HomeMy WebLinkAbout0377.000r
"
•
,
\,
_.~.'._._' •. _~'"-'_"'~_""_~~'SI'_<""~~'"'t'\~_#~"""-~.
<
o
June U, 1990
HONORABlE CITY COUNCil
P.lo Alto, Califorlia
Rousing Element Update
"-mbers of t~e Council,
Background'
o
The Housing Element of the (ompre~ensive Plan ex~;nes loclT housing
conditfons and eVllaates projected housing needs and avatlable ~Dusing supplJ.
The (lement 11s~ proposes speclffc goals~ policies and act;or. programs to meet
t~e commun'tJ~$ identified ~ousfng neEds. The first HouslDQ Element of Pal~
Alto's Comprehensive Plan vas adopted i. 1'76. The l'st update .f the Housing
{lemont was adopted by t~. Cit, Council on June II, 19S4.
Tils draft of the 199o·2000 Housing Element update has been prepared i.
compliance _it! • stlte mandate t"at requires local governments ~thi. the
regional jurlsdlctloo of the Association .f Sa, Area Governments to update
their bousing elements by Jul, I, 1990 {Article 10.6 of the Government Code}.
A 4S-day review of t~e d~ift Housl"g £lem~~t by the State Department If
ftousicg and CCII1JIl!.Ilitl ~e'/elo"ll-:!nt h also req,uired prior ta its adoption.
legislation adopted sloee 1984 reqlJires local housing elements: ) to add·ress
the issue of bomelessness~ and the ~eed (or emergency shelters and
transitfonal ~ous1og by Ju1, 1, 1990; and l) to eVil~ate re~til bousfng at
risk of becof!ling [lof'1-10'1lf-inc:ome hous1ng due to a loss of federil subsi·dies by
January, I 19~2_ Tbese issues Ire addressed 1ft t~fs update. Additional
jftfonnation cancerljng measures available t~ retafm rental subsidies and t~e
affordabilitl gf suc~ units will be provided i~ tne future Comprehensive Plan
update ~heA more .i11 be known about any ~ew Federa' and/cr State re~tal
subsidy programs.
To assist the (it1 (ou~cil 11 rewiewing the revised Housing Ele~nt, proposed
text additions iTe underlined and proposed deletions are lined out. A Review
~uide listing .11 new or modiffed polfci~s and programs is also provid~ is
Attachment 1. The Hous!ng Element will be repri,ted .fter final Council
action, at whic~ time al) cress-outs and un~erlfnes ~111 be removed and
pol icTes. and progralU renumbered.
CHR:377:0
,
I
o o
Process
The updated flO'!s;n.g: Eluent lias been prepared wit" the asslstarlc-e cf ol
s1x-~mber Pila Alto Rous;~g (orporati~n Subc~lttee and has beeR rewiewed by
the Palo A1t. Rous;~ Corporation Soard, t~e 'lanning Commission and the State
Department Df Housfn9 and CortmUnit1 Development. ne Housing n!1TIent
submitted for C~Uncl\ consideration c~"tlins revisions recommended as I res~Tt
of Ulese r-evlews. WTaten Dr ora.l co~e-n~s w,:!"e alse reeehed frnm Jill Bl.IrkTo
of t~e Urban Mfafstry. Innovative Housing, i 10cal ~onprofit housing agency.
Peninuli (oHousing Center .. the Sarron Park ,~ssociation? The Palo A1 to
Condarnillun Owners Assoc1atfon. league of Vomen Voters and other i~terest!d
members of the publfc {see Attachment 8).
Planning CommissIon Action
The Planning Commissio~ cons1dered tn~ updated Housing £lement at two public
hearings held on ~aJ '. 1990 and ~'Y 30. 1990. The c~.nges recommended by t~e
Planning Commission ~ave been incorporated int~ the Aevised Housing [lement.
f~ tlking tneir actfon. t~e Plann1Dg Commission requested staff .lghlfght for
t~e Council the recommendations t~at did not receive a unanimous vote. These
issues. Ilong wit~ Program and page references are listed below.
•
•
Ne~ Prog'" 7. (refer to page 30) t. consider modifying the cottage
provIsions to allow both detached and attached units and smaller lot
stzes ~here approprfate. The jnt~nt of the program ~as tD provide
additional bousing by ~atfng better use of existing housing. The
'lannfng Commfssion did not support placing language il the Hous;~g
Element to c~~sfdeT c~anging the exfstiog cQttage regulations ~thout
more speclf1c flfo~atfon and ~ublic review) and voted 4 t, 1 wit~ one
absent t. delete thfs progra~. Consistent ~t~ t~is ~iew. the Commlsslo~
11so voted C tt Z to delete I text reference tc consfderltlon of allowing
second \;tcb,p.s lrlt~fl existing stngle famil, bomes as ~art Qf the
propo~~ -attached-cottage ~~e permit provlsfons ((ourt~ paragraph, page
3D}.
~ificatfons to Frogram 9 (page 31} ~ere propo~d to e1imlnate t~e
fg~rth cfrcumstance under ~hlC~ t new dEvelo~ment couTd el;mi~ate
eXlsting rental bousfng (l.e. to ~irket SO peree~t of the units for
.;ddle-1ncome ~ouseholds'~ The 'lanning (ommlssion supported t~e
revfslons shown b~t were split {3-3) o~er I Commission proposal to modif,
t~fs proqra~ to require compliance with two of the three possible
cfrcumstan<e$ before obtafling subdfwision approval, rither than Dol, one
is now required.
o ~w Progra. 91 (page 32) was p~oposed ta more specifftl11, address the
tit,'s polic, regardlDg conversion Df land deSignated for resfdentlll use
11 the Comprehe~slve Flan to ot~er purposes. Two verSlons of t~is
program ~ere presented to the Commission --one supporte~ by the Pilo
Alto Housing Corporation Subcommittee and one supported by staff (,lease
ref.r t. page] .f attached 'Ianning CommiSSion Staff report dated ~al 4.
1990). The essentl.l ~ifference bet.een the two versions was that st.ff
believed that t~e progra~ to distourage conversion ~f resldentfill,
deSignated ~arcels to other ~ses s~ould appl} onT, to large parcels (S
.eres or Jarger f. sfze) and perllt tonversion ~here th£re would be ~
substa~t;il publfc benefit frOG suc~ a change. The Palo Alto Housing
CMR:l77:0
cchsg
c~-----
5/Z1/90
·z·
-, •
\
\
\
, ~-\
•
'Se,
-~
,
.---
-. '"
•
•
.. . -: . -
o o
Corporat1on Subcommlttee be11eved a program t~ discourage conversfon If
resfdentfal parcels ~hould applJ t~ 111 residential parcels regardless of
s;ze. ~n~ s~ould requfre provision of housing on-or off-site s~ould
conversion be permitted. The Planning Commission fa,ored a <Irnpllfied
versfon and ~oted 5-1 t~ elfmf~ate any reference to parcel sfze or a
requfrement for provislon of bousing on-ar off-site. The minority vote
was based on a belief that the program should appl, onl, t. large parcels
IS acres or larger II sf.e}. The Pa10 Alto Housing Corporation Board. at
Its oeetlng of June 13. 1990. unanfmousl, endorsed the Planning
Commfssfon c~anges.
Modifications t. Program 12 (page 33} .re proposed to expand the 10
percent Below ~artet Rate requirement to appll to ~ous;ng projects of 3
(lr lIIore units nther than 10 or 1I10f'e .. wi t" projetts of under ]0 units
paying an ia-lieu fee rather than providing a unit. The 'lannfog
Commissior. yote4 4-Z to support the modificatfon t but also supported
establis~tng I sliding scale for the BHR fa-lieu fee contributfon for the
smaller projects (see page 34). One of the minority vQtes WiS based on
the belfef that the progra. should not appl1 t. smaB projects. The
other was based on I belfef that a ~omprehensive evalnatlon of ill
exfstfcg and potentfal fees, and ~articwlirl} the possible fmplication of
I ~~i16 ~are fmpatt fee~ s~ould be made before tak;ng action to expand
Uls program.
N.w Program 18e (page 41) is Intended to support construction of new
Slngl. Occupancy ISRO) Hot.ls i. Palo Alt •• s parI of the Cily's program
to address t~e need for transitfonal ~ous;ng_ The Planning Commission
voted 5-1 to soften t~e language froe ·Factl1tate· to -Consider-ind to
delete t~e text reference to consideration af in SRO It t~e water tower
stte at the southelst <orner of ~awthorne A~enue and Alma street. The
majoritl of t~e Commfssfon. ~t~ one dissenting vote. did not favor
including suc_ language I. the Housing El<ment until nor. detailed
f.formatfon was available and DthpT alternatfve ~ses for t~e sfte ~ad
bee~ consldered.
state R.v1 ....
The 4S-day State review of the Housfng Element ended on June 1, ]990. As a
result the State c~nts were ~ot received ~rf9r to actfo~ b1 t~e Plinnfng
C0rm11ssion.
Tn. majo~fty of the State comments (see altache4 letter dated June 7. 1990)
f~volve mino~ correctfons or additfons_ The ~ore substantf~e conme~ts favolve
clarlfications fa Drder for t~e tit! to dsmonstrate that; 1) sufficient
residentfal development potentfal of .igher densities {RM-30 Qr greater)
exists tc meet the falT-s~are housing allotment establfs~ed for the CitJ by
o.;f,C! Association (If Bay ATea Governments; 2) t1lat exfsting government.l
(Jnstrilmts ire not Qf such magnitude t~at they will prevent prQvfsfon &f t~e
~~ditfonal housing; and 3) that lendfng policies of financTal i~stitwtfons
ali/or current lnterest rates fn t~e area will not preclude develcp~nt of
affordable housing. The State is primaril, interested 11 ~hether the
opportunitJ to provide the needed aff<wcfable 'housing exfsts, LE'. s~fficient
land cf s~frfcient densttJ, and ~fnf~iz~d governmental constr.l~ts.
Th~ corrections and addHional f~formatioD requested by the Stitt have been
incorporated f~tc t~e Revfsed Housing Element. Page references t~ the revised
OIR:l77:Q
uhsg
6/21/90
-3-
•
\
•
.. , i ' -
-. i , -, -.
"
'.
sections of t~e
.as. of Counc 11
prcvfded ~n the Ittac~State Jetter fo~
RecCOll8ndation
Yo tompl, with t~e State mandate to adopt i revised Housi~g [leme~t by JU 1, ]~
1990, it Is recommended t~.t the CouncIl: .,
b}
Ffod that adoptIon of the revised Housing ETemeot will bave no
sfgnifieanf fmpacts and adopt the proposed Negattve Declaration; and
Adopt the attached ~esol~tion amend1ng the Ho~sin9 Element of the
Comprehensfve Plan as recommended by the Plannlng Commission~
~df.j~
CHENEY
$.eniDr 'lanner
~ENNHH ~. SCHREIBER
Dfrector of Planning and
A~~~ CommunltJ Environment
Assistant City ~anager
[nclosure: Revised AO'JSing Element (Second Draft)
Attachments: I. Resol.tion
Z. Rovle .. Guide
3. EIA (90'EIA-25)
4. 'l.nnlng CommIssion Staff ~mo dated "OJ 30, 1990
S. PlannIng Commission Staff Report dated "a, 25, 1990
6. 'la",iog Commission Staff Report d.ted May 4, 1990
7a letter from State Department of Hous;ng and Community
Oevelopment dated June 1, 1990
8. letters Received:
Bob ~oss, May 14, 1990
InnOYit;~e Rousfog, ~aJ 21, ]99~
Barron 'art Associatfon. May 21. ]990
Herb Borock, ~ay 23, 1990
Pa10 Alto Condoolliw. Owners Association, M.y 24, 1990
Pe.i.s.l. CcHouslng Center, "ay 29, 1990
t.I, J.nderbeek, May 30, 1990
cc: Planning Commission
Architectural Revf~w Board
Pa10 Alto Housfng Corpcratfon Board
Plannlog Depart.ent, City of East Pal. Alt.
Planning Oe~art~~nt, City of ~eql~ Park
PlannIng Department, City ~f MountaiD View
ABAG
FaIr Pend.ll, Bay Area Council
Mike [vanhoe, GoldeR Tr1angle Task Force
Niel Davidson, Stanford Investment Gro~p
CltR:371:0
cdsg
-"'"L-.
-
6/21/90
-4-
•
,.
I
t
I
\
\
\ , .
~\
•
, "
... , ..
...J
j
1
-
cc:
. -_.
"
o
(cootlnuedJ
Andy Oot" Stanford Uni,er.ity
Plan WHlia.ms. Planning Director., Stanford lfnh'ersHJ
Charlotte streD t 'lann~Dg Depart~nt. Stanford Universit,
Palo ~lt. Unified School District
Palo Alto Ch.mber of Commerce
',1. Alto (lyle League
League .f Vomen 'olers
Aid Pelinsala (itizens for Fair Housing
Jim Bier, Ware ! frfedenrf~h
Bjarne B. Dahl
r. A. ""IS Jis Burll., Urban "I.ist.y
Barro~ Park ASSOC'itfo~
Palo Alto Co~do~lafum Owners Association
PeDIRs~11 (oHousing Center
[nnoYitfve Ro~stn9
~idpentAs~11 Coalftion Housing Fund
Bob ""ss
Herl> Boro<:k
l of 5 'anderbeet
John ~k
T. Badalter
'reg Cftesson
Roger (ralg
lrv;' Oawid
Sophia Ollr)'1l1Os
red lal
Dan larimer
Ii. ,~ Pete son
lick TiptoQ
Denn), Petros'",
Nancy SHiley
Susan AusUa
Pbyllfs Cassel
CMR;371:0
«h5g
L
6/21/90
-5-
•
, '
~ . ,,-. , .~
! .:;...-
--.., ~".
f
r '
t;
I '
~.'
f'
I
I
I
I
¥
-'" .--
.Y ,_
o
RESOWTION 110 • ."..,="...,=".,-
RESOLlJ'l'IOII OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AllENDIIIG THE HOOSING ELEKEIIT OF THE PALO ALTO
COKPREHENSlVE PLAN
WHEREAS, the Planning: Comaission, a.fter duly noticed public
hearing held on May 9~ 1990 and May 30, 1990, has recommended that
the council acend the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, upon consideration of said recommendation after
duly noticed: public bearing', the COUIlC'il desires to amend said plan
as hereinafter set forth:
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does
RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the public
interest, health, safety and welfare require amendments to the Palo
Alto Comprehensive Plan as set forth in section 2~
SECTION 2. The city Council does hereby amend the Bousinq
Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan by adopting a revised
Housing Element, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit -A-and
incorporated herein by reference.
SECTiON].. The Council hereby finds that this project will
have no significant effect on the environment.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sr. Assistant City Attorney
s."e: 0 6/18/9 0
.:' -
APPROVED:
Mayor
City Manager
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
::71\1,1,r
-
•
\
"
.--,.-.
•
•
")" '
~,.,,"."
•
, "
... -.
+~:..~ ••. ...:-
.. ~ .
, "
I
. 1,,_
5 •
o o
HOUSIN. [LEHE~T UPDAT[ R[VIEW GUIDE
N[II OR MOOIFlfO POtlCIES AND PRQGRAI!;;
" ,
\-:. "
i ,
"'
, ,
exfstfng progra~s
30 Pfi9FIM 111 (In'i~e, pe.i&i8~5 ta ea'ta,e .pli~a !! ts al1sd bett
ath;ba4 ?Ad dutu'1d \l"US u4' IiAlilh, let SiUi '~8P'8 iflP,.,phh.
31 Progrm 9: for any resldentiil developrner,t h lIultfp1e-hllilJ zones
wbfch causes the loss of rentil ~cu5ing units , subdiwlsfon approval
(Including condo.l.ium maps) may ~. sranted on11 If an, one of the
following t~ree ~ (irc~tances is met!
3l
a The praJe(t will resljlt 11 .a 51gniffcant net gallll til the Cit,
bousiD!i1 slJppTJ' (defined iilS lOa percent lOOn units than those
previousl, existing on the sit.) and comply wi t~ the Cit1 SMR
prograra (baaleRs. 'a i"elude fa this nu, :PP9joots wHh Ius
t:f4ia~ Ie IJPlih] , Dr
• The number of reRta' units to be provided by the prpjects fs it
leiSt eQ4.:il tl tf1.e number Iilf exfstfr.g rental units (deft .. e' as
aU dliih ~as" slle:, 'Ii) ,IsjedJ, or
•
.Not less tJlan 2Q percent of the units. provided are BMR units
( •. ", nil If e gHA; u " 1 fCl!l fee) i or
'8t llu tIIu iO :pcrGi'Jlt af the WRitt diP 1>, II.FrUlta" &8
l!IY&B~.ll& If .iEhlla hU"'B'i (_'1,8 \; ... 111, EJh,pjh:hll iWll!lft!l
1I8Wfi8l1,1d'ii 'f4thia 'h, laO t. UQ PI'F'i$lot Qf thg CO'tlA'y "odilP
fRee, .... ! fa,.!e) BRtf ,".11 ~&.e 'ee" 'BtrfeUe,,! \8 .9aud! en·
t;0'l04 If",r'ilability Rt" null,
PrOSlratt Sa:. The CHy should disco'lrage COflWI!i"'S;On of lands
designated as resider-till t~ non-residential uses~ iAl." iltlFRata
flea hH9iA!I f:I ,I "cfM:d' en ."-+J'OI eFF site.
33 MOdification of Program !t: [m ~ousing developments of ~3 Dr nore
units. not less than )0 pE~cent ~f the units should be provided at
be'ow-~ariet r!tes to low-and ~oderlte-income families {for
pr~jects of 3 h 9 units. a . .PT.Q.QQ.!'J.iQnate fI-lieu paxment"""'iill be
accepted'_ for ~ach BM~ un1t provided, I developer s~all be
perMitted to by11d ~ne additional ~arket-rite unit up to i ~aximum
unit fncrease ower the allowable zoning of 15 percent, and
consfstant with .11 other loning require~nts.
34 See section on BMR i~-lieu fee for pro~osed ~ercentage changes for
im-lieu fee contributions for differ!nt size projects..
;5 Program 13: Encourage the development of limit.d [Quit, Hou,ing
Cooperatives and (o-Ho~sillg Praje<:t!.
PAAC6/s<: rage I
•
, ' ,
,.-..,:-w
J .•.
---~.;
",
j'
~
, • c I ,
.~
I i
t
I
-:-"
i
l
.-.,., .....
36
o o
lIo~ificatfo" of Progr,m IS: Study sur,lus sdool '-"_<LI"tlt.tlon'l
sites to det ... lne possibility of ~ore affordable Eousing.
31 PrJ I"" 171 (IR.U., lea .wl HIla fMf11 nAiRl iR wU," th AURl~8'F
If uRit, .11 •• 'll II i fWR."IA if t~giF affav'iblli11.
31
38
38
Policy 7A: [nco~rage and foster I d;versit, of affordable bousing
opportunities for senior Citizens, including nousing ~hfch •• ,
provide I varfetJ ~f services for specl.l ~eilth. social and transit
[le!d's.
Progr .. IS,: Continue support for the Palo Alto Housing
Corporation , Senior Coordinating Council and Qt~er ~ agencies
that provide low-and .,odente-sad' .iof.4h income housing whic"
incorporates facllitfes and services to meet t~e health, transit or
social needs af sen for citizens.
P.llcy 18: Support IOCll .n~ regional bouslng-asslst,nce agencies
S. addressing the needs for emergency snelter and tral1sitfona,1
~ousing.
40 Program lab; Vafve application fees and issfst 10<a1 age~fes and
non-profit organizatfons il obtaiRfng fu~ding a~ <onditional use
pe~its t~ operate emergenc] snelters and transitional housfng4
40 Polfcl 7(: £nco~rage preseryatiDD~ renabilitation and construction
of Singl.-Roo.-Occup'nc~ ~otels.
40
II
Program 18c: Vorl w1t~ SRO hotel owners and local ~ous;n9
assistance groups to obtai. federal. state and local s~bsfdfes and
leans to ~afntai. and upgrade existing SROs~ t. construct new SROs
and to proYlde socfa1 servfces to SRQ residents.
Progra~ lad: (~,lore ~et~ods to discourage conversion Dr deaolition
of .xisting SRO ~otols.
41 Program 1St: Cons;'d!r Ja61litate construction Df new SRO hotels 11
s~Hable puNic n d frh,t. locations.
42 Policy 8: Encourage and partiCipate i. }O~-and moderate-income
hous'ng programs ft"2nced by local and ether levels of 9overnme~.!.
43 Progrlll 20: .ActhelJ PlI_rsue r_~_-estab1fshmellt If federal and sh.tt
fer-tal subsidy programs and refRstate the local reRt supplement
(PiggyEack) program UpOD the avallablll!y of appropriate federal or
state housfng programs.
~s Progra~ 22a: Recognize the Buena ¥ista ~bile Home Park IS an
important resource for low-and moderate-income housing
OPPof'tuni t fes.
46 frog rail 23: Use federal an_~ __ sh~_e tax credits. ~ortgage revenue
bonds, and mor-tS~.f __ redit <:ertiffcates t. reduce the cost of
!1ousfflg n"ance.
PAHC6/sc P'go Z
.. -
'-
o o
49 Policy 13: Continue .fforts which reduce the cost of housing by
promot'ng energy eff1t1ency and resource c~~servat'on for new ~nd
existing hoy,jog,
PAHC6/sc
Progr,a. 35: Continue City I!'nergy and wa.ter resource management
I",u'''i:,l,.". "1,,. , .. nUn"," ... ser~fces and loans.
Page 1
•
I
j
' ..
-
[n~;ronmental Documents -Cit1 cf Pal~ Alto
Project Desc.ription/Title: T~ __ 'proposed project c_9nsists of .!(iMt'" amendments
to the Cjt, of Pah A1'to' __ :!5~~_omprehenshe Pla.I1;s 1984 Housf~ement (refetn.1E.
84-0.0\-311_ HIe ild'ODtion of this a.~_e"'a"_~d KOlJsfnu_'--ement is ill a~cordanc~ wi tb the ~tate 0.' Can forah's rl:'Jl.lIirements for cities. and cou __ ~ .. tie5 to update
their hotJsJng elemeds ev~r,t __ rille years. TheU,ous;rl9 f1emen~~~jJ __ ~ __ :.
~ __ hot.'s inq conditions! ideAt'ifies bou __ ~~ needs ~-",opose5 _9.Q.!l~_L..P_()] '-efes
and action pro9!'.ams_ to address .thgse 7d'en~ified ___ I]~_~~~ __ ..e_r:oposed amend:
JjetJts incJuo_t! ,,~ ... polfcies n?;nd programs formJ1l..e provision !!If __ transitfonaL~ __ ~ __ ~
emI::E9.~_~_(:Y bO\Jsil"lLfu t~e homeless_.z_J .. 9 'increase affordable bOlISJ._~
senio,"s. h expanathe beToltf-market-rate botlsir;'l_9... __ regi1hemell~f.~!lL_~ __ ~
d'eveTo.2.!!!..~_r1J_~",it~ira the City"=.
~L~_()_ included 1s..urogram to reco~ize Ue Buer.a_·f; __ sta Mob; T~_H_q~_~ Park. a~
important resource as iii low-Rlod~l"'ite 'income hOl!_~inq opportUI} .. !JJ and iii pro9!..~_~
!..!.. r-evis~_J~e cottage __ ....Qrdinan~_e to CO_I}_~ .. .f.~er allowing ?loU attacne~ ____ ....!!lQ
~_~ __ oi~_~_ed units.
location/Address: ~_c:r~ _______________________ _
Sponsodng Agency/Ap,pHcant;
yironment _~epartmer:lt.
Add·ress Ind Tele.o'flone of Appl kant: 250 HarnJ..1JQ..:1') Avenue. PO BE_X ]0250 1 Palo
Alto, CA 94303, phone: ~U29-1170_ _ ___ . __ _
Application fo.,..; ~t;on of revi_se_!1 ]990 _J:!ousir;'l_L-Element.....Jlpda_~e! i9g0-
1000_
{e,g, .. ZOrling dlange ll subdivision of propertJ. ardlltectural review, use
~.l"ilitJ
loning at Project location; raries Fee Receipt No,:.~ ____ _
~TJC£ Of DfT[RM!NAT!ON
Based' upon re'.'fev of tne project files. the undersigned member of tne Planning
Departme~t has conclu~ed;
!!:; l!.g.tiv~Dech!:iJion: The project hs no signific.nt environmental imp.ct.
~O [r,vinmmelltal Impact Report 15 required. The reasons [or 3: Negiltive
Declaration are; -.!_~_ policies anrt_e.~_Q9ram5 contaiil_f2"E ___ lli1 tAis......!le'!'_~
mJ.!5gati~_~ea~~_es addr~_s5'ng ~_he existing "ou~_2_~~1em~ ____ ~!_ tfle Clli.:...
The ad2.2.1,[E..I}, ~f tflese"""""£QJ.f.!:5es and pro9r~_~ ____ "WilJ ..Q..oJ.....l!..c1_~_? ... _!_!....i9nific~nt
~!!_~_I)n the phy5ic:~J En'{iTonme~t. _____ Jmpleme~atlofl_.....2_f........!l1~polic: __ I..e5 and
££_~9!~_sfJoi1J~ ___ frlave .1: __ benefi __ <:_i~l impact on hQ.,U5iog pToblefll~ in tile Com-
!!I~~~?_ attac.nmentJ_::.
':1 The preject may have a significant environmental impact, An £~virofimental
Impact Report ... ;11 be prepared.
fll. No_ SO-EIA-1S
P.g, I
•
~'
if ~. ,
F ,
I , ,
I
f
I
, , ,
l
' ..
. ~ ... -
•
iJlnn1~g Ofre~toT: ~ ~~
The project bas be.n appre,.d.
The proj.<t fta, be •• d.oj.~.
"
Oate;
Dat.:
Oat.:
file No. 90·EI~·'5
Page l
..
'> .'
l1li.
o o
HVI PONI'ENTAl DOCUMENTS -PALO Al TO ElA-Z.
J. l'r<lject Title/Adidress: Amendment Jc Housing Element cf tne Comprehensive
Pla,
ri'. Project Des.criptfor!: AdoptfOD ~Umended HOLlsing £le_~_~ __ ~_ of the
Compre!ln,?nsive Phn
Ill. Environmental Setti[1g:~ll_il:T~ Alta
IY_ fnvironmental Impact Checklist (Explanatio~ of al' ·yes-answers are fa
Sect;" rJ
I. £art~~ Will the proposal result im:
t. Unstable earth conditions or c~anges
if geologic substructures?
b. DisTuptfons. dispTaceme~ts~ compictioQ
or overcovering ~f the soil?
c. Change fG topograpby or 9ro~nd surface
relief features?
i. The destructfon, (overing ~r modifica
tion of an, unique geologic ~r physical
fea't\lres?
e. Any increase ia wind or ~ter erQsio~
Qf s~il$. eitner on or Dff the site?
f. Exposure of people Dr propert, to
9!ologic hazards sudl is earthqlJa~es.
landslide;. ~udsl;des, groun~ fiilYre,
O~ similar hazards?
g. Changes fa siltation. depOSition, or
erQslon whic~ ~aJ modif~ the channel
of i river or t~e bed of a bay or inlet?
lA~~pted fro~ Appendix I, Califoraia Guidelines for Impleme~tation of
rrQI, December I~. 1976.
!Updated ~~y, IS82; June, 1963
E1AF~C(
st
·'r J}· ",.-.~"~
.','
l>-.'" '~~,.
! -flA-
1
..!..
I
•
'\ , ", ~
b, .
. ~.;" . '-'
,
; .,
,.
j.1.' .. ··".:.:.· .. ., -<
, '\.
" .
.,
" .
i"
l~ Air. Will t~e proposa' result ia:
a4 Substantial a~r tmissions D~ rleteriora
lion of ambient air quality?
b~ The creit;o~ of objectionable ordors?
c. Alteratfc~ of air movemtnt. mOisture
temperit~rt. or any ~han9! in climate~
e1ther 10cal11 or regional?
3_ ~ater. Will the proposal result in;
I. Changes il absorption rates. drainage
patterns, O~ t~e rate and amount of
surface water runoff?
b. AlteratlD~s t~ the ~oarse or flow cf
f1 Dod waters?
c~ DiscnarSle hto surfa.ce waters .. or h any
alteration of surface water Qual;tJ ..
including but ~ot limited to temperature ..
dissolved oxygen or turbfditJ?
d. AlteratioD of t~e clirecUofl of rate of
flow ~f ground waters?
e. [tposure of people or propert, t~ water
relate~ ~azaTd$ such .s floodiog cr
tlda'l waves?
f~ Cnange ia the quantity of ground waters.
either througb direct additions cr .;t~
drawals, o~ thrcugo laterceptions ;f an
aquifer by cuts or excavaticns?
4. PiantJjJ.!. 'Will tl'Je propcsal result in:
ElAFHCK
$(
I. (~ange ia the diversit, of species, cr
number of any spe~ies of ~lants llncl~d
ing trees. s~rubs, grass. cro'ps~ micro
flcn and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction ~f the numbers of an1 un;que~
Yare or endangered species of ,lants?
c. lmtrcd'uction of neli specfes of plants
into aA area. or 1. a barrfer to the
normal reple~fshment ~f existing species?
d. Red~ction 11 acreage ~f any agrlcwTt~rll
crop?
9 -EU,-
2
I
x
•
~:-;:; ~.
!~,
•
"
o
s. Anim.l Ufe. Will the proposal r.soH i.:
i. Change ia the ~iverslt1 of species~ or
of anJ species of animals lbiros, land
an;ruls incltJding reptiles .. fish and
shell fis~. be"thic or9anlsrus~ insects D'T
RlicrofalJna) ?
b_ Reductfon of the numbers of any unfque.
rare or endangered species of animals?
c~ h1troductiofl of new specfes of animals
i~to an arei~ OT res~lt in ~ barrier to
the migration or mo~emect gf animals?
d. Deterioration 1m existing fish or wild
I; f. babitat?
6_ ~Qi~-Will the proposal res~lt im:
i. Increases in existing rloise le~els?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
1. Ligbt and &jare. Will the proposal produce
new-1 igM 9lare2
8. land Use. Will t~~ proposal resalt i~ a
substantial alteration of t~e present or
planned land use of in arei?
9. Energy[Natural Resources. ~ill the proposal
result ill:
i. Use of substantial amounts of f~el or
energy?
b. Substantial increase fa demand ~pon
eXlsting sources of energy, or require
the deveTcpmer,t of new sources or
energ.,';'?
c. Increase ill tfle rate of tlse of any
~atural resources?
d. Substantial depletlo~ of any nonrene~
able ~atural resource?
)0. ri::is_k of ~p~. Does the proposal ir.volve i1:
risfICf an explosion or the re1ease Df
~azardous substances (including, but not
limited to, oil, pesticides~ cnemicals or
radiation) ia the event of an accide~t or
upset?
ElAfMl:K
SC
o
9 -E!.J.-
3
!-
".
\
,....." .
'1:\".". ;:., .
"
I
1
I
·1
I
-
< " -; '.
lL Popu"\'ltion/Ho\J_S'n9~
I. Will t~e proposal alter the location,
distrlbution, de~s;t1. ~r srowth r.te
of the h~man population of an area?
b. Will the proposal .ffect existing
housing, or create I demand for addi
tional 'housing?
12. lransport~tfon/Circulat;c~. Wl11 the proposal
resI:!1t 1":
a. Generation of substantial additional
veh~c~lar movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facilities,
Dr demand for new parklng?
c. Alterations te present patter~s of
c,rcwlation o~ moveme~t of peop1e andl
or goods?
d. lncrease ill traffic l1azards' to motor
ve~jcles~ bicyclists or pedestrIans?
U. Public _Services. ~il1 the proposal have an
effect upon, Dr res~lt II a need for new o~
altered grNernmental urv1ces i& any of Hie
{Qllolting areas:
b. Police protection?
c. ~l1oo1s.?
d. Parks or other recreational facflities?
~a~ntena~e of public fac,1ities,
;r.cl~1ing roads?
Cth~r gawernmental services?
f~, ~jll the proposal result it a need
Y[S t\AIBE NO
_L
_1_
I
• ~ systems. or substantfal alterations to the
"1 "ltnitie-s:
. l1attJr.,l gas'?
•
,
;
IS.
16.
11-
IS.
ElAFI1(K
SC
. . ~ .
·.·jt~~l
0 •• ;;,,:,",'
-
.,
,"-
0 0
YES
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septf c tan1c?
e. Storm water drifnag~?
f. So 11 d "aste and disposal?
!:!l!!!'an Health. iii 11 t~e proposal r.;;'s-!J!t h:
•• Cre~tioD of any heaTt~ hazard or
potential b •• lth bazard (excluding
mental bealth)?
b. Exposure of people t. poteDtial bealth
lIuards?
Aesthe~js~. Will the proposal result 1m the
obstructfo~ Df any scenic ~istl or vfew
ope~ to the publfc~ or vil1 the proposal
res~lt fa the creatioQ ~f aD aesthetfcall,
offensive sit! open to p~blic view?
Rec.re,atforl. ~jl' thR proposal res~lt fa an
Tmpact upon the qualitJ or quantitl Qf exist-
ing recreational opportunities?
(liIltllral ResotJrces.
o. ili11 the proposal result II the alteTI-
ticn ;f/or the destruction Qf I
prebfstoric or iistorfc irc~aeolo9ical
site?
b. ~ill the propos.l res61t in Idv~rs~
phys'cal or aesthetic effects to I
prehistoric or historic building.
structure;. or object?
c-Does the proposal kaye the potential
to causes ~ physical 'change wbic~ vould
affect unfQue ~~ltural values?
d. Will the proposal restrict £xfstiDg
reli;ious or sacred uses ~thi. the
potential impact area?
/tAYBt
9 -HA
S
NO
l
l
l
l
l
l
--L
l
--L
--L
-.!-
l
•
I' !
!
'/ ,
.-:~
l ~
• -:: -
1 , ,.
r
! ." !
I
t
f ,
I
t-
I
!
I ,
!
!
!
o
19~ .MancfatQ!:LJfnd~r;gs or Significance.
,. Doe. the project have the pot •• tl.l to
degrade the qo~'lt, of the eDvlr~nment.
sub.tantiall, reduce the habItat of •
fish or ~ldlife spet~es, taus! 1 fish
or wildlife popul.tion t. drop below
se'f-sustai§ing ievels , tnT~aten to
eliminate a ~lant or anfmal comm~nitll
reduce th~ Dumber of restrict the range
of a rare or endangered ~lant or animal or
eli~inate ~mpQrt~nt exarnp1es of the major
perr~s of Califor.ia history or prehistory?
b. Does the project ~a¥e the potential to
achieve s~ort-term, to the disadvantage
Df )ong-tenm~ environmental goats. {A
~bo~t-term ;m~act on the environment is
one wtic_ occ~rs it a relativel} brief.
defiaitive period af time .tile long-term
impacts will endure well i"t~ the future.}
c. Does the project have impacts ~hich are
indivfdual)! Jf~itedJ but cumulativel1
consi6erable? tA praject may impact on
two OT more separate resou~ces ~here the
impact CD each resource is relativel~
small. but .mere t~e effect Qf the total
If those impacts on the environment is
Significant.)
d. Does the project ~ave environmental
effects Yhfc~ will cause substantial
adverse effects on ~uman belngsJ either
direct11 or indirectlJ1
Y. Explanation of ·yes· answers ia environmental 'c~eck'ist.
See attached.
{JAFMCK
SC
-..,....,~c -r-C-. -------:-~~-
~<
9 -£IA·
S
•
i
I
1
t ,
r
.-,.
o o
The rnson fer iI Negative Oechration for this ,project is t"'at the proposed'
policies and their implementation ~ill promote an increase of the ~ousing sup
ply which would result ill an overill beneficfa.l effect on the pl'lysical el1-
YiTOnment~ Any incremental increase l~ the number of bousing units would re
~uce some impacts associilted wit~ the jobs-tc-housing imbalance (suc~ as traf
fic. energy consumption and air qualit.J .... hlch occur fror1l Ulis hrge commuter
popuhtion) lrf'fIfcl\ currentl.1 exist hi Pila Alto. In addition .. sioee PoI10 .Alto
is tssenthll.1 "bunt o-ut-. the result frorl tAls small incremental incre.a.se
WOQld be iRsignificant.
lhe potenthl effects of the proposed amended pol1cfes and progra.rRs .lre as f.' lows.
*Tr.a.,sitional housing and emerg_~_rlcl sh~lters fO'r U'le home1e __ s~~. The &lhys ical
c~ange wblc~ may occur fro~ this program would be the rede~elo~ment of an pre
'WiolJsly d'e.,:eToped site ... lIence there Ilay l10t be a sfgnlficant .tlteration to the
existing envir~nment. Howe~er,any speciffc f~t~!e proPO'sal for pro~iding tran
sitfonal llouslng and/or emergent)' s.helters 'Would' reql11re indhldual site
speclfic environmental revlew.
~Incl"'ease affo.rdable housL~_()-"· SEAlers. This pol icy of increasing affor
dability for senior tltizens ~ll not ~ave a direct/indfrect phYSical effect
Oll the uisticg: environment. therefore there will be no signiffcant effects to
t~e envlronment.
·Expand the __ ~elow-market-rit'! housiog re~~:rement for all new d'e\l_l:..lop~nt.
tals progTam could result i. housing prQj~cts Qf increased dens it, ~;ch cOUld
l'nd'irectl.1 effect the pbysical environment. Any proposal wh'icft could lead to
iln increase ill 'housing unit e'_!l1sit,. will require further environmental review
on il cilse-by-c.ase basfs. Otfler~'ise .. t~is program fs ecenomic :in uture and
~11 not have i direct/indirect effect on tne envlronment.
*Recogn5ze Buena Wish JIlolJi le Fl9}:ne .P~ri. as a low-moderate incOlll_~_ flou_s 109 op
~tunit'. The progra~ of recognizing Buenil 'ista ~ob;le Home Pari as a 10v
moderate income hOQsing opportunity will net have l dfrect/ind'irect effect on
the eXlstin~ environment sfnce the part is already b~ilt~ therefore there will
be no significant effects to the environment.
*Rew'jse _____ .!b_~ __ Cottage Ordirunc.e h __ ~Jlow bot~ attached and deta-ched units.
Tbere ~ill not he a significant effect to the en~ironment res~lt;ng from t~ls
prografl because this proposill is defined as a Class 1 ciltegorical exemptlon
wnich exempts sfng1e-farniTy homes and duplexes according to the CfQA
gu;6el~nes-
file No. 90·£14-25
Page 3
iliiij;l'·q .... ,..IIIJFIII. --", .... -. --~.~.-~;~ " ..
L-"-...,
. ,
•
1·'.·1··
!"
\ .
Mal 3D, 1990
TO:
FR!RI:
Planning CGmmissfon
(arol Jansen
CITY Of PAL. ALTO
M£MORA/lOlJlt
•
SUBJt:CT: RousIng EI .... nt Update
Here is the modified language for Program 10, page 31~ recommended by the Pil,
Alt. Housing CorporatIon Subcommittee and staff:
Affordo)l. RousIng
P~lic1 1: Enco~r'ge
units .ff,rd.bl. t.
those bouseholds
and fGster the develapment of new an~ existfDg bousiag
anrf ~fdd1e~i"coft bousell<)]as~ especfl1J:t
Program 10: (ontf~ue support for the Palo Alto Housing Corporation ia the
pro'Vhion Clf l!)v-. ~ moderite-and lIiddle-income-houslng, wiU primary
empllasis on the )011(-ilnd IOOderate-tncome settors. £AE"YlCI tht til.
1:le1:l5iAg ,!'avidd's luldiR! _flil"'e -I'IUfU h!Ui1A9, :FellalU lU'a"d'a.l.
a:e: '-118.
SClle
iisgmemo
SC
.. {
•
5/30/90
-1-
•
'I -
-
o
101" 25. 1990
PLANNING tOMMISSION
Pal. Alto. C.liforal,
RousIng (Ieeent Update
~ember. of t~e Commlss!on:
o
Tlfs report fncludes: I) additional fafo~atfon concerling the proposed c~ange
t. Progr~ 12. t~. Below-~.rk.t-Rat. (BKR) Ho.sing progra •• and 2) respon.e.
to publIc comments re<tfved oa the Draft Housing [lement.
Progr .. 12 -fen 'erelnt BHR Requlr ... nt
rhe o..ft HousIng Element Include. , proposed amendment t. frogr •• 12 t.
txpand t~e C;tJ~s BKR program to appl, the te~ percent BHR requirement to
~ousing projects If three Dr more units~ rather than prGjects of ten or more
units. Tlis c~ange was proposed ~t~ the recognitfon t~at projects ~th fewer
t~in ten units would provide t~efr contributfons IS fa-lfeu fees~
T~f5 change 1s proposed on th@ premise that as land available for ~~usiog il
Pilo Alto becomes ~ore scarce, i greater ~roportfcn Df hou~ing devel~pments
.nouTer be provided IS BMR unfts. and ,11 multl,le fam", bousing projects
s~ould make ~roportfonate contributions. As few large undeveloped parcels
remifl. man, Qf t~e D~ ~ulti,le-familJ projects are expected tQ fall fl the
1-1 unit range. funds Dbtained frOM the iA-liea fees from smaller housf~g
prRjects could be ~sed to purc~ase additional BMR units 11 larger projects.
To respond to a Commission question about the effects this change would have
on small projects and whether or not this ,laced I disproportionate burden on
them, staff informall] sur~eyed several Jocal developers and arc~ltects.
Staff was primarily i.terested i. whether they believed th.t smaller pr.jects
(3-9 units .s. I~ or .. re) ~.d to absorb dis~roportionatel, kigher costs_
Staff i.ked four s~ecffjc questIons:
1)
/)
3}
Did smaller pr~Ject$ pay disproportionate costs for Jand? If yes,
what percentage more1
Did smaller prgjetts pay disproportionate costs for architectural
and desfgn services? If yes, ~bat ~ercentage more?
Did smaller projects pay disproportfonate costs for constructi~n?
If yes, 'a'flat percentage lIOn?
r~e r~spons~s to t~ese questions rarfed; ~owever, there _as a general
consensus of opi~lDn that smaller projects do pay disproportionatel, '19~er
costs. Some respondents believed t~at smaller projects pay disproportionate
costs for all three categorles~ whfle ethers believed they ~aid bfg~er CQsts
pc~sgl
SC
5/25/90
-1-
I
l
I
-
U'-.-
Q
1& onl1 one or two c'tegori!~. I, t,y~~: to jrfi~e the averill d;ffere~ce ;1
cosl dlfferenll.l between t~e lorger (t,o or aore) and s~.ller projects, most
respondents felt comfort,bl. with an estimate that .. aller projects may cost
as muc~ as 25 percent more per unit fncludlng all cost factors.
II response to questIon •• s t. whether the BMR progr .. should be applied to
the sm.ller project., responses .1.0 .arled. Kost of those ,urveyed dId not
se. the present 10-unll fIgure '$ the .agfc cut-off poInt. ~ost felt that, i.
concept, it was more f.ir to have .11 projecls, Including the proposed 3·9
un't projects, contribute I proportfonate s~arg towards BMR units~ [I
generil~ oppos1tloD was expressed to applfcatfon of the fee per se as opposed
to the appropriate proportIonate share It should be.
I. light of the I.fo~atlon obtained from thIs i.fonnal survey, staff still
supports application of the BMR program t. the smaller projects but believes
t~at the1 should pI' a lower fa-lfe~ fee II order to Qffset their
disproportionate1, tigher development costs. Staff concurs with the survel
estimate and recommends that t~e 8MR io-lle. fee for 3-9 unit projects be 25
percent lower than that for larger proSects, or l_15 percent i.stead of 5
percent.
'ublfc C ..... nt.
Staff has received written comments from Mr~ Bob ~S5, Mr. Herb Borack and
fram Inno~iti~e Housfng, I non-profit bo~sfng cQ~poritfon. Staff also met
vit~ Mr. Herb Boroct prior to rete fling k~s Jetter to review 'is oral comments
whlc~ ~e ~roposed t. provide I. wrltlDg for distribution I. the Planning
Commission packet.
Ma~1 gf ~~ Moss's and ~. Boroc~'s comments (see Ittached letters) consist of
q~e$tfons or $uggeste~ editorfal changes which stiff does not believe are
necessary or requfre I ~h.nge to t~e Draft Hous1ng Element. ~o~ever. some cf
their co~nt$ did request substantive c~anges ~hic~ are briefl1 discwssed
below.
Mr. ~ss requested the f.llowlng changes:
pc~sg2
SC
(lf~;nate consIderation of allowing second t1tc~ens and modification
af lot size requfreme~ts for cottages (Program 3, page 24, and
Policy S, page 29, Program I., page 29). Staff recommends that the
Draft ~ousing Element language be retained to allow consfderltieD of
these options fl fwture zoning text amendments. Any c~anges wo~ld
require fUrther study and public review prior to adoption of
D~dinance amendments.
Do not expand Program 12 to applJ to housing projects of 3-9 units
tProgra~ lZ, page 31). T~fs issue fs addressed fl i previous
sectfoD of thfs report.
Retail ser,tence referring to site development standards for PC zones
(Page 34, par.grap~ 4, last sentence). '.ssible PC Ordinance
rewisions will be consfdered at a f~ture 'lanning Commissfon
meeting. Staff ~as proposed deletion of t~i. I.nguage becaus. it
ref,tes the purpose of the PC lone t. allow for more fle.ible site
development regulations co~nsurate wit~ a proposed Rse~ If no
Sj2S/90
-2-
•
\
. ,
~').'-'
;~ ..
,
•
--.J ..
: ,
~
I
o o
c~.ng •• ort to be ~de to the PC Ordinance, .taff would .tlll
reeommend thIs sentente be deleted.
lower tho denslt, of the Bueoo Wi,t ... bl,. ~ome por\. The Buena
'1st ... bll. ~ome pork Is now zoned RH·15, whic_ is the lowest
oultl,l.-, .. Ill lone. A lower-density lonlng would be less
refleetive of existing condition •.
00 not locat! senior bousing near ne'ghborhood commercial Irei$
(Polity TA, page 36). St.ff believe, that neish~hO"~ connorclal
arel$~ IS well IS the D~town area. art appropriate locatfons for
senior ~ousing, betause they are Io<ated close to the neighborhood
servfces t~at elderl, resfdents ~o do not drive are litely tc need.
To clarify the I.tent of to" policy, staff recommends that the te ..
neighborhood commercial -serwices' be substituted for neighborbood
commercial -.reas·. Tb1s change is included i. the attac~ed errata
and ~ndment sheets.
~. Boroc\~s comments included the fol1owloQ, sewer.' of whic~ are the same
pol.ts •• de bl "". Moss:
Objections to d.1etion of the sentence regarding the PC zone (see
respons~ provIded aboye}~
Objections to lccatlog seolor bousing projects i. ne!g~borbood
commercla1 .reas (page 36 parograph under Policy 7A); t~e reference
to ·seQ1or agencies-l~ Progri~ tSa {page 36); and te the study of
'fAstlt.tlonal' sites for possibillt, of .are .ffordable housing
(Progr .. 18, page 34). Ris objettlons t. these point. are prlmarlll
based on the objectfon t~ 'fgher deRsitl senIor bouslDg occurriDg
near netghbornood S~OppfDg areas or on church sltes 11 R-i zones~
suc_ as the St. ~ar\'s .Ite. Ae believes that suc~ language opens
the door t •• lloonng suc~ development to occ,r. Staff supports the
locitfo~ of seRior prDjects TI ~ef9~borbood commercial areiS and
considers it appropriate to consider the possibility of us log
surpl~s fAsttt~tional or church sites is a .eans of fncraising the
supplJ of .ffordable bouslog.
Statements descrJbi~g the recent i(tfon prohib,ting resfdentfll ~ses
io the CN lones it Mid-Town and Charleston Center need to be added
to the Draft Housing [lement 0' page 35. St.ff is i. agreement with
thfs recommendatfon and has included prcpcsed language as part If
the enclo~ed errata and aMendOents.
favors I 'fgher percentag! for t~e BMR i,-]re~ fee~ The BMR fl-lfea
fee Is Dol, to be accepted where It Is not feaSible t. provfde
actual un;ts~ II situations where the Cit, determines t~at fl~lieu
fe!s are appropriate, the 4e~elopers should on11 be reQufred to make
an eQufvalent co"trlbution~ See .1so discwssion ~f need for lower
lQ-JieY fee for smaller projects diStwssed aboye~
Comments from [nnovitfve Housing include i request tG l~lude language
de~rib;D9 the contribut;ons Innovative Hq~sing ~as ~ade to ~ousing il Palo
Alt. (see .ttached letter). Staff has rev!ewed and recommends the suggested
amendments with some .inar c~anges. fhese amendments are listed on page l mf
the attached err.t. and amendment. (amended pages 28, 29, 37 and 3B).
pdsg2
SC
5/25/90
-3-
\
"
,
"
""::--
\ , . \
\
L L."
"'-C",'''' , , .... . \ ."
, , '
I
, I
.. -'-
'):" ,---. -. -"~
"
(f
o
II recogn1tf~D of the ~oustng contrib~tfQn$ ~ade bJ non-profit age~cfes suck
as lnnovatfve Housfng, as wtl1 as others, stlff proposes an amendment tD tn!
la~guige Df Progra~ 10 to fncl~de I reference to support of other non·profit
.geoolo •• s well .s t~o P.lo Alto Housing torpor.tlon, .s fol10.s (t~l.
I,nguago .ls. foc1udes I correction);
·Pr.grilll 10; ContInue support for U. P.l0 Alto HousIng Corpor.tlon and
ether "0"-rofit I encfes fl th@ provisfon of low-, moderite-and
ml d.-Income ouslng, w th prl.ary emp~asls on the 10w-and
moderate-fnc sectors. [~sure t~at the housfng provided. includfog
.iddle-income ~ousfng remains affordable over t;me.·
ResP/7::~'
~N[Y ~ {JtP?;::cPHy
CAROl JANSl:N
Sen for 'lanner _ 1_ t"ef Pl.nning Offl".1
Attachments; letter fro. Ar. ~oss
Letter from Mr_ Boroci
tetter fro. Innoyatfve Houslng
frrat. and Amendments to Draft Housing flemeot
cc; P.l. ATt. ~o,slng Corpor.tlon Board Xembers
Pl,nnlng Dep.rtment, Clt, of E.st f.l. Alto
'lannlng Department, Cltl of ~.l. f.rk
Pl.nnlng nepart ... t, Citl of ~unt.l. Yiew
f.l. Alt. Department of Socl.l and tommunlt, ServIces
ABAG
Rolf Pendall. Bay Area tounell
Ml~. [vanhoe, Golde. Trlangl. rask forc • • ,.1 DavIdson, Stanford Investllent Group
Andy Dot/. Stanford University
P~ll ~illl •• s, Olrector, Stanford Unlversit,
f.1. Alto Unified School District
fal. Alto C.,mber of tommerce
f,10 Alto Civic teague
league gf Wome~ Jaters
~id-PeQfAs~li (1tfzens for Fafr Housfng
Ji~ Bier J Ware' Frfedenrich
Bjar.e B. D,hl
L A. Mus
Ji~ BurkT~. Urban Mfafstry
]nno~itive Housing
1Ir. Bob IIoss
Mr _ Borock
Mr. 'lock
pchsg2
SC
5/25/90 -c-
•
\
,;:.
'.
I
I
•
,-:
• 1II1iI! .... iiilll!l .. """ .... ..,., ..... __ """ __ «.~,.,.. ."",.,.<·""'~.,..","'~.j')ii1!iJ!tIiJ!J14!, iii.
PLANNING COMMISSION
Pa1. Alto, Cal iforAii
o
Rousing Element Update
~mbers Qf t~e Commfssion:
Backs.round'
o
The Rousfng [lament of t~e Comprehens've Plan eMamfnes local housing
conditfons. and evaluates projected ~ousfng ~eeds and i¥a11able housfng
supplJ~ Tbe element 1150 proposes specff1c goals, polfcfes and action
programs to meet the communftJ's Jdentified ~ousf~g needs. The first Housfng
Element of Pal. Alto's Compr.~e"slye flan ~.s adopted fo 1976. The last
update of the Housing Ilement was adopted by t~e C1t~ Councll on June 11.
1984.
lOis drift of t~e 1990·2000 Housing Ele •• nt up~ate has been prepared ;.
compliance ~t~ a state ~andate t~at requires local governme~ts withi) the
regional jurisdiction of the Assocf~tfon of BaY Area Governments to update
t~elr ~o"slng elements by July I, 1990 (Article 10.6 of the Go,.rnment Co~e).
A 4S-~ay review of the draft ~ousing Element by the State Department of
Housing and CommunitJ and Development is .1so require~ prior to its adoptfon~
legislation adopted sfnce 1984 requires local housing elements: 1) to address
the issue of bomelessness, and the need for emergency s~elters and
transitional ~ouslng by Jul, I, 1990; and 2) to .,.luat. rental housing .t
risk of becoming non~}ow·income housfng ~ue to a loss of federal subsidies by
January. 1 1991. These fssues ire addressed in t~ls updat~, ~it~ additional
fl'lfor~atiof'l concerD;ng t~e loss of federal subsidies to be provldec! ia the
fl!ture tomprehensfve Fl an update.
Process
A si%-member Palo Alto Housing Corporation Housing Element Subcommittee was
established to assist staff in the preparatio" of the updated ho~sing element.
Th~ substantive cnanges fnc1uded in the drift Hnusing lleme~t were developed
.ith the input of t~fs subcQmmittee t~rough a series cf t~ree two-hour
~2~tfngs b~ld during t~e month of ~ar(".
--:-~e recommendations of the Subcommittee were forwarded to He Palo Alta
Housing Corporation for rewiew at lts April 25, ]990 Board meetfng. The Palo
Alta Housing Corporation endorsed the recommended changes and deferred
~efinement of specific recomm€ndatfons back to the Subcommittee for final
j~~ommendatio~, prior to being forwarded to tne Plannfng Commlssio~. T~e
pchsg
sc
\
5/4/90
·1·
•
'0 ,
,"
\ ,
\,
~ .
1
I
I
1
I
" •
Q 0
changes recommended by the Subcommfttee at it~ last ~etfng ~f April Z1. 1990.
were rnc~r'porillted into the drift H(,)us ing f1ement as an erroilta sheet {Programs
9 .nd Il pages 30-34}.
'roposed Allen<!!!ent.!.
A r.,lew guld. pro,ldlog • list of .11 policy and progr.m c~anges is .tt.ched.
The majc~ -~anges proposed are discussed below.
Affordable Heuslng for SenIors
A new policy (7A} and program (lB.) are proposed to ~Ighlight the housing
needs of Pa10 Alto seniors and respond to an 1ncrea5;~ demand for affordable
ho~sf~g that meets the special ~eilth, transit and SOCiil needs of Palo Alto's
growing senior population.
Emergency Shelters ind Transitional Houslng
Two ne,. policies (7B and 7e) and four new policies (lSb, 1&, led and lBe) are
proposed to address the issue of horr~lessness and the ~eed for emergency and
transitional ~ousing. These policies and programs are directed at assisting
Dther Jocal agencies fl meeting ernergen(y bousfng needs and to preserve and
increase t~e (ft,'s suppll of 51ngle-Toom-occupancy (SRO) hotels. Program lSe
proposes ccnsfderitfan Qf Dse of t~e City-owned water-tower site at Hawthorne
and Alma for ~cnstruction ef a n~_ SRO hot!l.
~odiffcatfon and Expansfon of 8elow-~arket-Rate PrograM
Modifications are proposed to Program g: lJ to allow for al] eXist'cg units
t~ be counted when d~termimin9 t~e potential Toss of rental bousing due to
rec!evelopment; and 2) to eliminate the prevision of SO percent of new units
marketed to .fddle-SQcome bouse~olds is one of the options to compensate for
t~e loss of exfsting rental housing.
~odlficatfons ire ~roposed to Program II to app1y the ten perceR~
belaw-market-rate (BHR) requirement far new residential development to
projects of t~r~e ar more units, rather than prQ5ects of ten or ~cre units.
II-lieu payments wo~ld be accepted from projects required to provide fractions
of a BMR unit~ This change is one of the ~st s~hstant1we c~anQes proposed l~
the dr~ft Housing Element, and yould greatly increase the numher of projects
subject to the SMR requfrement~ Tbe basis of the cha~ge is t~e belief t~at,
as land iVii1abl~ for bousing becomes more scarce, contributions toward
provision of affordable units should fncrease. Such a change would more
equitably distribute the costs Df providing BMR units by requiring smaller
projetts to make i proportionate contribut;on~
~~difjcaticn to Selow-Market-~ate I~-lfeu Fee
C~-,~rentl, t~e Hotlsing Element allows payment of an ;~-1ieu fee for fractfo~s
~f BMR units required, or 11 situations w~ere the constructfon and ffnanct~g
c:c'sts ~f a BMR unit "ould exceed the tlriee 1 illits affordable to lllw-and
itlGderate-fncome nouseholds~ or on spechlized houslng projetts where unit
costs include service comp~nents. When t~e current fee of thre! percent of
the sales price of ill units sold was estab11s~ed 1m 1981. this amount was
found to be equivalent to the out-Df-pocket costs the devel~per would
(ontribute if act~al BMR units ~ere provided_ Due to c~anges iA marKet
pC~S9
sc
5/4/90
-2·
,.'0.
•
•
..
'"!r,O'""
-~.
• •
,
:1
l .
. -,;
-
'Dnd't'>n5~ and '~crelsed construction and land cost~. the t~ree percent
f1gu~e is no longer equ~~alent ta the costs of providin~ i~ ictdal ~nit a~d
developers have little incentive to provide units when paying t~e in-lieu fee
would be cheaper. [valuatfons of actual costs and sales prfces of
lultiple-fa~jl, units sold ;~ recent years show t~at t~e fee nee~s to te
lDcreased to five percent of t~e salps price ~f all units sold. i. order to be
eQufnlent to prov;·ding: actual BMR units. {see attached Table .A.}.
D1~ourag;ng Conversion of Residential lands
The Housing Ccrpor~t'on and staff disc~5sed at length a new progra~ (Program
90) recommended to be added to the HousIng [lement to ,ddress the loss of
resfdentfal lands due to conversion to ot~er ~se5. The Subcommittee a~
stiff, bowever .. differ 1n the specific. language recommendet1 ..
The program and accompanying paragraph language recommended by tne
SubcDrnmittee as ~ontafned in t~e Errata sheet of the Housing Element reads:
WProgra~ 9a: The Cit1 s~o~ld dfscourage co"~ersfon of lands
designated as residential to non-residential uses unless alternate
new bousf~g ;s prowided on and/or off site.
Jhe Cit1 currentl, has no polfc~ to address the housing opportunity loss
vhick may occur IS & result of c@w noo-resfdentill development on lan~s
comprehensivel, ,lanned for bousicg. or deemed ~ignl1 s~itable for
~ousing~ It fs envisioned that suc_ c~a~ges would be permitted on17 witk
~ajor housing ~ontribiltions~ ~ayment ~f iD-lie~ fees, o~ a combination
ther>2of •..
The language recommended by staff and contained i~ tne draft Housing Element
document pr]o~ to c~anges made by the Subcommittee reads:
-Pr09ri~ 9i~ The tity should discourage conversion of large pa~tels
of residentfll lan~s for commercial purp?ses ~nless alternate new
bousfng fs provided on and/or off-site, or un1ess i substantial
publ fe benefit is to be ac~hved b'y such cOClversion.
The efty currently ~a~ no poli(1 to address the housing oppo~tunlt1 lDSS
which may occur as I result of new non·residentlal development on lands
compref'1ensivell pl anned for bousir,g. or deemed ltigh1, s1jHable for
housing. Tbis program ~ould onl~ apply to large developments and ;s not
;~tended t~ applJ to small residential parcels zoned for commercial or
industrial ~se. It is envisi~ned t~at such ~hanges woald ~nl1 be
permitted with major housing contributfons, paymerlt of in-lielJ fees, o~ a
cornbi~ation thereof? D~ the inclusion cf a substantial communlt1-~ide
benefit.-
~taff believes, that ~1tncut t~e publfc benefit clause. the language of thIs
program ~ould everly enc~rnber f~ture Council land ~se decisfons. As the
iikelinGGd of alternate sites bei~ available for replacement housfng ;5 slim,
'r,is prDgra~, as recommended by the subcommittee, could make it nearl~
impossible to convert reside~till lands to other uses. There ~a~e been
circu~stances in the past where it has been found to be 1n the best interest
of the ~omrnilnitJ to con~ert res;~entfal lands to cthe~ ~sesJ such as t~e
Tezoo1ng of th~ Wintey lodge site from Multiple·Famlly Residential t~ Public
Facil1tfes in order to retaf~ the skating rink use. Staff would consider the
5/4/90
-3-
.,
•
, '-.
\
\
\
\
~. \
"-' .
. ', .......... ?>., " . --:;:;
\ .. t
:~
j
I
1
o
term -large parcels· contained i~ the above recommended par~9raph to mean
parcels af five ~r more acres. Tbis interpretation fs cons~stent ~t~ the
sect jon ~f the H~using £lement ~h1'~ estahlfshes I BMR requirement cf greater
t~an ten percent for parcels 1lrg~r t~a~ ffve acriS (see page 33).
The Subcommittee does Dot believe it necessary to form.lly stat. the public
benefit option sinte balancing the public fntere$t and generil ~e'fare of the
conmunit1 are always 'WiUh UH! Councl1' s· purwie.... The Subcommittee preferred
t~ emphasfze the need for replacement ~ousing+
Results of 1984-1990 HouslM Action Phn
The res.lts of the 1984-1990 Housing Action Plan are shown on Tables 0 through
I on pages 5l t~rough 56. These tables show th.t Palo Alto was able t •
• c~leve 866 of the 2.100 housing units forecasted_ PlIo Alto fell short of
its goal largely because the Stanford Vest project, orfgi~allY estimated tD
have J,140 units t was not constructed. Pilo Alto was successful il achfe~lng
its goals for assisting in pro~isiQn of affordable un1ts to lo~-and
moderate-income ho~seholds (Tables H and J~ pages 55 and 56).
1990-2000 Ho"s'"; Act'on Goals
f~e housing goals for the next ff~e years are shown im Tables J and l on pages
51-58. These forecasts sho~ that Palo ~lt. s~Duld be able to .c~i.ve Its fair
share of tilllfoay area's llousitlg: needs (l,600 neltl units) for tne ned five-year
perlod ~lth development o~ eXlstfng lan~s zoned residential. Pila Alt~ does
Dot expect to adlftve the total low-and moderate-income t.ousicg goals, but
efforts tc increase contrlbutions towards such ~ousing are reflected fa the
proposed changes to t~e (itJ~s 8MR programs.
Re~lew and reV1S10n of the draft Ho~s;ng Element must occur ~nder i sbort time
fram! fa order to meet the state mandate that Palo Alto adopt an updated
Rousing Element by July l~ 1990. ]A order to meet this deadline, it is
critical tnat the Plin~fng CDmmission complete its review of the Housfng
Elerr;ent 11 the month of Hay. City Council re'ifew of the Housing flement is
>eheduled for June 25 t 1990. To aSSist staff i~ responding to questions ~fc.
may be raised. it is requested that th! Planning Commission contact staff ~t~
any quesHons or cor,cerf1S prior to the .Planning Corrmfssion meeting.
The 45-~ay state revie_ of the draft Housing Element began on April 23, 1990
and will be completed on June I, 1990. The City ~as requested t~at the 4S-daJ
review period be reduc~".) f f possi blf, giveR tl'lat it is not a complEtel,. new
HOuSing flement. but an update of ~at the state had previousl, approved im
1984.
~Hommencfat f~!:!
Staff recom~n6s that the Flanning CommissioD recommend approvil ~f the draft
f<c.'..Jsing nement. inc1udil"lQ the change,; listed on the Errata sheet. with tfle
pchsg
>C
5}4/90
-4-
...... ,,"" ........ " .. I'!!i .... ·"--"·~-.. ""~·~'" '"~'".,'-""" "
"",
-
•
\
-',-
~~.
'.
i
I
i
'. --.
-,
o o
exception of ~ording of Program Sa wbich is recommended to be adopted i$ S~C~
fD t~e drift dotument.
Respeetf.ll, submitted,
.J;.~z£t~~
SAAAH CHfNEY
SenIor Plonner
Attac~ments: Review Guide
loble " El"
cc: Palo Alt~ Housing Corporation
Pl~nn\ng Oepartment~ ~,t, of [1St PalQ A1to
'lanning Departmtnt. Cit! of ~enl0 Park
Ilanning De~artment, Cft, of MountifB Yfew
ABAG
Rolf-Pendal1, Bal Ar •• Council
Mite fvan~oe, Golde~ Trfangle liSk force
Niel Davidson, Stanfor4 Investment ~ro~p
Andy DotJ~ StanfD~d OniversitJ
Pbtl ~;]lfam$, Director, Stanford UnfversitJ
P.1. Alt. Unified School DistrIct
Palo Alt. Chamber of Commerce
Pal. Alt. ei.ie league
leag~e of Women Voters
Mid PeniAsul. Citfzens for Fair Housing
Jim Baer, Ware & friedenrjc~
Bj.,". S_ O.hl
£. A. ~aas
Ji~ Burklo t Urba~ ~flistrl
CA£a::!f~~
ChIef P1annlng Offiel.l
5/4/90
-5-
'-<-. .~ .•• --. ·L-,-. . -'.
". -"
-
•
\
t, ,
",<"~,,,
!
f ,
-
Oovo 1 oponont
~ear of
.... ""....... .. .....
Charle,ton
Village
(1990)
rhe Rose.alk
(1988)
l .... c. Bay
Homes
(1988)
BMRch.rt/mb
BHR Unit
Number of Price * _ ..... "'"' .... n
2 $US,OOO
4 ms,ooo
2 SI60,OOO
Number of
Market Rate
YI~ I ... "
30
6-2 bed @
S343,OOO
24-3 bed &
$425,000
44
17-2 bed @
1240,000
27-3' bed @
$265,000
22
4-1 b'd @
$160,000
2-2 bed @
$195,000
12-2 bed @
$220,000
4-3 bed @
$240,000
rABL< A
E.tl.ated BltR
£.Itmated Ma.ket UnIt True
Rat. Unit Price Market price
• •
$1Z,258,OOC $768,000
m.m,ooo $985,000
$ 4,630,000 $390,000
.
•
It ..... ..;..... __ ,~-_,_,
Estl •• ted Developer
ContrIbutIon !~t
.
553,000
13,026.000 • 4,24%
570,000
12,220,000 -4.66%
230...090 5;O:!o,oo'O • 4,58%
",.,..-....... -
BMRs:
1-2 bed'
$100.000
1·3 bod ~
S1I5,OOO
BHRs: ()
3·2 bed @
SlOO,OOO
1-3 bed ~
$115,000
..
BMRs:
2-2 bed "
S80,OOO
,0
'----~----:'-:---:----:-----~---:---' .. "
, 1'/'
"1-.,.,..,' -.
J, ..
,. , _._,"-
•
I ' . . ;' ..
"
•
O 0 .~TiAC1iMENl' 7
.~A~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~==~~~============================~~========~~~~;ON~~~~'.~~~o.:~:;~
OEPARTMfNT Of HOUSING AND COMMtJNHY OCVELOPMfNT
Hvusing P~licy Development
Division
lBGO Third street, Room 430
P.O. Box 952053
sacramento~ CA 94252-2053
(916) 323-3176
"
June '. 1990
~I. William Zaner
city Manager
City of Palo Alto
P~O .. Box: 10250
Palo Alto. CA 94303-0862
Dear Hr .. Zaner:
RE: Review of City of Palo Alto's Draft ~sing Element
Thank you for sub~itting Palo Alto's draft housing element,
received April 23, 1990" for our review. As you know, lw"e are
required to review draft housing elements and report our findings
to the locality (Government Code Section 6558S(h).
Identified c~ncerns lw"ere reviewed in a telephone conversation on
June 1, 1990, with Saro?t:h Cheney, the City's Senior Planner ..
The draft element is a 'Well written and comprehensive document, and
we commend the City for its ambitious programs to address local
housing needs. In our opinion". ooW'ever, certain revisions are
needed for the element to comply with State housing element law
(Article 10.6 of the Government Code]. A listing of our
recommended changes is ir..cluded in the attached Appendix-.
We note that the City will not be responding to the potenti~l
conversion of existing assisted housing developments until it
updates its Comprehensive Plan .. scheduled for completion in January
1~92. We look forward to receiving the city's responses at that
time. An additional Appendix on ·Supplemental Bousin<;J Element
Information-describes this new requirement, and. other sUbject.s
that may affect your housing element.. As mentioned in the·
~upplemental information, we are developing a technical assistance
document to assist localities in meeting this new requirement. We
will forward a copy of this document to you upon completion.
Me hope our comments are helpful to the city and we appreciate the
assistance of Ms. Cheney d,urinq the course of our review.. If)'ou
have any questions about our comments,. or if we can be of
assistance in any other way,. please cont~ct Jeff Spano of our staff
at (916) 323-6174.
..........:,.
I
i , I
l
Kr~ william Zaner
Page Two .
Q o
In accordance with requests pursuant to the Public Information Act,
we are forwarding copies of this letter to the persons and
organizations listed below.
NJJ:JS:b.t
Attachment
cc: Sarah Cheney, Senior Planner, City of Palo Alto
Beverly Lawrence, Hidpeninsula c1ti~ens for Fair Housing
Antonio Estremara, Comm\L~ity Legal Services
SUe Bestor, Attorney at Lav
Gary Hambly, Building Industry Association
Tom Cook, Bay Area council
Revan A.F. Tranter, Association of Bay Area Governments
Kathleen Kikkelson~ Deputy Attorney General
Bob Cervantes., Governor's Office of Planning and Research
Richard Lyon, California Building Industry As.sociation
Kerry Harrington Korrison, California Association of Realtors
Marc Brown, california Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Christine o. Reed, oranqe county Buildinq Ind·ustry Asscciation
•
--1." '~
•
. --'
o
,,,=-,,-,,~--.,.----...... ;-•. \-....,..... r.-:..;---'
o
APPEIIDU
CU'Y OJ' PALO AU'O • ,
The followin<j changes would. in our op~n~onJl bring Palo Alto's
housing element into <:ampllance with Article lO~ 6 of the Government
Code. Follow-ing each recommended change or addi tion l 'We refer to
the applicable provision of the Government Code~ Where particular
program examples or data sources are listedJl these suggestions are
for your information only. We recognize that Palo Alto may choose
other means vf complying with the law.
Housing 5ee4s. Resources, .n~ Constraiats
I. rrlClude the locality 's share of the regional housill9 need
\
(Section 65583 Cal (1)).. The element includes an Page 42,
adjustment to the city's regional share of new para. 3-4-
construction need which reflects 208 units built between ~.
198-8-1989. Adjustments to each of the City's four r
regional share income categorIes appear to be based on
the percentage of the regional share total assigned by ..
ABAG to each income category.. While the city can adjust ,.
its ~egiollal share to reflect units constructed since
1988 1 the element should clearly demonstrate how income
category adjustments ar-e consistent lfith the rent or cost
of completed units ..
2. Analyze and document household characteristics JI including
3.
housinq stock condition (Section 65583 (al (2)). For
example:
a.. The a~lysis of housebold characteristics should be PAle 6.
expanded to include the total number of bouseholds para. 2
in the community. The Department of Finance {DOF)
prepares annual population estimates including:
popul at ioI'! I households I and dW'ellinq units. For
your assist~RCeI we have included the most recent
COP estimates, dated January 1. 1990.
b. The "element should include the number of units in Page 4 ..
need: of replacement. pa ra. 6
Clarify the amount of land suitable for residential
development, including vacant sites and sites baving:
po.tential .for redevelopmentJl and an analysis of the
relationship of zoning and public .facilities and services
to these sites (Section 65583 (aJ (3J). The land inventory
should demonstrate that the City has adequate sites to
accommodate the City's regional share of new-construction
need by income category. For example:
Pa.ge 53 ..
para.. 6
Page 53.
Table A
._\
,.
,I
I
, ,
.;:-,.. ~ J ,
-I ..J' -J
[ , ,
4.
5.
a. The land inventory should include the zoning
cateqory and zoning definition for each site.
•
\
Page 53 ..
Table A
b. Table X proposes 4~O multif.,.Uy units through
residential redevelopment~ The element should
demonstrate that there is a realistic potential for Page 60
development of 450 units durill9 the planning: period
of the element ..
If necessary" the element may need to include program
actions to identify adeqaate sites.
Analyze the City's land use requirements, ~,-and off
site improvement requirements. and local processing and
permit procedures as potential and actual governmental
constraints upon the maintenance, improvement. and
development of housing: .for all income levels (Section
55583 (a) (4». For example:
a.
b.
c.
According to the element, -The new multiple-family
zone req,ulations have increased requirements for on
site open space, setbacks from single-family
residences z and daylight plane provisions and bave
reduced allowable height and building mass.-While
the constraints section includes some Lnformation
on the new lIIultifamily ordinance, the analysis
should consider whethe= any of the above
requirements are constraints to the development of
housing.
The element
analysis of
requirements
requirements,
should include a description· and
on-and off-site improvement
such as street widths.. curbing
and c.irculation improvements.
The analysIs of processing: and permit procedures
should include examples of the time required for
,,·ariO'.ls procedures and describe typIcal approval
procedures.
Analyze the avaIlability of tinancing as a potential and
actual nongovernmental constraint upon the maintenance ..
improvement or development of bousinq for all income
levels (section 6SSBJ (a) {S». While the element includes
some intorZlation on financing, the analysis should
consider whether' financing is generally available l
Whether interest rates ere significantly different froD
surroundinq areas" and whether there are mortqage
deficient areas in the community tor new construction or
rehabilitation loans.
2
Page 23.
para. 3
Page 22 ..
para. fj
Page 22.
para. 2-4
Page 2] ..
para :;
,t'lt-, " .. . ,..~
r
: :s: .' , --
1
I
l
1
1
-
•
..
{) o
Inforzation on the availability of financing lDay be
available f"roDi local financial institutions under the
federal Some Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA). which
requires specified lending! institutions to disclose the Page 21,
number, amount and location of mortgage and para~ )
rehabili~ation loans originated o~ purchased, and under
the -community Reinvestmer".t Act (eRA), W'hich requires that
5pecifie~ lendinq institutions help meet the credit need
ot their communities.. The eRA requires that each lendin<j
institution covered by the act provide ~aps describing
i.ts lending areas and information about the types of
loans it provides l and that a public file be established
containing written comments from the community reqarding
the institution's CRA performance. Lending institutions
not covered 'Onder HMOA may be requlred t.o provide
comparable information by state disclosure la~ (SectIon
3S815 of Health and Safety Code).
B. oyaatifie4 ob1eetives
Establish the maximum n~~er of housing units ~hich can be
constructed, rehabilitated, and ~onserved during the planning
period of the element (section 65S83(b)}.
Table J on page 57 of the draft housing element contains
ne~ construction goals based on programs. However, the
element should clearly specify the total numbers of units
to be oor.structed, including market-rate units# during
the planning period of thio. element. Where the quantified
objective does not match the projected need, the element
should include the analysis used to estilblish the maximum
objective.
The element sbould establish quantified objectives for
the number of units to be rehabilitated and conserved
during th!! plan."inq period of the element.
c~ PUblie Participation
Describe the City's effort, in developing the housing element ...
to achieve public participation of all economic segments of
the community (Section 65583(c». According to the element,
Page 59-61
Page 27
"'The City sought public pat'ticipation throuqh direct Page I.
involvement with local orqanizations most involved and Para. 4
interested in housing and the housinq needs of lower-income
persons and the homeless, and at several public meetings
before the Planning Commission and City council.-However,
the element should specify ~hich organizations were involved
in the development of the housing: element and how those
organizations represented all economic segments of the
J
.c ____ ......... "
•
, .
•
\
" \ -:. \ . -\
\.'~
f
D.
o
community. The element should also describe efforts the City
made to publicize public hearings on the housing element to
all economic segments of the community.
prograa.
1. If necessary~ include program actions to identify
adequate sites which will be mad:e available through
appropriate .zoning and development standards and 'With
public services and facilities needed to facilitate the
development of a variety of housing sites for all income
levels (Secticm 65583 (e) (1)) . It is not possible to
deter.ine the City's compliance with this requirement in
tbe absence of a complete land inventory (see comment A
l) •
2. SectIon 65~3[c) states that the housing element shall
include a five-year schedule of actions the local
.government is undertaking or intends to undertake to
•
Page 53
implement the policies and achieve the qoals and Page 508-61
objectives of the housing element. While it may be
appropriate fo~ some programs to be on-going, program
descriptions should include specific time frames .for
i.llple.mentation ..
). AMreS5 and" where legally possible, remove governmental
constraints to the maintenance... improvement, and
development of housing (Section 65583(a)(4)}. The
appropriateness of the City's .itigating actions cannot
be detendned. in the absence ot a full constraints
discussion (see A-C above).
21-23 f '
I
! •
r
".-"
,
i'
--'
o
T~; The fal~ Alto Planning Commission
rr~: Lois Vanderbeek
136 BArron Avenue
falo Alto. CA 94306
~ , ..
Smpe sTrnt. OD 'be Bn,;nc Vl,Stl lfvbilr Ho:me Park And the _
BAA'ip,g E ltiptnt
Be a 43 &qgr,' 11." R~C'''9Zl.iz~ tlIt! Bu~I1.J Ti ... t;c,J lfo.bjl~ !I('JJJ:M
P.tri .6 .iI .t.p<Jrt.tJU rt1sourc. for Jcr-.00 JDOd~.r~r.-.JIJ~~..:Jl/}(t
.lJOfJSJ~ oppar'lJlJ.itj~.~.
I think tbe mobile home paIl n~ed~ prot~ction, and ~ stronger
statement needs to b4 made to that effect; as yell as more
extensive measures taken to save it than tbase I have se!n
p<opo •• d.
I yould like ~o ... tbe followinq. ~ndeIlin.d woeds added to
Frog 2:.1,
R~~oqn.iz~ t?J~ iJut1JJ4 r.ilt~ Kc>bjl~ BOfM P.I~ .,. _ uti seU ,.U'.! cp
pusttrv, it.
I am ~lad that the mobile home park is included in the documeot
as a yal~able ~eSOUlce. Hoyever l more tban tbAt statement is
needed, The City .hould tak, • mo~. active role in ~.arcbiog for
yays to protect it, Mobile home par"ka not h.r frcm here have
al~eady ~en lo.t to develcpment.
Under b-"$CM BUMQ!"bjlitr it would be good to include other
options~ su~h as the possibility of purcbase by a non-pcofit aqency
or other 9XOUP and ~oniD9 chang ••• as well a, the posslble
financial assistance ~otioned.
Perbaps a ,prcill zone appropriate tp a mgbile bgme porl needs
to be oreated ia order to ~e5erve it aDd to pcotect its resident •.
Tbat sbould certaialy be pos2!lible. RM-1S .. or other loyer gelleral
zon.l.ng does no,t offer ad~ate pcotection ••• larqe. expen6ive
bocses could still be bullt tbere, it .eem8 to se" if the pce~ent
~wn.r decided to •• 11 or red.v.lop. That yould b. a real tragedy.
Perhaps the City could loc& into a •• istiIl9 a Don-pcofit
o~qanizatioD. su~h a, • church" in purchaslnq it. i~ case it is put
on the market -in order to .ave it and to keep rent. from rili~
too qreatly. We ~boold be ready fOI that po~sibilitr. It 58ems
unlikely to me. that the State fUDds referred to would ~ avajlable
to Palo Alto re!ident! to purcba~e ! mobile bome par~. given the
,caroity of Stat. reSOUIoes and the finanoial Itrain on r~ral areas
at tblS time, Bot should they neoes~arjly be.
I imagine a number of *lderly peeple liv! at Buen! Vi~ta; and
they and otbere .hou!d not h~ve to f&oe the ~'llbl11ty of eviotion
and years of worry &~ut whether they Yl11 have a place to live i~
the fQtQ.n. Tbey .hould be &uur.d &bo'.lt that and given some
• , -
\
'-
'.
" '.,
\
\ -'
\ -~.
-I
, ,
I
I
l
'¥ :
•• curit", 'Io-,rcy t-'-.\ " tQoll Q:Q. r.,o.Pl.'* \,." .... 0-up .. oiAlly
whtn ~D~ do •• not bAv •• lot ot f _ea~eJ.l t.~o~rt~f, T~t.lr ff.ll~q
ct .~itr .h~14" pr.t.~tod, .1 ••.
Stro~9.r ~~t.~tiQR th.n that oft.~.d ~A tb. ~ut ~ • .d. t~
~ to\lll'!-I> •• rI.u, eft""t .hou1d be .... 4. to p .... n. that OM"".
ar.A~ t~ giv. th. r6.id.ntl .oa. peace ?f .und. Aud to k.tp 'he
.ttoc4sbl. ~O\I.iU9 and .lter~'iv. lif.~trl. t~t •• ,.t. th.~e. tt
if I rart tfSOUtoe i. tbi, &'.4.
lr. ne*t.! t~ pc:o,t.ot .all 1.10 Alto" ~it,l.:t'b. a.pd to plu.rv.
hou.;nq tor .11 ,~.t. of "ur c.moun'tr. It .. y ,.1 •• om.
cr ... tj .... tli$.u.:i.nq; to. do 11:'0, tiN sh.l')Ulcf n()t, boa lo.t 1a q-_tti.oq t,(),
tkif project_
•
."
:-.,..,
.~~
("\. v
.... -..
P. j'. • W ,,-e \..! 'j
sb~tqo
•
\
;r
/
;,:'
~
• ,
... -
~:,~.
, . ~~-~
~ ,
~. .::," ,.
~ ..
~.
i >-.
f ~;.' ,
~"
.... }
I
-
"--
To: Palo AlIo PIannin, Commission and Staff
Froon: Peninsula CoHousing Center
Subject: Draft Housina Elemenl
May29,I990
Accordin, 10 !be draft 01 !be Housing Elemenl 01 !be comprehensive plan for 1990-
2000, Palo Alto', bousina objeWves are lImefold: 10 maintain the character 01
neighborhoods, 10 maintain • diversity 01 housin, opponuoities, and to increase !be
housing supply. CoHousing is an approach to providing housing thaI will belp meet
lbese goals. We requeSl!bat !be Housing F.lemelll of the comprehensive plan 10 be
amended to encourage innovative housing alternatives such as CoHousing.
A CoHousing develop.nelll is de signed to create • strong sense 01 community and
neigbborhood. These communities span all ages and f2Il1ily c:ompositions. The
residelllS oIa CoHousing develcpment participate in !be design process, so Ihat each
developmelll would be specifically taiJon'A to !be needs of the residelllS and of the
neighbodlood in which !be developmenl is built. A typical develcpment has
clustered housing, perimeler parking. and shared facilities. Shared facilities usually
include park-like open space, auling hall, and children's play areas. The layout of
the buildings and maintaining of open space are designed 10 encourage intel1lctioo
among the IeSidents and between the residents and l21eir neighbors.
The Peninsula CoHousing Center has laken a differelll view ol reaching the same
goals as expressed in !be Housing Element We wish 10 provide affordable housing
in order to promoIe diversity, but we don't wish to limit CoHou sing to a particular
set of target family incomes. Rather we seek 10 bring together people who are
interested in the coooept ol CoHousing (as defined in !be attachment). and make the
neighborhood possible for a range of income levels. We found DO provision for the
support 01 mixed-income shared housing in the housing element. So thus we
propose amending !be elemelll by expanding 00 policy 7 with a derivative ol
program 13:
"Encourage tbe development or cooperative neighborhoods."
"Modelled after European cooperative housing. these
communities are residenl defined and should include such
features as clustered hous ing and shared common facilities.
Amoog the objectives 01 these developments are to provide
housing for a diversity of ages, household compositions, aOO
income levels. Projects that meelthese criteria should be
considered for city support as deemed awropriate.·
, -
•
-' . .., ..
f
f
1 ' '~ ,
f """
e ,
i ,
f
,
,
I -.. ~. ~
""c"
I
l _,"0·
I ;~
w~ would likelOpoini out several objectives o(the Housing Element thai support
the proposed amendment. The r"" of these is diversity. Although the Element
prov;des programs f 0( households with < I 00% medi an income levels, it does
noIhing for the middle income households that are be ing priced out 0( Pal<> Alto:
"vinually all first-time buye~ with incomes <20)% of the median were excluded
from purcbasing in the local housing markel (pg. 20)." The practical nature of I
CoHolll;;ng developnelll willleep rosts down, and thus provide an avenue for
middle income hou seholds. Currently, our group is working Iowards
developmentS based on housing priced in the 200K 10 3SOK range, and may include
rental units. City recognition of \be merits of CoHoosing can be the fIrst step to
retaining I place in our dive~ity for middle income households.
AnoIhercommon theme 10 the Housing Element is the desire 10 bell' families with
cbildren. "Families with children ..• will require affordable family oriented
housing with play an:a' for children (pg. 7)." CoHousing prov;des an ideal
environment for cbildren. The pedestrian-orienled design cbaracreristically limits
cars 10 the perimeter of the neighbomood, leaving open space around the bornes as
safe phly areas. The shared coounoo facilities help neighbors gel 10 blow each
OIher, and thus 10 promote interdependence for tasks like child care.
The Housing Element also states thai "special adentK>n should be given 10 housing
for seniOf citizens ... .(pg. 28)" CoHousing is attractive 10 retired people because of
its diversity, affordability and shared facilities. The senior membe~ of our group
typically cite the desire 10 live with people 0( all ages (especially children) as the
altraction 0( CoHousing. lbe availability of modest sized bornes also makes it
affordable. Furthermore, the shared facilities such as the dining hall makes daily
tasks a little simpler. CoHousing is thus an attractive alternative to typical senior
options.
In summary, we believe thaI our vision of cooperative neighborhoods matches Pal<>
Alto's objectives well. By amending the Housing Element as proposed. the city
could set an example for a new housing option thai meets society's changing needs.
The amcndmeIll provides an a venue 10 hasten acceplaIla! ol this new ;dea, while not
coounitting the city 10 any flnancial obligation.
nan\ you for yourconsideratioo O(these suggestions. Attached is I bdefhistory
d CoHoosing and a site plan for Muir Coounoos, a CoHousing developme!1l
WJderway in Davis, CA. If you have any Questions, or would like a more detailed
p.-esertatK>n about CoHoosing, please call me at 4934143.
•
--
,
, . , ."
\
\ ,
\ " ,
"---..
, ,
i
. ,
o
Sincerely,
'~ , ! II (;,/] :, (hi t'n"" ~.,.,,
Francis Schumacher &. Nina Friend
PCHC Si1e Committee
753B Lorna Verde Avenue
Susan Aut,; &. Kern King
360 College Avenue '5
ARlert &. Natalie Bivas
248 YelllUrli Avenue
Diana Bloch & Geocge Hunt
1650 Waverley
Marge &. Bun Liebe rt
3741 Redwood Circle
Dave Matheson & Loretta Warn
376 College Avenue.5
Mary Ruth Quinn & Sroo Schenker
3248 Morris Drive
Elizabeth Seman
2240 SL Francis Drive
Catherine Shinners & Jim McCarthy
('25 Moreno Avenue
-'~c-···-
o
..........•. '."
-.1"
.., '--.:-
,
1
..
, .
.. --(
o 0
A Brief His!OC)' of CoHoo sing
'CoHousing" is • term coined by two American architects, Katluyn McCarnaru and
OUIrles Durreu, who Spelll • year studying an evolving housing movemem in
Denmark. CoHousing, began in 1972 with one development and lOday L'lere are
over 140 CoHousing communities in Denmazl<, a country the size of the Bay Area.
McCarnam and Durreu describe their fmdings in a book entitied CoHousing: A
u,ntemporary Approach 10 Housmg Ourselves. Loosely defined, a CoHousing
development is a residenl designed complex that promotes community through its
physical design. These miniature neighborhoods take many forms, bot typically
center around I common house containing a dining hall, • child ca."e area, and fix
other s!wed facililies. Although the comm<J<l areas are important, an equal effort is
made 10 develop bornes that guarantee the privacy of each family.
The CoI·loosing pbenornenoo is now spreading throughout the U.s, .. 1th the peak
inlerest in the West and NorthWeslln Seattle, several group are worling with the
city kJ provide zoning provisions specif>eally for CoHousing. "Muir Commons" in
Davis is • CoHoosing community scheduled 10 start construction tills summer. That
developmen! coosisrs of 26 residences. a common hou se and other shared facilitie s
on 2.83 acres.
The Peninsula CoHousing Center is a diverse umbrella group formed 10 educate and
encourage the fonnation of '"ore groups' of people who share I Comm<Xl image of
I CoHoosing community. It is the core groups who will be doing the actual work of
developing I particular property.
•
"
• ,
i
i ,
I
.,
I
i
;~,I
r ~J
,
, '
,',
•
'\ -.
-,
! :-
i ' ,
,
i • l/' i
"
,
, '
i \. I
L I ('
,
\ ' , r' .
1-
'·t .\ . '. :'-. ", ,,'.';
.,-·'Y
~~~{
'-.,
o
THE ...... 1.0 ALTO CONDOMINIUM OWNERS' ASSOCIATION
f' l2Inni r .. .,'l '-·or" .... i:;3i·,"
Cit,v c.1 F'.:d.:-. Alto:>
'::'~;') H;,:'oo i I t c-o ("yo, e .
F"C'O 1':0 (II t,.':-' 1,31 if" "3.12_>1
""1.0 "LTO. C.l..l"-ORNIA ,.JOI
TCL.E"'j.jO"IE
/ ... 1 'l lZ I (ll ao
t'~rro:·~)f-I~' \·~".l :'1"";;-ip,.,,:,,[,,£"d in ur.jj+ir,..J tt"_,,, Ho::'" __ Jsin':l fJ.~-!.I"'lit., ~.f t..t,.-::·
('·'I"f-'l'-""·r:·n.t .. ~ F'}.""'n .?l1",j n,-·':in'] r~·:-rn,r~t(",qj-:I ... tI.:,rl":: to::· tt,.",. (;t~~ C·-:-"lll.;l
"~':":J"';'" I:~:,:?: I c'r:illt;.~~ '=':·I!-:::trtJ,~ti,~.p ;:..-,f 1~>:"""'" ~.f=."!j f.SJn-JJ·:: rC'1:"'~JI
'-~''-~IIf,-"V ... '1 t"~"_.,'ls jn ~' . .li"!'-blr:.-~~"-,''ir:: l'~I(-'1I+j':-"n::;; jnrl,_,,1.0.-;; tfr~:' f"'ll,~"~inn
-jl::.r-•.• --,j'-·n .. l\n· .... -ff-.. ··\· '~~-,t i,~ .. ! '_It''.1._~,,· o::u,\"i,,::I":1";>fi.c-o t,v th·"':-:::,F~J t,=>o:l 1'::-'1"'::-'-'
1-:; tr~-· I,··-:;,.l:_,!·-.· .1·~·'dj~""'t""1 •• ,. :-, "<:ily-o ..... 1'P?>j r·:Ol"(.€:l f,~'r ::-rr~'': ·--,r·:'"! f,,~·':.~,l
to. -. ",-. • 10---, '-. I '-:1"-".-" J ; n {' ,-.n l' In.: f i ('n '..c'l t, h +-1" P'I.-' r'"" 1 ':, r, It .::-' J-1<." l~ i ')oJ t ':>1 J:~~',r =-_ t i '~_,n
'1,,-. pr '·'f-~--.·:;,o.·d _ .... ;f-_,)_ =_ ~ ~ ~" __ 1 "'" . d<-~,',:? l'-:'of .. ::-.. 1_ td 'h ~ __ I_'_ ''::?f ':' tE _!,~ .. :c.,. t,~ I' t_':""~:,r 2nd 1. :.c
J,-{_-,'.--·d. in p~)'''''lt'J"'_n f-<'1.IGJI!t:,,) _:-l. ttr~:;' c'.:_~~i.",;:~:?.:.:;,._t .. r-·~'rn; 1 ,:-,f (11".:~ ::.t'f.:'o::t
.,..,,,! TI~.' ... tt .. -.,r' ... :---I'l,,J"f-I~p.~. '-::'f'f: .. -,c:;jt~ th·-·.-::. .... ,lft-.. --"',nJ~';::.r:j_fir-F~+IJ,O?,~ li,n"!" "
'I· .. -~ I'"t.::. {ll_ •• :. t,::-.y;,j.-ofl·; r,j 1_"'". 1('1 rtlr,,~ :::::·t.r.-::·.?t_ T",::-·'-l'-l'''"~':; ,:j.~l,,:,ti':-·>1 i)f I.~ .. :::
-, tv.', ,_"--,.-:l.: l' 1 'i I--)'--~j. s.-'n t ~-, 1,"-:: 0::' ~,,-)o t 'f I re· ~ I ~-, I .. _pO:: ,~, f <: i l y-.... -....wne-:i to:)
c.l tv-controlled f':'f HI'::: f,q 1· .. "''-" Ln''] r~-'~'-'nc
J ('1-, f'·I,,·.--,.-1.+j·-.-II" 1"J tt,-· t"-'rl"-"'::-:-:::-; ~h.""I.Jl'::'I n::-,t, ~-~.., r'--'lr,,,_'l1', =-f_,.j t'1
r.:)o-~. :--r.-::-::. ,_-,t ffre. (if-\'
I! .. -·, [""-"c"11t-:""11 "::.I~'-~ ,jlr-oo"r o:;if",.:; ~~r~~,qI.1 t: ... ".! ;-.+:,' .. :-1',-::',.1
,1,..-, rl1r...," O;:-.I,T'~-::----:'" ?I".-' Oo:-'rt~",>,'.:,::;t ,-,f t"li ..... _-::,.sit,.,: f)','='. l<=> f'_"! ~~::-·.lf I~'
1.-:"",;1. -,.,..1 .-::-·::h,'.::-,r,?,--'l", jli'r-''"'ct.;:·.j b',: +:i-~ ac+:io::'n-::' 'C,ni lite-:;1',,1.:-,
.:. f t,,'·n;.::>! -? -::. -; P-""~-r' I .:-.
II h'-"'J'"":'n,:;J .:-J.-·',-.:--·l'"'f'fo,,-n+ t··~, -tr-.. :-F-'Z'_,f,-, ("I.It,:. t-k"_.I-;l,,,,J C·~"r"~·T'"t_j·:'ll
""'~'! r.-•• "t".-'n"""1 .f~-· ·c·j fh tl',._~, fllr.,~ "'I~·i H-,,'~'tt"-'I"-l("' PH::;-:-=,--.p.;: !:""JI'
r~-· -~ ra,..,"~ ,i<:',.. .• ,·;bt.-::" 'r'-' .-..f 'ft---.. -, "-",",,1,:'1 1 '')'I·."''-f' ,-'j~.:, '-'SOC .:.f J:--',Ijr'-'
-"1 "_"',i·-f, -,-""~~:"FTI'; .... n'~,]o'~ "",p.J f,~,::,t,:;, =--dlv'\:::-r::=il'-" ,::-.f ;o.11'::->1·j:-..1-,l'::-,
t~··.r;ill<-' '-::'f_1~'.rt"Jlllti","',,-; t,-.r S.""lnl.::-'r r:11i=-,-'no:;,'" ".:-"ll,1 ;:-.rr:'-'rI'pf':-',
Hd"".
l' ~,,11'~_ I:,: "1·r-:'1\1~,"1.ll ":'t l.~::.:::;t 11'~-' [>l".::-,::;,::-,III. n'rr.,t"fI ,:.f
'''·lltlpl'~'~f'''~11il.t r'--l1t"l '.Jnit--; ';.'01'111;'"'] t-o jn!:r.::-'-';'.:' th-::-'::--_'"'r~'11
-·''l .... I" ;-,f I~"nl.l 11'''''I'''''')o:)'' \I."~"Jld t...,.,. ? hl·:,re ;'r~'J"'::1='I'i-~t~ U3':' ,::--1
1:1,,:> s i f 10"'.
T, '-, ••• _ .. _-__ >
i ,
~
i
t , , s
i , ,
f
•
)
o
5. rtn <2.(';'0 "-::"I ... lld r...:·t t-~ in J--~-:--.~.ino ,,,.jH-, citt-",",r r·:-licv..3: "F-"rQ~e-ct
;"noj E: .... " ... :>n<~ u .. -.::;..:: qJ;.lt~,f,",-:=; 'Jrfoir.-j-, 1I1~l:,,= Fal0 I"\ll.:o~s
I~joll:-<:>rr.=-=--J<;, e;.p~t::"iC!!llv .::f.:·5ir~bJe" or f'ro-:::H"2'/)I .: "'I.)s,~ t.h .. -·
;:',"1Iil'lool (l.·din.-.II.-.-·. ,-.fj",,·)" 1':.: .. :J .. "c;. '"'r .... i spo?cifio(-r-l;;o>n:; to R,;:;,inf .. "",in
hi''''r-,~J"'\li t", rl<:::i,~.t-"~'I'h,:--o.-:oo:'f';".
€" r'r':".J\·~nl l: "In ::-•. rr·~3 :arjj::v::~pt t..:. th~ f).~ ....... n'_"·)':'il sI":1=i= .. irJoJl 2'r0?o.,
~"'flltC'i\) s:;i,-.,J,:"'-f:-r.,;'I'" "n·f '_"JP!!"'~ ;;or-=~" ~,rd h:"'-.'~
"rt-ltti~.11~-f;:'f"il·" c) • .::,::-e t .. :-, '0'1"':1='5 ;:;nd .:-orfice':;" indio:::o.tl.:'5, H .. :-:;ito:::·
to: .. 1.--= iocg) t~'r I"t..lltirl~-r.;.nd:ly t,·: .. ..I'3ina.
lh·~ I it'"" l£o",-~'" 'll;'iH, St::rlfc'rd ':-'11 U..;? r'.rc"f'''::ri.:1( bet ... ·een El (';::>,,,in-:' P'!-~:=ol
?-r .... J t,-' .. ~· r",,_ilr.:.~j ll':?U,-,; ,=,~ill t~'5 t:,'I)-.''E":n.,N 1h,r~ 'l-'B~r5 t .. :,fc-r.:-
,-.'·~';r::.ti'>H t'f..: .. jlJl-=:·r-1:: ... T ....... t:".""\o{r-:t,r',.J<:t i.~"n f-:·r ~n-::.r.,"O t·~ t ... :· lc~", .•• :·d il("' '.'
-t,.:. 11,,-' p .. :-.-j (TO:"" bJildill"::t .:.on Hif,d,":c'l! lc>~~:-.~,r t~tt.'·?en ·U'..-=: 1J.::oJfd".· ... tnt'
pr.-1~"\~.r-l·-.i ."""nd t" ..... r,.."iJr.~.· ... ., 'y'"r::.~ 1:',:"..11.""" r-:.-s:;iblv t.>e ;:"n..-:-,rl.:.iz·:",j c·'.-r::r
t= ... ..,-:nl·.' .. ~-.Ctr~ lhit; .~.tic:.n sr,.':"'.JI·j 0.:::-IO':J;·1',:'rc .. :t
Si n<:€!relv ~
:i7~lf,i!-:~h.1!J
Vi re f'r!?"ii.j..:-nt. F-TI'{.:.IJ(\
(~-(~r-r··:.l .T::-'H""~.:'n .. (,hf~f F·I"n11i.-.,"l, Offil:i~l
"'"..;.y;:,rl 'tl'!'-·)I--:.r • :::"":11i·:;r f'r::Olr~ .... :!\-
'~l tv ('.'':'',,-f1'l': i I
"-:::".I'[',(i"", ~;":-"'.,r~:;-.rt. P t"\ ~t.""..!c;ir ... ,] (orp.
, -,
~
•
.' ,~
< ...... :.
,e-;4>
,<
~:'.
..
-
o
tiE'rb [·oro'ell..
27}1 }yron stro.t
Palo Alto, CA 94306
laIc .!-1to }'Iannicg Garrll!'lis~ion
250 .lamiltol'l Avel'l'J.{'
Palo Alto, ~A 94}Jt
Housing Element Update
DEar ~la~niog Commission:
o
You havE" re:i.oE'ste-d' that 1 provide you -with a writtE'n vE'rsion
of my remarks to you OIl ~:ay 9, 19'90 .. on this Puoje-ct .. I spoke
E'Itemporaneousl, from brief notes. so I canlt give you a verbatim
transcript that -would duplicate 70ur ~~eting minutes.. lio~ever,
I set fOI'th my concerns in this letter as b€-E-t as I can. Fy
COffiffients are keyed to page numbers in the draft M~ousing Element
of the CoroprE'h<>nsivE' .Plan 19'9',)-2000:
rage 7. paragraph 2 .. linE' 2: nThf'" aging population .... ill IlEE'd
jncr~a~ed numbers of ~~nior housing developm~nt~ •..•
1 have three co~cern~. }'irst. t~e legi~lative hi8tory
~ho~ld make clp~r (perhaps by a statement in t~~ minutps)~ th~t
the Clp;jng population rE'ferred to is that projf"ct€'d from de"r,oeraphic
data .. rather than basE'd on an assumption that cE-i'elopme-nts ;.,111
be ouilt to attract a population that does not DQ"'-live in Talo
Alta. Second, the local ne~d should be quantified to d~~on5tratE
the corltirJUing strong demand for subsidiz.ed 10""-2r::d rr.o,derate
inc-om ... sf'nior housi!:lg. compared to market rate bom::ing where
develo.pers need to ad'verti se in a ....-ide gE'oeraphic area to fill
their developments. Third. the term affordable used in the
housIng element may need to be qualified for thOFE s~niorS ....-b~
can £ink most or all of their assets in continuing ~are retirement
communities and then manage to qualify as middle income for
affordable h':lusing. thereby justifying approval of such projects.
Page 28 .. line 9: ]ns~rt tbe ~ord waffordable~. as follows:
·Special att~ntion shOGld be given to affordable housing
Eag~ 30. Program 9a: I ~upport thE' r~commeDdation of the Prtlo
",Ito B')llsing C<lrporation 1 s sut~ommittee. To help focus thE'
diff€'n'nc~s. it I"Jelpa to add languagE' to thE' f'taff versior;. to
Ir,a.i:e it consistent .. jth the staff report definition of largE"
p;qrcE'ls;. as follows in PrograM 9a and the SE'cond sentence of
tbe lJar"agraph fo110·""ing the :program~
~Ihe City should discourage conversion of large parcels
(five or ffiore acres) of reSidential landf' ••••
·7his progra.'!l. ","auld only apply to large d€'ve-] o:pmelltr (paI'cel~
of fIVe or luore acres) .... ~
!:>ince tbe adoptj_oIl of ti'H? 1)80 C'"):~'prE'lIenf'ivE" PIa!"., thE'
city has converted fi~e parce15. all of them lpss than five
acr€'f'. No~e of tbE'S~ conversions ~as mitig~tEd by new ~ousin~
or in-lieu palml?rlts~ anrf one c-onv€'rsion facilitatpd C0tll'ersion
of dedicated parklafj,j to CO[fL'T,E'I"cial dE'~elo'pmE'Dt.
•
•
, i
: i
~
.l 1 • 1
\ .
.
o E.erb E.oroclc:
?laooil1g Commission
l'.ay 2}, 19'90
Housing E]emet:1t
rage 2
o
\ ,
Tbe ti'Vf> 'parc~ls are 3163-3197 MiddlE'iie>ld (:';E'lltury Liquor!":
.t all, }045 lHddl.fi.ld (Palo Alto V.terinary liocpital), 1431
·.averley (Gamble property) 1 2995 Middlefield (Area station),
and 3005-3009 IUddlefield lWiot<I I"odge).
A pre'gram is clE'arly needed to addrE"s~ sMall parceolF ..... ithout
providing a vague ~ublic benE'fit option for roitlgation~
If the staff version is adopt~d, the only parcels larger
than five" acres to ..... hich it 'Would apply are tbosE' ,",'here tr .. e
City Coullcil has re-c€'ntly applie-d hc;ufing d€'sit:n2tion.s. ThEse
in~lude 3200 Park Blvd. (~aximart) --12.5 acr~s; 2650. 2700.
and 2180 EI Gam!no Real (Y.ayfi.ld School .t all --5.9 acres;
105-0 .A.rastradero --5.9 acres. ana the rf'ctangJe pare_E'l at ~u:trry
and Arboretum. Roads --5 .. 7 acrE's.. Allowing a p1..lblic benefit
.eICE'J.!tiot'l -wo-yld ll.egate recent City Council actions .. The-prvposed
.staff langua6E' could also "'be applied to Sta1:i.ford · .. est (46 acre-s)
that the owner vants to develop for hoUSing, and the Elks Cl~~
(8.2 acres) t:lat can retain its currE'nt USE' for€'vE'r.
F'age 33 .. fh'st flJll paragraprl: In-lieu p8;y~f"nt of 5',~ ..
On£' way to motivate developers to provide :housing is to
ma Ill? the in-Ii eu pa.iment more tha::J. rather th5n equal to} t.be
c-ost of providing actual u!lit~. AlsQ, ~in<:E' tr,e adj"ustmE'nt
of the in-lie~ payment lags ttl? market, it mi£ht GE' -wis~ to
£.et it higher.. Finally. y01J might 'Want to cOLsideT setting
tt..:.€' PY..R/in-lieu :r-eq1Jirf"ment oas.E"d oc the maximum U!lits alloVJ'a1;,le
for thE' actually D1..lilt s~uare fo,otage. That "Way. yo'Y cae gE't
tbe r:arr.8' W.R Q.oa1ri butloJi even thoueh the market ]r,oti vatEs tl",('
dE:'\i€,lo.p('r to provide tfWE'r, 'b1..lt largE'r, :M.arkE't rat,;: ti!lit~.
fa 5 E' 34. second paragraph under Prceram 14: I.e3VE' in thE' lanc'.l2gE'
prupo"ed to re deleted.
This deletion as~ume~ adoption of staff reco~~Ddatio~~
f",;I' pi; zone regulations amE'ndPlent~. The City GOt:!icll mu~t ad.:.'pt
tbi::: housjng elE'ment on Jtl.n~ 25. 1990. or two d"l.Ys before the
Planning CommiEsiOD considers the PC ame~dment~ ..
Pi~c~-~ealing for proposed development at st. '~rk's
I bel ie VE' a r.umber of changes • ....-b.e-n taken toge t'hE'r. fi?.:=i 1 i t<=tt€
a ~roposed m~rkE't-rate ~enior clevE'lopme-nt on l~~d currently ~oned
?'-T .:3.0d o ..... ·:!1€d 11]" st. l'~ark's :Episcopal Cburcb. TheEe ir:lclt.d~E" the
j-Jreliious commEnt on .PC rf'gulatiorls. the follo\lilng corr..me[Jts on
{Jages 34 and 36. ar;d thE" comment beloW' abollt parking lots {page-45).
Iagt ~,lj., Frogra.rn 15 and firE't paraeraph ur.der that progr.A:-rJ ..
ThE' Ilew langua£€' -institutiDnal" jn Frogrcull 15 and the r,,p ....
1 ;;)n~1.~abe j D the Pilragraph f<":lei litatE' de velopment at highf'r de-l's i tie:
•
'.
,
-\ ,
-" "
I
j
-
•
{)
E.f'rb .Horllck
?la~nin€ ~~~ission
l'ay 23. 1990
Housine !.lpme>ct
0'1 cburcl'1 property currectly ZODec R-1. The problem o-ec:urs I
1 beliE'~E'. becau~E' the paraeraph refers to "rr~~oni~g~ ~it~~ •
.... hee the ue .... -ward -institutionsi!!' inchHiE"s ~itE's that are alreadl
zoned r~sidpntial. If thE' paragraph is left as it i~. I are
co~c~r~~d that the u::=€ of thE' ~ord ·rezoni~g" would facilitatE'
changing currE'nt FI-l sitE'S to multi-fa .. "'lily. Scr.ool sitE'S are
zoned ,Pi-' and .IIlUf't be rE'zol:led for :hcuslng. Major Instltu1;icn/
Special Facilitif's. such as the Veterans Hospital and tl.e fOrmE'I'
Children's Hospital si'tP,. are also zor.ed P? and mu::=t be I€zQf.iE'd
for hDusing. Churches don't need to oe rezoned. 1he iol1o-winf
ch;;trlgE"s to Frogram 15 and to the E'rJd of the-fin::t paragraph
highlight these diff@rE'ocE's.
•
-.Program. 15: Stud] surplus scho,al sites and institutiaLal
sites, in-clcding ch~rches in si!lt)le-faiiiI'I'i""""oE'i,-:-;hborbo,o-ds. to ......
.... • each of tbe sites shu--1.11d be evaluated t'E'fore rE'zo!li!Jg
Doc-residE'ntiallr zoci'd sites to rE"sid€'ntial. or redeTi'lgpipg .church
sit~s already zoned residE'ntial, to determine if •••••
1f you .... z.nt to ExcludE' churches from this program, then
I suggest yotl use Co~prehensive Plan land desiE7Jatio[j~ instead
of geD{;ric terms. 'E'or exaJ'llple School District IJands instead
of ·-school sites~ al:l<! Major Institution/Special FAciliti~s i!lt=tead
of -..nst i tT,;ltiorls~
Fa~e 3~J First paragraph under Policy 7A, fourth line.
Delete the !'ollo'Wing -w()ros: "sele-ctine;: ~it~~ near lJ.{;lt;h}'orhood
c-o:nm('Tl~ial areas as we-ll as ....
Tbi s lancuage fac i Ii tatf's dE'veloprr::ent of i !lcrFa~E:'d rr=a~ s.
bulk, and densitYJ ar.d a loss -of open spacE:' in si£1';iifica~t arEas
of s:)uth Palo Alto. Ghurch propE'rty "near liE'ier.borbooci cOrT".ITleJ'ci?-l
-areas·,. in addition to St. Mark's at 600 Colorado, includes 505
F~. '::'harlE'ston, 3045 and 3233 ('..(Jwper. 3455 RosE' J and 2490. 2<;leo.
3313. 3391. 3>05. 3549. 3585. and 3865 Klddlefleld. plus 670
and 10 1 ]i~. r;E'adow.
l'erhaps a ne .... program is needed under this policy to specifically
Ftudy the effpcts of dev~loping such a large acreage of £-1
propeI'ty in oce part of thE:' city, prior to proc€'s~i~g any ne~
applications for zone chan~Es on the6e properties. Leaving in
t'-,t' l!":lr'lg'UagE' 1 propOSE to dele-te l'lakes a dpterl'linatiorl beforE'
a st!.oc.,;.
'fag!? 3-S, Program 18a .... cond lLc€': ·other .senior agenCies •
The langu~ge is vague and tee follo~jng teAt describes good
works. but l€'av~s op€'c the possibility that the program facilitates
market-rate, fer-profit developmE'nts undet the guise of
tbl!' tE'rm. -loeal Il-onprofit gro11ps" in the first line of the first
paragraph. Could the'sE' be ch1.lrches, such as Et. Yar1c\?
.
,
I
-1-'J
i --
.. '
H~rb Porock
Planning Commission
May 2}. 1990
HOlJsicg Element
FasE' 4
o
Here is what Consu~er Reports ~aid a~out such groups:
•
·Some arE' IlOt as nonprofit as they fiI'st ap'pear. Their
oWllel'S may be a Il.ooproiit grofJp, their managf"l'I1E'llt a profit-making
company. Vhether the financial decisions are r~ally made by
the ll.(lIlprofi t orgardzation's board at aI'mts l~r.gth from the
IlsnagE'mE'llt firm is nbt always clear." (COnsumer Heports, }'ebruary
1990. page 128)
t:ore thought nEeds to be given to a'ppropriatE' languagE'
for tb.i s grow-ing segm-E'llt of thE' housing markE't.
f'agf' 45 • .Program 2'6. A Dew paragraph is needf-d to qualify the
JanguaGf' ed,dE'd in the paragrapb followil1g thi S ,proErarn. The
City COQccil following the city~ide study placed prohibition~
on rt'sidE'rJtial use In th.e Xidto'#.'D and CharleostorJ DE'ighborhood
co~ercial zo,nes. ThE' follo1l.ring f:uggE'ste-d 12ngua~e Is from
th~ Final Report of SE'ptE'mber 7~ 1988. pages 39~ 42, 54 -56.
·Following thE' ci~de stud~ thE' City Council probiblt~d
housing in the ¥.idto;.r'rI Shopping District and tr.E' Charlf"ston
C€nter. Eousing ~aS prohibitpd in th.e Charleston GentE'r bE'cau~E'
the re 6t11 ting scalE' CQuld rai~e-concerns about the compatibility
of 3~ch a project ~th the surrounding single-family residE'ntial
arEa. "S,01ising -was prohibited in the JI1.idt • ...-n Shopping District
becau~e the ~dtown area of the city has already receiTed a
largE' share 01 new ~ultl-!tml1y housing .pr~jects; parkin~ require
ments and parcel lize limitations make practical application
()f any .hollsIng provIsion bighly unlikely; and the ellmination
~f the h0usiLg option may belp maintain and pre5erve the identity
and vitality of this neigr.:borno,o,e-serving bl.lsint:'ss centE'r .. '"
Page 4)" ,Faragraph undE'r Program 27 ..
I .... aula reEtor€' the oE'leted sentence ":rhe City -will pval"Uat€
Hils project to c~termine hoW' succeEsf"ul the air rightEt concept
is i~ appllca\ioc .. w and use it instead of thE' new last sentence
.. "
~Th€' Citl is ~illing to consider other sites for such development~~·
becau"'.E' I believe the City Coull,ell policy is to evaluate air
rit:;hte O'V€'r ass.?sSP\E'Ii;t district Jlarcels it~e1f, and I don't recall
ttl€' City Council evaluating thE." Arbftare devE'lopment, although
rr.y mli>'1't(lTy ma:! be faulty on thiS. I h",vE' !J.O objE'ction to such
devt'loprnent ~yer private lots in non-resIdential zones (in fact,
1 ene,::p..lragf" them in the S1:anford R€'sE'arch :Park), but I am concE'nH?,1
Uat ti"..:.f.'re ale largE' parking lots in chure-h prOpErty in Fe-I Z~IlE"S ..
'i'txrefort', 1 '\lIouid add ne"W'"lan6""Uaet' to thE' fjTst Ji.l'l€' of this
paralraph, as follo~s:
·Somf' ass€,~f::1'J.t·nt district and private off-streE't palldr:;g
lot.s in tlO:l-l'?sil~€r.tial ZO[)E'B can bE' put to .....
c.o.nceptually. the d1ffpr€'ncP is bEt'wttlE"en p'1l"king lots thi'lt
} .
,
\
\ ,
-, •
o
HE' .r b Bo ro,c k
Fla~ci~g Commission
1'lOY 23. \990
Ho'Usl1'1g EIE'ment
}la.g'? ~
pro.,ide rf''ll.1irE'd off-street pcHking for r~"f;idE'ntial U~f'~ VE"rSIlS
~ither parcels devoted solely t~ prowidp parkln~ for employmPf,t
t:E' c€ cat i nf, us-€s or pal"king ]ot~ tt~at provide re'll.dred ofl-st r€'f't
'parkin l: for corn.mf'rcial and lrJdustrial UFE'S.. ] 'believe it is
a good idea to E'ocouraee housinG woE's in tCE" ];::,ttE'r area·s. (Iut
I al~o belleTE' it is important to make the di~tjLction thAt in
those areas already zoned residential tb~ ho~~in£ can already
OE' provldE'd subject to the regulations for thE' zor,E'.
I'age SO, Tanle AJ li[lE's 2 .. iO .. and 11.
•
The Stanford ~est site (46 acres) and the Children's Hospital
site-(26 acrE's) ere both proposed for housioE. t,ut there it="
no table that could b€ uspd for the poteotial hOUSIng on tr.e
hos,pital site that is zoned PF.
The Y..ayfield site is sho~'D as 5.9 acres in the cityw-ii!e
stlJ.dy. -which is madE' up of 2650 II Camino Real (4.045 acrt'fl) ..
2700 :£1 Camino Real. the undeveloped Iestaurart Bite (1.421
acre.s). ana .2780 II Camino Real .. the EF gas stntian (0.4(,6 acrE~).
(If 2650 is 4.176 acres .. ill~tea(! of 4.045. tMn the total fOT
the ccmbi~E'd parcel~ is 6.1 acres. jn~t~ad of S.q acrel.}
lhe l~rge ml~cE'11anE'ous catf'eory t wiJthE'r lo'ul ti-l'ami ly")
migbt contain s-Ome 'pB.Tcels larger than thOBE' in tLe table and
should be listed f':eparatE'ly. l"'or example, tr.E' tlack 'b()unoed
ny ~1 CamiD0 Real. Faee Y.ill Road. Ash Street, and Sberidan
Av.nue .. in-cllJdE's the county parkine; lot at :E1 C=amirJ.{) and Ash
(approXimately 0.75 acres), the Lir.u~ Pauling Ir.~titlltE' at -<40
Pagr:-1-1't1], and vacant lots on Sh~Tidan Avenue' ... ~o:ne of 'Wbich
hav~ th~ sam~ oWDprship as 440 Page ~il].
Ecv1ronmrDtal Impact Assessment
I believe the draft lar.guage for thE' al'liE'DdmE'nt~ to the l:oup>inc:
Ele-meet bavE' the folloW'icg additional effects 1bat Eho ... ld be
i.acluded in thE' en'fironmE'ntal as:sesf'm.£'rrt for ttJis proJect.
#8. Land Use. y.t;S. Folicy 7.!., as propoE'E"d in tV; (haft,
,,"'(;uld re-sult in a s~.1IstaDtial alteration of tt.€' prE'sE-r,t or pl;:;.r;oe-c
land "Use of r.-l ZQ!'I£'S current:y used 'by T€lieioll.f" institutionf'.
rrOer&ro. 15 also afff'cts this item of tt..e CI:.ccklist. 'beca'W!?"e
of tt..€' nello' languace.
r
, ... ~ ..
f~ ~-,
#12 .. 'J.'racsportatfon/C'irculation. i-tAY:P:6 for Each of tt.e (
four .subitem.s due to Policy 71-. ,:rnd Frograrrl 15. l'he Dew langu.?,fe
in il'ogra~ 27 also affects 12.b.
'J:hanK you for Y01Jr considerati.on of tbe~E' corr.Jfit.[,ts ..
3irlcF'rt'ly ..
i:~tZ:~
L
-.
-Y , •... --1
I
t
p
-
o
BARRON
PARK
ASSOOATION
o
PALO ALTO, CALIFORNI"t.!ay 21. 1990
Falo A\to 1·i'nn1ng ~':s:s1on
250 Hamt 'j ton-
Palo Alto. Ca. 9.~1
Dear CorT'lT'Ilss;o·ners:
The 8<:lard of Oirectors of tt1e Barro'n Park .... SSOc;fllt1on re ... 1e .... eo al1d
d15CYSsed th¢se sec-t1ons of the proposed re',liston to the Ho,uS1ng
E~ement of the Comprehensive Plan w~ich are of particular interest to
Barro'M Park. The BPA Board 'Voted unamiously to ask the PTann1rtg
Commission to take seven speclfic actions regardlng the Housing Element
of the PTan:
Prompt
-shou'd he a
condltiofiS.
enforcement
and ~lgor~us enforcement of all building and ZOOlng c~des
pr1or1ty. lact ¢f enforcement encourages bl1ght and unsafe
W~ as' that a polic, statement urg;n~ compliance .1th and
of bu1i~;n9 a~ z~n1n~ codes be added.
00-not red,uce the minimum lot S1ze requirements for cottages.
The SPA led the fight for larger rrnnimum Tot s1zes ... to p,rellent
ollercro~dln9 of lots 1n our area, and to assure that cottages .1]1 not
b-e undul)' intrus1ve to. adjacent homes. This polley should be ikept.
Oslete pol;ctes permitting second ~1tchens for tenants 1n s1ngle
fam11'i homes. This po11ic'1 en.co'urages overuse of hOmes. an.d mor-e
traffiC and partins overflow. Barron Park already has Tocal poclets of
congest10n and excess pariled cars near rental homes, especJallv ttl-ose
5hared by students.
Retain the requirement that PCs shall adnere to pre-e.lst1n9 Site
development standards. This 11111 p,rotect ne1ghb(lrhoods from une):pected
and e~ceSSlve bulk a~ development near e~1stln9 homes.
Oelete multlfamil~ zonlng densit~ WhTCh increase5 ~hen unlt prTees
Jeerease. Actual developed denSity, traffiC r and Tmpact on 5urrOW1-dlng
:·c..mes ..-0'u1d be uncerta1n r and could be far greater than present zonlMg
alTc..-s. The ell~t;ng 15\. bonus for added SMR ur" ts shou1d be ar'l
="~2'quate incent;''rIe.
L
•
~-.
--'.' ,,-,.,-
,"
!
j
•
-
, ,
o o
Delete pro-posals to locate senior h<lusin.g 11"'. eN l()nes. !arrO·n
Park helped tG des1gn that zone for low intensity retail serw1ng the
comnuntty. E1 Camfno Real is n-ot a desirable lcx:at1::>n for such
housing, which could displace neede~ local bustnesses~ This POl1CY
se~ms 1nte~ed to gt~e e~ post facto justlficatfon for the senior
housfng at .4075 El Cam1n.o Way. In fact, the main reason 1t was bul1t
there is that the Isnd wa, available relat1~e'y cheap. Sen10r housing
should be Tocated 6Qwntown. and near medical facilities su~h as
Stanford ~$P1t.l. not tn eN zones.
Support efforts to reta1r, $uena V1sta TraBer cOurt 1n the present
use, and encourage that f'"etent10·n by lII:eep1ng poSSible density low, or
reducfng " even further. A,n FlM-10 zone for" the trailer par' 'IIo'ullj
return to t~e or"fg1nal zon1n9~ ad would decrease deyelepment potentja'.
We want to retain ol(er 100 untts of affordSible l'lo-using in the (;.ou'r"t.
rours ~e~~ truly
Barron. Par'k "'$soe~at10,n B-oard
(0.t-~:~J-,_".(f).j
I /' , ,
.. / /
~ ..
•
,
\
~
Innovati~e Housing
A Nonprofit Corporation
!'{d1 2!, 1990
Hall. ':b.aodler-... Chair
Palo Alto P!anni~~ Commission
250 Hamilton Awenue
?alo Alto, CA 94301
:; ,r / t
~~a( Ml~ Chandler aL~ ?lanni~g Commission Mem~e~~,
.:' , (
""'...'
I wou:C: like to recoC'jffiend the following te.1tua~ .I!.ocifiC'ations of
tht;:: d!Clft of Hpusing Ejement of tl?e COITIDIehepsJ.ve 50u:dng l=llan
which omitted mention of Inn.ovative Housing vbi ch has received
funding from Palo Alto CDBG since FY 1987}e8. 1he following
recommended lan9uage both includes Innovative HDu.sing ao·d also
names the SeDior C-oordinatin'9 Council in keeping \lith tbe state's
recommendation that specific nonprofits providing housing be
named ao,l in keeping loiith the rest of the document.
:MJ' recommended cbac.ges are (Changes ar:e underli::.<>';:J:
pp. 23-29-Folicl 5: Increase affordable hOiJsing sup-p1! tb:-ougb.
l'etter-:l.::H: of ezistinq bousiug.
1st parag[aph~ :ord sentence change to: The sepior C09tdinatipg
Coupcil Sbared Housitl; Prograre which I!latch~ bam.,. t,[ollids-LS ~iU,
come sp.e~ers and Ippgyative Housing·s Shared Hou$ing P(ograp
which ... s'rablishes sha.red households in lea.s~d r.?'uses are
~utreu~ly offered in Palo Alto.
?togta!'",7 CO!:l.tioue SUPPOLt for Shared Fousir:.g: ?r:C'l:'2IT1$.
:nd S'2::'V;L.CE' change to: The Se::.:;.)::,!" CODrgirlat1n4 ,:c:JJ.ci!. Sha.re-::
tLr::.t~.s';n(j p;ogram a.rra.:1qes a:p'pro.!:imately .sO SIJCCE:Sd?fr~! rfla';.cbes eacr ..
Jear r vith (7 matches made in 1999. Innoyative Hcusing·s sharej
housing p.roo{j'm in T983 provided housing for 55 f'a"!o Altans.
p. 37 PolLey 12 Support local and regional hous~n~-assista~c~
ag~nC1~3 in addressing the tl~eds for emergency $b~:ter and
transitional housing.
AdmWstralivo Offi«-. 325 Doherty Drive, Larkspur, CA 94939 {41Sl92C-6400
SaIl Francisco Office: 1328 C McA11ist:er Street. San Francisco. CA 94115 (41S) 346.(1267
Pminsu ~ ()ffi(e; {57lGngsTey A venue, Palo Aho, CA 94.301 (415) .327·5J.'7'}
Sonoma Offire 2353 Coddingiowu Center, San" RDsa, CA 954{)1 \707) 577-SOJ()
3..,.. ". L
•
1
1
j
\ .
,
o Q
.Add a pdragrCiph after paraqrarh 4~ Inno'o1a.tiy@ Hqusing it Bay
Are;! rynprgfit yUh its P~mins\,;]i' office in P .. "Q Alto ope-rates a
st""WiUt B. McKinney Transitional Housin.g pe-moilstl ation Program
~9!-H.oll~eless "iogle parent families in a ,ilJ.gj¢ tamil! hou.::;e itl
Mountain .,i@w far wbicb Palo Alt.o CpBG provided a. 515:,g.09 c=:.pital
grant to enlarge the hogse. FQu~ familie5 at a ti~'e receiy~
sgb"idi;ed h.gusing (miu;imu.'ll rent of 3Q\ of inCome) toge;th~r .. ith
~stensive suppqrti!e 5e[vic~s. Residents can rt~a~~ ip tb~
proorarn up to 24 mRPths doring which time they ."'ornelete
ed'lC'ationaJ and job trainipg geals ...
p~ 33 ;,dd: Program lac Continue tg .s'.IR?ort shal-e,i :lou.sinq
?@tviC'e.;; for homel€ss famil ies ii1pd individuals.
TnnoW'ative Hg.tising's Sbared Bqpsi~q Proat-am supported by Palo
Alto CDEG f$5,Q~O) iQ 1989 w~s able to place 3 homeles$ families
from Palo Alto directlY into long-term shared b . ..,psin a Fogr more
Palp Alto families at immediate risk of hQmeless~ess found lons-
telm h-ousin a thrgygb Innovative Hoosing, .
Thank yoo relJ mueh fo~ your consideration of tb~se
Leccmme~daticns.
Sincerell'.-
Judi th Steioet"
Peninsula Directc[
•
j •
.,
. . " ~ ___ ,~_~~~~~",~"_ ...... "";;:"J!.c::>--'C'_",>_--2:'~~_~.,"<.:,-",",~ __ ,,,--_______ ,,--1
o
tla), 1 '" ~ 1990
Palo A1to PlanolM9 C~~iss'on
250 Ham11ton A~e.
Palo "'.lto. 'Ca. 94301
DoO'ar-Co.'mllsstonet's.
o
The Palo Alto HOusing Corporat'o~ and city staff prepared a
p·royosed draft f"eV1S1C,n which .... as dlscussed May 9 and .'111 be
.:lls-cussed and acted upon May 30. PAHC 1S a fine -orgar,lzatlo·n whlCM
pro .... 'CI-es slgnlflcant benefIts to the cor;munlty. Neverthe'less. it has
3 partlcular vlewpofMt. and 60es ~t repre5ent many of the lnte.ests
ar~ ccn<ern$ of homeo~neis and resldents. Thus 1t is lmportant that
ather v1ews be represented. The fol1owlnq are some SU93ested
m~lf'catlo~s to the present draft hQus;n~ element. Added words are
In (I. deleted ~ords in <>_
Under P,,;etghoorhoods. bottom Qf p. 22. ct"HIn.ge to read ___ Pa1c:
"Han'S want to maintain the [low dens1t,. iirld h,uman scale) of
~e~;dentlal character ••.
At the top of P. 23, after the new statement about demolitlon
an("~ reDl~cenmt of sin91e fami1), hOmes wi th larger homes,. add Jfurther
red·u<:"tl0nS Tn al!oltlable tI.ome size may be necessary to reduce
lncentnres to-r--=p1ace smaller. more affordable homes ""lth large.
€~pen.lwe homes affordable only by those ~lth ~ or 5 tTmes average
(:)ur,tlo'lnC(lme.}
Pro.g:rarn 3. p. 24 relatln.g to cottages, chan-ge the last llne of
tt"je new tElIt to delete <and to reduce the minimum lot Slze
reo.uTrel'Be~ts 1n som~ cases>+ The Barron Pari( '\'5S0<:13t10n has tak.en
'"t,Gn9 stands in the past 1n fallor of Tncreased mlnlmUm lot sizes for
·cottsg>2s. to ~rolo'lde more open 'Space. red\.Ke overCI'Ollldtng o,n Tots,
"''''-.! a~sur<: tr-,at on1y larger lots ... i11 be develo-ped for c·:>ttages.
,"> 1S li'ltal to p·rever1t overdevelopment and e .. cessive traffiC,
;.rl-lf'"l'4, r'01s~. and intruSo10n from lnapprop.riate cott.51ges.
en P. 25. regardIng code enforcement. lust befa' PoliC~ 4, add
!rl-ompt an:; ~lgorous errforcement of all b-uildin.g and .<:cnlng codes
,hould te a pr1orlty.J Enforce~ent 15 by compla1nt only. and
s(.,met1mes r"ot e'w'en then. It lS "ital that codes an<:l ZOr"llng be
enforced to orevent 11Tegal constructlon and uses, and b119ht"
c~ p+
recognIzed
~lac:e+++·
27, ne .. t to last par&graph should read *It should be
t;'at [1'] ~a$~ Palo Alto is made an even more des1rable
£ontlnuat1on ~f present trends ..,..111 make Palo .1to more ------.-... , .. _--. "" -, -, ....... -'-.---
,
.~.
I.
•
o o
At th.e tOP of p~ 2"9, Polley 5, delete the last sentence <Th,S
nll~ht In.cl!,)d~ chan.gtng the rules tll~i:ting second I!;,tchet'"I'S, thereby
alloWln.g some large homes to be cx-cupied by more than one fafTIilY4>
Wlde aP011catie>n of $UoCh iii pol1cy can d.::luble the number of resldent-s.
traffiC. Qr'ld pa r kt:19 reqUlrements with.o,ut formally re'oliS1n.g the
:;:~nin9. It CQ·uld create a de-facto d,uplel: use .rr 'Slngle family
:-ones.
N:e ... Pro·gra."!'I 7a, P. 2'9, delete < ••• and smaller Tot Slzes .. her!!
3p{l'O;Jl"late."> In the Program statement and un-de. PrC;lram
1 Responsabl11ti. Aeescns are given a~ve.
Top of P. 30 regardln.g condo co,nversic;,ns, statement 15 wrong.
Th-ere ha'lle been at -least 3 SU<;:n co-nverS1'OrlS sin-ce 1981. [n Program 9
change -..• may b~ granted if any <one> [two] of the 'ono .. ing ••• ••
Ma~e It l1eCESSar, for 2 of the 3 specific conditions to be met before
deve10pments are allowed .... h1C'h result 1n a net loss of affordab'Te
rental U-n1tS.
Prc~r~~ 10, P. 31. ~elete redundant phrase regardins 10 .... and mode,at~
1 :..com€:" •
Pr0g~am '2. bOtt~m of p. 31, appl~lng a 6' fee to d~ve1cpment as
"'Il'lilll as 3 u'nlts may drlve up the cost of the u-n1ts srgtlif1cantly arlO
.edl.J.Ce affordabi:l1ty. fhe amoLH1t of money collected would be small.
l'So It ~orth about $15-0.000/year In houSlfl9 payments to-In-crease
t-")I.)'Solng prlces for" small new developments?
PrO'-:'ra,1'c ,C. p. 34 .. 2r'K1 (laragrapl1, reta1n [The s1te de .... elopment
'Ootand' .. rds of tMe p"latlned CC>frYnI.Jnit, distr1ct shil:ll adherE to these of
~Iv>; .:or"'''-''9 <:t;:..p11e'd j;H"10r to' the establ1shmer'lt of the planned
':'"rnu,r.lty,jl'50trlc.t.J lItost multlple faml1y. comme,c,al an<1 industrHlli
;COrles abu t s i J"lgle fam11 y homes" It is 1mpor tan t to retal n
o::rctections of the sirrgle f.amil'1 zones from e)(cessive bull( and S1ze
that ~ere present before a PC 15 a~royed" Other~lse large~
1 nco:nl:",aot 1 bl e jJro1ects co·uld be b-iJ11 t ,-, ght ne.t to homes .... hich
r-.revio'.Jsly "ere p.-otected from overbeartng neighbors.
F-r·::.(]r",m 11, P. 35 ~h-o·uld be deleted entlrely. <Consider new
,.i~l~-t~~'ly zO~Tng 1n ~h1Ch the number of un1ts al10~able lS a
l~tlj~ of theIr affor03bllity. Zoning for affordabTTlty is a oe~
.ceJ:-t that ;"o-uld establish flelible zo·nirlg denslt; for speclfTc
'ps, alTQ.lng a greater number of total houSlng units. dependTn9
·:)n 1!lt-r,uro" .. €'r of lower cost units 'Provided by tf"le de .. e~o·p.er.> ThlS
"";r'S !"'"..:J .:.erea can depend upon adJacent ,zonlng meani(1? what 1t appear's
.~ rl"":.rl, Tt"!€:-c already 1S a. 15\. denSity be·nus for e)ltrCl BMR u·nlts.
T~js pr0gr~m ~dds the uncert~'nty of no fl~ed cap on dens1ty to the
11.::::ZY def.Trn tion of affordab1 1 1t)". Is 1t reall)! a I:>er,e-fl t to have 3G
'.Hllts :If 71J.O sQ" ft. on a site rather-than 15 fam11Y-Sl;ced unlts of
~4')!) !',.Q" ft.~
....... • ... 'KIi!I!III!".S2l, .. , L'r""-_--~'· ,"--". -.----,
-' .... ,
.i
• \ ,
L \ -
\
"
,
.. :. ....
-
•
o o
Ne'of PollCf lA sh<luTo not propos~ senlar houslrlSJ ",,~;;!;r
rle~(::Ihl'XlrhOood r.onmerCla' area'S. 1't"Ie best place f<.ol'" sen,or oou'S1n9 1S
dOljJntown. neal" the SenlOI" Center. sho-pp1ng. and good trat1sportatio·n.
(ir near med,c:al faCllit1es such as Stanford Hospital or tt1e Palo Alto
Medical Cl1nlc. Oelete ••. housin~ needs of senl0rs mly requ1re
selectHtg sltes-<near -ne1gtlbort-.oOO cOf1'I';'\ercial are-a'!> is'S 'ilf>ll iloS>.~.
Rt"'plllce '~nth ••• sltes !dcvmtoW'n. near eillst1flg 'Senior '5oer .... ,ceS slXh
~S the Senior Center, and health care facil1ties wh'ch provide]
'"Jr'PDrtu~'-lt~e,S for ••• At ttle e~o of this section de1ete ._.seniors
""'of ai' lrrc;..ome leOlels)or add ___ ne-eds of 110\lil to moderate If'tcome1
sen~ors. There is ~ need to give prefere~e to higher ,~come
people. The IJealth'( ha .... e a Wei)' of oro'o'1dln.g for them:;e~ Io'es.
N.o:<'!i Pr09,rarn 183 .. p~ 36 .. delete ~ .. moder-ate iir'1d <m1ddle.,. Tn-come
n'..")USHl9.~_ In Pa.lo Alto-miGdie in·corne is. o ..... ~r $5' ,OOQ.l)ear-in-come
for a famTly of 2. We shOuld reser'w'e our 'he'lp for poe,rer people.
~t th~ bottom of the next to 1a~t paragrapn of F~ ~6. Paio Aito
00.:;0'5 n<:lt -fun,j'S a sen10r (H.Jtrlt10n pro-gram-. In 1ge9-90 Palo Alto
co,ntrrO-r,.J.ted $4800 to La Comlda, ... 'hich 1$ less than 3\ of the total
OI...KlgE-L and less than 112 the money scent to begln a study on
t.l.nldlng a stadium 11'\ Santa Clara for-the San f"rancts.cc G,ants.
Re' .. ls~ tt1is to read ~ •• and !pro\(id.es a 10111 level of fundin-g for} a
s~nlor nutr-ltlon p~ogram.
ro;e..v Pr.u,snam 180-... 2nd ellpl'anatory parag'raph falsly says th!it one
0f 't'he impe-d.ments to ellpanding the supply of emergenc'W' and
tranS'Itl0n t,0lJ.S1ng 1S ne'tghoot'hoo-d res1stan.ce. The C1ty has no me,net
for st.;.(n e)Op<:lr\$'c,n, nas not p-roposea any '!iu<:h sltes, aT"-u thus "as not
yet ha,j ':in'! 1es1stafl.ce. Deiete •. ~S~.Jitable structures <and
nelghborn-o,)d resIstance> aie the greatest obstacTes._ ~
Nell-Pros;ram 22a. P. 43. under responsabi11t:;~ a,jd [Malntaln tne
ro~est ~~$Sl~~e den$lt~. or con91der a special lo~er denslty
UI .• ltlfannT)/ zane to redu,ce the incet'ltlve to redEve10p thlS slte.!
Ih1S .. ddf:,d 1""n-g-uage rna)' help to. p-reser .. e tlie affordab1e rl-Q,uslng at
the BuEna ~l$ta Trajier Court.
Pale ~lto s~ou'd act1 .. ely encourage use of rene~able energy such
S(,J~". O~I P. 48, reta,. ... [Evening and weekend worilsr-·ops for
; '2SH:!.ents to learn Clb<ll..Jt so1ar. tour el(1stlng solar a,':-,o11catio,ns. ana
·~"-,,,t ... ltr-. so~ar contractor-s.] 0r1. p. 49, 2nd sentence retaln
,[ 1"'CtC1C \.,t111t'1 01sccunt of 10'\ to reSl0ents 'filth q. .... al'f'!ing so1ar
-i;.terns.} A.,jrj ICrge aooptlon of Federa1 and State lr..cet',t'''''E-S and ta.
JI';'dltS for ;!"Istal1atlon of soiar and other rerie"",able er:ert so,urces_ J
L
•
~:
o
I t1avE' Hlclude(j marked up pages. of teJ(t to sho'l 'IIIhere thE!
lnsert10ns ar"d deletlo,ns wo,uld appear. I al'5o de1eted spec1fic
refe("E:nces tCi pr1'Wate O't9anlzations su<:h as the Pa10 Alto Ho\Jsln.g
C·:.rporatlor. because I do n-ot belte\le prl'tate orga~'zatlons shO·U<f be
specifled in a publ1C document su-ch as the Ccmprehenslve Plan. If
f~ture City polley sncvld chan~e and the City establishes a~ther
s'x.h agency. or for some reason replaces support for a named agenoCy
\lilHl an-oth..er .. I=>ossibl)l one mandated by State or Federa'! regu1atio-r·s~
t her" t~ec CQfilprel"',ens1-..e Pl an lIIoul d have to be amended.
Adoptlo.l"l of these re'll'sio,ns will pro\lide a strengt!";en.ed Ho,using
Element 'll't.Tch provides means and if'centives for elilpandlng o'ur stocll:
of affordable h~usin9 for the ~~. seniors. and the Dresentl~
homeless while stllt p,ro)llding protectlons to our Momes and e.llstTn9
riei9hOOrrtoods.
, "
Yours slncerel.,.
(rl1--~~
800 Moss
4010 CXme
Pa10 Alto. C~~ 94306
-; -
i
I
': I
I