Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
0227.091
'. ~ ....... ' ~ April II, U91 HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL Palo Alto, California Attention: Finance ind Public Works C~ittee PLANNING rOlfolISSION RECO!t!fNQATlONS ON THE TOWER WHl SIT~ Members of the Counci1: R~port in Brief This report presents t~e Planning Commission's recommendations for a City process to consider proposa1s for reuse and/or disposal of the Tower well stte located at the southeast corner of Alma and Hawthorne streets. Background r. 1988, Council approved. Utilities Department recommend.tion to abandon and dispose of four of the City's ten well sites, including tne Tower well site. On J~ne 11, 1990, the (;ty Council considered the recommendations of the S1ngle~Ro~ Occupancy Ca.mittee which was created to address the issues related to the proservation of the City's single-room occupancy (SRO) hotels. One of the Initla1 recommendations of the SRO COMmittee was to commit the Tower well site for a new SRO development. At this ~eting I number of neighborhood residents raised concerns a~ut potential neighborhood impacts from an SRO at this site. The City Council voted 9-0 to approve the SRO Committee recommendatlons to 1J recognize SROs is an important element of the City'. low-Income housing stock in the HDuslog Element, and 2) to assist SRO Motel owners in obtaining loans and in upgrading and fxpanding existing SRO facilities. The Council did no! t.ke .ny lciion on the third SRO Committee recommendation, to use the Tower well 5it~ IQr an SRO, and forwarded this SRO Committee rec~ndatiQn back to the Planning Commission for their r~~iew a~d recommer.datiDns. The SRO subcommittee ~t twice, on August 20 and again on September 24, 1990 to reconsider their recomaendatioD regarding "se of the Tuwer Well site~ I~ response to neighborhood concerr.s and the increased i~terest in toe site by a number of parties, the SRO COimittee imended t~eir original recommendation for use of the s1te. The SRO Committee's n~w recommendation was for the Council to consider the Tower Well sIte for an SRO but make 00 comoitment for at least I year~ 00:227:91 • -.. • \ ./ . \ o Prior to thh time~ ttle Council had also rt(e.rred disposition of the Towel" Well .it. to the Coune1!', Finance .nd Public Works (FIPW) Committee. On October 30, 1990, the F&PW (oomitte' deferred t,klng act for. on the ,taff rocoomendation that. request for proposal. (RFP) be issued for the To.er w.ll sfte. bntil ifter publ1c hearings were conducted and 1 recommer.jati~n was received froc the Planning Comliss;~n on the SRO Subcommittee's report. More detailed backgrcund 1nf~raatfon on past ittions re1.ted to the Tower W~11 site Is provided i~ t~~ attac~td Plinr.~ng Commission and subc~jttee reports. On NDVe=OeT 14, 1990; the Planning Commiss1~n considered the recommendations of the SR~ CnRmittee. The Planning Comrnlssion a1so considered a separate staff rec~ndatlo" to ibftilte aT. RFP process for pr~posals for use of the Tower .ell site. Use of an RFP process WiS recommended by staff to establish a structured process and fr~wort for conSideration ind evalu~tion of different proposals. The SRO C.oarnittee did rIot favor ir.Ise of an RFP proc.ess. The Planning Co.mission believed the issue needed further study a~d created tnefr own Tower Well S~te SubcORIittee to revie. the issu!s and make a recommendation to the Planning Comm~ssion. The Tower Well Site Subcommittee met twice, on January l4 ind Fe~ruary 5. 1991. and concluded that use of an RFP process was appropriate as lo~g as tne proposals were ccnteptuai and werE prepared l~ complfa~ce .1th specific identified critertl. The Subcommftte! developed the concept of • Request for Conceptual Propos.l. (RFCP) and the specific items to be addressed. The conclusions of the Subcommittee were presented to the Planning Commission on February 27, )99J, -mfch unant~u51J endorsed them, ~th linor revisions in text a"d item order of the RFCP requirements. These changes ire reflected in the recommenditions listed below. RECOItM£NOATlON The Planning Coemi.sion recOIm<,ds th. City Council direct staff to proceed with I nine-month Request for Conceptual Prcposals (RFCP) for reuse or dispOSition of the Tower Well Site ~ncluding tne guidel1nes, criteria and specific content ftems listed bel~. and to ret~rn to the C;ty Council for Council approval of the final RFCP before it is se"t out. 1. While the RfP process is not always tne ~anner in which tn! City has dispos!d of properties in the past, it ;s an i~ceptible way of obtaining conceptual proposals fro~ a variety of sources to be e~aluated b~ the City in this case. It is advisable to ensure t~at the propostls remain co"ceptual iB nat~~ei tnerefore, the process sho~ld be called -request for conceptu,l proposals' (RFCP) i. th1. Case. It is understood that any future project which .ight be selected during the RFCP process would SubsEQ~ently be required to obtJiR all n~cessary zone change and development approvals through the regular planning permit process. t. A longer-t.,"-normal, ol"e-eonth time lfne should be established for CMR:227:91 ~:\cmr\to.er 4/11/91 P'go 2 • " . . "".- respondtng to the RFCP, in order not to put oonproftt entities It a d1sadya~tage to ether developers. 3. Once conceptual proposals have been received and the RfCP time-period ;s closed, the review process (or considering and recommending to City Council on t~e various proposals shuuld include review by the Plinning Commission and t~e Human Relations Commission~ as r~commending bodiES to finance and Public ~orks a"d tne City Council. 4. Tne neiQhborhood will continue to be involved in the process through direct .gend •• ailing to Indi.iduals on the Tower ~.ll Sit. mailing ll.t and through normal public noticing of t~e Planning Commission and H~man Relations Commission meetings. 5. The RFtP .houid encourage proposals to Include tne following characteristics: I. Providing for an identified publfc need t t.g., cnild care, SRO housing, i~d low-;nc~ faMily housingi b. Uses with low traffic and parking impacts on adjacent resldentl.l ne ighborboo.b; c. Use.nd deslQn compatibility with the adj,c~nt neighborhood; d. Consolidation wlt~ adj.cent prop~rtles I. order to gain the odv.ntages of I 1.rqer site and better planned project; and e. Compliance with the PC Zone district regulations. 6. The RFCP should discourage office .'es. 7. T"e Rf(~ s~oujd entertain and not r~le out: •. Abandonment or barricading of Hawthorne Street at tn. AT •• i71tersection; b. family projects such as single-parl!'nt transitional housing; and c. Reuse of t"e water tower. 8. Proposals submitted should be required to include the following specific iteas: i. Preli.inary site plans showing ingress and egress, parking. elevations, and fl~~r plans which lab~l proposed uses, b. A written description of: -How the" projed wi 11 satisfy. public benefit or need; ~R:227:91 p:\cmr\t"""r 4/11/91 Page 3 '. • < ,- / .-" -How t~e project .ill be c.~.tible with the adj.cent residential nelghborhood and the process fo~ involving the neighborhood In the development of the project pl.os; -The number and types .f residenti.l units, if any; The. plafl.fl!cf disposition of the propertY1 I.e .. purchase or lease and a general financing proposll for the project; proposed timing for project imp'~"tition; and c. An environ.entl' assessment work sheet; 9. Proposals should be ev,'uated US'"g the criterio listed in Policy and Procedure 1-11, modified as f." .. ,: a. Th. extent to which the proposed use s.tisf!e, • public need. b. Cons!stency of the proposed use with existing City qoal' and objectives (set forth i. the COMprehensive Pl.n, Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Cod.). c~ T~e fmpact of the P~QPosed use (compatible services and ~ses, traffic 1~ICtS, noise impacts, ener9Y conservJtfon, etc.) upon: The immediate n~ighborhoad; -The coaounlty gener.l1y; and The environment. d. The ~istorl and assess .. rot of the proposed group's abilit, to ~arr~ out the construction. if any, and operation af the facility and services is proposed. e. The .. netary conslderotioo to b< pro.i~.d to the City_ ReJAtf:J~ 5U~~' --.;;iI~. Dir.ctor Of~.nc. /~c-,-.-'4, . ~~~ .~~~~ ~7 ty ",_a~er P~l.ted CMRs: ~45:0, -CMR:267:8_ CMR:227:9} P:\C.T\towef KENNETH R_ SCHREIBER Director of Planning .nd CGnnunity Envircnment CMR:374:0, CMR:3S}:O, CMR:220:0, CMR:497:9, ; - t >:" --. 4/11/91 Pige 4 .\ , , AttacMtnh: Pllnnlnll t."",I"I.~ Sttff Report of hbruary 22, 1991 January 31 .. ~ to the Tower Well Site Subt..mitt •• Planning (0.01 •• ,00 .t~ff report of He.ember 9, 1990 Singl. RoO. Octup.n~! (.-mitte. Report of November 9, J~90 Cbapter 1-11 of the City of Palo Alto Poliey and Procedures !'\anuaJ Minut ••• f the tl.nnlng Commls,;on ~.tln9 of November l~, 1990 and Februa., 21, 1991 Ct: Pl.nnl~ CQMlI •• lon SIlO (.IlIIitt •• Tower Well Sit. Subt~ltt •• Milling tist bily Harrl,o. Bin Felli .. n Janet free land CMR:!27:91 p:\etor\tcwer CIll/91 Page S February 22, 1991 PlANNING CQHM[SSIOH Palo Alto, California Recgmmendations of the Tower Well Site Sybcqmmittee Members of the Commission: On November 14, 1990 Planning Commission considered the recommendatlons of the SIngle Room Occupancy Committee (SRO) and a recommend.tion from staff regarding ;nitiatio', of a ReQuest for Proposal (RFP) process for disposal and/or reuse of the Tower Well Site. Whil! the Commission endorsed the recOfIInendations of the SRO Conwittee, ttjey Wi!Te unable tt} approve staff' 5 recommendation to lBitfate an RFP w;tho~t further study. They formed a sutcommittee to address the concerns and take testimony from the interested publlc. Since their appOintment by the Pla~ning CommiSSion on Novemher 14. 1990. the Tower Well Site Subcommittee, composed ~f Commissfoners Be~cham, Christianson and C.l1en (substit"tlng for "arsh), has held two public meetings to develop recoanendations for a City process to consider p'I"op()sals for the reuse and/or dispos.l of the Tower Well Sito. The purpose of this staff report is to forward to tbe fuli Planning CommissiGn a su.mary of t~eir final recommendations. The Planning Commission should consider and adopt recommendations whjc~ will then b! forwarded to the Finance and Pub1ic Works tounittee (F and Pill. ",here the issue is urlct!-r consideration. from there~ the recommendations on the Tower Well Site and th! SRO Committee report will be agendized for City Council consideratfcn. In tneir ~eting of January 24, 1~91, the Subcommittee reached the following cQnd~sions: 1. c:\Tower .1 While the RfP process is not always the manner io which t~e City has disposed of properties i! the past, it is an acceptable way of obtaiAing conceptual proposals from a variety of so~rc~s to be evaluated by the City i~ tnis case. rt is advisable to !nstir~ that the proposals remain conceptual in nature, therefore~ the prDcess should be called -request for conceptual proposais (RFCP), in t~is Cise. [t is understood th.t an1 future project which olght be selected durlr.g the RFCP process would subsequently be required to obtain all necessary zane thange and development approvals tnrough the regular planning permit process. 2/11/91 Page 1 2. A longer-t~an no~al. nine ~onth. time line s~ould be established for responding to the RfC~t in order not to put nonprofit entities It a disadvantage to other de~elopers. 3. On~e conceptual proposals have been recefved and the RFCP time period is closed, the revie~ process for considering and recommend;~9 to City Counttl on tnf various proposals should fnclude revfew b~ the Planning Commission and the Human Relations Comm'sslon, as recommending bodies t~ F and PW and the Cit~ Council . C. The neighborhood will !ontlnue to be involved in tn~ process through direct .genda .ailing to individuals on the Tower Well Site mailing list and through normal public noticing of the Planning Commission and Human Relations Commission meetings. S. The RFCP should encourage proposals to include the following characteristics~ it. Providing for an identified public need, e.g., cillld care, SRO housing, etc.i b. Uses with 10111 traffic and par':.ing impacts on adjacent residential netghborhoods; c. Consolidation with adjacent properties in order to qain the l:dvarltage.s of i hrger site and better plarlned project; d. Use compatibi11t1 with the adjacent neighborhood; and e. Compliance with the PC Zone district regulations. 6. The RFCP should discourage office uses. 1. The RFCP should entert.in and not ruTe out: i. Abandonment Dr barrlcading of Hawthorne Street at the Alma 11'ltersectfon b. ramil, projects such is single· parent transitional housing c. Reuse of the water tower B. Propos!ls submitted should be reQ~ired to include the fo11owing specific items; c:\T"""r .1 a. Prel imifiary site pl ans showing ingress and egress and ~arking, elevations. and floor ~lans which label proposed wses; b. A written description of: 2121/91 Page 2 ." Ttle number .nd types of residentia1 units, if any; How the project will satlsfy • public benefit or need; What is the planned disp~sition of the property. i.e., purch2se or l&ase and a general finanting proposal for the projecti proposed timing for project ;mple~ntat;on; and How the proj.ct will be compatible ~lth the adjacent residenti.l neighborhood and the process for invol~ing the neighborhood in the development of the project plans; and c. An environmental asse~sment work~~eetj 9. Proposals should be evaluated using the criteria listed in Policy and Procedure ]-11, modified is follows: a. The extent to w~ich the proposed use satisfies a public need. b. Consfstency of the proposed .se with existing Cit] goals .nd objectives (set forth in the Comprehensive Plan, Zonfng Ordinance, Municipal Code)_ c. The impact of thf proposed use (compatible services and us£s, trafffc impact5, n~ise impacts, e~ergy conservation. etc.) upon: The famedi,te neighborhood; T~e community generally; and The environlTlent, d. T~e monetary consideration to be provfded to the City. e. The bistory and issessment of the proposed group's ability to ca.rry out tne construction, if any, and operation of ~he facility and services as proposed. Staff ReLQmmgndatiQn Staff recorwends that t"'e Plannlng Conmi ssion reconmend tf)illt tne C i h' COUTH:il direct staff to proceed with tne 9-month RFCP selection process is outlined above, fncl~ding tne guide1ines, criteria and specif1e content items rec~nded by the Tower Well Site Subcoomittee. <:\To""r .1 2/21/~1 Page 3 ;--,~. ">;,.~: Because the Planning CommisSion delayed making a re~ommendatior. on th~ SRO Committee report until the work of the lower Well Site Subcomm'tt!e ~as completed. stiff recommends that the SRO Committee report ~e reagendized for final Planning t~iss~on recommendation on the next ivailab1e agenda. R&spectfull] submltt.d, KENNETH R. SCHREIBER Oirector of Planning i~d Comur.; ty ErHoironment Attachments: Janua~y 31 memG to the Tower Well Site Subcommittee Planning Commission staff report of November 9, 1990 Sfngle ROGM Occupancy Committee RepQrt of November 9, 1990 Minutes of the Flannlng Commission meeting of November 14. 1990 <c: T.~r ~.ll Site Subcommittee Mailing list Emily Harrisol'l Bill Fellman Janet Freeland c:\Tower ,1 2/21/91 Page 4 Janua~y 31. 1991 TO: FROM: Tower Well Site Subcommittee of the Planning Commission Nancy Lytle, Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Sl.UTlTlary of Ccnc.lusfons of the January 249 1991 Publ ic Meeting and Items to be Discussed' and Rescl ~ed at ttl: February S. 1991 #IIeetlng The Tower Well Site Subcommittee conducted a public meeting on January 24, 1991 to discuss the process and 1and use issues involved with t~e disposal and/or reuse of the TowEr Well Site at 201 Alma Street. Planning Commissioners Beecham and Christensen attended {Chairman Marsh W3S JbsentJ and were supported by Nancy lytle and Virginia Warheit from th~ Planning Division, and Janet Freeland from the Real Property Division. COll1Tleilts were freely sol lcited frM sr.embers of the public who ittended, including Syl~ii Seman and lou Go1dsrnitA from the Pa10 Alto Hou$ing Corporation and Single Room Occupancy lS~OJ Subcommittee, Tony Badger from the Downtown Nort" Ne19hborhood Association, and Jon $chink lind Tony Carrasco. Jane Haley. staff liaison to tne-Human Relatione; C.omrni'ss.ion~ also contr1buted. Tne Subcommittee r~ached tne follOWing conclusions at t~e ~eeti~g: 1. Whlle a request for proposal (MP) process. is. not always. the manner in which t~E CUy has disposed of properties in the past, tha.t process is an acceptable way of obtaining conceptual proposals frum a va.ri~ty of so~rces to be ev~'uated by tn~ C.ity in this caSE. It is und~rstood that any future projec.t wnich may be selected dlJring the RFP ,process wouid subsequently be reQuired to obtain all neceS$ary zone c~ange and dev~1opment permit approvals through the regular Teview processes. 2. A nine-month time line should' be establis~ed for res.p.arrc.lng to t~e RFP in order not to put nonprofit entities at a di sad'vantage t(} other developers. 3, The rev;e.,., process for thi! -RFPs shouid include reco!ilTlendatiolls from the Human Relations Co:rmission ~nd the Pianning CO!Ml.is$ion~ prior to final consideration by the City Council. TWSU81 nl/dsk 1/31/91 Pags 1 .' ,--, 4. The ~efghbcrnood will contin~e to be inv~1ved through direct ag~nda moanillg to fnd.ividuals on the Towel" Wel1 Site Suocomittee ma.iling list and t~rough normal publfc hearfng notice of all future mef!tings. S. T~e prQPos~ls being solicited should be co~ceptua1. 6. Sit@ deve1cpment paramet~rs d~ net need to be defined for the site prior to the conceptual RFP process, i~ order to encou~age cri:i.tivity. 1. n,!; P.FP s.ho1Jld' contain broiild guidelines for the types of proposa1 s be1ng scHcited, criteria under which they will be evaluated, and spetifics about the expected cont~nt of the individual proposals. Topics for discussion at the next meeting include speciflc recommendations for item 7 above. NL/cs Attachment: leased Use of tity land/Facilities cc: T~r ~ell Site Subcommittee .al1ing list TWStlBl nljdsll: 1/31/91 page. 2 o . Cit}, of Talo 11 Ito IIovbber " 1t9D PLANNING COMMISSION 'alo Alto, Callforafl , C 1101: IO!SO STAff R[COMHENOATION TO PR!PARE A R[QUEST· FOR PROPOSAL FOB US. Of THE WELL TOkES SITE Members of the COID!ssfo., At t~, FI.ance and Publfc Worts (F I PW) Committee ... tlng of Oetober 30. 1990, stiff •• de a recomDt.d.tlo. th.t a Requast for Pr.~oslls ~ fssued for t~e Tow.r Well Sit. It Alma ,nd Hlwthorn.. The f I PW Commltt.1 dlferred ,ny Ictlon until the Ph.nl~ C .... !ssl •• hIS reported an thl $1'910 Room Oecuplncy (SRO) C .... fUee's recOlN.dltfon, for the property. The SAO Committee do •• not belieye thlt I fO"ll Rlque.t for Propos II (RFP, proc.ss Is requIred for the dlspo •• l or future Usf of the property ,nd reeo""",.ds n .• t the CHy Ceuncll d.1oy .,.1<lng • dlclslon on the sit. for on. , •• r. for rolsons outlined In the precedl .. g report fro. the SRO Coo=ltt... Th ... ~rs of the F I fV CommItte. wore Inclined to agree with the SIlO C ..... ltt .. roc_ndatlon. At the ... tlng. llt1II!>ers of f , PW •• pres.ed • preferenee In h.vlng proposlls received l.fonollll by a 11,ison In the ,la •• I'g Deplrt_nt, who would Iho eo.duct a neighborhood lIutlng to soilclt their Ideas. Thtre werl no Downtown North neighbors represented It the meeting Ind F • PW d.clde~ to continue tho deCision until .fter the Pllnnlng Commissl.n no_ndatlon Oft the SIlO IUulS h.v. be •• presented. Stiff would cont'nu. to recommend that. IOOre fenoal REP proce.s b. directed 'or nus~ .f the sfte. Tbl, recommendltl.n Is •• de bet au •• tho Cit, Council has not ~t provided cle.r ellrectlon on the goals for 'ne use or dlSPD .. l of the property, Ind ~CIUSI Interest I. the ... of the property hIS Ir!s.n 'rOIl I number of different sourees. Including tho IdJacont property owner. Without In RrP proc •••• which woulel outline the blslc subolttll requlr.ments 'Dr Iny plrty tnterl.ted t. purchlslng Dr rede.eloplng It. ft would be diffloult to tllrly •• Ilult. and tcaplre the •• rloul optIons that .Ignt be IYIlllble to the CitI. Withl. whate •• r tl .. frao. Is .olected to mike I d.clslo. on tne property. The 'llnnlng DepITt .. nt fs wIlling to Ippolnt I 111150n to the neighborhood lnd to conduct e .. etlng .ith the Downtown North n.lghborhood. Howeyer, Planning Ind AlaI Propertle. stlff~lft'l that It would be dlffle.lt to lofoMOlll, ".tertlln proposlls for the·re.5e of the propertJ from t~ •• lrfOUI Interest.~ p.rtles and hive • p~ess th.t ••• perceived IS under.tlnd.ble. '"Ir Inel 1~lrtl.,. Tnu. 10/0'1'0 oJ. , - '.'.' --- ou~ cDnciuSion that In RFP proctss thlt esflb1tshes rults for submittals. timing and dlcfsfon .. ting ~ould welZ strve resolution of tnt Tower We11 51te reuse issue. The RFP tl .. fr .... rec"""","ded to t~. F , P'i C."",lttee WIS three IIOnths for receipt of prep ••• l.. Th. RfP would be de.eloped .fter Council Ict!.n on the f , P'i recGamendltlon .nd thus t~e tot.l time frame wDuld be at l •• st s1. ~nths from Coom!ss!.n .ctlon. RECQJI1fHDATtOM St.ff recommends thot the Planning CommissIon rocommend to the F , P'i Committe. that the Cit". Councn direct staff to prepare. Request for Propo .. l for the Tower Well Site. St.rf concurs with oIl other recommendat1Dn. of the SRO Commltt.e. Respeetf.lly submitted, -(/r~ .. A4- NANCY IWlDOX l YTL£ Zoning Amolnlstr.tor NML/es 4;Ut£i£'L. {;(.a;/k L 1'~;;;,:rH R. SCHR~If- Director of Fl1nn1ng Ind Community Environment Attachments: II/Og/90 Single Room Occupanc1 CommIttee Kemo Ct: Jon $chink, 664 Gl1m.n Street Bill Peterson, 228 Fulton Street Roger Craig, 101 W •• erl., Str •• t Rick Tipton, 690 Oregon A.enue Toro)' B.dger, 381 Nawthorne Street Greg Cne.son, 115 Wa.erl., Stre.t Ted K.I, 724 Centrol Street Sophl. Ohrymes, 483 H.wthDrn. Stre.t Irvin O.wl~, 161 Brlont Street Anast •• i. Karr.s, 483 Hawthorno Streot Da.l~ "artln, Child Clre Coordln.tor, City of Palo Alto Anna Hernande., Deputy Director, Nousing Authority or Santa Clara County, 505 West Julian Street, San Jose, CA 95110·2338 leo~ersh!p P.lo Alto, 325 Forest Avenue J •• nne Vltterott, ,.10 Altans for Note1 Housing, 1560 San Antonio Str~et, Menlo Pork, CA 14025 TOIlER 10/09j90 .Vdst ·2· , , • . '- G) . . .. rit~J of Toto )lIto ',0 80J. 10150 Na.ember t, .990 Ta: Plannfng Cllllllfssfan From: Sfng" Ro .. Decupancy COIRltt •• Subjoct: Rec~ndltlans of t~. Coonltt •• R.Y!ewlng '"la Alt.', Slngl. Ra .. DeC"plnCY Hot.,. FollowIng Is the report and r.commend,llons of t~e Slngl. Room Decuplncy (SRO) Cammlttee to the Pl.nnlng Coemls.lan Ind City Council. Pl •• s. see the stiff report to which this .... fs Ittached for addltian,l InfoMlltfon and recommendatfons of the stiff reglrdlng the propos.d Requ •• t For Prap •• Il (RIP) proce •• for t~e Tower Vell Sitt. BACKGROUND On June II, 1990, I stiff report outlining Issuos pertllo!n, to S!ngl. Room Decuplncy batel. fn '"la Alto Ind fncludlng rlcoROe.d.tlon. of tho SRO Committee wa, pr.,enttd to City Cauncll fGr re,lew. Th. Committe. recommended th.t CouncIl con.lder the fallowing' I. Identification of SRO hot.l, " In Importlnt .lement of the City's law Income hau,fng stock f. the Clly's st.te-.ar.d.ted Hauslng £l_nt update; 2. Commit ldol.lstrllly. Ind technlcil I,slsllnce .1, P.lo Alto Hou'ing Co.,o.,llon and City ,t.ff resources 10 Issfst SRO hotel owners f. abtei.lng 1.111.b!. federll Ind stlt. srlnls Ind To.ns for seismic r.~abllit.tfon, general "pgrldlng and .ddll'.nl t~ .xlsttn9 SRO f.c!lltles; Ind 3. CommIt the Tower Well Site loclttd It tho so"the.st corner ~f AI .. Street Ind Hawthorne Ayenue for. new SRO de •• lo,..nt. Council voted t-C to appro •• the SRO Coomltt •• Recooaendations lind 2 but to refer Recommendation 3 and t~. conc.pt of I con.erston ordinance to the 'l.nnfng CGOmillion for reyfe. Ind consideration and to .. te Ipproprllt. recoaoend.tlons to the City Council. On AugUJt 20 Ind September 24, 1990, the SRO C..mltlee .. t to re.iew Council's Ictfon Ind to pr.pare recoomendllion, for 'l'n"lng Ccomlsslon review. rollowlng Is • Sum.arl of the CGlDlttee's rlcoomend.tlons. 11/9/90 -1- • • . . -----_.----- CONSIDERATION OF THE WATER TOWER SITE FOR SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY HOUSING BUT NO COMMiTMENT AT THIS TIRE The Commit.e strongly suppurts the construction of new ~~O housfng to augment the •• Istlng stock of SRO units. They believe that the Tower Well Site .'1 be I good location for new SRO units. Other sit •• Ire .1s. being considered by the Palo Alto ~ouslng Corporation IS possible locations for n~ SRO construction, Inc1uding I county·~ .. ed pareel at Page Mill Road and Ash Street. Upon further consideration, the Committee beTleves that It Is prem.t"~e for Council to commit the Tower Well Site to this use at this time. ATthough the Tower Well Sfte ~y be appropriate fer SROs, tnere aTe other sftes within the cODDunity which. lipon enminat10n t !lay provt to ~e IIOrt approprflte. Other potential uses for the Tower Well Site should be explored and relovant land use issues examined before making I commtt.ent to an, plrtlcular use. A process should be followed fDr doto .. iolng the use of the sit. which Illow. for neIghborhood Input and Planning Commission and City 'ouncl1 re,jew. The Commltteo recDgnlzes that SRO housing Is r.lotlvely controversial, and they recommend that coamunity edut.tion and neighborhood outr •• t~ precede the designation of the Tower Ve1l Site or any other site for this use. RiQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR USE OF TOWER WELL SITE At the Finance and Public Wor's Committe. (F&PW) .. etlng on October 30, 1990, "t.r staff presented a tity Manager'. Report regarding disposition of the "elT sltO$ vhlch recoamended that CDunc.l direct stiff to prepare a RFP for the Tower Vell Site. The FlPW Committee d.loyed &ttlon on that recommendation, prefer.ing that the Issue of an RIP for the Tower Well Site stay with the Committee u.tll the Planning CommIssion has reported to the Council on the SRO Committee~s recommendations. The SRO Committee is requesting that proposals for .se of the Tower Well Site not be solitlted and that Countil delay committing the Tower Well Site for any part!cu1ar .s. for ot 1 •• 5t one year. The Committee Is •• king this request in order to prDvlde tl .. to develop a plan for construtting new SRO Housing. This planning Is expected to take considerable time due to the complexity of the financing Inyol.ed and the b.ilding code .nd special design I •• ue. to be addressed. HUO is currently developfr1g I new IfIOrtga~e fl"lSurinCe program specifically designed for n~ con.tructlon of SRO housing. Other progra.s at the Stlte level for ne~ constr",tlon of S~O housing Ire also being explored. MODIFICATIONS TO ~E PALO ALTO BUILOING COOf TO FACILITATE SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY CONsTRUCtION Under t~e Building Code, slngl.·rDOG llvlni unit. Ire cotegDrlzed IS efficiency units If they Include tltchen facilities Ind IS hotel units If they do not Include kitchen f.cilltie.. The P.lo Alto BOilding Code provides standardS for "th of th.,e two categories, but neither one Is suited to the particular requl .... nts of SRO units. Under current code, In .fflclency unit lUSt have • ml.l..m of 220 squ.r. feet and must have Its own bathr..-and titchen. If no tltchen Is provided, the hotel provisions appl" which allow. siai.um size of 70 square feet with a ~i~imum dimension of 1 (eet. pc.srsro2 ... 11/9/90 .z. .--. --~ Tile Sute Building Code (He.1t11 a.d Safety Code, Sec.17gS3.1) 11 .. be.n ."",na.d to penllt cltle, to ldopt an ordln.nce to allow unit. of a mInImum of 15U square feet. to be occupied by a .axfmum of two people and to fncl~de I partial kltcl1en and/or batl1roOG facllltl •• Insfd. til. unit. Tiles. st.ndardS wore sp~I.11y deyeloped to lccommod.t. t~e ne.ds of SRO .nlts_ San Diego and other clt1,s have included these standards fn their b~ildtng codes in order to facl1It.t. tile provision of SR~ 110.slng. Pl10 Alto's Chief Building Offlcl.1 supports ... ndlng the City's Sulldfng Cod. to Include the specla' standard, for SAO housing .uthorlzed by the St.t. Building Code. The SRO Commltt •• recommends that the Council direct prep.ratlo" of an ordinance adopting the revislons &s a~ e~coura9ement to SRO devetopment~ PRESERVING EXISTING SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY liNUS B' PUBLIC AND PRIVATE EFFORiS. NoT WITH A CONVERSION ORDINANCE Tn. Committe. reaffirmed their lick of support for establIshing a conyerslon or demolition ordinance, since they thought that other effort. would be preferible for retaining the e,lst;ng SAO units. The June 7, 1990 staff report to the City Council pres.nted •• umber of ways that the CIty could support private owners Df SRO units tn t~e1r efforts to retlln t~e$e unit! in t~eir present use, including providing tec~n1cal assfstance tD owners in .cc •• sing sources of funding for rehabilitatIon. ~"exampl. of the •• efforts Includes a pending app11cltloo by the owner of the BarKer Hot.1 to the Rent.l Rehabilitation Progr .. {RAP) to help with the necessary selsoic upgrading of that hOl01_ Additlon.l1y, the Housing Authority of Santi Clara County has applied to Hous!nq Ind Urban Deve10peent (HUD) for a110cat;on of funds under ne~ programs for Section e Moderate Rehabilitation for SRO hotels, with the application being intended for the Barker Hotel. DISBANDING Of THE SINGLE R~ OCCUPANCV COMMITTEE Since the task. for whl~ the SRO committe. wa. established haye been accomplished, the Coomitt.e believes It should be disbanded .t the conclUSIon af City Ccunctl cQnsider~ttDn of the Pllnning Comm~ssion rec~ndations on tl115 r2port. SINGlE ROOM OCCUPANCY COHMITiEE RECCHMiNDArlONS I. That the CommissIon recommend th.t the City Counctl centinue to consider SAO housiog lS • possible use for the To •• r Well Site. 2. That the City Council defer for one year the decIsion to commit the Tower Well Site to any particular use, .mIle the ,,1. Alto Housing Co~oration explores construction of new SRO unit. 0.4 possible sites on .mic~ th.y could be built. 3. The Council should direct st.ff to proceed with Building Code r,~isions to ~roy~de incentive f~r private OY nonprofit proposals for SRO construction Dn Iny potential site. 4. The City should not enlct I drsolltfon or c~nyersfon ordinance, but should act to protect existing SRO units through comoit .. nt of adminlstr.tlve Ind technical Issistance to private owners with funding source~ for rehabil'tltio~, sefsmic ,mprQv~nts, and oth!r f.dero1 and state funding. pcsrsr()2 1I/9j9U YW -3- I 5. The SRO Coemitt ••• houT~ be disbanded .t t~e conclusion of City Council eonslderat1on of t~e Plinnfng Commission recommendations on th Is report. ;;;~:;"bm~~ £AJ / ~ <Z~ /-~ SINGLE Jocc~~m4 . ~ ~ '-- Ji. Bertlo ftOD Han ~arl.n. Pr.ndergast Sylvil Seman Hanc1 Shlp!ay Bob Woods Att.chments: October 25. 1990 City Manager's Report, C~R:S4S:0 August 20, 1990 lett.r fro. Zoning Adminlstr.tor August 1990 Article from ZONING NEWS, "SROs: A Poor Stepchild Comes of Age" July 5, 1990 letter from E. A. Ha.s Jun. 7, 1990 SftO St.ff Report to City Council cc: Jon Schink. 664 Gil ... Str.et, Palo Alto, CA Bill Peterson, 2Z8 F.Tton Stre.t, P.lo Alto, [A Roger !rolg. 101 "'overley Street, P,I. Alto. [A Rick Tipton, 690 Oregon Avenue, PlIo Alto, CA Tony Badger, 381 Hawthorne Stre.t, P.lo Alto, CA Din lorfmer~ 46S Hawthorn Avenue, Pilo Alto. CA Greg Chesson, 115 Waverl.y Street, P.lo Alto, CA red kal, 724 [entr.1 Street, P.l0 Alto, CA Sophia Dhryme., 483 Hawthorne Street, P.lo Alto, CA Irvin Oawld, 161 Sryant Street, PaT. Alto, [A Anastosll Karras, 483 Hawthorne Street, Polo Alto, CA Oavld Nartln, Child C.re Coordin.tor, City ef Palo Alto Anna Hernandez, Deputy Directer. Housing Authority of Santa Clar. [o"nty, 50S Wost Julian Stroet, S.n Jose, [A 95110·2338 leadership ,.10 Alto, 325 Forest A,enue, ',1. Alt., [A Jeanne Vatterott, P.l. Altans for Hotel Heuslng, 1560 San Antonio Street, Menlo Park CA 94025 pcsrs.ro2 vw • 11/9/90 -4- $ .. I \ f. A. MAAS ,. E, loIAtIi SiREEl LCS ~"O$, CAL~OAN"" '~32 1111 06135-<1 .... 1::10 r)-. ©~©~~~~(ID UU JUL 091990 f"" A:L", .. · f \ I .'\ ... Dl?AI.RT."-f£NI Ut t"lANMII>tti 1 t "ITY Of PAlO ~\. .I r \ ~ Hr. lien 5ehreil:.er 01= of Pl>.nnlJ-q and Camu:'lity InVirtnrent 250 F..amiltcn Avenue Palo Alto, CA. 94)(11 Sirs: •. 'e M"e: ill ro:eif"t. :.: yc;..;.r S.1\ .0. ~ C;;,.t.o:.d .!"o:c 7 I lS;'~. We are prco:1 of our ope!nItions at :toth. the craig an:! Palo Alto !Iotel.s. We c:cnstantlY"p grade livin; corrlitic>'lS and insist on ard 'J'f'a.inta.in a clean dnJg tree err~t.. 'n1e staff z ........ liierrlation that thee is a great need for cur hotels is \o'ell ~ ~ the Stanford 11eport, and the """"I"'r-e-"5. wrm ~ '10 'n!E ~C IN= SlGGES,ID DI YOOR = WE M1Ii'l: THE ~ OFnR: lIE WILL GI.lAAM'!'EE !liM' 'mE r= WIll. M1\DIrADl '!HEIR aJru'lNl' S.Il.O. ='-'S FOR A 1'=00 OF FIVE YVIRS IN EXOl'Ja FOR ~ 0(EHpJ'!C!< r.o< = 1'~= DISTRICT F=. '!HIS ~ IS RENElil\BU: XX FIVE 'fiN< !lnuM>J..s BY ML'IU1IL Ca<S<Nf'. "nle 5.1' .. 0. reports ....... it clear tillIt the resic!e.,ts do TlCt !JSE pu.bli;:: park.i..r.:1. arrl to d"l.arge an c::pera:tion like 0JrS parklr,g fees ,sUlply !:i.lbsidizes others at the ~ of the residerr-....s. It JruS't I.lso be clear that our cpen.tions do !'.lOt. yield a great ~it. """""'iNa the park\rg ~ ~,ity ~ shoo-<;!OC<l faith and S\lp\T..rt. tor the S .R-O. ~ and help us ""L"~in """ high stan:!.=:!s. Si=ely. E a Yt1fil~ E. A. HaAs for the craig uC Palo Alto }{otel.s I . " - !' .' : - 0891rtment of Pl&nning and Co~unity (nvironme~t (415) 329·1Jll L A. Mias 18 [4 Main Str~et los Gatos, CA B5032 Our ~Ir. Ma IS: Subjoct: letter of July ~, 1990 Regarding ~oncmic tncer.t'~es for SPQ~ 250 Ha~ilton Aven~e PO!t Office 6o~ 10250 P.le Alte C~ 94303-085/ Thank yOU' for yo!.!r If!thr to ~en S,hrefber in which you make oil ~roposal for p~ovidin9 tCOnomi~ i~(ent;~es for ~ainta}~ing SROS throu9~ i five·yt!r renewab1e agr~ement which allows for t~e waiver of parkir.g assessment fees. As J exphined to you by telep~one. I have reconfirmed with our-attorney's off;,!" that there is no mechan1sm throug~1 wbic.h the CHy ca., walve asStBn'1ent distT'ct fees. Either l..,.l.QJljn9 tert amendmeIl-La.!:LU.,gIlLtnal",9j_'Would be._ necl!SsarY--1.Q..ir,'lplement Y",ur im.~; :r}~tl"'~ pl..!12.:.. If ,YoLlr tl~e were rec101s.si fied to a residential citeg~r1. tnus al!cwing exemption (rom the req~irement to pay into the ;s:sessment district , it (.Qu1d n:)t l.Inder current ordirancu be reconverted to 1 co:rmerc'il us~ in the f'Jture wHItJut provic.-rng ~iri('jT"lg. J ~il1 r~fer your letter to tne SRO Subcommittee for their consideritior., as weil is i copy of this.respor,se. Piease feel fre! to contact me ~ith a~y further ~uestions. SiP'lcerEly, Afld4 MANer MADDOl LYTLE Zoning Administrator It/il/l c Attachment <c Ken khre;ber~ O·jrfc:tor !If oFl anning and Ccm.'TIuni t,. (nviroMent SRO Sub<:onmHt •• Susan C~se, Assistant (ity Attorney /Io1S/.ld •• • d I i I I I , SROs: A Poor Stepchild Comes of Age Sjl1g1c~roorn-oqup;;lney Plete!l (SROs) h.I .... e Jonl bc~n viewcd OI~ ~e ,Grimy CeJ'llc:rplC'Cel or seedy ~i!hborhoods< UnJcO'ed :11''11.1 undefen*d. many 5RO.s fen vic-lim to urb.J", renew",I, d~c.:lY. :InC Ilj~h prope.ny ta.ll:e"" BII!. as. n.l'lion.a:r lnCrtlion h:u; shifted 10 rhe problems of homc-ics.s;neJS InC: 3.ffordabic .hou\inE. . .it h.u become ek<l.r Cfl;M SROs. in r .. =t, provide:.a SIJblc: !ivifloE: cllvifonmtfll (or nu1"lY elderly pc-oprc:. h3ndicOIppcd people. 3ncl.fillllc members ort.~c: 'IiIo'Qrlr.!n&: poor. Thllls why scc.iai reformers. ciry pl.umcrs.. barJ;;crs, and rc.lt ("51;111: dl:"~"CJoperl an: hlJcjn,g 11tc-on-d Jook 'I SRO hoolc.!S ZCfling IJ:W5, v;rious blli1dl"., ("od~ I'tQuircmellls, :lind UJI. l.:w.5 can affect the: imP:lC1 Orf~ SR.O on the-neighborhood. oIrld ("In jflnu~ me: ;leihl)' ~rSRO owrw:~ lopro"'ide housinli I.e people :I( the bouom o(the i~omc I:ldder. '!".he foMowin, discu.\5ioll ('cr..sidcl"l cad'! cflh~se di&p::lr:nt tltmc:.nl5 inld ofrtl'3 suBges;liDIt! ::and lC.1.ampks of !loll( I'lannillg ane: ZOI'l1f1g Ofnc-i;1ls e.:ln rtVil::lfile .arid" ~.Ibrjsh SACs.s "'laMe tlou~tn. opdon.s (or.n il\Cr~sin! selmenl of me populalion. CommcrC::lI or Residential:' Fmm rit: fOcilY. zO!lm.la~$ renee ... C"or-fusion 3Po\lf the role or SR~ in lht roc::li housin:: Jnd hurd \'ru);rk"e:s. Unhl:e hOler.s Cr.:!1 C2LCr 10 lrJ!l$ilC"lU3. moll ltnJrlU of an SRO consider [he place their hOnlt. MJny h .... c ll\:eel in 'heif rOOHI for)'eJr"!. ::ImJ l'I::Ive d"C"\'cloped &ic~h:p:s "Wilh other rt.sidems. Howtvtr. unril;c: cxher permJrtCnt h~, SRO hmc15 after ncilhcr (un b;Jlitroom.s nor L.ite-hen (;acililie.s. AI bcsI. thert m;JY be p.lni~ f:lCi1ilje~ il'llh.c: roam. sueh as.a. sinl.: or • .s'o~·e. whde a show-c:r. 10iTel,'nd sI1.ared kilehcn .are loc.llied down thc hafT. IT is dime-un 10 ZOl".C (or .5!.!ch a pl.ta sir.c:e if: is ntirm:r.a tr .. dition.:zl h(X~ 1I0r .. (onvcnlio~l apanmc'U .build'"g. In some eiliu. SROs a:-e ('.)und in high-dcnJ;ity rcsidenli;:J.r 11US. In :.uch eues, the zon .. ll codc afloW} diem in residcllli.3T :IIU".l$ or Ir,:and[::Ilher c1:r\lSt.S ~ke ~m .. 1e,31 nOrlconiormil1i U~ Other cities permit SROs only in commcrci~ .reu. 1TO.51 Or~tn 1IC:lr downtowns. l.oc21 :toninll o(fieia Is .shourd t3ke irolO att"O\I/U ~ SROs are bc'sI placed in [h01C p;lru arto ..... o ~ orr4:l" tr.c.tpcfbh.t c.lrC~ri.as, ,rccery SlOn::S., alld adequiilu: pubrJC" Ir.aru:poru[KIn. ZOn;"1 GeIiniliOft$ 2150 rt: rtcC"l ~ con(u.sio,! .. bou" ..melner 5RO$ 0lI1"t more: ril;tl!(uny a re.5idc:nli.aI or CDml'fterCI21 Ute. All ordiruncc proposed in Actanta disl!rlrui)t-,cs bcllilfttll 1/.ln3ienl lod!crl.1UdI as tbo1e who SI:II)," rcw fti,hrs In .. bottl or mole!. and p::rrn.anem &aestI. ttuT trIOSl Ordl~nceS do not. In Chic:IIlO, (or iMt.antt. 1II SA 0 .is .zoned" u.d t.:I xed :IS 1I ..... c:rc a n:subf"hoIe1. e .... cn lI'Iot.;h. :liS CIne ad"OC31t' plir)!); ~I. no onc wilT tCIJI(1lK :II" SRO •• cf! cf\( M.trioll. 1110 a suburb or Cle-\!c:land. n.:ilhbofl .re oppos.inC a 'pr~d t~ldenc:~ iIIn u.. pln b«.;ou$C ,hey.::att afraid Ie rN.)' bc<"omt all 5ltO J"lhc oris inaJ UI( boccomc-s unprill':i'a.,re. The iIIn ..... tIlC!'!. if 111 1$ bl.l Ill ...... i" Inch/de-" .Lilche" in c .. ery fOiOlTl and wi!! calcr 10 .""f"'C .... ~I. ...... ""r ... c ... s.s.oe/ .... t-Io ... n, ~b.\· ofrlt.t McAd~ H~tl. ~It SROin S1!'T'.'f'~. w"i~i{JI\Q rill' hOlt! ~J" ;QC)af U'''.ltl'J {;r1WlJ~1(J" jcv irs "J,dnu'J '1M ~mo.... r:~CJJ-(qolj"l. slranlfl 'Ma/J. Q".d s«rarb1!f bll~j"elS p!:"op!c ie tOWI\. (er mor;: th;." a week. will ofler more: PJr~irl£ :lfI~ amen nics t11;1n;l !ypica-IS.RO ~sjc'Cnl can "riord" RoomSizt 5RO housil'-1 is ,anYthing b~ oIpiciCM.. iillihoolgh rIC'" dcvclopmC!lll !end" LO (C::Ill/Te biUer moms. 5,,11 D1CIO"s code requi res a mInimum (l( 70 5Qinlrc (ee: for 51tC"~i"; rOO1nl. That room..~ C;)ll~ ka ... c kltc~ru Or balhroonu.. A la .... rcecnd), p;lLSCd ill Cali(ornia d"er;~ a.ne .... I)'pt' or Livrlll space 1n.1loJou, IC SRO roams. a.ned Ii ... in.c unilS. Li-.in, ullits arc .I;I'nc.r rtl:In IradilillNl S.R.O unUl.lUCI"'C (rc.rn I ~qllired mInimum of 1 SO $qU;jrc: tee:r.o .. ~,jmum o(lbout 2'!i lCju:ne-(cel. They .Jfe iI"C""'td" in commerciall .. reu .. ·hefe hOlch and IT\CIc:lS .. re pc:rmillcd. Unlike StudiO Jp.anmc rI". .... t'!len rcquire II ru rJ' l:l~chcn a:ld bJltl. lillin) Llnils an: no~ fcql.ll~ed Ie erre:r (omplele: f-Klr,llts. For t.lJ.rnplc. o~ (JeII11."' ... ·,tt-, Ilvilll unllS ..... " fOOfnsl1'!ill Ire :I.( 1c.:I.sr 190 ~uart reet Thcv .ncltJdc J.lufJ NIh.Joom and J." 'l\Com~,leIC kirchen ",",uh II mll::;owiiI"'C r"'lher Ullin I con"'c,,~ion~ Ovt ... ·. .' 1'"\ A propos.cd At!::nl:J I::odc. wMe" ~ ~nlly in CO""lm~ !lce. requif"CS:h.1; roonu be: ~ Ic:l$! 100 lqu..ln: ~~I. In ~.llllc:. when olckr SR05 Ire: r'el'lltW:lled. the cicy CI~di~nce :lno....., tile cJcvr!opcr 10 k~p fDOfN wl\alcvtr .iu they we-re:, Howt:\lc r. lhe coil)'". Oc:p:Jnrrw:nt or Communil}! Dc: ... c IOp~ru is rtquiri"& th.2I nc'W SROs offer rooms du<;re:ll .leUI 1 JO .JqU-'irc ftel. The buiJdin,z code:, 01$ ,,(this .rijjI'1E. t!; t>.:in.s dl;~nfi'd. and it is unclof ilthc-.1'linimurn f'OOm Jilt will ~t1d: up br!in£ 120 or I ~ squ:ttt !'etc. CommonArc.;U CC)l'hTnOJI area£; 1t'C an impomnl P;" of an SRO. althol1gfl they 'T'C DOC rttttUtriJ] requj~d by kiUl ordinanc=s. 'The proposcd' Atl:tnta Of'd"ln2hC'e n:quire:s d'w Ikrt be,pL lou$! five square reeL afcommon. sp.cc pu dl/oltllinCllnit. ",jlh. mintmum or 250 sqlJ2tt rtel ~sc:rvcd (or. comrftC.iflarea. JtccfC.:IciOll arus. 1N'e1inC rooms, and dinin, toClmllre an «Insidei'd ccmmor'i sp;lcc. hlU($tin&''1.lhe rr.!.in robby. vendiill arus, and commtlnilY kilcheru In: IlOl cOMilk-r~ commOfl .rus. In SeluIc. where 5RO rchIbiliLl.dCl' is usuany dont by nonprotil or,pniutiOl'lS wfth JlOniaJ fundlf1,r: [rom the :iry. common space is 1101: I eode requiremenr, bvr it ts somcthi III Ihc-rily iNisu Ilpotl at the r.eIOl:lalj~, lIbre. Common .Ire.:1S art 110( required by lht: Shrevepon, Louisiil~. toCk. Howe'll'er. the McAdoo Hotel ir: Sh:-cv:pon bot$:Iu ~I)O 01'1 the.Jtt"Ond floor .I1Ilhreas ..,he re residents QIt srna.re cuokilll aDd ~r.s. Com~ areas Ire: not fcqlJi red in Oen"Cf e:il""'::. since 5ROs are cOlUickred rt3ick:m ial bO(e/.s. lAd mUR Intel [h( Arne requirementS;u IIny cw:he-r kind fJf hoIel. .Even tl'to-.ISh ofder eode.s Ctnd nQllO l"t'Quire common arcas.. ill is .IIDOd id-~ ID rorrc:.w AtIanu:'slaQ' itt lNl:itlg Ih:rn rnand::llOly. Th~ 5p.tC:5 not -:;only anow re.side~ts 10 de:velop supportive ties, they.alsc ol'1,W the:.1man si.ze or the-rooms. hrlml M"t'Sl cities rrqtJire TinJe Ctr no parkinl fur SROs. In some communi'.iC1, an dJc SROs are.so oid tho.1 sr61ldralhc:t-t11l!$CS procea ~m from pulcin, requirerne-Ilts. ~n Diego docs nOI nquire parkin, ror 1IC:W SitOs thaI art buitt in lhe 6oW1'!IOwn 1m_ AII.r.ta ... iIIl101 ~irc par!dn, rot'SRO!; iniksuel)' deve!09Cd a re.l5 near pubr.IC U.llUpOrtltior: b;,![ does require one spaet ror eYer')' two to four rtIOfI".s and one space per emplcyn: in some zones. Ltkew~. ~It Diego .sometimes rcquire.s parkin. in let.s..tJeydopcd ecrnrTlen:.iJ1 ~ru.s. The cilY ntSOI:i;llCS plr1:inl teq1lin:~nLS with dt .... c:lepc:1'l ~"C1:w;-br ~buis. Eric RllbenSt'!in. pmiden! (lIthe Si:1llc Room Operalon Auocialion in Chic.aIQ. Ihir.ks lNil lUrk 1111 I'CqOJ.iremcnu Irt: silly. or al1lhe. rcs.idcnu in [he 200 bulldin" cper.:=te-d by lhe" auoc-Wjon.,. ~ ulim.ate.J.1N1 ollly rlVC or .Ii .. have (!In, He further 1&I11ts:s th.Il. if .. rts:KkrJ: is .abre-10 .arrlX'd' a rar. rhJt pcrs.on is 'l1se like!y to be .. ble to ren.r.an .. partnwen:. 8vt no ~ hne used d'Ic parkin, requirements 1(1 ... ill SRO praposars. fll ClftC Wtlnc'c. a /kvf:!opcr ~nled 10 build. l~ SRO iIIlhc ul:cOaire Mi,h~ or AtI.aD:.l. He askcd!he: zonrn, boanlro reducc the required nl.lmbct of parkin, 1pCU. w.1ridllt INI time: ~~ the: s.lmt: as Ihos.c tequj~d (Of .. n:,utar hoIel. Tht .nei.hbors obj«lcd 10 rc6u.::int: me: number of ~frcG spaecs. and. C'OflKql.tCruJy. &he: SRO enck4 up t'lOt be:m, tM.IilL 8".1ifeline Codes J~ &I dle:re arc dirrcrC1lCe:S ICrIKS me COUIIl1)' I'C'I~rd'lnl park illl.and tonin, n:quirmlCnu. cit] builcflnl codes..I$(! differ in mtll rclullljOfl of SROs. 1lIc s..n 01.1:10 Cll), , ,ol'C1't.'i'f1.c:n~tjuJ1l:d'(por/oCY of ~!Io. .... in,£ code lr.tdcorTs t."'l.lt WCK./ld rcnlin~ 10 pr()(r-ct the ht:,lltll .. nd nrcl)' of re,;Cc:n'.S 'Il'fIile In:II.: in, dc:yelopmenT feu ellipe~iyt. For ill.$l~nce-. in neh.ln,e fOl" IJsinl tus expensi ... e tin: doors. a de ... e loper (j r OM 5RO ~ in I sprinlder .srsle-m Ihrol)Ihol.ll c.'le build~n8. The trsdeoff lInowC'd for 3ckquale fjrt prQ~c<:ljor.lNr.;!:! :3 lower tO$r to th< de ... tiop:r. ChiQ'::o's, COCkl de I)C)I h..Jve Ihe S:ITT~ buill· in Ile:libili!y. m .. ch LO lhe: fruslf';!:lio!l or SRO owner Eric R.ube~mei!l. H.: beli.c ... es lh':II buildln,£ code inspeclors. (:lor! be IflsC'!ail:"'c 10 lhe SROs fin.;lncil:l ~orullOoinrs .. ~el1 thcy crder u;x.n1i ... c te~valion.s O!al do fitlle: more tll.lndri ... e rtn;s ~p, For insL2no:;e, in orltefllis building' • .sink! wert: threC' inches lOO narrow· The tnspt('lor or(kred him to IUr OUl the s;:1k~ and 10 t'tpla.cl!: .them wilt1 ~r.&:c:r sinks In rn.u ease., ajudge uw rhinl\ R t.lbc:ruleirts W2)' .aPld MJ led i.t:-ht.s f ..... or, How.: l'eT. such dlfftcu tlie:s increase: !he (os: or dOl nl busi~s.!' Hul~("jc: Pr~n'.a!ion .:Ind ~·cj~bbcrhood S!3bilitJ SRO hOlels ful't hOld Stich a ch:dere,j..,3:.51 tJlal ttl.:)' 3re not the rlrs!' tIlir,£ one thiJ\b of "",hen try:~g (0 hdp spruce Up.l delerionlinl nci£l'lberhood or pre:~1"VC be.alJtif'J! old buildinJs., SIIII. in some plac;es, SROs .Ire hiSl0ric prope:nics Dr are in hisloric d'iutictS and ha:ve proven 10 be lInc!,l. 10 the communiTy. B;.Ike Ciu.mbcn. an 3rd1 ileCl and di rtCrOf or ~.e We-,sle-rll Housing .... ni~ .. l'IC'e Cellu::r i.n Dc:nv<:r. sinzs the pr;J.i.s.cs orthc E~nh }jOtt.1 re:no .. · ... tiOfl. He says !hit lIle old bric:k bui1d;I'lJ, wil.'" i!~ IrchilecluT;11 dtuil. !etvcS the neichbomood .... el1. It hUnl;lni:z~ the t;if,Y-SoC'Ipe 1M cncOll'f'ilgc::s O"ht'r owners of 01 do:r buiK1in,s to i'CnO .... .ale kit ~:'OpeftY. II .11'1 S R 0 is in J .hiS(otic (!illrict. dc .... e!open c .. n 80::1 U \ credil) 10 dO reh .. bilil.l:liol'l, The beneli15 !rom;:he !.1:1. br~:JJ. lenel'l.ny outwetgf! the diffi,u1lr of I.:~j);nl th:: facade hilIOriC'.lrl,. .ae-curate. Often, howevcr. the hisloric tHo c!"(di-s .:Ire 1'oOl enol.ll!n. for iru1ar.cc. ~nlc has SOIT'':: 5g()s in J:i,l.loric: diSlncls tNI have-Cl .. ~1ified (or prc~,...aliotl U:t credits. HCWC:Ye-r. b«a .. ;.$C the cred'ils }uve I'~ried over Ihe ye.2 rs. the c:: iry provid'es olhersubsldles in orde r LO I;«p the hOlels profi lablc. Norll Gr~r. rormcrl}:ofthe Nario'l,JJ Trus.l ror kisloric Prnervalion. suggcslS cdler be~fjlslt,;)n the preser· .... lior. of aid bl.lildlna,s, QuarilY SROs call help Pf~vCl\1lemflr.C:.liicn and sl.Ibseque-nl d':;piaC'Cm!!:nI or 10w·U\comc ,ra rcside:-Ol! The), COIn fl.clp pro .... lde raidents with a Rn~ of lIe1ihborhcod ~nd pIKe, F In.aJly. thc at;Ii! illeS Oft the finl noor or mJ;ny SR05. ,:l!ovidc sc:rvku f(I the-.-.eli/'lbcr~ ... nd jobs 10 lome Q r ~ hOl:1 f'tside-n:.s.. ;\!.an:lc-emtn! ~ q.:afi!) Lor s:qo ftUn.aI<:'1TlC1\l Y01!1~S &~C':11J1. nn:: old imOl!,e or tile tlotab.:J. flophouse-. ~e:min.c .... lIh r~eht:s ~ruJ dnlnio:. .,ld me" r.~ bot dispeljed onIy if hexe:/s ;UC' 'IIo'cn run. Sar. Dicro require~ lIIal every hore! wjtl'l more lh:lro 12 units ~yc :I rc:S.id:1I1 man.age:r. AI/anI.;! proposes 10 rc:q~ i re thal th(' (ronl 6r:s~ be: suff,ed al ... n times, lit If".any SROs. the: tn.INJe:me.ru does matC th01n tOnlt:c' rt~s. ,net mlke rep01if1,. SII rr mc:m~~ aliWllu:lp fC'.ljcj'o:: illS I'le-loo:~re the s.oc-i.ar $¢~ice sy~C'm. lndC'c:d. same SROs. es.pl:t:lilllly dlos.e na~led by nonprOrlt.s. I\a .. c a more rorm:t! SOCI .. t ICl"'IKe compol\("nl to !heir ~(ble. Sc-:atlle-2M Los. AIIICics borh ha .... e: sperQ1l1(:ed.s SJtOs,ltI.l1 C;llcr 10 rmnl.ln~: ill rf'1,idC'ntl :1M res)de-flt' wllo ""'~ III ,.,1 need .. rI akoflQl·rrC'c: home, M.:n .... ny ill r('sid<:nls. are com'enlr;:lc:d 0fI one nocr (lr S~uevrpon.·. McAdoo HOIel w/\ete: 2 cOl.ln:w;lor.lS or. dury 10 help 0111 ..... ,. ';Z , :a · . "Monl!'l M:mers -_/ Nu one bas C'lI'Cr Kr\,IJed SRO residenl] orh:l\'inJ all CI¥t:~lM.i~I1C"t: or we:dlh.. W~n. an SRO clous, ils tc.sidems de! MIC O~fI I'n(I\lC uno reaubr apnmcnu; thcy art: mlX'h more likely to end" lip in;ll shelu:r. imllllui(Jl\. or on the strcea;. T:u: "redils. p""~r!y UUl :II~I ~m-ef)tJ, liI~ subsic'iel un help ~d GWTICTI a.I::J!, in lxaiMSJ; ""i,/'Iour r;, iJin, rents. beyond lhe rex.h of lhc ICrunts. ~ discusscd ;lbov/!. his.101'it UJI <:red'itJ tan be used when te.habbinl builcf.inl:s in hiSh}ric: di.\cricu. The low-income hous.ina UIi.l e:redi I flu been used "' tc"nOV~[e C'xwinr: prope"ie1. If! addilion. scvc::-aJ ye2rs ago, HUD rel:t:lC'd rvllt,llMt Iw! discoun.ed' [he-UJC or .$eelion 8 «"ifICJICS for SR.O rcnt:lt &1 fi~~i .. T assi.Sla~t ft«d 110' hOlppell al the !dC'ra! level. Somr: or£hc bell: prolrams to cut the ("om crowning .. Ad: opcn:1ina SROs Ire bc:inl ma~cd or tllr)Q'~d byloc.:ll lO"Icromc:Ul. For inSlIl'IC:C:. Sultlc has u sR.a f",nd C's.t,;;br..hcd wilh Comm::.u'-uy .Dt veloprMIU Block Granr monty. The fUM boosts the bud&CH of nonprofit o .... ners wor-kinl 10 rth:.lb old holel buildina:!o. San DiclO .Iso JUhs jcfazc; SRO ~b and offell dcyelcpc-rs lo ... ·inter~$! JOinli w rehab or COnslrwQ new UTlil.S. The cily fUrther has dlOlm&o::d 1!'Ie I« .schtd"ulu fClr sewer .. DC1 ..... ier Ie mort &ccu rZlcl)' ren~ SRO U5.3CC:, I(=.M SRO proposal pas~s. in AI];tnl.Ol, the Itnglh or lime: iii bites for at; indi..,iduallo w::.bliU/ pc-rmancnJ rcsilkM"Y~ thus rnakinz: the SRO owner uempl from li'le PI~el/mClitI OCcup.ilncy t,"u. ",m be reduced from 10 d"~)'$IO scW"l'Id::.ys. AllO("u lIr,Iy 10 "keep 5ROs in !he brad is 10 about propc"'y UJ.:t$. III Chiea&-:I, SRO owners are .cs~~d .1 lhe ~m~ r~le :is the HolidllY Inn;lone:! r<he:r ~omrnertiaJ ytnIUre5. Advoc"le.s lire: plahina to gel the prcpe.n)' t.:n; r:llte dropped 10 the.same:lS thai for. sinrte·famil)' hOU$oC-l!i pcr«nl 0('S2SSed Y:alue. This tal. break wt/uld acknowlc:dge tM: residentlll purpose or Ihe bYlldi nl and m.Jke iI euier for o ..... ~n. 10 pro .... ide lo .... ·~ ClS1 hOl.ainl· Those eiUes lh21 hive redefined tIlcir poride.s 0.' SROs have: 1Nru.ged' 10 _rile builclng and ZC'Tlil'li ~odes moll ~equ:uel1 proLCC'I r.he ner,hborhoods .... hlle mak..inl row-COst PIous in&: "Yailable Ie! ~Ie who DCed iI:. Key faC-ICn. 10 SUiXess. art ....... ;,J1;ability or mOM)' .3n(f Ua: crediu. 11ca:ibiril)' reg.rcfing b\lildinl codes, .nd relued or, bt:ner yet. n.o par.k.inl rcql.lire:mc~l$. Zonin& codes s"'ould also rtQ!,1ire • round-ttlc· clock m.ffint: and .drq--J;Jle common s~ce C K. Hugo M. k ... Changes 10 South Carolina's Tougb Beach ManagemerH Law Soutlt c.ro["lJlI;'s. louJh ~ beach rnanarernenl '-w_ duil r.cl 10 f"C:SIr1c:1 buiJdin& on otunfron.: bexhc:$. appe2'" to be. IfIo':Uh OIIC. HIlIId~ of Jx:ach.rlOlU homes ll'Ns!)cd' by Hun-inne H .. ~ la:s8)Qr.re bcin, rebllim pn L1Ic lame b,md.ltiollS &tid o.llhc: same vulDCnbre bcxhrr-cru kits. And, as \.'311 .. 1, the: borncs _ill be ~ by az.payer,subsidIud (c.d(r:a1 "ODd ........... ae:f.orc-Hurrbnc HulO, 1M ~Lh C:lltoliNolaw was 1MC::as .a ft'IOd«:l b hvrTic:lne:'ponc-Nles. bur tlIe S1:Itc', relucUlI\CC" 10 ~ W ~ .. ft.c:r HUIO may be miltinl Ou: tJ .... JOtnc"I"inIIc:IS I!I.an. moc:.tl. The IUtt"So 1988 Coa.s...!JJ Zone M. na~mt ru Ac1 ~el.and Llt.al.anr hCU$C close-to the: dune unt It..1 W'U IIoIrO d\irds. or mon: dts;lr"," COI.IIc' not be n:bIllll. IIDleu iI ~s. pusl'ted Ihoreward 20 .eel bqIond the dlolDC: !II , r- BIJT •• lIer HUlo,lhr soUt,"C.r.:lh~ CoutJl Council .;dop!c:d wCI")' libcr:ll cr~l!r~ 10 delcrmine .... I\;al cCH\$til';tcd. house II it! /fIQrc th.il"l Or"!: "thir~ tnlX1. ""We wer~ airl)' len ie-MI. m:l)'be 100 kn.icrlt." Otdmir.cd It3tC :Repr.e.sem::lli .... t u~ir Sunkie . .1 chllmpion. or~ bc:;Jch rn:In..:I,gc:menlll':l ill t,~~ Sou:t. C;a rol ina Leli.slJ HIre: and 4 member or Lhc Co;a5-ta! Coun:;1 Slurkie iold!he Miami fkiQid •.. M ...... bc this WJS.l ~onscq .... e-ncc of the ma,~iludc orlhc d.:Imalc H.:,so did tCl this j.:t:lte.'" Lon, bcrort" Ihe 'hurrk.:tl'le OCClJrred. Sturkie .lnd OI"ef$lIIere in the mlds.: of a DI ii'll poliLial t'iJ'hL 10 prOt~"1 tl\c f .. \10' rrQm prodevcTopn1C"l"'.t forccs. AI the SInle time, t,:"c $~Ie .... 01.1 bcini noodrd ...... jlll I ...... stl't.t from OWl'lcrs orvac~!'Il bucllftonl prop«:~y, unabfe 10 ~lld bcal,j~ orLl'le 1 ..... ·J IUtriClions. Bel,"'etn ttot~ mounlinl la ..... :;uiu .nd Hu~ric:.rtC Hugo, the I.cgisr~10'" pa.s~d .. compromise .tmcndmell.ll0 l~ 198813\1.· on June 2~ ~I .1Iows.some cooS11VC1ion ne.r.nc wait.rfront. bUlllOl on .c:ti .... e br.:::::hc:s.or $.lIr.::I c!llncs. The-amer.dmt"nt .a!so prohibits tht: connronit'll or .s.e.:W:lI~ cr.o:-~ they ha',,;e bee n destroyed .Eyen wil" !ht neli' .mend:mnt, me~ is !Iii) the probl~m c r tile federal nood insurance prol:.lm ... rId its cO!I!rcl:s. S 1:lle Serulor John H.yes, :ancMcr membc~ orlht-CoastJ'1 Coun.cil, said IN!L, .flef Murrie-.. nc HUI'" he fu.d" upec!td tht' fc:d~ r.ll prOJram iO lImil rc:bvlldinl er. di:s.ulC1-prOM: .shortTine..s. Bul iJle progr.am doesn't do mud more L.~n pr.:lvid~ IOlJlilt:r ('oll$trvClion rcquittmtn:s The Pfol"'""'. "e ~id, docs nothing 10 push bcat~ fl.oysei ~ci:!rom me short. Ami' £r. ..... ironmenlahs.lslfe nel h<lpP ..... eilht'r. "It t:!CI(:sn'j I'I'IJtc Kl'llC ICI provIde jns.ur ... r"IC~ :OliN en the bcxh -nOL ec%iiclln),. nOI for Pllblic Slrety, and ir: C"C:l't:lil\ly docs""' 1'1'13ke ~r .. ~ ttonomic~lly. ~ .dded EI isc Jo~s of Lhe 1\'ol'io1\JJ Wild! I re-Federlliol'l. ~I C<:Hl'i think d1~ pcol'le in Iowa. re:l)lle d.;allhc:ir 13.\ mCM)' i!. S\lbsldizing v.ac-;"I:ion "omt$ i!l S01J!"l C;arolin.;.~ S L Florid. Rigb'-of·\\ay Mapping Ru).d IIl.gal Fklrid:fJ. Supreme-COUM r::.:rndy Sli"\ICJ.: dowc the Sl:ltC"$ ·:-~flw;n,.nd ~scl'Viltion·l.aw. Thc law, enancd in 198 .... h.ld "nowed!he FlondJ Oc~rtmc:n:: of Tr.;nsporulior. (FOOT) '0 n:~~ ccrridotl ef u~ (or future; ri,ht-of.w:lY ;l("quis~tlon.s. The r"'\11 hold ~e~ pISsed Ic~ns'Jfe Jw FOOT '"oulcl ~ .fforcbble a.ecess t(l p.:Jrt:c!$ of iand dlJI cCluld be us.ed 10 e.lp;lnd bilhw:ly (:a~iIY in this ,~pidly Irowin! S1.:Ilt FOOT l'ud 10 Idcnlify L"'c~ corndo~ <Inc! men develop' mllp hi,hiigtllina L~m. The INP h<ld lO be (jl cd in the :lI'Prop' i:i1I: r;ounry coun.. Orn=e rht: rrn:p w.n filed. it bc;:arne ·,:1et;)j fur-: bn:fOWftCt 10 be,ill any new d~lcpmcru on • rn.:Jp~d P;lI(ctl for up lC .IO)'tIn. The .JUte "'U riUl ;"tql.l;red to crolTJptlls.;r-: lhe Ta~l\Cr uMillM p!Optn)' ....-:u KIWlr.y .ac-Q.uirel1 1n the mcanlime, cht P rope")' owner .-u 5-IU I requirc-4 LO p.I)' propcn:y I;I.\eS on thc: l.:and, ..... hie .. had beell m3dc euen.li.ny vMarke:abk oYC: mir:hL Soot'Wl: like" ~kin. ICl1O'J~ We:I. if; did 1O;he St.ltC\ hir:h COUI"\.. Tht case thJI rorctd lhe iuuc lnvgT\fCd.lf'! e;,Iu-.. crc pucet of land in Tamp10 owned by Jeim \,tnIOlr'C$. 1M. The COIT'P"lI'l)' rilC'd SUil.a&JlnS1 !he SUIte: in 191$ .lier at \Io."U Un.1bie: to comprc1t !he "Ie Ortll::'l prcrpc "y.u a lCwl[ of f DOT uppins; their parctllS .. futll~ ri,ht·or-~y E\fCn.tu:lfl"y. thoe stalC" bous:1u tM la~ rrom Jemu Vcn:\lfeS The toUt conlinl:rd u a ~101 or L."Ie ...... ridil)' of u-.c llw. AJ :l11'J.~lt orltlc: OUK:omc orlhi.$ Skirt. FOOT rOY:ln ) --.. _---~-----.