Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 8234 City of Palo Alto (ID # 8234) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 9/5/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Annual Office Limit Ord Extension & Discussion for Replacement Ordinance Title: PUBLIC HEARING. Adoption of an Ordinance for an Extension of Interim Ordinance 5357 Imposing an Annual Limit of 50,000 Net New Square Feet of Office/R&D Uses in Designated Areas of City to June 30, 2018 as Recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission on July 26, 2017 and Direction on a Replacement Ordinance. The Proposed Ordinance is Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in Accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council take the following action: 1. Find the proposed ordinance exempt from the provision of CEQA in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3); 2. Adopt an ordinance (Attachment A) to extend the existing interim Annual Office Limit Ordinance #5357 for an additional seven months to expire on June 30, 2018, allowing time for development and adoption of a replacement ordinance, as recommended by the Planning & Transportation Commission on July 26, 2017; and 3. Provide direction to staff regarding contents of a replacement ordinance for consideration at a future public hearing. At a minimum, City Council direction is needed to address the following issues and choices: A. Boundaries of the area that should be subject to the annual limit 1. Use the boundaries in the existing ordinance; 2. Make the ordinance apply citywide; or 3. Make the ordinance apply citywide, with the exception of the Stanford Research Park. City of Palo Alto Page 2 B. The quantitative annual limit 1. Continue to use 50,000 gross square feet (gsf) as the annual limit; or 2. Identify some other number of square feet as the annual limit. C. The fate of unused annual allocations 1. Do not roll-over unused allocations to future years; 2. Roll-over unused allocations for up to three years before they expire (or some other timeframe); 3. Roll-over unused allocations up to a numeric limit, such as 100,000 gsf per year; or 4. Allow allocations to roll over indefinitely. D. Uses that are exempt from the annual limit 1. Maintain the current list of exemptions for (a) office/R&D development less than 2,000 gsf; (b) medical office development less than 5,000 gsf; and (c) self-mitigating projects that propose sufficient housing to meet the housing demand of additional employment; or 2. Modify the current list of exemptions. E. The process for reviewing projects subject to the annual limit 1. Continue the current competitive process; 2. Use a first-come first-served process; or 3. Use some alternate or modified process. Executive Summary On September 21, 2015, the City Council adopted an interim ordinance establishing an annual limit on the amount of net new office/research and development (R&D) space that can be approved each fiscal year in specified areas of the City including Downtown, the California Avenue area, and the El Camino Real Corridor; this interim ordinance will expire on November 26, 2017. To allow sufficient time for staff to prepare the replacement ordinance and to assure no lapse in the regulations, an extension of the existing interim ordinance is proposed. In addition to the extension of the interim ordinance, staff also seeks direction from Council regarding the replacement ordinance for regulating office/R&D development. As indicated in the Recommendation above, items identified for Council’s comment and direction include the boundaries and quantitative size of the annual limit, as well as the fate of unused annual allocations, exempt uses, and the process for reviewing projects subject to the annual limit. More explanation is provided in the Discussion section below. Background The current City’s Comprehensive Plan contains an overall cap of 3.2 million square feet on the amount of non-residential development that can occur in Downtown and in “monitored areas” City of Palo Alto Page 3 of the City, but does not currently limit the pace of development.1 In the summer of 2014, conversations with the community, associated with early Comprehensive Plan update workshops, identified some frustration that the current Comprehensive Plan’s approach to growth management (i.e. an overall “cap” on non-residential development) has not been effective at moderating the pace of growth and development in the robust economic recovery following the recession. Based on these early communications, a growth management policy that moderated or metered the rate of development rather than the overall amount became the focus of discussions. This emphasis on the rate of development had its genesis in the impacts associated with increased employment in the City as experienced by Palo Alto residents. Impacts include traffic congestion/delay, parking demand, increased housing costs, and more. The objective of the annual limit is to moderate the pace of change by metering the rate of office/R&D development, thereby also reducing the rate of employment growth and related impacts. Over the course of six meetings from January through June of 2015, the City Council discussed the concept of limiting the pace of new office/R&D development, a discussion that resulted in the adoption of the Annual Office Limit (AOL) interim ordinance in September 2015. During the January 30, 2017 City Council hearing on the draft Land Use Element, Council directed staff to bring forward a replacement annual office limit ordinance separate from the Comprehensive Plan Update, affirming that the development limitations were to remain in effect on a continuing basis beyond the interim ordinance’s sunset date. Additional background information is available in earlier staff reports on this subject, including the Planning and Transportation Commission study session staff report dated March 29, 2017 (http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/56641) and a City Council report for the approval of the original interim ordinance, dated September 21, 2015 (http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/48971). Interim Ordinance (2015) In September 2015, Council adopted an ordinance to establish an annual limit on new office/R&D development in areas of the City experiencing the most rapid change. The ordinance applied to office development in fiscal years 2016 and 2017, established applicable land uses, designated areas affected, identified exemptions, and outlined other procedural items. The City Council also approved a process for proposals once the 50,000 sq. ft. limit is 1 The cap that applies to “monitored areas” of the City was established by Comprehensive Plan Policy L-8 and addresses all non-residential development, not just office/R&D. “Monitored areas” are illustrated in Comprehensive Plan Map L-6. The ongoing Comprehensive Plan Update is proposing to change this policy so it would place a cumulative cap on office/R&D uses citywide except at the Stanford University Medical Center (i.e. not just in “monitored areas”). The Comprehensive Plan Update does not contain a policy regarding an office/R&D annual limit, which the Council indicated it wished to adopt as a standalone ordinance. City of Palo Alto Page 4 reached. The ordinance was to be in effect for a limited duration to pilot the new, interim procedures and then determine future measures. As described later in this report, the 50,000 sq. ft. limit has not been exceeded during this pilot period. Below is a summary of the key elements of the ordinance. Please refer to Attachment B for additional details. Affected Area The interim ordinance applies to three primary commercial areas in Palo Alto: Downtown, California Avenue, and El Camino Real. These areas are delineated on the map (Attachment B, Exhibit A) included with the ordinance. Applicable Land Uses The following land uses, which are defined in Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, are limited by the AOL Ordinance:  Research and Development  Administrative Office Services  General Business Office  Medical Office over 5,000 sq. ft.  Professional Office Exempt Projects There are three types of projects that qualify for an exemption from the limitations:  Small projects less than 2,000 sq. ft. and accessory office space that is incidental to principal use.  Small medical office less than or equal to 5,000 sq. ft.  Self-mitigating projects that provide rental housing to accommodate more workers than would be employed by the project and includes substantial transportation demand management strategies that improve current parking and traffic conditions. Process and Selection Criteria The interim ordinance requires the City to hold all approval-ready or “qualified” applications that are subject to the ordinance until March 31st each fiscal year. At that time, if the sum total of the applications does not exceed the 50,000 sq. ft. annual limit, the applications can be approved and the unused portion of the 50,000 sq. ft. limit expires at the end of the fiscal year. When the 50,000 sq. ft. limit is exceeded by the qualified projects pending on March 31st, the following criteria are to be analyzed and used by Council to evaluate and rank projects for approval or disapproval (projects that are identified for disapproval can be deferred to the next year at the request of the applicant): City of Palo Alto Page 5  Impacts: appropriate density of development; avoidance/mitigation of traffic and parking impacts.  Design: quality design and compatible with surrounding context.  Environmental Quality: degree of environmental impacts as determined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis.  Public Benefit: meaningful public benefits included.  Uses: inclusion of mixed-use with substantial housing, retail, and cultural amenities. As shown in Figure 1, there are three primary steps that apply to office development. The first step in determining if the AOL thresholds apply is to inventory all qualifying projects on March 30 that are ready for action. Then, the second step is to calculate whether the 50,000 sq. ft. threshold has been triggered. If it has, then the projects would be evaluated based on the criteria listed above (e.g. impacts, design, public benefit, etc.) and ranked for Council review and action. If the threshold is not triggered, then the qualifying projects would follow the standard steps for review and action. Action on both categories of projects must be completed prior to the end of the fiscal year, June 30. Figure 1: Primary Decision Points in AOL Review Process Administrative Guidelines The administrative guidelines (Attachment C) were reviewed and approved by Council on February 8, 2016 and outline the procedural steps in more detail to streamline implementation. Additionally, the scoring process and “scorecard” for evaluation of projects are explained in finer detail. When qualifying projects exceed the 50,000 sq. ft. limit, each project will be City of Palo Alto Page 6 assigned points (based on criteria above) and then ranked; the Planning Director will provide Council with a recommended ranking for consideration. The guidelines also clarify that all Council approved entitlements would follow the standard review timelines (i.e. entitlement expiration, extensions, etc.) and if the applicant allowed the entitlement to expire, the approved square footage allocation associated with the project could not be rolled-over to another project; the approved project must use it or lose it. AOL Activity FY16-FY17 The first round of analysis for qualifying AOL projects was last year in March 2016 and the 50,000 sq. ft. limit was not exceeded; there were three projects proposed totaling 40,863 sq. ft. In March 2017, the 50,000 sq. ft. threshold was again not exceeded since there were no qualifying office projects ready for approval. For March 2018, there is one project on file so far with 11,164 sq. ft. of office that may potentially be ready for approval; it is not likely that another large office project, if submitted soon, would be ready for approval by March 2018. Staff’s observation is that projects proposed in the ordinance-affected areas of the City are either limiting their office use to less than 2,000 sq. ft. (to be exempt) or choosing to pursue other commercial and housing uses. Subsequent to the implementation of the AOL ordinance, there has not been any significant office development proposed in the ordinance-affected areas. Although the time period has been relatively short, it appears that the interim ordinance has reduced the amount of applications for net new office projects. A list of the AOL applicable projects referred to above is provided in Attachment F. Planning and Transportation Commission Review of Extension On July 26, 2017 the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) reviewed the proposed extension of the AOL ordinance and unanimously recommended approval. No changes were recommended for the extension ordinance. The PTC comments provided regarding the future replacement ordinance are discussed later in this report. The PTC meeting minutes are included as Attachment D, and the staff report is available online (https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/58763 ). Planning and Transportation Commission Comments for Replacement Ordinance On March 29, 2017, the PTC discussed and provided a range of comments for the preparation of the replacement ordinance. The highlights of the comments are below:  AOL Intent: Several PTC members voiced strong concerns that the AOL was not the appropriate approach to address the concerns focused on traffic congestion and single occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips. One alternative approach that was suggested by one City of Palo Alto Page 7 commissioner included using both the AOL and traffic mitigation, and the AOL would sunset when effective mitigation measures were put in place (or the cap increased or restrictions lessened, etc.).  Competitive Process: The majority of the PTC expressed a preference for maintaining a competition; only two spoke against a competitive process and encouraged a first-come first-served approach. Additionally, it was suggested by one commissioner that for the formal evaluation process, the Architectural Review Board should be the judging panel and not a political body (i.e. City Council), so as to maintain a greater sense of impartiality.  FAR Exemptions: Two PTC members specifically mentioned that smaller office proposals should not be exempt from the regulations because cumulatively these smaller offices do add to the congestion impacts since these small businesses may be less likely to have a robust TDM program in place.  Boundary: Two PTC members specifically mentioned including Stanford Research Park (SRP) within the applicable boundary because the uses there generate the highest volume of SOV trips when compared to the other commercial areas in the City. It was also suggested that office development should be allowed or encouraged in areas that are most accessible by transit (i.e. Downtown and Cal Ave) and be more regulated in areas not well serviced by transit.  FAR Rollover: The majority of the PTC supported some type of rollover allowance but did not suggest specific criteria.  50,000 Square Foot Limit: It was suggested by one commissioner that the limit be reduced, but the majority of the PTC did not raise any concerns about the 50,000 sq. ft. threshold.  Self-Mitigating Projects: Several PTC members asked for information on examples of these types of projects. At the July 26, 2017 PTC meeting, two members of the public made comments directed towards the future replacement ordinance, not the interim ordinance extension. Both speakers stated that the 50,000 sq. ft. limit was too high; raised the concern about the jobs/housing imbalance; and thought the regulations should apply to the City as a whole, although one speaker specifically stated citywide minus the Stanford Research Park. The PTC minutes for March 29 are included in Attachment E; and the associated staff report is available online at (http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/ptc/default.asp). City of Palo Alto Page 8 Discussion The discussion items below are separated into those applicable to the existing interim ordinance extension and those focused on the replacement ordinance. A. Interim Ordinance Extension With the direction from Council in January 2017 to proceed in preparing on-going office limit regulations and with the interim ordinance due to expire in November 2017, staff is proposing an extension to the existing interim ordinance to provide staff sufficient time to complete the necessary preparation work; no changes are proposed. The interim ordinance extension would expire on June 30, 2018, which coincides with the end of the fiscal year. It is staff’s intent to have the replacement ordinance in place by this time so there is no lapse in the requirements. B. Future Replacement Ordinance In order to prepare an AOL ordinance to replace the interim ordinance, staff seeks direction from Council on any additions or modifications to the existing interim regulations. The discussion below is provided to facilitate focused feedback. At the time of the adoption of the interim ordinance in 2015 and in the recent January 2017 Council discussion, it was clear that Council intended to establish code changes to continue the development restrictions of the interim ordinance. On January 30, 2017, individual councilmembers commented on the AOL during their discussion of related Comprehensive Plan policies and indicated their support for expanding the affected area of the City (to the whole city minus the Stanford Research Park) and potentially dispensing with the competitive process (and transitioning to a first-come first-served system). The issues and options below have been highlighted to help guide the discussion for direction on the replacement ordinance. These issues reflect similar topics that the PTC commented on that are noted above. 1. Boundary The affected geographic boundary under the current interim ordinance includes areas in the City that have experienced the most rapid growth. Although the boundary does not precisely follow established business districts, it generally follows the Downtown, California Avenue, and El Camino Real commercial areas. The three suggested options include maintaining the current boundary or modifying it to apply the ordinance citywide, either including or excluding the Stanford Research Park (SRP). A map that indicates the areas within the entire City where office use is allowed is provided for reference as Attachment H.  Option 1: Maintain the existing boundary, which is limited to Downtown, California Avenue, and El Camino Real corridor. City of Palo Alto Page 9  Option 2: Apply Regulations Citywide. This option would encompass the SRP as well as all other parts of the city. The AOL regulations, if extended citywide, would apply only to new square footage not covered under the Mayfield Development Agreement (DA), an exception that could add some complexity to the program. Applying the AOL citywide would recognize there is additional development potential for office/R&D throughout the areas shown in Attachment H.  Option 3: Apply Regulations Citywide Excluding the SRP. This approach would apply the regulations to office development throughout the City with an exception for SRP. A potential reason to exclude the SRP is that it is a discrete geographic area with a development agreement in effect governing development. Also, with a single property owner, the City has a greater opportunity to negotiate agreements regarding development and the impacts of development. 2. Square Footage Limit On March 23, 2015, Council directed staff to use a 50,000 sq. ft. threshold for the annual limit for office development, based upon review of the VTA’s Congestion Management Program (CMP) office/R&D development data spanning 2001 through 2015. From 2001 through 2017, the CMP data shows there were six years when office/R&D development in the commercial districts affected by the interim ordinance exceeded 50,000 sq. ft. (FY2006, FY2007, FY2010, FY2012, FY2014, and FY2015). Within the three ordinance-affected areas, the average annual development over the 17 years was approximately 39,459 sq. ft., with a range from 0-106,829 sq. ft. A table summarizing this development activity is provided as Attachment G.2  Option 1: Maintain the existing 50,000 sq. ft. annual limit.  Option 2: Identify a new annual limit. 3. Unused Square Footage Allocations A related issue to the annual limit number is consideration of allowing the roll-over of unused floor area. The majority of the PTC supported the concept of rolling over unused floor area, but did not have any suggestions on how this should be managed. An indefinite roll-over (i.e. allocations roll over without restriction until they are used) could be seen as inconsistent with 2 The CMP data includes all office and R&D development, including projects that are exempt from the AOL ordinance. This explains the square footage difference in the CMP data (Attachment G) and the approved AOL projects (Attachment F) for FY2016. City of Palo Alto Page 10 the purposes of the AOL because it would defeat the goal of pacing the development and allow spikes to occur. Below are some options for consideration.  Option 1: Continue with no-rollover allowance.  Option 2: Allow floor area that is not allocated to a development project to carry over to subsequent years, but make it expire after three years (or another timeframe).  Option 3: Allow the roll-over of floor area that is not approved with a development project to carry over without expiration, but include a cap (e.g. 100,000 sq. ft.).  Option 4: Allow the roll-over of floor area that is not approved with a development project to carry over without expiration and continually add on to the yearly limit. 4. Exemptions As mentioned earlier, small office projects up to 2,000 sq. ft. and medical office up to 5,000 sq. ft. are exempt from the AOL under the interim ordinance. Several PTC members stated that all new office should count towards the 50,000 sq. ft. because, cumulatively, many smaller offices could have the same or more impacts as larger offices. The PTC discussion suggested that since these businesses are small, they potentially are less likely to have the resources or impetus to actively manage a Transportation Demand Management program for their individual businesses.  Option 1: Continue to exempt small projects (office/R&D development less than 2,000 gsf and medical office development less than 5,000 gsf) and self-mitigating projects that propose sufficient housing to meet the housing demand of additional employment.  Option 2: Modify the current list of exemptions. 5. Review Process The current process under the interim ordinance requires a competitive approach when the 50,000 sq. ft. threshold is exceeded. There is a subjective evaluation that must occur for each of the projects to rank them and forward to Council for consideration. This process is untested because thus far the 50,000 sq. ft. threshold has not been exceeded. Staff anticipates that this process may be challenging to implement because of its subjective nature. This process is also time-intensive for the applicant and staff, and does not provide any assurances to the developer that their project will be approved now or in the future. The natural side effect of this ambiguity is the reluctance of developers to propose office projects in the City. City of Palo Alto Page 11 An alternative to the competitive process is to approve projects on a first-come first-served basis. This approach would approve projects in order, based on the date the application is ready for approval. Any number of projects could be approved, depending on their size, up to and until the 50,000 sq. ft. threshold is reached. This approach would obviate the need for approvable projects to wait until March 30. This approach likely can be done in various iterations. Options for consideration are:  Option 1: Retain the existing competitive process.  Option 2: First-Come First-Served All projects follow the standard review steps as applicable to the project type (i.e. Architectural Review, Site & Design), but instead of sending projects to Council for action when the 50,000 sq. ft. threshold is exceeded, as required now, the applications would complete the applicable review, on first-come first-served basis3. Projects that cannot be approved for that fiscal year would be in the queue for approval in the following year.  Option 3: Consider an alternative or modified process. Staff would encourage the use of a first-come first-served process because it will be more straightforward to implement for both staff and property owners, while still achieving the purpose of metering office growth in designated areas of the City. Administrative Guidelines The current administrative guidelines will need to be modified based on the revised AOL ordinance. After receiving direction from Council, staff will prepare the revised guidelines and present then in tandem with a draft ordinance. Public Outreach In order to inform the community about the efforts to prepare the replacement Annual Office Limit ordinance, staff informed various known developers, property owners, architects, and resident groups about this meeting. Staff would welcome City Council input on the desired level of public outreach for the adoption of the replacement ordinance. At a minimum, staff will use electronic notification for interested parties and will maintain a project information page on the City’s website to keep the public up-to-date on meeting dates and staff reports. Policy Implications 3 The “first-come first-served” determination uses to the date a project is deemed complete according to the Permit Streamlining Act and not the date an application is filed with the City. Using the deemed complete date deters applicants from submitting incomplete application packages to simply secure an earlier filing date. City of Palo Alto Page 12 The proposed ordinance would seek to moderate the pace of development without changing the zoning regulations that affect land uses and densities. The annual limit program would complement and not replace growth management stategies in the current Comprehensive Plan, which consists of a cumulative cap on non-residential development Downtown and in “monitored areas” Citywide. In this way, the proposal would implement Comprehensive Plan Policy B-1 to “use a variety of planning and regulatory tools, including growth limits, to ensure that business change is compatible with the needs of Palo Alto neighborhoods.” Timeline The AOL interim ordinance (#5357), adopted on September 21, 2015, will expire on November 26, 2017. The approval of the attached extension ordinance would make the annual office limit effective for seven additional months, expiring on June 30, 2018. For the replacement AOL ordinance, staff anticipates returning to the PTC and City Council for review and final action in Spring 2018. Environmental Review The subject project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. Specifically, the project is considered exempt under Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15061(b)(3) because it is a temporary measure designed to slow the rate of change in some commercial areas of the City. Attachments: Attachment A: Annual Office Limit Extension Ordinance (DOCX) Attachment B: Interim Ordinance #5357 Annual Office Limit (PDF) Attachment C: Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit Guideline (PDF) Attachment D: PTC Meeting Excerpt Minutes, July 26, 2017 (Ordinance Extension) (DOC) Attachment E: PTC Meeting Excerpt Minutes, March 29, 2017 (Comments on Permanent Ordinance) (PDF) Attachment F: Approved and Pending Office Projects Subject to the AOL Ordinance (DOCX) Attachment G: Office Development Summary FY 2001 to FY 2017 (PDF) Attachment H: Map Showing Where Office Use is Allowed in Palo Alto (PDF) Attachment A NOT YET APPROVED 170818 jb Lee/PLANNING 1 Ordinance No.__________ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Extending Interim Ordinance No. 5357 that Added Sections 18.85.200 through 18.85.208 to Chapter 18.85 of Title 18 Imposing an Office Annual Limit of 50,000 Square Feet in Designated Areas of City The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Recitals. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and declares as follows: A. On October 26, 2015, the City Council adopted Interim Ordinance No. 5357, and related findings, establishing an annual limit of 50,000 square feet of net new office/R&D development in specified areas of the City including Downtown, the California Avenue area, and the El Camino Real Corridor. By its terms, Ordinance No. 5357 will expire within two years of its effective date of November 26, 2015 or upon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Update, whichever occurs earlier. B. On January 30, 2017, during consideration of the Comprehensive Plan Update, the City Council directed staff to prepare and bring forward, separate from the Comprehensive Plan, an ordinance establishing the annual office limit on a continuing basis without a specified sunset date. C. A limited extension of the interim ordinance through June 30, 2018 will allow time for the City to complete the necessary work and analysis to prepare the annual office limit ordinance. D. The findings adopted in Ordinance No. 5357 are incorporated herein by reference and reaffirmed. SECTION 2. Extension. The City Council hereby extends Interim Ordinance No. 5357 through June 30, 2018. SECTION 3. Supersede. This Ordinance supersedes any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Interim Ordinance No. 5357 inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance. SECTION 4. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this ordinance, or the application to any person or circumstances, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. 170613 jb Lee/PLANNING 2 SECTION 5. Effective Period. This Ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its adoption. This Ordinance shall expire on the earlier of June 30, 2018 or upon Council adoption of an ordinance replacing the interim ordinance and establishing an annual office limit on a continuing basis. SECTION 6. CEQA. The City Council finds that this Ordinance falls under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemption found in Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15061(b)(3) because it is a temporary measure designed to slow the rate of change in some commercial areas of the City. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: ______________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ City Manager ______________________________ Assistant City Attorney ____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment DocuSign Envelope ID: 058EA42C-633E-4A 13-9788-084 711 CF4A49 Ordinance No. 5357 Interim Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Section 18.85.200 (Annual Office Limit) to Chapter 18.85 entitled "Interim Zoning Ordinances" Imposing an Office Annual Limit of 50,000 Net New Square Feet in Designated Areas of City FINDINGS A. The City of Palo Alto has long been considered the birth place of Silicon Valley. With its proximity to Stanford University, its international reputation, its deep ties to technology firms, its highly rated public school system and its ample public parks, open space and community centers, Palo Alto continues to serve as a hub for technology-based business. B. Palo Alto is considered one of Silicon Valley's most desirable office market~_,_ _________ _ According to one study Class A office rates have climbed 49 percent since the start of 2010. The same study reported Class B office space increasing by 114.4% since 2010. C. In particular, average commercial rental rates have gone up significantly from 2013 to 2015. In 2013 the average monthly rental rate citywide for office was $4.57 per square foot. That rate increased to $5.12 in 2015. D. As a result, the City has seen a steady increase of new Office and Research and Development (R&D) projects. According to data submitted by the City to support the Valley Transportation Authority's Congestion Management Plan (CMP), since 2001, the City has added 234,002 of net new square feet of office/R& D development in the California Avenue area; 315,586 in the downtown area, and 46,210 in the El Camino Real corridor. E. While this new development is consistent with the City's zoning ordinance and its Comprehensive Plan, the rate of change has been faster than anticipated, resulting in changes in the character of the City's commercial districts. The changes have also resulted in additional parking demand, traffic, and greenhouse gas emissions, and negatively impact the City's jobs/housing ratio. F. Based on the CMP data, there have been six years since 2001 in which more than 50,000 net new square feet of Office/R&D development have been entitled in these districts combined, and these six years include the last two (fiscal years 2014 and 2015). G. Record high monthly rental rates for office space and low vacancy rates suggest that the rapid pace of development is likely to continue, putting pressure on sites that are not currently developed to their maximum potential, and contributing to a feeling in the community that the character of the City's commercial districts are changing too fast. 151001 cs 0131471 1 Rev. October 1, 2015 DocuSign Envelope 10: 05BEA42C-633E-4A 13-9788-084 711 CF4A49 The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. A new Section 18.85.200 {Annual Office Limit) is added to Chapter 18.85 entitled "Interim Zoning Ordinances" to the Palo Alto Municipal Code to read as follows: "18.85.200 Annual Office Limit 18.85.201 Definitions. For the purposes of this Ordinance, the following terms shall have the definitions below: (a) Office Annual Limit Area shall include the area shown in Exhibit A, comprising the commercial districts of Downtown, the California Avenue Area, and the El Camino Real corridor. (b) Office Annual Limit Land Uses shall include any of the following uses in the Office Annual Limit Area: 1. Research and Development as defined in Section 18.04.030(123); 2. Administrative Office Services as defined in Section 18.040.030(6); 3. General Business Office as defined in Section 18.040.030(61); 4. Medical Office greater than 5,000 net new square feet as defined in Section 18.04.030(95 ); and 5. Professional Office as defined in Section 18.04.030(116). (c) Qualifying Application shall mean an application for a permit or other planning entitlement for an Office Annual Limit Land Use which (1) has been determined to be complete, (2) has completed the necessary analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act and (3) has been reviewed by all required commissions and/or Planning Director, as applicable. 18.85.202 Office Annual Limit. During the pendency of this Ordinance no more than 50,000 net new square feet of Office Annual Limit Land Uses per fiscal year shall be approved by the City in the Office Annual Limit Area. (a) For purposes of this Ordinance, the fiscal year shall be defined as July 1 to June 30. (b)The 50,000 square foot limit imposed by this section shall not apply to exempt projects as defined in 18.85.203 and such projects shall not be counted towards this limit. (c) This restriction shall be in addition to any other applicable growth restriction including but not limited to Comprehensive Plan Policy L-8 and Section 18.18.040 of the Zoning Code. In the event multiple policies apply to a project, the policy most restrictive of growth shall apply. 18.85.203 Exemptions. The following shall be exempt from this Ordinance: 151103 cs 0131471 2 Rev. October 1, 2015 DocuSign Envelope ID: 058EA42C-633E-4A 13-9788-084711 CF4A49 (a) Small Projects. Projects containing less than 2,000 net new square feet or less of Office Annual Limit Land Uses and accessory office space that is incidental to and customarily associated with a principal use or facility are exempt from the Office Annual Limit. (b) Small Medical Office Projects. Projects containing 5,000 net new square feet or less of Medical Office are exempt from the Development Cap. (c) Self-Mitigating Projects. Projects that would both: (1) provide rental housing for more workers than would be employed in the project; and (2) provide substantial transportation demand management strategies (individually or in cooperation with other projects or programs) to improve the current parking and traffic conditions. (d) Pipeline Projects. Projects which have been approved, or which are considered "pipeline projects" as follows: 1. Projects which obtained a planning entitlement for an Office Annual Limit Land Use prior to the effective date of this ordinance. 2. Projects which are the subject of a planning entitlement application that was submitted to the City in 2013 or 2014 and deemed complete by the City on or before March 31, 2015. (e) City Office Space. New office space used by the City of Palo Alto. 18.85 .205 Economic Hardship Waiver or Adjustment. An applicant may request that the requirements of this Ordinance be adjusted or waived based on a showing that applying the requirements of this Ordinance would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property. The applicant shall bear the burden of presenting evidence to support a waiver or modification request under this Section and shall set forth in detail the factual and legal basis for the claim, including all supporting technical documentation. Any such request under this section shall be submitted to the Planning and Community Development Director together with an economic analysis or other supporting documentation and shall be acted upon by the City Council. 18.85.206 Procedures for Reviewing Qualifying Applications. The following additional processing and approval requirements shall apply to Office Annual Limit Land Uses: (a) No Qualifying Application for an Office Annual Limit Land Use shall be acted upon by the Director or by the City Council between July 1 and March 31 of the following year. (b) If the combined square footage proposed by all Qualifying Applications that are 151103 cs 0131471 3 Rev. October 1, 2015 DocuSign Envelope ID: 058EA42C-633E-4A 13-9788-084 711 CF4A49 pending on March 31 would not exceed the annual limit, the Qualifying Applications shall be acted upon using the Zoning Code's usual process immediately following March 31. (c) If the combined square footage proposed by all Qualifying Applications would exceed the annual limit, the Director shall rank all Qualifying Applications based on scoring criteria set forth in Section 18.85.207 and make a recommendation to the Council. The Council may accept the Director's recommendation or reevaluate the ranking based on the scoring criteria. Based on their review, the Council shall approve in ranked order one or more Qualifying Applications to achieve a maximum of 50,000 net new square feet. The Council may approve applications as proposed and recommended, and may require modifications of any project to reduce the proposed square footage in order to stay within the 50,000 square feet Office Annual Limit. The Council's action on all Qualifying Applications shall be made before the end of the fiscal year on June 30. (d) Any application which is subject to City Council evaluation and action pursuant to Section (c) above and which was not approved by the City Council shall be denied unless, at the request of the applicant, it is rolled over to the next fiscal year for processing in accordance with the terms of this Ordinance. Further, in lieu of modifications to the project's Office Annual Limit Land Use, the applicant can elect to roll over the application to the next fiscal year. The City and applicant may agree to extend any applicable processing time periods to effectuate this provision. 18.85.207 Selection Criteria. The City Council shall evaluate applications subject to the annual limit using the following criteria based upon weighting set forth in administrative rules or procedures which shall provide that projects meeting criterion (i) shall be selected first and weighted against each other: Impacts (a) The density of the development in the context of underlying zoning and the site surroundings; and (b) The ability to avoid or address potential impacts on traffic and parking; and (c) The quality of design, including the attention to human scale where the building(s) meet the street, the compatibility with surroundings, and the overall architectural quality; and Environmental Quality (d) Environmental quality; and Public Benefit (e) The value to the community of public benefits offered; and 151103 cs 0131471 4 Rev. October 1, 2015 DocuSign Envelope ID: 05BEA42C-633E-4A13-978B-OB4711 CF4A49 (f) Mixed use projects including substantial housing; and (g) Mixed use projects including retail; and (h) Mixed use projects that provide space for cultural amenities such as but not limited to art galleries and studios; and Pipeline Projects (i) Any entitlement application involving an Office Annual Limit Land Use deemed complete by the City between March 31, 2015 and June 15, 2015. 18.85 .208. The Director has the authority to adopt rules or procedures to implement the efficient and equitable implementation of this Ordinance." SECTION 2. Supersede. This Ordinance supersedes any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance. SECTION 3. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this ordinance, or the application to any person or circumstances, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its adoption. This ordinance shall expire within two years of its effective date or upon Council adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Update, whichever occurs first. SECTION 5. CEQA. The City Council finds that this Ordinance falls under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemption found in Title 14 California Code of Regulations II II II II II II II 151103 cs 0131471 5 Rev. October 1, 2015 DocuSign Envelope ID: 058EA42C-633E-4A 13-9788-084711 CF4A49 Section 15061(b)(3) because it is a temporary measure designed to slow the rate of change in some commercial areas of the City. INTRODUCED: September 21, 2015 PASSED: October 26, 2015 AYES: BERMAN, BURT, DUBOIS, FILSETH, HOLMAN, KNISS, SCHARFF, SCHMID, WOLBACH NOES : ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATIEST: ~ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ~~~1~ .. --------------- Senior Assistant City Attorney 151103 cs 0131471 6 APPROVED: Mayor [?:-;;!' 3QFZ2Q8F82064QB City Manager Director of Planning and Community Environment Rev. October 1, 2015 CJL Stanford Shopping Center Downtown/Unniversity Area UniversityStation PAMF Town & Country California AvenueArea Fry's Site Stanford Research Park El Camino RealCorridor El Camino RealCorridor El Camino RealCorridor Alma Plaza Stanford MedicalCenter CharlestonCenter R-1 San AntonioArea San AntonioArea Midtown West BayshoreArea EdgewoodPlaza East BayshoreArea MSC Embarcadero EastArea SOFA I SOFA II R-1 R-1 (7000) East MeadowCircle s J u n i p e r o S e r r a B o u l e v a r d P a g e M i l l R o ad R o a d E l C a m i n o R e a l S a n A n t o n i o A v e n u e C h a r l e s t o n R oa d O re g o n E x p r e s s w a y M i d d l e f i e l d R o a d U niversity Avenue y 1 0 1 A l m a S t r e e t El Camino Real n e R o a d F o o t h i l l E x p r e s Hi l l vi e w E a st B a y s h or e W e st B a y s h o r e Fabian S a n d Hill R oa d E m b a r c a d e r o R o a d Wallis Ct Donald Drive Encina Grande Drive Cereza Drive Los Robles Avenue Villa Vera Verdosa DriveCampana DriveSolana Drive Georgia Ave Ynigo Way Driscoll Ct ngArthur' Maybell Way Maybell Avenue Frandon Ct Florales Drive Georgia AvenueAmaranta Avenue Amaranta Ct Ki sCourt Terman Drive Baker Avenue Vista Avenue Wisteria Ln Pena Ct Coulombe Drive Cherry Oaks Pl Pomona Avenue Arastradero Road Abel Avenue Clemo Avenue Villa Real El Camino Way Curtner Avenue Ventura Avenue Maclane Emerson Street Ventura Ct Park Boulevard Magnolia Dr South El Camino Real Cypress Lane GlenbrookD Fairmede Avenue Arastradero Road Irven Court Los Palos CirLosPalosPl Maybell Avenue Alta Mesa Ave Kelly Way Lo s Palos Avenue Suzanne Drive Suzanne Drive rive El Camino Real Suzanne CtLorabelle Ct Mc Kellar Lane El Camino Way James Road Maclane Second Street Wilkie Way Camino Ct West Meadow Drive Thain Way Barclay CtVictoria Place Interdale Way West Charleston Road Tennessee LaneWilkie Wa y Carolina LaneTennessee Lane Park Boulevard Wilkie Ct Davenport Way Alma Street Roosev Monroe Drive Wilkie Way Whitclem Pl Whitclem DriveDuluth Circle Edlee Avenue Dinah's Court Cesano Court Monroe Drive Miller Avenue Whitclem Wy Whitclem Ct Ferne Avenue Ben Lomond Drive Fairfield Court Ferne Avenue Ponce Drive Hemlock Court Ferne Court Alma Street Monroe Drive San Antonio Avenue NitaAvenue Ruthelma Avenue Darlington Ct Charleston Road LundyLane Newberry Ct Park Boulevard George Hood Ln Alma Street eltCircle LinderoDrive Wright Place StarrKingCircle Shasta Drive Mackay Drive Diablo Court Scripps Avenue Scripps Court Nelson Drive Tioga Court Creekside Drive Greenmeadow Way Ben Lomond Drive Parkside Drive Dixon Place Ely Place Dake Avenue Ferne Avenue San Antonio Court (Private) ChristopherCourt CalcaterraPlace Ely Place Ely Place Adobe Place Nelson Court ByronStreet Keats Court Middlefield Road Duncan Place Carlson Court Duncan Place Mumford Place Charleston Road San Antonio Avenue East Meadow Drive Emerson Street Court BryantStreet RooseveltCircle RamonaStreet CarlsonCircle RedwoodCircle South Leghorn Street Montrose Avenue Maplewood Charleston Ct Charleston Road Seminole Way Sutherland Drive Nelson Drive El C apitan Place Fabian Street Loma Verde Avenue Bryson Avenue Midtown Court Cowper Street Gary Court Waverley StreetSouth CourtBryant StreetRamona Street Alma Street Coastland Drive Colorado Avenue Byron Street Middlefield Road Gaspar Court Moreno Avenue Coastland Drive El Carmelo Avenue RosewoodD Campesino Avenue Dymond Ct Martinsen Ct Ramona Street Bryant Street Towle Way Towle Place Wellsbury Ct AvalonCourt FlowersLane Mackall Way Loma Verde Avenue KiplingStreet Cowper Street South Court Waverley StreetEl Verano Avenue Wellsbury Way La Middlefield Road St Claire Drive Alger Drive Ashton Avenue St Michael DriveSt Michael Drive Maureen Avenue Cowper Court Rambow Drive East Meadow Drive Ashton Court Murdoch DriveCowperStreet Murdoch Ct St Michael Court MayCourt Mayview Avenue Middlefield Road Ensign Way Bibbits Drive Gailen CtGailen Avenue Grove Avenue San Antonio Avenue Commercial Street Industrial Avenue Bibbits Drive Charleston Road Fabian Way T East Meadow Drive Grove Avenue Christine Drive Corina Way Ross Road Corina W ay Louis Road Nathan Way Transport Street Ortega Court East Meadow Drive yneCourt alisman Loma Verde Avenue Allen Court Ross Court Loma Verde Pl Ames Avenue Richardson Court Holly Oak Drive Ames Avenue CorkOakWay Middlefield Road A mes Ct Ames Avenue Ross Road Rorke Way RorkeWay Stone LaneToyon Place Torreya Court Lupine Avenue Thornwood Drive DriftwoodDrive Talisman Drive Arbutus AvenueRoss Road Louis Road Aspen WayEvergreen Drive East Meadow Drive Corporation WayElwell Court Janice Way East Mead ow Circle East Meadow Circle GreerRoad Bayshore Freeway rive Ellsworth PlaceSan Carlos Court Wintergreen Way SutterAvenue Sutter Avenue Clara Drive Price CourtStern Avenue Colorado Avenue Randers Ct Ross Road Sycamore Drive Sevyson Ct Stelling Drive Ross Road David Avenue MurrayWay Stelling DriveStelling Ct ManchesterCourt Kenneth Drive ThomasDriveGreer Road Stockton Place Vernon Terrace Louis Road Janice Way Thomas DriveKenneth Drive Loma Verde Avenue CliftonCourtElbridgeWay Clara Drive BautistaCourt Stockton Place Morris Drive Maddux Drive Piers Ct Louis Road Moraga Ct Old Page Mill Road D CoyoteHillRoad Hillview Avenue Porter Drive Hillview Avenue Hanover Street Foothill Expressway Miranda Avenue Stanford Avenue Amherst Street Columbia StreetBowdoin Street Dartmouth Street Hanover Street College Avenue California Avenue Hanover Street Ramos Way (Private) Page Mill Road Hansen Way Hanover Street Arastradero Road Miranda Avenue e Hill Avenue anuela Avenue Miranda Avenue Laguna Ct Barron Avenue Josina Avenue Kendall Avenue Tippawingo St Julie Ct Matadero Avenue Ilima Way Ilima Court Laguna Oaks Pl Carlitos Ct La CalleLaguna Avenue ElCerrit Paradise Way Roble Ridge (Private) LaMataWay Chimalus Drive Matader o Avenue oRoad Paul Avenue Kendall Avenue Whitsell Avenue Barron Avenue Los Robles Avenue Lag u na Way ShaunaLane La Para Avenue San Jude Avenue El Centro Street TimlottLa Jennifer Way Magnolia Dr North La Donna Avenue LosRoblesAvenue Rinc Manzana Lane onCircle Crosby Pl Georgia Av enue Hubbartt Drive Willmar Drive Donald Drive Arastradero Road Foothill Expres La Para Avenue San Jude Avenue Magnolia Drive Military Way Arbol Drive Orme Street Fernando Avenue Matadero Avenue Lambert Avenue Hansen Way El Camino Real Margarita Avenue Matadero Avenue Wilton Avenue Oxford Avenue Harvard Street California Avenue Wellesley Street Princeton StreetOberlin Street Cornell Street Cambridge Avenue College AvenueWilliams Street Yale Street Staunton Court Oxford AvenueEl Camino Real Churchill Avenue Park Boulevard Park Avenue Escobita Aven ue Churchill Avenue Sequoia Avenue Mariposa Avenue Castilleja Avenue Miramonte Avenue Madron o Aven u e Portola Avenu e Manzanita Avenue Coleridge Avenue Leland Avenue Stanford AvenueBirch Street Ash Street Lowell Avenue Alma Street Tennyson Avenue Grant Avenue Sheridan AvenueJacaranda Lane El Camino Real Sherman Avenue Ash Street Page Mill Road Mimosa Lane Chestnut Avenue Portage Avenue Pepper Avenue Olive Avenue Acacia Avenue Emerson Street Park Boulevard Orinda Street Birch Street Ash Street Page Mill Road Ash Street Park Boulevard College Avenue Cambridge Avenue New Mayfield Lane Birch Street California Avenue Park Boulevard Nogal Lane Rinconada Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Park Boulevard Seale Avenue Washington Avenue Santa Rita Avenue WaverleyStree Bryant Street High Street Emerson Street Colorado AvenueStreet Emerson Street Ramona Street Bryant Street South Court El Dorado AvenueAlma Street Alma Street HighStreet t Emerson Waverley Oaks Washington Avenue Bryant Street South Court Waverley Street Emerson StreetNevada Avenue North California Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Ramona Street High Street North California Avenue Oregon Expressway Marion Avenue Ramona Street Colorado Avenue Waverley Street Kipling Street South Court Cowper Street Anton CourtNevada Avenue Tasso Street Tasso Street Oregon Avenue Marion Pl Webster Street Middlefield Road Ross Road Warren Way El Cajon Way Embarcadero RoadPrimrose Way Iris Way Tulip Lane Tulip Lane Garland Drive Louis Road Greer Road MortonStreet Greer Road Hamilton Avenue Hilbar LaneAlannah Ct Edge Rhodes Drive Marshall Drive FieldinMoreno AvenueMarshallDrive Dennis Drive Agnes Way Oregon AvenueBlair Court Santa Ana Street Elsinore DriveElsinore CourtEl Cajon Way Greer RoadNorth California Avenue gDrive Colorado Avenue Sycamore Drive Amarillo Avenue VanAukenCircle Bruce Drive Colonial Lane Moreno Avenue Celia Drive Burnham Way Greer Road Indian Drive Elmdale Pl C Tanland Drive Moreno Avenue Amarillo Avenue West Bayshore Road Sandra Place Clara DriveColorado Avenue Greer Road Colorado Avenue Simkins Court Otterson CtHiggins PlaceLawrence Lane Maddux Drive Genevieve Ct MetroCircle MoffettCircle Greer Road East Bayshore Road ardinalWay Santa Catalina Street ArrowheadWayAztec Way Chabot Terrace Oregon Avenue Carmel Drive SierraCourt StFrancisDrive West Bayshore Road Tanland Drive East Bayshore Road woodDrive Edgewood Drive WildwoodLane Ivy Lane East Bayshore Road St Francis Drive Wildwood Lane Watson Court Laura Lane Sandalwood Ct O'Brine Lane (Private) Embarcadero Road FaberPlace Embarcadero Road Geng Road Embarcadero Way E Sand Hill Road Quarry Road Welch Road Arboretum Road Quarry Road Sand Hill Road Homer Avenue Lane 8 West Medical Foundation Way Lane 7 West Lane 7 East Embarcadero Road Encina Avenue El Camino Real Urban Lane Wells Avenue Forest Avenue High Street Emerson Street Channing Avenue Alma Street Alma Street PaloAltoA El Camino Real venue Mitchell Lane Hawthorne Avenue Everett Avenue Lytton Avenue Lane 15 E High Street Alma Street Bryant Street Lane 6 E Lane 11 W Lane 21High Street Gilman Street Hamilton Avenue University Avenue Bryant Court Lane 30 Florence Street Kipling Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Ruthven Avenue Hawthorne Avenue Lane 33 PaloAltoAvenue Everett Avenue Poe Street Waverley Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Palo Alto Avenue Webster Street Everett Court Lytton Avenue Byron Street Fulton StreetMiddlefield Road Churchill Avenue Lowell Avenue Seale AvenueTennyson Avenue Melville Avenue Cowper Street Tasso Street Webster Street Byron Street North California Avenue Coleridge Avenue Waverley Street Bryant Street Emerson Street Kellogg Avenue Kingsley Avenue Portal Place Ross Road Oregon Avenue Garland Drive Lane A West Lane B West Lane B East Lane D West Lane 59 East Whitman Court Kellogg AvenueEmbarcadero Road Kingsley Avenue Lincoln AvenueAddison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Forest Avenue Downing Lane Homer Avenue Lane D East Lane 39 Lane 56 Hamilton Avenue Webster Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant StreetRamona Street Addison AvenueScott Street Byron Street Palo Hale Street Seneca Street Lytton Avenue Guinda Street PaloAltoAvenue Fulton StreetMiddlefield Road Forest Avenue Webster Street Kellogg Avenue Middlefield Road Byron Street Webster Street Cowper Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Boyce Avenue Forest AvenueHamilton Avenue Homer AvenueGuinda Street Middlefield Road Channing Avenue AltoAvenue Chaucer Street Chaucer Street University Avenue Channing Avenue Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Regent Pl Guinda StreetLincoln Avenue Fulton Street Melville Avenue Byron Street Kingsley Avenue Melville Avenue Hamilton AvenueHamilton Court Forest AvenueForest Ct Marlowe St Maple Stree Palm Street Somerset Pl Pitman Avenue Fife Avenue Forest Avenue Dana Avenue Lincoln Avenue University Avenue Coleridge Avenue Lowell Avenue Fulton StreetCowper Street Tennyson Avenue Seale Avenue Northampton Drive West Greenwich Pl Middlefield Road Newell RoadGuinda Street East Greenwich Pl Southampton Drive Webster Street Kirby Pl Kent Place Tevis Pl Martin Avenue Center Drive Harriet Street Wils o n S t r e e t Cedar Street Harker Avenue Greenwood Avenue Hutchinson Avenue Channing Avenue Hopkins Avenue Embarcadero Road Ashby Drive Dana Avenue Hamilton Avenue Pitman Avenue Southwood Drive West CrescentDrive C University Avenue Center Drive East Crescen Arcadia Place Louisa Court Newell Pl Sharon Ct Erstwild Court Walter Hays Drive Walnut Drive Newell Road Parkinson AvenuePine Street Mark Twain Street Louis RoadBarbara Drive Primrose Way Iris Way Embarcadero Road Walter Hays Drive Lois Lane Jordan Pl Lois Lane Heather Lane Bret Harte Street Stanley Way De Soto DriveDe Soto Drive Alester Avenue Walter Hays Drive Channing Avenue Iris Way tDrive Dana Avenue Hamilton AvenueNewell RoadKings Lane Edgewood Drive Island Drive Jefferson Drive JacksonDrive Patricia LaneMadison Way EdgewoodDrive Ramona Street Addison AvenueChanning Avenue Waverley Street Tennyson Avenue Seale Avenue Middlefield Road Byron StreetWebster Street Marion AvenueWelch Road Sedro Lane Peral Lane McGregor Way Monroe Drive Silva Avenue Silva Court Miller Court Briarwood Way Driscoll Place Paulsen Ln Community Lane Lane 15 E Court Madeline Ct David Ct Green Ct Oregon Expressway Oregon Expressway Sheridan Avenue Page Mill Road Page Mill Road Foothill Expressway Miranda Avenue Foothill Expressway Cerrito Way Emerson Street Miranda Avenue Lane 20 WLane 20 E Oregon ExpresswayUniversity Avenue Jacob's Ct CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW Emerson Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Clark Way Durand Way Sand Hill Road Swain Way Clark Way Mosher Way Charles Marx Way Orchard Lane Vineyard Lane Oak Road Sand Hill Road Sand Hill Road Sand Hill Road Hillv Lane 66 Bryant Street Ramona Street Blake Wilbur Drive West Charleston Road Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway West Bayshore Road East Bays hore Road East Bayshore Road East Bays hore Road West Bayshore Road East Bays hore Road Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Fabian Way Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Palo Road Shopping Center Way Shopping Center Way Shopping Center Way London Plane Way Plum Lane Sweet Olive Wa y Pear Lane Lane 66 La Selva Drive Grove Ct Stanford Avenue Lane 12 WLane 5 E Lasuen Street Serra Mall Escondido Road Olmsted Road Phillips Road Pistache Place Santa Ynez Street Lane B Lane C El Dorado Avenue Oak Creek Drive Clara Drive Bellview Dr Everett Avenue Homer Avenue La Calle SAN ANTONIO AVENUE Matadero Ave Colorado Pl Los Robles Avenue Timlott Ct Vista Villa PaloAltoAvenu e Lane La Donna Avenue Cass Way Kenneth Drive Fabian Way Page Mill Road Middlefield RoadChristine Drive Louis Road Charleston Road Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Chimalus Drive Hanover Street Community Lane Greenwood Avenue Harker Avenue Parkinson Avenue Avenue Maplewood Pl Mackay Drive Santa Teresa Lane Byron Street Varian Way Quail DrQuail Dr Paloma Dr Paloma Dr Trinity Ln Heron Wy Feather Ln Stanislaus LnTuolu mne Ln Plover Ln Sandpiper Ln Curlew Ln Mallard LnEgret Ln Klamath Ln Deodar StAlder LnSpruce Ln Rickey's Ln Juniper Way Rickey's Wy Rickey's Wy Rickey's Wy Juniper Lane Emerson Street Boronda Lane Tahoe Lane Lake Avenue Donner Lane Almanor Lane Fallen Leaf Street Berryes sa Street Cashel StNoble St Hettinger Ln Pratt Ln Emma Court Galvez Mall Federation Way Abrams Court Allardice Way Alta Road Alvarado CtAlvarado Row Angell Court Arguello Way Arguello Way Avery Mall Ayrshire Farm Lane Barnes CourtBonair Siding Bowdoin Street Cabrillo Avenue Cabrillo Avenue Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus DriveCampus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus DriveCampus Drive Campus Drive Capistrano Way Casanueva Place Cathcart Way Cedro Way Cedro Way Churchill Mall Comstock Circle Aboretum Road Aboretum Road Blackwelder Court Campus Drive Cathcart Way Constanzo Street Cooksey Lane Coronado Avenue Cottrell Way Cottrell Way Cowell Ln Crothers Way Dolores Street Dolores Street Dudley Lane Duena Street Electioneer Road Escondido Mall Escondido Mall Escondido Road Escondido Road Escondido Road Esplanada Way Estudillo Road Fremont Road Frenchmans Road Frenchmans Road Galvez Mall Alvarado Row Galvez Street Galvez Street Galvez Street Gerona Road Gerona Road El Escarpado Gerona Road Hoskins Court Hulme Court JenkinsCourt Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Knight Way Lagunita Drive Lane L L ane W Lasuen Mall Lasuen Mall Lasuen Mall Lasuen Street Lathrop Drive Lathrop Drive Lathrop Place Lathrop Drive Links RoadLinks Road Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita DriveLomitaCourt Lom ita Mall Los Arboles Avenue Masters Mall Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue McFarland Court Mears CourtMears Court Memorial Way Mirada Avenue Mirada Avenue Museum Way N Service Road N Tolman Ln Nelson Mall Nelson Road North-South Axis Oberlin St Comstock Circle Escondido Mall Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Palm Drive Palm Drive Pampas Lane Panama Mall Panama Mall Panama Street Panama Street Pearce Mitchell Pl Peter Coutts Circle Peter Coutts Road Peter Coutts Road Pine Hill Court Pine Hill Road Quarry Extension Quarry Road Quillen Ct Raimundo Way Rai m undo Wa y Raimundo Way Roble Drive Rosse Lane Roth Way Roth Way Roth Way Running Farm Lane Ryan Court S Service Road S Tolman Ln Salvatierra Street Salvatierra St Salvatierra W alk Samuel Morris Wy San Francisco Terrace San Francisco CourtSan Juan St San Juan St San Rafael Pl Santa Fe Avenue Santa Maria Avenue Santa Teresa Street Santa Teresa Street Santa Ynez Street Searsville Road Sequoia Wy Serra Mall Serra Street Serra Street Serra Street Sonoma Terrace Stanford Avenue Stanford Avenue Stock Farm R oad Thoburn Court Tolman DriveValdez Place Valparaiso Street Vernier Place Via Ortega Via Palou Via Pueblo Mall Welch Road Wellesley St Wilbur Way Wing Place Yale St Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Hawthorne Avenue Lytton Avenue Alpine Acce ss Road Nathan Abbott Way Sam McDonald Road Sam McDonald Mall Vista Lane Bowdoin Lane Arguello Way Governors Avenue Governors Avenue Governors Avenue S Governors Lane Pasteur Drive Lagunita Drive Alma Village Lane Alma Village Circle R e s e r v oir R o a d Reservoir Road Reservoir Road Ranch Road Ryan Lane O'Connor Lane Gene CtBrassinga Ct Cole Ct Birch Street Arboretum Road Welch RoadPasteur Drive Pasteur Drive This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Commercial & RT Zoning Districts - Office is a Permitted Use w/ Possible GF & Size Limitations ROLM & RP Zoning Districts - Office and R & D is a Permitted Use MOR Zoning District - Medical Office is a Permitted Use PF Zoning District - Office is a Conditional Use GM Zoning District - R & D is a Permitted Use & Office is a Conditional Use Stanford Research Park Annual Office and R&D Cap Area Boundaries City Jurisdictional Limits abc Note: Other uses where Office may be an "accessory use" maybe conditionally permitted in Residential Zoning Districts 0'2200' Of f i c e a n d R & D An n u a l C a p B o u n d a r i e s Ar e a M a p CITY O F PALO A L TO I N C O R P O R ATE D C ALIFOR N IA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f A P RIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2015 City of Palo Alto RRivera, 2015-10-01 11:54:38 (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\meta\view.mdb) Exhibit A Certificate Of Completion Envelope Number: 058EA42C633E4A 139788084 711 CF4A49 Subject: Please DocuSign this document: ORD 5357 Office Growth Meter October 1 2015.pdf Source Envelope: Document Pages: 6 Certificate Pages: 5 AutoNav: Enabled Envelopeld Stamping: Enabled Record Tracking Status: Original 11/3/201510:58:11 AM PT Signer Events Cara Silver cara.silver@cityofpaloalto.org Senior Assistant City Attorney City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Accepted: 7/15/2015 5:07:16 PM PT ID: 11910ed1-61d1-4ff3-9cf9-f4eb5a0768e2 Hillary Gitelman Hillary.Gitelman@CityofPaloAito.org Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered ID: James Keene james.keene@cityofpaloalto.org City Manager City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Accepted: 4/14/2015 5:40:07 PM PT I D: 44fe333a-6a81-4cb 7 -b 7 d4-9254 73ac82e3 In Person Signer Events Editor Delivery Events Agent Delivery Events Intermediary Delivery Events Signatures: 3 Initials: 0 Holder: Kim Lunt kimberly.lunt@cityofpaloalto.org Signature ((DocuSigned by; ~:.0~:::,. Using IP Address: 199.33.32.254 ('UDocuSigned by: ~::;,.:~~ Using IP Address: 199.33.32.254 Using IP Address: 199.33.32.254 Signature Status Status Status Docu~. iii SiCU.lD Status: Completed Envelope Originator: Kim Lunt 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto , CA 94301 kimberly.lunt@cityofpaloalto.org IP Address: 199.33 .32.254 Location: DocuSign Timestamp Sent: 11/3/201511:01:21 AM PT Viewed: 11/3/2015 11 :27:49 AM PT Signed: 11/3/201512:46:40 PM PT Sent: 11/3/2015 12:46:41 PM PT Viewed: 11/3/2015 12:50:43 PM PT Signed: 11/3/201512:51 :05 PM PT Sent: 11/3/2015 12:51 :07 PM PT Viewed: 11/13/2015 2:33:24 PM PT Signed: 11/13/2015 2:33:32 PM PT Timestamp Timestamp Timestamp Timestamp INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 1 CITY OF PALO ALTO INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE February 17, 2016 Pursuant to the authority granted by Palo Alto Municipal Code (“PAMC”) Section 18.85.208, the following Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit Program Guideline (“Guideline”) is hereby adopted and determined to be desirable for the implementation and enforcement of PAMC Section 18.85.200 (Annual Office Limit) of PAMC Chapter 18.85 (Interim Zoning Ordinances). All defined terms used in this Guideline shall have the meaning set forth in PAMC Section 18.85.201. Overview: The purpose of this Guideline is to implement the annual limit on Office/R&D development adopted by Ordinance Number 5357 on October 26, 2015. The annual limit was adopted on an interim basis for two years (until November 26, 2017) or until the Comprehensive Plan Update is completed, whichever occurs first. No more than 50,000 gross square feet of new Office/R&D development can be approved within a given fiscal year in the subset of the City shown in Attachment A and adopted as Exhibit A of Ordinance 5357. This Guideline is intended to implement the interim annual limit in Fiscal Year 2015/16 and Fiscal Year 2016/17. Program Guideline: A. Applicability. This Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit Program Guideline is applicable to all discretionary development applications proposing an increase in gross square footage devoted to one or more of the following uses,1 when the site is located within the area shown on Exhibit A of Ordinance 5357: • Research & Development as defined in PAMC Section 18.04.030(123) • Administrative Office Services as defined in PAMC Section 18.04.030(6) • General Business Office as defined in PAMC Section 18.04.030(61) • Medical Office as defined in PAMC Section 18.04.030(95) • Professional Office as defined in PAMC Section 18.04.030(116). Building permit applications and associated use and occupancy certificates are not discretionary and applications proposing use or reuse of existing building space via non-discretionary applications are not subject to the Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit. B. Exemptions. Exempted applications, as defined below, shall be processed in accordance with applicable sections of the PAMC without regard to the 1 The text of the cited definitions is included in Attachment B. INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 2 procedures established by this Guideline. The decision to approve or disapprove such applications shall be appealable to the City Council in accordance with existing provisions of the PAMC. An applicant may request in writing a formal determination that a pending application is exempt pursuant to one of the exemptions outlined below at any time. The resulting written determination shall be considered a code interpretation that is appealable to the City Council consistent with Section 18.01.025 of the PAMC. 1. Accessory office space that is incidental to and customarily associated with a principal use or facility. Examples include a small office space used in conjunction with a retail establishment, a hotel, a school, or a religious institution. 2. City office space. 3. Any application proposing less than 2,000 new gross square feet of Research & Development, Administrative Office Services, General Business Office, and/or Professional Office, where such application does not also involve the Medical Office exemption in item (4) below. 4. Any application proposing a project containing less than 5,000 new gross square feet of Medical Office, where such application does not also involve the exemption in item (3) above. 5. “Pipeline Projects” as follows: a. Projects which obtained a planning entitlement prior to the effective date of Ordinance 5357 (November 25, 2015). b. Projects which are the subject of a planning entitlement application that was submitted to the City in 2013 or 2014 and deemed complete by the City on or before March 31, 2015. C. “Self-Mitigating Projects” which provide rental housing for more members of the workforce than would be employed in the project, and which provide substantial transportation demand management (TDM) strategies either individually or in combination with other projects or programs such that parking and traffic conditions in the site vicinity would be improved. D. Economic Hardship Waiver or Adjustment. An applicant may request that requirements of Ordinance 5357 be adjusted or waived based upon showing that applying the requirements of Ordinance 5357 would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property. INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 3 1. The applicant shall bear the burden of presenting evidence to support a hardship-related waiver or modification and shall submit an economic analysis along with an explanation of the factual and legal basis for the claim to the Director of Planning. 2. The Director of Planning shall review the request and forward it to the City Council with a recommendation within 60 days. The City Council shall consider the request at a noticed public meeting, along with the economic analysis and the Director’s recommendation, and provide a final decision to grant or deny the request. E. Processing and review of applications subject to the Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit. 1. Applications subject to the Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit shall be processed in accordance with the PAMC and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), except that neither the Director of Planning nor the City Council shall adopt the CEQA document or act upon any such applications between July 1 and March 31 of each year. 2. The Director of Planning shall review all such applications that are pending final action by the Director of Planning or City Council as of the close of business on March 31 of each year, and determine which applications are eligible for consideration. a. Pending applications only become eligible for consideration if they have been recommended for approval by the Architectural Review Board (ARB) and the Planning & Transportation Commission (PTC – for Site and Design and rezoning applications only), and if review pursuant to CEQA has been completed. For purposes of this section, subdivision requests accompanying entitlement applications do not need to be submitted or processed. b. Applications that are not eligible for consideration at the close of business on March 31 will be reviewed for eligibility in the following fiscal year unless the 50,000 square foot annual limit has not been reached as described in paragraph (c) below. In this case, additional applications may become eligible and be considered between March 31 and June 30, as long as the 50,000 square foot annual limit is not reached. 3. If the sum total of new square footage proposed by all eligible applications on the close of business on March 31 is 50,000 square feet or less, all of the applications will be acted upon by the approving authority established in the PAMC. For example, the Director of Planning would act upon Architectural Review applications, and that action would be appealable to the City Council. INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 4 The City Council would act upon applications requiring Site and Design or rezoning. 4. If the sum total of new square footage proposed by all eligible applications on the close of business on March 31 is greater than 50,000 square feet, the Director of Planning shall prepare the applications for hearing by the City Council as follows: a. At an initial hearing, the Director shall provide the City Council with all pending applications, including required CEQA documents, recommended findings and conditions of approval. Each applicant will be invited to present their project at the initial hearing, and the City Council may provide comments and direction regarding the recommended findings and conditions. The initial review of the eligible projects by the City Council may be spread over more than one meeting if time does not allow review of all projects on one meeting agenda. i. If the City Council is unable to support approval of the required CEQA document or the required findings for any of the eligible projects, it may direct staff to prepare findings for denial or impose conditions that will permit it to make the necessary findings. ii. Projects that are denied based upon not meeting required findings for approval are no longer eligible projects and the applicant must submit a new planning entitlement for a substantially different project for proposed development at the same site. b. At a second public hearing, the Director shall provide the City Council with a recommended ranking of the eligible applications using the scoring criteria included below. The Director may convene a panel consisting of the Chair of the ARB and the Chair of the PTC to assist in the ranking. At the second public hearing, the City Council shall review the Director’s recommendation and select the projects that shall receive an office/R&D allocation. The projects selected shall receive planning entitlement approval at the same hearing, which shall occur before the end of the fiscal year on June 30. The City Council shall approve, deny, or approve as modified the project(s) receiving an office/R&D allocation. c. Any application that is not approved by the City Council solely because it exceeds the office/R&D allocation shall be denied unless the applicant requests that the project be rolled over for consideration in the next fiscal year. In addition, the applicant may request his/her application be rolled over to the next fiscal year if the City Council INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 5 proposes to modify the project by reducing its square footage and the applicant declines to do so. A project can be rolled over only one time. F. Expiration of Office/R&D Allocation. Once a project has been approved, all applicable entitlement timelines apply to the project, including the expiration of approvals. If an entitlement expires, the approved allocation also expires. The allocation cannot be carried over to another development proposal; it must be used for the approved project or it will be lost. G. Review Criteria and Scoring. 1. Eligible applications that were deemed complete by the City between March 31 and June 15, 2015 shall have priority over other projects and shall be evaluated against each other and granted an allocation before other eligible applications are considered 2. Review criteria are established in Ordinance 5347 as follows: Impacts a. The density of the development in the context of underlying zoning and the site surroundings; and b. The ability to avoid or address potential impacts on traffic and parking; Design c. The quality of design, including the attention to human scale where the building(s) meet the street, the compatibility with surroundings, and the overall architectural quality; and Environmental Quality d. Environmental quality Public Benefit e. The value to the community of public benefits offered; and Uses f. Mixed use projects including substantial housing; and g. Mixed use projects including retail; and h. Mixed use projects that provide space for cultural amenities such as but not limited to art galleries and studios 3. The Director’s recommendation shall be based on an evaluation of eligible applications weighting the review criteria as shown in the score card in Table 1, below. All projects will be ranked against each other according to the point totals they receive. 4. The City Council may accept the Director’s recommendation or modify it based on its independent review of the criteria, and shall determine which eligible applications will be approved, approved with modifications, or INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 6 denied, such that the total square footage approved does not exceed 50,000 new gross square feet of the uses listed in Section A, above. INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 7 Table 1. Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit Scoring (One Score Card Shall be Used to Evaluate Each Eligible Application) Project Address and APN: Net New Square Footage Requested: Brief Project Description: Scoring Criterion Total Possible Score Considerations for Each Criterion Project Score Explanation 1. Impacts 30 a. The density of the development in the context of underlying zoning and the site surroundings 10 Projects will be ranked against each other, with the most points awarded to the project that does not require variances or exceptions from applicable quantitative standards of the code and that is deemed to be most consistent in terms of its mass and scale with nearby buildings. 1 b. The ability to avoid or address potential impacts on traffic and parking 20 Projects will be ranked against each other, with the most points awarded to the project resulting in the least traffic and the least potential for unmet parking demand, regardless of whether these impacts are considered significant pursuant to CEQA. 2. Design 20 c. The quality of design, including the attention to human scale where the building(s) meet the street, the compatibility with surroundings, and the overall architectural quality 20 Projects will be ranked against each other, with the most points awarded to the project with the highest quality of design. Rankings will consider how the buildings address the street and their compatibility with surrounding buildings. INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 8 Scoring Criterion Total Possible Score Considerations for Each Criterion Project Score Explanation 3. Environmental Quality 20 a. Environmental quality 20 Projects will be ranked against each other, with the most points awarded to project that avoids significant environmental impacts under CEQA and that is designed to enhance the built and natural environment. Enhancements may include, but are not limited to, incorporation of energy conservation, storm water, and sustainability features above and beyond legal requirements, as well as incorporation of vegetation/landscaping and bird friendly design. 4. Public Benefit 20 b. The value to the community of public benefits offered 20 Eligible projects will be compared to each other in terms of their value to the community, with the top project receiving up to 20 points and other projects receiving lower rankings based on their relative benefits. For purposes of this section, the value of public benefits may be qualitative or quantitative.2 5. Uses 20 c. Mixed use projects including substantial housing 10 Projects will be ranked against each other with the most points awarded to the project with the greatest number of dwelling units.3 d. Mixed use projects including retail 5 Projects will be ranked against each other based on their mix of uses, including the quantity of ground floor retail.3 e. Mixed use projects that provide space for cultural amenities such as but not limited to art galleries and studios 5 Projects will be ranked against each other based on their mix of uses, including retail or personal services uses (galleries or studios) for use by artists, or space for other cultural uses. A project’s public art requirement does not count towards this.3 INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 9 Notes: 1. For purposes of this section, exceptions to the “Build to Line” standard and requests for parking reductions per PAMC Section 18.52.050 shall not be considered. Section 18.52.050 can be used to allow parking adjustments based on provision of on-site amenities, shared parking, senior housing, affordable housing, housing near transit, and TDM plans. 2. Benefits may be intrinsic to the project, such as affordable housing units, publicly accessible open spaces, publicly accessible off-street parking, community meeting space, or subsidized rent for community-serving non-profits. Benefits may also be extrinsic improvements or voluntary financial contributions to larger community initiatives. Some benefits may be quantifiable and some may not. 3. By rewarding provision of uses that may not be permitted in all zoning districts, this section effectively gives some priority to those projects that are proposed within districts that allow the desired uses (when those uses are incorporated into the proposed project). INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 10 Attachment A Map of Areas Subject to the Interim Office/R&D Annual Limit Attachment B Definitions of Relevant Office and R&D Uses from the Palo Alto Zoning Ordinance Land Use Code Section Definition Research & Development 18.04.030(123) "Research and development" means a use engaged in the study, testing, engineering, product design, analysis and development of devices, products, processes, or services related to current or new technologies. Research and development may include limited manufacturing, fabricating, processing, assembling or storage of prototypes, devices, compounds, products or materials, or similar related activities, where such activities are incidental to research, development or evaluation. Examples of "research and development" uses include, but are not limited to, computer software and hardware firms, computer peripherals and related products, electronic research firms, biotechnical and biomedical firms, instrument analysis, genomics, robotics and pharmaceutical research laboratories, and related educational development. Research and development may include the storage or use of hazardous materials in excess of the exempt quantities listed in Title 15 of the Municipal Code, or etiological (biological) agents up to and including Risk Group 3 or Bio Safety Level 3 classifications as defined by the National Institute of Health (NIH) or the Center for Disease Control (CDC). Higher classification levels of etiological (biological) agents are not allowed without express permission of the City Manager, Fire Chief, and Police Chief. Related administrative uses such as finance, legal, human resources, management, marketing, sales, accounting, purchasing, or corporate offices; provisions of services to others on or off-site; and related educational uses may also be included provided they remain primarily supportive of the primary uses of "research and development" and are part of the same research and development firm. Administrative Office Services 18.040.030(6) "Administrative office services" means offices and service facilities performing headquarters, regional, or other level management and administrative services for firms and institutions. General Business Office 18.040.030(61) "General business office" means a use principally providing services to individuals, firms, or other entities, including but not limited to real estate, insurance, property management, title companies, investment, personnel, travel, and similar services. Medical Office 18.04.030(95) "Medical office" means a use providing consultation, diagnosis, therapeutic, preventive, or corrective personal treatment services by doctors, dentists, medical and dental laboratories, and similar practitioners of medical and healing arts for humans, licensed for such practice by the state of California. Incidental medical and/or dental research within the office is considered part of the office use, where it supports the on-site patient services. Medical office use does not include the storage or use of hazardous materials in excess of the permit quantities as defined in Title 15 of the Municipal Code. Medical gas storage or use shall be allowed up to 1,008 cubic feet per gas type and flammable liquids storage and use shall be INTERIM OFFICE/R&D ANNUAL LIMIT GUIDELINE Revised February17, 2016 Page 12 Land Use Code Section Definition allowed up to 20 gallons total (including waste). Professional Office 18.04.030(116) "Professional office" means a use providing professional or consulting services in the fields of law, architecture and architectural design, engineering, accounting, and similar professions, including associated product testing and prototype development, but excluding product manufacturing or assembly and excluding the storage or use of hazardous materials in excess of permit quantities prescribed in Title 15 of the Municipal Code. _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Planning & Transportation Commission 1 Draft Meeting Minutes 2 July 26, 2017 3 Excerpt 4 5 4. PUBLIC HEARING. Recommendation to the City Council Regarding an Extension of 6 Interim Ordinance 5357 Imposing an Annual Limit of 50,000 Net New Square Feet of 7 Office/R&D Uses in Designated Areas of City to June 30, 2018 and Finding That the 8 Proposed Ordinance is Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 9 in Accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). For More Information, 10 Contact Clare Campbell at clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org. 11 12 Acting Chair Waldfogel: Ok, let's move on to Item Number 4, public hearing. I’d just like to 13 remind everybody that we have taken up this issue of the office cap several times previously. 14 Tonight we're discussing a short extension to give the Council time to sort out what they want 15 to do. That said if anybody feels strongly about debating it tonight we can do that, but if we 16 don't then we can move it along, perhaps move it along quickly. So let’s just see what, where 17 the sentiment is. 18 19 Hillary Gitelman, Planning Director: Thank you, Chair [Note-Acting] Waldfogel. Clare Campbell 20 is here to give the brief presentation. This is a public hearing so we'd invite any public 21 comments after staff presentation and then we're interested in any comments from the 22 Commission. We're hoping you will recommend adoption of this extension. 23 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. 1 Clare Campbell, Senior Planner: Thank you, good evening Commissioners; Clare Campbell, 2 Senior Planner. The Planning Commission as you've just mentioned has reviewed this annual 3 office ordinance just recently in a study session in March. So since this was relatively recent 4 and for the purposes of managing our time tonight I’ll just provide a very high level overview of 5 the ordinance in my present presentation. And I can answer any specific questions you may 6 have afterwards. 7 8 So the ordinance was adopted in 2015, October 2015, and it applies to two fiscal years 2016 9 and 2017. And it will expire later this year in November. The interim ordinance affects all office 10 and Research and Development (R&D) development within defined areas in the City and that 11 includes the Downtown area, the El Camino corridor, and the California Avenue area. So earlier 12 this year Council gave directions specifically to staff to prepare a permanent annual office limit 13 ordinance and this effort was to be separate from the Comprehensive Plan update. So staff is 14 proposing an extension of the interim ordinance to give staff the time needed to prepare the 15 permanent ordinance and to assure there's no lapse in the regulations. And so no current, 16 currently no changes are being proposed to this existing ordinance. The proposed extension 17 would be for seven months with the expiration to coincide with the end of fiscal year 2018. 18 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. So as mentioned earlier the Commission did conduct a study session in March where staff 1 received a range of comments on the permanent annual office limit regulations and your 2 comments will be forwarded to Council in September when they will provide direction to staff 3 on the permanent ordinance. So this slide here gives you an overview of the next steps and 4 general timeline of the office limit. So tonight we're reviewing with you the interim office 5 extension. In September we're going to go back to Council to review the extension, take action 6 on the extension of the interim ordinance, and then get comments back from them on the 7 permanent ordinance. And then in early spring next year we're going to come back to you with 8 a draft ordinance for the permanent language and then shortly after that in the late spring 9 we're going to go to Council for review of that ordinance. So with all of his efforts we should be 10 on track to have a permanent ordinance in place no later than June 30, 2018, when the interim 11 ordinance expires. So this concludes my presentation and we're available to answer any 12 questions. Thank you. 13 14 Acting Chair Waldfogel: Great, thank you very much. I have two speaker cards so let's go to the 15 public speakers before we move on to Commissioner discussion. The two are Hamilton 16 Hitchings and Bob Moss. So let's take a Mr. Hitchings first. 17 18 Hamilton Hitchings: Good evening, my name is Hamilton Hitchings and I was one of the 19 members of the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) for the Comprehensive Plan update although 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. these comments are my own. In order to reduce greenhouse gases and traffic congestion the 1 State of California is trying to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and so should Palo Alto. 2 This means placing housing near jobs to reduce and ideally eliminate commutes thus taking 3 vehicles off the road. Palo Alto has some unique opportunities to do this such as by building 4 housing targeted for local workers such as those Downtown at Stanford Research Park (SRP), 5 Stanford Hospital, and Stanford. While Palo Alto may not be able to legislate a housing 6 requirement for local workers in many cases the [property] owners can deed restrict them as 7 an incentive to receive permits for zoning extensions. A perfect example could be SRP which is 8 considering adding housing along El Camino, but if that housing was limited to SRP employees 9 and Stanford employees not only would it provide more housing, but it would eliminate many 10 commuters and take cars off the road during rush hour. 11 12 Over the last decade Downtown [unintelligible] added numerous build office buildings. I'm not 13 sure the exact count, but I think it's around 20 versus almost no if not 0 office, I mean 14 apartment buildings. This is because the profit per square foot is higher for office buildings. It 15 means that every job, every new job added will likely mean a new commuter into Palo Alto for 16 the next 50 to 100 years and possibly beyond that. Thus, we have had an over development of 17 office buildings and under development of new housing Downtown. Furthermore, many of 18 these office buildings have been under parked and the result has now we now have 1,500 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Downtown workers parking in nearby residential neighborhoods. Almost no other city in the 1 Bay Area has this. 2 3 Palo Alto has a 3:1 housing to working adult ratio which is one of the highest in the nation 4 versus Santa Clara’s 1:1 ratio. That means if we do not build any additional housing, any 5 additional office space for the next 50 years we would still have a major imbalance and a large 6 number of commuters coming into the City. Every square foot of office space added is one less 7 square foot of housing built. Since the office cap ordinance was put in place applications for 8 new office development have slowed considerably and multi-unit housing applications and 9 projects including housing have increased. The office cap for Palo Alto except SRP is a critical 10 component to addressing our housing shortage and reducing VMT. 11 12 While I do see the value in a one year carry over so projects are not rushed anything beyond 13 that is just watering it down and reducing housing further and increasing the total number of 14 VMT daily. Also the limit needs to be low enough to be material and I feel that 50,000 sf is too 15 high when you add in the current exceptions. The misnamed beauty contest portion of the 16 office cap should be called highest quality project selection criteria rather than first come first 17 serve that can result in projects with worse parking, traffic, and environmental projects impacts 18 being approved. It has never been used, so has not yet been a significant burden to staff, but 19 should a large amount of new additional office space be requested in a single year then 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. buildings which have the least parking, traffic, and environmental and neighborhood impacts 1 would be selected. I also believe that when you consider November the and many of the other 2 folks on the CAC also believe this that the area of coverage for the office cap should be citywide 3 minus SRP thus if you are truly committed to increasing housing and reducing VMT you'll 4 support a meaningful office cap. Thank you. 5 6 Acting Chair Waldfogel: Thank you very much for the comments. Mr. Moss? 7 8 Robert Moss: Thank you, Chairman [Note-Acting] Walfogel: First I agree with the comments of 9 the speaker and would like to elaborate on a few of them. We've had a jobs/housing imbalance 10 in Palo Alto for over 40 years. It’s ranged from 2.8 to 3 jobs per housing unit. I went back in my 11 files since 1978 and it's created some really major problems. 12 13 Currently one of the problems we have because of State ordinances are that we're being asked 14 to build more housing in order to reduce the jobs/housing imbalance. And we have a problem 15 where we're going to fit them in. And then one of the things that people don't want to talk 16 about is a fact that every housing unit costs the City about $2,800 a year more for services than 17 pays in taxes. So you put in 10,000 more housing units and you increase the City's deficit by 18 about $2 [unintelligible] million a year. That can be a problem. And that doesn't even attack 19 the problem we have with the schools if you add that many housing units. We’re not a school 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. board so we don't have to address it directly, but it is still an issue and as citizens we worry 1 about it. 2 3 So the first thing I'd like to suggest is that we make the cap citywide not just on specific zones. 4 Second, I think it should be reduced [from] 50,000 to perhaps 30,000 or 40,000. Because one of 5 the things that has been happening over the last 10 years is the number of the employees 6 crammed into an office is been increasing significantly. Years ago the rule of thumb was 250 7 square feet (sf) per employee. Currently it's closer to 100 to 125 and when you have high cost 8 office space like you do in Palo Alto which is one of the highest cost per square foot per month 9 in the country it is a real incentive for the people who are there to cram as many people in as 10 they can because they are paying a lot for the space. That creates traffic problems, parking 11 problems, jobs/housing imbalance problems and it makes it harder for the City to be successful. 12 13 So I think it would pay to limit the amount of office space [we’re allowed to develop] in the 14 future and because if you're only limit it to certain areas I can guarantee you you’re going to 15 have more offices developed along Bayshore, along Fabian, along San Antonio because where 16 there isn't a limit that's where they will build. So the simple and also it's a lot easier to enforce 17 if it’s just citywide. You don't have to worry about is he putting it in exactly where it's 18 prohibited or limited or is he one or two parcels over. So simplify it, reduce the amount that's 19 allowed, and take another look at it in a year or two and see what our job/housing imbalance 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. looks like then and if it's not getting better we should scale it down again, but we have to 1 address this problem. We've been letting it go for decades and we should have to stop that, 2 grit our teeth, and make it harder to increase the jobs/housing imbalance. We haven’t been 3 doing that for years. It's time we did. 4 5 Acting Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Those are all the speakers cards that I have. Let's move on 6 to Commissioner discussion. Commissioner Gardias. 7 8 Commissioner Gardias: Thank you very much for your report and thank you very much for the 9 comments. So I understand that today's discussion is going to be about the extension of this 10 ordinance. We discussed this ordinance it was like over a year ago or so I remember the 11 comments I can even cite them. 12 13 Ms. Campbell: It was March. 14 15 Commissioner Gardias: It was March. Ok, thank you very much you. Yeah, so over a year ago. 16 So a personally I just I mean first of all I think that the discussion over the ordinance is on the 17 table today, right? I will reiterate the point the main point of this what I said in March that 18 pretty much I just disagree with the whole notion of the separate ordinance, but I understand 19 it's not the subject of our discussion today. However, I'd like to just make one point; typically if 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. we regulate something it has some other unintended consequences. So my question to the 1 staff is like this, have you observed some other imbalances that would be growing up as a result 2 of this ordinance? 3 4 Ms. Gitelman: Well we can certainly go into this when we come back with a recommendation 5 on a permanent ordinance. I think our feeling is that this has been really successful at what it 6 originally intended to do which was to slow the pace of office development in these three areas 7 that are covered by the by the current ordinance. It has certainly done that. I don't know that 8 there are other unintended consequences. [Unintelligible] give that some thought, but none of 9 them nothing occurs to me off the top my head. 10 11 Commissioner Gardias: The other question would be of course I mean if they are not building 12 offices what are they building instead? And since we don't have the whole [unintelligible] to all 13 the buildings because it's mainly within Architectural Review Board (ARB) purview I would like 14 to understand this. 15 16 Ms. Gitelman: Yeah. I think we've seen fewer large applications since this ordinance was 17 adopted then in the couple years preceding it. 18 19 Commissioner Gardias: Ok. I rest with this, thank you. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. 1 Acting Chair Waldfogel: Great, thank you. Commissioner Monk. 2 3 Commissioner Monk: What's the effect if the ordinance expires? 4 5 Ms. Gitelman: Well, when the clock runs out on the ordinance any applications we receive 6 would have to be processed without regard to this limit or the time frame that it sets up for our 7 reviews. 8 9 Commissioner Monk: Have there been applications received this year? 10 11 Ms. Campbell: Yep. We do have there's a few pending applications that we do have on file. 12 And right now they're still going through the review… well, there's at least one and it's going 13 through the review process. So if by March 18, March 30th of 2018… well, if it expires in 14 November then it would just be the standard review process, but if we do an extension then we 15 would take a look at whatever projects we have in March of next year and then we would make 16 a determination whether or not we have to go through the additional evaluation for the 17 contest. 18 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Monk: Do you expect to have a new ordinance before then even though this will 1 be in effect until then? 2 3 Ms. Campbell: So this existing interim ordinance is due to expire in November of this year. So 4 what we're asking tonight is to extend it from November of this year to June of next year. So 5 that way it will cover fiscal year 2018. 6 7 Monk: Right. So when are you going to come back to us or Council with the new ordinance? 8 9 Ms. Campbell: Oh. Yes, so in my timeline that I was explaining we're going to come back in 10 early spring to the Planning Commission with a draft ordinance and then soon after that we 11 would go to Council for their action on it. So we definitely our schedule is in line to have 12 everything completed before the expiration of the interim ordinance. 13 14 Ms. Gitelman: If I can offer one addition to that which is we had a great conversation with the 15 Commission on sort of pros and cons, what are the options for modifications to this in March. 16 We haven't had that conversation with the Council. So when we bring the Council this 17 extension we're going to have that kind of brainstorming session that will inform development 18 of a draft ordinance which we’ll get to you as soon as we can probably after the first of the year 19 and then to the Council. Just so we have it in place by the end of the fiscal year. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. 1 Commissioner Monk: Thank you for clarifying and just to confirm that you will be presenting 2 the findings from our March hearing to Council so that we're not rehashing it again tonight 3 because I do, I was involved with that meeting and did weigh in on it, on my concerns. Thank 4 you. 5 6 Acting Chair Waldfogel: Thank you. Commissioner Summa. 7 8 Commissioner Summa: Thank you to staff for the presentation and also to members of the 9 public. It's always great to see you and I really appreciate your comments. So I think since we 10 discussed this at some length so recently I just want to be very brief and I wholeheartedly 11 approve the extension. I would be very interested in the Council I would be very interested in 12 looking at reducing the annual limit to make it even more effective potentially in bringing, 13 trying to bring some a better balance of the to the house, jobs/housing imbalance. I have 14 always thought it should be citywide. And I like Hamilton's idea of changing the name of the so-15 called beauty contest which I think I opined about in March that it’s just kind of embarrassing 16 sounding. I'm not sure highest quality projects selection criteria is perfect. It might be a little 17 bit wordy, but I think we should change the name of that. And yeah, so I think those are my 18 comments. Thank you very much. 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Acting Chair Waldfogel: Great, thank you. Commissioner Rosenblum. 1 2 Commissioner Rosenblum: So I'm in favor of staff’s recommendation to extend this until they 3 can give a proper proposal. When we started reviewing this project though this proposal and 4 every time it's come I've disagreed with the whole ordinance. I think it's a poor ordinance. And 5 specifically the comment that it's worked because it's just slowed down applications I don't 6 think is very good. I think the reason why we're concerned about office buildings are the 7 effects of office buildings and the imbalance between housing and office which is traffic and 8 congestion and it's a regional problem. I think in using this tool what you do is put a chilling 9 effect on development of offices and clearly that's the goal of some people and maybe the goal 10 of this ordinance, but really what we want to work on is reducing the number of people who 11 have to travel by car to their offices. And I think in going for this kind of blunt instrument we've 12 taken our eye off that ball. I think that's the most important ball. 13 14 Notably a lot of people that are really excited about this ordinance are also it against many 15 housing projects. So the same people are not working to say let's build more housing then to as 16 a lever to reduce this imbalance. So I'm skeptical of the good will of those that are pushing for 17 this, but the motivations of them doesn't really matter. In the end it's the effect. And I think 18 what we're doing in this kind of ordinance is we're not getting anything good. We are putting a 19 chilling effect on development to the extent that you think less development is good then 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. great, you win, but the extent that what we really want to do is have a smarter city where we 1 invest in mitigations so different ways for people to get in out of town, different ways for 2 people to live and work then I think we lose. And I think long term as a community we do want 3 to invest in better ways of getting in and out, better ways of living. 4 5 And the last comment I'll make this came up after we had the Our Palo Alto Summit which was 6 as many people here know an off-site, had 300 plus citizens that gave up their Saturday to 7 discuss this, and this question was specifically asked: how do you want to account for the 8 jobs/housing imbalance? What tools would you use to meter growth? And there was three 9 choices. There was metering, there was a hard cap, and there was a project by project 10 mitigations through Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures. And 11 overwhelmingly the people there had this what we actually adopted as the worst option. The 12 Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) at that time in discussing it also didn't like this 13 option, but Council adopted it because their notion was I think that they want to have that they 14 want to reduce the number of offices being built. And so as Director Gitelman said that if that's 15 the intention then it succeeded, but the will of the citizens that had precipitated in this process 16 was that we should be smarter about this and we should come up with ways that individual 17 office projects have to be smarter about the way they handle the impacts. 18 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. So long winded way of saying I don't like this ordinance. I respect staff’s request during this 1 period when we're trying to get the Comp Plan over the line, etcetera for more time to have a 2 comprehensive proposal and I think that's completely rational. I also think the concerns of 3 people like Bob Moss and Hamilton Hitchings are completely rational. And in fact talking about 4 how we address the jobs/housing imbalance is one of the challenges we have. I think that this 5 tool does accomplish something, but I think it’s the wrong way that we're going about doing 6 this. It’s certainly not the smartest thing we could do. So at any rate I agree with the staff’s 7 recommendation for tonight, but I'd like to go on the record again in I saying I just don't think 8 this is a great, this is not the smartest thing we could have done around this problem. 9 10 Acting Chair Waldfogel: Great, thank you. I also plan to support staff’s recommendation. I'm 11 not as convinced that this is a terrible tool. I mean the problem in our [unintelligible] situation 12 where it's hard to find tools that work. And I think we have to be very pragmatic about finding 13 tools that do actually work on addressing traffic and congestion issues. I mean I think that 14 we've seen it's very difficult to set up Transportation Management Association (TMA) and TDM 15 in a in diverse districts. So we do need to be fairly pragmatic and I hope that we are considering 16 that as we look at permanent ordnances. I'd also comment that I think it's very hard to tell the 17 direction of causality on the slowdown in office development. It could be caused by this. It 18 could be caused by general economic conditions, secular economic conditions, the election, 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. who knows. Very it's always very hard to tell. Anyway I think we should just move on to a 1 Motion if we are ready for that. Yes. 2 3 Commissioner Rosenblum: I forgot to make I have a request though in this time that staff is 4 going to take to make their permanent recommendation there was a letter from Neilson 5 Buchanan which I admire around his ask for data collection. I don't agree with the actual data 6 that he's looking to collect, but I think that this time needs to be used for data collection that 7 prompted me to think what would I want to see as a Commissioner? And there are a couple 8 things I would really like to see. So I would like to see the parking utilization and employee 9 Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) rate at a couple of key locations around town; so in particular 10 the University Ave. core and the California Ave. core, and SRP. And this some of this data exists. 11 Some of it probably needs to get collected. 12 13 I would also like to see to the extent possible employee density. Mr. Moss made a gave some 14 data. He said that employees are now at 100 sf per employee or 150 sf per employee. I helped 15 conduct a survey of our company Downtown and we found the opposite. We found actually 16 kind of low density utilization because of our work pattern where we have a lot of cafes and 17 common spaces, etcetera. And we found that actually our utilization was quite un-dense which 18 I think surprised us. 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Now I think that staff should actually get this data and whichever way it goes I think all of us 1 would breathe a sigh of relief that we're not just making up numbers. So basically how many 2 people are working in our Downtown core per square foot and then how many of them are 3 using cars. I know that some of this data has been collected in the past, but that should be part 4 of this presentation that goes to us because I think that then it would help us come to grips 5 with is new construction adding this problem? Is it old construction that was under parked? Is 6 it increasing employee density that is causing more of a problem? So I have an ask for data 7 collection as part of our next package and not just do we want to extend this ordinance or not, 8 but as part of that it should be a pretty well constructed data package. 9 10 Acting Chair Waldfogel: Great, thank you. So we’re ready for a Motion? Do you want to make 11 a Motion on this? 12 13 Commissioner Gardias: I can make a [unintelligible] 14 15 Acting Chair Waldfogel: Yeah, please. 16 17 MOTION 18 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Gardias: Yeah, so agreeing with the whole discussion, but recognizing the reality 1 and being ready for the Comprehensive Plan I'd like to propose a Motion to accept staff 2 recommendation and recommend to the City Council of adoption, extend… recommend to the 3 City Council extension of this ordinance through June the 30th of 2018. 4 5 SECOND, VOTE 6 7 Acting Chair Waldfogel: Who’s the second? Commissioner Summa. Let’s toss one. Any further 8 discussion? All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Five to nothing in favor. Thank you. And for Mr. 9 Moss and Mr. Hitchings thank you for coming and please come back in the spring when we 10 discuss the permanent ordinance. Ok, are we ready to move on or should we take three 11 minutes or what do we want to do? Ok, we'll take three minutes. 12 13 MOTION PASSED (5-0, Chair Alcheck and Commissioner Lauing absent) 14 15 [The Commission took a break] 16 17 Commission Action: Motion to Accept Staff Recommendation and Recommend to the 18 City Council the Extension of the Ordinance Through June 30, 2018 (Motion: 19 Commissioner Gardias, Second Commissioner Summa) Motion Passed 5-0 (Chair 20 Alcheck/Commissioner Lauing Absent) 21 22 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Palo Alto Planning & Transportation Commission 1 Commissioner Biographies, Present and Archived Agendas and Reports are available online: 2 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/ptc/default.asp. The PTC Commission members are: 3 4 Chair Michael Alcheck 5 Vice Chair Asher Waldfogel 6 Commissioner Przemek Gardias 7 Commissioner Ed Lauing 8 Commissioner Susan Monk 9 Commissioner Eric Rosenblum 10 Commissioner Doria Summa 11 12 Get Informed and Be Engaged! 13 View online: http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city-of-palo-alto or on Channel 26. 14 15 Show up and speak. Public comment is encouraged. Please complete a speaker request card 16 located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Commission 17 Secretary prior to discussion of the item. 18 19 Write to us. Email the PTC at: Planning.Commission@CityofPaloAlto.org. Letters can be 20 delivered to the Planning & Community Environment Department, 5th floor, City Hall, 250 21 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. Comments received by 2:00 PM two Tuesdays preceding 22 the meeting date will be included in the agenda packet. Comments received afterward through 23 2:00 PM the day of the meeting will be presented to the Commission at the dais. 24 25 Material related to an item on this agenda submitted to the PTC after distribution of the 26 agenda packet is available for public inspection at the address above. 27 Americans with Disability Act (ADA) 28 It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a 29 manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an 30 appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, 31 or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329-2550 (voice) or by emailing 32 ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 33 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. 34 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Planning & Transportation Commission 1 Meeting Minutes 2 March 29, 2017 3 Excerpt 4 5 6 7 Study Session 8 Public Comment is Permitted. Five (5) minutes per speaker.1,3 9 3. Discussion and Comments for City Council Consideration Regarding Development of 10 an Ordinance to Perpetuate an Annual Limit on Office/R&D Development Following 11 Expiration of Interim Ordinance #5357 Restricting Such Land Uses in Certain Parts of 12 the City to 50,000 Square Feet per Year. Environmental Analysis: This Discussion is 13 not a Project Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). For More 14 Information, Please Contact Clare Campbell at clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org. 15 16 Chair Alcheck: To bring to order this meeting again and begin with Agenda Item 3. Staff would 17 you kick us off? 18 19 Commissioner Lauing: Chair can I just ask a procedural question? 20 21 Chair Alcheck: Yes (interrupted) 22 23 Commissioner Lauing: This is obviously characterized as a study session not an action item. 24 25 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Alcheck: That's correct. 1 2 Commissioner Lauing: Right, but I know that Council has already opined because they were 3 asked at the January 30th Council meeting to give their opinions on precisely this issue along 4 with a number of other large ones. So for us to come up with discussions that are just… our 5 only action item tonight is to come up with comments that are going to just be sent over to 6 Council. Wouldn’t it be more productive if we had a session, a subsequent sessions that 7 actually analyzed this issue in light of the Council direction apropos of Chair [Note-Vice-Chair] 8 Waldfogel’s comment in the last item so that we could maybe wrestle with this and come up 9 with a recommendation if that's something the Council has an interest in or we do? Rather 10 than just discuss it and ask questions and just send over 30 random comments that may be not 11 be pertinent or that they're interested. So I'm not saying that there aren't questions that we 12 could ask about what's in your staff report, but it doesn't seem productive if we aren’t going to 13 get into a situation where we're going to recommend something. I don’t know if other 14 colleagues have comments on that, but... 15 16 Chair Alcheck: That's an interesting question. My perspective here… what I would like to do is I 17 would like to give staff the opportunity to present and 18 19 Commissioner Lauing: Certainly, certainly. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. 1 Chair Alcheck: I appreciate the sense that there's not really a defined objective here. And that 2 there's a lot of unknowns, but I let's follow protocol and then we why don’t you circle back to 3 this concept in our first round of comments. 4 5 Commissioner Lauing: Sure, no I look forward to that (interrupted) 6 7 Chair Alcheck: [Unintelligible] we can kind of determine to what extent that might be an 8 appropriate. And we don't have to go through it for two hours. You'll have a chance I think to 9 speak in the first half an hour and then we can kind of figure out (interrupted) 10 11 Commissioner Lauing: That was part of my point is I don't think we need to discuss this 12 necessarily for two hours if we're going to come back with an action item at some later point 13 and we don't need to go on for two hours because we don't know what Council concluded at 14 the end of January because we didn't get a separate staff report on that. 15 16 Hillary Gitelman, Planning Director: Maybe I can offer just a little (interrupted) 17 18 Chair Alcheck: Why don’t you? Yeah, would you? 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Ms. Gitelman: Context on that. So the only question that the Council really weighed in on at 1 that meeting in January was whether they wanted to perpetuate an annual limit on office 2 Research and Development (R&D) and they said they did want to. They want a permanent 3 ordinance to replace the temporary ordinance and that's really all they decided. Each of the 4 Council Members offered their own thoughts, individual thoughts about what it would look like. 5 Some of them said oh, we don't want the beauty contest anymore, we want first come first 6 serve. Some said oh, we want the allocate, unused allocation to roll over, but there was no 7 action or unanimity about those characteristics of what the program would look like. And so 8 we thought before going back to Council we would seek the Commission's insights and input if 9 you have any. Again, we're not asking you to take any action, but we're interested in your 10 individual thoughts about how this program could be structured in the future and we will come 11 back to you for a more organized and formal action item at some point in the future. So I mean 12 I appreciate you might want to not want to spend a ton of time tonight, but I thought we 13 thought your comments would be useful (interrupted) 14 15 Chair Alcheck: And allow me just to also sort of suggest that our obligation, our I think chief 16 responsibility here is to review items and provide feedback on Council directed matters, but 17 also a lot of times we can provide insight and shape the discussions the Council has without 18 necessarily their direction and input in advance. And so I would encourage us to look at this 19 particular opportunity as a many of you were not on this Commission when we first dealt with 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. this cap. And it was a very interesting dialogue that we had last time we reviewed it. Here it's 1 coming to us again and there is a real opportunity here to figure out whether there are ways to 2 improve upon it. And I think we're all in a position to provide some insight and I think that that 3 will help this moving forward. And I know it's going to come back to us, but at least this way we 4 have an opportunity to see some of the questions that we might have get answered in that 5 follow up session, so. 6 7 Ms. Gitelman: Yeah and I apologize there's one thing I forgot about the Council's dialogue. So 8 they talked about the their desire to adopt a permanent ordinance. They also talked about 9 their preference that the annual limit area that's included be extended from what it is currently 10 to the whole City minus the Research Park. So they actually I think they did include that in their 11 Motion, but they didn’t include anything else about the process or exemptions or any of the 12 other details that will have to be figured out during the rewrite. And we'd love your thoughts 13 on those things so that maybe we can get let staff go with the presentation and then hear from 14 you on those elements. 15 16 Clare Campbell, Senior Planner: Ok great, thank you; Clare Campbell, Senior Planner. So tonight 17 we're going to be talking about the Annual Office Limit Ordinance. The purpose of our 18 discussion today is we're going to provide you with an update of the office development since 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. the implementation of the interim ordinance and ask for feedback and comments for 1 developing the permanent ordinance. 2 3 So the interim ordinance was adopted in September 2015 and the intent was to meter the pace 4 of development in the City regarding office and R&D development. The City had been 5 experiencing substantial development of office and R&D projects and concerns and had 6 concerns about the rapid growth and how that may exacerbate traffic congestion and parking 7 conditions existing already in the City as well as some negative impacts potentially on existing 8 neighborhood character. So the ordinance established a 50,000 square foot limit for new office 9 R&D development and it focused its focus on the Downtown California Ave area and the El 10 Camino corridor. And the ordinance is due to expire in eight months on November 26, 2017. 11 So here's a map showing where the area applies, the area that the ordinance applies to. So we 12 have a section here in the Downtown including South of Forest Avenue (SOFA) I along the El 13 Camino corridor and this whole section here is called the California Avenue area. 14 15 So give you a brief summary of our ordinance. So basically it applies to five different land uses. 16 We have R&D, administrative office services, general business office, medical office, and 17 professional office. We have included some exempt projects from the ordinance and they're 18 basically small projects that are less than 2,000 square feet (sf), small medical office that's 19 5,000 sf or less, and self-mitigating projects. So those are projects where the housing 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. component provides more housing than the number of workers that would be employed by the 1 project. And also self-mitigating projects include projects that have a really strong robust 2 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program that helps to improve the parking and 3 traffic conditions. 4 5 So the ordinance also established selection criteria for evaluating projects and we have five of 6 them here. So basically the first one is impacts and does the project include appropriate 7 development density, does it avoid or mitigate traffic and parking impacts. Design, does the 8 quality and is the design quality compatible, is the design quality good, and is it compatible with 9 the surrounding neighborhoods? The environmental quality, does the project have impacts as 10 determined by our California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) evaluation? And for public 11 benefits does the project include meaningful public benefits that the City can utilize and 12 appreciate? And the uses, so does the project include a mix of uses with substantial housing, 13 ground floor retail, and cultural amenities? 14 15 So to facilitate the implementation of the ordinance some administrative guidelines were 16 developed and this document basically reflects the ordinance requirements, but it includes 17 some more detailed procedures to streamline the implementation of the ordinance. It includes 18 the scoring process and the evaluation scorecard and that scorecard reflects the points which 19 we use for the ranking. The guidelines also reiterate the review timelines for projects and that 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. projects approved cannot roll over their square footage to another project. If you don't use it 1 you're going to lose it basically. 2 3 All right so I'm going to walk you through the basic steps of the existing process. So the first 4 thing is that it is based on a fiscal year and the projects as you know are submitted year round 5 for us to take a look at. During the time from July 1st through March 31st no qualifying projects 6 can be approved by the Planning Department. So the first step is we need to establish a project 7 list. So on March 31st staff will determine which office and R&D projects are ready for final 8 action. And ready means that they've been deemed complete, that we've done all the 9 environmental review, and all the boards and commissions except for Council have to have 10 done their review and all the required reviews have been completed and the project is ready 11 for action. The second step once we have our project list is to determine whether or not the 12 office square footage goes over the 50,000 sf. So on the bottom line here if the projects do not 13 go over 50,000 sf then those projects would get approved following the standard review 14 process. So for the other scenario if the projects do exceed the 50,000 sf those projects are 15 forwarded to Council for their review and determination of the project. So that kind of that 16 affects our first beauty contest review, but both scenarios must be completed by June 30th of 17 the year. So then after June 30th passes we start the process over again for the following fiscal 18 year. 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Ok so in the two years that we've had our ordinance we have not yet had the opportunity to try 1 out or test our process that we've put in place. So we actually don't have any real information 2 to report back to you on the effectiveness of our process. So since the implementation of the 3 ordinance though there appears to be some conscious efforts made by some of the applicants 4 to avoid triggering this ordinance and what they've done is they've either just taken office out 5 of their project or they've reduced the amount of office in the project so it becomes exempt 6 and doesn't trigger any additional review. 7 8 So here I'm going to go over our pending projects. So this is a list of all the projects that we 9 have currently on file that are open that have some office component to it. So the first two 10 3045 Park and 411 Lytton these two projects count towards the 50,000 square foot limit. The 11 next project 4115 El Camino I've included this even though it's a preliminary architectural 12 review just to illustrate what I had just mentioned that some projects really keep the square 13 footage down so they become exempt from the process. So this project is only proposing to 14 have 2,000 sf so then it's not part of the projects that we would review as part of the annual 15 office limit. The next one down is 3251 Hanover and this project is located in the Research Park 16 so the office limit doesn't apply for this particular project for two reasons: it's outside the 17 boundary that we've defined under the ordinance and it's also replacement square footage so it 18 doesn't account it doesn't count towards the limit. So the next one is 380 Cambridge and again 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. this one is exempt because it's less than 2,000 feet and 2600 El Camino is also exempt because 1 the 62,000 sf is replacement square footage. 2 3 So here you'll kind of get a sense that the total the figure at the very bottom here the 17,260 4 that's the number the square footage of projects that would count towards the 50,000 sf for 5 this ordinance. So even though you see several projects on our lists those would be the only 6 two that would count towards this ordinance. So for next year if it were just these two projects 7 that we're showing here to consider on March 31st then we would have left over square 8 footage. In this case it's approximately 32,000 thousand sf so that 32,000 sf can be approved 9 for other types of office projects long as it's done before June 30th. And again that's the hard 10 cutoff date for the process to start over again for the next fiscal year. 11 12 Ok so tonight we're looking to get your comments and basically they can be on any aspect of 13 this ordinance. It can be focused on the boundary, the square footage cap amount, the 14 selection process, first come first serve versus the competition, and the review process, but any 15 other part of this can be reviewed. We just know that we need to move forward with some 16 type of annual office limit. So next steps staff will continue with our public outreach and we 17 will forward your comments to Council for feedback and discussion and later of course this year 18 we’ll return with our draft ordinance for you to review. And the ordinance expires on 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. November 26th though Council action is needed by early October. And that concludes staff’s 1 presentation. Thank you. 2 3 Chair Alcheck: Thank you, staff. Ok I’d like to begin this oh, wait, we have a speaker card. Just a 4 minute, sorry. 5 6 Vice-Chair Waldfogel: [Unintelligible]. 7 8 Simon Cintz: Ok, thank you. My name is Simon Cintz. I'm actually going to decline to speak 9 now because I think what was pointed out before this is a study session and I would sort of also 10 be interested in seeing how you folks look at things and whatever and will reserve my 11 comments for later. So I've never been in here when I've been the only speaker in, but so but I 12 do want to thank the person from the City handling this for reaching out to the business 13 community. I did get an email. That was really important that we knew this was going on 14 although I didn't really quite understand what the details of it and look forward to hearing what 15 your comments are. Thank you. 16 17 Chair Alcheck: Ok. Yeah just so we're clear the next opportunity for public comment would be 18 the next time we see this item, not later tonight. Just in case. 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Vice-Chair Waldfogel: [Unintelligible-off mic]. 1 2 Chair Alcheck: I suspect it is. Ok, so what I'd like to do right now is I hope we're comfortable 3 with 10 minutes? I’ll give everybody sort of hopefully it's less than 10 minutes and I'd like to 4 start at the other end of the table for this item so Commissioner Rosenblum will you kick us off? 5 Questions/comments. 6 7 Commissioner Rosenblum: Sure. 8 9 Chair Alcheck: However you’d like to start. 10 11 Commissioner Rosenblum: First just want start with a question. So you made the statement 12 that regardless of what the discussion or comment is tonight we have to move forward with 13 some kind of office cap. And I want to just ask you why is that? My understanding was this 14 ordinance expired either two years from adoption or upon adoption of the new Comprehensive 15 Plan whichever is sooner. So we’re coming against the two year mark which is the sooner. 16 There's nothing in those says we have to have an office cap so I'm curious about that comment. 17 You seem to want us to continue this policy maybe with modifications, but I wonder if you 18 could respond to that. 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Ms. Gitelman: Sure, I'd be happy to respond to that. When the Council had that meeting on 1 January 30th where it was talking about the Comp Plan one of the questions we asked in the 2 context of a discussion of land use policies was whether they wanted to include a policy about 3 metering the pace of growth or a program related to the office cap. And the response was well 4 we don't really need to put this in the Comp Plan, but we would like to update the ordinance 5 about the annual limit. Maybe make some changes to it, but we would like to continue that. 6 So as you point out the current ordinance expires either in two years or when the Comp Plan is 7 adopted whichever is sooner. There is a potential that we could simply just extend it if we need 8 more time until the Comp Plan is adopted, but we are thinking based on the Council's direction 9 on January 30th that they will want a replacement ordinance and so we thought it was wise to 10 start thinking about what that might look like and this was an obvious first stop to get some 11 input. 12 13 Commissioner Rosenblum: Ok, great. In that case I have two parts to this. So the first is should 14 this ordinance be continued with improvements or should we allow it to expire. And regardless 15 of which way we think as a body I think that we do have to answer Council’s question which are 16 what are the parts of this ordinance that you’d want to adjust. But I think it's worth weighing in 17 to them is it a good thing to have a cap and as you know from the Our Palo Alto Summit there 18 were three different modes considered. There was metering, there was a hard cap, and there 19 was mitigations. And our Council ultimately went with a cap. But I think it's worth our body as 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. an independent advisory body first weighing in do we think that's the right mechanism, but 1 second to answer their direct question which is let's if we assume they do want to continue 2 with this current mode what are the changes that one would make. 3 4 So in terms of using my slot I would say first in terms of whether or not this is the right 5 mechanism I would argue it's never been the right mechanism. Now we're two years into it and 6 we know it literally didn't do anything. We've never hit the 50,000 number. So it took a lot of 7 staff time, it took like four Council meetings, it took three Planning and Transportation 8 Commission (PTC) meetings, it's taken all of our time quite a lot, but it hasn't actually done 9 anything. And all that time I think could have been more valuable if we had worked on 10 mitigation measures and had really focused on making a Transportation Management 11 Association (TMA) more effective. Now part of the reason why I never thought this would, was 12 the right approach was it's kind of the horse is already out the barn. A lot of the problems 13 we’re trying to address have to do with buildings that were constructed even before the 14 Ninety's which were under parked. So working on new construction doesn't really address this 15 problem of traffic and indeed again despite put this measure into place I don't think that there's 16 been a corresponding reduction in traffic that we would have wanted from this measure. 17 18 So also finally when we did the Our Palo Alto Summit I think there were like 300 people in 19 attendance seventy percent of people in attendance voted to work on mitigations and only five 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. percent for hard caps. So even the people that were most involved always said this was the 1 wrong approach. So I would argue pretty strongly that people that citizens involved the process 2 said it was the wrong approach, the analysis would say it was the wrong approach, and 3 hindsight suggested it didn’t do anything. So it feels like a weird thing to continue. 4 5 Having said that if we are going to continue my observations based on the way we have it are 6 the following. I think the first big problem with it that Stanford Research Park (SRP) is left out 7 of it. I think SRP is the biggest source of traffic through our community. And the reason is they 8 have most of the large employers and it's very difficult for them to have any kind of transit 9 program. And so I think it's something like 73 percent of SRP employees still take Single 10 Occupancy Vehicles (SOV) whereas the Downtown number I think was something like 57 11 percent and Stanford's number is something like 47 percent. And so whereas in other places 12 they've been able to get people out of their cars SRP has not and they have the big employers. 13 And so it's a bit of an odd thing that we have this program that exempts them from this. If 14 there's any place we want people to build it's actually here where people don't drive their car 15 as much it's not there, but this program as you saw in your pipeline the largest building I think 16 was 110,000 sf is not part of this because it's built there. And I think it would be much more 17 attractive now to build there because you’re not counting the cap. You don't have to go 18 through this beauty contest, etcetera. 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Second, I do think there should be some mechanism for banking unused credit so if we build 1 very little this year, if there's a downturn and we stop building that upon recovery there is cap 2 relief. Now in terms of how many years the credit can be built based on the analysis that you 3 gave us it takes anywhere between two years and five years after recession for us to start 4 building again. But any rate Council can come up with their own mechanism, but I would be in 5 favor of somehow banking these credits on a go forward basis. 6 7 And my final comment around the ordinance itself is that some of the exceptions seem 8 counterintuitive. So there's a real kind of love small projects meaning they don't count against 9 the cap. So offices below 2,000 sf, medical offices below 5,000 sf and again if part of our point 10 is that we're trying to cap office space to mitigate traffic impact which was I think one the 11 drivers of this having multiple small places just seems like it's counter to the goal of trying to 12 get a more efficient use of space. Meaning given X number of employees you want to have 13 fewer cars and if you're subdividing into multiple small places it doesn't seem like there's a 14 public interest in that or at least it's counter to the goal of the whole ordinance. So that's on 15 the general ordinance. 16 17 The last couple comments I'll make are on the beauty contest itself. I love the idea of beauty 18 contest so if we’re going to have this again I hate this whole, this whole ordinance, but if we're 19 going to have it I do like the that if we do have it that the beauty contest idea is kind of cool. I 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. like that then Mayor Burt had proposed it. I’ve always been in the context of this a fan. The 1 heuristic is a bit odd. It's very skewed towards penalizing density. So there's 110 points I think 2 that are allocated of which about 50 are related to density or impacts of density and 20 are 3 related to use. So do you have housing or do you have mixed use, etcetera of which 10 of the 4 points are those that feature housing and I would personally think that in terms of if we're 5 using beauty as one of our criteria one of our great community needs is more housing. And so 6 the beauty contest is heavily skewed towards weight sort of density verses use. And so my 7 personal preference would be to skew towards those who are helping us to relieve our housing 8 crisis. 9 10 So that's the sum of my comments. So just to sum it up first I'd say I would love this body to say 11 that this was the wrong mechanism we should go for a mitigations focus mechanism, A. But if 12 we're to go with this mechanism then my three big points are put SRP in as part of it, consider 13 banking credits, the exceptions we should not be skewed towards small. If anything if you're 14 trying to traffic mitigation normally having some kind of scale is better so you shouldn’t give 15 incentives to go smaller. And then finally the beauty contest should be skewed towards things 16 that we want and so I think housing is a big one. That’s it for me. 17 18 Commissioner Summa: So I actually don't think this is a bad ordinance I guess. I also I just don't 19 like the word beauty contest. I wish we could call it something else because it's kind of 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. offensive. But anyway I was going to ask couple questions and then I’ll make some comments. 1 Have we had any self-mitigating projects? No and ok, and then so couple of things. 2 3 There was a lot of talk at the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC). I think this should be citywide 4 for sure and there was a lot of talk on the CAC about including the Research Park, but maybe 5 allowing the Research Park to roll over square footages annually that they don't use and the 6 idea was that because there's such bigger buildings there. So I would say I favor a citywide 7 program and I would encourage the Council to look at a way to include the Research Park that 8 lets the Research Park be the Research Park, but also we'd have more control. I have a concern 9 about replacement square footage not being included and maybe this is a legal issue it can't be. 10 And one of the reasons is because replacement square footage is often replaced with a much 11 denser use which just has more people and more cars, more SOV trips, more greenhouse gas 12 emissions. So I would look at a way of maybe if it's legal including replacement square footage 13 with some, in some way. 14 15 And I was especially struck in the findings by Finding B about the huge, huge increase in Class B 16 office space. And I know we have a lot of concern about displacing those kind of uses so and 17 they've actually increased exponentially in price much more than Class A office rates. So that 18 was interesting to me. So I oh, and then I would like to give… I think it's interesting that this 19 ordinance not only… well, it did two things. It wanted to meter the pace of growth, office and 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. R&D growth, but it also wanted to give the Council a chance to look at projects and prioritize 1 them through the non-beauty contest, the merit contest, and it didn't do that. And I think that 2 was because 50,000 is too high a threshold. I think if we lower the threshold and I'm not sure 3 what the magic number would be we could get more projects into that prioritization and which 4 would also have the benefit of including projects that were better for the public. It may be 5 prioritized housing also so let's see… Yeah, so those are my comments for now. 6 7 Commissioner Monk: Ok so in looking at what the rationale was for creating the ordinance and 8 looking at the outcome of the ordinance I'm wondering why we would need to continue it 9 based on what the findings were on Page 33 and also in your presentation you were [sitting] 10 that in the end of the very first paragraph of the top of Page 33 that the projects really haven't 11 come forward and you believe that a lot of it was to avoid the potential of additional rigors 12 required by the interim [AOL] ordinance. I don't know if you wanted to provide any additional 13 input on that or feedback as to why the ordinance has reduced the amount of applications for 14 new office projects. 15 16 Ms. Campbell: I think basically applicants don't want to have to go through this additional 17 review. And it's very unsure for them to kind of go through this process and it can be very I’m 18 not finding the right word, but basically I think what's happening is that our review process is 19 well known. And it takes a lot to get through even a normal application process, but when we 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. have to add this additional contest for this evaluation I think it makes it much more 1 unpredictable for applicants to project forward and to invest time and energy to do something 2 here in Palo Alto. So I think that could definitely be something that adds to why we're not 3 seeing anything happen. 4 5 Commissioner Monk: Ok, so instead of it actually pacing growth it sounds like it's halting 6 growth. Does that sound correct under what we've seen in the last two years? 7 8 Ms. Campbell: I think honestly that the two year timeline might be a little bit short for us to 9 kind of make a full determination on that. 10 11 Commissioner Monk: Ok. 12 13 Ms. Campbell: Certainly just based on the numbers that are coming in for applications we 14 definitely have seen a decline in applications. 15 16 Commissioner Monk: And has this ordinance had a benefit on traffic in any way? Have we seen 17 any changes in traffic as a result of this ordinance? 18 19 Ms. Campbell: Not that I'm aware of. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. 1 Commissioner Monk: OK. What was the reason to not have a rollover? And if you don't want 2 to answer that I would just say that I would support a rollover with some sort of oversight or 3 timeline for it to expire. 4 5 Ms. Gitelman: I think originally the discussion was about a mechanism to meter the pace of 6 growth and so in the original deliberations I think the Council felt like if the allocation could 7 rollover then you're really not having that effect of metering growth because you'll continue to 8 have the spikes. The leftover allocation will all be used in a future year. What they were trying 9 to solve for was the spikes where some years you’d have a ton of growth and in the next year 10 you wouldn’t. 11 12 Commissioner Monk: Ok. Well I see that on Page 31 that you talk about the six years where 13 there was in excess of the 50,000 sf, but you didn't really detail how far the growth was beyond 14 the 50,000. So it's hard to know what those spikes were from just my reading of what was 15 presented in the packet. Is that information that you have or? 16 17 Ms. Gitelman: Yeah. We have a different data set that's a little harder to use that goes back 18 much further and it's we can represent it and really show the spikes. There are years in which 19 we see a lot of growth and we were trying to solve for that problem. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. 1 Ms. Campbell: And just to add to that in the staff report from September 21, 2015, when the 2 ordinance was adopted there was a hand out that was provided as an attachment that basically 3 showed all of the development over the last 15 years and it illustrated what the square footage 4 numbers were. 5 6 Commissioner Monk: That’s on this? 7 8 Ms. Campbell: No, in the September 21, 2015, Council report. 9 10 Commissioner Monk: Ok. And when it I just have one more question and then I have a few 11 comments on to the ordinance itself. When it comes to mixed use does the square footage 12 that could be occupied by a retail or residential use go towards that cap or is that kept outside? 13 14 Ms. Campbell: No. It’s just office only. 15 16 Commissioner Monk: Ok. So I wanted to look at Page 36 where it's talking about any 17 contradictions between our Comp Plan and the ordinance in the event that the ordinance does 18 remain in effect I would advise to look at the last sentence and consider making a change that 19 the policy most instead of the policy most restrictive of growth shall apply that that be further 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. qualified to the policy most restrictive of R&D growth or office growth or whatever people 1 agree with on the Council. Or it could say the policy least restrictive of housing shall apply. 2 That would be a recommendation that I would make because it's broad the way it's written by 3 just saying growth in general. 4 5 And then in regards to the self-mitigating projects I did send an email to Jonathan Lait on this 6 one because I was curious about whether or not any of those had been accomplished and you 7 confirmed now that it would had not. Has there are any examples ever of this ever being 8 attainable any point in time? On that's on Subparagraph C on Page 37. 9 10 Ms. Gitelman: Yeah, I'm not aware of any although we have had inquiries from developers who 11 are interested in this concept. So I think people saw this in the ordinance and thought it was an 12 intriguing idea. So I've had at least one local developer talk to me about how they might go 13 about something like this. 14 15 Commissioner Monk: Ok so what I would love to see is some follow up from the developer and 16 whomever to find out what we can do to make it more attainable and encourage development 17 because I think that self-mitigating projects that would increase our housing stock are in 18 compliance with the City's objectives of increasing housing. So I don't know if it's putting a 19 percentage in there rather than saying that it has to be more than the number of workers or 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. something like that. So I would like to see that looked at in a deeper level. And I think that's 1 my last comment. Thank you. 2 3 Chair Alcheck: Ok before I dive in I there’s this allegory I'm sure most of you are familiar with. 4 This individual, two individuals come into work and one is always too hot, they open the 5 window and the other individual is annoyed because they're freezing and so they close the 6 window and it's the same thing every hour one opens it, one closes it, one opens it and finally 7 someone’s like hey why don’t you put a sweater on? And then I and don't sit next to the 8 window and I'll sit next to the you know. That's not really how it goes, but you understand, you 9 appreciate my sentiment. 10 11 So I just want to acknowledge Commissioner Rosenblum’s comments. There is I always find 12 your analysis just to be incredibly valuable and it's not hard to understand how this ordinance 13 came about. It is it seems to just reek of a response that is politically driven. The overwhelming 14 growth that we experienced in Downtown the just the… we got the residential parking permit 15 program, we have so many, we have the difficulty these neighborhoods have in absorbing the 16 amount of office growth it's such a foreseeable sort of result, right? But we're capping office 17 growth that's it. Whether or not that actually achieves the goal of reducing so many of the 18 issues that the Downtown is suffering from is the sort of question that I think Commissioner 19 Rosenblum is highlighting tonight which is that at our at the Our Palo Alto event individuals 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. spent a great deal of time sort of evaluating options and the community felt that there were 1 some options that were more valuable than a cap. We currently have a cap in an area where 2 we the impacts are more mitigated than in areas that we don't have a cap which suggests a just 3 incredible iron, not I don't know if irony is the right, inconsistency with what are we actually 4 trying to do and what are we doing. 5 6 The best I should say the best or the only part of this ordinance that I like is that we get to re-7 review it because it's an interim. And I want to just commend staff and Council for operating in 8 that framework. There's a real there's a wonderful reason for using interim ordinances like this 9 one. It gives us a chance to look at it a couple years later. I felt the same way about the 10 ordinance we reviewed a couple weeks ago. I feel the same way about this one. I would never 11 encourage as a Planning Commissioner this City Council to adopt this ordinance in any other 12 way but in an interim fashion. So even if they proceeded to adopt this ordinance I would 13 encourage them to do it for either another two years or if they were uncomfortable with that 14 limit for four years, but to not necessarily adopt it permanently because I personally share the 15 view that this is not the correct solution for the subset of problems that we are attempting to 16 address. 17 18 I have heard really what I would describe as strong arguments for why a beauty contest despite 19 potentially the challenge of that name being divisive, but I've heard positive arguments for it, 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. arguments that I can relate to. Why not have a process in this City where we have architects 1 compete for projects that really demonstrate just tremendous architecture. The problem is is 2 in who's eyes, right? Who makes that determination, right? And then we created a framework 3 and my main concern is that the application of the point system or the decision… I don't I would 4 suggest that I'm uncomfortable with the decision of or the judges of the beauty contest to be in 5 a political body. I'd be much more comfortable if the Architectural Review Board (ARB) for 6 example evaluated the judged the beauty contest then the City Council because it depends how 7 you feel your Council member reflects whether you think they're pro-growth or you think 8 they’re a residentialist or however you feel they situate if you believe that they can be bought 9 or influenced in a political way then there's so there's it’s such a the system is sort of fraught 10 with potential problems. 11 12 So despite this beautiful, this I shouldn’t say beautiful. Despite this aspirational goal of having a 13 contest a system that pushes the best to the top I think the biggest problem with that is we’re 14 familiar with the saying you get what you pay for? I believe that applies in architecture and in 15 development. So if you're going to spend a significant amount of money developing a concept 16 for development and applying only to be slotted in with maybe 10 other projects that may or 17 may not that may exceed the thing and then to have absolutely no certainty as to whether or 18 not your project it we are discouraging individuals in my opinion from investing the sort of 19 money that would produce the best result because that's too much risk. Now if the goal of the 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. ordinance is to do just that we actually want to discourage developers from developing in this 1 town commercial office space not just literally with a cap, but also by creating a process that 2 involves so much ambiguity and uncertainty that developers won't even want to participate 3 then this is a great tool for that. And so from that perspective if that's the goal City Council's 4 within its right to make that determination and whether or not that's the right goal is a… but if 5 the goal is to discourage development because of ambiguity then I believe that this is the right 6 tool. So if that's the goal this is the right tool. I think that the lack the reason why we have not 7 hit the cap is not simply because there's been a slowdown in office. I believe it's already having 8 an impact of discouraging applications in office space because of this I don't want to say 9 unintended outcome because it could be the intended consequence. 10 11 I we just had a discussion about the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and I wondered during 12 that discussion whether the office cap affects the economic analysis that was inherent to the 13 scenarios. And I guess there was a part of me that believed that our when we adopted this 14 interim ordinance that the Comp Plan would actually come before it expired and somehow it 15 would incorporate policies and programs that furthered the stated goals of this interim 16 ordinance. So I guess one of my suggestions to Council would be to evaluate whether or not 17 they really would like to accomplish their objectives whatever they may be in an ordinance like 18 this one or whether there is a way for us to incorporate them within the Comp Plan that 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. prioritize… I'm not sure. If they if the Council decides to expand this ordinance citywide I think 1 that there should be a consideration for rollover. 2 3 And finally if the Council determines that they want to continue this ordinance permanently I 4 would suggest my recommendation to Council would be to eliminate the beauty contest 5 entirely. Right now we choose March 31st as just an arbitrary date. So any project that got 6 let's say the office cap had been hit and just at the right amount that didn't trigger a beauty 7 contest because it was only 50,000 projects, but it got hit in May of 2017 then any applicant 8 who is ready to go after May 2017 would in essence have to wait till March 31st. They could be 9 they could have spent two years getting through the process on May 1st, but they have to wait 10 till March 31st to participate in this process. And I would suggest that a much more investor 11 friendly or I should say maybe the right term is developer friendly way to do this would be to 12 treat it as a first come first serve process. Which is to say that no that you can't start you can’t 13 we can't green light your project on May 1st because you're in a calendar year where we've 14 exceeded the number of you exceed the cap, but come January one you're permitted to begin 15 your project. 16 17 And you may find that between May 1st of 2017 and November 1st of 2017 we already hit our 18 50,000. And so the projects that are slated for 2018 are all determined in those months 19 between May and November of the previous year, but at least there would be some ladder. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. And if you were a if you were out in the community and you were and attempting to gauge 1 whether a development project was worth your time you could very easily say ok wow, there 2 are 11 projects before me. The earliest I could possibly go would be 2019. That is the sort of 3 certainty that would encourage developers to go ok if I can get in line for 2019 then I'm going to 4 hire the best architect I have. I'm going to get the best design I can. I'm going to throw 5 everything at this because I get one shot possibly every four years and I want it to be brilliant. 6 And I think that will encourage that sort of dollars that will create the sort of results that we 7 want. 8 9 So again I would be in favor of eliminating the beauty contest and I'm not suggesting that we 10 don't create a framework that encourages the goals of the beauty contest, but we do in a way 11 that doesn't discourage investment. And I don't know what that is yet, but I know that this 12 doesn't accomplish that goal for me. Ok, that's those are my comments. 13 14 Vice-Chair Waldfogel: My turn? Thank you. I've heard some speculation both among my 15 colleagues and from staff that the cap produced office growth within the boundaries, but do 16 you have any interpretation on why we haven't seen significant net new office group growth 17 outside of the cap boundaries? 18 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Ms. Gitelman: We don't really and I'm not sure as Clare indicated that we've had a long enough 1 test of this idea to really draw conclusions and I think we need to study not just our local 2 conditions, but regionally what's happening in the office market. I don't know whether we 3 adopted this ordinance just at the time that something was changing here. I think we should 4 hesitate to draw (interrupted) 5 6 Vice-Chair Waldfogel: Ok, so yes so it's pretty speculative about cause and effect and I get that. 7 Also there's some discussion about traffic and was there ever any intent that the office cap 8 would remediate existing traffic? 9 10 Ms. Gitelman: No. I think the Council was very clear when this was adopted that they were 11 attempting to address the pace of change in neighborhoods that people felt were changing 12 most rapidly. 13 14 Vice-Chair Waldfogel: Ok, so we wouldn't expect to see traffic reductions over the last couple 15 years as an effect of this interim ordinance? 16 17 Ms. Gitelman: That’s right. 18 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Vice-Chair Waldfogel: Yeah, ok. Great. Yeah and I mean I've seen some speculation that it's 1 really higher office density that's above the code assumptions of four or five employees per 2 thousand that's really a causal factor. I’m going to… we all had anecdotes about this, but this 3 probably isn't the right place to share them. 4 5 So I support extending the cap at 50,000 feet. I feel like a bit of an odd man out here, but I 6 don't support extending it outside the current boundaries. I think that using mitigations in the 7 Research Park versus metering in the boundary districts gives us a really interesting local A/B 8 test on what works. And I think that both these approaches are valid and having a local running 9 a local experiment maybe making a decision in the future that one of the other is preferable 10 may be an interesting exercise. I don't support rollover although I could be persuaded that 11 rollover I mean well, if we only keep it within the current districts I don't support rollover. And 12 rollover isn't an issue outside of the current districts or in the office park. 13 14 I do support continuing I'll call the bake off process because I like the idea of the City having a 15 seat at the table to get good projects. I appreciate my colleague Commissioner [Note-Chair] 16 Alcheck’s comments about great architecture. I haven't seen great architecture regularly 17 committed in areas outside of the development cap boundaries. And I'm not too worried that a 18 bake off process will deter good design. I mean I think that we need to be cognizant that we 19 have to design processes as if our objective is to improve the quality of design we have to 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. design processes that will achieve that, but I'm not I'm not concerned that a the City having a 1 seat at the table will deter good design and will deter good projects. 2 3 Commissioner Lauing: I want to go back to that top of Page 33 again. Again if we’re going to 4 make decisions we like to have data and I think you're saying that we haven't had much time to 5 get much data in fact none so it's not indicative of anything really. So I just think we should all 6 kind of understand that. Were there any even anecdotal developers saying I don't like this 7 ordinance so I'm not going to submit or is this just sort of a presumption or speculation? 8 9 Ms. Campbell: I think so the project list that I gave you some examples we definitely saw some 10 projects where the applicant has reduced the amount of square footage and we had some 11 projects that were already like under review when we first adopted the ordinance where 12 they've actually they had planned for office and they've switched it to retail or yeah and 13 housing, yeah. So we’ve… but again we haven't really seen this enough to really make any real 14 determinations on a trend. 15 16 Commissioner Lauing: That latter example might turn out to be a plus. 17 18 Ms. Campbell: Yeah. 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Lauing: If they’re putting in more housing and retail than office. 1 2 Ms. Gitelman: That’s right. I mean there’s only a few examples, but we have had projects that 3 were in our shop for review as office projects the cap was adopted and they have since changed 4 to be residential projects. 5 6 Commissioner Lauing: Ok. So I also appreciate Commissioner [Note-Vice-Chair] Waldfogel’s 7 point that there's not been sizable building anywhere, but there certainly hasn't been in the 8 restricted area so to that extent it's been “successful” given very little data. I also wanted to 9 get clarification on what is the real assignment here? The words you put in the front here is 10 that they made a Motion, Council made a Motion that directed staff to bring forward a 11 permanent annual limit ordinance and it’s separate from the Comprehensive Plan update. Is 12 that separate in terms of timing? Because they want to get it done quickly by this date even if 13 the Comprehensive Plan is not available? I mean it certainly isn’t going to be in contradiction to 14 the Comprehensive Plan so I’m still looking kind of for clarity of what the assignment is. 15 16 Ms. Gitelman: Yeah I think they're there they meant separate to mean separate. That we were 17 asking them at that time whether they wanted to include a policy framework in the Comp Plan 18 for an annual process like this and they said no. We I mean obviously we don't want to 19 contradiction, but what we’d prefer is to refine this through an ordinance process. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. 1 Commissioner Lauing: Instead of a policy in the Comp Plan? 2 3 Ms. Gitelman: That's right. 4 5 Commissioner Lauing: Ok, that's helpful. Yeah I think we could use some more debate on if we 6 expanded to certain areas would they be just the office park or would they be other areas and I 7 don't know that tonight’s the night for that. So that's all. 8 9 Commissioner Gardias: Thank you. So I believe definitely that the room proper place for this 10 policy it's not a separate regulation, but the Comp Plan. And I'm not sure what's the 11 mechanism here is this is it either a representative of this Commission should speak at the 12 meeting of the City Council or maybe we could ask the staff or the Director to recommend if 13 that would be agreement maybe among ourselves to put a recommend the Council to 14 reconsider their suggestion and include this regulation in the Comprehensive Plan. And there is 15 a the reason is that a Comprehensive Plan should address housing and office balance. And then 16 specifically here there is no greater topic then that. This policy addresses this balance in a 17 significant way. So excluding that from the Comprehensive Plan somehow negates the purpose 18 of the Comprehensive Plan. So it's not very logical for me for this reason I would like somebody 19 there to from this Commission to recommend the Council to reconsider or maybe staff would. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. 1 In terms of how this should work so 50,000 annual limit cap it is the number that doesn't 2 explain itself. It's like with any other numbers that we reviewed here at this Commission and 3 the impact fees was recent topic. We are given the numbers and we need to somehow which 4 are artificial they mean nothing. They are prescriptive as opposed to performance based and in 5 this way they just don't work with variety of other regulations. They are just pretty much 6 artificially created. We know why because at the time when this regulation was created there 7 was a pressure to limit the office cap and then for the time being it worked so there was 8 nothing wrong with this interim regulation that Council passed at this time, but now we are 9 approaching discussions on the Comprehensive Plan so maybe we can just approach it 10 differently. 11 12 I think that the way to approach it is to define and to commit to a ratio which you already 13 presented to us when we were talking about EIR. Where we have jobs, employed, and resident 14 ratio of 3.3 and then this cap may be expressed with this ratio. We can maybe in the 15 Comprehensive Plan we can have a statement that this City that the vision of the City is to drive 16 towards a narrower or is to minimize the today’s differentiator or the ratio that is pretty much 17 high, it's very high maybe the objective of the City is to drive toward lowering this ratio. And 18 inclusion of the statement in the Comprehensive Plan would address this issue totally. We can 19 also assume that there is a variance that from the ratio, let's say 3.0. There can be variance 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. annual or quarterly variance of 0.05 which it would be a standard deviation from the mean and 1 then as long as the City marches with the development between those two parameters we’re 2 fine. So then we would not need to have any other review, any beauty contests or any other 3 first come first serve as long as there is a metric and this metric should be naturally maintained. 4 5 This discussion would resolve itself, but of course we would have to have understanding and 6 agreement and then maybe the agreement that City Council is trying to express with the recent 7 discussion maybe it’s the target ratio that we should have. And then if we have it as I said, 8 right, we would not need to have this cap. As I said 50,000 doesn't say anything to me? I was 9 trying just to do some numbers and then excluding I think we have 3.2 million sf which are in 10 the Comprehensive Plan out of this 1.3 million were already taken by the Stanford Medical 11 Center which leaves us with 1.7 so give or take. Now there is a question how much of this 1.7 12 will go to the toward the outside areas, how much will be left for the City and that remainder 13 should be pretty much allocated towards the 2030 horizon of the Comprehensive Plan. So if 14 you do if you discount the growth of the area outside of the… if you discount the growth of the 15 areas like SRP you are left with some office area that may be allocated toward the City if you 16 drive from 3.2 million sf number. Other ways to approach it as I said is to just pretty much look 17 around this ratio. One method or the other method it just give us the greater direction and we 18 don't need this regulation. 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. But however my colleagues talk about this that we need to answer this question what if we're 1 left out with this specific regulation so for this reason my propensity would be like this: I don't 2 believe that there should be any beauty contests because I don't really think that it serves 3 anything. I'm sure that it would not self-serve better architecture just knowing that higher is 4 the that higher burden of the regulation equates to a mediocre architecture. So architects are 5 busy with resolving the issues around the zoning and regulations and they don't design and we 6 know that. So I would be against the beauty contest. 7 8 I think that it should be on the first come and first serve basis and it should be within the rolling 9 timelines. So as long as there is a cap for the 12 months and if that amount of the area is 10 unattained, the office area designated within this 12 months it should keep, going. Of course 11 there is a question that you may ask what's going to happen if there's a large project on the 12 horizon that will automatically go above this cap,? So then of course we would have to just kick 13 in some other review, but then as long as this is below that cap that pretty much the 14 applications should be rolling in. That's how I think about this. I agree with colleagues of mine 15 that suggested to include all the office area regardless so I think that the medical offices all 16 should be included and then all the areas below 2,000 should be included in this cap as well. So 17 those are my comments. Thank you. 18 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Chair Alcheck: Ok Commissioners our the light system does not really work right now because it 1 doesn't reflect the news, the addition of our newest member so just signal me if you have some 2 additional comments. Any order. 3 4 Commissioner Lauing: I was just going to circle back to what I said before we had this 5 conversation and I think the conversation illustrates there are a lot of different opinions. 6 There's a lot of different levels of knowledge about this because of when it came up. And if 7 Council wants us to do something besides just tweak this ordinance which we certainly can do 8 then I think it needs more study. Perhaps even a two or three person ad hoc committee in 9 advance of the next meeting with people that we know have maybe a different opinions so we 10 get something done so we could reestablish the Waldfogel/Rosenblum couple there and see 11 what comes out of that one because there's various opinions that I heard up here so. 12 13 Chair Alcheck: It's an interesting idea. I think to what extent we can affect... So your tasked 14 with the process of bringing an ordinance to City, to the to us and then from us it will go to City 15 Council. So this is in essence like a study session before the development of an ordinance 16 which we’ll review and then either recommend or revise or theoretically recommend revisions 17 because it we may not see it twice on its way to Council, right? 18 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Ms. Gitelman: Right. I think we'd like an opportunity to think a little further about the process 1 after tonight's discussion. We did hear a wide variety of opinions if we had to develop an 2 ordinance based on tonight's discussion I think we would be hard pressed to do that. So I think 3 we want to regroup a little and maybe we'll sit down with the City Manager and talk about his 4 impressions of how this fits into the Council work program this year. We do always have the 5 option with this ordinance to just extended it or let it lapse for a little while we take a little bit 6 longer. So I guess what I'm asking is let's if you have any further thoughts tonight that be 7 terrific and why don't you let us assimilate the input we've received and come back to you with 8 some suggestions and an updated process. 9 10 Chair Alcheck: Ok, I'm going to make a comment and I hope that it serves as a quick example of 11 I think some things that might work out for us. So I'm going to let all of you have an 12 opportunity, but I want to just make a quick comment. I think this will help further the process. 13 14 I think when we come back or in the in your next step this self-mitigating projects exclusion I 15 think it would be very helpful if you could demonstrate how this would be achieved in a 5,000 16 or 10,000 square foot office project. How many housing units would have to be built based on 17 our assumptions for how 10,000 sf of office space is allocated or 5,000 sf or actually 2,100 sf 18 because one of my concerns is that this paragraph about self-mitigating projects is completely 19 unattainable. There is no 2,500 square foot office that within five stories could house enough 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. people to mitigate the jobs/housing imbalance. And so one of the questions that I would like to 1 explore down the road is ok well what how much, how what is reasonable? Like a half, could a 2 project a accommodate half of the housing units versus jobs that it creates? Because otherwise 3 this paragraph is essentially a impossible feat, right? 4 5 That's basically one of the questions that I have. So when, if we explore this further and if the 6 next version of this or what however this works I'd love to sort of figure out whether there is 7 such a thing as a self-mitigating project. Alright, so that's one example of potentially something 8 that could inform this discussion later and I encourage all of you if you have questions since this 9 is a very open ended return to go ahead. Ok. Commissioner Summa. 10 11 Commissioner Summa: So I mean it may not be a perfect ordinance I agree with that, but it 12 seems like it's been successful in doing something that was sort of a consensus moment on the 13 Comp Plan group and that is incentivizing mixed-use that's retail and housing. To respond to 14 people's concerns about housing and also address the jobs/housing imbalance or at least not 15 making it work. So I see it as having been sort of successful understanding that there's only 16 been a very short time to look at it. And yeah I think it’d be very interesting to have an example 17 of the self-mitigating project. Thanks. 18 19 Chair Alcheck: Commissioner Rosenblum. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. 1 Commissioner Rosenblum: Thanks. So a couple reactions; first, I don't think this is that well 2 suited for like an additional subcommittee and the reason is the history of it which is that 3 Council had many sessions on this. We had many sessions on this. And part of the reason I 4 think you sense passion at least on my part for this is that I never actually thought this would do 5 very much. My opposition to it is that it keeps us from doing things I think will do quite a lot. 6 And just to say well this at least accomplished something I don't think, I think the best thing you 7 can say is we don't know. There just hasn't been enough time or who knows, but after hours 8 and hours and hours of Council debate and hours and hours and hours of PTC debate and public 9 input I think we could have done something much better. 10 11 And specifically I think what the community has always been interested in is the impacts of 12 office, the impacts of people. So where do people put their cars? How do they get into our 13 community? And there are effective ways of dealing with that. And so when I suggest to let 14 this ordinance lapse what I really mean is to choose one of the other options that were on the 15 table. So one of the options on the table was to work extensively on mitigation, so cap is not a 16 mitigation. To work on in our community that would be getting a funding source for our TMA, 17 getting proper leadership in place, getting proper oversight. So when I think of those however 18 many hours nine hours of Council meetings on this and all the hours that we had on this and 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. could have been spent productively trying to find a funding source for example for TMA I find it 1 kind of tragic. 2 3 But if we are going to do this again the thing that to me is one of the biggest examples of why 4 this is strange is that the place that leads to a lot of our traffic which is SRP in terms of the total 5 square footage of office and the fact that 73 percent of them drive alone. This is a known issue. 6 This has been an issue for years. They've been working on trying to get people out of their cars. 7 It's a difficult place for people not to drive to. That we've actually just flipped everything on its 8 head. The places where people are reducing their reliance on cars we've put a cap in place. In 9 a place where people can’t get out of their cars we’ve put no cap in place. It’s just the whole 10 thing is very strange. 11 12 And so when I suggest we let this lapse I'm not saying not replace it with anything I'm saying to 13 work on something that we would feel good about which is a program to really reduce the 14 reliance on cars in the Downtown area where that ability exists. And to me again it would be 15 it’s the Stanford plan. Stanford did an amazing job over the last decade plus of getting people 16 out of their cars, but it’s by focusing on this and not just putting a cap in place. I think if they 17 had just put a cap in place and not focused on all the programming they did around the shuttle 18 program, the go pass program, the education program, the marking program. That took work 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. and they focused on that. If they had just said a cap will accomplish what we want I think they 1 would have been short changed. 2 3 So anyway so my suggestion given this process would be I think additional like subcommittees 4 in this case is probably not the best use, but I do hope that we at least come up with some 5 consensus. I have my view. I may be outvoted on this one. I expect I would be, but at least I 6 think we should give guidance to Council that we support this ordinance being extended or we 7 don't we think it should be replaced with something different. And then hopefully some 8 consolidation of our feedback if we decide that this ordinance is really well actually, either way; 9 even if we say we should replace it with something they can just ignore us. And then I think we 10 still owe them some pointers on things that we think should be changed. 11 12 Commissioner Lauing: So a process wise would you say bring it back in a month and have 13 another debate and then vote on something? 14 15 Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah, something like that. I mean I may be strong of will on this 16 one, but I'd be willing to do that right now. But I'm also happy to bring it back if people feel like 17 they need more time to digest and again this is maybe something where this all came during my 18 tenure and so maybe I feel like (interrupted) 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Lauing: You’ve got a lot of history. 1 2 Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah. So it's possible that given the composition of this Commission 3 if people want more time to absorb and talk to folks then I'm open to that. But yeah I think we 4 should we owe Council some kind of direction and answer on this. 5 6 Commissioner Lauing: Yeah unless they've already told us otherwise. I'd like to see the exact 7 Motion actually if we could get that sent to us. 8 9 Ms. Gitelman: Yeah we'd be happy to do that and one of the things that we are talking about is 10 whether we should go to the Council and have this same kind of open ended discussion. We 11 really just scratched the surface because there were so many other issues on the agenda on 12 that June 30 that January 30th date. And so we're kind of figuring out can we fit a study session 13 into the Council schedule, should we just draft an ordinance and bring it to you and bring it to 14 them, we really have to strategize after hearing the wide variety of thoughts expressed this 15 evening. 16 17 Chair Alcheck: Look, I’ll say this: new, old, it doesn't really make a difference. I think everybody 18 on this Commission is sensitive to the impacts that have occurred as a result of the growth that 19 I think most of us have seen as residents. And I don't want to take away here to be Commission 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. split on whether to continue to develop office or not. I think or I at least I speak for myself 1 when I say this is not I'm not opposed to the office cap because I would like more office in our 2 City. I and one of the I think most valuable comments you're making is how much more time 3 are we going to spend on a potentially flawed approach? That is something that we need to 4 address. We can have another two meetings and debate office caps and I think one question is 5 are we continuing to waste time and I think there maybe even Commissioners that don't think 6 we would be and there's a lot of uncertainty involved here. So I don't know that we're ready to 7 even make a Motion to… I don't know. I shouldn’t say make a, I don't know that what we... 8 please. Why don’t? 9 10 Vice-Chair Waldfogel: So Commissioner Rosenbaum raises an interesting point that mitigation is 11 really at the bottom of this is the objective and maybe the way to split the difference is for the 12 time being I really think we need to extend this office cap, but perhaps what we do is we sunset 13 it around demonstrably effective mitigation. That when we show that we have TDM that works 14 or other mitigations that work that we increase the cap or we relieve the restrictions, but I 15 mean for the time being I think this is the best tool that we have in our or the best tool that we 16 have in our tool kit. We don't have reliable funding sources for TMA yet and perhaps that 17 would be an incentive for the private sector to adequately fund TMA. Who knows, you know 18 that's pure speculation, but maybe we come up with some tool like that. I don't know is an 19 interesting? 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. 1 Chair Alcheck: I guess my I'm sort of curious to know how you would respond to this exclusion 2 of the SRP. I mean that being potentially the largest generator of the impacts that the TDM 3 measures that you're waiting for would address. So why wouldn't you use the best tool that 4 you have to address an area that is creating the largest problem that you are hoping will be 5 solved? 6 7 Vice-Chair Waldfogel: Well I partially because I think that the 73 percent and what is it, 54 8 percent numbers are slightly deceptive. Until we actually look at the occupancy per square foot 9 basically how many trips are generated per square foot of building in those districts. I don't 10 have those numbers, but at least historically the Research Park has had lower occupancy 11 density. So I think that if we knew that we could say something smarter about this. I mean we 12 know that for better for worse we know that Cal Ave. has more trips now than it had some time 13 in the past because we're seeing demand for Residential Preferential Parking (RPP), we're 14 seeing a serious discussion about a new parking ramp. So I mean we know that affects have 15 happened, but I don't know enough to agree or disagree that the Research Park is a bigger 16 causal issue than other districts. 17 18 Chair Alcheck: I just want to follow up, I'm curious. So let's assume for a minute the numbers 19 are the same. Let’s say it was 54 and 54. Still why wouldn't you include that area? What would 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. be the rationale to not… what would how would we encourage TDM measures in that area if 1 there was no cap? Or the development of [unintelligible]. I get (interrupted) 2 3 Vice-Chair Waldfogel: Well I’m not sure what you're, are you arguing that the cap should be 4 extended to the Research Park? 5 6 Chair Alcheck: I'm trying to suggest that the exclusion in your mind, in your… you suggested 7 that you want to continue the office cap, but you want to exclude the… its expansion citywide 8 seems inconsistent and I was trying to I was trying to pick your brain as to how that made 9 sense. I appreciate that there's information that you're that you would like to obtain so. 10 11 Vice-Chair Waldfogel: Well and I'd like to see mitigations in the Research Park. I mean I'm not 12 saying we shouldn't do anything in the Research Park. I'd like to see mitigations. I'd like to see 13 that perhaps as a local experiment on mitigations versus metering, but that but I'm trying to 14 suggest there may be a middle ground here which is this isn't a calendared interim item this is a 15 this is interim until we show that we can actually achieve what we say we want to achieve. And 16 we just haven't done that yet. So let's show that we can do it and let's create some incentives 17 for them for the private sector to respond. 18 19 Chair Alcheck: Commissioner Rosenblum. 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. 1 Commissioner Rosenblum: Yeah I guess it’s I think it's all well and good for us to say well it's not 2 ideal, but let's continue and then we also really care about mitigation so hopefully something 3 good happens there. To me it’s exactly the opposite which is what we really should care about 4 is mitigation. This is a program that has been shown to work by our neighbor at Stanford. It's 5 something that we've seen examples on individual building levels. So one building that really 6 struck me was this body presided over a proposal where the proposal was fully parked or they 7 offered Option 2 where they get rid of 10 spaces, but offer Caltrain Go Passes for every person 8 working in the building and it was near the Caltrain Cal Ave. station. And that really struck me. 9 They had something like a 10 percent reduction in number of spaces, but because it cost them 10 $60,000 per space that funded Caltrain passes for everyone. And we considered those two 11 options and one was they’re dramatically different. One you fit ten more cars in the other I 12 forget the number of people it was like 110 people work in the building would all get Go Passes. 13 14 And what I realize is we only have so much time and Council only has so much time and we do 15 what we spend time on and so this particular issue has taken up a lot of time and if we ranked 16 issues that in the last two years have taken Council time this would be a top five item talking 17 office cap, multiple sessions that went on for hours. And so my rejoinder to this is it hasn't 18 really done much. Removing it probably won't do much either. I actually like I said I don't 19 actually think this is that important a measure one way or the other, but I know it takes time 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. and it takes our focus off of what I think is the most important thing which is I think we right 1 now really ineffective TMA at the moment frankly. And I would love to see us and Council start 2 to spend a lot of time understanding why that is and all the different options we could have for 3 funding and staffing that body and doing it well. 4 5 Now the only objection I have to this again is I think it's a really blunt instrument, but at least if 6 we’re going to use the blunt instrument and let's apply it consistently so if we’re going to have 7 a blunt instrument then at least let's apply it to SRP, let's get rid of these exceptions that don't 8 make sense. But I think that we have much better instruments that we should spend our time 9 on. And so that’s it. I just feel sad that we keep discussing this cap which I don't think really 10 does much one way or the other. 11 12 Chair Alcheck: Is it, do, is there any baring other comment or go ahead. 13 14 Commissioner Monk: So looking first of all I just want to say that with what Commissioner 15 Rosenblum was saying I do agree that if it's about mitigation then the time should be spent on 16 doing the hard work to figure out how to really reduce the traffic and those things that impact 17 our quality of life. Although Director Gitelman said that this was more about the pace of 18 change and that's why it was enacted. So getting some clarity on that and addressing that 19 specific would be really important. And also looking at what our objective is tonight this is a 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. study session and as you mentioned you did hear of a variety of a range of opinions and I think 1 that is exactly what we were tasked to do tonight and I think we've successfully met our 2 objective for tonight. So I don't know what the additional conversation needs to continue on so 3 I just want to say that I think we've met our objective and I appreciate all of the interesting 4 commentary. 5 6 Chair Alcheck: Yeah I agree that I think we met our objective. I wonder if there is a way that I 7 can, we can and I'd love to hear if there is support for this empower staff to bring us an 8 agendized item this summer where we delve into TMA. Or if there is a way for us to begin a 9 discussion about effective TMA solutions that address the challenges that may or may not be 10 effectively addressed by this tool. I think that it would be we've talked about this a lot this 11 notion of proposing an item of interest on the Planning Commission that the staff would help 12 facilitate an opportunity to put it on the agenda. I mean I've had that conversation with 13 Assistant Director Lait a few times. And I don't know that I am following the right protocol 14 here, but I guess my question and I'd love if follow Commission Members feel strongly about 15 this I mean there is maybe an interest here in pursuing that. I'd much rather create a 16 subcommittee to talk about TMA than to talk about this ordinance. And is there a way we can 17 accomplish that goal in this calendar year? 18 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Ms. Gitelman: I think we can find a way to do that. I should mention that we have scheduled a 1 discussion with the City Council on April 11th. So coming up in fact the packet goes out 2 tomorrow on parking management strategies Downtown which does offer some potential for 3 funding the TMA in the long term. And what and our recommendation to the Council on the 4 11th is not to take any action just to receive a study that we've been working on and basically 5 instruct us to go and get some additional input and potentially work with the Commission on a 6 further evolution of kind of an implementation strategy if they're interested in pursuing the 7 recommendations of the study. So I'd encourage you to pay attention to the Council meeting 8 on the 11th. It's a Tuesday meeting rather than a Monday meeting, but that may evolve into a 9 Commission agenda item just like the one you're saying you're suggesting and even if it doesn't 10 we can find a way to bring the TMA related issues back to the Commission this year. 11 12 Chair Alcheck: Maybe one of the most constructive thing that we can do at this point would be 13 to encourage staff when they go for that meeting to communicate the passion and interest 14 among Commission Members to explore this and if they're so interested empower us that in 15 our discussion of the cap we had some discussion about delving into this further and if as part 16 of their review they consider that opportunity. Does anybody else have some? Commissioners 17 Summa. 18 19 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Summa: So I think it would be great to discuss a TMA, but unless TMA gets 1 significant funding that’s it's never going to get off the ground. It's a totally different thing than 2 Stanford’s academic success with reduction of trips because they own all the land. So it's very 3 different Downtown and that's why they have a harder time in the Research Park. Even though 4 they own the land there's these long term lease holders and they can't make all the rules. So I 5 appreciate my colleagues’ passion on the topic of the this item, but I think the fact that there 6 has been so much time spent on it is evidence of the passion on both sides around it. So I 7 would suggest it's perfectly appropriate for us to spend time on it because it just elicits a lot of 8 passionate responses. So yeah let's go for trying to improve the TMA, but we've got to figure 9 out who's going to pay for it because it needs professional people running it in my opinion. 10 Thanks. 11 12 Chair Alcheck: Any other comments? Commissioner Gardias. 13 14 Commissioner Gardias: Does the light system work or? 15 16 Chair Alcheck: Not really. 17 18 Commissioner Gardias: I just wanted to make a comment about this what Director Gitelman 19 said. So you said you were wondering how to approach this ordinance with the City Council 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. and some other items. My general thought is like this that Comprehensive Plan that we would 1 be approaching very soon gives us this opportunity to comprehensively review all the 2 ordinances like this one. I think that once we're going to approach summer or the 3 Comprehensive Plan discussion we should just have the laundry list of all the ordinances and 4 then see if they can be incorporated into Comprehensive Plan. Or if a Comprehensive Plan 5 pretty much invalidates them or replaces them in some way. 6 7 Ms. Gitelman: Certainly your review of the Comprehensive Plan is going to be an opportunity 8 for you to review the land use policies that involve growth management strategies and other 9 approaches to growth in the City. And once the Comprehensive Plan is adopted we will have to 10 undertake some changes to our zoning ordinances to implement the new policies in the plan. 11 12 Chair Alcheck: Ok I want to make one more suggestion when this does come back to us in 13 whatever form it comes back to us. I think we've talked about this last time I think it would be 14 very instructive if we could review any other American city’s approach to an office cap that 15 potentially involved a beauty or bake sale or whatever you want to call it. I think we talked 16 about this last time and we were does anybody else do this and how are they doing it and how 17 if because we don't really have a lot of data maybe there's a way we can analyze their results. 18 So barring any other comments by Commissioners I think we can sort of complete (interrupted) 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Lauing: Do we want to agendize this for the next meeting? 1 2 Chair Alcheck: I don't know that it will be ready in time. 3 4 Ms. Gitelman: Yeah. I think we'd like some time to think about it maybe we prepare an 5 ordinance so you have something to react to, something more concrete, but maybe we have to 6 go to Council first. We just have to give it a little thought, but we'll keep working on this. We 7 do know there is some urgency to this because the expiration date of the current ordinance. 8 9 Chair Alcheck: Time is on our side and this is different than the last interim ordinance 10 (interrupted) 11 12 Commissioner Lauing: That’s what I was just going to say. 13 14 Chair Alcheck: We’ve got a few months here. 15 16 Commissioner Lauing: I’m happy to get a little bit more extra time on this one. 17 18 Chair Alcheck: Yeah. 19 20 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Commissioner Lauing: It would be a great though if we could see the text of the Motion so that 1 we know what the direction is to you guys and effectively to us right now even if we want to 2 push back on that we’d like to know what the status is. Thank you. 3 4 Chair Alcheck: Ok. 5 6 Ms. Gitelman: Well thank you all for the input tonight. It's really helpful. 7 8 Chair Alcheck: Yeah this is really very effective. I'd like to close the study session now and move 9 to the approval of the minutes from the March 8th meaning. 10 11 MOTION: There was no Motion. 12 13 _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to three minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Palo Alto Planning & Transportation Commission 1 Commissioner Biographies, Present and Archived Agendas and Reports are available online: 2 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/ptc/default.asp. The PTC Commission members are: 3 4 Chair Michael Alcheck 5 Vice Chair Asher Waldfogel 6 Commissioner Przemek Gardias 7 Commissioner Ed Lauing 8 Commissioner Susan Monk 9 Commissioner Eric Rosenblum 10 Commissioner Doria Summa 11 12 Get Informed and Be Engaged! 13 View online: http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city-of-palo-alto or on Channel 26. 14 15 Show up and speak. Public comment is encouraged. Please complete a speaker request card 16 located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Commission 17 Secretary prior to discussion of the item. 18 19 Write to us. Email the PTC at: Planning.Commission@CityofPaloAlto.org. Letters can be 20 delivered to the Planning & Community Environment Department, 5th floor, City Hall, 250 21 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. Comments received by 2:00 PM two Tuesdays preceding 22 the meeting date will be included in the agenda packet. Comments received afterward through 23 2:00 PM the day of the meeting will be presented to the Commission at the dais. 24 25 Material related to an item on this agenda submitted to the PTC after distribution of the 26 agenda packet is available for public inspection at the address above. 27 Americans with Disability Act (ADA) 28 It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a 29 manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an 30 appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, 31 or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329-2550 (voice) or by emailing 32 ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 33 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. 34 Prepared by Planning Division, August 2017 Projects Subject to the Annual Office Limit for FY2016-FY2018 Approved Office Projects Fiscal Year Address Project Description Location Net New Office Area 2016 2747 PARK BL R&D: New three-story 33,323 sq. ft. research and development building, replacing the existing 4,800 sq. ft. commercial building. Zoning District: General Manufacturing (GM). [14PLN-00388] California Avenue 28,523 sq. ft. 2016 3225 EL CAMINO REAL Mixed-use: New 29,249 sq. ft. mixed-use project, replacing the existing 7,000 sq. ft. retail building, which includes eight residential units and 11,984 sq. ft. of commercial space (retail & office). Zoning District: CS Service Commercial. [15PLN-00003] El Camino Real Corridor 2,932 sq. ft. 2016 2585 EL CAMINO REAL Mixed-use: New three-story mixed use building including 19,954 sq. ft. of commercial space (retail & office) and 13 residential condominium units. Zone Districts: CN, CC(2). [15PLN-00170] El Camino Real Corridor 9,408 sq. ft. TOTAL 40,863 sq. ft. Fiscal Year Address Project Description Location Net New Office Area 2017 NONE Pending Office Projects Fiscal Year* Address Project Description Location Net New Office Area 2018 3045 PARK BL R&D: New two-story 29,120 sq. ft. R&D building replacing the existing 17,956 sq. ft. commercial/office building and construct a. Zone District: GM(AD). [17PLN-00073] California Avenue 11,164 sq. ft. Total 11,164 sq. ft. * Providing projects are ready for approval by March 30, 2018. Fiscal Year CalAve* Downtown* ECR* SRP Other Areas Total (sq. ft.) 2001 5,828 9,601 2,080 155,930 22,600 196,039 2002 4,490 42,210 1,191 32,433 9,950 90,274 2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 0 0 0 4,198 492 4,690 2005 26,320 10,201 0 0 ‐85,639 ‐49,118 2006 1,860 76,268 6,185 0 ‐164,152 ‐79,839 2007 60,703 410 0 5,700 ‐248,958 ‐182,145 2008 0 10,535 0 0 ‐15,442 ‐4,907 2009 1,754 0 0 0 ‐66,000 ‐64,246 2010 0 17,510 33,979 0 0 51,489 2011 0 28,148 0 35,000 5,690 68,838 2012 58,473 48,356 0 26,745 ‐162 133,412 2013 0 26,739 2,775 49,000 0 78,514 2014 45,406 45,608 0 11,571 ‐43,040 59,545 2015 58,840 0 0 0 14,608 73,448 2016 42,189 ‐9,203 12,340 47,141 0 92,467 2017 0 0 0 36,357 0 36,357 Total (sq. ft.) 305,863 306,383 58,550 404,075 ‐570,053 504,818 AOL Area* Citywide Citywide w/o SRP Total Development (sq. ft.): 670,796 504,818 100,743 Average Annual Development (sq. ft.): 39,459 29,695 5,926 Summary of Office/R&D Development FY2001‐FY2017 Notes: 1. Data shown is from VTA's Congestion Management Program's (CMP) and reflects office and R&D uses that is  derived from Planning Entitlements from FY 2001‐ FY 2017.  2. Data excludes Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) expansion and Mayfield Development Agreeement  Projects, which demolishes approximately 323k of non‐residential square feet and replaces 300k of demolished  square feet in Stanford Research Park (SRP). *The Annual Office Limit (AOL) affects primarily three commercial areas in the City: Donwtown, California Avenue  area, and the El Camino Corridor. Prepared by Planning Division August 2017 CJL Stanford Shopping Center Downtown/Unniversity Area UniversityStation PAMF Town & Country California AvenueArea Fry's Site Stanford Research Park El Camino RealCorridor El Camino RealCorridor El Camino RealCorridor Alma Plaza Stanford MedicalCenter CharlestonCenter R-1 San AntonioArea San AntonioArea Midtown West BayshoreArea EdgewoodPlaza East BayshoreArea MSC Embarcadero EastArea SOFA I SOFA II R-1 R-1 (7000) East MeadowCircle s J u n i p e r o S e r r a B o u l e v a r d P a g e M i l l R o ad R o a d E l C a m i n o R e a l S a n A n t o n i o A v e n u e C h a r l e s t o n R oa d O re g o n E x p r e s s w a y M i d d l e f i e l d R o a d U niversity Avenue y 1 0 1 A l m a S t r e e t El Camino Real n e R o a d F o o t h i l l E x p r e s Hi l l vi e w E a st B a y s h or e W e st B a y s h o r e Fabian S a n d Hill R o a d E m b a r c a d e r o R o a d Wallis Ct Donald Drive Encina Grande Drive Cereza Drive Los Robles Avenue Villa Vera Verdosa DriveCampana DriveSolana Drive Georgia Ave Ynigo Way Driscoll Ct ngArthur' Maybell Way Maybell Avenue Frandon Ct Florales Drive Georgia AvenueAmaranta Avenue Amaranta Ct Ki sCourt Terman Drive Baker Avenue Vista Avenue Wisteria Ln Pena Ct Coulombe Drive Cherry Oaks Pl Pomona Avenue Arastradero Road Abel Avenue Clemo Avenue Villa Real El Camino Way Curtner Avenue Ventura Avenue Maclane Emerson Street Ventura Ct Park Boulevard Magnolia Dr South El Camino Real Cypress Lane GlenbrookD Fairmede Avenue Arastradero Road Irven Court Los Palos CirLosPalosPl Maybell Avenue Alta Mesa Ave Kelly Way Lo s Palos Avenue Suzanne Drive Suzanne Drive rive El Camino Real Suzanne CtLorabelle Ct McKellar Lane El Camino Way James Road Maclane Second Street Wilkie Way Camino Ct West Meadow Drive Thain Way Barclay CtVictoria Place Interdale Way West Charleston Road Tennessee LaneWilkie Way Carolina LaneTennessee Lane Park Boulevard Wilkie Ct Davenport Way Alma Street Roosev Monroe Drive Wilkie Way Whitclem Pl Whitclem DriveDuluth Circle Edlee Avenue Dinah's Court Cesano Court Monroe Drive Miller Avenue Whitclem Wy Whitclem Ct Ferne Avenue Ben Lomond Drive Fairfield Court Ferne Avenue Ponce Drive Hemlock Court Ferne Court Alma Street Monroe Drive San Antonio Avenue NitaAvenue Ruthelma Avenue Darlington Ct Charleston Road LundyLane Newberry Ct Park Boulevard George Hood Ln Alma Street eltCircle LinderoDrive Wright Place StarrKingCircle Shasta Drive Mackay Drive Diablo Court Scripps Avenue Scripps Court Nelson Drive Tioga Court Creekside Drive Greenmeadow Way Ben Lomond Drive Parkside Drive Dixon Place Ely Place Dake Avenue Ferne Avenue San Antonio Court (Private) ChristopherCourt CalcaterraPlace Ely Place Ely Place Adobe Place Nelson Court ByronStreet Keats Court Middlefield Road Duncan Place Carlson Court Duncan Place Mumford Place Charleston Road San Antonio Avenue East Meadow Drive Emerson Street Court BryantStreet RooseveltCircle RamonaStreet CarlsonCircle RedwoodCircle South Leghorn Street Montrose Avenue Maplewood Charleston Ct Charleston Road Seminole Way Sutherland Drive Nelson Drive El C apitan Place Fabian Street Loma Verde Avenue Bryson Avenue Midtown Court Cowper Street Gary Court Waverley StreetSouth CourtBryant StreetRamona Street Alma Street Coastland Drive Colorado Avenue Byron Street Middlefield Road Gaspar Court Moreno Avenue Coastland Drive El Carmelo Avenue RosewoodD Campesino Avenue Dymond Ct Martinsen Ct Ramona Street Bryant Street Towle Way Towle Place Wellsbury Ct AvalonCourt FlowersLane Mackall Way Loma Verde Avenue KiplingStreet Cowper Street South Court Waverley StreetEl Verano Avenue Wellsbury Way La Middlefield Road St Claire Drive Alger Drive Ashton Avenue St Michael DriveSt Michael Drive Maureen Avenue Cowper Court Rambow Drive East Meadow Drive Ashton Court Murdoch DriveCowperStreet Murdoch Ct St Michael Court MayCourt Mayview Avenue Middlefield Road Ensign Way Bibbits Drive Gailen CtGailen Avenue Grove Avenue San Antonio Avenue Commercial Street Industrial Avenue Bibbits Drive Charleston Road Fabian Way T East Meadow Drive Grove Avenue Christine Drive Corina Way Ross Road Corina Way Louis Road Nathan Way Transport Street Ortega Court East Meadow Drive yneCourt alisman Loma Verde Avenue Allen Court Ross Court Loma Verde Pl Ames Avenue Richardson Court Holly Oak Drive Ames Avenue CorkOakWay Middlefield Road A mes Ct Ames Avenue Ross Road Rorke Way RorkeWay Stone LaneToyon Place Torreya Court Lupine Avenue Thornwood Drive DriftwoodDrive Talisman Drive Arbutus AvenueRoss Road Louis Road Aspen WayEvergreen Drive East Meadow Drive Corporation WayElwell Court Janice Way East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle GreerRoad Bayshore Freeway rive Ellsworth PlaceSan Carlos Court Wintergreen Way SutterAvenue Sutter Avenue Clara Drive Price CourtStern Avenue Colorado Avenue Randers Ct Ross Road Sycamore Drive Sevyson Ct Stelling Drive Ross Road David Avenue MurrayWay Stelling DriveStelling Ct ManchesterCourt Kenneth Drive ThomasDriveGreer Road Stockton Place Vernon Terrace Louis Road Janice Way Thomas DriveKenneth Drive Loma Verde Avenue CliftonCourtElbridgeWay Clara Drive BautistaCourt Stockton Place Morris Drive Maddux Drive Piers Ct Louis Road Moraga Ct Old Page Mill Road D CoyoteHillRoad Hillview Avenue Porter Drive Hillview Avenue Hanover Street Foothill Expressway Miranda Avenue Stanford Avenue Amherst Street Columbia StreetBowdoin Street Dartmouth Street Hanover Street College Avenue California Avenue Hanover Street Ramos Way (Private) Page Mill Road Hansen Way Hanover Street Arastradero Road Miranda Avenue e Hill Avenue anuela Avenue Miranda Avenue Laguna Ct Barron Avenue Josina Avenue Kendall Avenue Tippawingo St Julie Ct Matadero Avenue Ilima Way Ilima Court Laguna Oaks Pl Carlitos Ct La CalleLaguna Avenue ElCerrit Paradise Way Roble Ridge (Private) LaMataWay Chimalus Drive Matadero Avenue oRoad Paul Avenue Kendall Avenue Whitsell Avenue Barron Avenue Los Robles Avenue Laguna Way ShaunaLane La Para Avenue San Jude Avenue El Centro Street TimlottLa Jennifer Way Magnolia Dr North La Donna Avenue LosRoblesAvenue Rinc Manzana Lane onCircle Crosby Pl Georgia Avenue Hubbartt Drive Willmar Drive Donald Drive Arastradero Road Foothill Expres La Para Avenue San Jude Avenue Magnolia Drive Military Way Arbol Drive Orme Street Fernando Avenue Matadero Avenue Lambert Avenue Hansen Way El Camino Real Margarita Avenue Matadero Avenue Wilton Avenue Oxford Avenue Harvard Street California Avenue Wellesley Street Princeton StreetOberlin Street Cornell Street Cambridge Avenue College AvenueWilliams Street Yale Street Staunton Court Oxford AvenueEl Camino Real Churchill Avenue Park Boulevard Park Avenue Escobita Avenue Churchill Avenue Sequoia Avenue Mariposa Avenue Castilleja Avenue Miramonte Avenue Madrono Avenue Portola Avenue Manzanita Avenue Coleridge Avenue Leland Avenue Stanford AvenueBirch Street Ash Street Lowell Avenue Alma Street Tennyson Avenue Grant Avenue Sheridan AvenueJacaranda Lane El Camino Real Sherman Avenue Ash Street Page Mill Road Mimosa Lane Chestnut Avenue Portage Avenue Pepper Avenue Olive Avenue Acacia Avenue Emerson Street Park Boulevard Orinda Street Birch Street Ash Street Page Mill Road Ash Street Park Boulevard College Avenue Cambridge Avenue New Mayfield Lane Birch Street California Avenue Park Boulevard Nogal Lane Rinconada Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Park Boulevard Seale Avenue Washington Avenue Santa Rita Avenue WaverleyStree Bryant Street High Street Emerson Street Colorado AvenueStreet Emerson Street Ramona Street Bryant Street South Court El Dorado AvenueAlma Street Alma Street HighStreet t Emerson Waverley Oaks Washington Avenue Bryant Street South Court Waverley Street Emerson StreetNevada Avenue North California Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Ramona Street High Street North California Avenue Oregon Expressway Marion Avenue Ramona Street Colorado Avenue Waverley Street Kipling Street South Court Cowper Street Anton CourtNevada Avenue Tasso Street Tasso Street Oregon Avenue Marion Pl Webster Street Middlefield Road Ross Road Warren Way El Cajon Way Embarcadero RoadPrimrose Way Iris Way Tulip Lane Tulip Lane Garland Drive Louis Road Greer Road MortonStreet Greer Road Hamilton Avenue Hilbar LaneAlannah Ct Edge Rhodes Drive Marshall Drive FieldinMoreno AvenueMarshallDrive Dennis Drive Agnes Way Oregon AvenueBlair Court Santa Ana Street Elsinore DriveElsinore CourtEl Cajon Way Greer RoadNorth California Avenue gDrive Colorado Avenue Sycamore Drive Amarillo Avenue VanAukenCircle Bruce Drive Colonial Lane Moreno Avenue Celia Drive Burnham Way Greer Road Indian Drive Elmdale Pl C Tanland Drive Moreno Avenue Amarillo Avenue West Bayshore Road Sandra Place Clara DriveColorado Avenue Greer Road Colorado AvenueSimkins Court Otterson CtHiggins PlaceLawrence Lane Maddux Drive Genevieve Ct MetroCircle MoffettCircle Greer Road East Bayshore Road ardinalWay Santa Catalina Street ArrowheadWayAztec Way Chabot Terrace Oregon Avenue Carmel Drive SierraCourt StFrancisDrive West Bayshore Road Tanland Drive East Bayshore Road woodDrive Edgewood Drive WildwoodLane Ivy Lane East Bayshore Road St Francis Drive Wildwood Lane Watson Court Laura Lane Sandalwood Ct O'Brine Lane (Private) Embarcadero Road FaberPlace Embarcadero Road Geng Road Embarcadero Way E Sand Hill Road Quarry Road Welch Road Arboretum Road Quarry Road Sand Hill Road Homer Avenue Lane 8 West Medical Foundation Way Lane 7 West Lane 7 East Embarcadero Road Encina Avenue El Camino Real Urban Lane Wells Avenue Forest Avenue High Street Emerson Street Channing Avenue Alma Street Alma Street PaloAltoA El Camino Real venue Mitchell Lane Hawthorne Avenue Everett Avenue Lytton Avenue Lane 15 E High Street Alma Street Bryant Street Lane 6 E Lane 11 W Lane 21High Street Gilman Street Hamilton Avenue University Avenue Bryant Court Lane 30 Florence Street Kipling Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Ruthven Avenue Hawthorne Avenue Lane 33 PaloAltoAvenue Everett Avenue Poe Street Waverley Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Palo Alto Avenue Webster Street Everett Court Lytton Avenue Byron Street Fulton StreetMiddlefield Road Churchill Avenue Lowell Avenue Seale AvenueTennyson Avenue Melville Avenue Cowper Street Tasso Street Webster Street Byron Street North California Avenue Coleridge Avenue Waverley Street Bryant Street Emerson Street Kellogg Avenue Kingsley Avenue Portal Place Ross Road Oregon Avenue Garland Drive Lane A West Lane B West Lane B East Lane D West Lane 59 East Whitman Court Kellogg AvenueEmbarcadero Road Kingsley Avenue Lincoln AvenueAddison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Forest Avenue Downing Lane Homer Avenue Lane D East Lane 39 Lane 56 Hamilton Avenue Webster Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant StreetRamona Street Addison AvenueScott Street Byron Street Palo Hale Street Seneca Street Lytton Avenue Guinda Street PaloAltoAvenue Fulton StreetMiddlefield Road Forest Avenue Webster Street Kellogg Avenue Middlefield Road Byron Street Webster Street Cowper Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Boyce Avenue Forest AvenueHamilton Avenue Homer AvenueGuinda Street Middlefield Road Channing Avenue AltoAvenue Chaucer Street Chaucer Street University Avenue Channing Avenue Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Regent Pl Guinda StreetLincoln Avenue Fulton Street Melville Avenue Byron Street Kingsley Avenue Melville Avenue Hamilton AvenueHamilton Court Forest AvenueForest Ct Marlowe St Maple Stree Palm Street Somerset Pl Pitman Avenue Fife Avenue Forest Avenue Dana Avenue Lincoln Avenue University Avenue Coleridge Avenue Lowell Avenue Fulton StreetCowper Street Tennyson Avenue Seale Avenue Northampton Drive West Greenwich Pl Middlefield Road Newell RoadGuinda Street East Greenwich Pl Southampton Drive Webster Street Kirby Pl Kent Place Tevis Pl Martin Avenue Center Drive Harriet Street Wils o n S t r e e t Cedar Street Harker Avenue Greenwood Avenue Hutchinson Avenue Channing Avenue Hopkins Avenue Embarcadero Road Ashby Drive Dana Avenue Hamilton Avenue Pitman Avenue Southwood Drive West CrescentDrive C University Avenue Center Drive East Crescen Arcadia Place Louisa Court Newell Pl Sharon Ct Erstwild Court Walter Hays Drive Walnut Drive Newell Road Parkinson AvenuePine Street Mark Twain Street Louis RoadBarbara Drive Primrose Way Iris Way Embarcadero Road Walter Hays Drive Lois Lane Jordan Pl Lois Lane Heather Lane Bret Harte Street Stanley Way De Soto DriveDe Soto Drive Alester Avenue Walter Hays Drive Channing Avenue Iris Way tDrive Dana Avenue Hamilton AvenueNewell RoadKings Lane Edgewood Drive Island Drive Jefferson Drive JacksonDrive Patricia LaneMadison Way EdgewoodDrive Ramona Street Addison AvenueChanning Avenue Waverley Street Tennyson Avenue Seale Avenue Middlefield Road Byron StreetWebster Street Marion AvenueWelch Road Sedro Lane Peral Lane McGregor Way Monroe Drive Silva Avenue Silva Court Miller Court Briarwood Way Driscoll Place Paulsen Ln Community Lane Lane 15 E Court Madeline Ct David Ct Green Ct Oregon Expressway Oregon Expressway Sheridan Avenue Page Mill Road Page Mill Road Foothill Expressway Miranda Avenue Foothill Expressway Cerrito Way Emerson Street Miranda Avenue Lane 20 WLane 20 E Oregon ExpresswayUniversity Avenue Jacob's Ct CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW Emerson Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Clark Way Durand Way Sand Hill Road Swain Way Clark Way Mosher Way Charles Marx Way Orchard Lane Vineyard Lane Oak Road Sand Hill Road Sand Hill Road Sand Hill Road Hillv Lane 66 Bryant Street Ramona Street Blake Wilbur Drive West Charleston Road Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway West Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road West Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Fabian Way Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Palo Road Shopping Center Way Shopping Center Way Shopping Center Way London Plane Way Plum Lane Sweet Olive Way Pear Lane Lane 66 La Selva Drive Grove Ct Stanford Avenue Lane 12 WLane 5 E Lasuen Street Serra Mall Escondido Road Olmsted Road Phillips Road Pistache Place Santa Ynez Street Lane B Lane C El Dorado Avenue Oak Creek Drive Clara Drive Bellview Dr Everett Avenue Homer Avenue La Calle SAN ANTONIO AVENUE Matadero Ave Colorado Pl Los Robles Avenue Timlott Ct Vista Villa PaloAltoAvenue Lane La Donna Avenue Cass Way Kenneth Drive Fabian Way Page Mill Road Middlefield RoadChristine Drive Louis Road Charleston Road Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Chimalus Drive Hanover Street Community Lane Greenwood Avenue Harker Avenue Parkinson Avenue Avenue Maplewood Pl Mackay Drive Santa Teresa Lane Byron Street Varian Way Quail DrQuail Dr Paloma Dr Paloma Dr Trinity Ln Heron Wy Feather Ln Stanislaus LnTuolu mne Ln Plover Ln Sandpiper Ln Curlew Ln Mallard LnEgret Ln Klamath Ln Deodar StAlder LnSpruce Ln Rickey's Ln Juniper Way Rickey's Wy Rickey's Wy Rickey's Wy Juniper Lane Emerson Street Boronda Lane Tahoe Lane Lake Avenue Donner Lane Almanor Lane Fallen Leaf Street Berryessa Street Cashel StNoble St Hettinger Ln Pratt Ln Emma Court Galvez Mall Federation Way Abrams Court Allardice Way Alta Road Alvarado CtAlvarado Row Angell Court Arguello Way Arguello Way Avery Mall Ayrshire Farm Lane Barnes CourtBonair Siding Bowdoin Street Cabrillo Avenue Cabrillo Avenue Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus DriveCampus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus DriveCampus Drive Campus Drive Capistrano Way Casanueva Place Cathcart Way Cedro Way Cedro Way Churchill Mall Comstock Circle Aboretum Road Aboretum Road Blackwelder Court Campus Drive Cathcart Way Constanzo Street Cooksey Lane Coronado Avenue Cottrell Way Cottrell Way Cowell Ln Crothers Way Dolores Street Dolores Street Dudley Lane Duena Street Electioneer Road Escondido Mall Escondido Mall Escondido Road Escondido Road Escondido Road Esplanada Way Estudillo Road Fremont Road Frenchmans Road Frenchmans Road Galvez Mall Alvarado Row Galvez Street Galvez Street Galvez Street Gerona Road Gerona Road El Escarpado Gerona Road Hoskins Court Hulme Court Jenkins Court Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Knight Way Lagunita Drive Lane L L ane W Lasuen Mall Lasuen Mall Lasuen Mall Lasuen Street Lathrop Drive Lathrop Drive Lathrop Place Lathrop Drive Links RoadLinks Road Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita DriveLomita Court Lomita Mall Los Arboles Avenue Masters Mall Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue McFarland Court Mears CourtMears Court Memorial Way Mirada Avenue Mirada Avenue Museum Way N Service Road N Tolman Ln Nelson Mall Nelson Road North-South Axis Oberlin St Comstock Circle Escondido Mall Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Palm Drive Palm Drive Pampas Lane Panama Mall Panama Mall Panama Street Panama Street Pearce Mitchell Pl Peter Coutts Circle Peter Coutts Road Peter Coutts Road Pine Hill Court Pine Hill Road Quarry Extension Quarry Road Quillen Ct Raimundo Way Rai m undo Wa y Raimundo Way Roble Drive Rosse Lane Roth Way Roth Way Roth Way Running Farm Lane Ryan Court S Service Road S Tolman Ln Salvatierra Street Salvatierra St Salvatierra Walk Samuel Morris Wy San Francisco Terrace San Francisco CourtSan Juan St San Juan St San Rafael Pl Santa Fe Avenue Santa Maria Avenue Santa Teresa Street Santa Teresa Street Santa Ynez Street Searsville Road Sequoia Wy Serra Mall Serra Street Serra Street Serra Street Sonoma Terrace Stanford Avenue Stanford Avenue Stock Farm R oad Thoburn Court Tolman DriveValdez Place Valparaiso Street Vernier Place Via Ortega Via Palou Via Pueblo Mall Welch Road Wellesley St Wilbur Way Wing Place Yale St Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Hawthorne Avenue Lytton Avenue Alpine Access Road Nathan Abbott Way Sam McDonald Road Sam McDonald Mall Vista Lane Bowdoin Lane Arguello Way Governors Avenue Governors Avenue Governors Avenue S Governors Lane Pasteur Drive Lagunita Drive Alma Village Lane Alma Village Circle R e s e r v oir R o a d Reservoir Road Reservoir Road Ranch Road Ryan Lane O'Connor Lane Gene CtBrassinga Ct Cole Ct Birch Street Arboretum Road Welch RoadPasteur Drive Pasteur Drive This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Commercial & RT Zoning Districts - Office is a Permitted Use w/ Possible GF & Size Limitations ROLM & RP Zoning Districts - Office and R & D is a Permitted Use MOR Zoning District - Medical Office is a Permitted Use PF Zoning District - Office is a Conditional Use GM Zoning District - R & D is a Permitted Use & Office is a Conditional Use Stanford Research Park Annual Office and R&D Cap Area Boundaries City Jurisdictional Limits abc Note: Other uses where Office may be an "accessory use" maybe conditionally permitted in Residential Zoning Districts 0' 2200' Of f i c e a n d R & D An n u a l C a p B o u n d a r i e s Ar e a M a p CITY O F PALO A L TO I N C O R P O R ATE D C ALIFOR N IA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f A P RIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2015 City of Palo Alto RRivera, 2015-10-01 11:54:38 (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\meta\view.mdb)