Site 1 is 73 dB. Site 2
represents the noise level at the setback of the proposed building. We estinaate a DNL of 71 dB
at ~1~’ setback of the building. Site 3 represents the setback of the northerly portion of the project
site. The DNL at tiffs location is 65 dB.
3.11 ACOUSTICAL CRITERIA
Apl,licable acoustical criteria are contained in the City of Palo Alto’s Comprehensive Plan 1980-
1995 aad Title 24, Part II of the California Code of Regulations. The City’s Noise Element
recommends acceptable indoor and outdoor noise goals while Title 24, Part II addresses only
ind(~or noise standards.
3.1 (’ily of Palo Alto
The t’ity of Palo Alto’s adopted noise goals for both indoor and outdoor use areas are in terms of
average daytime L~0. Table 1 summarizes the City’s standards.
Table 1--Recommended Average Daytime L~0 Noise Levels (dB)
Land Use Superior Acceptable
Residential
Outdoor 55 65
Indoor 40 50
I\~X’ Night Sound Lcvcl (DNL)--A descriptor established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for tile
hour avcragc A-weighted noise level. Sound levels during the hours from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. are penalized 10 dB to
a,x,mnt for the increased sensitivity of people during the nighttime hours.
Charles I%1 Salter Associates Inc
3.2 State of California
Title 24, Part II of the California Code of Regulations is the State;s noise insulation standard.
Title 24 requires that interior noise levels due to exterior noise sources be controlled to a DNL of
45 dB if the exterior ndise level exceeds a DNL of 60 dB. Furthermore, Title 24 requires that if
the windows must remain in a closed configuration to meet the interior goal, then mechanical
ventilation, such as air conditioning, be provided.
Title 24 also has requirements for impact and airborne sound insulation between adjacent
dwelling units. The requirements are achieved through appropriate acoustical design of party
walls, interior corridor walls and floor/ceiling assemblies. The design of party walls and "
floor/ceilings for compliance with Title 24 is usually handled in the building design phase and
therefore not covered in this report.
4.0 NOISE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The proposed project will be exposed to increased noise levels in the future due to a potential
roadway widen and increased traffic volume. We spoke with the City’s transportation engineer2,
to obtain future traffic volume data and widening information for Page Mill Road. According to
this information the average daily traffic volume could increase from 37,800 to 47,000 by the
year 2010. This inci’ease in volume corresponds to a 1 dB increase in noise levels.
Page Mill Road may be widened to accommodate additional lanes and would be closer to the
project site. These additional lanes would move the roadway approximately 10 feet closer to the
proposed building facades. This corresponds to a 1 dB increase in noise levels. Overall, the
future levels could increase by 2 dB as a result of future growth and the widening. Therefore, the
¯ future DNL at Site 2 would be 73 dB (first floor receivers).
4.1 Exterior Noise
Noise levels in outdoor use spaces of units along Page Mill Road could reach a daytime Lm of 72
dB with future growth. This exceeds the City’s acceptable goal of 65 dB and superior goal of 55
dB. In order to reduce noise levels to achieve the City’s acceptable goal, a 7 foot tall noise
barrier would be required along the outdoor use spaces of first floor units along Page Mill Road.
The project plans include a 6 foot tall wall. This would reduce outdoor noise levels to within 1
dB of the City’s .goal. The noise barrier soundwall would be located approximately 15 feet from
the building facade and would need to be solid with no cracks or. gaps. Jf the roadway is
widened, the barrier height would need to be eight feet to accommodate the increased noise level
from traffic located closer to the building.
The project has dther outdoor use spaces which would be exposed to future noise levels below
the City’s acceptable goal. These areas include spaces in front of units in the courtyard as well as
Telephone conversation with Karl Stoft’cr, 4 December 1996.
,Charles M Salter Associates Inc
the large open space betv,,een the tv,,o buildings. Achieving this City’s superior goal would be
difficult due to the existing high noise levels from Page Mill Road.
4.2 Interior Noise.
The future DNL at the building facade could reach 75 dB at upper floors due to widening and
future growth. In order to reduce interior noise levels to the City’s and State’s goal, sound-rated
windows and wall constructions will be required. Based on preliminary calculations, windows
with a Sound Transmission Class3 (STC) rating of 36 would be required in all rooms in the units
nearest Page Mill Road. Windows in the portion of the building along Page Mill Road, but
further north would require approximately STC 30 windows. The exact STC ratings will depend
on the size of the windows, room furnishings, and wall construction. The required ratings can be
determined as the design progresses ahd should be requiredas part of subsequent building
review.
Sound Transmission Class (STC)--Single figure rating designed to give an estimate or the sound insulation properties of a
partition. Nt, merically, STC represents the number of decibels ot’ speech sound reduction from one side of the partition to the
other. The STC is intended for use when speech and office noise ~:onstitute the principal noise problem.
Charles M Salter Associates
C h a r I e s M S a I t e r A s s o c i a t e s I f~ C :"--÷: San Fta~]c,s¢o Cah!~,,," = 94’04 T.~ 4~5 397 0442 Fa~ 415 3-.
ATTACHMENT B
REVISED CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION
425-435 SHERIDAN AVENUE
CONDITIONS FOR SUBDIVISION
PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF FINAL MAP
Public Works Engineering
The subdivider shall arrange a meeting with Public Works Engineering, Utilities Engineering,
Planning, Planning Arborist, Fire, and Transportation Departments after approval of this map
and prior to submitting the improvement plans. These improvement plans must be completed
and approved by the City prior to submittal of a final map.
All construction within the City right-of-way, easements or other property under City’s
jurisdiction shall conform to standard specifications of the Piablic Works and Utility
Department.
Utilities
The subdivider shall coordinate with the Utilities Department to determine all utility design and
capacity requirements including water, sewer, gas, electric, telephone and cable facilities. All
new construction shall have underground utility, telephone and cable service. The project shall
be limited to single service laterals for each lot for sewer, water and gas. Each parcel shall have
separate electrical service. All utility plans shall be approved by the Utilities Department before
the Parcel map is recorded.
The subdivider shall submit improvement plans and specifications for all utility construction.
The plans must show the proposed alignment of water, gas,-and sewer mains and services
within the development and in the public right-of-way.
The subdivider shall submit flow calculations which will show the off-site and on-site water and
sewer mains will provide the domestic water, fire flows and sewer capacity needed to service
the development and adjacent properties during anticipated peak flows.
425-435 Sheridan Avenue
Conditions of Approval (1/15/98)
Page 1
PRIOR TO THE RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP
Planning
6.The subdivider shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City of Palo Alto. The
agreement shall be recorded with the approved final map at the office of the Santa Clara County
Recorder and shall include the following agreements:
a)The subdivider shall be responsible for installing any required off-site improvements,
including utilities, to the satisfaction of the Utilities, Public Works, and Planning
Departments. These improvements shall be guaranteed by bond or other form of
guarantee acceptable to the City Attorney.
The subdivider shall grant the necessary public utility easements to the City for the
location and maintenance of required utilities. The required easements shall be shown
on the face of the subdivision map.
c)The subdivider shall preserve all existing trees shown for preservation on the site plan
and shall include all trees in the final landscape plans.
d)The subdivider shall comply with the City’s Below Market Rate requirements as
described in Condition 5.
In compliance with Program 13 of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the project
shall provide two (2) two-bedroom units and one (1) three bedroom unit to be included in the
Below Market Rate program, and subject to the restrictions applicable to for sale units placed
in the BMR program. The units shall be two "K" units on the first floor and unit "IT’ on the
second floor, as specified on the approved plans. Unit "IT’ shall be reconfigured as a three
bedroom unit. The exact locations of the units shall be shown on the final subdivision map prior
to consideration by City Council.
The design, construction, materials, finishes, windows, hardware, light fixtures, landscaping,
irrigation, appliances and like features of the BMR units shall be comparable to all other units
in the project. The owners of the BMR units shall have access to all facilities, amenities, parking
and storage as provided to other owners in the project.
The initial sales price of each of the two-bedroom units shall be $140,700 and the initial sales
price of the three-bedroom unit shall be $164,800. These prices were determined utilizing the
City of Palo Alto current Housing Price Guidelines (effective May !, 1996). The price list is
adjusted annually. The greater of the sales price set forth above or the applicable prices in effect
at the time of final map approval shall be the initial sales price of the BMR units.
The provisions of this condition have been negotiated between the City and the project
applicant, and are based upon that letter from Ken Schreiber, Director of Planning and
Community Environment to J. David Knudson dated July 21, 1997, and signed by J. David
425-435 Sheridan Avenue
Conditions of Approval (1/15/98)Page 2
Knudson on July 28,1 997. In the event of conflict between the letter and the PC Ordinance,
the terms of the Ordinance shall prevail. The provisions were negotiated based upon the
understanding that the project will consist of for-sale condominium units. In the event that the
project is to be used for rental purposes a new BMR agreement must be negotiated with the
City prior to occupancy.
The final subdivision map shall be filed with the Planning Division within two years of the
approval of the tentative subdivision map.
Public Works Engineering
A street dedication as offered by the applicant as part of the PC rezoning of the property is
required as follows: Subdivider shall dedicate a ten (10) foot wide strip along the southerly side
of the property along the entire frontage of Page Mill Road.
10.The subdivider shall post a bond prior to the recording of the final subdivision map to guarantee
the completion of the work specified in condition(s) 9 and 18. The amount of the bond shall be
determined by the Planning and Public Works Departments.
11.The subdivider shall submit to Public Works Engineering one (1) permanent mylar with
reproducible set of "as built" drawings for the work in the City right-of-way.
Utilities
12.All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto Standard Specifications
and the Utility department Standard Conditions.
13.The subdivider shall be responsible for installing and upgrading on-site and off-site water and
sewer utilities as necessary to handle anticipated peak loads. This responsibility includes the cost
of all associated utility installations/upgrades.
14.
15.
The subdivider shall pay all costs associated with the required improvements to off-site gas
mains. All improvements to the gas system shall be installed by the City of Palo Alto.
The subdivider shall be responsible for identification and location of all utilities, both punic and
private, within the work area. Prior to any excavation work at the site, the Permittee shall
contact Underground Service Alert at (800) 642-2444, at least 48 hours prior to beginning
work.
16.
17.
All on-site and off-site improvements, including the relocation of any existing utilities to
accommodate the project shall be done at the subdivider’s expense. The City will provide one
electric service to the new merged parcel.
The subdivider shall submit a storm water pollution protection plan to be included in the
improvement plan submittal. ~
425-435 Sheridan Avenue
Conditions of Approval (1 I15/98)
Page 3
18.The subdivider shall construct public curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements along the entire
frontage of Page Mill Road. The improvements shall meet the City’s stafidard requirements and
shall be to the City’s satisfaction.
19.The subdivider shall comply with all the conditions of the PC Zone Change approved by the
City Council on October 20, 1997 and contained in the staffreport dated October 20, 1997.
PRIOR TO FINAL OF THE BUILDING PERMIT
20.The subdivider shall install all electric utilities in accordance with Palo Alto Standards,
including underground utilities and street lights, to the satisfaction of the Utilities
Department. Each residence shall have individual electrical service. A new padmount
transformer is required to serve the subdivision. All electrical plans shall be approved by
the Light and Power Division before the final map is approved.
ONGOING (Throughout Processing and Construction)
21.City staff required time for implementing and monitoring a Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP) shall be subject to cost recovery fees charged to the project
applicant.
425-435 Sheridan Avenue
Conditions of Approval (1/15/98)
Page 4