Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 249-052. Allowance for small (up to 450 square foot) second dwelling units on smaller lots in the RE district was removed, retaining the existing 1 acre minimum lot size requirement for a second dwelling unit in this zone. The provision allowing a small second unit in the two unit (R-2) district for those R-2 lots between 6,000 square feet (the minimum lot size) and 7,500 square feet (the size at which a duplex could be built) is retained, since this district is intended to provide for two units on a lot. Additionally, the provision adopted with the R-1 District to 'allow up to a 450 square foot (rather than a 250 square foot) attached dwelling unit is now also reflected in the RE zoning district for lots of one acre or more. The reduced parking requirement of one parking space for this smaller (up to 450 square foot) unit is included for the RE and R-2 districts. Similar to the adopted R-1 ordinance, however, parking spaces in the front setback would not be allowed. 3. The language relating to noise-producing equipment that was adopted with the R-1 chapter is reflected in the LDR chapter. This language allows some discretion for the Planning Director to modify the requirement for housing/insulation of the equipment, if a combination of noise-reducing equipment technology, location on-site, or additional screening/reflection can assure compliance with the City's noise ordinance at the nearest property line. As in the R-1 chapter, this discretion does not change the requirement that such equipment be located within the building envelope. Two minor clarifications were also made ~o the Low Density Residential chapter as discussed in the April 27, 2005 P&TC staff report including limiting bed and breakfast inns to a maximum of 4 rooms in the RMD zoning district, and clarifying that tandem parking is allowed for single- family and two-family uses in the Low Density Residential districts, provided that both spaces in tandem are for the same unit and not located in the front setback. COMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS Staff returned to the P&TC on April 27, 2005 with these changes for the P&TC's reco!11l11endation for adoption of the Low Density Residential Chapter ordinance. P&TC recommended (7-0-0) that Council adopt the Low Density Residential chapter. The P&TC discussion prior to the motion included a discussion on basement pumping, lighting intensity and cross-reference to the historic incentives in the LDR chapter (which staff agreed to do and which is reflected in the proposed ordinance). RESOURCE IMPACT The implementation of the proposed ordinance is not expected to significantly impact staff resources or the City's budget. Similar to the R-1 Chapter, some additional staff time will be required initially to educate staff and the public on changes. However, staff anticipates that the clarifications and reformatting of the regulations will also result in an ordinance that is more readily accessible and understood by applicants and staff. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The Zoning Ordinance Update is intended to bring the Zoning Ordinance into compliance with the 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan. Staff and the Commission believe that the proposed LDR Chapter is a significant step in that direction. CMR: 249:05 Page 2 of3 · \ NOT YET APPROVED SECTION 2. Chapters 18.10 [RE Residential Estate District Regulations], 18.17 (R-2 Two Family Residence District Regulations], 18.19 (RMD Two Unit Multiple-Family Residence District, and 18.30 (Neighborhood Preservation Combining District (NP) Regulations) of Title 18 [Zoning] of the Palo Alto Municipal Code ~re hereby repealed in its entirety and restated to read as follows: Chapter 18.10 LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Sections: 18.10.010 Purposes 18.10.020 Applicable Regulations 18.10.030 Land Uses 18.10.040 Development Standards 18.10.050 Permitted Encroachments, Projections and Exceptions 18.10.060 Parking 18.10.070 Second Dwelling Units 18.10.080 Accessory Uses and Facilities 18.10.090 Basements 18.10.100 Standards for Agricultural Uses 18.10.110 Home Improvement Exceptions 18.10.120 Architectural -Review 18.10.130 Historical Review 18.10.140 Neighborhood Preservation Combining District (NP) Standards 18~10.150 Grandfathered Uses 18.10.010 Purposes Three low-density residential districts are defined in this chapter. Requirements for the Single Family Residential (R-1) District and related subdistricts and combining districts are included in Chapter 18.12. The specific purpose of each low-density residential district is stated below: (a) Residential Estate District [RE] The RE residential estate district is intended to create and maintain single-family living areas characterized by compatibility with the natural terrain and native vegetation. The RE district provides locations for residential, limited agricultural, and open space -activities most suitably located in areas of very low density or rural qualities. Second dwelling units and 2 050504 syn 0120018 NOT YET APPROVED RE R·2 RMD Subject to regulations in: Flag lots As established by 21.20.301 (Subdivision Ora. ) ____ M _______________________________ Site Width (ft) 100 60 50 ------Sit-e--Iiepth--{ft-)-:---·-100 100 100 Maximum Lot Size None 11,999 9,999 18.10.040(g) Lot Area (square feet) Setback lines imposed by a special Minimum Setbacks setback map pursuant to Chapter 20.08 of this code may also apply. Front Yard (ft) 30 20 20 -----Rea:r--Yard--( f t i-------30 20 20 18.10.050 ------------------------------------Interior Side 15 6 6 Yard(ft) -----------------------------.------Street Side Yard 24 16 16 (ft) Maximum Height (as \ 18.04.030 measured to the peak of 30 30 (2) 35 (67) the roof) (ft) 18.10.050 Side Daylight Plane 18.04.030 (side lot lines) (44) i Initial Height (ft) 10 10 (j) 15 18.10.050 Angle (degrees) .45 45 45 Front Daylight Plane (front setback line) 18.10.050 Initial Height (ft) 16 16 (j) Angle (degrees) 60 60 Rear Daylight Plane (rear setback line) 18.10.050 Initial Height (ft) 16 16 (05) 15 Angle (degrees) 60 60 45 Maximum Site Coverage: 18.04.030 (86A) Single story 25% 40% 40% ______ ~~Y..~_~~:p~~~_~ ____________ Multiple story 25% 35% 40% development ----------------_.------------------Additional area permitted to be 5% covered by a patio or overhang 6 050504 syn 0120018 NOT YET APPROVED (b) Substandard and Flag Lots in R-2 District The following site development regulations shall apply to all new construction on substandard and flag lots within the R-2 district in lieu of comparable provisions in subsection (a). (1) Substandard Lots (A) For the purposes of this subsection (c) , a substandard lot shall be a lot with a width of less than 50 feet or a depth of less than 83 feet and an area less than 83% of the minimum area required by the zoning of the parcel. (B) Development Standards: . (i) The maximum height shall be 17 feet, as measured to the peak of the roof. (ii) There floor. shall be a Habitable limit floors of one habitable include lofts, mezzanines, and similar area with interior heights of five feet (5) or more from the roof to the floor, but exclude basements and exclude attics that have no stairway or built-in access. The chief building official shall make the final determination as to whether a floor is habitable. (iii) For lots less required street feet. than side 50' in setback width, the shall be 10 (C) Nothing in this subsection (c) shall affect or otherwise redefine the provisions of Section 18.88.050(a) as to whether a substandard lot may be used as a lot under this title. (2) Flag Lots (A) A flag lot shall be defined as set forth in Section 18.04. 84(B) . (B) Flag Lot Development Standards: 050504 syn 0120018 (i) The maximum height shall be 17 feet, as measured to the peak of the roof. (ii) There floor. shall be a Habitable limit of floors one habi table include lofts, mezzanines, and similar areas with interior heights of five feet (5') or more from the roof to the floor, but exclude basements and exclude attics that have no stairway or 8 NOT YET APPROVED prepared by a licensed engineer, architect, or surveyor, and shall be provided prior to frame inspection. (g) Lighting in R-2 District In the R-2 district, recreational and security lighting shall be permitted only so long as the lighting is shielded so that the direct light does not extend beyond the property where it is located. Free-standing recreational and security lighting installed on or later than March 11, 1991, shall be restricted to twelve feet (12') in height. (h) Location of Noise-Producing Equipment All noise-:-producing equipment, such as air conditioners, pool equipment, generators, commercial kitchen fans, and similar service equipment, shall be located outside of the front, rear and side yard setbacks. Such equipment may, however, be located up to 6 feet into the street sideyard setback. All such equipment shall be insulated and housed, except that the Planning Director may permit installation wi thout housing and insulation,. provided the equipment is located within the building envelope and where a combination of technical noise specifications, location of equipment, and/or other screening or buffering will assure compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance at the nearest property line. Any replacement of such equipment shall conform to this section where feasible. All service equipment must meet the City Noise Ordinance in Chapter 9.10 of the Municipal Code. 18.10.050 Permitted Exceptions Encroachments, Projections and The following proj ections and encroachments into required yards, daylight plane and height are permitted, provided a projection shall not be permitted to encroach into a special setback, as established by the setback map pursuant to Chapter 20.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, except as noted in (a) (1) (D) below. (a) Setback/Yard Encroachments and Projections (1) Horizontal Additions 050504 syn 0120018 In the R-2 district and the RMD district, where a single-family dwelling legally constructed according to existing yard and setback regulations at the time of construction encroaches upon present required yards, one encroaching side (first floor wall) of the 10 NOT YET APPROVED required rear yard no more than six feet· and with a height of no more than one story, except that a corner lot having a common rear property line with an adjoining corner lot may extend into the required rear yard not more than ten feet with a height of no more than one story. (3) Allowed Projections 050504 syn 0120018 (A) Cornices, Eaves, Fireplaces, and Similar Architectural Features For cornices, ·eaves, fireplaces, and similar architectural features, excluding flat or continuous walls or enclosures of usable interior space, the following projections are permitted: (i) A maximum of two feet into a required side yard. Fireplaces in a required side yard may not exceed five feet in width. Fireplaces not exceeding five feet in width mayproj ect into a required side yard no more than two feet. (ii) A maximum of four feet into a required front yard (iii) A maximum of four feet into a required rear yard (B) Window Surfaces Window surfaces, such as bay greenhouse windows, may extend into side or rear yard a distance not to feet, or into a required front yard not exceeding three feet. The window not extend into any yard above a first (C) Detached Storage Structures windows or a required exceed two a distance surface may story. In addition to the provisions for location of accessory structures under Section 18.12.080 (b), the following further projections are permitted. For structures not over six feet in height or twenty-five square feet in floor area, used exclusively for storage purposes, the following projections are permitted: (i) A maximum of two feet into a required side yard 12 Ic.:. [.r i i (ii) NOT YET APPROVED No swimming pool, hot tub, accessory facility shall be portion of a required front . yard. spa, or similar loca ted in any or street side (iii) No swimming pool, hot tub, spa, or similar accessory facility shall be located closer than six feet from an interior side yard property line. (b) Height Exceptions The following features may' exceed the height limit established by the specified districts: (1) RE and R-2 Districts: In the RE and R-2 districts, flues, chimneys, and antennas may exceed the established height limit by not more than 15 feet. (2) RMD District: In. the RMD district, flues, chimneys, exhaust fans or air conditioning equipment, elevator equipment, cooling towers, antennas, and similar architectural, utility, or mechanical features may exceed the height limit established in any district by not more than 15 feet, provided that no such feature or structure in excess of the height limit shall be used for habitable space, or for any commercial or advertising purposes. (c) Daylight Plane Exceptions The following features may extend beyond the daylight plane established by the applicable district, provided tha.t such features do not exceed the height limit for the district unless permitted to do so by subsection (b): (1) RE and R-2 districts: 050504 syn 0120018 (A) Television and radio antennas; (B) Chimneys and flues, extend past the distance exceeding to Chapter 16.04 of provided that chimneys do not required daylight plane a the minimum allowed pursuant this code; (C) Dormers, roof decks, gables, or similar architectural features, provided that (i) the sum of the horizontal lengths of all I such features shall not exceed 15 feet on each side; and (ii) the height of such features does not exceed 24 feet. 14 NOT YET APPROVED (b) Parking and Driveway Surfaces Parking and driv~way surfaces may have either permeable or impermeable paving. Materials shall be those acceptable to Public Works Department standards. Gravel and similar loose materials shall not be used for driveway or parking surfaces within 10 feet of the public right of way. (c) Parking in Yards (I) No required parking space shall be located in a required front yard. (2 ) No required parking space first ten feet adjoining required street side yard. shall be located in the the property line of a (d) Tandem Parking Tandem parking shall be permitted for single-family uses and for single-family uses with a permitted second dwelling unit. Tandem parking is permitted for two-family uses where both spaces in tandem (front space and tandem space) are designated for use by the same unit. (e) Bicycle Parking For two family uses, at least one Class I bicycle parking space shall be required. (f) Design of Parking Areas Parking faci Ii ties shall comply with regulations of Chapter 18.83 (Parking Standards) . 18.10.070 Second Dwelling Units all applicable Facility Design The intent of this section is to provide· regulations to accommodate second dwelling units, in order to provide for variety to the City's housing stock and additional affordable housing opportunities. Second dwelling .units are inte,nded as separate self-contained living units,· with separate entrances from the main residence, whether attached or detached. The standards below are provided to minlmlze the impacts of second dwelling units on nearby residents and to assure that the size, location and design of such dwellings is compatible with the existing residence on the site and with other structures in the area. 16 050504 syn 0120018 NOT YET APPROVED second floor uni ts shall be located toward the interior side or rear yard of the property. (3) Development Standards for Detached Second Dwelling Units Detached second dwelling units are those detached from the main dwelling. All detached second dwelling units shall be subject to the following development requirements: (A) The minimum site area shall meet the requirements specified in subsection (b) above. (B) Minimum separation from the main dwelling: 12 feet. (C) Maximum size of living area: 900 square feet. The second dwelling unit and covered parking shall be included in the total floor area for the site.. Any 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. (D) Maximum size of covered parking area for the second dwelling unit: 200 square feet. (E) Maximum height: one story and 17 feet. (F) The detached second dwelling architecturally compatible with residence, with respect to style, color and materials. shall be the main roof pitch, (4) Street Access The second 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. Separate driveway access may be permitted by the Zoning Administrator 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 two- family use. (5) Parking 050504 syn 0120018 The following parking criteria apply to both detached and attached second dwelling units: 18 NOT YET APPROVED (1) An accessory building shall not be used for living and/or sleeping purposes unless the building was legally constructed for or was legally converted to living and/or sleeping purposes prior to October 13, 1983. (2 ) An accessory required front rear yard of a building shall not be located in a yard, required street yard, or required through lot. (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. (4) Accessory buildings located within a required interior yard as permitted by this section shall be subject to a maximum height established by a daylight plane beginning at a height of eight feet at the property line and increasing at a slope of one foot for every three feet of distance from the property line, to a maximum height of twelve feet. (5) When located within a required interior yard as permitted by this section, no such accessory building shall have more than two plumbing fixtures. (6) Accessory buildings located within a required interior yard, as permitted by this section, shall not individually or cumulatively occupy an area exceeding fifty percent of the required rear yard. (7) The minimum distance between separate buildings located on the same·site shall be as required by Title 16; provided, accessory buildings in the Residential Estate (RE) district shall be separated from the principal building by at least three feet. (8) A principal building and an accessory building, meeting the requirements of Title 16 and ,each located on a site as otherwise permitted for principal building and accessory buildings, may be connected by a structure meeting the definition of a breezeway. Such structure, or breezeway, shall be a part of the accessory building. 20 050504 syn 0120018 NOT YET APPROVED (c) Location of Livestock Facilities. Barns, stables, sheds, chicken houses, and other similar facili ties for the shelter and feeding of animals, exclusive of domestic household pets, shall be located a minimum of 40 feet from any lot line (property line) . 18.10.110 Home Improvement Exceptions Home Improvement Exceptions may be granted for single-family residences in the R-E, R-2, districts, pursuant to the provisions of Section (R-1 Chapter) . 18.10.120 Architectural Review existing and RMD 18.12.120 Architectural Review, as required in Chapter 18.76.020, is required in the R-E,R-2, 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). 18.10.130 Historical Review and Incentives Historic home review, as required in Chapter 16.49 of Title 16 of the Municipal Code, is required in the R-E; R-2, and RMD low density residential districts for alterations or modifications to any residence designated on the City's Historic Inventory as a Category 1 or Category 2 historic structure as defined in Section 16.49.020 of the Municipal Code or any contributing structure located within a locally designated historic district. Exemptions to gross floor· area requirements are. available for historic homes pursuant to the definition of Gross Floor Area in Section 18.04.65(C2). Home Improvement Exceptions provide for additional square footage and certain other exceptions for historic homes pursuant to Section 18.12.120 (R-1 Chapter). 18.10.140 Neighborhood-Preservation Combining District (NP) (a) Purpose & Applicability. 050504 syn 0120018 The neighborhood preservation-combining district is intended to modify the regulations of the RMD two unit 24 NOT YET APPROVED existing historic and general character of the neighborhood, the planning director may grant exceptions to site development regulations (except limitations on residential density), parking regulations, and from the special setback requirements of Title 20 applicable to the underlying zone district where combined with the neighborhood preservation (NP) combining district . This exception procedure is the exclusive procedure for procuring an exception to development standards in the NP combining district. It is not necessary for the property owner to obtain a variance. (2) Findings The zoning administrator may only grant an (NP) District Exception if, from the application or the facts presented at the public hearing, he finds: (A) (B) The granting preservation on the same maintaining character of The granting detrimental improvements of the exception will facilitate the of an existing residential structure property and will be of benefit in the existing historic and general the surrounding neighborhood, and of the application will not be or injurious to property or in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience. (3) Conditions In granting NP District Exceptions, reasonable conditions or restrictions may be imposed as deemed appropriate or necessary to protect the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience, and to secure the purposes of this title. (4) Procedures 18.10.150 Please refer to Chapters 18.76 and 18.77 for further information regarding the procedures applicable to requests for exceptions. Grandfathered Uses (a) Applicability \ The uses specified in subsection (b) may remain as grandfathered uses provided that those uses: (1) are located in the specified districti 26 050504 syn 0120018 NOT YET APPROVED (A) such remodeling, improvement or replacement shall not: (i) result in increased floor area; (ii) result in an increase in the number of offices, in the case of professional or medical office uses, or dwellings, in the case of residential uses; (iii) result in shifting of building footprint; (iv) increase the height, length, building envelope, or size of the improvement, (v) increase the existing degree of noncompliance, except through the granting of a design enhancement exception pursuant to Chapter 18.76. (2) If a grandfathered use ceases and thereafter remains discontinued for twelve consecutive months, it shall be considered abandoned and may be replaced only by a conforming use. (3) A grandfathered use which is changed to or replaced by a conforming use shall not be reestablished, and any portion of a site or any portion of a building, the use of which changes from a grandfathered use to a conforming use, shall not thereafter be used except to accommodate a conforming use. (4) The following additional regulations shall apply to grandfathered professional or medical office uses: (A) Any remodeling, improvement, or replacement of any building designed and constructed for residential use shall be subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit in accord with Chapter 18.76. (B) In the event of redevelopment of all or a portion of the site for permitted residential uses, professional ·and medical office uses may not be incorporated in the redevelopment, except that this provision shall not apply to permanent conversion to residential use of space within an existing structure now used for professional and medical office uses. (d) . Existing Accessory Dwellings and Guest Cottages. In the RE district, accessory dwellings and guest cottages existing on April 28, 1986, and which prior to that date 28 050504 syn 0120018 NOT YET APPROVED SECTION 3. The City Council finds that the changes effected by this ordinance are exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per section 15061 of CEQA Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after the date of its adoption. Notwithstanding any other provision of this ordinance or the Palo Alto Municipal Code, all applications submitted prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be subject to the PAMC Title 18 Zoning Regulations in effect on the date ,the application is received by the City. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney 050504 syn 0120018 30 Mayor APPROVED: City Manager Director of Planning & Community Environment DISCUSSION: Zoning Ordinance Update (ZOU) staff and the City attorney's office have reformatted and drafted a new Chapter 18.10 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, to encompass the R-E, R-2 and RMD zoning districts, along with the related Neighborhood Preservation (NP) Combining District. The Chapter was prepared with the assistance of Current Planning staff and the Low Density Residential Working Group. Attachment A comprises a draft ordinance, prepared by the City Attorney's office, adopting the proposed Low Density Residential Chapter (18.10) of the Ordinance. Exhibit 1 to this ordinance is a "clean" version of the Chapter. A summary of the revisions to the Chapter, prior to Council action on the R-1 Chapter, is included in the August 4, 2004 P&TC staff report. The chapter is also provided in a redlined version to indicate the changes made to the current code provisions (Attachment B). The August 4, 2004 Commission staff r~port and minutes are also attached. The Council's adoption of the R-1 Chapter included adoption of the revised low density residential definitions, which are attached for Commission reference (Attachment C). Staff believes that many of the substantive items of discussion for these zones have already been addressed with the Commissibn and Council review of the RJ Chapter. To the maximum extent possible, language for similar provisions reflects wording from the R-1 Chapter. The City Council retained the vast majority of the R-1 Chapter as recommended by the P&TC, but modified some of the Commission's recommendations regarding second dwelling units, second stories on substandard lots, and the location of noise-producing equipment. Staff has revised the' relevant provisions of the LDR chapter accordingly: 1. Provision for second stories for substandard lots in the R-2 zone has been eliminated, leaving the current single story (17 feet) requirement for substandard lots intact. The allowance for a reduced streetsidesetback on lots less than 50 feet in width has been retained, however. 2. Allowance for small (less than 450 square foot) second units on lots smaller than one acre in the R-E zone has been eliminated. The Council removed all provisions' related to small second units from the R -1 ordinance, including reduced parking requirements (one space per unit and exceptions for parking in the front setback). The stated reasons for the Council's action were primarily the potential for a single-family zone to become a two-unit zone and a perceived lack of need to accommodate these units. The provisions for small second units in the R-2 zone h~ve been retained (including the requirement for only one parking space), however, since that zone is intended to provide for two units on a lot. 3. The Council did allow for the increase in size from 250 square feet to 450 square feet for an attached second dwelling unit. This provision is reflected in the second unit requirements for the R-E zone. Also, the reduced parking requirement of one City of Palo Alto Page 2 . ATTACHMENT B Chapter 18.10 LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Sections: . 18.10.010 18.10.020 18.10.030 18.10.040 18.10.050 18.10.060 18.10.070 18.10.080 18.10.090 18.1 0.100 18.10.110 18.10.120 18.10.130 18.10.140 18.10.150 18.10.010 Purposes Applicable Regulations Land Uses Development Standards Permitted Encroaclunents, Projections and Exceptions Parking Second Dwelling Units Accessory Uses and Facilities Basements Standards for Agricultural Uses Home Improvement Exceptions Architectural Review Historical Review Neighborhood Preservation Combining District (NP) Standards Grandfathered Uses Purposes Three low-density residential districts are dermed in this chapter. . Requirements for the Single Family Residential CR-l) District and related subdistricts and combining districts are included in Chapter 18.12. The specific purpose of each low-density residential district is stated below: (a) Residential Estate District [RE] The RE residential estate district ,is intended to create and maintain single-family living areas characterized by compatibility with the natural terrain and native vegetationve environment. The RE district provides .locations for residential, limited agricultural, and open space activities most suitably located in areas of very _ low density or rural qualities. Second Accessory dwelling units and ether accessory structures or buildings are appropriate where consistent with the site and neighborhood character. Community uses and facilities should be limited lIDless no net loss of housing units would result. (b) Two Family Residential District [R-2] The R-2 two-family residence district is intended to allow a second dwelling unit under the same ownership as the initial dwelling unit on appropriate sites in areas designated for single-family us~ by the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, under regulations that preserve the essential character of single-family use. Community uses and facilities should be limited unless no net loss of housing would result. 18.10.040 Development Standards (b) Substandard and Flag Lots in R-2 District The following site development regulations shall apply to all new construction on substandard and flag lots within the R-2 district in lieu of comparable provisions in subsection (a). (1) Substandard Lots ®For the purposes of this subsection (c), a substandard lot shall be a lot with a width of less than 50 feet or a depth of less than 83 feet and an area less than 83% of the minimum area required by the zoning of the parcel. (B) Development Standards: (i) The maximum height shall be 17 feet, as measured to the peak of the roof. (ii) There shall be a limit of one habitable floor. Habitable floors include lofts, mezzanines, and similar area with interior heights of five feet (5) or more from the roofto the floor, but exclude basements and exclude attics that have no stairway or built-in access. The chief building official shall make the final determination as to whether a floor is habitable. (iii) For lots less than 50' in width, the required street side setback shall be 10 feet. ~Nothing in this subsection (c) shall affect or otherwise redefine the provisions of Section 18.88.050(a) as to whether a substandard lot may be used as a lot under this title. (2) Flag Lots (A) A flag lot shall be defined asset forth in Section 18.04.84(B) .. (B) Flag Lot Development Standards: . (i) The maximum height shall be 17 feet, as measured to the peak of the roof. @LThere shall be a limit of one habitable floor. Habitable floors include lofts, mezzanines, and similar areas with interior heights of five feet (5'lar more from the roofto the floor, but exclude basements and exclude attics that have no stairway or built-in access. The chief building official shall make the fma1 determination as to whether a floor is habitable. (iii) Front Setback: 1 0 feet~ Flag lots are not subject to contextual front setback requirements. (iv) Flag lots are not subject to contextual garage placement requirements. 6 18.10.040 Development Standards (c) Maximum Lot Sizes in R-2 and RMD Districts This provision limits the potential for lot combinations with a net loss of housing stock and resultant homes that would be out of scale with homes in the surrounding neighborhood. III the R-2 and RMD districts, no new lot shall be created equal to or exceeding two times the minimum lot size prescribed for the district. as prescribed in Table 2. Lots larger than the prescribed maximum size are permitted only under the following circumstances: (i) where a Village Residential land use is approved concurrent with the new lot, resulting in no net loss of housing on the site(s); (ii) where underlying lots must be merged to eliminate nonconformities and no net loss of housing units would result; and (iii) where an adjacent substandard lot of less. than 25 feet in width is combined with another lot. resulting in no net loss of housing units on the site. (d) Garage Doors in R-2 District In the R-2 district, for garages located within 50 feet from a street frontage, on lots less than 75 feet in width, the total combined width of garage doors which faee-are parallel to the street at an angle of 90 degrees shall not exceed 20 feet. (e) Special Setbacks Where applicable, setback lines imposed by a special setback map pursuant to Chapter 20.08 of this code shall be followed for the purpose of determining legal setback requirements. (:0 Certification of Daylight Plane Compliance Upon request by the building official, any person building or making improvements to a structure in the low density residential districts shall provide a certification that the structure, as built, complies with the .daylight plane provisions in subsection (a). Such certification shall be prepared by a licensed engineer, architect, or surveyor, and shall be provided prior to frame inspection. (g) Lighting in R-2 District In the R-2 district, recreational and security lighting shall be permitted only so long as the lighting is shielded so that the direct light does not extend beyond the property where it is located. Free-standing recreational and security lighting, installed on or later than March 11, 1991, shall be restricted to 1'Nelve feet (12') in height. (h) Location of Noise-Producing Equipment All noise-producing equipment. such as air conditioners, pool equipment, generators, commercial kitchen fans, and similar service equipment, shall be located outside of the front, rear and side yard setbacks. Such equipment may, however, be located up to 6 feet into the street sideyard setback. All such equipment shall be insulated and housed, except that the Planning Director may permit installation without housing and insulation, provided the equipment is 7 18.10.050 Permitted Encroachments, Projections and Exceptions located within the building envelope and where a combination of technical noise specifications, location of equipment, and/or other screening or buffering will assure compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance at the nearest property line. Any replacement of such equipment shall conform to this section where feasible. All service equipment must meet the City Noise Ordinance in Chapter 9.1 0 ofthe . Murlicipal Code. 18.10.050 Permitted Encroachments, Projections and Exceptions The following projections and encroachments into required yards"daylightplane and height are permitted, provided a proj ection shall not be permitted to encroach into a special setback, as established by the setback map pursuant to Chapter 20.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, except as noted in (a)(l)(D) below. (a) SetbacklYard Encroachments and Projections (1) Horizontal Additions In the R-2 district and the RMD district, where a single-family dwelling. legally constructed according to existing yard and setback regulations at the time of construction encroaches upon present required yards, one encroaching side (first floor wall). of the existing structure at a height not to exceed 12 feet, may be extended in accord with this section. Only one such extension shall be permitted for-a-the life of such building. No sach addition shall be permitted to encroach upon a special setback established by the setback map pursuant to Chapter 20.08 of· the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This subsection shall not be construed to allow the further extension of an encroachment by any building which is the result of the granting of a variance, either before or after such property became part ofthe city. (A) Front Yard. In cases where the existing setback is less than 20 feet, but at least 14 feet, the existing encroachment may be extended for a distance of not more than 100% of the length of the encroaching wall to be extended; provided, that the total length of the existing encroaching wall and th~ additional wall shall together not exceed one-half the maximum existing width of such building. (B) Interior Side Yard. In cases where the existing setback is less than 8 feet, but at least 5 feet, the existLl1g encroachment may be extended for a distance of not more than 100% of the length of the existing encroachmentencroaching wall to be extended, but not to exceed 20 additional feet. (C) Street Side Yard. In cases where the existing setback is less than 16 feet, but at least 10 feet, the existing encroachment may be extended for a distance of not more than 100% of the length of the encroaching wall to be extended, but not to exceed 20 feet. I. 8 18.10.050 Permitted Encroachments, Projections and Exceptions CD) Special Setbacks. In cases where a Special Setback is prescribed pursuant to Chapter 20.08 of the Municipal Code, and the existing setback is less than the Special Setback distance, but is at least 14 feet for the front setback or at least 10 feet for the street side yard setback, the existing· encroachment may be extended for a distance of not more than 100% of the length of the encroaching wall to be extended, provided that the total length ofthe existing encroaching wall and the additional wall shall together not exceed one-half the maximum existing width of such building. ill Rear Yard Encroachments for Portions of Homes A portion of a main building that is less than half the maximum width of the building may extend into the required rear yard no more than six feet and with a height of no more than one story, except that a comer lot having a common rear property line with an adjoining comer lot may extend into the required rear yard not more than ten feet with a height of no more than one story. G.l-Allowed Projections (A) Cornices, Eaves, Fireplaces, and Similar Architectural Features For cornices, eaves, fireplaces, and similar architectural features, excluding flat or continuous walls or enclosures of usable interior space, the following projections are permitted: CD A maximum of two feet into a required side yard. Fireplaces in a required side yard may not exceed five feet in width. Fireplaces not exceeding five feet in width may project into a required side yard no more than two feet. (li) A maximum of four feet into a required front yard (iii) A maximum of four feet into a required rear yard em. Window Surfaces· Window surfaces, such as bay windows or greenhouse windows, may extend into a required side or rear yard a distance not to exceed two feet, or into a required front yard a distance not exceeding three feet. The window surface may not extend into any yard above a first story. (C) Detached Storage Structures In addition to the provisions for location of accessory structures under Section 18.12.080 (b), the following further projections are permitted. For structures not over six feet in height or twenty-five square feet in floor area, used exclusively for storage purposes, the following projections are permitted: CD A maximum of two feet into a required side yard (li) A maximum of four feet into a required front yard 9 18.10.050 Permitted Encroachments, Projections and Exceptions Ciii) A maximum of four feet into a required rear yard CD) Uncovered PorchesPatios ftflEl Decks, Stairways, Landings, Balconies, or Fire Escapes For uncovered porches (less than 30 inches above grade2-patios, decks, stairways, landings, balconies, or fire escapes the following projections are permitted, provided these projections are not pelmitted above the first story: CiA) A maximum of three feet into a required side yard (liB) A maximum of six feet into a required front yard. CiiiG) A maximum of six feet into a required rear yard CE) Canopy or Patio Cover A canopy or patio cover may be located in the required rear yard or that portion of the interior side yard which is more than 75 feet from the street lot line measured along the common lot line. Such canopies shall be subject to the following conditions: CiA) A canopy or patio cover shall not be more than 12 feet in height; (liB) The canopy or patio cover shall be included in the computation of building coverage. CiiiG) The canopy or patio cover and other structures shall not occupy more than 50 percent ofthe required rear yard. (ivG) The canopy or patio cover shall not be enclosed on more than two sides. CE6) Pools, Spas, and Hot Tubs CiA) Pools, spas, and hot tubs may extend into a required rear yard a distance not to exceed fourteen feet, provided that a minimum setback 'of six feet from the property line shall be maintained. (liB) No swimming pool, hot tub, spa, or similar accessory facility shall be located in any portion of a required front or street side yard. (iiiG) No swimming pool, hot tub, spa, or similar accessory facility shall be located closer than six feet from an interior side yard property line. (b) Hejght Exceptions The following features may exceed the height limit established by the specified districts: (1) RE and R-2 Districts: In the RE and R-2 districts, flues, chimneys, and antennas may exceed the established height limit by not more than 15 feet. (2) RMD District: In the RMD district, flues, chimneys, exhaust fans or air conditioning equipment, elevator equipment, cooling towers, antennas, and similar architectural, utility, or mechanical features may exceed the height 10 18.10.080 Accessory Uses and Facilities floor area of the second dwelling unit is 450 square feet or less, onlv a single parking space is required. and it may be covered or uncovered. b. Additional parking for the second dwelling unit shall be screened to off site viev/s by means ofyegetation or fencing. Such parking shall be located Ol.it of required front setbacks and not closer than 15 feet from the street in a street side setback. New parking areas created in the street side setback shall be of permeable materials if required by the Planning Director. . 18.10.080 Accessory Uses and Facilities Accessory uses and facilities, as referenced in Section 18.1 0.030, shall be permitted when incidental to and associated with a permitted use or facility in the R-E, R-2, or RMD districts, or when incidental to and associated with an allowable and authorized conditional use therein, subject to the provisions below and of Chapter 18.88 of this Title. (a) Types of Accessory Uses Accessory uses and facilities include, but are not limited to, the following list .of examples; provided that each accessory use or facility shall comply with the provisions of this title: (1) Residential garages, carports, and parking facilities, together with access and circulation elements necessary thereto; . (2) Facilities for storage incidental to a permitted use; and (3) Recreational uses and facilities for the use and convenience of occupants or employees, or guests thereof, of a principal use or facility; (b) Location and Development Standards Except as otherwise provided in this section, accessory buildings shall at all times be located in conformance with requirements for principal buildings, and shall not be located in any required front, side, or rear yard. See Section 18.1O.050(a)(3)(C) for allowed encroachments for small storage structures. Accessory buildings may be located in a required interior yard subject to the following limitations: (1) An accessory building shall not be used for living andlor sleeping purposes unless the building was legally constructed for or was legally converted to living andlor sleeping purposes prior to October 13, 1983. (2) An accessory building shall not be located in a required front yard, required street yard, or required rear yard of a through lot. (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 street line adjacent to a street, measured along the respective lot line. Provided, on comer lots, accessory buildings including detached garages and carports may 15 18.10.090 Basements be located in the rear yard if located at least 75 feet from the front street and I at least 20 feet from the side street property lines. . (4) Accessory buildings located within a required interior yard as permitted by this section shall be subject to a maximum height established by a daylight plane beginmng at a height of eight feet at the property line and increasing at a slope of one foot for every three feet of distance from the property line, to a maximum height of twelve feet. (5) When located within a required interior vard as permitted by this section, !!No such accessory building shall have more than two plumbing fixtures. (6) Accessory buildings located within a required interior yard, as permitted by this section, shall not individually or cumulatively occupy an area exceeding fifty percent of the required rear yard. (7) The minimum distance between separate buildings located on the same site shall·be as required by Title 16; provided, accessory buildings in the Residential Estate (RE) district shall be separated from the principal building by at least three feet. (8) A pri.ncipal building and an accessory building, meeting the requirements of Title 16 and each located on a site as otherwise permitted for principal building and accessory buildings,· may be connected by a structure meeting the definition of a breezeway . .such structure, or breezeway, shall be a part of . the accessory building. 18.10.090 Basements Basements shall be permitted in areas that are not designated as special flood hazard areas, as defined in Chapter 16.52, subject to the following regulations: (a) Permitted Basement Area Basements may not extend beyond the building footprint and basements are not allowed below any portion of a structure that extends into required setbacks, except to the extent that the main residence is permitted to extend into the rear yard setback by other provisions of this code. (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; or (2) basement area is deemed to be habitable space but ~he finished level of the first floor is no more than three feet above the grade around the perimeter of the building foundation!. . Any 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 16 18.10.090 Basements (c) (but may be excluded from calculations offioor 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. Lightwells; Stairwells and Other Excavated Features Excavated features shall not affect the measurement of the grade for the purposes of determining basement gross floor area, so long as such features meet the I . following provisions: (1) Lightwells, stairwells and similar excavated features along the perimeter of the basement, such as lightvvells and stairwells, shall not affect the measurement of grade, provided that~ (A) such features are not located in the front of the building; (B) such features shall not exceed 3 feet in width; (C) the cumulative length of all such features does not exceed 25 feet30% of the perimeterofthe basement; (D) such features do not extend more than 2~ feet into a required side yard nor more than 4 feet into a required rear yard, but where a side yard is less than 6 feet in width, the features shall not encroach closer than 3 feet from the adjacent side property line; (E) the cumulative length of any features or portions of features that extend into a required side or rear yard does not exceed 15 feet in length; (F) the owner provides satisfactory evidence to the planning division prior to issuance of a building permit that any features or portions of features . that extend into a required side or rear yard will not be harmful to any mature trees on the subject property or on abutting properties; and (G) such features have either a drainage system that meets the requirements of the public works department or are substantially sheltered from the rain by a roof overhang or canopy of a permanent nature. (2) Below-grade patios, sunken gardens or similar excavated areas along the perimeter of the basement that exceed the dimensions set forth in subsection (1), are permitted and shall not affectthe measurement of grade, provided that: (A) such areas are not located in the front of the building; (B) . All such areas combined do not exceed 2% of the area of the lot or 200 square feet, whichever is greater; that each Buch areas does not exceed 200 square feet, and that each such area is separated from another by a distance of at least 10 feet. Area devoted to required stairway access shall not be included in the 200 square foot limitation. _(C) a substantial portion of such areas are terraced and landscaped; 17 18.1 0.140 (b) Design Review (1) Purposes The purpose of design review of properties in an (NP) combining district is to achieve compatibility of scale, silhouette, fa9ade articulation, and materials of new construction with existing structure on the same property or on surrounding properties within a combining district. (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 Chapter 16.48 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 single-family structures that constitute the only principal structure on a parcel ofland. 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. . (3) Design Review Guidelines The architectural review board shall, at its discretion,' develop specific design review guidelines for each specific area to which this combining district is applied. (c) Exceptions to Development Standards (1) Applicability Subject to the provisions of Section 18.35.030 and Chapters 18.67thrbugh 18.81 and the general purposes of this title to foster retention of existing single-family structures and to maintain the existing historic and general character of the neighborhood, the zoning administrator planning director may grant exceptions to site development regulations (except limitations on residential density), parking regulations, and from the special setback requirements of Title 20 applicable to the underlying zone district where combined with the neighborhood preservation (NP) combining district. This exception procedure is the exclusive procedure for procuring an exception to development standards in the NP combining district. It is not necessary for the property owner to obtain a variance (2) Findings The zoning administrator may only grant an (NP) District Exception if, from the application or the facts presented at the public hearing, he finds: (A) The granting of the exception will facilitate the preservation of an existing residential structure on the same property and will be of benefit in maintaining the existing historic and general character of the surrounding neighborhood, and 20 Neighbo 18.10.150 Grandfathered Uses (B) The granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience. (3) Conditions In granting NP District Exceptions, reasonable conditions or restrictions may be imposed as deemed appropriate or necessary to protect the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience, and to secure the purposes oftms title. (4) Procedures Please refer to Chapters 18.76 and 18.77 for further information regarding the procedures applicable to requests for exceptions. 18.10.150 Grandfathered Uses (a) Applicability The uses speCified in subsection (b) may remain as grandfathered uses provided that those uses: (1) are located in the specified district; (2) existed on the specified date; (3) on that date, were lawful permitted uses or conditional uses operating subject to a conditional use permit; and (4) on that date, were confonning uses. (b) Grandfathered Uses (1)R-2 district: (A) Professional and medical office uses (except product testing and analysis, and prototype development), eXisting on July 20, 1978 or such uses which were, prior to July 20, 1978, located in an R-2 district which was imposed by reason of annexation of the property to the city without benefit of prezonmg and which, prior to the c;late of annexation, were lawful conforming permitted uses or conditional uses operating subject to a conditional use permit. (B) Two-family uses, except where one of the units is a legal nonconforming detached single-family dwelling on a substandard lot size, and multiple-family uses existing on July 20, 1978 or such uses which were, prior to July 20, 1978, located in an R-2 district which was imposed by reason of annexation of the property to the city without benefit of prezoning and which, prior to the date of annexation, were lawful conforming permitted uses or conditional uses operating subject to a conditional use permit. 21 18.12.150 Grandfathered Uses (2) RMD district: (A) Professional and medical office uses (except product testing and analysis, and prototype development), existing on July 20, 1978. (B) Multiple-family uses existing on July 20, 1978. (c) Permitted Changes The following regulations shall apply to the grandfathered uses specified in subsection (b): (1) Such uses shall be permitted to remodel, improve, or replace site improvements on the same site, for continual use and occupancy by the same use, provided that (2) (3) (4) (A) such remodeling, improvement or replacement shall not: (i) result in increased floor area; (ii) result in an increase in the number of offices, in the case of professional or medical office uses, or dwellings, in the case of residential uses; (iii) result in shifting of building footprint; (iv) increase the height, length, building envelope,or size of the improvement, (v) increase the existing degree of noncompliance, except through the granting of a design enhancement exception pursuant to Chapter 18.76. If a grandfathered use ceases and thereafter remains discontinued for twelve consecutive months, it shall be considered abandoned and may be replaced only by a conforming use. A grandfathered use which is changed to or replaced by a conforming use shall not be reestablished, and any portion of a site or any portion of a building, the use of which changes from a grandfathered use to a conforming use, shall not thereafter be used except to accommodate a conforming use. The following additional regulations shall apply to grandfathered professional or medical office uses: . (A) Any remodeling,improvement, or replacement of any building designed and constructed for residential use shall be subj ect to the issuance of a conditional use permit in accord with Chapter 18.76. (B) In the event of redevelopment of all or a portion of the site for permitted residential uses, professional and medical office uses may not be incorporated in the redevelopment, except that this provision shall not apply to permanent conversion to residential use of space 22 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 ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Phyllis Cassel-Chair Bonnie Packer -V-Chair Lee L Lippert Karen Holman Patrick Burt Michael Griffin Annette Bialson . AGENDIZED ITEMS: Wednesday; April 27, 2005 REGULAR MEETING at 7:00 PM Council Chambers Civic Center, 1st Floor 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 Staff: Steve Emslie, Planning Director Don Larkin, Senior Deputy City Attorney Lisa Grote, Chief Planning Official John Lusardi, Planning Manager, Special Projects & ZOU Curtis Williams, Consultant Clare Campbell, Planner Zariah Betten, Executive Secretary 1. Proposed Capital Improvement Program for 2005-2010 2. Zoning Ordinance Update: Chapter 18.12 Low Density Residential 3. Zoning Ordinance Update: Chapter 18.13 Multiple Family Residential APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of March 9 and 30,2005 Chair Cassel: This is the meeting of the Planning and Transportation Commission. I think I have the wrong agenda this says Wednesday, April 13. Would someone please get me a new agenda? This is the meeting of April 27 at seven o'clock and I would like to call the meeting to order. Will the Secretary please take the roll? Commissioner Packer will be here later. 3 1 The next item on our agenda is Oral Communications. Did you want to speak to Oral 32 Communications? Just a moment, I will have a card in a second. Will you fill that out later and 33 go ahead and speak now? 34 35 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. Members of the public may speak to any item not on the agenda 36 with a limitation of three (3) minutes per speaker. Those who desire to speak must complete a City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 1 of113 1 comfortable with giving the subcommittee a sense of their. intent and delegating to the 2 subcommittee the crafting of that? 3 4 Chair Cassel: Let me first ask Steve about the timeline involved. Our next meeting is May 11 is 5 that too late to get something to City Council? When is this going to City Council? 6 7 Mr. Steve Emslie, Planning Director: The budget is going June 20 so you would have time. 8 9 Chair Cassel: So they could_come back at the next meeting with a summary overall statement 10 and we could then vote on it. Would that be all right? 11 12 Mr. Emslie: Yes, you could do that. 13 14 Chair Cassel: Is that agreeable? Great, thank you. Then this could be attached to that summary 15 statement. That is good work, thank you very much for a lot of work and careful listening and a 16 lot of good suggestions. 17 18 The next item on our agenda'is Zoning Ordinance Update. May I ask for a Staff presentation? 19 20 2.' Zoning Ordinance Update: Review and recommendation to the City Council an 21 Ordinance adopting a revised Chapter 18.12 (Low Density Residential Districts) of the 22 Zoning Ordinance, pertaining to regulations for the Residential Estate (R-E), Two-Family 23 Residence (R-2), and Two Unit Multiple-Family Residence (RMD) Districts (Current 24 Chapters 18.l0, 18.l7, and 18.l9, respectively), and incorporating the provisions of the 25 Neighborhood Preservation Combining (NP) District (Current Chapter 18.30); and 26 amending Definitions in Chapter 18.04. 27 SR Website: http://www.cityofpaloaito.org/cityagendalpublishiplanning-transportation-meetingslI.pdf r City o/PaloAlto April 27, 2005 Page 15 0/113 1 allow small attached units of 450 square feet on those particular lots. The second change they 2 made is as Commissioner Lippert pointed out was they eliminated the provision to allow second 3 stories on substandard lots. So now the current application for a variance would stand rather 4 than the Individual RevIew application process that was proposed by the Planning and 5 Transportation Commission and the Staff. Those are the major changes that were made. They 6 amended the language for equipment generating noise. 7 8 Chair Cassel: So they took a Staff recommendation for the noise, which was slightly different 9 than ours, more conservative than what is there now but an adjustment that allows the Director to 10 find that it meets certain requirements and thus not have the equipment enclosed under certain 11 limited circumstances. 12 13 Mr. Lusardi: Right. It would still be required to be within the building envelope outside all the 14 setbacks but where it can be demonstrated through specs on the equipment that it can meet the 15 noise requirements then the Director has the discretion to not require substantial enclosure. 16 17 Chair Cassel: The other piece that they did in the R-l second units is that they did not allow a 18 parking space in the setback. I think that was the other major piece that happened. This all 19 happened two weeks ago, it was rewritten up and it was passed on second reading without 20 comment this last Monday. Michael. 21 22 Commissioner Griffin: I wanted to follow on with this discussion about noise because as I read 23 this I am concerned that the way the language is stated that it might encourage applicants to City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 19 of 113 1 appeal to the Director of Planning and Development on a rather consistent basis. I don't know if 2 Staff wants to comment on that but how do you see this playing out from a practical standpoint? 3 Is everyone that is going to build a new house going to say well, I want you to take a look at my 4 air conditioner for example to see whether or not I am exempted from the ordinance provisions? 5 6 Mr. Lusardi: I discussed this with the building official recently on this approach and there is a 7 lot of this equipment that can be housed such as pool equipment. That will continue to be 8 required to be housed. But there is equipment such as air conditioner units that need a certain 9 amount of venting especially around the sides and what would be required is they would be 10 required to submit specification sheets on that equipment that demonstrates that they can meet 11 the noise requirements and that enclosure would substantially harm the performance of the 12 equipment. 13 14 Chair Cassel: That was passed by City Council and it is now being included in this ordinance 15 that we are now looking at for the low-density units. 16 17 Commissioner Griffin: So if! understand it we can't change anything on R-l but we still have 18 an opportunity to change it in the materials that are in front of us tonight. Is that correct? 19 20 Mr. Lusardi: You can make a recommendation to the Council for different language with respect 21 to the low density residential and noise equipment. We are repo.rting as to what Council, and 22 they were very specific in their direction and we assume they would be applying the same 23 recoriunendation to low density residential. City o/PaloAlto April 27, 2005 Page 20 0/113 1 Then also regarding basements in 18.10090 it talks about basemerits that will not be counted as ' 2 floor area ratio and what will. In the R-l there was an exclusion for existing homes that have, I 3 think it was limited to historic homes, that had a floor height three feet or above above grade that 4 the basements would not be counted as floor area ratio. I do not see reference ofthat in here and 5 it seems like it would be consistent with what is allowed in R -1. 6 7 Mr. Williams: That provision I believe and I will have to double check it here is in the definition 8 of gross floor area, which applies to the low density residential, as well as the R -1 section. Le! 9 me find that here. 10 11 Chair Cassel: I had a question of order here. We are taking just a few questions now and then 12 having the public hearing or should we take the questions now. Last time we took the questions 13 right away and had a complaint and since we have a lot of questions at this point and not very 14 many people speaking I thought it might be helpful to take our questions and then they could 15 comment on our questions as well for this particular time. I know it is different but I don't 16 appear to have any cards at this time but I may later. 17 18 Mr. Williams: If I could respond to that one question. On page five and the top of page six on 19 the adopted definitions that are attached which is what the Council adopted for R-l but they 20 applied just in the definition secti6n and this all applies to low density residential as well. The 21 bottom of page five says, for residences basically historic designated residences that gross floor 22 area is excluded for new or existing basement area where the level of the first floor is three feet 23 or more above grade and up to 500 square feet of unusable attic space as well. City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 22 of 113 1 2 Commissioner Holman: For clarity should it not be included also on 18.10090 because it is kind 3 of a little hide-and-seek thing that we have going on here I think. Because 18.10090 does speak 4 specifically about what 'is or isn't included in floor area ratio regarding basements? 5 6 Mr. Williams: We certainly can do that, yes. So on 090, which subsection are you looking at? 7 Oh, inclusion in gross floor area? 8 9 Commissioner Holman: Yes, sir. 10 11 Mr. Williams: Yes, I think we could just add to that section and clarify that is excluded as per 12 the definition for the historical category. 13 14 Commissioner Holman: Thank you. 15 16 Chair Cassel: Pat, do you have a question? 17 18 Commissioner Burt: Yes, as long as we are on basement I have a new question on this that 19 wasn't part of what we had discussed previously when we did our initial review of it. First, does 20 Staffhave any familiarity with what are either regulations or practices on pumping out, I don't 21 know what the design is, maybe I will describe the circumstance and then you can help me out 22 here. It appears that basements have been put in recently and we have considerable growth in the 23 use of basements in the non-flood plane areas that there is considerable pumping that is being City of Palo Alto April 27. 2005 Page 23 of 113 1 done evidently during the wet season and perhaps more so this year because it is an abnormally 2 wet season that people have to .pump from I don't know whether it is the separation between the 3 basement and the surrounding earth or what is going on there. Maybe Commissioner Lippert 4 knows better as an architect but there is pumping that goes out onto the street and the problem 5 that we have just noticed in our neighborhood and a whole pattern of this is that the homes that 6 have had basements put in and this new pumping that is going on creates large pooling. This is 7 pooling 100 yards long and four feet wide that sits in the street for two weeks at a time because 8 there is no real drainage into a storm drain in there. We have a whole new pooling issue. Maybe 9 Lee has the ability to clarify this for me. 10 11 Chair Cassel: We were told by the building people that there shouldn't be any pumping after 12 they once sealed it. 13 14 Mr. Lusardi: The Council raised this issue too with respect to single-family basements and the 15 pumping issue and we discussed this with Public Works and Engineer. They did reference the 16 fact that they have the ability to limit pumping and they do generally limit pumping. So I think 17 the situation you are describing sounds like that is something we need to kind of look into. 18 19 Commissioner Burt: I want to clarify this is not during construction phase. 20 21 . Mr. Lusardi: I understand that, yes. 22 23 Chair Cassel: So you want Pat to tell you something more specific about a street. Lee? City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 24 of 113 1 2 Commissioner Lippert: I can clarify it. New basements are generally dry' spaces and the way 3 that is achieved is that there is a separation between where the soil is and where the basement 4 wall is. That is achieved by putting in gravel rock and then a membrane and then you have the 5 concrete wall. What happens is that when it rains a certain amount of moisture, water, percolates 6 down into the soil, it hits the gravel rock area and generally it just drops at that point. Water 7 finds the path of least resistance so it is not entering the basement. The pumping that you might 8 be seeing is in the event that a basement does get wet, people do have plumbing fixtures down 9 there, they do have showers and bathrooms. There is a sump located in the basement and the / . 10 sump is just a pump that if there is any water that accumulates in that basement space it then 11 finds the lowest area, the sump is located in a well and the water is then pumped out to the street. 12 Now, in the event of a major flood, if it is in a flood plane of course the basement is going to fill 13 with water and the sump is going to work overtime in terms of pushing that water out to the 14 street. You have to have it pumped out. I don't think that's the case of what you are looking at. 15 16 Chair Cassel: The issue here that we are looking at is we are looking at whether we should have 17 basements and we were assured that this pumping of water was not happening at that time that 18 that had been sealed and that that wouldn't be happening. 19 20 Commissioner Lippert: Correct. 21 22 Chair Cassel: So we went ahead and proceeded on the presumption that we weren't going to be 23 getting this excessive amount of pumping of water out onto the street all year long. So now the City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 25 of 113 1 question relevant to this ordinance that we have in front of us is are we able to accomplish that 2 goal and thus should we be having the basement situation that we have now? 3 4 Commissioner Lippert: . The only two things that I can imagine is number one pumping is 5 happening from older basements, ones that were not designed to be dry spaces. The other 6 thought is that you are not going to have people putting in new basements in areas that are flood 7 planes because that is prohibited by FEMA. 8 9 Commissioner Burt: So these are neither flood planes nor old basements. These are basements 10 that are two to three years old and there is significant pumping going on. So it is neither of those 11 cases. So I don't know the exact cause but one of the thoughts that I would request Staff to just 12 look at is whether we may want to look at the adjacency of a storm drain inlet to basements. If 13 there is this pumping that is a pattern then maybe we simply have to look at having storm drain 14 connections more when people put in basements. I wouldn't pretend to have a solution on this I 15 wanted to flag an issue that was really surprising that it is a pattern going on and it is a discussion 16 in our neighborhood saying gee what is happening here this is a whole new thing that we never 17 saw before and we are realizing that it seems to be related to basement pumping. 18 19 Mr. Lusardi: Staffwill discuss this with Public Works and we will put it on our agenda for our 20 Development Review Committee and discuss it at that point too. 21 22 Commissioner Bialson: Can I say something here? 23 City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 26 of 113 1 Chair Cassel: Yes. 2 3 Commissioner Bialson: I absolutely agree with Pat and you can put down my street as one of 4 those where we have neighbors gathering to see how much water is being pumped out. This has 5 been going on for three years. 6 7 Commissioner Griffin: I will reiterate the same concern and I will even go further and say that I 8 spoke with a plumber who had been summoned by a house in my neighborhood to check on the· 9 pumps and the plumber reported that the pumps were pumping into the sewer system as opposed 10 to the storm drains. I am not an expert on this sort of thing but I thought that the idea was that it 11 was not a good idea for basements to be pumped into t~e sewer system because then that caused 12 a capacity problem with the sewage treatment plant, etc., etc. So yes, I agree it is a bigger 13 problem I think than perhaps the Public Works Department realizes. 14 15 Chair Cassel: So that has duly been reported and will be followed up on. Thank you. Karen. 16 17 Commissioner Holman: I brought up concerns about this earlier when we were looking at the 18 low density residential and I am wondering if some of this could be happening where there is, 19 and I don't know, is this happening where there are several redevelopments near each other or in 20 your case it is not. 21 22 Chair Cassel: I don't think we are going to solve it tonight so I am trying to keep it focused on 23 City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 27 of 113 1 2 Chair Cassel: Thank you. Do I have more questions about the low-density issues that are in 3 front of us? Pat. 4 5 Commissioner Burt: As we all saw, Council had a lot of concerns with the second units. Is this 6 the correct time to comment on that? 7 8 Chair Cassel: Yes. 9 10 Commissioner Burt: As I listened to the City Council meeting several things occurred to me. 11 One is an apprehension that! think maybe a number of us had had and we briefly discussed 12 when we were talking about the second units ,or the granny units was that as the Comprehensive l3 Plan recognizes there are really two fundamentally different segments to our City. There is the 14 older part of the city and then the South Palo Alto post war development that is a more suburban 15 model. Those different parts of the city have really different development patterns and they 16 correlate to the historical practice of having second units. The only other maybe somewhat 17 newer area of the city that has a good number of them is Barron Park. I think that we have a lot 18 of apprehension that existed within those parts of the city that don't have second units that it 19 could fundamentally alter the character of their neighborhoods. So even though that 20 apprehension may be greater than the reality would have created it is still a different outlook 21 toward them. I think that those people who live in neighborhoods where there are second units it 22 is no harm, no foul, big deal they are part of the character of the neighborhood, it gives variety 23 and it is fine. For neighborhoods that ,have no second units that are all single family R-llots City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 29 of 113 1 what we need to do now though I am very frustrated with what happened on the second units the 2 question for us is are we going to include what they have included here for the second units and 3 would you like to include this or did you want to include more? Bonnie. 4 5 Vice Chair Packer: Well, I don't know if! can respond to that question directly right now. I just 6 wanted to say that I echo Pat's comments on the Council's action on the second units. I also 7 wanted to mention for whatever ears may choose to listen is that what the whole second unit 8 issue is probably ignoring is the big elephant in the closet and that is all the nonconforming or 9 illegal units that are out there in many different neighborhoods including South Palo Alto. When 10 we start dealing with grandfathering and those issues of those units, and I know we avoided 11 talking about this in the Comprehensive Plan, this issue of second units is going to come back 12 and the policymakers are going to have to deal with the issue that there are property owners who 13 would like to have second units. They have done so by building them illegally. I know of some. 14 15 Chair Cassel: You know I am going to stand up, turnaround, have a good laugh and sit down 16 again. We are discussing tonight this low-density proj ect and we are so angry about this other 17 one that we can't get to it. 18 19 Vice Chair Packer: So coming back to that I think the proposal that is before us tonight is 20 probably the best we can do given where the Council is on this subject. I support what is before 21 us tonight. 22 City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 31 of113 1 Chair Cassel: I had not opened it to the public at that point I had no cards. If you would like to 2 give that card to Zariah. If anyone else would like to speak on this issue I will open the public 3 hearing. Thank you very much. 4 5 Ms. Chiapella: Thank you very much, Phyllis. 6 7 Chair Cassel: You will have five minutes. 8 9 Ms. Chiapella: My first question was I guess the daycare thing was settled whether there is 10 seven, eight or six in a house. I couldn't quite get a handle on that but looking through this 11 myriad of -I guess that was settled. I am a little askance that there is no definitions anymore 12 that used to be six or less was small and six or more was large and now it is sort of up to the 13 discretion of I guess whoever just wants to do it. Perhaps they have to consult with the City. I 14 am a little concerned that a daycare of 14 can move in right next door to you and you will have 15 no idea and they may have three or four teenagers as well. But be that as it may I am a little 16 concerned on this lighting that appears on page ten, lighting in R-2 districts. I can't tell how that 17 relates to R-1 or RM-15. Is that different or is that the same? It is just kind of a freestanding 18 paragraph. I don't know if it is an improvement or whether it is actually making our life ... 19 20 Chair Cassel: Page ten of which section? 21 22 Ms. Chiapella: I am looking at what I think is part of the Staff Report. There are so many 23 sections in here I don't know. City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 33 of113 1 2 Chair Cassel: Section A where it says not yet approved? 3 4 Ms. Chiapella: Yes, not yet approved. At the top of that lighting in R-2 districts. If you are 5 living in a cottage in R-1 next door is this going to be an improvement for you or are you going 6 to have more lights coming in through your windows? I can't get a handle on what this means. I 7 know the Staffhas drawn these nice pretty pictures that show what an R-1 looks like and it is 30 8 feet tall and it is a huge house but sadly most of us don't have those houses. We live in 1,500 or 9 1,100 square feet, at least most of us in South Palo Alto who live in the original homes. So I am 10 asking when my neighbors want to do something are they going to stick up something that is 11 even more intrusive than they already have and I am going to have 12-foot lights banging into 12 my windows or how is that going to work? I can't tell from this it doesn't seem to offer any 13 information as to how that is better or worse for those of us that live next door to R-2 or near R- 14 2. 15 16 The next thing I had a question on is the [Kerry amendment] which you may not recall any of 17 you, however, the [Kerry amendment] is somewhat famous or infamous. It is on page 27, not yet 18 approved. It shows here that it is not yet approved it looks to me like this is exactly the language 19 that is inthe old ordinance. Unless I go through word-by-word with a. ruler I can't say, there is 20 no verification here. However, the old [Kerry amendment] that midnight hour amendment to 21 protect certain vested interests in Palo Alto was going to be removed in 1978 because housing 22 was very important. Somehow along the way we seemed to have just plain discarded that or 23 forgotten about that and the reason is that what were once physician's houses or lawyer's houses City of Palo Alto April 27. 2005 Page 34 ofll3 1 where they practice in their horne slowly but surely became converted to just a plain medical, 2 dental or lawyer office. In 1978 there was a strong movement to change that back to housing 3 with an amortization period of 25 to 30 years just like all the other amortizations that were done 4 in that period. I think it is time to take a hard look at that. We don't really need a lot more 5 dentists in town. We really don't need lots more lawyers or physicians or whatever 6 professionals. We have lots and lots of offices. So I would like you to really think about that. If 7 not now when are we going to take a look? It has been now almost 30 years since we last looked 8 at it. So I think that is really important to get the housing stock back in shape particularly when 9 there is no way that the permitted changes can be monitored and as is well known both to you 10 and Planning Commission Staff they have not been monitored. So they have all steadily 11 increased in usage regardless of what it says on a piece of paper. A dentist office became a gym. 12 A dentist on Middlefield decided to have a liquor license in his dental office. I do not know what 13 he wants to do but the City approved it. Fortunately the state did not and said it was not to be 14 done. He didn't need it and I don't know what he was up to. Another one was my doctor's 15 office was turned into a computer agency of some kind. So this cannot be monitored. You have 16 no way to know who has an office or doesn't or did or didn't so I hope you will take a hard look 17 at that. Thanks. 18 19 Chair Cassel: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak at this time? Thank 20 you. I will close the public hearing. Is there any response that Staff would like to make? 21 22 Mr. Williams: Yes, I don't know if we need to go back through the daycare issue. 23 City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 35 of 113 1 point to see what stays and what is out of date and what gets changed. So that will be addressed 2 through the Zoning Ordinance Update process. At this point we have continued to just be sure 3 that we haven't taken anything out that there might be some reason to not take it out now and it 4 might cause some problems so we have left it in there. Now ifthere are changes in those uses I 5 think you would need to make a complaint to the department or whatever because I don't see 6 provisions in this language for changing uses or expanding those uses. It basically says that they 7 can remain as medical and professional offices. 8 9 Chair Cassel: Karen. 10 11 Commissioner Holman: Two questions. One have to do with the grandfathered uses, can I make 12 sure that I have this clear then? So even though the R-llow density and this low density 13 ordinances are going to be adopted by Council to whatever d~gree they are that we will be 14 readdressing all the grandfathered issues throughout the low density ordinances that are just 15 going to be adopted recently? 16 17 Mr. Williams: Yes, we will be coming back to that and addressing them and it will be the same 18 with the multi-family and industrial sections as well. 19 20 Commissioner Holman: Then one other question having to do with lighting, which has come up 21 here before. One is ifI could I would like to ask Ms. Chiapella ifthere is an identified problem 22 that exists since this is the existing code. Then the other is a question about lumens and what 23 Staff might be able to enlighten us about because as we have shielded lighting still the lumens City of Palo Alto April 27. 2005 Page 37 of 113 1 are an issue and there are examples of that. What is Staff doing to address the intensity of light? 2 Then also we haven't closed public hearing so I would like to as Ms. Chiapella if there is an 3 existing or identified problem that maybe we are not aware of regarding lighting. 4 5 Chair Cassel: Regarding lighting? 6 7 Commissioner Holman: Yes, regarding lighting, which she brought up. 8 9 Chair Cassel: Does the rest of the Commission want to hear that? I am not hearing any other 10 Commissioners who want to waive that. 11 12 Commissioner Holman: Does it take anybody else to do that? 13 14 Chair Cassel: That can be brought to the Staff is you want to. Okay, go ahead. Do you have a 15 specific example? Lynn, she is asking you a question. You have to use the mike. Ms. Chiapella 16 is going to respond to Karen's question. 17 18 Ms. Chiapella: No, there is no such thing as a 12-foot lamppost on the property line that is what 19 I am worried about is that it is going to get worse. 20 21 Chair Cassel: Thank you. 22 City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 38 of 1 13 1 Commissioner Holman: To clarify my question or comment is I understand that the spillover is 2 addressed however, there is a lumen issue where sometimes porch lights or yard lights are so 3 intense that they are just beacons as you come down the street. 4 5 Chair Cassel: Can you respond to that? Is that covered under some other ordinance? 6 7 Mr. Lusardi: Well it is covered in the R-2 ordinance under lighting is shielded so that direct light 8 cannot extend beyond the property line. We feel that is not just a light that spills over but a 9 bright light that someone could see from an adjacent property. So if a code violation were 10 reported we would follow up on that. 11 12 Commissioner Holman: So ifthere is an intensity ofa light that exists on someone's property 13 and it is bothersome as you are coming down the street four houses away, two blocks away that 14 would be a violation of this code? It is not spillover light. 15 16 Mr. Lusardi: If it was deemed that it was not shielded though, I think the work 'shielded' that is 17 in there requires it to be shielded so you don't get that brightness several blocks or off the 18 property. 19 20 Chair Cassel: Is anyone interested in making a motion? Pat. 21 22 Commissioner Burt: I just w~nt to make sure I understood this correctly. I thought I understood 23 Commissioner Holman's concern to be you could have a shielded light that is nevertheless a very City oj Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 40 olll3 1 high wattage and it is shielded and there may not be direct lighting visible but is the concern that 2 still based upon the lumens of the light that you get more of an impact than you would perhaps 3 even from a very low wattage unshielded light. Do I understand this issue correctly? 4 5 Commissioner Holman: Yes. 6 7 Chair Cassel: Go ahead. 8 9 Mr. Lusardi: I think again we are referring to the code where it says 'shielded' that the light has 10 to be shielded. The brightness is determined obviously not only by the wattage but how the 11 shielding affects the light, the spillover or shine past the property lines. So I think we would 12 look at it in that context. Is that going to solve every case or every bright light that is in the 13 residential neighborhood?· I don't know and I honestly don't think so but if it is demonstrated 14 that that light is bright enough to spillover past the property line then a code enforcement action 15 would be looked at as far as reducing that light effect. We have done that. We have done that on 16 properties. 17 18 Commissioner Burt: What does spillover mean? I am struggling honestly to understand this. 19 Certainly a light could be visible and have spillover but it could be a very low impact spillover 20 on an adjacent property. I am not sure how we are drawing a line here. I am just not following 21 how the distinction is being made between something that you are saying has no spillover. Well, 22 it could be a low wattage light and still have spillover but it is negligible impact. So I don't 23 follow yet and maybe I could be guided. City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 41 of 113 1 2 Chair Cassel: Lee. 3 4 Commissioner Lippert: I think that what Pat might be alluding to is that there needs to be maybe 5 some technical language. When it comes to sound we are used to decibel ratings and whether 6 something is heard at a certain level on the adjacent property or at a certain distance away. 7 Maybe what has to happen is that in this case it needs to be a certain luminescence at the surface 8 on the adjacent property. That can simply be written into the ordinance. 9 10 Chair Cassel: I am interested in a motion and then we do more debate if we want but I think we 11 have done a lot of detail debating. This is an interesting question and we need some follow up 12 on that one I think. 13 14 Commissioner Lippert: I will do a motion if you want. 15 16 Chair Cassel: Yes, I would like a motion. 17 18 MOTION 19 20 Commissioner Lippert: I have no problem with these recommendations. I move that we approve 21 these recommendations and forward them to Council. I do have some concerns about some of 22 them but overall I think it is a relatively good section and I have no problem with it. 23 City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 42 of 113 1 Commissioner Holman: I just would like to ask the maker and seconder of the motion if the 2 motion includes the clarification regarding houses with basements that start three feet or more 3 above grade per the earlier comments, which would be consistent with the R-l? 4 5 Chair Cassel: You mean relating to historic? 6 7 Commissioner Holman: Yes. I was just asking if that was intended to be included in the motion. 8 9 Commissioner Lippert: I was not intending on including that in the motion but if you would like 10 to suggest an amendment I would be open to hearing that. 11 12 Commissioner Holman: I am suggesting an amendment. I am offering a friendly amendment to 13 include that being consistent with the provisions ofR-i. 14 15 Chair Cassel: Just a second, let me see, is that in the ordinance? I think it is in it. 16 17 Commissioner Holman: It is just a clarification. 18 19 Mr. Lusardi: I think what Commissioner Holman is suggesting and we are fine with that is just 20 simply cross-referencing in the R-2 chapter where that historic issue is in the definitions. It is a 21 simple cross-reference. 22 23 Chair Cassel: Can you make that a friendly amendment? City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 44 of 113 1 2 Commissioner Lippert: Fine, I will accept that. 3 4 Chair Cassel: Would you accept that? 5 6 Commissioner Bialson: My understanding is Staff is going to do it. I think rather than put that 7 into the motion since Staff is going to do it anyway it need not be in the motion. I would rather 8 send City Council a clear motion. So I would prefer not to accept it if Karen is satisfied that 9 Staff can be trusted to make that modification by their assent to it right here. 10 11 Commissioner Holman: Sure, if that is cleaner that is fine with me if Staff is agreeable to 12 making that change. 13 14 Commissioner Lippert: Thank you. 15 16 Chair Cassel: Okay, anyone else want to make some comments? Bonnie. 17 18 Vice Chair Packer: I will be supporting the motion if my fellow Commissioners don't object to 19 the fact that I came in late, however, this document has been before us several times and I have 20 had plenty of time to absorb it. I also would like to point out I didn't have the R -1 ordinance that 21 was approved by Council in front of me but I happen to have our existing old R-1 ordinance and 22 I found that paragraph about lighting is the same for R-1 as it is in this low density. So lighting City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 45 of 113 1 code has been around for many years and apparently has not been much of a problem. That is 2 just sort of an FYI so you know that. 3 4 Chair Cassel: Anyone else want to make a comment on the motion? Karen. 5 6 Commissioner Holman: I am never sure where to make this comment. It is not really a 7 comment on the motion it is just to complete the item. That is that we have raised questions 8 about basements that we want to have information about that come back to us. Then while 9 indeed this lighting issue has come up before and it was not changed for the R-l it has come up 10 again so I am trusting that Staff will come back to us with some indications about what we 11 should do regarding lighting as the lumens have gotten more intense in more recent lighting 12 fixtures. 13 14 Chair Cassel: I will support the motion. Like other I am disappointed that we weren't able to do 15 more with the second units. I agree with Lee that that will come back in some form to us. We 16 0 bviously have some issues on basemen,ts and some issues on lighting that I think are going to 17 need to be addressed but this particular motion should proceed and go forward. We can continue 18 to look as we look at other issues about the lighting because I think we are all facing an intensity 19 issue that we have been looking at and is coming forward to us. 20 21 Lee. 22 City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 46 of 113 1 Commissioner Lippert: I just have on other comment and this is really for Steve Emslie. With 2 regard to flood lighting the City might want to begin to look at in terms of regulating residential 3 flood lighting that may be flood lights that are on motion sensors and on for a certain duration in 4 general so that we require all residences that are going to have flood lighting that they be 5 activated by motion sensors rather than on 2417. 6 7 Chair Cassel: Okay, these may not fall under the Zoning Ordinance they may fall under 8 something else. Okay, go ahead. 9 10 Commissioner Burt: Well, as I think a number of the Commissioners have expressed there was 11 certainly disappointment that so much of the second unit recommendations were not adopted by 12 Council. I think that the Council recognized some concerns in the community that were valid 13 and they addressed but the circumstances of the City Council meeting kind of doesn't allow for 14 the extensive discussion and exploration of alternatives that we have and the Staffhas as we go 15 through this in greater depth. I was trying to figure out would there be an opportunity to relook 16 at the second unit issue in a way that addressed the concerns that the public and the Council 17 raised but not throw out as much of it as the Council made the decision to do. 18 19 I was considering making a recommendation to Council that they direct us to reexamine this 20 issue. An alternative which might have a better chance of being listened to is that if we have our 21 retreat or joint meeting with the Council maybe this could be a topic that we would discuss with 22 them and offer to revisit this issue through that. I know that we had asked Staff for a 23 clarification on whether the establishment of the Planning and Transportation Commission had in City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 47 of 113 1 fact included the requirement for an annual joint meeting with Council that was unclear. The 2 Staff Report to the Council when we were created as the Planning and Transportation 3 Commission recommended it and we didn't have an answer as to whether it was adopted that 4 way. So maybe we couid get an answer back from Staff on that issue and then perhaps this 5 would be an agenda item to fold into a joint meeting with Council. 6 7 MOTION PASSED (7-0-0-0) 8 9 Chair Cassel: I will so note that. Then I will call for a vote. The vote is on the low density 10 Zoning Ordinance Update for the low-density chapter, Chapter 18.10 all those in favor please say 11 aye. (ayes) All those opposed? I have no nays. Any abstentions? That motion passes 12 unanimously seven to nothing with everyone voting yes. 13 14 We will take a short break and then go on to the next one. Thank you. 15 16 I would like to call this meeting back to order. I'm missing two of us and a Staff member. 17 18 Commissioner Griffin: Do you have a quorum? 19 20 Chair Cassel: I do have a quorum. The next item on the agenda is the review and 21 recommendation to City Council of an ordinance adopting and revising Chapter 18.12 Multiple 22 Family Residential District of the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to regulations for the RM-15, 23 RM-30, and RM-40 Multiple Family Residential Districts. I believe this is not our final review· City of Palo Alto April 27, 2005 Page 48 of 1I3