The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0363.093" , - ··r· _0."...0( ","""". • '.-,"'''' -,~, o ~ sta!JeI~ __ Jun. 24, 1993 HOHORABlE CITY COUNCIL Pilo Alto, C.liforni, Appeal of Architectural P.e'oliew Board Approval of Construction of 24,910-Square·Foot Addition and Belated Parking and Landscaplng at 3412 ~Q5S Road. Members of the Counc11; Report in Brigf Pai 0 AHo YMCA 19 Tnis report forwards to Council an appea1 by Carol Thompson, JoAnne Wetze1. ~ary Ann Grant and K.J. Grant Jr. of tne Director of Planning and Ccmmunity Environr~ent/s. approval, based on recoRll'1endatioflS of the A.rchitectural Review Roard~ of the addition of 24,91Q square feet to the existing lS,74Q-sQuare foot Pil. Alto YMCA facility located at 3412 Ross Road. Backargund On November 25, 1991, following Exten5i¥e public testimor,y. the City Council approved a CQndltiona1 Use Permit (90-UP-38), including S4 conditions of approval (see attached ARB approval lett.r to YMCA, dat.1 May 11. 1993, for a list of the conditions), and certified a Final Environmental Impact Report (90-ElA-Sl) to .11ow remodeling and expansion of tho P,10 Alto YMCA f.tility. The Architectural Revie~ Board initially held a preliminary review of the projed desT9n on January 17. 1991. As this was a preliminary re\riew, no action was taken. The applicant, YMCA of the Mid-Peninsuia, subsequently submitted plans for final ARB approval in March of 1993. On May 6, 1993, the Architecturil Review Board reccmmended appraval of th~ plans to the Director of Planning and Community Environment, who approved the application on May 11, 1993. On May 21, 1993, the deciSion was appealed by the persons listed abo..,!', all of whom live adjacent to th.e YMCA 0,1 Stone lane (appeal app1ication and letter attached). Beth Carol Thompson and JoAnne "'etzel presented testimony it the ~RB heiring and spec1fical1j expr~ssed concerns about changes to the plans being revrewed by the ARB versus these approved by the City Council. These concerns are detailed in the appeal letter and addressed below. C~R;303;93 L .--, t . ' , , L ------------------- .. r- ~l Anahsis l'he ~ppe'lant5 ~ave based their appeal on several issues. T~ey are addryssed below in the order;r, which tnej are raised ~n t~e 1etter of ~ppeal. 1. A change iT"l the planJ:!-,~ .. ~ .. _added. an outdcoLdndre-f1's play 'H ... aL . i!.. A d.a.[!gL.in the g1c.1'l I',as add~_t.:l .. i...}!je\tljing area ~r'\d,_outdoor et'1tn .. 'ith benches. designed to encOtl;a..fl .. Lspectatc.J:.LtQ. .. i.jJ. OLlt of doors and waj!.h the acth'1ties in the sw~rnmi"g pool. For both of these items, the appellant.:i raise-concerns about incr.ea:;ed Mise from the Y~CA site, and the fact that these tWl'O e:lemer.ts of the site plan were not specifically shown en the plans reyie~ed by the Cjtj Council for the Use Permit approval and EI~ certification. The i~dus;on of ChilG'watch in the YMCA's overall program ... as anticipated in the ~ritten applicatiQn materials submitted for the Use Permit. However, the flQor plans reviewed by the Planning Commission and City (ouncil did not specifically indica.te where sud an a1::ti .... ity lJiou1d take place, no)"" was an)' outdoor p1a) area included on th~ slt~ p1an O~ discussed by tne CommissiDn or Council. Childwatdl does no" take plac.e at the fac.llity, with the (ourtyard a.rea bet~een the gym and th~ mcin bui'ding being used as a sort of ad hoc p1ay area. The o~tdQor seating area consists of several individual b~nches located in the entrYoJiay on the south side of thi2 bunding. Although the entryway configura tior. has not changed since the use permit rrview, the land~caplng and building facade details, which indicite the benches, windows into the pool irea, and landscaping in the entryway (as illustrated in the attached entryway detail diagrim, and on sheet A3 of the attached plan set5), ~ere appropriately left for consideratiDn by the ARB. Staff believes both the children's play yard ~~d the outdoor seating are within the overall scope c.f the use permit as approved by the Coulic+L They are both items wh'ich m1ght ordinarily be associated with il cOrmlunlty center USE and do not represent significant outdoor activity_ furthermore, the Council did not impose a condition specifical1y prohibiting outdoor uses at the sit!~ a1though many contrc1s were put in place to protect the neighborhood from ~xcest~v~ noise. These contro1s inClude: a lim~t on the hours of operation {condttion 1.4:; prollision of mechanical ventilation for the entire building (condition 4.2); instal1itio~ of key locks on windows {condition 4.4); prohibition on outdoor amplification of noise (condition 4.6); and construction of ~ sound wall around the perimeter of the site (condition 4.1). A further discussion of noise issues is provided below in Tfsponse to item 5. CHR:363:93 L 6/24/93 Page 2 ~ I I i I I , ·- ----------~--. -_ .. 3. A change in the D1acemer'1t. size and pUr'Qose_~ __ Q __ Lthe o~tdoor exerc1se ulh.,. Conditio~ 8.4 of th~ Use ?~rmit states: An outdoor exercise path 31'1al1 be allo'JI/ed on the project site. T~e final locflticn and config .... rat~on of the paU, sr.al1 be as apvroved Dy the Arch1t~cturi1 Revie~ Board. The exercise path wa~ not shown on the original plans sub~itted fer Use ermit approval or staff r.f! .... i~lIi. At the injtial Planning COlMliss;on public nearing, the ~HCA submitted revised plans proposing the p1acement of an exercise path a10ng the rear and nortn side property line. !n introducing the patn to the COlm1ission, 'William Leddy. architect for the VHU..! d2scribed it as being "used' by the cardiac therapy group~. Upon furtner questioning by the Commission, M~. Leddy stated -It is important to understand that it is not rea11y a running track. It is more of a br1skly .... al!cing trac!c-The C.omissicn requested the YMCA to return with add~tiona1 information about the exercise path at the following COJTlTlission meeting. In respol1se~ the YMCA. indicatEid ir'l a letter that the existing exercise path on the site was ~ori9inally built for the cardiac therapy patients·, but that ~members of other exercise classes also use the track by their choice~ (see attached excerpt from letter to PlanninQ Conmission from YMCA. dated September 19, 1992}. A rfad~rtg of the Planning Commission minutes provides one w4th the sense that the path was to primarily be used for the cardiac therapy progra.m. The question of whether th~ cardiac therapy program is still of~ered b_ the YMCA, thereby pC5sibly efiminating the need for the pat~. was r. 'Ised e" the ARB heal"'ir.g. Mr. Barry Taylor, Pr~sident of He YMCp.. of tne 141d-Penil'1 la~ has confirmed that the cardiac therapy program h~s be~n moved to the J ~ish Community Center. The patn as shown on the plans uHir;rately approved by the Councii was re'o'ised somewhat from what the Commission had seen. The plans showed the path iocated in the frc..r.t landscape reserve arca.. An altU'12te :ocatlan, .;lor..g the rear property line only. ifIIii.S also showfl. O~sclJssion among t)ie Coul"!cil as. to the best location for the path result~d in Condition 8.4 ~~ich left the deciSion to th. ARB. Originally. the path was laid out to accommodate the cardiac therapy partiCipants, whereby a staff person nad to be able to view the entire path from one 1ocation. The elimination of the cardiac therapy program resuited 1n the path being lengthened, upon subm~tta1 to the ~RB. As presented to ~nd appro",'ed by the ARB, the path is 5 f~et wide and located along the rear and a portion of both side property lines. 'The appe11ants belie\le the path as appro\'ed by th~ ARS does Ilot '1.110'," foT' the fun implementation of condition 5.4 which requires a ~dense landscaped buffer ... along the rear and side property lines~. Where the path is located more than 5 feet from the property line {alQng the rear and north side}, staff CMR:363:93 L 5/24/93 Pag. 3 • > ·'···1·········.·.··· .. " -; . . :'" ~' .. ~-'''~ -, ... ".'-.";1:. ,i_ balieves a dense buffer can be achieved with prop~r installation and maintenance. Where the path js only 5 feet or less from the property (along the south side). staff believes adeGu4te landscaping caf1 be ins b~t it is not an ideal condition tc create and maintajn dense landscap ine all ed. ng. During th~ City Council revie ..... staff recommended that the exercise path be eliminated from the phns for several reasons: 1) outdoor He.cise appeared tc be a source of cornpliir.t by the neighbors; 2) the path redllced the amount of uea along the property l·ine availab12 for landscaping; and 3) the avail ability of indoor activities was being greatly expanded. If the path ;s to remain, staff recommends that it be e1 iminated from along the ~outh side property lin~, where it could possibly interfere with the establishment and ma~nten~nce of 2 d€nse landscaped buffer+ 4. A change in th~ YMCA's stated reason for amending the original use lli:!!li1... T~e appe11ant5' contention that the YMCA has changed their ~tated reason for requesting an aitlendment to the IJse permit ;s nC't directTJ related to the approval <if the projt!ct design and sih p1an by the ARB. How2 ... er~ the {ouncil may wish to request the YMCA to address this question. Staff would note that the YMCA indicated i~ their application materials that only 11 percent of their membership is derived from Pal~ Alto residents. The City (ounc;: did not impose any specific conditions on the Y"1(A limitiflg their service area cp' the perscns who may benefit from the YMCA's activities, recognizing that the YMCA is a broader -eomm~niti~ resource, benefiting neighbors beY{lnd the Palo Alto borders. ne conditions of approval are designed to ensure that the operations of the YM(A at the Ross Road site do not negatively impact tn€ neighborhood. 5. These-changes listef! abo\le constitute an altered :!se of the Conditional Use Permit and the Mitigation Monitoring Proqram o In_addltion these danges were not hken into acccr.,mt dJ,l!'_2_r1.s....!.!Le fIR proc.ess _ Therefore" we ;~~ the Citv COuncil to reopen the EIR to re~ie~ the new uses as stat~d above. The EIR indicated that I 7-foot sound wal-1 t "if constructed and maintained properly, would reduce noise generat€d by parking lot acti~lty by about 8 dBA. to iI. level Hat wOlJld {exc~pt occasi!lnaliy} meet the llmlts set forth in the Palo Alto Noise Ordinance". The reduction 1S increased to 10 dB4 for an 8- foot fence (the neighbors a10ng the south, Stone lane~ property 1ine have !lected: to ha ..... e a~ a-foot-high sound wall). The types of noises anticipated to be heard in the parking area, which would occasionally reach a maxi~um le\lel of up to 60 dBA and €xceed the noise ordinance, included door slams ~nd people shouting. The fIR found that -the average noise level associated with this activity would not be expected to generate adverse community response. Typica1 maximum noise levels if I the yards adjacent to the northern .. nd sDuthfrn property lines would be below 48 dBA-. In re~iewlng the plans CMR:363:93 L 6/24/93 Page 4 i l r I -1 .. " , submitted far ARB a~pro~al1 staff found both the cntidren's piay ~r~a ~r.d the outdoor s'dating area to be ... ithir1 t~.e type of noises and noise levels considerfd' and mHigated by the [IR. and tht~S the ro 2 is no need for additional environm~ntal re~ie~. The noiSe consultant who performed the nois::-ana1ys;s for the EIR, l11in.gworth and ~Ddkin. ~as submitted an additional ~ritte" eva1uation stating thit na significant noise impacts are expected to ~es~lt from the seating area or children's play area (see letter from Illingworth and Rodkin dated June ??, 1~93J. 6. iii'Je dll~ consjderation to_lo)'iHing tile height of tn~ 1ightinQ ___ po1es from ]2 feet to the shorte_st pos:;ible beight. Condition 5.2 of the use pe~;t stat~s in part: Freestanding light fixtures are limit~d to twelve in height; however. th~ Architectura.1 Review Board should consider reducing the height of f1xtu":"es to the lowest le'Y~l ?os.sible while st\ll maint11n~lng security. lighting impacts were noted as i concern by the neighbors during the EIR and Use Permit hearings. Tn~ Mitigation Monitoring Program charges the ARB with ensuring that 1ightin9 is designed in such a way as to a~oid excessive glare and spillover to neighboring properties. At the ARB mee.ting~ the lighting intensity. spill olfer and height of poles was discussed by the Board {see pages 11, 16~ 23 of the ARB minutes). It was det'!!rt'lIined that lowering the poles would have the undesirabl~ effect of increasing the number of poles and the actual amount of lig~t on the site. The ARB felt that the lighting leve1s proposed were sufficiently low and glare guards adequate to p~Dtect the neighbors. While there are, of course~ other options for prowiding l;ghting ($uch as ballards, or more numerous a-foot-high poles), it ~as noted by ARB member Thomas Hise during the hearing that the ARB has experience with this type of 1ighting i~sue, and the 12-foot height has proven to work we)l in parKing lots that adjoin r-esider.tia' r.eighbors. Additional Information A','Ailable The Pa10 Alto YMCA expansion project received extensive review during the Use Permit amendment and EIR process. Materja1s related to the Use Permit and E!R have not been provided with this report~ but are a~ai1able llpon request by contacting Lori Topley in the Pla~ning Di ... ision at City Hali. The fo'lo~ing types of materia1s are l\lai1i\bl~~ • Draft and flnal EIR • Phnn i ng Co~i S5; on and City {:olJnc il Sta ff Report s • Minutes of Flanning Corrmission and City Council he<lrings fJse Perm; t Project Pl ans CMR:363:93 p:\<roY\~, <:OT'I" L 6/24/93 Page 5 '"l .. C.', • ~-4-'''' • . \ .FF - .' RecolT'l'l1endat1crt Staff recofMlends that tl1~ City (ourle;1 dEny the appeal, and upheld the decision of the Dire:tor of Planning a~d (ummur.ity Environment ~nd the ARB, sutlject to the conditio~s of approval as cutlined in the May 11, ]993 appro .... al letter to Barry Taylor (attacned), with the addition of the following conc:iition: 16. The exercise path shall be eliminated frorn along the south property 1 ; f!l! • R.spectfully subm'tted, // f 1/, " LORI TOPLEY Senior Planner _f' 7''/-/ ~ /' -', KENNETH R. SCHREIBER Director of Planning and Community Environment ~~ City M.nager Attachments: Location map Excerpt .... erbatim minutes of ARB meeting, Hay 6, i993 Appeal application and letter dated McY 21, 1993 Public correspondence received at AR8 meeting ARB appro,al letter to YMCA dated May II, 1993 Letter from Barry Taylor, YHCA, dated May 18, 1993, with letter from Illingworth & Rodki~ attached Exc~{pt of :etter from YMCA to Planning Commission, dated September 19, 1991 Diagram illustrating entryway details Project plans (CHy Counc.ll Members only) cc: Arc.hitectural Review Board Carol Thompsen, 755 Stone lane, Palo Alto, C~ 94303 JoAnne Wetzel, 787 Stone lane, Palo Alto, CA 94303 ,/ / Mary Ann Grant and K .. J. Grant Jr., 751 Stone Lane, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Barry Taylor, YMCA of the Mid-Peninsula, 4151 Middlefield Road, Suite 111, Palo AHo, CA 94303 Dick Trainer, 3423 Cork Oak Way. Paio Alta, CA 94303 William Leddy~ Tanner, Leddy. M~yturn~ Stacy Architects, 444 Spear Street, San Francisc.o, CA 94~C5 CMR:363:93 p: ,"""'\ymca ,emr -'L 6/24/93 Fag. 6 : l I I I ! " - lli" t .• " , •• 'I •• III II II il II i) '. I i II I I I ._-_ ....... _-, .. ,. L .. --, .... • -.'.~ o~ '~.' .- 13 . ;--, l . , . "-.""" I I , '" i ..J~ jJ.-" - --------------------'------ A.RCHT1£CTURAl gE~'l~\II B:..iMW .HEARING May 6, H93 3412 ~oss. Road YMCA of the Mid-PenInsula 9l-ARS-S! 90-EI.~~:1 Final r~Yiew of remodel and expansion of Pa10 Alto YMCA to add 2.4,910 sQl.ia,n: feet, re'locate existin'9 entraf'lce and e-,;pa~d and reccnngl.!re trre p~rkfng area. Ms. Maser: ~ ... are to focus our attent'ol1 on somE specific items. that are contained in the fjr~t set of conditions. Many of these conditions ha~e a.lready been approved by the City Council. T~at is t~e second set of conditions beginning or. Page 8. All of thos€ corditions were adopted by the City Councll in No .... ernber, so we should confine Ql,;rsel'ves to the conditions preceding those, with partic1.Jlar emphasis on the landscapir.-g plan. th..;: ele\iations, the SitE p1an, the transformer pad, the exercise path. The fence ~ei9ht apparently !'las b~er: established by the City (ouneil conditions, although there is confUSion on my part about that. You can comment on the ,lTlateri a1:;. Also 'ltie have received ho fetters this morning from neighbors, 1 belie .... e. One is from a neighbor and one is from a YMCA supp(!rter. Has everyone had a chance to read those? {~€s) Are there additional steff co~~ents1 Ms. W~'iss: I just want to not~ that lod l\:lp"ley, Senior Plal'lner? is. present to comment Dr! the project if you desjre, and the noise consultant s~Qu1d be here, as we11. M.s. Wi1iQI"': I wou.ld lik.e Lori to address the. issues; brQught up iT1 the Tetter from Ms. Wetzel regardil1g additional iJ,Ses on this site outdoor'; that ~ere not p~rt of the original ~PDroya'. specifically th~ outdoor Children's play yard, and the bleact1ers. (ould the applicant point those things out to us? Applicant: d1ild watch bl eachers. There is a small, fenced-in play area here area in the f~o~t landscape preserve area. There are a coupTe of benches shawn at the that is for their There are no entry here. ~ .. J .. i .. ~er: We are hiking about tha south side of th~ p~operty. ~hat about the play equipment? Applica_~: lhere is pldy equ)pmer.t here. lhat is one 1tem. Ms. M:a3er: It says, "Enclosed entrance on south ,s.ide of bl..lild~n9 and remove bleachers. The current desig~ encourages prople to sit and talK outdoors and .,ill function as an outdoor rnega\Jhone dhected at the res idents.· .pplicant: ~e have benches dawn there. 05/06/9j ·1- L " , .• , L ···:r \ . ~s. Maser: Is that the :outh side of the property? ~~Jtqy: Yes, it ;5. Ms. M.aser: ,I\nd they ha.'€ been rema',~d? ~~--':L!: They are still tIIere. UnfcrtlJnJtelj, they are not shown on this dra~ing. If you likE, I can present that later. tiL....M.!?~r: That would be good, if you could include tnat iil your presentation. ~!s.j!aser; Also, 15 the original S\.JGrrlittal? Ms. Weiss: Those are the origina1 subltittals. ~_~: Am I to und':!r.s.tal'1d that th~ City COLlneil salill these plans? MLlleiss: They are what were presented to the City Council and C!pproved in iktober of 1991. Ms. OaRosa: Is this set the set the ARB reviewed or was this originally in the preliminary review? Ms. Weiss: I thir:k the .D,RB reYlewed that set at the preliminary re .... iew because they were just conceptual. Ms. Wilson: Can we aSl the applicant to address this issue of the architect? This is not ne~ news to me, Ms. Maser: This is not new n~ws to you? (No) ~ou can ask the applicant. M,.s_,--",llson: Ha .... e you seen copies of these letters? Barry Tay1Q.r: I arr, president of the YMC.A. N·:), I have not seen t~ose ~5. Maser: While we are ~a1ting for the applicant to read the letter, could I aSK, there was a "~ree protection prC'2ra:":'. that .. as supposed to be included in our packet. I did not get one. Ms. Weis~: I ha .... e an edra copy. Ms. lWi1 son: Do you care to respond to thi s? Hr. Tilylor: Yes, but could we do it dur~n9 our presentation? !!1s. Maser: Yes, wby don't you incTlde it in yotJr' prese!'1tation? let us hear your presentation now. ~r..J . .g.'yJ..Qr: As I rr,entioned before, I am on the staff of the Mid-Peninsula YMCA. The joint staff, about two years ago, January ]7, 199r, tame before the ARB for our preliminary review. It has been a very enjoyable two years since then. P.s you ~.nDWt we recfived unardmous appro .... aT from the Planning Cnmmission and the City Council in the fall of 1991. We are ~leased to be here today. 1 would like to introduce Bill Leddy. whom some of you have already met. He is our leCid architect and w111 be maK.ing the O~/06/93 -2- - ! L main part of the presentation todd/. He 1S YIIHh lanner, lE-d,:jy, ~crtiT1 an,j Stacey. Architects. I would also like to introduce Jim L~u6~rbaugh, ~ho is the-lai1~5ca.pe H'chite-ct of la'Jde-r~',a\lgh -and ~s.scc~at~s.. We a~so ir.'Iited a soynd consultant who dl j the independent st~dy for the €Gvironmenta1 impact re-pol't to speak t\j aflY sQi.m;;! i SSI.i€S that maj a,ri se. t-I.i.s MT'i"e is lassus Papadjmos. I ~ould also 1ike to mention that loren Brown and Peter Fox al"'e ~ere from our general contra.ctors, Vance, Brawn and Sons. and E1iiot 8olt2r~ who, as a part of the condftions., has been appoi~ted by the YM~A as the nei9~borhc{l.1 liafsor, K€ is the imrrediate source for t:-tE:' ~efghbors to ask questions if they are not able to get inforreation fro~ t~e Y~CA, At this time I would 1 lke to pass this. on to Bill Leddy who will rT1ake a preser.ta.t ion. Mr. ledj:!,.!': Dur-'ig the design process, we met w:th .... arious neighbllrs to try and determir:-what the redl is-sues w~re. That essentially drove the site and des~gn J~ this project. 1he major issues were sound contra' and parking on Ross Road. We designed t~e site plan for the use permit aleng the back of th~ existing b~i1din9 which you can see out1inea here, such that it would create a placE well off the street that would draw people in from tt'd! enlarged parking lot. In terms of tne acoustical control, we ha .... e the additions \IIi'hieh. incorporate an indoor pool, which you can see here, also a r,~w exercise facility here and new locker rooms here. Also included is th~ new lobby here. The plan was acoustically to basically enclose th€ building, make the windows seilled. Where we have existing windo .... s, we want to provide locks on those windows so they would not be operable unless the air condjtioning syst€m broke down, in ..... tJich case, there .... {}u~d be coordil1ation between the YMCA and the nei9hbors to discuss that process. At any rate, what w€ have deslgned here is the parking lot that wraps around the building, access on both sides, a landscape preserve area here ~n~ch ~ould be landscaped as a mini-park, esse~tially. with 11. walK~aj going through it. In that landscaped park, we have proposed, sjnce the cond"it~onal use pErmit, the a;:Sdition of 1 sm.!ll outdoor ph)' area so that the cnildren who are in the child watch program who are brought tl-:ere by tne~r parents who are using th~ ~M(A fac\lit~ can 9~ outside an~ p1ay. Our thinking is that relative to the acoLIstical impact, it is rii.:)ht next to the ncisiest part of the sit~, which is Ross Road, ~itnin a heavily landscaped area. Our feeling is that the acoustical i~pact of that will be minimal. Hopefu1ly our sound (~nsultant can address that and respo~d to questior.s. In addition, we have located the exercise path. which ~as left as a~ option i~ the conditional use, in this area back here. It is right next to our masonry sound wall which wraps all around the property. The .all is 8 feet high along tnis side, and here. It was develnped in discussions ~ith neignbors. ]t is seven feet hi9h on this side. Still in question is the iSSue of dropping t~at sound wall to a four-foot height. wnich is required by the zonif1g ordinance, but some of the nE'ighbors do not want it dropped to a fo~r-foot height in the front of the property. T~is neighbor WOUld 1ike to have it dropped to a four-foot he1yht, so t.hat is someth"Ii"l9 which 'We need to decide on. 05/00/9, -3- - I L ,. So t~e exercise path is back here. ~h~t ~e h~~e dQ~e. essential }. si~ce the conditicl1al use pen!1it drolo¥ings and s!.Jbr:'issions and the init al ARB review, Is that we ha'le taken the :;;ame footprint ancf simply deve oped the design. The building itself is dt!signed to be what we cilll a "c0mmunHy of buildings." We h~'Ie brol:.€r. down the mas.'!. so that it is closer to residential scale. We have Expanded the existing building in the front to create a greater shield. and we have exte~ded it as you can see in these dra~'ngs over here. We have exoanded it in a styTe that is consistent with the existing Califo~nja mDderr style. ihe fr~nt building becnmes a screen for the ~e~ building in t~e back. !~ tf,~ back, we are retaining the e~isting gymnasium in this location. We have i~dicated the addition of an exercise room here, ald there is a low, flat roof in between the rnas.s of the gym and the exercise room and tne r.eljri pco-j building 'It'hich accommodates some equipment and a well which will be acoustically separated. Then we have the new pool bui'jding. So what ~e hdve tried to do in terms of the archit€cture is to take the therr.e of the building and create a s~rie'i of 'tariatiOr'l5 on Hat theme as we move around. So as you ca~ see, we have the aw;o;ing Or'! the n{)rtn side and. the awning at the entry. the ex·is.t1io9 9ymnas',um, the new exercis~ room here, coming around the corner, the exercise room at the lower area. It will b€ fir.ished in the wood siding to match the wood siding of the Existing gymnasium. The locker rcom nere will be fiflished in stucco colored to match the cOlor of the concrete bio(k. ll'le concrete block Of the po.,l bi};ldir.g will be a brick t{lne to pick up t~e color of the brick that exists on the front of the building. We brought some sample.s. Tl'lis is a samplE of the brown concri!te block fir-ish that is our intention. This was the only sample available at the time. It is the intention to try and break away from the split face block wMich is a little too indicative of Q research and deveTopment park. Ms. Maser: Would you paint OlJt where that material is going to be used. Is it around the pool? Mr. lavlQr: "The block is at the pool and 1 ha-'d~ carrled it out into the entries as we11, to sort of carry it out further. T~er, it is picked up again in this e;,,;stlng chimney whicr. we are retair.ing. So it is there and aroi..md Uis area. The same co1or is picked up in .... arious spots in tnis stucco wall here which is recessed and the st~C~Q wall here. Moving around the b~ilding, the west side of the building has a deep recess at tI'1e pool b~ilding. He idea is to create a snad~ garden there with recessed glass so that inside the peal, the afternoon sun will come in and filter through the lea~~s of the trees, creating a nice ambi2nce inside. Our intention with the entire building is to try and bring the 'Outside in as much as pC55ibl-e, sir,c.e we caf'1not. go o'Jt.s.i.je. Moving around the buiTdi~g, we have the long eievation of the p~ol bullding, which is articulated with the rhythm of the structure, infilled with vines and then !With some high wlodo!Ws a10ng the south side, shaded with the cantilevered sun screen, as you can see in the model there. The~ we have tne other entry which is on the south side. The o::haracter of these entries is seen as being a gracious, sun dappled place where ~e have trees on either side going in. You can get a sense of that on the L 05/06/93 -4 I I r I -' ... ' .. -i . ..J t j '" I . - drawing. It is a steel canopy which extends aut, bringing people off the stre~t and rea.lly l',,\(r:s a .statement abOtlt the entry so that tt'1ere is r.o confusion. People can see w~He the entry is anc \\Iill ~ot go wandering about the site. So the idea is to do th"t, and ~e thought it would be nice :0 have a couple of benc~es in thit are!. The 1dea is ~ot tc have bleachers. ~e are not looking at havins a spectator situation in a sense that we ~ou'd ha .... e crowds of people standing around cheering the sWlliJlTling races. Ea,ory Tayler might want t.o address that later in t~:'1T1S of tre ~rogriij,J. The ,jea is. rnere1y to h3\1e a pi ace WhHe-a couple of pa'fEfJts miglit s~t while the~r children are in t~e-e.'<ercisE: pool where they can :sa and watch them and ~njo~ lhe sunshi~~. As you move around the building, at t~e front. ~~ have taken the brick cnimney (whic~ is not really a chimney but a brick ~all with a prefab metal fireplace sitting again~t it) and actually perforated it wit~ a series Df openings to cr~ate a sense of some secret places for the kids to gQ and explore around. So we were able to maintain the (!rci1itectural vertica1ity of that to l"1e1p the 1inearity of tne fa~ade. irlc! it also provide~ an 0ppfJrtunity for the children to e-ngage in play. One of the options for the sound wall is concrete blo~k. This is the one which ~e have talked about that, and we are showing twa that are presented for discussion in terms of wnat would be most appropriate, sitting in amongst tnese trees around tne perimeter. Ms. OaRosa: Would JOU go through the colors t~at you f ~opose? .ML... .. Le~Q:t: The notlo", is to makf the building as recessive as possible in the sense of its ~ie~ from the str€et, and! thlnk we accom?lished that. We have tried to get a sense of ho~ this kind of project wilT set back in t~e landscape. This will be the bod~ of the bui1ding, this gray-green around it. We pick up a little bit of an accent in the fascia and in the wincow frames. This color~ sort of a primer red. ~ill be used to tie 4nto tne brick color and will be used far the awning. The intention is ta create kind af an indoor/outdoor e~perience, and will continue all the way through t~e building and act as sort of an architectural transition between the old and the npw, swch that it will be open On each side a!ld then stYle it Tn the lobby area, then CO'ler it here. We p1ck up a variation ~f that color in the stucco here and here and USE tnat for the structure on th~ other Side, M.sJ.~ser: Does anyone have iiny questior.s? Mr-Hise: I ,"ouid like you to su:ml1ariz!: the changes that have been made since the last approval. the zoning administrator's approval. Tn1s is the first time I ~ave seen the project. Mr._leQ.9"y: Sure, The changes to the site plan are Htat we have ... Mr. Hise: mean, aside from complying with the c.onditional USE permit requ.'remi:nts. Ms. DaRosa: It is actJJallj a City Council approval. 05 '05/93 5 A··· ' , " ", .:.-.. --, ~---;- I ~ Mr. Leddy: ... the proposal for the addition of a small, fenced play area here and the final location, we had an ~ption of locating it here or here, at the discretion of the ARB, and WE' were proposing to locate the final exercise path here. That is the su~ total of the changes sjn~e the site pl an. 1he building plan, as a res~lt of further review by the stafF of t~e 1, has resulted in no change 1n fJo:prlnt, but t~e orlg1nal sche~e had the exercise room in this location and the locker roorn~ back here. The) felt they wanted a larger eJl:crcise room and smaljer-1ockers, so to make that work, we located t~e exercise room here and put the locker rcom here. T~e o~eral1 footprfnt is the same, and we just ~hifted things around. Mr. HiSe; Would you ajso address your c.hoice of the barrel form Dr sDft arch form of the poel area, and how that rel ate.'> to tne other roof forms that are exiSting Dn the .s.tructure. What was your thinking as YI)U made those decisions? Mr. leddy: 1 felt Here were two wa)'5 of approaching this project. One way was t~ make e~erything Took the sam~. making e~erything kind of match. But j felt that following this notion of trying to make a cOmrT'lllnit)' of buildings, I felt it was mare appropriilte to break down the scah of things b.\" cr-l2ating a collage of Shapes that related to each other in terns of their fascia lines, etc.; but tnat had some vHiety. Sa ,",2 fe1t that f~orn the ~xterior, this form ~aS som~th~ng that would do that. It does not have the silme o .... erhangs that the exis:ing form does. It clearly is a new t~ling, yet somewhat similar. r~side we liked the idea of the gentle Clirve 'With skylights aiorrg the top_ 11 !r;ar..es. it a more unlisuai type of space in a pool. Hr. ~ise: What determined the height Df that buildlflgl ~r. leddv: What determined the height was just the vclume tha.t we felt 'Was appropriate-fDr such a long Spece and pool acti'Vity. I belie-\ie the height of the building is 20 feet. It alsc ended up being substartially lo~er than the exi5ti~g gym. Mf.:_Hise: But yOu do not t'iave diving acti~ities or a di'.ring board in there? (~D) Mi.:. __ JrIn._~ __ IE: Could you clarify the exercise pat!; for-me? that cTearly. did not track Mr. _led41; There win be two entry points. The beginning ar end is more or less here, r~nning next to the sound willl and coming out at this 1cn.t1c'l'1. Ms. Wi150n: Is this the type that has the statiDns where you do different tliir,gs: Mr. led.!fy: No, it is jU5t a ~·lace for someone to go outside and jog. Initially, there was a. cardiac prognm ... liich tilis 'tI,I('ulc. be used sp~cifically for. Barry, do you want to addre~s the status. of that? ~r..:_I.~..Yl9.r: One of the reaSOr1S the tracli. .. as s.pecific-any laid out like 05/06/93 -6- -. . .J , . ., - it was was 50 that a staff person, a medica11y certifl~d staff person. c.ould stand somewhere ~n this. .... icinit~ and see. an pilYticip?nt:. Q!'1 t~e. track. The track is used ever the course of the day by a variety of YMCA (fjemoe:--s who, instead of going off tne property and jogging on U,e !:.treets. c~n use this track. One of the p~rpose5 of t~at track was our YMCA cardi3c therapy program. Ms. DaRosa; Is that the reason the path is limited to just that b~ck area? It seems to er.d dbruptly. Mr. Leddv: There ~as a concern on the part of both the neighbors anj t~e planHing ~taff as to the extent of this thi~9. so we tried to limit it. A;so, the more running path, the less landscaping there is. Ms. Wilson: How wide is that path? ~r. Taylor: It is ftve feet ~ide. It is soft oyster shell. Ms. [l.aRo~.~: lhere was also the issue of the transformer and any fire nookups. Mr. Leddy: The buildi~g is fully sprinklered. This plan is not the most recent one, but ~e have ter.tative1y located a pad 'n this arE-d, pending your approva1 and PG&E appro~al. It is in this location near the street. lhe-uti1it1es come in from this d~rection. Ms. DaRosa: Are y~u prQ~idipg some screening? !1!:..:...J,,~ggy: There ~in be a landscaped scre02n a\"'Qurvj it. We felt that since it ~as right next to the sound wall and aTso to the street. any minor hum that might be emitted would be adequately controlled. Ms. Maser~ material on mater; -: 11 I ra\'e a few questions. Ha\le you conSidered using the same your sound wall as you are using on the building. in color and Mr. Leddy: ~es, we have. and ~e ~ave not necessarily rejected that. That is sOr1"eth"ing that is open for discussion Ms. Mase(: This is a question that I should not be asking you, but out of curicsity. it looks to me like th~ number of tOilets you have far the facility are very minima1. Is the If satisfied lIIith the number of toilets? ~~: The restrocm facilities have currently be~n the result of the input of the nationa1 YMCA. M.s. Maser: Based on other uses in other facilities, they feel it woto1d be adequate? ~(j.ser: 1 want to knD'#f what perlentage of laflosc..aping you ha .... e on HI~s sHe. w~ could have qotten ourselves into a bind, because we wart half-size drawings. yet. these were re-al1j difficl.llt tc read irl half-size. ~e h~~e been going round and round on this. At our retreat, .,..e decided thcit lialf-sizE-dralll'ings, if they a.re readable. IHoI.J1d be L 05/06/93 -7 - . - . ..J '. ', . -71 i . I ,~ j : t",=+. : r ---:-------.-. L preferab'~, but these are net readable. must Sdy it was painful to go through s~me of these statistics, so that is why I am asking abowt the percentage of landscaping on the site, not including t~e preser~~ area, that is, the percentage of the footprint tnat ;s in 'a~d$capjng. ~~~~: I know that the building coverage lS 26 percent of the site. The balance is in parking and landscaping. I do no~ have a breakdown. Ms. Maser: The city does not require that as part of ~1ur submittal? just want to know lf the pre$~r\'e E',er £ioes ir1to paving. what is the perc~ntagp. left? Ms . .....l:itl..g,: Here is I1Q percent-of·land~caping requiref'l1ent. ,Il.s you are probably aware, in the zoning ordinance, a.ll there is is a perimeter requirement, a n~mber-of-trees requirement, but no percent .. of-landscaping requirement as you have probably seen in Gther codes. Ms. Ma.1.!!.r.: r would 1 ike to know .. hat the inten:tion would be. if that landscaping preserve had to be built aut, what would happen to t~e reserved bike parking. the play yard, and other things that are located ~ithin that preserve area. Mr. Taylor: The child watch space is located here, which is for parents of smaller children who visit the facility in daylfg~t hours. It is directly adjacent to the spac~ ~nere they will be watched, an outdoor area for ".:.h~m to go lrlto. That would be in qupstiDn. Right f10W, in O'Jr facllity snmewhere in this neighbor~ood, W~ ~ave an outdoor area where ch11dren are accessing that type of space at this time. So we have to ~ave a different type of consideration, I presume, as to ~hether or nat they would stll1 have an outdoor space or whether it would be indoors. I would say the biggest loss to the preserve h€re relat~d to this would be to the nelghbors and to the YMCA in terms of our appearance. Prograi:1aticalTy, we do not have any futui~e ph.ns of e .... er using that area. We WOL!ld be more ~nc1ined to keep t~e restrai:1ts within our programs tha.n to ass~me we are goi ng to need that space l n the future. Ms. ~aser; In one of the condit'ons, tt 15 mentioned that tMere shall be no activities that would require overflow parking. They would re~trict the activities to what the parking lot would bear. Mr. Taylor; That is corr€ct. Mi..:.... .. "' .. iser: Are they including the reserve parking in that? quite understand that. did not Mr....!..-T13,WJ .. : At this time, they are only including the po:-tion that is already planned for parking. Bwt as )'OU know, we are also going to have an annual report t~at is going to be prepared in which the neighbor's will have-inpwt. My assumption is that ;~ they feel we are at capacity and cars are starting to park on the streets, tIlere may be a recommelld3.t; on through the city planning staff that we convert this into parking and al1e .... iate tne problems. From the Y's perspecti .... e. we would be very hard pressed to ever allow that to occur, and my hope and assumption Qre that it won't. Ms. Maser: ~ould the Y, rather than gi~jng up that landscaping and 05/06(9J '-8· • -'.>;. ,1·,- - COrlvertil'lg it to parking, be wining to curtail tneir activities ar.d downsize their actlYities7 Mr. "TaylQr: t~at coming, presen'i! . That is w~at I am indicatlng in wy s.taternent, yes. If we sa ... ' we would take action. ~e want this to remain as a landscape Ms. Ma-::er:: Just out of curiosity, what ':'Iou-Ie be the relo,:atiol1 of Uat bicycle parking in th~ rear, if those fe~ spaces th~rf were to go intc park.ing? l'ir.~: His is essentially tne .: spaces that exist c\Jr-rentl,1' (I~ Class 1]1 bicycle parking. "The intention of putting it back there was to make it essentially o~erfill bike parking. Right nD~ we have a lot of bike racks at the entry of th~ builQing_ Sased on current use, tneir guess was that ther€ would be a rare circumstance that all the bike rackS here ~ou1d actually be fille1. So rather than putting biK~ racKs all around. we have located them back ir. here. The approach would be t~e same. Ha\ling is !l1llch landscaping at tne rear of He site as possib1e is desirable in terms of limiting the noi.~e. etc. If they had to be moved, it is a fairly simple thing to relocate 15 spaces to some other location. Right now, we ha .... e more bike spaces at the entry, and ha-wing something back there for the rare circumstance that there would be an oVf!rfTow. Ms. Maser: But you do think you ha'.e other spots t~at would be suitab1e for that, and the city has obvious1y accepted tnat? Mr. Leddv: Actually? t~ere was a staff comment from the lransportttion D;lIision. I did not realTy ~ndHstand the c.o:rrnent, but my sense was that there was a misunderstanding and that we were treating these bike spaces l;~e 7andscape preserve biKe spaces, or something like that. But that is nat the intention. The intentio~ is that they would be ti1ere. J would' like to have the QPportu~ity to find out the ration)le about that. ~-U1.l.g: 1 can speak. to that. The policy for bjk,e rack l{lcation is to make tnem more convenient than automobile parking. By putting them at the ",ery reaT and c .. using people to 'JfaH .. a""li tlle way back to the entrance, Transportat ;'In \11111 always coment !'Iegati yell on that. tots. Maser: What was the condition about relocating those racks? Mh_Lytle: I bel ieve there was a statemo:nt from Transportation that another spot be selected f~r the required bike parking. Ms. Maser; Jim, if you would address for ~s and refresh our memory as t~ what existing trees are belng removed tn-at are not where the actua1 buiTding pad is . .Mr... Lauderbau9.~: nere ar€ 14 trees being remo .... f.:d out af 44 exi sting trees. Most of the trees are in the parking area or tea close to other existing tr~es. Ms. Ma_~_er; let me be specific. last year when we re"iewed ttl is, we had a different board memb~r. who has since left. She was our landscape guru. We still go back and look at her comments. She mentioned that she would like to see the Atlas cedars and what has been mislabelled as pepper trees 05/05/93 -9- :]. ",,' . I' .... -,<." '';.::,7t'ifl'· , ,,'. , , , .". "-'':- - -.- saved. 1 rsmembi!r th.os.e i'i beirlg 11'\ that la':"\ds,(o.pe prE'ser'le. area C\.l.t front, but perhaps I am ~rDrg. ~G~_I,J_ggrbaugh: There are some Atlas cedars tha't are being saved he:--e along the property line and some t~at will hav~ to be rtmo~~d to accommodate the park.ing. There are two"] ash trees which will be saved in this current configuration. Ms. Maser: Co you remember our tal~~ng about trees rjg~t in thE front of the bu'lTding ~n the landscape pre-sene area? Mr Leddy: I think one tn3t was ment~oned was a juniper. Ms. __ M.§;_~: She called Oile of them a:1 Atlas cedar, utd also a pepper tree. Actually, she said it had b~en incorrectly labeled as a pepper tree. M-. Lauderbaugh: ~ell. th~ Japanese pagoda tree. ~_~ ... ~.J.I:!~; There are two pepper trees here. There lrIIas some discussion during tile tHy Council meeting and aT so during Planrdrtg Commiss.ion meeting regarding trees in this area. 1 t~ink the final approval on this said that those cDuld be remoyed. )Its Maser: So tl1at has alread.", been cor.sidered by the (ourlcil. ~.L.JIIi1son: I dOfl't t"'ink it is this board's CGncern to a~dress these issu:es. Some of the iss.ues tnat r,a'.le be-err brought up in this 1etter are really between Nancy and the VMCA. these accusatio~s that they are net accommodating certain things. The last tnree paragraphs of Ms. Wetzel's letter about continuing to ignore city ordinances~ etc., thE Los Amigos dances, etc. really should be clarified between Barry and you. Maybe you could respond to her letter somehow. But I don't think that is this board I 5 concern. M .. ~.,...ll.q.~er: Also the other lette" con;:erning the architect~ral senices wcu!d not be somethi~g we should concern olJr5€lves 'With. 1 appreciate trre 1etten, but 1 don't tl\lr.k they arec really 9~rm'Hli: to ... hat we are 51..lpJ-\o.s.eo t~ be doing here. ~.t~: The primary concerns of the board. as e)(~re5sed in the letter from Joanne wetZEl, are those that ~he nas bullet",,:!. Hlose items are appropriate for ycur consjderdtion today. Maybe we could ask lori to comment on the outdoor children's play area, which is a change from the tjme-wher, this project went to tlie (itj COlJncli, a1so the proposal by Ms. Wetzel that we require enclosing the entrances, and the idea of reducing light and glare by lowering all free-standing lights, and moving the pool eql.Oi?ment. 112 .. : .... J':.Q!Llll: I certainly think that all of theSE requests are within your purvjew and something that you can take actio~ on, jf you so choose. As far as the outaoor c~;ldren's play yard is concerned, this is not somethlng that is unusual to most of the condjtionally allowed faciljties within a!l R .. l r'1eig~borhood, such as c~unhes, day car-e centers, commurdty facilities. etc. During our staff re~ie~ of the revised changes, we felt that this was an appropriate change. ~T$o, we gaye ton$;d~ratjon to the 0;/0';/9J -10- j - fact tt1at t~is parti'Cular facTl it)' is going to be re',iewed annually by the Planning Corrmission and is going to ha ... e a conditior-rr1CHl-itoring sti!tus report prepared by ar. outside consultant that t~e c;~y ~ill !lire to do that. $0 there will be an opportunity for tne Phrlning COmiT,ission and staff t~ review how these facIlities are operating. what kinds of prablems~ if any, are occ~rring, and the opportunit) ttJ review the conditions of aD~rova' and perhaps Change things, if necessJ.,(. So there is that safety ~alye for things of this nature. Also I m",ght add that If the noise cons~1tant has arrhred, YO'\J may want him to comment on the nois~ l~vel at the play yarc. Ms. Lvtle: Our thought was that both of these activities would be separated from the neighborhood by the noise \IIIall. and the.y ""ill probably not raise ambient 1evels consider3.bly, at alL In fact, the play yard on the Ross Road side ~jll prob~bly be muffled by the ambient leve1s of Ross Road noise, in general. The courtyard a'ld the idea of amplifying i:1 that directlon has a barrier in between the residentia1 area. Ms Maser: Perhaps the noise consultant can comment on these pOints. Ms. Topl~y: Alsc, if you see some architectural way to enclose thos~ areas? certa~nlj that ~ould not go against the conditional use permit or the EIR conditions as long as they remained entrances. The crucial portion of this whole plan is the entries. Ms Maser: It would not throw the parking off balance~ MS Tople~: If you were just talKing about ~Qme kind of architectural fix for this, that would be feaSible. Ms. Maser: But still an outdoor space, not make it an interior space? (V .. ) Ms. WjJSCJl.: JU:it one thing about these lights. There is a photometric drawing in our packet. ~ do not know how tall the lights are. !-1r. ~_ilYderb2u9£.: They are 12 feet high. M$ Maser: 00 we have an actual Gut sheet of those lights? Mr Lauderballgh: It ts included as part of the photometric plan. Mr. Hise: Vnc is the manufacturer of the lights! Mr Lauder_b_~..l!£.D_: (hands in a manufacturer's. speciflcation sheet) Mr. Hise: With side guard shields on the side? Mr. Lauderbaugh: Right. Mr. His~: So there will be no spillo¥er at all? Mr. Lau<t~rba.l!9.h: None at all. Mr. Mise: What is your minimum lighting level? L 05/05/93 -11- ~------.- "r·" ."~ •. ~, ttr.L ... !" .. ~ .. iJQ.erb.al.igh: T~ere will ,e: a final electrical plan submitted. ~~: So you think your ;r.ini;r:ufT1 is ~r.e. Ms. Maser; W~ wtil now hear from meMbers of the public. 'YOU ar.? limitE:d to fivE!minute5. Carol T~o~pson: Good marnirg. 1 would li~e us to reme~~€r, first and foremost, what w~s passed at the council level. One of the con~itjons ~as t~at there was to be no outdoor activities ~t the site. Judging from the jogging track. which was origin~lly going to be sftuat~~ down this side, or in front Qf the building. where the play yard now is, As you can see, the plan has c~anged enormously since the cou~cil approved it. It 1s now roughly three times the size. In addition, we were given to understand at the time this was ~assed was that this track was for cardiac therapy only. We are !lOW hearing that this is for anyone who uses the building, so the number of pt!aple using it on a g1.,.en dilJl is largE. f:.,s far as this entryway is concerned, there was never any condition gj ... erl a"ilciriing the viewwin~ area into thf pooL There is now going to be a large ... iewwing area where a lot of peQDle are going tQ stand arcund and congregate. T~at ~lS one of our problEms origtnall) with the YMCA. When they ha ... e classes, the rear doors here open up from the existing gymnasj~m, ~nd large numbers of peop1e stand cutsice. BelievE me, they 5hout and they screa~. Going back to the jogging path. The YMCA useS a megaphone. The megaphone sound is 90in9 to carry up and over a sound wall. SouPoj wa .. es d(ln-'t go straight and hit a wall. They travel up and over. With the dry creek here~ concreted on each side, the SOU'fld tend:. to magn,ify by th-e tim£! it gets down t.e the end of Stone Lane. So that is definitely a problem. ~lon9 with th~s ~iewing area here, wnere people are definitely going to congregate. Other outdoor Q.ctivities were never supposed to include a play yard. We were told at the time that child watch w~s rnini~a1. It was just for a few children. I believe that not to be the case. O~ernight stays are now offered by th.e YMCA, ~h i en a 1 so was. not part {)! the pl ar. We did ask many questions about the sound wall at a meeting we had several weeks ago. They were supposed to be answered, Mr. Logan ~as there and ~lso Mr. laylor. T~e quest10ns were never answered regarding t~e soundproofing and qual~ty of the wall. Also ne~er answered were que~tions c~ncern'ng the span of each sect iCrn of wall. They are supposed to be 24 feet apart. It seems to me to be a little far to support one section of wall on two ?~~rs 24 feet apart. Also the sound wall is not going to be buried in the ground, ~hich means that over a period of time, e~rth is going to erode wnderneath that wall, and the so~nd is goi~9 to gc under instead of elt~er nltting t~~ wall or going o'l'cr the top. At the rear here, there was never a door in the building. This has been the cause of much noise. It travels with the wind direction. Noise travels from the back of the building and up that creek channel to my hQuse. We as.ked s?ecific.ally that riot only sholJl~ the windo~s be sealed bllt there 5hould be no doors. There is a door here. I assume it is a fire door. If it is, ab~jously it needs to be t~~r~. but it also only needs to be able to opened in times of ~mer;ency. At the L 05/06/93 ·12 " "' . ;. '- " . ......... , fl·; . I , • - !T10me-nt, the fire doors are l~ft open a lot of the tliTl.e .. As far '1'5 the size {if the fIIa11 js concerned, I did calj l.!p one neighbor who w alerted originally that the walT would havg to be lowered from eight cet to four feet for a distance of 16 fe-et in the front of t~e property. Fortunately. she called a whJle bunch of us. ! called Lori 1op1ej who told me tnere was nothing! could do about it. 1 subsequently called the city attorne)'s offire, and I now helVE a letter in my possession \lihich states that the wall will be eight feet to a distance of four feet fram the sidewalk. I hope that is the way it is ~ojng to stay. ihank you for your tIme. Mr. Hise: Ms. "Thompson, could yO\J tell me which of the council's conditions you are ref~rring tn ~hen you ta'~ a~out no outdoor activities? Mr. l1ise: discussed wondering Does: that. about anyone e1se have but I do not see it. it? I do not Sfe it here. Tiley may ~alie it as one of the conditions. i am just Ms. T@TTIru.QD.: In the condition monitcring report, some of what was put on paper was actually a Tittle different from what took phce during the meet ;"g that night. One of the things r \IIoul d ha .... e 1 i ked to ha ... e had done was a complete review of the entire discussion, becaus:-e it 'IiIas very, ''1er,' clearly stated, fn fa-:::t, at the time, Los Amigos was supposed to end QuitE abruptly with having dances: at a c.ertaln point in time. and those dances continued for a lo~g period of time. That. too, was neyer written into the mitigation monitoring report. For that reaS{ln, r feef Hat a large> proportion of this should once again be reviewed, to include t~a;t council meeting where most of the decisions 'Were made. I feel \'ery strongly about that. ~rt~: There is not a condition that limits. outdoor activities. The mitigation monitoring report is inclUSive of all council-adopted corditions. I think what Ms. Thompson is rEferring to is that one of the benefits of the project is. that it moved a lot of outdoor acti .... ity into an indoor format, and I thi,nk the c.ouncil d~d d~scus.s the adlr'an.ta.ges of the design for that purpose. But there is not a condition regarding that, nor was l motio~ €'Jer made or l~tthing ch~nged in the recommended mitigation moni toring report that was adopted. Mr,_Jii.ll: That is the way I read it. In fact. ellen under Noise, they menUcn l riumber of things. that are concet"IIS, 3.l)d that is r,ot one of them. ~~ .. ,.~: S(lmetimes indiliidual comments by (:l)uncll memCers. can be retalned by indilJidual.s. as indicating some b:'ld of corrrnitmer1t, but in fact. unless that arises into 1 motiol"l arId is adc'?ted by five of the nine members, it does not become an official condition. Mr. Hi.g:: 111 fact. just for my own c1arification. these conditions were proposed and voted upon. and reviewed for accuracy at the follow)ng meeting by the council, j\Jst like we WOlJld do. So these are th€ conditions of record that the City Council has adopted. ~.l.Y.lli: That 1 s correct. L 05/06'93 -l3 - - Joanr!'? ~et2e~. 77 Stg_.n..~_1.~TIE:: I want tel menti()n someth:i"lg about the r:wde-l here. The flnt two h.oo:''2.s. on Stone Lan-=-are t...:o-stOf")', but it is. net indicated in trtE' plan. n-at '11ay make a difference. One of the things we are concerned about is the retention af the pin~ trees. along His area. Certainly, this plan does ~ot show e','er)' e)(ist~l'lg tre-e being retained. I believe another one did. rt ~as been ·"ery hdrd tc go bar:l< and forth on plans. Thes.e tr~e<; were tl) be retained 111 Ue origina1 landscape plan. We would like to make sure that those trees, ~hi'h are extremely tall and ~hich, with the sound wall, would create a bu ffe:"" , '1Ii11 an be retained. I bel ieJe tt1ey are Canary pirres along her-e. We ..... otJld also like you to require that the entry be encios.ed. The impact on our neighborhood over tr,~ last 40 years has. been prtma-riiy fro!;! outsioe acti~jties or acti¥ities that have been allow~d to become outside activities, such as the dances which mo~ed out to the patio, or the 'fjindo~s and dOQrs whh:1i hil .... e be~r'I i<.e?t open or the-er':tl'y ."here parents could gather end ~atch their c~i'dren swimming. I ~ave been a parent watching a child having a Te:ison. ~Je talk, we talk 1oudly, and it is, indeed, desigl1ed lik.e a megaphone to htt our hou~e, I "Write as a writer, I work. as a ..... riter 9 I work at home, and! really need quiet. We can hear the noise from Pal<:l Verde Schoo1 wtlicn is on lo~is Roarj come up during recess. We know exactly when recess occurs at Pa10 Verde. beca~se it travels up the creek. The outdoor cl1ildren's play yard was no2'ver considered by ttle Planning CommiSSion or the City CouneiT, or tr;e community. The additional impact on us of ttiis el1ormous project that is gOing into a residential area was simply ne.er a part of that c0nsideration. The exercise path which was going to be in this are~, agaln, it was not there at the Planni~g Commission, and it suddenly appeared. The Y said it was fo~ cardiac patients only, this very sm211 area that \'las gOing to be for them. It was slipped in at the last moment. ih1$ would be an inappropriate area to put it. mese are our backjards. To stick. it up against where our hous<:z-s adjoin the proPerty is the worst possible a~ea for any kind of patn. It just plJsnes the s.1J1J~·d to -rhe 'w'ery e-d9~ of U1l: buffer and s.ornet'imes intrudes in it. We ~ere told that tne mechanical equipment was all going to be in a w211 in the center of the building. Now we see that the mechanical equipment for the pool is out here, right where it will impact t~e neighbors. We think that should be rno¥ed to an inside well. r also want to make one comment abo~t the lack of toilets. One of the things thai: came lip at the Architect~ral Review Board and at the City Council meeting wa~ the Russiar; Orthodox Church cOIJ!~lairlin9 that the overflow from the YMCA was using the arra in front of their church as a tOilet after some of the nighttime a:tivities. I would ~uggest that there are adequa.te toilet facilities. 1 am hopi~g that .... 'ith the end of the los ~~igos dances, that is a problem that ha~ ended. As you make YDur recommendations a~d approva1s, WOUld you ?lease keep the needs of the neighbors as your paramount (onsideration? Do not assume th1lt the YMCA will beh2VE: any more honestly or hOrlQrably to its l1eighbors 0,/06/93 -14· f I q ":·>~~:··I >;:;:.;:c ~ : 4 L ··r -'~;~ 1 Ioi ~~~ .... --_,- '"', than it has in t~e last 40 y~ars. a period of time that wa5 characterized by the Planning Commiss.ion ;;;!o sham-2ful and lnto1erable. Some of the Planning Cormli sior. and City (ourren members indicated that tne only reas'Jn they ..... ot·!d for this expansion .... as to dmend the 1J5t! permit to e!'1~bje t~E cIty to put strong en0ugh controls on the YMC~ lnat t~ej could be enforced to protect the neighborhood. ~e hav~ had intolerable situations from them ove~ the 1ast 40 years. ~~ r~ally need help and protection. D~ck Trainer. 3423 C<:)rk O~_L2I_n: lhls l5 tlie n·" property d';rectly behind the YMCA. I take exception to the trees. I have no problem with lea~ing t~e tre~s here. ~e ha~e trees ~~re that Q~erhan9 our property. We have a pool t~at we constantly have to clean out from the leaves from tr.osr:. tre€'s. We "av~ asked and as!r.~d th.!t those tr-e.'Cs be recmc'Jed alld replaced. T~ey are old trees, tired trees, that ha¥e a finite life. We th·'nl tn~y sno:uld go. l,l!"1ether or not yot! can ad<iress th.~s i5SlJe, 1 am Mt sure. The two other issues I have is the e~ercise path wnich e~ists baCK here now right be~in-d my house. I find It does not bothH me a bit. It is used vEry seldom. People do not talk when t"-ey are jogging arourld that path. ff they do talk, it is relatively 10_. TMe other iss~e is the lights. I r~commend that you keep the one~foot candle level. I am a lighting consultant myself. A half-fact candTe is a1most unsafe tnese days. So I recommend that you keep the one-foot candle lighting. ~s~_aser: We wi11 now return to the board for their comments. Ms. "';:scn~ 1 want to comp"'liment the arcnitects. I met -.lith Mr. iaylor and Mr. teddy some months ago regarding this ~roject before it ~as as fu11y developed as this is. This has been a ~ery difficu1t project. It is difficult architecturally and difficult sociological~y. I think a lot of effort ha.s. bee-n trli:l<le to bring this projett to ~here-it is today. r am qu~t~ comf')rtable ..,ith the arch~tect\.Jre. aHhol.igh 1 am still a litt 1 e confused about the one brick colored material. But m.v understanding is that the-c~'or that is on the wzll is the finish on the tile, or ii that the color? Mr. Leddy; Yes, it is the color on the wall. ~s. ~ilson: I appreciate the way the architect pxplalned his philosophy. r think it is a sensible one, and I find t~e result to be Quite good, having started out with a fairly homely group of buildings. r am going to go through soml::! of these "issues, one by one, The-yare rather detail-oriented issues that I am concerned about. I am concerp€d about the architects. alt~ough 1 know we cannot control tnat. This building will be successful o~ the continuation of the input of these fine designe~s. and! encourage the YMCA to not try to cut corners at this stage, now that you have ARB approval, or hopefully will be getting it. It is important that the detajling be consistent with the original concepts and that only the people who conceived those concepts ~ill know what that is. It is a very important element in the success of t~;s, and I think the YMCA oweS that to the city and the neighborhoad to L 05/06/93 ·]5· .... ""]. - continue ~ith the excellence that you have started out ~it~. I find the colors acceptable, playful and fun. I am j:llea$ed to see some architectural 5~n screens being used around the pool area, 1 am satisfied with the transformer location. Regddlng the issue cf sound at ttle entri€-3. I would be ~nterested in a comme:'1t from H€ -EJJund consultant about that if he i3 he~e. I do not see that entry as a megaphone. The fact that there is no roof on that space means th~t the sQund ~il1 gJ up more than it ~ill go out. rt is disturbIng to me that people are as r~stricted on this site as they are. I ~ill 3ddress that later. The lighting le~els seem adequat~ to me. I am concerned that if the poles are lo .... e ... ed any more, we will ha .... e too many poles.. It seems like there are a lot of poles now. If you are going to increase the number of poles, that is something I would certainly leave up to the applicant ~nd staff to work out. 1 feel that lowering poles to eight feet will m~ke so many of them that it wlll be really unattractj~e. So that is a balance that has to be reached be-tween lighting le~e1:s. and thoe acceptability of how many Doles we have in the landscape area. I would encourage U1e retention of the C-lnuy pines along what I cal"l He south side of the prcperty. In deference to this last gentleman, anything that the YMCA can do to couperate with the 112 fghbors and make them l1appy shou1d be attempted. If you want some trees removed. talk to them ar1d see if you can get that worked out. I thlnk t~e gentleman is correct. I see the jogging path, or walking pat~ which is what it really is (no serious jogger wo~ld jog on such! short ljttle strip) as having little or no impact on the r.eig~bors. O~e of the biggest reactions I nad to this project when : pic~ed it up was twelve pages of conditions. J have neV€r seen a project .... 'th sc many cor.ditions ;~ my five years on this bnard. ~hile they are not all architectural conditions. they are conditions of the project. I think thls is a really important signa1 to all of us, to the applicant, to the city, that ther~ is something wrong here. I feel badly that the YMCA is beins rest-rided this miJch. r don't. think the pro<]rams, the acces.s to U1e outdoors whic~ should be a~ajlable to you, the sense of relaxation in rlJ!1l1ing )'.Jur programs, 1 lIfou1d hope WOUld be mor<:-joyful than this is turning out to bE. I hope that in time, ~ajbe the ~eighborhcod ~ill becume more comfortable ·with the YM[A. ~ith this marlY conditions, someone running a program might ask, is this the right pi ace for us to be? It is a big concern. and it is unfortunate that a facility which is such an importal1t part of the community and is ~ery substa.ndard for the community. and needed to be improved as yOJ.J are impro~i11g it, is getting so much resistance. I fEe1 badly about what ev€ryone has been t~rougn in this i SSu€. I am not uncomfortable getting back to a detail about this children's play area. I think it is perfectly viable where it is. I dcn't think it is going to bother anybody. It is not like something with a big direct:lr with ongoing program3 where tne kids are going to be playing big games. It is a place, to my understandlng, where o:hildren wilT b,~ watched for short periods of time. 1 cannot think of a better ~lac2 on tne site for it to be, and I feel the neighborhood concerns are unfounded. I would 5J.Jpport this project. Ms.. DaRosa: I nave! .:ouple of qu~stions for the applicant, staff and 'L 05/06/93 -16 - ~ ~-~ .----" • " - ac{)ustica.1 cons.ultant. Cou1d you clarify this conflict \IIith tt'le sound wall? Is it ejqht feet ~n one side a~d seven feet on the other side? Does it have to"be reduced to faur feet, a~d if so, to ~hat extent? Ms. lytle: The project that was approved by the counei owed a seven-foot wall all the way around. Staff is interpreting that to be t~e require~nt for approval of this plan. Th€ conflict comes because there is. i cedi! s€.c.tjorl r~quiri!'lg that 'f4ills trail down as they opproach tn~ street. It is our opinion th~t because t~e project, as it was approvrd, included the higher wall, we would net force the applicar: :0 go tnroiJg:, a variance applicat1or. in order to build what they proposed and what the council approytd, a~d wh4ch the nei~hbor5 appa~ently 61so want. Ms. Tople,,: The neighbors had the opt4o(l of choosing tn.e fence to g.:, to eight feet if the majority along that prop~rti line chose that. So the fencE is eight feet here and seven fee~ ~ere and /lere. Ms. ~aser: Aino, arf yOY co~cerned about it when it reac~es the ~treet? Ms. DaRo~a: I was just curious about the fence height all the Wi) '3!"ound. Here is also that question about .",t,at nilppens when it reac.h€'s the property line. What hapPElns when it reaches the sidewalk.? Ms. Tooley: The property line is fi~e feet back from the sidewalk, and the fence will corne to the property line at eight feet on this iide and seven feet on that side. ~!..ser: Is that a problem for the Trar,sportat i an Department? Ms. Topley: Transportation has re~iewed it, and fo~nd the site distance to be adequate. Ms. DaRosa: When it reach~s the property line at eight feet, ~oes it stop or does it th~n tap€r off? Ms. Tooley: N~, it will not taper. Ms. paRosa: So there is no fQur·foot fence at all? (No) M..s. Maser: But Y0l.l sa-id earlier in the com.'TI€nts on the north side, tnat property Dwner would 1 i ke to ha~e it dropped tD four feet. Is that what heard'? Ms. lytle: From our position, if the property o~ner and the applicant would lif.e to lQwer it in a tpnsition, as the zoning ordinance allows H, that would be fine, as well. We are nct going to stand in the way of a good agreement between neighbors here on the design of the project. Ms. wnSQn: location of about that. Ms. Ma5er: Before we go on, I think the architect shou1d clarify the thp mechanical equipment. I think there is a misconception I would like to let Aino conclude her comments. Ms. DaRosa: Then there was the question of o~ernight stays. Is that so? Are there D~ern;ght stays? wdnt to c1arifj that. 05/06/93 .) 7· , - c 1 \: .-, , -.1 .. - Mr. Tili.Qr.: The C~lrrer1t u!;.e pe'-I!'it allows f{ir Dvernig~t ~tays. T~e naw permit will not allow t;'lem. So as soon as \1/'2 are open, we will no lOl'iger have them. Our operating hours state in the conditions t~~t l~ere is to be nothin~ in the f~ci1~tj aft~r 11 p.m. ~s"~_aRo~<!: Thank you. I want to ask abCL!t the so_md \11;;11. In terms of sound. the design of the walT and this idea that there is no footing under~eath the wall, that is one i5s~e. Also sound control at the entrances. If you could just comment on those. Mr. Ledd¥: The condltion&l use permit required tMat ~e hav~ a sound wall with a minimum surface weight of tnree pounds p~r square foot. Th€ sound wall study was part of the ErR prOCESS. In fact, what was allowable to red.uce the sound leve1 to wI:11 below cod€' requirements 'tt~uid be-a wooder. 'W3.11 in this location. Sn by putting in a masonry sO'.H,d .. all, ... e are exceeding the r€quir~ment of threp. pounds per square foot. So based on the i~put from the consultant. I think ~e are really exceeding what is required by the ElR or the c.onditions. As far as the span of tne warl is conce.ned. we nav~ some conflicting hs.lJ€ that we ir-e trying to resohe. \Ie have the trees wnieh are-shallow !"ooted and carmot have lots Df founcation near tr1em. One of the reasons why the YMCA was initially trying to propose the IojDod wall way back. in the earl,. Planninq COlTII!!issio!1 hearing was that it If:'ould be of ~!J.ch lighter material and .. auld have less impact on the trees. Clearly. there is no agreement among the neighbors as to whether the trees are good or bad. What we are trying to {lo is to build ~ sound ",an that will stretcn acrOH the roots. essentiany, So the ba.ll€sters facing here vary fr-om j9 foot 4 inches on c~nter for a seven-foot wall and sixteen foot on centers for an eight-foot wall. Do you want to talk a little about the sound wall? Mj ... _Bro'Wn: The wall that is proposed .... as submitted by the subcontractor, ind it is a pre-eJ"lgineere-d wall (inaudible comments.) In U1e en .... ironmental im~act report, thE acoustical cons:..ltant has very explicit1y stated that all the .o.dges and columns. e'ieryt.,ing has to be sealed so that s.ound will not penetrate through the wall. The ~~ole purpose of the wall is tc provide a barrier to the so~nd. ihe environmenta1 impact report also says tnat the effect of the wall is to provide a 2db reduction in nOise. It is not a huge tureal1. It is sllpposed to minimize sound. I think. the important aspect of the. project is closing all the doors and windows and providing mechanical equipment to cool the space and a11 these ether features in combi~ation with the sound 'Wall Hat reduce sound l-eve1s, The sound wall itseTf is not a big cureall. It is all the ottler features in combination. Mr. [eddy: If I might expand a bit on thdt. There ~a5 concern on the part of Ms. ~etzel acout the rn€chdnical equl?ment for th~ pool. 1hat is completely enclosed within the concrete block walls of the building. W~at 1S shown he-re is simply a nue that ~hich is requirp.d for the venting of heat i ng system. Ms. Maser: ~hile you are up, cvuld you (o~T.ent o~ that door at tne rear of the building? L 05/06/93 -18- -.--1- ,'-. - --, Mr. LE"ody: That is a required fire e);ii-rt wcu;d be closed. The condition of ipproval r~quires that all doors be kept closed unless certain proc~durE'S: are gone tnro;.Jg~. It is inte~ded only as an emerge~c_y fire exit. Ms.. D~Ros~·. Is there a bel; en it that ·~o\.Jld sound ,f it \lien-op~ned? ~r. led<!:i: If that is ne"2deti, r a~. Sl.!r~ ~e ({,1J.1d de that. It 'IIIill ~ay "Fire exit. T{l be opened only i!'1 E-',rent of ar. emuoge!1cy." The point is that right nOllJ, the bui10ing does not hal,'€ a.ny air" conditioning, Tn (.act, the gymnasium is just naturaliy v~ntnat€d. That is the problem now. 011 hot days, they il3.lie to open ali He w~r.dOW5 and doors and put in some fans for" air movement. By air cO'1ditioning the entire building, the need for opening windows a~d doors will be remolied. Ms. DaRosa: What about t~~ sound from the mechanical equipment itself? Mr,-_~_edd.'l: As Ms. Wetzel correctly po~nted out, we had proposed and are still proposing to put all the mlO'chanHal equlpment for the bui1d.irlg within a well. You can see from the model here that all the mechanical equipmerit is in th~s area, whicl'1 is not on1.:f beicw the roof here, but a1so has an enclosure around it. In addition, the corditions ~f approval requir~ that we meet specific souod levels. so all that 1S being taken int~ consideration. Ms. paRosa: Could you comment on the sound cantroT at the entry? Mr. le~; 1 wish the acoustical consvlta~t ~es ~ere. I car. te11 you that we have a~ open area here, as Ms. Wllson pOinted out. which also has trees in it. pius we are a conslder~hle distance a~ay from the property line, with landscaping a~d iii sound wall in the middle. I think that from the pOint rtf view of entry, the pDint to make a150 is tnat we nave two entries. Presumably, people coming from this side or this sid~, y~u could saj that some portion are coming on one side a.nd some DorUon on thE other, whereas now~ e ..... eryone is coming in at onE point'. S~ we arc dl ..... iding up the n~mber of people ~ho are accEssing the building at this poi nt. Ms. Da.RR..§...a: 1 think the concern ... as .... ith people watchir.g the pot:il activitie~ and having that being a gathering place. M.!::......J,,~g_d.l:'; One of the things we are trying to do is to balance the fact that we hal,'E a building that is essentially hermetically sealed, Even with this wonderful climate that you hl~e here. There is a desire to want to fee1 some connection \IIitn the outdoors. Also, it is the desire on the part of the YMCA to create a sense of real acti~ity. They want to ha ..... e a 'tJibranc), of experience when YOll \lfi!lk in ~nc!. re~l~y mak~ it feel 1ike a p1a~e tnat is fun to be at, because, hopeflJily it ... ill be tr,at. Part of that is giving i l,nd of pre~ie~ is you ~alk in_ As YOy walk into t~is entry. this is a big glass walT here that alTows ~ ~i~~ into the ~ool. It has trees 'In front of it. I am not quaTified to g;'Ie you a definiti .... e answer about the sound issue, but m.l'· feel ing is that with th~ combir.ation of the needs of the YMCA to have this sense of a co~unity cente~. a sense of being able to ~ee the activity and n~t hiding bEhind walls, combined with the mediation t~at we have been able to provide w1th the sound wall, I feel satisfied. L 0,/06/93 -19- - M.L_QaP.Q __ ~ __ !': I ,,'~'l begin m)' co~;ner,ts here. krcriter;tlH'alTj. 1 support whit is l'1~ppening at (he ent.ry, 1 wish tne acoustical consultant were here to satisfy' the sound qlJes.tiofls. r ';hink the architect has done a ilery good job of Llrtlting these t:uildings. The co~cept of a community of bu~ldings reallj e~p13ins what they h~~e done. They ha~e h~d a clear concept and it works very well ",itt: this mishmash of Luildinas. So architecturally r support thi~ project. . As you can SEe from these letters and conditions, there is a long hjstGI~ of bad feelings, lack of tru~t, 50 I think it is important th~t we co~sider all of these conditions at this time and not accept statements based on good will. saying yes, "'E' will do this, or no. we "'ill not do that, but rather, ensure absolutely that t~ey are in t~e conditions. My concerns are similar to concer~s I had at the be9inni~g of the project. There has been a lot of discussion with neighbors on this side of the street. ~e ha~e not heard anything from neighbors acrcss the street. r do not know how the hOuses are sited acrQ~S the street with regard to these entrClnces to the ~arUng, But if you look down each of those dri .... eways. there is a ]J)J!.S expanse of parking. One of tne questions I isked early on was whether or not an entrance to the pa~King could be made here so that when yo~ ~ent in, you would see a block of landscaping. and wou1d not see head1ights coming out at you. I thi~k that aTthough you are plant!ng a lot of trees, there really is not a tremendous amount of landscaping. If you were to lese that lands:aping preserve, you would really have a building and a sea of parking. To me. that landscaping preser-ve at the front is critical and ver .. " important to the neignborhood, much more so than that small landscaping area Cit the Nc~c ft.t the back you have the sound wall and the rEtention of the existing trees. Also you can plant tall trees berlind He sound wall to get a .... isual screen. Tt1at J andscaping buffer back there really does not do rr,uch of anyHling up against the sound 1IIil.11. Eut at the front Df th:: project at ~oss Road, the landscaping is essentia.l. I arT'1 very uncomfortable with the pos5i~nity that it m;aht be ren:olJed in the futur€:, That would be absolutely deadly for this project. Once again, I wish the acoustical consultant ",ere ~ere to re~$sure us on some of these issues. I think. that if you are jogging along. a path. tha.t is immediately adjar.ent to the sound wdll, you have ~uct1 better control right next to the sound ~all than if it ~ere baCK aways and $ound is coming ov~r it. So I feel that the jogging path is ~ut in an appropriate p hc:e. I am su'vpartil.'e, gellerally. of this project, with the resenations I had at the prelimir.ar.1' re~iew, which are for maintaining that lar'ldscape ?reserlo!e a.t the front. Il,lso wHh regard to the l{)[\g ~i:s.tas. into the parkif"t9 Tot, I would like to see some ot~er entraf1ce to the parking lot so that th~re is. not a long Io!ie~ "in.ta the parking and a. stea.dy strea.m of 1 ights there. tI.i... ______ Maser: Thank you. Mr.: .... J:!.ise: r thir.k the applicant and the architect have gone a long ,,"'ay tcwuds addressing He neighbors' concerns. Tr.at, coupled ItiIHh the monttoring measureS tnat are in the use permit. I thi~k the neighbors arE L 05/05/93 -ZO- :71-\ .-.-1 , ,,--oj L going to find this is gcing to be le~~ of l problem than they fea~ ~t cnuld be. SCI 1 am \/€I'J suppc,rtive G~ the project as proposed. I agree w't~ Aino on t~e driveways. r am concerned about them, too. t~in~ it is a bad idea, and I am wondering how far it has gotte~ through the-process to get to the driveways 11ke t~lS configuration. 1 WQuid b2- willing t<J add a ronditlon that thei be single driveways. mat wC'!J1,j be milch more appropriate for the n:asans Aina ~~a.'i pointed <lut, especial1" far the neighbors across the street. Nancy. do you ~a~e a~j input on whether that is a possibility? ~_~lli: Vou want it to be a two-\l,'ay drlv€way? Mr. Hise: Yes. a two-way driveway so that you ar-e loo~~ng down the c.enter landscape island, ~here ~hat you ~il1 see is that the f~rst island is going to be landscaped, ar.~ t~en a row of trees, and then you m~ke a little jog Oll'er, 'Which I think Is a lI'ery gooe drivewaj configuration. As it ~as been pointed out, you are going to get lights and a view through this entire parking lot. The other one works i~ exactly the same ~ay, 'Whereas if you came in here-and did tt1is. U11s is what you wOIJld see, and th~n ther~ is landscapir.g over here. Tnat would protect the neignbors and Ue sight lines from tn.e street, S:.J the.re. is rea11~i no place you cou1d see all the ~ay down into t~e parking lots. I am surprised t~at it ~as gotten t~is far. Muitiple driveways are confusi~9. People invariablj will turn into the wrong way drive. It happens. You get there. there is confusion, you get a break in traff~c. and first thing yOIJ know, you are going in via the ·out" lane. Tnat is .. hy Iransportati~n lJS1.Jany does flot al1ciIII it. 1 am surprised that they hJve ptjt their blessing on this, M's. __ !'ilsJ;m: OlJt of curiosity, why are thes.e trees different from the:;e trees, as far a.s their ... Heeting the screen for the neighbors across He strfet? Mr. His",; Because, Shirle)', if the driveway came tnls .... ay. and t!'1ere is a landscape buffer here, then as they turn, yes, you are goif1g to get '~ghts there, but you ire not going to get it the entif'e tio,'l!.e th.a.t people are going all the way up ar.d d{!wn. You do 110t g.et the sight lines. \lihe~ you look ~dt your window. you can see all the ~ay to the end of this parking lot, with cars corning that full distaflce. Ms. wnson: With t'ne restriction of clear \lision and the trees having to be 1 imbed UPl I don't know that it wourd reallj work. ~1!i_S.5!; r can tt1i nk of half a delen parking lots that ha'.e been designed witt'l single entries for that ve~y reason. _~ .• _.!..Y.t~: 1 suspect that tn1 s wa:; for reasons of tree ~,reseryat i'Jn, Tnere 15 an eXisti!'1g very large tree in this UN, and anotl'1.ar here. 1 think there was an ~ttempt, right off tnE bat, to try and save tho>e trees, including Mar-I'd's tommer\t~ in the original relilew,:. Ms. DaRosa: This was an issue that came up in the preliminary design revie~. We talked about it then, that sQ~et~jng had to be done about the parking. It does not have to be laid out like this, but right now, you are forcjng the people acro~s the street to loo~ down these long, long rows of parking. There is nothing to mjtigate that. L 05/06/93 -21 - '-'-'.' " , .,;'. ,.:" .... cc. -;; ": -, ;.,---~ -:,," . , .. '" ____ 0 ~L,--_Ji.L~_e:.: The S3!l;e for peodestl"ians. Rlght at the drin'lIIay erit"'ance, yc·u would have that landscaped island. which is the center isl~nd, and th~n a row of trees and landscaping periodically through th2t cent£r island. ~ts~Jl~. I at) not r-emember tl'ij s becomil1'g art i ssu~ for a"y other reason than trEe preservation. t1r_!~_j_~: What are the trees. we are pre'5er .. ~~g U1"2n:1 JJnidenUfiedJi!1l: lt1ere is a 24·lnch palm tree <:.nd a 20·inch pepper tre-e. Ms. Lytle: In our Transportation Di~i5ion, the reason they will yield is that mature trees are considered to be sa.:rosa.r,ct in Palo I'l"Ho. "The 'dea of making people' b1.1jld around them .has been accept€d by them through the years as a typical soll!ticn. As regards the issue of the vieINs, I do not recall that coming u~ '-{ery dearly. Mr. H1sJ~; How mimy parking spaces are in the biggest parKing lot to the northeast side on tne right? Mr. Le_d_gy~ I don't have them split O'Jt, bu.t I quess this. is 110·115 spaces. J would have to gD back and look at the ElR and the tr~ffic consultant'$ input. My memory is that it was for tree preserYation, as well. B~rring any other reason, from the traffiC consultant's input. i:1 terms of access, I do not se~ any reason why we couidn't ~ave that. Ms. Tapley: Something I migh~ point out is that th€rE was some concern about s)owing down the trafflc as it exited the driveway. There was a condi t i an that has iI. stop s igrl here and a speed bump here. I f you comb~ ne this into one driveloiay, I see possibly two problems. One is that peop1e who are coming i~ may be b10cked bj somebody trying to get !rounQ tne speed bumps. In other ~ords, yot.. hC!vE' one driveway. SQ your speed bump is going to come ha1f way. It is easier to drive around it. Somebody coming 1n here could potentjally back up trafflc whil€ somebody else is t~ying to drjve around it. So we may be ~ctually slowing down traffic and lose same of whi:lt we gained In exiting, Ms. DaRosa: lh~ speed bump is supposed to be loca~ed 5D feet away, so think there is a design solution there when you com~ down the lane and tMere is a speed bump on one side. There is a comment in herE from Traffic and from Transportation that the speed bump right at the exit there is in the wrong place. ~r--," __ J:!is,g: As peoploe ha'Ie to .stop and make those tiJ.rns, that actual1y slows people down. They carlnot speed through it. (an you imagine teenagers gOing through t.h1S par~ing lot. 250 feet deep or 300 feet deep? That is a pretty good stretch if someone is acting irresponsibly. You need a speed bump to slow th~m down, whereas If they have to slow down to negotiate that central driveway. tMey have to sTow down tn a rea~onabTe speed, wnlch would actually e1lmlnate the neea fOT a speed bump. It could still be put in the lot if you wanted to. L 05/06/93 -22- -.1.00 - ···r __ ... ~u~._. _ ... ,.. _ ML_J..Y!J..g: My main hr=sltation ~n doi!1g a modiflcatiOrl like tnis without further notific~tion of t~e neighbors is that a very large, sign1ficant tree tnat has been maintained to be preserved tnro~ghout the cour~e of the process at the front of the project could cause problems. People 9r!ev~ over the 10s5. of tl1ings. like that w~en thy have watched 11 grow and develop over-the years. I know t~el"e ~,a'le been some Y€ry long·tim-: property owr'~s acrvss from the YMCA. I notice that those peop" ar in the room ... "day, so just eiimi~ating a couple of trees that t' 'j rr. have understood ~s be1~9 protected dur~~9 the process ~ithout 1 :in m knolll 1 would be uncomfortab1e wlth. PE."f'haps, if .,.-e do somethl~ i~' having a r~l{ision followup and make sure tt1at iIIe notify tno5e p "le case theye i~ an issue .... ith them, I would be less uncomfortable. Ms. DaRosa: I .... ant to clarify the transDortatian circ~lation comments. On Page 5 of this mega-memo, Item 4 says that road bumps must be installed at least 50 feet back from the stop Sign, not right next to the s;gn+ ~_Lytle; I don't know if that comment is consis-tprlt .,..it~ t~~ environmenta1 impact report. ~~g: Wel1. the fact is Vat if you get them too close to the stop s'gn, they don't work. You just make peo~1E kind of go out of control after they get onto the street. Ms. DaRosa: Well. are ~e revie~i~g this, we cannot make any changes at this point? stamp approval . or is this all set and fixed and This would just be a r~bber .!1h-WJ..g,: Chang~s !r'e acceptable. Ot..:r intent h-ete is that there has been a plan that has gone through extensive revie~. which you can see from the 35 pages of conditions. We are trying to make sure that any changes you proPQse are (ompatible wit~ those. alerting you to an~ issues t~~t might arise in inconsistencies between previous ap~rovals and what you do today. I am not bringing up these issues to tie your hands. 1 just want t~ alert you to it. and we can worK with you to try and accomplish what you are trying to accomplish while maintaining the ir!tegrity of p;-evio:.Js understanding'S with ne-ig'rlberrs who !~",'fl:7 not be in th~ room. Ms. M_aser: Thomas, you: are in the middle of your commEnts, • believe. Mr. Hise: I am prepared to lTiake a motion for approval of this project. but that c~ntral drl~eway is something r ~ould 1ike to craft inte a condition that could be follQwed up on. I would probably phrase It in a \liay so tnat it was mrilndato~y unles.s tI".ere .. as some overriding publ ic concern about retention of those twe tree>. but not just givp. people the opti{)n of ·~oting one '''lay or the otner on that. It;s difficult for people to visual1Le anc understand ~hat th~ end effect is going to look l1k~. There are emotional r€asons for wanting to hang Dr. to an existing tree, yet when it is all said and done. that could be a worse solution. Regardjng the lighting, ! art1 very familiar with this lighting ordlnance and the 12-foot height and Side yard ~hie1ds and t~e levelS tnat are being proposed. I thinK the neighbors are going to be very, very happy wlth t~e lighting and have no prcblems with spi1lnver or glare or anything like ihat. By lowering the poles, you wi 11 actual1y be adding 1 ight and increasing the actual amount of light that comes off the site. That will L OS/06/S) ·23- -'-,!_. fJ':"~-'\l .~:~" .. . ~.'#J ... J - .. --, be the net effect. That is what th~ net effect was of lowering them to 12 f2et. You actually have more light O~ the site. but you have less possibility of its spilliilg OV€'!'". This 12 feet ha:;. proven cut to be a good ordinance and works well in these par~in9 10t5 that ~~jotn residential neighbol""s. I have no problems: witi1 the sound wall as it is being propos~d, aTt,",ough I ~ould like to see the sa~e material and f~ni5h t~at is beIng put on the peal building and sl..:rroundjng walls be the same material t~at ttle .... a11 is made of. I would like that to be a condition. Fra~kly. I think the neighborhood is r,:aking :l big mistake by nat following our ordinance on stepping th~s wa1i down as it gets out to the street. I think that ae~thet1cally, it is a big mista~e. If the neighbors want to do it, obviously we are going to go along with that, but I think it is a big mistake. In fact, if you just treated this site like a megaphone that had noise coming out of it, dOing this wall by the ordinance would not improve sound on thi$ site at all for the neighbDrs. But again. jf that ~s what the neighbors want. I am willing to support them, but I think it is a mi stake-. I am fully supporti'Je of the outdoor-acti ... 1ties being prop':lsed there. My ~ffice is directly across the street facing onto a d~y care center that has several dozen dildren playing out there most of He day. Frankly. what little noise I do hear actually enhances m.¥' work environment, so I think it is going to be ... ery, ver.v rrdrdm31. My experie~ce witn jogging is that you are suppo~ed to keep your speed down SD that you can talk, but the fact of the matter is that most joggers do not feel like it. There is gOing to be very little no-ise comin::l off a jogging path like that. So I think that the activities being proposed are in 1 j~e ~ith ~h~t the caurlcil has approved. Again, I go back to the monitoring ~ea:;urES tnat are if1 place. These are not 1ik.e buildings that are built and Hen have to be torn down or abandoned if tney do not work. We are t;alking about activit~~s that can just tease 1f the neighborhood is not ~~ppy with them. I would like the n-eighbors to keep Hat in mind. That concludes my corrments. Ms. Maser: I id'entify rN11y strongly with St1irley wilsor.'s gen~ral c~ments about the quantity 'Jf the conditions. Again. 1 thi'ik WE have e c!se here ~here we have the right project in the ~rong place, yet it has gone tilrough aTl of these reviews and has been appro'o'ed by the Ci ty Council. I ache for the YMCA, as I think all of these conditions are gOing to really hamper the freedom of their operation. I feeT that it is too bad that there wasn't another site somew~~re that you could have utilized for your facility, but not all things are perfect ;~ tnis imperfect world. fou halle done a wonderful job of accommodating as best you can on t~is site. I hope that all of these conditions and monitoring programs are going to be .... ·orkable far you. Speciflca11y. ! want to touch on a couple of issues. Everyone has heard most of tne things r have mentioned, but at this one entry that Ms. Wetzel was talking about where people might gather to watch pool activities, I cannot envision t~at a lot of people are gDj~g to be out there watching the pool acti¥';ties in that smali courtyard area. There are tre~s there, and there is a minimal dept~ where people (an stand. If there is a problem and there a~·e benches ther-e. one of the ob'JlolJ> flClyS to encourage pecp1e not to gather out th2re 1s to remove the benches. I do not see L 05/0£/93 -24 - I I I ! , \: .-' i I j .' .. " ~. -. -" - '" .r- 1 . -~'~'-~-'-'-'" '-,' that as a huge potential, problem. One never ~,nows exactly r,ow t~es:~ spaces are going t(:. be used. T\-;e fact is. thilt the litti~ practice pool right off that courtyard and main racing peel where the kids ~il1 be competing ~s q\iitc. a distance from that courtyard. It Iioic1u1d seem to me t~at if par~nt5 are gOIng to watch tneir children O~ racing occasjons. they would move ir.to the pool room its~H. I entireTy agree with Tnom~s that that sound wall should be of the same material as the block that is belng used for the poc1. I thj~k that would realiy !dd to a cohesive design s,=nse for the whole property, making that sound .all r~al1y establish itself ~s a part of the design. But I still do not QuHe understand what is HIe color you are propos~ng for tnaL Mr. teddy: It is something like the dessert on t~e building. I was racing around, trying to get a sample of t~is colo~ and this finish. The idea 15 not to have a split face block, but instead, get a smooth block. ~.u:: I happen to love the colar of the bled that you are holding, e,'en though it does not quite match the brick. It is a softer color, and it is In the same fami1y, so menta11y, I think one wO<Jld connect them. It is a \fer.,; pretty color. M..;; •• ilson: Are thel"e t=..o colors to cnoose from? Cauld you go Oller tnat? Mr. ledd.:t.: These are two options tnat we are proposing. (In:wdlble corrments) Mr. TavlQr: Once again, maybe this is something the neighbors; should participate in. Ms. ~a$e!~ The ot~er thing is that I ha~e a little hard time with the driveways, too. I 1o .... e Aina's suggestion ahout combining those two dri~es) but after thinkln~ about ,t, I hat~ the loss of those trees. I am not sure that we are not lookfng at this situation a Tittle academically. You see things skewed more ofter'1 than you do dead on. It really depends upon the exact tonflguration and placement of neighbors c~ross the street, where tneir wind.ows are. what they are 90irr9 to be s.eeing di:--ectl-,I" from the inside of their homes. It could be that this configuration is more satisfactor,y to those ~eople tha:'1 cur r:amoving the tre-es and tryi~g to combtne those drives. So i ha ... e a diffjcuH time with mak'ino that a condition with~ut neighborhood input. - Everything else that concerned me has already been commented upon. wau1d be happy to entertain a motiun. MOTION; Mr. H,se: I make a motion fer approval, ... ith Ute staff conditions, inc1uding the use permit conditions that ha'-ole already been appro .... ed. W'itn two f'.!rth"!r conditions that (I) the sound ""all De of tne same material as the ether m2sonry materjals being p~oposed for t~e site. specifically, the pool building and walls 1n tnat are~; and (2) that the driveway configuration be restudied to be a single two-~a)l driveway at eac~ parking lot entrance which would req~ire the remollal of existing trees to be rep1aced at ttl\? rate of H_ree trees. for every ene rema~ed, per the ordinance. and that that prc.posal be reviewed .,ith thE: neighborhood association, and that that condition, along with the neighbors' responses, come back to us en consent to this board. Does anyone else ~ant to add 05/06/93 " 25- , "y """~ .... ' .1;' -,""""C""" '"" I I - anything? Ms DaRosa: Yes. that ne applicant contact the two neighbors. immediately adjacent to the sound ~al1 on Ro~s Road, to see if they ~ant that sound wall lowered to four feet. and that that b@ done jf they so d~sire. cthe~liI'ls.e. that it b€ left c.l13r,e. Ms. Thompso~: M~y I ask a question? ~auldn·t that iiolate ~hat ha~e illrC!ady received from the city attorney's cffice? M5 DaRosa: TMis a~,e~cment to tn-a motion is i~ the spirit of goad lIIill to contact neighbor:s owtlo seem to h,r,re di fferent conCE-t'nS from yours and who are immediate1y impacted by that sc~nd wall. That sound ~al1 ~111 ce built t~e way those two neighbors want it, either at the 8-or 7-foat height, or lowered to t~e 4-foot height, In tfiis case, the city is bending its own rules to a1iolll those imrr~ediately impa.cted !1eig~bors to ha .... e a say. Mr .. His~: I would like tl) include that in my motion a:; stated. S£COND: By Aino OaResa. t11~: Is any clarification needed by t~e applicant? Mr+ Tatlqr; TMere ~as o~e Questi~n is to wheth~r or not there was some option about the YM(J!. back and side wall trees. Ms. Mas_~; We aid not include that as a condition. Ms DaRosa: r think that would be a ~Dnderful thing, Anything that is cot}perat i ~e .. itl'. the ne\ghhcrs ; s an excel, lent 1dea, Ms. Maser: Would you like to restate your motion? Mr. Hise: If I understand what you just suggested is in response to MI-. TraiMr's comments about the trees that he is not happy with, YOll w{)uld go to each of the rear neighbors, i~dividually? Mr Leddy: It was suggested by one of the board memhers that we ~ake sure that their concerns are satisfied, Mr. Hise: be~dnd ~;s trees? Is Ml" ~.IiijlJ.Qr: neighbors. So H, for instan .... €'. Mr. Trainer wanted the trees dir~ctlY yard taken down. you lIIould do that and rep1ace them ~ith ne~ that what you are prcposing? What is the end result herE? we have had an onguing discussion with a couple of our rear So yes. it could result in remon1. ~.~ .. ~ser; Why not make tl'le suggestion that you support the interaction of the applicar;t with the neighbors with regard to trees alollg the perimeter and that any changes come bac~ to us on consent. Mr. H;se: It sounds like you a~'C! committed to having that discussiOf1. If changes come out of that (and we would encourage yau to cortinu€ to ~ave those disc11ssioflSJ. they will need to come bad to us e,l cDns~r.t, Actually, in your final landscape plan, that would be a time to present L 05/06/93 ·26 - i f ! I I ! i ! i , '-'1j~'. c'~~~::. .',. j - some of these si..Iggestions. l~ fact. the dri ... eway cnuTd corne back. \,dth t~e landscape p:an, which comes bad to us before a bui1ding permit. Mr. 1avlar: The only question O~ thit is, did I miss something? !~ it on both drive ..... ay s? Ms. Maser: Yes. Pie ..... ant you tn investlg;;.te tn€' possibility of nat. Ms.. lyt1?; And keep iii min<d tiiat (cndH'icn 5.4 and 5.S reqIJir'€ a certa'ir. amou~t of landscaping and p€rimeter trees in your discussion, as well. Ms. Maser: I would like to make a corrment before we take a \iote on this matter. When lcoki~g at these trees, with regard to the ne ghbors, consider, is a landscape architect, what you could do to prune tne tre~s. perhaps mitigating by pruning ar.d trim.in~ the tree rather-than taking it dowr-, if that · ... ould placate the neighbors, They would rave the bE'nefit of that growth and the screening and the noise reduction thElt the tree ill'ould pro .... ; de .. it r.Ol..lt aetua 11)1 rem(lv i ng ttl':: tree and putt; r.g ; n very sma 11, flew trees. That is just something tD consider wnen you are talking to them. ~_.IillQr:: Is interplanting acceptabla? ~5, Maser: I think that is something you need to work out with th~ neighbors a'lj with the landscape architect. I do not know, because too much plarrting can choke off growth, so there are thillgs that nave to be '!:ortSidered. Do we have a cT~ar motion on this? Ms.~~: would you like me to read it back to you? (Yes) Approval of staff conditions, all approved use permit conditions anr additional conditions to include (1] the sou~d wall to be of the same material as the swimming pool building; (2) driveway entrance confi91.;ration to be restudied for t'MO sing1e-lat1e <lriveways at each parking e!1trance and relandscaped appropriately, to be reviewed by neighbors and returned to .Q.RB un consentj the app1icant should contact nelghbors immediately a<ljacent to the sound wall on Ross Road to s,::e if they wdnt it to re~ajn c:.< the 7-or 8-foot height, or to be consistent 'It/it~ lorring regulations. ~,s. TlJp1ey: 'YOll might ~an.t to '\ imit that just to the n.orth ne~ghbor. be:ause we have heard from tne south neighbor who has very clearly stated that she wants the eight-foot wall. Ms. L~lli_: We don't want to have to ask .'Tlore questions of people ~ho are already riled up. Mr. Log~n: Tt1ere has beer, an owne-nnip clnr,ge in that south property, ho ... ever. Mr. H5~~: That r.ew rleighbor nl?eds ri!ing up anyw3)! Ms, Weiss: To continue, {4J cooperate ~ith neighbors to trim or remove trees, replacing ~ith other trees. Ms. Ma __ ~er: Dis.cussion on the motion? L 05/06/93 -27- ~ ..• -. , - ., ~ __ :;_, __ ~il_~il_n: want it Oil retard Ua t• r am 1'1ot er:thl.isiastic abo!..it cna~ging the dri.veways.. I think \ole are kidding tJurs-elves "bout it. I th;rk that the city reQtJiremer!'ts for ::lear vi'Sion "'ill ha .... e He same nl?t effect that you've got with one drive'.'G,y or two drivel'!aj's, becaus.e you ccnrlot b'ocic the lights. I would ~ave to be really conv;n~ed. I could v~te for this motion and let ~t go through to corne back Oil co~sent, but not ~jth the enthusiastic support of tnis concept. We cannot put up scree~s. 50 you will always have sight lines. r ~ould hate to lose mature trees because something that looks good on paper really does not ..... ork r a~ not convin~ed it ~or~s. If you can convince me, 1 will go along with it, but my analysis is tnat it will not ~ark Ms. MaSH: I tend to agree witn yau, but I dor,'t think lI!e iii!"!:: locked irltl~ anyt,,; rl<j. Ms. Wilson: I j~st .ant s~pporti~g this change. the way it is stated. to be on record U1at I am not entl;usia:st icaliy But I ttlill go along witn t~e If'otion. becalJse of ~s. Maser: Any other d'jscussion? All those ir, fa'Oor? "That passes unanimously. Thank you, e~erybody. for coming. Good luck. L 05/06/93 28- - ~-. ~ ~, F ,..!...----- ClTY OF PALO ALTO "ffi~e or the Chy Clf!!rk APPEAL FROM THE DEC!SION OF DIRECTOR OF PLANNIN-J ~J<O COMMUNITY,ENYmONMENT (AR>:~rTECTURAl REVJEW APPUCATICNSj i D be f~ eel in dupicate App(lca!lon No. ----,-- Name of Appellant _-,(.~'.!.'::.' ::~.::'..:'::.' _:.,~,-_-r; '--' "',,~ '_',:.":~,,,,:,-__ 1. ,-..... :. Crty ZIP LOCATION OF FROPERTY: ,Assessor's Par·:i:ll No. _______ _ Zane Oislnd __ ', ____ _ Name of Property Owner \~ other tllar'l ap~riantj . ___ '-'-__ "":"_--" Property eMmer's Address __ '-,00.' -'''"_'_'-;',,~ S:ree! The decision of the OirectOi' 01 Planning and C<lmmunrty Ei!VfrCJ(lment dated --":''-'-:':'~:;'i-,-.:.I,-I -'" \l\lhe1'eby the appllcatlOf1 of ____ -.<.l_'_~_'-;:::"C:;:, :::;--:c::1 = (original appllcar,tj _..,,-_'':1.1'"1'--.. t' E,:" ____ , is her~by appealed fO( the reasons ~Ialed (apprO\!edJdeniedl Dat~ _~",-")",_C-,I_'",,._ Sig:.ature of Ap~lan1 _,-,,-,"-,--,-I.!./_7iL' ,-' _'"oL' '= ____ _ cny COUNCil DECISiON; Date _______ _ ApprOVed ________________ Denied ___ _ Remarks a."ld/o< Conditions SUSMrrrAL REOOIREME~.rrS SATISFIE~: , 2. '0 50 Plans Label, .Appeal Appiica!ior, Farms Letter Fee (l ! i\ ./ t .. J .t_..-r :..-.j ~:'/-~ ?, ~.::;_-t:: '2/89 ,.-1 ~---_. - City Cou""iI City Hal: 250 H~minon Ave" Palo Mo, CA 9430 1 , May 20,1993 Dear Council Members , We are appealirrg the decision ot the Archftectural Review Board to appmve the most recent plans lor the proposed expansion of the YMCA for the following reasons: A change in the plan has added an outdoor chiidren's play yard. Thrs play yard puts a potential source of noise out·ol·doors and was never considered by the Plarming Commission or the City Council. It is contrary to the intent of Condrtion 1,1 of the Conditional Use Permit, 9O-UP·3B and the Mltigetron Monitering Pmgram which ""as enacted to ensure that all rooms that generate noise be sealed to control the noise disturbar.ce to the neighbors of the YMCA. A change in the plan has added a viewing area and outdoor entry with benches designed to encourage spectators to sit out 01 doors and .. atch the activflies in the swimming pool. The creation of an oLJtdoor room wfth seating for sp~tators is a major, potential source 01 noise and was never considered by the Planning Commission or the City Cour.cil. 1\ is contrary to the intent of Condition 1.1 of the Conditional Use Permit OO-UP-3S and Mitigation Monitoring Program, which was enacted to ensure every effort was made "to make every effort to avoid d'isturbances to the neighborhood" and Condition 4.4 which was enacted to ensure that all rooms that generate ncise be sealed to control the nOise distu !banee suffered now by the neighbo rs of the YMCA, L j , I .-,'-: ·.p~~f'··r· - A change In the pfacement , size and purpose or the oU1door J;!xel'cise path. An out:!oor e.w:ercise path was permitted in Condition 8.4. The purpose Dfthe track '.'\las explained to thE Planning Commission on 9111191 Cy WIlham Leddy, one of the e:rchilects: "It is important to understand t~a! it ~s rearly not a runnjng track. It is more of a brisk walking track. It is used by people undergoing cardiac thErapy· At the Architectural Review Board meeling or May 6, 1993. Borry Toylor staled thai Ihe Iracl< is used· over the course at the day by a variety of YMCA members", The path has grown significantly in sjza since it was presented to the City Council rind its placement tlas caused a corresponding reduction in the iandscape buffer a(ong the rear and side walls. This is contrary to Condition 5.4 which required ·a dense landscaped buffer· .... 'along Ihe rear aOO side property lio85." A change in the YMCA's staled reason for amending the or;ginal use p"rm1t. The YMCA's appflcation, daled , 0130/90,10 a",end rts use permit, 56-UP-, 9, stated on page 6: 'peason fQLbn"tndir19 Ihe~L!!lil. For at least the past 20 years, the Palo A~o YMCA has wanted to expar.d Jts present facility to meet the needs and requests for improved services from the Pajo Afto communrty .. The "rl.ACA's 'undraising for the expansion states a change in their intentron from building a neighborhood faclilly to a regional facility. From "Reaening Beyond Our Walls: a YMCA document: '0: Why does the Palo Alto Branch need 10 expand? A: ...... The expansion and renovat,on will allow increased programs, services and partiCipation, which wW enhance the Associatfon"s ability to reach further into our under-served comrnunrties" Boyd Smrth, in a YMCA video about the expansion, states it will enable them to better seNe the ·un<1srserved communities th.at surround u.s: L , i I t ! " ,--, - -- These changes listed above consiitute an altered use 01 the Conditional Use Permit, 90-UP-38, and the Mitigation Moniloring Program. In addition, these changes were not taken into accoun1 during the ErR process. Therefore, we ask the City Council to reopen the EIR to review Ihe new uses as staled above. We would also lik:a due consideration given to klwering the height of the Hgh!ing poles from 12 feet to the shortest possible height Condition 5.2 :;!a\es • the Architectura', Review Board should conSider reducing the height of fixtures to the lowest level possible .. ." Sincerely C a,{)1 jJ -rM ", /J--.-- 7~5 oS f-<J' CL tt(' /I.A. I) c.,)'; i+1/-0 {.t1 1...{4---3 .... 5 , c: "', , I ~ --' - Members of the Architectural Review Board City of Palo Al:o 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto. CA 94301 Dear Board Members: 7'7 Stone Lane " J Aito. CA 91303 May 3. 1993 RECEIVED I would lite you to make the fOllowing chiUlge. in the pJans ,ubmilled by the YMCA: odisapprove outdoor children's play yard. This is a new outdoor activity that was not inducted in Li~ scope of the project considered in the Envirionmental ImpacI Report or by the Planning CommiSSlon and Dty CounCil. .~nclose entrance on South side of building and remove bleachers. The current de'ign encourages people to sit and tali< out of doors and will funcLion as an outdoor megaphone directed at tbe rooms in which I work and sleep. Again, this is a new outdoor activity that was not included in the scope er the proje~t considered in the Envirionmenla] Impact Report or by the Planning Commission and DIY Council. • Please mak~ every po1$il>le effort to reduce light and glare to neighboring pro~rties. Please lower aU freestanding outside lights to S' tall or Ie ... tower aillighu on the buildings to j' tall or Ie .. wi:h all lights directed down. _Move pool meChanLc.li equipment Lo equj~ment well in center or building. The greatest problem the neighborhood ha, with tbe YMCA i, the noi,. generated by outdoor activities. Unreasonable violations of the city noise ordinance recur repeatedly. Sin"" the YMCA got ap~roval for its eIpan,ion, .... e have had Y camp counsellors outside practicing camp yell, at the top of their lungs and ba,ketbaJJ team.' ocming out of L~. gym to yell out their vicLories , ... 7t ....... . cl -1'. : -,.~ ,.~ --~'<' -~ ~. , .,' , 'j. : : , j ' . .-," .' - When the y's parking lots are moved to OUf bad:: yard!!:, the nois~ of car~, peop!e'5 volces. and sJam:J'1ing doors wrll greatly impact the n~iBhborh00d':; peace and quiet. .-'ldding the addltional noj~e that ~"ould be' created by i! children"s play yard or an outside area for parents to sit and i.aik while ~ratching lheif children learn to swim is to add an intolerable burden to our neighborhood Our neighborhood has suffered for 40 years [rom activities that the YMCA has sanctioned and its lotallack of concern about the health and welfare of it, neighbors. I hoped [h.t the Y', .,surances to the Cay Co unCI! that lhey Were turning over a new leaf end recognized their obligations to the neighborhood would make a difference in our relation,hip. It has not Since that time, t.~e YMCA has contmlJed to ignore city ordinances governing actions on its property, continuing outdoor aClivites after being laid lo .hut them dow", garaging buses on its property overnight and it continued t.o hold the Los A migos danres months after the neighhors were assured they would be stopped. Over the year>, the city has been unable to control the Y', aClivilies, though many were in clear violation of city code. Some of the planning commissioners and council members inrlicated that the only rearon they were voting for lhi. expansion was to put strong controls on the Y that could be enforced to protect it, neighbor •. Our neighborhood need. every possible help you can give u,. Sincerely )'ou,", 4i~~~w:f/ joAnne Stewart Wetzel I L - ." '. ·"0 • ' '.'"r.· '.' . .~-. ~ k Pi It ,_ ... 1 __ ~ 3366 Ross Road Palo AltO CA 9430) May 2,1993 At rtecturaJ Review BOa.l d City ofPah) A.lto 150 Hamilton. Aver,ue Palo Alto CA RE: 3411 Ross Road YMCA of the '!-.1id·Peninsula file Nos,:93-ARB-1 I, 90-LlP-)S, 90-EIA-11 To Whom It WLlY Coocem~ RECEIVED H~I 5 \993 CEPA'R'rl!.ENi O!" p ""NNING ANC COM~.'UN.rr,: r::5'ELOPM'EN'T I pa.-ticipated actively as a member of the Neighborhood Sounding Board wruch the I'J\..1CA fo:med prior to their application for their use pemrit In this capacity I also ,epresenl.ed the com..lluruty on the Y1'.1CA's Arcrutect Selection Committee, The Committee: selected the San Francisco firm Tanner Leddy Ma}tum Stacey as their architects because ofthelr demonstrated sensitivity to neighborhood issues and their other outstanding qualifications as designers, 1 was grateful that the Y proyided that opporturuty for the neighborhood to influ~nce the design of their proposed expansion in this way . ~' Howe\-·~r. I was recently infonned that the YMCA has all but removed Tanner from the project It is my understanding that a support er of the Y ...... ho is a local real estate developer has offered tbe se.""";ces of his arcrute(.;ts. No doubt there are many advantages for the Y to do this [imagine (hey are saving on design fees, and no doubt the developer's architects have-searcned for man)' W.1y to reduce construction costs. My concern is that the neighborhood has been left out of this prcx;ess, and that it is unlikely that a design team of YMCA insiders will bring t);e same sensibilities to neighborhood ~ssues that the onglnal team did v..1fule the Y may not have violated any regulations, nonetheless this constitutes a breech of faith v.it'h the COmr.1uruty ll:Jey purport to serve Much ofthe dialogue during the Plaruur.gDepa.:1ment a.."ld Cit"i Council hearings t:er:tered on the Th1CA's history of promising the neighborhood ol"'.e thing and delivering anothe:- Unfortunately I will not be able to attend the ARB hearing. Therefore I urge the panel to carefully probe the extent to which the design has been chaoged from that which was proposed at the time of the use permit hearings in order to assure :he community th<:.t all the mitigation mea:;ures wIll be met, and that the design inte:grtty has not been sa;::rificed to cost cutting measures xc: City Council, Planning Departmem, Dan Logan \ . 1 " ,- • ~ .' • i "". ,~ ...... .:..:.-....:..~ . ..:. ".,~-.:::",. " - May 11, 1991 Mr. Ba"ry Taylo· UMCA of the Mid-penlnsu1a 4151 Middlefield Road Pa10 Alto, CA 94303 Dear Barry: -, CitY9,J.alOAlto D.:pa.rtnu--r.tofPJam:illgand O:mumm ify !n ~ ircnment ihe Oil'ector of Planning and Commurdty Environment, upon recorrrnendat;(}n of the Architectura1 Review Board .at its meeting of MU 6. 1993 has approved the following applicatiorl per the plans submltted for review, and subject to the following conditions. 3412 Ross Road 93-ARB-Sl YMCA of the Mid-Peninsula 93-Eg-Sl Final review of remodel and e',.(pansl~n of PaTo Al to YMCA to add Z4191~-square-feet, relocate existing 2ntrance and expand a~d rec~nfigure the parking area. CONDITIONS L Trie applicant shall submit i final grading and landscape plan prior to submitting fo~ building permit, which precisely shows the boundar1es of the entire YMCA property. 2. A fiMaT landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted for ARB approva1 prior to subm!ssion for bul1d~ng permit which indicates separate irrigation circuits for all trees, a list of all tree and plant species, quantities and sizes, and a tree protection program prepared by a certified arbcrlst for all trees to be retained dU'r'ing construction of tn'! facility and noise wal1. The final landscape plan .shall include a minimum of 2S-percent of all trees ta be 24-inch box size or larger a~d 50-~erc~Dt of a~l shrubs shall be a minimum of five gallon size, 3. The applicant shall submit a re~ised grading and drainage plan prior to submlss1or. for building permit to be approved by the Publlc Works Engineering Department and Planning Staff ..... hich shows arrows indicating how draif1age worKs. a:\3412ross.1tr 2.."()Harni1ton AYer1ue r.o. BodQ2.<;:a Pa!o";'J!rl,CA 9rol3m 4L5.3..."'9.2441 41i32c;.2240Fax , , ~: ... . -'., ,-.,..,: l - .,-., 4. The applicant shall ~ru~ide ~ sUitable draindge system plan tQ allow wat~r from ~dja~ent upstream properties to drain properly. Thi~ drainage syste~ shall be ~hcwn in the drainage plC1ns and 5uu;;,itt.;d for appro',a1 by the Pub~it Works Department prior to sub~lss!on for building permit. 5. A light photometric plan which shows foctcandle measurements 5h~11 be submitted for ARB approval prlor to stJbmis'5ion for bulTding permit. Where light con'o'erges, the-footcandle measurement shall not exceed. s. 6, A J2-!nch~wide white stop limit line is required to be placed -entirely ac:ro~s etlch exit dr;":eway at t1"1e back of the sid~waH .. 7. ~ith the ~ubmitted final landscape plan, the applicant shall submit revised bicycle rack specifjcaticn~ which are acceptabl~ to the Transportation Division requirements. 8. In addition to the 86 linear feet of sidewa1k already required in the Conditional Use Permit to be replaced, the apPlicant shall rep1ac9 an additiun~1 6~ linear feet of sidewalk a1o~g Ross Road. 9. The applicant snall obtain a permit for construction in the publ ; c rlght-of-way from Uie Publ ic worKs Oe~artment prior to ;s£~Jance of biJilding permit. 10. The applicant shall install a padmDunt trans fermer on site at a location acceSSible by tne Utilities Department. The location and design of the traf1sfomer pad shall return for Utilit1es. Depa'r"tment and Arcf1itectural Re~iew Board appr.Qlo'al. 11. Tne proposed development will result in a ch~nge in the imp.e~"v'fous area on the property, and, thus, will affect the monthly storm drainage fee. The applicant must snow cf1lculations showing the char:ge of imperV1GLlS area this project will ha~e en this parc~l. The fee adju)t~e:.t will take place in the month folTowing the final approval of tne construction by the Building Lnspection Oivfsiot1s. 12. The sound wall shall matd1 the exterior wall material of the swimming pool building. 13. Dri~ing ~ntrance configuration shall be restudied for two-way single driveways at both parking entrances a~d relandscaped appropriately. This reVision shall be reviewed by tho: neigfio'Jr5 alld retu~rl to tne ARB on the consent calendGr. a:\3412ross.ltr- - 14. The applicant $ha'1 co~tact the two neighbors i~medJat~'y d1jacent tD the sound wall on R~5S ~oad and find Gut whether or not they want ne wall lo"er~.j for th2 first 16-fe~t of wall from the property line, ctherwi~e the wall shall be as proposed. 15. The ARS supports the intera~tion of thE app11cant to cooperate with neighbors t~ reli1OV~ trees if desired and replace with other trees, anc c.onsider pruning and trimmlng ~f trees. The conditions of the Conditional Use Permit/Mjt;g~tjon Monitoring Program of-the YM~A, continuE to apply. Please refer to the conditions below. CONDITIOt<S OF USc PERliIT 90-UP-38 (as adopted 'by City Co·,.mcn November 25, 1991) I. gNERAL I.l The applicar,t sMall ;::.ppoint a neighb(lrhood liais-on who may be contacted by nei ghbors of Ue projert site during all houY's of operatian and during sp~cial events to votce complaInts abDut nc's~ violations, parKing concerns or any other disturbances ~riginatin9 at the YMCA facility. Th~ liaison shall be provided the authority to correct any violation of the use permit conditions ~nd to make every effort to a· .... oid disturbances to the neighborh~~d. The name and phone nurnb~r~ and any changes thereto, of the liaison shall be provided tu the Zoning Administrator 50 that the City has continuous notice of the identity of the liaiso~. (C{)ndition Effec.tlve Upon fxecution of Use P~rmit) 1.2 The applic.ant shall !:ochea'ule regular meetings .. -ah tn'!! neighborhood~ iii. minimum of one every :;1.\1( months, to revi€w the status of complia~ce with the terms of tf1e use permit, the status of noise and disturbance control and the status of neighborhood relations. Advance notice of these regular meetings shall be provided to the Zoning Administrator in order to allow attendance by a City r~presentative. Following the first year of semi-annual f':1eetings. the meetings may be held Orlce yearly, with the con.r.ent of the necighbors. {CondItion Effecti~e Upnn Execution of Use Permit) 1.3 The applicant shall fund preparatio~ of a written condition monitoring and op~rations status report to be prepared annually. The Planrling Divi.:ion .,.;11 adrr.inister ~:r€parition of the report by a land .:\3412ross.1tr \$ • , .. • f , a :\3412ross .ltr L - use c.on:il·'tant chose:') from the City's lis·. of qualified ccnsultants. The YMCA shall post fu~d5 co~ering the costs of report preparat~on. net to exceed S7 ,000 fo: each report, in acconhn.:e '~ij t~ the Departme~t of Pla~ning ~nd Com~unity Environment's ado~ted guidelines for tech~j(al consultant contracts. This amount may be increased annually based on the Consumer Prjce Inde~ (all urban consumers, base years 1982-19a4~lOO, for th2 San Francisco-Oa~land-San Jose tMSA, publi~hej by the US Department of Labor+ Bureau of labor Statistics). ine contents of t~e report shall incl ude, at a mi,n imum: dOCUMentation of neighbor complaints; results of the regularly scheduled neighborhood meeti~gs; the status of compliance with all conditions of appronl and the City MGl1itipal Code; recolT'rnerldations for any necessary cods tompliance efforts: traffic counts o~ Ross Road and at the project dri~e~ays, Each report snall be presented to the Planni~g Commission for review at a noticed public ~earing to be held each year follow1ng the date of execution of the use ~ermit. The Planning Commission may. at ally time, delegate review of all subsequent reports to the Zoning Admlni)trator. Thereafter, the Zoning Administrator may refer any report to the PJa"ning Commissiol'1 as he/she determint!s necessary. At the hearing, if the Commission or Zoning Administrator finds that the conditions of th2 i.Jse permit arE: not being comp1ied with or that 1n the judoement of the Commission or Zoning Administrator. s~bstantiaT evidence indicate~ that the use granted by this permit is being conducted in a manner detrimental to thE ~ublic health, safety and welfare, the Commission or Zoning Administrator may recomme:'ld to the City Council that the use permit be revoked or modified in acccrdance ~ith Section 18,90,080 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. ShQuld reports prepared in three cO~5ecutive years indicdte a reas~nable record Qf compliance. the reports may be submitted bi-annually, or even less frequently at t~e discretion of the Pla~ning CommiSSion or Zoning Administ~ator. lhe Planning CommiSSion or Zoning Administrator may ir:crease He frequency of the reports at any time. Reporting - . --... , sha 1 1 in no ClSl:;' te T~s.s frequent tl1i!.!'l. every three years. (Condition Effective Upon Executi:Jn of Use Permit) 1.4 Hours of operation for all VMCA activities and specia.l ~vents shall be limited as follows. No large-group evening dance programs, such as the curr€ntly operating Los Amigos program I sha11 be a'lowed. This restriction s~al1 not apply to s~a'l dance classes held ~s a normal part of scheduled YMCA classes. Sunday: Monda.y throljgh Friday: Saturday: 9:00 a" to 10:00 pm 6:15 am to 10:00 pm 7:00 am to 10:00 P" [Condition Effecti~e Upon Execut~on of Use Permit) 1.5 All YMCA programs and c:1asses shall be scheduled to avoid conflict ~ith peak school commute times. VMCA classes shall ~ot begin or end less than fifte~n minutes prior to the start of school or fifteen mi!'1utes follOWing the finish of schooT. taking into attou~t all vari~tions of the daily school schedule. The YMCA shall mest annually "With local stho~l administrators and, if nec~ssary, adjust the VMC~, program schedule, (Condition fff;ecth'E Upon Execut ion of Use Pfrmitj I.E No event(s) "Which ~;li exceed the capacit~ of the parking lot shall be a11owed, 1.7 A permanent space s~all be set aside in the lobby to display the conditions of apP!"'oval indicated below. the YMCA's Good Neighbor Policy and other ~nformatio~ int~~ded to ~nform the users of the restrictions ... '!thin which the YMCA m\Jst opo:rate and to solicit their cooperation. The following conditions s~all be displayed: 1,1 t"rough 1.7, 1.1,3.4 t"rough 3.8, 4.4 through 4.6, and 5,1. (Condition Effective Upon Execution of Use Permit) 1.8 Should a condition rnonito"r"1ng fee be adopted by the City to allow the City to recover the costs of condition monitoring, the YMCA shall be subject to the fee, 1. TRANSPORTATIO" 2.1 A Transportation Demand Management (TOM) progra.m outlin~ng efforts to be rTidde by the YMCA to reduc€ ~eh;c'e trips to the facility shall be submitted for re~iew and approval by the Plailr1ing and a:\3412ro.is.1tr 3. 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 a:\3412ross,ltr •. ___ '_""~"l_-__ _ Transportation Di~isjorl~ prior to occupancy of t~e flaw addition. The program -:hall provid'? fo!", a~ minimYm, the fo'lo~ing: me3sures to be undert~~~n to ~ncrease t~@ u~e of carpools, bicycle US~, public transportation and sh~ttles bj' persons utilizing the YHC~ facility; the preparation of a user survey to deterffiine the travel patterns of users to and from th~ facility and the feasibility of providl~g shuttle service or assjst'~g in the organization of carpools from certain identified locationSi an aggressi~e member information pru~ram ad~jsing members of the need to reduce a~to trips to the YMCA and encourag ing the (';se of public tra~sit. bicycles, carpools, etc. Th~ member infomation program s.hall provide for a pel"'!'l1anent informatior. di spl aj in an area visible to ail members. p-refHably ir! the lobby. The program shall be updated and reviewed in conjuncticn · .... ith the conditiDn monitoring and cperations status ,eport required in (o~ditiof1 1.3. (Condition Effective Upon Execution of Use Permit) PARK lNG AND S.Af ElJ Del,ted. A minimum of 206 parking spaces shall be co~structed at the time of project de~elapment, and a total of 248 spaces., inc1uding these to be held in landscape reserve, shall be indicated on the final p1ans approved by He Architectural Revie'oIj Board. Conversion of the some or all ~f the landscape reserve to park.ing may be required by the Planning Commiss.ion or Zoning Adm~n,stratart should the need for additiona1 parking be indicated by the condition monitoring and operations status report required by Condition 1.3. YMCA staff shall be instructed to park in th~ spaces located along the rear ~roperty line. :-.. ~;~:>.~;: -~-~--:'~~;---:-~ ,,:)..;,", ,'. ' ;t~~r- - ].5 To prc~jde ~afe sjqht dista~c~s fer drivers ~~ yet:icles exiting the sHe, ' .. ithfn the "sight distance tri;;ngl~" area (as ~~ecifically def:r,€o tiY the Transportation Division) cf th~ exiting drjyew~ys, no landscaping (~ith the exception of existi~g trEes to be retaln@d), sjg~s (~lth the excepti~n of those identified i~ Condition 3.7), ber.lls or otht:-r obstach~ exceedir.g three fee-t in height shall be ~llowed. Landscaping species planted ~jthin this area arE limited to those wh:ch have a ma:(;mum un:trimmed natural g1'o'0'I1-.h i1€~<jht ~f t~ree feet. 3.6 On-streat parking ~hal1 be pronlbited wlthin 60 feet on eith~r side of each exiting driveway. The applirant shall obtain the approprjate apprc~als from the Transportatio~ Division to paint the curbs red in thes~ areas. 3.7 Stop signs shall be installed at bDth exit driveways. Additional signage shall be p1aced at the ex'ts rem1nding patrons to watch fGr pede-stri ans and to drive slollfTy arid safely. He type, size and location of all signage shall be subject to the approval of the Pli:1nnir.g and Transportation Divisions to ensure a minimum of interference with visibility for Exiting driv€rs. 3.8 Tne existing rolTed curb on Ross Road sha11 ~e replaced with i ~ert1cal curb, on the V~C~ side of the street, between the propertJ lines of the YMCA. Design and construction of the vert1cal curb shall be as appro\led by the Publ i c wlcrks Department. 3.9 Bicycle parking shall be p~Gvide~ as required by the bicycle park~ng ord'~ance previsions ~hich are ci..!rrently under re\li~ .... by the City and a{jt~[ip03ted to be adopted w1th1n the next 6 months. rjo deferr.al of spaces shall be allowed. The location lJf the bicycle park.ing space-s shall be sub,jer:t to the appro~al of the Transportation Di~ision_ 3.10 DeleteeL 3.11 Road bumpi shall be installed in the vicinity of tne exit drivewajs on the YMCA site for the purp~se of !'o~ing exiting vehicles. The bumps shall be 3- inches high, 12-f~et long in the direction of ~ehi(lE travel. and located in a position appro~ed by the Transporlat~on Division. a: \3412ross.1tr t i f - 3_12 Overnight bus parking shall be prohibited at the site. Bus storage shall be moved to a £uitabJe location outside of a re~ider.tial n~ighborhoGd_ (Condjtion Effecti~e Upcn Execution of Use Pe~~it) 4.1 A sound barrier s~all be construct~d along the full length of t~e nortn€rly, westerly ar.d southerly property lines_ The barrier shall he constructed to a height of 7 feet, unless a majority of property owners on any boundary indicate ir. writing t~at 8 feet is preferred, ;;,nd of a concrete or mascflr), mate-I"; a1. If a majori ty of al 1 adjacent property ~wn~rs indicate in writing a preference far wood rather than concrete or masonry. the Zoning Administrator ~aJ conside~ allowing such a change. A~y barrier constructed shell be of a material with a minimum surfac~ weight of 3 lbs_ per square foct, and shall have no cracks or gaps in or at its base. The noise barrjer shalT be maintained in gaod aesthetic condition and in such a manner as to not reduce its sound attenuating properties_ 4_2 Mechanical ventilation shall be pro~idEj for the entire bUilding, including existing areas. _ 4.3 All mechanical equipment associated 'With the facility shall be designed a.nd specified so that when all mechanical equipment is op:a-rating, noise levels do not exceed 40 dBA it th~ prcperty lines. A statement from a licensed noise engineer attesting to the noise properties of the equipment shall be provided prlor to issua~ce of a building permit for equipment irstal1ation. 4.4 ~indows in rooms which generate noise, i~cludjng the gymnasium, auditorium, and aeroblcs room, shall bE fitted with key 10cks to pyev~nt being opened by YMCA patrons. The windows may only be op~r~ted wHh the permission of the YMCA offiCial \lina is designated the neighborhood liaison_ Windows and exterior doors shalT only be operled when absolutely necessary. such as during a malfunction of the mechanic~l ventilating equipment. The situation w~ich causes the need for open ~indcws and exterior doors shall be remedied as soon as reasonably pOSSIble. a: \34!2ross.l tr 4 .. ' . .:';. ....... 4.5 The YMCA shall "t all tLr,es opera!.e in cOr.lp1ia!"'!ce with the Palo ~lto Ncis~ Ordinanc~ (C~apt~r 9.10 of the Municipal Code). (:ondition Effective UpGn Exe~utjc~ of Use P~rmitJ 4.6 All olJtdocr amplified sound is prohibited. (Condition Effective Up0n ExecutiD~ of Use Permit) 5. AESTHeTiCS AND LANDSCAPING. 5,1 Final plans for the project's dpS'gil, landsca~ing and lighting shall be sub~~(t to the review and approval of the ~rchitec~ .ral Re'w';e .... Board. 5.2 An lighting shall conform to City standards. Freestanding light fixtures ire limited to twelve feet in height, however, tne ArcnitectlJral Review Board should consider reducing the h~ight of fixtures to the low€st leve1 possible whtle still maintair,ing security. All lighting must be designed and located in such a way as to not cause light spill int~ adjacent propertie~. Ali light fixtures shall be Qf the lowest ~nte~sit.y anG energy use adequate for their pUrpOS'2!. All lights which are highly visible from adjacent properties shall be turr.ed off within 30 minutc-S following clOSing, as set fort~ in conditior I.~. 5.3 A landscape maintenance (cmpany shall be retaj~ed to provide weekly pick.up of 1 itter al!d other debri s, and proper maintenance of ill s1 te landscaping. Proof that such maintenan~e ser¥ices ~ave been contracted for shall be provided to the Planning Division prior to issuance of a building permit for the addition. {Conditi.on Effective tJ~Dn txecution of Use Permit) 5.4 A dense landscaped buffer, ccnsistjr,g of a combination of trees and shrubs, shall be provided along the rear and side property lines. Trees should exist or b~ planted at a ratio of not le£s than ene tree per thre~ hundred square feet of the landscape screen. All eXisting tre~s to be removed shall be replaced at a minimum ratio of three n~w trees for everyone which is removed. Replacement trees s~a11 be a mi~ of mostly five and fifteen ga1lon size, with s~me twenty-fDur i~ch box size also includ~d. These calculations shall be snown on the landscape plai1 submitted fDr ARB approval . • :\3411ross.1 tr " . L ,'--:: - 5.5 All steps [0 ensure t~e health and ae~thetic quality of e~istjng trees to be retained, as indic~ted i~ the "Reccmme~ded Prugram for EXisting Trees" prepared by the project la~d.sr::1Ipe arc~itect and dated October 22, 1990, shall be followed. A d€taned tree protection prDgrar:J, prt::.cared by a certified ubcrlst, for an site trees to be retained shall be submitted ~ith t~e final landscape plan, inC'l:dj~g measures to protect property line trees during constructicn of th-~ noise: barrier. 5.6 The final landscape plan shall meet the Citj's adopted Drought Tolerant landscape Guidelines fer selection of phnt materia1s and irrigation corr.ponents:. 5.7 lhe proposed parking and c.irculation plan shall be modi.fled to efisure retention of thB two as" tre~s 10cated in the existing rear parking area. If retention of any of the Cedar trEes 'n the northern front coner of the site wovld require awkward cnanges to the =-r.try and exit driveways, their retel"!tion will net be r;:q .. ired. but replace.rr.ent trees at a 3 to I ratio must be pl"DYided. S.B The YMCA shall file with the City a bOfld, or other fom of s€Curity acceptable to the Cty Attorney Tn a form appro~ed by the City Attorney. equal to the full value of all p1ant landscaping materials to guar~ntee landscapjng maintenance and rep'~cement of any lost landscaping. for i period of threE years from the date of installation of site landscaping. 5. .CCNSTRVCllON 6.1 The applicant shall submit a tempo~arJ parking plan, for the approv~l of the Planning and Transportaticn Divisions, prior to issuance of any building permit, as follows: The e::dst~ng parking lot s~al1 be maintained during the ext~r'or building construction phase. After the e~terior building construction is completed, the new parki~9 are~s on the southern and western sides should be construr:telj. Once these ntW areas are comph·ted (and while interior c\)nstruction is urlderwayJ, the ~xisting lots can be reconstructed. Construction ~hal1 be pha~ed so as to preclude completion of the building expansion until reconstruction of the entire parking lot is comp1eted. ihe plan shall indicate the n~mber of spaces which will be a:\3412ross.ltr :' I " '-,--~ - ann able during each phas.e a.,d any confl icts. wi th scheduled events whic~ m~y produc~ ~ar~ing de~~nd in excess of wh~t ~il1 be a¥ailab1e. jf such cQnfllcts are evident 7 such events shall be canc€led, rescheduled, or held in another location. Provision fer YMCA employee .and contractor employe€. park.ii:g shall also be -cetat1'?d, Sh'tJttle s:t'n'ire from a nl;arby des.ignated off-street parking area may be rl'qu red. 6.1.5 ftrl on-site construction acti¥ities, including cor:structian of the new addltion, rerlollaticns of existing building areas and reconstruction of the p-ark.ing area (including site lands(.apil",g, b'ut excluding the sound wail, ~hich must be compTeted prior to any other -.:onstruction begin~ing as required in condition 6.2), shan be completed within 24 months following lssuance of th~ building permit fvr the nEW addition a~d renovations. One extension of the 24 month time period not to exceed 12 months rna)' be granted by the Plan~ing Corr.misslon at the applicant's request, if tt1e Planning COrrt.'liHion finds good cause to grant slIch an extension. 6.2 T~e pro,perty line sound barrier required in c~ndition 4.1 sna11 be constructed as the first el!ment of the p~oJect, so as to reduce constr~ction noise generated by the remainder of the project. Temporary fenCing, tn provide sectJrity between tne site and adjacent parce15, sha1l be installed as necessary while the sound barrier is being cor.structed. The building permtt for'building improvements shall not be issued until the barrier is c9mpleted. 6.3 No co~structiQn activities shall be allowed on Saturday or S" .. mda..,Y. All cOl1structio'1 activities must be undertaker. during allowed nours of construction (8:0C am to 8:00 pm, Monday tnrough Friday), i!rind shall be in full compliance with th,= Pa1c Alto Noise Ordinance (Chapter 9.10 of the Municipal Code). 6.4 The name and p~ooe number of the City's Code Compliance lnspector and the construction project ma.nager shall be clearly posted at the e~trance to the construc~ion sit~, indicating ~c~rs of ~llowed construction and a message that these persons rna) b~ contacted with any concerns or complaints regarding construction noise. The sign shall be de~igned as set forth in Section 9.10.060(2)(9) of a :\3412ross .ltr .~/.' ____________ a-______ " __ ~""U.4 " ;;'-.-": .:' '''' .. ~ the neise ord;~ancE> with t~e except jon of the change in hours. The con~truct'on pi'oject manager shall b~ directly responsible to the City's Code Complia~ce rn~pector, and shall be ~ranted the authority by the applicant tc respond to any compliance request5 in a timelY manner. - 6.5 All exposed or disturbed earth surfaces shall be watered at least twj~~ dally, onCE during the late morning and cnee at t~e end of the ~ork day. The frequ~ncy of watering shall inLrease to include one additional accunenc€: un wlr!"dy days. Reclaimed w.ater, in accvrdance with Pu~l ic ~·ork.s DeDart1T'ent poliCies, sMall be USed fer this purpose." 5.6 Stockpiles of de~ris, soil, sand or otller materia1s that can be bl a,.n by wlnd shall be calte:-ed, All portions af the site sha1l be la~dscaped or cov€r~d as soon as c~nstructian is tompleted in that area. 6.7 All dearing. grading. earth moving and exca\lation actiV'itjes shall cease during periods «hen winds exceed 20 mph for more than or.e ncur, 6.8 On-S1te vehicle spee6 shall ce li~ited ta 15 mph. 6.9 The contractor shall designate a person to monitor dust control program who ~a.s the a'Jthorit,Y to request increased watering and c1eanjng of str2ets when necessary or upon req~est of the Publ i c wcr~s Department. 6.10 The construction area and adjacent streets shall be swept of all mud and silt on a daily basis. Any s~111age resulting from haul'ng operatiJ~S along or across any publ'c or priV'ate prop~rty shall be removed iIDnlEdiat€,ly. 5.n If, i!1 the opinicn of the City Engineer, the contractor fail; to comply with an) of the above r€quirements regard; ng spill age and dust control, and the contractor is either unwil,ing or unable to remedy the deficiency, the City Engineer shall have tI1e rigllt to employ private or public WOi'l<. forces and equipment as reasor,ably deemed necessary to correct the deficiency. The cost of employing such forces and eq~ipment snall be dDubled as a penalt,Y. and such CDst shall be borne by the applicant. a: \3412ross.1 tr Sud action taken by He City Engineer shall not relieve tne Contractor of the responsibility concer~ing spillage and dust control. ".' - 7. 7.1 A sajls rep>Jrt, prepared by ~ registHed engirre-er, shalf be revi~wed and approved by the Public ~'orks Department prlor to issuance of a building or grading pemit. The soils report must cons~d~r and address th~ potential for prDble~s to result from the h~gh groundwater levels indic~ted fer this general ar-iaG of Palo AHo. 7.2 A detailed gr.;ding and ,j,ainage p':jn, prepared by registered engineer, shall be approved by t~~ Public Works Department prior to issuance of a building or grading permit. The drainage plan shall prQ¥ide for the entire site to be drained dir1!ctly into Barron treek, rellev;,lg the existing storm drain on Ross Road of drllnage from tne site. Appro~al cf the drainaga plan shall be obtained from the Sa~ta Clara V~lley Wat~r District pr10r to submittal of the p1an for City appio¥al. 7.3 Prior to issual'!c~ of any buiTdir.g poarmit, He applicant shall provide certification to the Public Works Departm2r\t that the proposed con.struct i O!1 meets all the FEMA r~quiremer1ts for COrlstruction wtt~!n a flood zone. 7.4 A street npen;~g permit must be obta.ine.j p.rior to issuance of a grading or building permit. 7.5 Portions of damaged sidewalk. totaling ~pproximatejy 86 lin~~r feEt. lncated directly in front of the Y~CA site shall be replaced by the app1icant. Th~ Public Work5 Department will sp~cifically locate the damaged areas folTowing issuance of tr.t! street opening per:T1it. 8.1 Prior to receiving occupancy of the new addition, the YMCA must demonstrate that it has ccmpl led with the requirements ~f TitTe 17 (Hazardous Materials Storage) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. i~cluding obtainlng d permit for storagE a~d use of pool chemicaTs, 'if the Fire DEpartment determines one is necessary. B.2 The applicant must comp1y with Section i2.32.015(~) of the City's Municipal Code. which prohibits the filling of new pools. spas and hot tub~ with w~t~r supplied by the P~lo Alto water utility . • , \3411 ro". 1 t r .~~~-:-3:<>" ·;l ~ "': --.",.; . . ', i; :--.~~;<-_ , ~ ~~ ":,:~~~.~ .•. ~~~: J --............ - 8.3 The applicant shall ~ork with t~€ Utilities Depart~ent to d~termin! a11 utility design and capacity r~quireme~ts includ'~g water, se~er, gas, electric. and pr10ne facilities. T~:c applicant sh~ll be respor.sible for a11 ,osts eS5::)ci.at'E-:i wit~ any necessary upgrades to ser~e the facility. All utility p1nt"iS shall b~ appro'led t,y the UUlitio and W.ater. Ga.s and Se~ .. €r Oe.pa.rt~ents priar ':c 'ssuance of a building per~it. 8.4 An outdoor exercise pat~ shall be allowed o~ the ?foject site. lhe f~nal 'ccatio~ and confi9urat~on of the path shall be as approved by the ~rchitecturQl Re~1ew Board. Your next shp i~ to fuifi11 the tondHiofis of project apPTo'la1 and then apply to the Building Inspection Department for the 2ppropriate permits 1 provided' that nn appeal of the projE:c.t ~s fil ed bj M3)' 21, ]993. The project must comply ~ith the r~quirements of a'1 applicable City cedes and ordina~ces fur your permit. lh1s project approval is va1id for one (l) year from the d~t~ o! approval uroless specifical1y stateo oth€rwise. In the ev~nt th~ building permit for a project is not secured within the above specified time limlt, the appro~al af the proj~ct ~ill ~xpire and be of no further force or effect. Should you ha~e any questions regardi~g this AR8 action, please do not heSitate to call the Planniog Department at (41S} 329-2546. Lorraine weiss AP,8 Staff Lia"ison Planner a: \3412 rc:) s , 1 t T . ~:. r -.. ~--.. -- 'lrf Y!lf.CA of the Mid-Peninsula Assocfallon Office ... 41$' M.ccl\~f'i;'.r::: RDJlt SUI1e 2·,' Pale Arlo Cal:furnla ~·;JLl3 <\, 5-8-:'6--3"5S ~ FAX 415·e~o+}"f703 ""~" I!"'Y'.J s..,;~ 0",,,, -~~ geU,~t.I ~aCr,,",r ........... • .e.=::.-.... - R I" \n..~"':oIIM ~,"" C,.. ... 'r Ilaon: .. WytM. ' .. ~ Dw<r .ll:i'doMI.-. -'-,.,u"'1l< ~w,~ '""~, """,a.-""""" t,.,~t.I'-as:Cr>/IJ' ~e.I~ T<p{C-UCO e"rn.treCcle'/ MiKe t<r..d1 ,J..,¢y~r'I6tf)o ~WEIy -tll~S~ J;!.iillill."Ge""'" T/w:lITIasJ~S<J<l R.-r!W,~ Ot8t11i'~M ~S,~ EIIo,di.yman ~,,,,,Way 1=\ogerB,~C'd' "" '"'-,-...... e,ogQ~ -------,-----""'"'-= r~;-... ,.jer T....,I(~ ....., ~~C,~ _. STJad:~nl -""'"" JoI\IIB~ ~SE~ S~C;~,.,..., o.,,-,.,JdG (i'3.¥ Ao&r~rs.:lI'\ C~r4oct<~ S<d H~!l ~e, HuCal< ~"" '-"~ ...t.:>I1rDl~ ,""!1~.my" ~ 1k\Jo1C ~~ ~E~~ S~W,I" .. ,~r W......",E.Ae-Iot< ~L-~n:I ;0; i>lT"'<;>'S/'rM'I:J HD"n .. Oj~ v"""-"'-" P~w.~ II,.,...,... " .... A~8'.r'>Ci1 L - May18,1993 Lorraine Weiss Leri Tepley City ot Palo Mo Department 01 Plannlng 250 Hamilton Avsnue Palo Ana, CA 94301 Dear Lori and Lorraine: c ~.~ /.:-- . -'j We comacted the acoustiCal enginaers, Illingworth and Rodkin a!tanhe ARB meeting since their input would have been helpful during the meeling. They had the meeling scheduled for 8:00 p.m. instead of 8:00 a.m. We asked them to Submit a written response to questiQ{\s raised at the meeOng. The;r response is enclosed. While this i"formalion does not add to or change our assumptions, I thought ij would be help!,,1 tor the record. I am in receipt of the approval by the Director of Planning. Allow me to thank you for your continuing pa.~ic1patjo(l and assistance as we move lorwam on this project. Sincerel)', ~ Barry M. Taylor President - ~-------------------' ,.., IUJNGWORTH&RoDKIN,INC. 11" A co us TIC ALE N G I !II E E R s "ll June lS, 1993 Marilyn Riley Palo Al to YMCA 4151 Middlefield Road Palo Alto, CA 9430J St~JECT: The Palo Alto YMCA Expansion --Acoustical Consulting Oaar Ma. Riley: This letter is to ~esponc to three points raised at the Pa)~ Alto Architectural Review Board I!l.eeting 0::' ~:Qy 6, 1993. (1) 1he proposed a-foot high Fenstone Pre-engineered Wall System 'Will provide the noise reduction required :by the EIR. (2) The so~~d of people talking in the vie~inq area o~tside cf the Natatorium will be essentially inaudible to the neighbors. The sound levels generated by people engaged in normal conversation in this area 'Would generate a sound level of about 20 to 30 dBA in the nearest adjacent yard. This is below the background sound level in the area and would not be expected to be even audible. (J) The sound of children playing in a play yard in front of the ~uilding facing Ross Road eQuId occasionally be audible outside of the first couple of residences back from Ross Road. Sound levels generated by children yelling could reach 55 dBA in anjacent yards. Sound levels ~ould be significantly lower at the yards further f;;om Ross Road due to t.he shielding provided by the YMCA building. Outside of the occasional shout, general noise levels associated with play activity ~culd not be expected to be more than barely audible outside of the nearest properties. Noise levels in the fro~t yards of the homes directly opposite the play yard across Ross Road could reach 63 dBA when children are yelling. The noise l~vel due to general play activity in the yards woulQ ~e 10 to 20 dBA lower. The noise levels from the shouting would be typical of the noise levels generated ~y vehicles passing by on Ross Road. In the backyards of the homes across Ross Road, the maximum noise levels generated ~y children yelling Would be about 48 dBA. Even the noise of children L ~.~ - Marilyn Riley June UI, 199J Page 2 ,,,",, '~' yellinq wO':Jld just barely be audible a~ve the background noise level in this area. Since this activity ~oul~ cnly t.ake place in the daytime I '1le ... ·ould not expect any sigr~ificant adverse impact. P.P.! ,gfl (93-027) - '1 EXCERPT OF Lt'rrER fROM \1oKA. TO PLANNU,G COM\f1SSIO:-' DATED SEPTDIBER 19,1991 the .h..RB. close and closing. It .... au.ld be a fUnction of Y."1CA staff to lock this t,arrier l"ligt-.tly sno!'tly after 11. What is the ~akeup of the Sounding Board and can ~e see t.h~ lfliuutes of t.ile lneet.ings! Sour.ding Bo.a--rd Roster is enclosed. One h~lf Cif group have attend~d regularly and one half have droP?ed out. ~nno~nc~ments of ~eetings and minutes of meetings continue to be mailed to the original rost.er~ -Minutes of all meetings are available from the Palo Alto Planning staff -We contacted 240 households persor:allv and in ~Titing in January 1990. The~e homes-~~re b~tween Loma Verde and East ~eadow. Ea~h resident received an invitation to participate. 12~ Are the 2,000 si'Jnat\Jr~s presente.d by th.e YMCA actually Palo Alto re$ide~ts? In addition to the aGtual signatures, the YMCA provide.d an alphabetical list of all signees. We encourage an one to review that list. How maroy people use the .... ·alking track and at ·."hat ti:t".e of day? ~he exercise t-rack vas originally built far the Cardiac Therapy patients who. then and no\ol, need to exercise while under continuous observation of nurses. Members of other exercise classes also us~ the track bf -their choice. An average of 100 persons per day use the tracK ... typically bet ... 'een 6:30 a.~. and 7:30 p.m. Most o~ the participation is by the cardiac clas::es, Monday through Friday between 7; 3 0 -S: 3 0 a.m. and 6:00 -7:00 p.~. It should be noted that t~ack usage decreases in t1"',e coldE'_r, darker ...... inter months. With the availability of a lap pocl for e):ercisc ... :it can ,be expected that some currer,t track users ""ould shlft to ap s .... ~im.,.inq. 14. ","'hat can the YMCA do in reference to individuals identified as homeless? -8- L .- L " u " >-o " '" 9 'it " < " , ~ " 'j <: Q c:, "" <: ~ "" OIl .. z '" " z i= « OIl ... '" ~ ~ ::;: < OIl " ;S Q .~ ..• f , r- . ' '-', -, -, , ~' ~,:; -"'-: "