HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 228-05ATTACHMENTS
-A. Record of Land Use Action
B. Zoning Compliance Table
C. Applicant's Project Description Letter
D. Planning & Tran"sportation Commission Report dated March 30, 2005 (without
attachments)
E. Draft Planning & Transportation Commission excerpt verbatim minutes, March 30, 2005
F. Tentative Map (Council packet only)
COURTESY COPIES:
Chris Beach, Kier & Wright
CBC Bay View Partners LLC
Penny ElIson
CMR: 228:05 Page 3 of3
1. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable
general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451:
The site does not lie within a specific plan area and
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed
subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific
plans:
The site does not lie within a specific plan area and
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type
of development:
The site is improved with existing office spaces and
related site improvement. No physical changes would be made to the
buildings or the site
4. That the si te is not physically sui table for the
proposed densi ty of developmen t :
The site is currently improved with 67 1 400 feet of
office buildings and related site improvements. The project would
create 10 commercial condominium units in existing buildings and
would not increase the density of the site.
5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage
or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habi tat:
No physical changes are being made to the site that
would cause environmental impacts.
6. That the design of· the subdivision or type of
improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems:
No physical changes are being made to the site that
would cause serious public health problems.
7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public
at large, for access through or use of, property wi thin the
proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may
approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or
for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially
equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This
subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements
established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no
authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that
Page 2
.the public at large has acquired easements for access through or
use of property within the proposed subdivision.
The tentative map will not conflict with pre-existing
easements.
SECTION '4. Tentative Map Approval Granted. Tentative
Map approval is granted by the City Council under Palo Alto
Municipal Code ("PAMCII) Sections 21.12.090 and the California
Government Code Section 66474, subject to the conditions of
approval in Section 6 of this Record.
SECTION 5. Final Map Approval.
The Final Map submitted for review and approval by the City
Council of the City of Palo Alto shall be in substantial
conformance with the Tentati ve Map prepared by Kier & Wright
consisting of 1 page, received March 9, 2005, except as modified £0
incorporate the conditions of approval in Section 6.
A copy of this map is on file in the Department of Planning
and Community Environment, Current Planning Division.
Within two years of the approval date of the Tentative Map,
the subdivider shall cause the subdivision or any part thereof to
be surveyed, and a Final Map, as specified in Chapter 21.08.010, to
be prepared in conformance with the Tentative Map as conditionally
approved, and in compliance with the provisions of the Subdivision
Map Act and PAMC Section 21.16.210 and submitted to the City
Engineer (PAMC Section 21.16.010[a]).
SECTION 6. Conditions of Approval.
Department of Planning and Community Environment
Planning Division
1. A Final Map, in conformance with the approved Tentative
Map, all requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance (PAMC Section
21.16), and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, shall be
filed with the Planning Division and the Public Works Engineering
Division within two years of the Tentative Map approval date (PAMC
21.13.020[c]). '
2. The existing 4 foot wide footpath at the rear of the site,
providing access from the site to the Baylands, shall be maintained
as a path for access to the Baylands for use by the building
occupants.
3. A preliminary copy of restrictive covenants (CC&Rs) shall
be submitted for review and approval by the office of the City
Attorney at the time of Final Map submittal. The CC&R's shall
Page 3
contain a provision requiring Continued maintenance of the site and
exteriors of all buildings.
SECTION 7. Term of Approval.
Tentative Map. All conditions of approval of the Tentative
Map shall be fulfilled prior to approval of a Final Map (PAMC
Section 21.16.010 [c] ) .
Unless a Final Map is filed, and all conditions of approval are
fulfilled within a two-year period from the date of Tentative Map
approval, or such extension a~ may be granted, the Tentative Map
shall expire and all proceedings shall terminate. Thereafter, no
Final Map shall be filed without first processing a Tentative Map
(PAMC Section 21.16.010[d]).
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Senior Asst. City Attorney
PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED:
APPROVED:
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
1. Tentative Map prepared by Kier & Wright consisting on one page,
received 9 March 05 ..
(
Page 4
1129-1137 San Antonio Road
04IPT -02305
Attachment B
Project's Conformance with Zoning Code Regulations
No Physical Changes are proposed/or the Existing Buildings or Site
Table 1: CONFORMANCE WITH CHAPTER 18.60 (LM DISTRICT)
Regulation Required Existing Conformance
Minimum Site Area One Acre 4.5 acres Conforms
(43,560 sq. ft.) (196,020 sq. ft.)
Min. Site Width 100 feet 160 feet Conforms
Min. Site Depth 150 feet 1,134+ feet Conforms
Front Setback 20 feet 20 feet Conforms
Rear Setback 20 feet 20 feet Conforms
Interior Side Yards 20 feet 10 Legal Non-
Complying (side
setback was 10 feet ,
in 1978 when project
approved)
Floor Area Ratio .4 to 1 .34 to 1 Conforms
(78,408 sq. ft) (67,400 sq. ft.)
Lot Coverage .. 30 (58,806 sq. ft.) .34 (67,400 sq. ft.) Legal Non-
Complying (Lot
coverage was 40% in
1978 when project
was approved)
Building Height 35 feet 16 feet Conforms
Parking Spaces 196 Spaces 205 spaces Conforms
Riordan. Chris
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Chris,
Kathy Wegman [kathy@calbavarian.com]
Tuesday: March 01, 2005 5:20 PM
Riordan, Chris
Bayview Business Park Summary
Thank you for your phone call this aftem~on. Below is the brief summary you
requested regarding the Bayview Business Park Condo Conversion project:
Converting Bayview Business Park to commercial condominiums presents a
unique business opportunity. Much like residential condominiums, commercial
condominiums allow businesses to purchase their office or R&D space instead
of leasing such space. The commercial condominium market has been very
active in Silicon Valley during the last 12-18 months, particularly the
market for "for sale" space of 5,000 sq. ft and less.· Small business owners
are very interested in ownership opportunities. However, Palo Alto has very
limited product of this type.
Owner feels strongly that 'Bayview Business Park is well suited for a
condominium conversion due to its location and the layout of the business
park. The condominium conversion will allow Owner to offer 10 spaces "for
sale" ranging in size from 5,000 sq. ft. to 8,800 sq. ft~
Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can be of any further
assistance to you.
Kathy
Kathy Wegman
California Bavarian
kathy@calbavarian.com
Phone: (650) 326-4396·
Fax: (650) 326-4399
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged infonnation. Any unauthorized review,
use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender by return email and destroy
all copies of the original message. Thank you
1
Attachment C
Tentative Map would create 10 "for sale" commercial condominiums ranging in size from
5,000 ~ 8,800 square feet.
. The project would be consistent with the site development standards of the LM limited
industrial/research park district (PAMC 18.60.050).
SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES:
To subdivide the existing site into ten commercial condominiums, the applicant must obtain
the Commission's recommendation to the Council for approval of a Tentative Map as
required byPAMC Section 21.12.090(d).
The Tentative Map includes information on the existing onsite conditions. The Subdivision
Map Act does not require that the division of airspace be shown on the map. These drawings
are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. These
plans contain all information and notations required on a Tentative Map (per P AMC Section
21.12.040. Because the request is to create more than four condominium units, this request
cannot be processed administratively through the Director and requires review by the
Commission and City Council approval (PAMC 21.08.010).
TIMELINE:
Action:
Tentative Map Application Received:
Tent. Map Application De'emed Complete:
P&TC Meeting on Tentative Map:
Action by Council on Tentative Map:
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Date:
July 27,2004
January 19,2005
March 30, 2005
TBD
The City as the lead agency for the Project has determined that it is categorically exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act per section 15301(k)-Subdivision of
existing commercial or industrial buildings.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Record of Land Use Action
B. Applicant's Project Correspondence
C. Tentative Map (Commission Members Only)
City of Palo Alto Page 2
'.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
NEW BUSINESS:
Public Hearings.
Planning and Transportation Commission
Verbatim Minutes
March 30,2005
DRAFT EXCERPT
Attachment E
1. 1129-1137 San Antonio Road [04IPT-02305]: Request by Chris Beach ofKier &
Wright on behalf of CBC Bay View Partners LLC for a Tentative Map for commercial
condonUniums within three existing buildings. This map is required in order to create 10
commercial condominium units. Environmental Assessment: Categorically exempt from
the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15301 (k)-Subdivision of existing
commercial or industrial buildings. Zone District: LM(D).
SR Web link: http://199 .33.43 . 1 iportal!cityagenda/publisb!planning-transportation-meetingsll 83 .pdf
Mr. Chris Riordan, Planner: Yes, thank you. Good evening Chair Cassel and fellow
Commissioners. The project before you this evening is a Tentative Map to create ten
commercial condominiums withll three existing single story commercial buildings totaling
67,400 square feet located at 1129 through 1137 San Antonio Road.
It is important to note that the project would not include any physical changes to the site other
than the creation of the condominium air space units. The building was constructed in 1978, the
site setback requirement was ten feet and the ailowable lot coverage was 40%. The project
conforms to these requirements as shown in the Zoning Table left at your places. Later changes
to the zoning code increased the required site setbacks to 20 feet and the allowable lot coverage
was reduced to 30%. These two development standards for the project are now legal and
noncompliant. As mentioned in the Staff Report commercial condominiums allow businesses
the opportunity of purchasing their office or research and development space instead of leasing
it. The condominiums would range in size from 5,000 to 8;800 square feet. Staff requests the
Planning and Transportation Commission recommend approval of the Tentative Map to create
ten commercial condominium units to the City Council based on the fmdings and conditions
contained in Attachment A. Thank you.
Chair Cassel: Are there any questions for the Staff at this time or should I go to the applicant?
Let me go to the applicant. I have one person who would like to speak tonight. ,His name is
Mark Mordell. This is the applicant. You have a total of 15 minutes to speak and you don't
have to use all the time if you don't need to.
Mr. Mark Mordell, Applicant. 120 Hawthorne Avenue, #102, Palo Alto: Thank you for having
me tonight. I am president of California Bavarian Corporation, which is the manager of the
ownership of the property in question. I think Staffhas really done the job of explaining what
we are trying to do here. I am really here just to answer any questions that I can from the
Commission.
Page 1
1
2 Chair Cassel: Michael.
3
4 Commissioner Griffin: Good evening. I do have a question regarding the possible eviction of
5 current tenants. I did visit the site the other day and was surprised actually to see a rather large
6 adult daycare facility for Russian language people. I am wondering what your forecast might be
7 for the eventual situation there with the Russian group as well as your other current tenants.
8
9 Mr. Mordell: Well, each one of those tenants do have leases and options and they are all
10 different. The plan for this Tentative Map in this condominium conversion is really to give us
11 more flexibility as well as those tenants. They will have the option if we choose to sell to buy
12 their urtits to stabilize their tenancy as well. In particular the Russian dayca,re they have another
13 three years to go on the first term of their lease I believe and they have two options to go for
14 another ten years .. So they have all the right in the world to stay there. We have no right to evict
15 them if in fact they wish to stay. So we are really going to manage the tenants to the market as
16 we always do but we are not going to evict anybody. We are just not going to do that. So the
17 Russian daycare center has the right to be there for the next 13 years.
18
19 Chair Cassel: Are there any other questions of the applicant? Annette.
20
21 Commissioner Bialson: I have one question. I noticed on the Map and when I was out at the
22 location that there is a footpath, which is described in the Map as being through weeds and
23 brush. Does that I believe connect to the City's path through the Baylands park, is that correct?
24
25 Mr. Mordell: There is a path ·that goes out towards the Baylands park, yes.
26
27 Commissioner Bialson: And is that something that is going to remain or not?
28
29 Mr. Mordell: That path has kind of evolved over time. I don't know if it is going to stay or not
30 it really depends on what the City would require us to do. It is a nonconforming use and I think
31 the Russian daycare has just rolled something out in order to have access to that land.
32
33 Commissioner Bialson: There does seem to be use by both them and other tenants when lout
34 there at lunchtime. It seemed quite a benefit to the tenants to have. I was just curious.
35
36 Mr. Mordell: We are not going to change anything to do with the site, we have no plans to
37 change anything to do with the structure or the site or the infrastructure only depending on what
38 the City may require us to do.
39
40 Commissioner Bialson: Okay, thank you.
41
42 Chair Cassel: Pat.
43
44 Commissioner Burt: Just a follow on to that subject. Would you have a problem with that path
45 being made into a more proper permanent path access to that area?
46
Page 2
1 Mr. Mordell: I wouldn't have a problem with that, no.
2
3 Chair Cassel: Any other questions of the applicant? Thank you very much.
4
5 Mr. Mordell: Thank you ..
6
7 Chair Cassel: Do we have any questions of Staff? Annette.
8
9 Commissioner Bialson: Following the question that I had and that Pat also had with regard to
10 that path, is that something that is shown on any of the maps other than this as built map that we
11 got?
12
13 Mr. Riordan: It is just shown on this map. I have researched this project from 1978 when it was
14 created and there is no mention of that path. I think just over time it has been created. The
15 . Commission can condition the map to include that and we can include that when it goes to
16 CounciL
17
18 Commissioner Bialson: How would we do that? Just by mentioning it tonight?
19
20 Mr. Riordan: Just make it a condition of approval of the Tentative Map that that path remain
21 when it is approved by Council. We will go ahead and include that in the Record of Land Use
22 Action.
23
24 Commissioner Bialson: Okay, thank you.
25
26 Chair Cassel: Karen.
27
28 Commissioner Holman: Yes, I raised a question about maintenance of this as is typical with
29 residential condominiums there is like a homeowner's association that takes care of the common
30 space and common exteriors so that they are all maintained. So I was wondering if we could I
31 guess the appropriate place to address this would be in the CC&Rs that there be as a part of the
32 CC&Rs that there be a mechanism or" a provision that would require appropriate maintenance.
33
34 Ms. Lisa Grote, Chief Planning Official: That is correct and that would be an amendment to the
35 wording in condition two where it says a preliminary copy of restricted covenants shall be
36 submitted for review and approval by the Office of the City Attorney including a provision
37 requiring exterior maintenance of the building and site.
38
39 Chair Cassel: Thank you. Are there any other questions? Shall I bring this back for discussion
40 of the Commission? I will close the public hearing. Would anyone like to make a comment?
41 Annette.
42
43 Commissioner Bialson: I think that the request by applicant is a good one and is understandable
44 in light of market conditions. The only additional item I would want addressed is the one I have
45 asked questions directed to that is the path and its maintenance.
46
Page 3
1 Chair Cassel: Go ahead.
2
3 Commissioner Burt: That was not a motion?
4
5 Chair Cassel: No. Any other comments? Anyone want to make a motion?
6
7 MOTION
8
9 Commissioner Bialson: I move that we support the Staffs recommendation with the addition of
10 language with respect to the maintenance and creation of the path to show on the subdivision
11 map. I think I have explained why already.
12
13 SECOND
14
15 Commissioner Burt: Second.
16
17 Chair Cassel: Karen wanted to putin a friendly amendment. I think she already talked to the
18 attorney about that "
19
20 Commissioner Holman: Yes, the friendly amendment having to do with maintenance of the
21 building and the site as a part of the CC&Rs as Lisa stated. Would the maker of the motion
22 accept that? "
"23
24 Commissioner Bialson:Fine.
25
26 Chair Cassel: Thank you. Do you want to speak to the item? Is that okay with you?
27
28 Commissioner Burt: We sort of went out of order.
29
30 Chair Cassel: Well I did it so we could speak to the whole thing because she had already talked
31 to the attorney about that: Annette, do you want to speak to the motion?
32
33 Commissioner Bialson: Not necessarily, no, I think I have already spoken to it. Pat?
34
35 Commissioner Burt: I would just like to concur that the footpath is not merely maintained as its
36 current access but is essentially upgraded mto a permanent access. Then I would like to ask Staff
37 to do what I couldn't do just now which is find appropriate reference in the Comp Plan I tblnk
38 that talks about establishing pedestrian access where possible. I was hunting for appropriate
39 language and if you can locate that and add it to the Staff Report when it goes to Council that
40 would be great.
41
42 Chair Cassel: Any other comments? Then we are going to vote on a motion to support the Staff
43 recommendation with two additional conditions to that. One is to include the path on the Map
44 and the maintenance of that and the other is to include the maintenance of the condominium as
45 per either Lisa or the attorney had recommended.
46
Page 4
. .
1 Commissioner Holman: It is of the building and site.
2
3 MOTION PASSED (5-0-0-2, Commissioners Lippert and Packer absent).
4
5 Chair Cassel: The buildings and site. All those in favor please say aye. (ayes) All those
6 opposed? Motion passes five to nothing with two absences, Lee Lippert and Bonnie Packer.
7 Thank you. Thank you very much we appreciate your coming. When does this go to City
8 Council, do we know?
9
10 Ms. Grote: It will be within 30 days but we don't have a date certain set yet.
11
12 Chair Cassel: Thank you. Pat.
13
14 Commissioner Burt: I would just like to comment that this is a model of the Palo Alto process
15 and how expeditiously we work.
16
17
Page 5