HomeMy WebLinkAbout0142.095•
ro.
FROM:
City of Palo Alto
City Manager's Report
>-------
HONORABLE CITY COUNClL
CITY MANAGER
AGEM>A DATE: Febnaary 13. llI9S
DEPARTME!IIT: c~ Manager
CMR: 142:95
SUBJECT: Proposals for CootpM>emive Plan Advi!:ol'y (;()mmittee', Draft
Housing Goals, Policies and Programs
'JUlLTST
This lepcrI is ill response '" the City Council'. request for additional analysis and
infonnalioo regarding proposed housing poI" ..... 'ies for the City of Palo Alto. At the January
30, 1995 special meeting 10 d"1SCUSS staff and the Comprebensive Plan Advioocy Committee',
recommendaIions 08 the draft Hoosing Goals, Policies and Programs, Council direCled staff
10 tmmi with I mOre llH\epdI anaIyw of the housing proposals CODIained in CMR 488:94
daI.ed November 7, 1994. This CMR suggests alrematives 10 the Comprebensive Plan
Advisory Committee', Draft Hoosing 000&., Policies and Program •.
AJftmatjyf Gt.k PMries and Promms for Cnnsidenlfiog
If City Council wisbes 10 pursoe establishment of residential zones 8$ des.:ribed ill !his
report.slaff suggests the following amendmenls 10 the draft Hoosing Goals, Policies and
Programs:
Revise Al (08 Page 2):
Currently, the pcogralll reads as follows:
"Develop a P!anne<I DeveloprneDl pcoce85. v.i!boul requirement for a public benefit finding
for denser uses that encoufllge the collSlruclioo of affordable .maller lot single family and
multiple family housing unirs"
,.,.lofU
q
.(
=
'Develop higher density single family .Dd multiple family zones 1M! are based on housing
product 1ypeS. and whick remove regulations imped"lIlg site and design considel'lltions'
To Policy HS-I C. add program CI (Page 5) 10 read as follows:
'Develop hlghcr density single family a.'ld mILltip\e family zones Ibat ire based 0<1 housing
product types, aDd ",hid! remove regula60rls impeding site aDd desig!! considerations'
To Policy HS-l C, add program CI (page 5) 10 read as follows:
'Underlying residential zones should be as$igned 10 all of the City'. retail COOlll1<'rcial
zones, wbere appropriare. '
~ Program Al (on Page Ii} whicb ""erently read. as follows:
'Evaluate exisling incentives for eocooraging residenti.al .... on !aDd zoned foe oommercia!
use 10 deI.ecmiDe whether incentives implemented 10 dale are effective and sbould be
mainlai..oo and dcfermine what new incentives .bould be provided'
Add: 'Esmb/ish a revised site aDd design review process 10 accomplish mixed use p<Ojc<.1s
within 1he City'
POl ley IMPLICADONS
The policy implications of Ibi. analysis on boosing revolve around three key issues -laDd
use,le. density aDd Musing product type of residential deveklpment; desigR. which includes
boll! siting aDd archile<:tural aspects of residential and mixed "'" development; and the
discretionaIy review processes necessary 10 facilitate housing development. Foe purposes
oflhis disc1Js~ioo these three issues are addressed independently. and then 'repaebged' as
&II integrated set of proposals 10 address housing de-.elopmeru in the commu.ily.
~-' .
i
/.
~---:... ,-;,---~ ,,---
" .-~: ... :"
" .... -:;~~.-.
CMR ~:94 outJi_ m policy al1erruWves to provide bousing ill Pal" Alt<>. Aa e.panded
diJcu!Jsion of eacll alternalive follows:
I. Ft· ... At 6/--"" ..... d.' %OU(s) dull G/lQw/", sub~./Wd1IiIiIJ lit
.. plarbl. Jrd wldI deIIT liJodtJ ..... tle1uiI} aII4 ",,1Jj81 ___ Sado lIJII/.II6
tiuHlltllialil fIu~ t1pJIn1'HIl~ IDtIuip Imtu, liaclau, tIeui9,
""" hdK., ..... .., tHU14 H IkJiutl widdII flu fI>IIiar np,.". .....
EmbIishrnent of.!lUIdard housing zone. should be based on housing product types Ibal are
well defined 1nd identifiable 10 bo<h su..rrounding neighbo<s of f,ture booMng projects &n<I
\0 poIentW bUilders of housing projects. It is well-kno ..... Ib.t oor current multiple faIllL"ly
housing %ODC8 do not give !hat level of predictability. That is becouse !he regul8lions are
defined by physical development~, as <l!lI>JSCd \0 expectation of product type. For
eumpic, !he C"Ily'. R.lof 30 zoning allows any housing product type that does DOt exceed
Ibir!y units \0 !he acre, and !he Iooh applied \0 the zoning speak \0 maxi mum building
bcigbt; allowable fJoor area raoo; requi.red ope" space; fron(, rear, and side yard sedlacks;
etc. What is allowed 10 be buill on an RM 30 zoned property QD be anything from "ngle
I'amiIy detached \0 coocIominiums with double loaded caTidors (IC. inferior hallway entrance
Ie> eacII unit) on podium parking. Ii the de>..Joper purchased the property with !fie
cxperutioo of doi.'18 Ihe above described condominium project and by I combinatioa of
public review proces.s and rigid deve!cpmenl regu!&tions cDds up building single family
attached on small loU,lbe home developer". expectations are DOt being me{, and Wslle may
..... n have o-iuinvesfed in land for Ihe prqje<.1. EqU3l1y important. surrounding residents
have no predictability as \0 the kind of housing project that will ultimately be built in their
neighborhood.
This rq:>Ort suggests Ihe desip of boosi og zones whicl! are based on idenlifiable lwusing
'proIotypeI'. In addition,. rather Iban creating new ' aritbme6c' regulatior.s for eacII zone,
Ihe zoning itself",ouId rely upon community shored ideas of housing !)'pes as expre>sed
wilbin the purpose oflbc zone. The following housing types are offered for purposes of
CouDCil illustration:
A. SiDI" family detac!u:d and attAched hyrne, on ,maD lo!s -The PW]lC>Se of lhis zone
migh( be to promote infill single family development in mixed housing areas where
!here is I predominance of single family homes, c< to allow for a moce dense single
family housing type adjacent to traditions! ",.ngle family subdivisions !IIroughout the
Cily. The product type is 00<: and two story development. but predominantly two
CHIt: Ie," ..... J.r12
, -. : -r'-' ~., .. _:_
story, with surfo<:eonly olfs!reel parking, whkh is generally enclosed. Units can be
uro Io! line, <lr double zero Io! line, ie ..... aring • common wall. Tracfitional. yard
areas are substan1lalJy .mar"" Ih .. ~ with standard R·l development, however frooI
yard ""kks generally reflect surrounding DseS. Done wen, sucR projects will rarely
exceed IG-12 units !O the acre.
B. Townhomcs -The purpose of thi, ZODe might be 10 promote infill development in
or near single hmily or oIber Iownhouse developments, particularly in mixed housing
areas sud! as downtOWl! or c.Jifcmia AvenDC, <lr al""g !he EI Camino Real adjacent
\0 existing single hmily and Iownhorne neighborhoods, Under cum",! real cstale
IIIarhC cooditioos. foe·sale townhouse developments offer I particularly appealing
land use alternative 10 c:omCt..!n:ial development. The product Iype is !)'picony one
and two story developmenl (but predominantly two-story) with off·street surface <lr
'subterranean (tucl:-ur>der) parking. Building cluSlers generally include <C-6 units,
therefore higher building mas. is evidenced in townhouse projects. Wbile yard areas
may be minimal, they ore generally privaTe, in the form of feo=! in patios, balcor.ies
or boIh. Larger projects may provide common opeD spa"" amenities, sucI1 as pools,
spas, <lr children', play areas. Towobomes rarely e<ceed 12·15 units \0 the acre.
C. Counn'" Multjp!e Faroill' Housina -Tne purpose of this zone is \0 provide roc
~ or for·sale bou!ing in • garden·lilre oetting, Mid-I<>-Iatger sized prop.:rties
wilhia the oownlowA, Califcmia A venue. <lr along the EI Camino Real may be
suilabIc for this p<odllCl, particularly if inlegraled witloJn a commercial area or
adjacenl \0 existing Iownhouse or condominium projects. This product Iype is
ge ....... ny two and Ihtee story developmenl. and is characterized by multiple units
within. single structure. but with privale entries 10 eaclt unit. Covered parking is
geoocalJy ganged ... 'ld best Iocaled not visible from the street. W1u1e parios and
balconies may exist with incfividual units. opeD space is predominantly comruon. DOt
private. Units are stscW, therefore projects with portions 0( three story
deve1opmen! can accommodate townhouse style second floor unirs. Given the larger
unit expecta60ns of receDt years, counyard housing will not Jik::ly exceed 15-20 unirs
\0 the acre. f'rom a design perspe..'live, the better examples of!hi. housing prototype
are older -Websler Street between Hamill"" and University Avenue is one project
example noted by CPAC participants as exemplary.
D. Hip Pensky Muliiple family Resjdential -The purpose of !hi. wne would be \0
allow for very dense fur sale or rental housing in appropriate dow.towa or Califcmia
Avenueenvirorunents. SocII projects wculd generally not be suitable elsewhere in
the City. The product Iype is preOOminantly Ihtee .nd fo.Jt story stacked unirs,
1'q •• 0I1l
-c_.
.'
,"-.-.
. ;-' ".' -
'-0 ~
• 0.'._"
i,;=:.'it3;,;;'i!2.JX~~>2'~.;:~·5:;,' j;::;±:!::.,c.:_,-:t_ .. 0~: ", " .. '.:-.: .':c'-'-;~2:I~~fiL~
$lthoogh fcur "" six story prOjects could be appropriate in seiect commercial .• lId
transit statloo \Qcations. SQch projeds typically exfubit inteOo< haD entry "" the units
llICIliUle oo-site opeD space. Podium, .ltUcture, oc even .nderground parking may
be associale<! 'IlIith the ~, par1icularly if locale<! on small siles where 5UJface
parIrlngcannot be accommodale<!, CO!I..,quently ~'>e desiga challenge cf the.., projects
oftea re~oIves around parking. limn housing projects of !his kind baYe traditionally
not appealed 10 families "'ilk children., due 10 on-site opeD space limitations anillack:
of private eIllr)' to the unit Variable unit size can dramatically alter building
masaing, consequently the density of suclt projects could range from 20-40 nroilS pet
acre. A recent example of projea review of thl, Iype of housing prototype was the
JanWil)" 23. 1995 City CoonciI 8J.>proval of. pI.nned community zone in the 2650
Parle. Blvd. area of the Cily 10 a=modat<o • 30 unil ren!al bousing project
(CMR: 11 &:95').
Each of these housing Iypes has • 'look: .nd feel' ~'tat is identifiable 10 members of the
community, and the impacts of such projects on adjacenl residents are mostly design relaied.
and biglu'y unique 10 their particular surroundings. UDdetslaoding of the 'desig1l' aspects
of housing ptOlo!ypeS is important 10 thls discussion. Housing zones which set up rigid
arithmeti<: panme1ers, _ .. IDly 10 keep bad things from happening, ofiell wor!< against
good desig1l inlhat they do 001 allow the arcbitect(,} 011 the projoc1lV take into account. the
more rompeI!ing design issues of the surroonding el!Vironment Foc example. IoWnbomes
locared within • commercial area where buikftngs e,uS! at 1he property lines may be he1'.et
pIlIced willi no !roo! yard .. !back. JnfiJI projects Ioca!ed between single family and multiple
family projects ma)' wen require variable buikfmg beights from one .;& of1he project 10
1he o!her. !hereby running counter 10 1he tradibonal regul.tacy requirements on maximum
building heigbls. IS established in the City's curren! housing zones. • .. good example of
creative desiglt solution 10 mitigate that problem can be found in the Lytton IV project
currently under constructiou 011 Everett Street north of down!owll Palo Alto, where building
heights and selbach adjacent 10 the abutting single famil, l>ome(.) are sensitive 10 low
density, wbile the bigher building massing necessary 10 achieve the project density is Ioca!ed
Dex110 JIIid.risc residential coodorniniums.
n.e curren! sts.ff amended CP AC recommendation before the City Council 011 crean ng DeW
bousing zones speW 10 • Planned Dev~lopment zoning process that mirrors the City',
Planned Community zone, but without the requirements for providing public benefit within
housing proj.clll. This type of zoning involves • lengthy development application approval
process on all aspects of the project: land .so, ie. density and housing proto(ype; site
pIamling considerations; and archirectural merit of the project. Land-use deci ,ion making
is clearl), wilhin the purview of the City Council, by both I .... and righl, and !he in-process
CMR: 10'" ...,. S of 12
, .
• ,"0'
Comprehenshi. Plan Update provides \be oppo<tunity 10 \be City CouIlCll 10 "-define the
CiIy's land .... objectives. What Ihi. repo<1 suggests a that land use, de\-elopment
appIkation approval processes, and project desig" be 'separated """I' (O<: purposes of
CooDcil~.
In summary, zoning for boosing sllould provide a very high level of predictability 10 the
resi<lelltW. and devel<Jpment oomnrunity as IG the klnd of hoosing that can happen 0<1 &
pil1i<:-dlar piece of property. Application review processes should cJ-.arly define objectives
10 be achieved, .... d by wborn -""bether it is city staff, Board(s). Commission(s), 0<: City
Cooncil. Pe.-m.p.. long-held, but nnfortunsr.. vie ... of lhis issue suggests that 'bousing
developers' prefer little 0<: DO community input and L<e iD (avor 01 a. appr""a1 process that
a!lo ...... uclt; and !ha! 'housing advoe",:)" interests demand lengthy, multiple review
processes with final appeal 10 City Council. In stoff. opinion, neither is Ibe case, and we
have the opportunity 10 craft \be City'. land use decisioo-making and processes in • "".y Iba!
serve multiple inlerests.
AU housing projects proposed iIl Palo Alto are desigOed by one 0<: more memben of \be
archir..c!ural communif"1, and are reviewed by • Cooncil-appoinr..d and highly qualified
ArchiIectural Review Road. If \be use is establisfled by 2oning, and !here is great flexibility
In !he desigA of \be project by !he removal 01 regulations unrelated 10 individual site
considerations, \bere is DO need for • discretioo"'Y review process O!ber Iban siting and
dealgA. If we want 10 achieve hoosing and do no( wish 10 re~iew projects at !be City
CouDcil level on • case by case basis, we need 10 establish predictable zoning based 00
housing prototype, bul with great design flexibility, aro<! willt discretionary review processes
limited 10 desig. and architecturu considerations. A Planned Community-zone Iik. process
(eve .. without the public benefit requirernelll) leaves all aspects 01 tl1e decision-maldng
process, including use, 10 final approval before City Council. The risk (3CIcr 10 !be
developer i. great, tl1e product is 1l!lp<edictable 10 !be residents. and the City CouI!Cll may
be unnecessarily involved in <lesigA-reiated development application decision-making 011 a
~y-cose basis.
2. .u .,art of 1M c-,rdn.sin ""'" ~ ,-, idelllfjbJtiDa of Wf'OJ'ride
~ Q)IUS. 1I1I4111il11il111wa flu tksirrJbU ~, of 1uJusUt8 ill-&. of or
ill ulljwu:titJa lriIIo C6IfIIIIUdDI. Mon sucdulf.1. tsIl ........ "4tkiJHl'ed to IH
~ or ntlneJqped slwuld IH nalslote4 lor I1uir fIlIlIropritJUruu for
~ lISe, Iun.siq ill IUu of C6IfIIIIUdDI_. or 1IIiuJ ase. W1un liousUoll
iI tIpfH"t1JJriIIU, 1M appIkdJk Mlllkrlfo<8 ,..WfercMl UJ/U sJwuJ4 be ~.
ApyrtmIl pt'OU8SU, ~ for ItoILri"IlIHIIJ ,rofrcls, sIwuld IH miIIJnuIL
Page (DIU
c-" -' )
Tbt above ideas on hoosing could lead 10 IllO£O housing in rhe community foc severu
re&S()II$: ease of procen; prediclability of project review; and investmenl in devel<>pable land
based on ",'lIicipatod prodllCl type. Inherent in Ille proposal is subs!antially lowered density
for moot hooslng prodllCll)y.&. and in..--reased limits on those areas considered suilable foe
very high density housing projects. Unless !he overall land are. designated for boosing mere-. suhslantiall}, projectod housing uni!S, ie. the 'on paper' poIe1ItiaI foc ...... -net
housing SIoclr. .-ithl" the City, could decrease. The best way 10 offset the lowe .. densi:)'
designalions is 10 bIankeI the City', commercial are .. wi!h underlying llousing zones, where
~. Octside of tbe City', industrial zones, whiclo present serio", land use conflicts
and eme....,DCY service ;'sue. in incorporating residential developmenl, all cI Palo Alto'.
re!.IiI and even some service commercial areas could be coosidered suitable andIoc desirable
for residenlial development. DowntOWll Palo Alto, California A venllC, and large srre:ches
of the EI Camino Real coold be zODed 10 allow for either residential oc commercial, and if
the discretioruuy approval process is limited 10 site planning and desip considerations, ..
opposed 10 use or ROidential density, we could anticipate greater receplivity 10 housing
developments throcgbout the City.
While nearly an of the City's commercial zones ostensibly allow foc underlying residential,
the deveIopmeOt "",!rlctions virtually preclude such proposals wilhoot going Ihroogh the
Planned Community Zone process. There are two fundarDenlal mar1ret reasons why we
mighl anticipate housing proposals on commercially zoned land, if the zoning permilted.
One is dJa! the City'. absorption of Neighbodlood Commercial zoning may wen be Iimiled
10 our existing neighborbood commercial centers (based on the mar1ret trade area as defined
in the Midlowa Mar1ret Analysis), and the second is thaI the commercial real estale marJeet
for re!.IiI and resldenlial is very comparable; indeed. lower density residential land currently
commands even higher property valllCs ct.a.~ llOIl-spe<:ialty rewl commercial.
A key facIor in the land "alue issue is the availab.uty of larger p<q>erties for either reWl
or residential development. Large volume relailer> demand very large sites. which are
almost ~1eJ!l in Palo Alto, .nd the) generally pay the least .... ""unt of doilars per
square fooc of land in comparison 10 specialty retzil or residential. This would suggest that
presouteI foe hooslng sites would be greater !han those for map retailen, and that is
substantiated by the proposed !ingle fanu.."y and townbouse project on Ibe closed,
commcrciaDy designated Hyatt Cabana !ire. IMereni in Ihe City's housing policies has bee.
the promoIiO<I of very large .ites for housing over commercial use, whereas the community
reactioo 10 large housing projects (which bigger !ires facilitate) has olten beeE negative.
Current resistance 10 higber density housing on the Stanford West housing project is a case
in point. III contrast, small iD-fill housing projecls compatilJle with their surroundings have
Ion& been acttp!ed in the community, probably because building massing and the
...,.7 or 12
:":-
("
.. ~ .~,
. -.I .
prdikn.tion of !he same housing prod"" ... i. """tun!!)" <:<>ntrolled by \be smaller sites
available ro.. developmel>!_ On tile flip side, very .mall (and particularly sball<>w)
commercial pr<>peI1ie. are dLfficult k> redevelop. and !'e-D", of existing DOO-<:OOIplying
COIIlmerciaI structures in Palo Alto is an expensive pcop<l$t60n roc buildlng 0WtIen. Under
present codes, any viable fe-use of an eWling commercial "uMmg necessitates bo!b seismic
upgra<Ie and fire sprirJdering, improve"",ots "'hie!> can di .. uade many commerciallenants
unless !he buikftn& owner i. willing k> &bsorb those costs. The llitter bas bee •• key fac10r
in attempting k> facilitate buildiog rehabilitation of tile Midtown SIlopping Center.
If we consider the p!operty owners' desires for m8.J<imizing building and/or l."d value a
. primary motivating CaCl<>r, then flexibility in 1and use and ease 0( proces, is key 10 working
with those economic iocentives. In addition, property location and sulTOOnding' are always
unique 10 • developed community, as iB me personal financial position of any individual
pt<¥rtY owner. "The 1radi6ona! view of ",bat is an appropriate use of any partkular
p!c~1y does no! necessarily take iI>!o SCCOOIll ecooomk or personal fina:>cial
con.'lidenlIions, and may therefore run coulller 10 ",bat is achievable land use planning. For
cXll.Dlple, the City Cooncil recently approved • P'.anned Community zoni ng 10 allow ro.. !he
minor expusioo of the exi.ting Towoboose Mo1eI DI! the EI Camino Real into !he adjacelll
pr<¥J1y, which was zoned for medium densi!)" residential. A. publicly perceived, the City
Council's approval successfuny incorporated It .. desires of the future property owner, hi.
tracIc record in operating a very weD-run !DOIe1 on the adjaoeDl property, and the
unlikelihood 0( any future property owner developing three housing units on Ibat sile. In
approving the project, the coly expressioo of regret from the City Cooncil was lhat \toOre
.... 110 odler p<oces$ avaJ1able Ie the property owner Ie pursue \be application other !hAn
Planned Communi!)" zoning.
In summary, where housing is appropriare w;tbin a commercial area, the", sbot:ld be an
underlying /loosing deri~1ion wilh process .pproval that allows roc equal tteatment 0(
bcusing Ie commercial development proposals. If houring is considered 10 be more
appropria:e !ban commercial on • particular site, • conditional use permit Ie allow foe
commcrciaI coold be established in the zoning regulations. In reverse, if rommercial is
considered 10 be more appropriate or desirable t1uin bousing (as CD larger, more accessible
silts), housing could be • conditioual use. Such a provision would no( preclude either
cp60n and would allow for a casc-by<ase analysis on e .. issues, before the appropriate
legislative staff member or body, outside of !he presenlly (orced Planned Community Zone
proces.!. If after application of a p3I ticular boosing zone some other residential use is
deemed more appropriate, either the developer or !he City could initiate a rezoning action
Ie initiate the change i. land use (whid. wool" incorporate density and housing product
type). while design issues would remain before the designated approving body. The
",.1 vi U
. '-
-.
., ·it_,_;~:
" !--:,,'"';~! .
. -,:
odvan'.age 10 !he Jailer pro<:ess is great,. in that the acoo.. before the City Council (upon
recom"""",",tioIt of the Planning Commissloo) could be based on traditional 1and llSe
coosidentioos and without detailed project dnwings. If approval i. granted, bowe-,·er, the
e.~taOOns of both !he c:ommunity and the developer would be for • well-defined housing
proIotype. This is one ,...y Ibat the Com:;rehensive Plan .... dvisory Commitlee',
rwxnmendations for senoitiv. in·fill omall projects withlll single family ueas coold be
aocommodafed wltboul the current unpredictability 10 the residents of lraditiooa: multiple
famlly %OIling application, <lC the peril 10 the project propooent of provicfwg detailed
drawings and participating in llengt.~y &pprOl'a} process prior 10 Cit] Council detennina!icn
of whether !he fundamental use is appropria",. In """'Y WI)'S, the suggestloru ia this report
follow l!!e City Council', objectlve, in eSlablishing the pro·applkation screening process
over I year ago.
In cootrast 10 bcusir.g ooIy projects, mixed use projects involve I combination of bodt use
and silc and desip issues. Since current lending instituticnal practice and real e.state
madeIability of mixed use proje<,'!s work again't sucb developme"ts, development pressure,
10 coe&te opportunilies for mixed use projects is minimal. F,001 an urban design
pelspec6v., however, an accoounod.ticn of mixed use projects is highly desirable,
parIicuIarIy if such projects are subj«fed 10 an opproval process which has • rug!! degree
of predic(ahility and DO 'public benefil' cool for the bouoing portion. Nonetbeles., mixed
..... p<qjects do involve both use and desigu issues not eDdemic 10 residential or commercial
ooIy projects, I facIoc !hat s\Jggeol! I different approval proce.ss than ArchileCtural Review
BoanIooIy. One solution 10 !he developmenl review procel' dilemma of mixed use projects
!hat eorourages residential and does DOl penalize commercia! (",bore already permitted) is
10 allow ground floor commerclaJ(residen!ial projeclS wilhin commercial zone., subject 10
I modified versloo of the City's current Site and Design approval process, w~re the
Planning Commis';ou could focus 00 .oe issues, and the Architectural Review Board on
siting and design. with appeal 0D!y 10 Cit] Council (with fun recognition !hal • Cit)' Charter
lJDeDdmc!ll would be necessary 10 accomplish !he latter). Properly structured, however,
such • process 'fo'OIil4 encourage subslaJltial public review before lb. City Council', desip
and land use approval bodies, while ,till maintaining Cily Council decision-maldng authority
OIl appeal. Projects tIat incorporate retaIl, oc office commercial wllhilo residential only
zoning should be subject 10 either !be Planned Community zoning process, if retained iJlllle
Cit]'s zoning regulations, wit!> required pub& beren, for the inlroducticn of commercial
witl-Ja an ~ zoned for residential, oc by change in !be City's Comprehensive Plan and
zoning 10 allow for the commercial com~nt of the project.
3, . EqIiJnII/qIt oJdn~rninll'rocus, MpartDfliujobllO/J MlIIII4erlaty
AlJmIq'. ~,for aiu4 ILW projms triI1Jia IIu O/J's aJIIIIIIerCiDl _ M
CMR: lO,"
.'
. -. -.".
:',. -
lrIlA oIlltm.';.., tllNln,-nt8, 6u".b/ie hujil o,dt~ lloo£'.., "",.",. 0'. aiz«l
_ pn;.t:t s1MIuJ4 h 1tWi~
Proceases discussed in conjunctioo with 1&:2 above add. .... , many oC!he issues related 1<>
!he on-,oo.g joint City Managec/City Attorney', study oC development review processes.
4. 2'h £it)' IIIMIM IlIII'JIINf ,ercrfirtg ~ NJDI'I 1M Stsu of c.ti/f1nII4 '"
.tis ' requirtJ4f .... duzre..,.,. 1M btub ol,.,w.u or 6UJ ng'JIfU 1I'idWI
• Sa ~ B;q AnoI!. I7u cu, 01 ,oW Abo'. __u.f1IIl '" "" 01VII
IIDIuIII, JH"1fPDM6 rtIIfII4 _ k dl-lrdMai ., Ill9 dulttg. UI tII/ot:rdimt JIIVCftS.
S. 2'h £it)' IIIMIM «qImw '"" 1M SIIJtl of Cdi/ondA OJJia IIf Bousag tm4
C--uai{jo DeP.,.".....r (BCD) Ih ~ of IIIJowiag ... "ia«1IIbe Nset/"
It .. ., ~ "'.aIisfJ.1O'fimI "Idte cu,' •• .,.,.,~, Sado. "Ojj'_ woahI a-POiD:II: tfu nIIU1PiII of uJstilIg np/JlIimu t1UIt fI¥e4e lloe n og
... or J till, wIdh.jiIdIIg. pwIit:IDWe IfIIPITI'I1l procas for HIlI 1M dse10per
ad 1M t:ili:wuJ. . -
SIaie Hoosiog Element law requires !be City 10 study alternatives in order 10 satisfy housing
al1ocations, and bodt governmenral and DOO-govemmenral constraints (". be included in !be
1IUIlysis. Recommended c/wIges may include anything from revised zoning rcgula60na Eo
providing inceDlives to encourage boosing. Saclt changes can be used 10 gain approval of
!he Housing Element by HCD. however, satisfying !his requiremenl doe. 00( reduce 11Ie
obligation unde-z Slare law 10 identify adequale sires for !he fair ohare boosing allocation.
How one cIeti""" adequate sites is • negod.ting process with HCD, however. and is partially
dependent upon the total housing clemem pad"'ge before them.
Ii. EzplQrlllio4 of (h. leglll tm4 polk:! implicllliollf, ijlllJ}, 01 tit. flU 01 cOlll11lerdol
impact lUI 101' DCqUisiJio4 of uisti"g 60ulill, slod: lor lIS •... low tm4 m~ratt
I1tctmtt Aousillg. ExpIcrr t1o.leosibiJil;y 01 SIol. legislaliOIt thI11 allows low tm4
"'~rat. inalme uistiIog reFI/QJ /;o;,sill, acquisiIio,. l'rl1graml '" meet 8JJI. 01
CD1ifondA BCD requirements lor tit. 'crealien' oj I1W fJp. 01 Itouli"g.
The Palo Alto Housing C<><poratioo's Rental Housing Acquisition Pre>gram (RHAP) h ..
been ill exisreoc.. since 19S0 and baa added 91 units 10 II", I<lw-inrome housing slock. The
RHAP program h .. proven 10 be is or moce expensive than ne .... <Xlnstrucoon in 1I'.rms of
the amount oC local funds added 10 the projeot b=i"se of lb. cost oC rehabilitation oi
existing p<¥rties and the availability of tax credits and federal funding for ne ....
COIIStroctioo. The City is currentl,-exploring the use of commercial impact fees for
CMR: I~ PM;:. 11 '" Il
-.,-,.
\ :. '
.'( /
./
•
-.
'--"-.-
ocquisition of existing housing .toci for 0'" as loll/ and moderate income housing. Whi1e
HCD doeI JOllow !he City \0 coonl !he units cooverled frl)f!l m.net n.te \0 affoo!ab!e u
'dfordable units', cbey will DOl COOn! them as new llousing units 10 meelthe City', Fair
Shan: AllocsIio<I,
ADDlDQN.\L mSCH<jSlQN
III respome 10 1M public testimony received at the January 3', J 995 City CooDcil meeting
"" hoosing policies, the Council feqll'!sled additiooallnfonnation regarding 'mother-in-law'
VDits with; .. the City. Staff 'IWS s~uently eon£acted by represental;"e, of the Palo Allo
Board of Real'.ors ,.....que.ling funher analysis of the issues surroullding secorJd units, and
offering 10 assist in providing information and real .Slate industry feedback on these issues,
This discussion is in re;ponse 10 their comments.
The City of Palo Alto collage unit onIinance was adopted in order 10 COOIply with State of
California law requiring allowance of second units within single (annl)' zones. r" essence,
cbe Slalc law dicta.ted that ... ·bile zoning parameters could be formed governing .. -eom units
within. city's rlngIe family zoo..J are .... there could be 00 outright proIubitioo of suck uses.
In ~se, the City of Palo Alto adq>led • se-eorJd unit ordinance that required • minimum
IQI _ of 8,lOO square w-..l, and four on-site parking ~s, two of .. hieh must be
covered. Tandem parking is DOl permitted within the front yard setback. Finally, cbe
second OlIit must be located in an 1CCeSS<X)' structure DOl less than 12 feet from the main
house. The review process used 10 oown compliance with ordinance regulations governing
<:oIIage VDits is the issuance of a zoning adminislralor use permit.
Of COIlCMl 10 the Community, however, is DOlIhose units thaI are legal bulllwse that have
been illegally COI1SIructed wit1lout benefit of permjt. The Plllo Alto Board of Rullo<>
estinta!es that there are between 15().300 ilIegol secooo units within !he City. Code violations
may exist in some, and Iellding institutions .~ y away from financing bomu wIle« work is
prepared widloul beoetit of permjl. Given Pa!.:> Alto's very stroIlg rental market aDd !he
bip cost of bousing, added inCOOIe from reDial units will conlinue 10 be enticing 10 some
homeowners. However,!he stnA.-mre ofllle 'c~ge unit" regulatloos virtuaIIy preclude
many .,.".. of the City from ultimately complying, Standard Jots are generally smaller than
!I,100 square feet, and the requirement that such unit. be located within a detached sIructuI'e,
with no !andem parking wi.thia the froot yard setback, eliminates many south Palo Alto
subdivisioos froo. ob!aining compliance. If the City Council's desire is 10 oow. building
code rompliance for existing VDits, and 10 allow for addi tiona] secood units within all areas
«the CiIy.1lIe regulations need 10 be substanlially changed. Removal of !he minimum Joe
size, allowance for ei!her detached or attached second units, and reduction of !he re<jUired
on-sile parking would facilitate compliance Ihroogbout !he City. It should be kpt in wind
eMIt: 141:95 r-a. II 0111
;
./
dl8! the use permit ptOOCS' aJ1o,.', for pla,ming review 0( the partkular characteristics 0(
eaclt sile. Ia lieu 0( cIlange. 10 the CiIy" ordinance, ." aB8l'O.sive code eruorcement effort
coupled ,.;tI! an amnesty program (IS described in the accompanying CMR 139:95) could
be embarlced upon. but any proposed amnesty program only .ddre .. es ellistiog cooditions.
Facilitation 0( new second units would requiro amendments \0 the Cily oroina""".
Alternatives are disawed in the occompanying CMlt 09:95, pr-..pared by the DirecIoc 0(
Planning and Community EDvirorunenl
"SCAl, IMPACT
No dlroct fiscal impact.
ENYIRQNMENl'AL A"Sf'.SSMF.NT
Nare required.
A1]'ACfIMENTS!EXlIIB
NODe.
PREPARED BY: Carol Jansen, Manager, Economic Resources Planning
coY MANA6£.""",V"", ~
BE TR NY
AsslS!an II)' anager
cc, Sandra Eakins, Co-Cbair, CPAC
Will Beckeu, Co-Cboir. CPAC
Anthony Klein, CPAC
..... uoCu
. ':"