Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Staff Report 2312-2455
CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Monday, January 22, 2024 Council Chambers & Hybrid 5:30 PM Agenda Item 6.QUASI-JUDICIAL. 949 Scott Street [22PLN-00410]: Request for City Council Hearing on the Director's Decision to Approve a Variance application to Allow a New Single-Story, Single- Family Home with a Basement to Encroach into the Front, Side, and Rear Setbacks and Deviate from Standards for Below Grade Patio Side and Rear Setbacks, and Number of Parking Spaces. Zoning District: R-2. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15303. City Council Staff Report From: City Manager Report Type: CONSENT CALENDAR Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: January 22, 2024 Report #:2312-2455 TITLE QUASI-JUDICIAL. 949 Scott Street [22PLN-00410]: Request for City Council Hearing on the Director's Decision to Approve a Variance application to Allow a New Single-Story, Single-Family Home with a Basement to Encroach into the Front, Side, and Rear Setbacks and Deviate from Standards for Below Grade Patio Side and Rear Setbacks, and Number of Parking Spaces. Zoning District: R-2. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15303. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council take the following action(s): 1. Find the proposed project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15303 (New Construction) 2. Adopt the attached Record of Land Use Action, thereby denying the appeal, upholding the Director’s approval and the Planning and Transportation Commission’s recommendation of approval of the Variance and finding the proposed project exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The subject property owner requests approval of a Variance application to demolish an existing and build a new one-story single-family home with a basement on a substandard lot in the R-2 zoning district. The parcel is only 1,500 square feet in area with a developable potential of about 180 square feet when taking into consideration required setbacks. The existing residence is about 834 square feet and currently encroaches into the required front, side and rear yard setbacks. The owner seeks to essentially replace the existing residence with a modest increase in parcel coverage and a new basement. In accordance with the municipal code, the resulting floor area for the new home is 673 square feet (not counting the 670 square foot basement). The proposed Variance application would allow building (including basement) encroachments into the required front, side and rear yard setback. Additionally, the Variance authorizes increases to lot coverage, parking, and below grade patio encroachments. The proposed setback encroachments are generally consistent with the existing residence’s footprint. The Planning and Development Services director issued a tentative approval of the applicant’s request on October 26, 2023. In accordance with the municipal code, a request for hearing before the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) was received and the hearing scheduled for December 13, 2023. The PTC considered the request, including public testimony, and unanimously supported the director’s decision. The municipal code requires that the PTC’s recommendation be forwarded to the City Council within 45 days. This item has been placed on the consent calendar and if accepted, the recommendation to approve the Variance application stands. However, if three or more City Councilmembers want to hold a public hearing to consider the application, action is needed to pull the item from the consent calendar. If pulled, staff would return at a future date for hearing on the application and expanded analysis. Additional background information is provided in the PTC staff report and video discussion posted online.1 Variance applications are subject findings set forth in Section 18.76.030 of the zoning code. A Variance is intended to provide a way for a site with special physical constraints, resulting from natural or built features, to be used in ways similar to other sites in the same vicinity and zoning district; and provide a way to grant relief when strict application of the zoning regulations would subject development of a site to substantial hardships, constraints, or practical difficulties that do not normally arise on other sites in the same vicinity and zoning district. The parcel’s small size generally supports the need for the variance request and staff’s and the PTC’s supporting evidence is provided in the attached record of land use action (Attachment D). Two neighbors have expressed concern with the proposal. The written comments have been provided as Attachment E to this staff report. One neighbor spoke at the public hearing, reiterating their shared concerns which were: 1. The number of variances requested by the application; 2. The aesthetic/visual design of the building; 3. Whether the structure will be used as a home or an extension of the neighbor’s house; 4. Impacts to existing street trees 5. Impacts to parking/quality of life during construction 6. Consistency with General Plan/SB 330 Briefly, in response, the number of requested variances reflects the development constraints imposed by the size of the subject property. Visual and aesthetic design concerns are understood, but the City does not require design review for single family homes. The use of the house is designed as a single family home; the City does not regulate who occupies the residence. One 1 December 13, 2023 PTC Staff Report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/agendas-minutes- reports/agendas-minutes/planning-and-transportation-commission/2023/ptc-12.13-949-scott.pdf and video: https://midpenmedia.org/planning-and-transportation-commission-2-12132023/ existing street tree will be removed requiring a replacement with two trees; this request has been reviewed and is supported by the City’s Urban Forestry program. Construction impacts are part of development activity and staff acknowledges the disruption this will have on neighbors. The City imposes construction-related constraints in terms of noise and hours that are intended to mitigate this short term impact. With respect to SB 330, staff is not able to substantiate any violation with state law or the intent purposes of the comprehensive plan. Accordingly, staff recommends the City Council uphold the director and PTC’s recommendation to approve the Variance application on consent. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT This project is an application affecting a private property where all the costs associated with it will be borne out by the applicant. While an existing City street tree will be removed to accommodate the proposed driveway, the applicant will be responsible for planting one tree in the public right of way immediately adjacent to the site, and another within a half-mile of the property to increase the City’s tree canopy and achieve the No-Net-Loss Canopy replacement requirements noted in the City’s Tree Technical Manual. POLICY IMPLICATIONS To minimize the potential precedent set by any variance application, staff analyzed comparable properties within the city limits. For this particular project, staff utilized the City's GIS mapping software to identify suitable comparisons based on factors like size and existing use. Initially, staff found 60 parcels measuring 2,000 square feet or less, excluding condominium projects. Further investigation revealed that only 14 of these parcels currently house single-family dwellings. Notably, among these 14 single-family homes, just three parcels – including the subject property – occupy an area of 1,500 square feet or less. Therefore, based on this analysis, staff believes the scope of potential precedent arising from this application is effectively limited to a maximum of three properties within the city. This approach allows the City to strike a balance between addressing individual needs and maintaining responsible urban planning principles that minimize unintended consequences. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires notice of this public hearing be published in a local paper and mailed to owners and occupants of property within 600 feet of the subject property at least ten days in advance. Notice of a public hearing for this project was published in the Daily Post on January 5, 2024, which is 10 days in advance of the meeting. Postcard mailing occurred on January 2, 2024, which is 13 days in advance of the meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The subject project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. The City’s consultant, Page & Turnbull evaluated the existing building and found it ineligible for the California Register of Historic Resources (Attachment F). Specifically, the project is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15303. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A – Location Map Attachment B – Applicant’s Project Description Attachment C – Zoning Comparison Table Attachment D – Draft Record of Land Use Action Attachment E – Appeal & Public Comments Attachment F – Historic Evaluation Attachment G – Project Plans APPROVED BY: Jonathan Lait, Planning and Development Services Director 50.0' 112.5' 112.5' 150.0' 112.5' 50.0' 5' 2 5' 56.0' 112.5' 56.5' 112.5' 100.0' 112.5' 100.0' 112.5' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 125.0' 50.0' 125.0'50.0' 125.0' 50.0' 125.0' 70.0' 50.0'70.0' 50.0' 30.0' 50.0' 30.0' 50.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 100.0' 112.5' 100.0' 112.5' 100.0' 52.5' 100.0' 52.5' 100.0' 60.0' 100.0' 60.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 58.6' 27.3'16.5' 117.3' 75.0' 90.0' 50.0' 210.0' 110.0' 14.0' 30.0' 14.0' 70.0' 75.0' 22.7'16.5' 27.3' 58.6' 50.0' 150.0' 70.0' 150.0' 70.0' 200.0' 75.0' 200.0' 75.0' 110.0' 14.0' 30.0' 61.0' 140.0' 75.0' 50.0' 78.0' 50.0' 78.0' 50.0' 34.5'50.0' 34.5' 50.0' 90.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' .0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 75.0' 50.0' 75.0' 50.0' 75.0' 50.0' 75.0' 60.0' 150.0' 200.0' 200.0' 65.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 500 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 50.0' 1 105.0' 118.5' 50.0' 50.0' 150.0'68.5'50.0' 150.0' 65.0' 150.0'50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 175.0' 281 943 327 942 928 930 931933 1010 376 370 358A 358 326 959 947 933 935 943 951 1 1005 350 915 352 354 940 930 920 912 362 370 900 1027 1017-1023 980960 990 342-352 301 319 960 935 949928 936 940-946 353 367 361 310 936 1035 1037 1001 SCOTT STREET ADDISON AVENUE REET WAVERLEY STREET Scott ParkScott Street Mini Park This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Project Site Current Features 0' 51' Attachment A: Location map CITY OF PALO ALTOINCORPORATED CAL I F ORN I A P a l o A l t o T h e C i t y o f AP R I L 1 6 1 8 9 4 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2016 City of Palo Alto gsauls, 2023-11-21 14:58:15 Attachment A. Location Map (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Personal\Planning.mdb) July 6, 2023 City of Palo Alto Planning & Development Division 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: Amy French, Chief Planning Official Jodie Gerhardt, Manager of Current Planning Garret Sauls, Project Planner Re: Variance Findings for 949 Scott St. The letter is to accompany our application for the proposed project at 949 Scott St. to build a new single-family residence on the property to replace the existing residence. The purpose of this letter is to address the findings and justifications to request a variance to encroach into the front, side, and rear yard setbacks with both first floor and basement. Additionally, we are requesting a variance to provide only one off-street covered parking space (where none currently exists), to exceed the maximum lot coverage, and the below grade patio allowance. Introduction: The lot is zoned as R-2 within a mixed residential R-2 district. The property is substandard in size is 30 feet wide by 50 feet deep for a total of 1,500 sf. The property appears to have been subdivided off the rear of 353 Addison Ave. at some point in the past when such actions where allowable. The context is a mixture of single-family homes of varying architectural style, size, and era of construction. The existing development on the property is a one-story single-family home of 835 sf. The existing residence encroaches within the setback distances on all sides. The existing front setback of the home is 10’-9 (6’-8” to the entry porch) where 20 feet would be required. The existing side setbacks are 2’-10 on the right side and 3’-0” on the left side, where 6 feet would be required. The existing rear setback is 3’-11”, where 20 feet would be required. The home was designated as potentially eligible for the CRHR, however upon the research by Page & Turnbull it was not determined to be historically significant. For substandard lots in the R-2 districts, zoning section 18.10.150 provides allowance for replacing lawfully created structures with new structures without compliance with height and habitable floor area limitations, provided the new structure does not exceed 17 feet in height or create habitable area above the first floor level. This section provides an allowance for this proposed new home to replace the existing structure, however it would require a variance approval to keep the same location and setbacks. Re: 949 Scott St. variance request July 7, 2022 Pg. 2 of 5 We respectfully ask for granting of the variances for the success of this project, based on the four findings and conditions below. Findings: 1. The granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience The proposed single-family home will maintain the existing use on the property, consistent with the current presence in the overall neighborhood. The placement of the proposed new residence will have side setbacks with greater distances than the existing setbacks to property lines, increasing separations between neighboring structures. The above ground footprint will be reduced from the existing conditions, creating additional distance and privacy between neighboring structures. At the proposed 4’-0 side and rear setbacks it would be equivalent to what is currently allowable for Accessory Dwelling Units on any single family lot in the city. To comply with current building codes, the new structure will be equipped with an automatic fire sprinkler system per NFPA-13D standards. With respect to the construction assembly, the exterior walls and eaves on the left and rear sides will comply with requirements when building less than 5 feet but at least 3 feet of the property line. For the right side it will comply with the additional requirements when building between 3 feet and 0 feet of the property line. The replacement of the existing residence will result in removal of a wood burning masonry fireplace, which is in line with the goals of the City of Palo Alto and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. The new structure will also be more energy efficient and will rely on electricity for all appliances instead of natural gas, which is in line with the goals of the City’s energy reach code. The proposed design will be providing one off-street parking spaces, where it currently does not provide any. This is particularly notable for such a narrow dead-end street with limited vehicular clearances. 2. The granting of the application is consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of Title 18 (Zoning) The district is zoned R-2 to allow for one- and two-family development. Reconstructing the property with a new single-family residence will maintain the objectives of the zoning. The residence will be one story above grade, as is consistent with substandard lot limitations. Noise producing equipment will be situated in a location that complies with the minimum setbacks and decibel ratings. The proposed size of home would be comparable to many of the ADU projects being encouraged and approved to be built throughout Palo Alto under current State guidelines. Re: 949 Scott St. variance request July 7, 2022 Pg. 3 of 5 Additionally regarding the lot size, this existing parcel could be equivalent to a parcel that would be created today under the State SB-9 guidelines. So neither the lot size or home size are outside the normal range of current scale under the overall zoning intent. 3. Because of special circumstances, including (but not limited to) size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the requirements and regulations prescribed in Title 18 substantially deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and in the same zoning district as the subject property. Special circumstances that are expressly excluded from consideration are: A) The personal circumstances of the property owner B) Any changes in the size or shape of the property made by the property owner or his predecessors in interest while the property was subject to the same zoning designation. If standard setbacks are applied, the resulting buildable area would only be 18 feet wide by 10 foot deep rectangle of 180 sf. This would not be feasible for any type of new residential structure to be built. A typical one car garage of 10 foot by 20 foot interior would not even fit within the required setback distances. As far as can be ascertained, there are no other properties in the neighborhood with such small property dimensions. From our study, there are no feasible home designs that would comply with all of the zoning without some kind of variance approval. Re: 949 Scott St. variance request July 7, 2022 Pg. 4 of 5 Sketch 1: the allowable building area on this property if standard minimum setbacks where applied. 4. The granting of the application shall not affect substantial compliance with the regulations or constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district as the subject property. The zoning ordinance for substandard lots zoned R-2 provides an allowance for grandfathered uses, allowing replacement lawfully created structures with new structures without compliance with height and floor limitations. 18.10.150 Grandfathered Uses (f) Existing Homes on Substandard Lots In the R-2 district, single-family and two-family homes on substandard lots, as defined in Section 18.10.040(b), and flag lots existing on August 1, 1991 and which prior to that date were lawful, complying structures, may remain and be remodeled, improved, or replaced without complying with the height and habitable floor limitations for substandard lots specified in Section 18.10.040, provided that: (1) any such remodeling, improvement, or replacement does not result in a height above seventeen feet or any additional habitable floor area above a first habitable floor, except that any structure damaged or destroyed by a natural disaster (such as fire, flood or earthquake) may be replaced to its previous size without regard to the height and habitable floor limitations imposed by this section; and (2) in the case of a conflict between the provisions of this section and the provisions of Chapter 18.70, this section shall control. With the combination of this zoning section and the variance approval, the proposed structure will replace a lawful pre-existing residence of equal size, and will not exceed 17 feet in height or contain a habitable floor above the first floor. With respect to parking: it was suggested that the property could/should be built without including any off-street parking. However that would mean this residence is solely reliant on street parking, which is very limited in this area. As a short narrow block, the street parking is typically full at most times of day. There is a nearby medical rehabilitation center which also regularly contributes to the competition for street parking. So without dedicated off-street parking access for this property, all daily activities of loading and unloading personal items between the home and transportation will be a continual challenge. With the limited width of the lot, we won’t physically have enough width for a full two-car garage width, so an oversized one-car garage is all that can fit. Since there will be no options for driveway parking with the short front setback, the garage will be a critical amenity for this residence. Additionally, the extra garage width will allow for storage of other personal belongings that could typically be stored in yard space on a normal-sized property. With such limited space around the sides and rear, there isn’t room for any items that could typically to be stored outside the residence, or be kept under a porch, or in a rear shed or elsewhere. Re: 949 Scott St. variance request July 7, 2022 Pg. 5 of 5 With respect to the two existing Street Trees: With a narrower driveway, it could be possible to keep both street trees, though it would be extremely tight. There is only 14 feet distance between the two trees, so even with a 10 foot wide driveway it would still just barely clear the trunks. We are currently proposing to remove only one of the trees to facilitate the new driveway. For the remaining street tree in front of this property, we have adjusted the driveway dimensions to create 6 feet of separation between tree and the driveway. For the replacement of the other tree, we could propose moving it to the right side to create more separation. But there is a street light not far away on that side, and the neighbors driveway just beyond that, so it would not be a location with improved clearances for the tree to grow. So ultimately we are proposing to relocate the one street trees to the left of the remaining tree, just in front of the neighboring property, spaced equally to their current location in front of 949. There is a wide open section of the sidewalk planter that is not planted, so a replacement street tree would have ample room to grow, not affect any utilities, and be clearly away from any driveways. Summary: In weighing different design directions and options for this parcel, we have arrived at our current proposed development as submitted with this application. We feel this embodies the best use of the property, is the most compatible with the context of the surrounding neighborhood, and poses the least impacts to the overall neighborhood, environment, and public welfare, and will be consistent with the Title 18 zoning intentions. We appreciate your time in the review and consideration of our application and are available to answer any questions or to provide additional information. Sincerely, Daniel S. Rhoads, Architect Y&B Architects Inc. ATTACHMENT C ZONING COMPARISON TABLE 949 Scott Street – 22PLN-00410 Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.10 (R-2 DISTRICT) Regulation Required Existing Proposed Minimum/Maximum Site Area, Width and Depth 6,000-11,999 sf area, 60 ft width, 100 ft depth 1,500 sf 1,500 sf Minimum Front Yard (2) 20 ft 10 ft, 9.5 in 10 ft, 9.5 in Rear Yard 20 ft 3 ft, 11.5 in 4 ft Interior Side Yard 6 ft 3 ft, 0.5 in; 2 ft, 8 in 4 ft Street Side Yard 16 ft N/A N/A Special Setback 24 feet – see Chapter 20.08 & zoning maps N/A N/A Max. Building Height 17 ft due to substandard size 14 16 ft, 11 in Side Yard Daylight Plane 10 feet at interior side lot line then 45 degree angle (3) Complies Complies Front and Rear Yard Daylight Plane 16 feet at rear setback line then 60 degree angle (3) Complies Complies Max. Site Coverage 40% for single story, 35% for multi-story with an additional 5% for covered patio/ overhangs (600 sf) 57.3% (860 sf)44.88% (673.3 sf) Max. Total Floor Area Ratio 45% for first 5,000 sf lot size and 30% for lot size in excess of 5,000 sf (675 sf) and additional 200 sf for one covered parking space (4) 55.66% (834.8 sf)44.88% (673.3 sf) Max. House Size 6,000 sf 834.8 sf 673.3 Minimum site area permitting two-family use 7,500 sf 1,500 sf 1,500 sf (1) Minimum Lot Size: Any lot less than the minimum lot size may be used in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.40. (2) R-2 Floodzone Heights: Provided, in a special flood hazard area as defined in Chapter 16.52, the maximum heights are increased by one-half of the increase in elevation required to reach base flood elevation, up to a maximum building height of 33 feet. (3) R-2 Floodzone Daylight Plane: Provided, if the site is in a special flood hazard area and is entitled to an increase in the maximum height, the heights for the daylight planes shall be adjusted by the same amount. (4) Exemption from Floor Area for Covered Parking Required for Two-Family Uses: In the R-2 and RMD districts, for two-family uses, floor area limits may be exceeded by a maximum of two hundred square feet, for purposes of providing one required covered parking space. (5) Maximum House Size: The gross floor area of attached garages and attached accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units are included in the calculation of maximum house size. If there is no garage attached to the house, then the square footage of one detached covered parking space shall be included in the calculation. This provision applies only to single-family residences, not to duplexes allowed in the R-2 and RMD districts. Table 2: CONFORMANCE WITH SECTION 18.10.060 and CHAPTER 18.52 (Off-Street Parking) for Single Family Residential Uses Type Required Existing Proposed Vehicle Parking 2 parking spaces per unit, of which one must be covered None One covered parking stall in garage Bicycle Parking None N/A N/A Page 1 of 9 APPROVAL NO. 2024-____ RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE APPROVAL FOR 949 SCOTT STREET: VARIANCE (22PLN-00410) On January 22, 2024, the Council held a duly noticed public hearing and, after considering all of the evidence presented, approved the Variance application to encroach into the front, side, and rear setbacks for the first floor and basement of a new single story, single-family home. The Variance application also requested to deviate from the below grade patio side and rear setback, and number of parking stall requirements required by the R-2 Zoning District regulations. In approving the application, the Council could make the following findings, determination and declarations: SECTION 1. Background. A. A Variance to allow encroachments into the front, side, and rear setbacks for the first floor and basement of a new single story, single-family home. A Variance to allow deviations from the below grade patio side and rear setback, and number of parking stall requirements in the R-2 Zoning District regulations. (“The Project”). B. The project was reviewed by Staff and approved in a Director’s Decision on October 26, 2023. C. The neighbor requested a PTC Hearing, pursuant to PAMC 18.77.060, on November 13, 2023. D. On December 13, 2023, the Planning and Transportation Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, at which evidence was presented and all person were afforded an opportunity to be heard in accordance with the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Council’s Policies and Procedures. E. On January 22, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing, at which evidence was presented and all person were afforded an opportunity to be heard in accordance with the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Council’s Policies and Procedures. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The proposed project has been determined to be Categorically Exempt per section 15303 (New Construction) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. SECTION 3. Variance Findings. 1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including (but not limited to) size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the requirements and regulations prescribed in this title substantially deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and in the same zoning district as the subject property. Special circumstances that are expressly excluded from consideration are: (A) The personal circumstances of the property owner, and (B) Any changes in the size or shape of the subject property made by the property owner Page 2 of 9 or his predecessors in interest while the property was subject to the same zoning designation. The City’s standard dimensions for a new R-2 lot are 60 feet wide by 100 feet deep while the property’s dimensions are 30 feet wide by 50 feet deep as shown in the image below. When applying the standard setbacks to the property it leaves an area of 180 square feet to develop a new single-family home where a 675 square foot home is permitted to be developed based on the City’s Floor Area Ratio (FAR) allowance of 45% of the first 5,000 square feet. The existing building is roughly 840 square feet and the applicant’s proposal will replace it with a home that is below the City’s allowed FAR – at 673 square feet. While the property at 362 Channing Avenue is similar in size, neither represent a predominant pattern in the neighborhood as most properties are wider and deeper than the subject property. Due to this uniqueness, strict application of the standard requirements would deprive the homeowner of their ability to build a home close to the size permitted by the City’s zoning code. 2. The granting of the application affects substantial compliance with the regulations or constitutes a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district as the subject property, and The current building exists at a roughly 2’-8” rear setback, 3’ to 3’-11” interior side setbacks, and 10’- 9” front setback. The proposed building will result in the rear and interior side setbacks being improved to a four foot setback, which is a consistent setback requirement for new ADUs and homes built through the Senate Bill 9 process, and the front yard setback will remain the same. The substantial changes made to the design of the building will be the inclusion of one on-site parking space, where there are currently none, and a basement underneath the footprint of the ground floor above it, which will not be visible to residents off-site. Per the Zoning Code, basements are not included in the floor area for the site and are not permitted in the setbacks for the property, outside of where the primary house can expand into. As noted in Finding 1, however, strict application of Page 3 of 9 those rules would only permit a 180 square foot basement under the first floor of the structure which may lead to design challenges and functional limitations to a building meeting those standards. Due to the unique size of this parcel and physical limits of where a house can be built, allowing a basement under the proposed building would not grant this property owner a special privilege that other owners in the vicinity do not already enjoy. 3. The granting of the application is consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of this title (Zoning), and The proposed development is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance in that it replaces an existing single-family home with another single-family home and seeks to improve on legal, non-conforming conditions to the site related to FAR, parking, and setbacks. In addition, the application is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan policies: Policy L-1.3: Infill development in the urban service area should be compatible with its surroundings and the overall scale and character of the city to ensure a compact, efficient development pattern. The proposed building will be compatible with its surroundings in that it is designed as a single- family home. The building will be designed as a single-story structure and the ground floor footprint will be reduced from the existing conditions on site, which will help to ensure the scale of the building is in keeping with the existing, surrounding buildings. Additionally, the new building is designed to meet the single-family daylight plane requirements in the R-2 zone district so there will be no added massing to the structure that will overly impact neighboring properties. Policy L-3.5: Avoid negative impacts of basement construction for single-family homes on adjacent properties, public resources, and the natural environment. The proposed basement will not impact adjacent properties as it will be contained within the boundaries of the property. The construction of the basement will not affect any adjacent trees on neighboring properties. The City has adopted a dewatering process for basement construction in the event the water table is high within this area to accommodate this construction. Policy N-2.8: Require new commercial, multi-unit and single-family housing projects to provide street trees and related irrigation systems. The proposed application will include two street trees: one as a replacement adjacent to the property in the right of way and another within a half mile from the property in the right of way. This will benefit public health by expanding tree canopy coverage within the public right of way where it does not currently exist. 4. The granting of the application will be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience. The proposed structure would not be detrimental or injurious to property or negatively impact the Page 4 of 9 public health, safety or general welfare of those in the nearby vicinity. All proposed construction would be located within the lot’s area. While one existing street tree will be removed to accommodate the proposed driveway, the City will be receiving two replacement trees: one adjacent to the property and another placed within a half mile from the property, both in the public right of way. This will benefit public health by expanding tree canopy coverage within the public right of way where it does not currently exist. SECTION 4. Conditions of Approval. PLANNING 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS: Construction and development shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "Tong Residence,” stamped as received by the City on August 29, 2023 on file with the Planning Department, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. BUILDING PERMIT. Apply for a building permit and meet any and all conditions of the Planning and Building Departments. 3. BUILDING PERMIT PLAN SET: A copy of this cover letter and conditions of approval shall be printed on the second page of the plans submitted for building permit. 4. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: All modifications to the approved project shall be submitted for review and approval prior to construction. If during the Building Permit review and construction phase, the project is modified by the applicant, it is the responsibility of the applicant to contact the Planning Division/project planner directly to obtain approval of the project modification. It is the applicant’s responsibility to highlight any proposed changes to the project and to bring it to the project planner’s attention. 5. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE. All landscape material shall be well maintained and replaced if the plant material dies or if the irrigation equipment fails. Planters shall not drain onto sidewalk, ground, or public right of ways. 6. PROJECT EXPIRATION. The project approval shall automatically expire after two years from the original date of approval if, within such two year period, the proposed use of the site or the construction of buildings has not commenced pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the permit or approval. Application for a one-year extension of this entitlement may be made prior to the expiration. (PAMC 18.77.090(a)) 7. INDEMNITY: To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City for its actual attorneys’ fees and Page 5 of 9 costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. 8. FINAL INSPECTION: A Planning Division Final inspection will be required to determine substantial compliance with the approved plans prior to the scheduling of a Building Division final. Any revisions during the building process must be approved by Planning, including but not limited to; materials, landscaping and hard surface locations. Contact your Project Planner, Garrett Sauls at Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloalto.org to schedule this inspection. BUILDING 9. A building permit is required for the proposed structure. URBAN FORESTRY 10. The proposed removal of street tree #1, a six-inch Crepe Myrtle, to accommodate a new designated driveway for at 949 Scott Street is approved. The replacement requirement is two new 36-inch box, drought tolerant trees. One tree will be planted near frontage of address in the public right of way and the other planted in the ROW within a half mile radius. The offsite replacement tree location is to be determined once work commences. The applicant must keep Urban Forestry updated on the time of proposed home demolition in order for a 14-day Public notice to be posted to the street tree prior to its removal. A no-fee TRE application will be applied to the building permit when submitted. ZERO WASTE 11. REQUIRED DECONSTRUCTION. In conformance with PAMC 5.24, deconstruction and source separation are required for all residential and commercial projects where structures (other than a garage or ADU) are being completely removed, demolition is no longer allowed. Deconstruction takes longer than traditional demolition, it is important to plan ahead. For more information, visit www.cityofpaloalto.org/deconstruction. 12. SALVAGE SURVEY FOR REUSE. A Salvage Survey is required for deconstruction permit applications. The survey shall be conducted by a City approved reuse vendor. The survey submittal shall include an itemized list of materials that are salvageable for reuse from the project. The applicant shall source separate and deliver materials for reuse. Certification is required indicating that all materials identified in the survey are properly salvaged. Contact The ReUse People to schedule this FREE survey by phone (888) 588-9490 or e-mail info@thereusepeople.org. More information can be found at www.TheReusePeople.org. Please upload a completed copy to the deconstruction permit. 13. SOURCE SEPARATION FOR RECYCLING. The applicant shall source separate deconstruction materials into specific categories for recycling. Additional staging areas for source separated materials will need to be considered. All materials shall be delivered to one of the City approved materials recovery facilities listed in Green Halo, all records shall be uploaded to www.greenhalosystems.com. For more information, refer to www.cityofpaloalto.org/deconstruction. Page 6 of 9 FIRE 14. Install a NFPA 13-D fire sprinkler system with coverage throughout the house including closets and bathroom. PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING 15. PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD CONDITIONS SHEET: The Department of Public Work’s full-sized "Standard Conditions" sheet shall be included in the improvement plans and the applicant shall comply with all conditions listed in the sheet. The sheet can be obtained at the following link under “Public Works Plan Review Documents”: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Public-Works/Engineering-Services/Forms-and- Permits 16. SIDEWALK, DRIVEWAY, CURB & GUTTER: The applicant shall meet with a Public Works inspector by calling 650-496-6929 to determine portions of sidewalk, curb, gutter, and driveway approaches that shall be replaced along the project frontage. These portions shall be indicated on the site improvement plans. In addition, a Site Inspection Directive sheet shall be completed, signed by the inspector, and scanned onto the plan set. The sheet can be obtained at the following link: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/public-works/engineering- services/webpages/forms-and-permits/other-guidelines/pwe-siteinspection-directive_rev- 2021.pdf 17. DRIVEWAY APPROACHES: The applicant shall comply with all regulations in PAMC Chapter 12.08 for driveway approaches. A summary of those regulations can be obtained at the following link: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=69580.09&BlobID=66035 18. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION SHEET: The City's full-sized "Pollution Prevention - It's Part of the Plan" sheet shall be included in the improvement plans. The sheet can be obtained at the following link under “Public Works Plan Review Documents”: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Public-Works/Engineering-Services/Forms-and- Permits 19. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA WORKSHEET: The applicant shall fill out and include with the building permit submittal the Impervious Area Worksheet for Land Developments. The sheet can be obtained at the following link under “Public Works Plan Review Documents”: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Public-Works/Engineering-Services/Forms-and- Permits 20. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN: The plan set shall include a grading & drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional. See the Grading & Drainage Plan Guidelines for New Single Family Residences: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/public- works/engineeringservices/webpages/forms-and-permits/grading-drainage-residential- guidelines.pdf Page 7 of 9 21. C.3 STORMWATER REGULATIONS: This project creates or replaces over 2,500 square feet of impervious surface area. The applicant shall implement one or more of the following site design measures on improvement plans: a. Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse. b. Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas. c. Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. d. Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas. e. Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces. f. Construct driveways, and/or uncovered parking lots with permeable surfaces. 22. STREETWORK PERMIT: All improvement plans shall include the following note adjacent to proposed work in the public right-of-way. “Any construction within the public right-of-way requires an approved Street Work Permit from Public Works Engineering”. 23. DEMOLITION PLAN: The following note shall be placed adjacent to all affected trees on the Demolition Plan: “Excavation and trenching is restricted within the Tree Protection Zone (refer to T-1 Tree Protection Sheet) or as approved by the Urban Forestry Division at 650-496-5953. Any changes shall be approved by the same”. 24. CONSTRUCTION STAGING: All improvement plans shall include the following note on the Site Plan and the Grading & Drainage Plan. “All construction materials and equipment shall be staged, stored, and stockpiled onsite and not on any public street”. 25. EXCAVATION & GRADING PERMIT: The site plan shall include an earthworks table showing the cut and fill volumes. If the total is more than 100 cubic yards, an Excavation and Grading Permit shall be obtained per PAMC Chapter 16.28 prior to building permit approval. The permit application and all required documents shall be submitted to Public Works Engineering. The application can be obtained at the following link: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Public-Works/Engineering-Services/Forms-and- Permits 26. CONSTRUCTION DEWATERING: This project may require dewatering during construction due to the groundwater level relative to the excavation. Refer to the following link and navigate to “Construction Dewatering Plan Design Guidelines” for more information: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Public-Works/Engineering-Services/Forms-and- Permits 27. BASEMENT DRAINAGE: A drainage system is required for all exterior basement-level spaces such as lightwells, patios, or stairwells. This system consists of a sump, a sump pump, a backflow preventer, and a closed pipe from the pump to a dissipation device onsite at least 10 feet from back of sidewalk and 3 feet from side and rear property lines, such as a bubbler box in a landscaped area. NOTE: Perforated pipe drainage systems at the exterior of the basement walls or under the slab are not allowed for sites on the bay side of Foothill Expressway. Page 8 of 9 28. EXCAVATION SHORING: Shoring Plans prepared by a licensed professional engineer shall be submitted with the Grading and Excavation Permit. Shoring and tiebacks shall not extend onto adjacent private property or into the City right-of-way without having first obtained written permission from the private property owner(s) and/or an encroachment permit from the Department of Public Works. a. LOGISTICS PLAN: A construction logistics plan shall be provided addressing all impacts to the public including, at a minimum: work hours, noticing of affected businesses, bus stop relocations, construction signage, dust control, noise control, storm water pollution prevention, job trailer, contractors’ parking, truck routes, staging, concrete pours, crane lifts, scaffolding, materials storage, pedestrian safety, and traffic control. All truck routes shall conform to the City of Palo Alto’s Trucks and Truck Route Ordinance, Chapter 10.48, and the route map. NOTE: Some items/tasks on the logistics plan may require an encroachment permit. Logistics Plan Preparation Guidelines can be found here: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/public-works/engineering- services/webpages/forms-and-permits/logistics-plan-preparation-guidelines-2021.pdf SECTION 5. Variance Approved. This Record finds that the project was approved. PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Director of Planning and Community Environment APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney Page 9 of 9 PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED: 1. Those plans prepared by Young and Borlik Architects titled “Tong Residence”, consisting of 17 pages, and received August 29, 2023. Andrew Martin 940 Scott St Palo Alto, CA 94301 Garrett Sauls Department of Planning City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto, CA 94301 23 March, 2023 Dear City Planning Staff, I am writing this letter to register concerns regarding the proposed redevelopment and variance for 949 Scott Street, File number 22PLN-00410. The plans for 949 Scott contain many of the rudimentary building blocks for a house on paper but are designed in a way that seem inconsistent with the intended zoning use. I am concerned that, in practice, this design may be less of a single-family home and more of a garage extension. As such, this may be reducing, not maintaining density and be in violation of the General Housing Plan and SB330. In our neighborhood most houses have "curb appeal" - that is, they have a front door or clear entry, they have windows or some visibility from the street, and they have a front yard and/or porch. If none of these are met, and if the primary living quarters, kitchen, living room, are all underground, is it still a viable family house? Is it consistent with the General plan? Would such a property be the future home of a new family? Or, is it possible such a development would become an extension to a nearby residence – a large, albeit very expensive, garage and bonus space? Senate Bill 330 expressly redefines "lower density" to include any action that has the effect of reducing housing density: “Lower density” includes any conditions that have the same effect or impact on the ability of the project to provide housing. One could assert, and the City of Palo Alto has argued similarly in the past, that designing a house that serves, in effect, to form a multi-lot compound violates SB330 in word or certainly in spirit. As designed, 949 Scott may no longer be a realistic home for a future family but, de facto, an accessory unit for the 935 property and thus further reduce density in the neighborhood. In 2008 there were three single-family homes adjacent on the odd side of Scott street numbered 935, 943, and 949. One buyer then purchased both 935 and 943, removed the existing houses, combined the two properties into a 10k sq ft lot, and built a 5,500 sq ft home. In 2019, a new owner bought 935 Scott and the adjacent substandard lot of 949 Scott. The two homes sat unoccupied for four years until both properties were bought by the current applicants in 2022, where 935 is the primary residence and 949 is adjacent. Palo Alto has many residents who own multiple properties - which is certainly legal. However, if the properties are developed in such a way that they form a compound where residents are not occupying the properties, where neighbors have fewer neighbors, this should be of concern for the Council. Could it be that in a 15 year span we will go from 3 family housing units to just 1 on this stretch of Scott St? Furthermore, the proposed plans are not consistent with and will have a negative impact on the immediate neighborhood in other ways: ● ● ● ● ● From the street, the proposed plans do not resemble a home, but rather a garage entry in San Francisco where the sidewalk blends into a door with little between. If approved, this small property (less than 1498 sq ft) would be the only double-wide cutout on Scott - with almost the entire frontage of the lot as entrance to the garage. Since the lot is so small, the front setback, as designed, does not leave space to park on what would be a driveway - you go from street to sidewalk to garage. If approved, the double driveway would require the removal of two street trees - leaving that side of the block relatively barren. If approved, the proposed two car garage would take 2-3 street parking spots. Parking is a challenge on the street during the day with the close proximity to Scott Park, the basketball hoop, and Palo Alto Sub-Acute visitors. I would welcome a revised design that has more features resembling a home and less impact on the existing neighborhood, such as a front door or entry way, perhaps a one-lane parklet or single garage, loss of only one parking space, loss of only one street tree, all provided off-street parking is really essential for such a small lot. If we were to grant a variance on this house, let it be to have NO parking as on-site parking isn't really compatible with such a small lot. The variance is an opportunity for the City to ensure the proposed plans are in the best interest of its residents and its larger plan. In the case of the currently proposed design for 949 Scott, I struggle to see how the 2-car garage concept is compatible and may be in violation of the General Plan and SB330 by effectively reducing density. Over 10 years ago, our family moved to downtown Palo Alto because we wanted our children to grow up in a neighborhood with a sidewalk and with neighbors. We are thrilled to have the applicants move in across the street, to have another home serving treats on Halloween and another family joining the annual block party. I hold out hope that with 949 there is or will be space for one more family in the future. Sincerely, -Andy Martin From: To: Andrew Martin Sauls, Garrett Subject: Date: 949 Scott Friday, May 19, 2023 6:20:09 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Garrett, I recently found that there had been some updates with 949 Scott. I was able to view a rendering of the second version and view the plans. I wanted to share my feedback with you and the planning department. 1. The rendering and plans are not in-sync. The curb cut is larger in the rendering than plans - it is hard for people evaluate if not matching. (Or, perhaps I could have seen an incorrect rendering). 2. The proposed plans do not seem very residential in nature. A few examples: - there isn’t a distinct pedestrian walkway from the sidewalk to the door - there is no roof element covering the front entrance. The existing structure has a small porch as do must other homes. - the wide driveway and excessive paving leave little space for any front yard. - the front door leads to the garage Zoning is meant to control use of land. Is this consistent with the zoning? 3. In addition to these points, the strongest challenge to the proposal is, once again, the intended use of the this property if these plans are approved. - a design that requires one to enter the garage and walk through it (so long as there isn’t a car inside) and the go down to the basement seems suspect given the current home. - as the submitters of these plans are also the owners of the adjacent 10+M property, does it seem like these plans are an extension of their adjacent lot or a real attempt at building a better single family residence? How common is it for a neighbor to support a setback reduction when both properties lie on the shared setbacks? While the city may not be able to reject a set of plans based on an interpretation of intended use, they can certainly exercise the right to refuse any variances. The approval of variances for this design by the city effectively endorses a reduction in housing and is contrary to the intent, and perhaps actual word, of both city code and state law (SB330). If the result of this project were a new home that would enhance our neighborhood and provide a place for someone to realistically move into I would be supportive of granting variances. Unfortunately, I do not see that in these plans. Sincerely, Andrew Martin 940 Scott 650-380-3405 From:Andrew Martin To:Sauls, Garrett Subject: Date: Re: 949 Scott Street - 22PLN-00410 Thursday, November 2, 2023 5:24:03 PM Attachments:image003.png image007.png image009.png image034.png image019.png image028.png image015.png image001.png image014.png image029.png image030.png image027.png image023.png image035.png image012.png image025.png image032.png image018.png image024.png image017.png image033.png image036.png image020.png image022.png Thank you for the information. On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 1:18ꢀPM Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Hi Andrew, The City issued a decision letter for the application on October 25 but notice cards didn’t get sent out until October 26. As a result, the 14 day appeal period will continue through November 9. Should anyone wish to appeal the decision, they will need to fill out the attached form and send it to myself or those listed in the form, as well as pay the appeal fee prior to the end of business day on November 9 (5:00pm). If no appeal is received, then the decision will be final on November 10. Let me know if you have any questions. Best regards, Garrett Sauls Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 329-2471 | Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Application Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped From: Andrew Martin <123andy@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2023 12:54 PM To: Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Re: 949 Scott Street - 22PLN-00410 Hello Garrett, Can you please provide me with an update of the approval timeline and variance process for the 949 Scott project along with relevant future dates / hearings / deadlines? Thank you. -Andy 650-380-3405 On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 3:41ꢀPM Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Sorry, Andrew. I think I read Scott in the title of the email and put that as the name instead. Garrett Sauls Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 329-2471 | Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Application Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped From: Sauls, Garrett Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2023 3:40 PM To: 'Andrew Martin' <123andy@gmail.com> Subject: RE: 949 Scott Street - 22PLN-00410 Thanks Scott. I read through the letter and will add it to the record as comments against what has been submitted so far. Best regards, Garrett Sauls Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 329-2471 | Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Application Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped From: Andrew Martin <123andy@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2023 3:25 PM To: Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Re: 949 Scott Street - 22PLN-00410 Thanks Garrett, I reached out a few months ago and gave some feedback. They said they might take it to their architect, but I think this wasn't the case. Attached is my feedback. Thank you, -Andy Martin 650-380-3405 On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 3:16ꢀPM Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Hi Andrew, I have not received any resubmittal from the applicant. Best regards, Garrett Sauls Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 329-2471 | Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Application Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped From: Andrew Martin <123andy@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2023 3:16 PM To: Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Re: 949 Scott Street - 22PLN-00410 Hi Garrett, Has there been any update on this proposal? If not, I have an official letter to send to register my issues. -Andy On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 1:45ꢀPM Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Hi Andrew, Thanks for letting me know. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. At the moment, we provided comments to the applicant on January 13. I haven’t heard back from them about those comments so I imagine they are working with the homeowner on it. Best regards, Garrett Sauls Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 329-2471 | Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Application Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped From: Andrew Martin <123andy@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2023 12:51 PM To: Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Re: 949 Scott Street - 22PLN-00410 You don't often get email from 123andy@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Hi Garrett. Just FYI that I have reached out to the owners to talk about the project. I do have some concerns and will address them when we meet. Please keep me posted on the status of this project and any scheduled public meetings or deadlines. Thanks! -Andy Martin On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 8:39 AM Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Hi Andrew, Due to new copyright laws that took effect on January 1 we can’t provide unfiltered plan sets anymore unfortunately which is probably why you can’t access the drawings on BuildingEye. I have modified the drawings to include information that we can share and attached it to this email. If you have any questions, please let me know. Best regards, Garrett Sauls Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 329-2471 | Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Application Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped From: Andrew Martin <123andy@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2023 1:25 PM To: Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: Fwd: 949 Scott Street - 22PLN-00410 You don't often get email from 123andy@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello Garrett, I tried to view the application on the BuildingEye site but there was only reference to an electrical panel upgrade a few years ago. Can you please send me all the plans/information regarding the proposed development for 949 Scott St. I live across the street. Thank you, -Andy Martin 650-380-3405 DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary #______________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #__________________________________________________ PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial______________________________________________ NRHP Status Code Other Listings_____________________________________________________________________ Review Code________ Reviewer________________________ Date_______________ Page 1 of 11 Resource name(s) or number (assigned by recorder) 949 Scott Street P1. Other Identifier: *P2. Location: Not for Publication Unrestricted *a. County Santa Clara *b. USGS 7.5’ Quad Palo Alto, CA Date 2023 *c. Address 949 Scott Street City Palo Alto Zip 94301 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone mE/ mN *e. Other Locational Data: Assessor’s Parcel Number 120-17-074 *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries.) 949 Scott Street is located on a 30’ x 50’ lot on the northeast side of Scott Street, between Addison and Channing avenues. Built in 1922, 949 Scott Street is a one-story residence designed in a simple Craftsman style. The rectangular-plan house, clad in stucco, sits on a concrete foundation, and is capped by an asphalt shingle hipped roof. The primary façade faces southwest. Fenestration consists of multi-lite wood windows with wood sills. The primary facade terminates in a hipped roof with a slight overhang. The house is set back in a small yard with a stone walkway enclosed by a wood picket fence. The house appears to be in good condition. Southwest (Primary) Façade The southwest (primary) façade fronts Scott Street. The façade is symmetrical, containing a pair of fixed 12- lite wood windows on either side of the primary entrance (Figure 2 and Figure 3). At the center of the façade is a glazed 12- lite wood door behind a wood storm door, under an extended roof overhang, supported by two paneled square wood columns and accessible by concrete steps. Above the front door within the roof line is a three -pane wood dormer window capped by a hipped roof. (Continued on page 2) *P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2: Single Family Residence *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other P5b. Photo: (view and date) Southwest (Primary) Façade *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: Historic Prehistoric Both January 1922. Permit Card *P7. Owner and Address: Simon and Shamim Tong 949 Scott Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 *P8. Recorded by: Page & Turnbull, Inc. 170 Maiden Lane, 5th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 *P9. Date Recorded: March 13, 2023 *P10. Survey Type: Intensive *P11. Report Citation: None *Attachments: None Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (list) P5a. Photo State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # __________________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _____________________________________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial __________________________________________________ Page 2 of 11 Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 949 Scott Street *Recorded by Page & Turnbull, Inc. *Date March 27, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L *P3a. Description (Continued) Figure 1: Aerial view of 949 Scott Street. Subject property outlined in red. Google Maps, 2023. Figure 2: North half of southwest facade. Figure 3: South half of southwest facade. Northwest Façade The northwest façade fronts a narrow gravel pathway and a concrete property wall, accessible by a wood picket gate to the south. The north (left) side includes two double-hung wood windows (Figure 4). At the center of the façade is a six-over-one double-hung wood window, slightly higher than the others on the façade plane. The south (right) side includes two double-hung wood windows (Figure 5). State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # __________________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _____________________________________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial __________________________________________________ Page 3 of 11 Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 949 Scott Street *Recorded by Page & Turnbull, Inc. *Date March 27, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L Figure 4: Northwest facade, looking southeast. Figure 5: Northwest façade, looking northeast. Northeast Façade The northeast (rear) façade fronts a narrow graveled space next to a concrete property wall. The east (left) side has two concrete steps leading up a 10-lite wood door behind a screen door (Figure 6). A small rectangular wood vent sits west of the door. At the center of the façade is projecting vinyl garden window (Figure 7). The west (right) side has a projecting wood shed and a double- hung wood window (Figure 8). Figure 6: Northeast façade, looking west. Figure 7: Northeast facade, looking west. State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # __________________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _____________________________________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial __________________________________________________ Page 4 of 11 Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 949 Scott Street *Recorded by Page & Turnbull, Inc. *Date March 27, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L Figure 8: Northeast facade, looking east. Southeast Façade The southeast façade fronts a gravel walkway and tall hedge, accessible by a wood picket gate to the south. The south (left) corner of the façade contains a square nine-lite fixed wood window (Figure 9). The center has a second square nine-lite fixed wood window. Two double-hung wood windows sit on either side of a square fixed wood window. The rest of the north (right) portion of the façade contains no fenestration (Figure 10). Figure 9: Southeast façade, looking northeast. Figure 10: Southeast façade, looking southwest. Surrounding Neighborhood The immediate surrounding area is primarily residential. Scott Street dead-ends at small public park called Scott Park, which contains picnic tables, a half-court basketball court, a bocce ball court, toddler swings, and lawn . The area showcases a mix of residential styles, including Craftsman, Contemporary, and Spanish Revival. The homes were built starting in 1902 to 2011 (Figure 11-Figure 14). State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # __________________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # _____________________________________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial __________________________________________________ Page 5 of 11 Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 949 Scott Street *Recorded by Page & Turnbull, Inc. *Date March 27, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L Figure 11: 353 Addison Avenue. Figure 12: 327 Addison Avenue. Figure 13: 935 Scott Street. Figure 14: 943 and 936 Scott Street. DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary #__________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#______________________________________________ BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 6 of 11 *NRHP Status Code______6Z______________ *Resource Name or # 949 Scott Street B1. Historic name: B2. Common name: 949 Scott Street B3. Original Use: Residence B4. Present use: Residence *B5. Architectural Style: Craftsman *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Prior to construction in 1922, the site was previously undeveloped. (Refer to continuation sheet, page 7) *B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location: ____________________________ *B8. Related Features: None B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown *B10. Significance: Theme N/A Area University South, Palo Alto Period of Significance N/A Property Type Residential Applicable Criteria N/A Historic Context: Palo Alto History The earliest known settlement of the Palo Alto area was by the Ohlone people. The region was colonized in 1769 as part of Alt a California. The Spanish and Mexican governments carved the area into large ranchos which contained portions of land that became Palo Alto including Rancho Corte Madera, Rancho Pastoria de las Borregas, Rancho Rincon de San Francisquito, and Rancho Riconada del Arroyo de San Francisquito.1 These land grants were honored in the cession of California to the United States, but parcels were subdivided and sold throughout the nineteenth century. The current city of Palo Alto contains the fo rmer township of Mayfield, which was located just southwest of Alma Street. In 1882, railroad magnate and California politician Leland Stanford purchased 1,000 acres adjacent to Mayfield to add to his larger estate. Stanford’s vast holdings became known as the Palo Alto Stock Farm. On March 9, 1885, Stanford University was founded on land of the Palo Alto Stock Farm through an endowment act by the California Assembly and Senate. Originally looking to connect Stanford University as a part of the already established town of Mayfield, Stanford asked resid ents of Mayfield to make the town a temperance town. Their refusal in 1886 caused Stanford to found the town of Palo Alto with aid from his friend, Timothy Hopkins of the Southern Pacific Railroad. Hopkins purchased and subdivided 740 acres of private land, that was known initially as University Park (or the Hopkins Tract).2 This land was bounded by the San Francisquito Creek to the north and the railroad tracks and Stanford University campus to the south. A new train stop was created along University Avenue and the new town flourished in its close connection with the university. University Park, under its new name of Palo Alto, was incorporated in 1894. (Refer to continuation sheet, page 9) B11. Additional Resource Attributes: N/A *B12. References: Refer to footnotes B13. Remarks: N/A *B14. Evaluator: Page & Turnbull, Inc. *Date of Evaluation: March 29, 2023 1 Ward Winslow and the Palo Alto Historical Association, Palo Alto: A Centennial History, (Palo Alto: Palo Alto Historical Association,1993), 12-17. 2 City of Palo Alto, Comprehensive Plan 2030 (adopted by City Council, November 13, 2017), 16, accessed January 2, 2019, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/62915. Source: City of Palo Alto, Online Parcel Reports, 2023. Subject Parcel shown outlined in blue. (This space reserved for official comments.) State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # _____________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # ________________________________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial _____________________________________________ Page 7 of 11 Resource Name or # 949 Scott Street *Recorded by Page & Turnbull, Inc. *Date March 27, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L *B6. Construction History (continued): 949 Scott Street was constructed in 1922 as a residence in the University South Neighborhood. No known architect or contractor was identified in the course of historic research. The house is visible on a 1924 Sanborn Map then later in a 1941 aerial photo (Figure 15 and Figure 16). The footprint of the house has been the same from 1924 to present. The house was reroofed in 1979, first completed as an unpermitted project, but later corrected that same year. In 1983, a permit was issued to “rebuild fire damaged residence as was existing with new electrical service.” It is not explicitly stated what portion of the residence suffered the damage, and no photos of the house were found from this period . Given that the aerial photos from 1941 and present show the same footprint, as well as wood windows throughout each facade, it could be presumed that the fire damage was on the interior, or the house did not suffer much damage. Other interior improvements were made in 1998, according to permit records. Upon visual inspection, there do not appear to be unpermitted changes to the house. Figure 15: Sanborn Map Company Fire Insurance Map, 1924. 949 Scott Street outlined in red. Source: San Francisco Public Library. Figure 16: Aerial photograph of 949 Scott Street, 1941. Subject property outlined in red. Flight C-7065, Frame 43. Source: University of Santa Barbara. State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # _____________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # ________________________________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial _____________________________________________ Page 8 of 11 Resource Name or # 949 Scott Street *Recorded by Page & Turnbull, Inc. *Date March 27, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L The following table includes known construction and alterations undertaken at the subject property based on the permits on file at Palo Alto Development Services. *B10. Significance: Historic Context (continued) In its early years, Palo Alto was a temperance town where no alcohol could be served. The residents were mostly middle and working class, with a pocket of university professors clustered in the neighborhood deemed Professorville. The development of a local streetcar in 1906 and the interurban railway to San Jose in 1910 facilitated access to jobs outside the city . They also increased access to Stanford University and encouraged more people to move to Palo Alto.3 In July 1925, Mayfield was officially annexed and consolidated into the City of Palo Alto.4 Like the rest of the nation, Palo Alto suffered through the Great Depression in the 1930s and did not grow substantially. Wor ld War II brought an influx of military personnel and their families to the Peninsula; accordingly, Palo Alto saw rapid growth following the war as many families who had been stationed on the Peninsula by the military or who worked in associated industries chose to stay. Palo Alto’s population more than doubled from 16,774 in 1940 to 33,753 in 1960.5 Palo Alto’s city center greatly expanded in the late 1940s and 1950s, gathering parcels that would house new offices and ligh t industrial uses and lead the city away from its “college town” reputation. Palo Alto annexed a vast area of mostly undeveloped land between 1959 and 1968. This area, west of the Foothill Expressway, has remained protected open space. Small annexations continued into the 1970s, contributing to the discontinuous footprint of the city today. Palo Alto remains closely tied to Stanford University; it is the largest employer in the city. The technology industry dominates other sectors of business, as is the ca se with most cities within Silicon Valley. Palo Alto consciously maintains its high proportion of open space to d evelopment and the suburban feeling and scale of its architecture.6 University South Neighborhood History The current University South neighborhood was located in the southern portion of the original University Park track platted b y Timothy Hopkins. It was the core part of the early city, along with today’s Downtown North neighborhood (located northwest of University Avenue, the main commercial corridor within the original core of Palo Alto). The neighborhood contains the residen tial and commercial areas that lay southeast of University Avenue, although does not encompass Professorville, the residential neighborhood closely associated with early Stanford faculty members and their families. As a result, the neighborhood is U - shaped, bounded by University Avenue at the northwest, Alma Street and the railroad tracks at the south, and Middlefield Road at the northeast. The southeast boundary follows Embarcadero Road but steps northwest to Addison Avenue, so as to exclude Professorville. The 1895 Sanborn Fire Insurance Company map illustrates that stores were located along University Avenue, and were particularly concentrated at its southwestern end, where a large lumberyard stood near the railroad . Residences were scattered along the street just east and west of University Avenue on Hamilton and Lytton Avenues. A few churches, hotels, and boarding houses also stood among many vacant lots. Contemporary newspapers called the homes that housed artisans and merchants in this area “neat cottages”—which stood in contrast to the houses occupied by Stanford faculty members, located to the southeast in what is today the Professorville neighborhood. Some grander homes for more affluent residents were sprinkled throughout the current -day University South neighborhood.7 3 Dames & Moore (Michael Corbett and Denise Bradley), Final Survey Report – Palo Alto Historical Survey Update: August 1997-August 2000 prepared for the City of Palo Alto Planning Division (February 2001), 1-4. 4 City of Palo Alto, Comprehensive Plan 2030, 16. 5 “Depression, War, and the Population Boom,” Palo Alto Medical Foundation - Sutter Health, accessed January 2, 2019, http://www.pamf.org/about/pamfhistory/depression.html. 6 City of Palo Alto, Comprehensive Plan 2030, 11-20. 7 Palo Alto AAUW, …Gone Tomorrow? “Neat Cottages” and “Handsome Residences” (Palo Alto: American Association of University Women, 1971, revised 1986) 5. Permit # Date Owner Architect/Contractor Description Unknown 6/6/1979 Dennis Lovett Unknown Reroof (noted that the roof was replaced without a permit in May 1979) B-83-86 2/8/1983 Dennis Lovett Keith Ahhen Rebuild fire damaged residence as was existing with new electrical service 983815 12/17/1998 Jeanne Anne Breen Unknown Heater replaced. Built in shelves and mantel added on the interior State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # _____________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # ________________________________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial _____________________________________________ Page 9 of 11 Resource Name or # 949 Scott Street *Recorded by Page & Turnbull, Inc. *Date March 27, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L By 1901, Palo Alto had grown, and the Sanborn map showed more than just the original core. Houses were filling in the lots on the blocks around the railroad while scattered residential development extended up to and beyond Middlefield Road. Additional institutions had been built in the area, including a public school and high school. Ownership and Occupancy Summary The following table outlines the ownership and occupancy history of 949 Scott Street. This information was compiled from Palo Alto City Directories, Santa Clara Assessor records, building permit applications, newspaper articles, and public records available through Ancestry.com. Year of Occupancy Known Occupants (known owners in bold) Occupation 1924-1947 Elizabeth Fu Son Josephine Fu Son (1931-1947) Frances Sims (1924-1927) Teacher Christian Science Practitioner Pastry Maker/Christian Science 1950 Vacant 1953-1955 James H Swezy Isabel Swezy Salesman 1961 Charles E. Stollenwerk Carolyn Stollenwerk Engineer at Lockheed 1962 John J. Bosley Psychologist 1965 William W. Bromund Student 1969 Vacant 1972 No Return 1974 Cheryl Romner Unknown 1976 Andrea Burris Unknown 1979-1983 Dennis Lovett Unknown 1984 Alan L. Svec Jennifer M. Svec Unknown 1986 Robert Leon Baer Technician 1993-1998 Jeanne Anne Heilig Breen Patrick R. Heilig James L. Heilig Jr. David Breen Unknown 2012 Anita Coutts Unknown 2023-Present Simon Tong Shamim Tong Unknown Elizabeth Fu Son, Owner and Occupant 1924-1947 If an owner or occupant resided at 949 Scott Street from its construction in 1922 to 1924, that person is not documented in city directories. Elizabeth Fu Son (spelled Fuson in the U.S. Census records of 1920, 1930, and 1940) lived at 949 Scott Street starting in 1924, according to Palo Alto city directories.8 Originally from Goshen, Indiana and born about 1871, she was a member of the Daughters of the American Revolution and the Presbyterian Church of Palo Alto.9 Elizabeth was a longtime teacher at Miss Harker’s School and lived at the school (addressed 118 Greenwood Avenue) with Catherine Harker and other teacher/lodgers in 1920. She appears to have also owned a property in Goshen, Indiana, as she also appears in a 1920 U.S. Census there with her friend, Frances Sims.10 She lived at 949 Scott Street with Frances Sims from 1924 to 1927, then with her sister Josephine Fu Son from 1931 until 1947. Elizabeth Fu Son lived in the home until her death in 1947. Research did not find Elizabeth Fu Son significant to the overall development of Palo Alto. 8 Note: while the name Fu Son appears to potentially indicate an Asian surname, Ms. Fu Son was white according to U.S. Census r ecords. 9 “Elizabeth Fu Son dies; funeral set for Monday,” The Peninsula Times Tribune, July 5, 1947, Accessed March 7, 2023, https://www.newspapers.com/image/838649384/?article=0935b9d8-feb8-487d-8070- 029a999e1046&focus=0.3694026,0.65429586,0.48802704,0.76918787&xid=3355&_gl=1*g9pkxt*_ga*MTU2MTA4MzQ1OC4xNjUyODkxMzA5*_g a_4QT8FMEX30*MTY3ODIyNjE5Mi4xNjAuMS4xNjc4MjI2NDMwLjYwLjAuMA..*_ga_B2YGR3SSMB*ODM4MzdkZTEtZGNjOC00MzZlLWExY2ItZTI 4YTRmYTk1MjFkLjgwLjEuMTY3ODIyNjQzMS42MC4wLjA.&_ga=2.115031559.1615584679.1678220685-1561083458.1652891309. 10 U.S. Federal Census, 1920 for Elizabeth Fuson. Accessed March 27, 2023 from ancestry.com. State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # _____________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # ________________________________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial _____________________________________________ Page 10 of 11 Resource Name or # 949 Scott Street *Recorded by Page & Turnbull, Inc. *Date March 27, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L All other owners and occupants lived at 949 Scott Street for a relatively short period of time. Design of 949 Scott Street 949 Scott Street is designed in a simple Craftsman style, which was popular in California from the 1900s to the 1930s. The Craftsman style was utilized predominantly in residential properties and evolved from the English Arts and Crafts Movement an d later, the work of innovative American architects working in the Midwest and California, in particular Frank Lloyd Wright and Greene & Greene. The style was strongly associated with the graphic designs and furnishings of William Morris and the architecture of M.H. Baillie Scott and Charles F. A. Voyse y. The Craftsman magazine, published in America from 1901 to 1917, further disseminated the ideals of the Movement, such as anti-industrialism and emphasis on handcrafted products in North America. The Craftsman style took off in California during the firs t decade of the twentieth century in response to the work of Greene & Greene in Southern California and the Bay Area. Additional influences included Japanese architecture and the native - grown Bay Region Tradition of Northern California. Ranging from the el aborate one-off homes of the wealthy in Pasadena and the Berkeley hills to the rows of bungalows of Oakland, Los Angeles and San Jose, Craftsman dwellings are typically characterized low-pitched gabled roofs with wide, unenclosed eave overhangs, decorative beams or braces, tapered square columns or pedestals and extending porch elements. In Palo Alto, as in many contemporary smaller California communities, the Craftsman style is the dominant residential style present within many neighborhoods in the city. 949 Scott Street characteristics of Craftsman style include overhanging eaves, a centered dormer window, and a projecting porch supported by square columns. Statement of Significance: In order for a property to be considered eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register), the property must possess significance and retain integrity to convey that significance. The criteria for significance are: Criterion 1 (Events): Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. 949 Scott Street does not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 1 (Events), as the subject building does not appear to have contributed to the broad patterns of history in Palo Alto, the state, or the nation. The property was constructed in 1922 in the University South neighborhood of Palo Alto. At the time of the subject building’s construction, the subdivision was one of several in the area undergoing increasing development and infill, and the property i s not significant to the development of University South neighborhood. No significant events were known to have occurred at 949 Scott Street, such that it would be individually eligible under Criterion 1. The house at 949 Scott Street does not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 1. Criterion 2 (Persons): Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history. 949 Scott Street does not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 2 (Persons). Since its construction in 1922, the subject property has had one long term owner and many short-term owners and occupants. Elizabeth Fu Son owned and lived at 949 Scott Street from 1924 to 1947. Research was unable to uncover significant professional or personal achievements by Elizabeth Fu Son that would make the subject building individually eligible for listing on the California Register. Therefore, 949 Scott Street does not appear to be individually eligible for the California Register under Criterion 2 (Persons). Criterion 3 (Architecture): Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values. 949 Scott Street does not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 3 (Architecture). The residence was constructed in 1922 by an unknown architect or builder. The house was designed in a simple Craftsman style, which was common in the 1920s in Palo Alto. The design is without exposed rafters, patterned windowpanes, or other details often seen in the Craftsman style, and does not possess high artistic values. Therefore, 949 Scott Street does not appear to rise to a level of individual significance under Criterion 3. The property does not appear to be eligible as a contributor to a historic distric t, as the subject block features a variety of architectural styles. However, the evaluation of a potential district is outside the scope of this report. The house at 949 Scott Street does not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 3. Criterion 4 (Information Potential): Has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation. The property at 949 Scott Street does not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 4 as a building or property that has the potential to provide information important to the prehistory or history of the City of Palo Alto, state, or nation. It does not feature construction or material types, or embody engineering practices that would, with additional study, provide important information. Evaluation of this property was limited to age-eligible resources above ground and did not involve survey or evaluation of the subject property for the purposes of archaeological information. State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # _____________________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # ________________________________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial _____________________________________________ Page 11 of 11 Resource Name or # 949 Scott Street *Recorded by Page & Turnbull, Inc. *Date March 27, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L Conclusion The property at 949 Scott Street does not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources under any criteria. The California Historical Resource Status Code (CHRSC) of “6Z” has been assigned to the property, meaning “Found ineligible for National Register, California Register, or Local Designation through survey evaluation.”11 Resources California State Office of Historic Preservation Department of Parks and Recreation. Technical Assistance Bulletin #8: User’s Guide to the California Historical Resource Status Codes & Historical Resource Inventory Directory. Sacramento November 2004. City of Palo Alto. Comprehensive Plan 2030 (adopted by City Council, November 13, 2017). Accessed March 21, 2023. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/62915. Dames & Moore (Michael Corbett and Denise Bradley). Final Survey Report – Palo Alto Historical Survey Update: August 1997- August 2000. Prepared for the City of Palo Alto Planning Division. February 2001. “Depression, War, and the Population Boom.” Palo Alto Medical Foundation - Sutter Health. Accessed March 21, 2023. http://www.pamf.org/about/pamfhistory/depression.html. “Elizabeth Fu Son dies; funeral set for Monday.” The Peninsula Times Tribune. July 5, 1947. Accessed March 7, 2023. https://www.newspapers.com/image/838649384/?article=0935b9d8 -feb8-487d-8070- 029a999e1046&focus=0.3694026,0.65429586,0.48802704,0.76918787&xid=3355&_gl=1*g9pkxt*_ga*MTU2MTA4MzQ1 OC4xNjUyODkxMzA5*_ga_4QT8FMEX30*MTY3ODIyNjE5Mi4xNjAuMS4xNjc4MjI2NDMwLjYwLjAuMA..*_ga_B2YGR3S SMB*ODM4MzdkZTEtZGNjOC00MzZlLWExY2ItZTI4YTRmYTk1MjFkLjgwLjEuMTY3ODIyNjQzMS42MC4wLjA.&_ga=2.1 1503155 9.1615584679.1678220685-1561083458.1652891309. Palo Alto AAUW. …Gone Tomorrow? “Neat Cottages” and “Handsome Residences.” Palo Alto: American Association of University Women.1971, revised 1986. Palo Alto City Directories. 1920-2002. Ancestry.com. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps. San Francisco Public Library. The Peninsula Times Tribune. “Community Calendar.” May 18, 1928. Accessed January 6, 2023. https://www.newspapers.com/image/838344054/?terms=%22240%20Rinconada%20Avenue%22&match=1. United States Federal Census for 1920, 1930, 1940. Accessed March 27, 2023 from Ancestry.com. Winslow, Ward and the Palo Alto Historical Association. Palo Alto: A Centennial History. Palo Alto Historical Association. 1993. 11 California State Office of Historic Preservation Department of Parks and Recreation, Technical Assistance Bulletin #8: User’s Guide to the California Historical Resource Status Codes & Historical Resource Inventory Directory, Sacramento, November 2004. If you need assistance reviewing the above documents, please contact the Project Planner or call the Planner-on-Duty at 650-617-3117 or email planner@cityofpaloalto.org Attachment G Project Plans In order to reduce paper consumption, a limited number of hard copy project plans are provided to Council members for their review. The same plans are available to the public, at all hours of the day, via the following online resources. Directions to review project plans and environmental documents online: 1. Go to: bit.ly/PApendingprojects 2. Scroll down to find or search for “949 Scott” and click the address link 3. On this project-specific webpage you will find a link to the project plans and other important information Direct Link to Project Webpage: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Current- Planning/Projects/949-Scott-Street