HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 14058
City of Palo Alto (ID # 14058)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/11/2022
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Council Review of Changes to Height Transitions
Title: Public Hearing: Adoption of Ordinance Clarifying Ambiguities in Height
Transitions, Adding RMD to the list of Residential Districts and Amending the
Setback for the RM-40 Zone District
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Development Services
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council adopt an ordinance proposing changes to height transitions and
other development standards (Attachment A).
Executive Summary:
The issue of height transition development standards is related to the objective standards
project but focuses narrowly on development standards tables within district regulations in
Title 18. This draft ordinance is the first of two ordinances expected in the first half of the year
as part of the objective standards project.
Changes to height transitions are proposed for two reasons. First, the language governing
height transitions varies across districts and is sometimes ambiguous; this has resulted in the
code being interpreted and implemented differently over time. Second, community members
have expressed concern that these lower height limits generally do not apply to the RM-40
zone district which is a high-density district. Additionally, this report proposes adding the RMD
(Two Unit Multiple-Family Residential District) to the list of Residential Zones in title 18.08 and
to the PC list of zoning districts where a reduced height is required. Lastly, this report proposes
changes to the RM-40 front and side setbacks to be consistent with all RM zones and to
transform the subjective variable setbacks to objective standards. This change is being made at
this time since it was a straightforward request by the Council and relates to the development
standards tables already being modified herein.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
A near-future second ordinance will address all other aspects of the objective standards
project, based on feedback received from the Council on October 4 and November 8, 2021.
Background:
For further details on the larger Objective Standards project and its relationship to State
Housing Laws and a summary of community outreach completed to date, please review the
January 24, 2022 staff report1. Records from previous meetings described above and the other
13 ARB meetings and three PTC meetings focused on objective standards can be found on the
project webpage: bit.ly/ObjectiveStandards
City Council Action
At its January 24, 2022 meeting, the City Council reviewed a draft ordinance and directed staff
to make the following changes:
A. Amend the proposed Ordinance to a 150 ft height transition zone, while leaving the
abutting conditions where they already exist;
B. Clarify if projects want to reduce the horizontal transition zone, they are opting into the
discretionary process;
C. Extend the height transition rules in Part A to RM40 adjacent nonresidential buildings;
and
D. Investigate 18.38.150 section (b), and to incorporate RMD into the language.
The next section of the report details responses to each motion item, explaining how the item is
addressed in the ordinance, this report, or a future ordinance.
Discussion and Analysis:
The following changes have been incorporated into the draft ordinance based on the Council
motion.
A. Amend the proposed Ordinance to a 150 ft height transition zone, while leaving the
abutting conditions where they already exist;
Abutting is defined in Chapter 18.04(2) as follows: "Abutting" means having property or district
lines in common. This means that where “abutting” is applied (i.e. for mixed use and residential
development in commercial zones), the lower height limit will apply to:
1. Abutting properties (i.e lots sharing property lines or corners), and/or
1 Link to January 24, 2022 staff report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-
reports/agendas-minutes/city-council-agendas-minutes/2022/20220124/20220124pccsm-amended-linked-cq-
added.pdf
City of Palo Alto Page 3
2. Abutting zoning districts, (i.e. including parcels separated by a street or alley, as district
boundaries are often along the centerline of a street2).
However, where “abutting” is applied, the lower height limit will not apply if the latter parcel is
separated by another parcel (i.e., not abutting). In the current version of the ordinance in
Attachment A, City staff removed “abutting” where it was proposed to be added to two sets of
district regulations: 18.13: RM-20/RM-30/RM-40 and 18.20: MOR/ROLM/RP/GM district
regulations. One of the consequences of the motion, as made, is that in these two sets of
districts, the lower height limit would apply to the “leapfrog” scenario, as illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Height Transitions for Parcels Not Abutting (Leapfrog Scenario)
As proposed by the draft ordinance, within 150 feet of a site with R-20 zoning, the lower height
limit of 35 feet would apply, as shown in light blue—regardless of whether a parcel is abutting
or separated by another lot. The dotted lines indicate separate parcels.
Staff was unsure if this was the Council’s intent. If this was the Council’s intent, then the
proposed ordinance in Attachment A is correct, as written. If this was not the Council’s intent,
then the term “abutting” should be added to the height standard in Chapters 18.13 and 18.20.
Figure 2 illustrates the effects of not including “abutting” in the reduced height standard in
Chapter 18.13 and 18.20 regulations (i.e. “leapfrog” scenario). In this South El Camino Real
location, the height transition (i.e. 35 foot height limit) would apply in the northern corner the
southern CS-zoned parcel, about 15 feet into the property. Since this site is a Housing Element
Opportunity Site it is required to meet its density threshold and realistic capacity as calculated
in the 5th Cycle Housing Element, which could result in taller building on other portions of the
site. The lower height limit would apply to the northern corner of the parcel and the remaining
portion of the site could build out up to the maximum height of up to 50 feet.
2 A proposed footnote to each development standards table helps clarify that the 150-foot distance is measured from
the property line of the subject site and not from the district boundary, which could be the centerline of the street.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Figure 2: Applicability of Height Transitions for Parcels Not Abutting (18.13: RM-20/RM-
30/RM-40 and 18.20: MOR/ROLM/RP/GM)
B. Clarify if projects want to reduce the horizontal transition zone, they are opting into
the discretionary process;
In general, when applicants request any kind of modification from a development standard or
objective design standard, they are opting into a discretionary review process. To vary from the
transitional height requirement, an applicant would need to apply for 1) a variance or 2) a
Design Enhancement Exception (DEE) both of which are discretionary processes.
1) Variances are reviewed at the staff level (PAMC Section 18.76.030). However, in the
case of a height transition, it would be very difficult for staff to make the required
findings for a variance, which include determining that the site has special
circumstances, including (but not limited to) size, shape, topography, location, or
surroundings, the strict application of the requirements and regulations prescribed in
City of Palo Alto Page 5
this title substantially deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in
the vicinity and in the same zoning district
2) Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEE) at reviewed in the same manner as architectural
reviews (PAMC Section 18.76.050 and 18.77.070), which can be done at the staff level or
through the ARB process. This allows the ARB to use discretion in their interpretation of
the AR findings to condition and recommend approval or denial of projects.
There is a key exception under State Density Bonus Law, which allows concessions and waivers
to modify development standards, without necessarily triggering discretionary review. An
affordable housing project proposed under State Density Bonus law could request a waiver or
concession from the height transition standards, and still be subject to ministerial review.3 As a
result, staff recommend not stipulating that the discretionary process is necessarily required.
Rather, proposed footnotes in the RM and CN/CS/CC development standards tables each
confirm that a reduction requires review by the ARB and approval by the Director, which are
inherently discretionary actions. This would apply to most projects except for a project utilizing
State Density Bonus law to exceed height standards.
C. Extend the height transition rules in Part A to RM-40 adjacent nonresidential
buildings;
The revised ordinance in Attachment A removes the exception for new non-residential projects
within 150 feet of a RM-40 district. This means that non-residential projects within 150 feet of a
RM-40 district would now be subject to the reduced height limit. As with most of Palo Alto’s
new ordinances, no caveats are identified in the ordinance for pipeline/pending projects, so any
project that has not yet been approved (i.e. 123 Sherman Avenue, 21PLN-00172) would be
subject to this standard, where applicable.
D. Investigate 18.38.150 section (b), and to incorporate RMD into the language.
This motion item relates to maximum heights stated in Chapter 18.38: Planned Community (PC)
District. The revised ordinance in Attachment A adds RMD to the list of zoning districts where a
reduced height limits would be required for new PC projects adjacent to an RMD site. Currently,
PC sites adjacent to RM-zoned sites—i.e., a higher density district—are subject to these lower
height limits, so it is reasonable to assume that RMD should be included in the list of zones.
Environmental Review:
3 For example, under SB 35, a project that utilizes State Density Bonus law to vary from development standards is
still considered “consistent with objective zoning standards.” (Government Code Section 65913.4(a)(5).)
City of Palo Alto Page 6
The ordinance revisions represent implementation of adopted plans and policy. Therefore, the
revisions are exempt under CEQA and covered by the CEQA documents prepared for the
Comprehensive Plan. The project aims to facilitate implementation of State law. The project
does not propose to increase development beyond what was analyzed in the Comprehensive
Plan.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Ordinance Amending Title 18 to Clarify Transitional Height Standards and
Update Setbacks for RM-40 (PDF)
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
1
0160063_20220329_ay16
Ordinance No. ____
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Various Chapters of
Title 18 (Zoning) to Clarify Transitional Height Standards and Update Setbacks for
the RM-40 Zone District
The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations.
A. Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code contains development standards
governing the maximum height of structures in close proximity to lower density
residential zones. The purpose of these development standards is to ensure the
harmonious transition between lower and higher intensity development.
B. The existing language on height transitions has created confusion among the public,
project applicants, and City staff. This confusion, in turn, has resulted in differing
interpretations of the law over the years.
C. The City Council now wishes to clarify the zoning code with respect to height transitions.
The clarifications to height transition standards contained in this ordinance are
declarative of existing law.
SECTION 2. Section 18.08.030 (References to Districts) of Chapter 18.08 (Designation and
Establishment of Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended as follows (new text underlined):
18.08.030 References to Districts
Reference within this title to residential districts generally and as a grouping, includes all
districts identified in this section. Where references are made to more restrictive or less
restrictive residential districts, such references shall apply sequentially between the most
restrictive and the least restrictive.
Residential District Restrictive Reference
RE Most Restrictive
R-1 (20,000)
R-1 10,000)
R-1 (8,000)
R-1 (7,000)
R-1
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
2
0160063_20220329_ay16
R-2
Least Restrictive
RMD
RM-20
RM-30
RM-40
SECTION 3. Section 18.13.040 (Development Standards) of Chapter 18.13 (Multiple Family
Residential (RM-20, RM-30 and RM-40) Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended as follows
(new text underlined and deletions struck-through; omissions are noted with [. . .] for large
sections of unchanged text):
18.13.040 Development Standards
(a) Site Specifications, Building Size and Bulk, and Residential Density
The site development regulations in Table 2 shall apply in the multiple-family residence
districts, provided that more restrictive regulations may be recommended by the Architectural
Review Board and approved by the Director of Planning and Development Services, pursuant to
the regulations set forth in Chapter 18.76, performance criteria set forth in Chapter 18.23, and
the context-based design criteria set forth in Section 18.13.060.
Table 2
Multiple Family Residential Development Table
RM-20 RM-30 RM-40 Subject to
regulations
in:
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Minimum Setbacks Setback lines imposed by a special
setback map pursuant to Chapter
20.08 of this code may apply
Front Yard (ft) 20 20 0-2520 (12)
18.13.040(b)
On arterial roadways, expressways, and
freeways (1)
0-20 (1,2) 0-20 (1,2) 0-25 (1,2)
Interior Side Yards (ft)
For lots with width of 70 feet or greater 10 10 10
For lots with width of less than 70 feet 6 feet
Interior Rear Yards (ft)3 10 10 10
Street Side and Street Rear Yards (ft) 16 16 0-16(2)
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
3
0160063_20220329_ay16
Maximum Height (ft) 30 35 40
Maximum height for those p Portions of
a site within 50 feet of a more
restrictive abutting residential district
or a site containing a residential use in
a nonresidential district (9)
35 18.08.030
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Footnotes:
(1) Minimum front setbacks shall be determined by the Architectural Review Board upon
review pursuant to criteria set forth in Chapter 18.76 and the context-based criteria outlined
in Section 18.13.060. Arterial roadways, expressways, and freeways are identified in Map T-5
of the Comprehensive Plan and do not include residential arterials.
(2) Lesser setbacks may be allowed by the Planning Director, upon recommendation
Minimum street side setbacks in the RM-40 zone may be from 0 to 16 feet and shall be
determined by the Architectural Review Board upon review pursuant to criteria set forth in
Chapter 18.76and the context-based criteria outlined in Section 18.13.060. Special setbacks
may not be reduced except upon approval of a design enhancement exception or variance.
[. . .]
(8) The minimum density for a site may be reduced by the Director if, after the proposal is
reviewed by the Architectural Review Board, the Director finds that existing site
improvements or other parcel constraints, preclude the development from meeting the
minimum density. A site with an existing single-family use or two-family use may be
redeveloped at the existing density, either single-family or two-family as applicable. An
existing or replaced single-family or two-family residence shall not be considered a
nonconforming use, and the provisions of Chapter 18.70 shall not apply, solely based on the
minimum density requirement.
(9) Distance shall be measured from the property line of the subject site.
[. . .]
SECTION 4. Section 18.16.060 (Development Standards) of Chapter 18.16 (Neighborhood,
Community, And Service Commercial (CN, CC And CS) Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended
as follows (new text underlined and deletions struck-through; omissions are noted with [. . .] for
large sections of unchanged text):
18.16.060 Development Standards
(a) Exclusively Non-Residential Uses
Table 3 specifies the development standards for exclusively non-residential uses and
alterations to non-residential uses or structures in the CN, CC, CC(2) and CS districts. These
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
4
0160063_20220329_ay16
developments shall be designed and constructed in compliance with the following
requirements and the context-based design criteria outlined in Section 18.16.090, provided that
more restrictive regulations may be recommended by the architectural review board and
approved by the director of planning and development services, pursuant to Section 18.76.020.
Table 3
Exclusively Non-residential Development Standards
CN
CC
CC(2)
CS
Subject to
regulations in
Section
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Maximum Height (ft)
Standard
25' and 2
stories
50' 37' (4) 50'
Portions of a site wWithin
150 ft. of an abutting
residential district (other
than an RM-40 or PC
zone) (9) abutting or
located within 50 feet of
the site
35'
35'
35'
18.08.030
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Footnotes:
(1) No parking or loading space, whether required or optional, shall be located in the first 10
feet adjoining the street property line of any required yard.
[. . .]
(9) Distance shall be measured from the property line of the subject site. 150-foot
measurement may be reduced to 50 feet at minimum, subject to approval by the Planning
Director, upon recommendation by the Architectural Review Board pursuant to criteria set
forth in Chapter 18.76.
(b) Mixed Use and Residential
Table 4 specifies the development standards for new residential mixed use developments and
residential developments. These developments shall be designed and constructed in
compliance with the following requirements and the context-based design criteria outlined in
Section 18.16.090, provided that more restrictive regulations may be recommended by the
architectural review board and approved by the director of planning and development services,
pursuant to Section 18.76.020.
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
5
0160063_20220329_ay16
Table 4
Mixed Use and Residential Development Standards
CN CC CC(2) CS Subject to
regulations in:
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Maximum Height (ft)
Standard 35'(4) 50' 37' 50'
Portions of a site wWithin 150
ft. of an abutting residential
zone district (other than an
RM-40 or PC zone) (5) abutting
or located within 50 feet of the
side
35'
35'(5)
35'(5)
35'(5)
18.08.030
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Footnotes:
(1) Twenty-five-foot driveway access permitted regardless of frontage; build-to requirement
does not apply to CC district.
[. . .]
(5) For sites abutting an RM-40 zoned residential district or a residential Planned Community
(PC) district, maximum height may be increased to 50 feet. Distance shall be measured from the
property line of the subject site. 150-foot measurement may be reduced to 50 feet at minimum,
subject to approval by the Planning Director, upon recommendation by the Architectural Review
Board pursuant to criteria set forth in Chapter 18.76.
[. . .]
(10) In the CC(2) zone and on CN and CS zoned sites on El Camino Real, there shall be no
minimum mixed use ground floor commercial FAR for a residential project, except to the extent
that the retail preservation requirements of Section 18.40.180 or the retail shopping (R)
combining district (Chapter 18.30(A)) applies.
(1) Nonresidential uses that involve the use or storage of hazardous materials in excess
of the exempt quantities prescribed in Title 15 of the Municipal Code, including but not
limited to dry cleaning plants and auto repair, are prohibited in a mixed use
development with residential uses.
(2) Residential mixed use development is prohibited on any site designated with an
Automobile Dealership (AD) Combining District overlay.
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
6
0160063_20220329_ay16
(c) Exclusively Residential Uses
[. . .]
SECTION 5. Section 18.18.060 (Development Standards) of Chapter 18.18 (Downtown
Commercial (CD) District) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended as follows (new text underlined and
deletions struck-through; omissions are noted with [. . .] for large sections of unchanged text):
18.18.060 Development Standards
(a) Exclusively Non-Residential Use
Table 2 specifies the development standards for new exclusively non-residential uses and
alterations to non-residential uses or structures in the CD district, including the CD-C, CD-S, and
CD-N subdistricts. These developments shall be designed and constructed in compliance with
the following requirements and the context-based design criteria outlined in Section 18.18.110,
provided that more restrictive regulations may be recommended by the architectural review
board and approved by the director of planning and development services, pursuant to
Section 18.76.020:
Table 2
Exclusively Non-Residential Development Standards
CD-C
CD-S
CD-N
Subject to regulations
in Section:
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Maximum Height (ft)
Standard 50 50 25
Portions of a site wWithin
150 ft. of an abutting
residential zone district
– (3) – (3) – (3) 18.08.030
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
(b) Mixed Use and Residential
Table 3 specifies the development standards for new residential mixed use developments and
residential developments. These developments shall be designed and constructed in
compliance with the following requirements and the context-based design criteria outlines in
Section 18.18.110, provided that more restrictive regulations may be recommended by the
architectural review board and approved by the director of planning and development services,
pursuant to Section 18.76.020:
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
7
0160063_20220329_ay16
TABLE 3
MIXED USE AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
CD-C CD-S CD-N Subject to regulations in
Section:
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Maximum Height (ft)
Standard 50' 50' 35' 18.08.030
Portions of a site
wWithin 150 ft. of an
abutting residential zone
district (other than an
RM-40 or PC zone)(4)
40'(4) 40'(4) 35'(4) 18.08.030
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Footnotes:
(1) Required usable open space: (1) may be any combination of private and common open
spaces; (2) does not need to be located on the ground (but rooftop gardens are not included
as open space except as provided below); (3) minimum private open space dimension 6; and
(4) minimum common open space dimension 12.
For CN and CS sites on El Camino Real, CS sites on San Antonio Road between Middlefield
Road and East Charleston Road and CC(2) sites that do not abut a single- or two-family
residential use or zoning district, rooftop gardens may qualify as usable open space and may
count as up to 60% of the required usable open space for the residential component of a
project. In order to qualify as usable open space, the rooftop garden shall meet the
requirements set forth in Section 18.40.230.
[. . .]
(4) Distance shall be measured from the property line of the subject site. For sites abutting
an RM-40 zoned residential district or a residential Planned Community (PC) district,
maximum height may be increased to 50 feet.
(5) The weighted average residential unit size shall be calculated by dividing the sum of the
square footage of all units by the number of units. For example, a project with ten 800-
square foot 1-bedroom units, eight 1,200-square foot 2-bedroom units, and two 1,800-
square foot 3-bedroom units would have a weighted average residential unit size of
((10x800)+(8x1,200)+(2x1,800)) ÷ (10+8+2) = 1,060 square feet.
[. . .]
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
8
0160063_20220329_ay16
SECTION 6. Section 18.20.040 (Site Development Standards) of Chapter 18.20 (Office,
Research, And Manufacturing (MOR, ROLM, RP And GM) Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning) is
amended as follows (new text underlined and deletions struck-through; omissions are noted
with [. . .] for large sections of unchanged text):
18.20.040 Site Development Standards
Development in the office research, industrial, and manufacturing districts is subject to the
following development standards, provided that more restrictive regulations may be required
as part of design review under Chapter 18.76 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
(a) Development Standards for Non-Residential Uses
Table 2 shows the site development standards for exclusively non-residential uses in the
industrial and manufacturing districts.
TABLE 2
INDUSTRIAL/MANUFACTURING NON-RESIDENTIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
MOR
ROLM
ROLM(E)
RP
RP(5)
GM
Subject to
Regulations in
Chapter:
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Maximum Height (ft)
Standard 50 35(4) 35(4) 50
Portions of a site wWithin
150 ft. of an abutting
residential zone district (5)
35 35 35 35 18.08.030
Portions of a site wWithin
40 ft. of an abutting
residential zone district(5)
35 25 25 35 18.08.030
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
(5) Distance shall be measured from the property line of the subject site. Residential zones
include R-1, R-2, RE, RMD, RM-20, RM-30, RM-40 and residential Planned Community (PC)
zones.
[. . .]
SECTION 7. Section 18.30(J).090 (Development Standards) of Subchapter 18.30(J)
(Affordable Housing (AH) Combining District Regulations) of Chapter 18.30 (Combining Districts)
of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended to read as follows (new text underlined and deletions struck-
through; omissions are noted with [. . .] for large sections of unchanged text):
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
9
0160063_20220329_ay16
18.30(J).090 Development Standards
The following development standards shall apply to projects subject to the AH affordable
housing combining district in lieu of the development standards for the underlying zoning
district, except where noted below:
Table 1
Development Standards
AH Combining District (1)
Minimum Site Specifications Subject to regulations in:
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Maximum Height (ft) 50'
Portions of a site wWithin 50 ft of
an abutting residential district
(other than an RM-40 or PC zone)
R1, R-2, RMD, RM-20, or RM-30
zoned property
35'(3) 18.08.030
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
(3) Distance shall be measured from the property line of the subject site. The Planning
Director may recommend a waiver from the transitional height standard.
[. . .]
SECTION 8. Section 18.30(K).070 (Development standards) of Subchapter 18.30(K)
(Workforce Housing (WH) Combining District Regulations) of Chapter 18.30 (Combining
Districts) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended to read as follows (new text underlined and deletions
struck-through; omissions are noted with [. . .] for large sections of unchanged text):
18.30(K).070 Development Standards
(a) Where the WH combining district is combined with the public facilities district, the
following development standards shall apply for workforce housing projects, including
permitted incidental uses, in lieu of the development standards for the underlying PF zoning
district:
Table 1
Development Standards
WH Combining District
Minimum Site
Specifications
Subject to regulations in:
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
10
0160063_20220329_ay16
Maximum Height (ft)
Standard 50'
Portions of a site wWithin 150
ft. of an abutting residential
district (other than an RM-40 or
PC zone)(5) abutting or
located within 50 feet of the
site
35', except as limited by
applicable daylight plane
requirements
18.08.030
[. . .] [. . .] [. . .]
Footnotes:
[. . .]
(5) Distance shall be measured from the property line of the subject site.
[. . .]
SECTION 9. Section 18.38.150 (Special requirements) of Chapter 18.38 (PC Planned
Community District Regulations) of Title 18 (Zoning) is amended to read as follows (new text
underlined and deletions struck-through; omissions are noted with [. . .] for large sections of
unchanged text):
18.38.150 Special requirements.
Sites abutting or and having any portion located with one hundred fifty 150 feet of any RE, R-1,
R-2, RMD, RM, or any PC district permitting single-family development or multiple-family
development shall be subject to the following additional height and yard requirements:
(a) Parking Facilities. The maximum height shall be equal to the height established in the
most restrictive adjacent zone district.
(b) All Other Uses. The maximum height within one hundred fifty 150 feet of any abutting RE,
R-1, R-2, RMD, RM-20, or applicable PC district shall be thirty-five 35 feet; provided,
however, that for a use where the gross floor area excluding any area used exclusively for
parking purposes, is at least sixty 60 percent residential, the maximum height within one
hundred fifty 150 feet of an abutting RM-4 30 or RM-5 40 district shall be fifty 50 feet.
[. . .]
SECTION 10. Any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code or appendices thereto
inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no
further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this
Ordinance.
SECTION 11. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
11
0160063_20220329_ay16
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each
and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or
unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be
subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 12. The Council finds that the Ordinance is within the scope of and in furtherance of
the Comprehensive Plan 2030 which was evaluated in that certain Final Environmental Impact
Report certified and for which findings were adopted by Council Resolution Nos. 9720 and 9721
on November 13, 2017, all in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The
Ordinance does not propose to increase development beyond what was analyzed in the
Comprehensive Plan. Pursuant to Section 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has
determined that no new effects would occur from and no new mitigation measures would be
required for the adoption of this Ordinance.
SECTION 13. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its
adoption.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
____________________________ ____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
____________________________ ____________________________
Assistant City Attorney City Manager
____________________________
Director of Planning & Development
Services