Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-01-16 City CouncilTO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: Planning and Community Environment AGENDA DATE: January 16, 1995 CMR: 103:96 SUBJECT:Approval of Transfer of Development Rights Contract Planner and Budget Amendment Ordinance REQUEST The purpose of this report is to request Council approval of a Budget Amendment ordinance (BAO) in the amount of $34,800. In order to hire a contract planner, $22,800 is needed. The contract planner wil! continue the preparation of a Transfer of Development Rights Ordinance, with a scope of work including seismic and/or historic up~ade incentives. The BAO also requests $12,000 to be used for contract legal assistance by the City Attorney’s Office. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council approve the attached BAO in the amount of $34,800 be used to hire a contract planner and contract legal assistance to continue preparation of a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) ordinance. POLICY IMPLICATIONS In general, a TDR progam is consistent with existing City policies if it encourages historic preservation and seismic safeD". Any specific policy issues arising from the TDR ordinance will be addressed at the time the City Manager’s Report on this matter returns to Council for consideration. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A TDR pro~am, as envisioned by the City of Palo Alto, would allow bonus floor area, granted for seismic or historic rehabilitation of buildings in the downtown area, to be transferred to eligible receiver sites in the downtown area. On May 1, 1995, the Council reviewed a proposal for a TDR ordinance that would have applied to buildings in Historic CMR:103:96 Page l of 3 Categow 1 or 2 only. Upon. reviewing the limited Ordinance, the Council directed staff to review additional considerations and, in particular, to include TDR for seismic rehabilitation. Staff had listed the TDR program as a possible item for the 1995-96 Planning Division Work Pro~am and had given it a low prioritT. Staff also noted that the services of a contract planner would be required in order to complete the assignment, given other assignments to the Division. On September 26, 1995, the Council endorsed the Planning Division Work Program and requested that the TDR assignment be initiated in the 1995-96 fiscal year. In preparing the Division Work Program, staff had utilized the attached "Scope of Work - TDR Assignment", prepared in May 1995, and estimates the Planning staff time required to complete the assignment at approximately 240 hours. The CitT Attorney’s Office estimates approximately 60 hours of contract legal assistance will be needed. The Scope of Work outlines the general issues and research to be done, as well as proposed meetings and review. It should be noted that meetings with City officials would include input from downtown property owners. FISCAL IMPACT Contract services of the contract planner and contract legal assistance will cost $34,800. The attached BAO allocates the funds from reserves. This is not a cost recovery project. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT The BAO and services of the contract planner and contract legal assistance are not a project under CEQA. An Environmental Impact Assessment of the impacts of the TDR program will be part of the contract planner assignment. ATTACHMENTS Budget Amendment Ordinance Scope of Work - TDR Assignment PREPARED BY: Jim Gilliland, Assistant Planning Official DEPART -MENT HEAD REVIEW:-_~, KENNETH R. SCHREIBER Director of Planning and Community Environment CMR: 103:96 Page 2 of 3 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: Ctty’Manager CMR:103:96 Page 3 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OE THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR PLANNING AND ATTORNEY SUPPORT TO CONTINUE PREPARATION OF THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ORDINANCE WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article III of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on June 19, 1995 did adopt a budget for fisca! year 1995-96; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Planning Department’s 1995-96 workplan, and has requested the department place a high priority on the preparation of the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Department and the City Attorney’s Office require contract assistance to complete this assignment; and WHEREAS, the scope of work for the contract planner for this assignment includes implementing seismic and/or historic upgrade incentive programs for the rehabilitation of buildings in the Downtown area; and WHEREAS, the costs of this contract planner support for the Planning Department are $22,800; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney’s Office will be impacted by the additional work in the Planning Department, and does not have the resources to provide the additiona! support; and WHEREAS, the costs of this contract attorney support for the City Attorney’s Office are $12,000; and WHEREAS, there will be no developer reimbursement for the preparation of the Transfer of Deve!opment Rights Ordinance; thus the project will be funded from the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve; and WHEREAS, City Council authorization is needed to amend the 1995-96 budget as hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION i. The sum of Twenty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars ($22,800) is hereby appropriated to non-salary expenses in the Advance Planning Functional Area in the Planning Department, and the Budget Stabilization Reserve is correspondingly reduced. SECTION 2. The sum of Twelve Thousand Dollars ($12,000) is hereby appropriated to non-salary expenses in the Project-Based City Staff Support Functiona! Area in the City Attorney’s Office, and the Budget Stabilization Reserve is correspondingly reduced. SECTION 3. This transaction will reduce the Stabilization Reserve from $13,596,266 to $13,562,266. Budget SECTION 4. As specified in Section 2.28.080(a) of the Palo Alto Municipa! Code, a two-thirds vote of the City Counci! is required to adopt this ordinance. SECTION 5. The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby finds that the enactment of this ordinance is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and,therefore,no environmental impact assessment is necessary. SECTION 6. Municipal Code, adoption. As provided in Section 2.04.350 of the Palo Alto this ordinance shal! become effective upon INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST:APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk Senior Asst. City Attorney APPROVED: Mayor City Manager Deputy City Manager Director of Planning and Community Development Scope of Work - TDR Assiqrnnent s/22/gs TASK I.Revise the existing inventory of potential sender sites and prepare a new inventory of potentia! receiver sites° Revise the existing inventory of sender sites to break out the properties into three categories: seismic (only), historic (only) and both seismic and historic. In addition, 529 Bryant should be deleted from the existing chart because it is zoned PC. Expand the existing inventory of sender sites to include PF, PC and residentially zoned properties within the area generally zoned CD. Residential Sites - There are three areas downtown that are surrounded on three sides by the CD District. These areas could only be sender sites (they are restricted from being receiver sites because they are within 150 feet of residentia! property). If these residentia! buildings are neither historic nor seismic they could be eliminated from further consideration. a. Meet with Fred Herman to determine whether any of these are historic or seismic buildings. b.If any of these buildings are either historic or seismic, include them in the inventory of sender sites. PC Sites - Since most Zoning Ordinance restrictions may be waived with appropriate public benefit findings, PC properties wold not benefit by the TDR program and therefore should not be included. a. Meet with staff (and possibly the Mayor, to determine whether it would be appropriate to include PC sites in the TDR program. b.If appropriate, include the five existing PC sites downtown: PC 3429 (123-127 Alma), PC 3974 (251 University and 529 Bryant), PC 3499 (Cowper Webster Parking garage), PC 3872 (250 University Avenue), and PC 4052 (531 Calper) . o PF Sites - All PF sites downtown are parking garages except ~ity Hall, the Post Office and the Senior Center. a. Meet with staff (and possibly the Mayor) to determine whether it would be appropriate to include PF sites. b.If appropriate, determine who owns the land and building at the post office site and meet with Fred Herman to determine whether the Post Office is a seismic risk (if it is, it could help to get it renovated if it is included in C o the TDR program). If appropriate, include the PF properties in the inventory. C o TASK IIo Prepare an inventory of the potentia! receiver sites, including the same information that is on the chart for the sender sites (i.e., APN, address, zoning, site area, existing use, seismic category, historic category, existing square feet, potential new square feet and new total square feet). Prepare written analyses of the fol!owing: Explain the pros and cons of the fol!owing revised policy proposals: Question @5: Should the TDR program be expanded to include PF, PC and residentially zoned promerties within the area generally zoned CD?Transfers between different zoning districts would be permitted.The addition of any PF, PC or residentially zoned sites into the TDR program would require modifying the corresponding zoning district. o Question #6: Should the TDR program be expanded to include seismic upmrades of nonhistoric buildings? There are a total of 30 such buildings? o Ouestion #9: Should sender sites be able to transfer bonus square footage above a 3.0 FAR? If so, an assumption will need to be made regarding what the maximum FAR should be increased to e.g., 3.5 FAR, 4.0 FAR, etc. Question #i0: Should the current restriction on new f!oor area at recelver sites be increased above the .5 FAR maximum? Presumably, In order to allow for a new second floor covering the entire first floor, the .5 FAR restriction would be increased to 1.0 FAR under this revised policy proposa!. Receiver Sites: Given the proposed increases in the potentia! transferable floor area from the above proposed policy revisions, determine whether there is an adequate number of receiver sites available. TASK !ii. Identify and make proposed ordinance and Comprehensive Plan revisions. Meet with staff and the Mayor to review the written analysis (Task II above) and identify any proposed revisions to the draft TDR Ordinance, including the above potential revisions, and the following a cap on the maximum transferable floor area under the TDR program; and a sunset date on the TDR Ordinance. Work c!osely with the City Attorney’s office who will prepare the actual revisions to the ordinance. TASK IV.Revise the Environmental Assessment to evaluate the impacts of revised policy proposals. Since the seismic (only) sites already can receive a 25% floor area bonus, the only impacts that would result would be due to the new ability to transfer floor area from the seismic sites to receiver sites. Increasing the .5 FAR restriction to 1.0 FAR would not increase parking or transferable floor area since it would only affect receiver sites. The following would increase the parking demand and require a parking analysis: i) inclusion of any PF, PC or residentially zoned sites into the TDR program; and 2) an increase in the 3.0 maximum transferable FAR for sender sites. The other proposed changes would not increase the parking demand. The following would increase the total amount of transferrable floor area to receiver sites: inclusion of any PF, PC or residentially zoned sites into the TDR program; inclusion of the seismic (only) sites as sender sites; and an increase in the 3.0 FAR from sender sites. The other proposed changes would not increase the tota! potential transferable floor area. TASK Vo Prepare Planning Commission Staff Report TASK V!o Prepare CMR TASK VII. Attend Public Hearings A.Planning Commission (one - 3 hour hearing) B.City Council (one - 3 hour hearing)