The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutStaff Report 14615 City of Palo Alto (ID # 14615) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 8/1/2022 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Supplemental Report - 22PLN-00016 Title: PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 1033 Amarillo Ave [22PLN-00016]: Request for a Preliminary Parcel Map With Exceptions to Subdivide a 20,787 Square Foot R-1 Property Into Two (2) Lots, Where Lot 1 Will be 10,668.50 Square Feet and Lot 2 Will be 10,118.77 Square Feet. Exception is for Minimum lot Width and Maximum lot Size. Zoning District R-1 Single Family Residential. From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Supplemental Report - Item 9 MEETING DATE: AUGUST 1, 2022 TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: JONATHAN LAIT, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 1033 AMARILLO AVE [22PLN- 00016]: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PARCEL MAP WITH EXCEPTIONS TO SUBDIVIDE A 20,787 SQUARE FOOT R-1 PROPERTY INTO TWO (2) LOTS, WHERE LOT 1 WILL BE 10,668.50 SQUARE FEET AND LOT 2 WILL BE 10,118.77 SQUARE FEET. EXCEPTION IS FOR MINIMUM LOT WIDTH AND MAXIMUM LOT SIZE. ZONING DISTRICT R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. This At-Places Memorandum acknowledges communication that occurred after publication of the staff report: (1) The applicant has provided a clarification memo. This memo attaches the City of Palo Alto Page 2 letter received after publication of the staff report and prior to the August 1st City Council Meeting. Applicant’s Memo The applicant, Ted O’Hanlon, provided the attached memo on July 28, 2022. The memo provides clarification on the development intent to develop the resulting lots each with a primary dwelling unit and an ADU (and potentially a JADU), for a total of 4-6 units at the Property. This project would use non-SB 9 processes including Building Permits and the Individual Review program. The memo also discusses why Mr. O’Hanlon does not intend on using SB 9. Staff has no additional comments at this time. Attachments: Attachment A: Applicant's Memo (PDF) John Kevlin jkevlin@reubenlaw.com July 28, 2022 Delivered Via Email Palo Alto City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: 1033 Amarillo Avenue Hearing Date: August 1, 2022 (Agenda Item #9) Dear Mayor Burt and City Councilors, Our office represents American Pacific International Capital, Inc. (“Project Sponsor”), the sponsor of a proposed subdivision of the existing parcel at 1033 Amarillo Avenue (the “Proposed Subdivision” and the “Property”). No other development is proposed in conjunction with the Proposed Subdivision, and any potential entitlement would be pursued subsequent to its approval. Approval of the Proposed Subdivision would allow for the rational redevelopment of the Property into family-sized homes while maintaining the existing density of four dwelling units. We are requesting the City Council’s support for the Proposed Subdivision, based on the justifications outlined in this letter. A. Project Sponsor Supports Staff Recommendation Planning Department staff is recommending approval of the Proposed Subdivision with an exception from the maximum lot size and minimum lot width requirements. As outlined in the staff report, the Proposed Subdivision would subdivide an irregularly-large lot, and even though the resulting lots will be slightly larger than the maximum lot size (by 118 and 668 square feet, respectively), the resulting lots will be much more in conformance with the maximum lot size requirement than the existing 20,787 square foot lot. Further, the resulting lot widths will be only 7 feet smaller than the minimum lot width of 60 feet, which is consistent with the other lots on this block. In order to ensure development of the Property after the Proposed Subdivision that preserves pedestrian safety and comfort, Planning Department staff is recommending a condition of approval that a covenant of easement be placed on the resulting parcel maps that ensures shared driveway and utility access between the two resulting lots once they are redeveloped. The Project Sponsor is in support of this condition and is prepared to work with staff to ensure the easement is written in a way that does not negatively impinge on future development of the Property. As such, the Project Sponsor is fully supportive of the Planning Department’s recommendation of approval and associated conditions. Palo Alto City Council July 28, 2022 Page 2 /Volumes/reubenlaw/Shared/R&A/696610/LTR - Palo Alto City Council - 1033 Amarillo Ave - 7-28-2022 Final.docx B. Project Sponsor Intends to Redevelop Property Using Palo Alto’s Zoning and ADU Regulations During the entitlement process for the Proposed Subdivision, there has been much discussion – and concern – about the potential use of SB-9 subsequent to this approval. This would have the potential of subsequently subdividing the two new lots into four lots and constructing up to 8 units on the Property, with no discretion or input from the City. For multiple reasons, the Project Sponsor has no intent of using SB-9, and, rather, intends to develop the resulting lots using the City’s well-established ADU program. The result would be two lots with a primary dwelling unit and an ADU (and potentially a JADU), for a total of 4-6 units at the Property. It is unlikely the Project Sponsor can waive their rights under SB-9, in particular, as a condition of approval. However, there are multiple reasons why the Project Sponsor has no intent to pursue an SB-9 project subsequent to the Proposed Subdivision, including: • SB-9 requires existing units to be vacant for three years. All four cottages are currently occupied by renters and the Project Sponsor would need to vacate them and to forgo three years of market rent before they could proceed with an SB-9 project. • SB-9 requires that the owner sign an affidavit declaring their intent to occupy one of the resulting units for three years post-construction. The Project Sponsor is an international real estate development firm, and the ownership has no interest in living in a unit that is redeveloped at the Property. • SB-9 limits resulting units to just 800 square feet. Palo Alto’s interim SB-9 ordinance restricts units constructed on a lot split pursuant to SB-9 to a maximum of 800 square feet. This is well below the desired size for the primary dwelling units on the Property once subdivided. Alternatively, Palo Alto’s existing zoning and established ADU program provides the development standards and reliability that the Project Sponsor needs to move forward. This would result in a R-1 zoning-compliant primary residence on each of the new lots, plus an ADU (and potentially a JADU). C. Proposed Subdivision Fulfills Findings for Lot Size, Lot Width Exceptions The staff report provides findings to grant an exception from the lot size and lot width requirements of the Planning Code. This is clearly a situation that is eligible for such an exception. The Property is a hugely over-sized lot (more than double the maximum lot size), the only way the Project Sponsor can reasonably develop the Property consistent with other, standard-sized lots is pursuant to the very small exceptions being requested here. The Proposed Subdivision will result in lot sizes that are much closer to conformance with the code requirement, and the resulting lot Palo Alto City Council July 28, 2022 Page 3 /Volumes/reubenlaw/Shared/R&A/696610/LTR - Palo Alto City Council - 1033 Amarillo Ave - 7-28-2022 Final.docx widths are well within the standard widths of lots on this block. The appropriateness of these exceptions is underscored by the two comparable projects granted exceptions by the City Council in 2021. In short, the Proposed Subdivision very clearly fulfills the criteria required for the requested exceptions. D. Conclusion We appreciate the City Council’s consideration of the Proposed Subdivision, and its approval will allow for a reasonable, contextual redevelopment pursuant to Palo Alto’s existing zoning regulations and the standard City review process. Based on this, we respectfully request the City Council’s support of the Proposed Subdivision. Sincerely, REUBEN, JUNIUS & ROSE, LLP John Kevlin