HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 7313
City of Palo Alto (ID # 7313)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 11/14/2016
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Ordinance Revising AR Findings
Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Approving Revisions to the
Architectural Review Findings in Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 18.76 and
Approval of an Exemption Under Sections 15061 and 15305 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. The Planning and
Transportation Commission Recommended Council Approval of the
Ordinance (Continued from September 12, 2016)
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council adopt an Ordinance modifying the Architectural Review (AR)
approval findings.
Executive Summary
This report is responsive to the City Council’s direction to make specific changes to draft
architectural review findings. An updated ordinance reflecting Council direction is provided in
Attachment A, where the language added by Council is highlighted in yellow.
Background
Since summer 2015, staff has been working on updating the City’s architectural review findings
to:
Facilitate easier review, reduce writing and reading fatigue, and improve analysis
Provide applicants a better understanding of how projects will be evaluated, and
Improve the standing of projects in court.
The City Council reviewed the findings on April 11, 20161 and requested that staff explore
additional refinements with the ARB and PTC. Staff conducted this review and presented the
1 City Council Staff Report April 11, 2016: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/51728
City of Palo Alto Page 2
results to the City Council on September 12, 20162. Council then directed further refinements,
which are addressed below. Excerpted minutes of the September 12, 2016 Council hearing are
provided as Attachment B.
Discussion
The findings reviewed by the City Council on September 12th are provided below and edited
with strikeout/underline text to reflect Council direction from that meeting.
1. The design is consistent with applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan;
Zoning Code including context-based design criteria, as applicable), coordinated area
plans (including compatibility requirements), and any relevant design guides.
2. The project has a unified and coherent design, that:
a. creates an internal sense of order and desirable environment for occupants,
visitors, and the general community,
b. preserves, respects and integrates existing natural features that contribute
positively to the site and the historic character including historic local resources
of the area when relevant,
c. is compatible with its setting, and in the Downtown business district and the
California Avenue business district, establishes design linkages with surrounding
existing buildings so that the visual unity of the street is maintained at a
minimum by:
i. The rhythmic pattern of the street established by the general width of
the buildings and the spacing between them; and
ii. The sizes, proportions, and orientations of windows, bays, and doorways.
d. provides harmonious transitions in scale, mass, and character to adjacent land
uses and land use designations, and
e. enhances living conditions on the site (if it includes residential uses) and in
adjacent residential areas.
3. The design is of high aesthetic quality, using high quality, integrated materials and
appropriate construction techniques, and incorporating textures, colors, and other
details that are compatible with and enhance the surrounding area.
4. The design is functional, allowing for ease and safety of pedestrian and bicycle traffic
and providing for elements that support the building’s necessary operations (e.g.
convenient vehicle access to property and utilities, appropriate arrangement and
amount of open space and integrated signage, if applicable, etc.).
5. The landscape design complements and enhances the building design and its
surroundings, is appropriate to the site’s functions, and utilizes climate appropriate
2 City Council Staff Report, dated September 12, 2016:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/53708
City of Palo Alto Page 3
regional indigenous drought-resistant plant material capable of providing desirable
habitat when feasible (and preferably California natives), and that can be appropriately
maintained.
6. The project incorporates design principles that achieve sustainability in areas related to
energy efficiency, water conservation, building materials, landscaping, and site planning.
While these changes have been incorporated into the draft ordinance attached, staff must note
that the suggested changes to finding 2(c) are redundant with the context sensitive design
criteria already applicable to the districts referenced by the changes (See Attachment C and
Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.16.090(a)(2)(B)) and 18.18.110(a)(2)(B)).
Council also directed staff to return with proposed boundary definitions for the Downtown
business district and the California Avenue business district. To address this request, staff
reviewed the City’s Comprehensive Plan, which provides the following boundaries.
The shaded area in Figure 1 (pink) represents the Downtown Business District and the dashed
(green) outline represents the Downtown Parking Assessment District. The shaded area is also
similar to the City’s Zone A and Zone B Business Improvement District (BID) Boundaries and
Benefit Zones.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Figure 1: Land Use Map L-5 depicting University Avenue/Downtown Commercial Center/Business District
The shaded area in Figure 2 (light blue with square-dashed blue outline) represents the
California Avenue Business District. The dashed outline (green) represents the California
Avenue Parking Assessment District boundary. There is no California Avenue BID to compare
boundaries as there is for Downtown.
When deciding on a definition for the two business districts, staff recommends the Council be
consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan designations or the parking assessment district
boundaries to minimize the confusion and variability of terms in different contexts. However,
the Council may determine an alternative boundary is appropriate that is different from those
presented in this report.
Policy Implications
The City Council’s decision to modify the AR findings reflects refinements of existing standards
that clarify and focus project review of projects subject to an Architectural Review approval.
There are no substantive changes to the standards or criteria of review or changes to project
review procedures.
City of Palo Alto Page 5
Figure 2: Land Use Map L-5 California Avenue Commercial Center/Business District
Resource Impact
Other than staff time, no additional fiscal or economic impacts are anticipated.
Timeline
If Council adopts these revisions or further modifications on first reading, the second reading
would be scheduled as a consent calendar review for adoption. Any ordinance adopted on
second reading would become effective 31 days from second reading.
Environmental Review
This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) (Review for Exemption) and 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land
City of Palo Alto Page 6
Use Limitations) in that (1) the activity (rewording of Architectural Review findings) is covered
by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a
significant effect on the environment, and it can be seen with certainty that there is no
possibility that the activity in question may have a significantly effect on the environment, and
(2) this ‘minor alteration in land use limitations’ does not result in any changes in land use or
density.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Ordinance Amending Architectural Review Findings (PDF)
Attachment B: Excerpt of Minutes for Council Meeting of September 12 (DOCX)
Attachment C: CBDC Compatibility Criteria (DOCX)
Not Yet Approved
160713 jb 0131537 1
Ordinance No. _______
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code
(PAMC) Title 18 (Zoning Regulations), Section 18.76.020 (Architectural Review)
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. As part of the City’s annual Zoning Code update, the City desires to improve its
Architectural Review findings to ensure robust design review, to eliminate repetitive findings and to
remove outmoded and unnecessary findings.
B. On September 3 and October 1, 2015, the Architectural Review Board (ARB)
reviewed the draft updated architectural review findings and provided input. Subsequently, the
Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) reviewed the AR findings and recommended that
Council approve them without any changes.
C. On April 11, 2016, the Council reviewed the draft findings, suggested revisions and
directed staff and the ARB to review the updated language and offer approval, feedback or changes.
D. On June 16, 2016, the ARB reviewed the updated findings and provided additional
comments.
E. On August 10, 2016, the Planning and Transportation Commission reviewed the
updated findings and concurred with the ARB and Staff’s comments.
F. On September 12, and December 12, 2016, the City Council conducted public
hearings on the updated and revised architectural review findings.
SECTION 2. Subdivision (d) of Section 18.76.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is
amended to read as follows:
18.76.020 Architectural Review.
***
(d) Findings
Neither the director, nor the city council on appeal, shall grant architectural review approval,
unless it is found that each of the following applicable findings is met:
(1) The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elementsprovisions of the Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan;, Zoning Code (including context-based design criteria, as applicable),
coordinated area plans (including compatibility requirements), and any relevant design
guides.
Not Yet Approved
160713 jb 0131537 2
(2) The project has a unified and coherent design, that:
(a) creates an internal sense of order and desirable environment for occupants, visitors,
and the general community,
(b) preserves, respects and integrates existing natural features that contribute positively
to the site and the historic character including historic local resources of the area
when relevant,
(c) is compatible with its setting, and in the Downtown business district and California
Avenue business district, establishes design linkage with surrounding existing
buildings so that the visual unity of the street is maintained at a minimum by:
i. The rhythmic pattern of the street established by the general width of the
buildings and the spacing between them;
ii. The sizes, proportions, and orientations of windows, bays, and doorways
(d) provides harmonious transitions in scale, mass and character to adjacent land uses
and land use designations, and
(e) enhances living conditions on the site (if it includes residential uses) and in adjacent
residential areas.
(3) The design is of high aesthetic quality, using high quality, integrated materials and
appropriate construction techniques, and incorporating textures, colors, and other details
that are compatible with and enhance the surrounding area.
(4) The design is functional, allowing for ease and safety of pedestrian and bicycle traffic and
providing for elements that support the building’s necessary operations (e.g. convenient
vehicle access to property and utilities, appropriate arrangement and amount of open
space and integrated signage, if applicable, etc.).
(5) The landscape design complements and enhances the building design and its surroundings,
is appropriate to the site’s functions, and utilizes to the extent practical, regional indigenous
drought resistant plant material capable of providing desirable habitat when feasible (and
preferably California natives), and that can be appropriately maintained.
(6) The project incorporates design principles that achieve sustainability in areas related to
energy efficiency, water conservation, building materials, landscaping, and site planning.
(2) The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site;
(3) The design is appropriate to the function of the project;
(4) In areas considered by the board as having a unified design character or historical character,
the design is compatible with such character;
(5) The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between
different designated land uses;
(6) The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site;
(7) The planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an internal
sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and the general
community;
(8) The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate to the design and the function
of the structures;
Not Yet Approved
160713 jb 0131537 3
(9) Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support the main functions of the project and
the same are compatible with the project's design concept;
(10) Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for pedestrians,
cyclists and vehicles;
(11) Natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project;
(12) The materials, textures, colors and details of construction and plant material are
appropriate expression to the design and function and whether the same are compatible with the
adjacent and neighboring structures, landscape elements and functions;
(13) The landscape design concept for the site, as shown by the relationship of plant masses,
open space, scale, plant forms and foliage textures and colors create a desirable and functional
environment and whether the landscape concept depicts an appropriate unity with the various
buildings on the site;
(14) Plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site, capable of being properly maintained
on the site, and is of a variety which would tend to be drought-resistant and to reduce consumption
of water in its installation and maintenance;
(15) ITie project exhibits green building and sustainable design that is energy efficient, water
conserving, durable and nontoxic, with high-quality spaces and high recycled content materials. The
following considerations should be utilized in determining sustainable site and building design:
(A) Optimize building orientation for heat gain, shading, daylighting, and natural ventilation;
(B) Design of landscaping to create comfortable micro-climates and reduce heat island
effects;
(C) Design for easy pedestrian, bicycle and transit access;
(D) Maximize on site stormwater management through landscaping and permeable paving;
(E) Use sustainable building materials;
(F) Design lighting, plumbing and equipment for efficient energy and water use;
(G) Create healthy indoor environments; and
(H) Use creativity and innovation to build more sustainable environments.
(16) The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose of architectural review as set
forth in subsection (a).
SECTION 3. Adoption of this ordinance is found to be categorically exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act under CEQA Guideline sections 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense
Exemption) and 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations)because: (1) the activity
(rewording of Architectural Review findings) is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only
to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and it can
be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a
significantly effect on the environment, and (2) this ‘minor alteration in land use limitations’ does
not result in any changes in land use or density.
Not Yet Approved
160713 jb 0131537 4
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of the ordinance is
for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it should have adopted the ordinance and
each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its passage
and adoption.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
__________________________ _____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________ _____________________________
Senior Asst. City Attorney City Manager
_____________________________
Director of Planning and Community
Environment
EXCERPT OF MINUTES FOR COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2016
7. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Approving Revisions to the
Number and Wording of the Architectural Review Findings in Palo
Alto Municipal Code Chapter 18.76 and Approval of an Exemption
Under Sections 15061 and 15305 of the California Environmental
Quality Act Guidelines. The Planning and Transportation Commission
Recommended Council Approval of the Ordinance.
Public Hearing opened and closed without public comment at 11:38 P.M.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Burt to
adopt an Ordinance modifying the Architectural Review Approval Findings
including the following changes:
A. Replace Finding Number 5 with the April 11, 2016 Council directed
language for Finding Number 5, “the landscape design compliments
and enhances the building design and its surroundings, is appropriate
to the site’s functions, and utilizes, to the extent practical, indigenous
drought-resistant plant material capable of providing desirable habitat
and that can be appropriately maintained;” and
B. Remove from Finding Number 2(b), “local.”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion Part A, “adding ‘regional’
after ‘to the extent practical.’”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “add to Finding 2(d), ‘mass’
after ‘transitions in scale.’” (New Part C)
AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council
Member Schmid to add to the Motion, “add to Finding 2(c), “and in urban
areas, establishes design linkages with surrounding existing buildings so that
the visual unity of the street is maintained at a minimum by:
i. The rhythmic pattern of the street established by the general
width of the buildings and the spacing between them; and
ii. The sizes, proportions, and orientations of windows, bays,
and doorways; and
iii. The location and treatment of entryways where applicable.
AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved,
seconded by Council Member XX to remove Part iii of the Amendment and
replace in the Amendment, “urban areas” with “the Downtown urban core,
California Avenue core, and El Camino Real.”
AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT RESTATED AND INCORPORATED
INTO THE AMENDMENT WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND
SECONDER to remove Part iii of the Amendment and replace in the
Amendment, “urban areas” with “the Downtown business district and the
California Avenue business district.”
INCORPORATED INTO THE AMENDMENT WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Amendment, “Direct Staff to return
with proposed boundary definitions for the Downtown business district and
the California Avenue business district.
AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT: Council Member Filseth moved,
seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Amendment, “remove from
Finding Number 2(d), ‘and land use designations.’”
AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER
MOTION RESTATED: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council
Member Burt to adopt an Ordinance modifying the Architectural Review
Approval Findings including the following changes:
A. Replace Finding Number 5 with the April 11, 2016 Council directed
language for Finding Number 5, “the landscape design compliments
and enhances the building design and its surroundings, is appropriate
to the site’s functions, and utilizes, to the extent practical, regional
indigenous drought-resistant plant material capable of providing
desirable habitat and that can be appropriately maintained;” and
B. Remove from Finding Number 2(b), “local;” and
C. Add to Finding 2(d), “mass” after “transitions in scale.”
AMENDMENT RESTATED: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by
Council Member Schmid to:
A. Add to the Motion, “add to Finding 2(c), ‘and in the Downtown business
district and the California Avenue business district, establishes design
linkages with surrounding existing buildings so that the visual unity of
the street is maintained at a minimum by:
a. The rhythmic pattern of the street established by the general
width of the buildings and the spacing between them;
b. The sizes, proportions, and orientations of windows, bays, and
doorways;’” and
B. Direct Staff to return with proposed boundary definitions for the
Downtown business district and the California Avenue business district.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Mayor Burt moved, seconded by Vice Mayor
Scharff to continue the Motion as Amended, the Amendment as Amended,
and this Item to a date uncertain.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION PASSED: 9-0