To: Planning and Transportation Commission

Subject: Opposition to proposal for 195 Page Mill Road and Park Blvd by Court House Plaza Company

Date: August 11, 2004

From: Dorothy Bender

I find this application very troubling.

=========================================================

Points about this project:

1. It is an abuse of the Planned Community (PC) ordinance.

2. Inappropriately suggests the transfer of public property to a private developer.

3. Promotes development in excess of existing zoning.

4. It is incompatible in scale with the existing neighborhood.

5. Highly questionable peak trip calculation

6. Park Blvd lacks the capacity to absorb more cars.

7. It will make parking and traffic in area too heavy and will harm local merchants and residents.

8. The 2,000 s.f. of retail is less than 1 % of the entire project. This amount should not qualify this project as “mixed-use”.

Additional points:

A PC allows developers to exceed city regulations because the proposal provides some sort of public benefit. I believe this designation gives developers the benefit of a larger

project without giving anything substantial to the public in return.

This project gives the developer a windfall at the community's expense.

The PC zone allows a developer to build bigger, denser, more obtrusive projects in exchange for supposed "public benefits." In fact, there is no correlation between what the developer extracts from the city as concessions and excessive development and the so-

called public benefit. Furthermore, the city rarely enforces continuation of these so-called public benefits.

Incompatible with Comprehensive Plan:

Policy L-31 of the Comprehensive Plan states:

Develop the Cal-Ventura area as a well-designed

mixed use district with diverse land uses,

two-to three-story buildings, and a network

of pedestrian-oriented streets providing links to

California Ave.

Questions raised:

1. With developments anticipated at the Campus of Jewish Life, Mayfield, Elks Club, Rickey's, what is our actual housing deficit?

[Note: Lisa Grote said she would get the exact number of the housing deficit.]

2. Regarding our overall buildout of offices, how far along are we towards the maximum permitted in the Comp Plan.

3. I'd like to see a complete traffic impact analysis for this project.

4. Without a PC, what would this developer be entitled to?

Conclusion:

● Palo Alto will be getting the short end of the stick if it agrees to this PC.

● This designation will allow the developer to circumvent zoning regulations.

● The developer should develop this site consistent with the general zoning laws and with the comprehensive plan.

Submitted by Dorothy Bender

650-494-2227

dbender@cwnet.com