HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 302-09TO:
FROM:
DATE:
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER
JULY 13, 2009
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
CMR: 302:09
REPORT TYPE: PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT: Approval of a Development Agreement to Extend Approvals for
Architectural Review and the Vesting Tentative Map with Exceptions
. and Providing Additional Project Benefits of the Approved 45-unit
Townhome Development at 200 San Antonio Road in the ROLM and
RM-30 Zone Districts and Adoption of an Ordinance Approving a
Development Agreement between Hewlett-Packard Company and the
City of Palo Alto
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This development agreement is requested to extend the Palo Alto approvals of a 45-unit housing
development on property owned by Hewlett Packard at 200 San Antonio, so that the Palo Alto
project will have the same effective date (February 26, 2014) as that of the adjacent 450-unit
housing development within the City of Mountain View, also on Hewlett Packard property. The
development agreement includes the relocation of a large sculpture (by Ginnever) from
Mountain View to a landscaped area within the Palo Alto project site, and requires compliance
with the City's Green Building Ordinance, which was adopted subsequent to project approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff and the Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) recommend that the City
Council adopt an ordinance (Attachment A) approving the proposed Development Agreement
for the project located at 200 San Antonio Road (Attachment B with Exhibits 1 and 2).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed development agreement is to extend previous approvals for a project to be
constructed on land owned by Hewlett Packard located at the intersection of San Antonio Road
and Central Expressway. Known as the Toll Brothers project, 45 housing units would be
constructed on approximately 4.9 acres in Palo Alto, and 450 housing units would be constructed
on approximately 20 acres in Mountain View.
CMR:302:09 Page 1 of3
On October 22, 2008, the Director of Planning and Community Environment (Director) issued
the Architectural Review approval for the 45 units to be contained within stacked flats and
townhomes between two and three levels high, clustered in a series of twelve separate buildings
containing two to six units each. The Director's approval became effective upon Council
approval of the Vesting Tentative Map on February 9, 2009.
The Development Agreement would extend the Architectural Review approval of the 45-unit
housing project and Council approval of the associated Vesting Tentative Map to a new effective
date (February 26, 2014), beyond the time frames identified in the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
This would be consistent with the expiration of approvals for development within the Mountain
View portion of the housing project. As a part of the extension, the agreement provides for
additional project benefits: the relocation of a large sculpture from Mountain View into Palo Alto
and project compliance with Palo Alto's green building requirements for multiple family
residential projects, which requirements were adopted after project approval.
Attachment F to this report provides information regarding why the applicants found it necessary
to submit this application, which was filed on February 17, 2009. In summary, the property
owners will sell the land to a "Master Developer" as required by the City of Mountain View to
ensure the construction of public infrastructure, utilities, parks and other project features will be
efficiently coordinated, economical and safe. The Development Agreement includes Exhibit B,
conditions of approval (of Architectural Review and Vesting Tentative Map approvals) and notes
that the owner shall comply with and perform all of the conditions of approval.
BOARD/COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOlVIMENDATIONS
On May 27, 2009, the Commission voted unanimously on a 6-0-0-1 (Fineberg absent due to
conflict of interest) to recommend Council approval of the development agreement with two
amendments: (a) add to Section 8.1 an introductory clause that reads 'at the expense of the
owner,' and (b) attach the conditions of approval as an exhibit to the Development Agreement.
There were no public speakers. The May 27, 2009 Commission staff report and minutes are
attached to this report. Staff reports and meeting minutes from the January 14, 2009
Commission, February 9, 2009 Council and April 17, 2008 ARB meetings are available on the
City's website to provide further background information on the approved project and vesting
tentative map.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The project was found to be in conformance with Comprehensive Plan Policies by the
Architectural Review Board, the Commission, and City Council in prior reviews. By extending
the time for compliance with the project approvals, the Development Agreement will provide
certainty that the project can be developed and used in accordance with the approved plans
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the Development Agreement provides
additional project benefits that could not otherwise be obtained, including the inclusion of the
Ginnever sculpture on the Palo Alto site, and the applicant's compliance with the Green Building
Ordinance, which was adopted subsequent to project approval.
CMR:302:09 Page 2 of3
RESOURCE IMPACT
A section on resource impacts was provided in a prior report to Council related to the
subdivision. The section noted annual revenues (totaling $75.000) and one-time fees and taxes
(development impact fees, school impact fees, and documentary transfer tax, totaling $435,000).
The Development Agreement will not result in additional impacts. Approval of the Development
Agreement will avoid the need to expend resources of staff and reviewing bodies to review re-
submitted applications after future expiration of permits.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Prior to Architectural Review approval of the multi-family development, an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) was prepared. Because most of the project lies within the City of Mountain
View, that city served as the lead agency for the document. The EIR was adopted by Mountain
View in June of 2006. It was provided to all Commissioners and Council members in compact
disc (CD) format prior to the public hearings on January 14,2009 and February 9, 2009, during
which the Vesting Tentative Map was recommended and approved, respectively.
PREPARED BY:
Manager of Current Planning
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
CURTIS WILLIAMS
Director of Planning and Community Environment
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: /t
ATTACHMENTS
A. Ordinance
B. Development Agreement
C. Planning and Transportation Commission Staff Report dated May 27, 2009, with
attachments (except for development agreement provided as Attachment B above)
D. Planning and Transportation Commission Minutes of May 27,2009
E. Sculpture Location plan set (Council only)
F. Applicant's Letter Dated March 25, 2009 Regarding Need for Extension
COURTESY COPIES
Penny Ellson
Jo Price, Toll Brothers
Peter Gilli, City of Mountain View
Frank Pedraza, Hewlett Packard
CMR:302:09 Page 3 of3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
ATTACHMENT A
NOT YET APPROVED
Ordinance No. ---
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving a
Development Agreement between the Hewlett-Packard
Company and the City of Palo Alto
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. Recitals.
A. The City and the Hewlett-Packard Company ("HP") have negotiated a
Development Agreement under which the Architectural Review approval and Council approval
of the associated Vesting Tentative Map for a 45 unit housing project located in the City of Palo
Alto would be extended to an effective date of February 26, 2014, beyond the time frames
identified in the Palo Alto Municipal Code, to be consistent with the expiration of approvals for
the larger portion of the housing project located in the City of Mountain View. As a part of the
extension, the agreement provides for additional project benefits, including the relocation of a
large sculpture from Mountain View to Palo Alto and project compliance with Palo Alto's green
building ordinance requirements for mUltiple family residential projects.
B. HP has requested this Agreement in order to vest the land use policies and
regulations established in the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the Palo Alto
Design Approval, current as of the Effective Date hereof. This Agreement authorizes HP and its
successors in interest to implement, subject to other City land use decisions consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and the terms hereof, a phased, multi-year program, of redeveloping and
completing its residential and related uses of the subject property.
C. City proposes to enter this Agreement for the reasons enumerated in the
Development Agreement Statute, and (i) to eliminate uncertainty in the comprehensive
development planning of large-scale projects within the City, such as the Project; (ii) to secure
orderly development and progressive fiscal benefits for public services, park and recreation
improvements and facilities planning in the City; (iii) to meet the goals and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan; and (iv) to replace, for Owner's and City's benefit, obsolete office and
parking buildings with a modem, attractive, master-planned residential community capable of
meeting the housing needs of many current and future Palo Alto residents, at a location well
served by regional thoroughfares, mass transit and retail services.
1
090708 syn 0120375
NOT YET APPROVED
SECTION 2. Findings.
The City Council finds and detennines that:
A. Notice of intention to consider the development agreement has been given
pursuant to Government Code section 65867.
B. The Planning and Transportation Commission and the City Council have each
conducted a public hearing on the Development Agreement.
C. The City Council has reviewed the contents of the Final Environmental Impact
Report ("FEIR") prepared for the Project, and all other relevant infonnation, including staff
reports, and all testimony, written and oral, presented on the matter.
D. The City Council finds and detennines that the development agreement IS
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Palo Alto.
SECTION 3. The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement
between the Hewlett-Packard Company and the City of Palo Alto, a copy of which is attached
hereto as Exhibit IIAII, and authorizes the Mayor to execute the agreement on behalf of the City.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk is directed to cause a copy of the Development
Agreement to be recorded with the County Recorder not later than ten (10) days after it becomes
effective.
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
2
090708 syn 0120375
SECTION 5
after its adoption.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Assistant City Attorney
090708 syn 0120375
NOT YET APPROVED
This ordinance shall be effective upon the thirty-first (31st) day
3
APPROVED:
Mayor
City Manager
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
ATTACHMENT B
NOT YET ADOPTED
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
CITY OF PALO ALTO,
a chartered municipal corporation
AND
HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY,
a Delaware corporation
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered as of this day of
_____ , 2009 ("Effective Date") by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO ("City"),
a chartered California municipal corporation, and the HEWLETT -PACKARD COMPANY
("Owner"), a Delaware corporation.
THE PARTIES ENTER THIS AGREEMENT on the basis of the following facts,
understandings and intentions:
A. Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the
"Development Agreement Statute") authorizes City to establish procedures to enter binding
development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property located
within the City for development of the property.
B. On March 9, 1987, the City Council ("City Council") of the City approved
Resolution No. 6597, establishing the authority and procedure for review and enactment of
development agreements pursuant to the Development Agreement Statute.
C. Owner is the legal owner of the property ("Property") governed by this
Agreement, comprising an approximately five (5) acre site located near the intersection of San
Antonio Avenue Street and Central Expressway in the City of Palo Alto, California, further
described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. Owner proposes to
build out a master-planned residential complex on the Property, and on adjacent property within
the City of Mountain View, in phases, consistent with the policies and regulations expressed in
the City's Comprehensive Plan ("Comprehensive Plan"), zoning ordinances, Vesting Tentative
Subdivision Map and Architectural Review Board design approval (collectively, "Palo Alto
Design Approval"), and consistent with the City of Mountain View's Master Plan, Tentative
1
090625 syn 0120356
Subdivision Maps and Planned Community Permits ("PCP's") for each of four (4) development
areas defined in the Master Plan (collectively, "Development Plan"). The approved Vesting
Tentative Subdivision Map, authorizing subdivision of the Property, and the approved Palo Alto
Architectural Review Board design approval, authorizing construction of Owner's new buildings
on the Property and specifying the permitted uses, density and intensity of use and public
improvements, are incorporated herein by this reference
D. Owner has requested this Agreement in order to vest the land use policies and
regulations established in the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the Palo Alto
Design Approval, current as of the Effective Date hereof. This Agreement authorizes Owner and
Owner's successors in interest to implement, subject to other City land use decisions consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and the terms hereof, a phased, multi-year program ("Project"), of
redeveloping and completing its residential and related uses of the Property. The City of
Mountain View has required that the Property in both jurisdictions must be developed by a single
"Master Developer" in order to ensure that construction of public infrastructure, utilities, parks
and similar Project features will be efficiently coordinated, economical and safe. The purpose of
this Agreement is to ensure that the Palo Alto Design Approval and the Mountain View
Development Plan will be efficiently implemented as approved by the Cities of Palo Alto and
Mountain View respectively, and that the vested term of all Project land use approvals will be
coeval.
E. City and Owner acknowledge that development and construction of the Project is
a large-scale undertaking involving major investments by Owner and City, with development
occurring in phases over several years. Certainty that the Project can be developed and used in
accordance with the terms hereof will benefit Owner, City and the general public, and will
2
090625 syn 0120356
provide to both parties a relatively stable and permanent plan for development of the Property, in
implementation of City's Comprehensive Plan.
F. City and Owner, through their representatives, cooperatively have invested
several years of comprehensive, community-wide planning and design effort into crafting the
Development Plan and the Palo Alto Design ApprovaL The Development Plan and the Palo Alto
Design Approval reflect extensive neighborhood, City staff, and community-wide insights and
priorities, and provides for several attractive design features, extraordinary park and recreation
amenities, and infrastructure improvements providing for safer, more convenient pedestrian
access to mass transit. The national real estate fmancing market recently has produced a
situation in which the foregoing amenities and improvements economically could not be
provided without relative certainty that the Project can be financed, built and implemented
consistently with the Development Plan and the Palo Alto Design Approval.
G. City proposes to enter this Agreement for the reasons enumerated in the
Development Agreement Statute, and (i) to eliminate uncertainty in the comprehensive
development planning of large-scale projects within the City, such as the Project; (ii) to secure
orderly development and progressive fiscal benefits for public services, park and recreation
improvements and facilities planning in the City; (iii) to meet the goals and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan; and (iv) to replace, for Owner's and City's benefit, obsolete office and
parking buildings with a modem, attractive, master-planned residential community capable of
meeting the housing needs of many current and future Palo Alto residents, at a location well
served by regional thoroughfares, mass transit and retail services.
H City's willingness to enter this Agreement is a material inducement to Owner to
implement the Project within the City of Palo Alto, and to provide at Owner's cost the park and
3 090625 syn 0120356
recreation amenities and infrastructure improvements described in the Development Plan.
Owner proposes to enter this Agreement in order to obtain assurance from City that the Project
may be financed in the current economic climate, developed, constructed, and occupied pursuant
to the Palo Alto Design Approval, subject to the limitations expressed herein.
I. On May 27,2009, the Palo Alto Planning and Transportation Commission held a
duly noticed public hearing on this Agreement, and (i) determined that consideration of this
Agreement complies with CEQA, based on certification of the Project's Environmental Impact
Report; (ii) determined that this Agreement is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan;
and (iii) recommended that the City Council approve and enact this Agreement.
1. On ______ , 2009, the Palo Alto City Council held a duly noticed
public hearing on this Agreement, determined that consideration of this Agreement complies
with CEQA, found this Agreement to be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, and
introduced Ordinance No. ___ , approving this Agreement.
1. On _______ , 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. ____ ,
enacting this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement
Statute and Resolution No. 6597, and in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises of
the parties, the parties agree as follows:
1. Development Of The Property.
1.1 Development Plan. Owner shall have the vested right to develop the
Property in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. The permitted uses of the
Property, the density and intensity of use, the vehicle parking plan, the heights, sizes, design and
construction methods of the proposed buildings and landscaping, the on-site and off-site public
4
090625 syn 0120356
improvements, the development schedules and the general prOVlSlons for reservation or
dedication of land for public purposes or fees in lieu thereof shall be as provided in the Palo Alto
Design Approval; provided, however, that future implementation of the Project will be subject to
other discretionary and ministerial decisions by City which will govern issuance of building and
grading permits, among other things. Owner shall comply with and perform all of the conditions
of approval embodied in the discretionary permit and vesting tentative subdivision map
comprising the Palo Alto Design Approval, which are attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and
incorporated by this reference. Where "Toll Brothers" or "Applicant" appears III approval
conditions, "Owner" and "Owner's successors" shall be responsible. Nothing contained herein
shall restrict City's discretion to approve or conditionally approve amended Project features
proposed by Owner.
1.2 Present Right to Develop. Subject to the provisions of this Agreement,
City hereby grants to Owner the present vested right to develop and construct all improvements
comprising the Project in accordance with the policies and development density regulations set
forth in the Comprehensive Plan, Municipal Code and Palo Alto Design Approval in effect as of
the Effective Date of this Agreement. No future modifications of the Comprehensive Plan,
Municipal Code, ordinances, policies or regulations which purport to (i) limit the development
density, design, residential unit count, parking plan, or schedule of development of the Project;
or (ii) impose new fees, exactions, design features or moratoria upon development, occupancy or
use of the Project, shall apply to the Project, except as otherwise provided herein. Nothing stated
herein, however, shall prevent or preclude City from adopting any future General Plan
amendments, zoning measures or other land use regulations.
5
090625 syn 0120356
1.3 Cooperation in Obtaining Allocation of Utilities. City shall cooperate with
Owner in obtaining and reserving the allocation of sufficient utilities, including electricity, gas,
water and sewerage service capacity and facilities, for development of the Project in accordance
with the terms hereofthroughout the Term of this Agreement (defined in Section 3 below).
2. Demolition of Obsolete Improvements. hnmediately following the Effective
Date, Owner is authorized to demolish all of the non-residential buildings and other
improvements ("Obsolete Improvements") located on the Property which are inconsistent with
the Palo Alto Design Approval, in compliance with the terms of one comprehensive "Master"
Demolition Permit, regulating demolition of Obsolete Improvements throughout the entire site,
to be issued by the City of Mountain View with the written approval of the Chief Building
Official for the City of Palo Alto. The scope ofthe Building Official's review shall be, to ensure
compliance with Palo Alto's regulations for diversion of demolition debris from landfills as set
forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 5.24. A condition of the Master Demolition Permit
shall be that the remaining landscaping shall be maintained (weeded, trimmed, mowed, watered)
until the site is redeveloped and access via roadways through the site shall remain open to the
public following the demolition and prior to commencement of redevelopment.
3. Relocation of Outdoor Sculpture. Owner, at its sole expense, shall relocate the
large metal outdoor sculpture ("Untitled; In Homage to My Father"), created by Bay Area artist
Charles Ginnever, from its present location in Mountain View to a publicly visible and publicly
accessible location on the Property in Palo Alto, near the intersection of "A venue B" and San
Antonio Road. Within two years of the Effective Date and prior to the relocation of the
sculpture, Owner shall finalize the landscaping plan for the sculpture's setting and submit the
plan for final Public Art Commission review and staff level architectural review approval and to
6 090625 syn 0120356
address comments noted by the Architectural Review Board. The Owner shall then implement
the Palo Alto Design Approval, in particular the site plan and landscaping plan, as it has been
revised to accommodate the sculpture.
4. Green Building Ordinance
Notwithstanding any provision(s) to the contrary herein, Owner shall comply with all
provisions of Chapter 18.44 of the Zoning Ordinance ("Green Building Regulations") in effect at
the time each building permit application is submitted
5. Effect of Agreement.
3.1 Supersedure by Subsequent State or Federal Laws or Regulations. If state
or federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date are inconsistent with the
provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall be deemed modified or superseded to the
extent necessary to comply with the new state or federal laws or regulations. Notwithstanding
any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, City may exercise its discretion to impose
conditions upon any development approval for the Project which will enable the City to comply
with any federal or state law, regulation, or mandate which is in effect at the time the approval is
sought, provided that the conditions imposed (1) are necessary to comply with any federal or
state law, regulations or mandate which is in effect at the time the approval is sought; and (2) are
necessary to protect against a substantial threat to the City's health, safety and welfare. Owner
shall have the right to challenge, in a court of competent jurisdiction, the law or regulation
preventing compliance with the terms of this Agreement and, if the challenge is successful, this
Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect.
3.2 Future Exercise of Discretion by City. This Agreement shall not be
construed to limit the authority or obligation of City to hold convenient or necessary public
7
090625 syn 0120356
hearings, to conduct all analyses required by CEQA, the State Planning Act, the Subdivision
Map Act, City ordinances or any other applicable federal, state or local law or regulation.
Furthennore, this Agreement does not limit the discretion of City or any of its officers or
officials with regard to rules, regulations, ordinances or laws which require the exercise of
discretion by any of its officers or officials, provided that the discretionary decisions reached are
consistent with this Agreement.
4. Term. The tenn (IITennll) of this Agreement shall commence upon the Effective
Date, which is the thirty first day after the date of adoption of ordinance No. __ , and shall
automatically expire on February 26, 2014. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Owner or its
successors in interest obtain and record a final subdivision map implementing the Palo Alto
Design Approval before January 27, 2014, the Tenn automatically shall be extended, to expire
on January 27,2017.
5. Development Fees, Assessments, Exactions, and Dedications. All Citywide
fees, assessments, dedication fonnulae and taxes payable in connection with the development,
construction, occupancy and use of the Project pursuant to this Agreement shall be those
applicable to all similar developments in the City at the time of issuance of Project building
pennits. Notwithstanding the foregoing general tenn and any interpretation of this Agreement to
the contrary, the city-wide Palo Alto Parkland Dedication Fee, enacted by City after Owner's
applications for the Palo Alto Design Approval were complete, shall not apply to the Project, due
to Owner's more than adequate provision for dedicated public park and recreation facilities
within the Project's design and conditions of approval. No other Project-specific fee,
assessment, exaction or required dedication policy, not in effect on the Effective Date, shall be
imposed on the Project, unless it is imposed unifonnly on all similar types of development
8
090625 syn 0120356
Citywide. This Agreement does not preclude imposition of new or increased fees or taxes on the
Project subsequent to the Effective Date, other than the Parkland Dedication Fee, provided that
the fees or taxes shall be imposed or increased on a Citywide basis.
6. Standard of Review of Ministerial Permits. All ministerial permits ("Permits")
required by Owner to develop the Property, including (i) demolition permits; (ii) street and
sidewalk construction permits; (iii) grading permits; (iv) building permits; and (v) certificates of
occupancy, shall be issued by City after City'S review and approval of Owner's applications
therefor, provided that City's review of the applications is limited to determining whether the
following conditions are met:
(a) The application is complete and includes payment of all applicable fees;
(b) The application complies with all city, federal and state requirements
normally administered by City; and
(c) The application demonstrates that Owner has complied with the
Palo Alto Design Approval as of the Effective Date hereof.
7. Cooperation in Implementation. City shall cooperate with Owner in a
reasonable and expeditious manner, in compliance with the deadlines mandated by applicable
statutes or ordinances, to complete all steps necessary for implementation of this Agreement and
development of the Project in accordance herewith, in particular in performing the following
functions:
(a) Scheduling all required public hearings by the City Council and Planning
and Transportation Commission; and
9 090625 syn 0120356
(b) Processing and checking all maps, plans, land use permits, building plans
and specifications and other plans relating to development of the Project filed by Owner or its
nommees.
Owner, in a timely manner, shall provide City with all documents, applications,
plans and other information necessary for the City to carry out its obligations hereunder and to
cause its planners, engineers and all other consultants to submit in a timely manner all necessary
materials and documents. It is the parties' express intent to cooperate with one another and to
diligently work to implement all land use and building approvals for development of the Project
in accordance with the terms hereof.
8. Periodic review.
8.1 Annual Review. At the expense of Owner, City and Owner shall review all
actions taken pursuant to the terms of this Agreement once annually, within sixty (60) days
before the anniversary of the Effective Date, during each year of the Term unless the City and
Owner agree in writing to conduct the review at another time.
8.2 Owner's Submittal. Within ninety (90) days before each anniversary ofthe
Effective Date, Owner shall submit a letter ("Compliance Letter") to the City's Community
Development Director, describing Owner's compliance with the terms of this Agreement during
the preceding year. The Compliance Letter shall include a statement that the Compliance Letter
is submitted to City pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 65865.1.
8.3 City's Findings. Within sixty (60) days after receipt of the Compliance
Letter, the Community Development Director shall determine whether, for the year under
review, Owner has demonstrated good faith substantial compliance with the terms of this
Agreement. Owner's failure timely to submit a Compliance Letter shall not affect the terms or
10 090625 syn 0120356
continuing binding effect of this Agreement. If the Community Development Director finds and
determines that Owner has complied substantially with the terms of this Agreement, or does not
determine otherwise within sixty (60) days after delivery of the Compliance Letter, the annual
review shall be deemed concluded and this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. Upon
a determination of compliance, the Community Development Director shall issue at Owner's
request a recordable certificate confirming Owner's compliance through the year(s) under review.
Owner may record the certificate with the Santa Clara County Recorder's Office. If the
Community Development Director initially determines the Compliance Letter to be inadequate
in any respect, he or she shall provide written notice to that effect to Owner. If after a duly
noticed public hearing thereon the City Council finds and determines, on the basis of substantial
evidence, that Owner has not complied substantially in good faith with the terms of this
Agreement for the year under review, the City Council shall give written notice thereofto Owner
specifying the non-compliance. If Owner fails to cure the non-compliance within a reasonable
period of time established by the City Council, the City Council, in its discretion, maya) grant
additional time for Owner's compliance, or, following a public hearing on the matter, modify this
Agreement to the extent necessary to remedy or mitigate the non-compliance, or b) terminate this
Agreement. Except as affected by the terms hereof, the terms of the Development Agreement
Statute shall govern the compliance review process to be followed by City.
9. Default and Remedies.
9.1 Default. Failure by either party to perform any material term or provision
of this Agreement shall constitute a default hereunder, provided that the party alleging the
default shall have given the other party advance written notice thereof and sixty (60) days within
which to cure the condition or, if the nature thereof is such that it cannot be cured within that
11 090625 syn 0120356
time, the party receiving notice shall not be in default hereunder if the party commences to
perform its obligations within the sixty (60) day period and thereafter diligently completes
performance. Written notice shall specify in detail the nature of the ob1igation to be performed
by the party receiving notice.
9.2 Remedies. Upon City's material default, Owner shall have all of
the remedies available to Owner under California law, including the option to institute legal
proceedings to specifically enforce, rescind or reform this Agreement.
Upon Owner's material default in its obligations set forth in Section 6 hereof, City
shall be entitled to initiate legal proceedings to specifically enforce, rescind, or reform the
Agreement. Any such legal action by either party does not preclude that party from recovering
damages or other judicial relief No action by either party during the Term hereof shall be
deemed a waiver or release of any right to assert a claim for monetary damages from the other
party.
10. Agreement to Amend or Terminate. City and Owner by mutual agreement may
terminate or amend the terms of this Agreement, and the amendment or termination shall be
accomplished in the manner provided under California law for the adoption of development
agreements. If Owner or its successors in interest apply for amendments to this Agreement for
the purpose of varying the physical design, number, location or other physical features of Project
residences within any area subject to the Palo Alto Design Approval, City in its discretion may
approve, conditionally approve or deny Owner's application, but the terms, conditions and
approved designs of the other Development Areas defined in the Development Plan shall remain
vested and not subject to amendment without Owner's consent.
11. Mortgagee Protection; Certain Rights of Cure.
12
090625 syn 0120356
11.1 Mortgagee Protection. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to all
liens placed upon the Property or portion thereof after the date on which a memorandum of this
Agreement is recorded, including the lien of any deed of trust or mortgage ("Mortgage").
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair
the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, but all of the terms and conditions
contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and effective against all persons and entities,
including all deed of trust beneficiaries or mortgagees ("Mortgagees") who acquire title to the
Property or any portion thereof by foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure or
otherwise.
11.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated. No foreclosing Mortgagee shall have any
obligation or duty under this Agreement to construct or complete the construction of any
improvements required in connection with this Agreement, or to pay for or guarantee
construction or completion thereof. City, upon receipt of a written request therefor from a
foreclosing Mortgagee, shall permit all Mortgagees to succeed to the rights and obligations of
Owner under this Agreement, provided that all defaults by Owner hereunder that are reasonably
susceptible of being cured are cured by the Mortgagee as soon as is reasonably possible. The
foreclosing Mortgagee thereafter shall comply with all of the provisions of this Agreement.
11.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee. If City receives notice from a Mortgagee
requesting a copy of any notice of default given to Owner hereunder and specifying the address
for service thereof, City shall deliver to the Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereof to
Owner, all notices given to Owner describing all claims by the City that Owner has defaulted
hereunder. If City determines that Owner is in noncompliance with this Agreement, City also
shall serve notice of noncompliance on the Mortgagee concurrently with service thereof on
13 090625 syn 0120356
Owner. Each Mortgagee shall have the right during the same period available to Owner to cure
or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy, the condition of default claimed or the areas of
noncompliance set forth in City's notice.
12. Assignability.
12.1 Right to Assign. Owner may assIgn its rights to develop the Project
pursuant to this Agreement without written consent by the City. Each successor in interest to
Owner shall be bound by all of the terms and provisions hereof applicable to that portion of the
Project acquired by it. Subject to the foregoing, this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure
to the benefit of the parties' successors, assigns and legal representatives. The terms of this
section 11.1 shall not restrict, prevent or otherwise affect Owner's ability to lease, sell or convey
interests in the Property. This Agreement or a memorandum hereof shall be recorded by the City
in the Santa Clara County Recorder's Office promptly upon execution hereof by both parties.
12.2 Covenants Run With The Land. During the Term of this Agreement, all of
the provisions, agreements, rights, powers, standards, terms, covenants and obligations contained
in this Agreement shall be binding unconditionally upon the parties and their respective heirs,
successors (by merger, consolidation or otherwise) and assigns, devisees, administrators,
representatives, lessees and all other persons or entities acquiring the Property, any lot, parcel or
any portion thereof, and any interest therein, whether by sale, operation of law or other manner,
and they shall inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors. This Agreement
creates no personal obligations of Owner or its successors, but only obligations appurtenant to
the Property.
13. General.
14 090625 syn 0120356
13.1 Construction of Agreement. The language in this Agreement in all cases
shall be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning. The captions of the
paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be
considered or referred to in resolving questions of construction. This Agreement shall be
governed by the laws of the State of California.
13.2 No Waiver. Subject to the provisions of Section 8.2, no delay or omission
by the City in exercising any right or power accruing upon the noncompliance or failure to
perform by Owner under the provisions of this Agreement shall impair any right or power or be
construed to be a waiver thereof A waiver by City of any of the covenants or conditions to be
performed by Owner or City shall not be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of the
same or other covenants and conditions hereof
13.3 Agreement is Entire Agreement. This Agreement and all Exhibits attached
hereto or incorporated herein comprise the sole and entire Agreement between the parties
concerning the Project. The parties acknowledge and agree that neither of them has made any
representation with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement or any representations
inducing the execution and delivery hereof, except the representations set forth herein, and each
party acknowledges that it has relied on its own judgment in entering this Agreement. The parties
further acknowledge that all statements or representations that heretofore may have been made
by either of them to the other are void and of no effect, and that neither of them has relied
thereon in connection with its dealings with the
other.
13.4 Estoppel Certificate. Either party from time to time may deliver written
notice to the other party requesting written certification that, to the knowledge of the certifying
15 090625 syn 0120356
party (i) this Agreement is in full force and effect and constitutes a binding obligation of the
parties; (ii) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or, if it
has been amended or modified, specifying the nature of the amendments or modifications; and
(iii) the requesting party is not in default in the performance of its obligations under this
Agreement, or if in default, describing therein the nature and monetary amount, if any, of the
default. A party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return the certificate within
thirty (30) days after receipt thereof. The Community Development Director of City shall have
the right to execute the certificates requested by Owner hereunder. City acknowledges that a
certificate hereunder may be relied upon by permitted transferees and Mortgagees. At the request
of Owner, the certificates provided by City establishing the status of this Agreement with respect
to any lot or parcel shall be in recordable form, and Owner shall have the right to record the
certificate for the affected portion of the Property at its cost.
13.5 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of
which shall be deemed to be an original, but the counterparts together shall constitute only one
Agreement.
13.6 Severability. Each provision of this Agreement which shall be adjudged to
be invalid, void or illegal shall in no way affect, impair or invalidate any other provisions hereof,
and the other provisions shall remain in full force and effect.
13.7 Further Documents. Each party hereto agrees to execute all other
documents or instruments necessary or appropriate to effectuate and implement this Agreement.
13.8 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of every
covenant and obligation to be performed by the parties hereunder.
16 090625 syn 0120356
13.9 Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any dispute between the parties involving
the covenants or conditions contained in this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to
recover reasonable expenses, attorneys' fees and costs. "Prevailing party" shall include a party
who brings an action against the other party after the other party's breach or default, if the action
is settled or dismissed upon payment or performance by the other party of the matter allegedly
due, or performance of the covenants allegedly breached, or if the plaintiff obtains substantially
the relief sought by it in the action.
13.10 Indemnity. Each party shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the other
party for all claims for damages of any kind arising from the indemnifying party's performance
of this Agreement.
14. Notice. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, all notices and demands
pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person, by commercial courier or
by first-class certified mail, postage prepaid and return receipt requested. Except as otherwise
expressly provided herein, notices shall be considered delivered when personally served, or upon
actual receipt if delivered by commercial courier or by mail. Notices shall be addressed as
appears below for the respective parties; provided, however, that either party may change its
address for purposes of this Section by giving written notice thereof to the other party:
City:
Owner:
090625 syn 0120356
City Clerk
The City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94301
General Counsel
Hewlett-Packard Company
3000 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, California 94304
17
The provisions of this Section shall be deemed directive only and shall not detract from
the validity of any notice given in a manner which would be legally effective in the absence of
this Section.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Owner have caused this Agreement to be executed
in one (1) or more copies as ofthe day and year first above written.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Assistant City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
Interim Director of Planning
and Community Development
090625 syn 0120356
18
"CITY"
CITY OF PALO ALTO,
a chartered municipal corporation
Mayor
"OWNER"
HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY,
a Delaware Corporation
By: ______________________ __
Title: -----------------------
CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
(Civil Code § 1189)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)
COUNTY OF )
On ________ , before me, ________ , a notary public in and for
said County, personally appeared who proved to me on the
basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in hislher/their authorized
capacity(ies), and that by hislher/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity
upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under penalty of peljury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
19
090625 syn 0120356
CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
(Civil Code § 1189)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)
COUNTY OF )
On , before me, , a notary public in and
for said County, personally appeared who proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in hislherltheir authorized
capacity(ies), and that by hislherltheir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity
upon behalf of which the person( s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
20
090625 syn 0120356
EXHIBIT A
090708 syn 0120375
Tbe City of
Palo Alto
nNetS,2006-12..Q2
200 SanAntonio Zoom (\\oc.-map$.'<;jI8$'(jls\edmln\PeTsonel\rri>lera.mdb)
EXHIBIT 1
Legend
City Jurisdictional Limits:
('::,:! Palo Alto City Boundary c::J 200 San Antonio Ave (Project Site)
abc Known Structures
~\1JIr~ William Kelly Parcel
This map is a product of the
City of Palo Alto GIS
200 San Antonio Ave
Project Area Map -. 0' 150'
e graphic representation only of be${ ev&llebie souro&$.
The City of Peb AJto asstMn8$OO responsibikty for any srtOt$ @1989!02008CltyofPaIoMo
200 San Antomo Avenue
October 2008
[07PLN-OOOOO-00302]
Page 2 of 16
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
]PLANNING DIVISION
EXHIBIT 2
1. The project shall be constructed in substantial conformance with plans dated received on
April 3, 2008 as modified by these conditions of approvaL
2. The approval of Major Architectural Review shall not become effective until the
City Council approves the Vesting Tentative Map. This condItion shall not effect the
appeal period ofthe ARB approval.
3. The light standard at the guest parking spaces located adjacent to the existing Rosewalk
development appears to cast light beyond the property boundary. This fixture must be
shielded or relocated such that light does not spill beyond the property boundary. This
requirement also applies to all other exterior light sources.
4. The applicant shall work with their design team and the appropriate city departments to
ensure that required utility features are not visible on the outside of the buildings
wherever possible.
5. All mitigations listed in the final EIR shall be implemented.
6. If the applicant is unable to secure the small City owned parcel adjacent to San Antonio
Avenue the alternate plan show on page All shall be considered approved.
7. The proposed development is subject to Development Impact estimated at
$360,675.00. The actual fees are due and will be calculated prior to building pennit
Issuance.
8. No music is allowed to be played outdoors in the carwash area.
9. The carwash area shall have no electrical outlets such that cars may not be vacuumed in
this location.
10. The plans submitted for building permit shall be revised to accurately show the cross
walk across San Antonio Avenue at Nita Avenue.
11. The Build It Green Multifan1ily Green Point Rated Checklist shall be printed on the
plans submitted for building pennit.
12. BMR Program Compliance:
At the 15% BMR rate, the mimmum number of required BMR units is calculated as'
45 units x 15% 6.750 units. Rounded up 7 out of the 45 total units proposed for
construction must be prOVIded as for-sale BMR units.
200 San Antonio Avenue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN-OOOOO-00302]
Page 3 of 16
13. The following items must come back to the ARB subcommittee for review prior to
building pem1it issuance:
f) Selection of an alternate street light standard;
II) Simplification of the carwash structure;
€I Reconsideration of the window material;
e Reconsider the shape of the proposed horizontal windows;
® Simplification of the proposed entry wall.
14. To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the
City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the "indemnified
parties")from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party
against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any
permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation)
reimbursing the City its actual attorneys fees and costs incurred in defense of the
litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with
attorneys of its own choice.
UTILITIES MARKETING
Prior to issuance of either a Building Permit or Grading Pem1lt, the landscape and
irrigation plans shall be approved by Utility Marketing Services, a division ofthe Utilities
Department. Since landscape modifications for this project exceed 1,500 square feet, the
applicant will need to comply with the City of Palo Alto's Landscape Efficiency
Standards. Note that a maximum water allowance and a dedicated irrigation and
backflow prevention device will be required.
Due to the size ofthis project and it's proximity to the Regional Water Quality Control
Plant (serving both Mountain View and Palo Alto), consider installing purple pipe for the
irrigation system. Although not mandatory requirement yet, the City is considering this
amendment for all commercial and multi-family projects with over 1,500 square feet.
To comply with the Landscape Efficiency Standards, please submit the following items
when applying for your Building and/or Grading Permits:
» Landscape Water Statement
» Water Use Calculations » Irrigation Plan » Grading Plan » Planting Plan
All documents and information to comply with the Landscape Water Efficiency
Standards can be found on the City of Palo Alto Utilities website at
\vww.cityofpaloa.lto.org/utll1ties. If you have any further questions, please contact
200 San Antomo Avenue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN-00000-00302j
4 of 16
Amanda Cox with Utility Marketing Services at (650) 329-2417.
In addition to planning a sustainable and water efficient landscape, applicants must work
to minimize fertilizer applications and reduce stormwater runoff Consider the fonowing
conditions at your project site:
J. Landscaping shall be designed with efficient irrigation to reduce runoff, promote
surface infiltration, and minimize the use of feliilizers and pesticides that can
contribute to water pollution.
Where feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat stonnwater runoff
by incorporating elements that collect, detain, and infiltrate runoff In areas that
provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and
prolonged exposure to water shall be specified.
3. Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil
type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall,
air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to
ensure successful establishment.
4. Existing native trees, shrubs, and ground cover shall be retained and incorporated into
the landscape plan to the maximum extent possible.
5. Proper maintenance of landscaping, with minimal pesticide use, shall be the
responsibility of the property owner.
UTILITIES ELECTRIC
1. A completed Electric Load Sheet and a full set of plans must be included with all
building permit applications involving electrical work. The load sheet must be
included with the preliminary submittal.
Applicant to submit engineering design for on-site electrical utilities. Design shall
include primary, secondary and service electrical facilities. Applicant is responsible
for ensuring the voltage and flicker drops are within Nand CPAU limits. City
staff will provide design standards to applicant's consultant. Design shall show trench
routes, location ofpadmount distribution transfom1er(s) and electric meter locations.
Design will be submitted to Utilities Engineering for review and approvaL
3 This project requires locations for padmount transfonners. The location of the
padmount transformers shall be shown on the site plan and approved by the Utilities
Department and the Architectural Review Board.
4. A location for a padmount switch may be reqUIred at the comer of San Antonio and
Whitney Avenue. Applicant shall consult with the Utilities Engineering to determine
design requirements.
200 San Antonio A venue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN-00000-00302]
Page 5 of 16
5. The developer/owner shall provide space for installing padmount equipment (i.e.
transformers, switches, and interrupters) and associated substructure as required by
the City. In addition, the owner shall grant a Public Utilities Easement for facilities
installed on private property as required by the City.
6. Applicant shall meet with the City'S Electric Engineering staff to determine the
electric utility design requirements for equipment and associated substructure work.
7. The customer shall install all electrical substructures (conduits, boxes and pads)
required from the service point to the customer's switchgear. All conduits must be
sized according to National Electric Code requirements and no Y2-inch size conduits
are permitted. Conduit runs over 500 feet in length require additional pull boxes. The
design and installation shall also be according to the City standards.
8. Location of the electric panel/switchboard shall be shown on the site plan and
approved by the Architectural Review Board and Utilities Department.
9. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backflow preventers, and any other required
equipment shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show that
no conflict will occur between the utilities and landscape materials. In addition, all
aboveground equipment shall be screened in a manner that is consistent with the
building design and setback requirements.
10. For services larger than 1600 amps, the customer will be required to provide a
transition cabinet as the interconnection point between the utility's padmount
transformer and the customer's main switchgear. The cabinet design drawings must
be submitted to the Electric Utility Engineering Department for review and approval.
11. No more than four 750MCM conductors per phase can be connected to the
transformer secondary terminals; otherwise, bus duct must be used for connections to
padmount transformers. If customer installs a bus duct directly between the
transformer secondary terminals and the main switchgear, the installation oftransition
cabinet will not be required.
12. The customer is responsible for sizing the service conductors and other required
equipment according to the National Electric Code requirements and the City
standards.
13. Proj ects that require the extension of high voltage primary distribution lines must be
coordinated with the Electric Utility. Additional fees may be assessed for the
reinforcement of offsite electric facilities.
14. Any additional facilities and services requested by the Applicant that are beyond what
the utility deems standard facilities will be subject to Special Facilities charges. The
200 San Antonio A venue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN -00000-00302 ]
Page 6 of 16
Special Facilities charges include the cost of installing the additional facilities as well
as the cost of ownership.
Prior Ito issuance of a building permit
15. The applicant shall comply with all the Electric Utility Engineering Department
service requirements noted during plan review.
During construction
16. Contractors and developers shall obtain a street opening permit from the Department
of Public Works before in the street right-of-way. This includes sidewalks,
driveways and planter strips.
17. At least 48 hours prior to starting any excavation, the customer must call
Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-800-227-2600 to have existing underground
utilities located and marked. The areas to be checked by USA shall be delineated
with white paint. All USA markings shall be removed by the customer or contractor
when construction is complete.
18. The customer is responsible for installing all on-site substructures (conduits, boxes
and pads) required for the electric service. No more than 270 degrees of bends are
allowed in a secondary conduit run. All conduits must be sized according to National
Electric Code requirements and no Y2-inch size conduits are permitted. All off-site
substructure work will be constructed by the City at the customer's expense. Where
mutually agreed upon by the City and the Applicant, all or part of the off-site
substructure work may be constructed by the Applicant. Utilities Rule & regulation
#16.
19. All primary electric conduits shall be concrete encased with the top of the encasement
at a depth of 30 inches. No more than 180 degrees of bends are allowed in a primary
conduit run. Conduit runs over 500 feet in length require additional pull boxes.
20. All new underground conduits and substructures shall be installed per City standards
and shall be inspected by the Electrical Underground Inspector before backfilling.
21. The customer is responsible for installing all underground electric service conductors,
bus duct, transition cabinets, and other required equipment. The installation shall
meet the National Electric Code requirements and the City standards.
22, Prior to fabrication of electric switchboards and metering enclosures, the customer
must submit switchboard drawings to the Electric Metering Department at 3201 East
Bayshore Road, Palo Alto 94303 for approval. The City requires compliance with all
applicable EUSERC standards for metering and switchgear,
200 San Antonio Avenue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN-00000-00302]
Page 7 of 16
23. All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the
Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before
energlZmg.
After construction and prior to finalization
24. The customer shall provide as-built drawings showing the location of all
switchboards, conduits (number and size), conductors (number and size), splice
boxes, vaults and switchitransformer pads.
Prior to issuance of building occupancy permit
25. The applicant shall secure a Public Utilities Easement for facilities installed on
private property for City use.
26. All required inspections have been completed and approved by both the Building
Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector.
27. All fees must be paid.
28. All Special Facilities contracts or other agreements need to be signed by the City and
applicant.
Additional comments
29. Load calculations based on National Electrical Code must be submitted.
30. Extension of existing distribution lines or relocation of utilities (if feasible and
required) will be at developer's expense. Developer must schedule a meeting with
Utilities Engineering Department (650-566-4516/4535) and obtain all the engineering
details prior to sUbmitting plans to the Building Department.
31. The electric utility will approve and maintain street light poles and fixtures thai are
cunently in the City's inventory. No new styles of poles and/or fixtures shall be
approved.
32. These are only preliminary comments and should not be construed as final review or
approval for the proj ect. Utilities Engineering will provide detailed comments as well
as cost estimate when plans are submitted to the Building Department for review and
approval. The City recommends customers/developers to contact Utilities Engineering
(650-566-4533/4516) and obtain Utilities Standards and Requirements prior to
finalizing plans.
BUILDING DIVISION
1. The plans submitted for the building permit shall include the Code Analysis on the
cover sheet of plans The following code information for each building shall be
provided:
200 San Antomo Avenue
October 22. 2008
[07PLN -00000-00302]
Page 8 of 16
<:) Type of Construction.
e Occupancy Group Classification.
e Allowable Floor Area.
G) Actual Floor Area Analysis.
2. The lower floor (garage / ground) shall be classified as the first floor. Every occupant
above the second floor shall have access to not less than two exits. This requirement
applies regardless of the marmer in which each floor is labeled on the plans. The third
floor within individual dwelling unit not exceeding 500 square feet may have access
to only one exit Total gross floor area of third floor (500 sq/ft) shall include area of
the stairway.
3. At least ten percent of the dwelling units shall be accessible to persons with
disabilities. See CBC Section 11 02A. 3 for the requirements.
4. Provide accessible path oftravel to all common areas.
5. The plans submitted for building permit shall include all mechanical, electrical, and
plumbing plans. M.E.P. plans shall not be deferred submittal.
6. A separate building permit shall be required for the construction of each building.
7. Due to the scale of the overall project, the applicant shall be required to utilize a 3Td
party plan check agency to conduct the building code plan review. A list of the
agencies approved by the City of Palo Alto is available at the Development Center.
The City's Building plan check fees are reduced by 75% when a 3Td party plan check
agency is utilized.
8. No wood burning fireplaces shall be constructed except as provided in P AMC Section
9.06.
9. An acoustical analysis shall be submitted and the plans shall incorporate the report's
recommendations needed to comply with the sound transmissions requirements in
CBC Appendix Chapter 12, Division llA
10. The plans submitted for each building permit shall include the full scope of the
construction including utility installations, architectural, structural, electrical,
plumbing and mechanical work associated with each proposed building.
11. The applicant shall be schedule and attend a pre-application meeting with Building
Division staff to review the pennit application process and to verify that the pern1it
application will comply with all of the foHowing conditions.
12. A separate grading permit shall be required for cut and/or fill grading exceeds 100
200 San Antonio A venue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN-OOOOO-003 02 J
Page 9 of 16
cubic yards and for other site development (such as landscaping, disabled access, site
drainage, common sanitary sewers, water, electric utilities) of areas outside the
perimeters of the buildings. The excavation of the basement parking garages is
included as part of the building perulit and does not require a separate grading permit.
13. The location of each buildings' electrical service shall require prior approval by the
Inspection Services Division and shall be located at an exterior location or in a room
or enclosure accessible directly from the exterior.
14. The plans submitted for the building permits for the multi -unit residential buildings
shall include allowable floor area calculations that relates the mixed occupancies to
type of construction.
15. Tne plans submitted with the permit application for the shell building shall include
the complete design for disabled access and exiting for entire site.
16. The project is located within a seismic hazard zone indicated on the State
Geologist's Mountain View Quadrangle Map and is thus subject to the requirements
of the California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (SHMA). As such, the building
permit application shall include a geotechnical report that identifies any site specific
seismic hazards and provides recommendations for their mitigation. Additionally, the
report's recommendations shall be incorporated into the building designs.
I)UBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
1. Public streets: Avenue A and the portion ofvVhitney Drive in Palo Alto are
designated as public streets. However, they do not meet Public Works' minimum
standards for a collector street, which requires 5-foot wide sidewalks, 4.5-foot wide
planter strips, 6-inch curbs, 8-ft parking lanes, and 12-ft drive lanes, adding up to a
60-foot wide right-of-way (ROW). We understand that Mountain View is requiring
all of the streets on the Mountain View side of the development to be public and that
they meet Mountain View's standards, which are a 56-ft wide ROW. The differences
in the two city's standards are that Mountain View only requires 7-ft wide parking
lanes and l1-ft wide drive lanes. Mountain View staff has informed Palo Alto staff
that the requirement for all of the streetS in the development to be public is primarily
due to the fact that the public will be using these streets to access the two public parks
that are part of the development and it IS felt that the homeowner's association should
not have to be responsible for the maintenance cost of these streets if they are being
used by the public. Accordingly, Public Works will accept Avenue A and Whitney
Drive as public streets with some adjustments to the proposed configuration ofthe
streets. Specifically, the 3 bulbed-out ends of A venues A & B at the crosswalks are
shown as 22-ft wide, but we require them to be 28-ft wide. The 24-ft wide section of
Whitney Drive near the center island must be increased to 28-ft wide.
200 San Antomo Avenue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN-OOOOO-00302j
Page 10 of 16
After ARB approval
2. Subdivision maps: A tentative map and a final map are required for the proposed
development. The applicant shall submit an application for a major subdivision with
the Plmming Division along with the tentative map. The "Step One: Preliminary
Parcel Map or Tentative Map" checklist must accompany the completed application.
All existing and proposed dedications and easements must be shown on the map, A
digital copy of the Final Map, in AutoCAD fonnat, shall be submitted to Public
Works Engineering and shall confonn to North American Datum 1983 State Plane
Zone 3 for horizontal survey controls and NGVD 1929 for vertical survey controls.
The applicant should review the Subdivision Map Act to determine the mapping
requirements for a subdivision that overlaps jurisdictions. It may be that one tentative
map should be prepared for the entire subdivision that both Mountain View and Palo
Alto approve rather than preparing separate tentative maps. Separate final maps, one
for each jurisdiction, would be required,
No grading or building permits wi]] be issued until the Final Map is recorded
with the County Recorder.
3. Private access road: In order to ensure public access to the development through the
underpass, the developer must acquire the private parcel on the west side of San
Antonio A venue on which the access road to the underpass lies and then deed this
parcel to the City of Palo Alto, The applicant will be required to upgrade the access
road to City standards, including sidewalks, should the road currently not meet these
standards. This work would be included in the improvement plans,
4, Improvement plans: After approval of the Major Architectural Review, the
applicant shall arrange a meeting with the Public Vv'orks Engineering, Public Works
Operations, Water/Gas/Wastewater Engineering, Electric Engineering, Plarming,
Transportation, and the Fire Department to discuss what on-site and off-site public
improvements will be required, Typical improvements may include the upgrading of
public utilities; replacement of the sidewalk, curb & gutter along the frontages of the
site, including the installation of curb ramps and street trees; and the resurfacing,
restriping and signage of the streets along the project frontage,
5. Underpass retrofits: The improvement plans must include the structural retrofits of
the underpass that were recommended in the structural evaluation perfonned by
Peoples Associates, Also, the applicant shall make repairs to the underpass' road
surface, sidewalks, gutters and stonn drain, "Low clearance" signage shall be
installed on both approaches to the underpass,
The final map cannot be submitted for review until tbe improvement plans have
been submitted, reviewed and preliminarily approved by tbe City.
200 San Antonio Avenue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN-00000-00302]
Pagellof16
6. Developer's project manager: The subdivision includes significant complexity
involving coordination of infrastructure design and construction. The developer shall
appoint a Project Manager to coordinate with Planning, Public Works and Utility
Department staff. Public Works will have regular communication with the Project
Manager in order to facilitate timely review and approval of design and construction.
Prior to Council approval of final map
7. Subdivision improvement agreement: A subdivision improvement agreement is
required to secure compliance with the conditions of approval and security ofthe
onsite and offsite public improvements. The agreement must be finalized prior to
City Council approving the Final Map.
8. Bonds: The subdivider shall post securities, typically payment and performance
bonds, prior to City Council approval of the Final Map to guarantee the completion of
the onsite and offsite public improvements. The applicant must submit a construction
cost estimate for the onsite and offsite public improvements. The amount ofthe
bonds shall be determined by the Planning, Utilities and Public Works Departments
after reviewing the plans and the estimate.
Include in submitta1 for Building permit
9. Grading & excavation permit: A Grading and Excavation Permit is required for
the project. A grading penuit only authorizes grading and storm drain improvements,
therefore, the following note shall be included on each grading permit plan sheet:
"This grading permit will only authorize general grading and installation of the stornl
drain system. Other building and utility improvements are shown for reference
information only and are subject to separate building permit approval." No utility
infrastructure should be shown inside the building footprints.
10. Storm drains: The existing municipal storm drainage system in the area is
undersized and may be unable to convey the peak runoff from the project site. The
applicantmay be required to provide storm water detention on-site to lessen the
project's impact on city storm drains. The applicant's engineer shall provide storm
drain flow and detention calculations, including pre-project and post-project
conditions. The calculations must be signed and stamped by a registered civil
engineer. Alternatively, the Palo Alto-side storm water may be collected and
discharged into the Mountain View storm drain system. It is Palo Alto staffs
understanding that Mountain View staff has reviewed and approved this scenario.
11. C3: This project is required to meet the Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.11 and
the California Regional Water Quality Control Board's revised provision C.3 for
storm water regulations that apply to land development projects that create or replace
10,000 square feet of impervious surface. These regulations require that the proj ect
incorporate a set of permanent site design measures, source controls, and treatment
200 San Antonio A venue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN-00000-00302j
Page 12 of 16
controls that serve to protect storm water quality. The applicant will be required to
calculate, develop and incorporate permanent stornl water pollution prevention
measures (preferably landscape-based treatment controls such as bioswales, filter
strips, and permeable pavers rather than mechanical measures that require long-term
maintenance) to treat a specified percentage of site runoff. The C.3 measures are
included on the grading and drainage plan. Public Works charges $750 (currently) to
review C.3 calculations and plans. The applicant must designate a party, typIcally the
homeowner's association, to maintain the control measures for the life of the
improvements and must enter into a maintenance agreement with the City. The
maintenance agreement and shall be in the form of a covenant running with the land.
The agreement shall provide access to the extent allowable by law for representatives
or agents of the City for the purposes of verification of proper operation and
maintenance of specific C.3 measures. The agreement must be entered into and
recorded prior to Public Works' inspector signing off on building permits. The
CC&R's should include provisions for maintenance of the C.3 measures.
Information regarding storm water control measures can be found on the web at these
addresses:
http://www .cabmphC!Dc.ibooks.org/Developm ent. asp
http://www.scvurppp.org/
12. Survey datum: Plans shall be prepared using North American Datum 1983 State
Plane Zone 3 for horizontal survey controls and NGVD 1929 for vertical survey
controls throughout the design process.
13. }i"inal grading & drainage plan: The plans shall include a final grading and
drainage plan prepared by a licensed professionaL This plan shall show existing and
proposed spot elevations or contours of the site and demonstrate the proper
conveyance of storm water to the nearest adequate municipal storm drainage system.
Existing drainage patterns, including accommodation of runoff from adjacent
properties, shall be maintained. Downspouts and splash blocks should be shown on
this plan. Public Works encourages the developer to keep rainwater onsite as much as
feasible by directing runoff to landscaped and other pervious areas of the site.
14, SWPPP: This proposed development will disturb more than one acre ofland.
Accordingly, the applicant must apply for coverage under the State Water Resources
Control Board's (SWRCB) :NPDES general perulit for storm water discharge
associated with construction activity. A Notice of 11ltent (NOl) must be filed for this
project with the SWRCB in order to obtain coverage under the permit. The General
Permit requires the applicant to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP), The applicant is required to submit two copies of the
NOI and the draft SWPPP to the Public Works Depalirnent for review and approval
prior to issuance ofthe building pernlit. SWPPP should include both permanent,
post-development project design features and temporary measures employed during
construction to control storm water pollution.
200 San AntOnIO Avenue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN-00000-00302]
Page 13 of 16
15. Impervious surface area: The proposed development will result in a change in the
impervious area of the property. The applicant shall provide calculations of the
existing and proposed impervious surface areas with the building pern1it application.
For multi-family residential properties, a StOID1 Drainage Fee will be assessed on the
monthly City utility bill in the month following the final approval ofthe construction
by the Building Inspection Division. The impervious area calculation sheets and
instructions are available from Public Works Engineering and on the division's
website: http://www .cityofpaloalto.org/depts/pwd/foID1s --'permits. asp
16. Storm water sheet: The City's full-sized "Pollution Prevention -It's Part of the Plan"
sheet must be included in the plan set. Copies are available from Public Works at the
Development Center or on our website:
http://www.cityoipaloalto.org/depts/pwd/forms--'permits.asp.
17. Dewatering: Add the following note to the plans, "If dewatering any excavation
becomes necessary during excavation or construction, all construction must stop and
the contractor must prepare and submit a dewatering plan to Public Works
Engineering. If acceptable, the plan will be included in a Permit for Construction in
the Public Street. The contractor will be required to pay a dewatering fee. The
dewatering system can then be installed, but must be inspected and approved by
Public Works' inspectors prior to commencing dewatering and resuming
construction." Alternatively, the applicant can include a dewatering plan in the
building permit plan set to help expedite this process. Dewatering guidelines are
available on Public Works' website.
18. Work in the right-or-way: The plans must clearly indicate any work that is to be
conducted in the public right-of-way, such as sidewalk, driveway approach, curb,
gutter or utility lateral work. The plans must include notes that the work must be
done per Public Works' standards and that the contractor perfoID1ing this work must
first obtain a Permit for Construction in the Public Street ("street work permit") from
Public Works at the Development Center.
19. Street trees: Show all street trees in the public right-of-way. Include street tree
protection details in the plans. Any removal, relocation or planting of street trees; or
excavation, trenching or pavement installation within 10 feet of a street tree, must be
approved by Public Works' arborist, Eric Krebs (phone: 650-496-6905). This
approval shall appear on the plans.
Prior to construction
20. Street work permit: A Permit for Construction in the Public Street ("street work
pennit") must be obtained by the general contractor to cover all work performed in
the public right-of-way. All construction within the right-of-way, easements or other
propeliy under City jurisdiction shall conform to the standard specifications and
200 San Antonio Avenue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN-OOOOO-00302]
Page 14 of 16
details of the Public Works and Utility Departments. Typically, the off-site public
improvement plan set is used for this permit. The fee for a street work permit is 5%
of the construction cost of the improvements.
21 . Logistics plan: A construction logistics plan shall be provided addressing al1 impacts
to the public and shall include, as applicable: work hours, noticing of affected
businesses and residents, construction signage, dust control, noise control, storm
water pollution prevention, contractors' parking, truck routes, staging, concrete pours,
crane lifts, materials storage, pedestrian safety, and traffic controL All truck routes
shall conform to the City of Palo Alto's Trucks and Truck Route Ordinance, Chapter
10.48, and the route map, which outlines truck routes available throughout the City of
Palo Alto. A handout describing these and other requirements for a construction
logistics plan is available from Public Works Engineering. The construction logistics
plan is attached to the street work permit.
During construction
22. Inspection: The contractor must contact Public Works' Inspector at (650) 496-6929
prior to any work performed in the public right-of-way.
Prior to Public Works acceptance
23. Storm drain logo: The applicant is required to paint "No Dumping/Flows to Bay (or
creek's name)" in blue on a white background adjacent to all onsite stom1 drain inlets.
The name of the creek to which the proposed development drains can be obtained
from Public Works Engineering or the City of Mountain View. Stencils of the logo
are available from the Public Works Environmental Compliance Division, which may
be contacted at (650) 329-2598. Include the instruction to paint the logos on the
construction grading and drainage plan. The applicant is required to install
thermoplastic logos adjacent to all off-site storm drain inlets that are located in the
public right-of-way and affected by the project. The thermoplastic logos may be
obtained from the Public Works Inspector.
24. Record drawings: At the conclusion of the project applicant shall provide digital as-
built/record drawings of all improvements constructed in the public right-of-way or
easements in which the City owns an interest. The digital files shall conform to North
American Datum 1983 State Plane Zone 3 for horizontal survey controls and NGVD
1929 for vertical survey controls. In addition, a digital copy of any project parcel
map, subdivision map, or certificate-of-compliance shall also be provided. All files
should be delivered in AutoCad fom1at.
25. Signoff: The Public Works' Inspector shall sign-offthe building permit prior to the
final sign-off by the Building Division. All as-builts, on-site grading, drainage and
post-developments BMP's shall be completed prior to sign-off. The maintenance
agreement for the C.3 measures must be entered into and recorded prior to the
200 San Antonio A venue
October 22,2008
[07PLN-OOOOO-00302]
Page 15 of 16
inspector's sign-off ofthe building permit. The work in the Permit/or Construction
in the Public Street must be completed and the Public Works' lDspector must sign off
this pennit prior to signing off the building permit
PUBLIC WORKS WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT
prior to plan approval by this department:
1. P AMC 16.09.032(B)(17) Covered Parking
Drain plumbing for parking garage floor drains must be connected to an oil/water
separator with a minimum capacity of 100 gallons, and to the sanitary sewer system
2. PAMC 16.09.106(1) Carwash Required
Residential buildings with 25 or more units provide a covered carwash area for
vehicle washing by residents. The carwash area is required to drain to an oil/water
separator with a minimum capacity of 100 gallons, and to the sanitary sewer.
3. PAMe 16.09.115(a) Pools, Spas or Fountains
It shall be unlawful to discharge water from cooling systems, pools, spas or fountains
to the storm drain system.
4. PAMC 16.09.032(15)
Swimming pool discharge drains shall not be connected directly to the storm drain
system or to the sewer system. When draining is necessary, a hose or other temporary
system shall be directed into a sewer (not stonn drain system) clean out. A sewer
clean out shall be installed in a readily accessible area.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
1. Overhead clearance at main vehicular entry shall be not less than 13 ft., 6 in. high.
2. Site address to prominently posted next to the driveway access to the property.
(2001 CFC90 1 )
3. Hydrants shall be placed at locations not 10 exceed 125 feet from any point along the
fire vehicle access. Fire access road for 20 in each direction from fire hydrant
shall be not less than 26 feet in width. (PAMC15.04.140)
4. A sprinkler system shall be provided which meets the requirements ofl\fFP A
Standard No. l3R, 2002 Edition. (P AMC15.04.160) Fire Sprinkler system
installations or modifications require separate submittal to the Fire Prevention
Bureau. (PAMC15.04.083)
5. An exterior bell shall be provided, and an approved audible sprinkler flow alaml to
alert the occupants shall be provided in the interior of each building in approved
locations. (2001 CBC904. 3. 2)Fire Alarm system installations or modifications require
separate submittal to the Prevention Bureau. (P AJ'vlC15.04.083)
200 San AntonIO A venue
October 22, 2008
[07PLN-00000-00302]
Page 16 of 16
6. All sprinkler drains, including those for floor control valves and inspector's test
valves, as well as the main drain, shall not discharge within the building. Water
discharged from these points shall be directed to an approved landscape location or to
the sanitary sewer system. (99NFPAI3, Sec. 5-14.2.4.3) NOTE: Please check with
Roland Ekstrand in Utilities for maximum flow capacity of sanitary sewer in the area.
Main Drain test discharge flow rate shall be impounded and attenuated to below
sanitary sewer capacity before discharge.
The approval will become effective 14 days from the postmark date of this letter, unless
an appeal is filed in accordance with Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This
project approval shall be effective for one year from November 6, 2008, within which
time construction of the project shall have commenced. Application for extension may be
made prior to the expiration on November 6, 2009. The time period for a project may be
extended once for an additional year by the Director of Planning and shall be open to
appeal at that time. In the event the building permit is not secured for the project within
the time limits specified above, the Architectural Review Board approval shall expire and
be of no further force or effect.
If you have any questions regarding the amount ofthe development fees or the nature of the
dedications, reservations or exactions imposed in connection with your project, please call.
Should you have any questions regarding this ARB action, please do not hesitate to call me at
(650)617-3119.
Sincerely,
~"" .)::;~"7:/C~:~/c
Russ Reich
Senior Planner
Attachment:
A. ARB Findings
B. Findings
C. Variance Findings
ATTACHMENT C
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION
STAFF REPORT
TO: PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
FROM: Amy French
Manager of Current Planning
AGENDA DATE: May 27, 2009
DEPARTMENT: Planning and
Community Environment
SUBJECT: 200 San Antonio Avenue: Request by Hewlett Packard for approval of a
Development Agreement extending the Architectural Review and the
Vesting Tentative Map (with exceptions) approvals for five years and
providing additional project benefits of the approved 45-unit townhome
development in the ROLM and RM-30 Zone Districts. Environmental
Assessment: An Environmental Impact Report has been adopted in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
requirements. Zoning District: ROLM and RM-30.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) recommend
that the City Council adopt an ordinance approving the Development Agreement, Attachment A.
SUMMARY OF LAND USE ACTION
Development Agreement
The requested action is a recommendation to City Council to approve the Development
Agreement extending the ARB approval for the 45-unit housing project and Council approval of
the associated Vesting Tentative Map beyond the time frames identified in the Palo Alto
Municipal Code, to be consistent with the expiration of approvals for development within the
Mountain View portion of the housing project. As a part of the extension, the agreement
provides for additional project benefits: the relocation of a large sculpture from Mountain View
into Palo Alto and project compliance with Palo Alto's green building ordinance requirements
for multiple family residential projects. The Development Agreement includes Exhibit 1, which
provides information regarding why the applicants found it necessary to submit this application,
which was filed on February 17, 2009. The Development Agreement notes that the owner shall
comply with and perform all of the conditions of approval embodied in the ARB and vesting
City of Palo Alto Page 1
2
tentative subdivision map approvals. Staff reports and meeting minutes from the January 14,
2009 Commission, February 9,2009 Council and April 17,2008 ARB meetings are available on
the City's website to provide further background information on the approved project and vesting
tentative map.
Environmental Review
The Environmental hnpact Report (EIR) prepared by the City of Mountain View for the project
included analysis of both Palo Alto's 4.9 acre portion (shown in yellow on Attachment H) and
the larger portion of the project in Mountain View. The EIR was certified by the City of
Mountain View in June 2006. The EIR was adopted by Palo Alto's Director of Planning and
Community Environment (Director) in conjunction with the Architectural Review approval on
October 22,2008. A compact disk of the EIR was provided to the Commission prior to its
January 14, 2009 consideration of the Vesting Tentative Map, for which an application to create
four parcels was filed on August 15, 2008.
Vesting Tentative Map
On February 9,2009, the City Council approved the Vesting Tentative Map with Exceptions for
creation of the four parcels, two of which would be smaller than the required minimum lot size of
one acre. The Council's Record of Land Use Action on the map is included as Attachment C to
this report. Attachment D is an image of the Vesting Tentative Map. The Vesting Tentative Map
would expire two years after approval, or February 9, 2011, unless a Final Map is submitted and
approved compliance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and Palo Alto Municipal
Code (PAMC) Section 21.16 and submitted to the City Engineer (pAMC Section 21. 16.01O[aJ),
or unless the Vesting Tentative Map is extended by the City Council up to five years beyond the
expiration. With a Development Agreement approval, the map may be extended for the period of
time specified in the agreement, but not beyond the duration of the agreement (pursuant to
Subdivision Map Act Article 2.5, commencing with Section 65864, of Chapter 4 of Division 1).
Architectural Review Approval
The Architectural Review Board (ARB) application, which involved the site design, architecture,
and Design Enhancement Exceptions for the 45 residential units and public streets, was filed on
October 1,2007. On April 17, 2008, the ARB reviewed and recommended approval, prior to the
July 2008 effective date of the green building ordinance for multiple family residential projects.
The Director of Planning and Community Environment (Director) approved the ARB application
on October 22, 2008, once the below market residential agreement had been finalized. The ARB
approval letter (Attachment B) includes condition #2, which notes that the ARB approval would
not become effective until Council approval of the Vesting Tentative Map (February 9,2009).
Therefore, ARB approval would expire February 9,2010, with an additional extension to
February 9,2011 allowable subject to the Director's approval, unless a building permit is issued
prior to the expiration. There are five items required to be reviewed by a subcommittee of ARB
members prior to issuance of building permit, as set forth in condition of approval #13.
Relocation of Ginnever Sculpture
The Development Agreement includes item #3, Relocation of Outdoor Sculpture. Staff learned
of the applicant's proposal to include within the agreement the relocation ofthe Ginnever
sculpture to an approved landscaped area in Palo Alto next to the approved recreation building in
Mountain View. On April 2, 2009, the ARB conducted a study session to review the proposed
City of Palo Alto Page 2
location of the sculpture, currently located within the Mountain View, and provided comments.
A copy ofthe ARB study session report is provided (Attachment F) along with a location map,
preliminary site plan and landscape perspective (Attachment J, for Commission only). The ARB
recommended the sculpture be more accessible from the streets in the development (Avenues A
and B) and that the "wall" of redwood trees be modified to allow additional sunlight into the
space and that the orientation of the sculpture be carefully studied. On April 16, 2009, the Public
Art Commission conducted a study session to review the proposed location of the sculpture and
requested that the applicant return for a final review of detailed plans to ensure proper placement.
Development Agreement Procedures and Requirements
Resolution No. 6597 (Attachment E) establishes procedures and requirements for the
consideration of development agreements. Development Agreements are considered to be a
legislative act approved by ordinance and subject to referendum. Resolution No. 6597 authorizes
the City to enter into a development agreement with any person having a legal or equitable
interest in real property within the City for the development ofthe property. It sets forth the
process as review by the Commission and Council, with noticing requirements and notes that
approval by Council requires a finding that the provisions of the agreement are consistent with
the City's general plan and any applicable specific plan.
Resolution No. 6597 requires the Director to review the development agreement every 12 months
to ensure the applicant or successor in interest is demonstrating good faith compliance with the
terms of the agreement. Section 8 of the resolution states that if the Director finds the agreement
has not been complied with or has resulted in dangers to health and safety matter, the Director
may refer to the Commission and Council for consideration at a public hearing the agreement's
termination or modification of the agreement's provisions.
SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES
As noted in Exhibit 1, attached to the Development Agreement (Attachment A), the City of
Mountain View's development agreement allows for an initial term of five years, extended by
another three years upon the issuance of a Final Subdivision Map. The applicant wishes to
provide this assurance to potential buyers of the combined properties who may wish to execute a
final map and develop the entire site as approved by both public agencies.
The City of Palo Alto's approval ofthe ARB application may be extended by the Director until
February 9, 2011 without Development Agreement approval. As noted on page 7 ofthe
proposed Development Agreement, the "Agreement is to commence upon the Effective Date, 30
days after the enactment of the agreement and automatically expires upon the 5th anniversary of
the Effective Date", The tentative date for City Council review has been set for July 6,2009,
with second reading then set for July 20. If August 19,2009 (30 days past July 20,2009)
becomes the Effective Date, the applicant would need to record a final map prior to August 19,
2014 in order to be able to extend the ARB approval to August 19,2017. This date is six years
and six months beyond the extended expiration available to the applicant under the existing
regulations set forth in Chapter 18.77 ofthe Palo Alto Municipal Code. Per the City's
regulations, building permits would have to be issued prior to August 19,2017, as long as the
Final Map is recorded with the County of Santa Clara prior to August 19,2014.
Neither the Improvement Plans, nor the application for a Final Map, have been submitted for
City of Palo Alto Page 3
City review. Nonnally, these documents would be submitted and executed within two years of
the Council's approval ofthe Vesting Tentative Map. Without a Development Agreement in
place, prior to the expiration ofthe Vesting Tentative Map (February 9,2011), the applicant
could request an extension ofthe expiration and the Vesting Tentative Map could be extended by
City Council up to five years beyond the initial two years as set forth in the Subdivision Map Act.
If extended five years beyond the initial two years by Council action other than a Development
Agreement, the fmal map would have to be recorded by February 9,2016. As noted above, the
Development Agreement (page 7) states that the final map must be recorded prior to August 19,
2014 in order for the ARB approval to remain in effect until August 19, 2017.
Demolition
The Development Agreement includes item #2, Demolition of Obsolete Improvements, which
notes that following the Effective Date of the Development Agreement, the owner is authorized
to demolish all of the non-residential buildings and other improvements that are inconsistent with
Palo Alto approvals and that Mountain View will issue a master demolition pennit. Additional
wording was included to ensure compliance with the City's demolition debris diversion
requirements (pAMC Chapter 5.24), and to ensure maintenance of public access and landscaping
to remain after demolition and prior to commencement of redevelopment. Maintenance of the
access is important since pedestrians from Palo Alto currently use the underpass through the site
to access the Caltrain station and the shopping center in Mountain View.
Final Review of Sculpture Setting
The Development Agreement includes a requirement that the final plans for development ofthe
sculpture's setting be submitted for staff architectural review and Public Art Commission review
within two years ofthe Effective Date of the Development Agreement.
Green Building Requirements
The approved ARB application included an applicant letter dated October 1, 2007 committing to
"sustainable construction" along with a Multifamily GreenPoint Checklist noting an intended 77
points (Attachment 1). At the time it was submitted, the checklist was required to create a
complete application, but the mandatory green building regulations (P AMC Chapter 18.44) were
not in effect until July 2, 2008. Therefore, the project was not subject to mandatory regulations.
Currently, multiple family residential developments of over 30 units are required to submit a
LEED for neighborhoods checklist for ARB evaluation and Director's approval. However, such
projects are not currently required to register the project with the U.S. Green Building Council's
processing agency to ensure the project achieves certification. The Development Agreement
includes a requirement that the developer meet the City's Green Building requirements in effect
at the time building permit applications are submitted.
Additional Benefits to City
There is no requirement stated within Resolution 6597 for an applicant to propose and the City to
detennine adequacy prior to accepting the additional benefits (sculpture and green building)
offered in conjunction with a Development Agreement. The Development Agreement tenns
ensure that the new owner pay the rate in effect at the time of the issuance of building pennits for
the applicable Development Impact Fees, which are the Community Facilities Fees (libraries,
community centers and parks). The Development Agreement does state that any new types of
City of Palo Alto Page 4
impact fees that may be proposed and adopted after the Effective Date of the Development
Agreement would not be applicable to the project. This is consistent with practice of imposing
the type of impact fees applicable at the time of planning entitlements, payable at the rates in
effect at Building Permit issuance.
William Kelly Parcel
When the Mayfield Mall was developed, an underpass was constructed beneath San Antonio Avenue
that provides vehicle access to westbound San Antonio A venue to avoid installing a left tum at the
Nita and San Antonio Avenue intersection. As a result of this earlier development there is a piece of
privately owned land (the William Kelly parcel) where the current roadway sits. The conditions of
the Vesting Tentative Map include that the William Kelly parcel shall be acquired by Toll Brothers
and dedicated to the City of Palo Alto prior to the approval of the Final Map. Although this condition
specified "Toll Brothers", it is intended to be applicable to the new owner ofthe Hewlett Packard
property. The Draft Development Agreement includes wording to ensure this and other conditions
specific to the previous applicant apply to the owner or owner's successor. The City has begun the
process of accepting the property. A level 1 hazardous materials investigation is underway, and upon
its completion, the parcel acquisition will come before the City Council for consideration.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Attachment G provides relevant Comprehensive Plan Policies and comments on the development
project's conformance as included in the staff report to the ARB for their review and
recommendation. By extending the time for compliance with the project approvals, the
Development Agreement will provide certainty that the project can be developed and used in
accordance with the approved plans consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the
Development Agreement provides public benefits that could not otherwise be obtained, including
the inclusion of a public sculpture and the applicant's compliance with the Green Building
Ordinance, which was adopted subsequent to project approval. Finally, resources of staff and
reviewing bodies that would have to be expended on re-reviewing re-submitted applications after
expiration of permits will be conserved.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Prior to Architectural Review approval of the multi-family development, an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) was prepared. Because most of the project lies within the City of Mountain
View, that city served as the lead agency for the document. The EIR was adopted by Mountain
View in June of2006. It was provided to the Commissioners in compact disc (CD) format prior
to the January 14, 2009 Commission meeting to recommend the Vesting Tentative Map.
TIMELINE
Action:
Environmental Impact Report Adopted:
ARB application received:
Director's approval of the ARB application:
Vesting Tentative Map Application Received:
Vesting Tentative Map Application Deemed Complete:
Action by Council on Tentative Map:
Development Agreement application received:
City of Palo Alto
Date:
June, 2006
October 1, 2007
October 22, 2008
August 15,2008
November 24, 2008
February 9, 2009
February 17, 2009
PageS
ATTACHMENTS
A. Development Agreement, and Exhibit I (Memorandum dated March 25, 2009*)
B. ARB approval letter with findings and conditions
C. Approved Record of Land Use Action for Vesting Tentative Map
D. Vesting Tentative Map image*
E. Resolution No. 6597 Establishing Procedures and Requirements for the Consideration of
Development Agreements
F. ARB Study Session Report regarding Sculpture Relocation
G. Comprehensive Plan Table
H. Project Area Map for 200 San Antonio Avenue
I. Applicant Correspondence dated October 1, 2007, MultiFamily Green Point Checklist*
1. Sculpture Location plan set (Commissioners Only)*
*Prepared by applicant; others prepared by staff.
COURTESY COPIES
Penny ElIson
Jo Price, Toll Brothers
Peter Gilli, City of Mountain View
Frank Pedraza, Hewlett Packard
Prepared by: Amy French, Manager of Current Planning W .
Reviewed by: Julie Caporgno, Chief Planning and Transportation Officia~
Department/Division Head Approval: ~ W~
Curtis Williams, Interim Director
City of Palo Alto Page 6
October 22, 2008
Jo Price
2560 North First Street, Suite 102
San Jose, CA 95131
City Palo Alto
Department oj Planning and
Cornmunity Environment
Attachment B
Subject: 200 San Antonio Avenue [07PLN-00000-00302]
Dear Ms. Price:
On Thursday, April 1 2008, the Architectural Review Board (ARB) reviewed the
application (07PLN-00000-00302) and recommended approval with conditions to the
Director of Planning and Community Environment. On Wednesday October 22, 2008, the
Director of Planning and Community Environment conditionally approved the project and
adopted the associated Environmental Impact Report.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Request by Toll Brothers on behalf of Hewlett Packard for a Major Architectural Review
Board review of a 4S-unit mUltiple family housing development. The proposal includes
requests for a Design Enhancement Exception for encroachments into setbacks, and a
Variance for encroachments into a special setback, and to provide a seven foot screen
wall exceeding the allowable height. Environmental Assessment: An Environmental .
Impact Report was prepared and certified by the City of Mountain View in June, 2006.
Zone District: ROLM,
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
1. The approval is based upon the project's compliance with the attached ARB, Variance
and DEE findings,
2. Approval of this project shall be subject to the conditions listed below.
Planning
250 Hamilton Avenue
PO. Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
650.329.2 441
650.329.2154
TransportatIon
250 Hanulton Avenue
PO. Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
650.329.2520
650.617.3108
Building
285 Hamilton Avenue
PO. Box 10250
Palo CA 94303
650.329.2496
6503292240
ATTACHMENT A
ARB J;'INJI}ING§ FOR APPROV AlL
200 Antomo A venue
07PLN-00000-00302
The design and architecture of the proposed project, as conditioned, complies with the
Findings for Architectural Review as specified in Chapter 18.76 of the PAMe.
(1). The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the city's
Comprehensive Plan in that the site is designated for research/office park which
allow multifamily residential uses. The proposed density is 13 du/acre and is on
the lower end of the scale of allowable density within the multiple family
residential land use designation, which specifies a range of 8 to 40 dulacre.
(2). The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site in that the
proposed development is located adjacent to existing multifamily residential
development and is pari of a larger housing development proposed across the city
boundary in Mountain View.
(3). The design is appropnate to the function of the project in that the design would
adequately serve the residents of the townhomes.
(4). In areas considered by the board as having a unified design character Or historical
character, the design is compatible with such character. Not applicable due to the
fact that this area does not have a unified or historical design character.
(5). The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between
different designated land uses in that the site would serve as a transition between
existing, multi-family uses and single family residences adjacent to the project site.
(6). The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site in
that this project is a residential infill development that will seamlessly tie into the
larger housing development proposal in Mountain View.
(7). The planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an
internal sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors
and the general community in that the proposed layout creates an enhanced
pedestrian environment by providing sidewalks that are separated from the street
with landscape medians filled with rows of street trees and has building entries
oriented to the street. Buildings are purposefully onented to engage the streetscape
while providing convenient access for both vehicles and pedesllians.
(8). The amount and anangement of open space are appropriate to the design and the
function of the structures in that the buildings and streets have been situated to
provide ample room for landscape material between the buildings and the public
rights of way.
(9). Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support the main functions of the
project in that there will be adequate onsite visitor vehicle and bicycle parking and
a covered car wash facility.
(l0). Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for
pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles in that pedestrian pathways throughout the' site
have been proposed in addition to a continuous street circulation for vehicles and
bicycles, which all link to the existing public street and sidewalk network.
(11). Natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project in that
the primary natural features on-site the trees -have been preserved where
possible and that a comprehensive tree inventory has been developed to integrate
the development with the existing trees. The removal of many of these trees is
supportable given the condition and location of the existing trees and the fact that
there are many replacement trees that would be planted as mitigation.
(12). The materials, textures, colors and details of construction and plant material are
appropriate expression to the design and function in that an appropriate colors and
materials palette has been chosen, as well as a variety of tree and plant materials to
enliven the site and to provide adequate buffer for the surrounding properties.
(13). The landscape design concept for the site, as shown by the relationship of plant
masses, open space, scale, plant forms and foliage textures and colors create a
desirable and functional environment in that project incorporates landscape
materials where appropriate which would provide screening and shading for the
units, the common open space areas, the surface parking areas, and the roadways.
The selected plant species are appropriate to the scale of the project.
(14). Plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site, capable of being properly
maintained on the site, and is of a variety which would tend to be drought-resistant
to reduce consumption of water in its installation and maintenance. The selected
plant species are a combination of California native plants with exotic and
ornanlental species which have low maintenance and water use requirements.
(15). The project exhibits green building and sustainable design that is energy efficient,
water conserving, durable and nontoxic, with high-quality spaces and high recyc]ed
content materials. The following considerations should be included in site and
building design:
'" Optimize building orientation for heat gam, shading, daylighting, and natural
ventilation;
• Design landscaping to create comfOliable micro-climates and reduce heat
island effects;
• Design for easy pedestrian, bicycle and transit access;
<> Maximize on site stornlwater management through landscaping and
permeable paving;
<> Use sustainable building materials;
o Design lighting, plumbing and equipment for efficient energy and water use;
'" Create healthy indoor environments; and
<) Use creativity and innovation to build more sustainable environments,
The applicant has provided the Build It Green Multifamily Green Point Checklis't
demonstrating that they have earned 77 points, exceeded the 50 point minimum
standard for consideration as a green horne,
(16). The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose of architectural review,
which is to: (1). Promote orderly and harmonious development in the city; (2).
Enhance the desirability of residence or investment in the city; (3). Encourage the
attainment of the most desirable use of land and improvements; (4). Enhance the
desirability of living conditions upon the immediate site or in adjacent areas; and
(5). Promote visual environments which are of high aesthetic quality and variety
and which, at the same time, are considerate of each other.
The design is consistent for all of the reasons and findings enumerated above,
ATTACHMENT B
DESIGN ENHANCEMENT EXCEPTION FINDINGS
200 San Antonio Avenue
File No. 07PLN-00000-00000-00302
The requested Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEE) are consistent with the following
findings as stated in PAMe 18.76.050 (c).
Section 18.76.050 provides for Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEE) to pennit mmor
exceptions to site development regulations.
The following Design Enhancement Exceptions are requested:
1. A six foot encroachment into the required 16 foot street side yard at building #
two.
A 10 foot encroachment into the required 16 loot street side yard setback at
building # three.
3. A nine foot encroachment into the required 20 foot front yard setback at building
# four.
4. A three foot encroachment into the required 16 foot side yard at building # nine.
5. A three foot encroachment into the required 16 foot street side yard setback at
building # 10.
1. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to
the property or site improvements involved that do not apply generally to property
in the same zone district, in that:
The project site is a uniquely located infill residential development. The two parcels
that would result are oddly configured in order to maintain the intemal street grid
pattem of the unified master plan for the entire project that spans the Palo Alto and
Mountain View borders. The site is further complicated by the location of the
existing intersection of Nita Avenue and San Antonio Avenue. To link San Antonio
Avenue with V.,lhitney Drive in Mountain View, Nita Avenue must bend to make the
connection without relocating the existing intersection. The site is further
complicated by the bend in San Antonio Avenue that narrows the site at the south
end resulting in a more triangular shape.
The granting of these Exceptions will enhance the appearance of the site or
structure, or improve the neighborhood character of the project and preserve an
existing or proposed architectural style in a manner which would not otherwise be
accomplished through strict application of the minimum requirements of Title 18
and the standards for review set forth in this Chapter, in that:
The granting of the exceptions will improve the neighborhood character by allowing
for adequate green spaces around the buildings while maintaining adequate setbacks
from existing residential uses, At building #2 and #3 the encroachments allow the
buildings to provide pedestrian friendly covered entry porches and maintain a
maximum setback from the existing Rosewalk town homes and the single family
residences in Mountain View. The encroachments at buildings nine and ten also
allow the location of covered entry porches that enhance the pedestrian environment
of the neighborhood.
3. The Exception is related to a site improvement that will not be detrimental or
injurious to property or improvement in the site vicinity, and will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience, in that:
The requested DEE will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvement
in the site vicinity as the exceptions are relatively minor in scope and are internal to
the project. The encroachments do not occur adjacent to existing uses and would
enhance the development of the site.
ATTACHMENT C
V ARIANCE FINDINGS
200 San Antonio Avenue
Toll Brothers Mayfield Townhorne Development
File No. 07PLN-00000-00302
Variances may be granted for setbacks and
Palo Alto Municipal Code,
height per section 17.76.030(b) of the
The following variances are requested:
1.
3.
Fence variance to exceed the allowable fence height of four feet by a maxImum of
for a total height of seven
Two foot encroachment into the required 25 foot arterial street setback at building
#
Seven foot encroachment into the required 25 foot arterial street setback at
building # seven.
4. Five foot encroachment into the required foot arterial street setback at building
# eight.
5. Ten foot encroachment into the required foot arterial street setback at building
#11.
6. Seven foot encroachment into the required 25 foot arterial street setback at
building # 12
(1) Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject properties, including (but
not limited to) shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict applicatwn of
the requirements and regulations prescribed in this title substantially deprives such
properties of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and in the same zoning
district as the subject properties.
The lots are inegularly shaped and located adjacent to a busy arterial street. Because San
The project SIte is a uniquely located infill residential development. The two parcels that
would result are oddly configured in order to maintam the internal street grid pattern of
the unified plan for the entire project that spans the Palo Alto and Mountain View
is further complicated by the location of the existing intersection of
Nita Avenue and San Antonio Avenue. To link San Antonio Avenue with Whitney Drive
in Mountain View, Nita Avenue must bend to make the cOlllection without relocating the
eXIstmg mtersection. The site is further complicated by the bend in San Antonio Avenue
that narrows the site at the south end resulting in a more triangular shape.
(2) The granting of the application shall not affect substantial compliance wzth the
regulations or constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limztations
upon other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district as the subject
property, and
The granting of the application is necessary to grant relief from the setbacks because of
the special circumstances of the two parcels. The proposed density of 45 units is far
below the allowable density of 120 units and the exceptions do not impart additional
development rights or privileges beyond what is allowed.
(3) The granting of the application is consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan
and the purposes of this title (Zoning), and
The exceptions allow the orderly implementation of the master plan within both Palo
Alto and Mountain View, providing the ability to create a cohesive neighborhood. The
exceptions also allow the preservation of tree # 50 a large mature Evergreen Ash located
prominently at the entrance to the development.
(4) The granting of the application will not be detrimental or mjunous to property or
improvements in the vzcinity, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
general welfare, or convenience.
The encroachments occur along San Antonio A venue where a six to seven foot high
screen wall would be located. This would be a decorative wall softened with shrubs and
vines. The encroaching buildings would be further obscured from the roadway by the
dense row of existing stone pines and new tree plantings.
APPROVAL NO. 2008-11
RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
LAND USE ACTION FOR 200 SAN ANTONIO AVENUE:
VESTING TENTATIVE MAP WITH EXCEPTIONS
08PLN-00000-00262
(TOLL BROTHER'S INC, APPLICANT)
Attachment C
At its meeting on February 9, 2009, the City Council of the
City of Palo Alto approved the Vesting Tentative Map with
Exceptions to subdivide four parcels (approx. 4.89 acres) into four
reconfigured parcels, which would be developed into 45 residential
condominium units on two of the four lots, and create a new public
street, making the following findings, determination and
declarations:
SECTION 1. Background.
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto ("City Council U ) finds,
determines, and dec as follows:
A. Proposed by Toll Brothers Inc. on behalf of Hewlett
Packard (HP) , this project involves the subdivision of four
sting parcels (approx. 4.89 acres total) into four reconfigured
lots. Lot 1 would be 43,996 square t and would be developed
with three separate buildings containing a total of nine multi-
family dwelling units and Lot 2 would be 97,139 square and
developed with nine separate buildings with a total of 36 multi-
family dwelling units. Lots 3 and 4 would also be created totaling
12,632 square feet with no structures proposed for these parcels.
In addition, 0.02 acres would be vacated and 1.1 acres would be
dedicated as a public right of way to create the new public street,
Avenue A, and to realign Nita Avenue to connect with the new
Whitney Drive.
B. The Vesting Tentative Map plan set dated November 12,
2008 includes information on the existing parcels, onsite
condi tions, and the layout of the proposed new lots. These
drawings are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the
City's Subdivision Ordinance with the exception to minimum lot
size. These plans contain all information and notations required
to be shown on a Vesting Tentative Map (per PAMC Sections 21.12),
as well as the design requirements concerning the creation of lots,
streets, walkways, and similar features (PAMC 21.20).
1
SECTION 2. Environmental Review.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),requires that a
Lead Agency examine the potent environmental impacts of the
'whole of an action' which has the potential to physically change
the environment, directly or indirectly, and not just the act of
merely subdividing a parcel into four lots. In this case, the four
lot subdivision would ultimately facilitate the construction of a
45 unit multi family development which is not exempt from CEQA
requirements.
Prior to Architectural Review approval of the proposed Toll
Brothers multi-family development, the city of Mountain View
prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) which evaluated the
potential environmental impacts the project. The Environmental
Impact Report was certified by the City of Mountain View in June of
2006. The EIR was adopted by Palo Alto's Director of Planning and
Community Environment on October 22, 2008.
SECTION 3.
A legislative body of a city shall deny approval of a Preliminary
Parcel Map, if it makes any of the following findings (California
Government Code Section 66474) :
1. That the proposed map is not consistent wi th
applicable general and speci c plans as specified in Section
65451:
This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The
site does not lie within a specific plan area and is consistent
with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The land use
designation in the area of the subdivision is Research/Office Park
which allows multifamily residential development and the zoning
designation is ROLM and RM-30. The proposed development of multi-
family dwelling units is consistent with the land use and zoning
designations of the site.
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed
subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific
plans:
This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The
map is consistent with the following Comprehens Plan policies:
(1) Policy L-1 -Limiting future urban development to currently
developed lands within the urban service areai (2) Policy L-6: Where
possible, avoid abrupt changes in scale and density between
residential and non-residential areas and between residential areas
of different densitiesi (3) Policy L-12 -Preserve the character
of residential neighborhoods by encouraging new or remodeled
2
structures to be compatible with the neighborhood and adjacent
structures.
3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type
of developmen t:
This finding can not be made in the affirmative.
site can accommodate the proposed residential development. The
is adjacent to established multifamily and single family
development and is proposed in conjunction with a master plan for
multifamily residential development in Mountain View. The site is
relatively flat and has multiple connections for bikes /
pedestrians/ and cars. The site is close to the San Antonio Cal
Train station and is currently served by water/ gas/ wastewater/
electric/ and communication ces. The site so has multiple
access points for emergency service delivery.
4. That the site is not physically suitable for the
proposed density of development:
This finding can not be made in the firmative. The
subdivision would be consistent with the te development
regulations of the RM-30 zone district. The proposed density of 45
units is less than the allowable density of 106 units. The
proposed density of development is not considered growth inducing
with respect to service and utility infrastructure or with respect
to access.
5. Tha t the design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat:
This finding can not be made in the firmative. The
subdivision would not cause environmental damage or injure fish/
wildlife/ or their habitat/ as the site is currently developed with
a paved parking lot and a portion of an elevated parking structure.
The site does contain a number of mature landscape trees. Many of
these were identified as being insignificant due to their size and
health. There are 75 trees on site that were identified as having
some significance. Of these trees/ 17 are specified to be
protected and 5 are proposed to be transplanted to a different
location on site. An additional 120 new trees will be planted as
specified in the approved landscape plan.
6. That the design of the subdivision or type of
improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems:
This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The
subdivision the existing parcels into four lots will not cause
3
serious public health problems. The resulting residential
development will not cause a public health problem in that it is
designed to provide access for emergency services, will supply
necessary utility services, such as sanitation, and is designed per
City and State standards to ensure public safety.
7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements wi conflict with easements, acquired by the public
at large, for access through or use of, property within the
proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may
approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or
for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially
equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This
subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements
established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no
authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that
the public at large has acquired easements for access through or
use of property within the proposed subdivision.
The subdivision of the existing parcels will not
conflict with existing public easements. New utility easements and
new public rights of way will be created and the plan is designed
to maintain public access throughout the site.
SECTION 4. Exception Findings.
Lots 3 and 4 result from the dedication of land for the public
streets and are smaller than the code requires. This section
contains the findings for the exceptions for lots #3 and #4 to be
smaller than the minimum lot size of 1 acre required by the ROLM
zone district.
1. There are special
affecting the property.
circumstances or condi tions
There are special circumstances fecting the property
in that the property is irregularly shaped. The curve in San
Antonio Avenue narrows the property from north to south. When the
regular street pattern of the proposed development is applied to
the property, the less than one acre parcels, lots 3 and 4, are
created. The proposed residential infill subdivision is requested
to be consistent with the Mayfield Masterplan approved by the
adjacent City of Mountain View where the majority of the new
residential development will occur.
2. The exceptions are necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner.
4
The exceptions are necessary in that the right to
develop the property would be severely impacted by the rigid
enforcement of the minimum lot size requirement. Imposing the
minimum lot size requirement would alter the street pattern and
would have a detrimental impact on the master plan. The resultant
street alignments would not be safe, efficient, or consistent with
those in the Mountain View portion of the project.
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.
The granting of the exception will not be detrimental
in that the resulting parcels less than one acre will allow the
harmonious development of the site such that the overall new
neighborhood street pattern would not be dictated by the lot size
requirement. The implementation of a regular street pattern will
be a benefit to the public and other property in the vicinity in
that it will improve pedestrian and vehicular circulation around
the community, provide public access to the new publ parks, and
provide access to the San Antonio underpass.
4. The granting of the exception will not violate the
requirements, goals, policies, or spirit of the law.
The granting of the exception does not violate the
requirements, goals, policies or sprit of the law in that the
intentions of each of these is to guide the harmonious development
of the community. The proposed exceptions serve to accommodate the
harmonious development of the site implementing the masterplan by
allowing for a regular street pattern where the roadway locations
are not dictated by the lot sizes and are designed for pedestrians,
bicyclists, transit riders, and drivers. The small lots, 3 and 4,
will not be developed, but instead are proposed as landscape
buf including planter strips, sidewalks, and recreational open
space.
SECTION 5. Approval of Tentative Map.
Tentative Map approval is granted by the City Council under Palo
Alto Municipal Code ("PAMC") Sections 21.13 and 21.20 and the
California Government Code Section 66474, subject to the conditions
of approval in Section 7 of this Record.
SECTION 6. Final Map Approval.
The Final Map submitted for review and approval by the City Council
of the City of Palo Alto shall be in substantial conformance with
the Vesting Tentative Map prepared by HMH Engineers titled
5
"Vesting Tentative Tract Map for 45 Condominiums -200 San Antonio"
consisting of four pages, dated November 12, 2008, except as
modified to incorporate the conditions of approval in Section 7.
A copy of this Tentative Map is on file the Department
of Planning and Community Environment, Current Planning Division.
Wi thin two years of the approval date of the Vesting
Tentat Map, the subdivider shall cause the subdivision or any
part thereof to be surveyed, and a Final Map, as specified in
Chapter 21.08, to be prepared in conformance with the Vesting
Tentative Map as conditionally approved, and in compliance with the
provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and PAMC Section 21.16 and
submitted to the City Engineer (PAMC Section 21.16.010[a]).
SECTION 7. Conditions of Approval.
Department of Planning and Community Environment
Planning Division
1. A Map, in conformance with the approved Vesting
Tentative Map, all requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance
(PAMC Section 21.16), and to the satisfaction of the City
, shall be filed with the Planning Division and the
Publ Works Engineering Division wi thin two of the
Tentative Map approval date (PAMC 21.13.020[c]).
2. The William Kelly parcel shall be acquired by Toll Brothers
and dedicated to the City of Palo Alto prior to the approval
of the Final Map.
3. A Below Market Rate agreement must be executed prior to City
Council Action on the Final Map and recorded concurrently with
the map.
Public Works Department
4. Private access road: In order to ensure public access to the
development through the underpass, the developer must acquire
the private parcel on the west side of San Antonio Avenue on
which the access road to the underpass lies and then deed this
parcel to the City of Palo Alto. The applicant will be
requi to upgrade the access road to City standards,
including sidewalks, should the road currently not meet these
standards. This work would be included in the improvement
plans.
6
5. Underpass retrofits: The improvement plans must include the
structural retrofits of the underpass that were recommended in
the structural evaluation performed by Peoples Associates.
Also, the applicant shall make repairs to the underpass' road
surface, sidewalks, gutters and storm drain. "Low clearance"
signage shall be led on both approaches to the
underpass.
6. The Final Map cannot be submitted for review until the
improvement plans have been submitted, reviewed and
preliminarily approved by the City.
7. Subdivision improvement agreement: A subdivision improvement
agreement is required to secure compliance with the conditions
of approval and security of the onsite and offsite public
improvements. The agreement must be finalized prior to City
Council approving the F Map.
8. Bonds: The subdivider shall post securities, typically payment
and performance bonds, prior to City Council approval the
Final Map to guarantee the completion of the ons and
offsite public improvements. The applicant must submit a
construction cost est for the onsite and offs public
improvements. The amount of the bonds shall be determined by
the Planning, Utilit and Public Works Departments after
reviewing the plans and the estimate.
Fire Department
9. Overhead clearance at rna
than 13 ft., 6 in. high.
vehicular entry shall be not less
10. Site address to be prominently posted next to the driveway
access to the property. (2001CFC901)
11. Hydrants shall be placed at locations not to exceed 125 feet
from any point along the re vehicle access. Fire access road
for 20 feet in each direction from fire hydrant shall be not
less than 26 feet in width. (PAMC15.04.140)
12. A fire sprinkler system shall be
requirements of NFPA Standard
(PAMC15. 04.160) Fire Sprinkler
modifications require separate
Prevention Bureau. (PAMC15.04.083)
provided which meets the
No. 13R, 2002 Edition.
system installations or
submittal to the Fire
13. An exterior bell shall be provided, and an approved audible
sprinkler flow alarm to alert the occupants shall be provided
in the interior of each building in approved locations.
7
(2001CBC904.3.2)Fire Alarm system installations or
modifications require separate submittal to the
Prevention Bureau. (PAMCI5.04.083)
14. All sprinkler drains, including those for floor control valves
and inspector's test valves, as well as the main drain, shall
not discharge within the building. Water discharged from these
points shall be directed to an approved landscape location or
to the sanitary sewer system. (99NFPAI3, Sec. 5-14.2.4.3)
NOTE: Please check with Roland Ekstrand in Utilities for maximum
flow capacity of sanitary sewer in the area. Main Drain test
discharge flow rate shall be impounded and attenuated to below
sanitary sewer capacity before discharge.
Utilities Water Gas Wastewater
15. Sanitary sewer mains and laterals on private streets are to be
privately owned and maintained and shall be designated as such
on the plans. The Cit responsibility for wastewater will
start at a cleanout where the onsite wastewater system enters
the public street right of way (Item 2 shall be included in
the CCRs) .
16. If the proj ect sanitary sewer main goes to the Palo Al to
sanitary sewer collection system, the applicant is required to
perform, at his/her expense, a flow monitoring study of the
existing sewer mains to determine the remaining capacity. The
report must include existing peak flows or depth of flow based
on a minimum monitoring period of seven continuous days or as
determined by the senior wastewater engineer. The study shall
meet the requirements and the approval of the WGW engineering
section. No downstream overloading of existing sewer mains
will be permitted.
17. A 16" water interconnect with the City of Mountain View is
required as part of this project. Show the 16" water line and
interconnect on the plans.
18. Onsite public water mains will be 8" diameter minimum (16"
diameter for the pipe leading from San Antonio to the Mountain
View interconnect) limited to the one loop through the
property as currently shown on the plans and will require a
minimum 20' wide public utility easement with limited street
parking (where not in a public ROW). All city owned water
meters shall be within the public ROW or a public utility
easement outside of the paved street surface (locate in the
sidewalk or planting strip). All other onsite water lines
downstream of the water meter shall be private water lines and
8
shall be designated as such on the plans. No dead end water
lines are allowed on the public water main except to the
hydrant. Where the water main is in an easement, no water
services may be connected thereto.
19. Public water mains shall have a minimum of 10' clear distance
from the parallel running sanitary sewer lines and 4' minimum
from the storm and as specified by the state health code.
Where the public water I cross storm or sanitary sewer
lines the state heal th code separation and material
requirements shall be adhered to. Onsite public water mains
shall be 5' minimum from the edge of the easement.
20. Flushing of the fire system to sanitary sewer shall not exceed
30 GPM. Higher flushing rates shall be diverted to a
detention tank to achieve the 30 GPM flow to sewer.
21. An approved reduce pressure principle assembly (RPPA backflow
preventer device) shall be installed for all existing and new
water connections from Palo Alto Utilities to irrigation,
mixed use, commercial and I buildings. The RPPA shall be
installed on the owner's property and directly behind the
water meter.
22. An approved double check assembly shall be installed for water
connections to residencies that are fire sprinklered. Double
check valves shall be installed on the owner's property
adjacent to the property I
23. An approved double detector check valve shall be installed for
the existing or new water connections for the fire system.
Double check detector check valves shall be installed on the
owner's property adjacent to the property I
24. Where public mains are inst led in private streets/PUEs for
condominium and town home projects the CCRs and final map
shall include the statement: \\Public Utili ty Easements:
the City's reasonable use the Public Utility Easements,
which are shown as P.U.E on the Map, results in any damage to
the Common Area, then it shall be the responsibility of the
Association, and not of the Ci ty, to Restore the affected
portion (s) of the Common Area. This Sec on may not be
amended without the prior written consent of the City".
25. Any existing water and wastewater services shall be abandoned
at the main per WGW util procedures.
26. The applicant shall submit a completed water-gas-wastewater
service connection application -load sheets for City of Palo
9
Alto Utilities. A separate application/load sheet needs to be
submitted for each set of meters (each residential or
commercial unit) The applicant must provide all the
information requested for utility service demands (water in
fixture units/g.p.m., gas in b.t.u.p.h, and sewer in fixture
units/g.p.d.) .
27. Onsite public gas mains will be limited to one loop through
the property in private/public streets in the same 20'
easement with water main or a dedicated minimum 10' public
utility gas easement. Show the gas and electric/comm on the
plans, so the ty can evaluate spacing and placement.
28. Gas mains will Iowa straight route through the development
and be within 3' of the curbline. Gas mains shall be in a
separate trench (gas is not allowed in a joint trench). A 4"
gas main crossing San Antonio is required. A separate gas
service is required for each building. Gas meters shall be
ganged at separate building per the WGW Utility
Standards.
29. The applicant I create a separate detailed public mains
and services plan under the direction of CPAU. The
applicant shall supply CPAU with an AutoCAD copy of the
approved gas plan.
Electric Utilities
30. Applicant shall show locations of public utility easements
associated with all pad-mounted equipment.
31. All electric utility equipment shall be pad-mounted.
32. Public utility easements for pad-mounted transformers shall be
10 feet by 10 For pad-mounted switches, the PUE shall
be 7 feet by 11 feet.
33. Typical space requirements are 8 feet from the edge of
the concrete pad on all \\operable" sides of equipment
(typically the sides with doors) and 3 feet from the edge of
the pad on "non-operable sides". Access to the equipment by
personnel and city trucks must also be provided.
34. The applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all ut ity
services and/or meters including a sign affidavit of vacancy.
Utilities will be disconnected or removed within 10 working
days after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be
issued by building inspection division after all utility
services and/or meters have been disconnected.
10
35. The applicant shall submit a completed elect load sheet for
each lot for City of Palo Alto Utilities. The applicant must
provide 1 the information requested for util service.
36. The applicant shall submit improvement plans for utility
construction. The plans must show the size and location of
all underground utilities within the development and the
public right of-way.
37. Any extension or relocation of existing distribution lines or
equipment shall be done at customer/developer's expense.
Customer /Developer shall ensure that no structure is built
over the sting easements.
38. The applicant shall secure a public utilities easement for
facil installed in private property. The applicant's
engineer shall obtain, prepare, record with the county of
Santa Clara, and provide the Utilities Engineering section
with copies of the public utilities easement across the
adjacent parcels as is necessary to serve the development.
39. Utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of
Palo Alto Utilities electrical service requirements.
40. Where ect c utilties are installed in private st s/PUEs
for condominium and town home projects the CC&Rs and final map
shall include the statement: "Public Utility Easements: If
the City's reasonable use of the Public Utility Easements,
which are shown as P.U.E on the Map, results in any damage to
the Common Area, then it shall be the responsibility of the
Association, and not of the City, to Restore the fected
portion (s) of the Common Area. This Section may not be
amended without the prior written consent of the City".
Transportation Division
41. An all-way stop shall be provided at the intersection of
Whitney Drive and Avenue A.
42. Transportation Division shall review the building permit plans
for final approval of intersection plans for specific ramp
locations, proposed signing, and striping.
SECTION 8.
Tentative Map. All conditions of approval of the Tentative
Map shall be fulfilled prior to approval of a Final Map (PAMC
Section 21.16.010 [c] ) .
11
Unless a Final Map is filed, and all conditions of approval
are fulfilled within a two-year period from the date of Tentative
Map approval, or such extension as may be granted, the Tentative
Map shall expire and all proceedings shall terminate. Thereafter,
no Final Map shall be filed without first processing a Tentative
Map (PAMC Section 21.16.010[d]).
PASSED: 5-0-2-0
AYES: Barton, Burt, Drekmeier, Klein, Schmid, Yeh, Kishimoto
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS: Morton, Espinoza
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
fi==:J~ ___ _
Asst. City Attorney
PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED:
~R~VE.DD~: ~~
Director DfPlaIlIliIl9and
Community Environment
Those plans prepared by HMH Engineers titled, uVesting Tentative
Tract Map for 45 Condominiums-200 San Antonio", consisting of four
pages, dated received on November 12, 2008.
12
GENERAl NOTES:
• f>RO".ECT NAME: ._"'"
.""""""",
·1.J'roI1i~
UAWlIl.O
IiI£UTf pAQ(ARI) co ~~~iml
H£W!.£TT PACkAAD 00 ~~= ~EHGI~ 157() 0AI':l..AN!) ROAO SAN JOSE. CA 95131
(4(8) 487-2200
AJrmlQfI' VlGHW),. RC£ f63461 A~~E£RS.CCM
• S'f'REET 1.QCA,11ON: NQif1H EAST o:¥lNER ~ <::DiTRA!.. DF'RESSWA '( AND $.l.N ANTtIfIO RQ.fII)
NONE
RCiI.M. RlI-JO ~Qi/OFFlCf! PARk. lA.Il..l'IP\.£ F..uQLY RESIOEND,IJ.
COWUERaAl 0f'f1CE, PJWQNG ....... -aTVOF' p~ ALTtI
CITY Cf' p~ ALTO
Cll'Y Of WOUNTAIN \4EW 147-~041. 05e. 057. Ot>Q
$HAU. OONF't1OoI TO CITY Cf' PAlO AlTO STANOAROS ~~C=c..-".",";_._. __ . : ;.t~(GROSS}
,., (1.4 AC1!:ES,
;t 3.S ACRES (NET)
• pRCPOS£O LOTS: 4 LOTS
• PROPOSED UNITS: 4:S ea.!OOWltwM UNITS
• AVERAGE SiZE OF LOT: ;t o.8B ACRES
• SIIIAt.LEST 512£ LOT: :t 0.09 ACRES • IoiUl,.l1Ft.£ FINAL Io4APS WAY 6'e FILED PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATI~ fF lHE lENTA11YE MAP. • R£OlJIRED ACCE'SS ROADS. UP 'THROOGH FIRST UfT OF' ASPHALT, SHAll BE INSTAl.l.£D AND r PRlOfii! TO THE START Of COOSTR\JCl1Qo1. BULK . BE DElJ\IERED TO THE SITE UKnL INSTALlA'TION IS EMERGENCY ACCfSS ROADS SHAI.J.. BE t.lAlNTAINED CI.£AR INC F'ERNIT ISSUANCE IoiAY BE WflHHElD UNTll
• A SANITAR'f LAVAL CI.£AN-OUT SHAll BE INSTAI.l.ED AT THE PROPERTY UHf. If" ONE DOES NOT ALREADY EXtS'T WITHIN TWO (2) FEET Of THE PROPERTY UNE. Alff 1REHCHING M11-I THE ORlPUN£ OF' Ai..L TREES SHAU. B£ HAND DUG AND SO NOTIl) ON THE P'lAHS.: AU. UT1Un£S SER\IING THE SITE SHALL. BE: UNDERGRWND.
• FlNHo. GRAOIIiG P1J.NS SHALL I»clUOt: A COWPlETE EROSION CONTRa.. PLAN. 1HTER!t.t EROSIOH CONTROl UEASVRES TO BE CAARJED WT 0URlNC CONSlRUC1l('Jo1 AND BEFORE INSTALlATJON OF THE FJHAL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE INC1.J.JOED. INlERIN ER~ ca.TRa... WrTliODS SiiOULO IriCt.JJO£ SILT fENCES OR STRAW BALE DIKES (Wlnl LOCATION ANO OCTAlIS) AND 1'HE CHY $TANDARD SE'EDIHGl SPEaFJCA11CH.
• DEWa.JTlaof Of: EXlSllNG STRUC'lURES TO 8£ COWP1.flED IlS PART a; lliE DDKlUTION P£RwT PROCESS AND PRIOR TO lliE ~SlTlON Of: FlHAJ.. ElUJU)tNG PEfO,(IT APPROVAL
• DE\'El.CPMENT SHOWN ON lHtS 'o'£ST\NQ. 'l'EHTATlVE UAP (\11'14) FOR lliE IiIOUNTAlN \'lEW PORTlaof Of: 1HE PMIPOS£D $liE j$ SJS'JECT TO A m"AAATt \11'14 lSSUED BY lHE OTY CF UOONTAIN W:W.
ELEV DATUY: mY Of: PALO ALTO (HG:\1) 1$~9) BlNQiUIJIK 2100. EL£V .... .».45 FEET, DES(.;RII3fD AS "C!S {CHISElm SOVAAfl N.w. COR N.W. RET'" Of" AlMA AND SAA ,JoN'f'CWIO AIJEfrCIJE.
BA$lS Of: SEARQilCS; a:.trrE:R UNt ~ SAN ANTONIO WAY AS ~TAWSHED NJ5'J9'35t:. TRACT NO. 5-477. 340-U-49.
LEGEND
I I
PRQ..ECT EIOUHtlARY
"""""""''''''"''''''''' -""""""'" UN£
UN£
C91TER thE Of: SlREET
R/W TO RaiAIH (So. ... AC)
IlfllICAlED
"""'''''
TANGENT TABLE CURVE TABL.I!
No. -Leng1h .... 1-1-1 .......
Li """'""' ...... 2 1'211"'" I 50"37'14" 1' ...... .................. ...... 3U8' 71"02'1r ......
l! .... 40'2%"lIl :nut
UI $8i .......... 2.57'
L1 .......... "" ......
IJI Nf1'3&'SO'W 20.411'
La N5i'3T'2S"W :ns
Lt. $8i"3r23"E 3$.04" • GRAPHIC SCALE
£V.A.£.
1.£.£.
P.s.£.
P.o.£.
~ VEHICt.£ A.CCiSS £J.SEW[HT
INCR£SS AHO ~ E:ASE:M£)!iT
PUEIUC $ER\\CE £J.SEW[HT
~ 0 ~ ~ _ a
I-w-• ..._' I
PV8UC Ul1UlIES E.ASDlEHT (In Feet)
.. 1H£ EXtS11HG,S' P.u.£. JS REca:tO€Ii IN BOOK 6529 C*. PAGE 603.. 1 Inch = 1001
H~'~H
ENGINEERS
SanJooe
(4(16).4874200
GlIf9y (""l""""'" --
-1----
I
--
Vesting Tentative Tract Map for
45 Condominiums -200 San Antonio
Palo Alto California
J(8 NUWI!IER
3298.00
~ -I ~
::t: s: m z
-I
C
Attachment E
ORIGINAL
RESOLUTION NO. 6597
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
ESTABLISHING PROCBOURES Aim REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGR~eMENTS
W!iEREAS., tre State legislature has found and declared that t
-(a) The lack of certainty in the approval of developmental
project. can result in a 4aste o~ resour~es, escalate the cost of
housing and other developm6P.t to the consumer, and discourage in-
ve~tment in and co •• it~ent to c~.prehensive planning which would
make maIillu. efficient utilization of resources at the least eco-
nomic cost to the public.
(b) Assurance to the applic.nt for a development project
that upon approval of the proje~t, the .vvlicant may proceed with
the project in accor~.nce with existiny policies, rules and r~gu
lations, and subject to conditions of approval, will strengthen
tr.e public planning process, encourage private participation ir
comprehensive planning, and rerluce the economic costs of de~elop
lIIent.
(c) The lack of public facilities, including .. but;. not 1i.i-
ted to, streets, sewerage, transportation, drinkin~ vater, school
and utility faciliti.s, is a serious impediment to the develop.ent
of new housing. Whenever possible, applicants and local gov6rn-
lIIents .. y include provisions in agree.en~8 whereby applicants are
relabursed over tia. for financing public facilities.-(Govern-
.ent Code Section 65864); and
WHEREAS, the legislature therefore adopted Gnvern.ent Code
Sections 6586. through 65869.5 authorizing cities to enter into
developaent agre ... nt.; and
WHBRBAS, Go~ern.ent Code section 65865(0) requires that
cities shall, if requested by an applicant, est~bli.h procedures
and require.enta for consideration of d.velo~.nt agree.ents.
Nai, TH8BE:FORE, the Couneil of the Ci ty of Palo AI to doea
hereby RESOLVE a • .i.;oliOWSI
SECTION 1. Authorization for ~doption. Theae procedures are
adoptea under the authOrIty of GOvernment Code Sections 65864-
65869.5.
SECTlvN 2. Authorization.
(a) The City .&y enter into a develop-ent agre ... nt with any
per~n hal~ng ~ legal oc equitable intereat in real property with-
in the Citt for the develoPilent of the property •• provided in
this re.olution.
1.
(b) The City may enter into a development agreement with any
person having a legal or equitable interest in real property in
unincorporated territory within the City's sphere of influence for
th~ development of the property as provided in this resolution.
However, the agreemeat shall not become operative unlsss annexa-
tion proceedings annexing the property to the city are completed
within the period ot time specifiAd by the agreement.
If the annexation is not compl<ted within the time specified
in the agreement or any extension of the agreement, the agreement
is null and void.
,!ECTION 3. Application. Appl tca tion for a developme.lt
agreell'l4nt shall be made to the ~partment of Planning and Com-
munity Environment on a form prescribed by the department. 'rhe
application shall be accompanied by the fee prescribed by the
municipal fee schedule, no part of which shall be returnable to
the appl ican t.
SECTION 4. C~ntents. A development agreeMent shall specify
the duration of the agreement, the permitted uses of the property,
the dt"::iai,ty or intensi ty of use, the maxill'lull height and siZe of
proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation or dedication
of :and to~ public purposes. The development agreem~nt aay in-
clude conditions, terms, restrictions, and require_ents lor subse-
quent discretionary acHol!&, provided that such conditionfl, ter.s~
restrictions, and require.ante for subsequent discretionary
actions shall not prevent develop_ent of the land for the uses and
to the density or intenaity of develop.ent set forth in the agree-
ment. The agreeMent may 9rovide that construction shall be com-
menced within m specified tiee and that the project or any phase
thereof be cOllp'leted within a $pe~ified tic ••
The agree.ent I14Y also inch,de ter.,. ana conditions relating
to applicant financing of necessary public facilities and subs&-
quent reimbursement over ti.e.
SECTION S. Rules, r.'ulationa and ofticial P2ltcies. Unless
otherwise providea by the develo~ent agreement, ruIes,-regula-
tions, lIrid official policies ooverni."~ permitted uses of the land,
governing density, and 90,;ernlng cMsign, improveNDt, and con-
struction standards ~nd specifications, applicable to development
of the property subject to a develop.ent agreeMent, ~hall be those
rules, regulations, and official policies in force at the time of
execution of the a9~ee.ent. A develo~ent agreeaent shall not
prevent the City, in .ub8~quent actions .pplicable to the pro-
pe~ty, fro. applying nev rul •• , regUlations, .nd policies which do
not conflict with thoae rule., regulations, lIt.nd policies appli-
cable to the progerty •• aet forth in the development agree •• nt,
nor ahall a develop •• nt agre.ment prevent the City fro_ denying or
<.londi tiot .... lly .pp~oving any Bub.equent develcp&8ent project !:ppli-
cation on the basis of auch exi8ting or ne" rules, regulation8,
and policie8.
2.
SECTION 6. Public hearin~ and notice of intention to con-
sider ~ adoption. A public hea:r ng on an appl Ica1Ion for a aevelop-
mant agreement shall be held by the Planning Commission ~nd by the
City Council. Notice of intention to consider adoption of a
development agreement shall be given as provided in Palo Alto
Municipal Code Section 18.98.060, in addition to any other notice
required by law for other actions to be considered concurr-ently
with the development a~reement.
SECTION 7. Lagislative Act. A development agreement is a
legielatlve act which shall be approved by ordinance and is sub-
ject to referendum. A development agreeMent shall not be approved
unless the legislative body finds that the provisione of the
agreement are conqistent ~i~h the City's general plan and any
appJ lcable spec~ofic plan.
SEC~ION 8. Amendment or terrintaion.
{a} Periodic reviev. The Director of Planning and Community
Environll!ent shall review the developmont agreemeo1t at least every
12 m~nths, at which time the applicant or successor in interest
thereto, shall be required to demo~strate good faith compliance
with the t~; OilS of the agreeMent. If, as a result of such periodic
reviewl the director determines that, on the basis of substantial
evidence, the ag~ee.ent has not been co_plied with in good faith,
or that the failure of the City to terminate or modify the pro-
visions of the development agree~ent would place the residents
of the territory subject to the development agreement, or the
~esid9nts of the Cit¥, or both, in a condi~ion dangerous to their
health or safety, or both, the Planning Co"mission and City Coun-
cll shall hold a public h4aring to consider terminating or .edi-
fying the a~ree~ent. ~ • .;tice of such hearing shall be given as
~rovid9d in Palo Alto Municipal Coda Section 18.98.060. If the
City Council determines, on the basis of substantial evidence,
that the applicant or 8UCCef"·(IIor in intereSt: thereto h!l8 not COil-
plied in good faith with the terms or conditions of the agreeeent,
or that the failure of the City to terminate or. modify the p~o
visions of tl,e developillent agreement would place the residents of
the te~ritory .ubject to the development agreement, or the resi-
dents of the City, or ~th, in a condition dangerous to their
health or safety, or both, tne Council may terminate or modify the
agreeJllent.
(b) Mutual consent. A develop.ent agree.ent may be amended,
or canceled in whole or in part, by ~utual consent of the parties
to the agreelll6·nt or their SUCC6ssors in interest. Notice of and
public hearing regacding an intention to amend or cancel ~ny por-
tion of the agreement shall be ~iv.n and held in the Minner pro-
vided in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.98.060. ~~ amendment
to an agreement shall be 8u~ject to the provisions of Section 7 of
this resolution.
(c} State or federal laws and regulations. !n the eve~t
that state or feder~1 law. or regulatIons, enacted after a
3. I I I -
development agreement has been entered into, prevent or preclude
compliance with one or more provisions of the development agree-
ment, such provisions of the agreement sh~ll be modified or sus-
pended as ~y be necessary t~ comply with such state or federal
laws or r8~ulation8.
SECTION 9. Enforeement. unle~s amenued or canceled pursuant
to Section § nereln, a development agreerent shall be enforceable
by any party therete, notwithstanding any change in any applicable
general or specific plan, zoning, subdivision, or buildil.g reQ",la-
tion adopted by the City, which altera or amends the rules, I'egu-
lations1 or policies specified in Section 5 herein.
SECTION 10. Recordation. No later than 10 days after the
City enters Into a develop.ent agreement, the City shall record
with the county recorder a copy of the agreement, which ehall
describe the land subject thereto. From and after the ti.~ of
such recordation, the agree_ent shall i.part such notice thereof
to all persons a. is afforded by the recording laws of this state.
The burde~s of the aqree.llent shall be binding upon, and tne bene-
fits of the agree.ent shall 1nt"re to, all successors in interest
to the parties to the agreement.
SECTION 11. The Council fia.:Ss that the adoption of this
r.solution is not a project for the purposes of the california
Environ.ental Quality Act, and, therefore, no environ .. ntal impact
assessaent is necessary.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED: March 9, 1987
AYES:
NOES:
Bechtel, Cobb. Fletcher. Klein, levy, Patitucci, SUtorius. Woolley
Renzel
ABSTENTIONS z None
ABSENT; None
APPROVED:
~ e;!-:: \.,~ J
Mayor ~
APPROVED.
~~ nreetor~ ann n9 an
Co •• unity £nv~ron •• nt
4.
Attachment F
PLANNING DIVISION
Memorandum
Date: April 2, 2009
To: Architectural Review Board
From: Amy French
Subject: ARB Study Session on 200 San Antonio: Ginnever Sculpture Relocation
SUMMARY
The study session will start at 8:30 AM in the Council Chambers. The applicant's
landscape architect will describe the proposed setting within the approved Palo Alto
portion of the Toll Brothers' development project, for a steel sculpture owned by Hewlett
Packard (HP) currently located on the Mountain View portion ofHP's Mayfield property.
The ARB is asked to comment on the appropriateness of the sculpture's proposed setting
in Palo Alto and the proposed adjustments to the previously approved landscape plan.
Since the proposal is for location on private property, involvement by the Art
Commission is not required. Should staff and the ARB find the proposed setting for the
sculpture to be appropriate, the sculpture would be included in a proposed development
agreement, which would be reviewed by the Planning and Transportation Commission
and City Council.
BACKGROUND
Hewlett Packard (HP) had commissioned the sculpture in 1985 to fulfill a requirement
that the City of Mountain View imposed on new projects. HP reported that the City of
Mountain View is not interested in keeping the sculpture in Mountain View. The City of
Palo Alto previously expressed interest in having the sculpture relocated into Palo Alto.
The artist is Charles Ginnever, who is originally from San Mateo. He's well-known in
some art circles and has had quite a few commissions and awards over the years. The title
of the piece is: "Untitled (In Homage to my Father)." The sculpture, along with it's
location at HP's Mayfield site, is listed in Ginnever's list of his works which include three
pieces at Stanford, one at the San Francisco Museum of Modem Art and many other
places across the country. The sculpture is included in a brochure & guide to public art,
both city and corporate-owned art, in Mountain View.
The link to the piece on Ginnever's Web site can be found at http://charlesginnever.net!
and on Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles Ginnever
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The large, steel sculpture is intended to be re-Iocated to the park adjacent to the
HOAlRec.Bldg. in Palo Alto. This park is surrounded by a grove of redwoods and the
proposed site could address a scale transition between the sculpture and the trees. The
sculpture is proposed to be located opposite the picnic area, where people could sit and
appreciate the sculpture.
HP has provided colored drawings for staff and ARB review and discussion. The set
includes a site plan showing the existing location of the sculpture, plan and elevation
views of the proposed location. HP proposes to pass the cost of moving the piece to the
developer and has discussed including sculpture relocation onto the City's portion of the
development project this as part of a development agreement recently filed with the City
of Palo Alto to extend the recently granted approvals to be consistent with Mountain
View's approval timeline for the project within Mountain View city limits.
Attachment G
ATTACHMENT G
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TABLE
200 San Antonio Avenue (ARB Approval)
POLICY
Policy L-5: Maintain the scale and
character of the City. A void land uses that
are overwhelming and unacceptable due to
their size and scale.
Policy L-12: Preserve the character of
residential neighborhoods by encouraging
new or remodeled structures to be
i compatible with the neighborhood and
adjacent structures.
Policy L-14: Design and arrange new
multifamily buildings, including entries
and outdoor spaces, so that each unit has a
clear relationship to a public street.
Policy L-15: Preserve and enhance the
public gathering spaces within walking
distance of residential neighborhoods.
• Ensure that each residential neighborhood
has such spaces.
Policy L-17: Treat residential streets as
both public ways and neighborhood
amenities. Provide continuous sidewalks,
• healthy street trees, benches, and other .. amemtIes that favor pedestnans.
CONFORMANCE
The proposal of 45 units, rather than the
allowable 120, reduces the scale of the
project to create a smother transition
between the low density residential
neighborhood in Palo Alto across San
Antonio A venue and the proposed higher
density structures in Mountain View.
The proposed buildings would enhance the
character of the neighborhood and would
be in a consistent character with the
surrounding buildings that are both multi-
family, single-family. The shallow sloping
gables of the proposed design are a familiar
design element of the Eichler homes in the
area.
The front doors and entries have been
oriented to the street wherever possible.
Two separate parks will be provided within
the master plan development area in close
proximity to this development. One 2.13
acre park on Whitney Drive and one 1.40
acre park on Mayfield Avenue.
The proposed public streets will provide
i five foot wide public sidewalks separated
from the street by continuous rows of street
• trees. The sidewalk would be shaded by a
double row of trees, one on each SIde ofthe •
sidewalk. The sidewalks will provide
uninterrupted access through the site and
provide connections to existing sidewalks
off site. For pedestrian safety, narrow
street comers (bulb outs), are provided to
reduce the walking distance across the
streets.
I
I
Policy L-48: Promote high quality, creative The proposed development would be
design and site planning that is compatible compatible with adjacent development.
with surrounding development and public Building one, adjacent to the Rosewalk
spaces. townhomes, is very similar in height and
massing. Buildings two and three, adjacent
to the single story residences in Mountain
View, are reduced to two stories for
compatibility. The Palo Alto portion of the
development is a small part of a larger
master plan for the entire site that crosses
the city border into Mountain View.
Policy T-19: Improve and add attractive, Guest bicycle parking racks are provided at
secure bicycle parking at both public and two locations within the proposed
private facilities, including multi-modal development.
transit stations, on transit vehicles, in City
parks, in private developments, and at other
community destinations.
Policy N-15: Require new commercial, The proposed proj ect would provide a
multi-unit, and single family housing double row of street trees along all public
proj ects to provide street trees and related streets including A venue A and Whitney
irrigations systems. Drive.
10/1107
Russ Reich
Planning Dlrector
HlOme
Palo Alto Department ofPlannmg and Community Environment
250 Hamilton Ave.
Palo Alto, CA 94303
RE: P A Townhomes Green Measures
Dear
Attached to this letter is the Multifamily GreenPoint Checklist produced by the
Attachment I
Build It Organization. As Toll Brothers further the townhome units in Palo
Alto and Master Plan in Mt VIew we are aggressively looking into good green building
practices. As we get further down the road and start our workmg drawings, with
consultants on board we intend to continue integrating additional measures into our build-
out that will create "sustainable construction".
This letter summanzes the environmentally sustainable practices and construction
materials we are incorporating into our Townhome product in Palo Alto, and areas we are
researching.
l. Community/Site
€1 As an Infill Site we are close to mass transit and
neighborhood services
pedestlian access to
1'1 Minimum 65% of Construction Waste is recycled
2 FoundatIOn
(!) Utilize a minimum of30% Flyash in lieu of Portland Cement m Concrete
3 Landscaping
() 75% of Plants are Califorma Natives or other
infrequent watering.
w is less than 33 oflandscaped area
appropriate that reqUIre
;j) Installation of HIgh-Efficiency IUIgation Systems(low flow drip, bubblers,
sprinklers)
4. Structural Frame/Rough-m and Exterior Finish
c Engineered lumber IS for Joist system as well as for sheathing(OSB
subfloor, walls and roof).
tiiI Non-combustible cementitious lap siding
<'I Insulation will be 01350 Certified(no added fonnaldehyde)
€> Hi-efficiency furnace and AIC with non-HCFC rerngerants(Puron)
New York Stock Exchange'" TOL
Northern California Division
100 Park Place, Suite 140 0 San Ramon, CA 94583 0 (925) 855-0260 0 Fax 855-9927
5. Finishes
~ Low VOC pamts and wood fimshes.
e Recycled Shaw Green Edge Carpet wlll be offered at the commumhes
~ ENERGY STAR appliances will be installed
Toll is very eXClted about movmg forward with above implementations and
products as well as reVIewmg as we get into workmg drawmgs:
<Ii> PrOVIding a tankless Water Heatmg system
~ Installation of a Durable 40-yr compositlOn roofing
o InstallatlOll of water efficient plumbing fixtures
* Radiant Barrier sheathing
As we further into the desIgn we look forward to other opportunities to
implement towards good green bUlldmg practices.
Yours truly, JCTaM~·~ W Mark Evans Q
Toll Sf. PM
100 Park Place, Suite 140
San Ramon, CA 94583
925 855-0260
-,:.; 'i :':1: '.'-:-. ~ --:~.: .. ,,:, " :,;; ~ -.... ~ :;.;.;' "'~! ~
This checkllsllracks green features in a multifamily prOject The recommended minimum requirements for a green
home are Earn a total of 50 pOints or more; obtain the following minimum points per category Community (6),
Energy (11), Indoor Air Quality/Health (5), Resources (6), and Water (3), and meellhe prerequisites A . .3.a (50%
conslruction waste diversion), A.10.a (No shingle roofing) and N.1 (Incorporate GreenPoint checklisl in blueprints).
The green building practices listed below are described in greater detail in the Multifamily Green Building Guidelines,
available al wwwmultifamilygreenorg
E~'tie~~ ':1T(i;'t:E1~ (~C![l!dG·230~~~Gf0 .~:::~C)O~ l~£G(:·; of 'U\G: [~['Q,jG(t:
(~ntG'fi'· Ya'l~eJ1 ~'1on"'I;~Gsndievi!t~C;!rr ~~bO(tV LS~rG0~ ()f t;i.t'{)i!ecL
Percent of Project Dedicated to Residential Use
Palo Alto Townhomes
o o
1. Infill Sites
a. Project is Located Within an Urban Growth Boundary & Avoids Environmentally Sensilive Sites
b. Project Includes the Redevelopment of At Least One Existing Building
82,339
100%
~('~' ".
. -'
c. Housing Density of 15 Units Per Acre or More (1 pt for every 5 u/a) E'1I'er Project Oe!'siiy Numbel (1/1 Units Pel Acre)
d. Locate Within Existing Communily that has Sewer Line & Utilities in Place o
0
0
0
0
0
0 n LJ
0
o o o o
[]
o
e Project Redevelops a Brownfield Site or is Designaled a Redevelopment Area by a City
f. Site has Pedestrian Access Within Y, Mile to Neighborhood Services (1 Pt for 5 Or More, 2 Pts for 10 Or More):
[!] 1) Bank 0 2) Place of Worship
0 4) Day Care [!] 5) Cleaners
[!] 7) Hair Care [!] 8) Hardware
0 10) Library 0 11) Medical/Dental
[!] 13) Public Park [!] 14) Pharmacy
[!] 16) Restaurant 0 17) School
0 19) Commercial Office 0 20) Community Cenler
[!] 22) Convenience Store Where Meat & Produce are Sold
g. Proximity to Public Transit
2.
Development is Located Wilhin
1/4 Mile of One Planned or Current Bus Line Stop
1/4 Mile of Two or More Planned or Current Bus Line Stops
1/2 Mile of a Commuter Train/Light Rail Transit System
h. Reduced Parking Capacity:
Less than 1.5 Parking Spaces Per Unit
Less than 1.0 Parking Spaces Per Unit --.-.. -.... ----.---.... ~.--" .. -.... -...... " ..... -....... -.. " '-.
Mixed·Use Developmenls
0 3) Full Scale Grocery/Supermarket
0 6) Fire Station
0 9) Laundry
0 12) Senior Care Facility
0 15) Post Office
0 18) After School Programs
0 21) Theater/Entertainment
a. Al least 2% of Development Floorspace Supports Mixed Use (Non-Residential Tenants)
b. Half of Above Non-Reside,1tial Floorspace is Dedica:ed 10 ~~ejghborhGod Services .. " ... " ....• " ..... '''-'.'' --.. ~.... _ .... --' .. ' ." -" .. . .... -
3. Building Placement & Orientation
... , .... _ .. ~~_~rot~:t~.?il.~_,E.x~s.ti~g~l~nts.~.,!~ee:
4. Design for Walking & Bicycting
a. Sidewatks Are Physically Separated from Roadways & Are 5 Feet Wide
b. Traffic Calming Strategies Are Installed by the Developer
c. Provide Dedicated, Covered & Secure Bicycle Storage for 15% of Residents
d Provi~~ Secure~i9'cl: Storag~for~%o.f~on.Resi?:n~.al Tenant Empl?x~.es & VI~!~()rs.
5. Social Gathering Places
a, Outdoor Gathering Places for Residents (Average or 50 sf Per Unit Or More)
... b :.?u.!9.?or 9a 1~.er~n.~._~I~~:~ ~rovid.~~.at~r,~1 ~ lelllen t~JF()rco.n:p_ac'~/'e:~n/y,!.hls.p()inf no'~v~!,a?~. irA 5~iS c~ec~:d) .... ... '
6. Design for Safety and Natural Surveillance o a. All Main Entrances to the Building and Site are Prominent and Visible from the Street o b. Residence Entnes Have Views to Calters (Windows or Double Peep Holes) & Can Be Seen By Neighbors
MF GreenPoint Checklist 2005 Edition v.2
...... ,,_ ......... _-" ... " ........... .
Current Point Total 77
.. ,, ___ c.'. ;
-~
'-
Page 1 of 6
Palo Alto Townhomes >-~ '" <= UJ
7. Landscaping
rul.: CheNCk hpere irS/he landsc
l
3
1
PRe areo i
s
S
h
<10% orthe lolal site area Pro/eeis wii!; ciO% l,;r,(lseape UN: Gilly c/Jeel, lip to 3 boxes in :ili,. ser.fie)?
~ a. 0 lanl peCI€s WI equ<re eanng
b No planlings are cisled on the Invasive Planllnvenlory by the California invasive Planl Council
c. Specify California Nalive or Mediterranean Species [hal ReqUife Occasional, lillie or No Summer Walenng
d. Creale Drought Resislanl Soils o i Mulch All Planting Beds (0 a Depth of 2 Inches or Grealer as Per Local Ordinance o i, Amend with 1 Inch of Composl or as per Sod Analysis 10 Reach 15% SOli Orgall!C Maller
e. Design & Inslall High·Efficiency Irrigalion Syslem
i. Specify Smarl (Weather·Based) Irngation Controllers
ii. Specify Drip, Bubblers or Low·Flow Spflnklers lor All Non T uri Landscape Areas
( Group Plants by Waler Needs (Hydrozones) in Planting Plans & Identify Hydrozones on Irrigallon Plans
g Minimize Turf in Landscape Installed by Builder
G j Do Nol Specify Turf on Slopes Exceeding 10% or in Areas Less Than 8 Feet Wide
".~~._~:s.~J~~r:: .. ~~~._~!"p:II.L~d.~.~~£,.~~.!::re-" .. ls as Turf AND All Turf has Waler
8. Building Performance E)(ceeds Title 24
filter tliG PerCent ij.Dove rhe 2005 Version or nNe 24 F?0Sideilii8i ali(; Non-I"<esil1enii2i PorilOI!S 0n!!(.; PwjecL i-":"H~i·o:":'j."" a. Residences 2 Poinls for Every 1% Above 2005 T24 (Weighted Average Up To 30 Total Poinls for Measure 8 a & b)
b Non·Residenllal Spaces 2 Poinls for Every 1% Above 2005 T24 (Up To 30 Tolal Points for Measure 8 a & b)
: J :;he[;J[ herG iF using 2C01vsrsion of Title 20. '; J,....;;;;;;;"'...I {v;t:;tery 1% l:hove 2001 Titla 24.
9. Cool Site o 3. At least 30% 01 the Sile Includes Cool Sile Techniques
10 Adaptable BUIldings
a. Include Universal Design Principles in Unils
50% at Unils
80% 01 Units o b. live/Work Unils Include A Dedicated Commercial Entrance
o
G
,"~-'''-"<--' ,-',,-,
11. Affofdabdity
1.
a. A Percentage 01 Units are Dedicated to Households Making 80% or Less of AMI
10% of All Units
20%
30%
50% or More
b. Develop'~~~~ Includes
Divert a Porlion of all Conslruction 8. Demolition Was Ie:
a. f·;'&(uireci Diverl50%
b. Divef16S%
Constfuctlon Material Efficiencies
a. Lumber is Delivered Pre·Cut from Supplier (80% or More of Tolal Board Feel)
b. Componenls of Ihe Projecl Are Pre-Assembled Off-Sile & Delivered 10 Ihe Project
25% of Total Square Footage
50% of T alai Square Footage o 75% of Tolal
3 Construction Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Management Plan
o
8. Minimum ,25':0 Recycle.d for Fill, Backfill & Other Uses
2. Recycled Flyash in Concrete
a. Flyash or Slag is Used to Displace a Parllon of Portland Cernenl in Concrele
E 20%
30% or More
MF GreenPoinl CheCkis1 2005 Edition v. 2
:" -
-= <h '" -;;; :: '" => ::c 0 :;; a '" ~ ~ '" s 0::
Page 2 of 6
· Palo Alto Townhomes
3. FSC·Certified Wood lor Framing Lumber
8. FSC·Certifled Wood for a Percentage of All DimenSional Studs
40% o 70%
b. FSC-Cerlifled Panel Products for a Percentage of Ail Sheathing (OSB & Plywood)
40%
70%
>',,~ "_ •• "P •••• _ •• _,,'.. " ,_" • ,., ••
4. Engineered Lumber or Steel Studs, Joists, Headers & Beams
a 90% or More 01 All Floor & Ceiling Joists
b. 90% or More of Ail Studs
c. 90% or More of All Headers & Beams
5. Optimal Value Engineering Framing
3. Siuds al 24" Centers on Top Floor Exterior Walls &/or All Interior Walls
b. Door & Window Headers Sized for Load
c._u.~.~ . .?~Iy'.J~c.k & Siuds
6. Steel Framing
....~ .. ~.jt!~~:.Lh !:~~~I •. ~~!9.RI~~_~~n_sl~~~1n.9,E:!e.f!~: _I,n.s u la I ion
7. Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) Or Other Solid Wall Systems
a. SIPs Or Olher Solid Wall Syslems are Used lor 80% of All
Floors
Walls
Roofs
a. 75% 01 All Rool Trusses Have Raised Heels
9. Insulation
a. All Ceitmg, Wall & Floor Insulation is 01350 Certified OR Conlains No Added Formaldehyde
b. All. C.e.!Ii~9.:.~~n.~ Flo0r.I~sulay?n H~:_ a HecY,cled Content ?,f5~'Y.~_ or More
10. Durable Roollng Options
a. R&quirect: No Shingle Roofing OR All Shingle Roofing Has 3-Yr Subcontractor Guarantee & 20·Yr Manufacturer Warranty.
__ .~. !\I1~!ope,? ~~~f~~ ~_M~teri~l,s.~~rry~~O:'(~a.r_~anu fa~turer,Wa,rra~ty.
11. Moisture Shedding & Mold Avoidance
a Building(s) Include a Definitive Drainage Plane Under Siding
[J b. Bathroom Fans are Supplied in All Bathrooms, Are Exhausted to the Outdoors & Are EqUipped with Conlrols
o
,c. __ ~,~lil:i~~rn of 80o/~ ol.K.iI~hen~ange Ho.?~s Are Venled to the Exterior
12 Green Roofs
a. A Portion ollhe Low·Slope Roof Area IS Covered By A Vegelated or "Green" Roof
25%
8. Orientation. At Least 40% of the Units Face Direclly South o b. Shading On All South-Facing Windows Allow Sunlight to Penetrate in Winter, Not in Summer
c. Therm~l~ass __ .At_Least50% of lh~Floor Area ~ir:Glly_?~_hln~
2 Radiant Hydronic Space Heating
o a'.,ln.~_ta_II_~~?~~nl~ydr?rJic Heating for IAO.p~rp?ses.(No Force.d. ~.ifJ.inJ',11 ReSidences
3. Solar Water Heating
a. Pre·Plumb for Solar Hot Water
_b~.In.~I,~I!S.O:~~~?_t_~lat:r~t:t::~_I?r. Pre~~~~i~g~Hvy_ .
4. Air Conditioning with Advanced Retrlgerants
a. Ins tail AirConditioning wit~ Non-HCFC H~frigeranls
5. Advanced Ventilation Pracfices
Perform the Following Praclices in Residences
a. Infiltration Testing by a C-HERS Raler for Envelope Sealing & Reduced Infiltration
b. Operable Windows or Skylights Are Placed To Induce Cross Venlilalion (AI Least One Room In 80% 01 Unils) o c. Ceiling Fans in Bedroom & Living Room OR Whole, House Fan isUsed
6. Ga;age Ventilation
a. Garage Ventiiation Fans Are Controiled by Carbon Monoxide Sensors (Passive Ventilation Does Not. Count)
MF GreenPoint Checklist 2005 Edition v 2
£' :£ ~
5 '" >-((; u
E '" :;; e' ::J: ~ E a 0 <ll <n 0 c: '" '" U LW ~ C!:; s
Page 3 of 6
Paio A~to Townhomes
7. Low-Mercury Lamps
a Low-Mercury Producls Are Inslalled Wherever Linear Fluorescenl Lamps Are Used
b L()~:I~~r.c~!LPrCl.~~.~~~ ~~e Ins~~I.I:_d .. W~erever Compacl Fluorescenl L~r:r:ps Are Used
8. Light Pollution Reduction
3. Exterior Luminaires Emil No Light Anove Horizontal OR Are Dark Sky CertifJed
.. b .. ~?~lr~I_I~gh!.~r.~spa.~: ()nl~~~I_g~?ori~g.Ar~~s.Thr0u.gh A.p'p~opri_~!e Fixture Selec!ion & Placement
9. Onsite Electricity Generation o a Pre-Wire for Pholovollaics & Plan for Space (Clear Areas on Roof & In MeChanical Room)
b. Install Photovollaics to OHset a Percent of lhe Projec!'s Total Estimaled Eleclricity Demand
10%
20%
30% or more
c. Educational Display is Provided in a Viewable Public Area
'_T_ ,. . ........ .
10. Elevators
a. Gearless Elevalors Are Inslalled
,~ .. '_ ~,~. _, _ .... ~ ..... _ ..... ~.~ ._ .• _ ... __ '· __ k·._·.·. ___ .~, . __ •. ~ •• '_.
11. ENERGY STAR®Appliances
a. Install ENERGY STAR Refrigerators In All Locations
ENERGY STAR·Qualified
ACEEE-Listed Refrigeralors
b. Install ENERGY STAR Oishwashers in All Localions
All Dishwashers Are ENERGY STAR-qualified
Residential-grade Oishwashers Use No More than 6.5 Gallons Per Cycle
install ENERGY STAR Clothes Washers In All Locations
in Residences
12. Central Laundry
a. ~e.nlra: L~~nd.fY F acilities Ar~ :r?~I?:~ for All Occupants
13. Water·Efficient Fixtures
a. All Showerheads Use 2.0 Gallons Per Minute (gpm) or Less
b High·Efficiency Toilets Use 1.28 gpf or Less or Are Dual Flush
In Ali Residences
In Atl Non-Residential Areas
c. Install High Efficiency Urinals (0.5 gpl or less) or NoWaler Urinals Wherever Urinals Are Specified
Average flush rale is 0.5 gallons per flush or less
Average nush rate is 0.1 gallons per nush or less
d. Flow Limilers Or Flow Conlrol Valves Are Installed on All Faucets
ReSidences: Kitchen· 2.0 gpm or less
Non·Residential Areas: Kitchen· 2.0 gpm or less
Residences: Balhroom Faucets-1.5 gpm or less
Non-ReSidential Areas; Bathroom Faucets· 1.5 gpm or less
. e.: N?n:.~:.~i~:.n.!~al.~!e.~.s.._ln~.~aH.~~e:.R.!~~:. ~era.y. ~av.es.l~g~.':1rn~r~Ia.I_~llchens 1:6gPm or less
14. Source Water Efficiency
a, Use Recycled Water for Landscape Irrigation or 10 t:lush Toilets/Urinals
b. Use Captured Rainwater for Landscape Irrigalion or to Flush 5% 01 Toilets &/or Urinals
c. Water is Submetered for Each Residential Unit & Non-ReSidential Tenant
1. Construction Indoor Air Quality Management
a. P~!.f?~rr:.~ 2·1J'J?:,<.":"'hol:S.~~~I~g Flush-_()~I~ri"or to?~cupancy
2. Entryways
a Provide Permanent Walk-Off Mats and Shoe Storage al Ail Home Entrances
b Perl1lane~tWalk()~_~ySlernS ~!~ Provided ~t~AII Main. Buildlng~n~rances & In ~ornmon A.~eas
3 Recycling & Waste Collection
a. Residences Provide Buill-In Recycling.Ce~t~r In Each Unit
MF GreenPoint Checklist 2005 Edilion v.2
"~ c: " E
E o C>
4 of 6
,. j
,,-..... ,
,
· Pa~o Alto Townhomes
4 Use LowINo-VOC Paints & Coatings
a. Low· VOC Interior PalOls «50 gpl VOC, (Flai) and <150 gpl VOCs (Non·Flal))
In All Residences o In All Non-Residential Areas
b. Zero·VOC: InleriorPainls «5 gpl VOCs (Flal))
In All F~esidences o In All Non·Residential Areas
c. Wood Coatings Meellhe Green Seal Standards for Low-VOCs
In All Residences o In All Non·Residential Areas
d. Wood Stains Meelthe Green Seal Standards for Low· VOCs
tn All Resrdences
In All Non·Residential Areas:
5. Use Recycled Content Exterior Paint
.. "" ..... ~:.~~~. ~e~r~"'.d_~?~.I:~t .~~i~.I.~n._50.~~.?~~II. Ex.~e~lors
6. Low-VOC Construction Adhesives
7 Environmentally Preferable Materials fOf Intenor
.£ :E '"' '" '" E '" u
'" '" :x:: E a '" '" 0 ::; <l> U C!::
Use Environmentally Preferable Materials for Interior Finish A) FSC-Certifled Wood, 8) Reclaimed Lumber, C) Rapidly Renewable D) Recycled-Content or E) Finger·Jointed
a. Residences AI Leas! 50% of Each Material
i. Cablnels
ii. Interior Trim o Iii Shelving
iv. Doors
0
0
0
0
v. Counlertops
b. Non-Residentr31 Areas At Leasl 50% of Each Material
i. Cabinets
il Inierior Trrm
iii. ShelVing
Iv. Doors
v. Cou nlerlops
, .. -~.,-,-.---~"-'-
8. Reduce Formaldehyde in Interior Finish Materials
Reduce Formaldehyde in Inlerior Finish Materials (Section 01350) for At Least 50% of Each MalerialBelow:
a. Residences'
i. Cabinets
il Inlerror Trim
iiI. Shelving
IV. Subfioor
b. Non-Residential Areas'
i. Cabinels
Ii. Inlerior Trim
iii Shelving
iv. Subfioor
9 Environmentally Preferable Flooring
..
Use Environmentally Preferable Floorrng A) FSC·Certified or Reclaimed Wood, 8) Rapidty Renewable Flooring Malerials, C) Recycled-Conlenl Ceramic Tiles, D) Exposed
Concrele as Finrshed Floor or E) Recyclea·Contenl Carpet Note. Floorrng Adhesives Must Have <50 gpl VOCs
a. Residences
i. Minimum 15% or Floor Area
[I] ii. Minimum 30% of Floor Area
iii. Minimum 50% of Ftoor Area
iv. Minimum 75% of Floor Area
b. Non ·Residential Areas' o i. Minimum 15% of Floor Area
ii. Minimum 30% of Floor Area o iii. Minimum 50% of Floor Area o iv Minimum 75% of Floor Area
.« .•••. ,., ,. ~ ~. ..' ."
10. Low-Emitting Flooring
a. Residences' Flooring Meets Section 01350 or CRI Green Label Plus Requrremerrts (50% MinImum) o b. Non·Residential Areas Flooring Meets Section 01350 or CRI Green Label Plus Requirements (50% Minimum)
MF GreenPOfnt Checklist 2005 Edition v.2 Page 5 of 6
. Palo Alto Townhomes
?: ::: c " ~ i::' E 0> <5 ,2 E :;; II> 0 c: ., ~ u UJ a::
11. Durable Cabinets
Inslall Durable Cabinets in All:
12. Furniture & Outdoor Structures o a. Play Structures & Suriaces Have an Overall Average Recycled COl1tenl Greater Than 20% o b. Environmentally Preferable Exterior Site Furmshlngs
c At Least 25% of All .• ~.c __ . __ • __ ._. ._._._ .•. _ .. _ .. c~_
a. ProJ:ctlndudes Vandalls.rn~:sjstafll Finishes.~nd~tra.legies
M.int,,,n:'nrp Manuals
a. Provide O&M Manual to Building Maintenance Staff
a. Residenls Are Offered Free or Discounled Transil Passes
._,_~_" .... ,".'~" __ ,~~,." __ .. "._,, .......... ~ ".~,. ,,"' __ """_'H'" ..... _ •. _.w._. __ ._ •• _.~' .• ,.,., M"'"
4. Educational Signage
a ~d.u.C~liona.L~I~~a.~e~ig~li~11tr~~& ~xp,tai~l~g the Green Features is Included
5. Vandalism Management Plan
• a.~r_oJec~ Includes a Vandalism M;lnl'!rIPITIPnl Plan for De.al'n.g wilh Dist .. ur~ances
6. Innovalion: Lisl innovative measures .hat meelthe green building objeclrves 01 the Multifamily Guidelmes. 'Enter up to a 4 Points in each calegory Poinls will be evaluated;
by local jur,sdiction or GreenPoint raler
ti' I nnovation in Community Enler up to 4 Points alleft Enler description here
II I nnovalion in Energy: Enter up to 4 Points alleh. Enter description here
{} I nnovation in IAQJHealth: Enter up to 4 Points alleft Enter description here
G I nnovation in Resources: Enter up 104 Points at left Enter descriplion here
fi I nnovation in Waler: Enter up to 4 POints at left Enter description here
.§~mmCJ.'Y .,.,.
MF GreenPoint CheCklist
POints Achieved from Specific Categories
Current Pornt Total
2005 Eoition v.2 Page 6 of 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
ATTACHMENTD
Planning and Transportation Commission
May 27, 2009 Approved Verbatim Minutes (approved June 24, 2009)
EXCERPT
Commissioner Fineberg: I will be recusing myself on the next item regarding the development
at 200 San Antonio. My husband is employed by Hewlett Packard so I have a personal conflict
of interest.
Chair Garber: Thank you. Five minute break.
Public Hearing:
2. 200 San Antonio Road: Request by Hewlett Packard for review and recommendation to
City Council to approve a Development Agreement extending the Architectural Review
and Vesting Tentative Map with Exceptions approvals for five years and providing
additional project benefits of the approved 45-unit townhome development.
Environmental Assessment: An Environmental Impact Report has been completed in
accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. Zone
Districts: ROLM and RM-30.
Chair Garber: Folks, lets get started. This is item number two, 200 San Antonio Avenue. A
request by Hewlett Packard for approval of a Development Agreement extending the
Architectural Review and Vesting Tentative Map with Exceptions approvals for five years and
providing additional project benefits of the approved 45 unit townhome development in ROLM
and RM-30 zone districts. Would Stafflike to make a presentation?
Ms. Amy French, Current Planning Manager: Yes, and I will make it rather short. Thank you,
Chair Garber and Commissioners. The Development Agreement is to extend the ARB and
Vesting Tentative Map approvals. It does note that the owner shall comply with and perform all
of the conditions of approval of those approvals. I want to note that we are looking at an end
date of February 26,2014, as far as the effective date. The applicant has made note of that and
he can present anything surrounding that. It would coordinate with the Mountain View
extensions of the Mountain View approvals. Of course, the project is heavily a Mountain View
project with just a mere 45 units in our city. So the Mountain View approvals are the ones that
they will be really interested in having a developer have a consistency between the two approvals
for anybody who does buy this parcel and develop it.
The project benefits of extending the development approvals includes the Ginnever Sculpture,
which you have a copy of the map which is helpful to see where the sculpture is now on the
Mountain View side and where it is proposed to be located as noted in the report from Staff. As
noted, this did go to the Architectural Review Board and Public Arts Commission for review of
the proposed location. As also noted in the report, the Development Agreement procedures and
requirements are governed by Resolution 6597, which notes that this is a legislative act. It is
approved by ordinance by Council and is subject to referendum. It also requires the Director to
review annually development agreements to make sure there is good faith compliance with the
1 tenns ofthe agreement. Again, the extensions are not a whole lot longer than what would be
2 allowed as far as the Vesting Tentative Map because the Subdivision Map Act does allow
3 extensions without a development agreement. So it extends it just a bit longer than those.
4
5 The staff just became aware tonight of an email that was sent from a neighbor in the
6 Greenmeadow Homeowner's Association, Penny Ellson. I believe it was put at places. We
7 found it on the back table. So I have shared that with the applicant who is here to present to you.
8 Just to clarify that the EIR covered some of these things.
9
10 Chair Garber: Excuse me Amy I don't think it was at places.
11
12 Ms. French: Oh, okay.
13
14 Chair Garber: Did anybody else get it? So you may want to review that.
15
16 Ms. French: Okay. It was received I guess Monday evening and Julie and I found it on the back
17 table today and I shared it with the applicant. So let's get it to you. It has three questions and a
18 comment; it has a comment on the submittal. As I said, the applicant is ready to address several
19 of those and I am happy to answer questions about it. Basically the first question relates to the
20 EIR and the analysis of approved projects and future reviews ofprojects. It would consider this
21 as an approved project for future review of traffic analysis for other projects that are going to
22 come in the future. The second question has to do with the fact that there is a property, the
23 William Kelley parcel, which you may remember from your review of the Tentative Map not
24 many months ago where they are doing a phase one analysis of the hazardous materials to make
25 sure there are no hazardous materials. The City would not want to acquire a dirty site so as part
26 of the conveyance document, it was actually analyzed in the EIR presented there, and as part of
27 any conveyance document to the City it would have mitigation for the applicant to clean up prior
28 to the City's acquisition of such parcel. Then the third question has to do with maintaining the
29 tunnel access during construction. On page four ofthe Staff Report as well as page six of the
30 Development Agreement we cover that, as far as after the demolition and during redevelopment
31 we would have access through the site preserved. That pretty much sums up what I was going to
32 say. As I note the applicant is here to make a presentation.
33
34 Chair Garber: You will have 15 minutes.
35
36 Ms. Caporgno: Before the applicant begins I would like to respond to the first question from Ms.
37 Ellson a little bit more about the Development Agreement and the traffic analysis. I think what
38 is being questioned is whether or not we are going to consider the site as being vacant for future
39 traffic analysis as they come forward before the project is actually built. That would not be the
40 case. Now that project is assumed to have 45 units on it. So any subsequent traffic analysis for
41 any future development in that area would assume that traffic on that property. So therefore it
42 would be in addition to whatever their impacts would be.
43
44 Chair Garber: Please.
45
1 Mr. Douglas Aikins, Palo Alto: Good evening Mr. Chainnan and Commissioners. I am with the
2 law finn of Rattan and Tucker in Palo Alto. I am representing Hewlett Packard. I would add
3 only to Julie's comment that all 481 units would be considered for planning and EIR purposes as
4 existing and their impacts would be factored into every subsequent environmental analysis in
5 that area.
6
7 I think the staff report in summary covered the project very well and I would only add a couple
8 of context comments in addition to speaking to Ms. Ellson's objections. By way of context the
9 same real estate financial crisis that cast Hewlett Packard in the role of a more or less unwilling
10 real estate developer has also placed a crucial premium on certainly and stability in the land use
11 approvals that have been granted over the last five years by both Mountain View and Palo Alto.
12 It took a long time to get them. They are very complex. They interrelate well. They address
13 literally hundreds of issues and the prospect of them unraveling in 18 months or less as current
14 land use approvals expire is intimidating and potentially fatal to a quick and successful
15 conveyance of the site into the hands an expert residential developer. Not only did Hewlett
16 Packard have to become a real estate developer overnight it had to become a residential
17 developer capable of game planning exactly what a buyer for the property would want to see.
18 Foremost among the things a buyer for the site would want to see is a very stable, relatively
19 certain set of land use approvals that can be properly priced that will detennine the value for the
20 property.
21
22 So Hewlett Packard came to the City of Palo Alto and to Mountain View relatively late in the
23 process and said this is the feedback we are getting from the buying community, the local expert
24 developers that you are familiar with, and we need a Development Agreement. Mountain View
25 was quick to accommodate with a Development Agreement that produced both party's best
26 guesses as to what the duration of time would be needed for the real estate financing crisis to
27 abate and things to get back to nonnal. They enacted one extending their land use approvals for
28 five years with the proviso that provided that all of the complex infrastructure improvements
29 would be bonded for and financially secured and a Final Map issued on that basis within the five
30 years. Then an additional three years would be available if necessary. Again, assuming that our
31 best guesses as to the duration of the current financial crisis might be off.
32
33 The financial reality driving that is the potential disaster scenario that expiring development
34 approvals could force the buyer, the project developer, to rely on insufficient or fragile financing
35 particularly construction financing and start demolition and construction prematurely, before the
36 financing picture was solid or affordable or feasible, leading to the potential scenario of a half-
37 built project and defaults in loans and a disappointment of all of the community expectations
38 both in Palo Alto and in Mountain View.
39
40 So the financial reality Mountain View, and we hope Palo Alto, recognize and accommodate is
41 one in which the developer needs time in which to select the moment at which it will obtain
42 construction financing, begin a roughly $2.5 million demolition process, and then begin
43 construction of a very complicated property. The approved building types are very complex and
44 difficult to finance because there is underground parking with four or five stories of building
45 above that. You can't build those in chunks you have to build them simultaneously and they cost
46 tens and tens of millions of dollars. So we are in effect accommodating the developer
1 community by providing the certainty that they require in order to get financing at all and make
2 the project approvals a reality as soon as possible.
3
4 I can only underscore that these Development Agreements are crucial to Hewlett Packard. They
5 are financially imperative to conveyance of the site and commencement of construction as soon
6 as feasible. I will be happy to answer any questions.
7
8 Before I get that I would like to speak briefly to the objections raised by Ms. Ellson. Her first
9 point to the effect that the developer could build the project virtually unimpeded by potential
10 future land use regulation changes is true but it is one side of a whole issue. While this
11 Development Agreement does protect against future land use regulation changes the very
12 certainty that future land use regulation changes will not overburden financially, or radically
13 restructure or redesign the project, is a crucial element in allowing a developer to not only
14 understand the financial obligations of building out the project but also be able to plan a timeline
15 during which the proj ect can be built without having to go back to the either city or both cities
16 for additional land use approvals. I can speak further to that issue if you wish. It is a very
17 important statewide policy issue that actually prompted the enactment of the development
18 agreement statute in the late 1970s, particular pertaining to large complex multiple phase projects
19 like this one.
20
21 The EIR issue, the second paragraph, she notes I think it can be characterized as her opinion on a
22 technical issue that the Mountain View City Council has resolved already in certifying the EIR.
23
24 Amy has spoken already to item number one. Item number two, I think there is no reason to
25 expect that any hazardous level one materials study would be an impediment to the conveyance.
26 That is a diagnostic study, it would simply say this is what we found on the site, the site has been
27 within Palo Alto's control for 30-plus years, and I doubt that there is anything there other than
28 what is there on other center medians and other traffic effected pieces of real estate. There are
29 no changes to that underpass area proposed by the new development. So her worry about
30 impeding a conveyance I think is unfounded.
31
32 The tunnel access issue, number three, there are no changes to the pedestrian tunnel proposed in
33 the new project. As Amy mentioned the Development Agreement explicitly requires that all
34 existing access will stay open until construction commences. That is an important issue for Palo
35 Alto and Mountain View both. The Development Agreement has regulated that issue. We are
36 perfectly content with that regulation. When first demolition and then construction begin of
37 course the site will be fenced and it will be an active construction site, a large one. So
38 unavoidably for the interim period the public will have to just avoid and go around an active
39 construction site until the new streets and new access ways are built. I hope that takes care of the
40 issues that have been raised and I will be happy to answer any questions you have.
41
42 Chair Garber: Commissioner Tuma and then Keller.
43
44 Vice-Chair Tuma: First a question for Amy. You said they would be allowed to get a certain
45 amount of time extended anyway and that it is only a little bit of difference. Can you quantify
46 that difference?
1
2 Ms. French: Yes, the ARB approval was extended to the adoption of the Vesting Tentative Map
3 approval. That was in February of this year, by City Council. So technically then the ARB
4 approval would go until next year, February 9, with an option for the applicant to request a one
5 more year extension. The ARB permit could conceivably expire February 9,2011 as opposed to
6 February 2014. so that is a three-year difference. The Vesting Tentative Map, again because of
7 the Subdivision Map Act, could extend all the way out to February 9,2011 unless the Final Map
8 is submitted. It can be extended by Council without a DeVelopment Agreement up to five years
9 beyond the expiration so even without a Development Agreement Council could extend it five
10 years beyond 2011 so that would be 2015.
11
12 Again, because the applicant is interested in selling the site it is important to do it this way with
13 the Development Agreement but I don't think it is all that different from what could be done by
14 Council.
15
16 Vice-Chair Tuma: Okay. So I am going to go straight to comments. In looking at this,
17 particularly Exhibit 1, Attachment A, the memorandum from the applicant, the last two
18 paragraphs I find it particularly compelling. I think the request is very reasonable and I see no
19 reason to not support the request.
20
21 My only concern is, and this is another question for Staff, we talked about this a little bit in pre-
22 Commission. Is there anything that the City of Palo Alto needs to do to protect itself from the
23 impacts of any delays? What I am thinking about in particular is essentially what I gleaned from
24 the math we just did is this basically gives them as a matter of right once this is defined
25 something two years longer than what they could otherwise get, which is five years instead of
26 three years. So it seems to me that if we have any ordinances that get passed in that intervening
27 time that would otherwise entitle the City to something whether it is impact fees or something
28 like that would it be appropriate to instead of that curtain going down now it would go down now
29 three years from now? So it would give them the certainty of the extended amount of time but
30 not impede Palo Alto's ability to get certain impact fees or other changes in ordinances that
31 would be applicable. Is that appropriate under these circumstances?
32
33 Mr. Larkin: I think if you look at Section five on page eight of the Agreement that actually
34 addresses the issue. It says that any fees, assessments, dedication, taxes payable in connection
35 with the development, construction, occupancy, and use shall be those applicable to similar
36 developments in the City at the time of the issuance of the Building Permits. So that does give
37 the City that flexibility. The only thing that is excluded from that is the Quimby Act fees. I was
38 reminded that the reason that we excluded Quimby Act fees to begin with is that the project is in
39 compliance providing more than adequate parkland. The difficulty is the parkland that is being
40 provided is on the site but it is not in the city limits and that is where the confusion comes in.
41
42 Vice-Chair Tuma: So in that paragraph it says no other project-specific fee, assessment,
43 exaction, or required dedication policy not in effect on the effective date. What would be the
44 effective date?
45
1 Mr. Larkin: The effective date is the date of Council passage. But again, it is unless it is
2 imposed uniformly on all similar projects. So ifthe City passes a citywide impact fee on certain
3 developments it would apply to this project. Normally that would not be the case with a Vesting
4 Tentative Map.
5
6 Vice-Chair Tuma: Okay, it sounds like that is covered. I am not prepared to make a motion at
7 this time but under the circumstances I see no reason not to be supportive of granting the
8 Development Agreement or recommending it anyway.
9
10 Chair Garber: Let's see if there are other questions and then perhaps we can come back to you to
11 make the motion. Commissioner Keller and then Lippert.
12
13 Commissioner Keller: So with respect to the timeline I notice that even under environmental
14 review it says that this went to the Commission on January 14, 2009 that date is not to be seen
15 within the timeline. So I am assuming that the fact that it went to the Planning Commission
16 should be in the timeline and is not there.
17
18 What I do remember at the meeting of January 14, 2009 when we had Toll Brothers here is that I
19 asked the gentleman from Toll Brothers whether they were planning to develop this or whether
20 they were planning to sell the rights or somehow transfer the right to develop to somebody else.
21 I was told unequivocably by Toll Brothers that they were planning to develop them themselves.
22 Yet, one month and three days later we get the application for the Development Agreement. In
23 fact that was eight days after the Council approved the Tentative Map. While I certainly have no
24 beef with Hewlett Packard trying to proceed this forward this does indicate that the statement
25 was somewhat misleading by Toll Brothers. Ijust want to point that out for the record. The
26 gentleman here from Hewlett Packard did not make that statement and should not be blamed for
27 it but does indicate some lack of clarity in terms of the statement made by Toll Brothers.
28
29 I have a couple of concerns. One is what is the timing of the conveyance of the William Kelley
30 parcel to the City with respect to this potentially eight-year timeline?
31
32 Mr. Akins: That is required by Condition 3 on page ten of ARB approval. It simply says it must
33 acquire it and I don't know of a required point in the sequence of events by which it must be
34 acquired. In order to obtain a Final Map all the conditions ofthe Tentative Map and the ARB
35 approval must be satisfied. So either this parcel must have been acquired by the time of issuance
36 of a Final Map or it must have been a performance of acquisition must have been guaranteed by
37 provision of an adequate financial security subject to the approval ofthe Staff and City Attorney.
38
39 Commissioner Keller: So it seems to me that part of the Development Agreement I think should
40 have a time line with respect to the conveyance of that parcel.
41
42 Mr. Akins: If! may, the acquisition is a mandatory prerequisite to issuance of a Final Map so it
43 must occur. Arbitrarily picking a time in space by which it must occur would probably not be as
44 effective as allowing the acquisition process to proceed because the acquisition is a two-step
45 event. The obligation is placed first on the owner, which would be a developer to be named later
46 at that time. That person would go and attempt to acquire it through private negotiations. If
1 those negotiations fail the owner, the developer at that time, will come back to Palo Alto and say
2 we have failed. Here are appraisals for the property. Here is our last best offer. Here is a
3 percentage surcharge that we think might be agreed to in a negotiation with the Kelley heirs, and
4 here Palo Alto is a check or a financial device of some sort in a certain amount, satisfactory to
5 the Staff and City Attorney that will guarantee that that property can be acquired through
6 eminent domain.
7
8 Commissioner Keller: If eminent domain turns out to be greater in cost.
9
10 Mr. Akins: We would make up the difference.
11
12 Commissioner Keller: You would make up the difference.
13
14 Mr. Akins: When I say we, it is the owner at the time, the person who wants that Final Map.
15 Palo Alto has a hammer that is unavoidable.
16
17 Commissioner Keller: Thank you. The second issue is I am concerned about the idea of early
18 demolition prior to an approved plan or Building Pennit issued for the new thing. The problem
19 is that essentially you would be creating something that is more, to me at least, more blight than
20 what currently exists. Rubble or sort of the removal of the existing building and the big expanse
21 of land I am not sure if that is better than what exists. I am wondering if it makes sense to defer
22 the demolition and perhaps put the building to some use in the interim rather than demolishing it
23 potentially eight years or so prior to I am not sure. There is at least five years between now
24 and when the Final Map can be approved and then it could be a year or two after that when
25 construction begins. So potentially it could be five, six, seven years of rubble.
26
27 Mr. Akins: If! may I could answer that to the Chair. Maintenance of the building in a lights out
28 condition, the building complex, costs nearly $2.0 million a year for security, inspections,
29 maintenance, and cleanup, you name it, people dump stuffthere, and a variety of community
30 organizations request pennission to use the facility for various things. Hewlett Packard provides
31 them for free but they cost money to Hewlett Packard. Hewlett Packard's motivation, and it
32 happens to dovetail perfectly with Mountain View's motivation, is to get rid ofthese buildings as
33 soon as possible. They are expensive, relatively dangerous, they are sort of an attractive
34 nuisance to people who want to go into empty buildings and do whatever they want to do there.
35 The cost of having them present is extraordinary compared to the benefit, and this Development
36 Agreement and the Mountain View Development Agreement both provide that we would be
37 starting immediately with negotiations and discussions on the technical merits of Mountain View
38 issuing a comprehensive master demolition pennit. That would address a long list of roughly 20
39 policy items that Mountain View has identified where it wants to properly coordinate the
40 sequence oftenninating utilities on the site, fencing, security provisions, what have you, off haul
41 of demolition waste. It is a big deal to take away an industrial complex like this. Mountain
42 View is focused on this extensively. They want the buildings gone as soon as possible. It is
43 roughly a $2.5 million process to demolish them. it is going to take roughly six months to get a
44 demolition pennit at all, and then roughly eight or nine or ten months, something like that to do
45 the demolition work. It is a major undertaking and it is under rather comprehensive management
46 by Mountain View. Hewlett Packard's request is that Palo Alto not inject its own additional
1 policy priorities into that process beyond what is expressed in the Development Agreement
2 already. The Palo Alto Staffhas gone through that and they provided for coordination between
3 the two building departments but once again Hewlett Packard is seeking a clarity and a
4 simplicity of the regulatory process that will translate in the eyes of the buyer of the site into a
5 bigger check. If the buyer of the site has to deal with two municipalities with competing and
6 conflicting requirements the site becomes less valuable.
7
8 Commissioner Keller: Thank you. So let's suppose this moves forward as you envision and a
9 year and a half from now the demolition is complete and there are presumably somewhere on the
10 order of three to six years after that before construction starts. What will be the state of the site
11 during that interim period?
12
13 Mr. Akins: A fenced grassy meadow punctuated by roads. The roadway network will remain.
14 Well, not necessarily, I take back, sorry. As long as possible the roadway network will remain
15 and at some point it will either have to be a set of roadways, existing roadways in the gaps
16 among fenced grassy sites or the entire area including the removed roadways will exist. That
17 will be immediately prior to construction. Palo Alto has required that the roadways remain as
18 long as possible to provide continuing community access to the site and that can be done. That is
19 feasible.
20
21 Commissioner Keller: So presumably getting onto my final question here is that other than as
22 needed during the demolition process and subsequently during the construction process there will
23 be continuous access for the bike lane from Nita into Mountain View.
24
25 Mr. Akins: As expressed in the Development Agreement. I don't recall specifically whether
26 your example is addressed there but the Development Agreement addresses it in a relatively
27 comprehensive way.
28
29 Mr. Larkin: It is all access via the roadways through the site shall remain open. Also the
30 Development Agreement has a provision that requires that the landscaping be maintained so as
31 not to create a public nuisance. So there would not be piles of rubble the site would be
32 maintained during the time there wouldn't be buildings on it.
33
34 Commissioner Keller: So what you are saying is that the bike lane from Nita into Mountain
35 View and the path from the tunnel to the Mountain View train station would be accessible.
36
37 Mr. Larkin: We were not explicit in the Agreement. We said that all the access ways had to
38 remam open.
39
40 Ms. French: Technically it says following the demolition and prior to the commencement of
41 redevelopment. So there is a window there when it is safe and there is not something happening.
42
43 Mr. Akins: Yes, that is the picture I was trying to create. All existing roadways remain and the
44 areas in between the roadways would be fenced and grassy.
45
1 Commissioner Keller: So if these things are grassy I am wondering why they have to be fenced.
2 Could these in some sense be used for recreational purposes during that period oftime or is that a
3 hazardous condition?
4
5 Mr. Akins: I am actually paraphrasing Mountain View's preference. I don't know whether they
6 would be fenced. Ifthey could be open I am sure Mountain View would go with that solution as
7 a community amenity for the interim. If they find that exposed items left over from demolition
8 are a problem again, their demolition permit is anticipated so far to be about 50 pages long.
9
10 Commissioner Keller: Okay, thank you. Just to close this issue I think that to the extent that the
11 space can be available for community use by having it be a grassy area without impedance of
12 fences it seems that the fences actually create a potential nuisance more than removing it does
13 if it is not hazardous.
14
15 Mr. Akins: If I may further paraphrase Mountain View they share your desire to balance both
16 access by the community, which is mostly Mountain View, with the upper limits of feasibility.
17 If it is unsafe, if it is impossible to maintain, if you can't maintain it without a half million
18 dollars worth of sprinkler system that might be a constraint. Some areas may be grassy and
19 others not. They share your desire to balance those two competing interests.
20
21 Commissioner Keller: Thank you very much.
22
23 Chair Garber: Commissioner Lippert and then Rosati and then Holman.
24
25 Commissioner Lippert: I have a similar line of questioning to Commissioner Keller's. I am not
26 concerned about the demolition of the building in the sense of having a physical building there. I
27 think it should be raised almost immediately.
28
29 My concern is slightly different though. Hewlett Packard acquired the site back in the mid to
30 early 1980s. At that time property tax adjusted on the sale when they purchased the property.
31 Now it has increased in property taxes that were paid into the county and the local governments
32 at the rate of Prop 13. Here we are that you are asking that we have this Development
33 Agreement so that you can defer building on the property. So the expectation is that as far as our
34 community is concerned the buildings would be raised and then developed and it would turnover
35 and thereby generate even greater property taxes. In this case, we are taking a site, demolishing
36 a building, and as far as the County Assessor there is no improvement on the land what happens
37 to that portion of the property tax?
38
39 Mr. Akins: Through the Chair, I think what you would see is an immediate step up in the
40 assessed valuation basis ofthe property from the valuation current as ofthe date when Hewlett
41 Packard acquired it, and I don't know what that is so let's say it is mid 1980s values or early
42 1980s values to present value. Hewlett Packard's interest obviously in obtaining a streamline,
43 simple, clear entitlements picture is to make sure that they get as much money for it as possible.
44 Therefore the assessed valuation basis would be current as of2009. My assumption, and it is
45 only that, is that would be substantially higher than the original acquisition price the early 1980s.
46 So Palo Alto would see a step up in property taxes current as of now, and then when construction
1 began the value of the construction financing loan would hit the Assessor's Office that would be
2 another step up in basis, and when the occupancy pennits are issued upon completion of
3 construction that would be another assessment event, and at that point it would be assessed at the
4 value of 481 units.
5
6 Commissioner Lippert: Maybe the City Attorney could correct me if I am wrong but once the
7 building is demolished can they not apply to the county to have the improvement portion oftheir
8 property taxes expunged?
9
10 Mr. Larkin: I am not a tax attorney.
11
12 Commissioner Lippert: Okay.
13
14 Mr. Akins: If! may just clarify a point. The last evidence the Assessor would have is of the
15 conveyance value. Assuming that that is higher than the present assessed basis, that step up on
16 basis would be continuous regardless of whether improvements were removed because it is the
17 land that is being purchased and it is the land that has that value.
18
19 Commissioner Lippert: So what you are saying is, and again I am not a tax attorney I am an
20 architect.
21
22 Mr. Akins: I am not a tax attorney either.
23
24 Commissioner Lippert: If the building were demolished it would not represent a reduction in the
25 property tax?
26
27 Mr. Akins: From my limited experience in this I think the property owner at that time would
28 have to carry the burden with the Assessor that the land without the buildings is in fact cheaper
29 than the price he paid for it. In this instance I think that would be a hard row to hoe because this
30 would be fully entitled land with six subdivision maps on it in probably the hottest residential
31 real estate market in Northern California.
32
33 Commissioner Lippert: Okay, that is just something I think Staff should probably be aware of
34 and probably want to check with Council on that.
35
36 Then one other question is with regard to the level one environmental that is being done. That
37 needs to be done for transfer of the property in order to be able to secure the financing. Hewlett
38 Packard is notorious for paying cash for their buildings. What they generally do is say we are
39 going to build another fab building or office building and then they pay cash and don't have to
40 worry about the level one. The Mayfield Mall site was there and something else was probably
41 there prior to that. What if it came back positive that there was contamination there? How
42 would that impact the financing and further impact the schedule?
43
44 Mr. Akins: The level one diagnostic analysis of soil conditions would be in the hands of both,
45 let's say the developer it wouldn't be Hewlett Packard by that time. It would be a sophisticated
46 residential expert developer. It also would be made available to the Kelley heirs, the people who
1 own the property. That would probably affect the price depending on the magnitude of what is
2 discovered there. Let's say the fair market value as clean is X, it would be X minus the
3 mitigation cost. Soil of this type in this location probably the worst risk is that it would have
4 either lead from automobiles passing by for 50 years or agricultural chemicals left over from
5 predevelopment days. One way or the other you can excavate a lot of soil from this center
6 median, this very large center median area, and replace it with clean soil. So mitigation is just a
7 question of how may trucks of soil you have to haul away and store appropriately. In the scheme
8 of things this land is covered by Palo Alto's easements for access and maintenance. It is literally
9 a center median where there is no development permitted so it has a very low market value.
10 When you take that low market value it has no access, it can't be developed, there is no utility
11 whatsoever but reduce it by the cost of mitigation of surface soil conditions it is a pretty cheap
12 piece of property.
13
14 Commissioner Lippert: Thank you very much.
15
16 Chair Garber: Commissioner Rosati and then Holman.
17
18 Commissioner Rosati: I have a question for Amy. Does this set any kind of precedent? I am
19 thinking if other developers or property owners wanted to do something like this in the future are
20 we thinking there are any worries or anything we should think about?
21
22 Ms. French: In fact we do have other developments out there, developers, applicants who are
23 concerned about pending expiration of permits in this current economic climate. So we have had
24 discussion about coming forward with a proposal to allow for extensions by the Director for
25 certain periods to get us through this crisis in the economy. As far as precedent, there is that
26 state law that allows for development agreements and so anyone can come in any time and
27 request these. They are approved by ordinance, by Council, and referendable.
28
29 Mr. Larkin: One distinction on this project is that it is a very large project the bulk of which is
30 not within our jurisdiction. So the idea of doing a development agreement that mirrors the
31 development agreement in Mountain View made a lot of sense to Staff.
32
33 Chair Garber: Commissioner Holman.
34
35 Commissioner Holman: A clarification on something that was just said. Amy, could you restate
36 what you were saying about the Director extending approvals.
37
38 Ms. French: Currently ARB approvals are good for a year and then by request they can be
39 extended for another year. This has some applicants concerned about approvals that have been
40 issued. There is a case of a Planned Community with similar concerns. There was no
41 development agreement accompanying that Planned Community, and a Planned Community
42 expires after a year. They can be extended for one year, with a two-year total by the Director.
43 Then after that they would have to do something extraordinary. So we are looking at coming
44 forward with something that wi11look into having the Director have greater flexibility, an
45 additional year maybe, but we can talk about that at this level. We have not agendized it. It has
46 not been vetted through Staff yet but we are getting concern out there.
1
2 Commissioner Holman: That would come to us? Nothing would happen without it coming to us
3 first?
4
5 Ms. French: Correct.
6
7 Commissioner Holman: Okay, thank you for that clarification.
8
9 Two things about this, and I appreciate the other Commissioner's lines of questioning. On page
10 ten of the Development Agreement, under number 8, Periodic Review, 8.1 Annual Review, City
11 and owner shall review all actions taken pursuant to the term of the Agreement once annually
12 within 60 days before the anniversary of the effective date, etc. Who pays for that? There is
13 going to be involvement with the City. Is there any mechanism by which the City can recuperate
14 the Staff expenses for doing that review?
15
16 Mr. Larkin: It is cost recovery. It is not expensive but it is cost recovery.
17
18 Commissioner Holman: Even after the Development Agreement is signed, after permits have
19 been given it is still cost recovery.
20
21 Ms. French: Our accounting allows for us to keep open, we have a deposit that is received. In
22 this case I believe Toll Brothers paid it. So the question would only be once there is a new buyer
23 do we look into getting a deposit if it is not Toll Brothers acquiring the property, we may look
24 into that.
25
26 Commissioner Holman: Would there be any difficulty in just saying 'at owners expense' in the
27 Development Agreement? That way it is clear, straightforward, and there is no question.
28
29 Mr. Larkin: We can talk to the applicant about that. I don't see why that would be a problem.
30
31 Mr. Akins: Through the Chair, if! may that is certainly an assumed principle. Every time we
32 come to the City or anytime anybody comes to the City for Staffwork my understanding is that
33 your existing ordinance and resolutions provide for cost recovery. This is a well-known
34 statewide principle. These sections are taken from state law and everybody in the development
35 business understands that a review of annual compliance is in effect an application subject to the
36 fees.
37
38 Commissioner Holman: It is somewhat different but it has come to my attention if it stated
39 correctly that in the PC Ordinance we have a requirement for review of those PC projects every
40 three years. A Staff person said that when we look at changing that ordinance we need to build
41 in something that says that it will be paid for by the owner because there is no way now to
42 recoup those costs. So that is what causes me to ask the question. So I am just looking for
43 would it provide better clarity rather than just an assumption to add that in.
44
45 Mr. Larkin: It is actually a good suggestion because the actual cost of doing this type of a
46 compliance certificate is less than. Normally what would happen is either we would have it at
1 the deposit, the deposit is gone, we would charge them a new fee for a certificate of compliance.
2 This is actually cheaper than a normal certificate of compliance. So we could put at owner's
3 expense and that shouldn't be an issue.
4
5 Commissioner Holman: Thank you. The only other thing that I have and it does come from
6 looking at ordinances in the last year or more is there any difficulty with including the conditions
7 of approval in the Development Agreement? What happens sometimes, more than one time, is
8 conditions of approval get separated from Development Agreements or PC Ordinances and then
9 you have track down something else and sometimes they are just lost. So could we incorporate
10 the conditions of approval in the Development Agreement? Is there any difficulty with that? I
11 would suppose not.
12
13 Ms. French: Or we could do it as an exhibit. I think that is one way we have done it in more
14 recent times and have actually kept track of those exhibits.
15
16 Commissioner Holman: If you are comfortable that it would not get lost or separated.
17
18 Ms. French: We are more modem today than we were in the 1960 when those kinds of things
19 went missing.
20
21 Commissioner Holman: More recent than that too but not under your watch. Okay, those were
22 my two questions.
23
24 Chair Garber: Commissioner Tuma, motion? We will close the public hearing.
25
26 MOTION
27
28 Vice-Chair Tuma: Yes, I would like to move that the Planning and Transportation Commission
29 recommend that City Council adopt the ordinance approving the Development Agreement,
30 which is attached as Exhibit A to our Staff Report with the following two amendments. Section
31 8.1 shall have an introductory clause that reads 'at the expense of the owner,' and additionally
32 the conditions of approval shall be attached as an exhibit to the Development Agreement.
33
34 SECOND
35
36 Chair Garber: I will second that. Would the Commissioner like to speak to his motion?
37
38 Vice-Chair Tuma: No.
39
40 Chair Garber: The seconder will just briefly. I would like to thank the Commissioners for their
41 questions. I thought they were very good. I think it is a very important thing for us to move this
42 forward. So let's vote unless there is other discussion, Commissioners? Commissioner Keller.
43
44 Commissioner Keller: I agree this makes sense to move forward and I cannot resist saying that
45 the economy has taken its toll.
46
1 MOTION PASSED (6-0-0-1, Commissioner Fineberg conflicted)
2
3 Chair Garber: Thank you, Commissioner Keller. All those in favor of the motion say aye.
4 (ayes) All opposed? The motion passes with Commissioners Holman, Rosati, Keller, Garber,
5 Tuma, and Lippert in favor and Commissioner Fineberg not participating.
6
7 With that we will close item number two. I would like to thank the applicant's representative for
8 a job very well done, nicely done, and for your patience waiting for this.
9
ATTACHMENT F
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ms. Amy French, Don Larkin, Esq.; City of Palo Alto
FROM: Douglas B. Aikins
DATE: March 25, 2009
FILE NO.: 027227-0005
RE: Mayfield Project; Supplemental Information Regarding Application for
Development Agreement
On behalf of my client, the Hewlett-Packard Company ("HP"), the following is
background information pertaining to HP's pending application for a development agreement.
Temporary uses of the Mayfield Site. At the request of the Palo Alto Public Works
Department, HP has granted temporary licenses to use portions of the Mayfield property to help
facilitate Palo Alto's nearby street widening project. HP granted a license to the Gideon Hausner
Jewish Day School to use the parking lot near the school for teachers and parents, while access to
the school's parking area is blocked by Palo Alto's street construction project. HP also granted a
license to Palo Alto's street widening contractor, Blossom Valley Construction, to use another
portion of the parking area for construction equipment staging and storage, and as a work area
for grinding and disposal oftrees removed as part ofthe street widening project. In addition to
these temporary uses requested by Palo Alto, portions of the Mayfield site are annually made
available to the Mountain View Fire Department and other local public safety agencies for
purposes of conducting realistic training exercises within the buildings and parking structures.
Rationale for Development Agreement. Normally, statutory development agreements in
California are used in two types of instances; (1) when it serves the public interest to ensure that
land use approvals will remain stable and effective for an extended period of time, or (2) when
relief or exemption from some otherwise applicable land use regulation is justified, so that a real
estate development project can be constructed as envisioned by its owner and by the municipality
involved. This agreement is requested only to extend the duration of existing project approvals,
and not to exempt the project from any Palo Alto land use regulations.
Development agreements typically are well justified are (a) when the development
project is unusually complex (mixed uses, a constrained site, etc.), (b) when a project will require
an extended build-out period, normally in several phases over several years, (c) when a project is
unusually difficult to finance or design, either due to its own unique features or its large size or
expense, or due to prevailing market conditions, (d) when the project requires modifications of
otherwise-applicable land use regulations in order to be feasible, or (e) when some other external
factor threatens to unravel carefully crafted development approval conditions.
In this case, several ofthe foregoing factors prompt HP's request for a development
agreement. The Mayfield project approvals are extremely complex and detailed. They have
been issued by two separate cities, are carefully coordinated, and address literally hundreds of
design, public improvement and land use elements of the project. The project includes five main
2486/027227-0005
999633.01 a03/24/09
Ms. Amy French, Don Larkin, Esq.; City of
Palo Alto
March 25, 2009
Page 2
"development areas" and 485 units of five principal housing types on an oddly-shaped large site,
comprising the largest current "infill" housing development on the Peninsula. Construction and
home sales ofa project of this large size, in the best of real estate markets, would require build-
out in phases over several years. The project's design, multi-level housing over an underground
garage, imposes unusually severe construction financing requirements, since the large buildings
over parking must be built all at once. In current national real estate financing market
conditions, very large construction loans are difficult, if not infeasible, to obtain. In this case, the
project requires no special relief or exemptions from Palo Alto's land use regulations; on the
contrary, it complies with or exceeds all applicable Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations.
The current construction financing market, however, does comprise an external factor
that threatens existing project approvals. After two municipalities spent over five years to craft
the project's land use approvals, involving many thousands of hours of community and
professional staff input, project approvals will start to expire if construction is not begun within
less than a year. In this real estate market, with credit restricted and house prices depressed, Palo
Alto's and Mountain View's investment in project approvals could be quickly wasted, unless the
expiration dates of project approvals are extended. Mountain View has enacted a development
agreement with an initial term of five (5) years, extended by another three (3) years upon
issuance of a Final Subdivision Map. Five years was selected as both parties' best estimate of
how soon the national construction credit markets would become more normal. The three-year
extension is intended to allow for a further extension before construction must begin, in case the
5-year estimate is not long enough, while ensuring that the first phase of the project's very
expensive public improvements will be guaranteed and financially secured.
This development agreement is requested purely for "defensive" reasons; not to obtain
relief from any applicable Palo Alto land use regulation, or to obtain any benefit or favorable
treatment normally withheld from other real estate developers, but simply to guard against the
possibility that an historically poor national financial market could force the project owner to
choose between letting project approvals expire, or starting construction prematurely, with
inadequate or insecure financing, running the risk of default or foreclosure and half-built
buildings. Either of these scenarios would be not only disastrous for the project developer, but
also contrary to the public interests embodied in seeing the project built and occupied as
envisioned and approved.
2486/027227-0005
999633.01 a03/24/09