Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0458.0931 I , August 51 199:3- HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL Palo Alto; California 53 S BRYt;"'~ • SnBSS HOUS? Members of the Council: ReRPrt in erief This is an information report only and no Council action is required. This report forwards to Council the process required to accomplish the retention of the Byxbee Cottage at 535 Bryant Street and satisfy the development requ.i rements of t.he owner. Ba:;;:kground The recent purchaser of the proper'i..-y at 535 Bryant Street I Mr. Sal Giovannotto; has proposed to restore and rehabilitate the historic Byxbee House at the rear of the property to provide two apartments; add four additional residential units by construc~ing an approximate 1.2S0·squal'e-foot addition in the existing parking lot. and add an outdoor landscaped/seating area for use by the commercial building on the front of the property. He also . requested that he be allowed to subdivide the commercial and residential portions of the project. On June 28 r 1993, the Council~ on an 8-0 vote, Y~iss absent. adopted the following: 1. Request the Historic Resources Board to initiate the process of reclassification of th_~ Byxbee HoUse as a Category 1 or 2 at ruct1.lre. and 2. Direct staff to proceed with the appropriate mechanisms to pursue the following: a. Exempt required parking for any expansion, b. Allow existing surface parking to be removed. c. Assure inclusion of an outdoor landscaped garden/pat~o area, and d. Subdivide the parcel to separate the commercial frQm the residential uses. CMIL_S8,93 :.' At that meeting staff suggested the appropriate mechaniem under the existing regulations was the processing of a Planned Community {PC) zone. AnalysiB Staff has fU.l-ther reviewed the City of Palo Alto development regulations, including several alternatives that would modify the ~egulations. and has concl1lded that the appropria':e mechanislTl for accomplishing the above-desired goals of the developer is the PC process, with a variar.ce for parking for the portion of the site remaining in the CD-C district and a minor eubdi'\~ision (parcel ~~p) to divide the property. The applications would be processed concurrently, with a total processing time of 4.5 to 5.5 months from date of receipt of application (refer to the attached schedule). The proposal requires review by the Plarll~ing Commission (twice), the Architectural Review Board and Cit:,.' Council~ The primBry reason a p~ process is necessary is the proposed six housing units, These six units will be placed on 3~690 square feet of land. This exceeds the density iF~-4C) permitted in the Zone District (CD-C), An increases in density can not be processed as a ~ariancel since variances may only be granted for site development regulations. Staff beli~ves that the Public Bene£it findings of the PC zone can be made on the basis of retention of the historiC 6tructure~ provision of housing units of a size and type not normally provided. and improvements to the visual quality of the alley. The project will also be subject to the BMR provisions of Program 13 of the Housing Element. The proposed parking changes on the site are also best accomplished through a PC. • No parking is proposed to be provided for the residential units. As a. PC zone, the: City Council~ 1.:pon recommendation of the Pl~,ing Commission and the Architectural Review Board, can approve a specific parking require~ent for this site. While the Zoning Administrator has the 3u.thority t.3 grant variances to the provision of reQuired numbers of parking spaces, veriance to required parking numbers in the downtOWTl. has not been granted due to the documented shortage of parking spaces in the d0wntown area. the perception that parking inade~Jacy is a rr~jor problem. and Comprehensive Plan policies yelated to provision of parking with new Do~~town development. The provisions of the Parking Ordinance, Chapters 18.83.120 and 18.93.130, which allow the Director of Planning and Community Environment or the Zoning Administrator to make adjustments to the parking requirements. are not applicable to the proposal . • Under Assessment District regulations, removal of the existing five parking a.paces is legally permissible and CMR,45S,93 p,\c.r\~ 8/5/93 Page 2 I \ ...... -- results only in an increase in the property owner;s asseesme~t. Under the parking regulations of the Zoning Ordinance, removal of the spaces is not allowed, but is subject to a variance for the CD-C portion of the site and PC approval for the propoge~. residential rezoning. Through the PC, subdivision and variance process~ the City Council can make the findings to allo~ removal of the five spaces. One of the original proposala by the owner was to convert: the current .r~sidential use of the Byxbee House to commercial us<;:!. If the residential use had been changed to commercial, Section 18.49.100(b) (l) (C) (iil of the parking Regulations allows exceptions to parking for Category 1 or 2 historic structures. Use cf this provision would have re~~ired that the Byxbee House be changed from Historic Category 4 to Ca~egory 1 or 2 and a zoning text amendment to delete the provision that existing on­ site parking may not be eliminated. Since the own~r now proposes continued residential use, the text amendment is not required. The Historic Resource Board has scheduled a public hearing for August 18. 1993, to consider changing the histoI'ic category for the Byxbee House from Category 4 to Category 2. The owner will request that this change be processed in conjunction with the PC. subdivision and variance. Staff understands that there have been problems with vandalism of the Byxbee House; and the owner is concerned that drug dealers, itinerants and others may start a fire or destroy the house beyond repair. Planning staff is prepared to process the application as expeditiously as possible upon receipt of the application~ and the Police Department has been requested to provide extra patrols in the alley. On July 30. 1..9.93. the owner obtained the demolition pennit for the Byxbee House. although he has indicated that it is not his intention to use it. Staff has advised the owner of the procedures for applying for a PC zone change. variance, and subdivision. It is our understanding that he is in contact with several architects/engineers to obtain design services. Respectfully 9ubmitted~ ~oe<;.! dP~t(2.-,{J GZ:'m> nager Planning Pz-ujects ~N~ Assistant City Manager CMR,4SS,93 p,,~\~ K~~~TH R. SCHREIBER Director of Plar~ing and Community Environment 8/5(93 Page 3 .. ,-- cc: Planning Commission Architectural Review Board Historic Resources Board Gail woolley San Giovannotto Jim Baer CMR,45S,93 JI'\WIr\CIIIZ:~ 8/5/93 Page "