Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-01-10 Planning & transportation commission Agenda Packet_______________________ 1.Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 1.The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 1.The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Planning & Transportation Commission Regular Meeting Agenda: January 10, 2018 Council Chambers 250 Hamilton Avenue 6:00 PM Call to Order / Roll Call Oral Communications The public may speak to any item not on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,2 Agenda Changes, Additions, and Deletions The Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management. City Official Reports 1.Assistant Directors Report, Meeting Schedule and Assignments Study Session Public Comment is Permitted. Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 2.Study Session to Review the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Implementation and Discuss Potential Future Amendments Action Items Public Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Fifteen (15) minutes, plus three (3) minutes rebuttal. All others: Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 3.PUBLIC HEARING: Recommendation to the City Council Regarding the Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Title 18, Chapters 18.12 (R-1 Single-Family Residential District), 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses), and 18.77 (Processing of Permits and Approvals). The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in Accordance With CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). (Continued from December 13, 2017.) For More Information, Please Contact Clare Campbell at clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org. Approval of Minutes Public Comment is Permitted. Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 4.November 29, 2017 Draft Planning & Transportation Commission Meeting MinutesNovember 29, 2017 Draft PTC Minutes _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 1. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 1. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Committee Items Commissioner Questions, Comments or Announcements Adjournment _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 1. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 1. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Palo Alto Planning & Transportation Commission Commissioner Biographies, Present and Archived Agendas and Reports are available online: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/ptc/default.asp. The PTC Commission members are: Chair Ed Lauing Vice Chair Susan Monk Commissioner Michael Alcheck Commissioner Przemek Gardias Commissioner William Riggs Commissioner Doria Summa Commissioner Asher Waldfogel Get Informed and Be Engaged! View online: http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city-of-palo-alto/ or on Channel 26. Show up and speak. Public comment is encouraged. Please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Commission Secretary prior to discussion of the item. Write to us. Email the PTC at: Planning.Commission@CityofPaloAlto.org. Letters can be delivered to the Planning & Community Environment Department, 5th floor, City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. Comments received by 2:00 PM two Tuesdays preceding the meeting date will be included in the agenda packet. Comments received afterward through 2:00 PM the day of the meeting will be presented to the Commission at the dais. Material related to an item on this agenda submitted to the PTC after distribution of the agenda packet is available for public inspection at the address above. Americans with Disability Act (ADA) It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329-2550 (voice) or by emailing ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID # 8744) Report Type: City Official Reports Meeting Date: 1/10/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: City Official Report Title: Assistant Directors Report, Meeting Schedule and Assignments From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) review and comment as appropriate. Background This document includes the following items:  PTC Meeting Schedule  PTC Representative to City Council (Rotational Assignments)  Tentative Future Agenda Commissioners are encouraged to contact Yolanda Cervantes (Yolanda.Cervantes@CityofPaloAlto.org) of any planned absences one month in advance, if possible, to ensure availability of a PTC quorum. PTC Representative to City Council is a rotational assignment where the designated commissioner represents the PTC’s affirmative and dissenting perspectives to Council for quasi- judicial and legislative matters. Representatives are encouraged to review the City Council agendas (http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/agendas/council.asp) for the months of their respective assignments to verify if attendance is needed or contact staff. Prior PTC meetings are available online at http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city-of-palo-alto/boards- and-commissions/planning-and-transportation-commission. The Tentative Future Agenda provides a summary of upcoming projects or discussion items. Attachments:  Attachment A January 10, 2018 PTC Meeting Schedule & Assignments (DOCX) Draft Planning & Transportation Commission 2018 Meeting Schedule & Assignments 2018 Schedule Meeting Dates Time Location Status Planned Absences 1/10/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 1/31/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 2/14/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 2/28/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 3/14/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 3/28/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 4/11/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 4/25/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 5/09/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 5/30/2018 6:00PM Council Chambers Regular 6/13/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 6/27/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 7/11/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 7/25/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 8/08/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 8/29/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 9/12/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 9/26/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 10/10/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 10/31/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 11/14/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 11/28/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 12/12/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers Regular 12/26/2018 6:00 PM Council Chambers CANCELLED 2018 Assignments - Council Representation (primary/backup) January February March April May June Ed Lauing Doria Summa Susan Monk Przemek Gardias Michael Alcheck Billy Riggs Asher Waldfogel Michael Alcheck Przemek Gardias Susan Monk Ed Lauing Doria Summa July August September October November December Asher Waldfogel Ed Lauing Przemek Gardias Susan Monk Michael Alcheck Asher Waldfogel Billy Riggs Michael Alchek Asher Waldfogel Doria Summa Przemek Gardias Ed Lauing Subcommittees Draft Planning & Transportation Commission 2018 Tentative Future Agenda July 19, 2017, 2017 Draft-All Dates and Topics Subject to Change The Following Items are Tentative and Subject to Change: Meeting Dates Topics January 31, 2018  Annual Office Limit Ordinance  Training: Brown Act & Conflict of Interest  2755 El Camino Real Zoning Code Amendment and Site and Design  PF Zoning Changes February 14, 2018  Study Session on Traffic Safety and Operations Annual Report (2017)  Ordinance to Modify Special Setback Map at 375 Hamilton Ave  Eichler Design Guidelines and Potential Zone Changes February 28, 2018  North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan Scoping  Housing Element Update  ADU Code Update Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID # 8773) Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 1/10/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: Update on Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Implementation Title: Study Session to Review the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Implementation and Discuss Potential Future Amendments From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) conduct a Study Session to review the implementation of the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance and provide comments on potential amendments that may be incorporated into a revised ordinance. Report Summary At its December 13, 2017 meeting the PTC began a discussion on the city’s accessory dwelling unit ordinance. That discussion was continued to the next meeting. The purpose of this study session is to: 1. Present information regarding the city’s implementation of the ADU program since the beginning of the year when new state regulations took effect. 2. Identify some implementation challenges that apply to property specific conditions that are not addressed in the code and receive PTC feedback on discrete legislative changes to fine tune the ordinance 3. Present two additional topics that the Council requested additional information on how to address related to permitting illegally established ADUs and incentivizing income restricted rental of ADUs. Staff anticipates returning to the commission with an updated ordinance that addresses the discrete issues in the Spring. Attached is the December 13, 2017 staff report with additional information. City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 Report Author & Contact Information PTC1 Liaison & Contact Information Clare Campbell, AICP, Senior Jonathan Lait, AICP, Assistant Director (650) 617-3191 (650) 329-2679 clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org jonathan.lait@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments:  Attachment A: December 13, 2017 PTC ADU Staff Report with Attachments (PDF) 1 Emails may be sent directly to the PTC using the following address: planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.org Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID # 8607) Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 12/13/2017 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: Update on Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Implementation Title: Study Session to Review the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Implementation and Discuss Potential Future Amendments From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) conduct a Study Session to review the implementation of the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance and provide comments on potential amendments that may be incorporated into a revised ordinance. Report Summary On May 8, 2017, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5412 amending Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to implement the new state requirements related to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU). These new regulations have eased the development requirements for ADUs for property owners and support the creation of additional, more affordable, housing units. This report provides a summary of the ADU development activity; identifies implementation challenges and recommended changes; considers Council direction to make ADUs available to low and moderate households and addressing illegally established ADUs; and, reviews updated state law taking effect in 2018. The purpose of this item is to get PTC feedback on changes or refinements needed for an updated ADU ordinance. Background In October 2015, the City Council approved a Colleagues Memo that directed the PTC to review the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) related to ADUs and recommend strategies to increase production of these units. Following this, the PTC conducted two Study Sessions in January and July 2017 (reports #6462 & #6944), just prior to the State of California adopting ADU and Junior City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 ADU1 (JADU) legislation in September 2016. In response to the new state ADU regulations, the City prepared a draft ordinance to incorporate the mandatory state requirements and some optional provisions with the existing local regulations. The PTC reviewed the ordinance on November 30, 2016 (report #7368) and made recommendations. In March 2017, the City Council held its first public hearing on ADUs (report #7517) and discussed in-depth the ordinance, making substantial revisions. On April 17, 2017, the Council adopted the ADU ordinance (Attachment A) with further refinements (report #7921 & #8048), which became effective on June 8, 2017. The City Council also directed staff to provide a quarterly report on ADU permits and to conduct a Study Session with the PTC to analyze the results of the ordinance. Prior to the implementation of the City’s ADU ordinance, the state regulations that became effective on January 1, 2017 governed all ADU permit applications submitted for review in the City. Once the City’s ordinance became effective on June 8, 2017, all ADU permit applications not already approved were subject to the new local regulations. Key Standards Incorporated into City’s Ordinance The City’s ADU ordinance consolidated all development requirements for these types of units into one section of the Zoning Code, PAMC Section 18.42.030. The standards listed below represent the key provisions of the current ordinance:  Minimum lot size requirement of 5,000 square feet  No parking requirements (for ADUs & JADUs)  Detached ADUs allowed in rear yard  Garage conversions allowed with required displaced parking allowed to be uncovered  Attached ADUs may be 600 square feet; detached ADUs 900 square feet  Additional lot coverage and floor area provided under certain circumstances  JADUs allowed ADU Permit Activity On average, prior to the 2017 changes in the ADU regulations, the City approved four ADU units a year.2 Since the beginning of this year, the City has approved nine ADU permits; there are 14 other permits still under review. No JADU permit applications have been submitted yet. The average ADU unit size is 565 sq. ft. and the majority of units (80%) are detached from the primary home. Discussion Since the adoption of the state and local ADU regulations, there has been interest expressed by the community regarding these changes, including the implications for possible negative 1 The establishment of Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADU) as a permitted use was not required by state law and was left to the discretion of the local jurisdiction. With the local adoption of the ADU regulations in April 2017, the City Council allowed for these smaller JADU units in Palo Alto. 2 Development data based on 2015-2023 Housing Element. City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 impacts, as well as potential development possibilities. The City has received increased requests for information on ADUs at the public information counter and via email and phone calls. Staff has set up a webpage (http://cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pln/advance/accessory_dwelling_units_regulations_updat e.asp ) and an email address dedicated to ADU questions (ADUOrd@CityofPaloAlto.org ). City staff also participated in a couple of events hosted by others in the community. From the various interactions mentioned above, and in reviewing ADU building permits, staff has identified some implementation challenges not anticipated when drafting the ordinance. It should be noted that the local ADU regulations have been in place for a short time, barely six months. As more time passes and more projects are reviewed, staff will be able to provide additional feedback and analysis of the ADU provisions. A. Refine the Definition for ADUs There has been confusion on the part of some staff and applicants as to which ADU regulations apply to certain ADU units. The term “conversion,” in particular, has been a source of misunderstandings when applying the code. Staff recommends updating the definition to better describe the different unit types to reduce this confusion, and update the code section accordingly with these terms. The unit type definitions being considered are as follows:  “Attached ADU” means an ADU that is constructed as a new addition to a single-family dwelling which may include a remodeled portion of the existing home.  “Detached ADU” means an ADU that is constructed as a physically independent structure separate from the primary single-family dwelling unit and may be a new structure, an addition to an existing accessory structure, or include both new construction together with the remodeled area of the existing structure.  “Interior ADU” means an ADU that is located entirely within the existing building envelope of the primary single-family dwelling unit or accessory structure. For the purposes of this definition, existing structures are those legally constructed and completed on or before January 1, 2017. [These units are currently referred to as Conversions, as described in Section 18.42.040(a)(5)] For consistency and clarity, the staff report discussion that follows utilizes the above listed terminology when referring to specific ADU unit types. B. Bonus Lot Coverage and Floor Area for Attached and Detached ADUs The general intent of providing bonus lot coverage and floor area is to give some development flexibility for existing developed sites that may be at or near the related maximums allowed. With these bonus provisions, the additional lot coverage needed for an attached or detached ADU would be 100% exempt, and up to an additional 175 sq. ft. of floor area would be allowed. Below is the specific language from the code: City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 18.42.040(a)(4) Lot Coverage/FAR A. An accessory dwelling unit shall be included in the lot coverage and FAR requirements applicable to the parcel. B. Exceptions: i. Lot Coverage. When the development of an accessory dwelling unit on a parcel with an existing single family residence would result in the parcel exceeding the lot coverage requirement, the accessory dwelling unit shall not be included in the calculation of lot coverage applicable to the property, so long as the parcel meets the underlying zoning district's minimum lot size requirement or is substandard by no more than ten percent (10%) of the underlying zoning district's minimum lot size requirement. ii. Basement FAR. In the R-1 district and all R-1 subdistricts, basement space used as an accessory dwelling unit, or portion thereof, shall not be included in the calculation of floor area for the entire site, providing the measurement from first finished floor to grade around the perimeter of the building is no more than three (3) feet. iii. FAR. When the development of a new one-story accessory dwelling unit on a parcel with an existing single family residence would result in the parcel exceeding the maximum floor area, an additional 175 square feet of floor area above the maximum amount of floor area otherwise permitted by the underlying zoning district shall be allowed. This additional area shall be permitted only to accommodate the development of the accessory dwelling unit. The code specifically states that these bonuses are given when development of an ADU is on a site “with an existing single-family residence.” The scenario that staff has encountered is that property owners who are building completely new homes also want to take advantage of these bonuses. As the code is currently written, these bonuses do not apply to newly proposed homes. Staff is looking for input from the PTC as to whether this should be changed in the code. Some options to consider: 1. Leave code as is to apply to existing homes. Applicants can obtain the bonus/es by phasing the development on the site by building the home first and then coming back after for the permits for the ADU. 2. Modify the code to specifically allow the bonuses for any ADU development, whether in conjunction with the new or existing home. 3. Restrict bonuses only to existing homes that are existing as of a specific date, i.e., the effective date of the ordinance. C. Basements in ADUs For single-family development in the R-1 zone, basements are permitted and are generally not counted towards the site’s allowable floor area. The current ADU code is clear that an ADU may be located in the basement level of the primary home, but it is less clear about allowing a basement as part of a ground floor ADU unit. Staff believes it was the intent of the ordinance to City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5 permit ADU basements in attached or detached structures and recommends clarifying the code to reflect this provision. Since detached ADUs can be six feet from the side and rear property lines, this provision would introduce basements in sideyards, which is not something that is allowed for primary single family residences. For both situations, basements may not extend beyond the building footprint. D. Replacement of Noncomplying Structures Staff have encountered ADU proposals that included the conversion of existing non-habitable space (e.g. garage, accessory building, etc.) that had a legal noncomplying element, such as a setback encroachment; and these types of conversions are permitted with the ADU regulations. The issue that has emerged is that during the permit review process, it comes to light that the legal noncomplying structure is not structurally sound and cannot be converted to an ADU, as is. To be code compliant, the noncomplying structure must be demolished and rebuilt. The general rule is that once a legal noncomplying structure is removed, all new construction must be code compliant (Section 18.70.100(b) Noncomplying facility – Replacement). The intent of the ADU code was to allow the conversion of existing structures to create living units, including the conversion of legal noncomplying structures. But, the circumstance of requiring existing non-complying structures to be rebuilt (retaining the non-compliance) to accommodate the new units was not fully considered. The following options are raised for discussion: 1. If a non-complying structure is required to be rebuilt to accommodate an ADU, the replacement structure must be code compliant. 2. Establish an exemption to allow the reconstruction of non-complying structures when it is required by Building code when 100% of the space exclusively used for the ADU living area. E. Owner-Occupancy Requirements State legislation does not mandate or preclude owner-occupancy requirements related to ADUs, but does for most circumstances require owner-occupancy for JADUs. The owner may occupy the JADU or principal residence. The City requires owner-occupancy of the accessory unit or the principal living unit for both ADUs and JADUs. This provision and others are memorialized in a deed restriction that is recorded against the property to advise future owners of applicable provisions related to ADUs/JADUs. The owner-occupancy requirement was envisioned to help address neighborhood concerns about absent land owners and increased rental activity in residential neighborhoods. Moreover, City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6 having the owner on-site creates a self-regulating condition with the tenant and land owner relationship, and provides a point of contact for any nearby residents that may have a concern or problem with the tenant. One property owner has approached staff seeking this provision on ADUs be repealed because this owner does not currently, and would ultimately reside on the property with the proposed ADU. (See Attachment B.) Additionally, staff notes that based on the 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, there are 16,386 single family housing units in Palo Alto. Approximately 23% (3,803 housing units) of those housing units are renter-occupied. If the owner-occupancy requirement was removed for ADUs, it would provide a pathway to increase more ADU development on those parcels. Ultimately, this is a policy question that can be revisited and staff requests PTC comments on how to approach this issue. F. Opt-Out Provision The Municipal Code does not include provisions for when a property owner wants to remove the ADU/JADU from the site. Staff recommends adding a process to decommission an ADU/JADU but seeks PTC guidance on how far this effort should extend. It is unclear how often the City would receive a request to remove an ADU/JADU, but the question has come up at the planning counter. As noted earlier, ADUs/JADUs can benefit from increased lot coverage and floor area, and removal of the covered parking requirement for single family residences; benefits not enjoyed by other R1 zoned properties without an ADU/JADU. Staff requests Commission feedback on the extent to which site development benefits gained with the establishment of an ADU/JADU, if any, should be restored to its prior condition when the ADU/JADU is abandoned. G. Siting ADUs on the Front of a Home The ADU provisions include requirements for the exterior entry of an attached unit to be located on a separate building façade from the main residences’ entrance.3 With this provision, there was recognition that the ADU should be visually subordinate to the primary house. A recent detached ADU proposal highlighted another aspect of development that the ordinance does not adequately address and that is building an ADU in front of an existing home, whether attached or detached. Because this scenario is not captured in the ADU regulations, it should be discussed for inclusion. For clarification, the state regulations allow for local jurisdictions to impose standards such as setbacks, landscape, and design review, for ADU development. If the 3 Except on corner lots, the accessory dwelling unit shall not have an entranceway facing the same lot line (property line) as the entranceway to the main dwelling unit unless the second entranceway is located in the rear half of the lot. Exterior staircases to second floor units shall be located toward the interior side or rear yard of the property. [PAMC 18.42.040(a)(7)(F)] City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 7 City was to incorporate additional ADU development standards as it relates to placement, it would be consistent with the state provisions. There are some options identified below to initiate the discussion: 1. Leave the code as is and allow ADU placement as permitted by the existing development standards, regardless of whether it is located in the front of the home. In this case, the ADU would be located within the buildable area of the lot, but could be placed in front of the existing primary home. 2. Require the placement of detached ADUs when located in a side yard setback to be in the rear portion of the lot. Currently, for detached accessory structures, when located in an interior side setback, they must be located at least 75 feet back from the front property line. Detached ADUs could follow these same or similar requirements. Requiring a rear ADU placement would likely facilitate compliance with sites that may have received a planning entitlement (i.e. IR, HIE, Variance), including ones for exceptions to the Municipal Code. For the planning entitlements referenced, the approval findings include neighborhood compatibility and other similar standards. One could argue that placing an ADU on one of these sites, especially on the street facing sides, could negate the intentions of a previously granted entitlement. H. Miscellaneous a. 50% Rear Yard Coverage: The R-1 development standards require that no more than 50% of a required interior rear yard be covered by accessory structures [PAMC 18.12.080(b)(6)]. Staff would like feedback on whether this coverage restriction should also be applied to ADUs. The strict reading of the code would suggest that this provision would not apply to an ADU, whether constructed as new or done through a conversion of an existing accessory structure, because it is not an “accessory structure” by definition, and the 50% limitation applies to accessory structures.  "Accessory building or structure" means a building or structure which is incidental to and customarily associated with a specific principal use or facility, and which meets the applicable conditions set forth in Section 18.12.080.  “Accessory dwelling unit” means an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family dwelling is situated. …” b. Replacement Parking in the Streetside Setback: State law specifies that required replacement parking (i.e. for the primary home) may be “located in any configuration” on the subject property. The City code has identified that City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 8 replacement parking may be located in the front yard setback on an existing driveway (uncovered only). In the case of corner lots, the code is silent on allowing parking in the streetside setback. Staff suggests that replacement uncovered parking be allowed in the streetside setback similar to what has been permitted for the front yard setback and that the Director be given the discretion to approve parking stall dimensions less than required by code based on certain findings. c. Implications for Existing ADUs: The current ADU regulations are focused on developing new units and do not provide direction for applicability to existing units. Staff suggests that this clarification is needed in the code and should be analyzed for the appropriate clarifications. A few scenarios to consider would be: i. Allow the expansion of existing units, within the allowable size limits, to take advantage of bonuses (lot coverage/floor area). ii. Allow the elimination of required covered parking to support expansion of existing units. iii. Consider exempting the deed restriction requirement for improvements to existing units, providing no bonus lot coverage or floor area is granted. City Council Follow-up Discussion Items At the March 7, 2017 Council meeting regarding the ADU regulations, Council directed staff to return in 2018 with additional information regarding the two issues below. Options to Make ADUs Available to Moderate or Low Income Residents City Council directed staff to explore further the possible options to make ADUs accessible to moderate and low income residents. This type of program reflects the larger concern regarding the lack of affordable housing in Palo Alto and the greater Bay Area., Staff still needs to do more research on this issue, but preliminarily believes that a regulatory requirement to make ADUs available on an income-restricted basis could create a barrier to ADU production that may run afoul of state law provisions to encourage construction of ADUs. An incentive-focused approach would likely be necessary. One approach that could be feasible is to partner with an organization that has programs that reflect the City’s intention and goals; the City could contribute funding under specific conditions to help facilitate implementation in Palo Alto. As an example for this, Housing Trust Silicon Valley, a local non-profit organization based in San Jose, is currently developing a pilot program that would provide low-cost flexible loans to homeowners for the purpose of constructing an ADU in exchange for their agreement to rent the units at affordable costs to low- and middle- income earners. The Housing Trust’s funding “will be used to make capital loans to homeowners — who can easily spend $100,000 or $200,000 on ground-up construction of an ADU. But the Housing Trust also intends to create an educational outreach program — involving classes, workshops and technical assistance — to help homeowners navigate the ADU City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 9 process.”4 The partnership option ideally would place responsibility of the program management on the agreeable non-profit organization. If the City were to develop its own program, it could include the strategies listed below. It should be noted that many of these ideas can be used to encourage and support ADU development in general, without the specific focus on moderate/low income residents. Financial Assistance 1. Provide financial aid/loans or subsidies: a. Use City of Palo Alto’s Housing funds to finance affordable loans at low interest rates or subsidies for ADU construction. b. Provision of interest free or forgivable loans. c. Provide salary assistance (wage subsidy) for builders to lower construction cost. 2. Reduce or eliminate building permit fees and development impact fees. Technical and Educational Assistance 3. Develop prototype designs for ADUs that can be readily utilized for the permit process and can be approved more expeditiously. 4. Providing technical assistance grant where the City can pay a specified amount towards one hour of a professional’s time to help solve particular design problems or to adjust ADU Prototype. 5. Provide resources or training for what’s involved in becoming a landlord; develop a “kit.” 6. Providing other resources, such as an online information library on ADU resources. Strategies for Legalizing Illegally Constructed ADUs As with the item above, on March 7, 2017 Council directed staff to return in 2018 with discussion on approaches to bring existing illegal ADUs into compliance. Staff has researched what other jurisdictions5 have done to address this concern and compiled the discussion below. There are a few cities in the bay area that have implemented protocols to legalize illegal ADUs. These cities include San Francisco, Santa Cruz, and Oakland. A reoccurring fundamental condition was the required documentation that the living unit was in existence by a specific 4 The Mercury News “Bank funds ‘granny’ units project in affordable housing experiment for San Jose, L.A.” October 9, 2017: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/09/an-affordable-housing-experiment-for-san-jose-and- los-angeles-bank-funds-pilot-project-to-help-build-granny-units/ 5 Staff contacted the following cities for information: Berkeley, Los Altos, Menlo Park, Mountain View, Oakland, Redwood City, San Francisco, and Santa Cruz City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 10 date, and only those units would then be considered for the unique legalization process. Generally, the units had to be made building code compliant for all health and safety concerns, and then special consideration was given to other non-complying development standards (e.g. setbacks, height, lot coverage, etc.). Staff is still exploring options to balance city interests in possibly legalizing such ADUs while addressing life and safety concerns. Staff welcomes the Commission’s feedback on an approach to address this issue. The more common approach to incentivize property owners to legalize their units is associated with cost savings. Some strategies used by one or more of the cities with legalization programs include:  Waiving permitting and or development impact fees  Reducing permitting and or development fees  Fee waivers/reductions can be associated with a specific timeframe to motivate property owners to participate. State Regulations Taking Effect January 2018 Earlier this year, the City adopted comprehensive regulations related to ADUs to conform to state law that became effective on January 1, 2017. Subsequently, the state Legislature passed two additional bills AB 494 and SB 229, signed by the Governor in September 2017, clarifying the previously adopted ADU legislation. The City’s existing ordinance only requires minor modifications to remain consistent with state law. The proposed amendments include those conforming changes as well as other very minor clarifications. These amendments were included with the Planning Code Amendments agenda item at the November 29, 2017 PTC meeting (report #8041), but was not discussed due to a continuance; it is now on the December 13, 2017 meeting agenda. The changes are summarized below:  State law has been revised to clarify that an ADU may be constructed on sites with either an existing or proposed single-family dwelling. This revision is consistent with the City’s implementation of the ADU ordinance, and the proposed ordinance would make conforming changes to reference proposed single-family homes.  The proposed ordinance would also add to the list of zoning districts where ADUs are allowed (R-1, R-2, RE, RMD and OS districts) and those sites that are zoned Planned Community where single-family dwelling is an allowed use. The PC zoned sites would require a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet like the conventional zoning districts (other than the OS district) where ADUs are allowed.  With respect to ADUs established through conversions of space within an existing single- family home or an existing accessory structure, the new state legislation requires that such conversions be allowed in any zoning district where single-family residential is an allowed use. The proposed amendment would allow interior ADUs in the R-2, RMD, RM, and OS and PC districts where single-family residential is an allowed use. These state driven code amendments are anticipated to be reviewed by Council in February 2018. City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 11 Environmental Review The Study Session review does not require action and therefore does not constitute a “project” requiring environmental review and is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, any resulting ordinance will be reviewed in compliance with CEQA. Public Notification, Outreach & Comments The Palo Alto Municipal Code does not require notice of this public hearing be published in a local paper because it is a Study Session. As a courtesy, a notice of a public hearing for this discussion was published in the Palo Alto Weekly on December 1, 2017. For the discussion in this report, staff did not perform any specific public outreach; the meeting was noted on the City’s ADU project webpage. Staff did receive one comment letter that was focused on the owner-occupancy requirements and the interest in having them be removed (Attachment B). Next Steps It is anticipated that staff will return in Spring 2018 to the PTC with a draft ordinance for review and recommendation, which would be forwarded to the City Council soon thereafter. Report Author & Contact Information PTC6 Liaison & Contact Information Clare Campbell, AICP, Senior Jonathan Lait, AICP, Assistant Director (650) 617-3191 (650) 329-2679 clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org jonathan.lait@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments:  Attachment A: ADU/JADU Ordinance #5412 (PDF)  Attachment B: Lundy Comment Letter (PDF) 6 Emails may be sent directly to the PTC using the following address: planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.org 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 1 Ordinance No. 5412 Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Implement New State Law Requirements Relating to Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units and to Reorganize and Update City Existing Regulations The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows: A. Housing in California is becoming increasingly unaffordable. The average California home currently costs about 2.5 times the national average home price and the monthly rent is 50% higher than the rest of the nation. Rent in San Francisco, San Jose, Oakland, and Los Angeles are among the top 10 most unaffordable in the nation. With rising population growth, California must not only provide housing but also ensure affordability. B. Despite a high median income in Palo Alto, nearly 30 percent of all households overpaid for their housing (more than 30 percent of their income) in 2010. C. It is estimated that 63 percent of extremely low income renter households and 75 percent of extremely low income owner households overpaid for housing in 2010. Of the estimated 1,520 low income households, 75 percent of renter households and 44 percent of homeowner households paid more than 30 percent of their income for housing. D. The Palo Alto City Council, recognizing the severity of the regional housing crisis, requested that the Planning and Transportation Commission review constraints affecting the production of second (accessory) dwelling units and recommend modifications to the City development standards. E. While existing law enables accessory dwellings as a source of housing, recent studies show that local standards like P unintentionally, prevent homeowners from building ADUs with standards like lot coverage, large set­backs, off­street parking, or costly construction requirements. F. In September 2016, Governor Brown signed into law Senate Bill 1069, Assembly Bill 2299 and Assembly Bill 2406 relating to the creation of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units. G. These new bills were intended to address the housing crisis by easing regulatory barriers for homeowners who choose to build affordable housing in their own backyards. H. This ordinance is adopted to comply with these new State mandates regarding ADUs and junior accessory dwelling units, and to reduce regulatory constraints affecting their production. SECTION 2. Section 18.04.030 (Definitions) of Chapter 18.04 (Definitions) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended to read as follows: (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 2 18.04.030  Definitions . . . (4) Accessory dwelling means an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single­family dwelling is situated. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following: a. An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code. b. A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code. In some instances this Code uses the term second dwelling unit interchangeably with accessory dwelling unit. (46.5) Dwelling unit, se means a separate and complete dwelling unit, other than and subordinate to the main dwelling unit, whether a part of the same structure or detached, on the same residential lot. (74.5) Junior accessory dw means a unit that is no more than 500 square feet in size and contained entirely within an existing single­family structure. A junior accessory dwelling unit may include separate sanitation facilities, or may share sanitation facilities with the existing structure. (132) Single­family use means the use of a site for only one dwelling unit and, where permitted, an accessory second dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit. . . . SECTION 3. In Section 18.10.010 (a) substitute the ter essory dwelling unit( for second dwelling unit(s). SECTION 4. Section 18.10.030 Table 1 and Footnote (2) are amended as follows: TABLE 1  PERMITTED AND CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED LOW­DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES [P = Permitted Use ­­ CUP = Conditional Use Permit Required] R­E R­2 RMD Subject to Regulations in: ACCESSORY AND SUPPORT USES Accessory facilities and uses customarily incidental to permitted uses (no limit on number of plumbing fixtures) P P P 18.10.080 Home Occupations, when accessory to permitted residential uses. P P P 18.42.060 Horticulture, gardening, and growing of food products for consumption by occupants of the site. P P P Sale of agricultural products produced on the premises (1) P 18.10.110 Second Accessory Dwelling Units P P(2) P(2) 18.4210.0470 (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 3 Junior Accessory Dwelling Units P P(2) P(2) 18.42.040 AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE USES Agriculture P 18.10.110 EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS, AND ASSEMBLY USES Private Educational Facilities CUP CUP CUP Religious Congregations and Institutions CUP CUP CUP PUBLIC/QUASI­PUBLIC USES Community Centers CUP CUP CUP Utility Facilities essential to provision of utility services to the neighborhood, but excluding business offices, construction or storage yards, maintenance facilities, or corporation yards. CUP CUP CUP RECREATION USES Neighborhood Recreational Centers CUP Outdoor Recreation Services CUP CUP RESIDENTIAL USES Single­Family P P P Two­Family use, under one ownership P P Mobile Homes P P P 18.42.100 Residential Care Homes P P P RETAIL USES Cemeteries CUP Commercial Plant Nurseries CUP SERVICE USES Convalescent Facilities CUP Day Care Centers CUP CUP CUP Small Adult Day Care Homes P P P Large Adult Day Care Homes CUP CUP CUP Small Family Day Care Homes P P P Large Family Day Care Homes P P P Bed & Breakfast Inns P(3) P = Permitted Use CUP = Conditional Use Permit Required (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 4 . . . (2) Second Accessory Dwelling Units in R­2 and RMD Zones: An accessory second dwelling unit or a Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit associated with a single­family residence on a lot in the R­ 2 or RMD zones is permitted, subject to the provisions of Section 18.10.07018.42.040, and such that no more than two units result on the lot. . . . SECTION 5. Section 18.10.040 (Development Standards) of Chapter 18.10 (Low­Density Residential (RE, R­2 and RMD) Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended to read as follows: 18.10.040  Development Standards (a) Site Specifications, Building Size, Height and Bulk, and Residential Density . . . 18.10.040(a) Table 2, Footnote . . . (5) Maximum House Size: The gross floor area of attached garages and attached second accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units are included in the calculation of maximum house size. If there is no garage attached to the house, then the square footage of one detached covered parking space shall be included in the calculation. This provision applies only to single­family residences, not to duplexes allowed in the R­2 and RMD districts. . . . (i) Individual Review The Individual Review provisions of Section 18.12.110 of the Zoning Ordinance shall be applied to any single­family or two­family residence in the R­2 or RMD districts to those sides of a site that share an interior side lot line with the interior side or rear lot line of a property zoned for or used for single­ family or two­family dwellings. , except where architectural review board review is required for an accessory second dwelling on an RMD­zoned site. The individual review criteria shall be applied only to the project's effects on adjacent single­family and two­family uses. SECTION 6. Section 18.10.060 Table 3 is amended as follows: (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 5 TABLE 3 PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR R­E, R­2 AND RMD USES Use Minimum Off­Street Parking  Requirement Single­family residential use (excluding second accessory dwelling units) 2 spaces per unit, of which one must be covered Two family (R2 & RMD districts) 3 spaces total, of which at least two must be covered Second Accessory dwelling unit, attached or detached: >450 sf in size 50 sf in size 2 spaces per unit, of which one must be covered 1 space per unit, which may be covered or uncovered No parking required Junior accessory dwelling unit No parking required Other Uses See Chapter 18.40 . . . SECTION 7. Section 18.10.070 (Second Dwelling Units) of Chapter 18.10 (Low­Density Residential (RE, R­2 and RMD) Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning) is repealed in its entirety and a new 18.10.070 is added to read as follows: 18.10.070  Accessory and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units are subject to the regulations set forth in Section 18.42.040. SECTION 8. Section 18.10.120 (Architectural Review) of Chapter 18.10 (Low­Density Residential (RE, R­2 and RMD) Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended to read as follows: 18.10.120  Architectural Review Architectural review, as required in Section 18.76.020, is required in the R­E, R­2, and RMD districts whenever three or more adjacent residential units are intended to be developed concurrently, whether through subdivision or individual applications. Architectural review is also required for second dwelling units of more than 900 square feet, when located in the Neighborhood Preservation Combining District (NP). SECTION 9. Section 18.10.140 (Neighborhood Preservation Combining District (NP) Standards) of Chapter 18.10 (Low­Density Residential (RE, R­2 and RMD) Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning) (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 6 is amended to read as follows: 18.10.140  Neighborhood Preservation Combining District (NP) Standards . . . (b)(2) Design Review Required For properties on which two or more residential units are developed or modified, design review and approval shall be required by the architectural review board in compliance with procedures established in Section 18.76.020 for any new development or modification to any structure on the property and for site amenities. No design review is required for construction of or modifications to single­family structures that constitute the only principal structure on a parcel of land or for accessory dwelling units or junior accessory units. No design review is required for construction of second dwelling units on a parcel except when the second unit exceeds 900 square feet in size. . . . SECTION 10. Section 18.10.150(e) (Existing Second Dwelling Units on Substandard Size Lots) is deleted in its entirety and reserved for future use. . . . SECTION 11. Section 18.12.010(a) is amended as follows: (a) Single Family Residential District [R­1] The R­1 single family residential district is intended to create, preserve, and enhance areas suitable for detached dwellings with a strong presence of nature and with open area affording maximum privacy and opportunities for outdoor living and children's play. Minimum site area requirements are established to create and preserve variety among neighborhoods, to provide adequate open area, and to encourage quality design. Second Accessory dwelling units, junior accessory dwelling units and accessory structures or buildings are appropriate. where consistent with the site and neighborhood character. Community uses and facilities, such as churches and schools, should be limited unless no net loss of housing would result. . . . SECTION 12. Section 18.12.030 Table 1, is amended as follows: (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 7 Table 1  PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL R­1 RESIDENTIAL USES  R­1and all R­1  Subdistricts Subject to  Regulations for: ACCESSORY AND SUPPORT USES Accessory facilities and uses customarily incidental to permitted uses with no more than two plumbing fixtures and no kitchen facility, or of a size less than or equal to 200 square feet P 18.04.030(a)(3) 18.12.080 Accessory facilities and uses customarily incidental to permitted uses with more than two plumbing fixtures (but with no kitchen), and in excess of 200 square feet in size, but excluding second accessory dwelling units CUP 18.12.080 Home occupations, when accessory to permitted residential P 18.42.060 Horticulture, gardening, and growing of food products for consumption by occupants of the site P Second Accessory Dwelling Units P(1)18.42.04012.070 Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit P(1)18.42.040 EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUSAND ASSEMBLY USES Private Educational Facilities CUP Churches and Religious Institutions CUP PUBLIC/QUASI PUBLIC USES Community Centers CUP Utility Facilities essential to provision of utility services to the neighborhood, but excluding business offices, construction or storage yards, maintenance facilities, or corporation yards CUP RECREATION USES Outdoor Recreation Services CUP RESIDENTIAL USES Single­Family P Mobile Homes P 18.42.100 Residential Care Homes P SERVICE USES Day Care Centers CUP Small Adult Day Care Homes P (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 8 Large Adult Day Care Homes CUP Small Family Day Care Homes P Large Family Day Care Homes P P=Permitted Use CUP = ConditionalUsePermitRequired (1) An Accessory Dwelling Unit or a Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit associated with a single­ family residence on a lot is permitted, subject to the provisions of Section 18.42.040, and such that no more than two total units result on the lot. SECTION 13. Section 18.12.040 Table 2, footnote (8) is amended as follows: (8) Maximum House Size: The gross floor area of attached garages and attached accessory second dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units are included in the calculation of maximum house size. If there is no garage attached to the house, then the square footage of one detached covered parking space shall be included in the calculation. SECTION 14. Section 18.12.060 Table 4 is amended as follows: Table 4 shows the minimum off­street automobile parking requirements for specific uses in the R­1 district. Table 4 Parking Requirements for Specific R­1 Uses Use Minimum Off­Street Parking Requirement Single­family residential use (excluding second accessory dwelling units) 2 spaces per unit, of which one must be covered. Second Accessory dwelling unit , attached or detached 2 spaces per unit, of which one must be covered No parking required Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit No parking required Other Uses See Chs. 18.52 and 18.54 . . .  (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 9 SECTION 15.      Section 18.12.070 (Second Dwelling Units) of Chapter 18.12 (R­1 Single­ Family Residential District) of Title 18 (Zoning) is repealed in its entirety and a new 18.12.070 is added to read as follows: 18.12.070  Accessory and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units are subject to the regulations set forth in Section 18.42.040. SECTION 16. Section 18.12.090(b)(2) is amended to read as follows: . . . (2) basement area is deemed to be habitable space but the finished level of the first floor is no more than three feet above the grade around the perimeter of the building foundation. Basement space used as a second dwelling unit or portion thereof shall be counted as floor area for the purpose of calculating the maximum size of the unit (but may be excluded from calculations of floor area for the total site). This provision is intended to assure that second units are subordinate in size to the main dwelling and to preclude the development of duplex zoning on the site. . . . SECTION 17. Section 18.12.150(d) (Existing Second Dwelling Units on Substandard Size Lots) is deleted in its entirety and reserved for future use. . . .   SECTION 18. Section 18.28.040, Table 1, is amended as follows: Table 1  Land Uses  Subject to  in  Chapter: ACCESSORYAND SUPPORTUSES facilities accessory uses Chs. 18.40 and 18.42 and drinking services in conjunction with a use (1) CUP services as accessory to the administrative offices of a organization, that such services do not exceed 25% of the gross floor area of the combined services and retail uses (1) CUP services in with a permitted use (1) CUP (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 10 of on the premises; provided, that no commercial for the sale or of agricultural shall be permitted. Second Accessory dwelling units, to regulations in Section 18.28.07042.040 18.28.070 18.42.040 Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit 18.42.040 AGRICULTURALANDOPEN SPACEUSES Uses, including husbandry, crops, dairying, horticulture, livestock farming, tree farming, viticulture, and similar uses not inconsistent with the intent and of this chapter conservatories, nature laboratories, facilities sanctuaries Park uses and uses to park operation EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS, AND ASSEMBLY USES schools (1) CUP Churches and institutions (1) CUP research, and philanthropic institutions CUP facilities (1) CUP Public or colleges and and facilities thereto CUP classes (1) CUP OFFICEUSES services for non­profit organizations (1) CUP OTHER USES Other uses which, in the opinion of the director, are similar to as or conditionally uses CUP (1) FACILITY USES All facilities or leased, and or used, by the City of Alto, the of Santa Clara, the State of California, the of the United States, the Palo Alto District, or any other agency Facilities CUP Centers CUP (1) Utility Facilities CUP CUP CUP RECREATIONALUSES centers CUP (1) (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 11 services CUP (1)CUP uses including riding clubs, stables, clubs, and golf courses CUP Youth clubs CUP (1) RESIDENTIALUSES dwellings (including mobile homes on foundations) 18.40. Guest ranches CUP care when existing on the site CUP (1) Homes use, and accessory and uses to dwellings; provided, that such dwellings shall be the of the owner or owners, or or lessor of land upon which the is conducted, the of other of the same family and bona fide employees of the aforementioned SERVICEUSES care, including boarding and kennels CUP CUP Cemeteries CUP Cemeteries, not including mausolea, crematoria, or columbaria CUP day care homes day care homes CUP Day care centers CUP (1) Art, dance,gymnastic,exerciseor music studiosor CUP (1) Medical Services: Hospitals Outpatient medical facilitieswith associated medical research TEMPORARY USES Temporary parking facilities,provided that such facilities CUP (1) TRANSPORTATION USES Airports and airport­relateduses CUP (1) . . .  (2) An accessory dwelling unit or a Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit associated with a single­ family residence on a lot in the OS District is permitted, subject to the provisions of Section 18.42.040, and such that no more than two total units result on the lot. SECTION 19. Section 18.28.070(a) (Second Dwelling Units) is amended as follows: 18.28.070  Additional OS District Regulations The following additional regulations shall apply in the OS district: (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 12 (a) Second Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units are subject to the regulations set forth in Section 18.42.040. Not more than one attached or detached second dwelling units shall be allowed on a lot in the OS district, and shall be subject to the following regulations: (1) Second dwelling shall only be permitted on sites with a minimum site area of 10 acres; (2) Attached second dwelling units shall comply with the OS district height limitation of 25 feet; and (3) Second dwelling units shall follow the standards set forth in the Residential Estate (R­ E) District for second dwelling units (18.10.070(b)), with the exceptions outlined in subsections 1 and 2 above. . . . SECTION 20.  Section 18.42.040 (Accessory and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units) is added as follows: 18.42.040  Accessory and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units  The following regulations apply to zoning districts where accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units are permitted. (a) Accessory Dwelling Units 1. Purpose The intent of this section is to provide regulations to accommodate accessory dwelling units, in order to provide for variety to the city's housing stock and additional affordable housing opportunities. Accessory Dwelling Units shall be separate, self­contained living units, with separate entrances from the main residence, whether attached or detached. The standards below are provided to minimize the impacts of accessory dwelling units on nearby residents and throughout the city, and to assure that the size and location of such dwellings is compatible with the existing residence on the site and with other structures in the area. 2. Minimum Lot Sizes (i) In the R­1 district and all R­1 subdistricts, RE district, R­2 district, and RMD district, the minimum lot size for the development of an accessory dwelling unit is 5,000 square feet. (ii) In the OS District, the minimum lot size for the development of an accessory dwelling unit is 10 acres. 3. Setbacks and Daylight Plane (i) Except as otherwise provided in this section, accessory dwelling units shall (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 13 comply with the underlying zo setbacks, including daylight plane requirements. (ii) Notwithstanding section (i) above, no setback shall be required for an existing garage that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit, except as provided in subsection (a)(5) below. (iii) In districts permitting second story accessory dwelling units, a setback of no more than five feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit constructed above a garage. 4. Lot Coverage/FAR (i) An accessory dwelling unit shall be included in the lot coverage and FAR requirements applicable to the parcel. (ii) Exceptions: a. Lot Coverage. When the development of an accessory dwelling unit on a parcel with an existing single family residence would result in the parcel exceeding the lot coverage requirement, the accessory dwelling unit shall not be included in the calculation of lot coverage applicable to the property, so long as the parcel meets requirement or minimum lot size requirement. b. Basement FAR. In the R­1 district and all R­1 subdistricts, basement space used as an accessory dwelling unit, or portion thereof, shall not be included in the calculation of floor area for the entire site, providing the measurement from first finished floor to grade around the perimeter of the building is no more than three (3) feet. c. FAR. When the development of a new one­story accessory dwelling unit on a parcel with an existing single family residence would result in the parcel exceeding the maximum floor area, an additional 175 square feet of floor area above the maximum amount of floor area otherwise permitted by the underlying zoning district shall be allowed. This additional area shall be permitted only to accommodate the development of the accessory dwelling unit. 5. Conversion of Space in Existing Single Family Residence or Existing Accessory Structure Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(7) and (a)(8), in the R­1 district and all R­1 subdistricts and RE district only, an Accessory Dwelling Unit shall be permitted if the unit is contained within the existing space of a single­family residence or an existing accessory structure, has independent exterior access from the existing residence, and the side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire safety, and if the accessory dwelling unit conforms with the following: a. For the purposes of this section, the portion of the single­family residence or accessory structure subject to the conversion shall be legally permitted and existing as of January 1, (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 14 2017. b. Notwithstanding the allowance in this section, only one accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit may be located on any lot subject to this section. c. No new or separate utility connection shall be required between the accessory dwelling unit and utility service, such as water, sewer, and power. d. The accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the provisions of subsections (a)(6), (a)(9), and (a)(10). 6. Privacy Any window, door or deck of a second story accessory dwelling unit shall utilize techniques to lessen views onto adjacent properties to preserve the privacy of residents. These techniques may include placement of doors, windows and decks to minimize overview of neighboring dwelling units, use of obscured glazing, window placement above eye level, and screening between the properties. 7. Additional Development Standards for Attached Accessory Dwelling Units (i) Attached accessory dwelling units are those attached to the main dwelling. All attached accessory dwelling units shall be subject to the additional development requirements specified below. (ii) Attached unit size counts toward the calculation of maximum house size. (iii) Unit Size: The maximum size of an attached accessory dwelling unit living area shall not exceed 600 square feet and shall not exceed 50% of the existing living area of the primary existing dwelling unit. The accessory dwelling unit and any covered parking provided for the accessory dwelling unit shall be included in the total floor area for the site, but the covered parking area is not included in the maximum 600 square feet for attached unit. Any basement space used as an accessory dwelling unit or portion thereof shall be counted as floor area for the purpose of calculating the maximum size of the accessory unit. (iv) Maximum height (including property in a special flood hazard zone): One story and 17 feet. However, in the RE District attached Accessory Dwelling Units may be two stories and 30 feet. In the OS zone, attached Accessory Dwelling Units may be two stories and 25 feet. (v) Separate Entry Required for Attached Units: A separate exterior entry shall be provided to serve an accessory dwelling unit. (vi) Except on corner lots, the accessory dwelling unit shall not have an entranceway facing the same lot line (property line) as the entranceway to the main dwelling unit unless the second entranceway is located in the rear half of the lot. Exterior staircases to second floor units shall be located toward the interior side or rear yard of the property. (vii) If covered parking for an accessory dwelling unit is provided in the RE zone, the maximum size of the covered parking area for the accessory dwelling unit is 200 square feet. (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 15 8. Additional Development Standards for Detached Accessory Dwelling Units (i) Detached accessory dwelling units are those detached from the main dwelling. All detached accessory dwelling units shall be subject to the additional development standards specified below. (ii) The maximum size of the detached accessory dwelling unit living area shall be 900 square feet. a. The accessory dwelling unit and any covered parking shall be included in the total floor area for the site, but the covered parking area is not included within the maximum 900 square feet for detached unit. b. Any basement space used as an accessory dwelling unit or portion thereof shall be counted as floor area for the purpose of calculating the maximum size of the accessory unit. (iii) Maximum height (including property in a special flood hazard zone): one story and 17 feet. (iv) Setbacks: notwithstanding section (a)(3)(i), a detached accessory dwelling unit may be located in a rear yard, but must maintain a minimum s encroach into a daylight plane beginning at a height of eight fee one foot (1 . (v) If covered parking is provided for an accessory dwelling unit in the RE District, the maximum size of covered parking area for the detached accessory dwelling unit is 200 square feet. (vi) There shall be no windows, doors, mechanical equipment, or venting or exhaust systems located within six feet of a property line. 9. Additional Requirements for All Accessory Dwelling Units (i) Sale of Units: The Accessory dwelling unit shall not be sold separately from the primary residence. (ii) Short term rentals. The accessory dwelling unit shall not be rented for periods of less than 30 days. (iii) Number of Units Allowed: Only one accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit may be located on any residentially zoned lot. (iv) Existing Development: A single­family dwelling shall exist on the lot or shall be constructed on the lot in conjunction with the construction of the accessory dwelling unit. (v) Occupancy: The owner of a parcel proposed for accessory dwelling use shall occupy as a principal residence either the primary dwelling or the accessory dwelling, unless both the primary dwelling and the accessory dwelling are rented to the same tenant and such tenant is prohibited from sub­leasing the primary dwelling or the accessory dwelling. (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 16 (vi) Prior to issuance of a building permit for the accessory dwelling unit, the owner shall record a deed restriction in a form approved by the city that: includes a prohibition on the sale of the accessory dwelling unit separate from the sale of the single­family residence; requires owner­ occupancy consistent with subsection (a)(9)(v) above; does not permit short­term rentals; and restricts the size and attributes of the accessory dwelling unit to those that conform with this section. (vii) Accessory dwelling units shall not be required to provide fire sprinklers if they are not required for the primary residence. (viii) Street Address Required: Street addresses shall be assigned to all accessory dwellings to assist in emergency response. (ix) Street Access: When parking is provided, the accessory dwelling unit shall have street access from a driveway in common with the main residence in order to prevent new curb cuts, excessive paving, and elimination of street trees, unless separate driveway access is permitted by the director upon a determination that separate access will result in fewer environmental impacts such as excessive paving, unnecessary grading or unnecessary tree removal, and that such separate access will not create the appearance, from the street, of a lot division or two­family use. (x) For properties listed in the Palo Alto Historic Inventory, the California Register of Historical Resources, the National Register of Historic Places, or considered a historic resource after Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties shall be required, as determined by the Planning Director. (xi) No protected tree shall be removed for the purpose of establishing an accessory dwelling unit unless the tree is dead, dangerous or constitutes a nuisance under Section 8.04.050. Any protected tree removed pursuant to this subsection shall be replaced in accordance with the standards it the Tree Technical Manual. (xii) Except as modified by this Section 18.42.040, the accessory dwelling unit shall conform to all requirements of the underlying zoning district, any applicable combining district, and all other applicable provisions of this Title 18. 10. Parking (i) No additional parking shall be required for accessory dwelling units. (ii) If an accessory dwelling unit replaces existing required covered parking, replacement spaces shall be provided. When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit, any required replacement spaces may be located in any configuration on the same lot as the accessory dwelling unit, including, but not limited to, within the front setback if on an existing driveway, as covered spaces, uncovered spaces, or tandem spaces, or by the use of mechanical automobile parking lifts. All new parking structures shall comply with development standards of the underlying zoning. (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 17 (b) Junior Accessory Dwelling Units 1. Purposes: This Section provides standards for the establishment of junior accessory dwelling units, an alternative to the standard accessory dwelling unit. Junior accessory dwelling units will typically be smaller than an accessory dwelling unit, will be constructed within the walls of an existing single family structure and requires owner occupancy in the single family residence where the unit is located. 2. Development Standards. Junior accessory dwelling units shall comply with the following standards: (i) Number of Units Allowed: Either one accessory dwelling unit or one junior accessory dwelling unit, may be located on any residentially zoned lot that permits a single­family dwelling except as otherwise regulated or restricted by an adopted Coordinated Area Plan or Specific Plan. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall only be located on a lot which already contains one legal single­family dwelling. (ii) Size: A junior accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 500 square feet in size. (iii) Lot Coverage/FAR: a. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall be included in the calculation of lot coverage and FAR applicable to the property. b. A lot with a junior accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted to develop an additional 50 square feet of floor area above the maximum amount of floor area otherwise permitted by the underlying zoning district. This additional area shall be permitted to accommodate the junior accessory dwelling unit. (iv) Owner Occupancy: The owner of a parcel proposed for a junior accessory dwelling unit shall occupy as a principal residence either the primary dwelling or the junior accessory dwelling. Owner­occupancy is not required if the owner is a governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization. (v) Sale Prohibited: A junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be sold independently of the primary dwelling on the parcel. (vi) Short term rentals: The junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be rented for periods of less than 30 days. (vii) Location of Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit: A junior accessory dwelling unit shall be created within the existing walls of an existing primary dwelling, and shall include conversion of an existing bedroom. (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 18 (viii) Separate Entry Required: A separate exterior entry shall be provided to serve a junior accessory dwelling unit, with an interior entry to the main living area. A junior accessory dwelling may include a second interior doorway for sound attenuation. (ix) Kitchen Requirements: The junior accessory dwelling unit shall include an efficiency kitchen, requiring and limited to the following components: a. A sink with a maximum waste line diameter of one­and­a­half (1.5) inches, b. A cooking facility or appliance which does not require electrical service greater than one hundred and twenty (120) volts, or natural or propane gas, and c. A food preparation counter and storage cabinets that are of reasonable size in relation to the size of the junior accessory dwelling unit. (x) Parking. No additional parking is required beyond that required at the time the existing primary dwelling was constructed. (xi) Fire Protection; Utility Service. For the purposes of any fire or life protection ordinance or regulation or for the purposes of providing service for water, sewer, or power, a junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be considered a separate or new unit. (xii) Deed Restriction. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a junior accessory dwelling unit, the owner shall record a deed restriction in a form approved by the city that includes a prohibition on the sale of the junior accessory dwelling unit separate from the sale of the single­family residence, requires owner­occupancy consistent with subsection (b)(2)(iv) above, does not permit short­term rentals, and restricts the size and attributes of the junior dwelling unit to those that conform with this section. SECTION 21. Section 18.52.040 (6)(c) Table 1, is amended as follows: Table 1  Minimum Off­Street Parking Requirements  Use Vehicle Parking Requirement  (# of spaces) Bicycle Parking Requirement Spaces Class1 Long Term (LT)  and Short Term  (ST) RESIDENTIAL USES Single ­Family Residential (Primary Unit) Tandem Parking Allowed (a) In the OS district 4 spaces, of which at least one space must be covered None (b) In all other districts 2 spaces, of which at least one space must be covered (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 19 (c) Underground parking for single family uses is prohibited, except pursuant to a variance granted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.76 (Permits and Approvals) of this title, in which case the area of the underground garage shall be counted toward the gross floor area. Second Accessory DwellingUnit (In addition to main dwelling unit requirements) >450 sf in size <450 sf in size 2spaces, of which at least one must be covered 1 space, covered or uncovered No parking required None Junior Accessory Dwelling Units No parking required None Two­Family Residential (R­2 & RMD Districts) 1.5 spaces per unit, of which at least one space per unit must be covered Tandem Parking Allowed, with one tandem space per unit, associated directly with another parking space for the same unit 1 space per Unit 100% LT Multiple ­Family Residential 1.25 per studio unit 1.5 per 1­bedroom unit 2 per 2­bedroom or larger unit At least one space per unit must be covered Tandem parking allowed for any unit requiring two spaces (one tandem space per unit, associated directly with another parking space for the same unit, up to a maximum of 25% of total required spaces for any project with more than four (4) units) 1 per unit 100% LT (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 20 (a) Guest Parking For projects exceeding 3 units; 1 space plus 10% of total number of units, provided that if more than one space per unit is assigned or secured parking, then guest spaces equal to 33% of all units is required. 1 space for each 10 units 100% ST . . .    SECTION 22.  SECTION 23. Any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance. SECTION 24. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 2017­04­19_Palo Alto ADU FINAL 21 SECTION 25. The Council finds that the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.17 (Application of Division to Ordinances Implementing Law Relating to Construction of Dwelling Units and Second Units) and CEQA Guideline sections 15061(b) and 15301, 15303 and 15305 because it simply provides a comprehensive permitting scheme for accessory dwelling units whose construction is exempt from CEQA. SECTION 26. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty­first date after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: April 17, 2017 PASSED: May 8, 2017 AYES: DUBOIS, FILSETH, FINE, KNISS, SCHARFF, TANAKA, WOLBACH NOES: HOLMAN, KOU ABSENT: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager Director of Planning & Community Environment (SGY7MKR)RZIPSTI-()*'(()%%%%( 'IVXMJMGEXI3J'SQTPIXMSR )RZIPSTI-H)*'(()%%%%( 7XEXYW'SQTPIXIH 7YFNIGX4PIEWI(SGY7MKRXLMWHSGYQIRX36(%(93VHMRERGITHJ 7SYVGI)RZIPSTI (SGYQIRX4EKIW 7MKREXYVIW )RZIPSTI3VMKMREXSV 7YTTPIQIRXEP(SGYQIRX4EKIW -RMXMEPW /MQ0YRX 'IVXMJMGEXI4EKIW %YXS2EZ)REFPIH )RZIPSTI-H7XEQTMRK)REFPIH 8MQI>SRI 98' 4EGMJMG8MQI 97  'EREHE 4E]QIRXW ,EQMPXSR%ZI 4EPS%PXS'% OMQFIVP]PYRX$GMX]SJTEPSEPXSSVK -4%HHVIWW 6IGSVH8VEGOMRK 7XEXYW3VMKMREP %1 ,SPHIV/MQ0YRX OMQFIVP]PYRX$GMX]SJTEPSEPXSSVK 0SGEXMSR(SGY7MKR 7MKRIV)ZIRXW 7MKREXYVI 8MQIWXEQT 7ERHVE0II 7ERHVE0II$'MX]SJ4EPS%PXSSVK %WWMWXERX'MX]%XXSVRI] 7IGYVMX]0IZIP)QEMP%GGSYRX%YXLIRXMGEXMSR 2SRI 9WMRK-4%HHVIWW 7IRX%1 :MI[IH%1 7MKRIH%1 )PIGXVSRMG6IGSVHERH7MKREXYVI(MWGPSWYVI 2SX3JJIVIHZME(SGY7MKR -( ,MPPEV]+MXIPQER ,MPPEV]+MXIPQER$'MX]SJ4EPS%PXSSVK 7IGYVMX]0IZIP)QEMP%GGSYRX%YXLIRXMGEXMSR 2SRI 9WMRK-4%HHVIWW 7IRX%1 :MI[IH%1 7MKRIH%1 )PIGXVSRMG6IGSVHERH7MKREXYVI(MWGPSWYVI 2SX3JJIVIHZME(SGY7MKR -( .EQIW/IIRI NEQIWOIIRI$GMX]SJTEPSEPXSSVK 'MX]1EREKIV 'MX]SJ4EPS%PXS 7IGYVMX]0IZIP)QEMP%GGSYRX%YXLIRXMGEXMSR 2SRI 9WMRK-4%HHVIWW 7MKRIHYWMRKQSFMPI 7IRX%1 :MI[IH%1 7MKRIH%1 )PIGXVSRMG6IGSVHERH7MKREXYVI(MWGPSWYVI %GGITXIH41 -(JIEEGFFHEGI ,+VIKSV]7GLEVJJ KVIKWGLEVJJ$GMX]SJTEPSEPXSSVK 1E]SV 'MX]SJ4EPS%PXS 7IGYVMX]0IZIP)QEMP%GGSYRX%YXLIRXMGEXMSR 2SRI 9WMRK-4%HHVIWW 7MKRIHYWMRKQSFMPI 7IRX%1 :MI[IH%1 7MKRIH%1 )PIGXVSRMG6IGSVHERH7MKREXYVI(MWGPSWYVI 2SX3JJIVIHZME(SGY7MKR -( 7MKRIV)ZIRXW 7MKREXYVI 8MQIWXEQT &IXL1MRSV &IXL1MRSV$'MX]SJ4EPS%PXSSVK 'MX]'PIVO 'MX]SJ4EPS%PXS 7IGYVMX]0IZIP)QEMP%GGSYRX%YXLIRXMGEXMSR 2SRI 9WMRK-4%HHVIWW 7IRX%1 :MI[IH%1 7MKRIH%1 )PIGXVSRMG6IGSVHERH7MKREXYVI(MWGPSWYVI 2SX3JJIVIHZME(SGY7MKR -( -R4IVWSR7MKRIV)ZIRXW 7MKREXYVI 8MQIWXEQT )HMXSV(IPMZIV])ZIRXW 7XEXYW 8MQIWXEQT %KIRX(IPMZIV])ZIRXW 7XEXYW 8MQIWXEQT -RXIVQIHMEV](IPMZIV])ZIRXW 7XEXYW 8MQIWXEQT 'IVXMJMIH(IPMZIV])ZIRXW 7XEXYW 8MQIWXEQT 'EVFSR'ST])ZIRXW 7XEXYW 8MQIWXEQT 2SXEV])ZIRXW 8MQIWXEQT )RZIPSTI7YQQEV])ZIRXW 7XEXYW 8MQIWXEQTW )RZIPSTI7IRX ,EWLIH)RGV]TXIH %1 'IVXMJMIH(IPMZIVIH 7IGYVMX]'LIGOIH %1 7MKRMRK'SQTPIXI 7IGYVMX]'LIGOIH %1 'SQTPIXIH 7IGYVMX]'LIGOIH %1 4E]QIRX)ZIRXW 7XEXYW 8MQIWXEQTW )PIGXVSRMG6IGSVHERH7MKREXYVI(MWGPSWYVI CITY OF PALO ALTO PLANNING DIVISION- CORRECTION LIST IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please return both this correction list and any marked drawings or calculations along with your revised drawings when submitting corrections to the Building Department. Please reference on the correction list where on the plans the corrections have been made to assist in providing a more timely review. 1. Please adjust the scope of work for the project to include the construction of the new garage. 2. No AC units were shown on the plans; if AC units will be included in this scope please update the site plan to show the AC unit location. Also new AC units must be shown to comply with Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 9.10 (PAMC 9.10 “Noise”) and cannot be located within interior yard setbacks per PAMC Section 18.12.040(l) location of noise-producing equipment. Within this area of Palo Alto noise producing equipment are allowed to produce no more than 66db measured at the property line. Please provide specifications (spec sheets) for the AC units indicating their db range and update the plans to include model numbers and code compliant location. 3. Per the Building Permit Submittal Requirements, the Site Plan must be drawn to a scale of 1/8” = 1’. Please submit a revised site plan measured to this scale. 4. Please include the following information on the site plan: all trees located on the property along with their species, the public right of way, street tree location (see attached parcel report). 5. There is a public utility easement that runs along the northern and eastern side of the property that is not indicated on the site plan. Our records indicate that both are about 10 feet from the property line. Please show the utility easement on the site plan. (see attached parcel report) 6. On site plans from 2013 there appears to be a deck located in the rear yard of the property that is not indicated on the site plan. Please include and indicate all structures and paving for the property on the site plan. 7. On page A-2 the proposed garage has dimensions of 10’x20’ from exterior wall to exterior wall. Per PAMC 18.54.20(b)(2), interior dimensions for covered/garage parking must be 10’x20’. Please revise the plan and FAR/Lot Coverage calculations to reflect these dimensions. Date: June 7, 2017 Address: 592 Loma Verde Avenue Permit # 17000-00992 Reviewed by: Garrett Sauls 8. Please submit a completed T-1 sheet (signed) and update the site plan to include the Tree Protection Zone for any protected trees such as heritage trees (oak/redwood) or protected trees in the public right of way as instructed by the T-1 Tree Protection sheet. If the proposed work is within the TPZ then an arborist report would need to be submitted and modification to the project based on the assessment by the arborist may also be required. You may find copies of the T-1 Tree Protection Sheet here; http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/6460. 9. Prior to approval for a building permit, a deed restriction will be required for the new cottage on the property. Information about what needs to be in the deed restriction can be found in section 18.42.040(a)(9)(vi) of the new ADU ordinance. Here is the link to the new ADU ordinance: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/57945. 10. Due to the increase in net dwelling units on the property, new development impact fees will be assessed for the property. The impact fee is estimated to be $9,371. You can find information about development impact fees here;http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/27226. If you have any questions, please contact me by e-mail garrett.sauls@cityofpaloalto.org or by phone at 650-329-2471 to discuss the above comments prior to resubmitting. Sincerely, Garrett Sauls Planning Technician /HJHQG< <HVWKHPHDVXUHLVLQWKHVFRSHRIZRUN 3DUW 3DUW 3DUW 3DUW 1 1RWKHPHDVXUHLVQRWLQWKHVFRSHRIZRUN 3ODQQLQJDQG'HVLJQ &RGH6HFWLRQ < 1 &255 ,1,7,$/ &255 ,1,7,$/ &255 ,1,7,$/ &255 ,1,7,$/ 0DQGDWRU\'HFRQVWUXFWLRQVXUYH\ ORFDOO\DPHQGHG 3$0&$*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\6WRUPZDWHUGUDLQDJHDQGUHWHQWLRQGXULQJFRQVWUXFWLRQ OHVVWKDQRQHDFUH *%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\*UDGLQJDQGSDYLQJ *%&&Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\(OHFWULF9HKLFOH (9 &KDUJLQJIRUQHZUHVLGHQWLDOFRQVWUXFWLRQ ORFDOO\DPHQGHG 3$0&;1RW$SSOLFDEOH Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\(9&KDUJLQJ1HZVLQJOHIDPLO\UHVLGHQFHV ORFDOO\DPHQGHG 3$0&$;1RW$SSOLFDEOH Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\(9&KDUJLQJ0XOWLIDPLO\UHVLGHQWLDOVWUXFWXUHV ORFDOO\DPHQGHG 3$0&$;1RW$SSOLFDEOH Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\%LF\FOH3DUNLQJ ORFDOO\DPHQGHG  0XOWLIDPLO\RQO\ 3$0&$;1RW$SSOLFDEOH Ƒ :DWHU(IILFLHQF\DQG&RQVHUYDWLRQ 0DQGDWRU\,QGRRU:DWHU8VH:DWHUFORVHWV JSI *%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\,QGRRU:DWHU8VH8ULQDOV :DOO0RXQWHGJSIDOORWKHUVJSI ;*%1RW$SSOLFDEOH Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\,QGRRU:DWHU8VH6LQJOHVKRZHUKHDG JSPDWSVL ;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\,QGRRU:DWHU8VH0XOWLSOHVKRZHUKHDGVVHUYLQJRQHVKRZHU JSPDWSVL ;*%1RW$SSOLFDEOH Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\,QGRRU:DWHU8VH5HVLGHQWLDOODYDWRU\IDXFHWV JSPDWSVL ;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\,QGRRU:DWHU8VH>0XOWLIDPLO\2QO\@/DYDWRU\IDXFHWVLQFRPPRQDQGSXEOLFXVHDUHDV *%1RW$SSOLFDEOH Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\,QGRRU:DWHU8VH0HWHULQJIDXFHWV JDOORQVSHUF\FOH ;*%1RW$SSOLFDEOH Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\,QGRRU:DWHU8VH.LWFKHQIDXFHWV JSPDWSVL ;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\,QGRRU:DWHU8VH6WDQGDUGVIRUSOXPELQJIL[WXUHVDQGILWWLQJV 0HHW3OXPELQJ&RGH ;6KHHW$Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\2XWGRRUSRWDEOHZDWHUXVHLQODQGVFDSHDUHD 7LWOH&KDSWHU*%Ƒ 0DWHULDO&RQVHUYDWLRQDQG5HVRXUFH(IILFLHQF\ 0DQGDWRU\5RGHQWSURRILQJ ;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\(QKDQFHGFRQVWUXFWLRQZDVWHUHGXFWLRQ'LYHUVLRQ /RFDOO\DPHQGHGLISURMHFWYDOXDWLRQFRQGLWLRQVDUHPHW 3$0&$;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\&RQVWUXFWLRQZDVWHPDQDJHPHQWSODQLQ*UHHQ+DOR;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\:DVWHPDQDJHPHQWFRPSDQ\;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\2SHUDWLRQDQGPDLQWHQDQFHPDQXDO ;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\5HF\FOLQJE\RFFXSDQWV ;*% (QYLURQPHQWDO4XDOLW\ 0DQGDWRU\)LUHSODFHV ;*%1RW$SSOLFDEOH 0DQGDWRU\&RYHULQJRIGXFWRSHQLQJVDQGSURWHFWLRQRIPHFKDQLFDOHTXLSPHQWGXULQJFRQVWUXFWLRQ ;*%Ƒ ; ; 0DQGDWRU\$GKHVLYHVVHDODQWVDQGFDXONV7DEOHDQG;*%Ƒ 6LJQDWXUH 'DWH 0DQGDWRU\3DLQWVDQGFRDWLQJV7DEOH;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\$HURVROSDLQWVDQGFRDWLQJV ;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\&DUSHWV\VWHPV ;*%$UDVK)LURX]MDHL 0DQGDWRU\&DUSHWV\VWHPV&DUSHWFXVKLRQ ;*%Ƒ 3ULQW)XOO1DPH 0DQGDWRU\&DUSHWV\VWHPV&DUSHWDGKHVLYH ;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\5HVLOLHQWIORRULQJV\VWHPVIRU;*%DUDVK#FDOWLWOHFRP 0DQGDWRU\&RPSRVLWHZRRGSURGXFWV ;*%Ƒ 3KRQHRU(PDLO 0DQGDWRU\&RQFUHWHVODEIRXQGDWLRQV ;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\&DSLOODU\EUHDN ;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\0RLVWXUHFRQWHQWRIEXLOGLQJPDWHULDOV ;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\%DWKURRPH[KDXVWIDQV ;*%Ƒ 0DQGDWRU\+HDWLQJDQGDLUFRQGLWLRQLQJV\VWHPGHVLJQ ;*%Ƒ 5(6,'(17,$/*5((1%8,/',1*$33/,&$7,21&$/*5((10$1'$725< 9HUVLRQ 7LWOH3DUW&DOLIRUQLD*UHHQ%XLOGLQJ&RGH &$/*UHHQ KWWSZZZEVFFDJRY+RPH&$/*UHHQDVS[ &LW\RI3DOR$OWR*UHHQ%XLOGLQJ3URJUDPDQG5HVRXUFHV KWWSZZZFLW\RISDORDOWRRUJJRYGHSWVGVJUHHQBEXLOGLQJFRPSOLDQFHDVS &LW\RI3DOR$OWR*UHHQ%XLOGLQJ2UGLQDQFH 3$0&$PHQGPHQWV KWWSVZZZFLW\RISDORDOWRRUJFLYLFD[ILOHEDQNGRFXPHQWV 0$1'$725< *% $FNQRZOHGJHPHQW 3U R M H F W  $ G G U H V V     / R P D  9 H U G H  $ Y H    3 D O R  $ O W R   & $     5 ( 6 , ' ( 1 7 , $ /  & + ( & . / , 6 7   & $ / * 5 ( ( 1  0 $ 1 ' $ 7 2 5 < $SSOLFDWLRQ7KLVSODQVKHHWLVIRUPXOWLIDPLO\DQGVLQJOHIDPLO\QHZ FRQVWUXFWLRQOHVVWKDQ6)RUDGGLWLRQRUDOWHUDWLRQVOHVVWKDQ 6)WKDWLQFUHDVHWKHEXLOGLQJVFRQGLWLRQHGDUHDYROXPHRUVL]H 7KLVSURMHFWLVUHTXLUHGWRFRPSO\ZLWKWKH 6WDWH&DOLIRUQLD*UHHQ%XLOGLQJ&RGH 7 3DUW DQGWKH&LW\RI3DOR$OWR VORFDO DPHQGPHQWV 3$0& ,WKHSURSHUW\ RZQHUOHJDOUHSUHVHQWDWLYHDFNQRZOHGJH DQGXQGHUVWDQGWKHUHTXLUHPHQWVDQG SHQDOWLHVIRUQRQFRPSOLDQFH SHUWRQRI ZDVWHQRWGLYHUWHGIURPWKHODQGILOOZLWKD PLQLPXPRIDQGDGD\IRU QRQFRPSOLDQFHZLWKWKHUHPDLQLQJJUHHQ EXLOGLQJPHDVXUHV ,DPUHVSRQVLEOHIRUDOO DFWLYLWLHVSHUIRUPHGE\GHVLJQWHDP PHPEHUVFRQWUDFWRUVDQGVXEFRQWUDFWRUVLQ PHHWLQJWKHUHTXLUHPHQWV 1RWH,QOLHXRIDVLJQDWXUHDQDWWDFKPHQW OHWWHULVDFFHSWDEOHLIWKHRZQHULVQRWORFDO DQGFDQQRWVLJQWKLV*%VKHHW 3ODQ6KHHW6SHFRU $WWDFKPHQW5HIHUHQFH &RPSOLDQFH3DWK9HULILFDWLRQ 3ODQ&KHFN 5RXJK*% ,QVSHFWLRQ ,95 )LQDO,QVSHFWLRQ,95 The Green BuildingSurveyisarequiredprojectsubmittal.Thesurveycanbefoundatthefollowinglink.ThesurveyshallbecompletedonSurveyMonkey andascreenshotshallbeincludedonaseperatepageinthisplanset.Pleaseindicatethereferencepagehere_____________________.The Green BuildingSurveyisarequiredprojectsubmittal.Thesurveycanbefoundatthefollowinglink.ThesurveyshallbecompletedonSurveyMonkey andascreenshotshallbeincludedonaseperatepageinthisplanset.Pleaseindicatethereferencepagehere_____________________.The Green BuildingSurveyisarequiredprojectsubmittal.Thesurveycanbefoundatthefollowinglink.ThesurveyshallbecompletedonSurveyMonkey andascreenshotshallbeincludedonaseperatepageinthisplanset.Pleaseindicatethereferencepagehere_____________________. The Green BuildingSurveyisarequiredprojectsubmittal.Thesurveycanbefoundatthefollowinglink.Thesurveyshallbecompletedon SurveyMonkeyandascreenshotshallbeincludedonaseperatepageinthisplanset.Pleaseindicatethereference pagehere_____________________. com.apple.idms.apple id.prd.7833544e4d74 4747772b685474526 7304777756a35773d3 d Digitally signed by com.apple.idms.appleid.prd.7833544e4d744747772b6854745267304777756 a35773d3d DN: cn=com.apple.idms.appleid.prd.7833544e4d744747772b6854745267304777 756a35773d3d Date: 2017.05.03 08:47:46 -08'00' "CALGREEN NOTE" 4.1 PLANNING AND DESIGN Section A4.105 Deconstruction and Reuse of Existing Materials. Section A4.105 is adopted as a Tier 1 and Tier 2 elective measure and is amended to read: A4.105.1 General. Existing buildings on the site are deconstructed and the salvaged materials are reused. Reused materials or products must comply with the current building standards requirements or be an accepted alternate method or material. Salvaged materials may be reused onsite or for a different project. The Chief Building Official may require documentation confirming that salvageable materials have been reused. 16.14.140 A4.105.2 Reuse of materials. Non-hazardous materials which can be easily reused include but are not limited to the following: 1. Light fixtures 2. Plumbing fixtures 3. Doors and trim 4. Masonry 5. Electrical devices 6. Appliances 7. Foundations or portions of foundations Note: Reused material must be in compliance with the appropriate Title 24 requirements. 4.106.2 Storm water drainage and retention during construction. Projects which disturb less than one acre of soil and are not part of a larger common plan of development which in total disturbs one acre or more, shall manage storm water drainage during construction. In order to manage storm water drainage during construction, one or more of the following measures shall be implemented to prevent flooding of adjacent property, prevent erosion and retain soil runoff on the site. 1. Retention basins of sufficient size shall be utilized to retain storm water on the site. 2. Where storm water is conveyed to a public drainage system, collection point, gutter or similar disposal method, water shall be filtered by use of a barrier system, wattle or other method approved by the enforcing agency. 3. Compliance with a lawfully enacted storm water management ordinance. A4.106.2.3 Topsoil protection. Topsoil shall be protected or saved for reuse as specified in this section. Tier 1. Displaced topsoil shall be stockpiled for reuse in a designated area and covered or protected from erosion. Note: Protection from erosion includes covering with tarps, straw, mulch, chipped wood, vegetative cover, or other means acceptable to the enforcing agency to protect the topsoil for later use. Tier 2. The construction area shall be identified and delineated by fencing or flagging to limit construction activity to the construction area. Heavy equipment or vehicle traffic and material storage outside the construction area shall be limited to areas that are planned to be paved. 4.106.3 Grading and paving. Construction plans shall indicate how the site grading or drainage system will manage all surface water flows to keep water from entering buildings. Examples of methods to manage surface water include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Swales 2. Water collection and disposal systems 3. French drains 4. Water retention gardens 5. Other water measures which keep surface water away from buildings and aid in groundwater recharge. Exception: Additions and alterations not altering the drainage path. 16.14.150 Section A4.106.8 Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging for New Construction. Section A4.106.8 is not adopted as a Tier 1 and Tier 2 elective measure. Projects must comply with the mandatory electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) requirements stated in Section 4.106.4, as amended. 16.14.150 Section A4.106.8 Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging for New Construction. Section A4.106.8 is not adopted as a Tier 1 and Tier 2 elective measure. Projects must comply with the mandatory electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) requirements stated in Section 4.106.4, as amended. A4.106.8.2 Single Family Residences. The following standards apply to newly constructed detached and attached single family residences. In general. The property owner shall provide Conduit Only, EVSE-Ready Outlet, or EVSE Installed for each residence. Location. The proposed location of a charging station may be internal or external to the dwelling, and shall be in close proximity to an on-site parking space consistent with City guidelines, rules, and regulations. A4.106.8.3 Multi-Family Residential Structures. The following standards apply to newly constructed residences in a multi-family residential structure, except as provided in section A4.106.8.4. Resident parking. The property owner shall provide at least one EVSE-Ready Outlet or EVSE Installed for each residential unit in the structure. Guest parking. The property owner shall provide Conduit Only, EVSE-Ready Outlet, or EVSE Installed, for at least 25% of guest parking spaces, among which at least 5% (and no fewer than one) shall be EVSE Installed. Accessible spaces. The percentage calculations and substantive requirements imposed by this section shall be applied separately to accessible parking spaces. Parking at accessible spaces where an EVSE is installed shall not be limited to electric vehicles. Minimum total circuit capacity. The property owner shall. ensure sufficient circuit capacity, as determined by the Chief Building Official, to support a Level 2 EVSE in every location where Circuit Only, EVSE-Ready Outlet or EVSE Installed is required. Location. The EVSE, receptacles, and/or raceway required by this section shall be placed in locations allowing convenient installation of and access to In addition, if parking is deed-restricted to individual residential units, the EVSE or receptacles required by subsection (a) shall be located such that each unit has access to its own EVSE or receptacle. Location of EVSE or receptacles shall be consistent with all City guidelines, rules, and regulations. A4.106.4 Water permeable surfaces. Permeable paving is utilized for the parking, walking or patio surfaces in compliance with the following. Tier 1. Not less than 20 percent of the total parking, walking or patio surfaces shall be permeable. Tier 2. Not less than 30 percent of the total parking, walking or patio surfaces shall be permeable. Exceptions: 1. The primary driveway, primary entry walkway and entry porch or landing shall not be included when calculating the area required to be a permeable surface. 2. Required accessible routes for persons with disabilities as required by California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 11A and/or Chapter 11B as applicable. A4.106.5 Cool roof for reduction of heat island effect. Roofing materials for Tier 1 and Tier 2 buildings shall comply with this section: Exceptions: 1. Roof constructions that have a thermal mass over the roof membrane including areas of vegetated roofs, weighing at least 25 pounds per square foot. 2. Roof areas covered by building integrated solar photovoltaic panels and building integrated solar thermal panels. 18.54.060 Bicycle Parking Facilities Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided for new buildings, addition or enlargement of an existing building, or for any change in the use that results in the need for additional vehicle parking facilities consistent with the parking requirements contained within Section18.52.040. Bicycle parking facilities required by Section 18.52.040 may contain bicycle parking elements of the types described in subsection (a) below, and arranged according to the layout requirements described in (b) below. The department of planning and community environment maintains a list of Approved, Conditionally Approvable, and Prohibited types of bicycle racks and bicycle lockers. Bicycle racks and lockers not on the “Approved” list must be approved by the director. Likewise layout diagram examples specifying clearances and other aspects of bicycle parking areas are also available from the department of planning and community environment. A4.103.1 Selection. A site which complies with at least one of the following characteristics is selected: 1. An infill site is selected. 2. A greyfield site is selected. 3. An EPA-recognized A4.103.2 Community connectivity. Facilitate community connectivity by one of the following methods: 1. Locate project within a 1/4-mile true walking distance of at least four basic services, readily accessible by pedestrians. 2. Locate project within a 1/2-mile true walking distance of at least seven basic services, readily accessible by pedestrians. 3. Other methods increasing access to additional resources. Note: Examples of services include, but are not limited to, bank, place of worship, convenience grocery, day care, cleaners, fire station, barber shop, beauty shop, hardware store, laundry, library, medical clinic, dental clinic, senior care facility, park, pharmacy, post office, restaurant, school, supermarket, theater, community center, fitness center, museum or farmers market. Other services may be considered on a case-by-case basis. 16.14.120 Section A4.104 Site Preservation. Section A4.104.1 is adopted as a Tier 1 and Tier 2 elective and is amended to read: A4.104.1 Supervision and Education by a Special Inspector. Individuals with oversight authority on the project, as defined in 16.14.090 ofthis code, who have been trained in areas related to environmentally friendly development, can teach green concepts to other members of the builder's staffand ensure training and written instruction has been provided to all parties associated with the development of the project. Prior to the beginning the construction activities, all the builder shall receive a written guideline and instruction specifying the green goals ofthe project. 16.14.130 Note: Lack of adequate supervision and dissemination of the project goals can result in negative effects on green building projects. If the theme of green building is not carried through the project, the overall benefit can be substantially reduced by the lack of knowledge and information provided to the various entities involved with the construction of the project. A4.106.2.1 Soil analysis. Soil analysis is performed by a licensed design professional and the findings utilized in the structural design of the building. A4.106.2.2 Soil protection. The effect of development on building sites is evaluated and the soil is protected by one or more of the following: 1. Natural drainage patterns are evaluated and erosion controls are implemented to minimize erosion during construction and after occupancy. 2. Site access is accomplished by minimizing the amount of cut and fill needed to install access roads and driveways. 3. As allowed by other parts of the California Building Standards Code underground construction activities are coordinated to utilize the same trench, minimize the amount of time the disturbed soil is exposed and the soil is replaced using accepted compaction methods. 4.3 WATER EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION 4.303.1.1 Water closets. The effective flush volume of all water closets shall not exceed 1.28 gallons per flush. Tank-type water closets shall be certified to the performance criteria of the U.S. EPA Water Sense Specification for Tank-type Toilets. Note: The effective flush volume of dual flush toilets is defined as the composite, average flush volume of two reduced flushes and one full flush. 4.303.1.2 Urinals. The effective flush volume of wall mounted urinals shall not exceed 0.125 gallons per flush. The effective flush volume of all other urinals shall not exceed 0.5 gallons per flush. 4.303.1.3.1 Single showerhead. Showerheads shall have a maximum flow rate of not more than 2.0 gallons per minute at 80 psi. Showerheads shall be certified to the performance criteria of the U.S. EPA Water Sense Specification for Showerheads. 4.303.1.3.2 Multiple showerheads serving one shower. When a shower is served by more than one showerhead, the combined flow rate of all showerheads and/or other shower outlets controlled by a single valve shall not exceed 2.0 gallons per minute at 80 psi, or the shower shall be designed to allow only one shower outlet to be in operation at a time. Note: A hand-held shower shall be considered a showerhead. 4.303.1.4.1 Residential lavatory faucets. The maximum flow rate of residential lavatory faucets shall not exceed 1.2 gallons per minute at 60 psi. The minimum flow rate of residential lavatory faucets shall not be less than 0.8 gallons per minute at 20 psi. 4.303.1.4.2 Lavatory faucets in common and public use areas. The maximum flow rate of lavatory faucets installed in common and public use areas (outside of dwellings or sleeping units) in residential buildings shall not exceed 0.5 gallons per minute at 60 psi. 4.303.1.4.3 Metering faucets. Metering faucets when installed in residential buildings shall not deliver more than 0.25 gallons per cycle. 4.303.1.4.4 Kitchen faucets. The maximum flow rate of kitchen faucets shall not exceed 1.8 gallons per minute at 60 psi. Kitchen faucets may temporarily increase the flow above the maximum rate, but not to exceed 2.2 gallons per minute at 60 psi, and must default to a maximum flow rate of 1.8 gallons per minute at 60 psi. Note: Where complying faucets are unavailable, aerators or other means may be used to achieve reduction. 4.303.2 Standards for plumbing fixtures and fittings. Plumbing fixtures and fittings shall be installed in accordance with the California Plumbing Code, and shall meet the applicable standards referenced in Table 1701.1 of the California Plumbing Code. 4.304.1 Outdoor potable water use in landscape areas. After December 1, 2015, new residential developments with an aggregate landscape area equal to or greater than 500 square feet shall comply with one of the following options: 1. A local water efficient landscape ordinance or the current California Department of Water Resources’ Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), whichever is more stringent; or Projects with aggregate landscape areas less than 2,500 square feet may comply with the MWELO’s Appendix D Prescriptive Compliance Option. GB.2 RESIDENTIAL GREEN BUILDING APPLICATION CALGREEN RE S I D E N T I A L G R E E N B U I L D I N G A P P L I C A T I O N C A L G R E E N Ap p l i c a t i o n : T h i s p l a n s h e e t i s f o r us e b y r e s i d e n t i a l a l t e r a t i o n s Pr o j e c t A d d r e s s : 5 9 2 L o m a V e r d e A v e . P a l o A l t o , C A 04/02/2017 3039 GB.3 RESIDENTIAL GREEN BUILDING APPLICATION CALGREEN RE S I D E N T I A L G R E E N B U I L D I N G A P P L I C A T I O N C A L G R E E N Ap p l i c a t i o n : T h i s p l a n s h e e t i s f o r us e b y r e s i d e n t i a l a l t e r a t i o n s "CALGREEN NOTE" Notes: 1.The Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) and supporting documents are available at: http://www.water.ca.gov/wateruseefficiency/ land scapeordinance/ 2. A water budget calculator is available at: http:// www.water.ca.gov/wateruseefficiency/landscapeordinance/ 16.14.220 Section A4.304.6 Irrigation Metering Device. Section A4.304.4 is adopted as a Tier 1 and Tier 2 prerequisite and is amended to read: A4.304.2.11rrigation Metering Device. Dedicated irrigation meters are to be installed in all new construction and rehabilitated landscapes when the landscape is greater than 1,000 square feet. 16.14.230 Section A4.305 Water Reuse Systems. Sections A4.305.1 through A4.305.3 are adopted as Tier 1 and Tier 2 electives and are amended to read: A4.305.1 Gray water. Alternative plumbing piping is installed to permit the discharge from the clothes washer or other fixtures to be used for an irrigation system in compliance with the California Plumbing Code. A4.305.2 Recycled Water Piping. Based on projected availability, dual water piping is installed for future use of recycled water at the following locations: 1. Interior piping for the use of recycled water is installed to serve all water closets, urinals, and floor drains. 2. Exterior piping is installed to transport recycled water from the point of connection to the structure. Recycled water systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with the California Plumbing Code. A4.305.3 Recycled water for landscape irrigation. Recycled water is used for landscape irrigation. Section A4.305.4 is added and adopted as Tier 1 and Tier 2 prerequisite and shall read as. follows: A4.305.4 Additions and alterations. All multifamily residential additions and alterations exceeds 1,000 square feet. Section A4.305.5 is added and adopted a Tier 2 prerequisite and shall read as follows: A4.305.5 Diverter Valve. Newly constructed Residential Buildings with a landscape area of any size shall install a three-way diverter valve in the drain-line of all laundry fixtures to assist-in the future installation of a "Laundry-to-Landscape" irrigation system. A4.305.5.11dentification. The diverter valve shall be labeled as "LAUNDRY-TOLANDSCAPE CABABLE". A4.303.1 Kitchen faucets. The maximum flow rate of kitchen faucets shall not exceed 1.5 gallons per minute at 60 Kitchen faucets may temporarily increase the flow above the maximum rate, but not to exceed 2.2 gallons per minute at 60 psi, and must default to a maximum flow rate of 1.5 gallons per minute at 60 psi. Note: Where complying faucets are unavailable, aerators or other means may be used to achieve reduction. A4.303.3 Appliances. Install at least one qualified ENERGY STAR dishwasher or clothes washer. Note: See Section A5.303.3 for nonresidential dishwashers and clothes washers. 4.4 MATERIAL CONSERVATION AND RESOURCE EFFICIENCY A4.403.2 Reduction in cement use. As allowed by the enforcing agency, cement used in foundation mix design shall be reduced as follows: Tier 1. Not less than a 20 percent reduction in cement use. Tier 2. Not less than a 25 percent reduction in cement use. Note: Products commonly used to replace cement in concrete mix designs include, but are not limited to: 1. Fly ash. 2. Slag. 3. Silica fume. 4. Rice hull ash. A4.405.3 Recycled content. Comply with the requirements for recycled content in Section A4.405.3.1. A4.405.3.1 Recycled content. Use materials, equivalent in performance to virgin materials with a total (combined) recycled content value (RCV) of: Tier 1. The RCV shall not be less than 10 percent of the total material cost of the project. Required Total RCV (dollars) = Total Material Cost (dollars) × 10 percent (Equation A4. 4-1) Tier 2. The RCV shall not be less than 15 percent of the total material cost of the project. Required Total RCV (dollars) = Total Material Cost (dollars) × 15 percent (Equation A4. 4-2) For the purposes of this section, materials used as components of the structural frame shall not be used to calculate recycled content. The structural frame includes the load bearing structural elements, such as wall studs, plates, sills, columns, beams, girders, joists, rafters and trusses. Notes: 1. Sample forms which allow user input and automatic calculation are located at www.hcd.ca.gov/ CALGreen.html and may be used to simplify documenting compliance with this section and for calculating recycled content value of materials or assembly products. 2. Sources and recycled content of some recycled materials can be obtained from CalRecycle if not provided by the manufacturer. A4.405.3.1.1 Total material cost. Total material cost is the total estimated or actual cost of materials and assembly products used in the project. The required total recycled content value for the project (in dollars) shall be determined by Equation A4.4-1 or Equation A4.4-2. Total material cost shall be calculated by using one of the methods specified below: 1.Simplified method. To obtain the total cost of the project, multiply the square footage of the residential structure by the square foot valuation established pursuant to the ICC Building Valuation Data (BVD) or other valuation data approved and/or established by the enforcing agency. The total material cost is 45 percent of the total cost of the project. Use Equations A4.4-3A or A4.4-3B to determine total material costs using the simplified method. Total material costs = Project square footage × square foot valuation × 45 percent (Equation A4.4-3A) Total estimated or actual cost of project × 45 percent (Equation A4.4-3B) 2.Detailed method. To obtain the total cost of the project, add the estimated and/or actual costs of materials used for the project, including the structure (steel, concrete, wood or masonry); the enclosure (roof, windows, doors and exterior the interior walls, ceilings and finishes (gypsum board, ceiling tiles, etc.). The total estimated and/or actual costs shall not include fees, labor and installation costs, overhead, appliances, equipment, furniture or furnishings. 4.406.1 Rodent proofing. Annular spaces around pipes, electric cables, conduits or other openings in sole/bottom plates at exterior walls shall be protected against the passage of rodents by closing such openings with cement mortar, concrete masonry or a similar method acceptable to the enforcing agency. 16.14.260 Section A4.408.1 Enhanced Construction Waste Reduction. Section A4.408.1 is adopted as mandatory and is amended to read: Section A4.408.1 Enhanced Construction Waste Reduction. Nonhazardous construction and demolition debris generated at the site is diverted to recycle or salvage facilities. 75% construction waste reduction is required for all Residential Projects, including new construction, additions, and alterations, as long as the construction has a valuation exceeding $25,000. Residential projects with a lower valuation shall remain subject to California Green Building Code Chapter 4 mandatory requirements. 4.408.2 Construction waste management plan. Submit a construction waste management plan in conformance with Items 1 through 5. The construction waste management plan shall be updated as necessary and shall be available during construction for examination by the enforcing agency. 1. Identify the construction and demolition waste materials to be diverted from disposal by recycling, reuse on the project or salvage for future use or sale. 2. Specify if construction and demolition waste materials will be sorted on-site (source-separated) or bulk mixed (single stream). 3. Identify diversion facilities where the construction and demolition waste material will be taken. 4. Identify construction methods employed to reduce the amount of construction and demolition waste generated. 5. Specify that the amount of construction and demolition waste materials diverted shall be calculated by weight or volume, but not by both. 4.408.3 Waste management company. Utilize a waste management company, approved by the enforcing agency, which can provide verifiable documentation that the percentage of construction and demolition waste material diverted from the landfill complies with Section 4.408.1. Note: The owner or contractor may make the determination if the construction and demolition waste materials will be diverted by a waste management company. 4.408.5 Documentation. Documentation shall be provided to the enforcing agency which demonstrates compliance with Section 4.408.2, Items 1 through 5, Section 4.408.3 or Section 4.408.4. Notes: 1.Sample forms found in “A Guide to the California Green Building Standards Code (Residential)” located at www.hcd.ca.gov/CALGreen.html may be used to assist in documenting compliance with this section. 2. Mixed construction and demolition debris (C&D) processors can be located at the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 4.410.1 Operation and maintenance manual. At the time of final inspection, a manual, compact disc, web-based reference or other media acceptable to the enforcing agency which includes all of the following shall be placed in the building: 1. Directions to the owner or occupant that the manual shall remain with the building throughout the life cycle of the structure. 2. Operation and maintenance instructions for the following: psi. Equipment and appliances, including water-saving devices and systems, HVAC systems, photovoltaic systems, electric vehicle chargers, water-heating systems and other major appliances and equipment. Roof and yard drainage, including gutters and downspouts. Space conditioning systems, including condensers and air filters. Landscape irrigation systems. Water reuse systems. 3. Information from local utility, water and waste recovery providers on methods to further reduce resource consumption, including recycle programs and locations. 4. Public transportation and/or carpool options available in the area. 5. Educational material on the positive impacts of an interior relative humidity between 30–60 percent and what methods an occupant may use to maintain the relative humidity level in that range. 6. Information about water-conserving landscape and irrigation design and controllers which conserve water. 7. Instructions for maintaining gutters and downspouts and the importance of diverting water at least 5 feet away from the foundation. 8. Information on required routine maintenance measures, including, but not limited to, caulking, painting, grading around the building, etc. 9. Information about state solar energy and incentive programs available. 10. A copy of all special inspection verifications required by the enforcing agency or this code. 4.410.2 Recycling by occupants. Where 5 or more multifamily dwelling units are constructed on a building site, provide readily accessible area(s) that serves all buildings on the site and is identified for the depositing, storage and collection of non-hazardous materials for recycling, including (at a minimum) paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastics, organic waste, and metals, or meet a lawfully enacted local recycling ordinance, if more restrictive. Exception: Rural jurisdictions that meet and apply for the exemption in Public Resources Code Section 42649.82 et seq. are not required to comply with the organic waste portion of this section. A4.405.2 Concrete floors. Floors that do not require additional coverings are used including but not limited to stained, natural or stamped concrete floors. A4.407.4 Material protection. Protect building materials delivered to the construction site from rain and other sources of moisture. A4.407.6 Door protection. Exterior doors to the dwelling are covered to prevent water intrusion by one or more of the following: 1. An awning at least 4 feet in depth is installed. 2. The door is protected by a roof overhang at least 4 feet in depth. 3. The door is recessed at least 4 feet. 4. Other methods which provide equivalent protection. A4.407.7 Roof overhangs. A permanent overhang or awning at least 2 feet in depth is provided at all exterior walls. 4.5 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY SECTION 4.503 FIREPLACES 4.503.1 General. Any installed gas fireplace shall be a directvent sealed-combustion type. Any installed woodstove or pellet stove shall comply with U.S. EPA New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) emission limits as applicable, and shall have a permanent label indicating they are certified to meet the emission limits. Wood stoves, pellet stoves and fireplaces shall also comply with applicable local ordinances. 4.504.1 Covering of duct openings and protection of mechanical equipment during construction. At the time of rough installation, during storage on the construction site and until final startup of the heating, cooling and ventilating equipment, all duct and other related air distribution component openings shall be covered with tape, plastic, sheet metal or other methods acceptable to the enforcing agency to reduce the amount of water, dust and debris, which may enter the system. TABLE 4.504.1 ADHESIVE VOC LIMIT1, 2 Less Water and Less Exempt Compounds in Grams per Liter ARCHITECTURAL APPLICATIONS VOC LIMIT Indoor carpet adhesives 50 Carpet pad adhesives 50 Outdoor carpet adhesives 150 Wood flooring adhesive 100 Rubber floor adhesives 60 Sub floor adhesives 50 Ceramic tile adhesives 65 VCT and asphalt tile adhesives 50 Drywall and panel adhesives 50 Cove base adhesives 50 Multipurpose construction adhesives 70 Structural glazing adhesives 100 Single-ply roof membrane adhesives 250 Other adhesives not specifically listed 50 SPECIALTY APPLICATIONS PVC welding 510 CPVC welding 490 ABS welding 325 Plastic cement welding 250 Adhesive primer for plastic 550 Contact adhesive 80 Special purpose contact adhesive 250 Structural wood member adhesive 140 Top and trim adhesive 250 SUBSTRATE SPECIFIC APPLICATIONS Metal to metal 30 Plastic foams 50 Porous material (except wood) 50 Wood 30 Fiberglass 80 1. If an adhesive is used to bond dissimilar substrates together, the adhesive with the highest VOC content shall be allowed. 2. For additional information regarding methods to measure the VOC content specified in this table, see South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1168. Pr o j e c t A d d r e s s : 5 9 2 L o m a V e r d e A v e . P a l o A l t o , C A 04/02/2017 3039 GB.4 RESIDENTIAL GREEN BUILDING APPLICATION CALGREEN RE S I D E N T I A L G R E E N B U I L D I N G A P P L I C A T I O N C A L G R E E N Ap p l i c a t i o n : T h i s p l a n s h e e t i s f o r us e b y r e s i d e n t i a l a l t e r a t i o n s "CALGREEN NOTE" 4.504.2.1 Adhesives, sealants and caulks. Adhesives, sealants and caulks used on the project shall meet the requirements of the following standards unless more stringent local or regional air pollution or air quality management district rules apply: 1. Adhesives, adhesive bonding primers, adhesive primers, sealants, sealant primers, and caulks shall comply with local or regional air pollution control or air quality management district rules where applicable or SCAQMD Rule 1168 VOC limits, as shown in Table 4.504.1 or 4.504.2, as applicable. Such products also shall comply with the Rule 1168 prohibition on the use of certain toxic compounds (chloroform, ethylene dichloride, methylene chloride, perchloroethylene and trichloroethylene), except for aerosol products, as specified in Subsection 2 below. 2. Aerosol adhesives, and smaller unit sizes of adhesives, and sealant or caulking compounds (in units of product, less packaging, which do not weigh more than 1 pound and do not consist of more than 16 fluid ounces) shall comply with statewide VOC standards and other requirements, including prohibitions on use of certain toxic compounds, of California Code of Regulations, Title 17, commencing with Section 94507. 4.504.2.2 Paints and coatings. Architectural paints and coatings shall comply with VOC limits in Table 1 of the ARB Architectural Suggested Control Measure, as shown in Table 4.504.3, unless more stringent local limits apply. The VOC content limit for coatings that do not meet the definitions for the specialty coatings categories listed in Table 4.504.3 shall be determined by classifying the coating as a Flat, Non flat or Nonflat-high Gloss coating, based on its gloss, as defined in subsections 4.21, 4.36, and 4.37 of the 2007 California Air Resources Board, Suggested Control Measure, and the corresponding Flat, Non flat or Non flat- high Gloss VOC limit in Table 4.504.3 shall apply. 4.504.2.3 Aerosol paints and coatings. Aerosol paints and coatings shall meet the Product-weighted MIR Limits for ROC in Section 94522(a)(2) and other requirements, including prohibitions on use of certain toxic compounds and ozone depleting substances, in Sections 94522(e)(1) and (f)(1) of California Code of Regulations, Title 17, commencing with Section 94520; and in areas under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District additionally comply with the percent VOC by weight of product limits of Regulation 8, Rule 49. TABLE 4.504.2 SEALANT VOC LIMIT Less Water and Less Exempt Compounds in Grams per Liter SEALANTS VOC LIMIT Architectural 250 Marine deck 760 Non membrane roof 300 Roadway 250 Single-ply roof membrane 450 Other 420 SEALANT PRIMERS Architectural Nonporous 250 Porous 775 Modified bituminous 500 Marine deck 760 Other 750 4.504.3.1 Carpet cushion. All carpet cushion installed in the building interior shall meet the requirements of the Carpet and Rug Institute’s Green Label program. 4.504.3.2 Carpet adhesive. All carpet adhesive shall meet the requirements of Table 4.504.1. TABLE 4.504.3 VOC CONTENT LIMITS FOR ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS2, Grams of VOC per Liter of Coating, Less Water and Less Exempt Compounds COATING CATEGORY VOC LIMIT Flat coatings 50 Non flat coatings 100 Nonflat-high gloss coatings 150 SPECIALTY COATINGS Aluminum roof coatings 400 Basement specialty coatings 400 Bituminous roof coatings 50 Bituminous roof primers 350 Bond breakers 350 Concrete curing compounds 350 Concrete/masonry sealers 100 Driveway sealers 50 Dry fog coatings 150 Faux finishing coatings 350 Fire resistive coatings 350 Floor coatings 100 Form-release compounds 250 Graphic arts coatings (sign paints) 500 High temperature coatings 420 Industrial maintenance coatings 250 Low solids coatings1 120 Magnesite cement coatings 450 Mastic texture coatings 100 Metallic pigmented coatings 500 Multicolor coatings 250 Pretreatment wash primers 420 Primers, sealers, and undercoaters 100 SPECIALTY APPLICATIONS PVC welding 510 CPVC welding 490 ABS welding 325 Plastic cement welding 250 Adhesive primer for plastic 550 Contact adhesive 80 Special purpose contact adhesive 250 Structural wood member adhesive 140 Top and trim adhesive 250 SUBSTRATE SPECIFIC APPLICATIONS Metal to metal 30 Plastic foams 50 Porous material (except wood) 50 Wood 30 Fiberglass 80 1. If an adhesive is used to bond dissimilar substrates together, the adhesive with the highest VOC content shall be allowed. 2. For additional information regarding methods to measure the VOC content specified in this table, see South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1168. 4.504.3.1 Carpet cushion. All carpet cushion installed in the building interior shall meet the requirements of the Carpet and Rug Institute’s Green Label program. 4.504.3.2 Carpet adhesive. All carpet adhesive shall meet the requirements of Table 4.504.1. A4.504.2 Resilient flooring systems. Resilient flooring systems installed in the building shall meet the percentages specified in this section and comply with the VOC-emission limits defined in at least one of the following: 1. Products compliant with the California Department of Public Health, “Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions from Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers,” Version 1.1, February 2010 (also known as Specification certified as a CHPS Low-Emitting Material in the Collaborative for High Performance Schools High Performance Products Database. 2. Products certified UL GREENGUARD Gold (formerly the Greenguard Children & Schools program.) 3. Certification under the Resilient Floor Covering Institute (CHPS) FloorScore program. 4.Meet the California Department of Public Health, “Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions from Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers,” Version 1.1, February 2010 (also known as Specification 01350.) Tier 1. At least 90 percent of the total area of resilient flooring installed shall comply. Tier 2. At least 100 percent of the total area of resilient flooring installed shall comply. Exception for Tier 2: An allowance for up to 5-percent specialty purpose flooring may be permitted. Note: Documentation must be provided that verifies that finish materials are certified to meet the pollutant emission limits in this section. A4.504.3 Thermal insulation. Thermal insulation installed in the building shall meet the following requirements: Tier 1. Install thermal insulation in compliance with the California Department of Public Health, “Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions from Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers,” Version 1.1, February 2010 (also known as Specification 01350), certified as a CHPS Low- Emitting Material in the Collaborative for High Performance Schools (CHPS) High Performance Products Database; products certified under the UL GREENGUARD Gold (formerly Greenguard Children & Schools program); or meet California Department of Public Health, “Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions from Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers,” Version 1.1, February 2010 (also known as Specification 01350). Tier 2. Install insulation which complies with Tier 1 plus does not contain any added formaldehyde. Note: Documentation must be provided that verifies the materials are certified to meet the pollutant emission limits in this section. 4.504.5 Composite wood products. Hardwood plywood, particleboard and medium density fiberboard composite wood products used on the interior or exterior of the building shall meet the requirements for formaldehyde as specified in ARB’s Air Toxics Control Measure for Composite Wood (17 CCR 93120 et seq.), by or before the dates specified in those sections, as shown in Table 4.504.5. 4.504.5.1 Documentation. Verification of compliance with this section shall be provided as requested by the enforcing agency. Documentation shall include at least one of the following: 1. Product certifications and specifications. 2. Chain of custody certifications. 3. Product labeled and invoiced as meeting the Composite Wood Products regulation (see CCR, Title 17, Section 93120, et seq.). 4. Exterior grade products marked as meeting the PS-1 or PS-2 standards of the Engineered Wood Association, the Australian AS/NZS 2269, European 636 3S, and Canadian CSA O121, CSA O151, CSA O153 and CSA O325 standards. 5. Other methods acceptable to the enforcing agency. TABLE 4.504.5 FORMALDEHYDE LIMITS1 Maximum Formaldehyde Emissions in Parts per Million PRODUCT CURRENT LIMIT Hardwood plywood veneer core 0.05 Hardwood plywood composite core 0.05 Particleboard 0.09 Medium density fiberboard 0.11 Thin medium density fiberboard2 0.13 1. Values in this table are derived from those specified by the California Air Resources Board, Air Toxics Control Measure for Composite Wood as tested in accordance with ASTM E1333. For additional information, see California Code of Regulations, Title 17, Sections 93120 through 93120.12. 2. Thin medium density fiberboard has a maximum thickness of 5/16 inch (8 mm). 4.505.2 Concrete slab foundations. Concrete slab foundations required to have a vapor retarder by the California Building Code, Chapter 19 or concrete slab-on-ground floors required to have a vapor retarder by the California Residential Code, Chapter 5, shall also comply with this section. 4.505.2.1 Capillary break. A capillary break shall be installed in compliance with at least one of the following: 1. A 4-inch-thick (101.6 mm) base of 1/2 inch (12.7 or larger clean aggregate shall be provided with a vapor retarder in direct contact with concrete and a concrete mix design, which will address bleeding, shrinkage, and curling, shall be used. For additional information, see American Concrete Institute, ACI 302.2R-06. 2. Other equivalent methods approved by the enforcing agency. 3. A slab design specified by a licensed design professional. 4.505.3 Moisture content of building materials. Building materials with visible signs of water damage shall not be installed. Wall and floor framing shall not be enclosed when the framing members exceed 19-percent moisture content. Moisture content shall be verified in compliance with the following: 1. Moisture content shall be determined with either a probe-type or contact-type moisture meter. Equivalent moisture verification methods may be approved by the enforcing agency and shall satisfy requirements found in Section 101.8 of this code. 2. Moisture readings shall be taken at a point 2 feet (610 mm to 4 feet (1219 mm) from the grade stamped end of each piece to be verified. 3. At least three random moisture readings shall be performed on wall and floor framing with documentation acceptable to the enforcing agency provided at the time of approval to enclose the wall and floor framing. Insulation products which are visibly wet or have a high moisture content shall be replaced or allowed to dry prior to enclosure in wall or floor cavities. Wet-applied insulation products shall follow the manufacturers’ drying recommendations prior to enclosure. 4.506.1 Bathroom exhaust fans. Each bathroom shall be mechanically ventilated and shall comply with the following: 1. Fans shall be ENERGY STAR compliant and be ducted to terminate outside the building. 2. Unless functioning as a component of a whole house ventilation system, fans must be controlled by a humidity control. a. Humidity controls shall be capable of adjustment between a relative humidity range of ≤ 50 percent to a maximum of 80 percent. A humidity control may utilize manual or automatic means of adjustment. b. A humidity control may be a separate component to the exhaust fan and is not required to be integral built-in). Notes: 1. For the purposes of this section, a bathroom is a room which contains a bathtub, shower, or tub/ shower combination. 2. Lighting integral to bathroom exhaust fans shall comply with the California Energy Code. 4.507.2 Heating and air-conditioning system design. Heating and air-conditioning systems shall be sized, designed and have their equipment selected using the following methods: 1. The heat loss and heat gain is established according to ANSI/ACCA 2 Manual J—2011 (Residential Load Calculation), ASHRAE handbooks or other equivalent design software or methods. 2. Duct systems are sized according to ANSI/ACCA 1 Manual D—2014 (Residential Duct Systems), ASHRAE handbooks or other equivalent design software or methods. 3. Select heating and cooling equipment according to ANSI/ACCA 3 Manual S—2014 (Residential Equipment Selection) or other equivalent design software or methods. Exception: Use of alternate design temperatures necessary to ensure the systems function are acceptable. A4.504.1 Compliance with formaldehyde limits. Use composite wood products made with either California Air Resources Board approved no-added formaldehyde (NAF) resins or ultra-low emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins. Note: Documentation must be provided that verifies that finish materials are certified to meet the pollutant emission limits. A4.506.1 Filters. Return air filters with a value greater than MERV 6 shall be installed on HVAC systems. Pressure drop across the filter shall not exceed 0.1 inches water column. Pr o j e c t A d d r e s s : 5 9 2 L o m a V e r d e A v e . P a l o A l t o , C A 04/02/2017 3039 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A B C D E F G H J O P 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A B C D E F G H J O P NO.REVISIONS DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NO. DRAWN PROJ. NO. CAD FILE NO. CHECKED DATE OF SHEETS MAY, 2017 DM AF S-1 T24-01 TI T L E 2 4 I N F O R M A T I O N Al i A d i b 12 0 2 M a i n S t . R e d w o o d C i t y , C A 9 4 0 6 3 Te l . ( 6 5 0 ) 3 6 3 - 2 3 3 8 , F a x ( 6 5 0 ) 3 6 3 - 2 0 3 1 Em a i l : a t a @ a t a e n g . n e t DATE: 03-22-17 NOTE: PRIOR TO ORDERING OR PURCHASING ANY ITEMS RELATED TO TITLE 24 SUCH AS BUT NOT LIMITED TO: WINDOWS, DOORS, MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, INSULATION, ETC., CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AS STATED IN THIS REPORT AND INFORM ALI ADIB IF MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT MET. IF SO, CALCULATIONS MUST BE REVISED AND APPROVED BY BUILDING DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO ORDERING AND PURCHASE NE W C O T T A G E ; LU N D Y R E S I D E N C E 59 2 L O M A V E R D E PA L O L A L T O , C A 9 4 3 0 6 T24-02 TI T L E 2 4 I N F O R M A T I O N Al i A d i b 12 0 2 M a i n S t . R e d w o o d C i t y , C A 9 4 0 6 3 Te l . ( 6 5 0 ) 3 6 3 - 2 3 3 8 , F a x ( 6 5 0 ) 3 6 3 - 2 0 3 1 Em a i l : a t a @ a t a e n g . n e t DATE: 03-22-17 NE W C O T T A G E ; LU N D Y R E S I D E N C E 59 2 L O M A V E R D E PA L O L A L T O , C A 9 4 3 0 6 CO V E R S H E E T / N O T E S / D E T A I L S CITY OF PALO ALTO NOTE: PA L O A L T O , C A 59 2 L O M A V E R D E A V E N U E GR A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N S SMP AP N : 1 3 2 - 1 0 - 1 9 8 ENERGY REDUCTION BOX SECTION Z-Z Z SECTION W-W W PLAN W Z ELECTRICAL NOTES: PA L O A L T O , C A 59 2 L O M A V E R D E A V E N U E GR A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N S SMP AP N : 1 3 2 - 1 0 - 1 9 8 GR A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N / D E T A I L S 4. INLET/ PUMPWELL DETAIL ELEVATION VIEW X PLAN Y X Y SECTION Y-YSECTION X-X PO L L U T I O N P R E V E N T I O N P L A N PA L O A L T O , C A 59 2 L O M A V E R D E A V E N U E GR A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N S SMP AP N : 1 3 2 - 1 0 - 1 9 8 CO V E R S H E E T / N O T E S / D E T A I L S CITY OF PALO ALTO NOTE: PA L O A L T O , C A 59 2 L O M A V E R D E A V E N U E GR A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N S SMP AP N : 1 3 2 - 1 0 - 1 9 8 ENERGY REDUCTION BOX SECTION Z-Z Z SECTION W-W W PLAN W Z ELECTRICAL NOTES: PA L O A L T O , C A 59 2 L O M A V E R D E A V E N U E GR A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N S SMP AP N : 1 3 2 - 1 0 - 1 9 8 GR A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N / D E T A I L S 4. INLET/ PUMPWELL DETAIL ELEVATION VIEW X PLAN Y X Y SECTION Y-YSECTION X-X PO L L U T I O N P R E V E N T I O N P L A N PA L O A L T O , C A 59 2 L O M A V E R D E A V E N U E GR A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N S SMP AP N : 1 3 2 - 1 0 - 1 9 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A B C D E F G H J O P 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A B C D E F G H J O P NO.REVISIONS DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NO. DRAWN PROJ. NO. CAD FILE NO. CHECKED DATE OF SHEETS MAY, 2017 DM AF S-1 Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID # 8769) Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 1/10/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: Planning-Related Code Amendments (2018) Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Recommendation to the City Council Regarding the Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Title 18, Chapters 18.12 (R-1 Single- Family Residential District), 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses), and 18.77 (Processing of Permits and Approvals). The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in Accordance With CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). (Continued from December 13, 2017.) For More Information, Please Contact Clare Campbell at clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org. From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) take the following action(s): 1. Find the proposed draft ordinance exempt from the provision of CEQA in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3); and 2. Recommend to the City Council adoption an ordinance (Attachment A) to amend various sections of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. NOTE: This item was continued from November 29 and December 13, 2017. All items in the attached ordinance were reviewed by the PTC and recommended for adoption by the City Council on December 13, 2017 with the exception of five items highlighted in this staff report for the Commission’s attention on January 10, 2018. Report Summary The PTC reviewed the majority of proposed code changes included in the attached draft ordinance on November 29 and December 13, 2017 and provided recommendations for City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 adoption by the City Council. The Commission then continued the discussion to permit consideration and recommendations regarding five remaining items: Table 1. Proposed Code Amendments for PTC Review Item # Amendment 22 Updates to Application Processing and Approvals 23 Clarifications to the Wireless Communication Facilities Review Process 27 Individual Review and Demolition of Historic Inventory Properties 28 Correct Code Section Numbering for Cannabis Definition 17 Citywide Prohibition of Gas-Powered Leaf Blowers (not just in Residential Districts) Note: Item #s correspond to those in prior Staff Reports included in Attachment B and D. Citations to relevant sections of the proposed draft ordinance are provided in the Discussion section below. This report includes explanations of these five items, including changes to the last item (leaf blowers) to address input from the Commission on November 29, 2017. The November 29, 2017 staff report (Attachment B) and minutes (Attachment C) are provided for reference, as are the December 13, 2017 staff report (Attachment D) and minutes (Attachment E). Background Several years ago, City planning staff began preparing an annual “clean-up” ordinance to bring forward a number of small zoning text amendments for consideration by the PTC and the City Council on a regular basis. The primary objective of this effort is to increase the consistency and useability of the code over time. Items are identified for inclusion in the course of the year, and included if they are considered relatively minor changes that do not represent major policy shifts and that are unlikely to result in significant controversy. The 2017 draft ordinance included in Attachment A has 28 individual component parts. An earlier draft of the ordinance was reviewed by the PTC on November 29, 2017, at which time, the PTC suggested minor text edits to a few topics and identified other topics that needed more in-depth discussion. On December 13, 2017, the PTC reviewed a revised version of the draft ordinance and discussed items that had been pulled for further discussion or revised based on the prior meeting, as well as some items that had not been considered on November 29th. By the end of the evening, the PTC had reviewed and recommended approval of all items in the draft ordinance excepting those listed in Table 1. These items are explained in more detail below and the attached draft ordinance has been revised to address some of the PTC’s input about leaf blowers. Discussion City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 There are five follow-up items from the earlier PTC meetings requiring the PTC’s review and recommendation. Staff is seeking a recommendation on these items. (Additional comments on other aspects of the draft ordinance are also welcome, but are not required.) Item 22. Various Updates to Application Processing and Approvals There are a number of provisions in Chapter 18.77, Processing of Permits and Approvals, that no longer reflect the Department’s regular practices or that could benefit from small adjustments or clarification. The proposed draft ordinance would make related changes, and each change is described below with a brief rationale:  Reduce the time to request a hearing on a staff-level reviewed Minor Architectural Review (AR) from 14 to seven days and specify that requests may only be filed by the applicant, the property owner, the owner of an adjacent property, or a tenant on the subject or adjacent property. Rationale: Staff-level (Minor) AR projects are small in scope and public hearings are rarely requested1; the two-week waiting period unnecessarily slows down work for relatively routine and minor projects. The impact of Minor AR projects is typically negligible and if experienced at all, it is likely affecting adjacent property owners or tenants. This modification affects Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.77.070(b)(3) and (b)(4) and can be found in Section 16 (page19) of the attached draft ordinance.  Remove requirements for publishing and e-mailing Director’s decisions, relying on the current practice of providing mailed notice to owners and residents within 600 feet and posting on the City’s website. Rationale: This change would codify existing practice. Mailing the decision letter to the applicant, sending notice cards to the 600 foot radius when applicable, and posting decisions on the City’s website have served as an effective process to keep citizens informed. Notices to individuals who request them will continue to be sent. This modification would affect the following code Sections: 18.77.060(c)(2) & (d)(2) & (e)(2); 18.77.070(b)(2) & (d)(2); 18.77.110(c)(2). These proposed changes can be found in Section 16 (page 19) of the attached draft ordinance.  Replace outdated language regarding application completeness in PAMC Section 18.77.060(b) with the current language from Section 18.77.030. Rationale: Improves internal consistency.  Include in the description of Notice of Posting in a Public Place (Section 18.77.080(f)) that it may include posting on the City’s website. This addition is taking into account the prevalent and commonplace use of the internet to access public information. Rationale: Reflects current practice. 1 In the last six years, the City has processed an average of 130+ minor AR applications per year. In the last three years, only two requests for hearing were filed; these projects involved applications to install solar panels on city parking garages. City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 Item 23. Clarifications to the Wireless Communication Facilities Review Process The proposed text changes would clarify that the Director may refer wireless permit applications to the Architectural Review Board (ARB) or PTC for a recommendation to City Council, and that appeals are heard directly by the City Council. This clarification more closely reflects staff’s current practice of seeking ARB input prior to issuing a Director’s decision on certain applications, eliminates the potential for duplicative hearings, and provides a more efficient process consistent with the federal “shot clock” timelines applicable to wireless permit applications. The proposed text changes would amend PAMC Section 18.42.110 and can be found in Section 12 (page 16) of the attached draft ordinance. Item 27. Individual Review and Demolition of Historic Inventory Properties The proposed text change would impose a five year waiting period before an Individual Review (IR) application for a two-story home can be considered on a site previously occupied by a single family home that has been demolished. This would address the rare scenario in which an applicant demolishes a single family home intending to replace it with a one-story structure, and then decides to modify their plans and construct a two-story replacement structure. Because construction of a one story home is not subject to discretionary or environmental review, this scenario effectively eliminates the opportunity for review that would occur prior to demolition if a two-story replacement home was proposed originally. This provision would only apply to properties that had structures listed on the City’s historic inventory or listed as National Register Eligible, which are defined terms in state and local laws. An exemption would apply to the removal of dangerous or unsafe buildings. The proposed text changes would amend PAMC Section 18.12.110 and can be found in Section 6 (page 8) of the attached draft ordinance. Item #28: Correct Code Section Numbering for Cannabis Definition On November 13, 2017 the City Council adopted on second reading Ordinance No. 5419 (“Cannabis Ordinance”) to prohibit medical cannabis dispensaries and prohibit commercial cannabis activities, except for deliveries. The ordinance added a new definition of cannabis that was numbered incorrectly, and the proposed amendment in Section 4 of the attached draft ordinance (page 3) would correct that error. There are no substantive text changes being proposed to the definition in the code. Item #17: Prohibit Gas-Powered Leaf Blowers in Commercial Districts At its discussion on November 29, 2017, the PTC was concerned about the unintended consequences of adding the gas-powered leaf blower prohibition to commercial properties and allowing for an exemption for City-related uses. To address the latter concern, Section 2 in the proposed draft ordinance in Attachment A (page 1) has been modified to eliminate the new exemption suggested for City properties. (There is an existing carve out for streets, parking lots, parks, etc.) City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5 Staff continues to believe the City’s current prohibition on gas powered leaf blowers will be more understandable to the public and more logical if it applies Citywide, and not just in residential districts. The change would mean that the City’s ordinance would seek to address noise impacts on all land uses, not just residents, and also addresses air pollution and GHG emissions associated with gasoline powered leaf blowers. If the Commission remains concerned about unintended consequences, staff suggests a motion recommending this item to the Council with modifications. The suggested modification could be to adjust the existing carve out in PAMC Section 9.10.060 to exempt large commercial parcels, parking lots, and parks. (The Commission’s motion would not have to provide precise language.) As an informational item, the Department has received Approximately 600 leaf blower complaints and conducted over 600 inspections since March of 2016. In that time, staff opened 491 code enforcement cases (not all complaints are turned into cases), sending out letters to the property owners (and gardeners if known) involved. About eight citations have been issued and on follow-up inspections staff routinely observes property owners or their gardeners using rakes or electric blowers once they have received a notice. Environmental Review The proposed code amendments are exempt from further environmental review per CEQA Guideline section 15061(b)(3) (Review for Exemption) because the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significantly effect on the environment. Next Steps Upon recommendation from the PTC, staff will forward the staff recommended ordinance with agreed upon changes to City Council for review. In instances (if any) where a majority of the PTC has a different recommendation from staff, that viewpoint will be represented in the staff report along with implementing language for the Council’s consideration. Only one ordinance, however, will be presented to the Council, which is anticipated to occur within the next several months. Alternative Actions In addition to the recommended action, the Planning and Transportation Commission may recommend adoption of the draft ordinance to the City Council with modifications. Report Author & Contact Information PTC2 Liaison & Contact Information Clare Campbell, AICP, Senior Planner Jonathan Lait, AICP, Assistant Director (650) 617-3191 (650) 329-2679 clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org jonathan.lait@cityofpaloalto.org 2 Emails may be sent directly to the PTC using the following address: planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.org City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6 Attachments:  Attachment A: Draft Ordinance (PDF)  Attachment B: PTC Staff Report w/o Attachments, November 29, 2017 (DOC)  Attachment C: PTC Excerpt Meeting Minutes, November 29, 2017 (DOC)  Attachment D: PTC Staff Report w/o Attachments, December 13, 2017 (PDF)  Attachment E: PTC Excerpt Meeting Minutes, December 13, 2017 (PDF) NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 1 November 2017 Ordinance No. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 2.20 (Planning and Transportation Commission) of Title 2, Chapter 9.10 (Noise) of Title 9, Chapter 10.64 (Bicycles, Roller Skates and Coasters) of Title 10, and Chapters 18.04 (Definitions), 18.10 (Low-Density Residential (RE, R-2 and RMD)), 18.12 (R-1 Single-Family Residential District), 18.15 (Residential Density Bonus), 18.16 (Neighborhood, Community, and Service Commercial (CN, CC and CS) Districts), 18.28 (Special Purpose (PF, OS and AC) Districts), 18.30(G) (Combining Districts), 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions), 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses), 18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements), 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards), 18.76 (Permits and Approvals), 18.77 (Processing of Permits and Approvals), and 18.80 (Amendments to Zoning Map And Zoning Regulations) of Title 18, and Chapters 21.12 (Tentative Maps and Preliminary Parcel Maps), and 21.32 (Conditional Exceptions) of Title 21 The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows: SECTION 1. Section 2.20.030 (Officers) of Chapter 2.20 (Planning and Transportation Commission) of Title 2 (Administrative Code) is amended as follows: 2.20.030 Officers The commission Commission shall elect its officers annually at the first meeting in Novembera chairperson and a vice chairperson from its membership who shall serve in such capacity for terms of one year each, or until a successor is elected, unless his or her term as a member of the Commission sooner expires. SECTION 2. Section 9.10.060 (Special provisions) of Chapter 9.10 (Noise) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals and Safety) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) is amended as follows: 9.10.060 Special provisions The special exceptions listed in this section shall apply, notwithstanding the provisions of Section 9.10.030 through 9.10.050. . . . (f) Leaf Blowers. (1) No person shall operate any leaf blower which does not bear an affixed manufacturer's label indicating the model number of the leaf blower and designating a noise level not in excess of sixty-five dBA when measured from a distance of fifty feet utilizing American National Standard Institute methodology. Any leaf blower which bears such a manufacturer's label shall be presumed to comply with any noise level limit of this chapter provided that it is operated with all mufflers and full extension tubes supplied by the manufacturer for that leaf blower. No person shall operate any leaf blower without attachment of all mufflers and full extension tubes supplied by the manufacturer for that leaf blower. NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 2 November 2017 (2) No person shall operate any leaf blowers within a residential zone except during the following hours: nine a.m. and five p.m. Monday through Friday and ten a.m. and four p.m. Saturday. No person shall operate any leaf blower within any non- residential zone except during the following hours: eight a.m. and six p.m. Monday through Friday, and ten a.m. to four p.m. Saturday. No person shall operate any leaf blowers on Sundays and holidays. No person shall operate any leaf blower powered by an internal combustion engine within any residential or commercial zone after July 1, 2005. Commercial operators of leaf blowers are prohibited from operating any leaf blower within the city if they do not prominently display a certificate approved by the Chief of Police verifying that the operator has been trained to operate leaf blowers according to standards adopted by the Chief of Police. In addition to all authorizations and restrictions otherwise provided in this chapter, public streets, sidewalks, and parking lots in business districts and at the Municipal Golf Course and all city parks may be cleaned between 4:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. using leaf blowers which bear an affixed manufacturer's label indicating the model number of the leaf blower and designating a noise level not in excess of sixty-five dBA when measured from a distance of fifty feet utilizing American National Standard Institute methodology. . . . SECTION 3. Sections 10.64.010 (Bicycle license required), 10.64.060 (License fees), and 10.64.070 (Safe mechanical condition prerequisite to issuance of license) of Chapter 10.64 (Bicycles, Roller Skates and Coasters) of Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the PAMC are deleted in their entirety. 10.64.010 Bicycle license required No resident of the city shall operate any bicycle (defined as any device which a person may ride, which is propelled by human power through a system of belts, chains, or gears and which has wheels at least twenty inches in diameter and a frame size of at least fourteen inches) on any street, road, highway, or other public property within the city, unless such bicycle is licensed in accordance with Division 16.7, Sections 39000 through 39011 of the California Vehicle Code. Any person who violates the provisions of this section may be cited pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 39002(a). 10.64.060 License fees The license fee to be paid for each bicycle licensed pursuant to Section 10.64.010 shall be paid in advance. A fee shall be paid for application for transfer of license pursuant to Section 39008 of the California Vehicle Code. Said fees shall be as set forth in the municipal fee schedule. 10.64.070 Safe mechanical condition prerequisite to issuance of license Any person applying for a bicycle license pursuant to the provisions of this chapter must demonstrate to the chief of police or his designated representative that the bicycle for which the applicant desires to secure license plates meets the requirements of this chapter and the California Vehicle Code as to safe mechanical condition. NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 3 November 2017 SECTION 4. Section 18.04.030 (Definitions) of Chapter 18.04 (Definitions) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC is amended as follows: 18.04.030 Definitions (a) Throughout this title the following words and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed in this section. . . . (23.5 94.5) “Cannabis” means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa Linnaeus, Cannabis indica, or Cannabis ruderalis, whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin, whether crude or purified, extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds, or resin. “Cannabis” also means the separated resin, whether crude or purified, obtained from cannabis. “Cannabis” does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination. For the purpose of this Title, “cannabis” does not mean “industrial hemp” as defined by Section 11018.5 of the Health and Safety Code. (A) “Commercial cannabis activity” includes the cultivation, possession, manufacture, distribution, processing, storing, laboratory testing, packaging, labeling, transportation, delivery or sale of cannabis and cannabis products as provided for in Division 10 of the California Business and Professions Code. “Commercial cannabis activity” does not include personal uses allowed by Health and Safety Code sections 11362.1 and 11362.2 or personal medicinal uses allowed by sections 11362.765 and 11362.77, as amended from time to time. (B) “Cultivation” means any activity involving the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, curing, grading, or trimming of cannabis. (C) “Medical cannabis dispensary” is a facility where cannabis is made available for medicinal purposes in accordance with any provision of state law that authorizes the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes. . . . (24.5) “Carport" means a portion of a principal residential building or an accessory building to a residential use designed to be utilized for the shelter parking or storage of one or more motor vehicles, which is open (unenclosed) on two or more sides, including on the vehicular entry side, and which is covered with a solid roof. . . . (41.5) “Director” means the director of planning and community environment or his or her designee. . . . (59) “Garage, private” means a portion of a principal residential building or an accessory building to a residential use designed to be utilized for the shelter parking or NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 4 November 2017 storage of one or more motor vehicles, and which is enclosed on three two or more sides and covered with a solid roof. . . . (65) "Gross floor area" is defined as follows: . . . (B) Non-residential & Multifamily Exclusions: For all zoning districts other than the R-E, R-1, R-2 and RMD residence districts, "gross floor area" shall not include the following: . . . (iv) Except in the CD District and in areas designated as special study areas, For existing structures, minor additions of floor area approved by the director of planning and community environment for purposes of resource conservation or code compliance, upon the determination that such minor additions will increase compliance with environmental health, safety or other federal, state or local standards. Any additional floor area approved shall not qualify for grandfathered floor area in the event the building is later replaced or redeveloped. Such allowable additions may include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Areas designed for resource conservation, such as trash compactors, recycling, and other energy facilities meeting the criteria outlined in Section 18.42.120 (Resource Conservation Energy Facilities); and b. Areas designed and required for hazardous materials storage facilities, disability related access or seismic upgrades. For the purposes of this section disability related upgrades are limited to the incremental square footage necessary to accommodate disability access and shall be subject to the Director’s approval not to exceed 500 square feet per site. Disability related upgrades shall only apply to remodels of existing buildings and shall not qualify for grandfathered floor area in the event the building is later replaced or otherwise redeveloped.; and c. Areas designed and required for refuse storage, such as trash, recycling, and compost, when it is the minimum amount needed to comply with current code requirements. The provisions of this subsection (a)(65)(B)(iv) are not intended to and do not allow the removal of a previously approved existing interior refuse storage area. . . . NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 5 November 2017 (D) Low Density Residential Exclusions: In the RE and R-1 single-family residence districts and in the R-2 and RMD two-family residence districts, "gross floor area" shall not include the following: . . . (vii) For residences designated on the city’s Historic Inventory as a Category 1 through 4or Category 2 historic structure as defined in Section 16.49.020 of this or any contributing structure within a locally designated historic district, or if individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places or California Register of Historical Resources, the following gross floor area exclusions apply. . . . (114.2) “Porte-cochere” means a covered structure attached to a residence or adjacent to a residence and erected over a driveway, which is completely open on three or more sides and used for the temporary unloading and loading of vehicles. . . . SECTION 5. Sections 18.10.080 (Accessory Uses and Facilities) and 18.10.090 (Basements) of Chapter 18.10 (Low Density Residential RE, R-2 and RMD Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC are amended as follows: 18.10.080 Accessory Uses and Facilities . . . (b) Location and Development Standards . . . (3) An accessory building shall not be located in a required interior side or rear yard unless the building is at least seventy-five feet from any property line adjacent to a street, measured along the respective lot line. Provided, on corner lots, accessory buildings including detached garages and carports may be located in the rear yard if located at least 75 feet from the front street and at least 20 feet from the side street property lines. (A) Fixed outdoor fire pits, fireplaces, and cooking surfaces shall be set back a minimum of four feet from the interior side and rear property line. 18.10.090 Basements . . . (b) Inclusion of Gross Floor Area Basements shall not be included in the calculation of gross floor area, provided that: (1) basement area is not deemed to be habitable space, such as crawlspace; or NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 6 November 2017 (2) basement area is deemed to be habitable space but the finished level of the first floor is no more than three feet above the grade around the perimeter of the building foundation. Grade is measured at the lowest point of adjacent ground elevation prior to grading or fill, or finished grade, whichever is lower; or (3) basement area is associated with a historic property as described in Section 18.04.030(a)(65)(D)(vii). . . . SECTION 6. Sections 18.12.040 (Development Standards), 18.12.080 (Accessory Uses and Facilities), 18.12.090 (Basements), 18.12.110 (Single Family Individual Review), and 18.12.120 (Home Improvement Exception) of Chapter 18.12 (R-1 Single- Family Residential District) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC are amended as follows: 18.12.040 Site Development Standards . . . (b) Gross Floor Area Summary . . . TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF GROSS FLOOR AREA FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Description Included in GFA Excluded from GFA Accessory structures greater than 120 sq. ft.  Second floor equivalent: areas with heights >17'  counted twice) Third floor equivalent: areas with heights > 26'  (counted three Third floor equivalent, where roof pitch is > 4:12  up to 200 sq. ft. of unusable space Garages and carports  Porte cocheres  Entry feature < 12' in height, if not substantially enclosed and not recessed  (counted once) Vaulted entry > 12' in height (footprint counted twice) Fireplace footprint  (counted once) First floor roofed or unenclosed porches  First floor recessed porches <10' in depth and open on exterior side  Second floor roofed or enclosed porches, arcades, balconies, porticos, breeze- ways  Basements (complying with patio & lightwell requirements described in Section 18.12.090)  Areas on floors above the first floor where the height from the floor level to the underside of the rafter or finished roof surface is 5 or greater  Bay windows (if at least 18" above interior floor, does not project more than 2', and more than 50% is covered by windows)  Basement area for Category 1 & 2-4 Historic Homes or contributing structure within a historic district, and individually listed homes on the National Register of Historic Places or California Register of Historic Resources (even if the finished level of the first floor is greater than 3' above grade)  NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 7 November 2017 Unusable attic space for category 1 & 2-4 Historic Homes or contributing structure within a historic district, and individually listed homes on the National Register of Historic Places or California Register of Historical Resources  (up to 500 sq. ft.) . . . (f) Contextual Garage and Carport Placement If the predominant neighborhood pattern is of garages or carports located within the rear half of the site, or with no garage or carport present, attached garages/carports shall be located in the rear half of the house footprint. Otherwise, an attached garage/carport may be located in the front half of the house footprint. "Predominant neighborhood pattern" means the existing garage/carport placement pattern for more than half of the houses on the same side of the block, including the subject site. This calculation shall exclude flag lots, corner lots and existing multifamily developments of three or more units. For blocks longer than 600 feet, the calculations shall be based on the 10 homes located nearest to and on the same side of the block as the subject property, plus the subject site, but for a distance no greater than 600 feet. Detached garages/carports shall be located in the rear half of the site and, if within a rear or side setback, at least 75 feet from the front property line. Detached garages/carports on lots of less than 95 feet in depth, however, may be placed in a required interior side or rear yard if located in the rear half of the lot. Access shall be provided from a rear alley if the existing development pattern provides for alley access. For the calculation of corner lots, the "predominant pattern" shall be established for the street where the new garage/carports fronts. . . . 18.12.080 Accessory Uses and Facilities . . . (b) Location and Development Standards . . . (3) An accessory building shall not be located in a required interior side or rear yard unless the building is at least seventy-five feet from any property line adjacent to a street, measured along the respective lot line. Provided, on corner lots, accessory buildings including detached garages and carports may be located in the rear yard if located at least 75 feet from the front street and at least 20 feet from the side street property lines. (A) Fixed outdoor fire pits, fireplaces, and cooking surfaces shall be set back a minimum of four feet from the interior side and rear property line. . . . 18.12.090 Basements . . . NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 8 November 2017 (b) Inclusion of Gross Floor Area Basements shall not be included in the calculation of gross floor area, provided that: (1) basement area is not deemed to be habitable space, such as crawlspace; or (2) basement area is deemed to be habitable space but the finished level of the first floor is no more than three feet above the grade around the perimeter of the building foundation. Grade is measured at the lowest point of adjacent ground elevation prior to grading or fill, or finished grade, whichever is lower; or 3) basement area is associated with a historic property as described in Section 18.04.030(a)(65)(D)(vii). . . . 18.12.110 Single Family Individual Review . . . (i) If a structure listed on the City’s Historic Inventory or by the State of California as National Register Eligible was demolished on a site in conjunction with the issuance of an approval for a building permit, no application for Individual Review for the same property shall be filed within five (5) years from and after the date of issuance of the demolition permit, unless the structure was demolished pursuant to a determination by the Building Official under Section 16.40.040 of Title 16 of this Code that the structure was a dangerous building that cannot be repaired or rehabilitated. 18.12.120 Home Improvement Exception . . . (c) Limits of the Home Improvement Exception A home improvement exception may be granted only for one or more of the following, not to exceed the specified limits: . . . (10) For any residence designated on the city's Historic Inventory as a Category 1 or Category 2 through 4 historic structure as defined in Section 16.49.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code or any contributing structure within a locally designated historic district, to allow up to 250 square feet of floor area in excess of that allowed on the site, provided that any requested addition or exterior modifications associated with the HIE shall be in substantial conformance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Rehabilitation. The property owner who is granted a home improvement exception under this subsection (10) shall be required to sign and record a covenant against the property, acceptable to the city attorney, which requires that the property be maintained in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Rehabilitation. . . . NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 9 November 2017 SECTION 7. Sections 18.15.020 (Definitions), 18.15.030 (Density Bonuses), 18.15.080 (Application Requirements), and 18.15.090 (Review Procedures) of Chapter 18.15 (Residential Density Bonus) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC are amended as follows: 18.15.020 Definitions Whenever the following terms are used in this Chapter, they shall have the meaning established by this Section: . . . (h) “Density bonus” means a density increase over the maximum residential density granted pursuant to Government Code Section 65915 and this ordinance., or, if elected by the applicant, a lesser percentage of density increase, including, but not limited to, no increase in density. . . . (s) “Replace” means either of the following: (i) If any dwelling units described in Section 18.15.030(h) are occupied on the date that the application is submitted to the City, the proposed housing development shall provide at least the same number of units of equivalent size or type, or both, to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as those households in occupancy. For unoccupied dwelling units described in Section 18.15.030(h) in a development with occupied units, the proposed housing development shall provide units of equivalent size or type, or both, to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category in the same proportion of affordability as the occupied units. All replacement calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, theses units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. For purposes of this subsection (s) of Section 18.15.020, “equivalent size” means that the replacement units contain at least the same total number of bedrooms as the units being replaced. (ii) If all dwelling units described in Section 18.15.030(h) have been vacated or demolished within the five-year period preceding the application, the proposed housing development shall provide at least the same number of units of equivalent size or type, or both, as existed at the highpoint of those units in the five-year period preceding the application to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as those persons and families in occupancy at that time, if known. If the incomes of the persons and families in occupancy at the highpoint is not known, then one-half of the required units shall be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, very low income NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 10 November 2017 persons and families and one-half of the required units shall be made available for rent at affordable housing costs to, and occupied by, low- income persons and families. All replacement calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years. . . . 18.15.030 Density Bonuses This Section describes the density bonuses that will be provided, at the request of an applicant, when that applicant provides restricted affordable units as described below. (a) The City shall grant a 20 percent (20%) density bonus when an applicant for a development of five (5) or more dwelling units seeks and agrees to construct at least any one of the following in accordance with the requirements of this Section and Government Code Section 65915: . . . (iv) A qualifying mobile home park; or. (v) At least ten percent (10%) of the total dwelling units of the development for transitional foster youth, as defined in Section 66025.9 of the Education Code, disabled veterans, as defined in Section 18541 of the Government Code, or homeless persons, as defined in the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 11301 et seq.). The units described in this subsection shall be subject to a recorded affordability restriction of 55 years and shall be provided at the same affordability level as very low income units. . . . (c) No additional density bonus shall be authorized for a senior citizen development or qualifying mobilehome park beyond the density bonus authorized by subsection (a) of this Section.Reserved . . . (e) Each development is entitled to only one density bonus, which shall be selected by the applicant based on the percentage of very low restricted affordable units, lower income restricted affordable units, or moderate income restricted affordable units, or the development’s status as a senior citizen housing development or qualifying mobilehome park, or the development’s provision of restricted affordable units for transitional foster youth, disabled veterans or homeless persons. Density bonuses from more than one category may not be combined. In no case shall a development be entitled to a density bonus of more than thirty-five percent (35%). . . . 18.15.080 Application Requirements NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 11 November 2017 An Application for a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, modification or revised parking standard shall be made as follows: (a) An application for a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, modification or revised parking standard shall be submitted with the first application for a discretionary permit for a development and shall be processed concurrently with those discretionary permits. The application shall be on a form prescribed by the City and shall include the following information: . . . (iv) If a concession or incentive is requested, a brief explanation as to the actual cost reduction achieved through the concession or incentive and how the cost reduction allows the applicant to provide the restricted affordable units. . . . (viii) For concessions and incentives that are not included within the menu of incentives/concessions set forth in subsection (c) of Section 18.15.050, the application requires the submittal of the project proforma or other comparable documentation (referred to herein as the “proforma information”) to the Director, providing evidence that the requested concessions and incentives result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. The cost of reviewing the project proforma information, including, but not limited to, the cost to the City of hiring a consultant to review the financial data, shall be borne by the applicant. The proforma information shall include all of the following items: . . . (B) Evidence that the cost reduction allows the applicant to provide affordable rents or affordable sales prices; and (BC) Other information requested by the Planning Director. The Planning Director may require additional financial information including information regarding capital costs, equity investment, debt service, projected revenues, operating expenses, and such other information as is required to evaluate the financial proforma information; . . . 18.15.090 Review Procedures . . . (a) Before approving an application for a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, modification or revised parking standard, the Approval Authority shall make the following findings, as applicable: . . . NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 12 November 2017 (ii) Any requested concession or incentive will result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions based upon the financial analysis and documentation provided. The City finds that the concessions and incentives included in Section 18.150.050(c) will result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. . . . SECTION 8. Section 18.16.050 (Office Use Restrictions) of Chapter 18.16 (Neighborhood, Community, and Service Commercial (CN, CC and CS) Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC is amended as follows: 18.16.050 Office Use Restrictions The following restrictions shall apply to office uses: (a) Conversion of Ground Floor Housing and Non-Office Commercial to Office Medical, Professional, and Business offices shall not be located on the ground floor, unless any of the following apply to such offices: (1) Have been continuously in existence in that space since March 19, 2001, and as of such date, were neither non-conforming nor in the process of being amortized pursuant to Chapter 18.30(I); (2) Occupy a space that was not occupied by housing, neighborhood business service, retail services, personal services, eating and drinking services, or automotive service on March 19, 2001 or thereafter; (3) In the case of CS zoned properties with site frontage on El Camino Real, were not occupied by housing on March 19, 2001; (43) Occupy a space that was vacant on March 19, 2001; . . . SECTION 9. Section 18.28.070 (Additional OS District Regulations) of Chapter 18.28 Special Purpose (PF, OS and AC) Districts of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC is amended as follows: 18.28.070 Additional OS District Regulations . . . (b) Site and Design Approval (2) Major Site and Design Review: For all other projects not reviewed as Minor Site and Design Review, the project will be forwarded to the Planning and Transportation Commission for review and recommendation and then placed on the Council Consent agenda for final action, as prescribed for staff actions outlined in Section 18.76.06018.77.060 (Standard Staff Review Process). Provided, however, that the following projects may be forwarded directly to the City Council Consent agenda by staff without review by the Planning and Transportation Commission, where all of the following conditions apply: NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 13 November 2017 . . . SECTION 10. Section 18.30(G).060 (Action by Commission) of Chapter 18.30(G) (Site and Design (D) Review Combining District Regulations) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC is amended as follows: 18.30(G).060 Action by Commission Unless the application for design approval is diverted for minor architectural review under Section 18.76.020 (b)(3)(DE), the planning commission shall review the site plan and drawings, and shall recommend approval or shall recommend such changes as it may deem necessary to accomplish the following objectives: . . . SECTION 11. Section 18.40.050 (Location and Use of Accessory Buildings) of Chapter 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC is amended and a new Section 18.40.190 (Application Withdrawal) is added to the same Chapter as follows: 18.40.050 Location and Use of Accessory Buildings . . . (b) Limitations of Uses for Accessory Buildings In residential zones, accessory buildings may be located in a required interior yard subject to the following limitations: . . . (3) An accessory building shall not be located in a required interior side or rear yard unless the building is at least seventy-five feet from any street line, measured along the respective lot line. (A) Fixed outdoor fire pits, fireplaces, and cooking surfaces shall be set back a minimum of four feet from the interior side and rear property line. . . . 18.40.190 Application Withdrawal by Applicant or Director (a) Applicant Withdrawal. The applicant may withdraw any rezoning, permit or other application submitted pursuant to this Title at any time before action to approve, conditionally approve or deny the application has been taken by the decisionmaking body, by providing written notification to the Director. (b) Inactive Applications. Where there is inactivity on an application on the part of the applicant for a period of at least six consecutive months, the Director shall have the authority to deem an application withdrawn after providing written notice as provided herein. The Director shall provide notice of his or her intent to deem an NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 14 November 2017 application withdrawn at least thirty days’ prior to the proposed effective date. Such notice shall be provided by first class mail to the last known address of the applicant on record with the Director. For purposes of this section, “inactivity” on an application means that the Director has requested from the applicant or has provided the applicant with notice of additional information, materials and/or fees needed by the Director from the applicant to continue to process the application and the applicant has failed to adequately respond to that request or notice. 18.40.200 New Application Submittal Required The Director shall have the authority to require the filing of a new application when a pending application project description, proposed land uses, building design, or other aspects of the project are substantially modified as to warrant a new review of the project to applicable code sections. The filing of a new application shall be subject to new fees and shall render the previous application withdrawn. SECTION 12. Sections 18.42.040 (Accessory and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units), and 18.42.110 (Wireless Communication Facilities) of Chapter 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC are amended as follows: 18.42.040 Accessory and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units The following regulations apply to zoning districts where accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units are permitted. (a) Accessory Dwelling Units (1) Purpose The intent of this section is to provide regulations to accommodate accessory dwelling units, in order to provide for variety to the city's housing stock and additional affordable housing opportunities. Accessory Dwelling Units shall be separate, self-contained living units, with separate entrances from the main residence, whether attached or detached. The standards below are provided to minimize the impacts of accessory dwelling units on nearby residents and throughout the city, and to assure that the size and location of such dwellings is compatible with the existing or proposed residence on the site and with other structures in the area. (2) Minimum Lot Sizes A. In the R-1 district and all R-1 subdistricts, RE district, R-2 district, and RMD district, and properties zoned Planned Community (PC) where single-family residential is an allowed use, the minimum lot size for the development of an accessory dwelling unit is 5,000 square feet. NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 15 November 2017 B. In the OS District, the minimum lot size for the development of an accessory dwelling unit is 10 acres. . . . (3) Setbacks and Daylight Plane A. Except as otherwise provided in this section, accessory dwelling units shall comply with the underlying zoning district's setbacks, including daylight plane requirements. B. Notwithstanding section A. above, no setback shall be required for an existing garage that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit, except as provided in subsection (a)(5) below. C. In districts permitting second story accessory dwelling units, a setback of no more than five feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit constructed above a garage. . . . (5) Conversion of Space in Existing Single Family Residence or Existing Accessory Structure Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(7) and (a)(8), in the R-1 district and all R-1 subdistricts, and the RE district only, R2, RMD, RM and OS districts, and properties zoned Planned Community (PC) where single-family residential is an allowed use, an Accessory Dwelling Unit shall be permitted if the unit is contained within the existing space of a single-family residence or an existing accessory structure, has independent exterior access from the existing residence, and the side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire safety, and if the accessory dwelling unit conforms with the following: . . . (7) Additional Development Standards for Attached Accessory Dwelling Units A. Attached accessory dwelling units are those attached to the main dwelling. All attached accessory dwelling units shall be subject to the additional development requirements specified below. B. Attached unit size counts toward the calculation of maximum house size. C. Unit Size: The maximum size of an attached accessory dwelling unit living area shall not exceed 600 square feet and shall not exceed 50% of the proposed or existing living area of the primary dwelling unit. The accessory dwelling unit and any covered parking provided for the accessory dwelling unit shall be included in the total floor area for the site, but the covered parking area is not included in the maximum 600 square feet for attached unit. Any basement space used as an accessory dwelling NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 16 November 2017 unit or portion thereof shall be counted as floor area for the purpose of calculating the maximum size of the accessory unit. 18.42.110 Wireless Communication Facilities . . . (f) Tier 1 WCF Permit Process and Findings (1) A Tier 1 WCF Permit shall be reviewed by the Director. The Director's decision shall be final and shall not be appealable pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapters 18.77 or 18.78; (2) The Director shall grant a Tier 1 WCF Permit provided that the Director finds that the applicant proposes an eligible facilities request; (3) The Director shall impose the following conditions on the grant of a Tier 1 WCF Permit: (i) The proposed collocation or modification shall not defeat any existing concealment elements of the support structure; and (ii) The proposed WCF shall comply with the development standards in Section 18.42.110(i)(3), (5), (6) and (7), and the conditions of approval in Section 18.42.110(j). (g) Tier 2 WCF Permit Process and Findings (1) A Tier 2 WCF Permit shall be reviewed by the Director, who may, in his or her sole discretion, refer an application to the Architectural Review Board. The Director's decision shall be appealable directly to the City Council. An appeal may be set for hearing before the City Council or may be placed on the Council’s consent calendar, pursuant to the process for appeal of architectural review set forth in Section 18.77.070(f). . . . (h) Tier 3 WCF Permit Process and Findings (1) A Tier 3 WCF Permit shall be reviewed by the Director, who may, in his or her sole discretion, refer an application to the Architectural Review Board and/or Planning and Transportation Commission. The Director's decision shall be appealable directly to the City Council. An appeal may be set for hearing before the City Council or may be placed on the Council’s consent calendar, pursuant to the process for appeal of architectural review set forth in Section 18.77.070(f) and the process for conditional use permits set forth in Section 18.77.060. . . . (k) Removal of Abandoned Equipment NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 17 November 2017 A WCF (Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3) or a component of that WCF that ceases to be in use for more than ninety (90) days shall be removed by the applicant, wireless communications service provider, or property owner within ninety (90) days of the cessation of use of that WCF. A new conditional useWCF permit shall not be issued to an owner or operator of a WCF or a wireless communications service provider until the abandoned WCF or its component is removed. (l) Revocation The Director may revoke any WCF Permit if the permit holder fails to comply with any condition of the permit. The Director's decision to revoke a Permit shall be appealable pursuant to the process applicable to issuance of the Permit, as provided in subdivisions (f), (g), and (h) of this sectionfor architectural review set forth in Section 18.77.070 and the process for conditional use permits set forth in Section 18.77.060. SECTION 13. Sections 18.52.030 (Basic Parking Regulations) and 18.52.050 (Adjustments by the Director) of Chapter 18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC are amended as follows: 18.52.030 Basic Parking Regulations . . . (i) Transportation Demand Management Plan (1) Requirement for TDM Plan: A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to reduce and manage the number of single-occupant motor vehicle trips generated by the project shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant in the following circumstances: A. For all projects that generate 100 50 or more net new weekday (AM or PM peak hour) or weekend peak hour trips; . . . (1) The Director shall have the authority to adopt guidelines for preparing TDM plans and when applicable shall coordinate such guidelines with the Transportation Management AuthorityAssociation. 18.52.050 Adjustments by the Director . . . (d) Transportation Demand Management (TDM) (2) Where a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program is proposed or required, the TDM program shall outline parking and/or traffic demand measures to be implemented to reduce parking need and trip generation. The Director shall have the authority to adopt guidelines for preparing TDM plans. Required measures may include, but are not limited to: participation in the Transportation Management Authority Association or similar organization, limiting “assigned” NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 18 November 2017 parking to one space per residential unit, providing for transit passes, parking cash- out, enhanced shuttle service (or contributions to extend or enhance existing shuttle service or to create new shared or public shuttle service), car-sharing, traffic-reducing housing, providing priority parking spaces for carpools/vanpools or “green” vehicles (zero emission vehicles, inherently low emission vehicles, or plug- in hybrids, etc.), vehicle charging stations, additional bicycle parking facilities, or other measures to encourage transit use or to reduce parking needs. The program shall be proposed to the satisfaction of the director, shall include proposed performance targets for parking and/or trip reduction and indicate the basis for such estimates, and shall designate a single entity (property owner, homeowners association, etc.) to implement the proposed measures. . . . SECTION 14. Section 18.54.020 (Vehicle Parking Facilities) of Chapter 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards) of the PAMC is amended as follows: 18.54.020 Vehicle Parking Facilities (a) Parking Facility Design . . . (3) The required stall widths shown in Table 5 3 of Section 18.54.070 shall be increased by 0.5 foot for any stall located immediately adjacent to a wall, whether on one or both sides. The director may require that the required stall widths be increased by 0.5 foot for any stall located immediately adjacent to a post, where such post limits turning movements into or out of the stall. . . . SECTION 15. Section 18.76.020 (Architectural Review) of Chapter 18.76 (Permits and Approvals) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC is amended as follows: 18.76.020 Architectural Review . . . (b) Applicability No permit required under Title 2, Title 12 or Title 16 shall be issued for a major or minor project, as set forth in this section, unless an application for architectural review is reviewed, acted upon, and approved or approved with conditions as set forth in Section 18.77.070. (1) Exempt Projects. The following projects do not require architectural review: Single-family and two-family residences do not require architectural review, except as provided under subsections (2)(C) and (2)(D). (A) Single-family and two-family residences do not require architectural review, except as provided under subsections (2)(C) and (2)(D). NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 19 November 2017 (B) Projects determined by the director of planning and community environment to be substantially minor in nature and have inconsequential visual impacts to the adjacent properties and public streets. These exempt projects are referred to as “over the counter projects”. The director shall have the authority to promulgate a list of such exempt projects under this subsection. . . . (3) Minor Projects. The following are “minor projects” for the purposes of the architectural review process set forth in Section 18.77.070, except when determined to be major pursuant to subsection (2)(I) or exempt pursuant to subsection (1)(B): . . . SECTION 16. Sections 18.77.020 (Applications), 18.77.060 (Standard Staff Review Process), 18.77.070 (Architectural Review Process), 18.77.080 (Notice), and 18.77.110 (Revocation or Modification of Approvals) of Chapter 18.77 (Processing of Permits and Approvals) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC are amended, and new Section 18.77.077 (Over the Counter Project Review Process) is added to the same Chapter, as follows: 18.77.020 Applications . . . (d) Resubmittal of applications If an application is denied, the director or city council may specify that a substantially similar application may not be accepted within 12 months prior tofollowing the date of such denial, unless it is shown that the circumstances surrounding the application have changed substantially. 18.77.060 Standard Staff Review Process . . . (b) Notice of Application Completeness Not later than thirty days after an application has been received, the director shall notify the applicant in writing whether the application is complete. If the application is determined not to be complete, procedures outlined in in Section 18.77.030 shall apply. Once an application is deemed complete, notice that the application has been filed and deemed complete shall be given by mail to owners and residents of property within 600 feet of the property, by publication, by e-mail, and by posting in a public place. The notice shall include the address of the property and a brief description of the proposed project. (c) Decision by the Director Not less than twenty-one days following the date an application is deemed complete: . . . NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 20 November 2017 (2) Notice of the proposed director's decision shall be given by mail to owners and residents of property within 600 feet of the property, by publication, by e-mail, and by posting in a public place. The notice shall include the address of the property, a brief description of the proposed project, a brief description of the proposed director's decision, the date the decision will be final if no hearing is requested, and a description of how to request a hearing. (3) The proposed director's decision shall become final fourteen days after the date notice is mailed or published, whichever is later, unless a request for a hearing is filed. The director may, for good cause, specify in writing a longer period for requesting a hearing at the time he or she issued the proposed decisions. . . . (d) Withdrawal of Hearing Request . . . (2) Notice of the proposed director's decision shall be given by mail to owners and residents of property within 600 feet of the property, by publication, by e-mail, and by posting in a public place. Notice shall include the address of the property, a brief description of the proposed project, the specific modifications made to the application, the date the decision will be final, a description of how to request a hearing, and a statement that any request for a hearing on the revised decision is limited to those modifications. (3) The revised proposed director's decision shall become final fourteen days after the date notice is mailed or published, whichever is later, unless a request for a hearing is filed. The director may, for good cause, specify in writing a longer period for requesting a hearing at the time he or she issues the proposed decision. (e) Hearing and Recommendation (Upon Request) by the Planning and Transportation Commission (2) Notice of the revised director's decision shall be given by mail to owners and residents of property within 600 feet of the property, by publication, by e-mail, and by posting in a public place. Notice shall include the address of the property, a brief description of the proposed project, and the date, time and location of the hearing. . . . 18.77.070 Architectural Review Process . . . (b) Tentative Director’s Decision and Hearing Upon Request for Minor Projects For a minor project, as defined in Section 18.76.020(b)(3), once the application is deemed complete: . . . NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 21 November 2017 (2) Notice of the proposed director's decision shall be given mailed to property owner or applicant and posted in a public placeby publication. The notice shall include the address of the property, a brief description of the proposed project, a brief description of the proposed director's decision, the date the decision will be final if no hearing is requested, and a description of how to request a hearing. (3) The proposed director's decision shall become final 14 7 days after the date notice is mailed or published, whichever is later, unless an appeal is filed. The director may, for good cause, specify in writing a longer period for requesting a hearing at the time he or she issues the proposed decision. (i) When there is more than one entitlement required for a project, the longer appeal or request for hearing period shall govern the effective date for the Minor Architectural Review decision. (4) The applicant or the subject property owner, or owners or tenants of an adjacent propertyAny party, including the applicant, may request a hearing by the architectural review board on the proposed director's decision by filing a written request with the planning division. There shall be no fee required for requesting such a hearing. . . . (d) Decision by the Director Upon receipt of a recommendation of the architectural review board: . . . (2) Notice of the director's decision shall be given by mailing to owners and residents of property within 600 feet of the property, by publication once in a local newspaper, and by posting in a public place. Notice shall include the address of the property, a brief description of the proposed project, a brief description of the action to be taken, the date the decision will be final, and a description of how to request a hearing. (3) The director's decision shall become final 14 days after the date notice is mailed or published, whichever is later , unless an appeal is filed. The director may, for good cause, specify in writing a longer period for requesting a hearing at the time he or she issues the proposed decision. (e) Appeal of the Director's Decision – Filing Any party, including the applicant, may file an appeal of the director's decision with the planning division for projects reviewed by the architectural review board. The appeal shall be filed in written form in a manner prescribed by the director. . . . NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 22 November 2017 18.77.077 Over the Counter Project Review Process The director of planning and community environment shall be authorized to adopt guidelines, rules, and procedures to implement the over the counter project review process for projects exempt from architectural review under Section 18.76.020(b)(1)(B) of this Title. 18.77.080 Notice . . . (f) Notice by Posting in a Public Place When notice by posting in a public place is required, notice shall be posted in one or more locations accessible to the public, which may include posting on the city’s website. The director shall determine the location or locations for posting. . . . 18.77.110 Revocation or Modification of Approvals . . . (c) Decision by the director . . . (2) Notice of the director's decision shall be given by mailing to owners and residents of property within 600 feet of the property, and by publication once in a local newspaper, and by posting in a public place. Notice shall include the address of the property, a brief description of the noncompliance, a brief description of the action to be taken, the date the decision will be final, and a description of how to appeal the decision. . . . SECTION 17. Section 18.80.060 (Notice of Public Hearing) of Chapter 18.80 (Amendments to Zoning Map and Zoning Regulations) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the PAMC is amended as follows: 18.80.060 Notice of Public Hearing (a) The planning commission shall give a notice of hearing on a proposed change of district boundaries in the following manner: (1) Notice of the hearing shall be given by publication once in a local newspaper of general circulation not less than twelve ten days prior to the date of the hearing. (2) Additionally, excepting a city-wide change in the zoning map, the city shall mail written notice of such hearing at least twelve ten days prior to the date of the hearing to each owner of real property and to each residential occupant within 600 feet of the exterior boundary of the property for which classification is sought. Notice shall be provided as specified in Section 18.77.080. Compliance with the procedures set forth in this section shall constitute a good faith effort to NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 23 November 2017 provide notice, and the failure of any owner or occupant to receive notice shall not prevent the city from proceeding with the hearing or from taking any action nor affect the validity of any action. . . . SECTION 18. Section 21.12.090 (Action on tentative and preliminary parcel maps) of Chapter 21.12 (Tentative Maps and Preliminary Parcel Maps) of Title 21 (Subdivisions and Other Divisions of Land) of the PAMC is amended as follows: 21.21.090 Action on tentative and preliminary parcel maps . . . (e) Action on Preliminary Parcel Map. Subject to the appeal procedures of this title, the director of planning shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny any preliminary parcel map filed. The director of planning shall take such action or defer the application for decision by the City Council pursuant to Section 18.40.170 of Title 18, within fifty days of the date of filing, unless extended by the mutual consent of the director of planning and the applicant. Prior to taking any such actionapproving, conditionally approving, or denying a preliminary parcel map, the director of planning shall hold a public hearing at which any interested person shall be allowed to present testimony regarding the preliminary parcel map. If, in the opinion of the director of planning, there are issues of major significance associated with the proposed parcel map, such map may be deferred by the director of planning to the planning commission and the city council for processing in accordance with the procedures set forth in subsections (c) and (d) of this section. (f) Notice of Hearing. (1) Notice of the hearing required by subsections (c), (d), or (e) above shall be given by publication once in a local newspaper of general circulation not less than twelve ten days prior to the date of the hearing. (2) Additionally, the city shall mail written notice of such hearing at least twelve ten days prior to the date of the hearing to each owner of record of real property within ninety-one and four-tenths meters (threesix hundred feet) of the exterior boundary of the property for which classification is sought as such owner of record is shown in the last equalized assessment roll and to owners or occupants of the property within ninety-one and four-tenths meters (three six hundred feet) as shown on the city utility customer file. Compliance with the procedures set forth in this section shall constitute a good-faith effort to provide notice and the failure of any owner or occupant to receive notice shall not prevent the city from proceeding with the hearing or from taking any action nor affect the validity of any action. . . . NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 24 November 2017 (4) In addition to any other information required, the applicant shall submit with its application a list of all owners of record of real property within ninety-one and four-tenths meters (threesix hundred feet) of the exterior boundary of the property to be subdivided as shown in the last equalized assessment roll (as updated by the semiannual real estate update information). SECTION 19. Section 21.32.010 (Application for exceptions) of Chapter 21.32 (Conditional Exceptions) of Title 21 (Subdivisions and Other Divisions of Land) of the PAMC is amended as follows: 21.32.010 Application for exceptions A subdivider may apply for conditional Eexceptions to any of the requirements and regulations set forth in this title and Title 18, as defined in Section 21.04.030(b)(17). Such exceptions may be granted only by the city council after recommendation by the planning commission. Application for such exception shall be made by petition of the subdivider, stating fully the grounds of the application and the facts relied upon by the petitioner. Such petition shall be submitted with the tentative or preliminary parcel map for which the exception is requested and shall be reviewed and processed concurrent with said map. SECTION 20. Any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance. SECTION 21. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 22. The Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guideline sections 15061(b) and 15301, 15302 and 15305 because it simply provides a comprehensive permitting scheme. SECTION 23. This Ordinance shall not apply to any planning or land use applications deemed complete as of the effective date of this Ordinance. // // // NOT YET APPROVED 171011 jb SL/Amending Planning Codes 25 November 2017 SECTION 24. This Ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ Assistant City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Planning & Community Environment Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID # 8041) Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 11/29/2017 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: Planning-Related Code Amendments (2018) Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Recommendation to the City Council Regarding the Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 2.20 (Planning and Transportation Commission) of Title 2, Chapter 9.10 (Noise) of Title 9, Chapter 10.64 (Bicycles, Roller Skates and Coasters) of Title 10, and Chapters 18.04 (Definitions), 18.10 (Low-Density Residential (RE, R-2 and RMD)), 18.12 (R-1 Single-Family Residential District), 18.15 (Residential Density Bonus), 18.16 (Neighborhood, Community, and Service Commercial (CN, CC and CS) Districts), 18.28 (Special Purpose (PF, OS and AC) Districts), 18.30(G) (Combining Districts), 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions), 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses), 18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements), 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards), 18.76 (Permits and Approvals), 18.77 (Processing of Permits and Approvals), and 18.80 (Amendments to Zoning Map And Zoning Regulations) of Title 18, and Chapters 21.12 (Tentative Maps and Preliminary Parcel Maps) and 21.32 (Conditional Exceptions) of Title 21. The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in Accordance With CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). For More Information, Please Contact Clare Campbell at clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org. From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) take the following action(s): City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 1. Find the proposed draft ordinance exempt from the provision of CEQA in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3); and 2. Recommend to the City Council adoption an ordinance (Attachment A) to amend various sections of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Report Summary This report transmits proposed amendments to various sections of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC), with many changes affecting Title 18, the Zoning Code. These code amendments are intended to modify code provisions to reflect current practice or policy, correct errors, and introduce some new policy initiatives. The proposed code modifications are focused on the items listed below and are presented in the report in this same order. Minor Text Clarifications: 1. Correct Threshold Requiring a Transportation Demand Management Plan 2. Correct Reference to Transportation Management Association 3. Remove Duplicate Definition of “Director” 4. Correct Table Reference – Parking Stall Widths 5. Correct Site and Design Code Reference 6. Clarify that the Contextual Garage Placement Applies to Carports 7. Clarification of Carport and Garage Definitions 8. Site and Design Review – Correct Code Reference for Minor Projects 9. Resubmittal of Denied Applications – Correct Language 10. Map Exceptions Process – Add Reference to Title 18 11. Clarify Floor Area Exemptions for Historic Homes 12. Office Restrictions in CS/CN/CC – Remove CS Reference 13. Preliminary Parcel Map – Add Option of Director’s Deferral Directly to Council Procedural-Related Amendments: 14. Remove Restrictive Election Time for PTC Officers 15. Establish Uniform Timing for Public Hearing Notices for Maps and Zone Changes 16. Add Provision to Allow Closure of Inactive Applications and Require New Application for Substantially Modified Projects 17. Prohibit Gas-Powered Leaf Blowers in Commercial Districts 18. Add Floor Area Exemption for Trash Enclosures in the CD District 19. Expand Exceptions for Historic Homes Related to Floor Area and HIE’s 20. Clarify Setbacks for Outdoor Fireplaces and BBQs 21. Establish an Over the Counter Architectural Review Process 22. Various Updates to Application Processing and Approvals 23. Clarifications to the Wireless Communication Facilities Review Process 24. Modify Accessory Dwelling Unit Requirements Per State Regulations City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 25. Update Residential Density Bonus Per State Requirements 26. Remove Bicycle License Requirement 27. Individual Review and Demolition of Historic Inventory Properties Background As circumstances warrant, the City reviews the Municipal Code and makes changes intended to better achieve stated goals, reflect operational practices, provide clarity, or improve a process provided for in the ordinance. There are also instances where code changes are needed to address changes in State law or in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The various code amendments proposed are part of an on-going effort to bring the zoning code into alignment with these practices and regulations. The last collection of Planning Code Amendments was approved earlier this year in February 2017. It is staff’s intent to bring forward minor code amendments annually, as needed. In this collection of proposed code updates, there are references to code sections other than Title 18 (Zoning Code). These additional sections include the noise ordinance, parking and bicycle regulations, and the subdivision process. Discussion The proposed code amendments are divided into two groups, one for minor text clarifications and one for procedural or process focused changes. Each amendment is presented with the “issue” that is being addressed by the proposed code change, and includes any relevant background. Additionally, for each existing code section, the staff report provides links to the web-based municipal code so the reader can review the related code sections in full detail. For each amendment, once the issue has been identified, the report then provides the proposed text modifications. The majority of the proposed text amendments are included in the body of the report and for those that are not, they can be found in the attached draft ordinance, Attachment A. A. Minor Text Clarifications 1. Correct Threshold Requiring a Transportation Demand Management Plan Issue: With the adoption of Ordinance 5406 in February 2017, a text correction was missed regarding the threshold of when a project would be required to provide a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan. Section 18.52.030 (i)(1)(A), in Basic Parking Regulations, should reflect 50 new vehicle trips and not 100. This 50 trip threshold was what Council intended by their motion, and the code sections were amended to reflect this change, but the correction was overlooked for the section referenced here. Proposed Text: (i) Transportation Demand Management Plan City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 (1) Requirement for TDM Plan: A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to reduce and manage the number of single-occupant motor vehicle trips generated by the project shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant in the following circumstances: (A) For all projects that generate 50 100 or more net new weekday (AM or PM peak hour) or weekend peak hour trips; 2. Correct Reference to Transportation Management Association Issue: In Chapter 18.52, Parking and Loading Requirements, there are two incorrect references to the Transportation Management Authority; it should read Transportation Management Association. Proposed Text: 18.52.030 Basic Parking Regulations (i) Transportation Demand Management Plan (2) The Director shall have the authority to adopt guidelines for preparing TDM plans and when applicable shall coordinate such guidelines with the Transportation Management AuthorityAssociation. 18.52.050 Adjustments by the Director (d) Transportation Demand Management (TDM) (2) Where a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program is proposed or required, the TDM program shall outline parking and/or traffic demand measures to be implemented to reduce parking need and trip generation. The Director shall have the authority to adopt guidelines for preparing TDM plans. Required measures may include, but are not limited to: participation in the Transportation Management AuthorityAssociation or similar organization, 3. Remove Duplicate Definition of “Director” Issue: Section 18.04.030(a), Definitions, contains the same two definitions for “Director” and they are listed in subsections (41.5) and (44.8). The second listing is the correct placement for this definition. Proposed Text: (41.5) “Director” means the director of planning and community environment or his or her designee. City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5 4. Correct Table Reference – Parking Stall Widths Issue: Section 18.54.020(a)(3), in Parking Facility Design, refers to the incorrect table for the dimensions for parking stalls. Proposed Text: (3) The required stall widths shown in Table 3 5 of Section 18.54.070 shall be increased by 0.5 foot for any stall located immediately adjacent to a wall, whether on one or both sides. 5. Correct Site and Design Code Reference Issue: Section 18.28.070(b)(2), in Site and Design Approval, refers to the incorrect application review process/code section. Proposed Text: (2) Major Site and Design Review: For all other projects not reviewed as Minor Site and Design Review, the project will be forwarded to the Planning and Transportation Commission for review and recommendation and then placed on the Council Consent agenda for final action, as prescribed for staff actions outlined in Section 18.77.060 18.76.060 (Standard Staff Review Process). 6. Clarify that the Contextual Garage Placement Applies to Carports Issue: Section 18.12.040(f), Contextual Garage Placement, specifies requirements for where the required covered parking can be placed on the lot for single-family homes in the R-1 zone. Staff believes, and has expressed in the past, that this code provision as written fails to capture its intended purpose of discouraging covered vehicle parking in the front half of the lot where a pattern exists with parking placed on the rear half of lots. This matter was previously presented to the PTC on September 9th, September 30th and October 28, 2015.1 The Commission at that time did not support forwarding to Council a recommendation to change this code section based in part on commissioner arguments that the modification represented a new policy direction and not a clarification. Staff disagrees with this perspective. Long term city employees with knowledge of the municipal code have affirmed the interpretation to allow carports in the front portion of the lot when a garage was precluded from doing so is anomalous to the historical application of the code. Moreover, staff has found only a limited number of examples where building permits were issued that allowed carports in the front half of the lot when the neighborhood pattern clearly shows parking in the rear half. To avoid any future misinterpretations, staff recommends adding text to clearly indicate that carports must also comply with the contextual placement requirements that apply to garages. 1 PTC Meeting Minutes: 09/09/2015 Meeting; 09/30/2015 Meeting; 10/28/2015 Meeting City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6 Proposed Text: (f) Contextual Garage and Carport Placement If the predominant neighborhood pattern is of garages or carports located within the rear half of the site, or with no garage or carport present, attached garages/carports shall be located in the rear half of the house footprint. Otherwise, an attached garage/carport may be located in the front half of the house footprint. "Predominant neighborhood pattern" means the existing garage/carport placement pattern for more than half of the houses on the same side of the block, including the subject site. This calculation shall exclude flag lots, corner lots and existing multifamily developments of three or more units. For blocks longer than 600 feet, the calculations shall be based on the 10 homes located nearest to and on the same side of the block as the subject property, plus the subject site, but for a distance no greater than 600 feet. Detached garages/carports shall be located in the rear half of the site and, if within a rear or side setback, at least 75 feet from the front property line. Detached garages/carports on lots of less than 95 feet in depth, however, may be placed in a required interior side or rear yard if located in the rear half of the lot. Access shall be provided from a rear alley if the existing development pattern provides for alley access. For the calculation of corner lots, the "predominant pattern" shall be established for the street where the new garage/carports fronts. 7. Clarification of Carport and Garage Definitions Issue: The definitions of “carport” and “garage” are not as clear as they should be and the proposed text change would help clarify these terms and correct the specifications for what is considered a garage. Proposed Text: 18.04.030(a) Definitions (24.5) “Carport" means a portion of a principal residential building or an accessory building to a residential use designed to be utilized for the shelter of one or more motor vehicles, which is completely open (unenclosed) on two or more sides including on the vehicular entry side, and which is covered with a solid roof. (59) “Garage, private” means a portion of a principal residential building or an accessory building to a residential use designed to be utilized for the shelter of one or more motor vehicles and which is completely enclosed on three two or more sides and covered with a solid roof. 8. Site and Design Review – Correct Code Reference for Minor Projects Issue: Section 18.30(G).060, Action by Commission, contains the wrong code reference for the minor architectural review process. City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 7 Proposed Text: Unless the application for design approval is diverted for minor architectural review under Section 18.76.020 (b)(3)(D) (E) the planning commission shall review the site plan and drawings, and shall recommend approval or shall recommend such changes as it may deem necessary to accomplish the following objectives… 9. Resubmittal of Denied Applications – Correct Language Issue: Section 18.77.020(d), in Resubmittal of Applications, has a text error regarding when an applicant may submit a revised project when the earlier application was denied. Proposed Text: (d) Resubmittal of applications If an application is denied, the director or city council may specify that a substantially similar application may not be accepted within 12 months following prior to the date of such denial, unless it is shown that the circumstances surrounding the application have changed substantially. 10. Map Exceptions Process – Add Reference to Title 18 Issue: Title 21, Subdivisions, provides direction for all subdivision processes, including a map with exceptions. In this title, “exception” is defined to mean “an exception to any of the requirements for lot width, lot depth, lot area, street frontage or access, as set forth in Titles 18 or 21… ” For added clarification to the map exception process in Section 21.32.010, a specific reference to this “exception” definition is proposed. This will help clarify that map exceptions may include certain standards (i.e. lot width, lot area, street frontage or access) required by Title 18. Proposed Text: 21.32.010 Application for exceptions. A subdivider may apply for conditional Eexceptions to any of the requirements and regulations set forth in this title and Title 18, as defined in Section 21.04.030(b)(17). Such exceptions may be granted only by the city council after recommendation by the planning commission. Application for such exception shall be made by petition of the subdivider, stating fully the grounds of the application and the facts relied upon by the petitioner. Such petition shall be submitted with the tentative or preliminary parcel map for which the exception is requested and shall be reviewed and processed concurrent with said map. 11. Clarify Floor Area Exemptions for Historic Homes City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 8 Issue: Section 18.12.040(b) Table 3, Summary of Gross Floor Area for Single Family Residential Districts, does not precisely reference how basements should be evaluated for inclusion in the floor area. Table 3 is meant to serve as a simplified reference of the specifications for low density residential floor area inclusions and exclusions, as outlined in the definition of Gross Floor Area (PAMC 18.04.030(65)(C) & (D)). The edit to the Table 3 makes the language consistent with the definition. Proposed Text: 18.12.040(b) Table 3 Summary of Gross Floor Area for Single Family Residential Districts Description Included In GFA Excluded from GFA Basement area for Category 1 & 2 Historic Homes or contributing structure within a historic district (even if greater than 3' above grade)  12. Office Restrictions in CS/CN/CC – Remove CS Reference Issue: The section 18.16.050(a)(3), in Office Use Restrictions, specifies that for CS zoned sites along El Camino Real, ground floor office use is allowed providing the site was not used for housing on March 19, 2001. This provision is at odds with other code language seeking to minimize or limit the circumstances in which office is allowed in certain districts. A preceding code section prohibits ground floor office when housing, neighborhood business service, retail services, personal services eating and drinking services and automobile services previously occupied the site in the CS, CN or CC districts. Section 18.16.050(a)(3) created a loophole that would allow in the CS zone commercial office to replace retail or restaurants, which is not the intent of this section. It was believed that this issue was addressed in the last planning codes update, but it was not. The City’s adoption of the retail preservation ordinance has further limited the impact of this code section, nevertheless, staff recommends amending this section. The proposed amendment would simply strike in its entirety subsection (a)(3) of Section 18.16.050 thereby remedying the conflict. Proposed Text: 18.16.050 Office Use Restrictions The following restrictions shall apply to office uses: (a) Conversion of Ground Floor Housing and Non-Office Commercial to Office Medical, Professional, and Business offices shall not be located on the ground floor, unless any of the following apply to such offices: City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 9 (1) Have been continuously in existence in that space since March 19, 2001, and as of such date, were neither non-conforming nor in the process of being amortized pursuant to Chapter 18.30(I); (2) Occupy a space that was not occupied by housing, neighborhood business service, retail services, personal services, eating and drinking services, or automotive service on March 19, 2001 or thereafter; (3) In the case of CS zoned properties with site frontage on El Camino Real, were not occupied by housing on March 19, 2001; (4) Occupy a space that was vacant on March 19, 2001; 13. Preliminary Parcel Map – Add Option of Director’s Deferral Directly to Council Issue: Section 21.12.090, action on tentative and preliminary parcel maps, provides the director of planning the option to defer action on a preliminary parcel map after a Director’s Hearing if the project is considered complex. The current process requires both the PTC and Council to review the deferred action. Staff suggests modifying the code language to allow the director discretion to forward deferred actions directly to Council for review, making the PTC review optional. The reason to provide this alternative process is to streamline the review of certain projects that have multiple entitlements where Council is required to take action en masse and the PTC has already reviewed the project in a non-map related public hearing, or where the PTC otherwise has no other review authority. Proposed Text: 21.12.090(e) Action on Preliminary Parcel Map. Subject to the appeal procedures of this title, the director of planning shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny any preliminary parcel map filed. The director of planning shall take such action within fifty days of the date of filing, unless extended by the mutual consent of the director of planning and the applicant. Prior to taking any such action, the director of planning shall hold a public hearing at which any interested person shall be allowed to present testimony regarding the preliminary parcel map. If, in the opinion of the director of planning, there are issues of major significance associated with the proposed parcel map, such map may be deferred by the director of planning to the planning commission and the city council, or the city council directly under the provisions of Section 18.40.170 of Title 18, for processing in accordance with the procedures set forth in subsections (c) and (d) of this section. B. Procedural Related Amendments City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 10 14. Remove Restrictive Election Time for PTC Officers Issue: The current code Section 2.20.030 specifies that the PTC officers, chair and vice chair, shall be elected annually in November. The proposed code revision would remove the November provision and allow elections to occur as needed, while maintaining the one-year term limit. This change is consistent with the provisions for other city commissions, including the Utility Advisory, Parks and Recreation, and Library Advisory Commissions, and the Architectural Review Board. The PTC can update its rules of order as needed to establish a preferred time to conduct its election of officers. Proposed Text: 2.20.030 Officers The Commission shall elect a chairperson and a vice chairperson from its membership who shall serve in such capacity for terms of one year each, or until a successor is elected its officers annually at the first meeting in November. 15. Establish Uniform Timing for Public Hearing Notices for Maps and Zone Changes Issue: All required public hearings associated with planning entitlements have a ten calendar day minimum for providing notice, with the exceptions of zoning amendments (18.80.060) and maps (21.12.090(f)), which require 12 days. For consistency and to eliminate errors, staff recommends using the 10 day noticing requirement for all public hearing requirements. Additionally, the mailing radius is being updated to reflect our existing practice of doing a 600 foot radius mailing for all hearings, except for hearings for Home Improvement Exceptions and Individual Reviews. Proposed Text: 21.12.090 Action on tentative and preliminary parcel maps. (f) Notice of Hearing. (1) Notice of the hearing required by subsections (c), (d), or (e) above shall be given by publication once in a local newspaper of general circulation not less than ten twelve days prior to the date of the hearing. (2) Additionally, the city shall mail written notice of such hearing at least ten twelve days prior to the date of the hearing to each owner of record of real property within ninety-one and four-tenths meters (three six hundred feet) of the exterior boundary of the property for which classification is sought as such owner of record is shown in the last equalized assessment roll and to owners or occupants of the property within ninety-one and four-tenths meters (three hundred feet) as shown on the city utility customer file. (4) In addition to any other information required, the applicant shall submit with its application a list of all owners of record of real property within ninety-one and four-tenths City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 11 meters (threesix hundred feet) of the exterior boundary of the property to be subdivided as shown in the last equalized assessment roll (as updated by the semiannual real estate update information) 18.80.060 Notice of Public Hearing (a) The planning commission shall give a notice of hearing on a proposed change of district boundaries in the following manner: (1) Notice of the hearing shall be given by publication once in a local newspaper of general circulation not less than ten twelve days prior to the date of the hearing. (2) Additionally, excepting a city-wide change in the zoning map, the city shall mail written notice of such hearing at least ten twelve days prior to the date of the hearing to each owner of real property and to each residential occupant within 600 feet of the exterior boundary of the property for which classification is sought. Notice shall be provided as specified in Section 18.77.080. Compliance with the procedures set forth in this section shall constitute a good faith effort to provide notice, and the failure of any owner or occupant to receive notice shall not prevent the city from proceeding with the hearing or from taking any action nor affect the validity of any action. 16. Add Provision to Allow Closure of Inactive Applications and Require New Application for Substantially Modified Projects Issue: The zoning code does not have a provision that specifically allows staff to close out or withdraw a planning application due to lack of response by the applicant. In practice, staff notifies an applicant in writing that a response to staff comments is needed within a specific timeframe (this time line is relative to the level of response required); otherwise the project will be closed out. This practice has been sufficient for determining which applicants are still interested in moving forward and which ones are not. Staff seeks to codify this existing practice by adding a new section to 18.40, General Standards and Exceptions. Additionally, staff is proposing new code language that would give the Director authority to require the filing of a new planning application when substantial changes to a project warrant a new review to applicable code sections. While this does not happen often, there have been instances where an applicant’s project plans change, sometimes significantly, and all previous work reviewing the prior project is no longer relevant. In some of these instances, the City is not being compensated for staff time spent reviewing a new project. New Text: 18.40.190 Application Withdrawal (a) Applicant Withdrawal. The applicant may withdraw any rezoning, permit or other application submitted pursuant to this Title at any time before action to approve, conditionally approve or deny the application has been taken by the decisionmaking body, by providing written notification to the Director. City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 12 (b) Inactive Applications. Where there is inactivity on an application on the part of the applicant for a period of at least six consecutive months, the Director shall have the authority to deem an application withdrawn without holding any hearing. The Director shall provide a courtesy notice to the applicant at the last known address of the applicant on record with the Director of the Director’s intention to deem an application withdrawn at least thirty days prior to deeming such application withdrawn, and the notice shall specify the date that the application is deemed withdrawn. For purposes of this section, “inactivity” on an application means that the Director has requested from the applicant or has provided the applicant with notice of additional information, materials and/or fees needed by the Director from the applicant to continue to process the application and the applicant has failed to adequately respond to that request or notice. 18.40.200 New Application Submittal Required New Application Submittal. The Director shall have the authority to require the filing of a new application when a pending application project description, proposed land uses, building design, or other aspects of the project are substantially modified as to warrant a new review of the project to applicable code sections. The filing of a new application shall be subject to new fees and renders the previous application withdrawn. 17. Prohibit Gas-Powered Leaf Blowers in Commercial Districts Issue: The use of leaf blowers powered by an internal combustion engine generates high noise volumes and is generally considered a public nuisance. The current regulations prohibit the use of these gas-powered leaf blowers in residential districts (Section 9.10.060(f)(2)). The proposal is to carry the prohibition over to commercial districts as well. The proposed amendment includes an exception for activity on City-owned or operated lands and on Palo Alto Unified School District lands. Another exception is proposed on these lands for emergency related operations. Proposed Text: 9.10.060(f) Leaf Blowers. (2) No person shall operate any leaf blowers within a residential zone except during the following hours: nine a.m. and five p.m. Monday through Friday and ten a.m. and four p.m. Saturday. No person shall operate any leaf blower within any non-residential zone except during the following hours: eight a.m. and six p.m. Monday through Friday, and ten a.m. to four p.m. Saturday. No person shall operate any leaf blowers on Sundays and holidays. No person shall operate any leaf blower powered by an internal combustion engine within any residential or commercial zone after July 1, 2005. Commercial operators of leaf blowers are prohibited from operating any leaf blower within the city if City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 13 they do not prominently display a certificate approved by the Chief of Police verifying that the operator has been trained to operate leaf blowers according to standards adopted by the Chief of Police. In addition to all authorizations and restrictions otherwise provided in this chapter, public streets, sidewalks, and parking lots in business districts and at the Municipal Golf Course and all city parks may be cleaned between 4:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. using leaf blowers which bear an affixed manufacturer's label indicating the model number of the leaf blower and designating a noise level not in excess of sixty-five dBA when measured from a distance of fifty feet utilizing American National Standard Institute methodology. (3) The use of leaf blowers powered by an internal combustion engine shall be allowed when used on property owned or operated by the City or the Palo Alto Unified School District between nine a.m. and five p.m. Monday through Friday and ten a.m. and four p.m. Saturday for routine maintenance operations, and at any time for emergency operations. 18. Add Floor Area Exemption for Trash Enclosures in the CD District Issue: Currently the code [Section 18.04.030(a)(65)(B)] allows some minor floor area exemptions upon Director approval for non-residential and multi-family development, but specifically excludes the CD Commercial Downtown zone district. The recommendation is to allow these same minor exemptions to apply in the CD zone and clarify the requirements. For existing developed commercial sites in the CD zone district, businesses are finding it difficult to comply with City regulations for required enclosed and covered refuse areas (as required by Public Works Water Quality). This is primarily because these refuse structures count towards the site’s floor area calculation and many of the existing developed sites are at or over their floor area ratio (FAR) limit. The purpose of requiring covered exterior refuse areas is to prevent rain from falling on containers, compactors, or the enclosure floor and carrying contaminants to the stormwater system. Additionally, polluted water can enter the storm drain through leaks or spills when the containers are emptied. Although this current code section allows for additional Director approved FAR for the purpose of code compliance, the recommendation is to explicitly identify that new code- required structures for refuse areas for existing facilities may qualify for this exemption. The intent of this code modification is not to allow conversion of existing interior refuse area to be relocated outside the building, but to provide some relief for constrained sites when no refuse storage area exists. Additionally, the added FAR cannot be grandfathered and carried over to a newly constructed project. Proposed Text: 18.04.030(a)(65) Gross Floor Area City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 14 (B) Non-residential & Multifamily Exclusions: For all zoning districts other than the R-E, R-1, R-2 and RMD residence districts, “gross floor area” shall not include the following: (iv) Except in the CD District and in areas designated as special study areas, For existing structures, minor additions of floor area approved by the director of planning and community environment for purposes of resource conservation or code compliance, upon the determination that such minor additions will increase compliance with environmental health, safety or other federal, state or local standards. Any additional floor area approved shall not qualify for grandfathered floor area in the event the building is later replaced or redeveloped. Such allowable additions may include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Areas designed for resource conservation, such as trash compactors, recycling, and other energy facilities meeting the criteria outlined in Section 18.42.120 (Resource Conservation Energy Facilities); b. Areas designed and required for hazardous materials storage facilities, disability related access or seismic upgrades. For the purpose of this section disability related upgrades are limited to the incremental square footage necessary to accommodate disability access and shall be subject to the Director’s approval not to exceed 500 square feet per site. Disability related upgrades shall only apply to remodels of existing buildings; and shall not qualify for grandfathered floor area in the event the building is later replaced or otherwise redeveloped; and c. Areas designed and required for refuse storage, such as trash, recycling, and compost, when it is the minimum amount needed to comply with current code requirements. The provisions of this subsection (a)(65)(B)(iv) are not intended to and do not allow the removal of a previously approved existing interior refuse storage area. 19. Expand Exceptions for Historic Homes Related to Floor Area and HIE’s Issue: The existing code allows for certain exceptions to residences designated on the city’s Historic Inventory as a Category 1 or 2 historic resource. The Historic Resources Board (HRB) and staff recommend the two exceptions highlighted below regarding basements and Home Improvement Exceptions (HIE) be extended to residences designated as Category 3 and 4 resources. And, in the case regarding basement floor area exceptions, to also include homes listed on the National Register of Historic Places or California Register of Historical Resources. The inclusion of these other historic designated properties for exceptions further supports retention and preservation of these valued resources in the City. A. Expand basement exceptions for historic homes in the Gross Floor Area definition. Proposed Text: 18.04.030(a)(65)(D) Low Density Residential Exclusions: In the RE and R-1 single-family residence districts and in the R-2 and RMD two-family residence districts, “gross floor area” shall not include the following: City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 15 (vii) For residences designated on the city’s Historic Inventory as a Category 1 through 4 or Category 2 historic structure as defined in Section 16.49.020, of this or any contributing structure within a locally designated historic district, or if individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places or California Register of Historical Resources, the following gross floor area exclusions apply. a. New or existing basement area, including where the existing finished level of the first floor is three feet or more above grade around the perimeter of the building foundation walls; and b. Up to 500 square feet of unusable attic space in excess of five feet in height from the floor to the roof above. B. Correct references in 18.12.040(b) Table 3, Summary of Gross Floor Area For Single Family Residential Districts, to reflect definition changes noted above. See attached ordinance for details. C. Update basement regulations for R-1, RE, R-2, and RMD (Sections 18.10 and 18.12) to reflect changes in definition noted above. Proposed Text: 18.10.090/18.12.090 Basements (b) Inclusion as Gross Floor Area Basements shall not be included in the calculation of gross floor area, provided that: (1) basement area is not deemed to be habitable space, such as crawlspace; or (2) basement area is deemed to be habitable space but the finished level of the first floor is no more than three feet above the grade around the perimeter of the building foundation.; or (3) basement area is associated with a historic property as described in Section 18.04.030(b)(65)(D)(vii). D. Expand the applicability of HIE provisions related to Historic Homes. 18.12.120(c) Limits of the Home Improvement Exception A home improvement exception may be granted only for one or more of the following, not to exceed the specified limits: (10) For any residence designated on the city's Historic Inventory as a Category 1 through 4 or Category 2 historic structure as defined in Section 16.49.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code or any contributing structure within a locally designated historic district, to allow up to 250 square feet of floor area in excess of that allowed on the site, provided that any requested addition or exterior modifications associated with the HIE shall be in substantial conformance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Rehabilitation. The property owner who is City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 16 granted a home improvement exception under this subsection (10) shall be required to sign and record a covenant against the property, acceptable to the city attorney, which requires that the property be maintained in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Rehabilitation. 20. Clarify Setbacks for Outdoor Fireplaces and BBQs Issue: There has been a noticeable rise in the popularity of outdoor fireplaces and cooking surfaces in residential properties. The key concern that staff considered with regards to siting these features was fire safety. The Fire Department advised that there are no setback requirements for single-family homes, but suggested a three to five foot clearance to provide maneuverability in case of a fire was appropriate. Another concern considered by staff was the potential nuisance from smoke and odors traveling to neighboring properties. As it stands today, kitchens (i.e. open kitchen windows) can be as close as six feet from a property line and chimneys four feet away, which provides some context for smoke and odor producing activities relatively close to property lines. When an outdoor fireplace or kitchen has been proposed in the interior yard, staff has applied the R-1 development standards of an attached fireplace to these detached accessory structures and uses. The R-1 code allows a fireplace/chimney, when attached to the home, to encroach into a side setback up to two feet, maintaining a four foot minimum setback. Based on the interpretation of this R-1 standard, outdoor fire pits, fireplaces, and cooking surfaces/BBQs have been required to maintain a four foot setback from both the interior side and rear property lines; they are not permitted in the front yard or street side yard. All other requirements that apply to accessory structures would apply and remain unchanged. The intent with the revision is to codify this code interpretation and practice. Proposed Text: 18.10.080(b)(3)/18.12.080 (b)(3) Location and Development Standards [RE, R-2, RMD, R-1] (b) Location and Development Standards (3) An accessory building shall not be located in a required interior side or rear yard unless the building is at least seventy-five feet from any property line adjacent to a street, measured along the respective lot line. Provided, on corner lots, accessory buildings including detached garages and carports may be located in the rear yard if located at least 75 feet from the front street and at least 20 feet from the side street property lines. (A) Fixed outdoor fire pits, fireplaces, and cooking surfaces shall be set back a minimum of four feet from the interior side and rear property line. 18.40.050 (b) Limitations of Uses for Accessory Buildings [General Standards and Exceptions] In residential zones, accessory buildings may be located in a required interior yard subject to the following limitations: City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 17 (3) An accessory building shall not be located in a required interior side or rear yard unless the building is at least seventy-five feet from any street line, measured along the respective lot line. (A) Fixed outdoor fire pits, fireplaces, and cooking surfaces shall be set back a minimum of four feet from the interior side and rear property line. 21. Establish an Over the Counter Architectural Review Process Issue: Architectural review (AR) is required prior to the issuance any permit on private property except for single family homes and two-family residences.2 The Municipal Code identifies two types of AR projects: Major or Minor. All Major projects go to the Architectural Review Board for review and recommendation. Some Minor projects go to the Board, but most are administratively approved by City staff. Minor projects range from new buildings or additions fewer than 5,000 square feet to fences, landscaping, signs, and other minor building changes. Any decision on a Minor AR requires a written determination and a 14-day appeal period.3 Such requirements are not practical for trades professionals seeking to obtain an over the counter permit from the building department for minor and routine work. Moreover, these requirements may discourage property owners and trades professionals from seeking the permits needed for building, mechanical or electrical work due to the extended application processing time and costs. From a public health and general welfare perspective, staff would rather encourage individuals to obtain required permits and streamline or exempt certain work from the Minor AR requirement. To advance this objective, staff proposes introducing a new category of exempt projects from AR review. The planning director, or designee, would have the authority to determine a project exempt if it is it would not have a significant or material effect to the building or environment (natural and built) and was consistent in scope with a list of representative projects that the director would maintain and update from time to time. An initial draft document is provided in Attachment B, and includes items such as in kind window and door replacement, mechanical screening, refuse enclosures and small business signs. A final list will be provided to the City Council and maintained by the director. Importantly, this process gives the director the authority to make any of the exempt projects subject to a Minor or Major review process. Projects that are determined exempt would not be subject to further administrative processing including formal determination letters or appeal opportunities. Proposed Text: 2 Architectural review may be required for these structures under certain circumstances in the Neighborhood Preservation Combining District or when three or more single family residences are proposed at one time. 3 Amendments to the 14 day appeal period and the requirements for publication of the Minor AR decisions are also proposed for modification in this ordinance and are addressed in the following sections. City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 18 18.76.020 Architectural Review (b) Applicability No permit required under Title 2, Title 12 or Title 16 shall be issued for a major or minor project, as set forth in this section, unless an application for architectural review is reviewed, acted upon, and approved or approved with conditions as set forth in Section 18.77.070. (1) Exempt Projects. The following projects do not require architectural review: Single-family and two-family residences do not require architectural review, except as provided under subsections (2)(C) and (2)(D). (A) Single-family and two-family residences, except as provided under subsections (2)(C) and (2)(D). (B) Projects determined by the Director to be substantially minor in nature and have inconsequential visual impacts to the adjacent properties and public streets. These exempt projects are referred to as “over the counter projects”. The director shall have the authority to promulgate a list of such exempt projects under this subsection. (3) Minor Projects. The following are "minor projects" for the purposes of the architectural review process set forth in Section 18.77.070, except when determined to be major pursuant to subsection (2)(I) or exempt pursuant to subsection (1)(B): 18.77.077 Over the Counter Project Review Process The director of planning and community environment shall be authorized to adopt guidelines, rules, and procedures to implement the over the counter project review process for projects exempt from architectural review under Section 18.76.020(b)(1)(B) of this Title. 22. Various Updates to Application Processing and Approvals Issues: Chapter 18.77, Processing of Permits and Approvals, has numerous sections affected by the following proposed modifications. The issues have been identified below, but the proposed text revisions are included in attached draft ordinance. Please refer to Attachment A for details. A. Reduce Request for Hearing Timeline to Seven Days & Limit Hearing Request to Adjacent Property Owners and Tenants (Minor Architectural Review) Minor AR projects, reviewed by staff, are subject to a 14-day period in which anyone may request a hearing before the ARB. Staff recommends reducing this waiting period to seven days. The staff-level reviews are rarely called up for public hearings. Based on the last six years, an average of 130+ minor AR applications were processed each year; and in the last City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 19 three years, only two requests for hearing were filed.4 The two-week waiting period unnecessarily slows down work for relatively routine and minor projects. Moreover, staff proposes limiting the opportunity to request a hearing before the ARB to the applicant, property owner and any adjacent owner, or tenant on the subject or adjacent property. The impact of Minor AR projects is typically negligible and if experienced at all, it is likely affecting adjacent property owners or tenants. This modification affects code Section 18.77.070(b)(3) and (b)(4). B. Remove Requirements for Publishing and E-mailing Director’s Decisions In several sections of Chapter 18.77 of Title 18, the code specifies that the notice of the director’s decision is to be given by mail to owners and residents of property within 600 feet of the property, by publication, and by e-mail, and by posting in a public place. This notification requirement applies to the majority of entitlements that we have and include conditional use permits, variances, and board-level architectural review. Staff recommends removing the requirement for publication (i.e. newspaper notice) and/or e-mail of director’s decisions from the relevant code sections. In practice, the director’s decision for any entitlement is not published in the newspaper, and there is no associated standard e-mail practice that staff completes. Removing these references codifies existing practice. If we were to fully implement these existing requirements for additional notices, the newspaper publication specifically would increase the cost for the applicant and delay the approval process by an additional week, at minimum. The current notification process of mailing the decision letter to the applicant, sending notice cards to the 600 foot radius when applicable, and posting decisions on the City’s website has served as an effective process to keep citizens informed. Notices to individuals who request them will continue to be sent. This modification would affect the following code sections: 18.77.060(c)(2) & (d)(2) & (e)(2); 18.77.070(b)(2) & (d)(2); 18.77.110(c)(2). Additional clean-up language is needed to strike references to publish as it relates to the above section. This modification would affect the following code sections: 18.77.060(c)(3) & (d)(3); 18.77.070(b)(3) & (d)(3). C. Miscellaneous In addition to the issues mentioned above, staff has taken the opportunity to clarify some additional outdated references in this same Chapter 18.77, as noted below: a. Replace outdated language regarding application completeness in section 18.77.060(b) with the current language from 18.77.030. b. Include in the description of Notice of Posting in a Public Place (18.77.080(f)) that it may include posting on the City’s website. This addition is taking into account the prevalent and commonplace use of the internet to access public information. 4 These two projects were related to applications to install solar panels on city parking garages on Cambridge Avenue. City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 20 23. Clarifications to the Wireless Communication Facilities Review Process Issue: Section 18.42.110, Wireless Communication Facilities, requires that the Director, or Council on appeal, make specified findings prior to issuing a wireless communications facility permit, including, in some cases, Architectural Review and Conditional Use Permit findings. In many cases, staff may wish to seek input from the ARB or PTC prior to issuing a Director’s decision. Unfortunately, the current code is, at best, silent on whether wireless permit applications may be referred to the ARB or PTC for recommendation; at worst, it suggests that the ARB and PTC would consider a wireless permit only pursuant to an appeal after the Director has issued a tentative decision. In addition, because the code addresses appeals by simply referencing the processes for architectural review and conditional use permits, it is unclear whether appeals may be heard directly by the Council or must first be heard by the ARB, PTC, or both. Because federal regulations set presumptively reasonable “shot clock” timelines for processing wireless permits (including appeals), it is essential that the City’s wireless code spell out clear and efficient procedures for decision and appeal. The proposed changes clarify that the Director may refer wireless permit applications to the ARB or PTC for recommendation, and that appeals are heard directly by the City Council. This clarification more closely reflects staff’s current practice of seeking ARB input prior to issuing a Director’s decision on certain applications, eliminates the potential for duplicative hearings, and provides a more efficient process consistent with the federal “shot clock” timelines applicable to wireless permit applications. Proposed Text: 18.42.110 Wireless Communication Facilities. (f) Tier 1 WCF Permit Process and Findings (1) A Tier 1 WCF Permit shall be reviewed by the Director. The Director's decision shall be final and shall not be appealable pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapters 18.77 or 18.78; (g) Tier 2 WCF Permit Process and Findings (1) A Tier 2 WCF Permit shall be reviewed by the Director, who may, in his or her sole discretion, refer an application to the Architectural Review Board. The Director's decision shall be appealable directly to the City Council. An appeal may be set for hearing before the City Council or may be placed on the Council’s consent calendar, pursuant to the process for appeal of architectural review set forth in Section 18.77.070(f). (h) Tier 3 WCF Permit Process and Findings (1) A Tier 3 WCF Permit shall be reviewed by the Director, who may, in his or her sole discretion, refer an application to the Architectural Review Board and/or Planning and Transportation Commission. The Director's decision shall be appealable directly City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 21 to the City Council. An appeal may be set for hearing before the City Council or may be placed on the Council’s consent calendar, pursuant to the process for appeal of architectural review set forth in Section 18.77.070(f) and the process for conditional use permits set forth in Section 18.77.060. (k) Removal of Abandoned Equipment A WCF (Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3) or a component of that WCF that ceases to be in use for more than ninety (90) days shall be removed by the applicant, wireless communications service provider, or property owner within ninety (90) days of the cessation of use of that WCF. A new conditional use WCF permit shall not be issued to an owner or operator of a WCF or a wireless communications service provider until the abandoned WCF or its component is removed. (l) Revocation The Director may revoke any WCF Permit if the permit holder fails to comply with any condition of the permit. The Director's decision to revoke a Permit shall be appealable pursuant to the process applicable to issuance of the Permit, as provided in subdivisions (f), (g), and (h) of this section. for architectural review set forth in Section 18.77.070 and the process for conditional use permits set forth in Section 18.77.060. 24. Modify Accessory Dwelling Unit Requirements Per State Regulations Earlier this year, the City adopted comprehensive regulations related to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) to conform to state law that became effective on January 1, 2017. Subsequently, the state Legislature passed two additional bills AB 494 and SB 229, signed by the Governor in September 2017, clarifying the previously adopted ADU legislation. The City’s existing ordinance only requires minor modifications to remain consistent with state law. The proposed amendments include those conforming changes as well as other clarifications. Cities still retain the ability to designate those areas where new ADUs are permitted. The City’s existing regulations allow ADUs to be constructed in districts where single-family residential is an allowed use on parcels with an existing single-family dwelling. State law has been revised to clarify that an ADU may be constructed on sites with either an existing or proposed single- family dwelling. This revision is consistent with the City’s implementation of the ADU ordinance, and the proposed ordinance would make conforming changes to reference proposed single-family homes. The proposed ordinance would also add to the list of zoning districts where ADUs are allowed (R-1, R-2, RE, RMD and OS districts) those sites that are zoned Planned Community where single-family dwelling is an allowed use. The PC zoned sites would require a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet like the conventional zoning districts (other than the OS district) where ADUs are allowed. With respect to ADUs established through conversions of space within an existing single-family home (i.e., garage) or an existing accessory structure, the new state legislation requires that City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 22 such conversions be allowed in any zoning district where single-family residential is an allowed use (i.e., multi-family zoning districts permitting single-family dwellings). The state law previously required only that such conversions be allowed in single-family residence districts, and the existing ordinance accordingly applied these provisions to the R-1 district, all R-1 subdistricts, and the RE district only. The proposed amendment would also apply the conversion provisions to the R-2, RMD, RM, and OS and PC districts where single-family residential is an allowed use. The proposed ordinance revisions are in Section 12 of Attachment A. 25. Update Residential Density Bonus Per State Requirements On January 1, 2017, several amendments to the State Density Bonus Law took effect. The proposed amendments to the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance are intended to conform to the current state law. AB 2501 made a number of changes to facilitate applicants’ use of Density Bonus Law and clarify provisions of the law. Among them:  Local governments may not require applicants to prepare an additional report or study to qualify for a density bonus, but may require provision of reasonable documentation to establish eligibility for the requested density bonus.  Local governments may no longer reject incentives and concessions on the grounds they are not “required in order to provide for affordable housing costs”. The requested incentive or concession may only be denied if it “does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions.” The agency as the burden of proof for denying an incentive or concession.  An applicant that qualifies for a density bonus can choose to accept a lower density bonus or none at all, while remaining eligible for incentives and concessions.  Certain mixed use projects may qualify for a density bonus. Amendments are proposed to PAMC Sections 18.15.020(h), 18.15.080 and 18.15.090, as shown in Attachment A, to implement these changes. AB 2442 added that a 20% density bonus shall be granted to any project that reserves at least 10% of its housing units for disabled veterans, foster youth, or homeless persons. These units must be offered to the selected group at the same affordability levels of very-low income units. The proposed ordinance would amend PAMC Section 18.15.030(a) to add this type of housing to the list of projects eligible for a density bonus, and require an affordability restriction of 55 years to be recorded for these very-low income units. The Density Bonus Law requires that developers interested in demolishing an existing housing development (or constructing on a site where housing was demolished in the prior 5 years) ensure the new housing project that enjoys a density bonus includes at least as many City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 23 affordable units as were demolished. This ensures there is no loss to the affordable housing stock overall. State law requires that any new affordable units constructed are the “equivalent size” of the units being replaced, which, the law states, means that the replacement units contain at least the same total number of bedrooms as the units being replaced. This requirement is narrower than the current requirements of PAMC Section 18.15.020(s)(i)-(ii), which allow for new units of equivalent size or type or both. The proposed ordinance would amend that section to mirror state law’s narrower definition of replacement. 26. Remove Bicycle License Requirement Issue: The current code Section 10.64.010, bicycle license required, requires all residents to obtain a license to operate a bike of certain size within the City. The license requirement has not been enforced in the City and is considered a barrier to encouraging the use of bikes as an alternative mode of transportation. In support of City goals to encourage and support bike use, staff recommends the removal of the bike license requirement. In lieu of a City license, staff will encourage cyclist to register bikes online through a state or regional program to prevent theft. Proposed Text: Delete section 10.64.010, which requires bicycle licenses and strike all references thereto in the chapter. See draft ordinance for details, Attachment A. 27. Individual Review and Demolition of Historic Inventory Properties Issue: Individual Review (IR) is an application process to review two story homes in the R1 district in compliance with the IR Guidelines. The City receives about 100 IR applications a year. Due to the discretionary nature of these applications, some properties require a historic evaluation if the existing structure is listed on the City’s historic inventory. If a property is on the inventory and confirmed to be a historic resource, project modifications or an expanded environmental analysis may be required. In some instances, an owner may seek to replace an existing residence with a single story home. This type of project is not subject to discretionary or environmental review. Staff has observed in rare instances, after the existing structure has been demolished, that an owner, or perhaps new owner, seeks a project modification that includes a second story and is now subject to discretionary review. However, with the existing structure removed, any opportunity to review a potentially historic resource is lost, which may affect neighborhood character and potentially the community’s historic fabric. While rare, the above scenario illustrates a concern staff has with the code. And, while it may not be construed by some as a loophole, the current code does not create any disincentive to discourage this activity that effectively circumvents the historic evaluation process and could have a significant effect on the local and community-wide environment. Accordingly, staff recommends that a stay in application processing be established that would prevent the issuance of a second story addition on those properties that previously received approval to demolish an existing structure. This provision would only apply to properties that had City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 24 structures listed on the city’s inventory or listed as National Register Eligible, which are defined terms in state and local laws. Another exemption allows for the removal of dangerous or unsafe buildings. The draft ordinance includes a five year stay on future IR applications, but the Commission may want to discuss whether that is the appropriate timeframe. Proposed Text: 18.12.110 Single Family Individual Review (i) If a structure listed on the City’s Historic Inventory or by the State of California as National Register Eligible was demolished on a site in conjunction with the issuance of an approval for a building permit, no application for Individual Review for the same property shall be filed within five (5) years from and after the date of issuance of the demolition permit, unless the structure was demolished pursuant to a determination by the Building Official under Section 16.40.040 of Title 16 of this Code that the structure was a dangerous building that cannot be repaired or rehabilitated. Environmental Review The proposed code amendments have been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. Specifically, the proposed amendments have been determined to be exempt from further environmental review per CEQA Guideline section 15061(b)(3) (Review for Exemption) because the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significantly effect on the environment. Additionally, all future development that may be impacted by any of the proposed code changes will be subject to a project specific CEQA analysis as part of the required planning entitlement review (e.g. Architectural Review, Site and Design, Subdivision, etc.) to determine if there are any environmental impacts. Public Notification, Outreach & Comments The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires notice of this public hearing be published in a local paper at least ten day in advance. Notice of a public hearing for this project was published in the Palo Alto Weekly on November 17, 2017. Included as Attachment C of the report is a comment letter received regarding ADU ownership requirements. Staff will be prepared to discuss as needed at the meeting. Next Steps Upon recommendation from the PTC, staff will forward the staff recommended ordinance with agreed upon changes to City Council for review. In instances where a majority of the PTC has a different recommendation from staff, that viewpoint will be represented in the staff report City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 25 along with implementing language for the Council’s consideration. Only one ordinance, however, will be presented to the Council, which is anticipated to occur in early 2018. Alternative Actions In addition to the recommended action, the Planning and Transportation Commission may: 1. Recommend adoption of the draft ordinance to the City Council with modifications. 2. Continue the discussion to a future PTC hearing with the expectation that a recommendation to the City Council would be forwarded that time. Report Author & Contact Information PTC5 Liaison & Contact Information Clare Campbell, AICP, Senior Planner Jonathan Lait, AICP, Assistant Director (650) 617-3191 (650) 329-2679 clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org jonathan.lait@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments:  Attachment A: Draft Ordinance (PDF)  Attachment B: Draft Over the Counter Architectural Review Guidelines (DOCX)  Attachment C: Lundy Comment Letter Regarding ADUs (PDF) 5 Emails may be sent directly to the PTC using the following address: planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.org _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Planning & Transportation Commission 1 Action Agenda: November 29, 2017 2 Council Chambers 3 250 Hamilton Avenue 4 6:00 PM 5 6 Call to Order / Roll Call 7 6:02PM 8 Oral Communications 9 The public may speak to any item not on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,2 10 Agenda Changes, Additions, and Deletions 11 The Chair or Commission majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management. 12 City Official Reports 13 1. Assistant Directors Report, Meeting Schedule and Assignments 14 Action Items 15 Public Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Fifteen (15) minutes, plus three (3) minutes rebuttal. 16 All others: Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 17 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Recommendation to the City Council Regarding the Adoption of an 18 Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 2.20 (Planning and 19 Transportation Commission) of Title 2, Chapter 9.10 (Noise) of Title 9, Chapter 10.64 20 (Bicycles, Roller Skates and Coasters) of Title 10, and Chapters 18.04 (Definitions), 21 18.10 (Low-Density Residential (RE, R-2 and RMD)), 18.12 (R-1 Single-Family 22 Residential District), 18.15 (Residential Density Bonus), 18.16 (Neighborhood, 23 Community, and Service Commercial (CN, CC and CS) Districts), 18.28 (Special 24 Purpose (PF, OS and AC) Districts), 18.30(G) (Combining Districts), 18.40 (General 25 Standards and Exceptions), 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses), 18.52 (Parking and 26 Loading Requirements), 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards), 18.76 (Permits and 27 Approvals), 18.77 (Processing of Permits and Approvals), and 18.80 (Amendments to 28 Zoning Map And Zoning Regulations) of Title 18, and Chapters 21.12 (Tentative Maps 29 and Preliminary Parcel Maps) and 21.32 (Conditional Exceptions) of Title 21. The 30 Proposed Ordinance is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 31 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. in Accordance With CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). For More Information, 1 Please Contact Clare Campbell at clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org. 2 Chair Lauing: Ok, so the first study session is on the action item is itemized in number two so 3 we’ll not take any speaker cards for item two and (unintelligible) (interrupte) 4 Mr. Lait: Do you want to hear a Staff report first or – your call. Typically, we do it a Staff 5 presentation and then hear from the public. 6 Chair Lauing: I presume they read it but let’s go ahead and do that. 7 Ms. Clare Campbell, Senior Planner: Great, thank you. Good evening Commissioners, Clare 8 Campbell, Senior Planner. So, tonight Staff if bring forward a collection of planning related code 9 changes for adoption in 2018. The group of miscellaneous code amendments were adopted 10 earlier by Council in February. 11 The proposed amendments are intended to be minor in nature and not controversial. The 12 amendments are to address simple text errors, modify the code to reflect current practice, 13 introduce some new policy initiative and update the code to be consistent with the State law. 14 This is specific to the accessory dwelling units and the housing density bonus. As noted it the 15 Staff report, the amendments are grouped into twenty-seven categories and are broadly 16 divided into minor text amendments and procedural amendments. This slide shows that the 17 majority of changes are affecting Title 18 and you’ll also see noted that there are a handful of 18 other code sections that are also being affected by the proposed amendments today. 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. So, here is a list of all of the text clarification amendments. Basically, we’ve got some that are 1 just typo corrections and then we have some clarifying language that’s being added to the 2 code. The next list here represents all of the procedural related amendments. So, here we’ve 3 got quite a few on the list for all of the things that we’re looking at tonight and Staff has 4 selected six amendments to review in more detail in the presentation. And those are the ones 5 that have been high lighted on the slide for you so there are six of them. These amendments 6 are thought to be generally of more interest for discussion tonight. 7 So, the first one is item number 18 in the Staff report and this is related to adding the floor area 8 exemption for refuse areas for the CD District. So, in the commercial and multi-family zones, 9 the current code already allows for minor floor area exemptions for purposes of code 10 compliance. One is determined that these minor additions would increase compliance with 11 environmental health, safety, or other standards; with the exception for sites that are located 12 in the CD District and special study areas. So, the proposed amendment would remove this 13 exemption for the CD District and special study areas and then specifically mention that refuse 14 areas are considered for the floor area exemption, even though it’s already implied with the 15 existing language. 16 So, the next one is to establish an over the counter review process. So, I’d like to just clarify first 17 that the Staff report incorrectly refers to this amendment as an over the counter architectural 18 review process so this was missed in the final edits of the report. The proposed amendment 19 was intended to establish an over the counter review process separate from the architectural 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. review. As a reminder, for all commercial and multi-family projects, all exterior changes to the 1 site which can be new constructions or existing façade improvements or site improvements, 2 these all require architectural review. And depending on the scope of the work, it would be 3 considered either Major or Minor and there would be a respective review process applied to 4 that project. So, for very minor projects such as a door or window change or adding equipment 5 screening, trash enclosures and that type of thing, we regularly review and approve them at the 6 Development Center in association with related Building Permits. And we… and this is without 7 requiring a Formal Architectural Review Application to be completed first. So, our current code 8 doesn’t actually have a specific provision to allow Staff to approve projects in this manner and 9 the proposed amendment would codify this existing practice. At the Director’s discretion, the 10 over the counter process would allow approval of projects deemed insignificant and that have 11 no effect to the building or the adjacent environment. And again, it’s typically associated with a 12 Building Permit but there could be instances where maybe it’s not and a good example of that 13 is it may be a minor landscape change like switching out a plant type or something like that on a 14 site. Project subject to the over the counter review would not be subject to further 15 administrative processing so that would include appeals and having to do approval letters and 16 decision… a formal decision-making process. Everything would be encompassed within the 17 Building Permit review and that process. So, Attachment B provides a draft of the Over the 18 Counter Review Guidelines and this is still being developed. And this guideline will help guide 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Staff and applicants with the process and the possible eligible projects that would be 1 considered for this type of review. 2 Ok, so the next one is Item Number 22(A) in the Staff report and it’s an amendment to reduce 3 the request for hearing time for Staff Level architectural reviews and limit those that make 4 those requests. So, as noted in the Staff report, we process over 130 Staff level Architectural 5 Review Applications a year and we rarely get a request for hearings for these minor projects. 6 So, I think this understanding helps bolster support for these proposed amendments. So, the 7 amendment would apply to Minor Staff level architectural review projects only and it doesn’t 8 apply to anything that’s a Board level review. It would reduce the request for hearing time from 9 a 14-calendar day period to a 7-day period and this is intended to reduce the overall application 10 processing time and it still maintains a process for an appeal if that was something that a 11 member of the public wanted to do. The amendment would also reduce the range of hearing 12 requesters from anyone to project applicants and adjacent property owners or tenants. And 13 this is usually what we think of the people who are most affected by these minor projects. 14 Ok, so the next amendment is related to the ADUs and it’s to bring our local regulations in 15 compliance with the state regulations. So, the state regulations will take effect on January 1st, 16 2018, and basically, it includes these very minor but key changes. So, ADUs are permitted not 17 only on sites with existing single-family homes but now must be allowed with proposed homes. 18 So, basically what that means is if someone submits for an Architectural – I’m sorry, an 19 Individual Review Application or even and Single-Story Home Building Permit it can now include 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. the accessory dwelling unit with that permit application. And we’ve actually been doing this 1 already with the permits that have been submitted. The second item is that all ADUs must be 2 allowed in zones that permit single-family use and it’s listed here. So, that’s the R-1, R-2, RE, 3 RMD, OS and designated PC zones that have single-family as a use and not just those districts 4 zoned for single-family use. So, there are other updates to the ADU Ordinance that are being 5 prepared and that will be brought back to the Planning Commission in December in a study 6 session. So, this is also a good time to mention that Staff has received a letter from the public 7 which was attached to the Staff report. The issues raised in the letter regarding occupancy will 8 be one of the items that will be discussed or addressed in the study session coming up next 9 month. And as you are already aware, Mr. Lundy is present in the audience and his sister to 10 speak to his concerns. 11 Alright, so the next state driven update is for the Housing Density Bonus Regulations. The 12 updates state regulation took effect earlier in January of this year and the key updates include 13 local governments may not require applicants to prepare an additional report or study to 14 qualify for a density bonus, local governments may no longer reject incentives and concessions 15 on the grounds that they are not required in order to provide for affordable housing costs, 16 there’s a twenty percent density bonus that shall be granted to any project that reserves at 17 least ten percent of the housing units for disabled Veterans, foster youth or homeless persons. 18 And lastly, the density bonus law requires developers of new housing projects to replace all 19 demolished affordable units so there’s no net loss. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Alright, so this is the very last one here so… And its item number 27 and it has to do with the 1 Individual Review Process and the demolish of historic properties. So, the purpose of this 2 amendment is to discourage the misuse of the permitting process to potentially avoid 3 additional environmental analysis and historic review when building a new home. If a structure 4 is listed on the City’s Historic Inventory or is National Register Eligible and is demolished, an 5 association with an approved Building Permit for a new single-story home and no home is 6 constructed, no application for an Individual Review shall be filed within 5-years of the date of 7 the demolish permit issuance. That was a mouth full, alright. 8 So, now there are three ordinance corrections that I just want to review quickly with you. They 9 are very minor and I’d just like to point those out. So, the first one is Section Number One of the 10 ordinance and it’s related to the PTC Officer election and the highlighted text here should be… 11 Should remain in the section it was just erroneously deleted so that’s very simple there. 12 The next one is related to Section Two of the ordinance related to leaf blowers and basically, 13 we want to strike the language referring to the Palo Alto Unified School District. The school 14 district is exempted from complying with the City’s Noise Regulation. 15 The last one is related to ADUs and again, there are two words of highlighted text that just need 16 to be deleted. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Alright so for our next steps, upon recommendation from the Planning Commission, the draft 1 ordinance will be revised and forward to City Council for review and that’s tentatively 2 scheduled for February 2018. 3 And then I’d just like to do a summary of a revised motion. So, Staff recommends that the 4 Planning Commission find the proposed draft ordinance exempted from the provisions of CEQA 5 in ordinance [Note - accordance?] with the CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) and that PTC 6 recommend to the City Council adoption of an ordinance with the three text corrections just 7 sited in Section One, Two and Twelve to amend various sections of the Palo Alto Municipal 8 Code and that concludes Staff’s presentation, thank you. 9 Chair Lauing: Ok, thank you. We do have two speaker cards but I understand that Commissioner 10 Rosenblum has to leave in about 15-minutes so is that, about right? So, if we could just maybe 11 slightly change the procedure, you’re speaking to one narrow issue and we can get his 12 comments a number of things before he has to leave. So, unless there are any objections to 13 that, let’s go with that and we’ll be to you in about 10-minutes speakers. Commissioner 14 Rosenblum. 15 Commissioner Rosenblum: Great, thank you so much. I have – my daughter is in the Jordan 16 Choir and she got a solo for the first time so she really wants me there. So, just a couple things, 17 first I appreciate this exercise. I’ve now gone through it several times and I think each time I 18 think it’s getting closer to the intent so my comments are really about the intent of this 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. exercise, which is there’s a number of things that are really small. So, Staff, there is a couple 1 instance where there’s clearly a word missing and they’ve reinserted that word and that makes 2 sense but then there are other things that are quick significant. So, one of my main things that I 3 think the discipline that needs to be on this Commission is that things that big should not just 4 be approve in this kind of meeting. They should have a full hearing, we should discuss is this the 5 right thing, is this the wrong thing so a lot of things I go through and I try to take the test of is 6 this is a meaningful change or is this just something that oh, we should have been recorded. So, 7 under that I say, my personal belief is that Item Number Six which is clarification of the 8 contextual garage placement [unintelligible] it applies to carports is actually significant. Even 9 though the Staff explanation is that this was always the intent, I’m not sure and I think it could 10 affect a lot of people so it’s something that I don’t think is one of these on the bus type changes 11 of just cleaning up language. 12 Number 11 which is floor are exemptions for historic homes. This is just one I don’t understand 13 as well as I should so I would just ask I hope my fellow Commissioner’s dig in a little bit to 14 understand this a little bit better. 15 Number 12, office restrictions in CS, CN, CC, I looked at the Palo Alto zoning map and looked at 16 all of the CS areas affected and again same thing. I am not sure… it’s not apparent to me that 17 this is one of those things that was just an obvious mistake and so would like the 18 Commissioners to dig in a little bit with Staff to understand was this something that when 19 drafting the ordinance around office use was simply overlooked. But it doesn’t appear that way 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. to me from the way it’s written and it doesn’t appear that way to me necessarily from where 1 the CS zones are on the map. 2 The procedural items, the ones that I think are of interest to discuss further, are obviously we’ll 3 discuss the election time for PTC Officers. I think that would be a lively discussion but on that 4 one, my only comment is since Commissioner Lauing has served on other Commissions and it’s 5 referenced in the Staff report that part of the reason for this is to align with the way other 6 Commissions do their business. It would be great to hear from you how that works in other 7 places because I just don’t know what that means that we shall elect Officers at our discretion. 8 I’m not sure what that means exactly, like what time, who calls it, is it like the British system 9 where you call for a vote of confidence at any time? 10 The – Number 17 which is the gas-powered leaf blowers in commercial districts, this is also one 11 that I just don’t necessarily understand the leaf blower industry. I’m not sure if there are certain 12 commercial properties that are just not… That you have to have a gas-powered leaf blower for. 13 So, I don’t understand if this is a big change for some folks or not a big change. I personally 14 don’t like gas-powered leaf blowers in Palo Alto but it’s possible that I just don’t understand 15 that electrically flowers may have constraints. For example, that this may have unintended 16 consequences to extend this into commercial areas. 17 The… to be consistent, Items Number 24 and 25 I’m in favor of but to be consistent I’m not sure 18 these are small deals. I think this puts us in alignment with state law, this is around ADUs and 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. density bonuses and so if the… If Staff’s argument is this simple aligns us with what the state 1 has already required then I am satisfied with that and I’m in favor of these anyway. But to be 2 fair, I’m not sure that these are small deals and I’m not sure that Palo Alto always tries to be 3 perfectly in compliance with state law. And I guess our Attorney can comment on that at the 4 time that we discuss these items but those are my impressions. These are the items I pulled out 5 as not necessarily being as simple as oh, a word was omitted and we’re just adding that back. 6 These things seem to have more substance, at least on my reading. And that’s it for me and 7 I’ll… if that’s ok, I’ll listen to the speakers and the (interrupted) 8 Chair Lauing: Yeah, no I was just going to ask you just for clarification. So, are you suggesting, 9 for example on some of these bigger deals, that we carve those out, re-agendize them for a 10 different time and give them further debate? 11 Commissioner Rosenblum: For some of them so for example, Items Twenty-Four and Twenty-12 Five (interrupted) 13 Chair Lauing: Right. 14 Commissioner Rosenblum: If it’s determined that those are a bigger deal then it should be part 15 of an ADU review for example and then this should be considered. Like I said, I would support 16 these things and say it’s in accordance with state law but this is something where if you 17 determine that these are bigger deals, then it should come back and have a more meaty 18 discussion on that issue with people preparing against that issue. And so, these are the items 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. that seem to be slightly larger. I doubt we’ll have a whole meeting on gas-powered leaf 1 blowers, I ask from the Commissioners was just to ask about this. If this is something that is an 2 onerous requirement in any way or if this is something that is actually just an omission where it 3 should have always exempted commercial properties and just no one ever did it. 4 Chair Lauing: My question was your intent on the process and it sounded like, which was why I 5 was asking a question just so that your colleagues can hear, that you want some of these things 6 carved out for more discussion at a later time. 7 Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, if you guys agree with that… With those points of views then 8 of course. 9 Chair Lauing: Or others. 10 Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah. 11 Chair Lauing: Alright, thanks for your patience. Now we’d like to call the two speakers, Jackie 12 and Tom Lundy, in that order. 13 Ms. Jackie Lundy: Good evening, congratulations on your daughter’s solo, that’s a big deal. So, 14 my brother Tom and I are here to talk about a small unit that we’re trying to add onto an 15 existing house we own on Loma Verde. And this house and the house next door were houses 16 built by our parents and when our parents went to buy the property to build these houses on, 17 Loma Verde was still a gravel road, there was nothing but fields and oat hay. And when our 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. grandfather came out to look at it, he called it lonely acres because it was so far away so that’s 1 where we started with as far as way back when. And then we have the two houses and now 2 we’re moving up to post World War Two and these houses are completely corralled… 3 Surrounded by all the building boom that had happened in mid-town; lots of track houses and 4 modest bungalows as I’m sure you all are very aware of. And then we’ve gone to today, another 5 transition is going on in our neighborhood where these small bungalows are disappearing, very 6 large homes are being put in on many small lots, [Note - and] any big lot has an even bigger 7 house on it. The house that we’re talking about on Loma Verde at this point is between 8 Middlefield and Cowper; it’s a flag lot. That house and the house that we… that was the house 9 that we grew up in front of it, each are on quarter acre lots. The house in the back my parents 10 built as a rental, it’s been a rental ever since they’ve built it in the 1950’s. So, now when we 11 come up to today and we’re looking at Palo Alto, it’s the town we love, it’s the town that we 12 grew up in, [Note - and] we also think or at least I think back about what did it mean to live 13 here? When I lived here all my friend’s parents basically they were the teachers, they were the 14 truck drivers, they fixed the phone, they did all that sort of thing. Housing for those kinds of 15 people now, as you all I’m sure are very aware of, is rapidly disappearing, almost to zero. In 16 addition to that, just down the street from us on South Court and Loma Verda a friend of mine 17 lives there and the house across the street from her was torn down, a very large house was put 18 in, it sold for over three million dollars and this was several years ago and nobodies ever moved 19 in. The house has remained vacant so you have small houses disappearing, big houses going in 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. that nobody can afford to rent and even more of shame is big houses were nobody even lives in 1 it, they don’t even rent it. So, what my brother and I are trying to propose is a very small help in 2 the way of trying to make Palo Alto still affordable to people who have a modest income. 3 Maybe they are a teacher, maybe work somewhere in town but at least they can live in town 4 because when I taught at Ohlone School I was one of three teachers that actually lived in town. 5 Everybody else had to live elsewhere and I got to ride my bike to school, they all had to drive 6 miles. So, it’s not… even in the greater sense of what’s sustainable to have that many people 7 living that far away. So, the little house that we’re talking about putting in is a very modest size 8 house, it would go in a spot on the quarter acre where there’s a perfect spot of it. And my 9 brother will fill you in on more of the details. 10 Chair Lauing: Ok, thank you. Tom Lundy? 11 Mr. Tom Lundy: Thanks. I just had two or three points just to give a little more practical idea of 12 what’s going on here. Break a leg for your daughter. The reason we’re here is… Been talking in 13 terms of amendments to the ordinance and the reason we’re here is that I feel that the 14 ordinance overlooked having a retroactivity provision. And as a result, we got… We were on 15 parallel tracks with the new ADU Ordinance. We started planning our ADU, back then they were 16 called Secondary Dwelling Units, in early 2016. I believe the state statute passed somewhere 17 like January 2016. The City was on a track at that point to revise the ADU Ordinance and we 18 were on the track to build our ADU Ordinance under the old statue. Completely oblivious to the 19 fact that this new statue was in the works. We sold property in Santa Rosa in January 2016 to 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. raise funds to build the unit. We signed a contract in September with our contractor, we began 1 designing and engineering and doing architectural work in December 2016 through March of 2 2017. We interacted with the City during that time, we had no notice from the City that there 3 was a new ordinance in the works. Now both Jackie and I live out of town so it’s in a way I guess 4 it was our fault also that we didn’t know about this but the fact of the matter is we didn’t. We 5 submitted our application for a Building Permit on the very day that the new enactment was 6 passed that night. We were actually on file before the statue by a matter of hours but we were 7 on file before the statute but that was a complete coincidence because we still didn’t know that 8 the new statue was in effect. We finally found out in June when we went to get our final 9 Building Permit and there was a requirement of the deed restriction. And the deed restriction is 10 the problem for us, I exampled that in the letter. We don’t want to have a 2,500-square foot 11 rental, we want to have a 1,700-square foot rental and a 900-square foot rental and that’s what 12 Palo Alto needs. Thank you. 13 Chair Lauing: Ok, thank you. A question Commissioner Alcheck? Oh, he’d like to address you. 14 Mr. Lundy: Pardon? 15 Chair Lauing: If you’d you stay up there, Chair [Note - Commissioner] Alcheck would like to 16 address you, excuse me. 17 Commissioner Alcheck: I have read your letter, I’m curious if you could articulate essentially 18 what change you think could we make to essentially accommodate the goal you have? 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lundy: Well, we actually, coincidentally, we had an email communication back and forth 1 with Karen Holmen and she suggested that the Council typically has retroactivity language in 2 new ordinances that provides that if an application is on file prior to the passage of the new 3 ordinance, that application would be processed under the old ordinance. So, I would suggest 4 something along those lines given the fact that we were on file before the old ordinance… 5 Before the new ordinance was passed. It was the same day but we were before so if the 6 language of the amendment were phrased in terms of on file before the passage of the 7 ordinance, that would do the trick. 8 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok, I appreciate that help, thank you. 9 Mr. Lait: And Chair, if you don’t mind? Just because I’ve had some correspondence with Mr. 10 Lundy. 11 Chair Lauing: Sure. 12 Mr. Lait: I think alternatively because that could present some challenging issues from an 13 administrative standpoint to retroactively at this point go back and do that. I think the other 14 issue, and Mr. Lundy can correct me if I am wrong, has to do with the deed restriction 15 requirement that the owner occupies one, either the primary residence or the ADU at the time. 16 And so, I think that’s the specific issue that… To respond to your question, it has to do with the 17 deed restriction requirement for ADUs requiring the owner to be on… in one of the units. 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lundy: Or… Yes, or alternatively that you have to rent both units out to one tenant that 1 (interrupted) 2 Commissioner Alcheck: I actually have a quick question. 3 Chair Lauing: Go ahead. 4 Commissioner Alcheck: So, to Staff so properties that have an ADU, which have rented an ADU, 5 if the owner rents the main facility that would essentially violate our ADU Ordinance? 6 Mr. Lait: The owner just has to occupy one of the two units. It could be the ADU or it could be 7 the primary residence. 8 Commissioner Alcheck: Is that… I’m just curious because I’m not saying that’s unfamiliar to me 9 but what’s the… do you know the intent of that sort of position? Is it that we don’t want 10 essentially two renters? I mean is there… I’m trying to understand why we would require that. 11 Mr. Lait: Yeah, you know (interrupted) 12 Commissioner Alcheck: I’ll give you a quick example, I’m sorry. If the owner dies and the child 13 inherits it, the child has to take possession and live there. If they, for example, live out of state, 14 they couldn’t rent it out, they would have to sell the property. These sorts of requirements are 15 odd. 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: Right but I… so I don’t think that the ordinance would require that scenario but there 1 are some provisions in which the whole… Both units could be rented to a single entity so that’s 2 an option. 3 Mr. Lundy: Yeah and I’ll… sorry. 4 Chair Lauing: Yes, go ahead. 5 Commissioner Summa: So, before… so it’s one parcel in an R-1 zone and they want to put a 6 second unit on it which they were going to rent. They don’t live in either… They currently don’t 7 live in Palo Alto, what… so how were they going to do that before the state law? 8 Mr. Lundy: There was no deed restriction required before the state law. See that’s the problem 9 when we were… We were working under the old ordinance. We qualified in terms of setbacks 10 and everything under the old ordinance and the old ordinance did not have the deed 11 restriction. That’s where we got caught up and I just would reemphasize that the fact that you 12 can rent to a single party… You can rent both units to a single party really defeats the purpose 13 from our standpoint providing rental units. 14 Chair Lauing: Did you have any additional comments? 15 Mr. Lait: Just that we have a deed restriction requirement for… this is a one-line item on the 16 deed restriction requirement. The deed restriction that we require be associated with the 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. property that’s seeking an ADU also has to… It’s just standard language about the size of the 1 unit, the plumbing fixtures and so on. 2 Chair Lauing: Ok, thank you so let’s go… I’m sorry, go ahead. 3 Commissioner Waldfogel: I’m sorry, a point of clarification. Is deed restriction either required 4 by state law or is it consistent with state law? 5 Mr. Lait: So, it’s required for the JADU. 6 Commissioner Waldfogel: It’s required by state law for JADU. 7 Mr. Lait: But it’s not required for the ADU. 8 Commissioner Waldfogel: In the new state law… I mean I’ve seen some briefings and summary 9 on new state law which is it possible for us to be more restrictive than state law on 10 requirements? I think this is a legal (interrupted) 11 Mr. Albert Yang, Senior Deputy Attorney: So, the deed restriction for non-JADUs or just ADUs, 12 it’s not required by state law but it is permitted… Expressly permitted by state law so it’s 13 consistent with state law that way. 14 Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok, it’s consistent. Thank you, that’s what I wanted to know. 15 Mr. Lundy: Could I just interject just one quick point? 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: It’s got to be really quick because you’ve had three speaking engagements. 1 Mr. Lundy: Ok, I live in Santa Rosa and pre-fire we had a deed restriction on the ADU Ordinance 2 for 12-years. They are now eliminating the deed restriction because it was an impediment to 3 the building of ADUs; it defeated the purpose. For whatever that’s worth, that’s not… that’s 4 beyond our issue but anyway, thank you. 5 Chair Lauing: Ok, thanks so let’s get back to considering this. I do want to talk about a process 6 question which happened to come up with our first Commissioner comments is… which is how 7 should we go through this? I mean we can go through this sort of point by point and some of 8 these can be grouped I think and some can’t. But some clearly are, quote bigger than others, 9 and we need to decide as a Commission if we do want to pull those out and how that helps or 10 hinders your process. So, could you give us feedback on that first? 11 Mr. Lait: Yeah, I think that’s… I think that’s a good idea. Maybe… I think it might be good to first 12 go down the list that we have on packet Page 8 and continues on 9. And maybe we could just 13 go down the line and see what items Commissioner’s want pulled. You know, it may be… 14 Chair Lauing: Well… but the other way to do it is just to go through them and if they are quick, 15 we knock them off and if they don’t then we say well, this one seems a little bit bigger, let’s put 16 this one out… over. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: I just want to… so that’s fine and I just wanted to mention because this has come up a 1 couple times as we’ve been doing these ordinances. And Commissioner Rosenblum has left I 2 recognize at this point but it’s… This is an effort that Staff initiated a few years ago to clear up 3 the code but it wasn’t always… Our first run on this was to have minor amendments and to 4 have things that are not controversial because we agree that if it’s a big controversial item, we 5 should have a hosted public meeting specifically on that issue. But I want to push back a little 6 bit on the idea that they all have to be minor in nature and there can’t be a change in policy or 7 direction because that’s not how the report is presented. And what we’re trying to do here is 8 address some operational challenges and procedures that we’ve run into at the Planning 9 Counter or processing applications. So, we don’t think any of these things are hugely… Are huge 10 policy shift but they may be a little bit more than minor, we recognize that. And as for as the 11 final product goes, we’re presenting… This is a Staff ordinance that we’re presenting to the 12 Commission to seek the Commissions feedback and input. We may make some modifications 13 just based on the feedback that we receive. It is possible as it has been for the previous years 14 that the Planning Commission and Staff may have a different perspective on which ones should 15 advance to the Council. And the way that we’ve done that in the past is that Staff has moved 16 the ordinance forward but in our Staff report we have a very detailed discussion about where 17 were the points that the Planning Commission supported and the areas that they didn’t 18 support, then the reason that support was not there. And we presented the totality of the 19 ordinance to the Council so that they can have the flexibility to concur with the Commission 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. and pull things off or also alternatively, put things on if they think they need to move forward. 1 So, we're helping to facilitate a conversation in the best way that we can. 2 Chair Lauing: Right, you covered that on point… On Pages 30 and 31 in the packet which is 3 perfectly acceptable as you eventually go and have descending opinions or we have descending 4 opinions, perfectly fair. 5 It’s also kind of hard to estimate the amount of time this is going to take. It might take less time 6 as we start to pull things out and say we’re going to come back to them. I think we should… My 7 suggestion is we work through this for about an hour and see where we are. And then kind of 8 recalibrate relative to the other items that are on the agenda and see if we think it’s going to a 9 second meeting or we should just push on. 10 [Note - Female:] [unintelligible] 11 Chair Lauing: But we’re going to go through them in order, that’s right. And I think the simplest 12 way to do it is just to… Because someone might… Literally be simple is just to kind of go down 13 the row. I’ll go last as I often do when I sit in this chair and just see what the comments are. So, 14 this starts on Page 9, maybe we could take the first two together because they are about 15 transportation; Threshold on Transportation Demand Management. Do we want to start with 16 Commissioner Summa on that one and if anybody has no comments just say pass so we can rip 17 through these shorter ones? 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Summa: Pass. 1 Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, no, I just had a quick question. So, if the Council’s motion was for 2 it to be 50 or for it to be 50 trips, how… What… Does that mean they… Someone spoke wrong 3 during the meeting and they didn’t realize it until too late? 4 Mr. Lait: No, it’s a Staff error. It just… The official record that got memorialized and adopted by 5 the Council said 100. We have to go through this process to change it. 6 Commissioner Alcheck: You have to go through the process to rectify it, ok. That’s all… I just 7 didn’t understand. Ok, alright, I have no conflict with this one. 8 Commissioner Monk: Pass. 9 Commissioner Waldfogel: Pass [unintelligible -mic not on] 10 Commissioner Gardias: [unintelligible- mic not on] 11 Chair Lauing: On One, ok. We’ll stay with you and what about Two? 12 Commissioner Gardias: Are we going through all of them or just one by one? 13 Chair Lauing: Well, we did one by one but now we’re on two and we’re going to come back this 14 way. 15 Commissioner Alcheck: Number Two then. 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Ok. 1 Commissioner Gardias: Number Two? 2 Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, he’s going (interrupted) 3 Chair Lauing: He did… Alright, what about you? 4 Commissioner Monk: Pass. 5 Chair Lauing: Yes? 6 Commissioner Monk: Pass. 7 Chair Lauing: Ok, sorry. I have nothing, go ahead. 8 Commissioner Gardias: So, I… Excuse me so I have a question on Two. So, what’s the… Yes, this 9 is clarification, I’d like to understand what is the association? Is there a definition of the 10 association in the Palo Alto Code? 11 Mr. Lait: Yeah, so this is… the City Council formed the Transportation Management Association; 12 they formed it. We have this… There’s a whole set of… They might… Do they have their own 13 Charter? I mean there’s a whole set of procedures for it. We’re just doing a work change. 14 Commissioner Gardias: Because association is legal organization (interrupted) 15 Mr. Lait: Yeah, yeah. 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Gardias: Legally registered rights. This is legal entity, authority is not a legal 1 entity so I think this the difference right, isn’t it? 2 Mr. Yang: Well and authority can be a legal entity as well, we just got the name wrong. So, 3 there is an entity that exists and we have the wrong name so we’re fixing it. 4 Commissioner Gardias: Ok, so it’s recorded as an association? Ok, good, thank you. 5 Chair Lauing: Let’s go Three, Four and Five. Commissioner Summa? 6 Commissioner Summa: Pass. 7 Commissioner Alcheck: Three, Four, Five, pass. 8 Commissioner Monk: Pass. 9 Chair Lauing: And you did. 10 Commissioner Gardias: Pass through Five. 11 Chair Lauing: Ok, why don’t you pick up Six then and come back this way. This is the one on the 12 garage placement and carports. 13 Commissioner Gardias: Ok, yeah so this is… Actually, we voted on this 2-years ago. If I… If we 14 have time just to go through the votes of how they were… How they fell so I can remember 15 how I voted but I remember there was discussion and we pulled it out. Because we felt that this 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. was rather a policy change as opposed to cosmetic change that should go through this 1 Commission without our review. So, my perspective the questions like this, can we get some… 2 And this is one of those that I would recommend maybe for pulling out till we get some 3 documentation or support documents from the Staff. And I would like to just get some statistics 4 which neighborhoods or some numbers that would illustrate what would be truly impact of 5 those changes. If we’re going to have the carport in the front as opposed to in the back. And I 6 understand totally that there is a context in place but then I think that this is in relationship to 7 the ADU Ordinance that we approve because this placement would affect the ADU Ordinance, 8 is this right? 9 Chair Lauing: Well, Mr. Lait suggested that there were going to be some potential policy issues 10 here so I don’t think there’s a debate about that right now. So, are you questioning whether it 11 should be a policy? 12 Commissioner Gardias: No, what I am saying is that I would like to just get some 13 documentation… I’d like to pull it out. I’m proposing to pull it out and then get more supportive 14 documentation… Supporting documentation that would allow us to make some judgment. 15 Chair Lauing: Ok, let me ask… Adding to the process issues here. What do you folks all think 16 about how many votes we should have for pulling it out? Is it one, two, three, four? One person 17 says majority, any other ideas? 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Gardias: Well, I mean if you are asking me, I’d like to just hear the discussion 1 about the topic so it’s… I understand that there are pros and cons. From my understanding is 2 that pros and cons are perspectives of ADU Ordinance that would [unintelligible] the placement 3 of the carports may affect how you could have an accessory dwelling unit on your lot. So, this 4 has not been… This relationship is not disclosed in here so I would like to ask Staff to provide 5 more materials, specifically from the ADU perspective. Is there any effect on that ordinance or 6 not? 7 Mr. Lait: Yeah, so Chair if I can just respond to that, the specific on the ADU? 8 Chair Lauing: Go ahead. 9 Mr. Lait: We don’t see any policy implication with this ordinance relative to ADUs. 10 Ms. Campbell: And just to kind of clarify, an AD… if you’re going to build an ADU, you can 11 remove the required covered parking to accommodate that ADU. So, if someone were to install 12 a carport or a covered detached garage, that could be torn down and that floor area could be 13 used for something else for the ADU. So, that’s… it doesn’t prohibit an ADU from being 14 developed. 15 Mr. Lait: This, from our perspective, is really about the garage placement requirement in the 16 code, which I think you’re familiar with, where it says set forth where a garage… If the pattern… 17 If the neighborhood pattern is such that most of the garages or carports are in the back, we 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. want to see new development have garages and carports in the back; that’s the Staff’s read of 1 that provision. The way that it is now if the pattern is most of the carports or garages are in the 2 back of the lot, you have to put your garage back there but your carport can be in the front. 3 And we have… I hear your request for some data, we’re… I don’t see that we’re going to be able 4 to collect the kind of data that you’re seeking for… Seeking on that but we have done some 5 research talking to the folks that have been processing these permits for quite some time and 6 there are not a lot of examples of the carports being placed in the front when they have been in 7 conflict with the neighborhood garage placement criteria. There are a few examples out there 8 but it is not the prevalent pattern and so that’s why we think this is a correction. 9 Commissioner Gardias: Sure, I understand but… So, from… The reason that I am talking about 10 this relationship is because I think that with the ADU Ordinance that we passed, there may be a 11 placement of carports either at the back or allowing this at the front against the contextual 12 pattern may either constrict or not constrict placement of an ADU. Because if you have an ADU 13 at the back, right and then you have a garage at the back, then you have to also put that 14 carport at the back. 15 Chair Lauing: Ok, so I think the question is do we want to call this out or not so let’s get to that 16 but go ahead. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: I was just going to say ADUs do not require parking in the City. That’s not… We don’t 1 have a parking requirement for ADUs. Parking… Under certain circumstances, covered parking 2 can be removed when placing an ADU but I’ll differ to the Chair. 3 Chair Lauing: Ok so for this exercise I would like to get consensus or a vote or other suggestions 4 if it’s other than four people that we need to vote for putting it on a pull-out list. I heard one 5 person say one… four and I heard one person say one. The question is if anybody… If every… If 6 one… If each of us picked out ten, we’d have forty so it seems like there should be some vote 7 rather than just anyone asking for this be sort of continued and debated. 8 Commissioner Alcheck: I guess I would support a process where if we’re going to go item by 9 item, we give everybody a chance to talk through it. So, maybe somebody might say this is a big 10 deal and somebody might say it’s not a big deal, they might persuade each other. And then 11 maybe after that preliminary discussion, you could determine whether a quick poll would be 12 required to figure out whether (interrupted) 13 Chair Lauing: Yeah, I’m asking what the poll should be? Should it be four to three or can it be 14 anyone one or any two? 15 Commissioner Alcheck: I don’t have a particular (interrupted) 16 Chair Lauing: Well, in absence of any then we would need four to pull it out. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Monk: Chair Lauing, I did have my light up if you recall. So, I just wanted to ask 1 folks here if we think it makes sense to discuss Item Seven, which discusses what the definition 2 is of a carport. Should we have that discussion before we have the discussion on the 3 modification to the ordinance? Do you think one should go first because the way they have it 4 presented is the other way? I’m wondering if that will (interrupted) 5 Chair Lauing: If you do, we can. 6 Commissioner Monk: If that makes sense to… they are concurrent, ok so we’ll discuss them 7 concurrently, ok. I think we should just have the discussion. We’ve already started it, let’s just 8 discuss it. 9 Chair Lauing: Yeah so, we are, so your... Actually, your light is not on here but anyway go ahead, 10 continue. 11 Commissioner Alcheck: You have to push up or down. 12 Chair Lauing: But you’re speaking so we don’t need a light. 13 Commissioner Monk: But can you just check because… 14 Commissioner Alcheck: It’s the green one. 15 Chair Lauing: Yeah, it’s not. 16 Commissioner Monk: I don’t know, I’m not seeing a change [unintelligible] 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: Try again. Sorry, it’s not my fault, this is the most confusing 1 [unintelligible] 2 Commissioner Summa: So, in the meantime, I’ll opine on Six and Seven that I’m fine with them 3 as they are but if any… But if some of my colleagues or one have a very serious concern about 4 it, I think we should just put it on the list and if we have too many, we’ll whittle the list down. 5 Chair Lauing: Let’s see, I think Waldfogel had (interrupted) 6 Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, just a couple of things. I think you started to speak to this 7 about the prevalence of this issue. I mean I think that if this is just a clarification of placement 8 for a feature with… What is it, two walls or two open sides versus three open sides? 9 Mr. Lait: Yeah so speaking to Item Number Seven, if you read it unmodified (interrupted 10 Commissioner Waldfogel: Yes. 11 Mr. Lait: As proposed, you can simultaneous have a carport and a garage and meet both 12 definitions. 13 Commissioner Waldfogel: Well, I think there’s also a conflict with the Porte Cochere definition. 14 Mr. Lait: There… well, we can take a look at that. 15 Commissioner Waldfogel: I think you should take a look at that because that’s defined as three 16 or more open sides. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: Ok but that’s different than… I mean that would not be considered a garage. 1 Commissioner Waldfogel: But a carport and a Porte Cochere may overlap under these 2 definitions so I just think that if we want to be (interrupted) 3 Mr. Lait: Yeah, we can take a look at that. 4 Commissioner Waldfogel: We want to be careful. If the point is that we want to restrict a 5 parking facility in the front of the building, whether it’s in the form of a garage or carport, I 6 support that. I don’t want to make a change on Porte Cocheres without being thoughtful about 7 that. 8 Mr. Lait: Right. 9 Commissioner Waldfogel: And I’ll just make a side point on this, maybe it’s slightly off topic but 10 to meet this high-level goal of vehicle parking that’s not in front half of the lots. Something that 11 I’ve noticed over the last couple of years in residential neighborhoods is that I think our 12 driveway requirements are too narrow. So, I’m not seeing people use the garages that are 13 located in the back of lots because possibly because they don’t have the driving skills to get in 14 and out of them or because we don’t require a big enough turn around space. But I think that 15 that’s something we should potentially look at for next year, to meet our high-level objective of 16 actually… of parking actually ending up in or near the garage and not in front yard setbacks. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: Ok and we… and to your point, I mean maybe there’s a… To the… Maybe there is a 1 need for us to clarify… Distinguish a carport from Porte Cochere as you pointed out. 2 Chair Lauing: Commissioner Alcheck, your light’s on. 3 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok, so we have dealt with this before and I would suggest that… I would 4 reiterate the comments that I made on the prior three occasions that we discuss this item. So, I 5 would share Commissioner Gardias and Commissioner Rosenblum’s suggestion that this might 6 be something that we want to visit. And I’ll suggest that… Look when… The notion that we 7 would essentially try to consistently approach the location of parking facilities on a lot is not 8 problematic for me. But I think actually there is a nuanced issue with the ADUs and I’ll tell you 9 why. And I had this conversation yesterday with City Attorney Albert Yang, which is that the 10 likelihood of a new development… A lot of ADUs are coming in by converting existing detached 11 garages into accessory dwelling units; which in assents eliminates parking for the home and the 12 result would not satisfy, for example, Commissioner Waldfogel’s desire for these people to be 13 able to get to the back. The answer Staff gave earlier about, you could always take down the 14 carport and make it an ADU also wouldn’t satisfy that requirement. So, the question is are we 15 really trying to eliminate the parking facility in the front and maybe what we want to do and I 16 think Council would be in it’s right to make that determination but I don’t think they make that 17 determination in the absence of understanding the effects on ADUs. Principally if you are to 18 build a new construction project today, the likelihood of you building two detached structures 19 in the rear of your lot is very low. The likelihood of you building a detached structure in your lot 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. that you would then take down for the purpose of rebuilding an ADU is unlikely and so to the 1 extent that if you can accommodate the parking somewhere in the front through a carport let’s 2 say, you’re actually less likely to tear that down in an effort to have an ADU because you don’t 3 have to pick between the two. So, I… it’s not that I’m opposed to this, I would support this 4 change, I just think we have to sort of figure out what is our goal. And I would argue the 5 following one comment about Commissioner Waldfogel’s suggestion that we widen the 6 concrete requirement. We are vastly… we are quickly, maybe not quickly enough, approaching 7 a world were car ownership may dramatically change. These structures that we’re approving 8 for build today are (interrupted) 9 Commissioner Waldfogel: I just want to make a point of order. I just think that that’s a false 10 and unknowable statement. 11 Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, no, that’s fine. I believe that we are approaching that world. I 12 don’t think that it’s actually an argument that we can dispute but the point is that the notion 13 that we pay… I’ll just say this. The notion that we would encourage paving more, I couldn’t 14 imagine how that wouldn’t trigger some kind of CEQA analysis. How that wouldn’t affect 15 (interrupted) 16 Chair Lauing: Ok, anyway, you want [unintelligible](interrupted) 17 Commissioner Alcheck: Anyway, I’m saying I’m not opposed to the change if we determine that 18 that’s what we want. The question is how does it reconcile with our other goals, that’s my only 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. comment and then I’ll just quickly say something about the carport. It didn’t occur me that 1 there was a Port Cochere discrepancy there. I believe that we could change this to be even 2 more precise, for example, if we give a percentage. I believe in the past they’ve approached this 3 with a notion that it should be more than fifty percent open. So, if you look at the language of 4 this classification it says cover means a portion of a principal residential building on an 5 accessory building to residential use design for utilized shelter for one or more vehicles which 6 are open or unenclosed on two or more sides and including on the vehicle entry side. So, 7 obviously on the vehicle entry side, if you don’t have fifty percent of the front open you’re not 8 going to get your car in but on the other side the notion of louvers or some architectural 9 component. This seems to basically support a carport that’s just four posts, which I think it 10 architecturally restrictive. Maybe we can require seventy-five percent open and that allows 11 some architectural detailing and it would be a little less imprecise. Those are my two 12 comments. 13 Chair Lauing: Ok, Commissioner Monk, is your light still on? 14 Commissioner Monk: Yes. 15 Chair Lauing: Ok, go ahead. 16 Commissioner Monk: I just flipped it on for this issue. So, I just have a general comment about 17 how this was presented to us because it’s not how I typically receive a redline document. So, 18 it’s unclear to me what we’re trying to achieve as far as the ordinance goes under the 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. definitions because if we were to accept your proposed changes it would read, carport dot dot 1 dot, which is completely unenclosed on two or more sides. Is that what’s you’re looking to do? 2 To take out the parentheticals and have it read completely enclosed so am I reading that 3 correctly? 4 Ms. Campbell: Yes, you are. 5 Commissioner Monk: Ok because typically… Ok so redline would redline that stuff and it just 6 doesn’t look… I just want to make sure that I’m reading it correctly. So, I would propose putting 7 in language to the effect of mostly unenclosed an opposed to completely. I think it’s 8 problematic and contradictory with the rest of the sentence. I think it would be difficult to 9 comply with because you’re going to have framing on different sides and the roof, that would 10 make it not feasible to fully comply with the way that you’re making the proposed changes. 11 On the second part of that definition, I would consider adding in some language to alleviate any 12 concerns about it resulting in some sort of non-compliance with the new ADU Ordinances that 13 were inactive by the state and by our City. So, if that’s something that would be appropriate to 14 put in the definition, you don’t typically see that in the definitions. I would just encourage some 15 language to the effect that this isn’t in anyway intended to or Albert you can speak to that if 16 you’d like. I’m not trying to propose language but we just want to make sure that it's covered. 17 Chair Lauing: Well, for now, we’ve pulled this off at 6 and 7, do we want to hold on getting the 18 wording changes? If we’re going to take another look at this one. 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: Well, yeah, I guess alternatively I mean I think if the Commission is articulating… I 1 mean I can understand the challenge with the word completely and I can understand also the 2 interest in wondering how some kind of aesthetic flexibility, we can look at that terminology. 3 So, not that’s not… I think it’s ok to have dialog, not be precise about the language but 4 communicate the intent for us to work on and communicate that to the Council. 5 Chair Lauing: Yeah, ok, great. 6 Commissioner Monk: So, just to continue, I just want to acknowledge the letter that we 7 received from Ronit Bodner. I thought what was presented in that letter addressed a lot of the 8 concerns that we have in that this is something that should be presented to Council as part of 9 the regular legislative process and not as a minor clarification. These are material changes in 10 the building requirements for a carport and I couldn’t agree more. Thank you. 11 Chair Lauing: Commissioner Gardias, your light is on. 12 Commissioner Gardias: Sorry this is past light. Thank you. 13 Chair Lauing: Oh, ok. No other items on this, we’ve got this on the potential carve-out area. So, 14 Number eight… I’d like to go back to our potentially quicker process of just running down the 15 line on these things so Number Eight? 16 Commissioner Summa: Pass. 17 Chair Lauing: Eight. 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Monk: I pass on Eight, Nine and Ten. 1 Commissioner Waldfogel: Pass. 2 Commissioner Gardias: Pass through Nine. 3 Chair Lauing: Ok, I think we’re passed through Nine, do you want to go to Ten then? 4 Commissioner Summa: Pass. 5 Chair Lauing: [unintelligible] Commissioner Monk, Ten? 6 Commissioner Monk: Pass. 7 Commissioner Waldfogel: I’m just trying to sort out, is this a clerical error or is this a change in 8 any way? Number Ten the Map Exception Process? I mean does it change anything? 9 Mr. Lait: Ok, yeah, so thank you. Give us a second here to jog our memories. 10 Commissioner Waldfogel: We can keep going if you need some time. I’m sorry to be asking hard 11 questions but it was a little too complicated for me parse. 12 Mr. Lait: So, this one is we have a process in our subdivision section of our code that allows an 13 applicant to request a Map Exception to standards in the… Title 18, our Development Code 14 Standards. And we believe that the Map Exception process allows for that today without any 15 change. This added language here just puts it in black and white a practice that has been done 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. for many years using the Parcel Map Exception to grant changes to Development Standards. 1 This Commissioner considered a project, I think it was on California, there were some three lots 2 with a Parcel Map Exception for three lots. I think you considered a Parcel Map Exception for 3 the Bowmen School. There’s a number of examples where we’ve used a Parcel Map Exception 4 for Development Standards like lot area and things like that and so now we’re just making it 5 explicatively clear. 6 Commissioner Waldfogel: Just as a point of clarification, this isn’t code your changing but this 7 language may be granted only by the City Council after recommendation by the Planning 8 Commissioner. Does that mean the Planning Commission needs to make an affirmative finding 9 and the City Council does not have the discretion to do this without an affirmative finding by 10 the Planning Commission? I mean what does that language mean? 11 Mr. Yang: We would read that language that the Planning Commission has to make a 12 recommendation so that the item would need to be considered by the Planning Commission. 13 Not necessarily the Planning Commission would need to make an affirmative recommendation. 14 Commissioner Waldfogel: That doesn’t seem like a plain language reading of that piece of code. 15 Mr. Lait: So, I just want to make sure that we’re in the same section. So, right after 16 [unintelligible][interrupted] 17 Commissioner Waldfogel: It’s right after the red section. 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: Such exceptions may be granted only by the City Council after recommendation by 1 the Planning Commission. So, you can have any kind of recommendation; one of support, one 2 of against. 3 Commissioner Waldfogel: I would use different language for that then recommendation. I mean 4 then… The language I would use would only after consideration. 5 Mr. Lait: If you want we can say consideration or review, this is consistent language. 6 Commissioner Waldfogel: Well, no but I just… I mean I am just… This may not be the right time 7 or place but I’m really taking issue with this notion that recommendation just means the same 8 as a consideration as opposed to an affirmative finding. 9 Chair Lauing: Ok, we’re through Ten I believe. Ok, go back to Eleven, anyone wants to speak on 10 that starting with Commissioner Summa. 11 Commissioner Summa: I believe the only change here is to add above grade because before it 12 just said… read 3-feet, like a 3-foot. So, I don’t think it’s a substantive change at all. I know 13 that… I believe Eric Rosenblum…. Commissioner Rosenblum mentioned it but I think it’s just 14 because he didn’t read it maybe so I don’t have a problem with this one. 15 Chair Lauing: Ok, others? Commissioner Alcheck, you’re good? 16 Commissioner Alcheck: I guess I’m… The… I wouldn’t have flagged this one but I was curious if 17 Staff would help us understand really what are they preventing I guess or what… 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Ms. Campbell: I can go ahead and jump in here. 1 Commissioner Alcheck: Can you clarify (interrupted) 2 Chair Lauing: Please do, thanks. 3 Commissioner Alcheck: I didn’t want to flag this one but after Eric mentioned it, I kind of looked 4 at it again and I thought ok what are they curing? 5 Ms. Campbell: Ok, so there’s a table in 1812 in the R-1 Chapter that basically has this laundry 6 list of all of the exemptions from floor area and one… This is one of the line items in that table. 7 So, what we’ve done is we’ve just added the clarification and this reflects exactly the same 8 language that’s in the definition for low-density residential projects… For low-density projects. 9 So, basically… It’s just basically if as long as your basement isn’t more than 3-feet above grade 10 and it was just adding that clarifying above grade so it's just not 3-feet; just say above grade so 11 there’s a relationship to what that's supposed to mean. And it’s taken directly out of the 12 existing definition for floor area for low-density residential so really, it’s just a clarification of an 13 existing definition. 14 Commissioner Alcheck: If you don’t mind, I’d like to follow up. So, I was under the impression 15 that there were requirements for single-family new construction that your first floor couldn’t 16 begin more than 3-feet above grade; which essentially created a… Which made it unnecessary 17 to distinguish where a basement could exist. So, for example, if you were going to build a new 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. construction, you couldn’t build a walk up that puts you 5-feet above grade so that you only 1 had to dig 5-feet down to have a 10-foot basement let’s say. And my question here is this would 2 affect existing structures whose floors are already in place so is that right? 3 Ms. Campbell: Actually, that’s not (interrupted) 4 Commissioner Alcheck: Is this like if you were going to build a basement under a historic 5 structure? 6 Ms. Campbell: No so for an existing project, if you wanted to build a basement today and if you 7 didn’t want that basement to count toward floor area for your site, it has to only be a certain 8 distance above grade and that’s where this number comes in. So, if it’s 4-feet above grade, then 9 your basement is going to count toward your floor area for your site. If it’s less than, then we 10 won’t count that basement towards the floor area of your site. So that’s why… the idea is you 11 have your basements that are low and so it’s not a visual impact to the site, it keeps your 12 building smaller and that kind of thing. 13 Commissioner Alcheck: Got it, ok. So, is this similar to the other requirement of not having your 14 first floor above 3-feet? 15 Ms. Campbell: No. 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: Because if the top of the floor is 3-feet above grade and you count all 1 the studs and all the framing, then it kind of necessitates the requirement that your basement 2 also not be above that same number so I’m confused. 3 Ms. Campbell: Yeah, I’m confused about what you’re suggesting for this particular requirement. 4 I’m not familiar with that. 5 Commissioner Alcheck: Oh, I was under the impression that there’s a requirement in our code 6 that says that for the first floor of new development can’t be higher than 3-feet or then it could 7 theoretically could qualify as a second floor; which is why the basement would then be deemed 8 FAR accountable. 9 Ms. Campbell: We don’t have a minimum requirement for that height that I’m aware of. 10 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok. 11 Chair Lauing: Anyone else on Eleven? 12 Commissioner Summa: That was Eleven. 13 Chair Lauing: Yeah, I know and I said anyone else on Eleven? Let’s move to Twelve then, this is 14 that… 15 Commissioner Gardias: Just a quick comment if I may? Just [interrupted][unintelligible] 16 Chair Lauing: Are we on Eleven now or what? 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Gardias: On Eleven, yes please, so just wait… When one reads it and I listen to 1 the discussion it’s obvious what it says but when I read it without the discussion, I really don’t 2 understand this sentence. What is great than 3-feet above grade? It doesn’t specifically say 3 what is greater than 3-feet above grade so I would just suggest some clarification that we’re 4 looking for the floor level (interrupted) 5 Ms. Campbell: Yes, I think we can do that. 6 Commissioner Gardias: Or a ceiling level or just (interrupted) 7 Ms. Campbell: Right or we can refer them back to the definition which (interrupted) 8 Commissioner Gardias: Subfloor. 9 Ms. Campbell: Is much more specific. 10 Commissioner Gardias: Typically, it’s the subfloor, ok. Thank you. 11 Chair Lauing: Alright, Twelve? 12 Commissioner Summa: So, I do have some comments about Twelve and that is that I think in 13 office use, especially in CN, CS, and CC, there’s a lot of confusion about different kinds of offices 14 and what they mean. So, I would say that business offices are… Needs… Under a medical, 15 professional, and business offices should not be located on the ground floor. Does that mean 16 administrative offices as defined in the code? General business office as defined in the code? 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. So, I… and there’s a lot of question and there’s a lot of concerns about these uses in the little c, 1 as I like to call them, zones. So, I think that that could be clearer and I also, under number Two, 2 occupy space that was not occupied by housing etc.; business service, retail services, personal 3 services, eating and drinking. I also think that maybe… It doesn’t… I think there are some things 4 that… uses in there like may warehouse that should be added and that it should be covered 5 too. I’m not sure if that list is complete and that’s it on that one. Does that make sense? 6 Mr. Lait: Yes, I hear it clearly what you’re asking. I think it goes a little bit beyond what we were 7 trying to do. 8 Commissioner Summa: Ok. 9 Mr. Lait: It’s… And I’m not saying that we don’t have a position against it but I know there’s 10 been a community conversation about different types of office. And what we were specifically 11 interested in on this one is the strikeout language on Packet Page 15 because we believe that 12 creates a loophole wherein the CS zone… On any CS zone property, if there was housing on that 13 property or if there was no housing on that property which is most of them, then you can do 14 office. And we’re thinking that the one above it too is actually… Yeah, the one above it too… I’m 15 sorry. It’s actually already covered… Captured in Two where it says not occupied by housing 16 but then it lists all these other uses and so it captures the greater universe; whereas three 17 throughs out that universe and simple just say housing for the CS zone property. 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Summa: Yeah, I think striking out Three is good. I was wondering if the list in 1 Two (interrupted) 2 Mr. Lait: Yeah, we updated that list last year to add neighborhood business service but we 3 haven’t heard any other conversation and haven’t run across any specific issues to add more 4 items on there. Certainly, this is an amendment that is being considered by the Commission, it’s 5 been advertised if the Commission feels like there’s more that needs to be added to that it’s 6 within your authority to make that recommendation. 7 Commissioner Summa: Ok so I was wondering if it covered all retail like uses and the one I 8 really thought of was warehouse but I will stop there. 9 Chair Lauing: Commissioner Alcheck? 10 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok, sorry, I’m sorry to bring this up. I just… the reason why I mention 11 this is because again, it always comes back to this sort of new ADU process you have. I’m going 12 to go back to Number Eleven for a second. On Page 5 of this… of the Single-Family Technical 13 Manual, which I know is not the ordinance, it specifically says that basements of Category One 14 and Two historic homes or contributing structures in a historic district even if greater than 3-15 feet don’t count as floor area. One of my questions here is because these structures are built, 16 whatever’s existing exists so the comment you made about sort of discouraging basements 17 from rising above a certain level and being unsightly. In theory, these basements already exist 18 and so my issue is that if you now count area that you didn’t use to count, then someone who 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. would then want to let’s say build an ADU attached in their rear may not be able to anymore 1 because they don’t have the adequate floor area. And so, the concern that I have here is 2 basically what we’re saying is we want to start counting square footage that we didn’t use to 3 count. 4 Mr. Lait: I think it’s… I think what we’re trying to do is exactly what you want us to do, which 5 excludes that floor area. So, we’re saying even if it’s above 3-feet above grade, even if it’s 6 bigger than… More than, we’re saying it doesn’t count toward floor area. 7 Commissioner Alcheck: I understand. 8 Mr. Lait: Ok, thank you. 9 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok because that’s… I was confused. I thought that what… Yeah so, it’s 10 basically the same. I apologize, thanks for making that clarification. 11 With respect to Twelve, my major concern with this one is I actually think it applies to a very 12 small number of parcels and I was concerned coming into this that did we invite the individuals 13 who own these parcels to participate in this discussion or is there any sort of notice that we 14 may want to go through to indicate to these parcels owners that this changed? I don’t 15 completely understand this one so I’m not entirely sure. I would suggest pulling it but because 16 it was so few parcels, I wondered if it merited a discussion and I don’t know. I’ll just throw that 17 out there, I don’t feel strongly about it. 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Commissioner Monk, Twelve. 1 Commissioner Monk: This was included amongst the minor text clarifications section so to me 2 removing an entire section of an ordinance does not seem like a minor text clarification. I’m not 3 inclined to support this without further understanding of what the impact or the intent is and it 4 seems like something that should go to Council in my viewpoint. 5 Chair Lauing: So, you are suggesting we pull that one for further discussion? 6 Commissioner Monk: I’m just not really sure what the impact is of pulling that text is. 7 Chair Lauing: Ok, you’re fine. I mean these all go to Council eventually so but that’s fine; 8 because we’re trying to get together a list here so let’s do that. 9 Commissioner Monk: I guess for minor text clarifications that’s pretty obvious when that’s the 10 case and to me taking out it… this is not a text clarification. I’d rather have some more color 11 around what is trying to be accomplished. Chair, I know you did give some background on it. Is 12 the Commissioner stratified with this? I’m just curious. 13 Chair Lauing: Well, let’s see what some other folks say. Commissioner Waldfogel, do you have 14 any comments? 15 Commissioner Waldfogel: Are you finished with that? Yeah, thanks. I’m actually not sure 16 because I actually find this language extremely hard to parse so I’d like a little bit of help 17 because it keeps going positive and negative on me. So, I’m not quite sure what’s in and out as I 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. read through it so help me out a little bit here to just explain what are the conditions where 1 office would or would not be allowed in the CS district. Because I’m kind of… maybe everybody 2 else here is perfectly clear but I’m not. 3 Mr. Lait: No, it’s one that requires a few reads. 4 Commissioner Waldfogel: I’ve done that. 5 Mr. Lait: So, what this is saying is that in the CS, CN and CC zones, there are some additional 6 office restrictions that apply and they apply under these circumstances. The conversion of non-7 office space… housing and non-office space to office in these three zones can only occur under 8 these prescribed scenarios. The first one is the office has always been there, that makes sense. 9 The second one says for all these three zones if it has not been occupied by housing, 10 neighborhood business services, retail services, personal services, eating and drinking services 11 and automobile services; if it's not been occupied by those then you can convert to office. 12 Warehouse can convert of office under that scenario and the reason for that is… I mean these 13 are a list of uses that are seen as supporting the neighborhood and/or neighborhood serving 14 uses and so those are trying to be protected. Three is a subset of Two and it specifically carves 15 out the CS zone and it says in the CS Zone, if you’ve got housing or if you did not have housing 16 on that property, you can do office. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Waldfogel: I don’t want to pick on any size bullets. Let’s talk about… I’m just 1 trying to think of some examples. So, you’ve got like that Quonset hut building that CrossFit is 2 in and I’m trying to remember what it’s use was (interrupted) 3 Mr. Lait: Yeah, I don’t know. 4 Commissioner Waldfogel: Before CrossFit was there but… so which bucket? I’m just trying to 5 work out what bucket that would be and what the potential conversions… I mean under the 6 current circumstance, that could be taken over and converted to the office because of the CS 7 carve out, is that correct? 8 Mr. Lait: Yeah, so under the current zoning if it’s a… if a CS zone property is not used for 9 housing, it can convert to office. And we believe that, well one, the Retail Preservation 10 Ordinance kind of makes this a little bit moot because the Retail Preservation Ordinance casts 11 an even wider net than Item Number Two. The Retail Preservation says any retail or retail like 12 use that’s in existence as of a certain date has to stay there. And so, if we didn’t make this 13 change, we still have that Retail Preservation Ordinance but this has been one that’s been on 14 our list and I think that it still… We would like to have it cleared up. Clarified and cleared up so 15 it’s not… it just makes it cleaner for us to administer the code. 16 Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok, actually that helped a lot because I wasn’t sure about the 17 relationship between this and Retail Preservation and that actually helped connect a couple of 18 dots. 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: Yeah, that… if we did nothing, we’re… There’s no change but from esthetics and 1 administration, we would prefer it to be removed. 2 Ms. Campbell: And I just want to add one clarification to that. Office is restricted with 3 Conditional Use Permits so it’s only up to 5,000-square feet and anything above 5,000-square 4 feet would require that use permit. 5 Commissioner Monk: Could I just add one thing before we move on? Would it make sense to 6 reference the Retail Ordinance in this ordinance in some capacity just so that when someone is 7 coming to the code and reading it, they are not reading it in a vacuum and they know there’s a 8 related code section that they might also want to reference? And likewise, in the Retail 9 Ordinance to reference this section. 10 Mr. Lait: Sure, so yeah (interrupted) 11 Chair Lauing: That seems pretty easy and helps clarify it. 12 Mr. Lait: Yeah, we’d like to maybe add that too. I think Albert was whispering in my ear that we 13 could have some kind of provision that says that in the event of any conflict between this and 14 the Retail Preservation Ordinance in section blah blah blah, that provision [unintelligible]. 15 Chair Lauing: Ok. 16 Mr. Lait: Ok, so we’ll make that change. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Good. Good suggestion. Alright so we’re onto Thirteen, let’s keep the same 1 batting order. 2 Commissioner Summa: So, I didn’t really understand the point of this one and given 3 Commissioner Waldfogel’s earlier question about the other Map Act Item and I guess this is a 4 question for Staff. Do… Doesn’t the PTC have to review this? 5 Mr. Lait: Well, the PTC and I’m going to maybe need some help here from the colleagues but 6 there was a… so the reason we’re doing this is to… let’s just back up a step because this does 7 refer to the… It relates to the referral, right? Ok. So, last year or earlier this year the Council 8 adopted this provision where the Director can differ any project that is… requires City Council 9 approval or one of the applications requires City Council approval or major policy… Basically, it 10 allows the Director to differ any actions being considered like an Architectural Review Board 11 Action, CUP, all that stuff can be pushed to the City Council under broad circumstances. We 12 believe that includes the subdivision maps that are processed in our code as well but because 13 we don’t have this specific reference in the language, a project came up where there was this 14 debate that we had internally at Staff, which was does the code allow for Director deferrals of 15 these maps to the City Council when it’s a non-controversial map? I mean we were able to 16 make the decision on it but the map was associated with another permit that was going to go 17 to the City Council for approval. I’ll just say site and design by way of example and so we were 18 kind of stuck on this procedural issue, can we send the map and the site and design to the City 19 Council for a decision or do we have to declare that this something that we need PTC guidance 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. on, even though it was a really straightforward map, to get it to the City Council? And so, all this 1 language does is it gives us the ability to link that map, that otherwise has to be approved by 2 the Director, and allows us to move it forward to the City Council along with its other Council-3 related permits. It’s awfully nuanced and more… We write it down because we stubble on but 4 it’s not a huge process change and we believe it’s reflective of the Council’s action earlier this 5 year that gives the Director the ability to move things up to Council if it’s appropriate to do so. 6 Commissioner Summa: Ok, thank you. 7 Chair Lauing: And this says, and PTC has already reviewed it in a non-map public hearing. 8 Mr. Lait: That’s right. Yeah, I’m actually trying to remember the (interrupted) 9 Chair Lauing: So, we’ve already seen it at the time. 10 Mr. Lait: You saw it in some context already. 11 Chair Lauing: Right, pre-map. 12 Mr. Lait: Saw the site and design, it was… But… And you saw the project but I don’t know if they 13 saw the map. And so, the question was, well gosh, now do we have to send a map back to the 14 Planning Commission? 15 Chair Lauing: Right, so this is just a later stage deferral. Commissioner Alcheck? 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, so I actually agree with this change but it is a good opportunity 1 for me to demonstrate sort of another issue that I have with the process that was sort of 2 outlined at the beginning of this meeting. Which is let’s say we didn’t agree with this position 3 and Staff… As Jonathan already articulated at the beginning of the meeting, they may take a 4 different position than us. And then the Staff report that goes to Council will in an effort 5 articulate our concern but maintain the ordinance as written and here’s my issue. I’m not 6 exactly sure where Staff would have the authority to sort of disagree on whether any of these 7 items are clerical and minor and where they are not. And I agree with the suggestion that this 8 isn’t just clerical and administrative, we are actually exercising an opportunity here to make 9 decisions. The problem is that if the ordinance moves forward without edits by this 10 Commission, it strips this Commission of the opportunity to essentially oversee and help Staff 11 determine what should the policy be. So, if for example we take issue with one of these items 12 and say this is policy and we need to spend more time on this and Staff goes no, we disagree. 13 Then the Commission is essentially stripped of the sort of power and authority to participate in 14 the process. And the discomfort I have is that the suggestion that this is minor creates an 15 uncomfortable context for City Council because if they fail to read our minutes and Staff 16 doesn’t articulate the narrate of our argument as well as, frankly I think we could, then there’s 17 a little bit of conflict of interest. So, while I agree with this one (interrupted) 18 Chair Lauing: Yeah, I got you. 19 Commissioner Alcheck: I’m a little… The process here is a little concerning. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: But I think the process here you’re describing is not the intent even of the written 1 document that will go to Council. So, Jonathan, why don’t you speak first? 2 Mr. Lait: Well, so, yeah, I mean I… The reason we noted it in the Staff report and I made an 3 extra effort to communicate it in the presentation is to sort of navigate what I thought was a 4 pretty awkward experience a few years ago as we kind of did our first one of these ordinance 5 changes. And not everyone was on the Commission at that time but it was… I think it was a 6 reflection of that series of meetings would show that there was… It was not a smooth process 7 and so we wanted to be clear about what our intent is. And then it is our job I would say to 8 make these recommendations to City Council. It’s fully within what we believe to be our scope 9 of authority to make these recommendations and I would argue or suggest that this is the 10 process where we are engaging the Planning Commission in its conversation. There will be 11 minutes, there will be a Staff report, one of you will attend the City Council meeting to offer 12 those comments to the City Council in that forum. We, in fact, made changes to our Staff report 13 as a result of this discussion last year where we include this blurb for each of these things in the 14 Council reports and we’ve been sending those to the Chair [Note-asking] did we get this right? 15 And we have a dialog back and forth about that when those opportunities happen. I don’t think 16 we had any conflicts or issues in this year so I feel like there’s… and we’re having this 17 conversation now in the absence of a critical issue. I mean we already heard from 18 Commissioner Alcheck that he supports this amendment so I kind of feel like we’re rehashing 19 this in a moment where we really don’t need to do that. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: I don’t dispute the authority that you can make the recommendations. 1 The point I’m making is when they are lumped together, something this simple and something 2 more complicated, for City Council to be able to navigate that in one meeting is complicated 3 and that’s the part that (interrupted) 4 Chair Lauing: Yeah but I think the process… The end game process is that we might pull out two 5 or three of these, we might debate them, we might then vote in a different way than what City 6 is going to recommend. The City thinks about it and says we’re still going to recommend it 7 because we don’t agree but they call out here’s the PTC’s position on these two items. We 8 don’t have an agreement, now you seven Council Members have to make a decision. So, that 9 way both… It’s been hashed by us, it’s been hashed by them, we got a dialog together and then 10 here are the twenty areas we agree, here are the two areas we don’t, then they have to make a 11 call. Ok, others on Thirteen? 12 Commissioner Waldfogel: I have a question. 13 Chair Lauing: Go ahead. 14 Chair Lauing: Again, just a point of clarification on this. I think I support it but I’m just trying to 15 understand if there any scenario under this in combination with any other Director 16 discretionary approvals where projects would completely bypass the Planning Commissioner? 17 Where it would just get processed by Staff? I’m just… Because I know the Explanatory Tax 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. describes a scenario which an intent but that’s not what the actual code language says so I just 1 want to understand if that’s a scenario. 2 Mr. Lait: Yeah, no I believe the answer to that question is no. The types of applications that you 3 would see that would be included in this would either be… It’d either be a standalone map 4 application which the Director routinely approves or reviews I should say and makes a decision 5 on. If its an acceptation, it has to go to the PTC and then on to the City Council. If it’s a site and 6 design application, that has to go to the PTC and then on to the City Council. I suppose if it’s an 7 ARB application but then the Director still makes the decision. 8 Mr. Yang: [unintelligible- no mic] 9 Mr. Lait: CUP has to go to the Planning Commission. 10 Mr. Yang: [unintelligible -no mic] 11 Mr. Lait: On a request for a hearing. If… That’s right. That’s right so no, I don’t… I’m not… I can’t 12 think of an application type where the Planning Commission would be (interrupted) 13 Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok thanks, that clarification helps. Thank you. 14 Chair Lauing: Ok. 15 Commissioner Gardias: Yes so exactly… Thank you. So exactly, I had the same concerns that 16 Mike had just… named when he spoke first. I was thinking that pretty much there would be a 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. process to bypass the Commission and then just reading the issued language. the proposed text 1 didn’t agree with this… What I understood as an issue was and I was thinking pretty much there 2 should not be any direct submittal to the Council. That this should be… my understanding was 3 submittals to the City Council would be dealt for those projects that were reviewed by the 4 Planning and Transportation Commission but the intent is no, is this correct? 5 Mr. Lait: So, that’s… We’re talking about one application type that is the Parcel Map, the 6 Preliminary Parcel Map, which is traditionally reviewed by the Director. The Planning 7 Commission doesn’t have a role in that process today and what we’re trying to do is say on 8 projects where we want to forward something onto the City Council because of some other 9 entitlement. A site and design would come already before the Planning Commission and that’s 10 what happened in one instance that we’re talking about; that we’re referencing. So, again, this 11 isn’t designed to… The reason it’s written this way is because the language in here says that the 12 Director that makes the decision or sends it to the Planning Commission and City Council for 13 review when the Director feels like there’s an issue that needs to be made. That process still 14 exists, if we felt like there was an issue that we weren’t able to make it at staff level [crosstalk], 15 it would still go through that same process. All we’re saying is for those other ones that are 16 more minor in nature, tradition… Typical but there’s this other application, we want to be able 17 to group those together. 18 Commissioner Gardias: Ok so thank you very much, then I’m fine with the proposed change. 19 Thank you. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Ok, on Fourteen, which is collection time for Officers. Let’s start with… sorry? 1 Thirteen? 2 Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, just one other point of clarification. This language was prior to 3 taking such action, the Director of Planning shall hold a public hearing. So, what is the proposed 4 venue for that public hearing because it sounds like you can’t forward it… The Director can’t 5 forward it to Council without holding that public hearing. 6 Mr. Lait: We have Director hearings all the time, at least once a… We have them scheduled for 7 once a month and they take place either here or in other conference rooms that we have 8 available. 9 Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok, thank you. 10 Mr. Lait: On this Item Fourteen that’s coming up, just a clarification. So, I thought Commissioner 11 Rosenblum’s comments were kind of enjoyable on how this gets scheduled. So, I just wanted to 12 state that the intent of this is to strike the specific reference from the code and leave it to the 13 Planning Commission through its rules and procedures, which we hope to have a conversation 14 about earlier next year, to set the date and time… The date where this would happen. Not that 15 it’s just going to be this free-flowing concept but you will actually (interrupted) 16 Chair Lauing: Right. 17 Mr. Lait: Decided. 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Right, that’s exactly what I was going to say and he asked for consistency with 1 other Commissions and the constituency is that they now have the flexibility to choose when to 2 do the election of Officers but once you do that, it doesn’t change every month. You get on a 3 different annual schedule. One other comment though in the wording, which is actually better 4 in the ordinance but not as it’s explained, there’s the unfortunate reference to maintaining a 1-5 year term limit. Just the words term limits have implications and that’s not the intent to limit 6 anybody to only 1-year ever. And I just think it’s… 7 Commissioner Alcheck: One-year at a time. 8 Chair Lauing: At a time, yeah so if that could just be clarified. 9 Commissioner Monk: I would just say 12-month period. 10 Chair Lauing: We’re just going to do down the rows here on this stuff. 11 Commissioner Summa: [unintelligible – no mic] 12 Chair Lauing: Yeah, we’re on Fourteen. I was just tagging onto the Assistant Director’s general 13 comments about the flexibility that’s being created here, just to kind of set the stage for the 14 discussion. But the other point that I was raising was this term limit just has implications that 15 aren’t intended so I just think that there’s some language change there. Why don’t we go ahead 16 and Commissioner Summa, did you have anything on that? 17 Commissioner Summa: On Fourteen? 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Yeah, ok. Alcheck? 1 Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah so, I’ll just chime in here. I think actually it’s a very good point. It 2 didn’t even occur to me when I read it and it’s happened in my experience. Commissioner 3 Eduardo Martinez served at Chair during my 10-year and the then Vice Chair was not 4 reappointed and in the absence of that reappointment we could have selected a new Chair 5 from the remaining Commissioners but we chose to reappoint Commissioner Martinez and he 6 served 2-terms. And so, the language kind of sounds like it would prohibit that so I actually 7 think that’s a really good idea. And I actually would suggest that we change the sentence a little 8 more so it would say something like serve in such a capacity for 12-months at a time or 1-year 9 at a time (interrupted) 10 Chair Lauing: It says that for 1-year each. 11 Commissioner Alcheck: Until… Then I would add at which point another election should take 12 place. I don’t think it should say until a successor is elected because I think we should codify 13 that elections should take place regularly, as opposed to… Here’s my [unintelligible], the reason 14 why this got all messed up is because the City Council had a very difficult time recruiting people 15 to this Commission and as a result, they actually unilaterally extended the terms. I originally… 16 my term was supposed to end in June 2017 and about 3-year ago they extended it to December 17 2017 and in the process, it became problematic. I guess my point is, is that (interrupted) 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: But the phrase here doesn’t refer to just the person that is elected. They could… 1 The Commission could decide to elect a new Vice Chair or somebody could resign or something 2 so it was meant to give us maximum flexibility but I agree with you. It should be tightened up a 3 little bit so it’s not misunderstood. 4 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok. 5 Chair Lauing: So, you could say annual terms and notwithstanding the foregoing as Attorney’s 6 say. There are no limitations to the number of terms someone can serve as an officer or 7 something like that, [unintelligible] change. 8 Commissioner Alcheck: So is it your vision that in the near term we would specifically clarify in 9 our bylaws when (interrupted) 10 Chair Lauing: Yes, right. 11 Commissioner Alcheck: I would just make one point there, which is that I… I don’t know where 12 everybody stands on this but I… Despite the fact that I don’t think it was the original intent for 13 outcoming Commissions to choose incoming leadership. I accept… I acknowledge that I don’t 14 believe that was the original intent. I believe the original intent was for the new members to 15 choose new leadership. There are two problems with that, the first is that if you have a term 16 ending Chair, there’s no one to preside over the meeting or a term ending Vice Chair and term 17 ending Chair. You have no one to preside over that meeting, that’s problem number one and 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. problem number two is that in our practice now for the last 4-years, we’ve actually had the 1 outgoing or term ending participates, so it’s the opposite of Commissioner Gardias’s point of 2 view, select the future leadership. And what I’ve personally found is that has been very helpful 3 because it allows the Commissioners who are familiar with the practices of the different 4 Commissioners to participate even if they are being termed off. Even if they “have no dog in the 5 race”, they might have a more informed opinion about who might make a better leader. 6 Whereas a new Commissioner who has never served like for example [Billy Riggs] who may be 7 unfamiliar with us doesn’t. And the significances of not making the decision today is that one of 8 those individuals who participated in the vote tonight who I believe would support my… This 9 argument that I’m making and opposed the argument Commissioner Gardias would make, 10 wouldn’t be there in January to participate in that discussion about it. That’s not to say 11 anything, I’m just making that point so that you’re aware of it and I think that there’s a vote 12 there that won’t get heard in January. 13 Chair Lauing: So, I think we get another dip at this when we come back with the bylaws so I 14 don’t think we have to really beat this up or take it offline or pull out. But let’s continue if other 15 Commissioners have comments, Commissioner Monk? 16 Commissioner Monk: Again, just looking at this purely from how it was drafted and the original 17 language which reads the Commission should elect its Officers annually at the first meeting of 18 November. So, I would hope that in the future we would receive changes that are redlined that 19 it would be more accurate so the Commission… I don’t know why Commission and elect are 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. read. Those are language that hasn’t changed so it’s just confusing to me when I’m reading this 1 for the first time. I’d like to see original context listed as it is originally. Shouldn’t be italicized, it 2 should just be black unless you want to make Commission capitalized and maybe that’s why 3 you’re trying (interrupted) 4 Mr. Lait: That’s what happened. 5 Commissioner Monk: Do it. 6 Ms. Campbell: That is what happened. 7 Commissioner Monk: So, then the C should be red and capitalized, just to make it clear for us 8 who have never seen this ever before. I shouldn’t have to be referencing it back and forth so 9 just making that as a side note from a clerical standpoint. 10 As far as the proposed language goes, I would like to see something along the lines of the 11 Commission shall annually elect a Chairperson and Vice Chairperson from its Membership who 12 shall serve in such capacity for 12-months and just leave it at that or something as simple and 13 along those lines. 14 [Note Male:] That’s fine. 15 Commissioner Monk: Thank you. 16 Commissioner Waldfogel: I don’t think I have any comment. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Commissioner Gardias? 1 Commissioner Gardias: Very good so on the… You heard me talking about this many times so 2 probably I should not be talking about this any longer but first, congratulations to the newly 3 elected Chairmen and Vice Chair; congratulations. 4 Commissioner Monk: Thank you. 5 Commissioner Gardias: However, so I resent the comments that some people are enlightened 6 and they know better whom to elect and then they have the right to elect for others. I really 7 believe this is the direct democracy and then [Note -the] body has the right to elect its 8 leadership. It means also build who’s going to be incoming Members, he should have this right. 9 and also, the same right that Commissioner Summa and Commissioner Lauing [Note -Monk?]. 10 Last time when they joined the Commission there was a curiosity because the prior leadership 11 was pretty much elected by two Council Members so for this reason, I think that things like this 12 should not be happening. Specifically, that this could make us… An argument against this 13 Commission when we fight very hard to get the public to come to our meetings and discuss it 14 with us. We should be as crystal clear from the perspective of our code and I believe that this is 15 not right. It may be legal that somebody elects people for others but I think that this is… This 16 doesn’t feel right to me. And for this reason, I think that elections should be happening once all 17 the Council… City Council appointees are installed. I think that sentence should read, the 18 Commission shall elect Officers annually at the first meeting upon installation of new 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. appointees. Which clearly says that pretty much that once the process takes place, the new 1 appointed Commissioners by the City Council, then the body selects its leadership. Thank you. 2 Chair Lauing: So those two bits of suggested wording frame the debate for the next time we’re 3 talking about the bylaws. Do you have another comment Commissioner Monk? 4 Commissioner Monk: Well, Commissioner Gardias is bringing up a point and he’s brought it up 5 now twice in this meeting so I don’t know if this is the time to discuss it but I did want to 6 address this point because he’s now made the same point twice. Is this the appropriate time? 7 Chair Lauing: Yeah but let’s keep it brief. 8 Commissioner Monk: I just want to say that I understand what you’re saying but we’re all 9 appointed by Council so the timing of it, to me, seems relevant. I think the bigger issue is what’s 10 most appropriate for this Board and I have a different perspective in that I was brought on this 11 year and Commissioner Summa was brought on as well and I don’t know if she shares this 12 perspective but I think it would be immense amount of pressure and unknowing on who to vote 13 for coming in a vacuum. I don’t know our future Commissioner Riggs and he doesn’t know any 14 of us so I wouldn’t feel comfortable coming onto this Commission and having to vote when I 15 first step onto it. I think that being here and seeing how we all interact with each other, how we 16 interact with Staff, our positions on things, I think we have a lot of value and a deep 17 understanding of what each of us brings to the table when we make out selections. So, I 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. actually support the outgoing members to do the voting versus the incoming members. I just 1 want to make that different perspective known to you, thank you. 2 Chair Lauing: Ok, Commissioner Waldfogel? 3 Commissioner Waldfogel: Sorry, just one quick comment. I just looked at the codes for other 4 Commissions and so far, everyone that I’ve looked at also includes the phrase at the end of the 5 sentence; until successors are elected unless his terms are, I’m not sure about the is but unless 6 his term is the member of the Commission sooner expires or expires sooner. So, I’m seeing this 7 under Human Relations and Utilities. 8 [Note- Male:] [unintelligible – mic not on] 9 Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah but they all seem to have this mention of term expiration. I 10 mean that might be [uninteligible] in this other language about appointing a replacement but 11 I’m just pointing out the inconsistency in the language. 12 Chair Lauing: Commissioner Summa. 13 Commissioner Summa: Just really briefly since Commissioner Monk referenced my name. I 14 would have been perfectly comfortable to vote when I got on this Board. I was familiar with the 15 members and I’ve never… I mean I’ve never heard of a Board or Commission that doesn’t vote 16 for their own Chair so just for what it’s worth, I support Commissioner Gardias’s concern. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Ok, we’ll get another dip at this one as I said so let’s go onto Fifteen but before I 1 do that, I promised to do a time check, it’s about 8 o’clock. I think we’re making, actually, quite 2 good progress with only possibly two pulls outs right now. So, if we want to press on, we can 3 unless someone wants to (interrupted) 4 Commissioner Alcheck: [unintelligible – mic not on] 5 Chair Lauing: Yeah, we can set another time limit. Do you want to go to like 8:45 and take 6 another time check? Ok, so… I’m sorry, Fifteen. 7 Commissioner Summa: I have nothing on Fifteen or Sixteen. 8 Chair Lauing: Mr. Alcheck? I had a question on Fifteen as long as we’re just going down the line 9 here. I totally agree with consistency, I just was wondering how you picked which number for 10 consistency because there could be an argument that there should be long time frames, not 11 shorter. So, as long as it’s consistent, I’m cool with it but why not make it longer so that people 12 can be notified well in advance? 13 Mr. Lait: Yeah and that’s fair. I mean the… everything else is ten so we chose ten. That’s the 14 traditional noticing period that we have for all of our entitlements. On Number Fifteen, right? 15 Chair Lauing: Yes. 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: The reason twelve is problematic for us is because it actually requires everything to be 1 set forward a week earlier for publication than it does for ten. The way the calendar sets up and 2 we (interrupted) 3 Chair Lauing: What about fourteen, does that help? 4 Mr. Lait: Well, it just pushes everything back. I mean if it was (interrupted) 5 Chair Lauing: I see what you’re saying. 6 Mr. Lait: For me, there’s no difference between twelve and fourteen because it’s in the same 7 cycle but we’re so programmed to do everything at ten. We don’t… It takes somebody who’s 8 really paying attention to what they’re working on to know that this one is unique and if you 9 missed the noticing timeline for that, we get this awkward moment where we’ve got to 10 postpone it. 11 Chair Lauing: Ok. 12 Mr. Lait: We don’t really have so much of a dog in the fight for the number, we want them to be 13 consistent. Nine out of ten are ten so we selected ten. 14 Chair Lauing: But it’s harder for you if it goes longer? 15 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: It has other implications in application processing timelines will get dragged out 1 because we’re not… We lose a week of putting things together and a lot of stuff happens in the 2 week leading up to a notice and packet. 3 Chair Lauing: Ok. Sorry, go ahead. 4 Commissioner Waldfogel: Why calendar days and not business days? I mean just in terms of 5 your process. 6 Mr. Lait: Well, this… So… (interrupted) 7 Commissioner Waldfogel: I mean does that get dicey over sometimes a year to (interrupted) 8 Mr. Lait: Over a year? 9 Commissioner Waldfogel: Well, over sometimes a year like over the holidays, does ten calendar 10 days… If somebody walked in on Christmas Eve with an application or if a notice period 11 (interrupted) 12 Mr. Lait: Yeah, so this is all noticing that we do to advise the public about stuff in the paper. 13 Commissioner Waldfogel: Right. 14 Mr. Lait: And so that always gets published on Friday. 15 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: There is a requirement that if the tenth day lands on a holiday, then 1 (interrupted) 2 Chair Lauing: It goes over. 3 Commissioner Alcheck: It’s the following business day. 4 Mr. Lait: For appeals and things of that nature, we [unintelligible] (interrupted) 5 Chair Lauing: Yeah but this is our posting as a City. 6 Mr. Lait: That's right which always happens on Friday and we account for holidays and we have 7 to do some planning ahead for holidays that are especially on Mondays and things like that. So, 8 if we published a ten-day notice in the paper, it’s there for ten days. It gets published on Friday 9 and it’s there the whole next… It’s… The meeting isn’t until the next week and then the week 10 after that so holidays don’t really come into play. 11 [Note-Male:] [unintelligible – mic not on] 12 Mr. Lait: Right. 13 [Note-Male:] [unintelligible – mic not on] 14 Commissioner Alcheck: Do you have to re-publish like if it’s ten days and the paper comes out 15 twice in that period of time? 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: No. 1 Commissioner Alcheck: Do you re-publish? 2 Mr. Lait: No. 3 Chair Lauing: Ok. Did you have anything Commissioner Gardias? 4 Commissioner Gardias: Yeah so, I was looking for the same clarification and so pretty much the 5 ten means that… Is the period because a number must mean something? So, you’re saying that 6 ten is specifically because of the process of publishing on Fridays and then it pretty goes into 7 effect or pretty much it’s business, as usual, the following Monday. 8 Mr. Lait: Yeah so basically that two adds a week to our preparation time; those two days add a 9 week. 10 Commissioner Gardias: Ok, yeah, I’m fine with this. Thank you. 11 Chair Lauing: Ok, back to the other end on Sixteen. Did you already pass on that one? And so, 12 did Mr. Alcheck? I’m good on that one. Sixteen, Commissioner Monk? 13 Commissioner Monk: Can you just give us a little context of where this is coming into play 14 because it’s referring to the Chapter and I don’t know what Chapter it’s referring to since it’s 15 entirely new. 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Ms. Campbell: Yeah so what we’re trying to do is add in some specific language to state that 1 applications can be withdrawn by the applicant and (interrupted) 2 Commissioner Monk: Sorry, there’s a little bit of a side dialog. Can you just tell me where to 3 look in the current code where you’re planning on putting this and then (interrupted) 4 Ms. Campbell: 1840.190. 5 Commissioner Monk: So, it’s going to follow what? 6 Mr. Lait: It’s just another grab bag area of the code, it’s [unintelligible](interrupted) 7 Commissioner Monk: Oh, ok so where (interrupted) 8 Ms. Campbell: It’s going to follow the set Retail Preservation is… 1840.180 is the section 9 previous. 10 Commissioner Monk: Ok, I don’t have that in my (interrupted) 11 Mr. Lait: You don’t. 12 Commissioner Monk: I might have an outdated printout. I… My… The zoning code that I was 13 provided seems to end at 1840.150, that’s probably why I’m a little lost. 14 Mr. Lait: We’ve adopted a couple things probably since we’ve given that to you, Retail 15 Preservation is one of them. 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Monk: Ok so that’s why I don’t know the context of this. 1 Mr. Lait: Yeah, that’s right. So, this is like the general provisions where we don’t have a place to 2 put something, this is the section that it goes. It doesn’t neatly fit into districts or things like 3 that. And again, we just have some applications that sit around for a long time and we don’t 4 really have a mechanism to deal with them. We ask applicant… a lot of people blame the City 5 for not processing applications in a timely manner but I’ll tell you, there’s a whole other set of 6 stories where we have a bunch of applications that we’re waiting for a response from an 7 applicant or architect. It’s amazing how many times architects can change, homeowners change 8 plans and so the whole point of this is to allow us to move applications along without denying 9 them. And an applicant doesn’t get a refund on denials but here we can have their application 10 withdrawn and then people are eligible for a refund at least. 11 Chair Lauing: Was that it? 12 Commissioner Monk: Thank you. 13 Chair Lauing: Commissioner Waldfogel? 14 Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, I’m sorry, I’m still on Fifteen and I was just trying to get 15 clarification on this. Is there a reason why you wouldn’t operate on six business days rather 16 than ten calendar days? I mean would that have the same effect? What I’m trying to get at is 17 suppose you sent out… I’m not saying you would ever do this but you could imagine an evil 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Director who sends out applications… Who sends out a notice the Friday before Thanksgiving. 1 And then in the ten-day requirement goes through two or three holidays so you… But you’d still 2 be fully compliant. The end day would still be a business… It would still be a work day; the start 3 day would be a work day but this would go out over a duration that really takes away an 4 opportunity to respond. 5 Mr. Lait: Its… Again, this is a notice requirement with an outgoing notice to… From the City to 6 the paper. This is also to residents? 7 Ms. Campbell: Nope, this is just notice (interrupted) 8 Mr. Lait: This is just a notice to the paper so I… All of our notices are ten-day notice. This one’s 9 an outlying at twelve days. I don’t know how the holidays necessarily factor into that notice. 10 They always get published on Friday. 11 Ms. Campbell: It does include the card as well, sorry. It does include the notice cards. 12 Mr. Lait: Advising of the hearing date. 13 Ms. Campbell: Yes. 14 Mr. Lait: I would say I think business days adds… I mean that’s a real shift of us. If the 15 Commission thought that the ten days was too short and there’s been no indication that it is so 16 far by… Since I’ve been here. People may talk about not getting notices but nobodies talked 17 about the time frame for the notice. But I would polite push back on business days and if there 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. needed to be some movement, I’d rather see the number of days change but I’m not 1 advocating for that. I just think that’s more of a structural change. 2 Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, I’m just looking… I think there’s a legal definition somewhere 3 on what business days or work days are for the City and I’m just trying to track it down in the 4 code; I’m looking for the reference. 5 Commissioner Monk: I think that going back to the twelve days, if that’s a concern of yours, 6 would just elevate any of those calculations if that’s what you’re really worried about. But I 7 think for consistency, you’re looking… Is this… Is what you do in this section going to have an 8 impact on other notice requirements? 9 Ms. Campbell: This existing… So, the ten days requirement is what we use for everything else. 10 We use it for architectural review (interrupted) 11 Commissioner Monk: So, this is the main section so don’t you think that our community would 12 be a little (interrupted) 13 Ms. Campbell: No, it’s the other… So, for all of our other entitlements aside form these ones 14 here for the maps, we use a ten-day period… Calendar day period. So, these are the only ones 15 that are inconsistent with everything else that we do so that’s where the difference is. 16 Chair Lauing: Ok, we’re on Sixteen now. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: I have a quick question about the inactive application provision, that 1 would be on Page 18b. So, I understand that there’s a lot of application that Staff… That no one 2 is waiting on Staff to do anything. That’s really on the… The [unintelligible] is on the applicant to 3 sort of do something. One of my issues here is like for example, let’s say you submitted 4 something at the beginning of this year and then you’ve become aware of the ADU discussion 5 and it makes you want to wait so that you can sort of determine how the ADU would shake out. 6 Considering how long it took for us to sort of… We haven’t even had out study session yet to 7 sort of understand it. I was at a meeting a couple weeks ago that Director Gitelman hosted 8 where she explained how the ADU is working in our City and I noticed a lot of people felt like it 9 was very informative. I guess my point is that to me is like the classic example of somebody 10 goes in but then they are like oh, interesting and my comments that I got back reflected issues 11 but this ordinance might change. Their decision to be inactive for a certain amount of time 12 while they reevaluate the financial implications and maybe the law changing. I wonder if really 13 six months should just… My point is that six months seem very short considering that most 14 applications from beginning of submission to conclusion are not typically six-month process; 15 like you submit and if you’re in a single-family review… I mean a two-story IR review, you’re 16 unlikely to get your final probably within six months. It’s probably going to be a little longer 17 than that so (interrupted) 18 Chair Lauing: Jonathan. 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: Just to clarify, we’re talking about no activity in six months. We know that 1 applications could take six months, eight months to process. We’re saying we’re 2 [unintelligible]… We’re getting no feedback from the applicant team for six months. 3 Commissioner Alcheck: So would like an email saying we’re going to wait until your ADU 4 discussion is complete to respond to the comments you’ve made which could theoretically take 5 eight months. Would that suffice as activity? I guess that’s what I’m trying to say. I understand 6 you say we need to see your architectural plan reflect the following changes. Those changes 7 require someone to sit down with their architect and make some compromises but they may be 8 navigating other issues and financial questions and six months just seem short. That’s what I am 9 saying. 10 Mr. Lait: So, the whole point about this is to connect with the applicant, make sure their still 11 connected and engaged in the project. This doesn’t mandate the Director to withdraw the 12 application, it simply states that the Director shall have the authority. We get cases where an 13 applicant will say we’re going to have revised plans to you in six weeks. Two months pass, we’re 14 going to have revised plans in a month. Fine (interrupted) 15 Commissioner Alcheck: My question is you have a term here called adequately respond and 16 the question is would (interrupted) 17 Mr. Lait: The scenario that you just described may qualify for that. I mean if there’s a policy 18 issue. 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: That’s my point, sort of figuring out would it qualify and (interrupted) 1 Mr. Lait: It’s subject… Yeah, the Director would have that authority to make that 2 determination. I mean part of this is as an application, is it right for processing? There’s a lot of 3 expectation on Staff to process applications within a certain time frame. We want to also make 4 sure that there’s an expectation of that when you file an application, that it’s being processed 5 and that we’re getting that same response time so that we can provide that service to you. So… 6 But if there’s a policy… 7 Commissioner Alcheck: I don’t… now look, I don’t know that I necessarily think they are linked. 8 We’re in the habit of processing applications because we run a Development Center that takes 9 applications and we make it… We’ve sort of obligated ourselves to respond quickly but I don’t 10 know why an applicant is… I don’t know why the… I don’t know why our Building Department 11 would have… Would be concerned whether an applicant was working through the issues they 12 have to work through in a timely way. It’s not like if you want to build, you have to build quick. 13 Mr. Lait: So, I don’t disagree with that statement. That’s exactly right and if that’s the scenario, 14 then there’s no issue. We’re talking about inactivity, nothing, no feedback. 15 Commissioner Alcheck: Well, adequate. 16 Mr. Lait: That’s right. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: We’re talking about adequate responses so I’m just saying, my point is 1 that that’s where I’m struggling with this. I don’t know maybe the time frame should be 2 extended based on our experience with the ADU. That’s really the only reason I mentioned it 3 because I feel like there are people who are in the marketplace right now who have put their 4 plan on hold because they are still trying to figure out if the ADU changes are affecting them. 5 Chair Lauing: Commissioner Monk? 6 Commissioner Monk: To follow up with what Commissioner Alcheck was stating, perhaps we 7 would consider putting in a definition of inactivity. Just something to think about. 8 Commissioner Alcheck: It is defined. It’s the question of what is adequate? 9 Commissioner Monk: Or rather a definition of adequate. Just something to consider and I 10 would just also add that the way it’s written, the first sentence, in and of itself is quite extreme 11 if you just read it by itself. It looks like now after you read that sentence, then there’s a notice 12 that they may or may not provide. I’d like to see baked into that first sentence that some sort… 13 I think it would be fair that they would be obligated to notify the applicant because the way 14 that its written looks pretty draconian. And then just maybe clean up the second sentence 15 afterward to support that. That would just be my feedback on that content. 16 Chair Lauing: Ok, Commissioner Waldfogel. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Waldfogel: Thanks. Just some clarification on the process here so let’s say that 1 an applicant submits… Let’s say if somebody submits an application for development, do we 2 freeze the codes that apply to that application on the day that first application is submitted? I 3 mean I’m just trying to understand a scenario… What the scenarios are for something sitting in 4 the process for a long period of time; potentially dormmate. 5 Mr. Lait: So, I think it depends on the application, for one. Most of our applications would be 6 subject to the codes that are in place at the time that permits are issued. Though if you’re 7 deemed complete… Well, I guess… Yeah, once your… Ok. 8 Mr. Yang: So, typically pending applications are subject to any new changes in the law. Often 9 when we do change the law, we exempt pending applications but there’s no obligation to do 10 that. 11 Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok, so there’s no freeze. There’s no… you don’t get any entitlement 12 to the current law by submitting an application on… On a date certain, is that correct? 13 Mr. Yang: As a general matter, no, unless there’s some specific provision that says that there is 14 such a freeze but as a general matter, no. 15 Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok, let me just ponder that for a second but thank you. 16 Commissioner Alcheck: I do have a quick question, is there… I’m vaguely remembering that 17 there’s a rule that allows the Building Department or maybe the Director to refuse applications 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. if another application was submitted within a certain period of time. Is that… Is there… So, if 1 someone’s application was withdrawn, they could be excluded from re-submitting an 2 application? 3 Mr. Lait: So, this wouldn’t apply to that scenario. There is something where after… the City 4 could take an action where it would freeze the filing of a similar application that was denied 5 within twelve months. This has nothing to do with that provision that a withdrawn application 6 doesn’t trigger that. And then also, just to be clear, we’re not talking about Building Permits. 7 We’re talking about planning entitlements, these are AR… not a Building Permit. Architectural 8 Review Applications, individual review applications, Conditional Use Permits, these are the pre-9 planning process, not the Building Permit. 10 Chair Lauing: Ok. Commissioner Waldfogel, are you ok on this one? 11 Commissioner Waldfogel: I’m just still trying to work through some scenarios in my head 12 because it seems like it’s prudent if you know the rules are changing, a prudent course of action 13 is to try to get a complete application in as quickly as possible to… That you may even… You 14 may choose to amend later. But I’m just trying to understand the process and can do to protect 15 themselves from code changes because you know, design processes take time so what’s the… 16 What is a prudent person… What would a prudent person do and how does that play into this 17 timeline? 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Yang: So, typically the general rule is that you only obtain a right to the rules as they exist to 1 freeze them in place. If you have an improved… Sorry, if you have an approved entitlement so 2 you’ve made your application, it’s gone through the process, it’s been approved and you’ve 3 made a substantial expenditure in reliance on the entitlement. That’s the point in which the 4 rules freeze so just filing an application, complete or not, really, for the most part, does 5 nothing. 6 Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok, so substantial… I’m sorry, what was the word you used? 7 Substantial (interrupted) 8 Mr. Yang: Expenditure and reliance on that approval. 9 Commissioner Waldfogel: And what about substantial expenditure and reliance in a design 10 process on a rule set? That’s not something that [unintelligible](interrupted) 11 Mr. Yang: If there’s no approval, then you’re not relying on anything. 12 Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok, that may be a different topic but I think that is on the earlier 13 point that is something that maybe we need to… That bears on what the Lundy’s were 14 discussing and something that we may need to explore. Because what that does is it 15 discourages the design because it creates huge risks for taking the time to do go design. 16 Chair Lauing: Ok, one final comment from Commissioner Alcheck. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, I know I… Now look, I appreciate that we’re eager to wrap this 1 quickly but the whole point here is to figure out whether or not these issues are more complex. 2 And so, I would just ask this question too or this is for the group to think through. What extent 3 does this… How could financial hardship… how could a… I don’t know a death that involved in 4 the applicant ownership group or something… I’m trying to think through the scenarios where 5 somebody is like you know, I can’t work on this. And maybe they are not even really the… I 6 don’t know. The time frame seems very short, that’s my main issue with this. I think that the 7 idea is correct, I just think the time period is short and I wonder if there’s any consensus there. 8 Mr. Lait: So, can I just offer… So, nothing about this prevents the Director from making a 9 decision on a project that’s been inactive. We can deny an application that’s been sitting 10 around for three months, four months, if we’re not getting what we think is enough traction on 11 the application to move it forward. What this is doing is it’s creating… It’s codifying a process, 12 memorializing this withdrawal procedure and it gives an applicant an opportunity to receive 13 money back. You’re not getting money back if we make an action on the application. If we deny 14 the application because we don’t have enough information to process the application, we’re… 15 And we deny it, you got to pay your new fees and all that kind of stuff. If you’ve paid fees and 16 you’ve for whatever reason, it stalled out and you’re not going to get to it for a while, maybe 17 this application isn’t right for processing. You withdraw the application, you recoup your fees 18 that you’re able to recoup and you come back and you file when you are ready to file. It also 19 doesn’t preclude the Director from having the thoughtful conversation that you are talking 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. about which is when the circumstance comes up and it’s reasonable to say yeah, you’re right. 1 This… we’ll give this one more time to move… Take the time. If there was a death in the family 2 and we’ve had that. We’ve actually had those kinds of scenarios come up and we… Where not 3 in this to be difficult, we’re trying to create a process that transparent and everybody 4 understands the rules because right now we’re just kind of winging it. 5 Commissioner Alcheck: I think what you’re trying to do is encourage… You’re trying to create a 6 process by which your encouraging applicants to be responsive. I understand that I actually 7 think it’s a smart idea. I just am of the opinion that six months is a very short time frame, that’s 8 all. I think… That’s all I have to say. 9 Chair Lauing: Ok. 10 Commissioner Monk: I don’t know about the six months but just in how it’s written, I would 11 just have you look at it again through the lens of the applicant and determine whether or not 12 you’re having it be too subjective on the Director’s side because it looks pretty one-sided. 13 Mr. Lait: Yeah, we can certainly look at how we’ve phrased it. 14 Commissioner Monk: Yeah and even at the end of it because under inactivity, that definition is 15 saying if the Director deems they haven’t adequately responded. So, even if they do respond if 16 the Director says oh, well you responded but it wasn’t adequate therefore I’m denying you. It 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. just gives a lot of power to the Director and I just would like to see a little bit more balanced if 1 possible. 2 Then going back to Section A, you might want to consider adding in a time period. You’ve 3 mentioned that the application… That by providing written notification to the Director but you 4 don’t give any indication about when so you might want to consider what would work on your 5 end on the time period. If they need to give twenty-four hours or week or whatever would be 6 best for Staff. 7 Commissioner Alcheck: A follow up question, is there a process… If someone felt that they have 8 been withdrawn in a… If an applicant felt that they had been sort of withdrawn and disagreed 9 with this sentiment of the Director that their response wasn’t aliquant. Is there a process by 10 which they could appeal? 11 Mr. Lait: So, there’s no appeal of a withdrawal, you can file a new application. 12 Commissioner Alcheck: No, I mean is there a process by which they could appeal the Director’s 13 determination (interrupted) 14 Mr. Lait: To withdraw an application? 15 Commissioner Alcheck: That their response wasn’t adequate? 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: No but I would say this. If it was… If you are an applicant, I don’t think we’re going to 1 go through the process of withdrawing it. We just may make a decision on it, I mean you 2 understand what I’m saying? It’s (interrupted) 3 Commissioner Alcheck: I’m actually just trying to understand how what oversite there is. 4 Mr. Lait: Yeah, this isn’t… I mean clearly there’s intended to give broad authority to the 5 Director to make this decision, that’s clear. And it is with the intent to make sure that 6 applications are being processed in an efficient manner both on our end but also on the 7 applicant end. It creates a process for withdraws and application refunds without having to 8 make a decision. None of this precludes the City from making a decision on an application. 9 There’s no added process, there are no added timelines, there are no added hurdles for an 10 applicant. It sets up a transparent process for dialog and we’ll work on the language to make 11 sure that it reads more balanced and less draconian as I heard. But this is how organizations… 12 The fact that we don’t have something like this in our code is a bit surprising frankly, on how 13 you process applications that have been stale. 14 Commissioner Monk: I think it’s necessary but also maybe consider you’re calling it application 15 withdrawal so maybe also consider in the title the additional powers that you’re looking to give 16 to the Director. So, at least they are aware that application withdrawal and results of inactivity 17 in six months or just something along those lines so that it alerts the applicant that there’s this 18 authority that they can lose their application within a period if they are not active. 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Ms. Campbell: I just want to add too, just coming from a planner’s perspective. We would very 1 diligently to engage with our applicants all the time. We never just say oh, I haven’t heard from 2 you in a month. We email, we call, we try to engage and we’ll hear back from them all the time 3 and we try our best to work with them to accommodate their issues and their concerns. We… 4 closing out an application is not something that we do all the time. It actually doesn’t happen 5 very often at all but this is just putting something in the code that actually gives us a process… A 6 legitimate process. 7 Chair Lauing: Ok, I have new lights popping up here and ok. Mr. Gardias? 8 Commissioner Gardias: Sure, yes, thank you so I’m fine with the language. I think it’s very 9 reasonable and clarifies the process. Maybe the wording could be a little bit polished just so 10 applicants don’t feel pressed but you know, it’s logical. Six months is a reasonable period if 11 there’s no activity within this period of time and then there’s also a mechanism to interact 12 between the Director… It says the Director shall and then just it’s a [unintelligible] process upon 13 the Director to follow up with applicants whose applications are inactive for a period of time. 14 So, I don’t find anything wrong with this process, I support this and hope we can move on. 15 Thank you. 16 Chair Lauing: Ok. Are you done? 17 Commissioner Monk: I just want to say that I absolutely support this and Commissioner 18 Alcheck and I are both attorneys so we’re looking at this through the lens of what’s the best 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. way of drafting. And we’re not… At least I’m not passing judgment on any capacity so I hope it’s 1 not interpreted that way. I’m just trying to be helpful. 2 Mr. Lait: And please, I mean absolutely, that’s why we are here. It’s the spirit of this 3 conversation and the back and forth and please don’t construe any excitement, particularly on 4 my end, about the topic. It’s just something that we’re… We’re passionate about the work that 5 we do and we’re presenting here. It’s not like we’re trying to be difficult. 6 Chair Lauing: Ok, thanks. Are we ready for a juicy one now? Are we ready for leaf blowers? 7 Commissioner Gardias: That was a very interesting statement by the way. I look forward to 8 going back to these meeting minutes. 9 Chair Lauing: So, I’m getting a question now from Commission Alcheck is this one we want to 10 pull? I (interrupted) 11 Commissioner Alcheck: I guess I would say I’m not suggesting pull but maybe at the follow-up 12 meeting we could see language that reflects the changes that we’re suggesting. 13 Chair Lauing: Isn’t that intent? You’re going to show us kind of any revised languages before it 14 goes to Council? 15 Mr. Lait: Yeah, we’ll wait to see what the disposition is here but we’re definitely going to do 16 some different language. I mean we’re hearing very clearly that we need to polish this up and 17 make it a little more… 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Lawyerly. 1 Mr. Lait: Well and you know we have our lawyers also looking at it too but we get the 2 sentiment. I mean that’s what we’ll do. 3 Chair Lauing: Right, let’s jump right into leaf blowers. I’m sure this will be completely non-4 controversial. 5 Commissioner Summa: Okey-dokey. So, you already answered one of my questions that we’re 6 not… that we don’t have jurisdiction over the school district. So, some observations I have is 7 that since we’ve determined that there’s technology available besides… That are not internal 8 combustion engine leaf blowers. Why wouldn’t the City use them as well? 9 Mr. Lait: So, this ordinance… So, I’m not… We don’t have a position on that right now. I mean 10 that’s not what we studied. That’s not what we were looking at in this particular ordinance. 11 There is a policy conversation that probably should take place about the City’s use of leaf 12 blowers. And… But that is something that has broader implications across multiple departments 13 and City operations and fiscal considerations. We weren’t interested in making any changes to 14 any existing City procedures. What we are trying to do is address a consistent refrain that we 15 get from the community and confusion about these… And we get these requests that come in 16 and they’ll say hey, this building just down the street… This commercial building… Has got all 17 these… They're using their gas-powered leaf blowers. I thought they were banned and what 18 we’re trying to do is in the same vain that the gas-powered leaf blowers were implemented in 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. the first place in the residential districts, we’re particularly interested in these transition areas 1 where people are… they are not understanding why we can’t enforce it in the commercial area 2 but we enforce it… We have regulations to enforce in the residential area. And So, I… I’m not… 3 Your topic Commissioner Summa is, I think a broader policy conversation that was beyond 4 where we wanted to go on this particular issue. 5 Commissioner Summa: Ok but we are prohibiting now in commercial areas with this? 6 Mr. Lait: That’s the proposal. 7 Commissioner Summa: And our… currently, the ordinance allows certain… Based on how 8 powerful and loud they are certain gas leaf blowers, will those still be allowed? 9 Ms. Campbell: The gas leaf blowers are not allowed a period in residential districts. 10 Commissioner Summa: Ok So… Ok, I guess I would just say that it looks a little funny to impose 11 something on everybody else in the City, including huge properties in the Research Park with 12 very big amounts of areas they might like to manicure and not ask the City to do it. So, I think 13 we should probably consider that. 14 Mr. Lait: Yeah, I… You know obviously we’ll hear from the rest of the Commission about that 15 but I think that’s a comment that we’d absolutely include in the Staff report to Council about 16 what is the City’s disposition on this issue and should we be studying it further? 17 Commissioner Summa: Ok. 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Commissioner Alcheck. 1 Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah so, I’m going to take a different position here but before I do that, 2 this is a good example of like why does the City Staff feel that they are in a position to articulate 3 what should or should not be allowed and why aren’t the community participating more in a 4 process to determine what they want? This is a perfect example of my issue with you advancing 5 the ordinance as written with comments of ours on the side. In theory, this is something we 6 should discuss and determine if we want. 7 Now I will make my case really quickly, I think it’s ludicrous to require commercial property 8 owners in the City to use leaf blowers. I believe that one of the reasons why the regulations 9 that exist currently aren’t well enforced, one of the many reasons, is because neighbors don’t 10 really want to call in enforcement on other neighbors. And when neighbors talk to their 11 landscapers about this, they probably hear from the landscapers that non-gas-powered leaf 12 blowers are pretty ineffective. However, for the moment I will not make that argument but I 13 will suggest to you that the notion that… Take the property on the corner of Page Mill and El 14 Camino that houses the movie theater. I don’t know the name of that property. 15 [Note-Female:] Palo Alto Square. 16 Commissioner Alcheck: Palo Alto Square. The notion that someone would drag an extension 17 cord from corner to corner on that property is so… And their little parking lot is so ridiculous to 18 maintain the property. I want to jump onto the back of what Commissioner Summa said which 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. is the notion that individuals around the corner from where Commissioner Gardias lives on… 1 across the street from Rinconada, can’t use a blower but the Staff of Palo Alto can use a blower 2 for 2 1/2-hours at Rinconada Park is also problematic. If the City… And I believe the City if they 3 did investigate this issue, they would come back and say it is literally economically infeasible for 4 us not to use blowers, that would be the response. If the City did look into it, they would get 5 feedback from their landscaping services that what do you mean? How can we possibly 6 maintain all of our property without the flexibility of non-corded blowers? So, that’s what the 7 City would say and we would exempt them because we don’t want to ensure the extra cost or 8 the inefficacy that would surround hand raking or potentially running around with an extension 9 cord. So, to me in perfect world neighbors who have real problems with this, maybe their 10 neighbors would respect them and adhere to the policy that we have in place for the R-1 but to 11 require for example our local schools that [unintelligible] private or our major property owners 12 that have huge parking lots, Stanford Research Park is a perfect example, from not being able to 13 effectively do this, seems like a problem. 14 And here’s again, I’ll restate my first point, we didn’t really notice the community that we were 15 going to take on. It’s kind of a big… I would argue a big change so nobody is here from the 16 commercial community to sort of understand this because if you read the notice in the paper, 17 we were doing an annual exercise in clarifying policies and revising and correcting little nuance 18 issues. And so, again, I don’t know why this… The Planning Department or where ever this came 19 from has a dog in this fight, aside from the fact that they may get some or to many complaints 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. from a resident. But the notion that we would discuss this without more input seems very 1 foolish and I believe that the reason why they’re excluding the City from the discussion is 2 because the answer is… I’m not suggesting that they are hiding the answer but I’m suggesting 3 that the answer is very likely to be that it would be very infeasible economically. So, that’s 4 where I stand on this one. Pull, pull it. 5 Chair Lauing: Commissioner Waldfogel. 6 Commissioner Waldfogel: Thanks, yeah, this is an interesting one. I agree with some of the 7 points that Commissioner Alcheck just made but what I point out is that the purpose of this 8 seems to be around high noise. I mean you could imagine three purposes around leaf blower 9 bans, one being the noise, the second on being dust, and the third one being fumes and carbon 10 footprint. And we generally have a requirement on noise, 65 DBA, in… what is this? 9.10.060f-1, 11 there’s a 65 DBA noise requirement that’s across the board for combustion or electric leaf 12 blowers and some compliance process. I’m not sure that’s well enforced. I looked at some 13 other jurisdictions, I think Burlingame publishes a list of approved products that meet that 65 14 DBA standard and it might be that just across the board. What we should be focusing on are the 15 noise levels. You know basically requiring that everybody meet the 65 DBA standard or some 16 other standard and that would be a fair approach. I could imagine over time battery powered 17 leaf blowers may evolve to a point where they work on commercial scale. I don’t know but this 18 just seems like it’s trying to capture something that may be a problem but I’m just not sure 19 we’re addressing it correctly tonight. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Commissioner Gardias, do you have a questions or comments? 1 Commissioner Gardias: Sure, thank you. So, I have a subtly different perspective. So first of all, I 2 don’t understand, I mean we… you told me why very much the City is excluded from these 3 operations but I just… Looking how further our government operates, for example on the 4 [unintelligible] buildings. Where pretty much it takes leadership on converting government 5 buildings to lead certifiable buildings and to allowing the rest of the world just to catch up as 6 they may economically and giving thirty percent of GEP [unintelligible] or large number or 7 twenty being a government expenditure. I think that the City should take the lead pretty much 8 on proposing the internal processes before the rest of the City is subject to this legislation. So, I 9 disagree totally that the City should be excused from this ordinance but then, of course, there’s 10 a larger problem with enforcement and we know this. I totally… It’s not enforced in my 11 neighborhood at least, everybody is using gas-powered blowers. 12 By the way, there are leaf blowers that are battery operated these days and then of course 13 contractors, they have the cord that can span for hundreds of yards away from the truck 14 because they have a battery on the truck. And then pretty much they pull this cord far away so 15 they can service large areas, even the parking in front of the theater square. But then there’s a 16 technology that allows them to do this… To use the power… Battery powered blowers 17 remotely. So, I don’t believe that from the technology perspective there’s any use, my request 18 is rather just to have the City take leadership on enforcing its own policy as opposed to before it 19 proposes any policies on the rest of the town. Thank you. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Yeah so, I would make a couple comments here but the main one is this one 1 might have enough consensus to pull it now and just say that the Commission doesn’t support 2 it. Based on the consistency issue that any number of these other things we’re trying to get in 3 place, a number of days and so on. If we have commercial banned, homeowners banned, and 4 City can do whatever they want, that goes beyond a problem of just optics. There is just no 5 consistency with that so I think we can get there. 6 With respect to enforcement, its kind of the same thing. I mean it seems to me that there are 7 ways that you could make sure that some Deputy gives out two tickets a day to gardeners, the 8 word starts to spread that you’re not supposed to use these. That might help a little bit but 9 that’s going to be inconsistent as well because the factory next door to the house can use it. So 10 similar to what Commissioner Alcheck said if we were going to consider this I think the… we 11 would like to have the City come up with what would they do and then notice it so there can be 12 some comment on it. I think without that I’m not hearing any votes in place of that. Yeah, 13 Commissioner Alcheck? 14 Commissioner Alcheck: I just want to understand because I’m not saying I don’t see… I’m not 15 suggesting that I personal… I mean I don’t love this personally but I’m not suggesting in this 16 medium that my personal opinion about the validity of electric versus gas should control. What 17 I’m suggesting and I just want to clarify, is that we should have a conversation outside of the 18 annual code clean up where we discuss this. 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: I got it but what I’m suggesting is we might be able to go further now which is to 1 say that we (interrupted) 2 Commissioner Alcheck: No, see this is my problem, I just want to clarify. Asher… Commissioner 3 Waldfogel’s comments are actually very interesting. He just came up with a very interesting 4 way to approach it but I don’t believe that this type of decision should be made on the fly 5 where one Commissioner says oh, I know there’s electric out there and other Commissioner 6 says well, why don’t we… The real way that we should approach these decisions is by noticing 7 the community and having a discussion. 8 Chair Lauing: Right, I’m not disagreeing with you so it’s good we’re having this conversation. 9 What I’m saying is that there isn’t enough information here to even have a conversation on it 10 tonight so what I’m suggesting is we have to make a non-decision meaning we cannot support 11 what’s being done. 12 Commissioner Alcheck: I just wanted… I just hope that our communication to Council isn’t 13 reflective that we disagreed with the position. It’s that we felt that the position shouldn’t be 14 incorporated into the ordinance without further review. 15 Chair Lauing: Yeah. 16 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok, alright. 17 Chair Lauing: And again, my understanding… 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: Some of us might agree that it should be a restriction. 1 Chair Lauing: Yeah so… But my understanding again, we’re reiterating, is that anything that 2 goes to Council is going to very specifically itemize and iterate what our objections were to one 3 of these twenty-three policies. 4 Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah but it’s not… I just want to be clear. I’m not objecting to the policy, 5 I’m objecting to the process. The process should involve community outreach and discussion. 6 We should have a hearing where we talk about whether or not we want this new policy 7 initiative so I’m not objecting to… In this particular instance, I’m not objecting to the use of… To 8 the restriction that leaf blowers not be used on commercial property even though I personally 9 feel they probably shouldn’t. I’m objecting that we’re including this new policy as if we’re 10 annually improving our ordinance without… Nobody is here. 11 Chair Lauing: Right, no, no, that’s what I’m saying. 12 Commissioner Alcheck: That’s my point. It’s not… and that’s why I find that this notion that the 13 Staff is going to articulate that we took issue with… It’s not that. It’s why aren’t you… Why does 14 Staff believe these are minor enough to not include a discussion with the community? This is 15 my point. 16 Chair Lauing: I think we get the point. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: We can’t possibly know how involved this is without having a 1 conversation. 2 Chair Lauing: I think we got that point. Commissioner Summa. 3 Commissioner Summa: I did want to make a few clarifying comments. I really appreciate in 4 general that Staff brought this forward because I think gas-powered leaf blowers are awful 5 personally and they get complaints all the time. If you look on [Note - Building I] on the 6 enforcement map, it’s one of the most common code enforcement complaints. 7 I also would like to state that there are battery driven ones, I think Commissioner Gardias 8 mentioned it. One of the worries that I have frankly is the cost of replacing the equipment will 9 go to the people… In most cases most financially capable of … Incapable of not having it hurt 10 them, meaning small gardening firms. So, I think some consideration should be given to that 11 also because maybe the building owner should be required to provide the equipment. There’s… 12 we have to think about that at least and how that might affect a lot of people. 13 And also, I think we should examine the City’s policy of where we use leaf blowers. Leaf blowers 14 are generally regarded to be very bad for the environment because they blow away the topsoil 15 so I think maybe… I’m not saying I think the City does it wrong but it would be good to have a 16 conversation about the policy about leaf blower use in City-owned properties, especially parks. 17 So… but I think there’s enough concern about this that we should take it off. 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Yeah, what I was suggesting is that we can take it off because of all of the 1 information so right now Seventeen is off. Any other comments on Seventeen? 2 Commissioner Monk: Yeah, I had a question and perhaps it’s been answered but in the policy 3 behind bringing this tonight, you’re talking about extending this existing regulation to 4 commercial and that’s all you state. But then when we look at it, you add a whole new Section 5 Three about this internal combustion engine and all these things. How does that comport with 6 the beginning of this code section that you did not include in our packet that says, the DBA 7 levels and things like that in Item Number One? So, it is contradictory within its own section? 8 Under F you gave us a language for Number Two and Number Three but Number One talks 9 about… No one else here can look at it because it wasn’t provided. I’m looking online at our 10 code section under leaf blowers. Again, this was just pulled out of… This was part of the code. 11 The code says that no person shall operate a leaf blower which does not have the manufactures 12 label designating a 65 DBA when measured at a distance of 50-feet American Standards, things 13 like that. That’s how this provision starts so how does that comport with this new internal 14 combustion engine language that you’re adding? 15 Mr. Lait: Yeah, we can… We’ve heard a lot of comments on this one. Let us talk a look at that 16 one as well and we can report back to the Commission on this item when we come back. I don’t 17 have the code section in front of me right now. 18 Commissioner Monk: Ok. 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Ok so Seventeen is off right now. Moving to Eighteen, trash enclosures in CD. 1 Since there was a lot of discussion about that, Jonathan do you want to kind of very briefly 2 reframe that? Number Eighteen on what we’re trying to capture here. 3 Commissioner Alcheck: Oh, yeah, I’ll let Clare actually summarize the trash enclosure in the CD 4 district. 5 Ms. Campbell: Ok so let me just bring up the slide. 6 Chair Lauing: This is probably going to be the last one before we do the time check. I mean it is 7 the last one before the time check and it may be the last one we do period. 8 Ms. Campbell: So currently in our definitions in the gross floor area for commercial and multi-9 family exemptions, there is this existing language that’s referenced in that first paragraph and 10 it’s listed in our attached ordinance. I can find that page for you which is… so it’s on Packet Page 11 34 and that’s the draft ordinance. So, there was existing language that has some exemptions for 12 minor additions when its related to code compliance. So, what we’re trying to do is take away 13 the restriction of the CD districts so that we can also have this Director… At the Director’s 14 discretion to have this additional exemption provided for projects in the downtown. And it’s 15 just that it’s come up where many sites are maybe built up with the floor area but there is still 16 available lot coverage but because trash enclosures would count toward your floor area, there’s 17 no way to accommodate these trash enclosures without going through a complicated variance 18 process or some type of exception process. So, what we’re trying to do is have a provision that 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. would apply not just everywhere but… I mean not to just everywhere other the CD but include 1 the CD as well and have the provisions that are a limited amount of floor area could be made 2 available to be compliant with our code requirements for a covered and enclosed trash area. 3 Chair Lauing: Ok. Let’s start with Commissioner Summa. 4 Commissioner Summa: Ok and thank you to Staff because I sent in a lot of questions about this 5 because in my… I had two main concerns about this and one is that if… That downtown, 6 obviously it's tight. Most… Many of the parcels are all the way built out to the line so that map 7 was interesting to me because a lot of the areas that are yellow are actually, probably a 8 required garden. I know there’s on behind a big residential building on Lytton or they might be 9 parking; there are other reasons that couldn’t be used. Downtown is pretty tight and they 10 can’t… They may have area left in the parcel but it might already have parking spots on it and 11 they can’t get rid of those. So… but where… So, what the code really requires… you directed me 12 to 16… oh, whatever it was, 16 something b10 but that is actually for new buildings. So, it's for 13 new buildings and it also says covered area for a dumpster, it doesn’t say covered and enclosed. 14 So, I’m wondering if we… If there are dumpsters in the CD zone that are outside but are… can’t 15 they just be covered? Do they have to be enclosed also? So, I have a question about covered 16 versus covered and enclosed. 17 Ms. Campbell: Ok so let me just address that right now. So as part of our architectural review 18 when we have things that are placed out in the public view, we always want them to be 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. screened. So, I think from the planning perspective, we’re looking for that enclosure but the 1 Public Works Department is looking for that cover so then it ends up being a covered and 2 enclosed facility to screen the refuse area. 3 Commissioner Summa: Ok so you added that language and then the amendment, the area that 4 your planning on amending formally didn’t not exempt trash. It exempted those in special 5 environmental areas and what not. So now you want to amend… You want to exempt trash 6 rooms in basically all residential zones and large multi-family zones. Which is a change not to 7 CD, it’s actually a bigger change to all of the other zones. 8 Ms. Campbell: I was reviewing this with Sandy the City Attorney and we… In this… In the 9 paragraph subsection four, it refers to minor additions of floor area for the purposes of 10 resource conservation or code compliance. So, there is this resource conservation section that 11 we think could definitely be applied to recycling, composting and the related trash areas. So, 12 we did see a connection there and also with just compliance with environmental health. So, the 13 pollution prevention to me is consistent with that goal of compliance with environmental 14 health. 15 Commissioner Summa: And I’ll leave it at there for now. 16 Commissioner Alcheck: I have no comment on this. 17 Chair Lauing: Commissioner Waldfogel. 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah just one area, I mean directionally I understand this. I think it’s a 1 good thing. I’d like some clarification on the criteria… The areas designed for resource 2 conservation and other energy facilities… Resources conservation and energy facilities, there’s a 3 cross-reference to code 1842120 which that code allows up to 3,000-square feet for code 4 generation and energy recovery… Energy conservation… Resource conservation energy 5 facilities. So, I’d just like some clarification on what the intent is on including that language into 6 this piece of code and if there was no intent, it was just there, that’s fine? I think it makes sense 7 in other districts but from the CD district, I’m trying to understand how and where it would 8 make sense. 9 Ms. Campbell: So, I’m just going to clarify so you’re talking about subsection A? 10 Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, subsection A. 11 Ms. Campbell: So, that’s an existing language. 12 Commissioner Waldfogel: Right but we’ve never included that in the CD district before so how 13 would that make sense in the CD district? 14 Ms. Campbell: I’m not too sure, I would have to kind of think that through. 15 Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, I mean this is a thing that happens with kind of a… with code 16 changes is that the cross-references get… Can get interesting. 17 Chair Lauing: Ok, Commissioner Gardias, did you have anything? 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Gardias: Let’s see if they can answer this. I’ll wait for my (interrupted) 1 Commissioner Waldfogel: You’re curious too? 2 Commissioner Gardias: Time, yes. 3 Commissioner Waldfogel: We stumped them. 4 Commissioner Gardias: Yeah, that was a good point. 5 Commissioner Waldfogel: As long as we’re all confused together, that’s all I can ask for. 6 Mr. Lait: It’s a little bit late and I think we’re probably trending to a place where we’re going to 7 be coming back for another meeting. 8 Chair Lauing: We are. 9 Mr. Lait: So, rather than just give you an off the cuff response, we’ll research it a little bit more 10 and come back. 11 Commissioner Gardias: Ok, so now it’s my questions I guess. What does this 500-square foot 12 stand for? That’s the area that can be granted up to the ceiling of that area that can be granted 13 by the Director’s permission. It’s a large enclosure so I want to understand what does this… 14 how has this… How was this calculated? B. 15 Mr. Lait: Yeah so that’s… so that’s not text we’re changing, that’s just… That’s been there. 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Gardias: No, I understand but then (interrupted) 1 Mr. Lait: So presumably they got… I mean they just had to set a cap and it looks like they set a 2 cap at 500-square feet, not to exceed. 3 Commissioner Gardias: Ok, I [unintelligible], thank you. 4 Chair Lauing: Is that it? Commissioner Gardias? 5 Commissioner Gardias: For now, yes, thank you. 6 Commissioner Waldfogel: I’ll just point out in that section that Commissioner Gardias was just 7 referencing, Section B, it also references hazard mat storage facilities which I would hope that 8 the CD districts have some other restrictions on haz. mat storage. That we’re not authorizing 9 haz. Mat storage behind buildings in the CD district. 10 Chair Lauing: Ok so I would like to suggest that we suspend the discussion. 11 Mr. Lait: So, just on that last point so we’re not freaking out this stuff. What we’re talking 12 about are just exemptions… What qualifies as floor area and what doesn’t? That doesn’t change 13 any regulations in place about where haz. mat material is located or not. We’re just saying what 14 is exempted in floor area and the main purpose of this one is we’re trying to align the City’s 15 pollution prevention along with some constraints that we’re seeing with the code. And do 16 things have to be enclosed, maybe not. Do they just need to be covered? These are the things 17 that we can talk about at the next time that we come together. 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Ok so I’m going to suggest that we… Although we’re only four items from the end, 1 I’m going to suggest that we suspend this right now given agenda Items Three and Four. And if 2 we’re at lightning speed through those two, then we can come back to this and finish. 3 Otherwise, we’ll pick it up in our December meeting. 4 Commissioner Summa: Are we going to pull the last one? 5 Chair Lauing: Oh, I’m sorry and I think the three that I have… Thank you. I was going to 6 summarize this, the three that we have listed as potential pulls are Six and Seven together, 7 Twelve and Seventeen but I didn’t have this one as a pull that you just discussed. 8 Mr. Lait: I didn’t have Twelve as a pull. I thought that was just a clarification and an add 9 reference to the Retail Preservation Ordinance. 10 Commissioner Alcheck: [unintelligible – mic not on] 11 Chair Lauing: I had it as a pull so what is the view? Michael? 12 Commissioner Alcheck: I was just… My concern with this is that there’s a community of parcel 13 owners that might be impacted and I was uncomfortable with (interrupted) 14 Commissioner Monk: It was a pull because they’re striking out the language. I think you’re right 15 that it was a pull. 16 Chair Lauing: So, we (interrupted) 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: I had a concern that it just felt like there wasn’t enough interaction 1 with maybe the community on this. I’m not saying I wouldn’t support it, I think the process… 2 This process should not pass this element. That’s… I just was uncomfortable with that. 3 Chair Lauing: Ok so, for now, the pull list is Six, Seven which is kind of the same, Twelve and 4 Seventeen. 5 Commissioner Alcheck: I also don’t think Six and Seven are the same. 6 Chair Lauing: No but they are related. We discussed them (interrupted) 7 Commissioner Alcheck: I think one of them… for one of them the issue was potentially 8 [unintelligible] but for the other one its esthetics. I don’t know that they are the same. 9 Chair Lauing: Well my view on this is when we get through the next four, whether that’s now or 10 in two weeks, we’ll come back to these pulls and discuss them again and see if we need to 11 actually pull them or we just need to revise them. 12 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok. 13 Chair Lauing: So, we’re all concurred that we’re going to move to Agenda Item Number Three 14 and this is agenda… Sorry, Commissioner Summa? 15 Commissioner Summa: Can I make a quick comment about I. Eighteen? 16 Chair Lauing: Eighteen. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Summa: The one we were just doing before we move on. The one we just did, 1 the trash enclosure. 2 Chair Lauing: Ok, trash. 3 Commissioner Summa: Yeah, trash enclosure so I also didn’t understand why this wouldn’t be 4 in like 1806 which is other exemptions in the CD district. And it seems to me… I understand the 5 need to craft something for the downtown district regarding trash enclosures for existing 6 buildings but I think it would be better in the CD zoning, and there is a section as I mentioned 7 that has other exemptions, rather than changing all the exemptions everywhere to add trash. I 8 just… I’m a little uncomfortable. I understand the special conservation area as being an 9 exemption because it’s providing a unique solution to the environmental problem but trash has 10 always been around and it doesn’t fall into the same category for me. And I think it just looks 11 like kind of a give away of FAR to me, which I think that the public is uncomfortable with. So, I 12 would like to discuss it more or at least if nobody else wants to discuss more, at least get that 13 on the record. Thanks. 14 Chair Lauing: Yes, go ahead. 15 Commissioner Waldfogel: Sorry, just a question... One other legal question for Twenty-four and 16 Twenty-five, is there any urgency around deadlines proposed by state law? Is anything 17 happening on January 1 if we don’t act quickly? 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: I thought that we said this was only going to come up for Council in 1 February anyway? 2 Commissioner Waldfogel: Well but this is (interrupted) 3 Commissioner Alcheck: So how could our incorporation today (interrupted) 4 Commissioner Waldfogel: Well the question… Yes, but still the question does anything happen 5 on January 1 if we don’t act in a speedy way? 6 Mr. Yang: So, I’ll need to take a closer look at these but my understanding is that there changes 7 where just meant to conform to state law so if we don’t make these changes, we’ll still have to 8 comply with state law and our local code just won’t be consistent. 9 Commissioner Waldfogel: Right but is there any validation of the rest of our code from non-10 conformance with state law? I’ve seen some analysis that suggests that there might be if we’re 11 not fully in compliance? 12 Mr. Yang: I’ll take a closer look but doubt it. 13 Mr. Lait: Can I… Commissioner Summa, can you… That code section that you referenced you 14 said 1806 I believe. 15 Commissioner Summa: [unintelligible – mic not on] 16 Mr. Lait: Ok, thank you. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Summa: I think it’s e, little letter e. Its [unintelligible – no mic on] 1 Mr. Lait: Great, I see it, thank you. 2 [The Commission revisited Item Two after hearing Items Three and Four] 3 Mr. Lait: Well yeah but I… So, I… Correct and just to be clear, I thought we had tabled Item 4 Number Two to see if we were going to revisit it after this discussion. We’re happy to do that 5 but if you’re not, we would like you to continue it to the next meeting. 6 MOTION 7 Commissioner Alcheck: I’d like to move that we continue Item Two to the next meeting. 8 SECOND 9 Commissioner Monk: I’ll second that. 10 Mr. Lait: Ok, and that’s December 13 for the record. 11 Chair Lauing: Any discussion on that point? 12 SUBSTITUTE MOTION 13 Commissioner Gardias: Well, if I may just make a comment? Since this is a motion, I think that 14 it's up to you if you still have power, I think it would be beneficial to the Staff to spend another 15 half an hour just to go through the rest of the items so at least they can hear our comments. 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Otherwise, if there was to be something new, we are going to just spill this over through the 1 next after the following meeting. So, my proposal is that [unintelligible] motion just to continue 2 for another half an hour to go through the rest of the items on this second topic. 3 Chair Lauing: Yes, go ahead Commissioner Alcheck, speak to your motion. 4 Commissioner Alcheck: I’ll just quickly speak to my motion before you seek a second for that 5 substitute motion. Which is that I do think that the items that are at the end of this, some of 6 them are more complex and will take more time. I want to suggest to you that our 7 Commissioner Rosenblum began the meeting by referring to Items Twenty-four and Twenty-8 Five specifically and that I think it would probably behoove us to come together at the next 9 meeting with fresh minds and also our seventh Commissioner. Because I think it will help us 10 when we conclude the review and determine how you should process the items that you’re 11 pulling. In addition to the discussion of the remaining items, we also need to have a process 12 discussion on what we really want to see. And I think it’s just going to take time and I’d rather 13 have Commissioner Rosenblum be apart of those two discussions. 14 Chair Lauing: Yeah to be clear there wasn’t a substitute motion. He was just speaking against 15 the motion. 16 Commissioner Alcheck: I actually think he made a substitute motion. 17 Commissioner Gardias: No, actually I was trying to make a substitute motion. 18 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Lauing: Oh, I’m sorry, I didn’t hear that. 1 Commissioner Gardias: Yes, but I respect… He’s right because he should have spoken 2 (interrupted) 3 Chair Lauing: Yeah, I’m sorry, I did not hear (interrupted) 4 Commissioner Gardias: His motion first. 5 Chair Lauing: I didn’t hear the word substitute. I thought you were just speaking against the 6 motion. Alright, so I thought that was going to pass quickly so that’s why I moved along so the 7 second can also speak to the motion and then we’ll have to come back to the substitute. 8 Commissioner Monk: Yeah, I just want to clarify that at our next meeting it looks like we don’t 9 have a lot on the agenda and so I think we do have time to discuss Items Nineteen through 10 Twenty-Seven to continue it. Is that right Jon… Assistant Director? 11 Mr. Lait: Yes, so you’re going to receive a housing law update, that will probably be the first 12 item on your agenda and we have a discussion on ADUs. 13 Commissioner Alcheck: Thirty minutes on process. 14 Mr. Lait: We’ve got the thirty minutes process discussion, you’ve got this ordinance so I mean 15 it’s not a lite agenda. 16 Chair Lauing: How many housing laws are you going to update for us? There are a lot of them. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Mr. Lait: There’s like thirteen or something. 1 Chair Lauing: Yeah, that’s why I was asking. 2 Commissioner Alcheck: I’m sorry, is it your anticipation that presentation will be long? 3 Mr. Lait: Well, it could be tailored to the Commission’s interest but the other thing is we’re 4 presenting it to the City Council. The Commission is interested, it could also (interrupted) 5 Commissioner Alcheck: Are you seeking input on revisions to it? 6 Mr. Lait: No, we’re just informing. There’s some interesting housing law updates that we’re 7 going to have to (interrupted) 8 Commissioner Alcheck: State law. 9 Mr. Lait: Respond too. 10 Commissioner Alcheck: It seems like a lot of reading material but not necessarily a lot of time. 11 Mr. Lait: Well again, so we can… I mean (interrupted) 12 Chair Lauing: We pace that with our numbers of questions. Ok, so let’s get back on… So, it was 13 not a comment against the motion, it’s a substitute motion to continue moving along. 14 Commissioner Gardias: Yes, so (interrupted) 15 Chair Lauing: So, now I need a second for that. 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Gardias: So, let me just reiterate this. So just (interrupted) 1 Chair Lauing: We don’t have a second so if we don’t have a second, we can’t (interrupted) 2 Commissioner Gardias: Half an hour just to give Staff the taste of our comments. I understand 3 this topic will continue in the second but I propose just to go quickly through the rest of those. 4 We can at least read out the comments, they can make a note (interrupted) 5 Chair Lauing: I understand. 6 Commissioner Gardias: And then make our following meeting productive. Thank you. 7 Chair Lauing: Is there a second to the substitute motion? 8 SECOND 9 Commissioner Summa: I will second. 10 Chair Lauing: Ok, now we get to have debate on the substitute motion; thirty-minutes more on 11 the (interrupted) 12 Commissioner Alcheck: I don’t think it’s realistic to assume we will finish in thirty minutes these 13 issues because I think they are actually just as complex as (interrupted) 14 Chair Lauing: I believe he just suggested a substitute motion to limit it to thirty no matter 15 where we are. 16 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Alcheck: I know but the point though is that somehow by working on it tonight, 1 we won’t have anything to work on next week, which means that they could bring this to 2 complete… If we work on it in two-weeks, that means there’s probably going to be a third 3 meeting. I think he’s trying to avoid that, I think thirty minutes is going to cut it so at the very 4 least we’re going to have to meet next time. And so, I just… I don’t see why we would go 5 through that exercise? 6 Chair Lauing: Any further comments? Ok, substitute motion is to continue on, whatever that 7 was, Item Two for thirty minutes. 8 Commissioner Monk: Tonight? 9 VOTE ON SUBSTITUTE MOTION 10 Chair Lauing: Yep so all in favor of that motion? Two. Opposed? Five [Note- four], defeated. 11 SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED: 2(Gardias, Summa) -4(Alcheck, Lauing, Monk, Waldfogel) -1 12 (Rosenblum Absent) 13 VOTE ON ORIGINAL MOTION 14 Chair Lauing: Back to the original motion so the motion is to continue it to the next meeting. All 15 in favor of that? All in favor of this motion, please to continue to the next meeting, Item Two? 16 Right now, we’ve got one, two, three, four, five. And opposed? One. 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. MOTION PASSED 5 (Gardias, Waldfogel, Monk, Lauing, Alcheck) -1 (Summa) -1(Rosenblum 1 absent) 2 Chair Lauing: Right, ok. 3 Commissioner Summa: [unintelligible – mic not on] 4 Commissioner Monk: I just wanted to point out that the person who drafted the Staff report is 5 no longer here so I don’t think there’s value in having it continued tonight anyway. 6 Mr. Lait: But the person who reviewed it is so. 7 Commissioner Monk: So, it would have been fine to… Ok. 8 Commissioner Gardias: And who was that? 9 Commissioner Monk: Oh, so you would like to stay? 10 Commission Action: Item was continued to December 13, 2017. 11 Approval of Minutes 12 Public Comment is Permitted. Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 13 Committee Items 14 Commissioner Questions, Comments or Announcements 15 Adjournment 16 10:41pm 17 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Palo Alto Planning & Transportation Commission 1 Commissioner Biographies, Present and Archived Agendas and Reports are available online: 2 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/ptc/default.asp. The PTC Commission members are: 3 Chair Michael Alcheck 4 Vice Chair Asher Waldfogel 5 Commissioner Przemek Gardias 6 Commissioner Ed Lauing 7 Commissioner Susan Monk 8 Commissioner Eric Rosenblum 9 Commissioner Doria Summa 10 11 Get Informed and Be Engaged! 12 View online: http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city-of-palo-alto or on Channel 26. 13 Show up and speak. Public comment is encouraged. Please complete a speaker request card 14 located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Commission 15 Secretary prior to discussion of the item. 16 Write to us. Email the PTC at: Planning.Commission@CityofPaloAlto.org. Letters can be 17 delivered to the Planning & Community Environment Department, 5th floor, City Hall, 250 18 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. Comments received by 2:00 PM two Tuesdays preceding 19 the meeting date will be included in the agenda packet. Comments received afterward through 20 2:00 PM the day of the meeting will be presented to the Commission at the dais. 21 Material related to an item on this agenda submitted to the PTC after distribution of the 22 agenda packet is available for public inspection at the address above. 23 Americans with Disability Act (ADA) 24 It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a 25 manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an 26 appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, 27 or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329-2550 (voice) or by emailing 28 ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 29 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. 30 Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report (ID # 8739) Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 12/13/2017 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: Planning-Related Code Amendments (2018) Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Recommendation to the City Council Regarding the Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 2.20 (Planning and Transportation Commission) of Title 2, Chapter 9.10 (Noise) of Title 9, Chapter 10.64 (Bicycles, Roller Skates and Coasters) of Title 10, and Chapters 18.04 (Definitions), 18.10 (Low-Density Residential (RE, R-2 and RMD)), 18.12 (R-1 Single-Family Residential District), 18.15 (Residential Density Bonus), 18.16 (Neighborhood, Community, and Service Commercial (CN, CC and CS) Districts), 18.28 (Special Purpose (PF, OS and AC) Districts), 18.30(G) (Combining Districts), 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions), 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses), 18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements), 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards), 18.76 (Permits and Approvals), 18.77 (Processing of Permits and Approvals), and 18.80 (Amendments to Zoning Map And Zoning Regulations) of Title 18, and Chapters 21.12 (Tentative Maps and Preliminary Parcel Maps) and 21.32 (Conditional Exceptions) of Title 21. The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in Accordance With CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). For More Information, Please Contact Clare Campbell at clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org. (CONTINUED FROM November 29, 2017) From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) take the following action(s): 1. Find the proposed draft ordinance exempt from the provision of CEQA in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3); and 2. Recommend to the City Council adoption an ordinance (Attachment A) to amend various sections of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Report Summary The discussion regarding the proposed code amendments was not completed at the November 29, 2017 PTC meeting. The PTC reviewed the majority of proposed code changes and continued the discussion. This report includes staff responses to the PTC comments and the addition of one code amendment, as discussed below. The November 29, 2017 staff report (Attachment B) and meeting minutes (Attachment C) are attached for reference. Background The PTC reviewed the items listed in Table 1 below and provided suggested minor text edits to a few topics (“revise”) and identified topics that needed more in-depth discussion (“pull”). This report summarizes the staff response to the PTC discussion and the draft ordinance (Attachment A) has been revised to incorporate these changes. For the items that were not discussed (see Table 2) and for general background, please refer to Attachment B, the 11/29/2017 PTC Staff Report. The exception to this is for item #28 Correct Code Section Reference for Cannabis Definition; this is a newly added item that will be explained in the discussion section that follows. Table 1: Proposed Code Amendments Discussed by PTC Amendment PTC Direction 1 Correct Threshold Requiring a Transportation Demand Management Plan No Change 2 Correct Reference to Transportation Management Association No Change 3 Remove Duplicate Definition of “Director” No Change 4 Correct Table Reference – Parking Stall Widths No Change 5 Correct Site and Design Code Reference No Change 6 Clarify that the Contextual Garage Placement Applies to Carports Pull 7 Clarification of Carport and Garage Definitions Pull 8 Site and Design Review – Correct Code Reference for Minor Projects No Change 9 Resubmittal of Denied Applications – Correct Language No Change 10 Map Exceptions Process – Add Reference to Title 18 No Change 11 Clarify Floor Area Exemptions for Historic Homes Revise 12 Office Restrictions in CS/CN/CC – Remove CS Reference Pull 13 Preliminary Parcel Map – Add Option of Director’s Deferral Directly to Council No Change 14 Remove Restrictive Election Time for PTC Officers Revise City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 15 Establish Uniform Timing for Public Hearing Notices for Maps and Zone Changes No Change 16 Add Provision to Allow Closure of Inactive Applications and Require New Application for Substantially Modified Projects Revise 17 Prohibit Gas-Powered Leaf Blowers in Commercial Districts Pull 18 Add Floor Area Exemption for Trash Enclosures in the CD District Revise Table 2: Proposed Amendments To Be Reviewed Amendment 19 Expand Exceptions for Historic Homes Related to Floor Area and HIE’s 20 Clarify Setbacks for Outdoor Fireplaces and BBQs 21 Establish an Over the Counter Architectural Review Process 22 Various Updates to Application Processing and Approvals 23 Clarifications to the Wireless Communication Facilities Review Process 24 Modify Accessory Dwelling Unit Requirements Per State Regulations 25 Update Residential Density Bonus Per State Requirements 26 Remove Bicycle License Requirement 27 Individual Review and Demolition of Historic Inventory Properties 28 Correct Code Section Numbering for Cannabis Definition with No Substantive Change (ADDED ITEM) Discussion There are eight follow-up items from the earlier PTC meeting and one newly added item that are discussed below. The numbering shown below reflects how the items were presented in the previous staff report (Attachment B). All proposed text modifications to the ordinance are presented in the draft ordinance, Attachment A. Item #6: Clarify that the Contextual Garage Placement Applies to Carports Staff understands the expressed position of commissioners speaking to this item on both the substance and process for the proposed amendment. Staff has a different perspective as to the nature of the regulation and the proposed change in question. Staff will present the PTC comments as articulated at this and the preceding meeting to the City Council along with a staff recommendation for the proposed amendment. Item #7: Clarification of Carport and Garage Definitions The PTC expressed some concerns about the clarity of the definitions for carports, garages, and porte-cochere. The proposed revised definitions of “carport” and “garage” are listed below along with the City’s “porte-cochere” definition in the Municipal Code. When comparing a carport and porte-cochere, they are described similarly, with the exception for how it is used. A porte- cochere is a sheltered transitory location used for loading and unloading; it cannot be used for City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 any required onsite parking. It seems appropriate to clarify carports and garages are intended for the parking or storage of vehicles. (24.5) “Carport" means a portion of a principal residential building or an accessory building to a residential use designed to be utilized for the shelter parking or storage of one or more motor vehicles, which is open (unenclosed) on two or more sides, including on the vehicular entry side, and which is covered with a solid roof. (59) “Garage, private” means a portion of a principal residential building or an accessory building to a residential use designed to be utilized for the shelter parking or storage of one or more motor vehicles, and which is enclosed on three two or more sides and covered with a solid roof. (114.2) “Porte-cochere” means a covered structure attached to a residence or adjacent to a residence and erected over a driveway, which is completely open on three or more sides and used for the temporary unloading and loading of vehicles. Item #11: Clarify Floor Area Exemptions for Historic Homes In response to PTC’s comments, staff added a clarification to the table that included clear direction on how to measure the basement for purposes of excluding it from the floor area calculation. Item #12: Office Restrictions in CS/CN/CC – Remove CS Reference The PTC asked for additional clarification for the proposed removal of language that permitted ground floor office along El Camino Real, providing no housing was developed on the site. The current code subsection 18.16.050(a)(2), which applies to CS, CN, and CC zones, states that ground floor office is permitted providing it would “occupy a space that was not occupied by housing, neighborhood business service, retail services, personal services, eating and drinking services, or automotive service on March 19, 2001 or thereafter.” Subsection 18.16.050(a)(3), the one proposed to be removed, states that “in the case of CS zoned properties with site frontage on El Camino Real, [ground floor office is permitted providing the sites] were not occupied by housing on March 19, 2001.” With the adoption of the citywide ground floor retail and retail-like preservation requirements (PAMC 18.40.180 – also referred to as the Retail Preservation Ordinance) earlier this year, subsection 18.16.050(a)(3) is no longer accurate; the City would not support the removal of retail/retail-like uses to accommodate ground floor office. Because the retail preservation is now applicable, subsection (2) is a better reflection of what would be considered if ground floor office was proposed on El Camino Real. This subsection (2) is slightly more restrictive than the retail City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5 preservation requirements in that it also includes protections for neighborhood business services and automotive services. Staff’s recommendation is to remove subsection (3) with the understanding the subsection (2) would then apply to CS zoned sites on El Camino Real, which is essentially how it is carried out today because of the retail preservation requirements. Item #14: Remove Restrictive Election Time for PTC Officers Staff revised the proposed text based on direction from PTC. It is noted that additional discussion on this subject matter will occur separately when the PTC conducts a retreat or special discussion on a future agenda. Item #16: Add Provision to Allow Closure of Inactive Applications and Require New Application for Substantially Modified Projects The intent of the proposed revision was generally supported, but there was concern about the use of overly strong and subjective language. The language has been revised accordingly. A commissioner also expressed concern with the six month timeframe. Staff notes that six months of inactivity is unusual for planning applications and that it mirrors the time after which a building permit is deemed to have expired by reason of inactivity. Item #17: Prohibit Gas-Powered Leaf Blowers in Commercial Districts The PTC was concerned about the unintended consequences of adding the gas-powered leaf blower prohibition to commercial properties and allowing for an exemption for City-related uses. Staff will conduct additional research on this item and report to Council as to whether this amendment is worth pursuing at this time. Item #18: Add Floor Area Exemption for Trash Enclosures in the CD District There were two primary comments made on this issue, one suggesting that the floor area exemption be placed in the CD district chapter (PAMC 18.16) of the zoning code and not in the definitions section; and the other was related to the floor area exemption revision, as proposed, would now allow hazardous material storage and resource conservation energy facilities in the CD district. The proposed text modification does not make any changes to the allowable uses in the CD or other zone districts. The existing exemption, unmodified, allows the floor area exemption in all zone districts but the CD, and staff is proposing to modify this language to have the CD district included for the exemption. Again, if the CD zone was included in this exemption, the established allowable land uses would not be impacted. City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6 Additionally, the added clarifying language regarding the refuse area being exempt is not a new provision to the code. The code already allows exemptions for resource conservation related compliance, which staff has interpreted to include refuse areas. By adding the specific refuse reference, it would eliminate any misunderstanding to it being included within this category of floor area exemptions. With regards to relocating the exemption to the CD district chapter of the code, staff feels that keeping it within the definitions section is more appropriate since the language already exists there. Item #28: Correct Code Section Numbering for Cannabis Definition (ADDED ITEM) On November 13, 2017 the City Council adopted on second reading Ordinance No. 5419 (“Cannabis Ordinance”) to prohibit medical cannabis dispensaries and prohibit commercial cannabis activities, except for deliveries. Included in the ordinance was the new definition of cannabis that is to be added to Title 18. The new definition was numbered incorrectly, and the amendment is to correct that. There are no substantive text changes being proposed to the definition in the code. Environmental Review The proposed code amendments have been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. Specifically, the proposed amendments have been determined to be exempt from further environmental review per CEQA Guideline section 15061(b)(3) (Review for Exemption) because the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significantly effect on the environment. Additionally, all future development that may be impacted by any of the proposed code changes will be subject to a project specific CEQA analysis as part of the required planning entitlement review (e.g. Architectural Review, Site and Design, Subdivision, etc.) to determine if there are any environmental impacts. Public Notification, Outreach & Comments The Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) does not require notice of this public hearing because it was Continued to a Date Certain at the November 29, 2017 PTC meeting, which was publicly noticed in accordance with the PAMC. Next Steps Upon recommendation from the PTC, staff will forward the staff recommended ordinance with agreed upon changes to City Council for review. In instances where a majority of the PTC has a different recommendation from staff, that viewpoint will be represented in the staff report City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 7 along with implementing language for the Council’s consideration. Only one ordinance, however, will be presented to the Council, which is anticipated to occur in early 2018. Alternative Actions In addition to the recommended action, the Planning and Transportation Commission may: 1. Recommend adoption of the draft ordinance to the City Council with modifications. 2. Continue the discussion to a future PTC hearing with the expectation that a recommendation to the City Council would be forwarded that time. Report Author & Contact Information PTC1 Liaison & Contact Information Clare Campbell, AICP, Senior Planner Jonathan Lait, AICP, Assistant Director (650) 617-3191 (650) 329-2679 clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org jonathan.lait@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments:  Attachment A: Draft Ordinance (PDF)  Attachment B: PTC Staff Report w/o Attachments, November 29, 2017 (DOC)  Attachment C: PTC Excerpt Meeting Minutes, November 29, 2017 (DOC)  Attachment D: Draft Over the Counter Architectural Review Guidelines (DOCX) 1 Emails may be sent directly to the PTC using the following address: planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.org _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Planning & Transportation Commission 1  Excerpt Minutes  2  December 13, 2017 3  Council Chambers 4  250 Hamilton Avenue 5  6:00 PM 6   7  Action Items 8  Public Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Fifteen (15) minutes, plus three (3) minutes rebuttal. 9  All others: Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 10  5. PUBLIC HEARING: Recommendation to the City Council Regarding the Adoption of an 11   Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 2.20 (Planning and 12  Transportation Commission) of Title 2, Chapter 9.10 (Noise) of Title 9, Chapter 10.64 13  (Bicycles, Roller Skates and Coasters) of Title 10, and Chapters 18.04 (Definitions), 14  18.10 (Low‐Density Residential (RE, R‐2 and RMD)), 18.12 (R‐1 Single‐Family 15  Residential District), 18.15 (Residential Density Bonus), 18.16 (Neighborhood, 16  Community, and Service Commercial (CN, CC and CS) Districts), 18.28 (Special 17  Purpose (PF, OS and AC) Districts), 18.30(G) (Combining Districts), 18.40 (General 18  Standards and Exceptions), 18.42 (Standards for Special Uses), 18.52 (Parking and 19  Loading Requirements), 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards), 18.76 (Permits and 20  Approvals), 18.77 (Processing of Permits and Approvals), and 18.80 (Amendments to 21  Zoning Map And Zoning Regulations) of Title 18, and Chapters 21.12 (Tentative Maps 22  and Preliminary Parcel Maps) and 21.32 (Conditional Exceptions) of Title 21. The 23  Proposed Ordinance is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 24  in Accordance With CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). For More Information, 25  Please Contact Clare Campbell at clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org. (CONTINUED 26  FROM November 29, 2017) 27  Chair Lauing: Item Five, I think there’s a public speaker for this, Justine Burt. 28  Ms. Justine Burt: This has actually been really interesting and I’m glad I sat through this because 29  I often come to City Council meetings and I give talks or I give public comment. And they have 30  an open, whatever you want to talk about for 3‐minutes at the very beginning (interrupted) 31  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing:  So, do we, so do we. 1  Ms. Burt: Maybe you guys should do that. 2  Commissioner Alcheck: So, do we.  3  Ms. Burt: Well, I gave my comment at the very beginning at 6:03 and (interrupted) 4  Chair Lauing: But you itemized it for Agenda Item Number Five so that’s why we slotted you 5  here. 6  Ms. Burt: I guess I learned how to do it for next time. So, what I want to share is that there are 7  so many reasons why we cannot, in Palo Alto, increase the supply of housing. And having been 8  in on a lot of…  We moved here 3‐years ago from Fremont where we own a house and we 9  moved here because our son at the time was starting 8th grade and he went to school at Jordan 10  and he didn’t do well in the Freemont School System… Public School Systems. And since we’ve 11  moved here, he’s just blossomed and he does so well and loves Pally and he’s a junior so we’re 12  really happy to be here and we’d like to be able to buy but the lowest level condo is $2 million 13  so that’s not going to happen. And I’ve noticed a lot of nimbies at the City Council meetings 14  who… It seems like 10, 20 vocal people who don’t want to see additional housing shot a lot of 15  the debates down but it feels like the Planning Commission is where the rubber hits the road. 16  And where you guys could really make a big difference in terms of adding housing in a way that 17  makes sense is by making one tiny change and so bear with me for a second here. If you step 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  back and look at where the opportunities are to add housing, you could potentially open up 1  potentially 1,000s of units by creating submitting middle housing. And given… I just get such a 2  sense being here for 3‐hours that there’s so many ropes and wires constraining what you can 3  do and there’s so many, again reasons why you can’t add housing. But from the way that I look 4  at this, I’ve been pouring over zoning maps for the last few years and wondering how could we 5  add more housing that’s not like scary 10‐story buildings that a lot of people think of when you 6  say more densification in downtown. I think they are picturing 10, 20, 30‐story Shanghai kind of 7  things. What I’d like to see is change the zoning within a mile radius of the train stations; of the 8  University Avenue train station, California Avenue and San Antonio, change the zoning around 9  there. Almost this whole City is R‐1 and when I looked for opportunities to go in with three 10  other families… I’ve been talking with a bunch of other families, go in with three other families, 11  buy a tear down for $2‐$3 million and then spend $300 per square foot to build four 1,500‐12  square foot units; two units and then two on top. It would only be two‐stories but you would, 13  for the price of about $1.2 million dollars per family, create a nice livable unit and not to tall, 14  not scary densification but just a little more densification. And so, $2 to $3 million for the tear 15  down, I’m talking like cracked foundation, from the 20’s, just the plumbing needs to be 16  replaced, the electrical system is a hazard, replacing that it could be affordable. The lowest cost 17  condo is like $2 million now and so I don’t harbor any illusions that housing pricing are going to 18  come back down. We’re just not building enough housing so between allowing an R‐30 or an R‐19  40 on some of the lots that are within a mile of the train stations and allowing perhaps building 20  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  over those one‐story shops and restaurants on El Camino, we could put in a lot of housing here 1  and that’s where the transportation corridor is. I’ve been doing consulting downtown to try to 2  reach out to shops and restaurants to give away free transit passes on behalf of the Palo Alto 3  TMA and there are a lot of people that just don’t know what the transportation alternatives 4  are. I talked to one guy that works at the Verizon store and he said I’d love to take alternative 5  transit but I can’t. I live in Heyward and I said drive to the Union City Bart Station, there’s lot of 6  parking, you can take Dumbarton Express right over here. So, I know transportation issues are a 7  major reason why people are so afraid of additional housing. I live on University, we rent, if 8  there were a zip car within two or three blocks of me, I would love to get rid of my car. And so, I 9  think adding additional density and that means changing the zoning in certain places because 10  there is such a robust mix of transit options here in the downtown areas that that could be an 11  option. And in terms of transit, electric scooters help with the first last mile issue. I think there 12  are solutions so all it takes is you guys changing zoning. That’s all I wanted to say, thank you. 13  Chair Lauing: Very much appreciate those comments and yes, that for example, you should feel 14  free to bring that up at the beginning; a general zoning question like that, great suggestions like 15  that. Sorry, you had to wait given where we had this one agenized and please tell all your 16  friends to come and give us input because we’re frustrated we don’t have more folks like you 17  out here. Appreciate it. 18  Commissioner Alcheck: And if you don’t mind, if you could send an email with your contact 19  information so that some of us could reach out to you may be to continue this discussion 20  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  because it’s a… You’re actually talking about a very broad discussion. And this zoning change is 1  a very specific one and it wouldn’t even be appropriate for us to have a discussion about the 2  changes you are suggesting tonight because technically it’s not apart of the changes that are 3  being agenized. That’s not to say that it’s not worth a big discussion but I’d love to be able to 4  reach out to you and sort of work with you so that I could help, in particular, figure out when 5  we could create that opportunity.  6  Ms. Burt:  Ok, thanks. 7  Chair Lauing: Alright so Clare is going to handle this one. This is also complex because we have 8  stuff that we’ve done. That stuff that we’ve done has some changes that we need to have be 9  discussed. There is stuff that we haven’t done yet that we need to jump into and its pretty time 10  sensitive so Clare, you’re going to also have to instruct us which documents to refer to and page 11  numbers so please be super attentive to that. 12  Ms. Clare Campbell:  Alright, great, thank you for that introduction. So, what… each one of you 13  has a reference sheet that includes page numbers for where that item is located in the draft 14  ordinance which is Attachment A of your Staff report. As well as the page number for where it 15  is located in the old Staff report which is Attachment B and I probably have an extra one if you 16  don’t have one because everybody needs it.  Who doesn’t have one? Alright, so should I 17  continue? Great. Ok so you have this reference sheet for page numbering and hopefully, every 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  time we reference an item number, we can quickly flip where we need to be within out Staff 1  report package.  2  So, tonight is a continued discussion from our November 29th PTC meeting. The PTC reviewed 3  the majority of the code amendments and identified eight items that need some follow up. 4  Staff has prepared responses to those eight items that we designated and just to add, there 5  was one additional item that was added to the Staff report regarding a correction for the code 6  change numbering for the definition of Cannabis. This chart here represents the eight items 7  that we identified as follow‐up items and I’m going to go through each one of them in the 8  presentation tonight. The second … And then this table here covers all of the things that we did 9  not get through last time and I’ve highlighted the items in red. Those are the ones that I’ve 10  specifically identified that I’ll be talking about in these Staff presentation. 11  So, the first one is the contextual garage placement so we… Staff did not make any changes to 12  the code language and we did have some discussion about this but there are no proposed… The 13  proposed amendment does not preclude the ability to developing an ADU on the parcel. So, 14  Item Number Seven, carports and garage definition. The definitions where revised and we also 15  had to make a slight modification to the Porte Cochere definition and we clarified the use for 16  the garages and carports. So, we’ve made that a little bit clearer on what they are supposed to 17  use for. 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Number Eleven is the floor area exemption for historic homes so the language was revised in 1  the table to provide clearer direction on how to measure the basement for the purposes of 2  measuring the floor area.  3  Item Number Twelve, the office restrictions in the CS. Staff did not make any changes to the 4  code language. We did provide additional explanation in the Staff report to explain the 5  rationale for removing that specific code section and I can answer question if you have those 6  about that. 7  Item Number Fourteen is to remove the restrictive election time for the PTC Officers and we 8  revised that language based on your comments that you provided last… at the last meeting.  9  So, Number Sixteen, the closure of inactive applications so we revised that language in 10  response to the comment provided to make it a little bit less severe.  11  Then on our leaf blowers for the commercial districts so we understand that this one is 12  definitely a controversial issue. We plan to do additional research with Staff of other City 13  Departments and then report back to see… with Council whether or not this amendment is 14  going to be moving forward. And certainly, we’ll be listening closely to what you have to share 15  with us tonight about this item. 16  Number Eighteen, the floor area exemption for trash enclosures in the CD. No changes were 17  made to that code language but we did provide some additional clarification in the Staff report 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  specifically to kind of make it clear that this amendment does not in any way impact the 1  allowable uses in the CD. That was something that was raised at the last meeting but it has no 2  impact to the uses that are already established for the zone district. 3  Item Number Twenty‐Eight is to correct the numbering for the Cannabis definition so that one 4  was straightforward. Correction, no text changes to that.  5  So, moving onto the items that we didn’t get to at our last meeting. The first one is to establish 6  the over the counter review process and I wanted to be clear, I didn’t… our Staff report was a 7  little bit misleading. It referred to this as an architectural review… over the counter 8  architectural review and that was just a mistake in editing. We missed that when we looked at 9  the report but basically, we’re looking to establish an over the counter review process which is 10  separate from an architectural review process. So, this process would codify the existing 11  practice that we currently do at the Development Center and it’s at the Director’s discretion. 12  The over the counter process would allow approval of projects deemed insignificant and that 13  have no effect to the building or environment. And typically, this is associated when we see a 14  building permit come across the counter. Projects subject to the over the counter review would 15  not be subject to further administrative processing which included approval letters and an 16  appeal period and things like that. Attachment D of the Staff report provides the draft over the 17  counter review guidelines that we would be using to help guide Staff and applicants as to the 18  types of projects we would consider for this review and it outlines the process. 19  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  So, the next one, Number Twenty‐Two A, this is to reduce the request for hearing time and limit 1  the requesters. I’m on slide Number Eleven. So, this one is an amendment that would apply to 2  minor Staff level architectural review projects and not to Board level review projects. It would 3  reduce the request for hearing timeline from 14 calendar days to 7 days and this is basically 4  intended to reduce the overall processing time of applications while still providing an avenue 5  for an appeal. Excuse me, it would reduce the range of hearing requesters from anyone to the 6  project applicant and adjacent properties, that includes owners and tenants and this is similar 7  to how we do this for the individual review process. In reviewing the application date and this is 8  noted in the Staff report, you know we process over 132… Over 130 Staff level architectural 9  review applications per year and in the last 3‐year we’ve only had two projects that were 10  appealed. So, we really think these numbers kind of support a shortened or tightened up 11  hearing time and limitations for who can make appeals.  12  So, Number Twenty‐Four is to modify the ADU requirements and this is exactly what we just 13  saw in the earlier presentation so we have regulations going into effect January 1st.  Our code… 14  our proposed code amendments are specifically to address the state regulations. There might 15  be just a minor text correction but everything is in response to the state requirements. There is 16  no additional proposed modifications to the ADU requirements. That will be a separate effort, 17  as you already know.  18  So, item twenty‐five is to update the residential density bonus per the state requirements. So, 19  the updated state regulations took effect alright in January 1st, 2017, and the key updates 20  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  included a local government may not require applicants to prepare an additional report or 1  study to qualify for a density bonus. A local government may no longer reject incentives and 2  concessions on the grounds they are not required in order to provide affordable housing costs. 3  A twenty percent density bonus shall be granted to any project that reserves at least ten 4  percent of its housing units for disabled veterans, foster youth or homeless persons and the 5  density bonus law requires developers of new housing projects to replace all demolished 6  affordable units so there’s no net loss. 7  Alright, so this is our last one. This is the individual review process and the demolishing of 8  historic inventory properties. So, the purpose of this amendment is to discourage the misuse of 9  the permitting process to potentially avoid additional environmental review, historic review 10  specifically, when building a new home. So, if a structure is listed on the City’s Historic 11  Inventory or it’s a National Register Eligible property and is demolished when it’s in association 12  with developing a single‐story new home but no home is constructed. We would not allow the 13  filing of an individual review application within 5‐years of the date of that demolish permit 14  issuance.  15  Ok so for next steps, upon recommendation from the Planning Commission the draft ordinance 16  will be revised and forwarded to the Council for review which is tentatively scheduled for spring 17  2018. And I’ll just do a quick review of the motion so Staff recommends that the PTC find the 18  proposed draft ordinance exempted from the provisions of CEQA in accordance with CEQA 19  Guideline Section 15061B3 and recommend to the City Council adoption of an ordinance to 20  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  amend various sections of the Palo Alto Municipal Code as reflected in Attachment A. And that 1  concludes Staff’s presentation, thank you. 2  Chair Lauing: So, I think the best process is to go back over the ones that have been reviewed, 3  see if we’re comfortable with the pull/non‐pull statues and any changes and then just get that 4  section done first before going to table two. Is that alright with Staff? 5  Ms. Gitelman: That’s what I was going to suggest, that we group these and try and get to a 6  motion on Group One and Group Two either as one motion or two motions but get there as 7  quickly as we can.  8  Chair Lauing: Ok, great. So, I’m just going to itemize for discussion those that had been changed 9  as opposed to all the other ones. So that brings us down to Number Six and Staff just gave the 10  reason why they feel like the language that they have in there is not inconsistent with ADUs. 11  Ms. Campbell:  So, I think we tried to explain this the last time but the placement… If someone 12  where to place… Where ever someone puts a garage or a carport based on the contextual 13  garage placement requirements, it does not circumvent someone from coming forward to 14  either convert or to demolish it to create an ADU. I know we’ve kind of talked about them but 15  they are actually separate items, at least from the Staff’s perspective. We don’t see that they 16  are connected. 17  Chair Lauing: The what’s connected? Six and seven? 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Campbell: Oh, I didn’t say anything about Number Seven.  1  Chair Lauing: Ok well because it was originally connected up here when we talked about it. 2  Ms. Campbell: I think you were talking about ADUs and the contextual garage placement.  3  Chair Lauing: Yeah. 4  Ms. Campbell:  Yeah so, they are not related. Developing or requiring your garage to be placed 5  in a certain place on the property does not prevent someone from developing an ADU. It has no 6  impact. 7  Chair Lauing: Right, we discussed that in the pre‐meeting. I just wanted to make sure it was on 8  the table tonight. 9  Ms. Campbell:  Great. 10  Chair Lauing: So, we’ll look at lights for people who want to discuss this issue and that is 11  Commissioner Alcheck. 12  Commissioner Alcheck: Ok so I’ll just sort of frame this discussion from my perspective. I don’t 13  believe that the change contemplated changes… Is a dramatic change. I think though… So, the 14  question isn’t so much whether the change right now is going to somehow make it harder or 15  less hard to do ADUs. I don’t think it will. I don’t think this change will affect… have an impact 16  on the development of ADUs. I will suggest this and maybe tonight is not the appropriate night 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  to jump into this but I do think we need to look at this requirement in general. Not the change 1  but holistically. Do we… This requirement effects I think nearly every Commissioner on here 2  except Commissioner Monk and potentially you depending on your zoning and myself at this 3  time. And the question really is, this gives the perception that we want to sort of reduce the 4  parking… the visual notion of parking. And my only issue with the ADU is, and it’s the same as 5  before, encouraging people to go into a two‐step process to get a new ADU seems not so 6  prudent. So, to suggest that doesn’t discourage ADUs is to suggest that having to build a two‐7  car garage or one car garage. And then come back and then either, I don’t know, I guess it’s not 8  tearing it down but remodel it so that it now is an ADU seems like we’re encouraging people to 9  do a two‐step process which is more costly.  And so, my issue with this isn’t so much that the 10  change creates a new problem but whether or not we really need to look at this section in 11  general (interrupted) 12  Chair Lauing: Why don’t we take it in that order unless there are other major objections? 13  Commissioner Alcheck:  My recommendation through to Council would be when can we 14  understand… because here’s the issue. Everybody is going to convert their back detached 15  garage into an ADU. So, we effectively create incentive, number one to not have any covered 16  parking in this regard because if you are building a new construction project, you’re very likely 17  going to somehow incorporate… You’re going to eliminate your covered parking because you 18  can. You can take that space and you can create an ADU. And let’s say you only have 175‐feet 19  for the bonus because we were just talking about that and you come back and you say well, I’m 20  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  going to take the 400‐square feet from this garage and make it my ADU and now I have no 1  covered parking. No big deal, I don’t need to have parking so that begs the question why would 2  a home built now be required to have covered parking but a home built last year is completely 3  exempt from it? Right because in theory, you could… If somebody did want to build an ADU in 4  conjunction with new construction, they would have to do both. They would have to build the 5  covered parking and a separate detached ADU Unit. They couldn’t build the covered 6  (interrupted) 7  Ms. Gitelman: If I could just interject, we’re getting way off topic here. I mean we’re going back 8  to the prior discussion. This is a (interrupted) 9  Commissioner Alcheck:  Well, I’m just suggesting that the… Again, like I am saying, I’m not 10  taking issue with the change. I don’t think the change makes it more difficult. 11  Chair Lauing: Well, then let’s just take it to another agenda item. 12  Commissioner Alcheck:  But that’s something that we need to communicate to Council. 13  Chair Lauing: Ok. 14  Commissioner Alcheck: That we should investigate this and (interrupted) 15  Chair Lauing: Ok, let’s do that. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck: maybe the appropriate forum would be at a follow‐up or in the ADU 1  discussion. 2  Chair Lauing: Ok. 3  Commissioner Alcheck: That’s what I would say. 4  Chair Lauing: Commissioner Gardias. 5  Commissioner Gardias: Thank you. So, yes, I think that is should be pulled only because of the 6  reason that we were just talking about, the ADU separate. In terms of contextual garage 7  placement, I have a question. Does the contextual for other zones then R‐1, does it fall under 8  non‐objective parameters or not? 9  Ms. Campbell: There are no other zone districts that require contextual garage placement. It’s 10  only for the R‐1 single‐family. 11  Commissioner Gardias: Ok so it’s only for R‐1. Ok so, in this case, it makes it very simple so I 12  think that my perception is that just to out of the respect to the neighborhoods, we should 13  support this Staff proposal to pretty much place the garage following the contextual 14  neighborhood placement of garages. But just because of this reason to have it to discuss it with 15  ADU together, I agree with that suggestion. 16  Chair Lauing: Ok, can we move onto Number Seven then? So, seven is the clarification 17  (interrupt) 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck: You’ve got a light. 1  Chair Lauing: I’m sorry, Commissioner Waldfogel. 2  Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, I’ll just say that I support the Staff recommendation. I also 3  support reopening this discussion about contextual placement. I’m not sure we have the same 4  reason why we want to do that but I think we should discuss whether it’s working… I’m sorry, 5  we should discuss whether the contextual placement is working or not. 6  Chair Lauing: Ok, at a different agenda item. So, Number Seven, any comments on Number 7  Seven which is (interrupted) 8  Commissioner Alcheck: So, I (interrupted) 9  Chair Lauing: Commissioner Summa. 10  Commissioner Alcheck: Sorry. 11  Commissioner Summa: I just want to say I support Staffs recommendation on six and seven. 12  Chair Lauing: Commissioner Alcheck. 13  Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, I think that the… sorry, it’s not in my… what page of the packet is 14  the change? 15  Vice‐Chair Monk: 133. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Campbell:  In the ordinance, you could take a look at the ordinance, it’s on Page 114. I’m 1  sorry, it’s 109. Packet… Oh, I thought we were talking about contextual garage placement. 2  Commissioner Alcheck: 133, ok so I just want to make sure I refer to it properly. So, look, the 3  only reason why I think this language is problematic is because in the past the interpretation 4  has essentially supported the notion that you have… Let’s say you have this carport and on two 5  sides it can be completely enclosed and on one side you have a vehicle entry. Which means it 6  has to be substantially open if you’re going to fit a car through and all the fourth and final side, 7  it had to be, excuse me, open and unenclosed. And that interruption uses to support the notion 8  that it could be fifty percent open in practice. What that means is that there’s… You could have 9  some architectural flare. My only issue with this is that we’re just encouraging what I would call 10  a four‐post carport and there’s some really… You could go to Hows.com and type in the word 11  carport and you’ll see a bunch of really cool carports. There is a benefit to carports, carports are 12  used to cover cars and rarely used as storage. And so, if… this kind of tees off on essentially 13  whether or not the contextual garage placement provision even works. To a certain extent it 14  might work better if carports where used more often, I don’t know. My point is that I just would 15  prefer that this language be more specific. For example, I’d say something like completely 16  seventy‐five percent unenclosed or something. Something that would allow you to use flares 17  like maybe there was an architectural design that included posts that cross at a X on the side as 18  opposed to, you know I don’t know. So, to the extent that there could be a percentage that 19  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  allowed us to have a little bit more architectural flair, I would prefer that. I don’t know that that 1  the intent of the code is whether or not to be. 2  Mr. Albert Yang, Senior Deputy Attorney:  So, if I may clarify, the ordinance you saw 2‐weeks 3  ago include this language about completely unenclosed. Since then we’ve taken the word 4  completely out to allow just that flexibility that Commissioner Alcheck is proposing. 5  Commissioner Alcheck: Sorry, I’m looking at Page 133. 6  Vice‐Chair Monk: It’s not reflective in what’s (interrupted) 7  Mr. Yang: I’m sorry, Page 133 is the previous Staff report. 8  Ms. Campbell:  Page 105 [unintelligible ‐no mic] 9  Mr. Yang:  Yeah, Page 105 or Packet Page 99 would also have the (interrupted) 10  Commissioner Alcheck: So, I’m on Packet Page… So, Packet Page 99? 11  Mr. Yang:  Yeah, also has the new language.  12  Vice‐Chair Monk: Wait so we should be looking at the third column where it says ordinance 13  page is really referring to the packet page of our current packet? 14  Mr. Yang:  Yes. 15  Vice‐Chair Monk: Ok. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Campbell: I would suggest that we look at the ordinance language which is on Packet Page 1  105.  2  Vice‐Chair Monk: It’s just not clear on how it was presented. 3  Commissioner Alcheck: This is my point, I think we talked about this last week, I get it. Now it 4  doesn’t say completely, it just says open and I think maybe it would behoove us just to create a 5  definition because it’s come up. Right, what does it mean? Does it mean that it can be fifty 6  percent enclosed? Can it have a pony wall? Can it have… I mean let me put it you this way, 7  ninety percent of these parking structures have a curb because the foundation is required. 8  Especially attached garages… attached carports. So, if you have an attached carport, you’re 9  going to have a curb and if your carport requires that you have the power for alternative 10  vehicles like electric vehicles, then you might need some portion… There might be a header 11  involved. I’m just saying choose a percentage, decide what you are comfortable with that you 12  think it reflective of the intent of the code that might be more appropriate. I would suggest a 13  percentage because that’s easy to use. An architect can say we’re going to use this system and 14  that represents sixty percent or eight percent open, just so that you don’t have a situation 15  where they come with a design or a drawing and you’re like that doesn’t really meet our 16  concept of open. And then the question is well what is your definition of open? The idea here is 17  let’s just create clarity so that there is no dispute later.  18  Chair Lauing: Commissioner Waldfogel. 19  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah just another point of clarification. I think the reason why 1  carports or a reason why carports have been popular is they don’t count as FAR and 2  (interrupted) 3  Ms. Campbell:  Can I just clarify for you? 4  Commissioner Waldfogel: Please do because this (interrupted) 5  Ms. Campbell: Any required covered parking in the R‐1 district, whether it’s a carport or a 6  garage, counts as floor area towards the site. So, the differentiation, on the Staff perspective, is 7  we look at these two things exactly the same way when we’re evaluating a proposed project or 8  a new one. It all counts towards floor area, it all counts towards lot coverage. 9  Commissioner Waldfogel: Is that a newer interpretation? 10  Ms. Campbell:  No, not at all. 11  Commissioner Waldfogel: So, since 2006? Because I’ve seen… I mean I’ve seen a historical trend 12  of carports being built and then subsequently post final being enclosed, turned into garages. 13  Ms. Campbell:  We… Yes, and that’s ok because it counts as floor area regardless so we do have 14  people who enclose their carports but it has no impact to their floor area or lot coverage. 15  Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok so if somebody... I’m sorry to keep dwelling on ADUs but if 16  somebody replaces a required covered parking space with an ADU. And then they are required 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  to replace that with something else, can they replace that with a carport or will that just be 1  with uncovered parking for that second phase? 2  Ms. Campbell: The… When you construct an ADU, you can remove the uncovered space and it 3  can be… I’m sorry, you can take away your covered space and it can be remained uncovered. 4  You don’t have to make a new covered parking space when you (interrupted) 5  Commissioner Waldfogel: Right so they… so if you convert a garage, can you then build a 6  carport? 7  Ms. Campbell:  If you have the available floor area and lot coverage. 8  Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok but if you’ve consumed the floor area in the conversion and you 9  don’t have any others, then you’ll just be building uncovered. 10  Ms. Campbell:  That’s right, yes. 11  Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok, that’s just what I want to understand. 12  Chair Lauing: Commissioner Gardias. 13  Commissioner Gardias: Thank you. So, there is a reason and I believe the reason is… And look 14  at… Go to Green Meadows and there is plenty of Eichler houses in those so houses from the 50s 15  and 40s that were built over there. You may find lots of carports that are in the corners of the 16  houses and pretty much like 50‐years ago or 60‐years ago a number of the houses were 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  designed this way were pretty much the car was part of the house. It was like a feature that 1  was added to the house, this was pretty much that era so having a carport that has tools makes 2  perfect sense from the perspective of the history of architecture and also of usage of the car. I 3  think that just having limitations of the additional wall, which we were just talking about the 4  third wall, would force the design there to specifically design carports in this way and I don’t 5  agree with this. So, for this reason, I propose to retain the language as it’s been used because I 6  believe there is a reason behind this. Thank you. 7  Chair Lauing: So, my understanding is you oppose Number Seven? 8  Commissioner Gardias: Oppose the change. 9  Chair Lauing: Right so what we’re going to need to do here is that in each of these tables we’re 10  going to have to come up with a motion and then some exception where I think we’re going to 11  have to vote individually. 12  Ms. Gitelman:  Can I make a recommendation on that process piece (interrupted) 13  Chair Lauing: Yep. 14  Ms. Gitelman: And I want to get back to Commissioner Gardias’s opinion because I believe what 15  we’ve done is make a little editorial change that doesn’t really change the meaning of this 16  section. So, if you like the way it stands in the code, I don’t know why you would oppose the 17  change, but getting back to process. What I would suggest is that the Commission entertain a 18  motion to… I mean we have really tried… Let me step back, we have tried to either explain or 19  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  modify all of the recommendations that you pulled in your last discussion. So, we believe that 1  we have addressed them all with the possible exception of the leaf blowers. We think more 2  work is needed so we would appreciate a motion to include all of these items, save the leaf 3  blowers, in your recommendation to Council. Once you have that motion on the floor and 4  seconded, then you can entertain amendments if any Commissioners would want to make 5  changes to that motion (interrupted) 6  Chair Lauing: Yeah.  7  Ms. Gitelman:  On specific items. 8  Commissioner Alcheck:  Let me just get a question on this then. I mean I guess the question is if 9  we treat them the same, same floor area and there’s no bonus, what difference does it make if 10  a carport had three walls? I mean I’m must like what difference would it make to the Planning 11  Staff or to an Architectural Review Board is someone decided not to have a garage door and if 12  someone didn’t want to put a garage door on. I mean I guess my question is what difference 13  does it make? What do we care if a carport in the rear has three walls or a wall that’s eighty… 14  how is that significant? 15  Ms. Campbell: So, Staff, we don’t ever look at that. We just look for your required covered 16  parking. I think somehow this may be tied into the other section, the contextual garage 17  placement where Staff is saying that it applies to a carport. So, maybe if we’re changing the way 18  we look a carport so it doesn’t somehow get included in that contextual placement discussion. 19  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  So that’s… So, from a Staff’s perspective from the planner, we look at these things exactly the 1  same way so but I do think maybe there’s a correlation between these definitions and the other 2  section that we were talking about, the contextual garage placement. And if somehow, we 3  don’t include carports, then maybe it then makes a difference on how we define what a carport 4  is but right now, we’ve always treated carports and garages the same for contextual garage 5  placement. And so, we’ve never even… We’ve never had an issue about figuring out what is it. 6  Is it a garage, is it a carport? It hasn’t been an issue for us. 7  Commissioner Alcheck: Alright so I’ll respond and say that I don’t know that that’s true. That 8  you’ve always treated them the same way. I think there are probably some examples that they 9  haven’t been treated the same way and I think the argument that we had the last two times we 10  went through the carport change was that we didn’t… The Commission did not agree that that 11  was the intent to treat them the same way. I get that this Commission decides that it is not an 12  issue for them which is fine and I don’t particularly have an issue with it myself anymore. But I 13  do think that we should revisit the issue to determine whether it’s actually doing what we want 14  it to do and I actually don’t think me and Commissioner Waldfogel differ on this issue. The 15  question is how much more time are we going to spend on this definition (interrupted) 16  Chair Lauing: Well, that’s right. 17  Commissioner Alcheck: That seems like it’s doing nothing and if it’s not doing anything, my 18  comment which just provides a definition for open so that there is no vagueness. So, if you say 19  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  open means fifty percent open, then you’re done. Just like what’s a full wall, what’s a partial 1  wall? Because if a partial wall counts then we’re done and I think the idea here isn’t to grapple 2  with this. The idea is to give the people who are building projects in the City clarity so that they 3  don’t have to guess what we’re getting at, that’s all. 4  Ms. Gitelman: So, if you would have a motion on the floor, I think Commissioner Alcheck could 5  suggest an amendment to change that to read which is at least fifty percent open on two or 6  more sides.  7  Chair Lauing: Right so the last pull one, if anyone wants to discuss it, is Number Twelve and 8  then we can put a motion together for the whole first set. 9  Ms. Gitelman: Ok. 10  Vice‐Chair Monk: Looking at this chart that we were handed out today where it says 11/29/17 11  report page, that column, my November 29th report ends at around Page 99. So, I don’t what 12  your page numbers are referring too. I’m a little confused. 13  Mr. Yang: Packet Pages. 14  Vice‐Chair Monk: My packet ends at less than 100 pages. 15  Mr. Yang:  From today’s meeting? 16  Vice‐Chair Monk:  No, from last week. 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Mr. Yang: Yeah so last meeting Staff’s report was republished in today's packet as well and so 1  (interrupted) 2  Vice‐Chair Monk: So, these pages are referring to (interrupted) 3  Mr. Yang:  Today’s packet. 4  Vice‐Chair Monk: Ok, the way it’s labeled is entirely confusing. I don’t know why you’re just… 5  So, we’re… These pages are only referring to the Packet of today? Of our… you see that the top 6  of it is labeled as 11/29, ok whatever. This is very confusing.  7  Ms. Campbell: It’s all in today’s packet. 8  Vice‐Chair Monk: Ok, thank you. 9  Chair Lauing: Any other comments on twelve, right? I don’t see any other lights. 10  Vice‐Chair Monk: I just found where twelve is. 11  Chair Lauing: Ok so seeing no other lights can we get a motion, to begin with, to approve the 12  first table, which is our second reading of this, and then we can entertain amendments? 13  Director Gitelman, do you want us to opine on seventeen with an amendment in non‐support 14  or are you pulling seventeen from this table? 15  Ms. Gitelman:  I think it’s up to the Commission. You know one option would be for you to say 16  we recommend furthering all of the items except Number Seventeen which needs further work. 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: Ok so we’ll just keep that as part of the amendments that we’ll work on here. 1  Alright so do I have a motion to accept the Table 1 part of this code review? 2  MOTION #1 3  Commissioner Waldfogel: So, moved. 4  Chair Lauing: Waldfogel moves, second? 5  SECOND 6  Vice‐Chair Monk: Second. 7  Commissioner Alcheck: So, just to be clear, you’re moving the table as is or changed? 8  Commissioner Waldfogel: I’m moving the table with seventeen pulled. 9  Commissioner Alcheck: Only? 10  Commissioner Waldfogel: Only seventeen not forwarded. 11  Chair Lauing: Ok. 12  Vice‐Chair Monk: I thought you talked about the fifty percent or is that not happening? 13  Commissioner Waldfogel: Well, that would be an amendment. 14  Vice‐Chair Monk: I thought that’s what they said they were doing? 15  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck: Would you like me to make a friendly amendment? Can I make a 1  friendly amendment? 2  Chair Lauing: Yeah wait, let’s make sure we have the motion correctly. What was the fifty 3  percent reference? 4  Vice‐Chair Monk: I thought you said something, I just want to make sure I understand. 5  Ms. Gitelman:  No, was suggesting that Commissioner Alcheck would offer that as an 6  amendment, that’s not our proposal. The proposal stands as its written. 7  Chair Lauing: Ok so the motion is to approve the initial eighteen on the proposed code 8  amendments with the exception of seventeen. 9  Commissioner Waldfogel:  Yes. 10  Chair Lauing: That’s right and the second agrees with that? 11  Vice‐Chair Monk: I’d like to hear what the friendly amendment is. 12  Chair Lauing: Well, we have to have the motion on the floor first. So, the motion right now is 13  everything gets approved except the… We don’t approve the gas leaf blowers and then there 14  would be amendments. 15  SECONDER WITHDRAWN 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Vice‐Chair Monk:  I withdraw my second. 1  Chair Lauing: Ok. 2  Commissioner Gardias: Yeah, with the whole respect… I’m sorry, I’m going to just cut into this 3  discussion. At a certain point in time we stopped at the number, whatever it was, the number 4  about the garages and then we jumped to the conclusion. Then the rest… so then we jumped to 5  seventeen and then the discussion is over. I was having comments to some other item and I 6  don’t feel comfortable just to close on this issue. So, if you don’t mind just to conclude the 7  discussion, I would just like to make additional comments to some other item within this. 8  Chair Lauing: We can still do that in the context of the motion that’s on the table, that’s no 9  problem. 10  Vice‐Chair Monk: [unintelligible ‐no mic], I withdrew my second. 11  Chair Lauing: If there’s a second. 12  Commissioner Alcheck: Can I just ask a quick question? 13  Chair Lauing: Wait, hang on, there are too many questions. 14  Commissioner Alcheck: We said revised though. 15  Chair Lauing: Right. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck: So, it is (interrupted) 1  Chair Lauing:  That’s what I’m saying is that I thought we were only going to discuss the pull 2  items so that’s what was my understanding. If people want to comment on the revised items, 3  that’s perfectly acceptable as well. 4  Commissioner Alcheck: Ok so I’m willing to make a friendly amendment. 5  Chair Lauing: Well, we don’t even have a second right now. 6  SECOND 7  Commissioner Summa: I will second. 8  Chair Lauing: Ok we have a second from Commissioner Summa and we know what that article 9  is. We can still discuss other items that are on this list of eighteen items so if you want to raise a 10  question on that Mr. (Note‐Commissioner) Gardias, please go ahead. 11  Commissioner Gardias: Thank you. Thank you but just remind me so there’s a motion on the 12  floor to pretty much to move it to the Council with pulling Number Seventeen? 13  Chair Lauing: That’s the current motion (interrupted) 14  Commissioner Gardias:  That’s the current motion 15  Chair Lauing: And there are plans to do additional amendments to not support other items. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  AMENDMENT #1  1  Commissioner Gardias: Ok good. So, pretty much if it’s a case of the amendments, then I would 2  just like to propose the amendment to pull item Number Fourteen, remove restricted election 3  time for the PTC Officers and combine it with the discussion on the by‐laws. And the reason is 4  that pretty much I just personally I don’t feel comfortable just separating those two parts. 5  Chair Lauing: Right so we can get a second and vote on that but all we’re doing here is just 6  taking out November and it is planned during the retreat agenda to discuss this again in the 7  context of the by‐laws so that’s already scheduled. Voting for this or against this tonight does 8  not change that policy because we can vote to change our own PTC rules and regulations. Ok so 9  is there a second on this? 10  Commissioner Alcheck: So, can you separate them? [unintelligible – no mic]? 11  Chair Lauing: We’ll just let it die and you make your own motion, there’s no second to his so go 12  ahead. 13  AMENDMENT #1 FAILED BECAUSE OF THE A LACK OF A SECOND. 14  Commissioner Alcheck: Ok so look, I’m just going to say it because I feel like to, to be consistent 15  with the previous. I think that the changes to contextual garage placement provision should be 16  apart of a more involved discussion. And the effective change of this means that individual 17  subject to the contextual garage placement provision won’t be able to avoid having to build a 18  rear parking facility. And so (interrupted) 19  Chair Lauing: So, excuse me, this is your motion? 20  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #2 1  Commissioner Alcheck: My point is that this is a substantial change, I believe change is the 2  intent, past Commissions have pulled it and I feel obligated to suggest that we continue to pull 3  that item unit it gets reviewed more holistically because it’s not (interrupted) 4  Chair Lauing: So, that’s your proposed amendment relative to Number Six. 5  Commissioner Alcheck:  That’s my six and I would suggest (interrupted) 6  Chair Lauing:  Not supposed to discuss until we have a second. 7  Vice‐Chair Monk: What is the motion [Note‐amendment] doing? 8  Chair Lauing: The motion [Note‐amendment] is to not (interrupted) 9  Commissioner Alcheck:  I would suggest that we pull Number Six. 10  Chair Lauing: Approve item Number Six.  11  Commissioner Gardias: Isn’t it pulled? 12  Commissioner Alcheck: No, it’s not pulled.  13  Chair Lauing: Nothing is pulled right now. 14  Commissioner Alcheck:  Except for seventeen. 15  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Waldfogel: Pull means that it was revised between the last meeting and this 1  meeting. 2  Commissioner Gardias: Oh, I see. 3  Commissioner Waldfogel: That’s what pull means in this (interrupted)[unintelligible] 4  SECOND 5  Commissioner Gardias: So, it’s a cow, right? So, I’m going to second this. 6  Chair Lauing: So, now we have a motion [Note‐amendment], seconded, the speaker’s already 7  (interrupted) 8  Commissioner Alcheck: I don’t even need to speak to any motion [Note‐amendment]. 9  Chair Lauing: You did, that’s what I am saying. Did you want to comment on that? 10  Commissioner Gardias: No. 11  Vice‐Chair Monk: [unintelligible] substitute motion? 12  Commissioner Waldfogel: No, it’s just an amendment. 13  Chair Lauing: No, it’s an amendment. 14  Commissioner Alcheck: It’s a friendly amendment so it has to be accepted by the maker first 15  which is why it doesn’t (interrupted) 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Gardias: So, it doesn’t need to be seconded.  1  Chair Lauing: The amendment does have to be seconded. 2  Commissioner Alcheck: No, it’s not an unfriendly amendment. I offered a friendly amendment 3  so, in theory, he has to say that he doesn’t accept it first before whatever. 4  Commissioner Waldfogel: Ok so yeah, I won’t accept it.  5  Commissioner Alcheck: Ok. 6  Commissioner Waldfogel: I’d rather just go through this process. 7  Chair Lauing: Ok, are there any other amendments to these first eighteen? 8  Commissioner Suma: Yes. [Note‐ everyone started talking at once]  9  Commissioner Alcheck: If it’s an unfriendly amendment, we’ve got to vote on it. 10  Chair Lauing: Ok, alright so we’re going to vote on that. All in favor of the amendment, signal by 11  raising your hand. 12  Commissioner Waldfogel: This is to remove this from (interrupted) 13  Commissioner Summa:  To remove six. 14  Commissioner Waldfogel: To remove six. 15  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Vice‐Chair Monk: And just to clarify, this was from this person, [Note‐ Ronny Bodner] had sent a 1  letter in last time on this, right? 2  Chair Lauing: I don’t know. Ok, opposed? So, it’s a tie so it doesn’t pass. 3  UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT FAILED WITH A VOTE 3(Alcheck, Monk, Gardias) ‐3(Summa, 4  Waldfogel, Lauing) 5  Chair Lauing: Other amendments? Commissioner Summa’s light is on. 6  UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #3 7  Commissioner Summa:  I don’t know if I’ll have any support for this but I would still… I’m still 8  uncomfortable with Number Eighteen which is the floor area exemption for trash enclosures in 9  the CD district. I don’t need to talk to it much because I think I talked to it a lot before but I 10  don’t think that trash areas are the same as resource conservation energy facilities. It’s clear if 11  you read the code that they are not and I don’t see a reason to exempt these. 12  Chair Lauing:  Is there a second to that? Ok. 13  SECOND 14  Commissioner Waldfogel: I’ll second that but I just want to ask Staff a question. 15  Commissioner Summa: Ok. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: Ok, Commissioner Waldfogel seconds. 1  Commissioner Waldfogel: We did discuss this at the last meeting and Assistant Director Lait said 2  that he would get back to us on what the intent was. Including resource conservation energy 3  facilities in this, I mean what does that mean in the downtown districts?  4  Ms. Gitelman: I’m sorry, we dropped the ball on that one. I don’t know off the top of my head. 5  Do you have any insights? 6  Ms. Campbell:  And so just to kind to add to that conversation, I do think that was one of the 7  concerns you raised about maybe how it might impact the uses, is that correct in the CD 8  district? 9  Commissioner Waldfogel: Well, it’s just that I believe the code that references allows up to 10  1,500 or 5,000‐square feet for this resource conservation energy facility use which probably 11  doesn’t make economic sense in this context but I just don’t know why we would want to grab 12  that into this. I thought there would be some clarification on that. 13  Commissioner Summa: To be clear, my concern was in letter C of this, that you added trash as 14  an area designated to be removed and refuse storage. I don’t have a problem with the special 15  resource areas. I have a problem with adding Citywide an exemption for trash areas. 16  Chair Lauing: Did Staff have any comment on that? Particularly in light of the revisions? 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Campbell: I think I tried to express that in the Staff report so we actually have been 1  interrupting this code section to apply to trash areas because… Let me find the exact language 2  here but (interrupted) 3  Chair Lauing: So, you’re saying that the words that you have in there are now codifying what 4  you’re already doing? 5  Ms. Campbell:  Exactly. It’s just really being specific so people understand that yes, these 6  conservation type uses includes recycling, compost and those types of facilities because it’s all a 7  part of that effort. 8  Commissioner Waldfogel: [unintelligible ‐no mic] 9  Ms. Campbell:  Are you looking at the new Staff report or the old Staff report? 10  Commissioner Waldfogel: I’m looking at this week’s Staff report. 11  Ms. Campbell:  Ok so for this weeks Staff report it’s on page… Packet Page 100 and in this 12  paragraph, it only talks… I was specific about the use. I’m sorry, not seventeen, I’m looking at 13  the wrong one, eighteen, yeah. So, it talks about it towards the bottom of that page and it goes 14  over to page 101.  15  Commissioner Waldfogel: Right and my feeling on this is I agree with you’re trying to do which 16  is to allow trash enclosures. What I disagree with the way that you're doing which is that you’re 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  also allowing some other things. Specifically, this cross‐reference to 184212, which probably 1  doesn’t make sense in the CD district but this is just a sloppy way to write code. 2  Vice‐Chair Monk:  I just want to say that this was discussed at our last meeting extensively so if 3  we’re going to be reviewing all the items that we previously discussed. I don’t think that it’s fair 4  that when we continue discussions, that we have an opportunity to always go back and revisit 5  all these things. 6  Chair Lauing: We’re making amendments now to what we're interested in approving. 7  Commissioner Alcheck: Can I ask a quick question to the seconder? 8  Chair Lauing: To the seconder? 9  Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah. 10  Chair Lauing: Yeah. 11  Commissioner Alcheck:  Commissioner Waldfogel, it sounds to me like you’re pulling this for a 12  very different reason than the maker of the motion. Is it possible that you have an amendment 13  to the language of the actual ordinance that would satisfy you so that you wouldn’t pull this 14  item? Could you carve out the issue that you’re concerned with so that it could move forward 15  with a more appropriate… I understand your concern about the sloppiness so is there… Do you 16  have anything in mind that could solve that problem without having sort of conflicting reasons 17  for pulling the item? 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Waldfogel: It’s a good question. I think we’d have to write the whole section 1  because the problem is we’re mixing cats and dogs in the same piece of code. And I think we 2  need to… If we’re going to update code for clarity, we should update it for clarity. 3  Commissioner Alcheck: So, I guess maybe it would be appropriate to sort of specifically direct 4  them as to the reasoning because if the reasoning… I could support a motion to revise it 5  according to specific instructions but for the reason because trash enclosures should be 6  included in FAR if that makes any sense to the motion makers. 7  Commissioner Waldfogel: Right, the problem with this is that if we yank these other 8  definitions… If we yank the cross‐reference 1842120 here, then we’re affecting other districts 9  because what this is doing is it’s removing the restriction in the CD district. 10   11  Commissioner Alcheck:  No, I think I actually completely understand. I’m just saying I would 12  support a motion that articulated the very reason why you would suggest revision as opposed 13  to the suggestion that the revision be made because of trash enclosures should somehow be 14  counted towards FAR. 15  Ms. Gitelman: Through the Chair, can I offer a suggestion? 16  Chair Lauing: Yes, please. 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Gitelman: I mean I think I understand the concern and I think a potential remedy could be 1  to put that phrase that we’ve suggested, eliminating except for in the CD district and move it 2  down to subparagraph A. So, the part about resource conservation and that stuff (interrupted) 3  Commissioner Alcheck: What page are you on? 4  Ms. Gitelman: Would still be qualified by (interrupted) 5  Chair Lauing: 101. 6  Ms. Gitelman: accepting in the CD district but we get the benefit of these refuge, storage, trash 7  and etc. Do you see what I mean? Would that address your concern Commissioner Waldfogel? 8  Commissioner Waldfogel: A just a minute, I need a minute to parse that. So, if you read this 9  paragraph A and paragraph B are both kinds of out of context for the CD district and we had a 10  discussion about the hazardous materials section that there restricted… They are otherwise 11  restricted in the CD district but there’s just kind of a weirdness about having a code section that 12  sort of allow them in in the CD district and then you have to cross‐reference to another code 13  section that doesn’t allow them. So, I mean this is just not the right way to write code. 14  Ms. Gitelman: Would the Commission consider an amendment acknowledging the intent of this 15  change and suggesting a correction to this section? I do understand your concern.  16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Waldfogel: So, what would that… I mean I’m open to that. What would that look 1  like? Just direction to Staff to draft something that captures this intent of allowing trash but not 2  allowing these other uses? 3  Ms. Gitelman: In the CD, that’s correct. 4  Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, I would be supportive of that. 5  Commissioner Summa: See in general, my concern was this didn’t do enough for the CD which 6  is a very constrained zone because it just is. It’s built out and constrained and there’s no place 7  but what it does… And that’s why I originally thought it would be better as site and 8  development standard in the CD. And instead, what it does is actually increase the things in all 9  the other zones through subparagraph C. It increased the floor area reductions. I didn’t think it 10  did enough for the CD zone and I thought it went to… I thought it increased the FAR reductions 11  in other zones which I didn’t see helping the CD zone. It didn’t seem to achieve the purpose 12  that Staff intended. But we can just vote on this, I mean. 13  Chair Lauing: Would the concept that Commissioner Waldfogel is working on help that or no, 14  not necessarily? 15  Commissioner Summa: [unintelligible ‐no mic]  16  Commissioner Alcheck:  I don’t think his change suggests including anything in FAR the way that 17  Commissioner Summa would like the trash enclosure to be included in FAR. 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: I’m just wondering if there’s some way that we can collaborate on the wording so 1  that isn’t just off into a black hole and then it comes back. 2  Commissioner Alcheck: Right but you might lose support for the motion if you include that. I 3  wouldn’t support a motion that included that.  4  Chair Lauing: Well, may need two different ones. 5  Ms. Gitelman:  I do think that Commissioner Summa and Commissioner Waldfogel are talking 6  about two different things. So, I don’t know that we have a coherent motion or amendment. 7  Chair Lauing: Are you withdrawing your second Commissioner Waldfogel to the original motion 8  [Note – amendment]? 9  Commissioner Alcheck:  No, to the amendment. 10  Chair Lauing: Yeah, that’s what I’m saying, the original amendment or are you saying that you 11  would leave it in there but you would want to have it rephrased in the way that you described? 12  SECONDER FOR AMENDMENT #3 WITHDRAWN 13  AMENDMENT #4 14  Commissioner Waldfogel: So, I’ll withdraw my second but I would still like to see… I would like 15  to introduce… I’d like to propose another amendment to direct Staff to redraft this in a way 16  that captures this intent of trash but doesn’t capture these other unintended uses. 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing:  So, let’s take those in order. He withdrew his second so is there any second to 1  Commissioner Summa’s original motion [Note ‐amendment]? 2  UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #3 FAILED WITH A LACK OF A SECOND 3  Chair Lauing: Then in that case that dies and there is a new amendment on the table from 4  Commissioner Waldfogel that needs a second. 5  SECOND 6  Commissioner Alcheck: I’ll second that. 7  Chair Lauing: And is there any further discussion on that? 8  Commissioner Alcheck: I have no comment. 9  Chair Lauing: Then all in favor of that amendment… I’m sorry. 10  Commissioner Summa: I’m sorry, could you repeat his [unintelligible]? 11  Chair Lauing: Sure, could you repeat your motion[Note‐amendment]? 12  Commissioner Waldfogel: Approximately, yeah, it’s getting late. Directing Staff to redraft this 13  code to permit trash enclosures in CD districts but do not permit these other uses like resource 14  conservation energy facilities. 15  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: Ok, that’s moved and that’s seconded. All in favor of that amendment say aye? 1  One, two, three. Opposed? 2  Commissioner Alcheck: So, we’re treating this as an unfriendly amendment? 3  [Note ‐Male:] Yes. 4  Chair Lauing: Sorry, let’s revote. In favor of [note‐ Commissioner] Waldfogel’s amendment is 5  four… five and opposed? One. 6  AMENDMENT #4 PASSED 4(Alcheck, Lauing, Monk, Waldfogel, Gardias) ‐1 (Summa). 7  Chair Lauing:  So, any other items that were listed as revised instead of no change that 8  somebody wants to chat about? 9  FRIENDLY AMENDMENT #5 10  Commissioner Alcheck: I’ll make a quick friendly amendment that or I would hope to make a 11  quick friendly amendment that we just revise language in Number Seven to reflect fifty percent 12  open as opposed to the vague term open. So, that anybody reading it understands what we 13  mean. 14  Ms. Gitelman: You mean at least fifty percent. 15  Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah at least fifty percent. It says completely open and I would say at 16  least fifty… I would just like to define that term so that people aren’t like what does that mean? 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Vice‐Chair Monk: Can it say mostly open or does that not (interrupted) 1  Commissioner Alcheck: I’m trying to create accurate… less discrepancy. Mostly is what, fifty‐one 2  percent in your mind? I mean I guess what I’m trying to do (interrupted) 3  Chair Lauing: That’s good. 4  Vice‐Chair Monk: It just seems like an easier standard that we can agree on. 5  Commissioner Alcheck: At least fifty or (interrupted) 6  SECOND 7  Chair Lauing: I would second that. 8  Commissioner Alcheck: Which one? 9  Chair Lauing: What you said, fifty percent. 10  Commissioner Alcheck:  At least fifty percent, ok. So, are you treating this as a friendly or no? 11  Commissioner Waldfogel: I’ll accept that as friendly partially because I think you’ve convinced 12  me that the difference between carport and garage isn’t really material. 13  Commissioner Alcheck: Right so I’m just trying to create no uncertainty. 14  Chair Lauing: Ok, any other discussion on that point? Alright, in favor of carport and garages 15  definition is greater than fifty percent. One, two, three, four. Opposed? Two. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  FRIENDLY AMENDMENT #5 PASSED 4(Waldfogel, Lauing, Alcheck, Monk) ‐2(Summa, Gardias) 1  Commissioner Alcheck: No, I didn’t oppose it. 2  Chair Lauing:  I know, you got it, she did. She opposed it. 3  Commissioner Alcheck: Who else opposed it? 4  Chair Lauing: Gardias. 5  Commissioner Alcheck: So, it’s an unfriendly amendment. 6  Chair Lauing: It’s four to two. It’s fine, we’re fine. 7  Commissioner Alcheck: Because I thought Asher [Note – Commissioner Waldfogel] said he’ll 8  treat it as a friendly amendment which means we don’t vote on it. 9  Chair Lauing: Well, we did so we’re done. Now we have to vote on the original amendment 10  which is… I mean sorry, the original motion which now has its amendments which is this first 11  Table One, alright? 12  Ms. Gitelman: Table One without leaf blowers, with the amendment regarding trash enclosures 13  and this latest amendment about at least fifty percent open for carports. 14  Chair Lauing: Correct. So, all in favor of that motion as amendment say aye? Three, four and 15  opposed? One. Abstention? Where are you? 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck: I support it. 1  Chair Lauing: Ok, sorry, I didn’t see you're (interrupted) 2  Commissioner Alcheck:  I thought I was one of the four. 3  Chair Lauing: One of the five. 4  Ms. Gitelman: So, just for the minutes, it’s five in favor with Commissioner Gardias voting no. 5  MOTION PASSED 5(Summa, Lauing, Monk, Waldfogel, Alcheck) – 1(Gardias) 6  Chair Lauing: Correct. Time check here, we’re now at 10:10. 7  Vice‐Chair Monk: Would we like to invite him to speak to his distention? 8  Chair Lauing: Sure, if you’d like too. 9  Commissioner Gardias: Sure, thank you. I [unintelligible] should be our practice. So, the reason 10  that I voted no pretty much is because I didn’t support the inclusion of the election time for the 11  PTC Officers. 12  Vice‐Chair Monk: Are you aware that that’s an item before the Council? That they are going to 13  be changing that in the near future? 14  Commissioner Gardias: I’m sorry? 15  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Vice‐Chair Monk: There might be a change to the term limits and we’re going to address it at 1  our (interrupted) 2  Commissioner Gardias: Yes, I know that. I know that but pretty much that was the reason. That 3  I already just spoke about this and I am aware about some upcoming changes but you know it 4  doesn’t make me comfortable supporting this just because of the reason specifically that we 5  will just discuss by‐law separately. So, just having part of the law approved today, part of the 6  law discussed, later on, doesn’t give me a complete picture and also it just… With no vote, I 7  want to just abstain the comments that I made in the past. Thank you. 8  Chair Lauing: So, we still have ten of these items. Let’s take a… is it essential that we get these 9  things finished tonight relative to your calendar for spring to the Council? 10  Ms. Gitelman: We would really like to try because we have a full agenda that first meeting back 11  in January (interrupted) 12  Chair Lauing: I agree, we do. 13  Ms. Gitelman: And (interrupted) 14  Chair Lauing:  So the things that we still have to discuss after this, very briefly, is an outline of 15  the agenda for the retreat and then any other agenda items. So, I don’t think beyond this is too 16  long but I want to be respectful of people’s time. I’m not sure that all these are going to be 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  controversial either so I am personally happy to jump right in but I’d like to hear comments 1  from colleagues. 2  Vice‐Chair Monk: Apologizes, I thought at our pre‐meeting we did discuss fourteen and making 3  a change that was different than what was presented in the packet to Commissioner Gardias’s 4  point. Did we decide to take out the last part of unless? 5  Commissioner Alcheck:  Yeah, that’s true. 6  Vice‐Chair Monk: Didn’t we change that? 7  Ms. Gitelman: I mean you could do that but we just [unintelligible](interrupted) 8  Chair Lauing: What we said was… All we did was sort of take away the November thing. That 9  means that we can do whatever we wanted to do and we wanted to make it more specific 10  when we reviewed other of our PTC procedures. 11  Vice‐Chair Monk: I thought we discussed removing the language that says or Commission 12  sooner expires. Is that currently not what’s in there? 13  Ms. Gitelman: This Commission added that at the last meeting is my understanding. 14  Chair Lauing:  So, yes, we did discuss that.  15  Vice‐Chair Monk: Ok, I think we probably should have looked at this more closely.  16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: So, not hearing any objections, I’m willing to try to pour through this.  1  Commissioner Alcheck: I’ll just suggest that maybe you set a time limit because I… it just seems 2  to me that this is going to Council in March or April, then maybe January doesn’t have to be the 3  date. I just don’t know that we should spend an hour so the question is how much time are we 4  willing to spend (interrupted) 5  Chair Lauing:  I don’t think anybody disagrees with that but it’d just be nice if you had some 6  items that are closed as opposed to continued. And if we find that some of these are 7  controversial (interrupted) 8  Commissioner Alcheck: I’m just suggesting setting a time, that’s all I’m saying. 9  Mr. Yang:  I will say that we would especially like to have the Commissioners feedback on 10  twenty‐four and twenty‐five, the ADU and the density bonus revisions to conform with state 11  law. We’d like to get those to the Council in January if possible. 12  Chair Lauing: Alright, let’s start with twenty‐four and twenty‐five. How about we have a 30‐13  minute limit on the rest of the meeting, which is 10:45? 14  MOTION 15  Commissioner Waldfogel: I’ll move twenty‐four and twenty‐five. 16  Commissioner Alcheck: Can we just separate those out? 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: We are. 1  Commissioner Alcheck: No, I mean (interrupted) 2  Chair Lauing: He just did. 3  Commissioner Alcheck: No, I mean like completely. Just separate them out, move them to 4  Council or do they have to go altogether? 5  Chair Lauing:  I differ that (interrupted) 6  Commissioner Waldfogel: [unintelligible] we can separate it out if we want too. Those are the 7  urgencies. 8  Commissioner Alcheck: Ok, sorry. 9  Chair Lauing:  So a second on twenty‐four and five [Note – twenty‐five]? 10  Commissioner Alcheck: Can you… I’m sorry, I just want to grab the page.  You seconded it? Can 11  we just take a vote? 12  Chair Lauing:  I didn’t but I can. 13  Commissioner Alcheck: No one seconded it? 14  Chair Lauing: No. 15  SECOND 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck: I’ll second that motion. 1  Chair Lauing: Commissioner Summa. 2  Commissioner Summa: This is a question for Staff. I know that the housing…. The density bonus 3  law hasn’t been used that much in Palo Alto but a couple times it’s come up that this provision 4  that you have to show the actual cost reductions. It’s come up a couple times from members of 5  the public that that was not actually done. Do we need to make that… Do we need to somehow 6  make that stronger so a document… So, there’s no confusion from members of the public so a 7  document that shows the actual cost reduction can be found or are you satisfied with that the 8  way it is? Am I making my… Am I making sense? 9  Ms. Gitelman: Well, I think that the change in state law means that we can’t require this 10  analysis and by making this change to the code, I hope it will be clear to the public that we are 11  not going to be able to require this analysis. 12  Commissioner Summa:  Ok so the change in the state law actually took that provision away? 13  Ms. Gitelman: Right. 14  Commissioner Summa: Ok, thank you for clarifying that. 15  Vice‐Chair Monk: So, referring to… Is that ok if I (interrupted) 16  Chair Lauing: Go ahead. 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Vice‐Chair Monk:  Item twenty‐four, accessory and junior accessory dwelling units, are we still 1  calling them JADUs because I didn’t see that defined in our definitions earlier? 2  Ms. Campbell: No, the… What you’re seeing for this packet… This Item Number Five is just 3  addressing the state‐mandated changes. The things that we talked about in the study session 4  are not part of the code amendments. Yeah, that’s for a future discussion when we come back 5  in the spring. 6  Commissioner Alcheck:  So, I’m just going to ask the question I asked 7  [unintelligible](interrupted) 8  Vice‐Chair Monk: I had… So, I just… I guess I’m confused by seeing the JADU language here 9  when I don’t know if that’s what we’re going to be calling it going forward. And then with the 10  addition on the minimum lot sizes, what’s the reasoning by adding this; pros and cons on the 11  planned community? 12  Ms. Campbell:  Could you tell me what packet page you’re on, please? 13  Vice‐Chair Monk: We’re looking at item Number Twenty‐Four so that would be the ordinance is 14  on Page 116 and 117, right? 15  Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, I think… Can I just say something? I think it would be helpful if we 16  understood what parts of twenty‐four and twenty‐five went beyond the requirements of the 17  state. If none of them do (interrupted) 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Vice‐Chair Monk:  That’s what I am reading so I just want to know (interrupted) 1  Ms. Gitelman: None of them do.  2  Commissioner Alcheck:  If none of them do, then I don’t even think we really have anything to 3  talk about because we have to pass it.  4  Chair Lauing:  Right, they are state laws. 5  Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, then you can call the question. 6  Chair Lauing: Right. 7  Commissioner Alcheck:  I’m only asking because I think… We just had a broad discussion about 8  ADUs that is much broader than these comments and I think we still need to have that 9  discussion. And then maybe then we’ll make amendments that will enhance the ADU ordinance 10  but I just want to understand. My understanding is that these two, the state requires that we 11  adopt these to comply with their laws and if we don’t, we will be out of compliance. 12  Chair Lauing:  Yeah, absolutely. Right? 13  Mr. Yang:  Yes and no. I don’t think that we would agree that we would be out of compliance 14  with state law. We think these are all basically clarifying changes and the changes in state law 15  were also essentially clarifying but we think that these do make it absolutely clear that we are 16  aligned with state law.  17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: So, Commissioner [Note ‐Vice Chair] did you get your questions answered? 1  Commissioner [Note‐Vice Chair] Monk, did you get your clarifications? 2  Mr. Yang:  I can also speak to Commissioner [Note ‐Vice Chair] Monk’s question about the PC 3  zone language in here. 4  Vice‐Chair Monk:  Thank you. 5  Mr. Yang: It’s basically a recognition, what we had done is we had tried to list all of the… 6  basically the low‐density residential districts and when we first created this list, we forgot there 7  were some PCs that also included single‐family residential as an allowable use. And so, this is 8  just a recognition that there are some PCs that include single‐family residential and for those 9  zones, the same ADU regulations would apply as they do in other single‐family residential 10  areas. 11  Chair Lauing:  Yeah, Commissioner Summa. 12  Ms. Gitelman: But to change the PC, don’t we have to open the ordinance that created the PC 13  and change it? 14  Mr. Yang:  So our ADU laws apply throughout the City and state law requires them to apply 15  throughout the City including in PC zones. And so, this just makes it clearer which set of ADU 16  laws apply in the PC zones. 17  Commissioner Summa: Thank you. 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Vice‐Chair Monk: And to my earlier question, if the ordinance gets passed the way we discussed 1  it tonight and we’re calling attached and detached and interior. Are we no longer going to be 2  calling this a junior accessory dwelling unit? I just need some clarity on that. 3  Mr. Yang: So, those definitions attached, detached, interior, those were conceptual study 4  session ideas. They are not apart of an ordinance, they are not a topic proposal. JADU is what 5  we call them now, it’s what state law calls them and we’re going to continue calling them 6  JADUs. 7  Ms. Campbell:  And just to clarify, a JADU is not the same thing as an interior accessory unit. It’s 8  a different type of (interrupted) 9  Vice‐Chair Monk: And I assume you have a definition of a JADU? 10  Ms. Campbell: Yes, it’s in our code. 11  Vice‐Chair Monk: Thank you. 12  Chair Lauing: Commissioner Gardias. 13  Commissioner Gardias: Thank you. The way that I read them there is just a mechanical 14  confirmation or alignment with the state laws. There is nothing out of the ordinary that we 15  should know of? 16  Mr. Yang: No. 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Gardias: Exactly so, for this reason, I propose that we agree with the proposed 1  language for twenty‐four, twenty‐five. 2  Chair Lauing: That’s the motion. [unintelligible – talking over one another] 3  Commissioner Gardias: Let’s vote then. 4  Chair Lauing: Alright, great. Alright, all in favor of approving twenty‐four and twenty‐five? Aye. 5  MOTION PASSES 6‐0 6  Chair Lauing: Unanimous, yeah. No opposed, thank you. Alright, let’s take a look at nineteen, 7  historic homes. 8  Commissioner Waldfogel: [unintelligible – no mic] 9  Chair Lauing: That was tempting to get the easy ones done like the no bike license. 10  Commissioner Waldfogel:  You get twenty‐six done [unintelligible] 11  Chair Lauing: I was going to try to use that as a rider on twenty‐four and twenty‐five actually.  12  Commissioner Alcheck: So, anybody wants to pick this one up? 13  Chair Lauing: Nineteen, any comments? I don’t see any lights so (interrupted) 14  Commissioner Waldfogel: Well, does Staff want to speak to the problem? What problem you 15  are solving? 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Campbell:  What we’re trying to do is just expand the applicability to more than just a 1  Category One and Two historic inventory property to also include the Threes and Fours and 2  other historic. Basically, the intent is to help preserve these historic structures and this is one 3  way to help do that and encourage that. 4  Chair Lauing: Nineteen.  5  Commissioner Waldfogel: Right and have you had applications where this has been a problem? 6  I mean is this solving a problem… A real problem or a theoretical problem? 7  Ms. Campbell:  You know I think this is information that I was given from Amy French, our Chief 8  Planning Official and she has gotten direction from the HRB. And they have… Their Board has 9  expressed a desire to see these additional provisions provided for other historic properties. I 10  don’t know specific details on the projects. 11  Commissioner Alcheck: I’m sorry… I’m really sorry to ask you to do this but would you just tell 12  me what page. I’m so lost right now. I’d like to look at the language of Number Nineteen. 13  Ms. Campbell:  So, Number Nineteen (interrupted) 14  Ms. Gitelman: Packet Page 142 is where I found it. 15  Ms. Campbell: Yeah, 141‐ 142, oh yeah. 16  Ms. Gitelman: Top of 142. 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck:  So, didn’t we discuss this one last time? Did we not get to this? 1  Ms. Campbell: There was some… There was another historic floor area discussion about the 2  tabling, I think that’s the same thing or something related.  3  Chair Lauing: Commissioner Gardias, did you have comments on this? 4  Commissioner Gardias: Yeah (interrupted) 5  Commissioner Alcheck: I thought we had a whole discussion about the 3‐feet above grade and 6  not (interrupted) 7  Chair Lauing: Different item. 8  Commissioner Alcheck: Literally, different item?  9  Chair Lauing: Yeah. Go ahead. 10  Commissioner Gardias: Yes, so I have a quick question to Staff, what’s the difference because 11  this is expansion from Category One through Four? So, what are the objects… Historical objects 12  that are under Category Three and Four? 13  Ms. Campbell: I’m not quite sure I understand but this is definitely all applicable to R‐1 homes, 14  single‐family homes so is that what you’re trying to clarify? 15  Vice‐Chair Monk: You’re making a change from Category Two to Category Four. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Gardias: I’m trying to understand what objects or what historical houses are 1  categorized as Three and Four as opposed to One and Two. I suspect that Hewlett Packard’s 2  garage is number One. So, what’s number Two, Three, and Four? 3  Ms. Gitelman: We’ll have to look that up but the intent is to make this incentive available to 4  more historic resources. So, buildings that are categorized but they are just not at the highest 5  level of recognition.  6  Mr. Yang: Categories Threes and Four are contributing buildings where Categories One and Two 7  are exceptional and major buildings. So as Hilary explained, historic but a wider net of historic 8  structures is what we’re creating. 9  Commissioner Gardias: So, would you mind just reiterate on this which are contributing 10  buildings? Are we talking… So, a garage would be a contributing building or it would be 11  significant building? 12  Mr. Yang:  So, the definition in our code is a contributing building means any building or group 13  of builds which are good local examples of architectural styles in which relate to the character 14  of a neighborhood grouping in scale, materials, proportion or other factors. This may have had 15  extensive or permanent changes such as inappropriate additions etc. etc. By contrast exception 16  building which is Category One means a building or group of buildings of preeminent national 17  or state importance, meritorious work of the best architects or an outstanding example of the 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  stylish development of architecture in the United States. It has no exterior modifications or 1  such minor ones that the other all appearance is its original character. 2  Chair Lauing: Any further comments? 3  Vice‐Chair Monk: On this item nineteen, I’m inclined to support all of it except for that section 4  on the home improvement exception because I still think it’s very vague that you’re asking us to 5  change an ordinance that did read Category One or Two. And now you’re asking us to change it 6  to Category One through Four and I just don’t have a clear picture of what entrails and what the 7  implications would be of that. So, for that reason, I wouldn’t want to support that change. If 8  you want to illuminate us more on it, I just don’t know what impact that would have. 9  Ms. Campbell: Yeah, I don’t have any additional information but it’s a similar intent as the 10  modification in the definition. So, it goes through a discretionary process so it wouldn’t just be 11  some automatic approval. It goes through the HIE, you have to make the findings and so I don’t 12  know if that kind of help with (interrupted) 13  Vice‐Chair Monk: One or Two and One through Four to me are very significant changes in 14  however you slice and dice them. 15  Chair Lauing: Well, but they are all historic contributors. 16  Vice‐Chair Monk: Yeah but changing a code section that was written One or Two to One 17  through Four. 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: Yeah but what they are extending it to is those that are not quite as spectacular 1  but they are still spectacular. It’s sort of the (interrupted) 2  Commissioner Gardias:  No, so if I may? Sorry for interrupting. If I understand it clear if you 3  could just hear me out. If I understand this correctly, this is just a cosmetic clarification because 4  existing language already talks about those buildings in the City’s Historic Inventory and also 5  calls out contributing structures. So, if contributing structures already included in this 6  paragraph are of Category Three and Four, then pretty much everything what it does it just 7  makes the clarification that those that are already named are truly included. Which is pretty 8  much no change to the pronouncement, it’s just clarification. Is my understanding correct? 9  Ms. Campbell: [unintelligible ‐no mic] 10  Vice‐Chair Monk: Is this broadening the exceptions for home improvements? 11  Ms. Gitelman:  No, it’s making them available to additional historic resources. 12  Vice‐Chair Monk: That sounds like a (interrupted) 13  Ms. Gitelman: It’s a process by which someone can apply for an adjustment to a historical 14  resource like a… What would it be? A typical minor change, a dormer. 15  Ms. Campbell: An HIE, maybe they are looking to do some additional lot coverage or something. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Gitelman: A modest change, usually small scale and this would allow additional historic 1  resources to use that process and ask for permission to do something like that. It’s not 2  automatic, it just makes it available to them. 3  Vice‐Chair Monk: Are there any negative downsides? 4  Ms. Gitelman: It’s a historic preservation incentive. If you believe in historic preservation and 5  you… I guess we thought it was kind of minor and it was doing a good deed but (interrupted) 6  Vice‐Chair Monk: It might be minor, I just don’t know what it entails so that’s where my 7  question was coming from. 8  Commissioner Gardias:  So, if you are done, I still don’t understand it. The reason is that existing 9  verbiage if I read correctly, allows already for modifications for those that are on the Historic 10  Inventory which would be the highest landmark of Category One and Two.  11  Ms. Campbell: I understand the question. 12  Commissioner Gardias: Yes so (interrupted) 13  Ms. Campbell:  So, just to clarify what you were getting to so this sentence about contributing 14  structures, those are specific… This is a specific reference to structures that are within a historic 15  district. So, I definitely can see how you can make that connection but it is not exactly the same 16  thing as saying it includes a Three and a Four… Category Three and Four. Because I think that’s 17  what you were suggesting that it (interrupted) 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Gardias: Yes, so what’s the difference then? 1  Ms. Campbell:  Because these are specific structures… Well, Categories One through Four are 2  specifically identified and on our inventory, they have already been identified. Sometimes 3  contributing structures need to evaluate when you’re in like the Professorville District, you 4  would do an additional evaluation to see if that house was a contributing structure to the 5  district and then they could make a determination. 6  Commissioner Gardias: So, hold on a second so just following up on this. So, thank you very 7  much for this discussion, it helps me understand because I think it would [unintelligible]. So, are 8  we saying that pretty much that true revision is just broadening of this language from the 9  structures that are within the district to those that are individually listed that would be beyond 10  the district? So, for example, Professorville is a district so it’s already covered but then if there’s 11  a structure somewhere in the community center. Then pretty much because of this language, 12  this structure is also included in this language. Is this the true revision? Ok, thank you. 13  Chair Lauing: Ok, let’s vote on the motion. All those in favor of approving it please say aye. One, 14  two, three, four, five. Opposed? Abstention? 5‐0‐1. 15  MOTION PASSES 5‐0‐1(Monk) 16  Chair Lauing: Ok, we have about 15 minutes left. 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Gitelman: I’m sorry, just for the minutes so it was five yes, Commissioner [Note ‐Vice Chair] 1  Monk abstaining. Commissioner (interrupted) 2  Chair Lauing: 5‐0‐1 so five for (interrupted) 3  Ms. Gitelman: 5‐0‐1, ok, thank you. 4  Chair Lauing: Zero against, one abstention. 5  Ms. Gitelman: Thank you. 6  Commissioner Waldfogel: [unintelligible – no mic] Somebody… Whoops, turn this. Something 7  that would be helpful is if the HRB voted on this, it would be helpful to include that in the 8  packet because I supported it based on the assertion that HRB… That the HRB recommends it. 9  So that would just be a helpful addition.  10  Ms. Gitelman: Will do.  11  Chair Lauing: Ok, the next one I actually think we did discuss last time so I’m not sure why it’s 12  on this list but outdoor fireplaces and barbeques. 13  Ms. Campbell:  I don’t think we did. 14  Commissioner Alcheck: Is there a distinction between outdoor fireplaces and fire pits?  15  Ms. Campbell:  No. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck:  So a fire pit is an outdoor fireplace? 1  Ms. Campbell:  That’s right. 2  Commissioner Alcheck: And what’s the (interrupted) 3  Chair Lauing: It’s 4‐feet.  4  Commissioner Alcheck: Four feet from the rear setback? 5  Chair Lauing: From the interior side and rear property line. 6  Commissioner Alcheck: Four feet.  So presumably someone has put a fireplace on a fence? 7  Ms. Campbell:  Well, we’ve had them right up against property lines in the past so we had to 8  clarify that… And we were kind of using the guide for where we would allow your chimney for a 9  single‐family home. So, we have a requirement that we allow your fireplace to encroach 2‐feet 10  into your 6‐foot setback for a single‐family home. So, we’re using that 4‐foot as a guide for 11  (interrupted) 12  MOTION 13  Commissioner Alcheck:  This is literally the perfect example of the context I would have needed 14  to support this so thank you for exactly that comment. I move that we adopt this change or 15  don’t oppose it. If there’s a second we can move on. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  SECOND 1  Chair Lauing:  Second. 2  Commissioner Gardias: Just can… I’m sorry, can we have a discussion [unintelligible – all talked 3  at once] 4  Commissioner Alcheck: [unintelligible] outdoor fireplaces should be on the fence, closer than 4‐5  feet from a property line? We need to have that discussion? 6  Commissioner Gardias: If you adopt my perspective, we don’t.  7  Chair Lauing: So, we now have a motion and second and it’s open for discussion. We have 10‐8  minutes left of this meeting so go ahead. 9  Commissioner Gardias: So, it’s a motion already (interrupted) 10  Chair Lauing: Yes. 11  Commissioner Gardias: Without discussion? 12  Chair Lauing: No, it’s a motion and a second and now you have discussion. 13  UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT 14  Commissioner Gardias:  Ok so the reason that I just want to have a conversation on this is 15  pretty much that I understood that 4‐feet was related to the encroachment of the existing 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  attached chimney into the setback when it’s part of the house. However, firepits, fireplaces, 1  this is a totally different animal. There is a… It’s pretty much when you have a fireplace, there is 2  a sparker [unintelligible] that’s up there so from the perspective of a neighbor, it may make a 3  difference. You may say that 2‐feet is not much but it just… I think that there should be a 4  setback of 6‐feet as opposed to 4 [note‐feet] because there is a smell, there could be smoke 5  and then 4‐feet, it’s really just one meter; it’s very close. And pretty much 6‐feet would be 6  consistent with the setback… The property setbacks, that’s the reason. 7  Chair Lauing:  Any other comments? If there aren’t any comments, we can vote. 8  Commissioner Alcheck: I would suggest that I would treat as an unfriendly amendment simply 9  because I would prefer to go with the recommendation by the fire… I’m assuming somebody 10  was involved in this? 11  Ms. Campbell: Yes, we talked with the fire and the Building Department so fire recommended… 12  I think they were saying at least a 3‐foot clearance just for access purposes. So… but 4‐feet has 13  been sort of the consistent set… So, we’ve already been doing it already so we’ve been applying 14  the 4‐foot. 15  Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, ok, I’m not… Sorry to interrupt you. I’m just going to suggest that I 16  would accept that… I would not accept that as a friendly amendment. So, if you want to get a 17  second and put it to a vote. Otherwise, my motion supports moving forward with the 18  recommendation from the already exceeded recommendation of the Fire Department. 19  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: Is there any second to that amendment? 1  AMENDMENT FAILED BECAUSE THERE WAS NO SECOND 2  Chair Lauing: Ok then we’ll go back to the original motion so all in favor of approving this as 3  recommended? Two, three, four, five. [Note‐Opposed] one and I think you’ve already spoken to 4  your dissent essentially, right? Ok. 5  MOTION PASSES 5(Lauing, Alcheck, Monk, Summa, Waldfogel) ‐1(Gardias) 6  Chair Lauing: So, let’s do the easy one and pick up the bike license. Does anybody have a 7  problem with that? 8  Vice‐Chair Monk: I think twenty‐one is easy.  9  Chair Lauing:  I think twenty‐six is easier. 10  MOTION 11  Commissioner Waldfogel: I move twenty‐six. 12  Vice‐Chair Monk: And twenty‐one, we’ll put them together? 13  SECOND 14  Chair Lauing: Twenty‐six, second. 15  Commissioner Alcheck: Wait, hold on. Can we do one at a time, please? 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: We are. Twenty‐six is moved and seconded. That’s removing the requirement for 1  a bike license requirement. 2  Vice‐Chair Monk: Second. 3  Chair Lauing: I already did. Any comments. 4  Vice‐Chair Monk: Call the question. 5  Chair Lauing: Ok, all in favor? One, two, three, four, five, six to zero, ok. 6  MOTION PASSES 6‐0 7  Chair Lauing:  Going back to twenty‐one then. Comments on over the counter architectural 8  review process. 9  MOTION 10  Vice‐Chair Monk: I move that we adopt Staff’s suggestions to make the changes for the 11  (interrupted) 12  Commissioner Alcheck: So, my only concern (interrupted) 13  Chair Lauing: Second, please? 14  Commissioner Alcheck: Oh, sorry. 15  SECOND 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing:  We need a second to discuss it. Ok, I’ll second it so we can discuss it. Comments 1  then. 2  Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, I would just… Sorry.  3  Commissioner Gardias:  Yeah you know I have a comment in a formal sense because typically 4  when there is a… I mean to pick a form of a meeting like this should be that there is a discussion 5  and then pretty much when the discussion… There’s some sort of agreement or disagreements 6  built during the discussion. Then pretty much there is a motion proposed. 7  Chair Lauing: Yeah, the parliamentary procedure is that you should have a motion on an item 8  and a second. Therefore, its qualified to have enough interest to discuss it and then you have 9  an extensive discussion as long as it takes. So, there’s not anything here that’s not being 10  discussed and everybody has a chance to do that so I think we are following that process. 11  Commissioner Gardias: I’m not sure, I would have to look up our by‐laws. Maybe Council [Note 12  ‐Staff] can help me with this right? I’m just up to having a discussion on this. I just don’t feel 13  comfortable with the (interrupted) 14  Chair Lauing: You’re asking for discussion before there’s motion and what we’re in here for is to 15  review each one of these things that we’ve all studied offline and at length and discuss each 16  one of those. Staff would like to have approval on each one of them so we’re taking them one 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  on one and seeing where we can get them approved and where we can’t. So, I think we’re right 1  on target here. 2  Vice‐Chair Monk: And just speaking to my motion, I reviewed the proposed changes I think that 3  they are pretty minor. They do add some additional authority towards moving things along 4  from a procedural process standpoint on behalf of the Director and I think they are changes 5  that I would support as written. 6  Chair Lauing: Other comments on… I’m going to clear these lights because they’ve been 7  stacking up so Commissioner Alcheck. 8  Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah so, I guess my only issue here is it’s… One of the methods that 9  we’ve been sort of following is what does this solve, what problem? I don’t know if we’ve gone 10  over that so I think we might be rushing this one. I want to understand why, for example, 11  projects that are determined to be exempted would not be subject to administrative processing 12  including a formal determination letters or appeal opportunities. I just think, why are we 13  putting people in a position where they can’t sort of have a discussion that has some oversight? 14  I guess what I’d like to know is I’d like Staff to provide us a little bit of an idea of how this has 15  worked in the past? I understand what it says but why is this a problem? Why would this 16  process give the Director authority to make projects exempt from appeal opportunities? 17  Ms. Campbell: So, the way that it works today, let’s just say you have a commercial building in 18  the Research Park and you wanted to switch out a window to a door. So, that’s an exterior 19  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  modification to a site so typically we would say that if you have any exterior modification, you 1  have to go through architectural review. And when we see things at the counter… So, we do 2  this every day at the counter. When we see something at the counter that is so minor, which 3  we would consider that to be so minor, we approve it just through the building permit process 4  and we don’t make the applicant go through a formal architectural review application. 5  Commissioner Alcheck: What if you don’t approve it? 6  Ms. Campbell:  What we do is we have them go back and (interrupted) 7  Commissioner Alcheck: Would they be able to go… Could they go through a different process? 8  Ms. Campbell:  There’s a couple option so one option is you go revise your building permit or 9  typically what is, is we just don’t have quick enough information. So, they maybe need to go 10  back and revise the plans to include full dimensions or show us what the existing conditions is 11  more clearly with some photos and they have a proposed condition or they can actually 12  formally submit an application. So, when they formally submit an application, if they are 13  somehow don’t agree… I mean that doesn’t happen. They could submit an application or 14  sometimes it happens where we see something, they think its simple but we do not and we say 15  ok, well this rises to a level of a Staff level review and you have to submit and go through that 16  formal process. But what we’re trying to do is establish a codified process because we do this 17  and nowhere in our code today does it say that we can actually do what we do by approving 18  these things at the counter. And what we’re trying to do is get something done quickly and 19  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  efficiently and usually it’s always associated with a building permit so we do have some kind of 1  paper trail for whatever we’re doing. 2  Commissioner Alcheck: Do you anticipate a list that would determine minor and not minor? 3  Ms. Campbell: Yeah, we’ve… There’s a draft document in the Staff report attachments that give 4  you… That we’ve put together as some guidelines for the types of projects we would potentially 5  consider for this process. So, like I was saying, like a window change, door changes, maybe 6  some minor landscaping or vary… They have to be very minor and if for any reason we think 7  that it just doesn’t meet that threshold, we bump it up into the formal process but the idea of 8  not having an appeal period and things like that, it just doesn’t make sense. Because when 9  we’re doing something at the counter and we’re trying to help get this process done, it just 10  doesn’t make sense. 11  Commissioner Alcheck: Let me ask you this question. Is it your… Is it Staff’s opinion that your 12  intent of this is to insolate builders from appeals that contradict Staff approvals? 13  Ms. Campbell: No.  14  Commissioner Alcheck: Ok. 15  Ms. Gitelman: This is really a kind of customer service thing that we’re already doing. It’s the 16  kind of thing like if you brought in one of these little applications to the counter and we said oh, 17  that’s a Staff level ARB. I have to take it in, it’s going to take 14‐days, I have to notice it, blah 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  blah blah. They would say are you kidding me, to replace a window? To replace 12 shrubs 1  outside the front door? So just as we’ve done this over time we’ve developed this workaround 2  and we’d like to codify it so everyone is aware of kind of the list of things that are on Packet 3  Page 272 that initially that we would recommend having this streamlined process. 4  Commissioner Alcheck: So, is it like an automatic approval? 5  Ms. Gitelman: No, it’s with a building permit. I mean you still have to… We… You still have to 6  prove to us that it’s a good idea and it meets our code.  7  Commissioner Alcheck: Ok and so if they didn’t, then they could seek a different kind of review? 8  Ms. Gitelman: Then it would go up to the Staff level ARB. 9  Commissioner Alcheck: Alright. 10  Chair Lauing: Ok, I see no other lights so is there any other discussion on this? 11  Commissioner Gardias: Yeah, I mean this is exactly what I was talking for because my question 12  was here what’s material, what’s not material so thanks very much for directing us to this list of 13  those items that qualify for this over the counter. My question is like this, is the neighbor 14  notified somehow if there is maybe a minor item but facing the neighbor that would be 15  impacting the neighbor in some way? 16  Ms. Campbell:  There is no notification process that we’re suggesting.  17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Gitelman: We’re really trying to put things on this list that no one is going to care about.  1  Commissioner Gardias: Ok so for example, if somebody… Like a color rendering if somebody 2  paints the rafters 4‐feet away from the property lot red and those rafters have never been red. 3  So now the neighbors see a red color, which may be impacting him, does the neighbor know 4  about this process? 5  Ms. Campbell: I mean they could definitely contact the City and then we can investigate how 6  that was approved and I mean they still… This wouldn’t apply to single‐family homes. This is 7  only for commercial and multi‐family projects but then we would need to do that research to 8  figure out, was that part of a building permit? If it was part of a building permit, did the planner 9  sign off on it? I mean things happen all the time without the City being involved at all with 10  approving it.  11  Commissioner Gardias: Sure. Ok, thank you. 12  Chair Lauing: So, this is twenty‐one, over the counter architectural review process. All in favor 13  of supporting that, please raise your hand. Seven… sorry 6‐0. 14  MOTION PASSED 6‐0. 15  Chair Lauing:  Alright so per our agreement of 30‐minutes ago, we’re coming up on 30‐minutes. 16  We have four to go. I would suggest that we move over to the announcement section and if 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  somebody wants to press on after that’s done, we can come back to these four. So, in other 1  words, we’re going over to the agenda item number (interrupted) 2  Commissioner Alcheck: [unintelligible – no mic] 3  Chair Lauing:  Otherwise we’d have to continue these last four items to the next meeting 4  because it would be very short. 5  Commissioner Waldfogel: So, you’re talking about twenty‐two? 6  Vice‐Chair Monk: Twenty‐two, twenty‐three, what else? 7  Chair Lauing: Sorry, I’ll close that up.  Twenty‐two, twenty‐three, twenty‐seven and twenty‐8  eight. 9  Ms. Campbell: And twenty‐eight (interrupted) 10  Commissioner Alcheck: So, is seventeen like going to Council in some fashion or it’s not going to 11  Council or what’s (interrupted) 12  Chair Lauing: Is what? 13  Commissioner Alcheck: Seventeen; between now and spring, is seventeen going to go to 14  Council? 15  Chair Lauing: What’s seventeen? 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck: The blowers. 1  Chair Lauing: No. 2  Ms. Gitelman: We’re going to do some more research and we’ll let you know. If we take it 3  forward, we’ll keep you in the loop on what happens with that. I mean there is interest to move 4  something forward but we recognized that you’ve raised some issues and we may need to 5  modify the text. 6  Chair Lauing: Right so we’re on record as against it so if it goes to Council, it goes with us 7  against it at this point in time. 8  Commissioner Alcheck:  So, when we talked about this… I’m sorry when we talked about being 9  against it, I feel like there was various reasons why we were against it. I think Commission 10  Summa for example, just opposed gas leaf blowers in general. My suggestion was (interrupted) 11  Chair Lauing: Yeah, that’s all true. 12  Commissioner Alcheck: So how would (interrupted) 13  Chair Lauing: It’s not ready for prime time is the way I would explain it. 14  Commissioner Alcheck: It doesn’t sound like we’re going to review it. It sounds like it’s going to 15  go up when it’s ready and I don’t know if we have consensus on how we feel about it. That’s all 16  I’m saying. 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: I don’t know that that’s the case because Director Gitelman said that there has to 1  be some more research before they are comfortable presenting it and if it’s not (interrupted) 2  Commissioner Alcheck: [unintelligible]  3  Chair Lauing: But what a second, that’s what I’m trying to say here. And if it’s not going to go 4  until March, we would have time take a look at your new proposal and incorporate it into our 5  motion or not. So, we don’t know that yet because you don’t know that yet. 6  Commissioner Alcheck:  So just so I understand it, is that you’re understanding? That you’re 7  going to bring back that item before the next time you bring it to the council [unintelligible]? 8  Ms. Gitelman: You know we had hoped you would get all the way through here and that would 9  be the only outstanding item and we wouldn’t have to come back necessarily but it looks like 10  you’re going to have a handful of things that we’re going to have to bring back so we can bring 11  that with it. 12  Chair Lauing: Right but we don’t know that yet. What I’m saying is we might be able to get 13  through these next set of agenda items quickly or not. 14  Commissioner Alcheck: The question I had wasn’t whether or not we know that. The question is 15  if we do get through the things that your optimistically excited to get through, which I’m happy 16  to do, will that item come back? That’s my question. 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Gitelman: Our thought is if you got through everything, our thought was that we would 1  carry a recommendation forward to the Council that attempted to address the concerns you 2  articulated at the last meeting.  3  Commissioner Alcheck: Right so my comment is just that I don’t know that we have consensus 4  on those comments. That’s it so if she… if the [unintelligible] does not come back on seventeen, 5  which they just said they wouldn’t if we finish tonight, my point is that I don’t know that we 6  actually developed a consensus on seventeen. We had a few people comment about it but we 7  did not actually say here’s how we feel about it and so I just want to put that out there that that 8  item would not be resolved by us at a later date if we move tonight. 9  MOTION 10  Commissioner Waldfogel: Can I move twenty‐two and if it gets a second, I have a question for 11  Staff? 12  SECOND 13  Vice‐Chair Monk: Second. 14  Chair Lauing: Question to Staff. 15  Commissioner Summa: You want to approve twenty‐two? 16  Commissioner Waldfogel: Yeah, I want to move (interrupted) 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Vice‐Chair Monk: I seconded. 1  Chair Lauing: What’s the question for Staff? 2  Commissioner Waldfogel: The question for Staff is just as a matter of code design, I agree with 3  what you are doing here which is to change the way that you give notices. I’d actually prefer to 4  see these definitions of how to give notices pulled out. To just say give notice and then have 5  some definition section that describes how to do that as a matter of architecture because I am 6  looking at a piece of code from 1963 that says written means includes printed, typewritten, 7  mimeographed or multi‐graphed and I don’t even know what a multi‐graph is. So, you know the 8  problem is these kinds of codes get obsolete because technology changes but that said, I 9  support this direction today.  10  Chair Lauing: Any other comment on that? 11  Commissioner Gardias: Yes, I have a comment. So, in twenty‐two, there is a recommendation of 12  removing the requirements for publication. Why would we do this? 13  Ms. Campbell:  Let me get to the page and I’ll be right there.  14  Commissioner Gardias: No so the reason that I am asking is because pretty much that 15  supporting the whole paragraph, twenty‐two, I think that because of our relationship with Palo 16  Altons it should be keep… should be sustaining the publications… Sustaining the notice in the 17  press. 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Campbell: Ok so let me help clarify so this is a very specific code reference to publishing 1  and emailing a Director’s decision. So, when… Currently, when we take action on a project and 2  we prepare a letter, we do not publish that decision in the newspaper. So, we have not been 3  doing that for the last 15‐16‐years that I’ve been here and we don’t email the Director’s 4  decision either to anyone. We do put things on the web and things like that, we do have other 5  existing processes that we do to make the Director’s decision known but we have not been 6  doing anything to publish a Director’s decision. We still always notice and publish for hearings 7  and we send out cards when we in a use permit or a major ARB, we sent out notifications to the 8  neighborhoods; a 600‐foot radius. But this I specifically to clear up a reference to publishing a 9  Director’s decision which we don’t do and we have not been doing. 10  Commissioner Gardias:  Yes, I understand. This has already been said so my question was about 11  those items that I cannot read. So, this fact that the Director’s decisions were not published in 12  the paper don’t justify not doing so and then as an argument I can say that with recent 13  discussions for the last couple of years, we were expanding the Director’s purview for various 14  decisions within a number of the code chapters. So, having exposing Director’s decision, 15  pushing them to the citizens via papers that they read, which is the proper communication 16  channel. As opposed to the posting to the website which they have to actively reach out to as 17  opposed to paper that they receive because it lands in their driveway. I think that I would 18  support just maintaining this process and truly following it as it’s today stance. 19  Chair Lauing: Commissioner Summa. 20  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Summa: Thank you. I’m fine will all the rest of them except for this one. I was 1  going to make a motion to pull this one. I was… I’m kind of… I think it’s harder for people to find 2  information about decisions. There use to be a running list of applications applied for, there use 3  to be a running demo applied for, and I sort of agree that we are giving the Director more 4  authority to do more things, not in public. So, I kind of has a problem with this one although I 5  understand it’s… You’re codifying a present process but I think there might be a way we could 6  expand letting people know about this without sending direct letters on the website, just list. 7  But also, I’m very uncomfortable with only… in the first paragraph at the end, only the… any 8  adjacent owner or tenant being able to appeal a decision. I just think that’s to narrow, a group 9  of people that could appeal something. It could be someone across the street, someone down 10  the street so I could make a motion… Wait, I forget if we have a motion on the floor? 11  Vice‐Chair Monk: We have a motion and I think (interrupted) 12  SUBSTITUTE MOTION 13  Commissioner Summa: To move twenty‐two, ok. I’d like to make a substitute motion to pull 14  twenty‐two and to move approval of twenty‐three, twenty‐seven and twenty‐eight. If I 15  (interrupted) 16  Chair Lauing: Whoa, whoa, whoa. 17  Vice‐Chair Monk: Wait, wait, wait. 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck: Don’t do that, just one (interrupted) 1  Vice‐Chair Monk: Hold on. 2  Chair Lauing: Wait. 3  Commissioner Alcheck: Or let this go to a vote. 4  Vice‐Chair Monk:  I think the main thing that I heard from you was that it went from the owners 5  or the adjacent property owners and they took out the ‘any’ part. That sounds like (interrupted) 6  Commissioner Alcheck: I have a [unintelligible ‐no mic] 7  Chair Lauing: So, yeah but she is commenting right now. 8  Commissioner Alcheck: But she’s not (interrupted) 9  Vice‐Chair Monk: I just wanted to clarify what Commissioner Summa was taking issue with. 10  Chair Lauing: Right so procedurally a simple way to do this is to have a discussion about it and 11  either approve or defeat this and you’ve just stated that you would like to have a different kind 12  of motion to they know what your intent is but you’re perfectly qualified and can go ahead and 13  do a substitute motion if you’d like. 14  Commissioner Waldfogel: Do you want to just make an amendment to yank that section? 15  Chair Lauing: That’s another option. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Vice‐Chair Monk: Want Staff to speak to it? 1  Commissioner Summa: I could make an amendment to yank the… to eliminate the… Pardon 2  me? 3  Commissioner Alcheck: You don’t like any part of it. 4  Commissioner Summa: To eliminate the limiting the appeal… It doesn’t even seem like it was a 5  big problem so in the last 6‐years you’ve had only two of these such appeals, right? 6  Ms. Campbell: That’s correct. 7  Commissioner Summa: And so, it doesn’t seem like a big problem that we have to solve and I 8  don’t think eliminating it to only adjacent property owners or tenants is appropriate. And I’d 9  like to add something that I think the Directors… I think it would be good to have a running list 10  of Director’s decisions because I think they are very hard for people to know about if they do 11  want to appeal them. And so, I would like to add in B something about that and I don’t think it’s 12  going to add a lot of hassle or work for Staff because you’ve only had two in 6‐years. 13  Chair Lauing: I’m not clear what you want. Did you may want to make a lot of adds to this, is 14  that your amendment? 15  AMENDMENT #1 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Summa: No, my amendment would be to remove from paragraph one where it 1  limits anybody… it limits the requesters for a hearing to appeal to only tenants or property 2  owners adjacent to the subject. 3  Vice‐Chair Monk: You want to keep it as is. 4  Commissioner Summa: And then in B, I think it would be appropriate to explore a way in which 5  we can convey in an easy fashion, just a list on the website, Director’s decisions… I don’t think… 6  So, people know about them. 7  Vice‐Chair Monk: Can the letters get posted maybe to the website? Something like that? 8  Commissioner Summa: No, it would just be a running list of Director’s decisions or something. I 9  mean I want to leave it open, I don’t want to be too prescriptive but I don’t think people have a 10  way of finding out about Director’s decisions. 11  Chair Lauing: Right but if we’re amending (interrupted) 12  Commissioner Alcheck: Can I… I have a question (interrupted) 13  Chair Lauing: No, wait for a second, if we’re amending the motion, then we have to have a 14  specific what the amendment is so that comes down to language. Otherwise, we have to give 15  the intent of that and then have the Staff come back with another revision. 16  Commissioner Summa: That’s what I’d like. 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  AMENDMENT #1 FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND 1  Chair Lauing: Ok. Yes, Commissioner Alcheck. 2  Commissioner Alcheck: So, two things, number one, one option is to pull this item so that we 3  can spend a little bit more time on it as opposed to passing as is. I would suggest to you that I 4  absolutely agree with Commissioner Gardias’s statements. I don’t think the logic that we 5  haven’t been doing this is represents… We haven’t followed our code so that’s why we should 6  change our code maybe not be prudent. And the only other caveat to this is I… Are you 7  suggesting that you don’t post any Director’s decisions or you don’t post Director’s decisions 8  related to this? And I’ll say that with this caveat which is I thought we just created this whole 9  notion of Director’s decisions within the last year. This sort of idea that we have a Director 10  determination was sort of created only a little while ago and I thought that when we created 11  that determination, we also created an appeal process that was kick‐started and terminated 12  based on the date the document was published. So, if you remove that date, what does that do 13  to the appeal process that’s in place? Maybe that appeal process didn’t apply to this specific 14  caveat but my broader question is, are you even publishing any Director’s opinions? 15  Ms. Campbell: So, for decision action items, we do have a running list of the Staff level 16  architectural review applications that get approved. That’s posted on the web through the ARB 17  agenda, I believe that’s still on the ARB agenda. 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck: No but I mean this… The [unintelligible] Director’s decision, I thought 1  was something that we created. 2  Ms. Gitelman: Yeah, you’re talking about interpretations… code interpretations. 3  Commissioner Alcheck: Is different than this? 4  Ms. Gitelman: We established a process for Director’s code interpretations where we would 5  publish them and someone could appeal them, that is different than this. These are decisions 6  (interrupted) 7  Commissioner Alcheck: What is that? What does published mean in that regard? 8  Ms. Gitelman: I don’t remember off hand but we made some process where we would have to 9  disseminate an interpretation and someone could appeal it. This is about decisions that we 10  make on minor Architectural Review Applications so it’s a decision on an applicant’s project. 11  They are usually minor projects, they qualify for our Staff level review and we make the public 12  aware of it by placing a notice that’s been approved on the ARB agendas. So that’s how we’ve 13  been doing it but we haven’t been publishing in a newspaper, we haven’t been doing all this 14  stuff that’s in the code and so we’re trying to make the code match reality. 15  Commissioner Alcheck: So, would it be more appropriate to instead of removing… So, is it your 16  opinion that this provision removes the published requirement altogether or continue to 17  publish it in the ARB agendas? 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Ms. Campbell: So, just to clarify too, it does apply to other projects, not just the Staff level 1  Architectural Review. It applies to variances and Conditional Use Permits. So, all we’re trying to 2  do is just eliminate the requirement to publish in a newspaper and do an emailing for the 3  Director’s decision. We do have (interrupted) 4  Commissioner Alcheck: To the applicant? 5  Ms. Campbell:  Yeah. No, it's to whoever is interested. I think it… So, it’s like to the 600‐foot 6  radius or something. It’s just (interrupted) 7  Ms. Gitelman: It's still an administrative burden and quite a notification requirement. Saying the 8  current notification process of mailing the decision letter to the applicant, sending notice cards 9  to the 600‐foot radius when applicable and post decisions on the City website has been 10  effective to keep citizens informed. Notices to individuals who request them can be sent. 11  Commissioner Alcheck:  Ok so (interrupted) 12  Chair Lauing: So, as a practical matter (interrupted) 13  Commissioner Alcheck: Then it’s not such a significant change and if that’s the case, then I 14  think… That’s the problem with this process is that we’re not all talking about the same thing. 15  So, if it’s not… If it’s just a different type of notice as opposed to no notice, then that would be 16  relevant, I’m sure, to your support and mine. And I think to a certain extent, it doesn’t sound… I 17  would suggest that I don’t share the same concern as Commissioner Summa regarding how 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  many people can appeal because if it’s very minor, then really your neighbors are probably the 1  only people who are relevant, not people who live down the street. 2  Chair Lauing: So, as a practical matter, we now have a substitute motion [Note‐amendment] on 3  the floor. 4  Commissioner Alcheck: Which doesn’t have a second. 5  Chair Lauing: It doesn’t have a second but I just want to say that we’re done. We’re over our 6  time limit, we’re not going to be able to finish this thing. So, we can also just hold on this entire 7  thing and not vote on it tonight.  So, at this point (interrupted) 8  Commissioner Alcheck:  I think we (interrupted) 9  Chair Lauing: Hang on, hang on, so at this point, the substitute motion is there which is going to 10  need some word smiting and I don’t think that there’s a second at this point. 11  Commissioner Gardias: Yeah so if I may, right? So, this (interrupted) 12  Chair Lauing: Is there a second for this motion, please? If there’s not, then we can move on.  Ok, 13  there’s no second so now we can move on. Commissioner Gardias. 14  SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND 15  AMENDMENT #2 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Commissioner Alcheck: I’d like to make an amendment. I mean I don’t know how I would make 1  an amendment to this because the motion is to just pass it but what I’d like to suggest that if 2  there’s a concern, that we articulate it a little more clearly because there might be some 3  support for… I just want this to work the right way. 4  Vice‐Chair Monk: Wait, I’m a little behind. I thought (interrupted) 5  Chair Lauing: I think what we should do is we should withdraw the motion and work on the 6  working until the next time we need it and then come back with the wording. 7  Commissioner Alcheck: But it’s not eliminating a notice so the discussion we had was based on 8  this notion that somehow people weren’t going to get a notice on something. 9  Vice‐Chair Monk: I think we’re close on it. I’m just confused because I thought Commissioner 10  Summa had an amendment. Did that get withdrawn? 11  Chair Lauing: It did not get a second. 12  Commissioner Alcheck: She substitutes motioned it. 13  Vice‐Chair Monk: There was a substitute motion. 14  Commissioner Alcheck: That failed. 15  Commissioner Gardias: Yeah, if I may? I agree with this reasoning right so if this twenty‐three, 16  twenty‐two paragraphs just relate to all those items on Page 272 which are minor items, then 17  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  from my perspective, I agree with that there is no need for publication so I withdraw my 1  comments. I totally agree those are minor items, they don’t need to be reviewed. However 2  (interrupted) 3  Ms. Gitelman: That list on 272 was the prior item. That’s irrelevant to Number Twenty‐Two. 4  Commissioner Gardias: So, it’s irrelevant so what (interrupted) 5  Ms. Gitelman: Number Twenty‐Two is about other matters. 6  Commissioner Alcheck: No, no but the premise remains. It’s just a different publishing, it is not 7  a no publishing. You are in fact probably noticing, even more, people it’s the relevant people 8  and so the reason why I mention that this is important is because I don’t want there to be the 9  false impression that there’s all this support for pulling if, in fact, you’re ok. 10  Commissioner Gardias: No, just hold on a second, I just want to now understand right because 11  it says here in paragraph A of Twenty‐two that minor architectural review project. So, B relates 12  only to minor architectural review projects. 13  Ms. Campbell: No B, if you read through the paragraph, it actually talks about architectural 14  review, Conditional Use permits, variances, and so it does talk about… It’s more than an 15  architectural review. 16  Commissioner Gardias: Ok so that’s what I was looking for so example if there’s a Director’s 17  decision that we talk the masks for the Verizon… For the antennas for Verizon communications. 18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  And then Director’s… We gave the Director’s decision to make her accountable and to allow her 1  to make the decision on placement of those… On some architectural… On some buildings. And 2  then my question is does this fall under… If the Director makes a decision under preview of that 3  ordinance, does this fall under this publication or not? 4  Ms. Campbell: So currently… so that example for this, a wireless project that you’re using, the… 5  I’m just going to explain what we would do. We would send out an approval letter to the 6  applicant, we would send out notice cards to a 600‐foot radius around every single pole if that’s 7  what we were doing initially and we also post to the website to let people know what the 8  Director’s decision is. But we wouldn’t publish it in the newspaper and wouldn’t do some kind 9  of email notification unless it was part of that specific project where people said hey, email me 10  with the statues on the application. 11  Commissioner Gardias: Ok so it’s different then so I sustain my comments because I thought 12  that my comments were pertinent to the process and I think that we should be pushing the 13  communication to the constituent. As opposed to just having constituent coming for the… to 14  our website with the desire to understand the Director’s decision. Giving the same argument 15  that I already made that we entitle the Director with lots of decision making and I think it would 16  be appropriate to push this communication by a press posting so they are aware about the 17  decision that the Director made. 18  Chair Lauing: Ok I think we’ve debated this enough. Motion‐maker? 19  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  MOTION WITHDRAWN 1  Commissioner Waldfogel: So, I’m persuaded to pull this motion for two reasons and should I 2  say what they are? 3  Chair Lauing: You can or we can just vote on it. 4  Commissioner Alcheck:  Let’s vote on it. 5  Vice‐Chair Monk: I want to hear why he wants (interrupted) 6  Chair Lauing: We can vote on it. 7  Vice‐Chair Monk: I’d like to hear why (interrupted) 8  Commissioner Waldfogel: Do you want to just vote on it? No, I mean what I am persuaded by is 9  the idea of what a publication is something that we need to… I’m sorry. I can’t see the red light 10  on my side. This notion of publication needs to be just better defined. I think you’re probably 11  right in where your cut off is but I’m not one hundred percent sure so I’m a little worried about 12  it. And then the second issue is on this… The issues that Commissioner Summa raised about 13  who has the right to appeal is something where perhaps this is so narrowly circumscribed that 14  it doesn’t matter but I actually need to spend quite a bit more time reading a very complicated 15  piece of code to know if that’s true or not so that’s why. 16  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Chair Lauing: Ok so this should be not pulled but pushed. In other words, we just don’t make a 1  decision on it and this will be one of the left‐over items. 2  Commissioner Alcheck: Is there… I’m sorry, Is there already a definition for publishment or no? 3  Like what do you do for all the other publishment requirements? Actually, don’t answer that. I 4  guess the question (interrupted) 5  Chair Lauing: Ok we’re moving. 6  Commissioner Alcheck:  that would [unintelligible] would be if we just knew what those where 7  because if it’s the same as what you’re proposing then maybe this wouldn’t be [unintelligible]. 8  Vice‐Chair Monk:  I also think it might be helpful to get more of the ordinance in front of us so 9  that we’re not looking at it as this grand thing because if it’s really just a minor ordinance and 10  we saw what it was referring to, we might not have had such a big debate. 11  Commissioner Alcheck: For the record, I would have supported this too. I would have supported 12  this motion. 13  Chair Lauing: So, unfortunately, we’re going to have to leave this one with two or three 14  unfinished unless somebody wants to stay till 1 AM.  15  Commission Action: Item Continued to 1/10/18 16    17   18  _______________________    1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at  the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair,  provided that the non‐speaking members agree not to speak individually.   2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers.  3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers.  Palo Alto Planning & Transportation Commission 1  Commissioner Biographies, Present and Archived Agendas and Reports are available online: 2  http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/ptc/default.asp. The PTC Commission members are:  3   4  Chair Michael Alcheck  5  Vice‐Chair Asher Waldfogel 6  Commissioner Przemek Gardias 7  Commissioner Ed Lauing 8  Commissioner Susan Monk 9  Commissioner Eric Rosenblum 10  Commissioner Doria Summa 11   12  Get Informed and Be Engaged!  13  View online: http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city‐of‐palo‐alto or on Channel 26.  14   15  Show up and speak. Public comment is encouraged. Please complete a speaker request card 16  located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Commission 17  Secretary prior to discussion of the item.  18   19  Write to us. Email the PTC at: Planning.Commission@CityofPaloAlto.org. Letters can be 20  delivered to the Planning & Community Environment Department, 5th floor, City Hall, 250 21  Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. Comments received by 2:00 PM two Tuesdays preceding 22  the meeting date will be included in the agenda packet. Comments received afterward through 23  2:00 PM the day of the meeting will be presented to the Commission at the dais.  24   25  Material related to an item on this agenda submitted to the PTC after distribution of the 26  agenda packet is available for public inspection at the address above. 27  Americans with Disability Act (ADA) 28  It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a 29  manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an 30  appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, 31  or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329‐2550 (voice) or by emailing 32  ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 33  24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. 34