Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-03-12 City CouncilTO: Attention: FROM: AGENDA DATE: SUBJ-ECT: City of Palo Alto City Manager’s Report HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL Policy and Services Committee CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: Planning and Community Environment March 12, 1996 CMR: 175:96 Comprehensive Plan Update -- Incorporation of Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study REQUEST The issue addressed in this staff report is how to treat the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study in the forthcoming Draft Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATIONS Recognize in the Draft Comprehensive Plan the policy intent and value of the Citywide Study. The Citywide Study, as a policy document, fits very well within the Draft Comprehensive Plan. The four objectives of the Citywide Study are consistent with the Draft Plan. Reduce future commercial and industrial development potential to minimize deteriorating traffic conditions; Preserve existing businesses; Encourage desirable uses such as housing by identifying commercial and industrial sites or areas suitable for mixed-use or housing projects; and Identify appropriate traffic mitigations in major employment areas and necessary physical traffic improvements. CMR:175:96 Page 1 of 21 The Draft Plan should recognize the importance of the Citywide Study by acknowledging the Study’s objectives and the importance of the zoning and other actions taken in 1989. The Draft Plan should include the following policy with supporting Plan text that indicates that consideration of changes to the specific features of the Citywide Study needs to include evaluation of the benefits to be gained from the change. Policy: In evaluating potential increases in non-residential growth limits, consider the objectives of the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The Draft Comprehensive Plan goals, policies and programs, to a very considerable degree, are consistent with the objectives and general results of the Citywide Study. Both documents seek to limit non-residential development and control the growth in traffic. Both documents encourage development of more housing, including use of non-residential land for residential use. Both documents recognize the need for limited intersection improvements and agree that the City cannot build itself out of existing and future congestion. The Citywide Study was not developed or implemented as a development cap. The Study addressed most, but not all, non-residential development. The Study excluded most, but not all, governmental facilities (e.g., airport, Water Quality Plant, Veteran’s Administration Hospital) and non-residential Plarmed Community zones such as the Holiday Inn, Palo Alto Medical Foundation and the Palo Alto Hyatt Hotel. Thus the development potential cited in the Study relates to the build out under the City’s commercial and industrial zones, which is close to, but not the same as, the build out of areas designated for commercial, industrial or public sector employment activities in the Comprehensive Plan. The Citywide Study was an important summation of the numerous planning studies that were undertaken by the City in the 1980s. As such, the Study serves as an important set of modifications to the current Comprehensive Plan and a key element in setting the stage for the current Comprehensive Plan effort. The objectives and broad results of the Study should not be lost. However, staff concludes that the next Comprehensive Plan would not well serve the community if the details of the Study were continued in the new Plan as a narrow limit on future flexibility. The only development cap identified in the draft goals, policies and programs reviewed by the Council is the downtown development cap resulting from the 1986 Downtown Study and incorporated into the zoning ordinance. Staff does not recommend creation of more development caps. As described in the staff report, the pace at which new additional floor area (i.e., floor area beyond replacement of demolished floor area) is being created has been CMR: 175:96 Page 2 of 21 relatively slow since completion of the Citywide Study in 1989. The goals, policies and programs identified for the Draft Plan incorporate in many ways and places the philosophy of the Citywide Study. New development caps would lead to future zoning complexity and, if drawn too tightly, could conflict with efforts to revitalize areas such as Midtown and South E1 Camino Real. If the City Council is interested in pursuing development caps, the alternatives are a citywide development limit or area-specific limits. A citywide limit, given the size and configuration of Palo Alto, would not be a particularly meaningful number. Area-specific limits would need to go beyond the Citywide Study for several reasons. First, as noted above, the Citywide Study did not include all non-residential land uses. Second, for the area bounded by University Avenue, E1 Camino Real, Embarcadero Road and the railroad tracks, development approvals have exceeded the square footage numbers in the Citywide Study. Third, the draft goals, policies and programs that the Council has directed be incorporated into the Draft Plan encourage area studies (Midtown, Cal-Ventura, South E1 Camino Real, PAMF/SOFA and the University Avenue Multi-modal Transit area) that could result in modification of regulations to permit some additional development. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study resulted in a substantial reduction in development potential by reducing the floor area ratios (FAR) of four nonresidential zones (Service Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, Office Research and General Manufacturing) and reducing the amount of additional floor area that could be constructed at the Stanford Shopping Center and Town and Country Village. A variety of other changes were made to the zoning regulations, and the land use designation was changed at ten sites. The Citywide Study did not establish a development cap and did not evaluate all non- residential development. Between adoption of the Citywide Study in August 1989 and September, 1995, the City approved about 451,000 square feet of additional floor area in the areas and zones evaluated in the Citywide Study. Three developments outside the scope of the Study (Holiday Inn Expansion, 1050 Arastradero and the Veterans Administration Hospital) have added about another 289,000 square feet of floor area. The Citywide Study’s objectives are, to a very considerable degree, consistent with the goals, policies and programs identified by the City Council for inclusion in the Draft Comprehensive Plan. Both documents seek to limit non-residential development and control the growth in traffic. Both documents encourage development of more housing, including use of non-residential land for residential use. Both documents recognize the need for limited intersection improvements and agree that the City cannot build itself out of existing and future congestion. CMR: 175:96 Page 3 of 21 There are, however, subtle but important differences between the 1989 Citywide Study and 1996 planning policies. In 1996, there is greater understanding that Palo Alto exists in a very competitive commercial and industrial environment. Just because land is located in Palo Alto does not ensure economic success. There is also a notable difference between the expected handling of follow-up studies in 1996 versus 1989. The coordinated area planning concept envisions greater public participation, much more emphasis on economics and receptivity to regulations that include three-dimensional representations of desired new development rather than reliance on traditional zoning tools. Follow-up studies are to be conducted with greater receptivity to the need for, value of, and economic requirements of physical change. The hope is that by combining extensive and intensive public participation, economic and planning expertise and more visually understandable regulations, ways can be found to rejuvenate and redevelop areas that are experiencing significant economic and physical problems. Thus, there is more receptivity to potential physical change in 1996 than 1989 and a recognition that upgrading parts of the community may need to involve changing City land use regulations, including the possibility of, in selective locations, some increases in development intensity. Finally, there is greater awareness in 1996 than 1989 of the value to the City (and School District) revenue base of certain types of economic activities. Within the nine areas evaluated in the Citywide Study, there are potential variations between the Study results and the Draft Comprehensive Plan. Many of these differences reflect the identification of five areas for future area studies (University Avenue Multimodel Train Station Area, Midtown, Cal-Ventura, PAMF/SOFA, and South E1 Camino Real). Other differences include the 1989 Holiday Inn expansion and the recent PAMF Urban Lane Campus approvals in the Urban Lane area, the extension of the nonconforming use of the former Maximart site, and some of the Land Use Plan Map changes considered by the Council on February 29. Staff concludes that the Citywide Study was an important summation of the numerous planning studies that were undertaken by the City in the 1980s. As such, the Study serves as an important set of modifications to the current Comprehensive Plan and a key element in setting the stage for the current Comprehensive Plan effort. The objectives and broad results of the Study should not be lost. However, the next Comprehensive Plan would not well serve the community if the details of the Study were continued in the new Plan as a narrow limit on future flexibility. Therefore, staff recommends recognition in the Draft Comprehensive Plan of the policy intent and value of the Citywide Study without incorporation of the Study’s detailed zoning limits and restrictions. FISCAL IMPACT To the extent that the alternative of translating the Citywide Study into specific area development caps could restrict future efforts to revitalize some areas, the issues raised in CMR:175:96 Page 4 of 21 this staff report could have fiscal impacts. The issue of fiscal impact will be addressed when the Draft Comprehensive Plan is prepared. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT The Draft Comprehensive Plan will be the subject of an Environmental Impact Report. The issues before the Policy and Services Committee involve identification of policies and programs for inclusion in the Draft Plan. As such, no environmental review or findings are necessary at this time. PREPARED BY: Ken Schreiber KENNETH R. SCHREIBER Director of Planning and Community Environment CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: Ci CMR: 175:96 Page 5 of 21 SUBJECT:Comprehensive Plan Update -- Incorporation of Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study REQUEST The issue addressed in this staff report is how to treat the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study in the forthcoming Draft Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATIONS Recognize in the Draft Comprehensive Plan the policy intent and value of the Citywide Study. The Citywide Study, as a policy document, fits very well within the Draft Comprehensive Plan. The four objectives of the Citywide Study are consistent with the Draft Plan. Reduce future commercial and industrial development potential to minimize deteriorating traffic conditions; 2.Preserve existing businesses; o Encourage desirable uses such as housing by identifying commercial and industrial sites or areas suitable for mixed-use or housing projects; and Identify appropriate traffic mitigations in major employment areas and necessary physical traffic improvements. The Draft Plan should recognize the importance of the Citywide Study by acknowledging the Study’s objectives and the importance of the zoning and other actions taken in 1989. The Draft Plan should include the following Policy with supporting Plan text that indicates that consideration of changes to the specific features of the Citywide Study needs to include evaluation of the benefits to be gained from the change. Policy: In evaluating potential increases in nonresidential growth limits, consider the objectives of the 1989 Cit3avide Land Use and Transportation Study. BACKGROUND On February 7, 1996, the City Council reviewed a staff report (CMR: 129:96) that identified inconsistencies, conflicts and gaps in the Council’s review of draft goals, policies and programs for the Comprehensive Plan. The Council referred to the Policy and Services Committee further consideration of the issue of how to treat in the new Plan the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study. CMR:175:96 Page 6 of 21 The February 7, 1996 staff report addressed the issue of the Citywide Study in the following way: "Page 10, BE-9: Goal BE-9 is Maintain the limits of the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study with a notation that "Staff is to bring back modifications to the Study necessary to have a consistent Comprehensive Plan." "DISCUSSION: For most nonresidential areas, the proposed Draft Plan’s goals, policies and programs are consistent with the 1989 Citywide Study’s nonresidential floor area limits. Modifications to the Citywide Study could occur with area and large site plans (e.g., Cal- Ventura, Midtown, Stanford Medical Center) and a few other site and/or use specific changes (e.g., conference hotel at Page Mill Road and E1 Camino Real, Stanford Shopping Center). Staff would not expect the overall Citywide limits contained in the Citywide Study. to be exceeded in the life of the next Comprehensive Plan and probably for years beyond that. "RECOMMENDATION: Goal BE-9 should be modified to reflect that the 1989 Citywide Study floor area ratios are not considered to be site specific limits. The Economic Balance vision statement on page 10. could become a goal with a related policy addressing the 1989 Study. "GOAL: Assure a balance between supporting businesses, maintaining residential character and preserving the environment. "POLICY: In evaluating potential increases in nonresidential growth limits, consider the objectives of the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study." POLICY IMPLICATIONS The Draft Comprehensive Plan goals, policies and programs, to a very considerable degree, are consistent with the objectives and general results of the Citywide Study. Both documents seek to limit non-residential development and control the growth in traffic. Both documents encourage development of more housing, including use of non-residential land for residential use. Both documents recognize the need for limited intersection improvements and agree that the City cannot build itself out of existing and future congestion. The Citywide Study was not developed or implemented as a development cap. The Study addressed most, but not all, non-residential development. The Study excluded most, but not CMR: 175:96 Page 7 of 21 all, governmental facilities (e.g., airport, Water Quality Plant, Veteran’s Administration Hospital) and non-residential Planned Community zones such as the Holiday Inn, Palo Alto Medical Foundation and the Palo Alto Hyatt Hotel. Thus the development potential cited in the Study relates to the build out under the City’s commercial and industrial zones, which is close to, but not the same as, the build out of areas designated for commercial, industrial or public sector employment activities in the Comprehensive Plan. The Citywide Study was an important summation of the numerous planning studies that were undertaken by the City in the 1980s. As such, the Study serves as an important set of modifications to the current Comprehensive Plan and a key element in setting the stage for the current Comprehensive Plan effort. The objectives and broad results of the Study should not be lost. However, staff concludes that the next Comprehensive Plan would not well serve the community if the details of the Study were continued in the new Plan as a narrow limit on future flexibility. The only development cap identified in the draft goals, policies and programs reviewed by the Council is the downtown development cap resulting from the 1986 Downtown Study and incorporated into the zoning ordinance. Staff does not recommend creation of more development caps. As described in the staff report, the pace at which new additional floor area (i.e., floor area beyond replacement of demolished floor area) is being created has been relatively slow since completion of the Citywide Study in 1989. The goals, policies and programs identified for the Draft Plan incorporate in many ways and places the philosophy of the Citywide Study. New development caps would lead to future zoning complexity and, if drawn too tightly, could conflict with efforts to revitalize areas such as Midtown and South E1 Camino Real. If the City Council is interested in pursuing development caps, the alternatives are a citywide development limit or area-specific limits. A citywide limit, given the size and configuration of Palo Alto, would not be a particularly meaningful number. Area-specific limits would need to go beyond the Citywide Study for several reasons. First, as noted above, the Citywide Study did not include all non-residential land uses. Second, for the area bounded by University Avenue, E1 Camino Real, Embarcadero Road and the railroad tracks, development approvals have exceeded the square footage numbers in the Citywide Study. Third, the draft goals, policies and programs that the Council has directed be incorporated into the Draft Plan encourage area studies (Midtown, Cal-Ventura, South E1 Camino Real, PAMF/SOFA and the University Avenue Multi-modal Transit area) that could result in modification of regulations to permit some additional development. CMR: ! 75:96 Page 8 of 21 DISCUSSION Purposes and Outcomes of the Citvwide Land U~e and Transportation Study The Citywide Study, which began in 1986 and concluded in August 1989, was initiated to address community wide concerns about increasing traffic congestion. It is important to remember that the early 1980s witnessed a major growth in commercial and industrial development. The City’s initial planning responses focused on area-specific studies (i.e., East Bayshore Study - 1984, Park Boulevard GM Area Study - 1985, California Avenue Study- 1985, San Antonio/West Bayshore Study - 1986, and Downtown Study- 1986). The Citywide Study followed these area studies and had four main objectives: Reduce future commercial and industrial development potential to minimize deteriorating traffic conditions; 2.Preserve existing businesses; Encourage desirable uses, such as housing, by identifying commercial and industrial sites or areas suitable for mixed-use or housing projects; and Identify appropriate traffic mitigations in major employment areas and necessary physical traffic improvements. Several conclusions from the Study process are important to emphasize: Under previous zoning regulations, the City had the potential to roughly double the existing approximately 25,000,000 square feet of commercial and industrial development; The Study focused on commercial and industrial zoning and did not incorporate relatively smaller amounts of employment-generating activity resulting from Planned Community Zones (e.g., Holiday Inn, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Palo Alto Hyatt) and from some governmental activities (e.g., airport, City facilities, Veteran’s Administration Hospital); While 25,000,000 additional square feet of development could not have been physically accommodated, future growth levels were assumed to be high, especially based on the development activity of the early 1980s; CMR: 175:96 Page 9 of 21 Three reduced-development scenarios were evaluated in the Citywide Study, ranging from an additional 2,030,000 square feet of development to 4,937,000 square feet of development; Relatively little difference was found among the traffic impacts of the reduced- development scenarios; Peak hour traffic conditions were found to be poor on major routes, getting worse, and would continue to deteriorate, even with no new development; and The set of adopted regulation and land use changes would result in a maximum additional development of about 3,258,000 square feet for the zoning districts included in the Study. The major results of the Citywide Study included: o Zoning Regulation changes - Four zones had their floor area ratios reduced (Service Commercial from 2:1 to 0.4:1, Neighborhood Commercial from 1:1 to 0.4:1, Office Research from 0.75:1 to 0.5:1, and General Manufacturing from 1:1 to 0.5:1); Special provisions were added to further reduce FARs at specific sites (a 0.35:1 FAR at the Town & Country Shopping Center, a maximum addition of 65,000 square feet to the Stanford Shopping Center, and a 0.25:1 FAR for Hoover Pavilion); Office size limits were added to the Service Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial zones and to Town & Country Village Shopping Center; A Hotel (H) Combining zone was created with an FAR of 0.6:1 and applied to the Rickey’s Hyatt and Dinah’s Motor Lodge sites; The housing provisions in the non-residential zones were modified; and A variety of other changes were made, including the creation of a Neighborhood Business Service use, modifications to the noncomplying facility provisions and elimination of three combining zones. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan Map and related zoning changes - CMR:175:96 Page 10 of 21 Five sites were redesignated from commercial to housing (Elks Club, Fiesta Lanes, a portion of the Traynor/Hill property at E1 Camino Real and Charleston, a property on Maybell behind 4170 E1 Camino Real and the Mayfield School/service station/restaurant site at Page Mill Road and E1 Camino Real); Service Commercial property on the west side of E1 Camino Real between California Avenue and Stanford Avenues was changed to Neighborhood Commercial; The service station site at Arboretum and Quarry Roads was changed from Community Commercial to Neighborhood Commercial; The unincorporated site on Quarry Road south of Arboretum Road was changed from Major Institution/University Lands/Academic Reserve and Open Space to Major Institution/University Lands/Campus; The unincorporated site on Quarry Road north of Arboretum Road was changed from Major Institution!University Lands/Academic Reserve and Open Space to Major Institution!University Lands/Campus Multiple Family Residential; and The portion of the Hewlett-Packard training center at 100 Mayfield Road that is located in Palo Alto was changed from Regional Community Commercial to Research Office Park. Traffic Mitigations Intersection capacity improvements were approved for future implementation at 27 intersections; A Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance was adopted for future development in the Stanford Research Park; and A policy to develop Transportation Demand Management programs was approved (implementation was subsequently shifted to the County Congestion Management Agency, then to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and then eliminated by State law). Five areas of future study were identified CMR:175:96 Page 11 of 2t -Urban Lane CS parcels; -East Meadow Circle LM area; -Commercial/Industrial/Transport area; -395 Page Mill Road site; and -1050 Arastradero Road site. What is important to highlight is that the Citywide Study was not, in either the study or implementation phases, regarded as an effort to establish a growth cap. While development potential was evaluated for nine study areas, Planned Community zones and most governmental facilities were excluded from the analysis. For example, the Holiday Inn site was included on some Citywide Study maps of the Urban Lane area and excluded on other maps. The following Table 1 was incorporated into the Citywide Study Summary Report and identified a development potential of 34,400 square feet for the Urban Lane area. Yet, in October 1989, the City Council approved an expansion of the Holiday Inn to add 50,270 square feet of floor area. TABLE 1 Comparison,,,0f Commercial and Industrial Dev,elopment Potentials Study Area 1. Downtown 2. Urban Lane 3. Midtown 4. East Bayshore 5. Southeast Palo Alto 6.South E1 Camino Real Central Palo Alto Existing Square Feet/May 1987 3,313,200 578,100 143,600 1,318,800 3,072,300 1,084,900 Development Potential/ Previous Zoning* 7.1,878,900 2,526,900 (6,200) CMR:175:96 Page 12 of 21 Development Potential/New Zoning* 350,000 34,400 5,200 93,500 665,000 200,100 350,000 2,501,600 253,500 450,900 1,567,200 3,356,100 9.Stanford Research 9,555,700 2,906,800 1,794,100 Park/ECR 10.Sand Hill Road 3,941,300 11,401,600 121,800 Corridor TOTAL 24,886,800 25,314,600 3,257,900 * Amount of development which could be added. In the 1980s, the City did adopt two development caps. The first was for the California Avenue area and established a ten year cap of 100,000 square feet. The cap was adopted in 1985 and expired last year. The second development cap is the 350,000-square-foot limit on new floor area in the downtown. That cap was incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance in May 1986 and does not have an expiration date. Non-residential Development Since the Ci .tywide Study As noted above, the Development Potential!New Zoning identified in Table 1 was based on realistic buildout of the commercial and industrial zoning classifications that were the focus of the Citywide Study. City staff has tracked development approvals since 1980, and the following information is taken from that data base as updated through September 1995. Occasionally, approved development is not implemented and time does not permit a rigorous cross-checking of development approvals and building permits. The following information is based on net floor area and does not include floor area that replaces demolished floor area. The 1980 data base does not, in some cases, correspond to the nine Citywide Study Areas and allocations need to be made. Thus the information is quite accurate, but the exact square footage may be off by a small amount. The following information is based on the nine Citywide Study areas and information is divided between two time periods: May 1987 to August 1989 (the date for existing square footage in Table 1 and the adoption of the Citywide Study) and August 1989 to September 1995. Area 1 -- Downtown The Downtown Area mapped in the Citywide Study includes the Palo Alto Medical Foundation site, which was not covered by the 1986 Downtown Study and is not part of the area that has the 350,000-square-foot development cap identified as the remaining development potential in Table 1. The area subject to the development cap had 26,914 additional square feet of development between May 1987 and August 1989 and 8,723 additional square feet from September 1989 to September 1995. CMR:175:96 Page 13 of 21 The 1989 Palo Alto Medical Foundation Specific Plan would have permitted an additional 45,000 square feet, but that area is excluded from all further analysis because of the recent PAMF Urban Lane Campus approval. Area 2 -- Urban Lane The Urban Lane area had 1,307 additional square feet of floor area between May 1987 and August 1989 and 50,678 square feet between September i989 and September 1995. Of this amount, 50,270 square feet were approved for the Holiday Inn Planned Community zone expansion in October 1989. Area 3 -- Midtown No additional floor area was approved in Midtown from May 1987 to September 1995. Area 4 -- East Bayshore 8,500 square feet of floor area was approved between May 1987 and August 1989 and an additional 294 square feet between September 1989 and September 1995. The predevelopment review application that the Council reviewed in 1995 for Victor Aviation, if ultimately approved, would be outside of the zoning classifications included in the Citywide Study. Area 5 -- Southeast Palo Alto 112,073 square feet of additional floor area was approved between May 1987 and August 1989, including 101,257 square feet for the then-Ford Aerospace expansion. 39,287 square feet of additional floor area was approved between September 1989 and September 1995. Area 6 -- South E1 Camino Real A net loss of 1,400 square feet of floor area was recorded between May 1987 and August 1989.12,588 square feet were added between September 1989 and September 1995. Area 7 -- Central Palo Alto No floor area was added between May 1987 and August 1989 and 4,805 square feet of floor area was added between September 1989 and September 1995. CMR: 175:96 Page !4 of 21 Area 8 -- Stanford Research Park and E1 Camino Real 7,614 square feet of additional floor area was approved between May 1987 and August 1989. Between September 1989 and September 1995, 491,146 square feet of floor area was approved. Of this area, the 162,540-square-foot addition to the Veteran’s Administration Hospital and the 75,980-square-foot development of 1050 Arastradero were outside the framework of the Citywide Study. Of the remaining 252,626 square feet, the bulk was in three projects approved between June 1990 and April 1991 (114,000 square feet at 3400 Hillview, 30,775 square feet at 1681 Page Mill and 46,000 square feet at 3500 Deer Creek). Area 9 -- Sand Hill Road Corridor 10,616 square feet of floor area was approved between May 1987 and August 1989 and 127,898 square feet between September 1989 and September 1995. The 127,898 square feet include 13,391 square feet at the Stanford Shopping Center, a 73,100- square-foot Stanford Medical Center clinic building approved in 1991, and a 30,000 square foot addition to Children’s Health Council approved in 1995. The following table summarizes the above information: TABLE 2 Ci ..tywide Study Area Development, May 1987. to June 1995 Ar~a I.Downtown 2.Urban Lane 3.Midtown 4.East Bayshore 5. Southeast Palo Alto 6. South E1 Camino Development Potential after Citywide Study 350,000 34,400 5,200 93,500 665,000 May 1987 to August 1989 Increases in September 1989 to September 1995 Increases Increases in Floor Area Outside Scope of Citywide Floor Area 26,914 1,307 0 8,500 112,073 in Floor Area 8,723 408 0 294 39,289 Study 0(1) 50,270(-’~ 0 0 0 Total Net Increases in Floor Area,, May 1987 to September 1995 35,637 51,985 0 8,794 151,362 200,100 (1,400)12,588 0 11,188 CMR:175:96 Page 15 of 21 Area 7.Central Palo Alto Stanford Research Park/ ECR Development Potential after Citywide Study (6,200) 1,794,100 May1987 to August 1989 Increases in Floor Area 0 7,614 September 1989 to September 1995 Increases in Floor Area 4,865 252,626 Increases in Floor Area Outside Scope of Citywide Study 238,520(3) Total Net Increases in Floor Area, May 1987 to September 1995 4,865 498,760 9. Sand Hill Road 121,800 10,616 127,898 0 138,514 Corridor TOTAL 3,257,900 165,624 451,112 288,790 905,526 Does not include the 1989/90 PAMF Specific Plan. Holiday Inn Planned Community Zone. VA Hospital (162,540) and 1050 Arastradero Road (75,980). Differences Between the Citywide Study and Draft Comprehensive Plan Goals. Policies and Programs Overall Comparison - The Draft Comprehensive Plan goals, policies and programs, to a very considerable degree, are consistent with the objectives and general results of the Citywide Study. Both documents seek to limit non-residential development and control the growth in traffic. Both documents encourage development of more housing, including use of non- residential land for residential use. Both documents recognize the need for limited intersection improvements and agree that the City cannot build itself out of existing and future congestion. There are, however, subtle but important differences between the 1989 Citywide Study and 1996 planning policies. In 1996, there is greater understanding that Palo Alto exists in a very competitive commercial and industrial environment. Just because land is located in Palo Alto does not ensure economic success. There is also a notable difference between the expected handling of follow-up studies in 1996 versus 1989. The coordinated area planning concept envisions greater public participation, with much more emphasis on economics and receptivity to regulations that include three-dimensional representations of desired new development, rather than reliance on traditional zoning tools. Follow-up studies are to be conducted with greater receptivity to the need for, value of, and economic requirements of physical change. The hope is that by combining extensive and intensive public participation, economic and planning expertise and more visually understandable regulations, ways can be CMR: 175:96 Page 16 of 21 found to rejuvenate and redevelop areas that are experiencing significant economic and physical problems. Thus, there is more receptivity to potential physical change in 1996 than 1989 and a recognition that upgrading parts of the community may need to involve changing City land use regulations, including the possibility of.. in selective locations, some increases in development intensity. Finally, there is greater awareness in 1996 than 1989 of the value to the City (and School District) revenue base of certain types of economic activities. Area-Specific Comparison -- The following commentary on the nine Citywide Study areas highlights the differences between the Citywide Study and the Draft Comprehensive Plan goals, policies and programs. Area 1 -- Downtown. Both the Citywide Study and Draft Plan incorporate the 1986 Downtown Study development caps. The Citywide Study did not address the Palo Alto Medical Foundation, even though preparation of the PAMF Specific Plan overlapped the main part of the Citywide Study. The Draft Plan (and recently amended PAMF Development Agreement) calls for a coordinated area plan for the PAMF/SOFA area. Area 2 -- Urban Lane. The 1989 approval of the Holiday Inn expansion was not part of the Citywide Study. The recent PAMF Urban Lane Campus approval goes beyond the additional floor area identified in the Citywide Study. Finally, the Draft Plan includes a future area study for the University Avenue Multi-modal Transit Center (i.e., Dream Team) area. Area 3 -- Midtown. The Citywide Study envisioned very minimal changes in the amount of commercial floor area in Midtown. It is still too early to tell to what extent the current Midtown Study will consider changes to floor area ratios. Area 4 -- East Bavshore. There are no differences between the Citywide Study and Draft Comprehensive Plan treatment of the East Bayshore/Embarcadero Road area. Area 5 -- Southeast Palo Alto. The only possible difference between the Citywide Study and Draft Comprehensive Plan treatment of this area is the yet to be resolved land use designation of the Spanger School site.. Area 6-- South E1 Camino Real. El Camino Real from Charleston Road north to Curmer Avenue is identified as a future study area in the Draft Comprehensive Plan. The Citywide Study identified 200,000 more square feet of non-residential floor area for South E1 Camino Real. Area 7 -- Central Palo Alto. The Citywide Study assumed the 100,000-square-foot floor area cap for the California Avenue Area. However, this cap expired in 1995. The Draft Plan calls for adjusting downward the California Avenue Area zoning, which may result in it being CMR: 175:96 Page 17 of 21 compatible with the Citywide Study. The Citywide Study assumed the closure of the former Maximart site by 2000. The Draft Plan calls for an area study of the Cal-Ventura area bounded by Page Mill Road, E1 Camino Real, the residential area south of Lambert and the railroad tracks. Area 8 -- Stanford Research Park and Adjacent E1 Camino Real. The Research Park’s floor area is the same in the Citywide Study and the Draft Plan. The major potential difference is the land use designation of the vacant site at Page Mill Road and E1 Camino Real. Area 9 -- Sand Hill Corridor. The Citywide Study implicitly assumed residential reuse of the former Children’s Hospital site and did not acknowledge that the Children’s Health Council (which had a 30,000 square foot expansion approved in 1995) and the Ronald McDonald House are not part of the former Children’s Hospital site. The current set of Sand Hill Corridor development applications includes more floor area at the Stanford Shopping Center than was incorporated into the Citywide Study. In summary, only one or two of the nine Citywide study areas are not considered for some type of non-residential land use change, either directly in the Comprehensive Plan or as part of follow-up studies identified in the Plan. While the overall objectives of the Citywide Study are incorporated into the Draft Plan, there is the likelihood of notable detailed changes. Conclusion The Citywide Study was an important summation of the numerous planning studies that were undertaken by the City in the 1980s. As such, the Study serves as an important set of modifications to the current Comprehensive Plan and a key element in setting the stage for the current Comprehensive Plan effort. The objectives and broad results of the Study should not be lost. However, the next Comprehensive Plan would not well serve the community if the details of the Study were continued in the new Plan as a narrow limit on future flexibility. Therefore, staff recommends recognition in the Draft Comprehensive Plan of the policy intent and value of the Citywide Study without incorporation of the Study’s detailed zoning limits and restrictions. Recommendation Recognize in the Draft Comprehensive Plan the policy intent and value of the Citywide Study. The Citywide Study, as a policy document, fits very well within the Draft Comprehensive Plan. As noted earlier, the four objectives of the Citywide Study are consistent with the Draft Plan. CMR: 175:96 Page 18 of 21 Reduce future commercial and industrial development potential to minimize deteriorating traffic conditions; 2.Preserve existing businesses; Encourage desirable uses such as housing by identifying commercial and industrial sites or areas suitable for mixed-use or housing projects; and Identify appropriate traffic mitigations in major employment areas and necessary physical traffic improvements. The Draft Plan should recognize the importance of the Citywide Study, by acknowledging the Study’s objectives and importance of the zoning and other actions taken in 1989. The Draft Plan should include the following Policy and supporting Plan text that indicates that consideration of changes to the specific features of the Citywide Study needs to include evaluation of the benefits to be gained from the change. Policy: In evaluating potential increases in nonresidential growth limits, consider the objectives of the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study. ALTERNATIVES Alternative ways of addressing the Citywide Study in the Draft Comprehensive Plan include: 1.Establish a citywide non-residential growth cap. As identified in Table 1, the Citywide Study identified a future development potential of 3,257,900 square feet of floor area for the zoning districts incorporated into the Study. As noted before, there are various developments (e.g., City facilities, VA Hospital, Planned Community zones such as the Holiday Inn) that were not included in the Citywide Study. If a City growth cap was to be established, immediate questions include: What is the start date for counting development toward the cap? Alternatives include May 1987, as cited in Table 1, and August 1989, when the Study was adopted. What development counts toward the cap? Alternatives include all non- residential development, non-residential development within certain areas (remembering that the nine study areas are defined differently on different CMR: 175:96 Page 19 of 21 Citywide Study maps), or non-residential development within the zoning districts analyzed in the Citywide Study. Establish sub-area growth caps. The only area in Palo Alto that has a growth cap is the downtown. Based on the Citywide Study, growth caps could be established for other areas. Numerous problems would need to be addressed, including Urban Lane, where approved development exceeds the Citywide Study, and Midtown, where the small amount of additional growth may be incompatible with efforts to rejuvenate the area. Further, the growth caps may or may not be compatible with the intent of area studies such as Cal-Ventura, where the Citywide Study assumed removal of the former Maximart site’s commercial uses by 2000, or for the University Avenue Multi-modal Transit Station area, which is outside of a Citywide Study Area. The questions addressed under Alternative 1 would also have to be answered for this alternative. o Maintain the zoning restrictions incorporated into the Citywide Study. This alternative would make it more difficult to adjust floor area ratios if deemed important as part of future area studies. Further, some of the use restrictions (i.e., office limits) may prove to be undesirable. This approach would also tend to lock into place selective elements of particular zone districts (e.g., office and other commercial size limits. Another question is whether the site-specific zoning changes made in the Citywide Study would be maintained or open to change. FISCAL IMPACT To the extent that the alternative of translating the Citywide Study into specific area development caps could restrict future efforts to revitalize some areas, the issues raised in this staff report could have fiscal impacts. The issue of Fiscal Impact will be addressed when the Draft Comprehensive Plan is prepared. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT The Draft Comprehensive Plan will be the subject of an Environmental Impact Report. The issues before the Policy and Services Committee involve identification of policies and programs for inclusion into the Draft Plan. As such, no environmental review or findings are necessary at this time. CMR: 175:96 Page 20 of 21 STEPS FOLLOWING APPROVAL The Policy and Services Committee recommendations, after review and action by the City Council, will become part of the Draft Comprehensive Plan. The Draft Plan is tentatively scheduled for publication and distribution by September 1996. Extensive public review will follow release of the Draft Plan, including public hearings by the Planning Commission and City Council. CC:Planning Commission CPAC Speakers at February 7, 1996 City Council Meeting Robin Bayer Herb Borock Lynn Chiapella Pria Graves Yoriko Kishimoto Bill Peterson Ed Power Emily Renzel Susie Richardson Joseph Violette Stanford University Stanford Management Company Chamber of Commerce Denny Petrosian CMR: 175:96 Page 21 of 21