Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-08-06 City Council (13)City of Palo Alto City Manager’s Report TO: FROM: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DATE: SUBJECT: AUGUST 6, 2001 CMR:338:01 ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE FOR A SINGLE FAMILY INDIVIDUAL REVIEW PROCESS AND AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SINGLE FAMILY (R-l) DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS REPORT IN BRIEF This report conveys to the City Council the recommendations of the Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) regarding the single family review program. The report also includes the recommendations of the staff and the Future of Single Family Neighborhoods Advisory Group and identifies the differences between the Commission and staff recommendations. These differences include the appropriate threshold for the Individual Review process and level of review for the Individual Review Guidelines. The report also requests City Council action on two separate ordinances. The first ordinance amends several sections of the Single Family (R-l) Zone District provisions and the second ordinance amends the zoning Ordinance to include enabling legislation to implement an Individual Review Process and associated guidelines for single family houses, establish a threshold for such review, and propose a sunset clause for the Individual Review Process. CMR:338:01 Page 1 of 10 RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the City Council: Adopt an Ordinance amending the Single Family Residence (R-l) District regulations (Attachment A), including changes to the definition of floor area ratio (FAR), daylight plane, lot coverage, parking surfaces, height and grade definitions, contextual front setback, and new regulations related to contextual garage placement, restrictions on bay window and fireplace projection into minimum side yard setbacks, outdoor lighting, and permeable surface standard for the front yard setback area. 2. Adopt an Ordinance for an Individual Review Process (Attachment B), including: a) A threshold for Individual Review for any new two-story house, new second story addition, or addition greater than 150 square feet to an existing second story. b) Optional Director’s Hearing and mediation program. c) City Council "call-up" appeal procedure. Direct staff and the Future of Single Family Neighborhoods’ Sub-Group to prepare final Individual Review Guidelines and associated checklist to be approved and adopted by the Director of Planning and Community Environment after review and comment by the Planning and Transportation Commission. Direct staff to conduct an annual assessment of the impact of the proposed Ordinance and Individual Review Guidelines to identify necessary changes and adopt a "sunset" clause five years after implementation of the Individual Review program. Direct staff to develop a community and staff awareness program in conjunction with the Future of Single Family Neighborhoods Advisory Group Program Planning Committee. The Planning and Transportation Commission recommendations- (Attachment C) mirror those of staff, with the following exceptions: 1.A threshold for Individual Review of any new construction greater than 80 percent of the allowed floor area ratio for the site. 2.The final Individual Review Guidelines and associated checklist to be reviewed by the Planning and Transportation Commission and adopted by the Council prior to implementation of the program. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The single family review proposals (Individual Review process and changes to the Single Family (R-l) Zone District provisions) are intended to address the concerns brought CMR:338:01 Page 2 of 10 about by new and remodeled houses in existing neighborhoods. The new houses often cause a loss of privacy, seem too large and out of scale, and do not relate well to neighborhood patterns. These core issues can be summarized as problems related to privacy, mass and scale, and streetscape issues. The problems identified can be further classified as generally functional or aesthetic issues. Functional issues, such as the size of setbacks, lend themselves to a quantified approach while aesthetic issues, such as scale, are more difficult to quantify. The Individual Review process is intended to address those issues that are more difficult to quantify. The vast majority of new house construction in Palo Alto occurs on infill sites and the Individual Review process and associated Guidelines provide flexibility to address the uniqueness of each residential parcel and the existing relationship to adjoining properties. The changes to the Single Family (R-l) Zone District regulations are intended to address those issues that can be more easily quantified and a number of amendments to the existing regulations are proposed. RESPONSE TO COUNCIL QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE On June 18, 2001, the City Council held a Committee of the Whole meeting at the Arts Center to review the proposed single family program. During the Committee of the Whole meeting the Council requested clarification or additional information on a number of issues, as follows: 1.Clarify the proposed "call-up" appeal procedure. 2.Provide more information on the proposed optional mediation program. 3.Provide a chart comparing the current and proposed amendments to the R-1 District regulations. 4. Expand information on the proposed budget for the Individual Review Program. 5. Assess the effect of the proposed regulatory changes on houses located in flood zones. 6. Provide information on single family programs in other cities with similar demographics to the City of Palo Alto. 7. Expand the analysis of the timeline for the Individual Review process. As well, the council indicated an interest in a tour of Single Family neighborhoods similar to the tour for the Future of Single Family Neighborhoods Advisory Group. On Friday, July 27th, Council Members Wheeler, Beecham, and Burch participated in a tour led by members (and architects) of the Advisory Group John Northway and Judith Wasserman. 1. "Call-up Procedure" This procedure is often used in Southern California cities but less frequently in the Bay Area. The proposed steps in the process are as follows: CMR:338:01 Page 3 of 10 1.If an appeal is filed (following an optional Director’ s Hearing) the appeal is placed on the Council consent calendar with a brief staff analysis and recommendation. 2.A Council Member or member of the public can request the item be moved from the consent calendar for discussion. 3.If Council (by a vote of at least four members) agrees to hear the appeal, the item is placed on a future Council agenda for a public hearing on the appeal. The "call-up" procedure is intended to both provide due process and allow the Council to hear those appeals that it deems necessary to establish or clarify policy. As well, the proposal is a streamlining measure based on a concern that a large number of appeals could adversely impact the already crowded Council agenda. Significant concerns could also be addressed through the annual review of the Individual Review process. 2. Optional Mediation The Individual Review process proposes a rather unusual mediation program. The intent is to use professional mediators to assist participants in developing solutions to Guidelines issues that are not, in the view of the applicant or neighbor(s), satisfactorily addressed during the project review phase. The final program details are not complete. However, staff has been working with two experienced mediators to develop the program outline. Mediation would only be available if an optional Director’s Hearing is requested. That is, mediation would not be available until there has been a proposed Director’s decision on the project based on conformance with the R-1 regulations and Guidelines and with input and comments, if received, from the neighbors. After receiving a request for mediation and with the concurrence of the parties involved, staff would contact the next available mediator (eight mediators have expressed interest in participating) and schedule mediation session(s). The City would pay for a maximum of two mediation sessions and the Director’s Hearing would be continued for three weeks with the consent of the applicant. Staff would attend mediation sessions in a resource capacity, that is, to ensure any agreements conform to ordinance requirements and intent of the Guidelines. If the mediation is successful, the request for a Director’s Hearing would be withdrawn and the relevant.terms of the agreement would be incorporated in the Director’s decision. The Director’s Hearing is intended to be informal and will typically be conducted in the Council Conference Room. 3. Comparison of Current and Proposed R-1 Zone District Regulations A chart comparing the current regulations and the proposed amendments to the R-1 Zone District is included with this report as Attachment D. CMR:338:01 Page 4 of 1(1 4. Proposed Budget for the Individual Review Process To be successful, the Advisory Group and staff envision a "hands-on" approach, site- specific knowledge, and a strong emphasis on regular communication between staff, the neighbors, and applicants. Staff estimates five to six applications per week or approximately three hundred applications per year. To fully implement the Individual Review Process, staff estimates two additional planner positions (one FTE and one contract planner position) will be required at a cost of approximately $180,744 per year. Support services can be absorbed with the existing Planning Division staff. As well, staff believes an on-going contract of up to $70,000 per year will be required for the consulting architects. Currently, the City contracts with Origins, Inc. to provide design assistance through the Voluntary Design Assistance Program. The feedback-regarding the services provided by Origins, Inc. has been very positive and staff anticipates retaining the firm to provide consulting assistance for the Individual Review Process. All the costs of the program are being analyzed by the Administrative Services Department, and staff will return to the Council with a Budget Amendment Ordinance. A fee of $800 for projects involving a new two-story house or new second story addition and a fee of $300 for the expansion of an existing second story is anticipated to ensure cost recovery for program staffing. 5. Flood Plain and Grade Staff from Planning, Building, and Public Works met to discuss the ramifications of the proposed changes to the grade definition on properties within the FEMA-designated Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA). Currently, height is measured from finished grade five feet from the building wall. Since earth fill is often used to raise the grade of sites in the SFHA to minimize stem wall heights, finished grade may sometimes be several feet higher than the natural surrounding grade. Thus, the current definition of "building height" allows the construction of buildings that meet the height restrictions but are nonetheless several feet higher than adjacent buildings. If fill is not used to raise the site, then a conforming building in the SFHA has less internal height (lower ceilings) than a non-SFHA building of the same height because the floor must be elevated to at least the Base Flood Elevation. Base flood elevations range from one to two feet above natural grade in the San Francisquito and Matadero/Barron Creek floodplains to as much as five feet above grade in the tidal floodplain. Approximately 4,850 Palo Alto properties are within a Special Flood Hazard Area. Staff reviewed several options for addressing this problem, including a variance for houses in a flood zone (not supported under state law). The alternative would be an acceptance that the proposed ordinance change will result in less internal height for CMR:338:01 Page 5 of 10 buildings in a SFHA. Staff is proposing an allowance to increased height and the daylight plane height by one-half the amount the floor must be raised to meet the Base Flood Elevation. As an example, if a floor were required to be raised by four feet to meet the Base Flood Elevation requirement, then the height of a house could be increased two feet (to a 32 foot maximum height) and the daylight plane could be increased by two feet (for a 26-maximum height). This would have the effect of providing some relief to homeowners in the SFHA while recognizing the relationship to adjacent (presumably lower) developed properties. The same exception would be provided for properties located in a Single Story Combining District and Special Flood Haard Area. Staff’s recommendation is included in the proposed ordinance amending the Single Family (R-l) Zone District regulations. In no case would the maximum height be allowed to exceed 33 feet. 6. Single Family Programs in Other Cities In its initial staff report on the single family review program, staff provided a chart comparing the single family review programs in a number of Santa Clara and San Mateo County cities as well as some outside the immediate area. As noted at the time, most of the surrounding cities do require some form of discretionary review for single family houses. Typically, the difference between the cities is the level of review (i.e., at the staff level, by a specially appointed single-family house review committee, a design review committee similar to Palo Alto’s Architectural Review Board or a Planning Commission). An updated version of this chart is appended (Attachment E). Of special note are the cities of San Mateo, Burlingame and Santa Clara, with somewhat similar development patterns, particularly Palo Alto’s mixture of pre- and post-World War II neighborhoods. 7. Individual Review Process Timeline Staff and the Advisory Group strove to balance concerns about the time the process would add to a project and the need to provide adequate time for neighborhood noticing, with due process issues. The Individual Review Process in unique in the numbers of decision points proposed; therefore, a wide range of potential timelines is possible. The shortest processing time from the time the project is deemed complete would be approximately 33 days, assuming no optional Director’s Heating is requested and no plan revisions are needed. The lengthiest processing time would be 90 days, assuming revisions to the plans, optional mediation, an optional Director’s Hearing and request for appeal are all needed. This estimate does not include the call-up and appeal procedure. A reasonable estimate would be a minimum of an additional 60 days to schedule the call- up and hearing. Staff believes the most likely scenario would be approximately 47 days, assuming the need for some plans revisions, but no mediation or Director’s Hearing. The time frame would be approximately 73 days for projects that do have a Director’s Hearing and are not appealed to or heard by the City Council. CMR:338:01 Page 6 of 10 PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS The Commission held two study sessions on the single family program review on March 21 and May 23, 2001, a review on June 6, 2001 to continue a discussion of the proposed revisions, and a noticed public heating on July 11, 2001 to review the proposed ordinances implementing the Individual Review process (enabling legislation) arid amendments to the Single Family Residence (R-l) District. On July 11, 2001, the Commission expressed the need for strengthening its alternative recommendation in future staff reports to the Council, including its support for an Individual Review threshold based on a new project exceeding 80 percent of the allowed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) rather than the second-story recommendation proposed by staff and the Advisory Group. As. noted in the June 18 staff report for the Committee of the Whole and the recommendations of this report, the Advisory Group and staff continue to support the second-story threshold because privacy issues such as window and balcony placement would not always be addressed with an 80 percent FAR threshold. As well, while the second-story mass would presumably be less with the 80 percent threshold, there is no guarantee of this result nor would there be a review of the second-story massing relative to adjacent properties. Finally, there is a concern that the 80 percent threshold would extend Individual Review to projects such as one-story additions that do not create adverse massing, privacy, or streetscape impacts (for example, the expansion of an existing house from an FAR of 75 percent to 90 percent). The Commission has also recommended an identified "sunset" clause for the Individual Review process five years after implementation. The Commission had discussed this option at an earlier review, at that time considering a three-year (as proposed by a member of the public) to five-year timeframe. The Commission and staff concurred that a five-year (rather than three-year) timeframe would be necessary to provide a sound basis for evaluation of the program, particularly given the often lengthy lead time for new home construction. Staff also suggested the following clarifications, with which the Commission agreed: 1.Any program termination is to be reviewed by the Council as a consent calendar agenda item. 2.The review would not require the reforming of the Future of Single Family Neighborhoods or other advisory group. The Commission was also concerned about issuance of the final Individual Review Guidelines by the Director of Planning and Community Environment (Director) without a review by both the Commission and Council. Staff and the Advisory Group have recommended that issuance of the Guidelines be delegated to the Director after review by the Commission. CMR:338:01 Page 7 of 10 As noted in earlier staff reports, draft Guidelines were prepared prior to the Commission study session on May 23, 2001 and were included in the Council binder for the June 18 Committee of the Whole meeting. The Advisory Group and staff believe the draft Guidelines clearly communicate the intent of the Guidelines and address the three Advisory Group-identified major areas of concern: privacy, bulk and mass, and streetscape. The preparation of the final Guidelines will focus on editing, formatting, and illustrations. The staff and Advisory Group believe the draft is clear enough for the Council to approve the Individual Review Process with authority for the Director to issue the Guidelines after review by the Commission. The Advisory Group and staff recommendation is a streamlining measure, to implement Council policy direction at the staff level with Commission review. The Commission, as part of its recommendations also proposed a review of one of the amendments to the R-1 regulations and a clarification of another. The amendment proposes that the FAR for any entry feature or tower be counted twice for any portion above twelve feet in height. The Commission asked that staff and an Advisory Sub- Group review the possibility of increasing this height to fifteen feet. The staff and Advisory Group recommendation remains the same because the proposed twelve-foot maximum reflects a more pedestrian/human scale; however, as part of the proposed on- going evaluation, this issue could be highlighted for further review. The Commission was also concerned at what point in time "existing grade" is established. The intent of the regulation is to prevent any fill prior to new construction that then results in a higher structure than would be allowed from natural or existing (i.e., prior to any fill) grade. Compliance with this regulation would depend to some extent on a site visit and relationship to adjacent properties. Staff believes the intent is clear and the vast majority of applicants will not attempt to alter the on-site grade prior to applying for individual review. Only one member of the public, Karen Holman, spoke at the Commission hearing on July 11, 2001. Ms. Holman expressed a concern with several aspects of the proposed Individual Review Process and the amendments, including the possible precedent setting nature of the proposed "call-up" procedure, the implementation of the contextual front setback provision and the 60 percent permeable front setback provision as an absolute number rather than a neighborhood average. Staff is aware of some confusion by the public about the proposed 60 percent front setback area permeability requirement. The Zoning Ordinance currently has no provision requiring permeable surfaces and does require an impermeable surface for driveways. In theory, although not that frequently seen, most or all of the front setback area could be covered by impermeable surfaces. The appearance of the front setback area (the "public" face of a home) contributes significantly to the overall streetscape. In recognition of this, and to support non-point source goals, the ordinance proposes the 60 percent permeable CMR:338:01 Page 8 of 10 surface requirement. It should be noted, as well, that for the vast majority of new homes and remodels that will be affected by this ordinance, the 60 percent permeable surface requirement more than offsets the increase in lot coverage proposed for full FAR for one- story houses. POLICY IMPLICATIONS Adoption of an Individual Review Program for most second story construction in the Single Family (R-l) Zone would be a change from the City’s traditional practice. While the City has offered a voluntary design assistance program, discretionary review in the Single-Family (R-1) Zone District for individual homes has only been required for Home Improvement Exceptions, Variances, and Conditional Use Permits for secondary dwellings. The proposed amendments to the R-1 regulations themselves, while significant, are of a type-often adopted by the City in the past. The Advisory Group and Planning and Transportation Commission concluded that the best way to avoid adverse impacts from the construction of new houses in existing neighborhoods while maximizing the choices of individual homeowners, is to have an individual review program of limited scope. The two major policy alternatives for the Council to consider are: The adoption of a discretionary review program for the review of individual single family houses in response to the concern about the adverse impacts of new single family homes in existing neighborhoods. Further amendments to the Single Family (R-l) Zone District regulations beyond those proposed to address adverse impacts of new single family homes in existing neighborhoods. RESOURCE IMPACT Please see the response to Council question number 4, on page 5. NEXT STEPS In recognition of the need to develop the final Guidelines, staff has proposed an October 29, 2001 (Monday) implementation date for both ordinances rather than the more typical thirty-one days after the second reading of an ordinance. This interval will allow time for preparation of the final Guidelines and sufficient time for an outreach program informing the community of the changes to the regulations and implementation of the Individual Review Process. The outreach program will consist of informational notices to design professionals, contractors, and neighborhood associations through letters, e-mail and the City’s website; and at the Development Center, signage, handouts/brochures, copies of the new regulations, the draft Guidelines, and as completed, the final Guidelines. Development Center staff has been informing applicants of the proposed single family review changes and has received a number of phone calls. Those inquiring about the program have been informed that the Council had not yet taken action on the proposals CMR:338:01 Page 9 of 10 and would not do so until August 6 at the earliest. As a matter of public record, staff has also provided copies of the draft Guidelines on request. In addition to preparation of the final Guidelines, the current City Zoning Guidebook for the R-1 Property Owner and Builder will require updating, both to incorporate the new regulations and current inadequacies. Code language is often difficult to read and communicate. The illustrations and language of the guidebook provide a much more understandable and user-friendly explanation of the code requirements. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15305 of the Guidelines. ATTACHMENTS A. Ordinance amending the Single Family (R-l) Zone District Regulations B. Ordinance for Enabling Legislation for the. Individual Review Process, as recommended by staff and the Single Family Neighborhoods Advisory Group C. Ordinance for Enabling Legislation for the Individual Review Process, as recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission D. Chart of proposed changes and additions to the Single Family (R-l) Zone District regulations E. Single Family Review, Comparison with Other Cities PREPARED BY: JOAN I~I’AYLOI~ Planning Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: Director of Planning and Community Environment CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: EMILY HARRISON Assistant City Manager cc: Planning and Transportation Commission The Future of Single Family Neighborhoods Advisory Group. CMR:338:01 Page 10 of 10 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT CHANGES INTO THE SINGLE FAMILY (R-I) ZONE DISTRICT REGULATIONS The City Council of the City of Palo Alto does ordain as fol!ows: SECTION i. The Council finds and declares that: A. Because the City is largely built-out, most residential construction takes place within established neighborhoods. Construction of new houses and remodeling of existing houses may have a significant impact on a neighborhood’s visual character. B. Encouraging respect streetscape and preserving the neighborhoods fosters harmonious enhances the desirability of neighborhoods. for privacy, massing and character of established community relationships and the City’s residential C. The City formed an advisory group to study the ongoing problem of residential construction that significantly alters privacy relationships and streetscape. The advisory group began meeting in January 2000. After thorough consideration of the problem and possible solutions, the advisory group recommended that the City amend the R-I development standards to promote neighborhood compatibility. D. After considering the recommendations of the advisory group and public comments at study sessions on March 21, 2001 and May 23, 2001 and duly noticed hearings on June 6, 2001 and July ii, 2001, the Planning and Transportation Commission recommended to the City Council that Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code be amended to adopt changes into the single- family (R-I) zone district regulations. SECTION 2. Subsection 18.04.030(64) of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: ¯" in all districts other(64) A "Grade, than R=I, means the lowest point of adjacent ground elevation, of the finished surface of t~ 010801 syn 0090859 ground, paving, or sidewalk, excluding areas where grade has been raised by means of a berm, planter box, or similar landscaping feature, unless required for drainage, within the area between the bui!jing and the property line, or when the property line is more than five feet from the building, between the building and a line five feet from the building. In building areas, with natural slopes in excess of ten percent ~grade" shal! mean the adjacent ground elevation of the finished or existing grade, whichever is lower. B. "Grade" in the R-I District, means, for each buildinq or structure, the lowest point of adjacent qround elevation prior to qradin~ or fill, if the site has a natural slope of 10% or less. For R-I sites with a natural slope of more than 10%, (calculated using the lowest and highest elevations on the site), "qrade" shal! mean the adjacent qround elevation of the finished or existing grade, whichever is lower. SECTION 3. Subsection 18.04.030(65) Code is hereby amended to read as follows: of the Municipal (65) (A) "Gross floor area" means the total area of all floors of a building measured to the outside surfaces of exterior walls,and including all of the following: (i) Halls; (ii) Stairways; (iii) Elevator shafts; rooms; (iv) Service and mechanical equipment (v) Basement, cellar or attic areas deemed usable by the director of planninq and community environment; plazas, (vi) Open .or roofed porches, arcades, balconies, courts, walkways, breezeways 010801 syn 0090859 or porticos if located above the ground floor and used for required access; (vii) Permanently roofed, but either partially enclosed or unenclosed, building features used for sales,service, display, storage or similar uses; and (viii) In residential districts, all roofed porches, arcades, balconies, porticos, breezeways or similar features when !ocated above the ground floor. (B) -Gross floor area shall not include the following: (i) Parking facilities accessory to a permitted or conditional use and located on the same site; (ii) Roofed arcades, plazas, walkways, porches, breezeways, porticos, and similar features not substantially enclosed by exterior walls, and courts, at or near street level, when accessible to the general public and not devoted to sales, service, display, storage or similar uses. (iii)Except in the CD District and in areas designated as special study areas, minor additions of floor area approved by the director of planning and community environment for purposes of resource conservation or code compliance, upon the determination that such minor additions will increase compliance with environmental health, safety or other federal, state or local standards. Such additions may include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Area designed for resource conservation, such as trash compactors, recycling and thermal storage facilities; b. Area designed and required for hazardous materials storage facilities, handicapped access or seismic upgrades; 010801 syn 0090859 3 (iv) In commercial and industrial districts except in the CD District and in areas designated as special study areas, additions of floor area designed and used solely for on-site employee amenities for employees of the facility, approved by the director of planning and community environment, upon the determination that such additions will facilitate the reduction of employee vehicle use. Such additions may include, but not be limited to, recreationa! facilities,credit unions, cafeterias and day care centers. (C) In the R-I and R-E single-family residence districte, "gross floor area" means the total covered area of all floors of a main structure and accessory structures greater than one hundred twenty square feet in area, including covered parking and stairways, measured to the outside surface of exterior walls, subject to the following exceptions: (i) Floor area where the distance between the floor and the roof directly above it measures 5.18 meters (seventeen feet) or more, shal! be counted twice; (ii) Floor area where the distance between the floor and the roof directly above it measures 7.92 meters (twenty-six feet) or more shall be counted three times; (iii) Basements where the finished level of the first floor is not more than .91 meters (three feet) above the grade around the perimeter of the building foundation shall be excluded from the calculation of gross floor area, provided that lightwells, stairwells and other excavated features comply with the provisions of Section 18.10.050(m), 18.12.050(o), 18.17.050(p), or 18.19.050(o), as applicable; and (iv) Two hundred square feet of unusable third floor equivalent, such as attic space, shall be excluded from the calculation of gross floor area. There shall be no exclusion 010801 syn 0090859 of floor area if any portion of the unusable third floor equivalent area has a roof slope of less than 4:12. (v)Carports shall be counted toward the maximum allowable floor area ratio requirements. (D) In the R-I sinqle-family residence districts, "Ggross floor area" means the total covered area of al! floors of a main structure and accessory structures greater than one hundred twenty square feet in area, including covered parking and stairways, measured to the outside surface of exterior stud walls, subject to the following~~ exclusions and conditions: (i) Floor area where the distance between the floor and the roof directly above it measures 5.18 meters (seventeen feet) or more shall be counted twice; (ii) Floor area where the distance between the floor and the roof directly above it measures 7.92 meters (twenty-six feet) or more shall be counted three times; (iii) Basements where the finished level of the first floor is not more than .91 meters (three feet) above the grade around the perimeter of the building foundation, shall be excluded from the calculation of gross floor area, provided that lightwells, stairwells and other excavated features comply with the provisions of Section 18.10.050(m), 18.12.050(o), 18.17.050(p), or 18.19.050(o), as applicable; e~4 (iv) Two hundred square feet of unusable third floor equivalent, such as attic space, shall be excluded from the calculation of gross floor area. There shall be no exclusion of floor area if any portion of the unusable third floor equivalent area has a roof slope of less than 4:12. 010801 syn 0090859 (v) Carports gross floor area. shall be included in (vi) Entrance structures or towers, whether enclosed or unenclosed, shall be included in gross floor area. Any portion of an exterior entrance structure or tower greater than 12 feet in heiqht shal! be counted twice. (vii) Fireplaces shall be included in qross floor area. (viii) Recessed porches located on the first floor shall be excluded from ~ross floor area. SECTION 4. Subsection 18.04.030(67) Code is amended to read as follows: of the Municipal (67) "Height" means the vertical distance above grade to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof or to the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof, except that in the 9~, R-2 and RMD Districts the height of a pitched or hipped roof shall be measured to the height of the peak or highest ridge line. In the R-I district, height shall be measured from the highest point of the structure’s roof, includin~ wall parapets, to the qrade directly below. The height of a stepped or terraced building is the maximum height of any segment. SECTION 5. Subsection 18.12.050(d) ’of the Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: (d) Front Yard. The minimum front yard ("setback") shall be the qreater of 6.1 meters (twenty feet) or the averaqe setback. "Average setback" means the averaqe distance between the front property line and the first main building wall on sites on the same side of the block. For blocks lonqer than 600 feet, the averaqe setback shall be based on the ten sites located on the same side of the street and nearest to the subject property. 010801 syn 0090859 6 SECTION 6. Subsection i8.12.050(h) of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (h)Site coverage is regulated as follows: (i) The maximum building site coverage~ shall be ~"-~ .........~ ~ ~ ~~ .....~ ....~ .................area for sites with single-story development shall be equal to the maximum floor area ratio. The maximum buildinq s[te coveraqe for residences of two or more stories shall be thirty-five percent of the site. (2) Covered~ patios and overhangs otherwise in compliance with all applicable laws may cover five percent of the site area in addition to the maximum site coverage prescribed in subdivision (i). (3) The covering of a court is exempt from the calculation of site coverage provided that the court existed prior to July 20, 1978. SECTION 7. Subsection 18.12.050(j) of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (j) Height (i) General. The maximum height shall be 9.14 meters (thirty feet) as measured to the peak of the roof or 10.05 meters or (thirty- three feet) if the roof pitch is 12:12 or qreater. Provided~ in a special flood hazard area as defined in Chapter 16.52, the maximum heiqhts are increased by one-half of the increase in elevation required to reach base flood elevation, up to a maximum of thirty- three feet. (2) Daylight Plane. No structures except those described in subsections (A), (B), and(C) of this subsection (2) shall extend beyond a daylight plane having a height of 3.05 meters (ten feet) at each side lot line and an angle of forty-five degrees, nor beyond a daylight plane having a height of 4.88 meters (sixteen feet) at the front or rear setback line and an angle of 010801 syn 0090859 sixty degrees. If the site is in a special flood hazard area and entitled to increased maximum heiqht under subsection (i) above, the heiqhts for the daylight planes shall be adjusted by the same amount. (A) Television and radio antennas; chimneys and flues with a maximum width of five feet; .(B) Dormers, roof decks, gables or similar architectural features; provided that the horizontal length of all such features shall not exceed a combined total of 4.57 meters (fifteen feet) on each side. No sinqle feature shall exceed 7.5 feet in lenqth and there shall be a minimum five-foot separation between each feature. The height of such features shall not exceed 7.3 meters (twenty-four feet) above grade; (C) Cornices, eaves, and similar architectural features, excluding flat or continuous walls or enclosures of usable interior space, may extend into a required daylight plane a distance not exceeding 0.6 meters (two feet). Chimneys may extend into the required daylight plane a distance not to exceed the minimum al!owed pursuant to Chapter 16.04 of this code. Upon request by the building official, any person building or making improvements to a structure shall provide a certification that the structure, as built, complies with the daylight plane provisions of this subsection (2). Such certification shall be prepared by a licensed engineer, architect or surveyor and shall be provided prior to frame inspection SECTION 8. Subsection 18.12.050(1) Code is hereby amended to read as follows: of the Municipal (1) Lighting. Recreational and security lighting shall be permitted only so long as the lighting is shielded or diffused so that the direct light does not extend beyond the property where it is located. From March Ii, 1991, both recreationa! and security lighting, if free- 010801 syn 0090859 standing, shall be restricted to twelve feet in height. Direct liqht from outdoor fixtures shall only fall on the walls, eaves, and yard areas of the site on which it is located. Outdoor fixtures shall have lens covers that diffuse light or reflectors that shield the lamp from view and direct the liqht away from neighboring properties. SECTION 9. Subsections (m) through (o), inclusive, of Section 18.12.050 of the Municipal Code are hereby redesignated as subsections (n) through (p), inclusive, and the following new subsection (m) is hereby added to Section 18.12.050 of the Municipal Code to-read as follows: (m) If the predominant neighborhood pattern is of garages located within the rear half of the site, attached ~ara~es shall be located in the rear half of the house footprint. Detached garages shall be located in the rear half of the site and, if within a rear or side setback, at least seventy five feet from the front property line. "Predominant neighborhood pattern" means that of half or more of the houses on the same s±de of the block, or half or more of the houses on both sides of the block. For blocks lonqer than 600 feet, the calculations shall be based on the ten homes located nearest to and on the same side of the block as the subject property, and on the combination of those ten homes and the homes facinq them. Access shall be provided from a rear alley if the existing development pattern provides for alley access. SECTION I0. The~ following new subsection (q) is hereby added to Section 18.12.050 of the Municipa! Code to read as follows: (q) Sixty percent of the required front yard shall have a permeable surface that permits water absorption directly into the soil. Provided, all sites may have an impervious 16’x 20’ driveway and an impervious 4’x 20’ walkway. 010801 syn 0090859 SECTION ii. The following new subsection (r) is hereby added to Section 18.12.050 of the Municipal Code to read as follows: (r) Parkinq and driveway surfaces may have either permeable, or impermeable paving. Gravel and similar loose materials shall not be used for driveway or parking surfaces within ten feet of the public riqht of way. SECTION 12. Section 18.88.030 of the Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 18.88.030 . Location of accessory buildings. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, accessory buildings shall at all times be located in conformance with requirements for principal buildings, and shall not be located in any required front, side or rear yard. (b) In residential zones, accessory buildings may be located in a required interior yard subject to the following limitations: (i) An accessory building shall not be used for living and/or sleeping purposes unless the building was legally constructed for or legally converted to living and/or sleeping purposes prior to October 13, 1983. (2) An accessory building shall not be. located in a required front yard, a required street yard, or a required rear yard of a through lot. (3) An accessory building shall not be located in a required interior side or rear yard unless the building is at least 22.9 meters (seventy-five feet) from any street line, measured along the respective lot line. Provided, on corner lots in the R-I district, detached ~araqes and carports may be located in the rear yard if at least seventy-five feet from the front street and twenty feet from the side street. 010801 syn 0090859 10 (4) Accessory buildings located within a required interior yard as permitted by this section shall be subject to a maximum height established by a daylight plane beginning at a height of 2.44 meters (eight feet) at the property line and increasing at a slope of one meter for each three meters of distance from the property line, to a maximum height of 3.66 meters (twelve feet). (5) No such accessory building shall have more than two plumbing fixtures. (c) .No swimming pool, hot tub, spa or similar accessory facility shall be located in any portion of a required front or street side yard. SECTION 13. Subsection 18.88.090(a) of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (a) (i) Except in R-I single family residential districts, Gcornices, eaves, fireplaces and similar architectural features, excluding flat or continuous walls or enclosures of usable interior space, may extend into a required side yard a distance not exceeding 0.6 meters (two feet), or may extend into a required front or rear yard a distance not exceeding 1.2 meters (four feet). Window surfaces, such as bay windows or greenhouse windows, may extend into a required front, side or rear yard a distance not exceeding 0.6 meters (two feet) or into a required front yard a distance not exceeding three feet. In residential districts or nonresidential districts adjacent to residential districts, the window surface may not extend into any yard above a first story. (2) In R-I sinqle-family residential districts, fireplaces into a required side yard may not exceed five feet in width. Fireplaces not exceedinq five feet in width may project into a required side yard no more than two feet. (3) In R-I residential districts, window surfaces may not extend into required side yards, with the exception of one qreenhouse 010801 syn 0090859 t! window with a maximum width of six feet, framed into a wall, may project into the side yard no more than two feet. SECTION 14. Environmental Impact. The City Council finds that the adoption and implementation of this ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Guideline 15305. SECTION 15. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective on October 29, 2001. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST:APPROVED: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney Mayor City Manager Director of Planning and Community Environment 010801 syn 0090859 12 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 18.14 (INDIVIDUAL REVIEW PROCESS FOR CERTAIN TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN THE R-I SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT) The City Council of the City of Palo Alto does ordain as follows: SECTION I. The Council finds and declares that: A. Because the City residential construction takes neighborhoods.Encouraging new privacy, streetscape, and the neighborhoods fosters harmonious enhances the desirability of is largely built-out, most place within established construction that respects character of established community relationships and the City’s residential neighborhoods. Appropriate massing of new construction and additions is an important technique for achieving these goals. B. The City formed an advisory group to study the ongoing problem of residential construction that significantly alters privacy relationships and streetsc~pe. The advisory group began meeting in January 2000. After thorough consideration of the problem and possible solutions, the advisory group recommended that the City adopt a discretionary individua! review process for new two-story home construction and for the addition or expansion of second stories in single family (R-I) zone districts. C. After consideration of the recommendations of the advisory group and public comments at study sessions on March 21, 2001 and May 23, 2001 and a duly noticed hearings on June 6, 2001 and July !i, 2001, the Planning and Transportation Commission recommended to the City Council that Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code be amended to adopt a discretionary and individual review process for certain new residential construction projects. SECTION 2. A new chapter 18.14 is hereby added to Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to read as follows: 010730 syn 0090862 Chapter 18.14 R-I Single Family Individual Review. Section 18.14.010 Section 18.14.020 Section 18.14.030 Section 18.14.040 Section 18.14 050 Section 18 Section 18 Section 18 Section 18 Section 18 Section 18 .14 060 .14 070 .14 080 .14 090 .14 !00 .14 !I0 Applicability of chapter. Goals and purposes. Definitions. Preliminary meeting with plannihg division. Application for individua! review. Notice. Comment period. Staff review. Optional director’s hearing. Appeal to council. Guidelines. 18.14.10 Applicability of chapter. The provisions of this chapter apply to the construction of a new two-story structure; the construction of a new second story; or the expansion of an existing second story by more than 150 square feet in the R-I single family residential district. All second-story additions on a site after [the effective date of this ordinance] shall be included in calculating whether an addition is over 150 square feet. 18.14.020 Goals and purposes The goals and purposes of this chapter are to: (a) Preserve the unique character of Palo Alto neighborhoods; (b) Promote new construction that is compatible with existing residential neighborhoods; (c) Encourage respect for the surrounding context in which residential construction and alteration takes place; (d) Foster consideration of neighbors’ concerns with respect to privacy, scale and massing, and streetscape; and (e) Enable the emergence of new neighborhood design patterns that reflect awareness of each property’s effect upon neighboring properties. 010730 syn 0090862 2 18.14.030 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, the fol!owing terms shall be used as herein defined: (a) "Adjacent properties" means those properties sharing a common boundary with the subject property, the property or properties located directly across the street, and the next properties located diagonally across the street from the subject property. (b) "Director" means the Director of Planning Community Environment or his or her designate. and (c) "Individual Review Guidelines" means the standards issued by the Director to implement the provisions of this chapter. (d) "Storyboard" means a visual depiction of the proposed project in its setting among the adjacent properties. 18.14.040 Preliminary meeting with planning staff. Project applicants are strongly encouraged, before applying for individual review of a project, to meet with planning staff to discuss designing a project that promotes the goals of this chapter and the individua! review guidelines, and to discuss the proposed plans with their neighbors. 18.14.050 Application for individual review. Applications for individual review shall be made to the Director in the form prescribed by the Director, including an individual review check list,and shall be accompanied by project plans. 18.14.060 Notice. (a) Notice of the proposed project shall be mailed to the owners and occupants of all adjacent properties by the city within three business days of the date the application is deemed complete. Notice shall also be posted, in the form and manner prescribed by the director, at the site of the proposed project within the same period and for the duration of the comment period. 010730 syn 0090862 3 (b) Notice shall include but is not limited to the following the name of the applicant; the address of the proposed project; and a description of the project; and information on when and how comments will be accepted by the city. 18.14.070 Comment period. The comment period shall be ten calendar days beginning on the third business day after an application is deemed complete. If notice is mailed or posted on a later date, the comment period shall begin on the later date. Written comments received by the city during this period shall be considered as part of the staff review. 18.14.080 Staff review. Upon receipt of a complete application, (a) The planning division shall review submitted plans for compliance with R-I zone district regulations. (b) The planning division and a consulting architect(s) shall review the application and comments received during the comment period and evaluate the project under the individual review guidelines and R-I single family residential district regulations. A written proposed director’s decision to approve the application, approve it with conditions, or deny it shall be prepared. (c) The proposed director’s decision shall be mailed to the project applicant, the owners and occupants of all adjacent properties, and any person who has made a written request for notice of the decision. The decision shall be accompanied by notice of the time period within which any appeal must be filed and the procedure for filing an appeal. (d) The proposed decision shall become final ten calendar days after it is mailed unless a written request for hearing with the Director by the applicant or by the owner or occupier of an adjacent property within that time. (e) The time limits set forth in section 18.14.080 may be extended upon the written request of the applicant. 010730 syn 0090862 18.14.090 Optional hearing with Director. (a) If a timely request for a hearing on a project is received by the city, it shall be scheduled for the first available director’s hearing; (b) Notice of the hearing shall be mailed to the project applicant, the owners and occupants of all adjacent properties, and any person who has made a written request for such notice. Notice of the hearing shall also be posted at the site in the form required by the director and shall remain posted up to and including the hearing date. (c) At the time and place set for hearing the director shall hear evidence for and against the application or its modification. The hearing shall be open to the public. (d) The director shall issue a written decision approving, approving with conditions, or denying the project application within ten days of the hearing. The Director’s decision shall be based upon the R-I district regulations and the individual review guidelines, taking into consideration the application, the comments received during the public comment period and the director’s hearing, and such other evidence as the director determines to be relevant. If the project conforms to the R-! district regulations and meets the standards set forth in the individual review guidelines, it shall be approved. (e) Notice of the Director’s decision shall be mailed to the project applicant, the owners and occupants of all adjacent properties, and any person requesting notice of the decision. (f) The Director’s decision shall be final ten calendar days after it is mailed unless, prior to the expiration of said ten-day period, the project applicant or an owner or occupant of any "of the adjacent properties requests review by the City Council as provided in section 18.14.100. 18.14.100 Appeal to council. (a) The project applicant or an owner or occupant of any of the adjacent properties may request that the City Council review the director’s decision. The request shall be made in writing in the form prescribed by the director and filed with the city clerk within ten calendar days from the date the director’s decision is mailed. 010730 s.vn 0090862 5 (b) The City Council shall de<ermine whether to hear an appeal of the director’s decision within thirty calendar days or following the filing of the request, or at the first regular council meeting following the filing of the request, provided, however, the City Council shall hear the requested appeal only if four or more of its members vote in favor of conducting a hearing. (c) If the City Council declines the request to review the decision, the Director’s decision shall be final. If the City Counci! consents to hear an appeal, a hearing shall be scheduled as soon as practicable. (d) Notice of time, place and subject of the City Council hearing shall be mailed to the project applicant, the owners and occupants of all adjacent properties and any person who has previous requested notice in writing at least twelve days prior to the hearing. (e) The City Council review shall be based on the evidentiary record before the director. (f) The City Council shall affirm or reverse the Director’s decision by a majority vote of those participating. (g) Notice of the City Council’s decision shall be mailed to the project applicant, the owners and occupants of al! adjacent properties, and any person requesting notice of the decision. (h) The City Council’s decision shall be final. 18.14.110 Guidelines. The Director of Planning and Community Environment shall issue guidelines to direct staff and project applicants in implementing the goals and purposes and other provisions of this chapter. Guidelines establishing substantive review standards for second story development shal! be presented to the Planning and Transportation Commission for their comment prior to adoption by the Director. SECTION 3. Environmental Impact. The City Council finds that the enactment and adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15305 of the Guidelines. 010730 syn 0090862 6 SECTION 4. Effective Date and Sunset Clause. This ordinance shall be effective on October 29, 2001 and continue in full force and effect through October 28, 2006. Thereafter, it shal! be of no further force and effect unless on or before October 28,2006] a City Council ordinance extending its term or making the ordinance permanent takes effect. No further hearing before the planning and transportation commission is required for such action. Nothing in this section shal! limit the power of the City Council, after further hearings by the Planning and Transportation Commission if required by law, from adopting any other zoning regulation, including one concerning the subject matter of this ordinance. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST:APPROVED: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney Mayor City Manager Director of Planning and Community Environment 010730 s.vn 0090862 7 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 18.14 (INDIVIDUAL REVIEW PROCESS FOR CERTAIN TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN THE R-I SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT) The City Council of the City of Palo Alto does ordain as follows: SECTION I. The Council finds and declares that: A. Because the City is largely built-out, most residential construction takes place within established neighborhoods.Encouraging new construction that respects privacy, streetscape] and the character of established neighborhoods fosters harmonious community relationshiPS and enhances the desirability of the City’s residential neighborhoods.Appropriate massing of new construction and additions is an important technique for achieving these goals. B. The City formed an advisory group to study the ongoing problem of residential construction that significantly alters privacy relationships and streetscape. The advisory group began meeting in January 2000. After tho.rough consideration of the problem and possible solutions, the advisory group recommended that the City adopt a discretionary individual review process for new two-story home construction and for the addition or expansion of second stories in single family (R-I) zone districts. C. After consideration of the recommendations of the advisory group and public comments at study sessions on March 21, 2001 and May 23, 2001 and a duly noticed hearings on June 6, 2001 and July II, 2001, the Planning and Transportation Commission recommended to the City Council that Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code be amended to adopt a discretionary and individual review process for certain new residential construction projects. SECTION 2. A new chapter 18.14 is hereby added to Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipa! Code~ to read as follows: 010730 syn 0090865 Planning Commission Alternative Chapter 18.14 R-I Single Family Individual Review. Section 18.14.010 Section 18.14.020 Section 18.14.030 Section 18.14.040 Section 18.14 050 Section 18 14 Section 18 14 Section 18 14 Section 18 14 Section 18 14 Section 18 14 060 070 O8O 090 i00 ii0 Applicability of chapter. Goals and purposes. Definitions. Preliminary meeting with planning division. Application for individual review. Notice. Comment period. Staff review. Optional director’s hearing. Appea! to council. Guidelines. 18.14.010 Applicability of chapter. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to projects which add gross .floor area to a site in an R-I single family residential district if, upon completion of the project, the floor area ration ("FAR") on the site will exceed eighty percent. 18.14.020 Goals and purposes The goals and purposes of this chapter are to: (a) Preserve the unique character of Palo Alto neighborhoods; (b) Promote new construction that is compatible with existing residential neighborhoods; (c) Encourage respect for the surrounding context in which residential construction and alteration takes place; (d) Foster consideration of neighbors’ concerns with respect to privacy, scale and massing, and streetscape; and (e) Enable the emergence of new neighborhood design patterns that reflect awareness of each property’s effect upon neighboring properties. 010730 syn 0090865 Planning Commission Alternative 2 18.14.030 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall be used as herein defined: (a) "Adjacent properties" means those properties sharing a common boundary with the subject property, the property or properties located directly across the street, and the next properties located diagonally across the street from the subject property. (b) "Director" means the Director of Planning Community Environment or his or her designate. and (c) "Individual Review Guidelines" means the standards issued by the Director to implement the provisions of this chapter. (d) "Storyboard" means a visual depiction of the proposed project in its setting among the adjacent properties. 18.14.040 Preliminary meeting with planning staff. Project applicants are strongly encouraged, before applying for individual review of a project, to meet with planning staff to discuss designing a project that promotes the goals of this chapter and the individual review guidelines, and to discuss the proposed plans With their neighbors. 18.14.050 Application for individual review. Applications for individual review shall be made to the Director in the form prescribed by the Director, including an individual review check list,and shall be. accompanied by project plans. 18.14.060 Notice. (a) Notice of the proposed project shall be mailed to the owners and occupants of all adjacent properties by the city within three business days of the date the application is deemed complete. Notice shall also be posted, in the form and manner prescribed by the~ director, at the site of the proposed project within the same period and for the duration of the comment period. 010730 s>~a 0090865 Planning Commission Alternative 3 (b) Notice shal! include but is not limited to the following the name of the applicant; the address of the proposed project; and a description of the project; and information on when and how comments will be accepted by the city. 18.14.070 Comment period. The comment period shall be ten calendar days beginning on the third business day after an application is deemed complete. If notice is mailed or posted on a later date, the comment period shall begin on the later date. Written comments received by the city during this period shall be considered as part of the staff review. 18.14.080 Staff review. Upon receipt of a complete application, (a) The planning division shall review submitted plans for compliance with R-I zone district regulations. (b) The planning division and a consulting architect(s) shall review the application and comments received during the comment period and evaluate the project under the individual review guidelines and R-I single family residential district regulations. A written proposed director’s decision to approve the application, approve it with conditions, or deny it shall be prepared. (c) The proposed director’s decision shall be mailed to the project applicant, the owners and occupants of all adjacent properties, and any person who has made a written request for notice of the decision. The decision shall be accompanied by notice of the time period within which any appeal must be filed and the procedure for filing an appeal. (d) The proposed decision shall become final ten calendar.days after it is mailed unless a written request for hearing with the Director by the applicant or by the owner or occupier of an adjacent property within that time. (e) The time limits set forth in section 18.14.080 may be extended upon the written request of the applicant. 010730 syn 0090865 Planning Commission Alternative 18.14.090 Optional hearing with Director. (a) If a timely request for a hearing on a project is received by the city, it shall be scheduled for the first available director’s hearing; (b) Notice of the hearing shall be mailed to the project applicant, the owners .and occupants of all adjacent properties, and any person who has made a written request for such notice. Notice of the hearing shall also be posted at the site in the form required by the director and shall remain posted up to and including the hearing date. (c) At the time and place set for hearing the director shall hear evidence for and against the application or its modification. The hearing shall be open to the public. (d) The director shall issue a written decision approving, approving with conditions, or denying the project application within ten days of the hearing. The Director’s decision shal! be based upon the R-I district regulations and the individual review guidelines, taking into consideration the application, the comments received during the public comment period and the director’s hearing, and such other evidence as the director determines to be relevant. If the project conforms to the R-I district regulations and meets the standards set forth in the individual review guidelines, it shall be approved. (e) Notice of the Director’s decision shall be mailed to the project applicant, the owners and occupants of all adjacent properties, and any person requesting notice of the decision. (f) The Director’s decision shall be final ten calendar days after it is mailed unless, prior to the expiration of said ten-day period, the project applicant or an owner or occupant of any of the adjacent properties requests review by the City Counci! as provided in section 18.14.100. 18.14.100 Appeal to council. (a) The project applicant or an owner or occupant of any of the adjacent properties may request that the City Council review the director’s decision. The request shall be made in writing in the form prescribed by the director and filed with the city clerk within ten calendar days from the date the director’s decision is mailed. 010730 s.~ 0090865 Planning Commission Alternative 5 (b) The City Council shall determine whether to hear an appeal of the director’s decision within thirty calendar days or fol!owing the filing of the request, or at the first regular council meeting following the filing of the request, provided, however, the City Council shall hear the requested appeal only if four or more of its members vote in favor of conducting a hearing. (c) If the City Council declines the request to review the decision, the Director’s decision shall be final. If the City Council consents to hear an appeal, a hearing shall be scheduled as soon as practicable. (d) Notice of time, place and subject of the City Council hearing shall be mailed to the project applicant, the owners and occupants of all adjacent properties and any person who has previous requested notice in writing at least twelve days prior to the hearing. (e) The City Council review shall be based on the evidentiary record before the director. (f) The City Council shall affirm or reverse the Director’s decision by a majority vote of those participating. (g) Notice of the City Council’s decision shall be mailed to the project applicant, the owners and occupants of all adjacent properties, and any person requesting notice of the decision. (h) The City Council’s decision shall be final. 18.14.110 Guidelines. The city council shall adopt ~--~ .... ~ guidelines t direct staff and project applicants in implementing the goals and purposes and other provisions of this chapter. Guidelines ~-~-~-~ be presented to the planning and transportation commission for their comment prior to presentation ....to ~’-~w ......~ the councilDircstor. SECTION 3. Environmental Impact. The City Council finds that the enactment and adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15305 of the Guidelines. 010730 syn 0090865 Planning Commission Alternative SECTION 4. Effective Date and Sunset Clause. This ordinance shall be effective on October 29, 2001 and continue in full force and effect through October 28, 2006. Thereafter, it shall be of no further force and effect unless on or before October 28,2006, a City Council ordinance extending its term or making the ordinance permanent takes effect. No further hearing before the planning and transportation commission is required for such action. Nothing in this section shall limit the power of the City Council, after further hearings by the Planning and Transportation Commission if required by law, from adopting any other zoning regulation, including one concerning the subject matter of this ordinance. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST:APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment 010730 syn 0090865 Planning Commission Alternative Attachment D New R-1 Regulations Name New or Description of new or changes to existing R-1 RegulationsExisting ¯ ¯ Floor Area Ratio Building Height Contextual Front Yard Setback Building Site Coverage Daylight Plane Contextual Garage Placement Permeable Lot Coverage Outdoor Lighting Grade Projections into minimum side yards Change to existing regulation Change to existing regulation Change to existing regulation Change to existing regulation Change to existing regulation New Regulation New Regulation Change to existing regulation Change to existing definition Change to existing regulation Fireplaces added to measurement of Gross Floor Area. Director of Planning and Community Environment instead of the Chief Building Official will determine usable basement or attic area. ¯First floor recessed porches excluded from Gross Floor Area measurement. ¯Gross Floor Area will be measured from the outside of stud walls. ¯No third floor equivalency for a roof slope less than 4:12. ¯Exterior entrance structure floor area shall be counted towards the maximum allowable floor area ratio. Portions of an exterior entrance structure greater than 12 feet shall be counted twice. ¯Building height shall be measured from the highest point of the structure to the grade directly below rather than the lowest point of the site 5 feet away from the building. ¯Maximum building height will be 33 feet if the roof pitch is 12:12 or greater. Current maximum building height is 30 feet. ¯Building height in a flood hazard area may be increased one-half of the increase in elevation to reach base flood elevation, up to a maximum height of 33 feet. ¯Minimum front yard setback shall remain at 20 feet. When the average setback on the block exceeds 20 feet, the setback shall be the average of the existing front setbacks of houses on the same block. ¯The maximum building site coverage shall be equal to the maximum floor area ratio for a single-story house instead of maximum site coverage of 35 percent. Site coverage for two-story houses will remain at 35 percent. ¯Eliminate front daylight plane. ¯Chimneys with a maximum width of five feet may extend into the daylight plane. ¯Dormer, roof decks, gables, etc. may not extend into the daylight plane if any single feature exceeds 7.5 feet in length. Total length of encroachment may not exceed 15 feet on each building side with a minimum five foot separation between each element. ¯The maximum heights for daylight plane shall be adjusted for buildings in flood hazard areas commensurate with total height adjustment. ¯Attached garages shall be located within the rear half of a house footprint and detached garages in the rear portion of the lot if 50% of existing garages on subject property’s side of the block or 50% of existing garages on both sides of the block are located in the rear portion of the lots. ¯Detached garages or carport shall be located 75 feet from the front property line and 20 feet from a street side property line if on a comer lot rather than 75 feet from street side property line. ¯60% of the front yard shall be composed of a permeable surface. ¯Parking/driveway surfaces may be composed of either a permeable or impermeable paving material with the exception of gravel or similar loose materials. ¯Exterior light fixtures will be required to have diffusing lens covers or reflectors to shield the lamp from view and direct the light away from neighboring properties. ¯Direct light from outdoor fixtures will only be permitted to fall onto the subject property’s walls, eaves, or ~¢ard areas. ¯Measured from lowest point of adjacent ground elevation, prior to any earth moving, fill, or padding rather than the lowest point of the finished surface of the adjacent ground elevation as measured five feet from the building. ¯Fireplaces not exceeding 5 feet in width may project 2 feet into a side setback. ¯Bay windows may not project into a side setback. ¯Greenhouse windows with a maximum width of 6 feet and framed into a wall may project into a side setback no more than 2 feet. Attachment E