HomeMy WebLinkAbout0421.091Sept.~ber 12, 1991
HONORABLE CITY CCUNCll
Pilo Alt., C.Ilf.roi.
0-
Thi s ~-':!I ,.;11 T be placed' O!1
the 'g"nda of the Palo Alto
City Council meeti~Q of
September 23, 1991.
SOUTH OF FOREST AREA: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOf~ENOATIONS
QlLISSUES ANP STRATEGIES
Hembers of the Council:
REPORT IN BRIi:F
This rt!port transml~s the Planning COlTITl'ission's recolTl1'1endations and cOITJTl~nts
on South of FJrest Area (SOfA) issues ind the COTm1;ssicn's recol1T~endat;ons on
strategies that address these issues.
Background
On September 13, 1990, the City Council and Planning Commission held a joint
meeting to diSCUSS SOFA issues that had been r-aised C"rer time by a iJlumber of
;ndivfd~als. including nearby re$idents of the SOfA arei. At that meeting,
tbe City Council dir~cted the Planning Commission to Establish priorities on
SOfA issues and s~ggest strategies in addressing these issu~s. On Oecember
12, 1990, the Planning Commissicn established a subcommittee to respond to the
Council direttive. The Planning Commission's Sout~ of Forest Avenue
subcommittee ((omaiss;oners Nuber. Hirsch and Glazferj discussed the range of
issues and possible strategies it two meetings on March 13, 199] and May ]5,
1991. Members of the public also participated it these meeting'. Shortly
after the s~bcGmmittee concluded its recommendations on May 15. 1991. the Palo
Alto (~amber of Commerce, on June 4, ]99!, sponsor~d a publir. forum on options
for the South of Forest commercial area. At i regular meeting ~n August 14,
19~1. the Planning CDmm7ssion heard additional comment fr~rn the public,
including South of Forest Prea business owners. The CommiSSion then endorsed
the subcomeittee's rec~ndations on S~uth of Forest Area strategies for City
C.uncil consideration. [Att.ched ire :) the Augu,t 9, 1991, report to the
Plann~ng Commission Gn the subcommittee recommendations for the South of
forest Are. including .11 .ttachments. ,nd 2) a July IE, 1991, lett.r from the
Ch~r of ComBerce summtrizing tne discussion of the June 4. 1991, forum.]
Plannjng Commissi~n RecPmm?ndations on >QF_~
The Planning CDSmis~ion concurrfd with the subcommittee's findings that visual
concerns are the most important issues faCing the SOFA area wit~1" a
relatively short five-year ~orizon and that land use issues are of equally
ClIR ;421: 91
--"-~.ao.\.i/JII
, ,
•
. .
/
o
ft1gh i~porti~ce from a lon~er-t~rm, lC-to 15-year perspective. Therefore,
the P1anning Conmissjon, in 115 recommendations, considered visu"l issues and
strat~g;es addressing t~ese issues to be of the hlghest priority for thf short
term, and land use issues and rf?ated strategi2s to be of equally high
priority for the long term.
The Planning C01ll'l1ission's specHk recolMIel"!-dations referred to the SU.'MIary
table of issues and strategies that appeared ~n pages 1 and 2 in ~MR:489;O of
Sept.ober &. 1990. (1his CMR is in attachment to th, August 9, 1991, report
to the Planning Cnmmfssion.) The Commission;s recommendations appear on the
following table.
PRIORITY
Highest
Highest
Middle
lower
ISSUE
Visual
(Short Te",)
J land Use
(Long Te"",
Parl.lng
Traffic
SU6GESTED STRATEGIES
Complete the Urban DesIgn Plan
Underground utilities in South of
Forest commer~ial area
Plant ~treet trees fcllawing Urban
Desl n Plan Guidelines
~11ow auto service businesses to
remain indefinitely
Consider higher density mi~ed use
officejresidenliil use incentives
along the Alma corridor
Consider more effective ~ousin9
transitions along Emerson Street
Review permitte4 uses in (O-S and
consider scme moGificaticn to
elimi~ate inappropr1ite uses
Do not re are a s ecific lin
City CQu~cil t~ continue to re~i~~
off-site parking a~reements
Consider el,minating parking deficit
credit provisions in 20fling
regul atiar.$ when uses cka.nge and
intensif
00 not consider street closures
Staff Concurs .;th t~e Planning Commission that SOfA ~is~al issues an~
strategies for addressing these issues can be completed within a relativeiy
short time frame. Completion of the Urban Desfgn Plan should occur tat! t~1s
year. Furthermore, completion of two utility undergrol.lnding projects, that
include lost of the commercia' sites in the South of For!st Area, is ~xpecte~
by June 1994. Additional tr •• planting, where feasibl., could b. implemented
withi" the next fi~e years~ assuming c~rr~nt drought condit;cns are relieved
OIR:421:91
p :\cmr\sofa
9/12/91
Page 2
•
,\ .. ,
,
t
• •
-
1
1
1
!
1
l
I ,
• •
by sufficient rainh11. Staff rer:olTl':'1ends that n.e Couocil approve an
assignment to stiff to prepare i street tree planting program for SOFA.
',he Planning CulllTlission. in considering strctegies for land use issues in
SOfA. believed that t~10ges in 1and use policies for the SOfA commerc,a1 area
would r~Quire I rea$onable amount of tim~ before results could be T€alized.
Staff agrees wit~ this Planning tommissio~ obser~it;cn. 1he experience alor.g
[1 Camino Real south of Matadero Creek is an excellent example of the time lag
between chln~es in 'ity land use policy and actua1 changes in us~ and
function. In that area, the City appro~ed ~ajor changes in land use policy in
1976 and commensurate changes in zoning in 197$. y~t th~ pace ~f change in
tnat section of [1 Camino Real has begun to accelerate only in r!cent years.
The Planning (.ommission, in: its land use recorrrnendations., empnasized that the
~~t important lan~ use strategy to pursue should be directed to.ar4 a'lowing
aute service businessH te remain in the SOFA area.. [Currently, there are
21 auto SerY~CE bUSinesses and une vacant auto ser~ice site in this area -see
attached ~ap and list of uses.) Public testimony on t~is issue at tha August
14, 1991 P1anr.1ng Commission meet,n9 was. ,nteresting because 1t .as one Qf the
few meetings held on SOfA where auto service bus,ness owners appeared and
commented o~ (6ct~rs that could res.ult in retention of auto serwice
businesses. One auto service bUSiness owner, who did not own the property
where his business is located, said ee-ohomic competition from higher ),ieldlog
uses, e.g., as offices, posed as greet a threat t~ surviva1 of auto service
use~ in the SOFA area as did the threat of City regulation phasing ~ut such
!~$e.s. He also claimeci that O'flTlers wiJuld improve the appeara.nce of these auto
service busin!sses, if they did not feel threatened Eitner by private market
forces or by public ri!gulation.
T~e City has various options t~ consider in retainjng auto service businesses
iA this area. These options range fr~m 1J pro-actf~ely encouraging auto
servfce retention by modifying some permitted uses in the CO-5 district and
possibly limiting redeve10pment options tnrough a loning o~erliY di~t~ict for
all Dr part of SOFA, t~ 2) allOWing auto service businesses to remain w~ile
encouraging some redevelop0Ent in selected ~reas of SOFA.
A third policy option not recommended by eitnfr st~ff or the Planning
Commission would be to actively encourage rede~e10pme~t and discourage aut a
service uses tnrougn nonconforming zoning and other regulations.
Staff believes that if the City Council concurs wit~ the Planning Commission's
emphasis placing retention Qf auto service business€s as the highest priority,
then it should be specific i~ its direction to the Planning CGmmission
1'e9"rding the extent that the Corrmhsion should pursue proactive strategies ir.
retaining auto $er~ice for ~t leist portions of SOFA. While the Planning
Commission's recommended land use and parking strategies ire relitively
compatible, ~ome strategies would be r~re effective in retaining auto service
businesses while other strategies would encourage changes of use in selected
areas of SOfA. The strategies tnat (an most aggressively ~eek retent~on of
auto uses incl~de: 1) considerati~n of a spec~al overlay zane for ~uto
.service (not recorrroended by the Commission); 2) el iminating some CO-S
CMR:421:91
p: \cllr\soh
9/12/91
Page 3
•
'.
peril; tted uses that may offer higher rent or eeer,emie re~:jrns than auto
service; 3) referril of off-site parklf'i!jJ agreements to the City Coundl; and
4) elimination of credits an parking deficits when uses change and i~te~sify.
If Cou~cil believes that auto services should be allowed to remain in SOFA but
recognizes that over time many such businesses m~y well close or r~locite
elsewhere, then Council shou1d dfrect the Commission to pursue and em~hasile
strategies acknowledging the likely displacement of these businesses over
time. StTitegies allcwing retention of auto service but e~courage
redevelopmer,t in selected areas include: 1J mixed use incentives llong the
Alma r.ortidor and 2) a housing tranSition 110ng portitns of Emerson Street.
Staff supports t~is latter approach. Some auto service businesses in the SOFA
area could and snould be allowed to remain. However, tht Alma corridor, is a
Ilajor arterial, and gi"ven its proximit,Y to public trarlsit, is an appropriate
location for nigher density ~ousing combined wit~ some amount of ground floor
commercial. I~ addition, consideration of more !ffective transitional loning
along EIIenon street where single family resider/till development interfaces
with commercial uses is appropriate. As a result, staff supports directing
the Planning Comm~ssion to i~1t~ate land use stritegies for specifi~ areas of
SOfA incloding: 1) the aforementioned stritegy to c~nsider mixed use
incerftives along the .Alma corridor, ind 2) the strategy to consider a more
effective ~ousing transition along Emerson Str2et. The combined effect of
these two strategles will be the likely decline in SOfA~s auto ser~ice
business over the next ]0 to 20 years.
Nonetheless, to encourage some retenticn of auto ser~ice in SOFA, staff
supports the two ather J'ecolTl11ended strategies to consiO'er modification to
penaftted uses in the CO-S district, and to consToer elimination of credits on
parking deficlts ~hen uses change and intensify. Modifications to CO-S
permjtt~ (and presumably conditional) uses will require fine tuning If
retention ~f auto and business serv1c~ uses is given a high pr1ority_
Elimination Gf credits for parking deficits where ~ses change could f~rtt.er
reinforce retention of eXistirlg uses in SOfA, except iD those situations where
either an existing large lot or assfmbly of parcels makes provision of
additional parking feasible. One concluding item on tnesp land use
strategies, the Planning Corrmission said that the City should work with
business owners in the SOfA area if it ~ishes to pursue strategies of
retaining auto service busines5e~. In develop1ng draft responses to the
Council's direction, staff ;~tends to ~et with both busin2ss owners a~d
commercial and residential property owners. The details of a public
participation process will be developed ifter specific Council directions have
be~n given to the CommiSSion and staff.
S~ARY AND CONClUSION
In conclusion, staff supports the stritegies retommended by the Planning
Commfssion for the SOfA commercial area. Staff requests that the CounCil, if
it approves pursuing these strategies, be quite specifi, to the Planning
Commission in the priority it p1aces on retaining auto service uses in t~is
area.
CMR:4ZI :91
p: \cmr\sofl
9/IZ/91
Page 4
•
. .
As rioted ear11er, SOlIe of the visual conct-tns of tne South of Forest
commercial areal wh;(~ haye been raised by a n~mber of ~earby resldents, can
be .ddressed wit~in • rel.tl,oly short time frame. The City .1reJdy 15
C:lJII!i1itteci to cOlnplet~n9 Slany iJf them. On ti,e other 'rIand, potenthl land use
strategies will require longer time frames before changes can be expected to
occur.
If directed by touncil, staff would e,pect to return to the Planning
C_"ission by o"ly 1992 with proposed chaoges to zoning reg"lotlo.s on CD-S
perNitted useS .nd on parking deficit cred't~. Specific proposals for the
three majGr land use strategies. i.e., 1) auto service retention, 2J Alma
c~rridor mixed ~se intenti~e$, and 3) Emerson Street housin9 transit'on ~ould
be submitted to tho Planning Commis,i". in late 1992.
RECCHI£NOATlON
Staff recommends City Council approval of Planning Commissfon recommended
strategies regarding South of Forest issues. Staff further requests that the
City Countil tlarify for the Planning Commission the priority that it sho,ld
place or. retaining auto service uses in this area. In ad~ition, staff
recommends that the City Council direct staff to prepare I street tree
pl.nting program for SOfA.
Re~.ctf.lly submltted,
~, ~ORGE Z~E
Assistint PI
Cj)(~~
WILLIAM lANE~ \
City Managor
I. "/ ;t_,/~d)( A~:cd~ ,
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER ~
Director cf Plinning and
Community Service
Attachments: 1. Rep~rt of A~Qu$t 9, 199J, to t~e Planning tommissi~~ on
subc~mmitte~ recommendations f~r the South of rore3t Area
2. Letter of Ju1y 16, 1991, from the Chamber of Commerce
summarizing June 4, 1~91, forum on South of Forest ~Iea
3. Map of SoutM of Forest Area, with list of USE
4. fxcerpt Plannin9 Commission minutes of August 14, 1991
cc: Persons whQ attended South of Forest meetings
CMR:421:91
p: \<OIr\so fa
9/12/91
Page 5
•
August 9, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION
Palo Alto, California
Attachment 1
SQUTH OF FOREST AREA SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS ON ISSUE} AND STRATEG',S
Members af th! Commission:
REPD~l IN BRIH
ThIS report tr.ns~its the South of Forest Area tSOF~) Subcommittee's
rec~mmendatl~ns on 1) establishing prioritfes for Soutq of Forest Ar~a issues~
and 2) se1pcting strategies in address'ng these issues. The Planning
C~mmission is requested to review tnese TecDmm~ndat;ons and for~ard its
reconrnendations to the City (nunen for final direction regarding ho'..t to
proceed on South ~f ~orest issues.
BACKGROUND
on September i3 t 1991. after concluding a Joint City Council/Planning
Ccmmissio~ meeting on South of Fcr~st Ayenue issues. t~e City CounCil referred
this item back to t~e Planning Ccmmission to establish priorities and makf ~
recommendation on ~ppropriate strategits to address these 'ssues. (See
attached CKR:489:0 of September 6, 1990 and minutes of the joint Citl
Counci1/P1annin9 Commission meeting of September 13, 1990.) 0, December 12,
1990, t~e Planning Commission referred tnis item to a special Subcommittee
cllns.isting of COlm\issionerr. G1i.zier t Hirsch and Huber. ThE: Slib-cotmlHtee held
iw~ public ~eetin9s on March 13, :991 i.nd May 15, 1991. (Summary notes of
these meetings and cQrrespondence r~ceived from the puhlic to the Subcommittee
are attached.) Tn addition, on June 4, 1991, the Palo A1to Cnumber of
Commerce sponsored a forum on nptions for the South of forest commercial area.
(Minutes of this June 4 forum a15. are attached.)
~embers of the public who attended these subcommittee meetings included
property and business owners, residents within the South cf forest co~~ercial
area, members of the Urban Oesig~ Committee and residents living ~ear the
South of Forest comm~rcial area. After holding discussions with the public at
these two SUbcillTlnittee ',\ret ings, the Subcnmmi ttee made several informal
findings before developin~ its recommendations on appropriate issues and
str.tog!" .
SOfA\)
gz
~!n"~-----------'--
8/9/91
Page I
•
.-
'/--.
-.~., "
o
InitiAl)), the S~bco~tttee acknowledged that the Soutn of Forest commercia'
arei fs changing and that it is likely to co~tinue to cna"ge ever time. The
Subcarnm1ttee .1so acknowledged that many of the major issues are ~isua'
concerns reflecting the appearance of aute and business services that ~ave
been located ~n this commercial area for many years. The Subcommittee cited a
number of strategits that arE! either plir.ned for imp 1ementation t e.g., utility
undergroundfng or completlon of the Urban Design Plan, ~r that could be
implemented within i reasonabl) short time frame in order to address these
visual issues.
T~e Subcommittee stated tnat land use issues, including those discussed in tns
September 6. 1990 report to the (itl Council (CMR:489:0). are equally
important in the cent ext of conSidering lcng-term goals for this area.
However, the Subcommittee recognized that strattgies on land use require
longer time frames before actual changes ~ay occur. Thus, while the City
could take actions on land use policies withfn the next year, the effects of
suc.h actions may not be reillized' for a r,umb~r of years.
lastly, as the 5ubcommlttee reviewed issues and possibie strategi~s for the
area, it 1) emphaslzed the need to allow eXisting auto serwice uses to remain
in this commercial a~ea gi~en their declinin~ number in Pale Alto, and 2)
Teaffi~d that incent1~es to encourage c~anges of use ~Jy well result in some
degree of intensification o~er time.
SOUTH OF FOREST AREA SU8CO~ITTE£ RlCOKKENDATIONS
Tne Subco~;ttee de~eloped its recommenda' Ions by referrinJ to the summary
tahle of issues and strategies that appE" ..red on pa;i'!.$ 1 and 2 in CMR:4S9:0 of
September 6, 199~. Specific Subcommitt~e recommendations on assigning
priorities to issues and sU9gest'ng strategies ippear i~ the following tabl!.
Priprity
Highest
:-lighest
SOFP.\l
gz
~
Visual
(S'ort Torm)
land Use
(Long Te",,)
Suggested Strategies
Complete t,e Urban DeSign Plan
Unde't"ground utilities in SDUU, of
forest commercial area
Fl~nt ~treet trees following Urban
uesign Plan Gufdelines
Al1o~ auto service bUSinesses to remain
indefinitel,
Consider higher density mixed use
offfce/resident;al use incentives
along the Al~ corridor
Consider .are efftct~~e housIng
transHior'lS 11cr'9 [lIM!rsQn Street
Review pen.itted uses in CC-S and
conSider soee aodi(icltio~ to eliminate
inappropriate uses
Go not prepart I specifj~ plin
8/9/91
Page 2
Middle
Triffic
SU'f1ARY AIID CONCLUS 1011
/'
o
City Council to continue to reYlew off
site parking agreements
Consider el1mlnatin9 PGr~;ng deficit
credit provfs1nns in zoning regulati~ns
when uses change and intensify
ro not consfder street closures
Staff supports the Subco.mittee;s recommendations ~n priority of issues and on
appropriate striteg1es for the South of Forest cOlm'lercial area. .lIas noted
earlier, the Subcommittee acknowledged that s~bsequent modificacf~n to use
regulations reQuire longer ti~ frames before actual changes occur.
Nonetheless, staff supports the Subcommittee's recommended strategies on
modifying the loning regulations that would lJ eliminate inappropriate
permitted uses in t~e CO-S O;strfct. and 2) create I more effective transition
t, nearby Io.4densfty residential ir~iS on E~rson Street. Staff generally
supperts the rec~ndit~on to consider ~ig~er densities for mixed commercial
and reslder.t1al use5 .10ng the Alma Corridor in the Sout~ of Forest Area.
HD~ever, it fs important to emphasize t~at if the purpose of this
recommendation lS to encourage land use changes. tne new ~ixed use d~nsit1es
will undoubtedly need to b. qui" high and the likely new projects could
gene-rilte substantial increases In trafflc~ Also, effective ~1ghef~density
zonlng may need to encourage assembly of parcels in order to allow for
appropriate size and design of underground garag€s. Staff understands the
concerns about on-street parking that result in the recommendation to consider
elimination of credits for parking deficits ~nen uses change and intensify
within the (O-S and C04N So~t~ of Forest areas. An observation regarding this
recommendation is that for many of the auto-ser~lce oriented uses, the effect
of tne recommendatto~ may be to encourage retention of uses ~nless parcel
assembly can pr~vide tne additional parking opportunities that ire often
needed wtt~ change of lind use.
With the cOlTlTlents noted above regarding these recorrmendatiorls t staff concurs
with the Subc~mmittee's recommen~ations.
£HVIRONM£NTAL ASSESSMENT
Environlnental assessment of the impacts of the Council poliCies. wi 11 be
undertaken prior to any implementation.
RECOII1ENOATlON
Staff reco~nds tnat the Planning Commission forward t~e South of F~rest Area
Subcommittee's recommendations to the City Council for cons1d~ration in
deterafning sllbsequent directi .... es to the Planning Corrmi $S1on to address S{)I~th
of forest Area issues.
SOFA\!
gz
.....
B/9/91
Page 3
•
\
" ,
"i;',"
, ·i~.',·~-:'--
i
P' I' /f , '7/· "",.f ! iI/L .rtf:/, ,A.I/I.;....>_ ....... --t,.-.... 4' "'-, __ ':..
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER
Oirector of Pl,nnfng and
Con~unity Environment
~tt.chm.nt': (I) September 6, 19910 CMR:489:0
(2) S'ptember 13, 1990 Joint City Couroell/Planning Hinutes
(3) ~.rch 13 and May 15, 1991 SOF~ Subco"",ittee SUlIIl\ary Not.s
(4) Public eocrespondence submitted to the Subcommittee
(5) Ju,e 4. 1991 Ch.mber of Commerce forum Minutes
cc: Persons who ittended Sout~ of forest meetings
SOfA\!
gz a/9/91
Page 4
1 ....
~'"
. ,
~, -' '," ... " . .
September 6, 1990
HONORABLE CITI COUNCIL
H~RABL[ PLANNING COMMISSION
Palo Alto, CalifDrnia
SOOTH OF FOREST PLANNING lliGES
~ember5 of the Council and Commission:
Cn August 6, 1990, the City touncil dirocted staff to schedule a ,pee;'l joint
City Council-Planning Commission meeting to discuss key planning iss~es
re1~t'n9 to the South of Forest Area. 1his joint meetin9 ~il1 be he1d on
Thursday, September 13, 1990, at 7:30 p.m. in the 'ity (ounei' Chambers at
Palo Alto City Hall.
CONT[JIT OF REPORT
This re~ort 1) ic~~~ifies major land use policy options, 2J ident;fies key
iss~es of the South of Forest Area, 3) suggests alternative courses of action
for addressing these issues, and .J highlights possible policy and
implementation conflicts that may arise in addressing the key issues of the
South of Forest Area.
The following Tab1e identifies South Df forest Area i5sues and i~ternati~e
strategies that are discussed in later sections -.if th111; report.
SOUTH OF FORESl ISSUES AND SIRA1E.IES
Land Use Issue$.: Inter.s~fication and Autc/Sl.!$iness~~,rvices
l~ Intensificat10n
2". loss of Auto and Business Services
Strat!!lles
1. Modification of off·site Parking Procedures
2. liberalization of Offi,e Limits
3. Restrictions on Permltted Uses
4. Parcel-by-Parcel Regulations
CMR:489 :0
\ ,
.'
-'
'-
land Use Issues: ~ousln..g
1. Opportunities on Alma Corridor
2. Transition with Existing Residential
itr"iltegJ~..!
I. Reccnsider H~using an Alma Corridor
2. Rezoning t.o ~€sidential
3. Increase Housing Opportunities in Commercia1 Zones
Traffic rs~ues
Traffic on Residential Streets
Strategies
I. Closures
2. land Use and O;;';elopment Restrictionoe:.
Paric.in9 Issues
1. Visual Concerns
2. Parking Deficiencies
Strategies
I. Co~nci' R~viewing Off-Site Agreements
l. Elirnina~ing Credit for t~;sting Deficits
3. fstablish'ng an A$sessme~t District
Yi~ua' Issues
I, Buildings and Uses
2. Surface Parking Lots
3. Overhead Utility lines
4. Absence of S!reet Trees
Strategies
1. CompTeting Urban Design Plan
2. Undergrounding of Utility lines
3. StrEet Tree P1aning Pr~9ram
Issue Conflicts
1. Loss of Desired Commercial
2. Increased Traffic from Ne~ Uses
3. Effects on Pri~ate Market Upgrading
Special City CouncJL_!_~_t __ fJanning Commission Meeting on __ ~~E.!_~_lTlber 13. 1990
The special ~eting on September 13, ]990 will prowide opport~nity fer the
City CounCil and Plannin9 Commission )) to hear discussion of tne South of
Forest Ar!a's ~ey issues from neighbors, property owners and business~s; 2) to
CltR:4B9:0 son ssue/gzdsk
9/6/90
-2-
/
; ,
/
discl.OSS altel"flative courses of iIIIcti<ln discussed in this report or suggested by
member' of the public; and 3) to pro'i~e (ouncil direction to the Planning
Commission regarding iddressing ~ajor issue~ ider.tified f~r the South of
Forest Arpa arei.
BACKGROUND OF SOUTH Of FOREST AREA
land Use Designations and Z~~
The following ~aps shUw 1J Comprehensive Map land ~ses ciesignations for the
S~uth of Forest commercial and adjacent residential areaS, and 2) the znning
for these same areas. The list that follows th~ Zoning Map identifies
permitted and conditional uses in the CO-S and CD-N districts.
CMR:489:0
SOf i 55 ue/gzd, k
9/6/90
-3-
ii4¥§ SerVfCe Commerciar
"'" Multiple Family Residen'.ial
_ Single Family Residential
l1li Neighborhood Commercial
_ Major Instttutional I Specrat !=a.cWties
~m
j
~iL=_'~~I~~~~~W-
BRYANT
~,~f9A,~~
RAMONA ~
~ lfi ~1ir-t.-TT=i'llrj
EM'EF.$ON S~t<$-=;~L~~
CMR:489:0
·-'·L·· .. ;., .
•
~b§m
lJhlilFim rrT1
~ sITe LOCATION
South of Forest Area
_4_
j
I
I
I
-
< •
PC-2637
CMR:489:0
L
•
Ji:~::':';!' r::----~i ;'i:;~
~f,I,;~J
-5-
•
..
.i
!
~
... '
~-.,
-----1..-
o
PE~ITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES
IN co-s ~~ CO-N DISTRICTS
!!.~e_~ _ CDc-"S _____ "'CD"'-"'N'-_
Accessory fa~;'lties and uses customarily
incidental to permitted uses Permitted
Administrative office services as limited by
Section 18.49.080(d) Permitted
Ambulance ser~ices Conditional
Animal care, but excluding boarding and
kennels Permitted
An;~al tare, including boarding and kennels Conditional
Automotive services Conditional
Aulomot1ve serwlee stations, ~ubject to
site an~ design review Conditional
Business and trade schools Pe~itted
Churches and religiolls institlJtiofis Permitted
Commercial recreation Conditional
Conwalescent facilities Permitted
Day care centers, large day care homes,
small day care homes und residential care
homes Permitted
Driye-In senic.es or take-out services~
associated w1tn permitted uses--a maximum
of two s~ch serwic.~s shall be permitted within
1,000 feet and each use sha1l not be less than
150 feet from one! another Conditional
Eating and drinking ser~ices, !xcept drive-in
and take-out service~ Permitted
Farmers' markets Conditional
Financial servic.es, e~c.ept d:""ive-in serwices Permitted
General busfn~ss services Permitted
~ome occupations acc.~ssory t~ permitted
residential uses Permitted
Hotels without kitch,ns Permitted
CHR;489:0
SDfissue/gzdsk
Pennitted
Not Allowed
Conditional
Permi'ttad
Not ~llo.ed
Not Allowed
Not Allowed
Conditiona1
Condit iona1
C.onditional
Permitted
Condi tionai
Permitted
Conditional
Condit iona1
Not Allowed
Permitted
Not Allowed
9/6/90
-6-
,
\
~ot~l$ ~jth not mor~ than ten percent of
rooms with kitchens
Hotel~ built after August 5, 1985, having
an un11mited number of rooms with kitchens
Uquor stores
Lodging
Medical, profe~sional and genera1 business
'Offices
Mortuaries
Outdoor recreatiDn services
Parking as a principal use
Personal services
Private clubs, lodges or fraternal
organizations
Private educational facilties
Recy,ling centers
Retail services
Reverse v~nding mac~ines
Shopping centers
Sf~l!-fami11 uses, t~o famtly uses and
multiple-fami11 uses
Temporary parklng facilittes, provioj2d
that such facil it ies shall remain '10 more
than five y~ars.
Transportation terminals
Utilities facilities. excluding construction
or storige yards, ~aintenance fac11ities. or
curporation yards
Warehousing and distribution
,--,
Condit ional Not Allo.ed
Conditional Not Allowed
Permitted Conditional
Permitted Perm; Hed
Permitted Pe""itted
Permi tted Conditional
Cond; tional Conditiona1
Conditional Not Allowed
Permitted Permitted
Permitted Conditional
Permitted '::ond it i ona 1
Condit 10nal Conditional
Permitted Permitted
Pennitted Permitted
Not Allowed Not Allowed
Permitted Permitted
Condit lanal Conditionll
Cone; tional Not Allowed
Condit ional Conditional
(ond 1t i anal Not Allowed
In discussing the South of Forest Arei~ it should be pof~ted out that a
precise boundary of the area has not b€en Esta'lished. The Comprehensive Plan
~ap designation and t~e zoning for the commercial portions of this general
area south of forest Avenue ~~ye been in effect since the City Council acted
on the Oowntown Stud1 in ]985. At th~t time. changes from ser_ice commerc1al
CMR:489:0
SOfissue/gzdsk
9/6/90
·7·
o
to neighb~rhood c~mmerciil were approved for most of the eastern side of th~
9{){} block of Emerson Street. The remaining sendee cO:mlerchl designations
for this area were approved in 1976 when the original Camprfhensi lie Pl an was
adopted. (o~pr~hens,¥e Plan Mip deSignations for adjacent s1ngle-fami1y
areas t wh;(~ fnc1ud~ bot~ R-l and R-, duplex zoned ~istTicts, and for adjacent
multiple-fa~ily areas, w!re also apprc~ed as part ~f the 1976 p1an.
City Actions
Key City Council act fens that nave affected the South of forest Area o~er the
last twenty years include 1) the Fire lone I Study in 1974 that r€sulted in
the rel0n;ng of sites (In the periphery of downto"n Palo Alto t inc1uding
portions of t!1;s area from COimlercial to residential; 2) the approval of the
Comprehensive Plar: in 1976; 3) the adoption of a new Zoning: Ordinance and Map
in 1918 that resulted in expansion of the R·l zoned district and a creation of
the R-2 duplex district for some ;es;oentlal neighborhoods adjacent t~ the
South of Forest Area comreercial area; 4) the Downtown Study in 1986~ and 5}
extension of tne (Pi Pedestrian Combining District regulations to this area in
1988.
Key elements of tne Downtown Study that affscted thls area wer?:
]. A reduction in the floor area ratfo (FAR) for in.c:reases if!
de .... elc~.llent in areas zoned CO-5 and CD-N from 2.0 to 1 to 0.4 to 1;
2. A rezoning of most of the eastern side of the 900 blOCk of Em~rson
Street from CS Servite Commercial to COoN Downtown-Neighborhood
Carmie rei a 1 t
3. An ioclu~ion of the South of For~st COoS and CD-N area in the
350,000 square feet growth ca~ on additional devel~pment that was
applied to the entir~ Downtown CO district.
4. Imposition of a 5,OOO-square-foot limit ~!'! ~ffk:e i..ise.s. for sites
within the COoS and CD-N zoned areas with no use permit option to
exceed the limit in the CO-5 zone;
5. A de~lining gradation of housing densities within this South of
forest Area c{ll11ilercial area from RM-30 densities for most sites irl
the CD-S area betw~en ~lma and Emerson [i.e., the CD-S{P) district
un the Zone Mapj to RM-lS densities for CO-S and CO-N zoned sites
abutting or near r!sidenthll)-zcmed parcels along the not'ttl side of
Addision Avel'lue. and on the eastern side of Emerson Street (i. e.) the
CD-Stl)tP), CO-S(I)(P), and CO-N(1)(P) distr;cts on the Zone Map].
6. A transition setback reg..:1ation for con.nereial1y~zoned sites stlaring
a common b10ck face ~itn residentially-zoned s;tes that requires
street setback for the commerCial sites to be the same as the street
setback required' for adjacent reSidentially-zoned sites,
Higher density ho~sing deveTop~ent incentives for COoS sites along and near
the Alma corridor were originally recommended by t~e Planning Commission but
were not approved by the City Countll, because the Council feTt such
incentives could accelerate displacement of existing lutomoti~e and business
se~ice uses and the incentives would not attract the type of housing most
needed in Palo Alto, i.e., family hOllsing.
~R:489:0
SOFissuejgzdsk
9/6/90
-8-
\.
. ~,;-.;j
" ,~' .'
. ,
As redevelopment and c~anges of use cont!nued in the South of Forest Area,
st.ff not1f"d the City Council in 1.t, 1986 of proposed off-s1t' parking
arrangements associated .it' the proposed redevelopment of the old Podoleford
OTdsmobtle site to a food market and of a proposed reuse of a portion of the
Ptninsul. Cteamer) it 875 A1ma to I~ eatin9 and drinking estab1'shment.
In 1988, in response to i recommendation from the Architectural Review BOdrd
(ARBj, the City Council appro~ed tn extension of the (P) Pedestrian Combinin9
Distrjct regulations and design guidelines to all commercially zo~ed sites
South of Forest. The purpose of this (P) Combining Dlstrict extenSion ~as to
assure that new de~e1opment in the area would be designed at ground floor
l~vtis in a compatible manner for pedestrians w~ltin9 in the area. In
approving extens70n of the (P} Combining District, the Council requested thai
the ARB apply t~e (PJ District design gu~delines jUdicrously for projects
under review t in order to encourage retention ~f existing serv~ce commercial
businesses in the area.
Recent, Co rtC~.!!!..s_
As changes hive occurred or have been vroposed in this area~ residents in the
nearb~ res;dent~al areas s~uth and east of these (~-S ~nd CO-N zoned areas
South of Forest have voiced concerns over I) the increasing intensification of
commercial uses in this area; 2) the overspill of parking into the adjacent
neighborhoods; l} inc~eased traffi'; 4} thp ~1su~1 bl1ght affecting much of
the area; and S) the ne~d for mare effective transition between the existing
CD~S and CD~N zoned areiS and the adjacent residential ~eighborhoods.
Major land.Use Policy Options
[n developing the follDWing inform~tion on issues and alternati~e strategies.
four not mutually excl~sive po1icy options are available for the Soutn of
Forest Area.
1_ Mairtain the current ComprehEnsive Plan land ~se designations and zoning
regulations with some modifications to the zoning regulations.
2. Preserve the essenthlly service camrnerchl nature of the area by
adopting po1icies and re9u1ations to rerluce or e1iminate most or a11
reta i 1 ~ offi ce and hou s; n9 reuse potent; a 1 .
3. Facilitate (.orJ'oIersion of land to housing use tnrough some combination of
rezoning hnd and increasing ttle housing potential in thi! CO-5 zane.
4. Fac11itate converslon of the area to a retail and related commerCial use
extension of the Downtown.
The following information focuses on the first tnree options.
ISSUES
land Use Issues: ]ntensificoiltio~_I}_d Auto/8us~ness Services
land use issues for th~ South of Forest Area fall into three general areas:
intensification, retention of auto and service commerciil and housing.
CMR:4S9:0
SOFi ssue/gzdsk
9/G/90
-9 -
•
"\
[ntensificatlon w1thin the So~th of for~st Area ~as become an issue of
incTeasfnq concern to the adjacent neigh~rs as c~anges in the area either
haye occurred, e.g., the (merson Park complex that includes the Whole Foods
Market, or ire currently proposed, e.g., the reuse of the Peninsula Creamery
bui1d1ng at 87S Alma ~treet. On one ~and. the community and many of the
~tishbor$ appreciate the proximity of a lon9-a~aited food market that ser~~s
this area and otner neighborhoods near Downtown P.10 Alto. In addition, many
individuals acknowled1e the visual impro~ements that ha~e resulted from such
redevel~pment. On t~e ether hand, nearby residents ~ave experienced increased
tr1ff1c aTld parking overf1o~ on their res1dentia1 streets which they attribute
to these new busines5es and uses. In addition, they are concerned that
pressures for redevelopment and intensification .ill spread to those
c~rcially-zoned sites immediately adjacent to th~ir neighborhoods and, as a
result. such changes could further affect tha QualitJ of life in their
nelghb<.rhood5.
The grad~al displa(~mer.t of a~tomctive and business services uses in the area
is ,150 a concern to the cnmmunity and the neighbors. As land values increaSE
in the CO-S and CO-N area, economic pressures make uses yie11ing higher
financ1al returns more attractive to property o~ners than the traditional
service businesses that were locate~ in this area. The trend to~ard shifts
frDm service commercial to commercial uses yielding hlgher economic returns
has been occurring over tne last 15 y~ars. Nonethe1ess? as redevelopment
continues within H,e South of forest Area commercial area, the number of
re~ining bus~ness services are slowly becoming an ~endan~ered specj~5.·
Repeatedly, the community and, to a degree~ the n~i9hbors have reafff~ed the
desif~ and need to retain as many of these uses in Palo Alto as po~~ible.
However, in most Situations, service commercia' uses also are sources of
visual bl igM and, if they are in close proximity to resident'ii.1
neighborhoods, so~e of their functions may not be environmentally compatible
~it~ reSidential uses.
Alternat,ve Stri.te9'ies. _____ ~j.9!ess. Inte.nsification and Retention of
Service Commercial Business
I. Off-Site Parking
A previous staff reccmmendJtion (see attached r~port of 7/1g/90,
LMP.:42S:0) is the procedure to refer all off-site parking agreeme~ts
in the South of forest commerciil area of more than five spaces to
the tity Council for rev 1 l;'w. Substanthl intensification in the
Sout~ of Forest commercial ~r~a cannot occur without tne provisior.
of either on-site or off-sl~e parking. ror ~a~y sites~ reuse of
existing buildings for more parking-jnt~nsive ~ses can occur only
with off-site parking arrangements. As stated ir. the July )9, 1990
report, such a referral process would al~ow the Council to monitor
substantial use changes in tnis area and determine if and when
permanent parking measures are to b~ considered.
2. liberalization of Ofn~~_J._~ __ ~ __ iJ
CMR:489:0
The July 19, 1990 stiff report (CMR:.lS:O) .150 pointed out that if
retention of existing structures in CO-S zoned areas is co~s;dered
desirable, then allowances for office uses greater than S,OOO ~quare
feet with i use pe~it may facilitate reuse of some buildings.
Office u~es requ,rt le~s parking than retail and exhib't ~irtua11y
SOri ssue!gzd,k
9/6/90
-10-
{ ,
\
,'-
,
no evening tr weekend use. Such i ~dific~t1on tG the CO-S
regulations on office s;ze limits could be considered by the
Planning Commission withi~ a reasonable time frame, if it is
determined that such a course of action should be purs~!d.
3. Restrict ions on Permitted Use __ ~
Under current zoning reguiations, the CO-S area is the most liberal
of the City's ~ommercial zone district regulations 1~ te~s of t~e
ran~e of permitted and conditional uses~ One concept the City
Council and ~l~nning Co~,issiQn could explore is the application of
overllY use zones (i.e., combfnlng districts) witnin tMe CO-S area
of the S~ut" of Forest Area, that would limit the Pp!~;tted uses
~1th1n a given arei. As an example, (ert';n areas could be
desIgnated only for a~to service and busineS3 servic!s ~ses. Other
areas t:Juld be designated for cOlllTlercial us.es more compatible -.ith
adjacent res1dentfal neighborhoods. One benefit of this ·overlay
zoning concept· would be that ever time. uses desired for a given
area would not only be allowe~ to remain but also would not b~
threatened by displacement from co~rcial uses yielding higher
economit returns if the latter uses were not permitted. The
downside of such a concept is that it cculd greitly restrict the
aarket place in determining what may be suitable for an area; and,
as a result, where ~uch use overliYs are in effect, the area's
commercial vitality ma~ be threatened and the ph~sical condition of
strlactkf' es may deteriorate.
4. Parcel-boY-Partel Re!:juhticns for Use and Si_t~ Development
Requl a~_ions_
Such a strategy c~uld occur through the de~elopment and application
of a Specific Plan f~r the entire South of Forest Area. The
long-tenll benefit of such a strategy would be that the cOrmlun;ty
could determine the use, size. scale and possibly even building
design that would be appropriate for •• eh site within the South of
Forest commercial irea. One ~ajor concern in pursuing such a
strategy 1S the cost of resources that would be necessary in
prepari~g such a Specific Plan. Such re~ources within the City
organization are nnt av~ilable without substantial r~order;~g of
p'Ltnnfng special study and Comprenensi'ole Plan priorities. R~liance
on colnsiJTting services would be Quite expensh·e. rn add; tion, if
$~ch • plan were adopted. the inherent rigidity may stifle the
vftality of the area by not being responsive to the changing needs
of the comm~nit) Qr the market pl~te.
land U~e Issue: Hous1ng
Housing iss~es in the South of Forest Area commert1al area involve two
concerns. Tne first is whether greater housin~ opportunities should be
Qffered along the Alma Corridor, where higher densit) housing may be more
suitable t~an in other lDcations. As stated earlier. tne Planning Commission
had recoamonded such a propos.l in the Downtown Study. The proposal was not
approved by the City Council, because the Council felt that such incentives
could accelerate displacement of auto and business servic! uses; and, in
addition: the types of housing that ~ould replace these b~sinesses quite
likel, would not address the bigh~st priority housing needs of the commu~ity
CMl!:489:0
SOfisSUE./~zdsk
9/6/90
-11-
•
•
: .
, .
-',
~--,---
o
(i.e" famtl¥-orie~ted hous~ng and/or low-, moderate· and ~iddle-i~come
housing). Nonethel!ss. h1g~er density housing ~long the Alma Corridor could
be an issu! to reconsider 9iv~n the limited opportunitie~ for additional
housing 1" Pilo Alto and the ~Jsuil opportunlty to ~p~rade the A1~a Corridor,
partfcularlJ for those Sites c'~se$t to Forest AVEnue.
The other issue concerning housi:'lg. and one repeatedly raised by r,,~arby
residents, is whether greater housfng opportunities should be considered for
South of forest commercial areas adjacent to r~sidential neighborhoods in
o~Jer to provide not only more housing opportunities in the area cut also a
~ore effect1ve transition bet~een the South of Forest Area commercial area and
tne nearby residential neighborhoods.
Stratefjies o_1"l Housing Issues
The City could reconsider higher density ~ous1ng opp~rtunit1es along the
Alma Corridor. The issues of this strategy remain thr same IS they were
during the Downtown Study.
1. Is higher density ~ousing appropriate a'~ng the Alma Corridor?
2. Would higher density hOlJsing address the hDusing needs of st!9ments
of t~e community most in need of such hOlJsing opportunities, e.g.,
offord.ble family housing?
3. Would these h~usfng incentives hasten the displacement of auto and
business service uses?
The City could also consider greater hou~1ng opportunities ir. the areas
adjacent to the residential neighborhoods, particularly in t~e 9nO blocks
of High and Emerson between Channing and Emerson. Housing opportunities
could be ~:~ieved by IJ rezoning the areas to residential and either
allow !xisting co~ercia' ~s£s to remain or establis~ tennination periods
for $UC~ commercial uses~ and 2} retaining the existing cammerci~l zoning
b~t provide greater ~ousing ~pportunities in these transition 3reaS than
tne current CO-S and CO-N loning regulations illow.
Triffic Issues
As cha~ges have occurred in the South of Forest commercial area, nearby
residents have noticed increased traffic on their reSidential streets which
they believe resu'ts from grad~al intensification of this ar~a.
[n March 1990, the Transportation Division complet~d ! series of trafffc
coont~ in the area between H1gh and ~averl~y Streets and between Forest and
Addison Avenues. T~affic counts were also conducted at 50me locations in
January 1988. In revie~i~g this data f the Transportation Divlsion emp~asi!ed
t~at traffic counts fluctuate considerably, and usually five Lou~tS are
necessary for a given area over a period of years before defi~jtive trends can
be developed with any degree of r~liability. The Transportation Division
staff also noted that in the 15-year period bet~een 1969 and 19S4 t volume
increlses ran~ed bet~een O.S to 3.~ percent annually for ail street
claSSifications in Palo Aito (local t collector, arterial), and that the
Citywide Study projected the sa~e range of annual increases for all street
tlassifications o~er the next IS years. The following ~iP shows the act~al
numbers and location of t~ese traffic counts.
CHR,489,O
SOfissue/gldsk
•
9/6/90
-12-
Traffic Counts
-i
•
".-:.
~ '':! '.
1:,',"-
:'~"i:'-!:
"v'
Withln these parameters, the 1990 traffic counts showed that two locations
near the Whole F~ods Market ftperienced higher rates of increase in traffic
volumes than other locations i~ the arfa. They ire 1J on HOm€r Avenue bet~e~
EiT\€'rson and High Streets {2Z pen;ent in t'ol'C years) and 2) on (menor'i Street
between HOm£r and Channin~ Avenues (6 percent in two years)~ for the
remaining nine locations w~ere traff;c COunts ~ere conducted in both 1988 and
1990, the average volume increase \llliIoS 2 per{;E-nt (lller the ho-year period.
JIklreover. ~h1le tnffic \'olumes most likely are operating at acce~table leve'ts
of service {laS) according to estibl~shed C~ty stindards ell~n at pea\ periods~
nearby res~dent5 na doubt have witnessed traffic increases in recent years.
This is consistent with the aforementione~ traffic gro~h projected in the
Citywide Study, and especiall~ in locations near the food store, reflects
i~~reased activity ~ithin the So~th of forest commercial _rea.
f'ossibTe Strate9)eS {In ___ nT!affic
Strategies avai1able to addr"ess traffic increases in residential
neighborhnods are limite~. Street closures can reduce traffic in the
immediate areas where they are placod and shift dispersed traffic to
areas where they have not been placed. As a result. traffi~ closures in
many sit~ations are not desired solutions, because affected areas ~ithout
closures are then recipients of traffic shifted from areas with closures.
Other mechanisms aVii1able to addresi traffic problems include traffic
management strategies directed tGwar~ restricting cr slowing traffic. In
addition, traffic pT~blems can be addressed through changes in land us~
and deveTnprnent policies, because trip generation varies substantially by
use. Palo ATto has taken very significant measures over time, e.g., in
the Downtown Studl lJ.d the Citywide Study, to reduce nonresidential
development potent~al and limit expansion of us~s that are major peak
period traffic generators in order to minimize increasS!s in traffic.
Nonet~eless, the Citywide Study pOinted out that traffic increases
throughout the City a~e expe't~d to continue within the foreseeab1e
future.
E'arking [sstJes
Parking problems ip the South of Forest commer~ial area include 1) the vis~al
concerns of unsightly surface parking, particularly at highly visible corners,
and 2) ~;)e increasin.g parking deficiency and result ing on-street park.ing that
has occurred as activities and ne·~ u.s~s have intensified' on s.ome sit'2s -within
the South of Forest commercia1 area.
The visual problem reflects the continuing ~se of surf~ce parking by
businesses in the area. The park1ng deficien{;y reflects, in part, provisions
in the current zoning regulations which ~redit existing deficiencies when
changes of use occur from one of less intensity, e.g., ~holesale, to one of
greater intenSity, such as retail. In effect, such parking deficlencies are
·grandfat~ered" and exacerbated w~en more intensive uses are located on sites
already deficit '" paiking. The effect of this situation, as the July 19,
1990 report (CMR:425:0j pointed out~ may result in increases, particularly of
employee parking. within ne~rby r~sldentfal areas.
CMR:4S;,O
S()f i 5 sU!/glds~
9/6/90
·14·
. -
St"deg~es fo~_!,ilrk1n9 Prq~lenls
The visual aspects ~f surface rGrking ar! discussed in a subsequent
section on visua1 issues.
Parking deficiencies can be addressed by several strategie$. Staff has
previously recommended that tne Council review ill proposed off-site
parking agreements of more tnan five spaces In the South of forest
cu~r'ial area. Public re~ie~ of such applications on a case·by·cise
basis cDuld be expected t~ minimize future development of new off~stre~t
parking lots.
An~ther strategy for the City (ounci1 and P1dnning C~ission to consider
in addressing the So~th of Forest Area pa,king problems would be to
modify th~ zoning regulations 1 so that the full amount of parking that
would otherwise be required when uses changed and increased in intensity
be provfded. Thus, credits far existing on-site parking deficits would
be eliminated. The effect of such a change in the pariing regulati~ns
co~ld ~inim;ze exaterbation cf parking deficiencies in the area within
the foreseeable future, and it also could slow c~anges of use and
function in the arti. On the other hand, in the longer term, if market
forces increa3e dev~lopment press!Jres~ the stTiitegy could encourage
parcel assembly and major redevelopme~t.
The last strateg~ to con5id~r in addressing South of forest commercial
.rea parking problems would be the establishment of a p~rking asssessment
district so that s~fficient off-street parking, presum~bly in a
structure, would be pro~ided for t~fs commercial area's parking needs.
Such a strategy assumes that a new assessment district wou1d have to be
established within the South of forest Area~ rather than extending t~e
Downtown Parking Assessment District into the Sout~ of forest Area,
because of the complexity of expanding an assessment district, e.g., the
Downtown Oistrict, which has four outstanding G Bond issues. The
benefits of a parking assessment district would be the potential
provlslor. of adequate off-street public parking tnat not only addressed
existing deficiencies but also existing needs. Consolidated off-street
parking for this commercial area could be the most efficient method in
providing parking for individuals having multiple destinations but
essentially one stop parking needs within this area.
The problems of establisMing a parking assessment district for South of
Forest .A.rea would include the necessary land acquisition and construction
ccsts that ~Duld be required for the provision of public par~ing
fac1lities and t~e resultant tax burden it would place on affected
property owners. The current level of deveiopment in the South of Forest
commerciil area and tne economic return to the property owners that such
development yields may not be sufficient to justify tne cost of an
assessment distrlC'.t providing substantial off· street parkin~. (Existing
commercial building floor area in the South of Forest Are. is less than
400,000 sq~are fe&t; in the California Avenue assessme~t district, it is
.lmost 700,000 square feet; and in the Downtown assessment district, it
is approximately 2,225,000 square feet., Tnus, .hile the cost of
potential public parking faclllties in the South of Forest Area would
~ary by lotation, size and type of parking facility. the costs,
nonetheless. wo~ld add a significant financial burden to the property
CHR:489:0
SOFissue/gzdsk
9/6/90
-15-
•
-------,----
C) -
owners and, is I result, may encourage t~e gre~test cn!nge of uses
thruugh rent increases,
In addition, if a~ as!>essment district we-re formed, parking deficits
C~~~ i~c~s:.!~e :.: thcy ~~~ "'~!.~~i"\ t~.;z t"" .. ,,!-,,o.7t YQTk:i'il~ • .)!o.:~s.mlC-t'lt
distr1ct fer many years, unless on-site parking were also required for
all new or intensified de~elopment or unless the provision of public
parking .opt pace wit" increased parking demand.
Yisua1 Issues
Visual tssues of the South of Forest commercial area include the appearance of
oil number of rather unsightiy auto and business servfce uses remaining in this
area. ¥is~al blight ~f varying degrees is not an unusual situation wherever
such sery'ce uses ire located. Concurrent ~it~ the unattractive appearance of
many of the buildings and businesses in the area are 1) the numprous surf~ce
pa.rk.'lr.g lots, sany of wn1ch are t'\ot la.ndscaped. 2) the Ql{erhea~ utility lines.
anj 3} t~e lack of street trees a10ng many of the blocks. WhiTe the above
fattors characterize the visual blight affecting m~'h of the South of forest
commercial area at the present time. as staff pointed out earlier, the
appearance of the South of Forest Area t001Y is substanti4l 1 y improved over
how it appeared a decade earlier. At that time, the arpa's busi~esses ~ere
almost entirely devoted to business service and warehouse uses. As this
commercial area ha$ transformed. the appearance of many building facldes has
b&en substantijally upgraded.
Strit~ies on Visual Issue~
The pr)nc~~a1 strategy that ~ould affe~t the future ap,earance of the
South of Forest c~rcial area will be the irnp1ementation of the
Downtown Urban Design Plan wh1c~ is expected to occur within the next
year. As the staff report of July 19, 1990 pointed out, the Urban Design
Plan, as presently envisioned, would guide the City. parti~ularly the
ARB, in its d!cisl0ns regarding design·related issues for the Downtown
Irea, iocluding the South of Forest Area. Thus. is ~ildings are
remodeled or redeveloped ,n the future, the Urban Design Plan ~ould
provide guidelines on appropriate form, sca1e and relationships with
other de~elopment in t~e South of Forfst commercial area. rn addition,
tM Urban DeSign Plan will inc1ude a tree planting plan that, if
implemented. coul~ substantially change the appearance of the South ~f
forest Area over an (txtended period of t.ime.
As noted in the aforementioned staff report, the Urban Design Plan would
not address specific uses for the area and includes the assumption that
current (omprehensive Plan land use designations and zoning regulations
are in effect.
The other strategy affecting the visual ~ualiti~$ of the South of For~$t
commercial area will be the undergrounding of the existing utility lines.
Two undergrounding projects betwe€n forest and Addison Avenues are
currently ~lann€d in Palo Alto's Capital Improyement Program ovsr the
next five years. When these projects are completerl, all ut~1ity lines in
the Soutn :>f Forest cOlTInercia". area wi 11 be undergroiJnd and, as a resu1 t.
t~e area's appearance should be significantly improved.
CHR:489:~
SOF i ssue/9zdsk
9/6/90
-16·
/
1 ss.ue Ccnn ; c.ts
L loss of Desired Conrnercial At:ti_~Hies
One potentiil conflict among the stritegies sU9gested to address some of
10k", Irt>" r ............ ~ r_ ......... ~ ....... ~~"..'''' .. ~..-.. -.". ........ !oo. ... ",~", ............ ,."'l .... ~B. ,,;,-"'"J ., ... '" ~'; ....... "'"-" ". _ ........................ '",B "'-'-" _ ......... "':I ........... , ........ , ..... ..
snculd be retained versus ~ow much new de~elopment should be ~nco~raged.
As staff noted in the Citywide Study, In a sub,equent re?ort on
nonconforming ~ses, and in thg July 1~, 19S0 repcrt on the South of
Forest Area area, market Tortes in ta~dem with City development policies
have re-suHed in tne displacement of l1any a~to and business services.
throughout Palo Alto, inc.luding tne So~tn of Forest co~rcial area. On
one hand, s~cn uses are often located in unattractiye buildings and
s!tt1ngs. Where these uses are located in close prcxi~jty to residential
neighborhoods, they may be incomp~tib1e .ith tnt desired QUil,ty of 1ife
in these neighborhoods. On the other nand, such bUsinessEs provide
necessary services for both residents and workers in the communitj. As
fewer service bus~ne5ses remain in Palo Alto. individuals, increasingly,
have to dr;~e further distances for their luto and business service
needs. As ~ result, If the City rezones areas where suc~ U$es are
located, or if the City approves incentives to encourage other types of
dev!lopment in these areas, the greater the liKelihood that displacement
of tnes~ uses will be accelerated.
2. Incraased Traffic from New Uses
It is also quite likely tnat if different ~s.es, e.g,. housing, are
~nco~riged for ~ortions of the Soutn of forest commerc1al ir!a, increased
traffic could rEsult froll such changes if these new uses result in soone
degret of intensification o~er existing levels of develop~nt. Market
forces seldom respond to incentives unless they offer potentia~ higner
eco~om;c returns than existing uses pro~ides. Thus, in some situations,
new development could rtflec.t some foT'll of intens'ification that provides
higher economic return and that 1~ turn generates. more traffic. However,
some potential uses ma1 not generate triffic occurring at peak periods or
at other undersirable times for nearby residents~ e.g., during E~ening
hours Dr Dlj weekends.
3. Di ~c()l!rage Pri .... ate loIarket Up9!".ading of the Area
The last possible conflict th.t w.s .1so discussed in the July 19, 1990
stiff report (CMR:425:0) is • potential outcome that if City regulations
become too specific and rigid for an area. insufficient flexibility in
these regulations Ilay dis,ourage posHive responses frOiil the prhate
sector. As a result, the princfpal objecti~es of sUcM strategies could
be tnwart~d if the private market failed to respond to t~e desired needs
for tho! area.
~eSOJrces
Staff is committed to completing i series of Zoning Ordinance modlfications
within the remainder of 1990. Relalively straightforward modifications th.t
were discussed in the iforementioned strategies, e.g., eliminating parking
deficit credlts for changes of use in the South of forest commercial area,
co~ld be accomplished. On tne other ~and, staff resources are not available
it this time to embark on • full·scale study of the South of Forest commercial
CMR:4B9:0
SOFlssu./gzdsk
9/6/90
-17-
i ,
j
o
irei. Staff firmly believes that a number cf iS5ues raised by the neighbors
of the South of fo~est cDmmerci.' area cculd be addressed by some of the
strategies discussed in this report and ir. the July 19, 1990 report, without
t'lav"ing the Clt~ undertake a compreh~nsive study of the area.
CONCLUSION
The South of forest commercial area has been ,hanging for an extended perIod
of time. Many of these changes ~ave bpen wery posft1ve in terms of attracting
desired uses, e.g., a food marKet, and in teMlS of vlsua,11y upgrading iI number
of buildings in the area. Nonetheless, these changes have had less desirable
effects on adjacent ne1ghborho9ds, particu1arly in terms of dayti~~ parking
overflow and, to some degree, increased traffjc, 1n addition, while changes
have occ~rred i~ t~e South of forest commerc,al area, ~ln~ of the r~maih~n9
servfce businesses are in unattractIve structures and settings, and t~is
factgr is an additional concern to nearby residents.
This r~port identified four major policy options. Additional options may
emerge from the public and Council/Commission discussion. rn the review of
the issues l~d alternative stritegies, it is important to orient t~e
discussion to the desired policy option. As noted. tnese options ate not
~utual1y exclusive [e.g., preser~ation of ser~fce commercial could be combined
with convers1on of some land to housing; conversion of land to haYs}ng could
be combir,ed with ~ore active retail and' related commerCial uses). Tne visual
improvements associated wit~ undergrounding utility lines and planting ~treet
trees transcend the policy options and should be implemented in iny event.
Staff be11eves that consideration of str£~t closur~s should be considered only
in the ~ontext of the policy options and rtlated strategies to either con~ert
t~e area to ~igh density houslng or more intensive Downtown·oriented retail
uses. A$ an implementation tool. stoff doubts that tne effort to create a
specific plan is appropriate 1~ the context ~f available staff rsources and
other City planning prioriti~s. Of the fo~r options, i specific plan could be
considered for either ,onversion to ~ousing or conversion to more intensive
retall.
In summarYt the following policy options and related strategies should be the
focys of the COmRission and Council dis,ussion.
1. Maintain the current Comprehensive Plan land use designations and zoning
re9u1ations with some ~odificltions to t~e Ionin9 regulations.
Strategies: Refer Dff-~ite parking agreements to City Council
liberalize offic. limits
Use ARB p,Qcess and Urban DeSign Plan to bring about
visual upgrade
2. Pr!serve the essentially service commercial nature of tn~ area by
adopting PQlicf~s and regulations to reduce or eliminate most or all
retail. office and housing reuse potential.
Strategies: -Reduce or eliminate retail, ~ffice and hou~in9 uses from
list of permitted uses
CKR:489:0
SOF i ssue/gzdsk
Eliminate re9uiations that grindfatner existing par(ing
def'lcits
9/6/90
·18·
•
\
•
3. facIlitate converston of land to housing use through some combination of
rUC)fling land ind iocreasing the housing potential "in t~e CO-S zone~
StTOtogies: Higher dens ity .1 eng and near .~lma
-Rezone Dr provide greater CO-S housing opportunities irt
tra~sitic~ iTeas
4. Facilitate conversion of the area to a retaIl and related commercia1 use
extension of the Oownto~n.
As noted before, p~eparat;on gf this report dfd not focus on option
nY~r four. The one strategy that is identified and would be
appropriate for this option is creati~n cf 3 parking assessment
district. In the event that this option is to be seriously
considered, a variety of zoning changes would need to be
investigeted, including regulations deSigned to curtail s~rvice
commercial uses.
While solutions to the prevlous1y discU5S~d issues are not expected to be
detenlined at the spedal September 13, 1990 r.leeting of the City Council and
Phnning Commi$s~on, the-spechl m~etin9 father tilaTl studJl session fermat is
intended ttl pro-.,.ide the opportunity for the Councii to make iI: referral to the
COmMission if that is desired. Staff encourages the Council to be is precise
as possible in making any referral to the Commission.
Respectfully submitted,
~ ~lV~ <. .JJud~
KE~NETH R. ~CHREIBER
Director of Planning and Assistant Plan n9 Official
Community Environ~~nt
AHistant
$: 1) A memo on ~outh of forest Avenue frem Cnunci1members Mc~ -
son and Ren,el of 8/1/90 --------.
2) CMR:40: of Peninsulo 0 7/19/90
3) CMR:425:0 on South •• ning Issue. of 7/19/90
4) It. let ,,"se Df Peninsu71 ere . ding from linda
o t and Dena Mossar of 7/26/90
cc: ArchitectuTil Review Board
Downtown Urban Oesfgn Committee
VESCO Oevelopaent Co., 390 So. San Antonio Road, los Altos, tA 94022
Stoecker ana North~ay Architects, Inc., 437 Lytton Ave., Palo Alto, CA
94301
Dena Mossar, 1024 Emerson Street, Palo ~lto, tA 94301
So'an Richardson, 35; Addison Street, ?lo Alto, CA 94301
011<:489:0
SOfiss"e/gldsk
9/6/90
-19-
•
Steve Ployor, 1874 Guinda Street, Polo Alto, CA 94303
linda Scott, 1057 Ramona Street, Palo Alto, CA 94301
Jess W;l~on, 318 lincoT~ Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301
Martin and Bodtl Geratw<)l, 633 Channing Avenue, Palo .il to c.a. 943.(11
Harry lowenstein, 1102 Ramona Street, Palo Aito. CA 94301
.ayn. Smit', 835 Waverley Street, Polo Alto, CA 94301
Qave Ross, Jack and Cohen, BUilders, Jnc., 97S High Street, Palo Alto, CA 94301
Keenan land Company
James Baer
CMR:489:0
SOFissue/gzdsk
. '--,.---
9/6/90
-20-
(
..... ".
'.
-.'
'... .....
", -" ..".'
: .~ :' < •
.::~-. -
/
.",
CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
Special Meeting
Thursday, September 13, 1990
Oral Communications
1. Discussion of Policy Issues Relating to Development
in the South of Forest Avenue (SOFA) Area
AdjDurnment at 10:15 p.m.
•
297
297
64-296
9/13/90
Special Meeting
September 13, 1990
The City Council and the Planning Commission of the city ef Palo
Alto met on this date in the Council Chau~ers at 1:3~ p.m.
Mayor Cobb announced the Special Joint meeting of the Palo Alto
city Council and Planning Commission ~as B formal meeting and not
a study session, ~hich meant that both bodies could take action.
Council
PRESENT: Andersen (arrived at 7: 40 p.3' .. ) Cobb, Fazzirjo,
Kniss, Levy, McCo~n, Renze!, Woolley
ABSENT, Sutoril.ls
Planning Commission
PRESENT: Marsh, Cullen,
Glazier, Huber
ABSENT: None
Hirsch, Beecham, Ch:ristensen~
Mayor Conb announced that Council Member sutorius was representing
the City at a meeting in another part of the county but might be
present for the end of the meeting.
1. Discussion of Policy ISSUes Relating to Development in the
SOl!th of }-'orest (SOFA) Area
Mayor Cobb suggested some ground rules and an ending ti~e of 9:30
p~lD. unless ther-e .... ere objections. For the Council .. the Closed
Session re Personnel would not be held since it vas not noticed.
The objective from the point of view of staff vas for the Council
to send instruction or assiqrnnent to the Planning Comntission to
provide direction on the SOFA issue. To that end, he suggested
reserving the last 20 minutes of the ~eetinq for ~he Council to
provide specific direction.
ORAL COMHUNICATIO~S
HOTION: Mayor Cobb !(loved, seconded by Fazzino, to move Oral
communications forward and combine it with the discussion of the
South of Forest Avence (SOFA) issue.
KOTIOK PASSED 1(-0" Andersen and Sutorius absent.
Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said
the Planning Commission and Council received a staff report
(eM: 489: OJ dated september 6, 1990, extensive notice had been
provided to property owners and tenants within the immediatE!
commercial area as yell as the residential area surrounding the
commercial area" and copies of the report yere available in City
64-.97
9/1l/90
'-
I ,
--"-----" ----
o
I
Hall tor interested parties. The statf report ~ddressed what was
generally called the SOFA area. although the &ree was not precisely
define4. The staff report did not ad6ress the P31~ Alto Medical
Fou!"l-:iaticn .. 'Which was ncrth of the area. Tht! Me;dical Toundatio~
expansion proce!3s hl2d been movinq through the initi.,.l Pl""f".Inir-g
Commission review. An initial pubLi.c hearing Dt the Planning
Cc:rt:=lssion level 'Was schedul~d for October 2-4. Becau.se of the
separate processes that the Medical Foundation had been involv~d
with and the number of issues that could be related to the SOFA
area$ staff decided not to link the Medical Foun6ation and SOFA
discussions, recognizing the overlaps and important connections~
In the report 5taff identified four general policy alternatives
~hich ~ere not mutually eXClusive. at the sa~e time they ~ere not
easily intermixed a They ranged from lrlaintaining the current
CQmprehensive Land Use designations to preserving the essenti~lly
service co~ercial nature of the area~ to facilitating conversion
of land to housing, and facilitating conversion of the area to
retail and other related commercial uses. It was important to
focus on the City's hroao objectives and policies for the area.
The staff report contained considerable information and it ~as easy
for staff to get into a lot of detail, but the critical question
tonight ~as ~hat the policy and objectives were for the area. It
was important for the Council to provide as specific a direction as
possible to the Planning Commission and staff o~ ~he roany ti~e
consuming itemsa Resources were limited, so specific direction ~as
important to prevent r.e'JieW'ing matters where time 'itrould ba
misspent.
Shirley Wilson, 509 Hale street, said the drawing mounted on the
wall vas the most recent thinking of the Urban Design committee.
She urged looking at the problem cf the SOFA district in the
context of the total downtown area. No dist.rict was lOOKed at
individually; there yere overall concepts for the whole downtown~
Because the University retail district was so lon9, the Committee
tel t a need for it to function well and have some centers of
activity~ Th\! initial center 'Was established by 2!iO University as
.i.t d!lS b~ing completed with a central courtyard. Another secondary
cross axis was needed further to the east. All the principals--the
edges ot the districts, crossing$~ activity nodes--pertained to the
who!e downtovn area but also to each district a All the concepts
had to be reviewed for each district. The Committee felt the SOFA
district needed to be studied in that way, and how it linked to the
downtown area was also important. She fplt 250 University yas an
excellent example of hoW' a piece of land could be developed,
perhaps more intensely than thought possible, and have it york well
to become a pleasant experience. When reviewing the established
300~OOO square foct ceiling, the Urban Design Committee looked at
it as a tool to increase and better define downto~n~ The Urban
Design Committee completed a study of the SOFA district and felt
all the issues of edges, entries, open spaces, activity nodes--all
those things needed review; it was not a straight zoninq p~oblem.
Ken Alsman, 1057 Ramona Streett yas a resident of the .area who
became involved 'With the issues of the Palo Alto Medical Foundation
•
64-298
9/13/90
•
j
and the $itu.tio~ 'With Chevy's. The area had 'phenomenal potential
for the city, the nei9h~rhood~ downtown, property o~ners,
businesses, and l'lollsing. The public and private improvements ... ·ere
an embarrassment; they vere shoddy, did .not fit well toget"her, and
did not l~nd the~s~lv£s to be p~rt of the cc~~unity. Those it~ms
needed review, not just the ,oninq. The staft report (CKR:CS9;O}
contained a many options. All had value, :but .... hat was really
needed was a 6trategy for the change. He urged Council .to "take a
comprehensive approach.
~na Mossar, 1024 Emerson street, .... as a neighbor of the area. She
defined SOFA as the area south of Forest Avenue from Forest. to
Embarcadero and Middlefield to Alma. Although th~re were specific
reasons to look at the small area defined on the ma.p, it was
important to understand that SOFA 'Was a much larger, a very
complex., mixed-use area 'Which contained many residential properties
and included palo Al to Medical FO\.lndation~ A.-"y development in SOFA
'Would nave impact on a very large, mixed-use area. Though t~e
Urban Oesigr.; Committee presented a map referring to SOFA as an
extension of the downto.~ area, she preferred to refer to SOFA as
the transition frOm downtown to residential~ It ~3S ~ore impOrtant
to consider links to the residential area than to the co~~e~cial
areas to the north. An iterative process Was required to produce
a reasonable, profitable, produ~tive vision for the SOFA area and
needed to involve community members, neighbors, land and business
o.ners, as well as membe~s of the Council, Planning Commission ana
staff~
.Jim ,Rueter, 875-ALIDa street, owner of the Peninsula Creamery
buildinq, said ic was important to recognize the e~isting property
o .. ners~ For 15 months he had been trying to clean up the tC';.r;t
eyesore and felt caught in the process among different groups. Tr.e
propos~l had been modified a number of times and compli~d with the
existing zoning_ He felt it was unfair for property owners ~ho
felt held hostage to the process~ Hundreds of thousands of c.ollars
had been lost trying to build something with which everyone would
be happy. ccrunissio:1er Hirsch said at the last meeting that it ;.as
not fair to the applicant t~elve months or so into the process to
find out he was going in the wrong direction~ He ","as 15 :t1onths
i~to the process and ~as no further along than when he started. He
would appreciate some direction on what to d04
Chop Keenan, 700 Emerson Street, agreed "'ith Item 1 in the staff
report (CMR:4!9:0) to refer off-site parking agreements to the city
Council, liberaliZe office limits, and use Architectural' Review
Board {ARB} process and urban design plan to bring about visual
upgrades. There Was a bit of an overreaction to what happened to
Cheyy's~ The good news was the process 'Wo!"lced~ One of the
beauties ot workin9 in Palo Alto was that if one staye~ within the
toning box, the process vas quite lineal. It was not a politici~ed
process~ When one got out of tllat zoning box, perhaps what ChIC.,!VY's
did, then there might be problems. ~here was 3 reaction by the
neighborhood, pe:rllaps appropriately so, and the process prevailed.
In 1986 there began a two-year, comprehensive stu1y of the area,
64-299
9/ll/90
•
\
•
, . ,
" ,
and in that proc~ss SOFA ~as dovnzoned from 2:1 floo~ area ratio
(FAR) to .. 4, an extraordinary SO percent reduction in allo· .. able
square footage. Part ot the process required on-site parking for
all t.he intensification and grandfathered parking. There s.eemed to
be a concern that ~I,Jt.t:!-services ... ·e:r-e •• c~ ;p,akirlg r'ioney and tl'tat they
were a vanishinq breed: he leI t they 'Were doing tine. Surface
parking t.l'as important and could be donI! in an lI;esthetically
pleasing ~anner such as for his office at 700 Emerson, vhere the
parking vas placed in the bac~. The concept ot introducing more
housing should be carefully considered. Although it sounded ~rban
and ~eeD1ed cosmopolitan to have all the mixed us£s, the peoplE ",'ho
had to live in the irltensitied housing would like quiet enjoyment
just as single-family residerlts~ To introduce tlore housing into
mixed-us~ areas WOuld prove to be a problem.
Geeff Bertelsen~ 960 Waverley Street, vas directly opposed to Mr~
Keenan's comments. w"hile Mr~ lCeenan seemed \..0 think the past
years' reactive planning and ~oratoria were fine, he felt active
plannin9 vas needed. He submitted a drawing (on file in the City
Clerk's Office) to illustrat~ how much of the area was made up of
parking lots. The Comprehensive Plan stated hoW" much surfaCe
parking destroyed an urban environmpnt and how little lots caused
ploblems with parking and r~Clevelopl.I.ent. While Mr. Keenan gave a:n
example of 2: building: that was an asset to the community, he wou"ld
take exception to another of Hr~ ){eenan's projects, The Whole Foods
Market. He enjoyed the market but was ama~e~ by the parking lot,
whict-.. seemed to violate most of the landscaping regulatio!'l.s~
cities like East Palo Alto and Oakland had the political courage to
consider redevelopment agencies, rather than have an ;,rea ""ith
piecemeal development. He urged the Council to consider a redevel
opment agency for the ~hole area.
Linda Ludd~n, 1048 Ramona street, said the staff report (CKR:4B9~O)
covered the issues quite ~ell~ She had lived in the area for 16
years and saw the improvements were coming from the residents. The
commercial areas were very slow to respond to the improvements
occurrinq in the neighb~rhood. The big problem in the SOFA area
was lack of transition. Some unsightly uses vere up against R·l
and R-2 :ones. It ~as very important that transitions be created.
She felt the idea about getting more housing was good, particularly
a mixed-use ir.cluding ret.aliI ~ The transition from R-1 or R-2 could
b~ accomplished by R-15 rather th~n ve~y dense housing. The idea
of keeping up the qrandfathering of parking was a concern. Parking
for any new uses or converted uses absolutely shOUld be provided.
patricia Schmidt. 201 Homer Avenue, said no one had actuallY talked
to people who lived one block south of Forest. There were quite a
few people ~ho liked the area as it was. There were no vacancies
in the condominiums. What was at the corner or Homer and Emerson
was very good. The parking situation had been improved since The
Whole Foods Market had been built.
64-)00
9/13/90
'. , "
; ,
I
~ I.
Mayor cobb asked tor one round ot comments in order to take b step
back from the detailed and complicated staff report (CMR;489:0j and
provide objectives. Questions 'WOLlld be acceptablE" if they !,Jere of
proce~s and infc~atiob.
Planning co:rnmissio!".er Hir.sch asked how many parcels 'eo'ere being
considered iro the touncaries suggested by Ms. M~ssar.
Mr. Schreiber said the map in the statf repcrt '~~!48~:O) would
give some information but did not qo as far as Ms. Hoss~r suggest
ed. He estimated several hundred parcels were involved.
Planning co~issionEr Hirsch asked if a Comprehensive Plan could be
developed without encouraging parcel aggregation. He said it was
i!I; rhetoric-a! or philosophical question and did not require an
answer. He asked how badly the tax base ..... as needed: about the need
for clel!r boundaries and 'Whether a street could serve as a
transition from commercial to residential.. As an ex.ample, he askEd
if one side ~f ~ddison could be substantially commercial and the
south side be completely residential.
Council Member Kniss aSKed about the formation of a redev~lopment
~gency.
Mr. Schreiber said the St~~~ had consistently tiqhtened the
regulations dealing 'With blight.. Although there ",'ere a nuIl'lller of
not particularly attractive sites, there "'ould be a serio\ls p4'oblem
of whether the definition of blight could be met. Staff had no
experiEnce dealing with redevelopment agencies and more investiga
tion was required before a definitive ~nswer was given.
Flanning commissioner ClJ.lle~ felt it "'~oulj. be useful for each
member to sta.te views on the area. These 'Who .served on the
Oovntown Study ~ere glad that a review 'Was taking place and had
strong feelings about what could happen in the area as 3 transi
tion, particularly between the R-l and commercial. That particular
a~ea needed to be studied and rezoned.
council Membe~ Renzel referenced the area south of Channing across
from the Clinic zoned &~-l5 and ~sked ~hether the area could be
incorporated in the review of the SOFA area, not specifically ~ith
regard to changing existing uses but looking at f~ture Uses.
~r. Schreiber said the area included the Urgent Care center and the
Convalescent facility. The Urgent Care Center and the parking let
.long Channing _'ere important parts o~ the Medical Foundation
redevelopment proposal which were analyzed in the Environmental
Impact Report (E1RJ. At present reuse of the convalescent facility
was not under consideration by anyone.
Council Member Renzel said since the SOFA area did not include the
Clinic and there vas a propo~al 'With respect to the Clinic, she
asked how it was possicle to addc~ss leqitimate long-te~ planning
issues at the interfaces and \o'ith respect to the-overall circula-
'm "Hn-' '.,..
64-)01
9/ll/90
•
_,_-c ___ ", ____ .. ____ . ___ -_
tiOl. of the area~ Whatever the Clil"lic: did would have impact on all
sides of it wMich would then force 5~me decisionG in the SOFA area
that might not otherwise be chosen.
Mr. Scl"lreibe:.-did not think th-e F;:a.:r.:!::tior. precEss 10'0:...1::: tercE or"
decis.ion$ in the com..1\lercially-z.oJ'le~ area \;"lest of tr.-e Clinic.
Certainly there were connections between the Medical FOl,:.r.dation
process Bnd review of the commercial area of SOFA, but many of
Foundation issues and many of the commercial area issues stood on
their OYn~ The a.ecision processes could be kept relati .... ely
discrete as lonq as connections, overlaps and ramifications were
understood. It was t~e tasK of the public r statf, Plar:ning
Commission and Council in the revieW" proce:.:;;s to have that sensitiv
ity.
Council Me~be~ Renzel said so~e of the areas that had been zoned
commercial had developed as residential. Now there -was a ne .. ·,
fairly dense housing element between downtown and Professorvil1e
and a commercial elt:!mer,t wa.s ripe for change.. From a planning
point ~f view, she asked if the change dictated looking at the area
diffe~ently than if it hat! been developed as co::::ri.lcrcial.
Mr. Schreiber replied it 'We!" difficult to go back and reconstruct.
Cou~cil Member Renzel was referring to
were changed to allo~ residential~
different from what the zoning said ..
the cornnercial zones which
so now ~hat existed was
Mr~ Schreiber said ~ithin the commercially-zoned a~ea, there was
relatively little residential, bu-there ~as obviously residential
zoning tucked into the ccmmercia~ area. The cO!lUllercial zone as
presently set up did not encourage or facilitate residential reuse
~ut allowed it. Given the development standards it ~as relatively
difficul t to do~ There "'as not re.ally an incentive to 90 from
commercial to housing in the area.
Council Member Andersen stated two or three months ago he had asked
Planning staff t,o provide reco:;u,.,enoations ~ not the options. He
asked for the recommendations froIt a planning perspe,-"tive, not a
political or pressure group perspective, that '",IQuld be the most
exciting, creative direction the Planning Commission and Council
could take as the result of the discussion.
Mr~ Schreiber said the staff ~~etin9 with COUncil Member Andersen
was a relatively short, no-constraints identification of land use
conc~pts and w~s not a land u~e study in any sens~ of the ~ord~
The ultimate question vas what the policy for the area ~as and to
what extent the city wanted continue the service/commercial nature
of the area~ Tha auto-oriented businesses appeared to be doing
well~ The areal other than the Peninsula Creamery sit~, was not in
any imminent lixel ihood of conversion. Tl'le market forces :might
well :be reinforcing the validity and the profitability of auto
service in the area, especially as some of the other areas for
those services began to disappear. Staft had con$ider~d the area
n ... ,..---""",-
64-302
9/ll/90
tor a long tll11e~ The policy in the 1916 COrll.prehensive Flan
effectively Yas to recoqni~e the service/commercial natu~e of the
area but p~ovide latitune to bring about change it desirable~ The
Pl.anninq C~tnm.ission recomm-=nded liii..lC.h greater housi~g e!!'.phasis in
1986.. and philosophically ~ stott zuppc::-ted the t vi tt: t"_he recogni
tion that a stronq hO\J.sin~ emphasis -• .'Culd mea.n &:ervi·=e/commercial
~ould have to disappear. The conflicts betveen housing and the
euto-o~iented service commercial ~ere extremely difficult to
resolve end Council was aware of such situations~ The underlying
ca· .. eat .... 'as that there 'Was no right ans'Wer. It 'Was a quest.i.on of
~hat policy sh~uld be chosen. The auto-oriented services 'Were a
valuable community resource that had become in shorter supply over
the years. At the present time, he ~oul~ opt for strengthening the
auto service nature of the area, pursuing the visual upgrading to
the exten~ possible, recognizing that there vere transition areas
next to existing housing suitable fer conversion to single family
or loy density multiple family to provide a better bufter. If the
service corumercial disappeared, there ~as not another area in Palo
Altv as a likel!F candidate. Those uses .... ould be in ~ed1JooG city c-r
Mountain View, but probably not i~ Palo ~lto~
council Member Andersen said while there ",as a conflict between
service/comlUercial a"'ld hCllsing, he Ls}ced if Mr. Schreiber was
indicating there was a way~ in tact, to protect the auto segment pf
the service/commercial and increase housing density.
Mr~ Schreiber did not think the housinq density could be increased
$ignificantly~ It vas likely non-residential uses would be amor
tized for a minimu~ of IS years and probably longer. ~f present
uses were econo1'niC"~11y viable, they would stay that 'Way for some
considerable length of time.
V~ce Mayor-Woolley 'Was int:-igued 'With the idea of overlay z.ones i:n
the staff report (CKR:4S9:0). She asked if a possible solution to
the conflict might be overlay zones for the auto us~s and h~using.
She did not imagine the overlay zones vould necessarily include the
entire area$ but perhaps there was an appropri~te part vit~ the
rest without a~ overlay ~one.
Mr. Schreiber said overlay zoning was defined as involving
commercial uses with residential on the same site. It was probably
not the kind of transition the residents would £xpect to find the
City pramotin9~ but ~\ 'Was the kind of ~se that would be appropri
ate ralcmg Al=a and the area immediately adjacent~ The protllem then
~ould be a conflict with the euto-oriented use. Mr. ~eenan was
correct in that the situation with Coroon 6iersch ~as an examplt of
what occurred vhen intensive commercial was next to housin9' The
poliey would really have to state whether mixed uses. or auto
service was desi't"ed. Mixing them together \lould lead to little
developm~nt or to the t~es of conflicts that were being avoided.
council Member Jl:enzel said 'While. the council could set zonin9,
therQ was no control over .arket forces. The service commercial
zonih9 permitted a qreat variety of uses including housing. If the
64-303
9/13/90
•
':
-.-...,-.,..-.~.-------. -----.::.
maritet forces eliminated automotive uses. she lIIsked .... hether the
council would not ~ant to see ho~sin9 substitutc~ as opposed to
other kinds of commercial uses.
Mr. Schreiber said that was a point ve11 taken. The strategy might
well be to modify the. zoning to curtail the range of commercia~
uses and provide service/coI'l.!llercial and housing alternatives and
let t;"e market 'Work its way. If a s;i.te n~xt to the auto area was
developed for housing, there was the potential for complaints
regaraiTl9 the number of cars; level of activity and fu~es. It
could be a policy 8ction, recognizing that preservation of ;auto
oriented service/commercial was the primary objective.
Council Memb~r Renzel said ~nless housing was prohibited outright,
there was the chance that h.ousing m.ight be tn.lilt and political
conflict occur. She asked it the Council should not try to find a
vision for the area and accommodate existing uses beneficial to the
city, should the uses be phased out through m~rket forces~
Mr. Schreiber said the city needed to look at the vision for the
arE-a. His own thinking over the last decade had evolved from a
sympathy for housing toward a s~pathy to protect the auto~oriented
com.ro.ercial uses beca.use of some of tht'!'_ broader needs -:.f the
corn~unity~ The current regulations did net facilitat~ housing nor
did the current envirorunent~ As the commercial~ banking, and
Ularket forces became tighter, it was less IHcely that irwestmerlt
would be put into housing in ~ha~ area~ If housing vas desirecl,
then the vision 'Would be to make a transition over the next
15 years into housing from an auto-oriented service are~.
Council Meml:le.r Renzel referenced a vision for housing that :--ecog
nized that automotive services were viable and asked ~hat kinds of
constraints there might be from a Co~pr~hensiv~ Planning view to
grandfather in Uses.
Mr. Schreiber replied the choices ~ere to grandfather, ~hich had
heE'.n interpretE'!'d .e:s no termination ot use, or to p:rovide an
amortization schedule with required termination for 'Which tile
general practice was to allow a mini~um of 15 years.
City Attorney Ariel Calonne said there was no outer limit on length
ot time chosen to amortize a use or structure~
Council Member Levy said the problem with auto U$e ser
vice/commercial was the unattractiveness. ']:-he virt\le 'Was that the
services were needed. He asltoed 'What could be done, other than
zoning, to realistically clean them up and make them attractive
eno\lgh so that ride could be felt in the area~
Mr~ Schreiber said there 'Were three different areas; P~hlic
investment in street trees ana undergrounding utility ~lres;
private action dependent upon design review applications: and
assessment districts 'Which ve~e seldom used mechanisms for
landscape or improvement.
64 -3 04
9/13/90
-
l
,
Council Member ~vy asked i~ it was possible to have ~~ attractive
auto 6ervice/commer~i~1 area.
Mr. schreiber said it ~~uld be very difficult absent some type of
significant public or assessment district process. Depending upon
the r.ormal market forces, it 'Would :be very diffic-..;lt oVer the ne.xt
10 or 15 yeors to bring about any dramatic upgradinq of the area.
He did not have a hi9h level of hope for an aesthetic transforma
tion.
council Member Fazzino aSKed for comment on the rejection of the
specific plan procedure on page Ie: of the st.at! report CCHR:4B9~O).
Mr. Schreiber" said th~ specific plan might he a usable tool if th~
o!:ljective of the City was to :bring about dramatic changes in the
area. The specific plan 'Was not related to 'What was likely to
happen in the area, 'Was a very time consulr,ptive process, an~ if the
commitment was not to bring about radical change, the likely
bene~its for the cour~e Qf the next 10 or 15 years 'Would balance
out aqainst the amount of time and public process and resources
needed to be expended. He ~nderstood many prvperties in the area
were profitable and not likely to change. It was a de~ailed and
more complicated process than Palo Alto had used.
Council Member Andersen had a short-term question that probably
required a long-term policy examination. He recognized that much
of the concern about the Peninsula creamery structure was the
result of the problems that owners had ~ith regard to the politica!
process, but at the same time he was concerned ~bout a structure
that was not only ugly ~ut qne that appeared ha~ardous. Why the
structure had not been leveled 'Was of interest~ He asked if such
a policy existed to allow the structure to stand and wh~t ~ould be
necessary to change the policy.
Mr. Schreiber said the proble~~ was the. structure 'Was visually
obnoxious but not structurally bad. Tl".ere .... as no indication the
Luild~nq was so structurally weak that it w~uld qualify for the
conce!!lnation provision~ There were property maintenan,_.:. standards
that could be pursued. Staff had not pursued those because matters
were in progress.
council Member Andersen appreciated the situation but asked if a
building without 'Walls should not come dO\o'n~
Mr. Schreiber said the time .ould arrive when the situation would
need investigation, but the point vas that support columns and
beams, and not the walls, provided structural in~eg~ity.
Planning COWllissioner Ch.ristensen asked Ms~ Wil'!iion if the Urban
Design Plan was in a state to be the kind of visionary document the
neighbors were speaking to so that a &pecific plan ~ould not be
required..
"., p ",,,., -"",~
,~,
64-l05
9/1l/90
\
r
~ .. ",."---'---
y.s. Wilson replied a proposal for the area vould be part of the
plan. but perhaps not in the level ot det8il the neighbors ~culd
li);:e.
Planning commissioner christensen asked if there had been input
from the nei9hborhood.
Ms. Wilson said yes: the input had not been fvrma! but ~as received
through committee members and general listening.
Planning commissioner Harsh thought the difference betYeen ~hat the
neighbors were articulating and. 'What she had heard the Urban Design
Cml1D1ittee was creating ... as that the Committee ,,"'as ... orking on the
C!lssumption the basic t'ses would stay in place.
Ms. Wilson s~id yes: however, the Urban Design Committee had great
sensitivity to the transition issues.
Plannirig commissioner Marsh said some of
neighbors was with regard to m~re f~ndarnental
those simply contained in urban design.
the feedback from
land use issues th~n
Mayor Cobb wanted to get back to the original approach wi'th a
slight modification and asked the Planning cotMIissioners to speak
and give their thoughts.
Planninq commissioner Huber had been constantly saying in the
Med.ical Clinic hear-ings that the SOFA area needed revie'W. He
believed it was not possible to separate one from the ether
irrespective of the status of the Clinic~ It was a large facility
· ... ith much traffic and many employees 'Which 'Was ig"'lored in the
Downtown Stud)~ and now was being reviewed without a review cf SOFA.
It was important to look at the. transition~ understanding that from
R-l to multi-~amily simply ~eant moving the problem further toward
University Avenue. OVer the years there had been implied promises
made to the it-l areas that good~ solid buffe-rs .... ould be estab
lished.
Planning commissioner Hirsch asked if there had been an area the
size and area of SOfA which had been cleaned up in Palo ~lto or
anywhere in tne State of California. He viewed the area bounded by
}-.lmi!a~ Forest, Ramona and Addison, nine square blOCKS, as teing
essentially commercial. The pro~lem needed to be attacked in the
context of what it ~as. If a complete change .... as desired, it ~ould
!:le a 15-t.o 20-year process .... hich did not have the certainty of
success even after that period of time~ Looking back on the City's
efforts in the late 1970s on El Camino, many would say there still
needed to be a ~aitinq period for the fruits of that process. The
key neede~ to be found to encourage businesses owners and employees
to take pride in the area and somehow develop a voluntary effort to
operate the ar:e;e. significantly 'Well ...,ith the appropriate encourage
ment of the City. Along that line there needed to be an anonymous
surv~y. The area clearly needed visual improvement and might need
6~-306
9/13/90
\
..
redefining as well. In the short run, the people ~ho owned the
parcels should be queried for their solutions.
P14nning Commissionl.!r Glazier agreed with Planning Com."'ltissioner
Hirsch t~at the area was fundame~tally 8 service/commercial area.
The foremost goal ""as to clean up .... hat 'Was ~asically an very
unattractive erea. The is~ue in his ~ind was whether the Council
and Planning Commission could continue t~ be reactive in a
piecellleal fashion to proposals th~t COlme forward or could City
government be more proactive to project developments and perhaps
accelerate the process. Civen the fundamental service/commercial
n~ture ot the area, !Office use had more potential than housin9. He
would like to see the City find a vay to accelerate the process
..... hich had ber.n taking place, albeit slo!,o{ly,. o\"er the past 10 years
to clean up some less than perfect areas.
Flann~ng coamissioner Beecham said with regar~ to the geographic
scope, the needs of the entire eree including the area surrounding
the Medical Foundation 'Yer-e uniform needs; however, whatever
actions Were recommended or taken would be very different for the
Palo Alto He~ical Foundation &ituation versus the more commercial
SOFA area near Alma. ]I. second topic 'Was the general conflict
between a citywide desire, which was for ser~ice/cammercial
automotive, VE:rsus a neighborhood desire for quiet streets, more
availability of parking, etc. The matter would be difficult to
handle but 'Would neec to be acdressed. Third, it vauld be a long
process which should have two aspects: first, identific~tion of
the long-term goals and priorities; and follo~ing that, looking at
the short-term benefits and amelioration.
PlaJ'lning Cownissioner Christensen said her Vls~on of the. area
continued to be introducing the opportunities for housi~g.
Initially when the Planning: COI!.mission proposed housing for the
area, there had been much resistanr~. Now neighbors ~ere s~ying
they 'Would 'Welcome the transition; but without the cityts being
active in the proce'",3, the housing would not occur when the
opportunities came forward. In South Palo Alto, certainly along El
Camino, the continuation of auto uses and housing had been
possible. She wou~d hate to s~e housing not be part of the vision
for the area.
Planning Commissioner Cullen lived in the area and had several
observations. The trend ir. th2 area W3S toward housing. TWo lots
in the area 'Which the Planning Commission and Council had left
unamortized had gone from commercial to residential. Residences
would be built et the site of Merlin's Magic Meals on Homer and at
Johnts Coiffeurs at the corner of Channing and Hiddletield~ There
was a market. control by keeping the automotive ~ses ~ould be a
difficult thing to do, as keeping gas stations in town had been a
difficult. She urged the Council to look a,h~!lId ~s to ",hen th~
Downtown Study ~a.s prepared. to make residential with a higher
density to~ard the downto~n area and a lo~er density to~ard the x-l
areas. She believed it was important to get a transition area
between commercial and R-14
64-307
9/13/90
-""> .~:;y,,;
"~-'4'
-~~
" "-
Planninq COlnDlissioner Marsh agreed 'With the neighbors regar-ding the
potential of the neighborn~d. It was a rare event i~ Palo A!to to
have 4 neighborhood as und~!in~d that attorded the opportunity to
do some aggressive planning. Her vision vas for a urbar. nei9hhor
~ood ~ith Eome mixed use. She ~greed with Planning co~issioners
christensen and CUllen. that housing 'Was an .appropri~te introduction
into the neighbo!'hood. Four years ago the Planning Commission
provided a vell-considered ~lan for housing incentives in the area.
It was 8 plan that could be revie .... ed for appropria.teness at the
present time although the City Council had set it aside earlier.
The comments regarding the problems of mixed use were 'Well taken;
ho~ever, there were examples where mixed-use projects worked very
.... ell. Abitare .. as an exaIflple. She preferred to approach any
changes on a gradual basis and "Wo'Lalc3 1 ike to see the use 'of
incentives~ She would think very long and hard about any amortiza
tion process. If zoning ~ere changed, grandfatherinq lr incentive
process was preferred. She \las concerned about "t.he Planning
Co%lUtlission's 'Worle p!.an ana how the pr.oject could be incorporated
amonq the many things that needed to be done. Perhaps a short-term
solutio:"l .. as necessary to address immediate concerns, aDd a longer
term vie ... migh"t be placed en the agenda for the next j'ear or year
followinq.
Council Member Renzel said her inclinations could"be determined, by
her earlier questions. She was sensitive to the needs fot"
transition to the areas south of SOFA. Raving been around a lcng
time in the planning arena, she had seen ~any expectations totally
turned on their heads by unexpected economics and opportunities.
It ~as really iJllportant to set a vision and find a 'Way to
accomplish the vision. To allo~ piece~eal changes ~ithout
sensitivity to a -whole was 10$in9 a real opportuni'ty in the
planning area~ She would like to see the direction be ~ore housing
but ~ith grand fathering in existing uses. If substitutions ~ere to
occur. council should direct .. hat happened. Senrice/commercial 'Was
one of the most broadly pe:~is~ive zones ~i~h a wide vari~ty of
uses which included housing; therefore, all the arguments that
housing next to automotive uses would produce political headaches
'W~re out of the Council's hands. The Council chose to put Gordon
Biersch in after residential .. as established. It ~ight h~ve been
a bad choice in compatibility,. but it had heen made even though
problems had heen brought for-lard at the time. Bad p.olitical
choices did not necessarily mean there .. a~ bad planning in allowing
housing in the first instance. Public improvements in the w~y of
sidevalks, street trees I and street treatments had not b~en
discussed. Signaqe,. visual clutter, and lines overhead perhaps
were areas in the public works arena that could stimUlate definite
improvement. She agreed with Planning Commissioner Huber's remarxs
with respect to the Clinic; she found it hard to review the two
areas sequentially or separately without qiving a qreat deal of
consideratian of how decisions in one area might impact the other.
council Member A~:1e~sen was committed to protecting the auto repair
services, ~hich were an asset to the community. He believed that
64-308
9/13/90
•
\
----___ ." '-M' ___ '" ___ _
protection would not prevent increasing I h )using densi ty~ He
supported a mixed-use concept ~ith bore high-density residential
wh.tch liould benefit the community and: aid in the cotMlitrnent to thl!'
Golden Triangle Task. Force. It \to'as .an appropriate area for
allowing higher density housing particularly with the access to
DllIISS transit. In co~ir.ati'on ...,.ith mixe::d 'Use, he did not support
increasing office space. He agreed ·"lith Planning Commissioner
Marsh to explcre the incentive process and did not wish to have an
amortization process used. He ...,.ould like the city to make som~
improvementf:; in the short-tenn with regard to street trees. He -was
not anxious to have a long-term study. Staff and the Planning
commission did not have the time, and there would not be a great
benefit to be aerived. There was c€rtainly need {or some long-term
v~s~on, but to put the Council in a position of delaying the
efforts of the Palo Alto Medical Foundation 'Would not be good.
Improve~~nts of the Palo Alto Medical Foundation were consistent
with a mixed-use residential transition in the area.
council Member Fazzino agreea with Planning commissioner Hubpr's
remarks ::-egarding the Palo Alto Medi":al Clinic. No matter how SOFA
was defined, he believed it was essential that the Medical Clinic
issue be tactored irlto the whole question. He supported the
concept of mixed use in the are~~ at the same time he was conCerned
about the potential conflict of housing and comtercial. He 'Wanted
to protect the existing c':Jm."IIercial in tt.e an:~a~ which "'a's an
essential part of the city's economy. He vas \o"Uling to focus on
limited opportunities for additional housing. create a lw'ell-defined
buffer zone, end move as quick.ly as possible to underground
utilities~ The market had done .... ell end Chop l\eenan should be
applauded for his outstanding project 'Which improved. the area
dramatically; he ~ould certainly endorse such co~mercial use in the
future. He was very concerned about creating too much density. It
was essential to reflect the fact that the area ~as much more a
part of Protessorville lind University Park than it was of dO\olnto ..... n.
He would like to see ~any more trees and open space incorporated
into the are~. He .... as not as negative to the concept of a specific
plan as Hr. Schreibe~ and others were.
Vice Mayor WO¢lley ~ad difficulty ...,.ith the definition of the wurd
"neighbors." She did not see tonight that th.e neighbors were
speakinq .... ith one voice. She 'Would like to see more housing~ The
Council rejected the plan earlier because it .... anted to see more
family housing. It was true then and even truer no~. Th@ word
·family~ needed definition. Family was no longer two people with
kids; family Was probably one person .... ho on'y had o~e income and
therefore could not afford a single-family house. It family
housing-'Was reviewed, Council sh.ould be lookJng at small units
affordable to a family with only one income. It might be worth
while to lOOK at the idea the Planning Commission raised sometime
aqo to ~ake SUre there was the kind of housing which ~ould put a
minimum nulllber of units on the zone IS overlay for l.'..nits as low
priced as possible tor Palo Alto. If the zoning required a miniruurn
number of units, the price of land -would be commensurate with what
the developer could then put on the piece of property. She agreed
64-309
9/13/90
'0
,.......
J
with Planning Commissionel." Marsh that it 'Was important to be
cognizant of the workload~ wr.en Council Kember McCo~n pu~ the item
on the council ager.da for referral to the Planning CoD'l.ltLission, the
thought was for a relatively short-term study so the Peninsula.
Creamery could he redeveloped. Council review of proposed otf-site
parkinq and elimin~ting credit fer p~rking detici~ncies were t~o
things that could be done rather quickly to help the neighbors witn
concerns about parking~ She did. not support increasing office
spac~ which woul~ increa$e traftic~
Council Me%Wer Levy had. tour topic words: diverse, uniqo..le,
stimulating and transitions. He had always thought Palo Altojs
de6irability was in large part a tunction of its diversitY4 The
parti~ular area contributed to the diversitY4 If the area became
simply another housing neighborhood, the to~n would lose4 So it
~as good to ~ave the uniqu~ ele~ents that were found in the SOFA
erea. stimulation in the area was a function of 't_hl!' IJses that 'We:=-:e
found and not necessarily of the appearance o,f the area. There had
~een much dis~ussion about making the area look nieer~ but making
it look nicer ~eant losing the unique interplay of what ~as going
on there. HI:!-,.as -more concerned about how the area felt.
Transition from resi.dential to comme.rcial use was al· .. ays desired.
Most people did not want to live close to commercial uses if for no
other reason than that commercial uses tended to create ~ lot of
noise at 7 or 8 o'clock in the morning when ~any would desire 20
minutes more of peace and quiet. l.t Would be very difficu.lt. as
Mr. Schreiber described, to have housing and commercial uses cheek
by jowl. If people ~anted to put in housing near commercial use,
that was fine, b~t it was a mistake to dictate that housing use.
The question of code enforcement had not been discussed. There ~as
considerable amount that could ~e done to assure that there wa~ no
noise in excess, pollution, and odors. Mr. Schreiber made the
comment that there was no right planning ans'Wer.. It should be
recognized that it ~iqht be best to let the area be in term~~t and
transition and not dictate what ..... as thOught 'to be the perfect
sclutic>TJ .
council Member Kniss said one troubling thing was that Palo Alto
continued to have a high jobs/ho"lJsing imbalance. Although housing
",as continually sought, the City never could decic!e q-IJite ... 'here to
put it or whether or .not it COlJld be mixed or next door to
so~ething else~ As she recalled~ many neighborhoods went to bat
for the cammer-cia} areas in their neiqhborhoods; for example,
century Liquors and t.he AReO station. She was not certain that
housing could not exist cheek by jowl. The Medical Foundation and
SOFA existed side and by side and ~ne would ~bsolutely influence
the other. She sugqested the Medical Foundation be incorporated
into the plannin~ tor the SOFA area. Surely there might be more to
be dene to clean up the area. There was not total clarity on ~hat
transition 'Would be, only that transition was desired4 She
supported so~e housing; extensive housing was p~obably not
app-rcpriate.
64-310
'9/13/90
•
'!
;:.,
~ ;
~ r ;1
'.1
council Member McCown could not describe the overall context an)"
better that Council Member Renz:el die! in her opening comments
regardinq the need for "the longer-range vision and directicn to
encourage the ""ay change would occur. ChangE: .... ould be happtOniflg
and had :been happening. She concurred th;,t in establishing t~e
vision, it would not be 3 good idea to eliminate the auto repair
uses, but the desiqnation of the area AS service/commercial 'Was bad
~s long-term planning. ~ different vision vas needed for the area,
and the change could be accomplished .in a way tbat did not change
the economic viJ.bility l!.nO continued participation of the current
uses. The p!.rking -question .. as a challenging assignment that 'Would
probably need to 90 to the Planning commission. ·The off-site:
parking arrangement for Whole Foods Market seemed to be \lorking
....,ell, .but replicating that. situation in another-setting might not
be a good direction. Another issue that the Urban Design Committee
Was r~vie .. in9' dealt ..,ith the frontage on Alma. The viable, vital
auto uses were longer :really accessible from Alma. Al:c1a was a
ditticult street from an access point of view. There ~~re changes
that could occur right now to encourage QevelQP~ent on Alma. It
would be an interesting concept to develop an alley and face into
the neighborhood rather than f.ace out. She would 1 ike to see a
vision tha~ was directed more to housinq~ Planning Commissioner
Cullen \ras absolutely right "'hen sl1e stated there 'Were forces
pushing the City in that. direction already.· Although the current
~ules permitted ho~sing, in fact, they really discouraged it~ The
earlier techniques the Planning Commission recommended could very
~uic)Cly bE. freshened up. Svme short-term ac.tio!1 was prooablr
needed, regretfully including p~rhaps the staff's recommendation
t.hat the council review off-site parking situations. It .... ould be
a terricle way to handle the ~atter, but it ~as an admission that
there 'Was no ~ood plan to deal with parkirl9. The discussion
tonight had been t~eme~dously beneficial.
Mayor Cobb agreed there W3S a need for a long-term vision and also
believed that economics could no longer be ignored. Ultimately,
the decision was political, because as Mr. Schreiber pointed out
there was no right anSWer. He believed auto and similar at riSK
services needed to be preserved. If housing vas desi~ed, in the
context of that decision would be ~here use would be encouraged,
'Which inherently 'Would make the effort longer-term. Finding a
balance was important, because the jobs/housing imbalance could
never-be solved completely, but a community could be created absent
certain services 'Which the public ~culd like to remain in town.
The auto related and si~ilaL kinds of services should, over the
longer term, be focused on" Alma Street. If commercial ~as focused
on Alma Street then there v~s ~ definite need for a good t~ansi
tion. If in the longer vision the commercial could be moved out to
Alma Street, then a better envir-onment could be created in the
interior SOFA area. It was important to quickly clean up the area
because j t was an entrance to dO!Jntown. Parking required attention
and he agreed additional office space was not needed. After
listening to all the comments and taking extensive notes, he found
no one set of opinions emerged, but there were some common threads.
It was possible to pick out from the discussion some points of
•
64-ll1
9/ll/90
•
---.... _-----
'-~---------
-
agreement to send to the Planning Commission; that process. night be
difficult and ta~e some time~ He ~ould ask consider~tion to refer
the issue to the Planning Commission taking the guidance tro~ the
collective comments ~hich could be distilled from the discussion~
MOTION: Hayer Cobb moved, seconded by ~oolley. to refer the SOFA
issue back to the Plannir:g Com:nission for further review and
consideration with the request for develop~ent of recommendations
~hich r~fl~,ct the guidance provided by the CQ.uncil comments at the
September 13. 1990 1 Joint Meeting.
Council Member Andersen would endorse the motion but would also ask
staff to provide thEi Planning Commiss.ion yith the kind of creative
presentation that was provided to him4 He appreciated differences
of opinion among the staff. It was appropriate to hear the
creative thinking that planners were encouraged to present, and he
hoped tne PI~nning Commission Youlcl have the opportunity as ~ell~
Although he had not spoxen about parking, he was very anxious that
be a focus of th~ Planning C~mmission.
council Member McCown said the motion was an a~o~hous refe~ral to
the Planning Commission and each person could probably have five
key points and order them di[ferently~ The staff report
(CMR:4S9:0) had. alrea.dy ide.ntified some, She suggested for thE
short-term th~ Planning COmIl1.ission list a priority of issues. As
identified tonight, she felt they were parking. mixed use co~er
cial/hou~ing goais l handling the continuation of existing uses,
transition, and the neighborhood buffer issue. The Planning
Commission, probably het.tE:.r than t.he council, could with the
assistance of staff establish a time fram~ to discuss the issues.
CO\lncil Member Kniss 'Would like to add the Medical Foundation
although she realized it 'Was an issue that Council Membpr McCo .... ·n
could not vote on, One other issue was the clean up~
council Member McCown did not understand how the referral could
include the Medical Foundation since the FOUndation already had its
o .... n schedule~
Mr,'Calonne said what he had :heard did not :make the inclusion a
problem from the standpoint of the pending application from the
Foundation. The Planning Commission and Council seemed to be
focusing or. t~e interrelationships of what might happen with the
Foundation site, and that kind of direction ci'j not have direct
bearinq on the outcome of the current Foundation prOCESS. If the
direction of the Council and Planninq Commission was to taXe into
account how the results of the reviey of the Clinic site would fit
with the neighborhood, that was fine, If there ~a$ direction for
a specific outcome for the Foundation process. then there ~as a
problem ..
council Member Renzel would support the more general motion. She
'WoulcI acId the public works issue of how sidewalKS, s1;:reets,
64-312
9/13/90
, , ,
L __
signage, and utilities to council Member McCo\o,'n t .. list. A zr.emner
ot the public 6ub~itted ~ ~ap showing the ~mount of the ~arking in
the area. What was most offensive was how the parking lots came up
to the blocks. If there were some ~ay to create a revolving fund
thr.c>-ugh COBG to Zlllo\o' 10"" interest loans for some improvement along
the perimeters, it might b~ a short-term ~ay to encourage i~proye
men~s. It vas not a planning issue, but since short-term solutions
'Were beir.g sought, those kinds of matters should be taken into
, account.
Mayor Cobb said the basic ide~ 'Was that there were somE consistent
patterns and trends. The Jleeting ,.ould have clear a.nd complete
minutes, .and the Planning Commission could take .t.I'om the referral
the trains of thought and corornonalities and come back with the best
recommendation. The comments had implicit in them as :much guidance
as they wer~ apt tv get.
Council Member Levy said w"hat 'Was occurring 'Was throwing the ball
back to the Planning co~~ission. It was not S~ long ago that the
Commission had come to the Council after considerahle deliberation
and council turned down the recommendations. There \o'as some
consen~us, but there was also a broad range of opinions, and it
would be better for all concerned if Council spent a little more
time "'Co take specific votes aoout 'What kind of' policies and
directions it r-eall}' wanted to se:1o, rather than asking "the
commission to do all the ~licy work.
Mr. Schreiber said he and Council Member Levy were thinking along
the same line~, He was quite concerned with the general nature of
the referra14 There certainly ~as an ~ption for the council to
keep the item for a month or so until the minutes 'Were prepared and
then provide more precise dire~tion. If that was not th~ Council's
desire, he would suggest that the Planning Co~issionrs task be to
complete the job that had been. set out tonight, 'Which Was to
develop specific recommendations on policies for the area without
all the implementation measures or detzils. Staff had wOTKed a
number of hours and coul d not be asked to continue to put in
\lnpaid~ overtime in the evenings. The wide range of Council
comm~nts would invite a very extensive process involving consider
able amOunts of time qiven the historic differe~ces bet~een
Planning COn'JIlission recommendations and Council actions in the
area.
Planning Commissioner Marsh had a prior experience of spending a
good deal of time with a proposal and seeing it set aside by the
Council. She would !ike to see Council's input in several weeks,
as Mr4 SChreiber suggested, so that what ~as reviewed had a better
su~cess before the Council.
Hayor Cobb asked staff if Council had a relatively liqht agenda
next Monday.
64-)13
9/lJ/90
, ,
j
~ I
........
'-'
Assistant City Manager June Fleming said th!';!:re was a relatively
liqht agenda ~or Monday, but the packet had already been distribut
ed. Thp.re was the possihility of continuing the item.
council Me!nber 'Fazzino dis;.agreed 'With Mr. Sc'hreiber ar.d Pl~'r'_nin.'3'
commissioner Marsh. Th~ issue was discussed at the joint Planning
Commission and Ccuncil-zeeting several weeks ago. The reason for
the existence of a Pl~nnin9 Comnission was to have commissioners·
talent and expertise on planning issues. The Planning Commission
could add ill! tremendous amo'.lnt to the pnJcess and help move the
Council to decisions. He did not think there was much more the
Cou~cil could add on Monday night. For the zo.t part there ~aQ
been tremendous consh,tency :between the Planning Com.missio:l. and the
Council.
Council Kerober Rer:.zel agreed with Council Member Fazzino. She
recalled SOFA was like a stepchild dur-inq the Downtovn Stu~r.
There ...... as tremendous elllphasis on the big' part of the Downtown
study. but .... ith respect to SOFA, that part of the Planning
Commission recommendation ~aS not given the sa~e level of attention
as the do*ntown core. That inconsistent Council action in terms of
the Planning Co~ission recommendations should not be viewe~ quite
as onero\!sly~ Clearly there were: some las-t minute actions znade
-without fully unders'i::anding implications. In addition, in the
interim there had been increased activity in the area. The
neighbors were much more aware and concerned. There ...... as a reason
to revisit the issue. She sensed a fair degree of consensus, and
there wtere some general issues ·,riith pretty clear 9uidance~ She
Would not let an earlier action necessarily scare everyone a
Planni:1g Commissioner CUllen felt much more comfortable having
heard the discussion about ho~ the Council Members ~ere feeling4
She did not think what hapP1:med before ...... ould bp.: repeated. The
commonality could he understooQ from the minut~3, and she felt the
Planning commission could 9'0 ahead without additional Counci.l
deliberation.
Council Me!nber Andersen did not think he could. be. -.nore specific.
He asked if the motion would re~~ire a great deal more staff time.
Hra Schr~iber replied if the assignment WAS open-ended to bring
back recommendations for the SOFA area. it could entail consider
able additional staff timea If the referral was closer to one of
the options as he men'",ioned, which ..... as to have the Planning
Commission distill the pel icy and not get inv~lveQ with detailed
recommendations and citizen committees, then the amount of staff
time could he controlled in a reasonable manner. The motion as ~e
understood it ...... as a qeneral referral of the issue of SOFA, and it
was not clear to him ...... hether the co~ncil wanted a detailed set of
planning recommendations on implentEntation, etc., or a set of
policy recommendations which could be modified before more time
ccns~ming vork was done4
Council Member Andersen was not interested in having the staff put
in that kind of time and energy. He wished to see the leadership
-
64-314
9/13/90
.'
that could come f~om the Planning 'Department including the
differences of opinion. He wished to have ~hat had already been
prepared.4vailable tor ~he Planning Co~ission.
Vice Mayor ~Clollt!l'y ,ask@d it Hr. schreiber ",as advocating the
options on pages 18 and 19 of the staff report {CMR:489!O}.
JIlr. Schreiber said the selee:tion vas more complex than picking
Items 1, 2 or 3, becal.<.se there was overlap. There had been
comments fco!r'. Council Members, for exa:rnple, of existing auto uses
and whether they should he qrandfathered, but he was not certain ~e
~oulQ be able to put forth a specific.Council position on a very
critical topic~ The same would be true of encouraging mixed-use
housing. There certainly ~ere some themes, but there vas also a
great diversity.
Vice Hayer Woolley said there were some inherent conflicts that
were voiced. Everyone 'Wanted to keep the a.uto uses lind also
encourage housing4 She appreciated what Mr. Schreiber ~as saying
that. the messages were, to some extent, in cC'nflict 'With eac:h
other. She was not cer~ain that it was possible tonight to resolve
the conflict. she agreed with council Member Andersen that coun::il
did not want to create more work for staff but wanted the process
to move along fairly rapidlY4 She asked if it was possible for the
Planning Commission to return with a refined list of options,
pointing out the conflicts in the positions.
AssistCl~ ... Planning Official George Zimmerman was thinking along the
1 ines ot what Planning commissioner Marsh had suggested earlier
which was for the Planning Co~ission to review the minutes and the
staff report and prioritize which items could be handled in the
short term and which items could be handled in the long terIll,
particularly in the next two years .. ith the Comprehensive Plan
llpdat! •
Council Member McCown said what Mr. Zimmerman suggested yas what
she was tryin9 to accomplish by way of a refine~ent of the ~otion.
She felt the list of policy op~ions in the staff report (CMR:489:0)
could, ...,ithout much additional statf time and the conversations
which occl.lrred tonight~ be taken by the Planning Commission and
fleshed out. The details, further implementation, and strategies
were not yet needed: they were longer-term goals4 She would like
to see the Commission, based on the staff report and the policy
options discussed at the 30int Meeting, make a policy recommenda
tion to the council on strategies and approaches~ develop a time
line, and return the matter to Council.
IO.ltER AND SECOND£R Jt.GllEED '1'0 INCOIlPOUT.E "rH!. ~GUAGE ~and based on
the staff report (CMR:489:0): and develop a ti~e line and return
the matter to Counci14-
council Member-Levy 'Would prefer a specific motion with directions,
rather than le~ving the matter in a nebulous st~te.
64-315
9/13/90.
•
. ,
-----------
/'
AMENDKENT: council Member Levy moved that the item be continued to
Monday night in order to provide a ~ore specific policy directio~
t~ the Planning Co~,ission for further study of the SOFA area.
AHENDHENT DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND
MOTION PA8S~D 1-0: Levy nno~· sutorius absen~.
ApJOu~NMEHT: The meeting edjourned at 10:15 p.m.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
city Clerk Mayor
NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accoroance ~ith
Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.04.200(a) and (b). The City
council and Stanaing committee meeting tapes are made solely tor
the purpose of facilitating the prepar~tion of the minutes of the
meetings. City council ana Standing Commjttee meeting tapes are
recycled two years from the date of the meeting. The tapes are
avail~ble for members of the public to listen to durinq regular
office hours~
64-316
9/13/90
SUM~~RY HOTES ON
PLANNING CO~~ISSIOH SU3COMMITTEE
ON
SOUTH OF FOREST AVENUE AREA
March 13. 1991
Planning Commlssion
Subcommittee Members Present: Glazier, Hirsch and Huber ~
/ / /
St il ff Present:
and Members of the Public:
Sc~reiber and zi~erm~,1 ~
/ ~ d
The SubcQmmittee discussed the request of several members of tn~ public to
reconvene wit",in 60 days. Ttle purpose to reconvene 'Would al'ow tne University
Park working group on SOFA issues, SOFA commercial pr~perty owners and oth~r
i~terested members of the public to discuss long~term opportunities for this
area. Co:rmissioner Huber summarized property owner suggestions on incentives
saying that if incentiv~s for upgrading were implemented, intensification and
ccmme:nsurate t.'affic increases would result. On t~~ other hand, if the Q.4
CD-S fAR stays in place, rna~y existing businesses (ould be exp~cted to remain
in this area. Cormlissioner-Hirsch expressed (once!""n that if properly owners
did nat participCl.te~ they may be exc1uded from any future process en SOFA.
Commissioner Huber summarized four issu!s that nave raised levels of interest
and con(ern among nearby residents: 1) The Palo Alta Medical Foundation
proposal, 2J the Emerson Street nonconforming uses e.g., National Glass &
EurDpean Auto 3} the opening of Who1e Foods Market and resuTtant traffic
increases and 4} the Chevy's propesal. The Subcommittee agreed to schedule a
fully noticed meeting within 60 days, e.g., an ~ay 15~ 1991, to determine
issues, their priority and how to proceed on these issues.
p:\gz\SOF
SUMMARY NOTES ON
P~ING COKNISSION SUBCOKNITTEE MEETING
ON
SOUTH OF FOREST AREA
HAY 15. )g91
Attendees: Planning Commlssion Subccmmittee Members; Glazier and Huber
Staff: Gilliland and Zimmerman
Members of the Urban Design Committee and the Public
Commissioner Huber announ~ed the Subcommittee goal of coming up ~ith
retommendatfons at this meeting. Dena Massar and other members of the
University Park SOfA Subcommittee referred to their letter stating that
residents wanted t~ define a long-term goal for the South of Forest Area
(SOFA) area and to start I process with property owners regarding ho~ SOFA
should develop. One property owner, Chop Keeran~ said he agreed with the need
to SEt goals. He added that implicit in any change is intenSification. He
stated that ~xisting s~rv;ce uses are very viable 1n the SOFA area and. as a
result. redevelo?ment does not appear likely in the for~seeable future.
Another property owner and resident, Earl Schmidt, urged tke City to leave
SOfA aione. He said the City had saddled S.OFA with too man regu1ations over
time. l1nda Scott showed slides on positive and negatlve elements cf SOFA.
She said that she wo~ld like to see more landscaped areas in the SOFA area.
Shirley Wilson presented ideas and p~cposals that the Downtown Urban Design
Committee had been discussing for the SOFA district of the Downtown Area.
These suggestions incl~ded considering intenSification of office and
residential alonlJ tfle Alma Corridor and provi.dir.g a more effectiVe transition
between co~rcial and reSidentia1 along Emerson Street and developing a small
park in this area.
The Subcommittee then developed its ~riority issue list with ~isual issues
n!v~r,g the highest .:;hort·term ~I"i""'-Hy and ]arid use 1<::::; .. es having the highest
long-term priority. T~ address visual issues, the Subcommittee recommended lJ
ccmplet1r.g th~ Urban DeSign Plan, 2) unaergrounding utilities. and 3) planting
more street trees. To address land use issues, the Subcommitte~ recommended
1) retaining auto service uses, 2) conSidering mixed use incenti~es alnng the
Alma Corridor, 3) considering a wore effective transition to rEsidential along
Emerson, 4) reviewing CO-S permitted uses to eliminat~ inappropriate uses and
5) not preparing a specif;, plan. To address middle priority parking is!;ues,
the Subcommittee re~ommended 1) continuing referral of ~ff-sight agreements to
Council and 2) considering elimination of parking deficit credit provisions in
the zoning regulations when ~S2S intensify. To addre-s trafflc issues, the
S~bcommittee recommended not to (onsider street closures.
The Subconrnittee conc1uded the meding by noting its reccmmendiltions on SOFA
most likely would be considered by the Plannlng Commission in ~ugust.
,
\ .
. .
/
?!.TRiCl! CAS.'iEL f:>t,HAW1'
201 HOBer .Ave., P~la A":'to. C! 943<)1
4!5-J27--2'il?
10: lIembP.J'S of the 5pecllll ·SOF!" Subcomml ~
Pale Alte Piliulling Commission
In care of George Zimmerm./lltl. Plan.niLg Department
.larch 4-, 1~91
Sitlce 'We .... ill be out of the St./!tc at the tillle '8f the spe.:tal ".~rch 16th
SubcoD..alittee Ileeting I wish to exprp-::,'S .DIy feelings and concern, for the recon~,
and. your considera.tion.
1. speas. ~ 1I resident lind proper-ty owner with a lifetim .. int..('rest ill "'-be very
DeaM of the so called "SOFA'" llrea. lie b..oVl: own~~ properti~ at the COLDer of
Homer dlld E.erticn since tbe veT, early 1900's. 'ie-'ve been '"studied'", "planned'",
",Zoned", ·ie-zoned", <you D.Qlle lU, -by the City SuIf, Pla.Ilning Cm:lIllisSLOn,
Hhitarlc Sites GO.llBissioll, and Architectu:--al Review Board •• ore times than I
can count. We hAd felt. aItd hoped. that OJ:! cCG.pl€tian of tbe gecy I'L'C€,D~
OIeowntown'" study, and adoption of ~!t!ngl,. s~lD.d JIlu!tiple use .-"fAR"
!;:."t4nd&rds and a new Zoning "alphabet· we-ant! Ol:r !:mighhars llIigbt enjoy a
reaSODllble tiae of PEACE.
Our lIIost ~sic questiOIl is W~ ? ?
¥e arp, lind have al~"'ys been Ii Buffer aad :lulU [fse area. The recent fine
d~lcpaent of both residellUal and Ser9i:ce Comoez-cilll facilities, Deluding
-our t.aed1ate neighbor -a long needed "dolOfntcwtl· Food Supplier, b~ve. ~e
thJnk, been pD:Sitiv{: additicr:::s to au..-CIty.
Our new residential neighbors -incltJd.:cg a well respt.."'Cted. experiencP-d.
Call1lllisston .amber, Ob9iolJSly enjuy tbe convenience aod advantages of a near
DowntOPfll location. People wh.o work downtown '¥ery obviously appreciate th.e
availability :Jf 9aried busic.es5 s ... .rvices, resuuracts. and otber facilities co
close to their places of employment.
The second, significant question 1s, V!fY 10" ? ?
We are all izr:mersed in or inutldated hy tbe p~ls, and -n.eeds·. of PAJIF.
Redevelop.eat of ilY of the "clinic" pax-eels WILL hl!iV€ 1lI cDDtinu-iog IXPACT an
all adjacent Ill'eas through the CGll-St.rUGtion. period and afterward. Our bloclTo:~,
of residenc .. "85 and busiDC..-sses. immediately tD tbe We:;.t .. ill be the Illest directly
effected by trucks and cODstrUf'tion, for ... hat cnuld be 5, 10, (or 20?) years.
oare
f-2
S!lnuldn't the PUr" exp4!lSion piAu be fir-Ill 1] nnj cOIl!?lete!y S(~t, ::I:lc-pte-:::. and
started before .z:I tight City budget i'C. strC'tcb-c>d f1J!" sL~H tim':! !lnd e~pe!l.se. and
t:!1e dfor-ts of the CoJUlission llnd CouncU are di!u-teci for l!: lEY sper.:i<11 iete-nm
phnntng st~p for all area &0 directly related'?
Also, thc:-~ has been 10 move, so f,'U, by l!:Ily deveb!-'eT or io"{es.tu .. -!o implement
Iultiple use developDeni; or i.m::r-ovement -:If prnpert!.E:s -under the D'..',", 7ery
adve.IltAg'~5. -FAR-g· .. 1idelin.es in this llT"'~ -alo'1E; the Alaa (.orrioi':Jr -,bet"e<-"D
High and !1IIa. streets. Possibly it's t:l.e ecOilo:JDlJ. DR. simply the n£X:C for "'
Tra.ffic Plan. We accept th.e fact thllt SQ~E p:-operUC5 on. Atm,'"! ~re p .... ese:Jtly all
e-yesore, .and -1lItJ.y-be tbe total basis for the proponents pressur-e, B"L.1t -. wby
DOt let the cut!""en.t Zone/plan ha7e tiDe t:J work, BEFORE d lEY p::'.an is st.<lrte-d. ?
Fro~ what we've seen and heard th~ cur~ent cla~Qr for stud:es and cha~ge comes
f:-om a few 1:ld1vldual r~ideDts: wbo live South of Ch...::n!l.:..n u • DLl the fringe of
the area they have e;ott~tI reo::ogc.ized I:.S -SOFA-. lone wbo we rf>;."';.og-!',lZl" Joined ill
the fiIl-.!ll Downtown Study meetings, so short 1II time lIIgo, which did effect the
i:!"ntlre area, Those of us who Otnl and f'"c.~o,-properties JORTH of ClL:lnning bave a
diferent perspective.
Yoold !! Wall or &.rricades, 8t Channing, satisfy the new pl!:lD. pr-:Jponellts ?
Sincerely.
Patricia Cashel Schmidt
•
/
EARL F. & PATRICIA C, SCHMIDT
201 KOMer Ave.
Palo Al~o, CA 94301
","..r. Geor,ge Zimmerman, Ass-+';-. City Pla~nin~ Ofiic:-i~l
Palo Alto C!ty Hall
Palo Alto, CA 94301
[P!
r:" J ,.
ii,
I}
~'hile parti,:1patiC'r'. in a scheduled Conference in So.'::ramenta
prevents our atte.:.dance at the "Soutll of Fore:;t Arei\"
hearing set for August 14. we wish "tu record C'jr ccctinued
intere~t and concern with the tl~ing and premise of the S~
called SOFA plan.
Ve are long term res::'dent o .... -ners of prC'perti€;:. wt.::ch O'!IIl'e
currently zoned as Historic, F:esidential (2'. and (,=~rci.al
(3). which are located ~n t.:tJ'<t center of the desig-n.3.ted area.
Over the years we and the Cashel,. hdVe: developed, up~r~ded,
improv~d and maintained tnese and ether prop~rtjes within
the overall -CD South-~~ea to tbe cig~est ~xlsting
standards set by the City, - --Despi"te J::tlany ~nd f~et.;'-lelJ.t
·NEVU plans and Zoning Changes. Somehow. the "ne'E'd n far
change ~s always inst1gat.;!rj by people or intere~ts '~u1:side.
or on the fringes of the a~ea,
lie have attended all the noticeci meet1~gs we eculd. Vitb.
other .:lwners and businesses we are <."itally concerned witb
·our" area. Vle share a real interest in it's continuing
upgrading and p,ospcrity.
There are IW'O genUine, cu:-:-ent t:r::J'bl~n::s:
TIMING -We and t~e City a~e c~rrently trapped by the lang
delays in developing realistic p:ans for expansion of the
F'A.KF Clinic. Our drea IS seriously impacted NOlJ, and .and
WILL BE throughout the. (10, 12, or ?": year). c·:ms".;ruct1on
process. Etforts to change traff~c patterns NOW", or to
expect new inve~t=ent and developme~t in tbe i~diately
adjacent blocks befcre the ~jor-eXCO':ation an,j construction
work 1$ complete will waste Staff. a::ld COIUlIJission, time acd
shrinking City dollars.
THE ALKA. CORRIDOR -Is the fo::;~l pOint of tbe City's
p .. ·oblem. Invol"~ing or naming tne rest of our area for =--e-
study BOIi ~.s a notbing more then ~ oo!':"Clr=esc.een. In Gam-
pleting the -Downtown Plan" the CDmmissi~n, Stafi. and
Council made a valiant attempt to use Multi Use Zanfng and
existing -FAR" development ~tandar-d5 to get new inve-sotment.
1 --,
!
, "
i3Sr
It did not w~rk, Much 8f the area between .ttl~ ~nd Hir:;b.
end Forest and (almos"::) L1nCdln, looks, and is 'Wcrse,
In Itself. this block~wio.e -=.orri:!or will !';'=It b-;:, ,j.1re,::tl-y
1mpacted by tbe Cl i nic cleve:' Op:!ll~r:.t,
IF there lS an impelling r-~ason, or n2'S'd. fe:: imm.meoiiate.
NE~ city planning and rezon1ng inc~ntives, iet's kill tbe
"Sl:Jl':Il::P," and 60 called SDFA rede"J'elop!l)e:lt ~n,j ~et onto the
mllj or and real r;eed, a workable !='lar. for t:fle Al1lla I.:,"crridor
which IiILL attract private in'lest~nt 'ta our are~' s FrC'nt
Doar.
~ :inC;Q .. rel Y, ~~.
Earl F. Schmid~ & Patric1~ (ashel Sch~i~t
•
May \5, 19r;l
TO Plenning CommisslOn Subcommlttee on the South of 'O(~st Menue
(SOFA)
FROM: South Df Forest Ayenue (SO,A) Sut,comm,ttee of Ur,i','srslty Park
NeIghborhood Association
We MYe met seyeral times tD clanfy our Interest ar,d goals in partICipating
UI en oyeryiew of SllFf,. and its future. liost slgnifltar.tl~, we agree ',hot the
nine block commercial distnct c"rrenny under reYlew IS en ~rea of major
importance to the community BS B whole. In order to maxImIze obtalnabl.
Mnefits, it is imporlant to guide SGfA's future -to do comprettBnswe
planning for SOFA using a 10-20 ueer hOrizon, The planning process should
be inclusiye of ell interested parl;es, arod should not 'nerely be reBctll'. to
ind!vidu~1 deyelOpment proposals The resul tlng plen should Include
incentives to encourage de,elopment conslste"t wHr, the long range goals
f or Uti s 6re8.
Our subcommittee recognises the posltlve beneflts that eGuld be derlVed
from change and development in SOFA We feel that wltn careful
conSideration of the natural transition (rom dQwntown to resident,", areas,
community supported development is pOSSIble
An inclUSive planning process will enable the cre~t1ve use 01 this nine blGck
area located strategicBlly adjacent to our commercial/down!own are"
trBospor"ation corridor, anO' a large histone resldent,al population
It is inadequate tolnak£ minor adJ'Jstments to the Clty's building eMes
TMs approach will quickly result 'n lost opportunity for positive banef,ts
which could include housing in close prO>lmity to both Jobs and publ:c
transportation, ''''proved parking and traffic patterns; preservatIOn of
neighborhood serv;ces; and improved '"terface between (ommewel and
re.s:identifll uses
We urge your subcommittee \0 supporl such planning and \0 work WlU,
neighbors, property and business owners, aM other Interested parties to
ensure max, mum benef,t for all.
I
'1 i
·1 ,-J
I I
-" .
•
PALO ALTO CHAIWBER OF COMMERCE
SOFA Br!effng
Se~!cr CccrcHnating Canter
June 4, 1991
Summary Minutes
The following summarizes th~ key discussion pOints.
PaneliaU:
Moderalor:
Attendees:
Ken Alsman, Chop Keenan, Dena Moser, John Schink.
Hal Mickel .• on
(see attached sheet)
Status report: George Zimmerman, Assistant Planning Official,
City of Palo ARo presented an overview of existing uses, zoning
hiS10ry and area boundaries.
F()( pla":1ing purposes, the city defines SOFA as the south 01 Fo<sS1
commerCial area.
George reported on recent procee dings of the Plan ni ng Commission
subcommitle charged to make recommendaiions regardirog city
actions relative to SOFA-
Kev issUes jdentjlied: land use, (remaining uses,
int.gnsification) visual appearance, parking P<'oblems and
traffic
Priorjtjzatjon 01 iSSues' near term-visual, long term-land
use, mid-term-parking and then traffic
Strategies to consjder·
1. redevelop at higher densities along the Alma corridor
2. create transnion residential area in the Sollth East sector
3. review permitted uses in the CDS zone wnh iment of
retaining current (auto related) uses
ProceSS: subcommittee recommendations go to the Planoing
Commission in AugUS1 and then to the CounCIl in SeptlOct.
Relative 10 phyo;.;.al upgrade, the city will be undergrounding
utilities during the next S-year period.
PaneUsts' comment.:
• SOFA Iocalion P<'esents opportunities to use transrt, walk to
downtown
• challenges include: how to won.: with smaller P<'operties,
imP<'ovingthe physical design, creating a non-confrontational
P<'ocess, creatinga broad, community vision for SOFA
• need to create incentive zon i ng in ()(d er lor property owners
10 upgrade
•
, ,
•
",-. -." :"--.
..':.\~:.-
, •• r ,
~----.-. -----
o
• need a process that wi:1 allow the cc -,;munity to identity
.areas: of agreement and to disclJss differences, before we get
to a discussion of sc.'iutions
• need to preserve and enhance property ..... alues for residents
as well as commerciat property owners
• need a forum for discu~sion of ideas and a plan that can
guide fu1ure decisions
• need to estabiish long term goals and objectives and then
determine now to preserve propoerty values
Can-do statements:
• neighbors would support property upgrades
• neighbors would accept denser mixed use -including 314
story office buildings and > single family residential
(fevelopment
• auto related services property 0"'-. recognize need to
improve physical image of the area and to respect residential
character of streets
• if th~ c~y pursues consistent dealln~s and requirements
of property cwners, owners a,. .. more likely to upgrade
properties
• the planning staff will assist property owners interested
in affecting visual upgrades
groups could work together for mutual improvemen:s
Where we all agree:
1. Retaining property values and the areas's economic vitality
are important issues
2. Visual appearance needs improvement
3. A parking problem exists
4. SOFA is Ii! pleasant, good walking neighbor' oed
5. Alma street is visually blighted
t
-" "", . -".' -
Palo A110 Chamber of Commerce
SOFA Community Briefing and Information
A TTt!ND EES:
Roy Bucki ngham
'Kochael Mom's
Hal Lull
Jeann e loomis
Hal Mickelson
P atrida C. Schmidt
Don Youngs
Jon Schink
Drew Youngs
Bob Good61i
Andy ooty
Chop K~nan
Ken A, .... man
Marty Be mstein
Rose Theils
Bin Theils
Dee Hileman
Ken Schreioor
Uooa Bibbler
Marlene Elliott
Joe Varkin
Seth Trailer
Leonard Ely
Buzz Ellison
Patricia Gardner
Micki Schneider
RoxyRapp
George Zi m me nnan
Bot Mang
Dena Moser
,
Exchange
a IJ7.-~Tr.~:
l.it' .!,.
CH.'''I&~
or CO~,'lr.RC(
rr,,,,,I~~:
";,~It. ~-;,rr'U.
(· ......... r .o\"\"J~ \ ~"'k'
hr·idf"nl EI\"M
Tf.RP.F:~·'E CO~·:-:F.it
Tlm,l.'-. u.. • .
H"",,;'OeT,~r.t ~Ic~~n
\"1<:. P~I.J.nt."
A:-':DY Cl\lTY
::'!&n.r,,<"(j L-"inr'!'i:'.
WIL1....I},\! Jt1H~:'r. ....
ralo .!.I~ W..-ri.ly
[Jl.WS ~lltLER
J"~Ile;'~n :'ll iller I:. Co.
BEXEFt;..y S";>..Dl:-=:E
-rIM> 13; lor )!.a~
Pa.~1 'Pr .... iol.nl
':01"'';'< ~'{1R7H>I'Ar
S~krT I:: S~"'''I..\
.i\1"("r,.il«I.' I"c.
SA RB.-I, R...-\ BRfl~':-;
8ro"',,. Adams. s~~ ..... ,ItU" ell
liARr CA,"ULI
CJ ("omm1ll1H"';lI'on~
P.~~ D!('loir;o.;·:-(l;o.."
T .... ~1,1'\"u.~· ,"''''''1'
~·EIl Fl.AS"ZRAICH
S.,-nW-.. C'0f1l;Jl'a1_
PETE R RE R. ... n-
T;m~ Trlbufl/'
D"\'LO " .... L"'BRf.S"SER
l)"ll!·hnlnstlhlo Ban ..
C"L..\, RL.ES J HE S" A~· III
Ji.eeJ\.;l~ ~rw:l lIar",..mf"M
tF.:."lU:-':£
U.'Mf T~"r' Cen.er. Inc::.
STE'.f'HES U:\l
C .. llt.« lOf !Ilt (00111\ • ..,1$ SlwJ.I"
IIrw C~lif~rni. EC'Onomy
HAt. )11CKEL<:{J:'>:
Hn.-Iffi;· Pukarcf
SiI P.tl EN ~'. PI..AY['R
(,in. Cr:m~
Slltllul: B,~
RllX," R.-'.PP
R·O-X,,"
''',:UrA!IIf P.[lUl
E"·S R.;a.1 E:iU.~
.1~r THORWAtD50S
Pille AI'ID ~1~'Ci~ rO<ln(b.(IO~
r . .u·C'III,.t D,~1Or
ttilE. OORII::'I."
/
Memt"len. or the Palo A!IO Cll), Council
Memh~rs of the Palo Ahe City Pl2:!1nlng Commission
Bill Zane<, City Manager
Ken Sch~ibc:r, Director of P12r.ning
Attachment 2
)'Iy 16, 1991
Palo Allo Chamhet of Comoen:e SOFA Forum Participants
On June 4, the Palo Alta Chamher of Commerce sponsored :I f<.Jru1!l 10 dhcu.ss the
city"l planning options for the commercla! area south of Forest Avenue CSOFA 4
).
hrticipaots im:lucJed repre!.entatives of the dry sClff, SOFA bu~iness and propert)'
owners, Chamhi-T members and neighboring resid"Qts.
The minutes oi the 1une 4 forum are anacbed for your inform.ation.
The Chamber'S objec~v('s in spons.vrinB the fOf"'olDl ... ·ete to bigbligbt issues of
interest 10 Palo Alto"s business communi!), and 10 id-!n[ify are.a.~ where L,usiness.
resi~ents and other conscrueaclcs C<U1 a!l Igr« a~U1 SOFA's future Deeds,
h.nicipaDt.s fOUlld that se .... era I poLnts reflect S'..uprisi.IJgly broad consensus:
.. SOFA ts. h1ighled ate!, espe<::iany alo!'l.g A!m.a, Major initiatives
are needed ID upgr;ade its appear;anc e in order to p.~el're and
echa.ace prope:rt)' va tu es for people who live nearby as we U as
OWfloers and occupants of SOFA'I commercial parcels.
·Business owners in SOFA Deed clear incentives 10 improve Ibeir
premises a-t.iJe cODtinui Ilg tfI e services they are pro\! idiag for me
community. Busines~s warn 10:) r:nake tong-nnge pb.m without
worrying tbey ,...·m need to ju.stify their ex.iste~e every ft1tt" years.
they feel me city's controls have fru~tr.lted 5Qmc of their pilR
anempts at impro .... emenl
-one 'Widely shMed view, including th.u of many rt:!-idenlS, ;accepts
mal changes in U~ and density may be required m SOfA -in
panicu.l.ar. alocg J..bJ.a -to provide iocentives for bener
appea:r:aace and more stable occupancy.
-Residents. bu.si.nes.ses a.."I.d property owners appear ,...iUing It) wor"
lOgetber to .. ddre3s dIese commoD CODCem5.
The Chamber of Commerce· ",-as eocour:aged 10 find ttm[ me forum al1r.icled people
from di .... erse. constituencies who were willin&: III speak up on tiJ~ points. E';Cl)'one's
comributions were smcerefy appreciated.. The Chamber plazu to continue tracking
Ibe SOFA prWlem &:Dd is confident die cjry's dccisi?1lS iboul it: will be prompt,
thoughtful and respomive 10 .n the in!e:rests a! stake...
lUI Mici:clsoD
Vice Presidefll for Govemrnem Affairs
Palo A.ho Chamber of Commerce
•
,
\
. :>
1. Pale /lite TT'II'I$II'LISI~I'I St'rovic.e
'O! E-=r~cm St.
2. PlIlo /lIto "Idl~to ..
'~J f:proeT'$on St.
). AA ",!:IllIto:" lterk.s
B!n E~nCl"1 St.
-
4. B~~'1IiI~n P.utornotiY!
a':l5 Eme:-sCH' St.
:>. PJi~ Alto Sp!!~ometer
He Emenol'l
s. Star Metors of "110 /11 to
882 Emer~oro st.
7. ;:~ Ml)tQr~
-'9Cl Cholnnln\l 1:-_',e.
B. Dllrll'S ';J~ety s.tryl,e
930 ['l:\Er.or. St.
,. 8111 h\Jn~'~ lIutCll',.oti'.! 'SerYice
84'> Hi~h St.
10.
n.
".
".
l<.
1>.
...
".
lB.
".
10.
21.
22.
r~t~ OIpt.e ..
!I,9 Hig1'l Strpet
Bi11's Auto Glass
744 Hi~1 ~t.
r.urt's AlJto $eno1c!
180 flig!; 'St.
Ibto .. CitJl
\t4Q HI.g" St •
.f{e1n.kh!II's Garllge
~ro 'rI1~" St.
e-lll'Qn.'.s BOO)' SMp
i~) AIIllo1 St.
Hor,da Sma" Colr S'-(lP
HI liorr.!T' Ave.
Hileman's '!'ulC*lOth,!
-,ell ~lm/ll St.
Ole's C~r $hup
009 '!'1N. St.
J , D TrinSlrIlulol"ls, Jnt.
841 A11111 St. (vacant)
l-tan.s ' IlI!pOrted ea .. S.rvfclI!-
n; Al,.. St.
OcJn l. ~rrls Auto 'Parts
9!19 A1W\11 St.
Union Auto !I:~I!""
1019 A1 .. St.
-.
AGE~Il~ lTEH 1
~. .. .. =-
EXCERPT
Planning Commisslon ~inutes
August 14. 1991
Attachment 4
SOUlH Of fOREST AREA (SOFA) SUBCOMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATIONS: lhe subcommittee recommends that the
plannin9 commisSion forward to the city tDuneil the
subcommitteels recommendations on (lJ priorities of South
of Forest issues a~d (2) ~trite9;es for addressing these
South of Forest issues.
(Commissioner Cullen does not participat~ in this item.,
Chairman Huber: This is not a public hearing, but we have se~eral slips
frem members of the public who wish to spea~.
Ms. Cast: It is y~ur normal tradition to allow peop1e to s~eak unless you
have advertised the meeting as not allowing people to spea~.
Commissioner Glazier: I received a tall frcm a citizen today who was
ir.t€rested in speaking, and I indi~ated incorrectly t~ him that ~e ~Guld
not be taking pubHc testimony. Jf yotJ are out there listening, it was
b~cause 1 .as not informed.
~~~an Huber: I ~ilt call upon the t~o individuals piesent tonight for
the' comments later on. Commissioner Glazier, as one of the tw~ members
of the South of Forest Area (SOFA) Subcommittee. would you like to lead
off?
COnnis-signer liilazi.er: I would l; ke to sUlTlTlarize some of the findi ngs of
the subcOflllti ttee. As is ad~o'ta.tel.Y demonstrated in the staff report I there
was a strong feeling with everyone on the subcommittee that the key issue
in SOfA that has the highest short-term priority attached to it was the
issue of visljal aestreth::s. Some people might USE' the word "bn~hted,"
although I ieel that might be a bit strong. But we were glad to have a
number of interesting presentations at one partic~lar me~ting that
highlighted some of the areas which cou1d use some urban design. We talked
through a variety of strategies to accomplish this improvement, ind we
talked about completing the Uiban Design Plan, undergrounding utilities,
etc. I d~ not think thit it was exhaustive. There are more things that
cou1d be added, but frankly. ! am net sure how much mon~y there will be in
the budget or bow much will be accompllshed in the absenc~ of a major
initiative. I noted in the letter that we received today and brou3ht
before us by the Chamber of Commerce that they say that major initiatives
are neEded to upgrade its appearance in order to preserve and enhance
property values. 1 can agree with that. If we do not do anything in a
major W~f I suspect there will be no incentive for people to upgrade their
procerties in this area, particu1arly along the Alma corridor.
The second priority that we discussed was providing incentives for people
to upgrade their properties, not just clean them up, but fundamentally
improving the ~at~re of what it is they do, particularly along the Alma
corridDr, which is the area that has the most blight right no~. We talked
about a mixed ~se commercial/residential approach for the ~lma area and a
possible housing buffer b~hind it. Again~ we are going to have to face the
08/14/91
-J-
-
issue af providing incentives for folks to ~o that, given that the current
auto s!r~~ce uses are very profitable. Thos~ ince~t1 les may require a
$ome~hat higher level of intensification t~an is there.
Other priorities tffic i.nd growth. Unrortunateiy, if we try and
upgrade the area all, ansify it more, there wi" be some tradeoffs with
growth and with tra, So it ~s not entirely clear at t~is point what
the Tight answer is. Une of the things that we stressed and that reflected
comments by the partlcipants is that this wiil be a Tong-term process and
will have to involve businesses and residents, as well as the city, in
making change happen and have; t happen constructi' .. ely in SOFA.
Commj~s)oner Beecham: Did the subcommittee have any information regarding
a scnedule for undergrounding t~e utilities?
Mr. Zimmerman: The origin~l schedule contemplated completion wit~in the
next five years. The schedule, however, was modified because of the
Medical Foundation Specific Plan. I would say that now it is contemplated
to be completed within the next six years. Two projects will result in the
complete underground1ng of tne utilities within the CO(S) and CO(N} area as
f!r south as Addison Avenue.
COrmlissioner Beecham: Any similar CORYlleflts regarding a street tl'ee program
by the city?
Mr. Zimm~rman! That will follow the urban design pla" and discussions on
how the proposals within the Urban Design Plan, if approved by the tity
counCil, would be implemented. Some of the problems that will arise in
some of the b10ck frontages in the South of Forest Area where you ~a~e
subterranean basements, such as at Emerson ?ark. extending out into the
sidewalk. wt11 mak.e tree planting difficult 1i1 those areas. That situation
obviously does not apply throughout SOFA, hut it was cited at one
subcomm1tee meeti"9 as one deterrent to tree p1ant1ng.
Mr. Schreiber; 1t;s certainTy within the commission~s prerogati~es that
yGU may want to consider -l ri!<:0111Tlendation to the c-ouncll that it direct
city staff to return, as part ~f next year's budget process t with specific
informat ion on both timirlg and potent, a1 accel eration of the underground
program, if that remains is a very high priority. as well as inf~rmation on
a street trae p1~nting program.
The City of Palo Alto has a two-year budget process, and the process
beginning next year will be for the next two years, so it would be an
appr~priate tlme to cnnsider those issues in the context of the budget.
Commissioner Begcham: Oid th@ subcommittet also t.lk about a proacti~e
p~9rarn between the city and pri¥ate property owners to encourage property
Q'Wrlers to upgrade the visual appearance of existing properties?
Commissioner Glazier: We did discuss that. We ~ere somewhat at l loss t~
corne up with ideas as to what those incentives would be alld how we would
pay for them, but certainly we recognlzed that there needed to be
incentives for folks to clean up their properties. The businesses are
running adequately right now, and given tne status of the way tney look~
there is not muth of an incenti~e for them to change it. So the city needs
to provide SDme kind of suggested incenti~e. To answer your question, we
08/14/91
-2-
•
. -
-------~-
. .
':J~~Ii
....
~ ..
did not talk about specifics, because __ e cculd n.at find very many.
CQmmlssiQn~r eeecha~; r would think that with /I lot of property owners,
upgrading the appear~nce is not so ~xpensiye. They just need to talk to
someOjji: about 1t somI2U~les. j am not sure that we TlEed a lot of inc.entives
as much 25 perhaps some simple program where a yolunteer or a staff person
goes out and identifies two or three or a dozen places that are either in
ke), pcsHions or lt10k terrible, and just ha\lE a chat with them. The~ cou.ld
offer a few ideas of what the owners could do. Also, t.he ideas that are
pres~nted should have unifying factors for the neighborhood to play up
certaif'!. features, such as iii type of tree or a fa~ade or something 1 ti:!
that. It could be an inexpensive program not requiring too much staff time
and may well produce immediate results. Otherwise, what [ think we are
talking about is waiting for the property uses to change before we get much
improvement.
CO!I'I!!issioner Glazigr: That is a sood suggestion.
Chairman Huber: I was another member of the subconnittE>e, and I fOllrld it
rather int!resting, as we had some very good discussions about th2
economics of SOFA in terms Df redevelopment, if that be the sulution to the
visual upgrad~. Baslcally, we were told that under current zoning. there
is really no ince~tive for any kind of upgrade or building or parcel
assemblage, etc .• because it is econom1ca1ly not feasible.
This area is an interesting ene, becalJse in the Downtown Study, we all
agreed that we should hald thts for auto usage apd repair, etc .• because we
need it. ~e are still saying that, yet it flies in the face of long-term
iction wherein that probably will change, although we certainly are not
forcing it or suggesting tnat it o~ght to be changed. Our major concern is
~at happens, long-term, when ultimately in all probability, some of those
business!s change and become something else. The oeighbors that were
present said essenti~lly that they underst~od that if things were to
change, it wCluld probably take some intensific,ation of yse 1n order to let
the market allaw for change. My sense~ from their perspective, was that
tney were w1lling to talk about and listen to incentives that may? in fact?
bring some loiger type buildings there. lhat seemed to c~mport with what
we were hearing about the economics of the area.
CormJissioner Glazier: Alt,icug~ we did say, in otlr suggested strategies.
that it was not appropriate at this p~int to prepare a sp~cific p1an, given
the general econo~jc situation that developers face, i.e., that reAl estate
is not doi~g very well these days~ it is not really apparent to me, in the
absence of something that the city does that is prompted by the city, how
much will change there. We talk a Tot about wanting change, but unless tne
ctty takes the bull by the horns and does something, [ frankly do pot
belfeve lI1:Jch is going to happ~n for the next five j'ears. Maybe. in some
ways, that ;s good b€cause there is still the shakeout in that neighborhood
as a result of what is happening with the Palo Alto Medical Foundation.
Still, at some point in time in the future, whet~er it be three years. five
yeir~, seven years, I think the city will nave t~ be proactive in its
approach to making change happen in tn~ way that it would lik~ to see jt
happen. Although 1t may be appropriate 1n the next few years to step back
and let things la, fallow for awhile, I think we will ha~e to come back to
this and be some ... hat more aggressive than we are in this report 'in terms of
trying to make things happen.
08/14/91
·3·
CQmmi~siQner Beecha~: Part of the subcommittee recommendation, 1n its
report, is to reco~nd to the counci1 items for consideratio~ in
determining subseql!ent directives to Ue planning cOlTlTlission. I think .. ~
might be ~Dre clear 1n specifying wnat directives we would liKe the council
til give us. 'SUff toni,ght has helped: with a directive for the visual. hign
priority items, which ;s to ~rOv)de specific fnformation for accelerating
the timing of undergrounding utilities and i tree program. I am trying to
think of a directive related to the land U's~ items. So tar, J am not
coming up with much that is clear, except that it would invoive the second,
tf'lird and fourth bullet items in YOlJr SUrmlary regardlng higher den!:.ity
mixed use, housing transitions, and eliminating in~pproprjate uses. I
wou1d like tG find out what th~ subcommittee members WOUld think about
recGmmending that the council direct the commission and st.aff in the coming
year to f1~i$h within the coming year a study of these three it~ms ~ith
specHic recommendations on how to implement them. That is a question from
me to the subcommittee members or anyone else,
Mr. Schreiber: Commissioner Beecham ~as identified three of the points
that J cheCKed off. J would add to that in the middle priority, Parkirg
Issues, the item on eliminating the parKing deficit credit provisions.
think that is an integral part of some of the other items, so that one
would probably fall into the types of specific actions. Essentially, what
I see coming out of the subcflrrrnittee's worK is that a t'J-ry fundamental
question was ~aised and led to the council study session. Sho~ld this area
close to Alma remain in a primarily auto service use? Or should the city
tar..e some proactive actions to get those uses changed? That. may take
fifteen years, but the city does have the mechanisms to do that. What is
coming out of the subcor.wnittee reconvnendations is t~at the cHy snould not
do that. The recommendation is to allow auto service businesses to remain
indefInitely. Once you have made that deCision, then the foliowup actions
become more a modification of existing situations and regulations, whether
it be the loning patlern on Emerson or the permitted uses in t~e CD(S)
zone. rather than looking at a fundamental change for that area. So that
is an important point in terms of what the counc.il asked the cOlilllisslon to
do, because the council asked the commissi~n to gi~e the council some sense
of policy priorities fer this area. I wanted to emphasize tnat, because
that is a critical polity point in terms of eHher retention or the planned
removal of the auto service uses.
Commissior:er Beecham: Disre-garding the auto services, if this discussiol1
today is going to be more or less a consensus from the commission~ J would
certainly want to make it clear that I strongly support keeping the
automotive ser~ices t~ere. I thinK it is an integral ~art of tne
requirements of the city. Maybe if we were 1a1ing out the city today. we
would not put them there, but right now, 1 feel it is the best place to
keep them, so I strongly support that.
Mr. Schreiber: There are a couple ramifications cf that. One is that we
have certainly heard in subcommittee meetings and in the Chamber of
Commerce meeting that auto service uses in that area tend to he re3sonab1y
prof1table~ to a point where alternative uses under the zoning do not make
economic sense. People cannot pay elloug~ for the land to put ill deal
together. So these uses are liKely to continue for a fairly long period of
time. So having those uses in place means that any voluntary turnover of
t~at area, not an amortization, but a voluntary one, is going to need to
.... r , ..........
'" ~-"' ..
08/14/91
-4 -
•
, .
-
. -
--....
inyo1ve lonir19 densities, 'Whether they be office or housing or
,ombinat1ons, etc., tnat are going to be reasonably high enough to generate
property values to encourage people to turn ov~r. T~~ subcommittee did l
good job of highligMing some of the inherent conflicts th"t would tend to
~,se to the sut face when you work with tr.at.
Chairman Hyber: r aqree with Comissior.er Beec~am. 1 think the auto
service bus'nesses need to remain there, and I believe we chose t~e word
·~ndefinlteiy· for good reason. We do need them. My pers~nal sense,
however , was that somel'ihe-re downstream, they win leav~~ poss'ibly because
sons or daughters ~ill not take o~er the business, or whatever. That may
be fifteen or t~enty years, and at that point, perhaps things might start
to ch.3nge, out of course, w.e still need to plan, on a long-term basis, fOf
what we ~ant there. My sense, fTcm 1isten~ng to the neighbors, is t~at
th~re is no real objection to the auto businesses but more an cbjaction
along the lines of the ~isual aspects -~ the trees, the undergrou~ding,
etc., and that what is tn~re is a known quantity. If it were made more
attractive, it ~ould probab1y be just fine. What is a little frightening
is what could happen. Right now, very litt1e cou1d happen ~ith the current
zoning. So real,stical1y, we are talking about some of this voluntary
cleanup and undergrounding. Howe\ler, I still t:.ink there may be something
we can do along Alma Street which is unrelated t3 the desire to retain the
auto servfce businesses. Commissioner Glazfer Cin correct me ;f 1 am
~rong, but that is why we sU9gested we take a look at some higher densities
along Alma Street. 10 so~e extent, that cou1d bump up against some of the
auto 2reas, but still, I thought it was worth looking at. The comrnlssion
suggested that se~eral years ago, how~ver. and the ~ity council sa1d no to
it. I agree with Mr. Schreiber that fundamentally, if you want it to
change, there will have to be some ~onsiderable increase in al1Q~ed density
before the market will take over and make something happen.
COmmissioner Scnmidt: I want to support my fe1Jow commissioners' opinions
about retaining auto service businesses in the SOfA district. ] feel that
indeed, the City of Palo A1to needs to keep t~ose services t~ere. We
cannot exclude things that everyone needs to keep their lives together.
would also agree with the idea that making some visual imprDvement is
s~meth;ng that co~ld be done more immediately. As staff suggested, maybe
t~y and get the budget priorities mdde tn bring this up a little earlier.
[ also l1k.~ Cornnissioner Beecham's idea of trying to establish some
mechanism that ~ill help the occupants of these buildings to do 50metnlng
inexpensive to these properties to make them lock a little better.
Chairman Huber: We will no-., call upon those members of the public W~IO
indicated a desire to speak to the SOFA issue.
Kurt Miller. 780 High Street, Palo ATto: I own Kurt's Auto S~r\lice on ~igh
Street. Th1 sis my fifteerlth year there. A couple of points f{)r the
record. ] lease the spa(~ that J am in, and I have recently spent
considerable time lOOKing to purchase land. The probl£m was not the way
tnat you see it. It is that auto repair cannot aff~rd the same rates as
off~c~ can. As long as th! area is zoned either/or, it is not 1 case of
auto repair being so lucrative that it can beat out the va1ue of an office
spa.ce. It, s rea.lly quite the reverst.
I would also submit that the industry is g~tting to be much more
technological. Therefore. the appearance of the industry ~ould support
C8/14/91
-5-
'? ;-sr .. ---------------..,;
--------'-
itself to go along w;t~ tn3t. looking better cannot hurt businesses ;~ any
wa.y. It seems a.s. l.:,ough there would be marty different ways to accomplish
that. I do not know of anyone who would be a~erse to that, but you have to
recognize that WE ne~d I future that looks a little more stable than maybe
two years, maybe fiYe years, maybe fifteen years. Fran~ly. as long as I
car. r!member~ watching each shop close around me over fifteen years has
never given any of us a strong feeling of security. Therefore, ~e do "ot
have the desire to in~est in beautification, wondering which year the place
would b~ turned into another office space. That 15 still going on pretty
much. So if the city hiS i desire to have auto services t which ;s a
service to the cOlTlllunity as much as a mone)'ma~ing \'enture~ the city may
~ant to think about taking steps to make th~t nappen, ~ith regard to zoning
o~ whatever steps are available, but leaving it on the competitlve basis
that the buildings can be either office or service. The circumstance is
really the way that ( ha.ve hurd )'OU putting them tonight. Thank. yeu.
Mike MQrrls. 999 Alma Strget. PalQ Alto: I am the presiden Jr Dunald
Mcrris Auto Parts. I a1so represent my p~rents who own the property.
Chairman Huber, unlike what yau may think1 there are some of us second· and
third-generation people in bUSiness in automotive service in Palo ATto.
Briefly, J would l:ke to say that J agree with the subcommittee's proposal
for SOFA~ i.nd hope that yOOJ wl)l forward ;t to the council. Some of the
things have been said already. The '&,lma torridor. appearancewise. whether
you change the zoning to higher denSity or whatever to ma~! people do
s~mething with the property, may be the action that could g~t s~methin9
going, but Alma does have to be cleaned up. I I'!-"e t'lad a couple of people
in the SOFA area tell us that our piece of propell.y at 999 Alma Street is
the best loo~i~q piece in that corridor. If that is the (ase, Lord help
us! Due to the comments you made earlier that a couple of years ago, there
was discussion abGut rezoning that area, as Kurt said, we do not knoill what
is going tp happen two, five, seven years down the road. If there is some
commitment f~cm the city to keep automotive services in that area, you
will. I be1ieve, see some actio~ taken by the property owners to clean up
t~eir areas and make it lOOK a lot nicer.
Tnere has been some discus~io~ abo~t the parking prob1em in thE SefA arfa.
r did not hear many comments about it tonight, but some people in town
f~nal1y realize that w,t~ th~ exception of i couple of repa,r shops in t~e
area, the increase in the parking jeficit over the past few years has not
been dUf;! to autc~otive services. It has been due t.o some other businesses
that have opened up in the area. A prime examp12 was the fitness place on
High Street that seems to have 50 cars go in and cut every hour. Yet, they
seem to have gotten a variance from providing the required par~ing. so the
story goes, and their bike rac~s are never full. So obviously the people
who are trying to get fit are driving to the p13ce.
To sum it up, those of us i~ automotive services in the SOFA area want to
hear your comments about keeping us there, and hope you will forward them
to the council.
CO!\'missigner Bee.d",am: Does s.taff hlll~ any da.ta, off "and. regarding the
number of autD uses or retailers in that area that have left and ~ave been
replaced by other types of businesses. pat~ticularly office uses?
Mr. lirrrnerman: No, we have not done a survey ever a specific time period
to measure that Kind of change for the South of Forest commercial area
08/!4/91
-6-
specificillly.
Commis;ioner Beecham; Any guesses?
t:1r. ZilTlTienni:ln: I would not venture to guess empir~cally~ I could say that
over the hst IS years, perhaps 50 percent of auto or auto-rel ated
businesses ha~e gone out in that area. But that includ~s some Targe sites
like Paddle-ford Oldsmobile or Lutz Ford. One auto service might be a ~ery
large site.
CO!jlD~:,s;Qne"i" Bgecham: In the silbcorm.itte-e report, in th~ item under ltl.l'id
Use, th! first strategy sats "Allow auto service blJSiness to remain
Indefinitely.'" [would liKe to see -allow· changed to "encourage" and to
include that also in the items which we reQuest council to direct us to
address in the coming year.
Commissioner Glazier: I agree with that.
Chainman Hu~er; As the other member of the subcommittee, I agree with
t"at. Fundamentally? we say if we are 9D,ng to leave auto senic,i?
businesses there, then we shouid encourage them to be there. That makes
sense to me.
COIr,TJissiGr;er Scl:1m.i.Q1: In the e:xistfng alJto service busin€'sses, are most of
the buildings owned by the occupants, or could the buildings be so1d out
from underneath the tEnants?
Mr. Miller: I would guess that it is somewhere around SO percent owned and
SO percent leas~d. I cannot tell yuu how many places have changed frGm
se~ices. I have a parking lot. This is one of the reasons that tne
parking is a critical issue for me. ] happen to be across the street from
the health spa, and have r~cently been forced to chain the lot. In
innulDerable instances, there are other. build?ngs on that block that cflanged
to an office use with no parking. We really need to recognlze that Even if
it is an office ve"rSUS i retail outlet, office b":ldings have people coming
and 90~n9, dropping off, d~1iverlng~ et~. They constantly need to ha~e
parking available around them. That is what make~ ~t a congested area. rt
is as much people driving around the block looking for a place to p~rK as
it is people i~ the area to do business. So that wHole ~uestion is
somewhat humorous, from our perspective, because it is not our experience.
1 aj not ree;ll ever ~arking a car in the street in my particular
business. r can tell you hGW many times I have been verbally abused when
aSKing peop1e to leave my 10t who were going to the office spaces around
me. The Pa10 Alto Weekly is a perfect example. This is a newspaper.
People are constantly needing to go in~ to drop off ads, to pick up a
paper, etc. They have parking for employees. That is the reality. It may
be said that that is not what it is for~ but that is w~at it is. Thefr lot
is always full, so all the people going to the Palo Alto Weekly are driving
around the block trying to find a space. That has a lot to do wltn the
congestion of the area, trying to find a way to stop at the business that
you know is there.
Commissioner Glazier: You talked, during your tomments, about wanting to
i~rove your property if the city 9~ve you some e~couragement. Could you
gbe tiS some gutdal1te on what encouragement you would 1 ike to see? ts it
enough to male a statement that we encourage auto service businesse~ to
C8/14/91
-7-
r!main ther! indefinitely? Or ~hat more concrete steps can we take to
en<:ou,'age you?
Mr, ~iller; Spea~in9 for myself as a tenant, I happen to ~avf a wonderful
larldlord. The whole town is going upscale, and I ..... ou1d just is soon go
along with that. If the threat is always, how much money can I make if
make it a~ offic~ space and rent it at 52.50 or S3.00 a square foct,
whereas auto repair, generally speaking, is BOt to 51.10 a square foot,
that is where the competition is. [~ould be willing to invest in the
upgrading myse1f, a10ng with my landlord, if I kne~ I was going ta keep on
renting the building. As 1or.g as it is always up to anyone to c~ange it
into an offi< s~ace, and there fare. change it from 9Qt a square foot to
53.00 a squal foot, what I have watched happen as the leases come up, that
is lit!nl1), .... hat happens. That is exactl), what happened \IIIith Dale Thomas
Upholstery on High Street, also Aiken's Bod)' Shop. It became Spencer and
AssDciates. That is the kind of thing that ~s happening, and that is the
reason why it happens, I believe. Even though the Spe~cer and Associates
site actuall), sat 'Vacant for two years, trlat building \lias turned from auto
repair into office spac~ for 53.00 a square foot versus the 51.00 a square
foot that was there. The on1y thing I know from talking t~ p~opTe in the
planning department, I understand that as long as it is zoned Commercial
Service, the co~petition s~ays there. If it is zoned Service, then it can
only be zoned itS st:rvice, and the property val ues are based on service.
Therefore, that is the ~ay the security is provided to us.
(01rmhsfoner _Glazier: So )'Qur comment is. in sU!llTlary, that unless wco zone
out the opportunity for the conversion to office use, it would be very
difficult for you, if you ~ere a property owner, to invest any significant
amount Qf money in upgrading.the property.
Mr. hillEr: It is difficult for me to answer that question specifically,
as I do not know tf that is the on1)' avenue avai 1 ab' e. 1 alsQ do ,;,~ot kilO,",
f,"ank.ly, the extent of th'! cost that would be requirec. If I wet"e going to
be i~ business for ten yea~s and 1 ~ad to put $10,000 in the building to
lake it lock. nicer, which would obviously affect m)' bu:iness in a positive
manner, that is .a w{lrth~ile investment. If I have "'0 ~ut $10,000 into it
for thr~e years. [ am not going to do that. 1 don't be1ieve that I am
going to be able to talk. to a landlord and offer them that kind of money
mj"self with a decrease in relit without a long-tem association. Mike was
referring to the same t,ing. It is a question of how lt~9 do I have to
earn back the mOlley I have made from the investn,ent. It is a very unusual
feeling to watch everytning clOSing down around you. It;s fifteen years
of watching_ It keeps shr~nking. You talk about the Alma corridor. w~
are r~al1y talk.ing about five or six b10cks as being t~e on1y blocks that
have auto repair servi(es on them. If it gets shrunk much more, whe~ do
you shrink to? It has a11 been closed do~ at the north end of town, or is
in the process of it. It seems like there has to be a commitment by more
than just myself as a tenant or Mike as a landowne:-or the cHy. It has to
be everyone doing it all to~ether.
I simply do not understand why I cannot have an attract,ve business. The
concept that auto repair has to be blight does not add up to me at all. 1
can understand that if I put cars in ~y parking lot with wires ha~ging out
Df them, the hood up and the wind{Jws down, looking like trash, then that is
blight, but one does not have to be a wizard to recognize that. I don't
see why that can't be add;>essed, as far as repair shop owners t~at do
08/14/91
-8-
•
that. 1 donit want to live next door to that) either~ A par~ing 10t fv'l
of cars that do~'t run could look like parked cars, ind is no different
fr~ I 9rocer~ store park~n9 lot. If you make them ~oak li~e relics and
dilapidated vehicles. then it loars lik.e blight. It seelTls to me tnat thii.t
is soeethin9 th.at cOIJ1d be dea,lt with., a.lot1.g 'Witt: fenc.es, etc.. and
probab1y not at tremendous cost.
thainasn Huber: Mr. Zimmerman, we went to a 0.4:1 in the dDwntown study.
Has there been significant con"{ersion ti:l office in in the SOFA area?
Mr. Zimmerman: The City of Paris, Mr. Keenan's new office bui1ding, which
is not a conversion but rather, redevelopment, and the fermer ~~nn Auto
site are th~ sites that come to mind.
Chainnan Huber: J was curious as to wtrat happerled IIIhen we downzoned tniiit
ar@1. I do. know there are some cffices that ha".,Ie '9one in there.
Fundamentally, we need to suggest to the council what we think should
happe~ out there, and it seems to me ~hit all of us up here, at 1east~ are
saying we should encourage the retention of our auto service industry.
Perhaps we should be suggesting to the council t~at as part of what they
direct us or staff to do is some realistic and rational means by whfch that
can be done. We can sit up here and say, rut in a tree or underground tne
ut~lities until we are blue in the face, but I don't know t~at that is the
way to accomplish it. fn 1isterling to the people who run He b~sinesses,
what we pt'obabTy need to do is to go out with staff and talk with them,
as~ing what does it take? How do we proceed? What do we need to do and
what do you need to do in order tc make it look better 50 that you will b~
happy and sati$f~ed that you can be here for a reasonable period of time to
operate a businessl The c~mm~nt is an exce11ent one t~at security in your
business tends to cause one to want to make the business look a little
better. we did not address that in th~ report, and t ~ould like to hove
that included sGmewhere.
Mr. Morris: Regarding the automotive services in the SOFA area, probably
around 30-40 perc~nt of them are owner-occupied. The majority of us, due
to uncertaintiEs ov.e;r the y~ars, have had no desire. is property owners, to
upgrade the p~operty. We enjoy what ~e do~ so not only for the people who
l€iSe property, but the people whD own property, if we know w~ are going to
be t~ere, we wi'l spend the money.
Chairman Huber: That is a good pOint. We did not hear from the property
owners lnd tenants in this area ~hen ~2 had our ~ubcommittee meetings. We
heard frDm Mr_ Keenan and neighbors, and a few ~thers. These have been
good comroents tonight, and I thank yo~.
If tha.t concludes the cOlTInents. WE:: win send U~i$ a.la~lg to the city c{Juncil
for September 23.
MJT10N: Commissio., r Beecham: I move that we recornnefld to the city
council the subcommittee recommendations, with ~4ifications as noteJ
tanlgM.
SECONO: By Commissioner Schmidt.
MOllON PASSES: Chairman Huber: Is there any further discuss~on on this
mot;on? All those in favor, say Aye? All opposed? That passes on a vote
08/14/91
-9-
of 4··0 vote. "'it~ Coanissioners Christensen and Marsh absent and
C~tss1oner Cullen ~bsent by reason of conflict of interest.
Nt~ BUSIN,SS
Chairman Huber: We ha~e the question of agenda .terns for the j~int meeting
of the planning commission and city council scheduled for August 28tn.
Tentative agenda items we have suggested' are: (1) regfonal issue:s~ how
decisions are handled and keeping apprised of decisions; (Z) prioritizing
potential study areas; (3) Comprehensive Plan update; (4) constructive
feedback t~ planning commfssion by city council.
Comro1s$iGngr Cullgn: W! ~ave had a lot Qf input on regional Issues 1n the
last few ~etings and how the d~c'sions are being handled, so I would like
to put that at the end of the list. I wo~ld prefer starting witn
construct he feedback and ,priorit'izing the study area, items which are
closer to our hearts.
Commissioner Beecham: J agree with that.
AOJOURNME~T: It was mo~ed, seconded and carried that thE ~etfng adjourn
at 9:00 p.m.
08/14/91
-10-