Dear City,

For reference and as a follow-on to last Tuesday's Council discussion about
how Gross Floor Area is defined and used in the measurement of Floor Area
Ratio, I attach a chart comparing definitions of what is counted by the
cities of Burlingame, Palo Alto, Redwood City, South San Francisco,
Sunnyvale, and Menlo Park. Following that page are verbatim copies of the
definitions in the cities' respective Municipal Code. The comparison chart
has been updated with typed inputs in some fields to replace the handwritten
notes you received that evening.

The genesis of this work was simply my own curiously about how other cities
define these terms. As mentioned Tuesday evening, I was quite surprised that
five of five cities I researched are consistent in specifying that they
count project components that apparently Menlo Park has stopped counting at
some point (e.g., corridors, covered balconies, elevator shafts, mechanical
equipment rooms).

As several speakers, myself included, tried to communicate, it's important
that rules be clear and written. Everyone concerned at any stage of
development needs to know what the rules are so they know what can be built.
It has been quite disturbing to learn that:

   - The definitions related to Residential development specify how to
   count a number of project design features (e.g., a stairwell is only
   counted on one floor), but only a few features for Commercial development
   are specifically excluded from being counted. Yet, staff "recognizes"
   numerous exclusions based on unwritten "interpretations."
   - Definitions apparently have evolved over time through a series of
   unwritten "interpretations" that benefit those who ask for them but not
   those who read the Zoning Ordinance definitions literally and design a
   project accordingly.
   - Only a few "interpretations" are based on specified exclusions. For
   example, it is understandable that there could be an "interpretation" that
   below grade parking is meant to be excluded when the Municipal Code
   specifies that "covered parking, and other structured parking" are excluded
   (section 16.04.325). However, it is not at all understandable how such
   things as elevator shafts and service and mechanical equipment rooms could
   be "interpreted" as being excluded when the definition states it "means the
   area within the surrounding walls of a building measured to the outside
   surfaces of the exterior walls or portions thereof, exclusive of vent
   shafts, courts, covered parking, and other structured parking." (also
   section 16.04.325)
   - There is no written trail of when these "interpretations" occurred,
   how they were justified, or what sort of environmental analysis was
   conducted of potential impacts city-wide.
   - There is no written list of these "interpretations," bringing to
   mind such questions as: How have new planning and building staff have been
   trained, How do project applicants know what is counted, How does a new
   "interpretation" get flagged as a policy issue, How could the public weigh
   in on these.

I urge the city henceforth to disclose any "interpretation" as a potentially
precedent-setting Policy Issue that is discussed separately from any
particular project and subjected to a formal process of evaluation
(including comparison with other cities' Municipal Codes) and environmental
review, resulting in formal codification as appropriate. What has happened,
even if for the best of intentions, is sloppiness at best. The city can and
should do much better.

Given other pressing matters such as the need to create a plan for El Camino
and to address economic sustainability, this is not the time to create a
"perfect" set of definitions but rather to make more clear what is currently
specified in the Zoning Ordinance relative to the 3 bullets at the top of
page 3 of the Staff Report. This is not the time to codify "interpretations"
that have crept in over time; these require additional formal and thorough
evaluation - particularly because many of these do not appear to be the norm
in nearby cities. Keep this effort simple and stick with your top
priorities!

Sincerely, Patti Fry, Menlo Park resident and former Planning Commissioner