Planning & Transportation Commission - October 30, 2024

Commission recommends tighter lighting and bird-safe glazing standards

The Planning and Transportation Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that the City Council adopt revised lighting, rooftop-garden and bird-friendly-design ordinances, while strengthening several provisions beyond the staff draft. The lighting and bird-friendly components passed in separate unanimous motions. The commission’s action was advisory, with council consideration expected in winter 2025.

For outdoor lighting, the commission recommended reducing allowable light trespass from 0.5 to 0.1 foot-candles and cutting the maximum duration for motion-sensor lighting from 10 minutes to five minutes. The proposed ordinance would set a 2700 Kelvin standard. Commissioners also recommended applying the lighting requirements to new or replacement fixtures citywide, with a hardship exception, despite concerns that replacements made without permits could be difficult to enforce. The rooftop-garden amendment would move existing rooftop-lighting provisions into the revised lighting rules.

The recommended bird-friendly standards would allow no more than 10% untreated glazing on each facade of nonresidential development citywide and all development in bird-sensitive areas. Residential development outside those areas could have up to 40% untreated glazing per facade. The proposed map would cover areas east of Highway 101 and west of Foothill Expressway and add 300-foot buffers along natural-creek centerlines between those roads. The commission also recommended removing an exemption for new additions to historic structures.

The bird-friendly motion retained a requirement that no untreated, unbroken glazing exceed 24 square feet, although its interaction with the percentage-based limits was not resolved in the meeting record. Estimates discussed at the meeting said bird-friendly elements could add approximately 2% to 10% to overall construction costs; one local office-project estimate put the increase at 1.5% to 2% of core-and-shell costs. The commission also called for public education, more information about hardship exceptions and possible future consideration of indoor commercial lighting.

Panel discusses micromobility study without authorizing it

The Planning and Transportation Commission provided feedback on a possible study of shared bicycles, e-bikes and scooters but did not authorize the study, approve funding or vote on a pilot program. Agenda materials estimated the feasibility study would cost approximately $60,000.

Staff said any shared micromobility program would require public funding and identified Stanford’s potential participation as an unresolved issue. Agenda materials also listed a staffing need of 0.50 full-time-equivalent position involving at least two staff members during a pilot’s first six months.

Commissioners asked for a study to examine long-term financial viability, operator interest, predictable and equitable pricing, staff workload, theft, maintenance, parking enforcement and age restrictions. They also sought consideration of devices suitable for older adults, cargo bikes and scooters, along with performance measures extending beyond ridership to vehicle-mile, greenhouse-gas and congestion reductions. Coordination with Stanford and Mountain View, particularly along the San Antonio Corridor, was another priority.

The feedback may inform the scope of a future feasibility study, but the commission gave no formal direction to begin or fund one.

Staff targets early 2025 for Safety Action Plan review

Transportation staff said it expects to bring a Safety Action Plan to the commission in early 2025, with January identified as the hoped-for timing. The plan will be based largely on five years of collision data and is expected to address monitoring, performance measures and data needs tied to a goal of zero injuries across travel modes. No commission action was taken.

Commissioner Cari Templeton asked staff to identify what support would be needed from the City Council and other agencies to provide more timely and detailed collision-injury information. Staff said detailed severe-injury data is delayed and may require additional analysis.

Primary sources

Watch the meeting on YouTube · Read the official meeting packet