HomeMy WebLinkAbout0382.091-
July 18, 1991
HONORABlE CITY COUNCIL
P,lo Alto, C.lifornia
Response to Santa Clara County --
Stanford Quarn Road Senera1 Plan Amendment
Members of the Council:
~port in Brief
23
This report transm1ts propo3ed City recommendat;~ns on key land use, housing
ind transPQrtatlon issues associated with Stanford's requested amendment of
the County General Plan for parcels along ~uarry R~ad on either side of
Arboretum Road. The recommendations have been developed in consultation with
Stanford staff and have been agreed to by St~nfcrd's Director of Plannfng.
Acticn by the CounCil is necessary on July 22 bfcause this matter is scheduled
to be ~eard by the Santa Cl.ra County Board of Supervi.or. on July 30, 1991.
BackgrQund
The att.ched April 25, 1991 and January 17, 1991 .taff reports (CMR:238:91 and
CMR:IZI:91) describe the Quarry Road are. amendment. to the Santa Cl.ra County
General Plan s~ught by Stanford University ind the issues of concern to t~e
'ity~ ]n summary, the primary issues in contention include:
• Tne land use designation of the 1.4-acre Rectangle site on the northeast
c~rner of Quarry and Arboretum Roads;
• The amount and timing of housing mitigations that tne County should
apply to development 00 the Reetangl •• it. and the II.S-acre Triangle
site on Quarry Road across from Saks;
• The ~ature and timing of the roadway mitigations on Quarry and Arboretum
Road.; and
• The City's deSire to ha~e the houslng mitigation incorporated 1nto the
County Generil Plan.
The City Council reviewed and comm~nted on the Draft EIR and General Plan
amendments on January 21, 1991. A subsequent effort to resolve differences
between the City and the University was ~nsuc,essful. The item returned to
the Council on April 29 and the Council's r~commendations to Santa Clara
CMR:382:91
, .
... -~
,
\ .---.y ..
I
l
f
!
-
o
County are contained 1n the attached AprIl 30 letter from Mayor Sutorius to
the (ounty Planning Comm'ssfon. the Count1 Planning Commission did not
1nccrpon,te any of the tHy's reCC1Tlfiel'olht\cf'ls .nd the diffenmce in
,ecommend,tfon, between tn. City and the Univer,lty was effectlv.ly
transftrred to the tounty B~ard of Super~is~~s. The City postt1cn vas
restoted fn the atta,h.d Jun. S, I!!I letter from the Kayor to the County
Soard .•
The County Board was sche~u'ed to consider this item on June IS but contin~!d
it It the request of Super~i$or M'~enna. Super~isor MtKenna's 5tlff contacted
City and University representatfves in an effort to facilitate reso1ution of
t~e issues in disagreement. On June 25. Council Member McCown and the City's
Planning efrector met with Stanford representatives to d~scuss and try to
reso1ve these issues. A tentative resolutfon was identified a~d, Dn July 12,
specific wording was rev hoed and agreed to by the Stanford and City Plannj"g
Direttors and Coencil Member McCown.
Propostd Resolution of Ket Issues
Plges 2 and l Df the Mayor's June 5 letter stlte the C;t1 1 $ PQsition on the
key Quarry Road Gen.rol Plan Is,ues. Attachm.nt r contoins proposed
~od\fication. to Page. Z and 3 that r •• ulted fon> t~e June 2S and July 12
titJ-Vnfversity discussions.
The issues ire proposed to bt resolved in the fol1e_ing way:
• Rectangle Site Land Use Designatjon -The Cfty will endorse the
·University lands-Campus· land yse designation for the Rectangle site.
• Incorporation qf Housina ~jtigat10n in Count V General Plan -The
University will endorse inclusion in the County General Plan of a futUre
housing construction m1tigatlon ·sufficient to ~itfgate any housing
impacts of n~nresidentlal development exceeding 175,000 square feet on
either or both of t~e parcels.· The 175,000 square feet of development
represents development incorporated 1n StanfDrdls Gen!ral Use Permit ~nd
mitigated by the County in approval of the Use Permit.
• Roadway rmDroVements -The University will endorse the widening ~f
Arboretum Road b't~een Quarry and Pa1m Orl., ,r,d the compl,tior. of the
partlally·finished widening of Quarry Road between Arbor,tum and W.l,h
Roads. These projects will be reQtJ1'1"ed whe.n drfveways from future
development on the Triangle site enter the respective roadways.
T~e other item on page l, tn! incorporation of future development into
Stanford's Transportation Demand Management program, was not an issue of
content1on bet~een t~e City and t~e University.
CMR:382:91
p:\cmr\quarryrd
L
7/18/91
Page 2
• ,
,
I " --~
'.~~ <-
,
o
Becpnmend;tfon
It 1. recommended that the Council adopt. motien ,uthoriling the Mayor to
send a letter to the Santa Clar. Countl Board of Superv!sor transmitting, ••
Cfty recommendat!on., the wording In Attachment I.
Respo<tfull~ submitted,
;t;:l:?1d/t -£ /d~l,
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER ~
Director of PJannlr,g and
Commun~ty Environment
Related [MRs: CMR:IZI :91, CHR:23B:9J
Attachments: Attachment I . Recommended Modifi,atlon. to Pages 2 and 3
of the City's 6/5/91 letter
JU'e S, 1991 letter
April 30, 1991 letter
CMR:238:91 (4/25/91)
CHR:J21:91 (1/17/91)
cc: Pa10 Alte Planning Commission
S .. nta Chri County (leode-frankl in, Hug", {;raham, Muriel Flil fora,
John Gibbs)
Stanford Univer.ity (Andy Ooti, David C'Bri.n, Phfl Williams)
CHR:382:91
p: \cmr \quarryrd 7/18/91
Page J
-~--... ----~.-'.-~.---;'tL .. l':'
-:~~~~H' .
. : ~
-
ATTACHMENT I
Pecommended Modifications to Page. land 3 of
Cit,'s Jun! S. 199] lett~r to Santa Clara Ccunt Board of Supervisors
CQmpre~ensive Plan Amendment
,Bec:tangle SHe: Delet. RectingTe Site sectic" i,., JII"e 5 Tetter.
Campus Drive Site; The City (If Palo .a.ltD supports the recorooll:nded ·Unh·ersHy
Lands-Academic Reserve and Open Space-designation for the Campus Dr;~e $ite~
Triang]! and Rectanole Sittl:
The City of Palo Alto concurs with the recomme~ded ·Unfvers1ty lands -Campus·
designation for the Triangle and Rectangle Sit!1. but strongly recommends t~at
de~elopment of the site be subject to the following conditions:
A condition be placed in t~e te~t of the County General Plan
Am€ndme.t which requires that approv.l beyond the first
nonresid!ntial project. not to exce~d ]75 1 000 square fEet l on
.t..i.1htr the-Triangle or Rectanole site be tied to appro\o'al and'
construction of a ho~sing project on Stanford lands beyond those
curr~ntly under corlsideration in the General Us-,!! Permit. .l.tJJ!
amount pf additional housing constructed on Stanfprd lands will be
sufficient to mitigate lilV housing imoacts of nonreSidential
development excgeding 175 1 000 square feet on either Dr hoth of the
paree1 $ I
The development permitted under t~e Gener.' Plan Amendment and
future use permits be incorporated into th~ Transportation Demand
Management Program required of Stanford for approval of the
Stanford ~eneral Use Permit.
Approval of deve1cpment on the Triangle site be conditioned on the
widening of Arboretum ~cad between Quarry Road and Palm Drive as
identified .t the top of page 76 of the Dr.ft EIR, .ith additional
me.sures described in Comment No.9 (aJ and (bJ en page 0-4 of th,
Final ErR, and: construction of the further widenin9 of Quarry Road
between Arboretum and' Welch Roads. These conditions should be
app~ied when driveways assotiated with deyel~pment of the Triangle
site directly impact the id~ntif;ed roadway segments.
•
'.< ........ ,. ~
,"
I'
··f-~":Y
" .:,~~<~: .... . :.\~il~~ -~
o,:-nc£ ~ Tl-!E ...... .,.O~
!<lIS· 3Z.·.z3a ...
~. O •• 0)( IC~.5C
".,1..0 "I.."TO,C" 8<1303
S.nt. C1ar. County Board of Supervl.or.
c/o Mr. Don.1d K. Rain., Clerk of tho So.rd of Super,l.or.
Santa C1ar. County
70 We.t Hedolng Street, 10th floor
San Jo.e CA 95110
Members of tne Soard:
Subject: Stanford Qu.rry Road Gener.1 Plan Amendment .nd
fllLaJ Enyjronment,l rmpact Repgrt (rIR) (File 32311
J,ne 5, 1991
This 1.tter cont.in. tne City of P,10 Alto'. recommendations for action on the
Stanford Quarry Road Gener,l Pl.n Amendment .nd final Environment.1 Impict
Report. Our recommendation. differ significantly from the County Planning
Commiss1on's racommendatlons in the ireas of approprilte land use designations
and traffic Bitig.tlon.. Tnroughout the review of thl. project the Cfty ha.
continued to meke it. position clear th.t the hou.lng .nd tr.fflc .itI9.tlon
.e.sure. Identified In the Dr.ft and fln.1 [IR. are inadequate, .nd the
proposed ·Campus· designation of tne Rectangle site is inappropriate. Tbese
recommendations were forwarded to t~e CDunty Planning Commission in I separlte
letter on April 30. 1991. A copy of that letter I, attached for reference.
FInal [IS
The fin-al EIR's responn5. to our cOITI!1ents concerning flec:e-ssary tr.ffic
mitigations ITe considered Inadequate. Our major concern 1s tne ~tdenings of
Quarry ,nd Arboretum Roads, whlc~ were Identified as oe<o".'Y IIltlg.tion. of
future development on t~e Triangle .Ite (ple ••• refer to comment. 8 and 9 on
Fin.1 EIR pages S·g, and comment H on Fin.l EIR pages 29-30). As ,t.ted in
comment H. these .itl~atlon. were recommend.d by the Pal~ Alto City Council as
conditfons of f~ture deveT~pment on tne Tri,ngle s.ite. There appears to be a
~ajor difference of opfnion as to the ~nner fn -m1ch mitfgation ~asures are
handled for. General Plan Amendment yer."s • specific proj.ct. w. wi.h to
cl.rify thot we recognize that no Ict •• l phy.lc.l .itlg.tlons will be required
of the General Plan Amendments. Howe~ert we believe it is apprDprlate and
n.c •••• ry to Identify those .Itlg.tlon. which are known to be needed for
future d.velopment of the .ffected p.rcel,. The need to Improve Quarry and
Arboret .. Roads ha. been known for ye.rs. It I. appropriote that they be
Identified IS mitigation measures at this time. rother than defer the decl.ion
until the. Incremental development of the Triangl. site.
-
,
<.> ;. -.-
\
, .
• <po •• Y
,.;.
-
Cgmorehens1ve Plan Amendment
Rp~tangle Site: Whe~ revtewtn9 the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments, it
is Important for the Board to evaluate the lmmedi'te and long-term needs of
both Stanford and the County. and the tradeoffs and opportunity cost. "hich
result from Iltern.te Comprehensive Pl.n land use desI9n.tlons. There Is •
serious shortage of housin9 available in the north county region. All
potenti,l housing sites .ust be carefully considered, particul.rly those, such
as the Rectongle site, >lhlch are unde'eloped Ind located clo>e to major
tr~ns1t hubs, services Ind 7arge employment centers.
The City of r,lo Alto strongly reco~nds , .ultlple-famlly housing
designation fay the Rectangl. site to offset the potentia' housing Impacts of
development of tht Trfang1e site and to pres~rve opportunit'es to increase the
housing supply. A specific housing d.slgnatlon will lncr •••• the likelihood
of housing. The Palo Alto ComprehenslYe Pl,. has designat.d this sfte for
~ousin9, using a land use designation ~h'ch is cDns~derfd appropriate for use
In the County Genera' Plan,
'/fIjQr l"stitutf.n//fultipl~ '..,iI, Residenti.I, multiple-family are ..
where the occupancy of the unIts Is slgnlfi"ntly limited to individuals
or f •• ilies or both .fflliated with the institution.'
Campys Prive Site: The City of Palo Alto supports the rec~mmended ·University
lands-Academic Reserve and Open Space-designation for the Campus Drive site.
Triangle Site:
The City of P.lo Alto concurs with the recommended 'University lands -Camp"s'
deSignation f~r the Triangle Site, but ltrong1y recommends that deve10pment ~f
the site be subject to the follOWing conditions:
A condition be placed In the text of tho County Genera' Plan
Amendment which requires thlt approval beyond the first
nonresidential project, not to exceed ]75,000 square feet, on the
Triangle Site be tied to appro~il and construction of a housing
project on Stanford lands beyond tho,. ,urrentlf under
conslderatlon_
lhe deyelopment permitted under the General Plan Amendment .nd
future use permits be Incorpor.ted into the Transportation Demand
K"ag_nt Pr,>gram required of St.nford for appro .. ' of the
Stanford 'ener.l Us. Per.lt.
Approvil of develo~nt on the Triang1e Site be conditioned on the
~iden~n9 of Arborttu~ Road btt~een Quarry R~ad and Pi1~ Drive as
identlfled at the top of page 75 of the Draft EIR, "ith additional
me •• ure. described in Comment No. 9 (a) and (0) on pag' 0-4 of the
Final [JR, and construction of the further widening of Quarry Road
between Arboretum and ~e'cb Roads. These (onditions should b.
SUGPAMD .ltT/SC rage 2
,
, ,
{
.~
\
A , ,
)
. ,
. ,
o
applied When driveways assocl.ted with development of the Triangle
sit. directly impact the Identified road.ay segments.
Sinc.r.~
ACK SUlOR1US
Mayor
Attachment.: April )0. 1991 letter froM pal. Alt. Kayor to
Santi Cllra County Planning CommIssion
cc: Pal. Alt. City tounell
Palo Alt. PlannIng Commission
Stanford UnIversIty (Andy Ooty. Phil Vllllams)
Santa Clara County (leode franklin. Hugh Graha., luke Sta.os.
MurIel Fulford)
SUGPA/1D .1tr/sc Page)
I
l
" .. '"
· .... -··i~;·~r.·:
P
..
-
C'''~ C4" ntl: ..... roll'
"1501 3.1:.-;f3a ..
City of )'010 tllto .
~. O. 80.-I02~O
~&I,.e ..... :TO, C'" .";'03
Santa Clari County Planning Commission
</a Hr. Luke Sttmos, Secretary
County Government Center, [ist Wing
San Jose, CA 95110
Members of the Commi!sion:
April 30. 199J
Subject: Stanford Quarry Rood General Plan Amendment and
final [f\vironmenhl Impact Report (fiR) (fi le 3231)
Tbis letter contains Palo Alt~ comments on the Final ElR and the Stanford
Qua,,'Y Road General Phn Amend"",nt. The letter was authorized by the Palo
Alto City Council on April 19. 1991, and contoins significant .odifications to
the Council's January 22 recommendations.
fin., fIg
The Final [lR's responses to our comments concerning necessary traffic
litig.tions Ire considered inadequat!. Our major concern is the widening5 of
Quarry and Arboretum R~ads, whicn were identified as necessary mitigations of
futyre de~e'opment on tne Triangle site (please refer te comments 8 and 9 on
fin.l EIR p.ges e-~. and comment H on final EIR pages 19-30). As st.ted in
comment Ht t~ese mitigations were rec~mmended by the File Alto City C~uncil as
conditions ~f f~ture de~elopment ~n the Triangle site. There appears to be ~
major difference of opinion as to the ~anner in which ~itigati~n measures are
handled for a General Plan Ar.',endment versus Ii speci fie project. \Ie wisn to
clarify that we reco9nize that no actual physical mitigations wi" be required
of the General Plan ~ndments. However. we believe it is appropriate and
necessary to identif)' those D'litigations wl'1id'l are known to "be needed for
f.ture development of the .ffected plrc.l.. The need to improve Quarry and
ArboretUll! Roads has been known for years. It is approp"iate that U,ey b.
fdentifhd IS lIitig.ation Ilenures It this time rather than defer the declslcHi
until the increment.l development of the Triangle sit •.
,
.\
1
"'-
•
I , r-...
t ,
-
, , " ,,./
Slnt. Cllrl Cour.t1
Aprll 30, 1991
P,ge 2
Pl.nnlng Commission
Ge~eril Plan Amen~
T~e City ~ ••• eviowed the April 19, 1991 ropori from the County's Adv,n,e
fllnnt~i Office t~ the Santi Clara County Planning Commission In~ Stanford's
response to OUT reQuest fOT I housing miti9at1~n. eas~d on the Economic Well
eeing Policies in the Santa Clar, County Gener,' Plan (p1eas. see page 32 of
the Fir,.l Environmental Impact Report) and poliCies in the Pilo Alto
Comprehensive Plan (i.e., the Rectangle site has a ~u'tiple family residential
land use d~si9natio·~), wt: recanrne!'ld' that Ue Rechng1e site be designated for
~ultiple ftmily reSrdential use. The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan has i land
use category that appears suitable for use in the County Gener.' Plan:
·lfijor In$tftutf~n/Hu1tiph famny Res;dentiaJ: multipTe-famil)' al"'US
where the occupancy of the unIts is sig,ific.ntly limited to indi,iduals
or families or botn affiliated with the institution~·
This land use cat!gory is consistent with the Housin; ilttrnative addressed on
pages 137-140 of t~e Draft EIR.
Regarding the Campus Drive site, the City concurs with the University and:
County staff regrading the appropriateness of th.e UnIversity Lands-C.mpus hnd
use designation.
Regarding the Triang1e .ite, the City concurs with t~e University and County
staff regard~ng the ap~ropriateness of the UniverSity lands~Campus land ~se
designation. H~eyer, the Cit, reiterates our January 22 recommendations
that:
-A condition be p1aced in the text of the County General Pl.n Amendment
~ich req~ires that approval beyond the first nonr!sidential project.
net to exceed 1~5.~OO square feet, en the Triangle site be tied to
approval and construction of • housing project on Stanford 'ands beyond
those curre:ntly under (.ons'iderat'on.
ihe development perwitted u~der the General Plan Amendment and fut~re
use permits be incorporat!d into the Trin~portation Demand Management
Program req~lred of Stanford for approval Df the Stanford G!neral Use
Permit.
Approval of development on the lriangle site be conditicned en ~e
~iden\ng of Arboretu= Road between Quarry Road and Pa1m Drive as
identified at the top of page 76 of the Draft fIR, wit" additional
measuro. described in Comment No. 9 (a) and (b) on page D·C of t~e fin.l
EIR. and construction of the further widening ef Quarry Road between
Art~retUM and Welch Roads. These conditfens should be applied when
driveways associated wit~ d •• elopment of the Triang1. site directly
impact the identified roadway segments.
\~
...... \',
1 ,
I
. .~
,--1 , .
. --
. -
o
Fln,llr. t". C;ly no longer requests that a ~.xim"m. floor area ratiO of Q.5:1
b •• p~l!.d t. the Triangl. sit.. This change in our •• <.mm.nd.tfa"
acknowledge. t~H future " •• prrmit, will re9"ht. floor .rn tm the Trhngle site.
Sintenly,
tc: P.l. Alto City Council
f.lo Alt. Planning 'ommi.si.n
Stanford University (Andy Ooty. Phil ~il1i.ms, 'harlott, Strom)
Santa Clara County {le.d. franklin. luke Stamos. Hugh Graham. R.bert l. Stord;v.nt)
Oav,'d Power> an4 Auoelat .. (Alida Guern) •
-'-
•