HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-06-06 Architectural Review Board Agenda Packet
City of Palo Alto Page 1
=================MEETINGS ARE CABLECAST LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 26======================
Thursday June 6, 2013
REGULAR MEETING - 8:30 AM
City Council Chambers, Civic Center, 1st Floor
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
ROLL CALL:
Board members: Staff Liaison:
Clare Malone Prichard (Chair) Russ Reich, Senior Planner
Lee Lippert (Vice Chair)
Alexander Lew Staff:
Randy Popp Diana Tamale, Administrative Associate
Naseem Alizadeh Amy French, Chief Planning Official
Jason Nortz, Senior Planner
Margaret Netto, Contract Planner
Elena Lee, Senior Planner
PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS
Please be advised the normal order of public hearings of agenda items is as follows:
Announce agenda item
Open public hearing
Staff recommendation
Applicant presentation – Ten (10) minutes limitation or at the discretion of the Board.
Public comment – Five (5) minutes limitation per speaker or limitation to three (3)
minutes depending on large number of speakers per item.
Architectural Review Board questions of the applicant/staff, and comments
Applicant closing comments - Three (3) minutes
Close public hearing
Motions/recommendations by the Board
Final vote
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. Members of the public may speak to any item not on the
agenda with a limitation of three (3) minutes per speaker. Those who desire to speak must
complete a speaker request card available from the secretary of the Board. The Architectural
Review Board reserves the right to limit the oral communications period to 15 minutes.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
May 2 & 16, 2013
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
AGENDA
City of Palo Alto Page 2
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS. The agenda may have additional
items added to it up until 72 hours prior to meeting time.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. 2080 Channing Avenue [13PLN-00166]: Request by John Tze, on behalf of Ho Holdings No.
1, LLC for Architectural Review of a master sign program for the Edgewood Plaza Shopping
Center. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of CEQA (15301) upon
Historic Resources Board determination that the project complies with the Secretary’s
Standards for Rehabilitation. Zone District: Planned Community (PC 5150).
2. 456 University Avenue [13PLN-00078]: Request by Robinson Hill Architecture on behalf of
Palo Alto Theater Corporation for Architectural Review of exterior modifications to an existing
historic building, including a front façade storefront window system, storefront openings at the
rear, and retractable covered canopy over a courtyard that would contain a bar and restaurant
seating, for a proposed eating and drinking establishment. Environmental Assessment: a
Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. Zone District: CD-C (GF)(P). The Historic
Resources Board is conducting a public hearing on this item on June 5, 2013.
MAJOR REVIEWS:
3. 490 San Antonio Road [13PLN-00140]: Request by Starkweather Bondy Architecture on
behalf of Gideon Hausner Jewish Day School for Architectural Review of a new 35 foot tall,
one-story gym and classroom building with 17,602 sq. ft. of floor area, proposed to replace two-
story buildings (two structures totaling 43,340 sq. ft. in area). Environmental Assessment:
Exempt from the provisions of CEQA (15302). Zone District: Research, Office, and Limited
Manufacturing (ROLM).
4. California Avenue Streetscape Improvements [13PLN-00211]: Request by the City of Palo
Alto Transportation Division for Architectural Review of streetscape improvements on
California Avenue, between El Camino Real and the CalTrain Station, including traffic calming
treatments, landscape elements with new street trees, street furniture, new street lighting,
parking enhancements, and a reduction from four vehicle travel lanes to two lanes.
Environmental Review: A Negative Declaration was adopted on November 28, 2011 for the
project.
5. 240 Hamilton Avenue [13PLN-00006]: Request by Ken Hayes of Hayes Group Architects on
behalf of Forest Casa Real LLC for Architectural Review of a new four-story, 50-foot, mixed-
use building with 15,000 sq. ft. of floor area, proposed to replace a 5,000 sq. ft., two-story
commercial building. Environmental Assessment: an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration have been prepared. Zone District: Downtown Community Commercial with
Ground Floor and Pedestrian Shopping combining districts (CD-C) (GF) (P).
PRELIMINARY REVIEWS:
6. 2209-2215 El Camino Real [12PLN- 00404]: Request by Karen Kim on behalf Tai Ning
Trading & Innovations Co. for Preliminary Architectural Review of a new three-story, 9,780
square foot mixed use building proposed to replace a 3,239 sq. ft., one-story commercial
City of Palo Alto Page 3
building on a 5,392 square foot lot. The proposal would include a request for a Design
Enhancement Exception (DEE), to allow the building to encroach into the 20-foot required
setback at the rear alley way. Zone District: Community Commercial (CC (2))
7. 2500 El Camino Real [13PLN-00161]: Request by Stanford Real Estate for Preliminary
Architectural Review of a new four-story, mixed use building with 70 below market rental
housing units (one, two and three bedroom units) and approximately 7,300 sq. ft. of commercial
space within a 100,000 sq. ft. building, proposed to replace a 38,416 sq. ft. commercial
building. Zone District: Commercial Service/Alternative Standards Overlay (CS (AS1)). This
item is continued to the regular meeting of June 20, 2013.
BOARD MEMBER BUSINESS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.
8. Recap of retreat discussion on Colleagues Memo.
9. Formation of subcommittees – nomination of special topics.
REPORTS FROM OFFICIALS.
Subcommittee Members: Naseem Alizadeh and Randy Popp
SUBCOMMITTEE:
10. 2080 Channing Avenue [10PLN-00198]: Request by John Tze for review of proposed shade
screen structures for the public park and other related items at the Edgewood Plaza mixed use
project. Zone: Planned Community (PC-5150) zoning district. Environmental Assessment: An
Environmental Impact Report was certified for the project in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
STAFF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW:
Project Description: Installation of two illuminated wall signs & two projecting wall (blade) signs
Applicant: Kevin Grant
Address: 278 University Avenue [13PLN-00164]
Approval Date: 5/17/13
Request for hearing deadline: 5/30/13
Project Description: New fencing and gate at an existing fire station
Applicant: Cecil Lectura, PWD Facilities
Address: 2675 Hanover Street [13PLN-00195]
Approval Date: 5/20/13
Request for hearing deadline: 6/3/13
Project Description: Installation of one internally illuminated channel letter wall sign
Applicant: Unju Lee
Address: 3375 El Camino Real [13PLN-00108]
Approval Date: 5/22/13
Request for hearing deadline: 6/4/13
City of Palo Alto Page 4
ADA. The City of Palo Alto does not discriminate against individuals with disabilities. To request accommodations to
access City facilities, services or programs, to participate at public meetings, or to learn more about the City’s compliance
with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), please contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at 650.329.2550 (voice)
or by e-mailing ada@cityofpaloalto.org.
Posting of agenda. This agenda is posted in accordance with government code section 54954.2(a) or section
54956.Recordings. A videotape of the proceedings can be obtained/reviewed by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (650)
329-2571.
Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Architectural Review Board after
distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Planning and Community
Environment Department at 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor, Palo Alto, CA. 94301 during normal
business hours.
@ w
CITY 0 F
PALO
A TO
Historic Resources Board
Architectural Review Board
Staff Report
Agenda Date: June 5, 2013 (HRB)
June 6, 2013 (ARB)
To: Historic Resources Board
Architectural Review Board
From:
Subject:
Elena Lee
Senior Planner
Department: Planning and
Community Environment
2080 Channing Avenue (aka -2170 W. Bayshore Rd.) [13PLN-00166]:
Request by John Tze, on behalf of Ho Holdings No.1, LLC for Architectural
Review of a master sign program for the Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center.
Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of CEQ A (15301) upon
Historic Resources Board determination that the project complies with the
Secretary's Standards for Rehabilitation. Zone District: Planned Community (PC
5150).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Historic Resources Board (HRB) review the proposed master sign
program, including the re-facingofthe original Edgewood Shopping Center moniunent sign, under
Standard 9 of the Secretary's Standards for Rehabilitation (compatibility with the historic Edgewood
Shopping Center), and provide their final comments regarding the signage to the Architectural ·
Review Board.
Staff recommends that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) recommend the Director of Planning
and Community Environment approve the proposed project based upon the Architectural Review
Findings (Attachment A) and conditions of approval (Attachment B) attached to the staff report.
BACKGROUND
Project History
The site was the subject of a Planned Community Rezoning approved in 2012 to update the
existing grocery building, rehabilitate one smaller historic retail building, relocate and
rehabilitate the second historic retail building, construct a small 9,000 sq. ft. park, and construct
ten single family homes. In September 2012, a stop work order was issued because the historic
building that was to be disassembled and reconstructed onsite was demolished illegally. On
March 4,2013, the City Council authorized the continued construction of the grocery store, the
remaining historic Building 2, six of the homes and other onsite and offsite inlprovements. The
reconstruction of the demolished historic Building 1 is pending the certification of a
Page 1
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and an amendment to the Planned Community
Zoning. The Planned Community zoning also authorized a slight reorientation of the existing
historic monument sign to accommodate parking lot improvements and to provide a better
visibility to customers driving along Embarcadero Road. The applicant had provided preliminary
sign designs for the historic monument and wall signs during the Planned Community Rezoning
process. However, those were schematic proposals only. The drawings had been included for
general input on whether the sign design approach was acceptable. No objections to the '
preliminary designs were expressed during any of the hearings.
Edgewood Plaza is a commercial shopping center built between 1956 and 1958 by Joseph
EichlerlEichler Homes and A. Quincy Jones of Jones and Emmons. The center was originally built
with the existing grocery building (1957), two retail buildings (1958), an office building that
formerly housed the office of Eichler Homes (1959), and a gas station (1957). The office building
and gas station sites are not part of the subject shopping center. Edgewood Plaza is not listed on The
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) , the California Register of Historical Resources
(CRHR), nor on the Palo Alto Historic Inventory. Although this site is not on the City's inventory,
because it has been deemed eligible for both registers, it is considered a historic. resource.
Accordingly, staff is requesting the HRB's input on the historic component of this project. As the
center is not on the City's Historic Inventory, the HRB is not required by the City's Municipal Code
to make a formal recommendation to the ARB. Given the historic importance of the site, the HRB's
comments will be important and helpful during the entitlement process. The HRB's feedback on the
monument sign is the most critical component of the review. Per the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), a project is considered to mitigate potential historic impacts to a less than
significant level by following the Secretary of Interior's Rehabilitation. The project has been
evaluated to confirm compliance and is compatible with the historic shopping center.
Master Sign Program and Previous ARB Approval
The master sign program is intended to create consistent signage that is compatible architecturally
and historically for Edgewood Plaza. The Director has separately approved signage for the grocery
building (Building 3) following recommendation for Architectural Review approval by the ARB.
The approved grocery store signage included the installation of one new halo illuminated wall sign
and two illuminated blade or projecting signs. Those signs were designed to be compatible with the
mid-century modem Eichler aesthetic that typifies the center. This master sign program includes a
proposal to reface the existing historic monument sign, install two new freestanding signs and wall
signs for retail buildings. The sign program ensures consistency of the remaining signs with the
recently approved grocery store signs.
The shopping center, Eichler's only commercial project, was designed with a distinctive design,
which the Planned Community zoning required to be maintained, consistent with the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. The buildings consist of a post and beam structure
system, 8"x 8" concrete blocks, vertical redwood detailing and large glazed panels. The grocery
store, although designed to be compatible with the Eichler design, has been determined to be not
historic. The approximately 20,000 sq. ft. grocery building consists of a concrete masonry block
base, aluminum storefront system, cement plaster walls and the wood beams indicatiye of the
Eichler design. In addition to the beams, the other retail buildings would also feature a turned
Page 2
parapet, concrete blocks, vertical redwood siding and tall glazed panels with transom windows.
The signs were reviewed with the City's Historic Preservation Planner as well as the City historic
consultant, Charlie Duncan of Carey & Company to confirm historic compatibility while still
meeting the center's signage needs.
DISCUSSION
Purpose
A master sign program is intended to provide design standards for all signage on the subject site
to follow, and to streamline the approval process. This ensures a certain level of design and
consistency. If a master sign program were to be approved, ARB review would not be required
for signs that meet the criteria -only staff level review would be required as a part of Building
Permit review. The sign program would allow a streamlining of the design review process for
the applicant, ensuring predictability for both the City and the applicant.
Historic Monument Sign
As discussed above, the existing historic monument sign was approved to be located within the
same general area, rotated to be parallel with Embarcadero Road to allow for better, visibility and
to facilitate the redesign of the parking lot. An image of the original sign is provided on the third
page of the plan set. The monument sign's frame has been placed in its new, previously
approved location, although actual signage has not been installed pending approval of a new sign
program. The double sided monument sign would consist of:
1) a 35-foot 10-inch tall 9 feet wide metal frame to be refinished in a muted moss green
color (SW 6173 Cocoon),
2) an approximately 130 sq. ft. tall trapezoidal aluminum marquee panel to be installed at
the top of the frame,
3) three aluminum sign panels to be installed between below the marquee sign, and
4) a 33 feet wide, 2 feet tall horizontal sign at the base of the monun1ent sign that will
feature the historic metal "Edgewood Plaza" identification sign. The shopping center
identification sign would 'be composed of a metal panel either in clear aluminum or
painted an off white color (Sherwin Williams 7049 Nuance) and the original historic
"Edgewood Plaza" metal letters refinished in bronze. This horizontal sign panel would
also be supported by a 4-inch, secondary metal post, similar to the original panel.
The Master Sign Program would allow a marquee sign at the top in the shape of a trapezoid,
typical of 1950' s signage and similar to the original "Lucky" sign. The aluminum cabinet sign
would, at its maximum, measure 21 feet wide at the top, 16 feet wide at the bottom, 7 feet tall
and 2 feet deep. The lettering andlor logo would be required to be no larger than 70% of the area
of its sign panel. The current proposal would be to place a sign for the grocery tenant (The Fresh
Market) at the top of the historic sign as shown on page 12 of the plan set. The tenant signs
below the marquee sign have been changed and are now proposed as shown on page 4 of the' plan
set and are discussed in the following section. The sign would, at 114 sq. ft., be slightly smaller
than the maximum that would be allowed. The aluminum cabinet would be green with white
letters that spell out "The Fresh Market" and these letters would be internally illuminated. The
green background would be required to be opaque enough so that only the letters would be
illuminated. Staff has some concern about the proportion of the letters relative to the overall sign
Page 3
area. Staff has included for the HRB' s and ARB's consideration condition number 9 to reduce
the letters by 10% to allow for more space around the letters.
The applicant is also proposing three additional panels below the Fresh Market marquee sign for
Chase Bank and other tenants not yet identified. The sign panels would be attached to the metal
frame along the sides and a minimum of 10 inches of space would be provided between the panel
and the frame, preserving the open look of the original sign while still allowing for more current
signage requirements. The lowest tenant sign panel would be large enough to provide space for
four tenant names. The upper two panels each would measure approximately 6 feet wide and 3
feet, 4 inches tall for a total sign area of20 sq. ft. The lowest panel would measure 6 feet wide
and 4 feet 10 inches tall for a total sign area of29 sq. ft. Each sign panel would be
approximately 24 inches in depth. The colors of the sign would be required to be compatible
with the approved colors of the shopping center and with the Eichler design, while allowing for
individual tenant identity. A color and material sample board will be available for review at the
hearing.
The applicant has also provided on page 13 of the plan set elevations for the panel proposed for
the Chase Bank t~ provide context. If approved, the size of this panel sign would be reduced to 6
feet wide and 3 feet, 4 inches tall, as proposed in the Master Sign Program. Staffbelieves that, as
proposed, the historic sign is appropriately designed and consistent with the Secretary of Interior
Standards for Rehabilitation. Per Standard 9, new additions, exterior alterations, or related new
construction shall avoid destroying the historic materials that characterize the property. New
work, while differentiated from the old, shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale an
architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the site.
MonYment Signs
The applicant proposes two double sided, internally illuminated, metal cabinet monument signs to
serve as directories. One directory sign is proposed at the St. Francis Driveway. The second
directory sign is proposed to be located at the primary Embarcadero Road driveway, near the historic
sign. Each directory sign would measure 84 inches wide, 36 inches tall and 10 inches in depth.
Each side would consist of five aluminum sign panels with white polycarbonate borders and satin
black stand-offs at the comer of each sign. The center panel would be for the grocery store, The
Fresh Market, and would measure 3.19 sq. ft. The four other panels to be placed on either side of the
center panel would be approximately 2.33 sq. ft. in size each. The lettering and logo would be
limited to 70% of the area of its sign panel. The site's address in metal lettering would be placed at
the bottom center of the sign. Similar to the historic sign, only the letters of each sign would be
illuminated, as show-through copy. The background would be opaque so that the light would not be
visible. The frame of the sign would be finished in a muted moss green color (SW 6173 Cocoon),
similar to the historic sign. These monument signs have been designed to be low profile so as to not
detract from the overall look of the center.
BladelProjecting Sign
The master sign program also includes two internally illuminated blade signs that would be located
on the southwest corner of the grocery building over each main entry door. These two signs have
already been approved with the Fresh Market signage and are also proposed to be incorporated into
Page 4
the Master Sign Program. The double faced aluminum signs, with a maximum size letter size of9
sq. ft., would measure 3 feet 3 inches in height and 3 feet and 6 inches wide, for a total of 12.25
square feet. A condition of approval was included requiring that only the letter or logo would be
illuminated. Staffbelieves that given the size of the building and setback from the streets, that the
proposed projecting signs are supportable.
Wall Signs
The applicant proposes two types of wall signs for each tenant of the commercial buildings; both
types would comply with the Sign Code and would not need any sign exceptions with respect to
maximum wall sign area. The first sign type would be an aluminum sign mounted under the canopy,
with a 2-inch thick metal raceway, metal standoffs, and acrylic backing where there are distinctive
overhangs. The channel letters would be made of metal and halo-illuminated with white LED lights.
The sign would have a maximum height of 22 inches and a width of approximately 16 feet, with
letter and! or logo heights 9f 18 inches. As shown on page 13 of the plan set, one of these signs
would be for a Building 2 tenant Chase Bank. The Chase Bank sign would measure 22 inches tall
and 105 inches (8 ft. 2 Y4") tall. Most of the signs would be under the canopy mounted type. The
second sign type would be a wall mounted sign where there is no overhang. The wall mOU1,1ted signs
would be channel letters, metal signs, halo-illuminated with white LED lights. The letters would be
18 inches tall and together, 16 feet wide at most. The sizes would ultimately be dependent upon the
size of each tenant's frontage but would not exceed these numbers to ensure an appropriate balance.
Plan set pages 15-16 illustrate how the building may appear with multiple tenant signs.
One 107 sq. ft. halo-illuminated, aluminum channel letter sign was approved for the Fresh Market.
The sign would have a maximum height of approximately 2 feet 8 inches and a width of 40 feet and
4 inches. The channel letters would measure 3 inches deep and would be offset 1 and Yz inches from
the wall. The proposed wall sign area is within the maximum allowed by the Sign Ordinance. The
sign was reviewed by the historic preservation planner to confirm that the sign, although not located
on a historically significant building, would be compatible with the adjacent historic buildings. The
two color schemes for the wall sign would consist of (1) an off white (Sherwin Williams 7049
Nuance) if the tenant has a dark lettering or (2) a plum brown color (Sherwin Williams 6272 plum) if
the tenant has a lighter lettering. Staffbelieves that the proposed sign types are compatible in design,
scale and size for the shopping center. The signs are architecturally compatible with the Eichler
buildings and the signs already approved for the grocery building.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project would be an alteration to an existing facility and new construction not exceeding
10,000 square feet qualifying for a Class 3 Categorical Exemption per section 15301 of the
California Environmental Quality Act upon the Historic Resources Board determination that the
project complies with the Secretary's Standards for Rehabilitation.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Architectural Review Findings
B. Draft Conditions of Approval
C. Project Plans (Board members only)
Page 5
COURTESY COPIES
John Tze, Ho Holdings No.1 LLC
Prepared by: Elena Lee, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Amy French, AICP, Chief Planning Official
Page 6
ATTACHMENT A
FINDINGS FOR APPROV AL
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STANDARDS FOR REVIEW
. 2170 Bayshore Road (Edgewood Plaza Master Sign Program)
File No. 13PLN-00166
The design and architecture of the proposed improvements, as conditioned, furthers the goals and
purposes of the ARB ordinances as it complies with the Architectural Review findings, as
required in Chapter 18.76.020 of the PAMC.
1) The design is consistent and compatible with the applicable elements of the city's
Comprehensive Plan in that the proposed project is consistent with policy L-18:
Encourage the upgrading and revitalization of selected Centers in a manner that is
compatible with the character of surrounding neighborhoods. The proposed signage was
designed to be compatible with the scale of the shopping center while respecting the
nearby residential neighborhood.
2) The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site in that the design is
compatible with the architecture within Edgewood Plaza.
3) The design is appropriate to the function of the project in that it accommodates a retail
use and is compatible with the pedestrian attributes of Edgewood Plaza.
4) In areas considered by the Board as having a unified design character, the design is
compatible with such character in that the space will be designed in a consistent manner
with Edgewood Plaza.
6) The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site in that the
space is compatible with the newly designed and original spaces in Edgewood Plaza.
12) The materials, textures, colors and details of construction and plant materials are an
appropriate expression to the design and function and whether the same are compatible
with the adjacent and neighboring structures, landscape elements and functions in that the
materials are of high quality and appropriately express the use of the space. The space
incorporates similar details and colors of the surrounding spaces while still maintaining a
unique design.
ARB standards #5, 7-11 and 13-15 are not applicable to the project.
ATTACHMENT B
CONDITIONS OF APPROV AL
2170 Bayshore Road (Edgewood Plaza Master Sign Program)
File No; 13PLN-00166
PLANNING DIVISION
1. The project shall be implemented as shown on the plans dated received May 30, 2013 on
file with the City of Palo Alto Planning Division except as modified by these conditions
of approval.
2. A copy of the ARB approval letter shall be printed on the plans submitted for building
permits (if required).
3. The project must comply with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation
of historic resources.
4. All wall signs shall utilize halo illumination.
5. Only the letter/logo portion of the monument and projecting signs shall be illuminated.
6. The new monument sign placed at the Saint Francis driveway shall be placed so that it is
at least 6 feet away from the driveway curb at its farthest point
7. Construction activities and all noise producing equipment shall comply with Chapter 9.1 0
(Noise) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
8. During construction, the site shall be kept clear of debris on a daily basis.
9. All landscaping located around the building shall be protected and maintained.
10. The letters for the Fresh Market marquee sign shall be reduced by 10%.
Ongoing Condition
11. Each tenant shall conform to the provisions of the Master Sign Program, as illustrated in
the plans dated received May 30, 2013. Signs that are consistent with the Master Sign
Program shall require only a building permit with Planning approval. Any variation from
this program would need to be approved via the Architectural Review process.
CITY OF
PALO
A TO
Agenda Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
June 5 and June 6, 2013
2
Historic Resources Board
Architectural Review Board
Staff Report
Historic Resources Board/Architectural Review Board
Steven Turner, Advance Planning Mgr. Department: Planning and
Community Environment
456 University Avenue [13PLN-00078]: Request by Robinson Hill
Architecture on behalf of Palo Alto Theater Corporation for Historic
Resources Board review of exterior modifications to the existing building,
including a new storefront window system at University Avenue, new
storefront openings at the rear (parking lot side), a new retractable covered
canopy over the courtyard, and installation of a bar and restaurant seating
in the courtyard for a proposed eating and drinking establishment.
Environmental Assessment: a Negative Declaration has been prepared.
Zone District: CD-C(GF)(P)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Historic Resources Board (HRB) and the Architectural Review Board
(ARB) initiate review of the project, ask questions of the applicant and City staff, open the public
hearing, provide direction to the applicant and continue the project to the June 19 and 20, 2013
meetings.
BACKGROUND
The project site is located at 456 University Avenue in Downtown Palo Alto (APN 120-15-069).
It is located in the Downtown Commercial-Community, Ground Floor and Pedestrian combining
zone district (CD-C(GF)(P). The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation is Community
Commercial (CC). Uses immediately adjacent to and in the vicinity of the project site inclUde
retail, eating and drinking, office, personal service, multiple-family residential, lodging, and
religious institution. The site is immediately adjacent to the Lot H public parking lot. The site is
area approximately 20,000 square feet. The site contains an existing building of approximately
22,458 square feet.
The existing building is known as the "New Varsity Theater" or "Varsity". It is listed on the
City's Historic Inventory in Category 1. The definition of Category 1, as provided in Palo Alto
Municipal Code (P AMC), section 16.49.020(b) is as follows:
Category 1: "Exceptional building" means any building or group of buildings of
preeminent national or state importance, meritorious work of the best architects
or an outstanding example of the stylistic development of architecture in the
United States. An exceptional building has had either no exterior modifications or
such minor ones that the overall appearance of the building is in its original
character.
The building is not included in the National Register of Historic Places. The State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) lists the Varsity as a "category 3" resource, meaning, a resource that'
appears eligible for the National Register.
As described in the Department of Parks and Recreation Historic Resources Inventory form dated
January 21, 1988 (Attachment A), The Varsity Was designed by Reid Brothers architects of San
Francisco and constructed in 1927 by McDonald and Kahn builders and various sub-contractors.
Prior research on the building conducted as part of an Environmental Impact Report (State
Clearinghouse No. 94083080), certified by the Palo Alto City Council in 1998, indicates that the
Varsity was designed exclusively for the presentation of motion pictures. The Varsity continued
to present films (and live musical acts for a period in the early 1980's) under various owners
through mid-1987. At this time, the Varsity's current owner, the Palo Alto Theater Corporation
(Keenan Land Company) leased operations of the theater to Landmark Film Corporation, which
continued to run international and special interest films through 1994. Landmark Film
Corporation ceased operations at the Varsity in July 1994.
In early 1994, the Palo Alto Theater Corporation requested an extensive exterior renovation,
interior remodeling, a seismic upgrade, historic renovation and preservation of selected building
components and expansion of floor area for a new retail use and cafe for Borders Book and Music
Store. The property owner requested a 50% floor area bonus as part of the seismic and historic
upgrade of the building, which was made available to property owners as an incentive to retain
the City's most important historic building in the downtown area. An Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) was prepared for the project that analyzed the historic resources, parking and trip
generation, construction period impacts, structural factors, compliance with applicable plans and
policies and provided alternatives to the proposed project. The analysis concluded that the
proposed project would have significant environmental impacts unless nlitigated to a less than
significant level. The EIR provided a comprehensive mitigation monitoring program with the
intent of reducing impacts to a less than significant level. After a period of public discussion and
debate on the proposed project, in May 1995 the City Council certified the EIR and mitigation
monitoring program and approved the project with conditions. Construction commenced in late
1995 and continued through June 1996 at which time Borders Book and Music Store occupied the
building. Borders continued operation until September 2011. The building has remained vacant
since Border's departure.
Since Border's departure, recent development activity has occurred at the site. In October 2011,
the HRB reviewed a request by the property owner to convert the second floor retail space,
installed as part of the 1995 conversion to retail use, to office use and conversion of a portion of
the ground floor retail use to office use. Although the requested project affected interior portions
of the building, the HRB reviewed the project as the retail conversion could have an effect on
interior historic character defining features. A new exterior storefront system at the parking lot
side of the building (at the non-historic addition created as part of the 1995 project) was also
proposed and was reviewed for consistency with architectural review findings as a minor project.
The interior changes included the removal of the previous interior central staircase constructed for
13PLN-00078 Page 2 '
the Border's store, installation of a glass cover at the "open-to-below" area at the second floor,
and installation of a demising wall separating the proposed office from the previous retail space.
The HRB recommended approval of this project, finding that the project, including the protection
and preservation of interior character defining features, was consistent with the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings,
subject to conditions of approval. Construction activities for this project are on-going, with the
new tenant, Samsung, expected to occupy the space in June 2013.
The request for historic and architectural review of the project that is the subject of this report was
received by the City of Palo Alto in February 2013.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project applicant, Alex Arie of Robinson Hill Architecture located in Costa Mesa, California,
on behalf of the property owner, Palo Alto Theater Corporation, has requested historic and
architectural review of a project that would convert the existing first floor retail use to a restaurant
and private dining room (eating and drinking use). The project includes the following
components:
1. Installation of a glass storefront system at the entrance to the courtyard on University
Avenue. The glass storefront would be set back from the property line at a distance to
comply with the Pedestrian overlay zone district (P) requirements. The applicant has
described the storefront as a butt jointed glass storefront system with Hurculite doors;
2. Installation of a retractable canopy over a proposed courtyard dining room. The canopy
would be constructed as three panels that would extend or retract over the courtyard. The
panel material is proposed to consist of a "glass-fabric" product intended to provide
visibility to building features beyond the panel. A sample of the material will be provided
at the meetings. The canopy structure would be installed on top of the existing, non
historic parapet walls (that were seismically upgraded during the 1995 project). Sheet
A3.1 contains the proposed renderings of the canopy and support system. The intent of the
canopy, as stated by the applicant, is to provide protection from rain and wind and would
not be extended on a permanent basis;
3. Installation of restaurant seating, including booths and tables at the indoor dining room
and courtyard areas. A new bar would be installed in the courtyard. Existing historic
character defining features in these areas, such as historic columns, piers, and capitols,
would be "maintained, protected and restored" as shown on Sheet A1.0P;
4. Installation of interior partition and demising walls to separate the various functions
. within the interior spaces of the ground floor. The walls would be constructed in a manner
so that they are not physically connected to interior character defining features, although
in some cases, would be immediately adjacent to historic features. The new interior spaces
include:
a) A private dining room primarily intended for the adjacent Garden Court Hotel. This
space is intended as a banquet-style facility serving large groups and events;
13PLN-00078 Page 3
b) A restaurant containing an indoor dining room at the interior ground floor of the
building. In addition, the courtyard adj acent to University Avenue would also contain
seating and a bar area.
c) Installation of a new commercial kitchen that would serve both the restaurant and
private dining room functions. Existing historic character defining features in this area,
such as the historic colonnade, would be covered and protected per the detail on Sheet
Al.OP;
5. Installation of a new restroom core at the interior of the building to serve the restaurant;
6. Installation of restaurant ductwork at the mezzanine-level restroom. This ductwork would
be required for the proposed kitchen and cannot be routed directly above the exhaust
source within the kitchen;
7. Installation of an artificial tree within the courtyard. This tree is intended to be a focal
point for the courtyard, and
8. Installation of three new storefronts at the parking lot side of the building, intendillg to
match the new storefront for the second floor office area (under construction). These
openings would allow access to and from the private dining room to a new hardscape patio
area with landscaping and containing tables and chairs. This work occurs in a non-historic
addition (built in 1996). The historic analysis does not cover this component.
These components are described within the applicant's project description letter (Attachment B)
and the project plans entitled, "Varsity Theater Proposed Restaurant and Banquet Hall" prepared
by Robinson Hill Architecture Inc., dated May 30,2013 (Attachment J).
DISCUSSION
Historic Resources Board and Architectural Review Board Applicability
This request is considered to be a major project under PAMC 18.76.020 (Architectural Review).
This project is not exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As discussed
below, a draft Initial Study has been prepared that analyzes the project against the Standards of
Significance as described in the IS document. As the proposed project is on a site containing a
historic structure in the downtown area, the Historic Resources Board is required to review the
proposed alterations and make a recommendation to the ARB (PAMC 16.49.050).
The records and materials from the 1995 Varsity Theater project also provide direction for
HRBI ARB review of future projects. The 1995 project included on-site use of bonus floor area for
the historic rehabilitation and seismic upgrade of the building. As described above, an EIR was
prepared and certified for the 1995 project that clarified that the theater must be preserved in a
manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for rehabilitation.
The Standards and Guidelines allow for physical changes in behalf of adapting a building for
"efficient contemporary uses" provided the building's "distinctive materials, features, spaces and
spatial relationships, finishes, construction techniques, and examples of craftsmanship" that
characterize the property are preserved. Because the City granted double bonus floor area to the
site (and it was constructed), the City requires that all subsequent proposed changes to the
building, both interior and exterior, are subject to review and approval by the City in light of the
13PLN-00078 Page 4
defined historic character of the building that was set forth in the EIR and in light of the
conditions of approval that were approved by the City Council for the 1995 project.
To prepare for the historic analysis, the City's historic peer review consultant, Garvaglia
Architecture Inc. reviewed the 1995 EIR to identify the applicable mitigations that would apply to
the proposed project. Garavaglia Architecture Inc. provided the following summary of applicable
mitigations from the 1995 EIR on Page 6 of their peer review report:
• Follow a design approach that sets a high priority on preservation of historic features and
finishes;
• Avoid cumulative impacts;
• Apply the State Historic Building Code (SHBC) (now the California Historic Building
Code (CHBC)) where possible to avoid extensive demolition;
• Follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for the interior and
exterior aspects of the project;
• Perform a complete photo-documentation of the building prior to any construction work
following the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) standards for archival
recordation and submit results to an appropriate repository;
• . Avoid false historicism by not replicating features that are not adequately documented
through adequate research; if this research is not available design new features to be
compatible with, but clearly distinct from, historical features;
• Protect in place the historic features during construction. If any areas containing historic
features require seismic retrofit, the applicant must, 1) carefully document and dismantle
these features; 2) salvage, catalogue, store, and reinstall these features after construction;
and 3) retain a qualified ornamental plasterer for the document/dismantle and the
reinstall/repair phases of the work, and
• Retain and reuse historic light fixtures.
City's Approach to the Project Analysis
City staff has conducted a thorough review of the proposed proj ect, including the materials
submitted by the applicant, research of prior analysis, studies and decisions related to the Varsity
Theater, and preparation of an independent peer review of the historic report prepared by the
applicant's consultant. The following is a brief sununary of the activities performed by the City
on behalf of the project:
Review code issues through the Development Review Committee. Within 30-days of the
application submittal date, the City held a Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting to
review code compliance issues with the applicant. As a result, the project plans were revised to
address the technical code compliance issues that could affect the overall design of the project.
Require a historic analysis provided by the applicant. At the time of application submittal, the
applicant submitted a report by Bruce Judd Consulting Group entitled, "Varsity Theater
Restaurant Development Resource Evaluation", dated February 19,2013; The purpose of this
report was "to review the character defining elements of the Varsity Theater in Palo Alto and to
evaluate the impact of a proposed restaurant development in the courtyard,.the lobby, and part of
13PLN-00078 5
the ground floor to modify these spaces for a new tenant space." 1. The applicant's historic
analysis report is contained in Attachment C.
Historic peer review consultant. The City has hired Garavaglia Architecture Inc. to provide
historic peer review and consulting services for this project. Garavaglia Architecture Inc. has
provided these ; and similar types of services to the City for previously reviewed projects. The
consultant has produced the memorandum entitled, "Varsity Theater Peer Review/Standards
Compliance Review", dated May 31, 2013. The City's peer review report is contained in
Attachment D.
Review of Prior 1995 Project EIRfindings, mitigations and conditions. In preparation for the peer
review analysis, the City and the City's peer review consultant reviewed the materials and reports
associated with the 1995 environmyntal review of the theater conversion project. Particular focus
was placed on the previously certified mitigations to assess applicability for the restaurant project.
A summary of the mitigation review is provided above and on Page 6 of the peer review
consultant report.
Review of Secretary Standards. Garavaglia Architecture compared each applicable project
component against the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic
Resources. The results of the comparison are contained in their peer review report.
Review project description/plans with project applicant; recommend revisions. Over the course of
the proj ect review period, City staff and the applicant discussed revisions to the project that would
improve the projects overall consistency with the Secretary Standards and the findings for
Architectural Review. As a result, the applicant has adjusted the plans with respect to the
storefront system and courtyard canopy design. The applicant has provided additional design
details for the protection and restoration of character defining features throughout the ground
floor areas of the building.
Complete draft of environmental analysis. City staff has completed a draft Initial Study (IS) with
a Negative Declaration finding for the project (Attachment F). Staffhas determined that the
project would not have a significant impact on the environment. The IS was released for a 20-day
public review period on May 31, 2013. The public is invited to review the IS and provide
comments prior to the close of business on June 19, 2013. All comments received will be
reviewed and, if applicable, the IS will be revised.
Overview of the Historic Analysis
As previously noted, two documents have been produced that describe the effect of the proposed
project on the exiting building:
1. "Varsity Theater Restaurant Development Resource Evaluation", prepared by Bruce Judd
Consulting Group, dated February 19,2013, and
2. "Varsity Theater Peer Review/Standards Compliance Review", prepared by Garavaglia
Architects Inc., dated May 31, 2013.
These reports are contained in Attachments C and D, respectively.
1 Bruce Judd Consulting Group, Varsity Theater Restaurant Development Resource Evaluation for Ferrado, Newport
Beach, California (completed February 19,2013), P. 3
13PLN-00078 Page 6
Bruce Judd Consulting Group has prepared a third document (Attachment E), dated May 17,
2013, in response to an early version of the May 31, 2013 Garavaglia report. Although the final
Garavaglia report is dated after the Bruce Judd May 17, 2013 response, it contains substantially
the same information as the initial version reviewed by Mr. Judd.
Staff recommends that the HRB, ARB and the public review each of these three reports in order
to understand the detail behind the conclusions made in each document. This staff report will not
repeat at length the information contained in these documents.
Project Components Not Consistent with tft.e Secretary Standards
As described in the May 31, 2013 report from Garavaglia Architecture, the peer review consultant
found that the following project components appear not to be consistent with the Secretary
Standards:
• Installation of a retractable canopy over the courtyard dining room-The report indicates
that "when closed, the canopy will block historically open views of the Mission-style
parapets at both the east and west ends of the forecourt. When open, the canopy views will
be limited by the portion afthe canopy that does notfully retract (west end) and obscured ..
throughout by canopy framing. JJ
• Installation of a glass storefront system at the entrance to the courtyard on University
A venue-The report indicates that the storefront system "will noticeably alter the historic
appearance, spatial relationships and physical experience of the theater entrance at
University Avenue. JJ
• Installation of a new restroom core at the interior of the building to serve the restaurant
The report indicates that "Though the auditorium space has been significantly altered and
no longer serves its original purpose, the installation of restrooms at this location will
noticeably alter the progression of spaces and circulation pattern that characterize this
building type. ", and
• Installation of an artificial tree within the court yard-the report indicates that, "The
introduction of artificial trees to the forecourt alters the original and intended experience
of this space for the visitor by obscuring views and altering historic character. Combined
with the proposed canopy, the cumulative effict would significantly alter this key
character definingfeature. JJ
The other project components including the restaurant use, the private dining facility, installation
of partition walls, installation of the kitchen, restaurant seating, the new storefronts at the rear
(parking lot side) of the building all appear to be generally compliant with the Secretary
Standards.
Obscuring Character Defining Features
A key consideration for the HRB is the issue of obscuring of historic character defining features.
F or example, the historic colonnade at the location of the proposed kitchen would be protected
and covered in order to minimize damage as a part of kitchen activities. These features would not
be visible while this space is used as a kitchen. In addition, the proposed canopy over the
13PLN-00078 Page 7
forecourt, when closed, would almost certainly obscure views of the Mission-style parapet wall
that dominates the forecourt space. When the canopy is open, the canopy support structure would
at least interrupt views of the parapet wall. Together, the mission-style parapet wall and the
forecourt space constitute an important character defining feature of the entire building.
It is important to note that those character defining features that would be covered or obscured
would not be "removed" from the building. However, these features would either be no longer
visible and enjoyed or at least temporarily obscured from view.
Staff is generally supportive of the project components that would maintain, protect and restore
character defining features, including the proposed protection of interior features within the
proposed kitchen. In addition, staff is generally supportive of the forecourt canopy. Staffhas
proposed conditions of approval (as described on Page 10 of this staff report) to ensure that
adequate protection of character defining features are in place prior to construction and to ensure
that the canopy design is respectful of the historic characteristics of the building.
The Secretary Standards provides guidance on the various approaches to rehabilitation, including
advice on additions and alterations to historic buildings. The advice indicates that rehabilitation
projects should not radically change, obscure, damage or destroy character defining features. Staff
recommends that the HRB comment on this guidance provided as part of the Secretary Standards
and how rigorous this guidance should be applied to the proposed project.
Alteration of the Historic Entry at University Avenue
A second key consideration for the HRB is the perceived alteration of the historic main entry way
at University Avenue. The 1995 EIR describes the entrance forecourt in the following way,
"Surrounded by adjacent two-story bUildings, the rectangular forecourt consists of two areas, the
covered two-story cupola and portal on University Avenue and the open courtyard with one story
tile-roofed arcades along the sides of the courtyard This protected, semi-enclosed space
provides a distinctive and gracious transition from University Avenue to the lobby entrance. "
Although the proposed project would not remove or alter the existing structure that compose the
entrance forecourt, the addition of a glass storefront system at University A venue would visually
and physically interrupt the open transition to the interior of the building.
Staff can support a new storefront system at the arched opening immediately adjacent to the
forecourt. However, given the current description of the glass store front system at University
Avenue, staff is not supportive of the current proposal. Staff recommends that the HRB comment
on the alteration of the historic main entrance and staff s r~commended approach.
Effect of Cumulative Changes to Character Defining Features
The City's peer review consultant noted that in the "Varsity Theater Restaurant Development
Resource Evaluation", prepared by Bruce Judd Consulting Group, dated February 19,2013, Mr.
Judd's report did not address the cumulative impacts of the various changes in any detail.
Garavaglia Architecture Inc. noted in their report that, "Continued modifications to the building
overtime may result in a cumulative and widespread loss of material integrity if care is not taken
to protect the remaining character defining features. Preservation of these features is imperative if
the building is to retain historical integrity and maintain its status as a listed historic resource."
13PLN-00078 Page 8
It is important to note that this project would not specifically remove or demolish any additional
character defining features of the building. In many cases, those remaining features would be
"maintained, protected and restored" in-place, although sonle features would be covered and
obscured from view, or perceived differently after the project
The HRB may want to consider this project's contribution to cumulative change at the Varsity
Theater as part of their deliberations.
Overall Historic Analysis Conclusion
The City peer review consultant has concluded (on Page 17 of their report, Attachment D) that the
proposed project is marginally compliant with the Secretary Standards. The report states,
"Through significant aspects of the proposed design are not compliant with the Standards and the
FEIR (Final Environmental Impact Report, 1995) provisions, the overall project respects the
historic qualities of the existing building and does not propose to drastically remove or alter
remaining historic features." City staff supports this finding and agrees with the consultant that
revisions to the project could be made to increase compliance with the Secretary Standards and to
be more consistent with the 1995 EIR. These conditions are specified below. A summary of the
Secretary Standards findings are contained in Attachment G.
Architectural Review Findings
The project is subject to the Architectural Review Findings as outlined in PAMC 18.76.050(d).
Staff s reconlmended draft findings are contained in Attachment H. <
Downtown Urban Design Guidelines
The Downtown Urban Design Guide is meant to advise the applicant, staff and the ARB
regarding development and design in the downtown area. The Downtown Urban Design Guide
divides the downtown area into districts, each having a unique identity and design characteristics.
The project site is in the University Avenue District, which is the identifiable center of the
downtown area. Within this area, the Downtown Urban Design Guide recommends reinforcing
the retail core by maintaining a strong concentration of ground floor retail and developing and
enhancing the qualities which make an exciting outdoor and pedestrian environment, including
vibrant and eclectic architecture. Furthermore, the project site is located in the Kipling Street
secondary district. This secondary district, along with the Florence Street secondary district, is
identified as a "unique opportunity to establish interesting links between University Avenue retail
and L ytton Avenue commercial area." As described in the Downtown Urban Design Guide,
"Efforts should be made to unify and complement each of the secondary districts through the use
of appropriate building design, landscaping and public amenities." The Downtown Urban Design
Guide is not a regulatory document, but to be used as a tool to guide development in the area.
For the Kipling Street secondary district, the Downtown Urban Design Guide recommends, "The
terminus at University Avenue should be enhanced through tie-ins to the Varsity Theater and mid
block access to Lot H behind the Theater. " As shown on Sheet AO.1, there is an existing alley at
south (southwest) side of the building that provides access from the forecourt to parking Lot H.
However, this is not a public alley and should not currently be considered as a means for public
access to Lot H. Informal access from University Avenue to Lot H has existed through the
forecourt and the Border's retail space since 1996 during normal operating hours, but access has
been removed since Border's vacated the building. No other formal mid-block connection
between University Avenue and Lot H is proposed with this project.
13PLN-00078 9
The proposed project would not extend the building envelop with respect to University Avenue
and public parking Lot H at the rear of the building. The proposed storefront system at University
Avenue would add a physical barrier to the building during normal operating hours that has not
previously existed. As mentioned earlier in the report, staff is supportive of a storefront system at
the arched opening immediately adjacent to the forecourt and recommends that the proposed
storefront system at University Avenue be removed from the proposed project.
Compliance with the Downtown Urban design Guidelines is described in Attachment 1.
Pedestrian Combining District
The project is required to comply with Section 18.30(B).040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
which designates the ARB to determine whether the building is harmonious and includes three
design features -(1) display windows, (2) a minimum covered recessed area, and (3) landscaping
or architectural features intended to preclude blank walls or building faces. The project would
provide approximately 60 square feet of recessed storefront area, where 47 square feet would be
required. Though there is no landscaping proposed in the recessed area adjacent to the storefront,
the project includes display windows and does not contain expansive blank walls or building
faces. As stated above, Staff is not supportive of the storefront system at University Avenue and
will recommend a condition to remove this from the project. Staffs interpretation of the
Pedestrian Combining District ordinance is that the existing opening satisfies the intent of the
ordinance.
Context-Based Design Considerations and Findings
In addition Architectural Review approval findings, Context-Based Design Considerations and
Findings would be applicable to projects in the CD district and sub-districts pursuant to P AMC
18.l8.110(b). For ARB discussion, context-based design considerations for the project are
provided as Attachment J.
Signage
The applicant has shown the approximate location of building signage on the elevation drawings,
located in the Project plan set. The marquee at University Avenue will be retained and used as the
location for tenant signage. The sign package for the restaurant will be submitted as a separate
architectural review application and is not part of this review; however the potential location for
signage is appropriate ARB discussion. Staff has approved identification signs for Samsung, the
second floor office tenant, at the back of the building facing public parking Lot H.
Staff Recommendations for Conditions of Approval
Although staff is recommending that the HRB and ARB continue the review of the proj ect to the
June 19 and 20, 2013 meetings, it is expected that stall will recommend approval of the project
with conditions that could be made to increase compliance with the Secretary Standards and to be
more consistent with the 1995 EIR. These conditions were informed in part from the city peer
review consultant's suggested modifications as described on Page 17 of their report. The
following draft conditions related to the project design are as follows:
1. Eliminate the storefront assembly at the University Avenue main entrance to reduce the
visual and physical impact. The storefront may be placed at the arched opening at the
entrance to the forecourt. Attachments to the historic finishes should be nlinimal to
minimize the impact to the historic fabric and facilitate potential removal of this element
13PLN-00078 Page 10
in the future with minimal change to the resource. The applicant shall use non-reflective
glass for this application;
2. Investigate alternative design solutions for the retractable canopy that uses a more
transparent fabric or material that would increase visibility of features beyond the canopy.
Investigate alternatives for the canopy support structure and framework to be lighter and
less visibly intrusive;
3. Provide a detailed maintenance, protection, and restoration plan for the interior and
exterior character defining features prepared by a qualified historic preservation
consultant. City staff will review the draft plan for consistency with the Secretary
Standards and guidance documents provided by the National Parks Service
( www.nps.gov/history/hps/pad/index.htm).
4. Remove the artificial trees in the forecourt;
5. The project revisions and preservations plans shall be reviewed by the HRB.
Other appropriate conditions of approval relating to technical code compliance and deyelopment
impact fees will be included in staff s recommendation.
Comprehensive Plan Policy Analysis
As conditioned, the project would be consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan policies
and programs:
POLICY L-23: Maintain and enhance the University AvenuelDowntown area as the central
business district of the City, with a mix of commercial, civic, cultural, recreational and residential
uses. Promote quality design that recognizes the regional and historical importance of the area and
reinforces its pedestrian character.
PROGRAM L-20:. Facilitate reuse of existing buildings.
POLICY L-48: Promote high quality, creative design and site planning that is compatible with
surrounding development and public spaces.
PROGRAM L-49: In areas of the City having a historic or consistent design character, design
new development to maintain and support the existing character.
POLICY L-49: Design buildings to revitalize streets and public spaces and to enhance a sense of
community and personal safety. Provide an ordered variety of entries, porches, windows, bays
and balconies along public ways where it is consistent with neighborhood character; avoid blank
or solid walls at street level; and include human-scale details and massing.
POLICY L-51: Encourage public and private upkeep and preservation of resources that have
historic merit, including residences listed in the Historic Inventory.
PROGRAM L-56: Maintain and strengthen the design review procedure for exterior remodeling
or demolition of historic resources. Discourage demolition of historic resources and severely
restrict demolition of Landmark resources.
13PLN-00078 Page 11
PROGRAM L-58: For proposed exterior alterations or additions to designated Historic
Landmarks, require design review findings that the proposed changes are in compliance with the
Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
POLICY L-56: To reinforce the scale and character of University Avenue/Downtown, promote
the preservation of significant historic buildings.
PROGRAM L-63: Streamline, to the maximum extent feasible, any future processes for design
review of historic structures to eliminate unnecessary delay and uncertainty for the applicant and
to encourage historic preservation.
PROGRAM L-64: Encourage and assist owners of historically significant buildings in finding
ways to adapt and restore these buildings, including participation in state and federal tax relief
programs.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
As noted above, City staffhas conlpleted a draft Initial Study (IS) with a Negative Declaration
finding for the project (Attachment F). The IS includes an analysis of the project's possible
impacts on the environment, and includes a focus on impacts to Cultural Resources, specifically,
the impact to the existing Category 1 building. This analysis is based upon Garavaglia
Architecture's peer review report.
The conclusion of the peer review report is that the proposed project is marginally compliant with
the Secretary Standards. As stated in the peer review report, individual project components were
found to be inconsistent with the Secretary Standards. However, overall compliance is not
necessarily a direct sum of the level of compliance of each component with the Secretary
Standards. Individual project component compliance is weighed with the overall impact on both
the design and historical significance of the resource. In this case, the overall project respects the
historic qualities of the existing building and does not propose to drastically remove or alter
remaining historic features. As the project was found to be compliant with the Secretary
Standards (although marginally so), staffhas determined that the project would not have a
significant impact on the environment.
As stated above, staff recommends conditions of approval that would further improve the
project's consistency with the Secretary Standards.
The draft IS with a Negative Declaration finding was released for a 20-day public review period
on May 31, 2013. The public is invited to review the draft IS and provide comments prior to the
close of business on June 19, 2013.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Department of Parks and Recreation Historic Resources Inventory form, 456 University
Avenue
B. Applicant's Project Description Letter, May 30,2013
C. Varsity Theater Restaurant Development Resource Evaluation, February 19,2013, prepared
by Bruce Judd Consulting Group
D. Varsity Theater Peer Review/Standards Compliance Review", dated May 31, 2013, prepared
by Garavaglia Architecture, Inc.
13PLN-00078 Page 12
E. Response to Varsity Theater Peer Review/Standards Compliance Review Draft Findings, May
17, 2013, prepared by Bruce Judd Consulting Group
F. Draft Initial Study and Negative Declaration Finding, May 31,2013
G. Findings Based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards
H. Architectural Review Findings
I. Context-Based Design Considerations and Findings
J. Project Plans (HRB and ARB members only)
COURTESY COPIES:
Alex Arie, Robinson Hill Architecture, Inc.
Joyce Yamagiwa, Palo Alto Theater Corporation
PREPARED BY: ~~
STEVEN TURNER
Advance Planning Manager
REVIEWED BY:!' ~ I '/.....--" .
'1"Z'r AARON AKNIN .
Assistant Director, Planning and Community Environment
13PLN-00078 Page 13
.. ,HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY I " .
.DEN.).CATION ,rn ~le,~~ (~et
.'.' •• 'c:.til.,,,i. -TN A • ." .. ~ ...... DEPARTMENt OF PARIeS AND REC¥ATION
_{ I., ,1,, __ _
Attachment A urM ______ 0 ____ "R -
I e. ---S"L_
I
-Lal _____ Len I, • " -----a._-I AtItIt_ 12 _,,_ Ca'_"AII_HAoI'" , ............... -
1. ~ ftlm.: ___ '! ... o --:~~ _______ -:---:" .• ________________ _
2. ..... Ioric name, I known: . ..,,'arlit! ""Iter . . .. . , .. ..
3.: IU",. rur.1 adef'ess 456 Vn!.erllt.l 'YIn"e -.
CItV': Palo Alto ZIP: _____ Cou".,: Santa Clara
• ,.. t
to: c. ".sen, owner. if know,,= Palo Alto 1helltre Corp. ~dr.lS: 400 Hamllton Ave
(Charles leenan,.tJark Gat •• ) • 0
CitV': Pal n '1+'0, c. . ZIP: 9 1t30) Ownership is: Publie . Piivalt. []
-.~~ •• ~~:~~~~e~.~t~u~.~~~d~B~e~s~t.~~.·~N~t~~~~~:~~~e~.~tge~r __________ ~_
0' ..... P;'~:I:~I: __ ----------------~:---~-----:----__ _ , ...
)ESCRIPTION • -.. r. .. .
-6. Ir ie'!y. dtlcribe I~I ,r".nt-physical appearance of Ihe she 01 structur •• nd delcribt .ny m.;or .... r.;ion' frorn -hs ·origin.I
. "' ~ fOnd.taon: . • .• .
!hi1 fine.an th •• t.eZ' bas an arcade and ooun7ard .between t,h. entrance racade
aid the tbeater proper. Althouah tobe outline Dr tbe tacade 1. )'.i.sionle"1".l,
there is loce Spanish lenai.lance decorat.ive deta1lJ.ras. the .hanel.ome neon te no
lonaer intact and eame alteratione have occurred in the Itreet 11.11 facad, and
-court1ard during recent J"uodel:1nl to accQlUCdat.e a reetlW"ant.. the tlank1ng
""u11dings vere desisned to coJ:1plement t.b e t.heaf.re and unif1 the .treetfront.. .
Several types of original iron lighting fixtures are still intact.
--------------------. 7... Locat;onal skelch INP (dr.w and I.bel sh •• nd
IUrroundi"lsl, •• IS, road •• and prominent I."dm.rks':
• • ~ NOl'TH
., .,
JAN 21 '988
8. Approaimlt. property size:
Lot liz. (in f'I\) F,on,.g'_rtl3~Q __ 200 D.pth ..... ____ ·;
• ., .pproa.acre. • _.. ... ,' .. , ..
I. Condition: Cch", 0"'). :
.. Ea.II,,,,· 0 ,. Good I[) 0 Co F •• , 0
d. D.w •• ted 0 I. No 10".' ill ,';s"nce 0 •
1D. 'S lhe fi.lur, .. Aller.d? l!] b. Unal,er.d' 0
11. Surroundi"IS: eCheck more Ih." one if "'C'ISa,y,
a. Ope,. I.nd 0 .. lea ... red buildings 0
c. Densely lluilt·yp 0 •. R.sid,,,,i.1 0
I. Commercia' ~ t. Ind""rial 0
.,olh.rD ---------------------12. Thrla', '0 site:
I. "None known III •. P,i ••• , dr.,lop ..... ", 0
Co Zoning 0 ct. Public Workl,roiecl 0
I. V.nd.lil", 0 I. O,h'f 0 _-___ _
11 D •• b) Gf ~'o ... atIDID •• ahl,,: 1",8
'TE: T-folilltlll;", II,."., '4·"1." Ir ""'1'11l1l'i1,.
; .... im.ry .... io' buildine m ••• ill: •• lton. 0 It. lriel 0 c. Stu.., I!] II. AdDbe 0 10 WoDd 0
t.O..,er 0,_____________ ........
i. -'s If" IINeture: I. 0,,'11 .,~ftI' IRe' Ii] It. McMdP 0 c. UnkflDWnt 0 \..
•• y ..... f .. ,w ... t'''CI''n• 1927 T .. isd.,. k: L ,,,,,, .. l!) It. E ...... 1d 0
'. Ar.ilect-"f Itnown):· Btid BroLher. (San Fran ell CO )
:. Build. el'lnown): I'.c1lonald AId Kahn· (San Francil.) J iron work, 'air I'-r,. Co. (S.,.)
e, ~ • erlo.n... ••
I. R ... , .. ,,,IU'.: .... n It. Cerd.,...,. c. 0u1hDu. U .... Shedls,D I. F.""",ltCS."ls) 0
. I.. W.....,.III 0 .. W.,enow.'II"hou. G. .. DItter 0 i. None [J
IlflCANCE t ..
I. Briefly lu.e hiSloric.I .nd/or .r",ilea",., imporl.nce linclud. d'les~ ewnlS,'N per.,n, •• da, .. with tht sitl wwh." ItftOwn,.
this is • fine example ot • rap1d17 d1lappear1D, t.JP8 of bulldJ.Da, _ tlaDked b7 ccmpat1bl~
commercial It.ructures t.o. produce an e.ftect.i:r. Itre.tacape. 2.b. orlctnal Varllt,. -
2beater "as located tram 1911 onward at Uni,..rllt.7 and luona, owed b, Frank LeSuer and
2'.Jt. Mett..e. In 1927, K1l11 tI. Arkuab, wit.h LeSuar,acctu:lr.cl t.he tbeat..r •• P&.rt -t
plana t,o dev.lop a cha1n of 'en1naulamot1on-p1cture houeee, at-anini with the h
.,.itallsed Stantord 1heater and cont.lnv.1ng with • D~ Yar.1t7 theater at t.he present
location (then owned b7 Dr. -Cbarle. Strub). 2be t.beater hubeen in continuous aenice
altJuNib 1ft tecent. 7earl, th. dlclJ.ne or t.be IDOt1on-plcture audience b •• led to.,..
effort. t.o capture a JU,,' .cl1e.nt..le 1d.th a re.taurant, and with performance. b7to ural
rock-muiic r;rOUpl. St),llltical.l7, it, ha. been compared t,o 'he Fox Arl1n£t,on 'lheater
.1n Santa larbara (WoodbrJ.d,e, .t. al.)
I. M.in theme of the hrstor'c,esburce: (ChICk onl, one): •. Ard,ileclure (!J b. Arl'. Leisuft 0
c. Economicllndustri.1 0 d. ExplorltionlSenlanenl 0 e. Government 0 f. Milil.lry 0
I. Reli~ion 0 h. SOCiai/EduCition.·· 0
2. $ourS!s: List ~nk'. dOQl",ents IUrv~s, "'19.",1 jnlwvlews •• nd 'h'ir d.lIS: P.A. t1z=ea 9/l1/u r,prlnted 9/11136. 10/2/26, 1125 and 29, '/26/27; Palo Alto Weekll, 10/l6/85;" ~ ana
John Woodbr1d", et. al., ! O.ai~l1:2 Arshltec1.ure ln ~ Francisco e..Non.hern Cal1f
ornia (Perep-in. <8m1th Co., Sant.aBarbara, 1913), p. lSS-6
J. D.te f.rm prep.red: 1978, 198; I, 'Mme): Hiltoric RCIQ.UtcCI Board
Add r ns: 2,0 Ib.nil ton Av. Cit, .PAIO AliP t C. -9~]Dl ZIP: __ _
'hDne: Or' .... i' •• ion: ___________________ _
(' ... eU. Only)
•
,.
Attachment B
robinson hill architecture, inc.
transmittal
Date: May 30th, 2013
To: Mr. Steven Turner
Advance Planning Manager
City of Palo Alto Planning Division
250 Hamilton Ave
Palo Alto, CA 94303
cc Mr. Bruce Judd
Mr. Bruce Binnquist
Mr. Jeff Hatch
Ms. Meredith Lake
RE: Varsity Theater -Proposed Restaurant Description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Project Description
The scope of the proposed project consists primarily of Ground Floor interior work to introduce
restaurant dining in the Theater Foyer and the Theater Open Forecourt as well as the introduction of
a private dining type use on the Ground Floor of the Theater Building.
The following items summarize the major components of our proposal. For additional information
please refer to the application drawings exhibits.
University Entrance
1. Proposed installation of a butt jointed glass storefront system with Herculite doors at the
University Entrance to replace the current steel security screen. The system will allow street views
of the forecourt and forecourt tower consistent with current conditions while providing an elegant
and minimalist private/public separation. Similar approaches have been utilized throughout the
country in historic renovation proiects. For reference we have provided before and after images
of the Old Slave Mart Museum in Charleston, SC.
Back Parking Lot Elevation
2. Proposed addition of 3 new storefronts bays to the non historic parking lot side elevation of the
Theater Building to replace the small existing windows. These storefronts will match the height
and construction of the existing 2nd floor entrance lobby storefront. They will provide substantially
improved exterior views of the interior Historic Arches currently not readily visible.
A California Corporation
3195 B Airport loop Drive
Costa Meso, CA 92626
www.rhainc.net
Telephone: 714. 825. 8888 • Facsimile: 714. 825. 8889
Open Forecourt
3. Proposed installation of a non combustible, translucent fabric retractable rain canopy above the
open forecourt. The proposed canopy and support structure will be installed above the existing
non historic forecourtparapets. Installing the translucent canopy above the p£apets will
maintain the views and the great spatial experience of the forecourt. Although the intent is to
leave the canopy open; weather permitting, the translucent quality of the non combustible
canopy material will allow viewsof the historic forecourt tower with the canopy in the closed
position during inclement weather. Material samples have been provided with our application.
We have researched multiple systems for weather protecting the forecourt including all glass fixed
roofs and concluded that the proposed canopy system is the lightest and least intrusive
structurally and visually. There is precedence for closing historic open courts. Please refer to the
National Portrait Gallery in DC.
Preservation
4. The historic features of the Theater Open Forecourt, Foyer and Theater will be maintained,
protected, rehabilitated and restored where necessary.
Interior
5. Restaurant type furnishing will be introduced in an intentional manner to maintain the historic
elements of to the Courtyard, Foyer and the Banquet Hall
6. Partitions are being introduced to demise the different uses and the service/kitchen areas. Where
necessary these partitions will be supported at the floor and ceiling only in order to be free of
connections to Historic Elements.
7. Certain Historic Elements within the kitchen will be concealed from public view due to the nature
of commercial kitchen uses. These elements will be protected in place from kitchen type uses as
detailed in the application drawings. In the future the protective enclosure can be removed to
expose the undamaged historic element.
8. Special care will be taken to maintain, protect and restore all interior historic elements. A great
majority of these elements will be directly visible to the patrons.
Please contact me with any qu~stions or comments.
Sincerely,
RHA., inc
Alex Arie
robinson hill architecture, inc.
California Corporation
3195 B Airport Loop Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
www.rhainc.net
Telephone: 714. 825. 8888 • Facsimile: 714. 825. 8889
VARSITY THEATER
REST AURANT DEVELOPMENT
RESOURCE EVALUATION·
FOR FERRADO
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
FEBRUARY 19, 2013
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
P. O. Box 4867
Seaside, FL,32459
! Attachment C -
(850) 687-4111
Table of Contents
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
Introduction (1)
Site (1)
Building Description (1)
Exterior
Courtyard
Interior
1997 Renovation (1)
Historic Registration Eligibility Criteria (1)
National Register of Historic Places Eligibility
California Register Eligibility Analysis
VI. Proposed Project
VII. Evaluation of Integrity
VIII. Project Affect on Character Defining Features and Conclusion
Appendix A -Bruce D. Judd, FAIA Resume
3
4
5
9
10
12
15
17
18
(1) These sections were initially prepared as part of a report prepared in 2011 for the Palo Alto Theater
Company, the developer of the theater, have been revised for this project, and are included here for
context regarding the current proposed restaurant. They are used with the developer's approval.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
I. Introduction
In response to a request from Ferrado, Bruce
Judd Consulting Group has prepared the following
report to review the character defining elements of
the Varsity Theater in Palo Alto and to evaluate
the impact of a proposed restaurant development
in the courtyard, the lobby, and part of the ground
floor to modify these spaces for a new tenant
space.
This and the following four sections were initially
prepared as part of a report prepared in 2011 for
the Palo Alto Theater Company, the developer of
the theater. They have been modified to reflect
the proposed restaurant development and are
included here for context. They are used with the
developer's approval.
The Theater, located at 456 University Avenue
was built in 1927 and used for musical
performances and later as a cinema. After 1987 it
was used as an "Art House" cinema and closed on
7 July 1994. It was then converted to retail use as
a Borders book store. When Borders left in 2011,
the building became vacant. Varsity Theater, opening night, 1927.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 3.
a
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
II. Site
Located on the main commercial street in Palo
Alto, the Varsity Theater has been a part of the
downtown life of the city for over eighty years.
The theater faces directly on the sidewalk to the
north and to the south, the rear entry faces a
public parking lot The theater consists of a long
courtyard running from the street fac;ade
approximately 87 feet to the main block of the
theater. The main building is two stories in height
containing the original theater lobby, bathrooms
and the auditorium.
The building is approximately 98 feet in depth by
approximately 135 feet in width. The roof of the
auditorium is relatively flat with perimeter
parapets. The stage house is approximately 98
feet by 20 feet and currently has air conditioning
equipment on the flat roof.
An aerial view of the theater and surroundings.
University Avenue is at the left of the image while the
parking lot is at the right.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 4.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
III. Building Description
The front fa9ade of the theater has a series of
decorative Spanish elements that contribute to
the Spanish Colonial Revival style of the theater.
Two small towers flank a central arched
pediment. The pediment has five small empty
niches and decorative moldings spanning
between the two towers. The central entry is
flanked by two decorative display cases for
movie posters.
In 1937 the main projecting marquee was added
to the fa9ade. The highly decorative marquee
projects from the front of the face of the building
with neon graphics and the name "Varsity" in
neon. The marquee was refurbished when the
theater was converted to a book store during the
1994 -1996 renovation and opened in1996.
The southern side of the front fa9ade has a
Churrigueresque parapet with large central
opening to the courtyard. Two large lanterns are
located to each side of the arch raised above the
courtyard arches.
The front fa9ade of the theater opens to a long
courtyard that is approximately 87 feet long by
18 feet wide. Each side of the courtyard is
flanked by an arcade approximately 7 and a half
feet wide. Eight arches that run the length of the
arcade walls with columns having ringed Doric
capitals. Four large decorative lanterns project
from each of the arcades into the courtyard.
Front far;ade and entry to the theater courtyard facing
University Avenue.
View of the courtyard from the street entry arch.
Each arcade is covered with a sloped tile roof
rising up the to exterior parapet walls of the
courtyard. These walls extend up approximately
eight feet above the tile roofs. Each of these
parapet walls has four small niches similar to
those on the front fa9ade.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 5.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
At the center of the courtyard is a small fountain
that is working but is not historic.
View towards the street of the courtyard and south side
of the front elevation.
Detail of the south side of the front fa~ade.
The southern fayade of the courtyard served as
the front fayade of the theater lobby, and the
entry to the Borders Bookstore. Three pai rs of
wooden doors are centered on this fayade. Each
door has leaded glass and wrought iron bars
inset into the door and decorative hardware.
Above each pair of doors is a recessed arch with
a decorative motif centered in the arch. Above
and between the pairs of doors are two projecting
decorative light fixtures similar to the ones on the
arches of the courtyard.
View of the courtyard from the front street arch.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19,2013· Page 6.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
View from one of the arcades looking towards the
central fountain.
Detail view of one of the arcades with parapet wall
behind
Current overall view of the courtyard
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 7.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
Main entrance to the theater building.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 8.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
IV. 1997 Renovation
In 1993 -1996 a major renovation altered much of
the interior of the theater. While the courtyard,
lobby and most of the exterior were retained and
restored, the auditorium of the theater was altered
to accommodate a new bookstore use. The raked
floor was covered over with a steel frame and flat
flooring installed. The existing historic finishes
and features were retained. During the renovation
existing decorative features in the auditorium such
as the columns and coves were protected. The
historic features of the front facade, the courtyard
and arcades, and the parapet walls were also
retained and restored. The parapet walls and
much of the interior were seismically -braced and
new stucco installed to match the existing stucco.
A new two story rear fayade with entry was added
to the building as were new exit stairs.
As part of the renovation damaged existing
historic elements were restored.
A new monumental stair was added and a new
mezzanine surrounding the large open space, that
served as the auditorium space, were added with
new lighting and decorative railings. The design
of these new features was detailed to set the new
features apart from the historic elements of
Theater.
The new fayade facing the parking lot has a
projecting facade with a secondary entry to the
building that was added in 1996.
Rear Entry added to the Theater in 1997.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 9.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
V. Historic Registration Eligibility Criteria
The Varsity Theater is listed on the City of Palo
Alto Historic Building Inventory. It is not listed on
the National Register of Historic Places or the
California Register.
National Register of Historic Places Eligibility
The National Register of Historic Places is the
Nation's master inventory of known historic
resources and includes listings of buildings,
structures, sites, objects and districts that possess
historic, architectural, engineering, archaeological
or cultural significance at the national, state or
local level. Four criteria provide the basis under
which a structure, site, building, district, or object
can be considered significant for listing on the
National Register. A potential resource needs to
meet only one of the four criteria to achieve
significance. The criteria include resources that:
(A) are associated with events that
have made a significant contribution
to the broad patterns of history (such
as a Civil War battlefield or a Naval
Ship building Center); or
(8) are associated with the lives of
persons significant in our past (si:Jch
as Thomas Jefferson's Monticello or
the Susan B. Anthony birthplace); or
(C) embody the distinctive
characteristics of a type, period, or
method of construction, or that
represent the work of a master, or
that possess high artistic values, or
that represent a significant and
distinguishable entity whose
components may lack individual
distinction (such as Frank Lloyd
Wright's Taliesin or the Midwestern
Native American Indian Mounds); or
(D) have yielded or may likely yield
information important in prehistory or
history (such as prehistoric ruins in
Arizona or the archaeological sites of
the first European settlements in Sf.
Augustine, Florida or at the Presidio
of San Francisco).
Once a potential resource is determined to have
met one of the four criteria, its significance should
be evaluated within its historic context or historical
pattern relevant to a particular geographic area.
Historic contexts are found at a variety of
geographical levels or scales, specifically the
local, state or national level. The geographic
scale selected may relate to a pattern of historical
development, a political division, or a cultural
area. 1
California Register of Historical Resources
The California Register of Historical Resources is
the authoritative guide to the State's significant
historical and archeological resources. It serves
to identify, evaluate, register and protect
California's historical resources. The California
Register program encourages public recognition
and protection of resources of architectural,
historical, archeological and cultural significance,
identifies historical resources for state and local
planning purposes, determines eligibility for
historic preservation grant funding and affords
certain protections under the California
Environmental Quality Act. All resources listed on
or formally determined eligible for the National
Register are eligible for the California Register. In
addition, properties designated under municipal or
county ordinances are also eligible for listing in
the California Register.
The California Register criteria are modeled on
the National Register criteria discussed above.
An historical resource must be significant at the
local, state, or national level under one or more of
the following criteria:
1. It is associated with events or
patterns of events that have made a
1 National Register Bulletin 15: How to
Apply National Register Criteria, p. 9.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 10.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
significant contribution to the broad
patterns of local or regional history, or
the cultural heritage of California or
the United States; or
2. It is associated with the lives of
persons important to local, California,
or national history; or
3. It embodies the distinctive
characteristics of a type, period,
region, or method of construction, or
represents the work of a master, or
possesses high artistic values; or
4. It has yielded, or has the potential
. to yield, information important to the
prehistory or history of the local area,
state or the nation.
As explained above, the California Register and
National Register criteria are quite similar.
California Register Eligibility Analysis
To achieve significance, and thus be eligible for
listing on the California Register, a potential
resource needs to meet one of the four criteria
described above. As stated above, the
significance of a historic resource is achieved
under California Register Criterion 3 if it:
Embodies the distinetive characteristics of a
type, period, region, or method of
construction; or
Represents the work of a master; or
Possesses high artistic values.
Each of these three components of Criterion 3 is
related to architectural merit or in this case,
concrete construction.
The Varsity Theater has been substantially altered
but the majority of the character defining features
remain intact. The exterior has had few
modifications and these have occurred on the
south,. non-historic fayade.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 11.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
VI. Proposed Project
The current theater auditorium configuration was
developed· in 1997 to accommodate Borders
Books as a single tenant occupying the entire
ground floor and mezzanine that surrounds the
open auditorium space. Borders Books left in
2011 and alterations are currently under
construction to accommodate the new restaurant
tenant. The central area of the auditorium space
is being covered with a flush jointed glass ceiling
at the 'floor level of the mezzanine to acoustically
separate this space from the new Banquet Hall
below. In addition, alterations are being made to
stairs and doors exiting from the building.
The proposed design for the restaurant itself is
described in detail in drawings prepared by
Robinson Hill Architecture, Inc., dated February
12, 2013. Several diagrams from these drawings
are included here for reference.
The design consists of alterations to five major
areas: 1) the theater courtyard, which will serve
as an outdoor seating area for the restaurant, 2)
the former lobby area, which will be the primary
interior seating area, 3) a banquet area in the
former auditorium space, 4) a new kitchen and
back-of-house space under the northern
mezzanine area, and 5) a new lobby and waiting
area just inside the southern wall of the theater.
~r~~~
The exterior of the Theater will remain as it
exists today with all historic features retained.
Only a few changes are proposed for the
exterior. Signage on the original marquee will
change to
reflect the restaurant use and a butt jointed glass
storefront system with glass doors will be
installed just behind the front exterior walls of the
courtyard on University Avenue. This will
maintain the feeling of the original open space
leading into the courtyard while providing
security when the restaurant is not open.
The fountain in the center of the courtyard will be
removed and stored off-site for possible future
reuse should that be desired. The fountain is not
from the period of significance of the theater and
is not historic.
The existing historic doors leading from the
courtyard into the theater will be retained and
restored. One pair of these doors may need to
have their swing changed to meet exiting
requirements.
Great care has been used to respect the historic
features and spaces of the theater. All of these
are tobe retained, protected, and restored as
necessary. A majority of these elements will be
seen by the patrons of the restaurant.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013· Page 12.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
The courtyard is one of the most significant
spaces that is part of the theater complex and it
will be retained and enhanced. It will continue to
be an outdoor space with seating located
between the·pilasters on each side of the long
walls under the arcades. All of the arches and
parapet walls will be retained.
The primary addition to the courtyard will be a
translucent fabric, retractable rain canopy above
the open courtyard. The canopy will be installed
above the existing parapets in order to maintain
the existing courtyard parapets and cornices.
The intent of the canopy is to maintain the
feeling of an open courtyard while allowing for
protection from rain and very hot days. The track
for the canopy will be recessed behind and
above the parapet walls and will be only Slightly
visible.
~o:umND 'ifl.WlHT9NilM~
~.f#lJM;~QilQl"fQ".Q';(l)~
Three new storefronts will be added to the south
fac;ade of the theater facing the current parking
lot. This wall is not an historic feature as it is a
plain concrete rear property line wall that was not
exposed until the earlier renovation.
The storefronts are designed to match the tall
height and construction of the existing second
floor entrance lobby storefront.· They will provide
views into the interior historic arches and today
are not easily viewed.
New restrooms will be installed off of the lobby
area, centered behind the two curved walls. The
restroom walls will not be attached to the historic
walls.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 13.
VARSITYTHEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
Furnishings are designed to maintain the historic
feeling of the theater and respect the existing
historic features in the courtyard, lobby and
banquet hall.
New partitions will be added in the kitchen and
service areas under the north mezzanine. These
are designed to not impact the historic features.
particularly column capitals and friezes. They
will be supported at the floor and ceiling where
required so that they are not connected to any of
the historic features.
Some historic features in the kitchen will need to
be hidden from public view because of the
commercial kitchen requirements. These
elements will be protected in place and could be
exposed at some time in the future.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 14.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
VII. Evaluation of Integrity
Integrity is a key component of an historic building
evaluation. Without sufficient integrity, further
discussion of the significance of The Varsity
Theater would not be warranted. For the Palo Alto
Historic Building Inventory, integrity is the
authenticity of an historical resource's physical
identity, evidenced by the survival of
characteristics that existed during the resource's
period of significance.
Integrity involves several aspects, including
location, design, setting, materials, workmanship,
feeling and association. These aspects closely
relate to the resource's significance and should be
primarily intact for designation. Discussion of
integrity generally concentrates on the building's
exterior envelope, though treatment of the interior
is also considered.
Location
Location is the place where the historic property
was constructed or the place where the historic
event occurred. The theater remains in its
original location and therefore, this aspect of its
integrity has not been diminished.
Design
Design is the combination of elements that create
the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a
property. The theater was designed as a theater
and used as such until 1993.
In 1997 a major alteration to the Theater occurred,
covering over the raked floor and adding a new
mezzanine with central stair in the central
auditorium space. At the time of the renovation
care was used to not damage or remove historic
character defining features. The perimeter
exterior walls were braced with steel on the
interior and the interior plaster finishes restored.
The primary fayade and the courtyard remain
essential as initially designed. The marquee that
was added in 1937 has been retained and
restored. The stucco and ornamental details have
been restored and the original exterior light
fixtures remain. The courtyard perimeter walls
were rebuilt and seismically braced as part of the
1997 renovation.
The lobby was restored as part of the renovation
and character defining features in the lobby were
retained and restored.
The renovation now under construction was also
designed to respect the historic features taking
care not to damage them, developing a butt
jointed glass ceiling at the mezzanine level to
maintain the visual connection between the
ground floor and the historic decorative ceiling
above, and removing intrusive stairs and other
non-historic elements.
The proposed restaurant design also preserves
the historic features of the theater. The glass wall
and doors at the entry preserve the view through
the courtyard to the main entry into the building.
The proposed courtyard canopy is deSigned to be
mounted above and behind the historic parapets
along the courtyard walls and could be removed in
the future with no damage to the historic features
of the courtyard. The canopy is movable so that it
can be opened to the sky preserving the open
courtyard feeling and yet provide protection from
inclement weather. The courtyard will not be
conditioned to preserve the outdoor nature of the
space.
The lobby will be used for seating and will
highlight the historic elements in the space.
In the kitchen and back-of-house spaces some
historic elements will be covered up and
protected. All new walls will not have connections
to, or through, decorative historic features.
The sets of new doors on the south fayade are not
impacting any historic features.
Setting
Setting is the physical environment of an historic
property, constituting topographic features,
vegetation, manmade features, and relationships
between buildings or open space. The setting of
the Theater has not changed at the front
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 15.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
elevation and the rear elevation faces a parking
lot.
Materials
Materials are the physical elements that were
combined or deposited during a particular period
of time and in a particular pattern or configuration
to form an historic property. Because the exterior
of the Theater has been restored, the materials
that are important have been documented and will
be retained.
The interior features have also been retained,
highlighted and will be restored where necessary.
Workmanship
Workmanship is the physical evidence of the
crafts of a particular culture, people, or artisan
during any given period in history or pre-history.
The original construction is typical of 1920s
building techniques. The exterior and interior
were both executed with a good degree of
craftsmanship. The workmanship on the exterior
remains intact and conveys the original intent.
As described, the interior has been altered.
Except for removal of the raked floor, seating and
stage area, the primary areas such as the lobby
and the auditorium forms, convey the
workmanship of the original theater.
Decorative features such as the lobby cornice,
arches, drinking fountain surround and columns all
are intact and in good condition and will be
highlighted in the proposed renovation.
The features of the courtyard have also been
retained with very little alteration overthe years
and will also be highlighted in the proposed
renovation
Feeling
Feeling is a property's expression of the
aesthetic or historical sense of a particular period
of time.
The exterior and the courtyard convey the feeling
of the original design very well. The interior
lobby and entry are also intact and convey the
feeling of a 1920s theater.
Due to the alterations in the 1990s, it is difficult
to get a full sense of the interior auditorium
space as a theater particularly with the removal
of the raked floor. The side aisles, arches and
the over all volume of the auditorium space does
give one a sense of how the space originally
might have felt.
Association
Association is the direct link between an important
historic event or person and an historic property.
The only association known at this time is that of
the building as an early motion picture theater in
the City of Palo Alto.
Summary
The exterior of the theater remai ns-nearly intact
from the period of significance. The interior has
been modified in many ways but also still has
integrity. The Varsity Theater is clearly
recognizable and understandable as an early
motion picture house and as an historic resource
for the City.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19,2013 • Page 16.
VARSITY THEATER RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT RESOURCE EVALUATION
VIII. Project Affect on Character Defining
Features and Conclusion
The proposed project begins with an already
greatly altered Theater. During the 1997
renovation much of the interior was altered with
the raked floor, seating, screen and stage house
removed and a new flat floor installed. At that
time a new mezzanine and a large central stair
were constructed in the central auditorium space.
During this renovation the exterior of the building,
including the courtyard was restored and the
marquee refurbished. Seismic bracing was also
part of this work with almost all of the work hidden
behind existing finishes or new finishes replicating
those existing.
The current proposed restaurant design will
maintain, highlight and restore remaining
character defining historic features. Except for
the glass doors at the entry, new doors on a non
historic fayade, and a new retractable canopy, the
exterior of the theater will remain as it currently
exists. All of the other proposed changes are
found on the interior.
New canopy has been designed to sit above the
historic parapets and will not alter them.
The new glass entry has been designed to be
visually transparent and continue the visibility
between the courtyard and the street.
Finally, all of the proposed additional elements
have been designed in such a way that they could
be removed with no impact on the historic
elements of the Theater.
While it is unlikely that the Varsity Theater will be
returned to use as a theater, none of the proposed
design additions will detract from that possibility.
The Varsity Theater remains an important
resource for the City of Palo Alto and this project
will continue that into the future.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
February 19, 2013 • Page 17.
Appendix A -Bruce D. Judd, FAIA Resume
Pasadena City HaJI
Seismic Retrofit and
Renovation *
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
25 Central Square
Suite 2-B • PO Box 4867
Seaside, Santa Rosa Beach, Fl·32459
(850) 687-4111
Bruce@brucejudd.com
Historic Preservation architecture wasn't an established field of practice when Bruce D.
Judd, FAIA, co"founded Architectural Resources Group in San Francisco in 1980. Thirty
years later, Bruce is considered a pioneer in the field and has a national reputation as a
thought leader, experienced practitioner and financial pragmatist. Over the years his
clients have learned that when they want their preservation projects to succeed, Bruce/s
skills are essential to ensure that the project proceeds, from the initial planning
processes through construction, with professionalism and integrity, while also meeting
the project team's goals. Whether it Is guiding the project team through the myriad of
governmental agencies at the local, state and national tevel, or navigating a project
team through the internal poUtical environment, Bruce's projects conSistently result In
satisfied cUents. His development projects are profitable to the investors, yet do not
compromise the sustainable concepts and ideas that have formed the foundation of his
career.
Bruce has directed more than 300 plannins, rehabilitation, and expansion projects for
architecturally significant buildings throughout the west and is a nationally recognized
expert in his field. He has led rehabilitation and new construction projects for Itbrary,
cultural, and performing arts facilities, including the award-winning master plan and
completed renovation and additions to the A. K. Smiley Library in Redlands. He has also
directed high-profile projects, including the rehabilitation of 50 United Nations Plaza in
San Francisco, currently in design, repair and restoration of the San francisco
Conservatory of Flowers in Golden Gate Park, seismic retrofit for the block-square
BeaUX-Arts style City Hall in Pasadena, and restoration work at the Hotel Del Coronado
in San Diego.
Bruce brings extensive experience with the application of The Secretary a/the Interior's
Standards for Preservation. For eight years he was a President-appointed Expert Membel
of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), the federal agency that oversee~
and advises on national preservation matters, and recently participated on the
Committee on Preservation and Security for the White House and CapitoL For nine years
he was a member of the Boa rd of Trustees of the Nationa1 Trust for Historic Preservation
Bruce meets The Secretary a/the Interior's Historic Preservation Professional
Qualifications Standards in Architecture, Historic Architecture, Architectural History, and
History.
582 .lvIARKE T STltEET
SA N FRANCISCO , CA 94104
'1': 41 5.39J.9633
F: 415.391.9647
www.gara\Taglia.com
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
31 May 2013
Steven Turner
City of Palo Alto
Sarah Hahn
Attachment D
Project: Varsity Theater Peer Review / Standards Compliance Review
Re: Final Report
Via: Email
INTRODUCTION
Garavaglia Architecture, Inc has developed this Peer Review / Standards Compliance Review
for the Varsity Theater at 456 University Avenue in Palo Alto, California at the request of the
City of Palo Alto's Planning and Community Environment Department (Client). The Varsity
Theater is a Category 1 building on the Palo Alto Historic Resource Inventory; it was converted
from a theater to a retail outlet in the mid-1990s. As a condition of this conversion, all
subsequent interior and exterior modifications must be reviewed for compliance with the
provisions established in the 1995 certified EIR.
As requested by the Client, this report-includes the following three components: a brief peer
review of a recently completed Resource Evaluation by Bruce Judd Consulting Group, a review of
the proposed project for compliance with the provisions of the 1995 EIR, and a review of the
proposed project for cqmpliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation. This report is intended to support preparation of an Initial Study by Planning
Staff.
METHODOLOGY
At the beginning of the project, the Client provided a series of documents tor review including a
. full set of plan drawings for the proposed project, the Varsity Theater Resource Evaluation by
Bruce Judd Consulting Group, and copies of the 1995 Draft and Final EIR reports. Garavaglia
Architectur~, Inc. reviewed these documents and performed limited additional research on the
subject property to complete this peer and standards compliance review.
In n ova t ing Tradition
PROPERTY OVERVIEW
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
The information in this section is quoted from the Draft Initial Study for the Varsity Theater
(April 2013):
RESOURCE DESCRIPTION
The Varsity Theater building is a cast-in-place reinforced concrete structure, designed by
the San Francisco office of Reid and Reid, architects. The original design featured a
Mission style entrance cupola on its University Avenue frontage, and a fore court and
columned entry arcades connecting to the lobby and l,OOO-seat auditorium located near
the center of the block. The structure was accented with a mix of eclectic architectural
detailing including a combination of Spanish style, Tuscan style, and other
Churrigueresque decorative details in the linear, columned forecourt; Spanish
Renaissance style decorative detailing in the lobby (including Corinthian column
capitals); and Mission style decorative detailing in the auditorium. These character-.
defining elements were retained when the theater building was converted to a bookstore
use in 1996.
Varsity Theater Historic Features
Main Facade: The University Avenue entrance fa~ade is comprised of a high, tile-roofed
cupola with a stepped, Mission-style shaped parapet and cantilevered marquee above
an entrance portal. Shallow niches adorn the parapet. Below the parapet is an arcaded
cornice and portal between two slightly projecting end mission style "bell-tower" piers.
[A second, prominent Mission-style parapet wall is set back above the lobby space,
dominating views within the forecourt as visitors proceed to the lobby entrance. It is
elaborated with a decorative shaped parapet cap; a large, blind rounded arch; Palladian
style arched opening with decorative columns; and a flagpole set at the apex of the
arched parapet.]
The large, three-sided marquee projects over the sidewalk entrance portal. The fa~ade
appears to originally have had an arched entrance portal topped with a curved entrance
awning marquee and a vertical "Varsity" sign projecting from the parapet. [The present
marquee was installed in 1936]. The marquee was refurbished when the theater was
converted to a bookstore in 1996.
The rear and side facades are utilitarian, constructed of poured-in-place unfinished
concrete. The long south (rear) fa~ade of the theater faces parking lot H. A new two
story rear fa~ade with entry and a stairway was added to the building when it was
converted to a bookstore in 1996.
Entrance Forecourt: Surrounded by adjacent two-story buildings, the rectangular
forecourt consists of two areas, the covered two-story [entry vestibule] on University
Avenue, and the open courtyard [or fore court] with one-story tile-roofed arcades alpng
the two long sides of the courtyard. Eight arches run the length of the arcade walls with
columns having ringed Doric capitals. Four large decorative lanterns project from each
of the arcades into the courtyard. Each arcade is covered with a sloped tile roof rising up
to the exterior parapet walls of the courtyard. These walls extend about eight feet above
the tile roofs. Each of these parapet walls has four small niches similar to those on the
front fa~ade.
Page 2 of 18
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
The southern fa<;ade of the courtyard served ·as the front fa<;ade of the theater lobby, and
subsequently as the entry to the bookstore. Three pairs of [single-pane glazed metal(?)
doors are centered on this fa<;ade. Each door has [faux] wrought iron bars inset into the
door and [modern] hardware [these doors are not original, but were installed as part of
the 1995 renovation]. Above each pair of doors is a recessed arch with a decorative motif
centered in the arch. Above and between the pairs of doors are two projecting decorative
light fixtures similar to the ones on the arches of the courtyard. [
Interior: The original theater consisted of three primary spaces, the lobby, a mezzanine
level above the lobby, and the auditorium. The primary interior spaces feature Spanish
Renaissance inspired decorative elements. Colonnades, arches, decorative plasterwork
and wrought iron fixtures embellish theses spaces. When the theater was converted to a
bookstore in 1996, the auditorium of the theater was altered to accommodate the
bookstore use. The sloping floor of the auditorium was removed and flat flooring was
installed. The existing historic finishes and features were retained throughout the
interior spaces, and damaged historic elements were restored.
As part of the 1996 renovation, a new monumental stair was added [now removed] and
a new mezzanine surrounding the large open space where the auditorium had been.
These new features were designed to set the new features apart from the historic
elements of the theater that were retained.1
SIGNIFICANCE
The Varsity Theater building is listed on the City of Palo Alto Historic Building
Inventory as a Category 1 historic structure. A Category 1 structure is defined as an
"exceptional building" of pre-eminent national or state importance. It is not listed on the
National Register of Historic Places. The State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO)
lists the Varsity Theater as a "Category 3" resource, which means a property that
appears to be eligible for listing ort the National Register.2
1 City of Palo Alto, 456 University Avenue Varsity Theater Building Alterations to Building for Restaurant/Banquet Space
Use Initial Study (Draft -Apri12013), 17-18.
2 City of Palo Alto, Initial Study, 7.
Page 3 of 18
PEER REVIEW
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
This section briefly reviews a report entitled Varsity Theater Restaurant Development Resource.
Evaluation for Ferrado, Newport Beach, California, by Bruce Judd Consulting Group completed 19
February 2013.
The Varsity Theater Restaurant Development Resource Evaluation by Bruce Judd Consulting Group
provides a brief historical and descriptive overview of the Varsity Theater's history and existing
conditions, and also describes the 1997 renovation that altered much of the theater's interior.
The report then outlines the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California
Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) criteria for listing and states that "The Varsity Theater
has been substantially altered but the majority of the character defining features remain intact.
The Exterior has had few modifications and these have occurred on the south, non-historic
fa~ade."3
Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. concurs that the Varsity has been substantially altered and finds
that many of its character defining features do remain intact. However, the Varsity Theater
Restaurant Development Resource Evaluation does not address the issue of cumulative impacts in
any detaiL Since the key character defining space, the theater auditorium, has been significantly
modified and many of its key features removed, the remaining character-defining features and
spaces in the building rise to a level of greater importance. Continued modifications to the
building over time may result in a cumulative and widespread loss of material integrity if care
is not taken to protect the remaining character defining features. Preservation of these features
is imperative if the building is to retain historical integrity and maintain its status as a listed
historic resource.
Following the introductory sections, the report provides a brief discussion of the main areas of
proposed alteration to the building, and an evaluation of how the proposed design will affect
the building's historical integrity. It concludes with a summary assessment on the effects of the
proposed project on the Varsity Theater's character defining features; the findings are as
follows:
The current proposed restaurant design will maintain, highlight, and restore remaining
character defining features. Except for the glass doors at the entry, new doors on a non
historic fa~ade, and a new retractable canopy, the exterior of the theater will remain as it
currently exists. All of the other proposed changes are found on the interior.
New canopy has been designed to sit above the historic parapets and will not alter them.
The new glass entry has been designed to be visually transparent and continue the
visibility between the courtyard and the street.
Finally, all of the proposed additional elements have been designed in such a way that
they could be removed with no impact to the historic elements of the theater.4
3 Bruce Judd Consulting Group, Varsity Theater Restaurant Development Resource Evaluation for Ferrado, Newport Beach,
California (completed 19 February 2013), 11.
4 Ibid, 17.
Page 4 of 18
The Varsity Theater Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. finds that while the Varsity Theater Restaurant Development Resource
Evaluation covers many relevant issues in relation to the proposed project and its impact on the
Varsity Theater, it does not provide an adequate analysis of the proposed project with relation
to potential cumulative impacts and to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. Specifically, it
provides only minimal discussion of the area of the proposed project that will have the greatest
impact on a key historic feature, the new canopy over the historic forecourt. It also does not
address in any depth interior alterations that may have an impact on remaining historic features
including the location of new restroom facilities at the former entrance to the theater
auditorium, and the treatment of the existing historic features in the area of the proposed
kitchen and banquet area. Finally, while Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. does agree that the
project has been designed to protect many of the building's historic features, we not concur
with the finding that the proposed project will have no impact to the historic elements of the
theater. Please seethe Standards Compliance Review section below for a detailed evaluation of
the project's compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation.
Page 5 of 18
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
EVALUATIVE FRAMEWORK
1995 EIR PROVISIONS
In February 1995 The City of Palo Alto issued the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the
Proposed Varsity Theatre Remodel Project, which described the environmental implications of the
"proposed remodel, partial restoration, and seismic upgrade" of the Varsity Theater for use as a
"large book and compact disc store and a cafe.',s The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)
was'issued in May 1995.
Though the 1995 DEIR/FEIR evaluated a set of design scenarios that are different from the
existing proposed project, several provisions were put forward in the mitigation measures that
are relevant to other projects that may affect historic features. The City has contracted with
Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. to review the current project for compliance with the 1995
mitigations.
The following key provisions are outlined on pages 11-23 in the mitigation measures of the 1995
FEIR and are summarized here for the purposes of this review:
• Follow a design approach that sets a high priority on preservation of historic features
and finishes.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A void cumulative impacts.
Apply the State Historic Building Code (SHBC) [now the California Historic Building
Code (CHBC)] where possible to avoid extensive demolition.
Follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for the interior and
exterior aspects of the project.
Perform a complete photo-documentation of the building prior to any construction work
following the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) standards for archival
recordation and submit results to an appropriate repository
Avoid false historicism by not replicating features that are not adequately documented
through adequate research; if this research is not available design new features to be
compatible with, but clearly distinct from, historical features.
Protect in place the historic features during construction.
If any areas containing historic features require seismic retrofit, the applicant must 1)
carefully document and dismantle these features; 2) salvage, catalogue, store, and
reinstall these features after construction; and 3) retain a qualified ornamental plasterer
for the document/ dismantle and the reinstall/repair phases of the work.
Retain and reuse historic light fixtures.
SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION
The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation lists ten key elements to consider
when new uses or architectural modifications are undertaken within historic resources.
1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change
to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive
materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property
will be avoided.
5 City of Palo Alto, Varsity Theater Remodel Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (February 1995), 1.
Page 6 of 18
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that
create a false sense ofhistorical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements
from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained
and preserved.
5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of
craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of
deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in
design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be
substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means
possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be
disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic
materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be
differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale
and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the.property and its environment.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner
that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its
environment would be un impaired. 6
6 National Park Service, Standards for Rehabilitation:
http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/standguide/rehab/rehab_standards.htm (accessed 16 May 2013)
Page 7 of 18
COMPLIANCE REVIEW
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
The following discusses the proposed project for compliance with the applicable provisions of
the 1995 FEIR and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (SISR). It presents
the components of the proposed project that have the potential to affect important character
defining features and discusses the level of compliance of the proposed project at the Varsity
Theater, Palo Alto. For each project component, a level of compliance is given: Compliant,
Marginally Compliant, Not Compliant. A compliant rating indicates that the alteration has little
or no impact on the resource. A marginal compliance rating indicates that the overall historical
significance of the resources is not impacted enough to warrant re-evaluation, but modifications
to the proposed design are strongly recommended. Not compliant indicates that the proposed
design would severely negatively impact the resource and its eligibility for formal listing on a
local, state, or national inventory.
This compliance review is based on the following drawing set:
• HRB Application For: Varsity Theater Proposed Restaurant & Banquet Hall by Robinson Hill
Architecture, Inc., full set architectural drawings, revised 5 April 2013.
PROPOSED WORK
The Initial Study provides this narrative description of the proposed project:
The proposed project consists of remodeling of the existing ground floor space of the
building to include a restaurant, banquet facility and shared kitchen space. The existing
uncovered courtyard which faces University Avenue will be used for outdoor restaurant
seating. The banquet facility would be used by the adjacent Garden Court Hotel, which
fronts on Cowper A venue. The major components of the project include installation of a
glass storefront system at the University entrance into the courtyard, addition of three
new storefronts at the rear of the building faCing the adjacent public parking lot,
installation of a translucent retractable fabric rain canopy above the open courtyard, and
installation of partitions to separate the different uses in the service and kitchen areas.
The applicant indicates that the historic features of the theater courtyard, foyer and
theater will be maintained, protected and restored where necessary, and that a great
majority of these elements will be in direct view of the restaurant /banquet facility
patrons. However, certain historic elements within the kitchen will be concealed from
public view due to the nature of commercial kitchen uses. The applicant also notes that
the retractable rain canopy would be installed above the existing parapets in order to
maintain the existing courtyard parapets and cornices. The new storefronts along the
parking lot elevation will match the height and construction of the existing entrance
lobby storefront, and will provide views to the interior historic arches which are not
currently visible? .
7 City of Palo Alto, Initial Study, 7.
Page 8 of 18
COMPLIANCE REVIEW
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
Project Component 1: Installation of a butt 'jointed glass storefront system at the University
A venue street entrance, and at recessed entry to courtyard.
As proposed, the project calls for the installation of a new butt jOinted glass storefront system at
the street entrance. (See Drawings: AO.2, Al.0P, A1.1P, A2.0, A2.1, A3.0.)
Applicable FEIR Provisions:
• Follow a design approach that sets a high priority on preservation of historic features
and finishes.
• A void cumulative impacts .
Applicable Standards:
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials
or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if
removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment
would be unimpaired
Analysis:
Original drawings were not available for this project, but historic images of the theater show
that the archway at the University Avenue entrance has historically been open to the street,
allowing views of, and pedestrian access to, the entry vestibule and open forecourt. At some
point prior to the 1995 renovation, the existing metal security gate was installed at the street
entrance to secure entry to the forecourt when the property was closed. This gate is not original.
The proposed new storefront will be glass, which will offer some visual access to the interior,
and will have minimal attachments to facilitate reversibility. However, it will still notably alter
the historic appearance and physical experience of the theater entrance at University Avenue.
Early 20th century movie theaters were characteristically open at the sidewalk entrance to allow
access to (and around) the ticket booth, which was typically pla~ed in the entry vestibule. Open
access to the entry vestibule and forecourt spaces is an original characteristic of the building,
and installation of this new glass storefront will remove this characteristic.
The Varsity Theater is a distinctive property type along the University Avenue commercial
corridor and has not historically been defined at the street access by a storefront system. Most
neighboring commercial properties along University Avenue do have glass storefront systems,
a feature characteristic of the retail or commercial property type. The absence of a storefront at
the street face distinguishes the Varsity Theater from the surrounding commercial properties.
Installation of a glass storefront system at the proposed location introduces a new element to
the street face of the building that did not exist historically, and that is not characteristic of the
property type.
For the reasons discussed above, the proposed installation of the butt jointed glass storefront
assembly at the University Avenue entrance is not compliant with Standard 2. It does not
prioritize the historic qualities of the theater, it alters the historic character of the property, and
it could also contribute to a cumulative loss of integrity.
Page 9 of 18
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
Project component 2: Installation of a translucent fabric, retractable rain canopy above the
open fore court.
As proposed, the project calls for installation of a new, retractable rain canopy over the existing
open fore court. The proposed canopy material is a clear plastic material (referred to as "glass
fabric" in the proposed drawings) with a tightly knit 1/ 4" grid of white threading throughout.
The installation of this new feature will require an increase in parapet height (on top of the
existing parapet) and insertion of a new pipe support into the existing parapet walls to support
the new steel framework for the canopy. At least three 8/1x 6/1 steel support beams will be
installed over the open forecourt to support the new sectioned canopy system, which will cover
at least one-third of the courtyard's west end at all times. The canopy system consists of a series
of arched panels with gridded framework that connect to 4" x 10" steel track beams, which
house the canopy track and roller wheel mechanisms. (See Drawings: A2.1, A3.0.)
Applicable FEIR Provisions:
• Follow a design approach that sets a high priority on preservation of historic features
and 'finishes.
• Avoid cumulative impacts .
Applicable Standards:
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive
materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be
avoided.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials,
features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated
from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion,
and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if
removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment
would be unimpaired
Analysis:
Aforecourt is defined as II an open area in front of a building."s The fore court at the Varsity
Theater is a key character-defining space of this historic resource. It is, and historically has been,
an open air space with views of the character-defining Mission Style parapets that bookend the
courtyard.
While the proposed If glass fabric" will allow some transparency and screened views of the
parapets at each end of the fore court, the gridded canopy panels and associated structural
components will be visually intrusive and will markedly alter the experience of this historically
open air space. When closed, the canopy will act as a roof, thereby diminishing the sense of
openness intended by this space. When open, views of the west end parapet will be limited by
the portion of the canopy that does not fully retract, and interrupted throughout by canopy
framing. With the one-story height of the existing forecourt, the bulky framework and gridded
panels of the proposed new canopy will be relatively low to the ground and therefore quite
8 http://www .merriarn-webster .com/dictionary /forecourt, http://oxforddictionaries .com/us! definition/american_englishlforecourt
(accessed 30 May 2013).
Page 10 of 18
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
noticeable within the space. This new feature will notably change the open-air qualities of the
forecourt by introducing a ceiling-type element to the space.
Installations of this size and scale tend not to be removed, so while the proposed canopy could
technically be removed in the future, the probability is unlikely.
For the reasons discussed above the proposed forecourt canopy and associated structural
components do not appear to comply with the provisions of the 1995 FEIR or Standards, 2, 9, or
10.
Project component 3: Introduction of restaurant furniture to the Forecourt, Lobby, and former
auditorium space
To support the proposed restaurant use, new furniture and restaurant-related features are
included in the proposed design. New furniture and features include moveable tables and
chairs, booths and banquettes, hostess stands, service tables, and a large rounded bar in the
forecourt. (See Drawings: AO.2, A1.0P, A1.1P, A2.1, A2.2, A2.3.)
Applicable FEIR Provisions:
• Follow a design approach that sets a high priority on preservation of historic features
and finishes.
• A void cumulative impacts.
Applicable Standards:
5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship
that characterize a property will be preserved.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if
removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment
would be unimpaired
Analysis:
As proposed, the restaurant furniture and other related features would be installed in a manner
that protects and maintains existing historical features. In the entry vestibule and forecourt,
tables and booths will be installed beneath both arcades, built up to, but not attaching to, the
existing movie poster frames. Similarly, banquettes, freestanding, and bench seating will be
installed in existing niches within the lobby. These furnishings will be attached to non-historic
floor surfaces in the vestibule, fore court, and lobby, and will not attach to original wall surfaces
or features.
A new bar will be installed in the center of the forecourt and the existing non-historic fountain
will be removed. The new bar will be anchored to the scored concrete paving, however, the
architectural drawings from the 1995 renovation indicate that this paving is not originaL so this
would not impact a historic finish.
In general, furnishings are considered a reversible alteration. The proposed introduction of new
furniture for the restaurant use would not significantly alter distinctive features or finishes, and
would maintain the essential form and integrity of the forecourt, lobby, and entry vestibule off . .
Page 11 of 18
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
of University A venue. As shown in the drawings, only freestanding furnishings are proposed
for the former auditorium space, so no historic features would be affected.
As proposed, this modification appears to be compliant with the 1995 FEIR provisions and SISR
Standards 5 and 10.
Project component 4: Introduction of partitions to the service/kitchen areas and related
treatment of historic features including measures to protect features in place.
To accommodate the new restaurant use, the proposed plans show introduction of new kitchen
facilities along the west side of the former auditorium, on either side of the remaining arcade
piers. The plan drawings indicate that the existing historical arcade piers in this area are to be
"maintained, protected, and restored," and that new partition walls will be constructed with a
1/4" gap between the historic surface and the new construction. Attachment points for the new
partition walls will be at the floor and ceiling to avoid damage to historic finishes. Where
historic columns are to be protected from kitchen use, they will be wrapped in 3/16" foam and
secured in a framed enclosure. Framing attachment points will be at the floor and ceiling to
protect these historic features. (See Drawings: A1.0P, A1.2, A1.2P, Al.3, A1.3P.)
Applicable FEIR Provisions:
• Follow a design approach that sets a high priority on preservation of historic features
and finishes.
• Protect in place the historic features during construction.
• Avoid cumulative impacts.
Applicable Standards:
5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship
that characterize a property will be preserved.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if
removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment
would be unimpaired
Analysis:
In the proposed design, a series of partition walls and new enclosures will be introduced to
accommodate the kitchen related activities for the new restaurant facility. These rooms will be
located in an area of the building that has already been significantly altered, and will not
negatively affect or alter a character defining space. However, one of the only remaining
historic features from the original theater -the western set of arcade columns -is located in this
area and is an important character-defining feature. As described above, new partition walls
will attach to points at the ceiling and floor, and not to the historic finishes or surfaces of the
arcade. Where extra protection from kitchen functions is necessary, the existing columns will be
wrapped in foam and covered by a framed enclosure. This design approach complies both with
the design provisions of the 1995 FEIR and the SISR by maintaining and protecting historic
features and finishes and allowing for the full retention of these features should the partition
walls be removed in the future.
As proposed, these modifications appear to be compliant with the 1995 FEIR provisions and
SISR Standards 5 and 10.
Page 12 of 18
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
Project component 5: Introduction of new restrooms at former entrance to theater auditorium.
New restroom facilities are proposed for installation along the south side of the lobby, at the
former entrance to the auditorium. The curved walls in this area (which are not original, .
according to the 1995 rehabilitation drawings -see Sheets A1.1 and A2.1) will be retained. A
new privacy partition is also proposed in front of the restroom access doors. (See Drawings: .
AO.2, A1.0P, A1.2P.)
Applicable FEIR Provisions:
• A void cumulative impacts.
Applicable Standards:
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive
materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be
avoided.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if
removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment
would be unimpaired
AnalysiS:
The progression of spaces found in historic theaters commonly consists of the following:
sidewalk entrance and marquee, entry vestibule with ticket kiosk, lobby with concessions area,
and auditorium. In the case of the Varsity Theater, the building has the added feature of the
open forecourt between the ticketing vestibule and the lobby, but it retains all other
aforementioned spaces in the proper sequence. Though the auditorium space has been
significantly altered and no longer serves its original purpose, the installation of restrooms at
this location will significantly impact the progression of spaces and circulation pattern that
characterize this building type. By introducing restrooms at this location, the lobby will lose all
connection to the original auditorium. This access point to the auditorium will no longer be a
transitional space, but a separate room entirely. This proposed modification further alters the
building's ability to communicate its original use as a historic movie theater (cumulative effect).
In addition, while the proposed restrooms could theoretically be removed in the future, the
likelihood is a greater that this modification will become a permanent fixture.
As proposed, this modification does not appear to be compliant with the 1995 FEI~ provisions
or SISR Standards 2 and 10.
Project component 6: Installation of artificial trees to forecourt
The proposed project calls for the installation of three artificial trees in the forecourt area. No
details are provided in the drawing about height or type of artificial tree.
Applicable FEIR Provisions:
• Avoid cumulative impacts.
Page 13 of 18
Applicable Standards:
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive
materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be
avoided.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if
removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment
would be unimpaired
Analysis:
No evidence exists to suggest that the fore court ever·contained trees or other plant materials.
Historically the forecourt has offered open views of the characteristic Mission Style parapets
and sky above. The introduction of artificial trees to the forecourt alters the original and
intended experience of this space for the visitor by obscuring views and altering historic
character. Combined with the proposed canopy, the cumulative effect would notably alter this
key character-defining space. The trees, however, are removable, and do not Significantly
threaten the essential form and integrity of the historic property.
As such, this modification appears marginally compliant with the 1995 FEIR provisions or SISR
Standard 2.
Project component 7: Kitchen ductwork at mezzanine level restroom
The proposed project includes the removal of the original wood stall partitions in the former
women's restroom on the Mezzanine level and installation of two vent ducts in this space. The
vent ducts will necessitate the creation of four new openings in this space -two in the floor and
two in the south wall-for entrance and exit of the two ducts. (See Drawings: AO.2.)
Applicable FEIR Provisions:
• Avoid cumulative impacts .
Applicable Standards:
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive
materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be
avoided.
Analysis:
According to the National Park Service, "the more important a feature or area is to the historic
character of a property, the less it can be changed without damaging the character as a whole.
On the other hand, aspects less critical to the historic character may sometimes be altered
substantially with little effect on the overall character."9
Since the women's restroom space and its associated features do flot playa key role in
communicating the original use or significance of the building, they are not critical in defining
9 National Park Service, Incentives, Applying the Standards at: http://www.nps.gov/tps/tax-incentives/incentives/standards_4.htm
(accessed 30 May 2013).
Page 14 of 18
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
the historic character of the Varsity Theater. As such, the proposed modification does not
notably impact the overall historic character of the property.
Note: While the restroom facilities are less critical to the historic character of the building than
the forecourt or lobby spaces, the restroom is original and it does contain some original
materials and features. To avoid a cumulative loss of historic integrity, retention of original
materials and features to the greatest extent possible is recommended. See the
Recommendations section below for documentation suggestions prior to removal of historic
fabric in this location.
This proposed modification appears generally compliant with the 1995 FEIR provisions and
Standard 2 of the SISR. .
General:
A number of the 1995 FEIR provisions and Secretary of the Interior's Standards were not
addressed in the above discussion because they did not directly apply to the project
components listed. The following addresses each of these items in brief:
1995 FEIR Provisions
• Apply the State Historic Building Code (SHBC) [now the California Historic Building Code (CHBC)]
where possible to avoid extensive demolition.
The proposed plans do not indicate an intention to use the CHBC. This code is available for
use and should be applied where applicable.
• Follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for the interior and exterior aspects of
the project.
Recommendations for and discussion of the current proposed project's compliance with the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards is provided above.
• Perform a complete photo-documentation of the building prior to any construction work following the
Historic American Building Survey (HABS) standards for archival recordation and submit results to
an appropriate repository
The proposed project does not include documentation of the building to HABS Standards.
This was a provision of the 1995 renovation. Consultation with City staff indicates that HABS
documentation may not have been completed as recommended in the 1995 FEIR. A review of
the HABS inventory online showed no records for the Varsity Theater. Recommendations for
documentation of the building are provided below.
• A void false historicism by not replicating features that are not adequately documented
through adequate research; if this research is not available design new features to be
compatible with, but clearly distinct from, historical features.
In general, existing historic finishes and features to be maintained and restored should be
restored using existing historic features and materials as a guide. This intention is generally
represented in the proposed project drawings.
Deteriorated or damaged historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced, and if
replacement is necessary, the new feature should match the old in design, color, texture, and
Page 15 of18
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
other visual qualities. Historic photographs and other historical documentation are also
recommended as support materials for any restoration or replacement work to ensure
accuracy in the historical record. New features should be compatible with the existing
materials and design, and should avoid creating a false sense of history and development.
• Protect in place the historic features during construction.
Some protective measures including the covering and wrapping of decorative columns and
other features is already in place at the project site. This includes the use of bubble wrap to
protect existing features and finishes. Additional details would be beneficial to better describe
proposed protection measures during construction.
Original features and finishes obscured through previous alterations to the building may be
discovered during the construction process. These elements should be documented with
photographs (and drawings, if possible) and measures should be taken to preserve these
features and finishes in place to the greatest extent possible.
• If any areas containing historic features require seismic retrofit, the applicant must 1)
carefully document and dismantle these features; 2) salvage, catalogue, store, and reinstall
these features after construction; and 3) retain a qualified ornamental plasterer for the
document/ dismantle and the reinstall/ repair phases of the work.
Seismic retrofit work was completed as part of the 1995 renovation and is not included as a
component of this proposal. However, if seismic issues do arise, the above provision must be
followed.
• Retain and reuse historic light fixtures.
The proposed plan drawings indicate the intention to retain and reuse historic light fixtures in
the forecourt and lobby. There are several original light fixtures in the entry vestibule off of
University Avenue that are not represented in the drawings. Since the applicant proposes to
retain and reuse other original light fixtures, it is assumed that these will be retained as well.
However, this is not clearly represented in the proposed plans. All original light fixtures
should be retained and reused.
SISR Standards:
1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to
its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
The proposed restaurant use is not the historic use of the building, but is a compatible use
considering the previous alteration and use for retail purposes. As such, the proposed
restaurant use is generally compliant with this Standard.
3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a
false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other
historic properties, will not be undertaken.
The proposed project does not attempt to add conjectural features or architectural elements
from other buildings. Therefore, the proposed project appears to be compliant with
Standard 3.
Page 16 of 18
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
4. Changes to a property that have acquired significance in their' own right will be retained and
preserved.
The Varsity Theater was completed in 1927 and is significant for its historic function as a .
movie theater and for its exceptional design qualities. None of the background information
or previously completed historical reports reviewed for this study indicated that any of the
alterati~ns completed after the 1927 construction date are considered to be important. As
such, these alterations need not be retained or preserved. Based on known information, the
proposed project is compliant with Standard 4.
6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of
deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in
design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be
substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
The proposed project drawings indicate the protection and restoration of existing historic
features. Most features appear to be in good condition and require little interference beyond
minor repair. Overall, the proposed project appears to be compliant with this Standard.
7. Chemical or Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest
means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
No such treatments are outlined on the presented materials. Any chemical treatments,
including sandblasting, epoxy injection or other specialty repair methodologies should only
be undertaken as a last resort and completed by a trained professional with expertise
working with historic materials. As proposed, the project is compliant with Standard 7.
8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed,
mitigation measures will be undertaken.
Archaeological investigation was not included as part of this review. Further, the proposed
project does not appear to create any ground disturbance and therefore would not affect
existing archaeological resources. However, should materials be found during construction,
a qualified archeologist should be consulted for assessment and mitigation
recommendations. Based on available information, the proposed project is compliant with
Standard 8.
Project Compliance Summary
The proposed project at the Varsity Theater is generally compliant with Standards 1, 3, 4, 6, 7,
and 8. Aspects of the project including the entryway storefront assembly, the forecourt canopy,
and the installation of restrooms at the entrance of the former theater are not compliant with
Standards 2, 5, 9 and 10. These alterations are also not in keeping with key provisions from the
1995 FEIR, specifically those provisions that require avoidance of cumulative impacts, and
prioritization and retention of historic features. Proposed alterations related to the installation
of new furnishings and partition walls in the new kitchen area are generally compliant with
Standards 5 and 10, and with the 1995 FEIR provisions. Overall compliance is not necessarily a
direct sum of the level of compliance with each individual standard, however that information
is weighed with the overall impact on both the design and historical significance of the
resource. Depending on the impacts to character-defining features and the level of importance
of the resource, different levels of overall compliance may result.
Page 17 of 18
The Varsity Theater -Final Peer and Compliance Review
31 May 2013
For the Varsity Theater, Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. finds the proposed project to be
marginally compliant in general. Though significant aspects of the proposed design are not
compliant with the Standards and FEIR provisions, the overall project generally respects the
historic qualities of the exi~ting building and does not propose to remove or impose significant
adverse changes on remaining historic features.
Recommendations
The proposed design could be brought into full compliance with the 1995 FEIR and the
Standards with some simple modifications. Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. has provided the
following suggestions to increase the project's level of compliance by addressing the key areas
of concern with the proposed design.
Proposed Storefront Assembly
1. Eliminate the storefront assembly at University Avenue access to reduce visual and
physical impacts.
2. Consider a recessed storefront assembly at the arched opening to the forecourt (instead
of at the street face) to minimize impact. Elimination of the storefront at the sidewalk
entrance would improve compliance with the Standards, as it would lessen the visual
impact from the street and preserve, to a greater degree, the original views and spatial
relationships within the space.
Proposed Forecourt Canopy
1. Eliminate or revise canopy solution at forecourt
a. Incorporate umbrellas for individual table shading; or consider light, retractable
awnings installed at the arcade eave line.
b. Investigate alternative solutions that use a less visually intrusive and permanent
framework.
1. Relocate the proposed restrooms to preserve the historic auditorium access location.
2. Eliminate proposed artificial trees in forecourt to maintain views and sightlines within
forecourt space, and to lessen cumulative visual impacts.
3. Document the existing conditions .of the mezzanine restroom prior to construction with
digital photographs and plan drawings. Store the original wood partitions on site in a
protected location.
4. Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. recommends review of City files to confirm whether HABS
documentation was completed as part of the 1995 renovation project. If this type of
documentation was not completed, Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. suggests some level of
documentation be completed for the Varsity Theater prior to further alteration. This
could consist of a "HABS-like" level of documentation that includes digital
photography of character-a.efining features and spaces, historical narrative, and a
compilation of a construction chronology that accurately identifies historic and non
historic features. (This study has found that the historical record compiled to date
contains some errors in regard to identification of historic fabric.)
Page 18 of 18
Attachment E
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
Response to Varsity Theater Peer Review/Standards Compliance Review
Draft Findings
Prepared by GarvigJia Architecture, Inc.
Dated: May 17, 2013
The following document is in response to the Varsity Theater Peer Review,
Standards Compliance Review, and Draft Findings. We appreciate the detailed
comments and the effort that has gone into preparing the Peer Review draft.
To help the reader, relevant text from the draft review has been included in italics
and our response follows.
ttGaravaglia Architecture, Inc. finds that while the Varsity Theater
Restaurant Development Resource Evaluation covers many
relevant issues in relation to the proposed project and its impact on
the Varsity Theater, it does not provide an adequate analysis of the
proposed project with relation to potential cumulative impacts and
to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. Specifically, it provides
only minimal discussion of the area of the proposed project that will
have the greatest impact on a key historic feature, the new canopy
over the historic forecourl. It also does not address in any depth
interior alterations that may have an impact on remaining historic
features including the location of new restroom facilities at the
former entrance to the theater auditorium, and the treatment of the
existing historic features in the area of the proposed kitchen and
banquet area. Finally, while Garavaglia Architecture, Inc. does
agree that the project has been designed to protect many of the
building's historic features, we not concur with the finding that the
proposed project will have no impact to the historic elements of the
theater. Please see the Standards Compliance Review section
below for a detailed evaluation of the project's compliance with the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. "
P. O. Box 4867· Seaside, FL 32459
(850) 687-4111 • bruce@brucejudd.com·www.brucejudd.com
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
Potential Cumulative Impacts and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards
The Varsity Theater was designed by the San Francisco office of Reid and Reid
Architects and opened in 1927 for musical performances and then was converted
into a cinema. The original design featured a Mission style entry leading into a
long open air arcaded forecourt, that then led into the lobby. The lobby led into a
1,000 seat theater with a raked floor and a stair from the lobby led up to a
mezzanine.
After 1987, it was used as an "Art House" cinema and then closed in 1994. In
1996 the theater was converted into a bookstore. The non-historic seats were
removed and the existing floor covered over. The stair to the mezzanine was
blocked of at the mezzanine floor level, and retained in the lobby.
At this time, the mezzanine was expanded on both sides of the auditorium and
the historic auditorium ceiling was retained and restored. At the east side of the
auditorium, a new monumental staircase was constructed that led down from the'
mezzanine going to the west. At a landing about half way down, the stairs split
with one set going to the south and the other to the north, both terminating at the
ground level. The staircase was centered directly above the two curved walls,
directly blocking the historic entry to the theater through the two curved walls.
This staircase is removed as part of the current renovations in the auditorium
area.
A major seismic braCing project was also undertaken as part of this work. Many
of. the historic finishes and elements of the forecourt were removed to install the
new steel and concrete bracing and then recreated to match the historic finishes.
As part of the 1996 work, all of the elements of the exterior (except for the south
facade which was not historic) were saved and restored. As part of the proposed
project, none of the historic elements will be removed or damaged (the current
forecourt paving and fountain are not historic).
The 1996 work also retained the existing historic finishes and features throughout
the interior spaces, and damaged historic elements were also restored.
To date, any cumulative impacts to the theater occurred prior to completion of the
1996 renovation work. All of the historic features that were called out in the 1995
EIR, and retained at that time, will also be retained and restored where
necessary as part of this work.
The proposed design retains the remaining historic features and restores them
where necessary. There are three areas where the Peer Review Draft
Supporting the protection, preservation .and restoration of America's resources.
Page 2,
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
suggested that the cumulative impact of proposed changes might affect the
Varsity Theater.
Project Component 1: Installation of butt jOinted glass storefront system at
the University Avenue street entrance, and at recessed entry to forecourt.
"Circulation through these spaces was originally intended to be free
flowing, and installation of these two doors remove this characteristic.
Installation of these storefront assemblies will affect visual access to the
forecourl interior and introduce a new element to the street face of the
. building that did not exist historically. This is especially true of the storefront
assembly at the sidewalk entrance. 11
The new glazing system will continue to provide complete visual access to the
forecourt at all times and physical access during open hours. Almost every
commercial operation facing a street needs a way of securing their facility when it
is not open.
The proposed design will have a minimal affect on views into and out of the
forecourt space and when open, will provide physical access. There will be
minimal impact to the wall and ceiling plaster surfaces where the glazing system
touches them. The glazing system is designed to be reversible (Standard 10).
Should the glazing be removed at some point in the future, the plaster could be
patched and the entry returned to a open entry space. This has already been
done where portions of the forecourt plaster were removed and reinstalled as
part of the seismic bracing system.
,There are many examples of where open air arches or gateways have had butt
jointed glazing systems installed in historic buildings. This is one of the most
, transparent and successful ways of installing controlled access into an historic
building when changing the use of an historiC building. One example, that is
similar to the Varsity Theater, that I am familiar with, is the Old Slave Mart in
Charleston, South Carolina. It is listed in the National Register and is a
Charleston Landmark. Here, an open arcade leading to a forecourt was
converted into the Main Entry for the Old Slave Mart Museum. (See attached
before and after photographs).
Supporting the protection. preservation .and restoration of America's resources.
Page 3.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
Project component 2: Installation of a translucent fabric, retractable rain
canopy above the open forecourt.
As proposed, the project calls for instal/ation of a new, retractable,
translucent fabric rain canopy over the existing open forecourt. The
instal/ation of this new feature will require an increase in parapet
height (on top of the existing parapet)"
"Further, the drawings do not address the potential for damage to
the historic parapet walls from insertion of the support pipes. It is
unclear if the historic parapets will be able to support the load of the
new canopy structure without suffering significant damage or loss
of historic material. "
'~n installation of this size will also likely not be removed in the
future, and would therefore not be considered reversible."
"In addition, runoff from the canopy in rainy months may increase
drainage down the side of the exterior walls, which could lead to
damage (to the theater and or neighboring buildings) in the future."
The proposed canopy will affect the visual character of the forecourt to some
degree. The existing parapet walls were cut down by about six feet and a new
steel frame property line wall was installed to return the wall to its original height.
The walls above the shed roofs are not historic and were designed to withstand
seismic forces, were tied into the new framing, and concrete below. The
engineer has determined that the weight of the new canopy can easily be
supported by the walls below and the structural calculations will show this. In
addition, these walls are property line walls and the parapet walls currently can
only be seen from the forecourt as the adjoining property line walls are higher
than the theater walls. The parapet trim at the top of the forecourt will be retained
and will still serve as the visual terminus for the forecourt. The canopy has been
detailed so that it is clearly modern and is set apart from the historic forecourt.
The joint between the two is set back from the front of the parapet to create a
gap between the two. While the canopy is located above the parapet walls, their
height will still be seen as their current height.
The canopy structure is designed to be removable in the future and when
removed, would only require patching of the non .. historic parapet walls.
The canopy has an integral gutter and downspout system at each side, so there
will be no runoff down the walls.
Supporting the protection, preservation .and restoration of America's resources ..
Page 4.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
Project component 3: Introduction of restaurant furniture to the Forecourt,
Lobby, and former auditorium space
"In general, furnishings are considered a reversible alteration. If
attachments to historic finishes are kept to a minimum, this
proposed modification would not significantly alter distinctive
features or finishes, and would maintain the essential form and
integrity of the forecourt, lobby, and entry vestibule off of University
Avenue."
"In general, furnishings are considered a reversible alteration. If
attachments to historic finishes are kept to a minimum, this
proposed modification would not significantly alter distinctive
features or finishes, and would maintain the essential form and
integrity of the forecourt, lobby, and entry vestibule off of University
Avenue. As shown in the drawings, only freestanding furnishings
are proposed for the former auditorium space, so no historic
features would be affected. "
The flooring in both· the forecourt and the lobby were replaced in the 1996
renovation and are of a stamped concrete pattern. All of the furnishings and
related restaurant elements are to be attached to the non-historic flooring
elements, none will be attached to any historic walls. All of the fixtures can be
removed without damaging any historic finishes. .
Project component 4: Introduction of partitions to the service/kitchen areas
and related treatment of historic features including measures to protect
features in place .
. " ... new·partition walls will attach to points at the ceiling and floor,
and not to the historic finishes or surfaces of the arcade. This
design approach complies both with the design provisions of the
1995 FEIR and the SISR by maintaining and protecting historic
features and finishes and allowing for the .full retention. of these
features should the partition walls be removed in the future."
Great effort is being made to detail the connections for walls in the kitchen area
so that they do not damage the historic columns or any of the features in the
Supporting the protection, preservation .and restoration of America's resources.
Page 5.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
kitchen area. The structural system securing the walls will tie into the flooring
and ceiling and they will be set off, not touching any vertical surfaces.
Part of the design is to ensure that these elements may be removed at any time
in the future without damaging any historic features.
Project component 5: Introduction of new restrooms at former entrance to
theater auditorium.
"Though the auditorium space has been significantly altered and no
longer serves its original propose, the installation of restrooms at this
location will notably alter the 'progression of spaces and circulation patter
that characterize this building type. Further, though in theory the
restrooms could be removed in the future to restore this key access point,
in most cases this does not happen and these alterations become
permanent fixtures. This proposed modification further alters the building's
ability to communicate its original use as a historic movie theater
(cumulative effect)."
The circulation progression of spaces hasn't existed for over eighteen years
when the monumental staircase was installed, completely blocking of any sense
of arrival into the theater and when all of the flooring, seating and aisles were
removed. The curved walls will be retained and protected. What remains, does
not give any sense of original progression. Addition of the restrooms does not
alter or change any of the remaining historic features in the auditorium or the
lobby area and also it. does not change the building's ability to communicate its
original use as a movie theater.
Project component 6: Installation of artificial trees to forecourt
No evidence exists to suggest that the forecourt ever contained trees or
other plant materials. Historically the forecourt has offered open views Of
the characteristic Mission Style parapets and sky above. The introduction
of artificial trees to the forecourt alters the original and intended
experience of this space for the visitor by obscuring views and altering
historic character.
While there were never any trees in the forecourt, it was primarily used as a
circulation space for the theater. The proposed used as a restaurant is one,
where having landscaping and trees seems appropriate. They are removable
Supporting the protection, preservation .and restoration of America's resources.
Page 6.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
and do not detract for anyone's ability to understand or appreciate the forecourt
space.
Project component 6: (Should be Component 7) Kitchen ductwork at
mezzanine level restroom
"Though the restroom facilities are not a primary character-defining
feature forthe theater, the space is original and it does contain
original materials and features. To avoid a cumulative loss of
historic integrity (from previous alterations to the building, from the
current proposed alterations, and from future modifications)
retention of original materials and features to the greatest extent
possible is recommended. "
The mezzanine restroom is not accessible and has not been used since 1996.
The space does not contain any original or historic finishes. The project team
proposes to document the restroom prior to any changes are made, and
removing and storing the partitions for reuse should that be desired at some point
in the future.
General:
1995 FEIR Provisions
". Apply the State Historic Building Code (SHBG) [now the
California Historic Building Gode (CHBC)] where possible to avoid
extensive demolition."
Where applicable the SHBC will be used.
• Perform a complete photo-documentation of the building prior to
any construction work following the Historic American Building
Survey (HABS) standards for archival recordation and submit
results to an appropriate repository
If there are no HABS documents found, the Varsity Theater will be documented.
Supporting the protection, preservation .and restoration of America's resources.
Page 7.
Bruce Judd Consulting Group
• Protect in place the historic features during construction.
The historic features will protected and preserved.
• If any areas containing historic features require seismic retrofit,
the applicant must 1) carefully document and dismantle these
features; 2) salvage, catalogue, store, and reinstall these features
after construction; and 3) retain a qualified ornamental plasterer for
the document/dismantle and the reinstall/repair phases of the work.
Seismic retrofit work was completed as part of the 1995.renovation
and is not included as a component of this proposal. However, if
seismic issues do arise, the above provision must be followed.
All work will comply with the above paragraph.
• Retain and reuse historic light fixtures.
The current plans include reusing all of the historic light fixtures.
Supporting the protection, preservation .and restoration of America's resources.
Page 8.
@
~
CITY OF
PALO
ALTO
Agenda Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
June 6, 2013
Architectural Review Board
Russ Reich, Senior Planner
Architectural Review Board
Staff Report
Department: Planning and
Community Environment
490 San Antonio Road 13PLN-00140: Request by Starkweather Bondy
Architecture on behalf of Gideon Hausner Jewish Day School for
Architectural Review Board review of a new 35 foot tall, one-story gym
and classroom building with 17,602 sq. ft. of floor area, proposed to replace
two-story buildings (two structures totaling 43,340 sq. ft. in area).
Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act CEQA per CEQA Guidelines Section 15302.
Zone District: Research, Office, and Limited Manufacturing (ROLM).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) recommend approval of the proposed
project based upon the Architectural Review findings contained in Attachment A, and subject to
the conditions of approval contained in Attachment B.
BACKGROUND
Previous ARB Review
On March 7, 2013, the Architectural Review Board conducted a preliminary review of the project
application.
The ARB was supportive of the project, but voiced the following concerns about the preliminary
design:
• The landscape design along the San Antonio frontage needs improvement;
• More details of the proposed fences/gates/walls are needed;
• Further refinement is needed for the proposed roof form;
• More emphasis is needed at the vehicular and pedestrian entries, to assist in way-finding.
• Greater articulation is needed for the left side wall of the building.
13PLN-00140 Page 1 of 4
Site Infornlation
The project site is comprised of two parcels located on the south side of San Antonio Avenue
between Nita Avenue and San Antonio Court. The site area of the two parcels, combined, is
approximately 179,203 square feet (s.f.). The site is located within the Research, Office and
Limited Manufacturing (ROLM) Zone District. The combined site is currently occupied by four,
two-story buildings that were originally built as office buildings. In 2003, two of the buildings
(450 and 470 San Antonio Avenue) were renovated for occupancy by a private school, the Gideon
Hausner Jewish Day School. The other two buildings, (490 and 560 San Antonio Avenue) are
also owned by the school but have remained vacant. Adj acent to the south side of the property is
a multifamily condominium development known as the Rose Walk. To the east (rear) of the
property are single family homes within the City of Mountain View. Also to the east of the
property, at the northern end, is the Palo Alto Gardens multifamily apartment complex, with a row
of carports that abut the rear property line of the subject property. To the north (left) of the site is
a private street known as San Antonio Court, with a multifamily condominium development
across that street, known as San Antonio Village.
Project Description
The project proposal includes the merger of the two separate parcels into one and the demolition
of the two vacant buildings (490 and 560 San Antonio Avenue). A new 17,602 square foot
gym/classroom building would replace the demolished building at 490 San Antonio Avenue and a
new turf playing field and parking lot would replace the office building at 560 San Antonio
Avenue.
The new gym/classroom building would be located in the approximate footprint of the building to
be demolished building at 490 San Antonio Avenue. The building would provide multiple
program spaces, including spaces for a gymnasium, theater, art room, music room, and a religious
study and prayer space. It would be single story, with the taller gym pOl1ion of the building
located closer to the street. The roof would rise up at an angle and then break to slope back down
facing San Antonio A venue to reduce the overall height of the building. The tall gym portion of
the building is surrounded by lower elements to transition the building height and breakdown the
perceived height and mass of the building. The exterior of the building would primarily be a sand
float finish cement plaster, with some areas having a decorative, colored composite infill panel.
Other areas would have green screens covering the walls. The windows and doors would be pre
finished aluminum storefronts with 'lowe' glazing. Windows would be operable to allow for
cross ventilation.
Between the existing building and the new gym/classroom building would be a new courtyard
with trees and decorative boulders for seating, providing a new outdoor gathering space. On the
560 San Antonio Avenue parcel there would be a new turf playing field, and a new parking area.
Much of the project frontage along San Antonio Avenue has an existing eight-foot-tall, concrete
grape stake wall, painted a tan color. The proposal includes the extension of this wall along the
San Antonio frontage. According to the current plan, the wall would extend down to San Antonio
Court and wrap the comer. New landscape material is proposed in front of the wall that would
coordinate with the new landscape nlaterial that the City planted in the nledian and at the street
edge.
13PLN-00140 Page 2 of4
The floor area allowance for the property is 70,853 square feet; a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.4: 1.
After projectcompletion, the total floor area on site would be 65,779 square feet. The parking
requirement for the private school is two parking spaces for each teaching station. With
approximately 28 teaching stations, the parking requirement per the code would be 56 spaces.
The applicant proposes to provide a total of 122 parking spaces on the site.
DISCUSSION
Roof Form and Left Side Elevation
The ARB had commented that the roof needed additional refinement. Some ARB members
commented that it was disjointed, while others felt that multiple breaks may help. The applicant
has revised the roof form by repositioning the roof break on the upper gym roof portion to
coincide with the roof break of the lower roof.· The board also commented that the left side of the
building needed additional articulation. The applicant has added new windows and blue rain
screen panels leading up from the doorway below, to break up the continuous wall mass.
Fences, walls, Gates, and Entries
The ARB had indicated a desire for more detail on the proposed fences and gates. The applicant
has clarified that the new gates will match the existing gates. While not in the project plans, the
proposed fence around the new playing field would be a black vinyl coated chain link fence that
would be four to six feet tall. On page A3 .11, cross sections of the different walls have been
provided. It should be noted that the grape stake wall that spans the front of the project would
only wrap the corner for a· few feet, then transitions to a lower CMU block wall on the San
Antonio Court frontage. Staff recommends that the ARB determine if it would be more
appropriate to continue the grape stake wall along the San Antonio Court frontage, or perhaps
extend the CMU wall from the corner rather than the current location. The ARB had also asked
the applicant to consider improving the way finding, to better identify and distinguish the vehicle
and pedestrian entries into the property. At this time, the applicant has chosen to keep the entries
as they are.
Landscaping at San Antonio frontage
At the Preliminary ARB Review the ARB had commented that the landscaping across the existing
project frontage was in need of an update. They also agreed that the existing frontage and the new
frontage should have a consistent and cohesive appearance. The proposed plans do indicate new
plant material for the planter strip, as well as for the area between the sidewalk and the wall. The
plant palette appears to be consistent across the entire frontage. Areas in front of buildings at 450
and 470 San Antonio would not include new plant material between the sidewalk and the walls.
The applicant has stated that the existing plant material is doing well in these locations. The plans
indicate that the plant material on the San Antonio Court side of the project will remain and will
not be replaced to match the material proposed across the front.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the project is
categorically exempt from CEQA, per Section 15302.
13PLN-00140 Page 3 of4
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C:
Attachment D:
Attachment E:
Attachment F:
Attachment G:
Attachment H:
Draft ARB findings
Draft Conditions of Approval
Location Map
Zoning compliance Table
Conformance with Comprehensive Plan Policies
. Project Description Letter*
ARB Preliminary Review Staff Report, March 7, 2013
Project Plans (Board Members Only)*
* Prepared by Applicant; all other attachments prepared by Staff
COURTESY COPIES
William Bondy AlA, 110 Linden Street, Oakland, CA 94607
Gideon Hausner Jewish Day School, 450 San Antonio Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94306
Prepared By:
Reviewed By:
Russ Reich, Senior Planner tU-
Amy French, AICP, Chief Planning Official Y
13PLN-00140 Page 4 of4 (
ATTACHMENT A
DRAFT FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STANDARDS FOR REVIEW
490 San Antonio Road / File No. 13PLN-00140
The design and architecture of the proposed project, as conditioned, complies with the Findings
for Architectural Review as required in PAMC Chapter 18.76.
(1) The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project
incorporates quality design that.
(2) The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site. This finding can
be made in the affirmative in that the proposed building is set away from the single
family neighbors to the rear and provides for increased parking and improved vehicular
and pedestrian circulation.
(3) The design is appropriate to the function of the project. This finding can be made in the
affirmative in that the new building enhances the types of facilities provided at the
school in the form of a multipurpose space, improved class room spaces, additional
outdoor play space, outdoor class rooms, and increased parking.
(4) In areas considered by the board as having a unified design character or historical
character, the design is compatible with such character. This finding is not applicable
to this project in that this area does not have a unified design or historic character.
(5) The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between
different designated land uses. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the
project maintains a similar height and massing on the site that had previously existed
with the office building and the new building transitions the height of the building such
that the lower portion is closer to the single family neighbors and the taller portion of
closer to San Antonio Road.
(6) The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site. This
finding can be made in the affirmative in that the building's design is intended to relate
to the existing classroom buildings while not trying to mimic their older architectural
style and still be sensitive to its visibility from San Antonio Road.
(7) The planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an
internal sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and
the general community. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the
placement of the new building would facilitate internal circulation on the site allOwing
vehicles to circulate around the new building and,the play space, keeping cars separate
from the areas where children will be playing and will provide pedestrian access across
the site.
(8)
(9)
The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate to the design and the
function of the structures. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the
proposal provides a new outdoor courtyard, open play space, and outdoor classrooms.
Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support the main functions of the project
and the same are compatible with the project's design concept. This finding can be
made in the affirmative in that a new trash enclosure is proposed to be compatible with
the new building.
(10) Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for pedestrians,
cyclists and vehicles. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposal
provides appropriate on site vehicular circulation around the building and play spaces
and provides pedestrian access across the site.
(11) Natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project. This
finding can be made in the affirmative in that most of the existing on site trees will be
preserved, while 50 new trees will be planted.
(12) The materials, textures, colors and details of construction and plant material are
appropriate expression to the design and function. This finding can be made in the
affirmative in that proposal includes new landscape material for the project frontage that
will blend with the new planting in the City right of way planted by the City.
(13) The landscape design concept for the site, as shown by the relationship of plant masses,
open space, scale, plant forms and foliage textures and colors create a desirable and
functional environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposal
includes native landscape materials that are used to screen and soften the appearance of
the wall across the front of the project while also providing a pleasing color pallet.
(14) Plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site, capable of being properly
maintained on the site, and is of a variety which would tend to be drought-resistant to
reduce consumption of water in its installation and maintenance. This finding can be
made in the affirmative in that the proposed landscape materials are well suited for the
proposed environment.
(15) The project exhibits green building and sustainable design that is energy efficient,
water conserving, durable and nontoxic, with high-quality spaces and high recycled
content materials. The following considerations should be included in site and bUilding
design:
• Optimize building orientation for heat gain, shading, daylighting, and natural
ventilation,'
• Design landscaping to create comfortable micro-climates and reduce heat island
effects;
• Design for easy pedestrian, bicycle and transit access;
• Maximize on site storm water management through landscaping and permeable
paving;
• Use sustainable building materials;
• Design lighting, plumbing and equipment for efficient energy and water use,'
• Create healthy indoor environments; and
• Use creativity and innovation to build more sustainable environments.
This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project would comply with the
City's green building ordinance and parking lot trees are provided to reduce the urban
heat island effect.
(16) The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose of architectural review as set
forth in subsection 18.76. 020(a). This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the
project design promotes visual environments that are of high aesthetic quality and
variety.
ATTACHMENTB
DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
490 San Antonio Road
13PLN-000140
Planning and Environmental Division
1. The plans submitted for Building Pemlit shall be in substantial compliance with plans date
stamped May 29, 2013 except as modified to incorporate these conditions of approval.
2. These ARB conditions of approval shall be printed on the plans submitted for building
permits.
3. The applicant is required to pay all applicable Development Impact Fees.
4. All noise producing equipment shall not exceed the allowances specified in Section 9.10
Noise of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
5. Any existing city street trees shall be maintained and protected during construction per City
of Palo Alto standard requirements.
6. All landscape material shall be well maintained and replaced if it fails.
Transportation Division
7. Prior to building permit issuance provide off-site parking management plan for
. Transportation Division review.
8. Bike parking requirement = 1 bike parking space / 5 students, 100% short term, or 70 spaces
(35 U racks). Prior to building permit issuance the building permit plans must be revised to
provide the required bike parking.
9. Prior to building permit issuance the applicant must provide an on-site student drop-off and
pick up plan, and include off-site inlprovenlents to improve existing conditions.
Water Quality
ART ROOM
10. If new art room includes clay and glazing work, please follow pollution prevention tips for
pottery studios, available from Watershed Protection by calling 329-2421.
11. PAMC 16.09.170, 16.09.040 Discharge of Groundwater
Prior approval shall be obtained from the city engineer or designee to discharge water
pumped from construction sites to the storm drain. The city engineer or designee may require
gravity settling and filtration upon a determination that either or both would improve the
water quality of the discharge. Contaminated ground water or water that exceeds state or
federal requirements for discharge to navigable waters may not be discharged to the storm
drain. Such water may be discharged to the sewer, provided that the discharge limits
contained in Palo Alto Municipal Code (16.09.040(m» are not exceeded and the approval of
the superintendent is obtained prior to discharge. The City shall be compensated for any costs
it incurs in authorizing such discharge, at the rate set forth in the Municipal Fee Schedule.
12. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(l0) Dumpsters for New and Remodeled Facilities
New buildings and residential developments providing centralized solid waste collection,
except for single-family and duplex residences, shall provide a covered area for a dumpster.
The area shall be adequately sized for all waste streams and designed with grading or a berm
490 San Antonio Road (13PLN-00140) Page 1 of7
system to prevent water runon and runoff from the area.
13. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(14) Architectural Copper
On and after January 1,2003, copper metal roofing, copper metal gutters, copper metal down
spouts, and copper granule containing asphalt shingles shall not be permitted for use on any
residential, commercial or industrial building fo'r which a building permit is required. Copper
flashing for use under tiles or slates and small copper ornaments are exempt from this
prohibition. Replacement roofing, gutters and downspouts on historic structures are exempt,
provided that the roofing material used shall be prepatinated at the factory. For the purposes
of this exemption, the definition of "historic" shall be limited to structures designated as
Category 1 or Category 2 buildings in the current edition of the Palo Alto Historical and
Architectural Resources Report and Inventory.
14. PAMC 16.09.175(k) (2) Loading Docks
(i) Loading dock drains to the storm drain system may be allowed if equipped with a fail
safe valve or equivalent device that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during
periods of loading dock operation.
(ii) Where chemicals, hazardous materials, grease, oil, or waste products are handled or used
within the loading dock area, a drain to the storm drain system shall not be allowed. A drain
to the sanitary sewer system may be allowed if equipped with a fail-safe valve or equivalent
device that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during periods of loading dock
operation. The area in which the drain is located shall be covered or protected from rainwater
run-on by berms and/or grading. Appropriate wastewater treatment approved by the·
Superintendent shall be provided for all rainwater contacting the loading dock site.
15. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(5) Condensate from HVAC
Condensate lines shall not be connected or allowed to drain to the storm drain system.
16. PAMC 16.09.205 Cooling Towers
No person shall discharge or add to the sanitary sewer system or storm drain system, or add
to a cooling system, pool, spa, fountain, boiler or heat exchanger, any substance that contains
any of the following:
(1) Copper in excess of2.0 mg/liter;
(2) Any tri-butyl tin compound in excess of 0.1 0 mg/liter;
(3) Chromium in excess of2.0 mg/liter.
(4) Zinc in excess of2.0 mg/liter; or
(5) Molybdenum in.excess of2.0 mg/liter.
The above limits shall apply to any of the above-listed substances prior to dilution with the
cooling system, pool, spa or fountain water.
A flow meter shall be installed to measure the volume of blow down water from the new
cooling tower. Cooling systems discharging greater than 2,000 gallons per day are required
to meet a copper discharge limit of 0.25 milligrams per liter.
17. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(b) Copper Piping
Copper, copper alloys, lead and lead alloys, including brass, shall not be used in sewer lines,
connectors, or seals coming in contact with sewage except for domestic waste sink traps and
short lengths of associated connecting pipes where alternate materials are not practical. The
490 San Antonio Road (13PLN-00140) Page 2 of7
plans nlust specify that copper piping will not be used for wastewater plumbing.
18. 16.09.180(12) Mercury Switches
Mercury switches shall not be installed in sewer or storm drain sumps.
19. PAMC 16.09.205(a) Cooling Systems, Pools, Spas, Fountains, Boilers and Heat Exchangers
It shall be unlawful to discharge water from cooling systems, pools, spas, fountains boilers
and heat exchangers to the storm drain system.
20. PAMC 16.09.165(h) Stoml Drain Labeling
Storm drain inlets shall be clearly marked with the words "No dumping -Flows to Bay," or
equivalent.
Utilities Electric
Water, Gas & Wastewater Division
21. The applicant shall submit a completed water-gas-wastewater service connection
application -load sheet for City of Palo Alto Utilities. The applicant must provide all the
information requested for utility service demands (water in fixture units/g. p.m., gas in
b.t.u.p.h, and sewer in fixture units/g.p.d.). The applicant shall provide the existing
(prior) loads, the new loads, and the combined/total loads (the new loads plus any
existing loads to remain).
22. The applicant shall submit improvement plans for utility construction (sheet C-21). The
plans must show the size and location of all underground utilities within the development
and the public right of way including meters, backflow preventers, fire service
requirements, sewer mains, sewer cleanouts, sewer lift stations and any other required
utilities.
23. The applicant must show on the site plan the existence of any auxiliary water supply,
(i.e. water well, gray water, recycled water, rain catchment, water storage tank, etc).
24. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading the existing utility mains
and/or services as necessary to handle anticipated peak loads. This responsibility
includes all costs associated with the design and construction for the
installation/upgrade of the utility mains and/or services.
25. For contractor installed water and wastewater mains or services, the applicant shall
submit to the WGW engineering section of the Utilities Department four copies of the
installation of water and wastewater utilities off-site improvement plans in accordance
with the utilities department design criteria. All utility work within the public right-of-way
shall be clearly shown on the plans that are prepared, signed and stamped by a
registered civil engineer. The contractor shall also submit a complete schedule of work,
method of construction and the manufacture's literature on the materials to be used for
approval by the utilities engineering section. The applicant's contractor will not be
allowed to begin work until the improvement plan and other submittals have been
approved by the water, gas and wastewater engineering section. After the work is
complete but prior to sign off, the applicant shall provide record drawings (as-builts) of
the contractor installed water and wastewater mains and services per City of Palo Alto
Utilities record drawing procedures. For contractor installed services the contractor shall
install 3M marker balls at each water or wastewater service tap to the main and at the
City clean out for wastewater laterals.
490 San Antonio Road (13PLN-00140) Page 3 of7
26. An approved reduced pressure principle assembly (RPP A backflow preventer device) is
required for the new water connections from Palo Alto Utilities as shown on sheet C-21.
An approved reduced pressure detector assembly is required for the new water
connection for the fire system as shown on sheet C-21.
27. All backflow preventer devices shall be approved by the WGW engineering division.
Inspection by the utilities cross connection inspector is required for the supply pipe
between the meter and the assembly.
28. The applicant shall pay the capacity fees and connection fees associated with new utility
service/s or added demand on existing services. The approved relocation of services,
meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the cost of the person/entity
requesting the relocation.
29. A separate water meter and backflow preventer is required to irrigate the approved
landscape plan.
30. All existing water and wastewater services that will not be reused shall be abandoned at
the main per WGW utilties procedures.
31. Utility vaults, transformers, utility cabinets, concrete bases, or other structures can not
be placed over existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services. Maintain l' horizontal
clear separation from the vault/cabinet/concrete base to existing utilities as found in the
field. If there is a conflict with existing utilities, Cabinets/vaults/bases shall be relocated
from the plan location as needed to meet field conditions. Trees may not be planted
within 10 feet of existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services or meters. New
water, gas or wastewater services/meters may not be installed within 10' or existing
trees. Maintain 10' between new trees and new water, gas and wastewater
services/mains/meters.
32. To install new gas service by directional boring, the applicant is required to have a sewer
cleanout at the front of the building. This cleanout is required so the sewer lateral can
be videoed for verification of no damage after the gas service is installed by directional
boring.
33. All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto utility standards for
water, gas & wastewater.
Public Works Engineering
34. A Certificate of Compliance Application may be required for removal of a lot line between
490 and 560 San Antonio Road and for any lot line adjustments. For lot mergers and lot line
adjustments, the parcels shall be under same ownership. The City approved certificate of
compliance needs to be recorded with the County Clerk-Recorder's Office before a building
permit can be issued.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pwd/permits.asp
35. As part of this project, the applicant, at minimum, will be required to repave (2-inch grind
and pave) the half width of San Antonio Avenue along the frontage of the project site, and
install new public sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and driveway approaches in the public right-of-.
way per the City Standards. The site plan must show the extent of the offsite improvement
work and note that any work in the right-of-way must be done per Public Works' standards
by a licensed contractor who must first obtain a Permit for Construction in the Public Right
of-Way ("Street Work Permit") from PWE at the Development Center.
490 San Antonio Road (13PLN-00140) Page 4 of7
36. The applicant may be required to replace existing andlor add new street trees in the public'
right-of-way along the property's frontage. Call Public Works' arborist at 650-496-5953 to
arrange a site visit so he can determine what street tree work will be required for this project.
The site or tree plan must show street tree work that the arborist has determined including the
tree species, size, location, staking and irrigation requirements. Any removal, relocation or
planting of street trees; or excavation, trenching or pavement within 10 feet of street trees
must be approved by the Public Works' arborist. The plan must note that in order to do street
tree work, the applicant must first obtain a Permit for Street Tree Work in the Public Right
of-Way ("Street Tree Permit") from Public Works' Urban Forestry.
37. This project must meet the latest State Regional Water Quality Control Board's (SRWQCB)
C.3 provisions. The applicant is required to satisfy all current storm water discharge
regulations and shall provide calculations and documents to verify compliance. All proj ects
that are required to treat storm water will need to treat the permit-specified amount of storm
water runoff with the following low impact development methods: rainwater harvesting and
reuse, infiltration, evapotranspiration, or biotreatment. However, biotreatment (filtering
storm water through vegetation and soils before discharging to the storm drain system) will
be allowed only where harvesting and reuse, infiltration and evapotranspiration are infeasible
at the project site. Draft criteria for determining infeasibility have been developed and are
being reviewed by Water Board staff (inquire with Public Works staff for the latest
information). Vault-based treatment will not be allowed as a stand-alone treatment measure.
Where storm water harvesting and reuse, infiltration, or evapotranspiration are infeasible,
vault-based treatment measures may be used in series with biotreatment, for example, to
remove trash or other large solids.
Reference: Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.11.030( c)
The applicant must incorporate permanent storm water pollution prevention measures that
treat storm water runoff prior to discharge. The prevention measures shall be reviewed by a
qualified third-party reviewer who needs to certify that it complies with the Palo Alto
Municipal Code requirements. This is required prior to the issuance of a building permit.
The third-party reviewer shall be acquired by the applicant and needs to be on the Santa
Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program's (Program) list of qualified
consultants. (http://www.scvurppp-w2k.con1iconsultants.htm) Any consultant or contractor
hired to design/and/or construct a storm water treatment system for the project cannot certify
the project as a third-party reviewer.
Within 45 days of the installation of the required storm water treatment measures and prior to
the issuance of an occupancy permit for the building, third-party reviewer shall also submit
to the City a certification for approval that the project's permanent measures were
constructed and installed in accordance to the approved permit drawings. The project must
also enter into a maintenance agreement with the City to guarantee the ongoing maintenance
of the permanent C.3 storm water discharge compliance,measures. The maintenance
agreement shall be executed prior to the first building occupanqy sign-off.
38. If the proposed development will disturb more than one acre of land, the applicant will be
required to comply with the State of California's General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction Activity. This entails filing a Notice of Intent to Comply
(NOI), paying a filing fee, and preparing and implementing a site specific storm water
pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) that addresses both construction-stage and 'post
construction BMP's for storm water quality protection. The applicant is required to submit
490 San Antonio Road (13PLN-00140) Page 5 of7
two copies of the NOI and the draft SWPPP to PWE for review and approval prior to
issuance of the building permit.
The following comments are provided to assist the applicant at the building permit phase.
You can obtain various plan set details, forms and guidelines from Public Works at the City's
Development Center (285 Hamilton Avenue) or on Public Works' website:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.orgldepts/pwd/forms'-permits.asp
Include in plans submitted for a building permit:
39. Since more than 10,000 square feet of the land area on the project site is being disturbed, a
Grading and Excavation Permit needs to be obtained from PWE at the Development Center
before the building permit can be issued. Refer to the Public Works' website for "Excavation
and Grading Permit Instructions." For the Grading and Excavation Permit application,
various documents are required including a grading and drainage plan, Interim and Final
erosion and sediment control, and storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP). Refer to
our website for "Grading and Excavation Permit Application" and guidelines. Indicate the
amount of soil to be cut and filled for the project.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.orglcivicaxlfilebankldocuments/11697
Site grading, excavation, and other site improvements that disturb large soil areas may only
be performed during the regular construction season (from April 16 through October 15th) of
each year the permit is active. The site must be stabilized to prevent soil erosion during the
wet season. The wet season is defined as the period from October 15 to April 15. Methods of
stabilization are to be identified within the Civil sheets of the improvement plans for
approval.
40. The plan set must include a grading and drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional
that includes existing and proposed spot elevations and showing drainage flows to
demonstrate proper drainage of the site. Other site utilities may be shown on the grading plan
for reference only, and should be so noted. No utility infrastructure should be shown inside
the building footprint. Installation of these other utilities will be approved as part of a
subsequent Building Permit application.
41. New driveway approach and curb cut in public right of way between sidewalk and street
shall be designed to city standard. See Driveway Approach Design & Construction
Requirements for detailed information on driveway design standards in the public right of
way. This form is available at the Development Center or on the city's website:
http://www.city.palo-alto.ca.us/civicax/filebankldocuments/2313
42. In order to address potential storm water quality impacts, the plan shall identify BMP's to be
incorporated into the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that will be required
for the project. The SWPPP shall include permanent BMP's to be incorporated into the
project to protect storm water quality. (Resources and handouts are available from PWE.
Specific reference is made to Palo Alto's companion document to "Start at the Source",
entitled "Planning Your Land Development Project").
The developer shall require its contractor to incorporate BMP's for storm water pollution
prevention in all construction operations, in conformance with the SWPPP prepared for the
project. It is unlawful to discharge any construction debris (soil, asphalt, sawcut slurry, paint,
chemicals, etc.) or other waste materials into gutters or storm drains. (P AMC Chapter
16.09).
490 San Antonio Road (13PLN-00140) Page 6 of7
The applicant is required to paint the "No Dumping/Flows to Adobe Creek" logo in blue
color on a white background, adjacent to all storm drain inlets. Stencils of the logo are
available from the Public Works Environmental Compliance Division, which may be
contacted at (650) 329-2598. A deposit may be required to secure the return of the stencil.
Include the instruction to paint the logos on the construction grad~ng and drainage plan.
Include maintenance of these logos in the Hazardous Materials Management Plan, if such a
plan is part of this project.
43. The City'S full-sized "Pollution Prevention -It's Part of the Plan" sheet must be included in
the plan set. Copies are available from Development Center or on our website. Also, the
applicant must provide a site-specific storm water pollution control plan sheet in the plan set.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebankldocuments/2732
44. Since the project will be creating or replacing 500 square feet or more of impervious surface,
the applicant shall provide calculations of the existing and proposed impervious surface
areas. The calculations need to be filled out in the Impervious Area Worksheet for Land
Developments form which is available at the Development Center or on our website, then
submitted with the building permit application.
http://www.cityofpaloalto;org/civicaxifilebankldocuments/2718
45. If any work is proposed in the public right-of-way, such as sidewalk replacement, driveway
approach, curb inlet, storm water connections or utility laterals, the following note shall be
included on the Site Plan next to the proposed work:
"Any construction within the city right-of-way must have an approved Permit for
Construction in the Public Street prior to comnlencement of this work. THE
PERFORMANCE OF THIS WORK IS NOT AUTHORIZED BY THE BUILDING
PERMIT ISSUANCE BUT SHOWN ON THE BUILDING PERMIT FOR INFORMATION
ONLY."
46. The contractor must submit a logistics plan to PWE prior to commencing work that addresses
all impacts to the City's right-of-way, including, but not limited to: pedestrian control, traffic
control, truck routes, material deliveries, contractor's parking, concrete pours, crane lifts,
work hours, noise control, dust control, storm water pollution prevention, contractor's
contact, noticing of affected businesses, and schedule of work. The plan will be part of the
building permit submittal.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebankldocuments/2719
47. The Public Works Inspector shall sign off the building permit prior to the finalization of this
permit. All off-site improvenlents shall be finished prior to this sign-off. Similarly, all as
builts, on-site grading, drainage and post-developments BMP's shall be completed prior to
sign-off.
490 San Antonio Road (13PLN-00140) Page 70f7
The City of
Palo Alto
rreich, 2013-02-28 14:18:33
(\\cc-mlpslgis$lgi8ladmlnlmotalview.mdb)
<)
450-560
San Antonio Avenue
Attachment ~
This map is a product of the
City of Palo Alto GIS
-.D
o· 291'
This documenllo a grapI1Ic rfipmo ... ~ only of belllv.ilable IOU .....
The City of Palo Alta 88SUmea no ,_noibility for any _. 01989 \0 2013 City of Palo Alta
ATTACHMENTD
ZONING COMPLIANCE TABLE
490 San Antonio Avenue / File No. 13PLN-00140
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ZONE DISTRICT PROPOSED
FOR ROLM ZONE DISTRICT STANDARD PROJECT
Minimum Building setbacks
Front Yard 20" 22'
Rear Yard 20' 114'
Interior Side Yard (right) 20' na
Interior Side Yard (left) 20' na
Total Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.4: 1 (70,853 sq. ft.) 0.37:1(65,630 sq. ft.)
Maximum Site Coverage 300/0 (53,140 sq. ft.) 23% (41,619 sq. ft.)
Maximum Height 35' 35'
(within 150 feet of residential zone)
Daylight Plane 10 feet up 45 degree complies
angle
Parking Requirement Approximately 28 122 spaces
(2 parking spaces per teaching station) teaching stations =
56 spaces required
CONFORMANCE
conforms
conforms
conforms
confornls
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
ATTACHMENTE
APPLICABLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES
490 San Antonio Road
. 12PLN-00140
Transportation
Policy T -19: Improve and add attractive, secure
bicycle parking at both public and private
facilities.
Land Use and Community Design
Policy L-5: Maintain the scale and character of
the City. Avoid land uses that are overwhelming
and unacceptable due to their size and scale.
Policy L-48: Promote high quality, creative
design and site planning that is compatible with
surrounding development and public spaces.
Policy L-66: Maintain an aesthetically pleasing
street network that helps frame and define the
community while meeting the needs of
pedestrians, bicycles, and motorists.
Policy L-70: Enhance the appearance of streets
and other public spaces by expanding and
maintaining Palo Alto's street tree system.
Policy L-75: Minimize the negative physical
impacts of parking lots.
Policy L-76: require trees and other landscaping
within parking lots.
The project will be providing new bike parking.
The project maintains the scale and character of
the existing development on the site and is
sensitive to adjacent single family uses by
reducing the height relative to those uses.
The proposed building respects the single story
residential neighborhood to the rear by reducing
the height of the building relative to the rear
property line where is abuts single family homes.
The design also attempts to reduce the overall
mass and scale of the building relative to the street
facing fayade by breaking the roof to slope down
as it faces San Antonio Road. The design will
receive review by the ARB to ensure quality of
design.
The project includes the re-landscaping of the
entire frontage along San Antonio Road including
the planter strips in the Public right-of-way.
The proposal includes the replacement of four
existing street trees with four new street trees.
The trees to be removed are in poor health and the
new trees will fill in a gap where street tree
coverage is need to maintain a consistent tree
canopy.
The new parking lot will be located behind a
decorative wall that is softened with new
landscape material.
The plan provides numerous trees and ample
landscaping in the parking lot.
Gideon Hausner Gym/Classroom Building
490 San Antonio Road
Project Description
Attachment F
The current Gideon Hausner Jewish Day School site consists of two renovated two story
buildings at 450 and 470 San Antonio Road and a third abandoned and partially
demolished two story building at 490 San Antonio Road. The school owns the adjacent
lot at 560 San Antonio Road and intends to remove the common lot line to create a single
parcel.
The project scope includes the complete demolition of a partially demolished two story
22,420 square foot office building at 490 San Antonio Road and a two story 20,920
square foot office building at 560 San Antonio Road. The 560 San Antonio Road portion
of the site will be developed as a new playfield and a parking lot. The current eight foot
high concrete grape stake fence along San Antonio will be extended for the full length of
the site along San Antonio Road. Landscaping along the street frontage will be
coordinated with City officials to be in keeping with the spirit of the newly installed
upgrades to the median and street edge.
The proposed Gym/Classroom Building is a single story 17,602 square foot structure
sited generally on the existing footprint of the former office structure at 490 San Antonio
Road .. The massing, exterior palette, and fenestration are designed to temper the overall
scale of the building and to create rooms with excellent day lighting and easy access to
the outdoors. The taller roof of the Gym slopes down to create a lower profile to San
Antonio Road and the lower mass of the classrooms and the support spaces surrounding
the gym reduce the apparent scale of the building on all elevations. The larger south
facing slope of the gym room will serve as a deck for a solar panel array with excellent
solar orientation. The exterior materials include cement plaster walls with a cool grey
painted sand float finish and decorative infill panel siding of a blue-colored solid
composite panel system. Windows and doors are dark bronze pre-finished aluminum
storefronts with low-E glazing to match existing buildings. At several locations along the
ground level walls green screens are incorporated. Light shelves are provided at all
classrooms to enhance daylight at the interior of the rooms. All rooms will have operable
fenestration with cross ventilation. The building will meet or exceed all of the Palo Alto
Green Building requirements. Because of the single story character of the building no
views into adjacent neighbors' yards will be possible from the proposed project.
The Gym/Classroom Building will consist of four primary program spaces;
GymnasiumlTheater, Art Room, Music Room, and Beit Tefillah (religious study and
prayer space). The Gymnasium ITheater will have facilities for indoor physical education
and sports, asserrlblies, and school performing arts productions. Motorized theatrical style
seats are provided for quick conversion from athletic activities to assembly uses.
The Art Room and Music Room will open to the existing sports field with glass doors.
The Beit Tefillah will be finished with a wanner palette of wood paneling, custom
cabinetry, a sculptural ceiling and a sprung wood floor that will allow for other
movement activities such as folk dancing or yoga.
The Gym opens to both a small courtyard for community gathering and to the new
playfield on the 560 San Antonio Site. This site will provide much needed outdoor play
space and incorporate the school's traffic circulation pattern with a new parking lot.
This lot provides for fire apparatus access and includes an entry only gate off of San
Antonio for parents and staff who want to park and walk into the school without joining
the pick-up drop-off queue.
The site design for the Gideon Hausner Jewish Day School project ties into both the
immediate and local context while providing a meaningful cultural link to the school's
curriculum. The design proposes a parking lot with bio-swales to treat water run-off, a
small playing field, courtyards and pathways to support a new multi-use building. In
addition, there are several areas dedicated to outdoor education where planting,
harvesting, and other activities explicitly supporting Gideon Hausner's outdoor science
curriculum will take place.
The proJect incorporates site materials such as high SRI colored concrete and concrete
pavers that complement the architecture of the existing and new buildings. Large,
rectangular boulders of Jerusalem stone act as architectural elements in the courtyard,
breaking the large area into smaller, more intimate gathering spaces while also providing
seating. A trellis divides the courtyard from the more functional outdoor classrooms.
There are three "rooms" within the garden classroom area: one is intended for
educational curriculum and will serve as an "edible schoolyard"; a second, infonnal
"room" under the canopy of large pine trees will serve as either a quiet contemplative
space or as an outdoor classroom; the third space will meet the. needs of the cultural
curriculum by providing an area for growing sacred plants.
The planting for the Gideon Hausner Jewish Day School project will both reflect the
California landscape and provide an important cultural connection to the school's
curriculum. Moreover, the plantings will reflect a commitment to drought tolerant
landscaping with a corresponding irrigation system supporting water conservation as
well. In addition to California native plantings, plant selections throughout the project
will incorporate biblically sacred plants; these may include fig, pomegranate, wheat,
citron, grapes, olives, myrtle, and date palm.
The central courtyard will contain a mix of medium-scale deciduous or flowering trees to
shade the space in the summer months. These plantings will include native California
grasses as well as plantings with cultural significance. Selected walls of the new building
will be planted with vines on a green-screen trellis. The site is divided into a series of
outdoor classrooms, each of which will support the school's cultural and environmental
curriculum. These spaces will be planted with a mix of fruiting trees, vegetables, and
edible landscaping. Across the site, a mixture of columnar, deciduous, and evergreen
trees will frame the building entrance, provide shade throughout the summer months,
reduce reflected heat from the parking lot, and support the parking lot's bio-swale
filtration.
~ w
Agenda Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
March 7, 2013
Architectural Review Board
Russ Reich, Senior Planner
Attachment G
Architectural Review Board
Staff Report
Department: Planning and
Community Environment
490 San Antonio Avenue 12PLN-00183: Request by William Bondy on
behalf of Gideon Hausner Jewish Day School for Preliminary Architectural
Review for the demolition of two existing office buildings and the
construction of a new gymnashunlclassroom building, a new playing filed,
a new parking lot, and new landscaping in the Research Office and Limited
Manufacturing (ROLM) zone district.
RECOMMENDATION
The Architectural Review Board (ARB) is requested to conduct a Preliminary Review of the
project concept. No formal action may be taken at a preliminary review; comments made at a
preliminary review are not binding on the City or the applicant.
BACKGROUND
The applicant has provided a letter describing the proposed project (Attachment A).
Site Information
The project site is comprised of two parcels located on south side of San Antonio Avenue between
Nita Avenue and San Antonio Court. The combined lot area, of the two parcels, is approximately
179,203 square feet (s.f.). They and are located within the Research, Office and Limited
Manufacturing (ROLM) Zone District. The combined site is currently occupied by four, t~o
story buildings that were originally built as office buildings. In 2003 two ,of the buildings (450 ..
and 470 San Antonio A venue) were renovated for occupancy by a private school, the Gideon
Hausner Jewish Day School. The other two buildings, (490 and 560 San Antonio Avenue) are
also owned by the school but have remained vacant. To the south (right side) of the property are
multifamily condominiums known as the Rose Walk. To the east (rear) of the property are single
family homes within the City of Mountain View. Also to the east of the property, at the northern
end, is a multifamily apartment complex known as Palo Alto Gardens with a row of carports that
abut the rear property line. To the north (left) of the site is a private street known as San Antonio
12PLN·00511 Page 1 of3
Court with a multifamily condominium development across the street known as San Antonio
Village.
Project Description
The project proposal includes the merger of the two separate parcels into one and the demolition
of the two vacant buildings (490 and 560 San Antonio Avenue). A new 17,751 square foot
gym/classroom building would replace the demolished building at 490 San Antonio Avenue and a
new turf playing field and parking lot would replace the office building at 560 San Antonio
Avenue.
The new gym/classroom building would be located in the approximate footprint of the demolished
building at 490 San Antonio Avenue. The building would provide multiple program spaces
including spaces for a gymnasium, theater, art room, music room, and a religious study and prayer
space. It would be single story, with the taller gym portion of the building located closer to the
street. The roof would rise up at an angle and then breaks to slope back down facing San Antonio
A venue to reduce the overall height of the building. The tall gym portion of the building is
surrounded by lower elements to transition the building height and·breakdown the perceived
height and mass of the bUilding. The exterior of the building would primarily be a sand float
finish cement plaster with some areas having a decorative colored composite infill panel. Other
areas would have green screens covering the walls. The windows and doors would be prefinished
aluminum storefronts with lowe glazing. Windows would be operable to allow for cross
ventilation.
Between the existing building and the new gym/classroom building would be a new courtyard
with trees and decorative boulders for seating, providing a new outdoor gathering space. On the
560 San Antonio Avenue parcel there would be a new turf playing filed and new parking area.
Much of the project frontage along San Antonio Avenue has an existing eight foot tall concrete
grape stake wall painted a tan color. The proposal includes the extension of this wall along the.
San Antonio frontage. According to the current plan, the wall would extend down to San Antonio
Court and wrap the comer. New landscape material is proposed in front of the wall that would
coordinate with the new landscape material that the City planted in the median and at the street
edge.
The floor area allowance for the property is 70,853 square feet. A Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of .4: 1.
After project completion, the total floor area on site would be 65,779 square feet. The parking
requirement for the private school is two parking spaces for each teaching station. With
approximately 20 teaching stations the parking requirement per the code would be 40 spaces. The
project proposes to provide a total of 122 parking spaces.
DISCUSSION
Privacy Concerns
Adjacent neighbors to the rear of the site have expressed concerns in the past about noise and
privacy. The new gym/classroom building would be single story building such that it would not
have second floor windows to impact the privacy of the single family residences adjacent to the
rear property line. The taller portion (gym area) of the building would set further away from the
---------------------------------------------------------------------
12PLN·00511 Page 2 of3
rear neighbors, closer to San Antonio Avenue. The high point of the bui~ding would be 35 feet
tall at the peak and the lower portion of the building surrounding the gym ranges in height from 12
to 18 feet tall. The lower portion of the building would be 114 feet from the rear property line at
its closest point. The taller (gym) portion of the building would be 184 feet from the rear property
line. The new paying field would also be sited away from the single family homes and would be
142 feet from the rear property line at its closest point.
Landscaping at San Antonio frontage
The proposal for new landscape material in front of the proposed street facing wall has not yet
been specified in this preliminary review application.. The applicant has indicated that new
planting would be coordinated with the new median and street edge plantings done by the City a
few years ago. Based on the current plan, it appears that new planting is only proposed in front of
the new wall sections. Staff would recommend that the landscaping in front of the wall and in the
planter strip for the entire property frontage be considered. This is recommended because the
existing landscaping in front of the wall appears to need improvement. By reexamining the entire
frontage, it provides the opportunity to provide a consistent landscape pallet for the whole
property frontage rather than just the new portion.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
No environmental review is required for a Preliminary Review as it is not considered a project
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C:
Attachinent D:
Applicant's Project Description*
Site Location Map
Zoning Table
Development Plans (Board Members Only)*
* Prepared by Applicant; all other attachments prepared by Staff
COURTESY COPIES
William Bondy AlA, 110 Linden Street, Oakland, CA 94607
Gideon Hausner Jewish Day School, 450 San Antonio Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94306
Prepared By: Russ Reich, Senior Planner
Reviewed By: Amy French, AI CP, Acting Assistant Planning Director
1 2PLN·005 1 1 Page 3 of 3
@ w
CITY OF
PALO
A TO
Agenda Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
Architectural Review Board
June 6,2013
Architectural Review Board
Shahla Y azdy, Transportation Engineer
Staff Report
Department: Planning and
Community Environment
California Avenue Streets cape Improvements [13PLN-00211]: Request
by City of Palo Alto Transportation Division for Architectural Review of
streetscape . improvements to California Avenue; between EI Camino Real
and the CalTrain Station, that include . traffic calming treatments, landscape
elements with new street trees, street furniture, new street lighting, parking
enhancements, and reduction to vehicle travel lanes from four to two lanes.
Environmental Review: A Negative Declaration was prepared in accordance
with CEQA guidelines and was adopted on November 29,2011.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff reconm1ends that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) recommend the Director of
Planning and Community Environment approve the proposed project, based upon the required
findings (Attachment A) and subject to the conditions of approval (Attachment B).
BACKGROUND
The City initiated the California Avenue Transit Hub Corridor Streetscape project in the Fall
2010. The RBF/David Gates & Associates consultant team prepared the project improvement
plans for the project. The project includes additional sidewalk widening treatments and street
and pedestrian scale lighting in response to Council's request for additional community
. amenities. A streetscape furniture and landscape treatment palette has been developed for the
project as part of the community outreach process.
Previous Review
The ARB previously reviewed the project plans at a Study Session on February 21, 2013. The
comments provided on the project focused on the following design concepts:
• Provide more consistency between all streetscape furniture;
• Provide a more low key central plaza pattern on the asphalt;
13PLN-00211 Page 1 of6
• Simplify the wall materials using brick, granite, concrete, etc;
• Provide consistency in the furniture in the plaza; and
• Make sure pedestrian lights are spaced such that lights are located at pedestrian crossings.
The updated concept plans have been revised based upon input received from the ARB, the
community, including businesses along California Avenue, and City staff. The updated plans are
included as Attachment C and will also be presented at the ARB meeting for review. The
following discussion clarifies the modifications to the project· in response to the previous ARB
comments.
DISCUSSION
California A venue is in a fully developed urban setting, with intensive development extending on
both sides of California Avenue. The California Avenue Caltrain Station is located on the east
side of the project, with pedestrian, bicycle and train traffic creating a strong visual boundary that
would be reinforced by placement of a new fountain. On the west end of the project at El
Canlino Real, the placement of native grasses and granite rocks in the center median would
create another strong visual boundary which would be reinforced by El Camino Real. An
eclectic mix of sculptures within the center medians and poetry inscribed in the brick walkways
along California Avenue create a unique urban experience.
The currently proposed street alignment, shown in Attachment C was adopted by the City
Council in July 2011 and is designed to balance the sidewalk and streets cape opportunity areas
evenly throughout the corridor. The proposed mix of traditional and modem streetscape
elements, such as benches and seat walls, should help to stimulate pedestrian activity and support
retail activities. The landscape elements are intended to respond to conlmunity interest for a mix
of colorful treatments with a strong seasonal emphasis in the Spring and Summer, while
maintaining a greener appearance during other seasons. The proposed streetscape palette also
includes new street light standards for the proposed lighting along California Avenue.
Furniture and Materials
Over the course of the outreach process, a range of viewpoints on s~te furnishings were heard
. from the community. Participants at the comnlunity meetings were shown imagery of a variety
of furnishing styles and were· asked to indicate their preferences. Some participants felt that the
street should have sleek and modem furnishings, to give it a more contemporary look and feel.
Others preferred a more traditional style of furnishings, which they felt was more consistent with
some of the existing brick and wood elements and the warm ambience of the space. The
proposed benches would provide a middle ground between the two styles, with simple, clean
lines, contemporary metal accents and the warmth and traditional aesthetic of wood. Seat pads in
either natural granite or a warm concrete provide additional seating options. Trash receptacles are
proposed to be a warm gray metal with simple lines and include both litter and recycling sections
in one unit. Newspapers would be consolidated in single racks with multiple compartments to
reduce clutter. The intent is for the furnishings to act as a unifying element that conveys a
polished style, yet establishes a friendly and approachable atmosphere.
13PLN-00211 Page 2 of6
To provide more consistency between all streetscape site furniture, each site furniture element
has been revisited, and the currently proposed families of site elements are simple, clean and
strong in form and color finishes, with a touch of history and a look to the future. The gray
metallic finish is a consistent theme color for all metal parts of site furnishings (legs and arm
rests of wood benches, the light pole, trash receptacle, news rack units and pedestal, drinking
fountain and game table). The proposed wood bench, granite bollards, concrete seat walls, trash
receptacles, news racks, street light and pedestrian lights, and bike racks all have simple and
clean forms. The proposed wood benches to replace the existing at the existing brick walls
provide a simple and contemporary look.
To simplify the wall materials (previously proposed as brick, granite, concrete, stone veneer,
etc.), the existing brick walls would. be retained, and all new seat walls would have a
simple/clean concrete form. The granite seating boulders and the stone veneer have been
removed from the wall palette.
Pedestrian lights have also been located at either side of the pedestrian crossings to emphasize
the pedestrian scale bulb-out and to enhance the safety and lighting levels at the crossings.
Working with the community, the preferred option for the improved plaza at the east end of the
street was developed. The plaza's focal element would be a dramatic custom sculptural water
feature by artist Michael Szabo. A variety of spaces would be provided in the plaza with a range
of seating options, including seatwalls and benches, as well as game tables.
Landscaping and Trees
The design for the plaza retains the existing Pistache trees, and additional trees would be planted
in the area left by the removal of parking spaces that are part of the existing plaza. The Parks
Department has requested the removal of the most easterly Pistache tree as to prevent the leaves
from clogging the fountain drainage system. Transportation staff will continue to work with
Parks to make sure all of their concerns are addressed. The proposed plaza shrub palette is made
up of drought tolerant plants including Coast Rosemary, Phormium, Agave, Dwarf Mat Rush,
Small Cape Rush, Flax Lily and Flowering Carpet Rose.
The proposed street tree palette follows the street's existing pattern and the City's Street Tree
Plan. Additional Crape Myrtles would be provided for accent color and to provide visual interest.
Additional pots, with shrubs and blooming trees, would provide vitality, color and retail
excitement throughout the corridor. Between EI Camino Real and Ash Street, proposed shrubs
include Meidiland Rose, Phormium, Dwarf Mat Rush, Hot Lips Sage, u and New Zealand Flax,
and Flax Lily. From Ash Street to Park Boulevard, proposed shrubs include Hot Lips Sage,
Mexican Sage, Phormium, New Zealand Flax, Fescue, Flax Lily, Agave, and Flowering Carpet
Rose.
Five existing street trees are proposed for removal due to the new streetscape improvement work.
The trees impacted are two (2) Valley Oak Trees, one (1) Southern Live Oak and two (2)
13PLN-00211 Page 3 of6
Shumard Oak Trees. All will be replaced with the same or similar species trees in 24" box size.
The locations of these trees are shown in the Project Planting Plans, Attachment C.
Flexibility for Central Public Plaza Space
A flexible plaza design element is included between Ash Street and Birch Street and further
defined in Attachment C. The flexible plaza space would use curbless transitions between
sidewalks and the street to provide accessible public plaza space for special event uses or
seasonal. expansion of retail activities. Decorative stone bollards to protect the street from the
sidewalk zones would introduce an opportunity for unique streetscape furniture to both
functional as barriers and aesthetically pleasing for the community.
To provide a more low key central plaza paving pattern, the colored asphalt paving pattern at
Central Plaza has been simplified with strong terra cotta color pavement bands -the horizontal
bands define the sharrow/travellanes and the parking zone while the vertical bands set the tone
and create a feel for the plaza. The simple square granite blocks are proposed as bollards (visual
barrier) at flush curbs between the parking zone and the sidewalk on either side of the plaza.
Park Boulevard Plaza
The Park Boulevard Plaza design is highlighted in the Attachment C and include several
community-requested treatments:
• Centering and buffering access to public art and fountain elements within the plaza to
preserve views to the fountain as a focal element down California Avenue;
• Providing ample useable seating areas for special plaza events or regular patron use;
• Maintaining accessible bicycle access and parking adjacent to the Califonlia Avenue transit
station and underpass;
• Preserving an unobstructed view of the California Avenue streetscape and hills west of the
project areas; and
• Introducing lighting improvements to the pla;za.
Community Involvement
To date, the City has sponsored six design-focused community outreach meetings focusing on the
alignment and on placement of streets cape furniture such as seat walls, bicycle parking facilities,
newsracks, trash/recycle bins, commercial loading zones, etc. In addition, four merchant-focused
meetings, including one day-long workshop at Mollie Stone's Market, were also held to get input
from the businesses in the area as to what they'd like to see on their block, as part of the project.
Staff has also met with the Business Association of California Avenue (BACA) on a monthly
basis to update the businesses on the latest project developments. Input from attendees at the
community meetings showed a general desire to implement sidewalk widening alternatives as
part of the California Avenue project along with other pedestrian-scaled inlprovements such as
lighting, and bulb-outs at intersections to reduce crosswalk lengths and introduce additional
planting opportunities. A1!endees also expressed a strong interest in the design of the Park
Boulevard Plaza.
13PLN-00211 Page 4 of6
Department Review
Staff has circulated the project plans to Public Works Engineering and Operations, Urban
Forestry, Landscape Architect, Parks and Open Space and Utilities Departments for review and
comments. Most comments have been incorporated and are shown in the attached plans.
One issue that staff would like direction from the ARB on is regarding the selection of the
proposed Silver Linden trees along the south side of California Avenue, between Ash and Birch.
The project includes adding five (5) new Silver Linden trees to the widened sidewalk area along
California Avenue, between· Ash and Birch, where the sidewalk would be widened by an
additional 10ft. The trees would match the exiting trees that are currently on CalifoTIlia A venue
and would create. a unifying visual corridor as the backbone of the streetscape design. The
proposed trees on the widened sidewalk would create a visual symmetry to the exiting Linden
trees on the north side of the block of California Avenue. The overall effect will be simple, clean
and strong. The nice fornl and vibrant green leaf color will provide a cohesive and distinct
corridor for vehicular speeds. The yellow white flowers, in drooping clusters, would provide
more delicate interest to the sidewalk users walking under the branches. These characteristics
make it a good tree for both auto and pedestrian users. The tree is tall when planted and fast
growing, providing shade quickly for cars parked along the street. Given their height, they will
not interfere with opening doors when entering and exiting the vehicle. From a maintenance
perspective, the tree is relatively clean with small leaves that will not clog drains and it is
relatively drought tolerant. In the long term, once the trees grow taller, the lower branches can be
trimmed to create nice overhead canopy for strolling the street in the shade, and maintains views
to storefronts. In addition, the area merchants have expressed that shading is important, as they
would like to utilize the widened sidewalks for outdoor seating and dining purposes, and the
shade provided by the Linden trees would provide a comfortable atmosphere as patrons enjoy
sitting on the proposed seat pads.
During the City department review, the Public Works Engineering Landscape Architect
suggested Crepe Myrtles as the second row of trees, instead of the proposed Silver Linden, on
California Avenue. The reason for this recommendation is because of the large scale nature of
the Linden Trees, and especially with the existing Linden Trees that are on this block, a smaller
scale tree, Crepe Myrtle, was suggested.
The ARB is requested to provide direction on the preferred tree selection.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will finalize the co~struction plans through June 2013 and will return to the Planning and
Transportation Commission and Council in late Summer 2013 to award the project for bids. The
City anticipates advertising the project for competitive bids in the Summer 2013 with
construction beginning in the Fall 2013.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Negative Declaration was
prepared for this project and was adopted by the City Council on Novenlber 29, 2011. The
13PLN·00211 Page 5 of6
Negative Declaration concluded that the project would not result in any significant environmental
impacts. Litigation challenging the CEQA compliance was filed shortly thereafter and the Santa
Clara County Superior Court ruled in February 2012 that the City did comply with CEQA.
ATTACHMENTS
A. ARB Findings for Approval
B. Conditions of Approval
C. Project Plans
Prepared By: Shahla Yazdy, Transportation Engineer
Manager Review: Jaime Rodriguez, Chief Transportation Official
13PLN-00211 Page 6 of 6
ATTACHMENT A
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
California Avenue Streetscape Project [13PLN-00211]
Architectural Review Findings (PAMC 8.76.020)
(1) The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project
incorporates quality design that recognizes the importance of the area as described in the
Comprehensive Plan. The project is also consistent with The Palo Alto Comprehensive
Plan policies related to enhancing public spaces, revitalizing the urban forest, and
promoting economic development (e.g. Policies L-15, L-21, L-22, N-14, L-28).
(2) The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site. This finding can be
made in the affirmative in that the design and layout of the project elements take into
consideration the existing conditions along California Avenue, including building locations
and circulation issues.
(3) The design is appropriate to the function of the project. This finding can be made in the
affirmative in that the project elements are consistent with the enhancement of the public
street within a busy business district that has a special focus on the pedestrian and bike
users of the area.
(4) In areas considered by the board as having a unified design character or historical
character, the design is compatible with such character. This finding is not applicable.
(5) The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between
different designated land uses. This finding is not applicable.
(6) The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site. This
finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project is compatible with the
surrounding office and retail uses of the downtown commercial area; see responses 2 and 3
above.
(7) The planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an
internal sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and the
general community. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that new street elements
are accessible and attractive to users.
(8) The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate to the design and the function
of the structures. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project enhances
the public sidewalks and plaza for visitors and patrons to make it functional and desirable.
(9) Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support the main functions of the project and
the same are compatible with the project's design concept. This finding is not applicable.
Page 1 of2
ATTACHMENT A
(10) Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for pedestrians,
cyclists and vehicles. This finding can be made in the affirmative; please see response to 2
above.
(11) Natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project. This finding
can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed tree removals are supported by the city
staff and are not considered significant as to require retention. The new landscape plan for
the street would be desirable and attractive.
(12) The materials, textures, colors and details of construction and plant material are
appropriate expression to the design and function. This finding can be made in the
affirmative, see Findings 2, 3,4 and 13.
(13) The landscape design concept for the site, as shown by the relationship of plant masses,
open space,' scale, plant forms and foliage textures and colors create a desirable and
functional environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed
landscape design enhances the street experience as well as provides a functional easy to
maintain layout. .
(14) Plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site, capable of being properly maintained
on the site, and is of a variety which would tend to be drought-resistant to reduce
consumption of water in its installation and maintenance. This finding can be made in the
affirmative in that the selected landscaping is relatively low maintenance and drought
tolerant.
(15) The project exhibits green building and sustainable design that is energy efficient, water
conserving, durable and nontoxic, with high-quality spaces and high recycled content
materials. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project intends to utilize
drought tolerant and low maintenance plantings.
(16) The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose of architectural review as set
forth in subsection 18.76. 020(a). This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the
project design promotes visual environments that are of high aesthetic quality and variety.
Page 2 of2
DRAFT
CONDITIONS OF APPROV AL
ATTACHMENTB
California Avenue Streetscape Improvements / File No. 13PLN-00211
PLANNING & COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
The Architectural Review Board (June 6, 2013) recommended approval of the application
referenced above, and the Director of Planning and Community Environment (Director)
approved the project on date, 2013.
PLANNING DIVISION
1. The project shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plans and related
documents received May 15, 2013, except as modified to incorporate these conditions of
approval.
2. The Conditions of Approval document shall be printed on all plans submitted for building
permits related to this project.
3. Transportation staff will work collaboratively with other City departments to assure all
required standards are complied with for the implementation of the project.
4. All trees shall be maintained, watered, fertilized, and pruned according to Best
Management Practices-Pruning (ANSI A300-2001 or current version). Any vegetation that
dies shall be replaced or failed automatic irrigation repaired by the property owner within
30 days of discovery.
5. The project approval shall be valid for a period of one year from the original date of
approval. In the event a building permit(s), if applicable, is not secured for the project
within the time limit specified above, the ARB approval shall expire and be of no further
force or effect. Application for extension of this entitlement may be made prior to the one
year expiration.
Page 1 of 1
Agenda Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
June 6, 2013
Architectural Review Board
Jason M. Nortz, Senior Planner
Architectural Review Board
Staff Report
Department: Planning and
Community Environment
240-248 Hamilton Avenue [13PLN-00006]: Request by Ken Hayes of
Hayes Group Architects on behalf of Forest Casa Real LLC. for Major
Architectural Review Board review for the demolition of an existing 7,000
square foot, two-story commercial building and the construction of a four
story, 50 foot, mixed-use building with a new floor area of 15,000 square
feet on a site located at 240-248 Hamilton Avenue. Environmental
Assessment: an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been
prepared. Zone District: Downtown Community Commercial (CD
C)(P)(GF) with Pedestrian Shopping and Ground Floor combining districts.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) consider the project and findings
for Architectural Review approval and recommend approval of the proposed project to the
Director of Planning and Community Environment (Director), based upon the findings in
Attachment A and subject to the conditions of approval in Attachment B.
BACKGROUND
Site Information
The proj ect site is located within the Downtown Parking Assessment District and close to the
southen1 edge of the Commercial Downtown zone district as shown on the attached map
(Attachment C). The site is 50 feet wide by 100 feet deep and is located at the southern corner of
the Hamilton Avenue/Ramona Street intersection. Surrounding land uses include office,
restaurants and retail. Directly east of the project site on the eastern side of Ramona Street is the
eight-story Palo Alto City Hall. Directly adjacent to the project site along the western side of
Ramona Street is a two-story office building. On the southwestern side of Hamilton Avenue near
the subject property is a two-story building housing the restaurant, Reposado. Across the street on
the northern side of Hamilton Avenue is the Cardinal Hotel, a three-story commercial building
with ground floor uses that include ground floor retail, a restaurant and a hotel lobby. The hotel
occupies the remaining two floors. A four-story commercial building with ground floor retail
(University Art) and office uses on the uppers floors is located "kitty corner" to the project site.
13PLN-OOOOO-00006 Page 1 of 8
The site is zoned Downtown Commercial with a GrolUld Floor and "Pedestrian" combining
district CD-C (GF)(p). The CD-C (GF)(P) zone district is intended to be a comprehensive zoning
district for the downtown business area, accommodating a wide range of commercial uses serving
citywide and regional business and service needs, as well as providing for residential uses and
neighborhood service needs. The Pedestrian combining district is designed to help foster the
continuity of retail stores and display windows and to avoid monotonous pedestrian environment
in order to establish and maintain economic viability for a healthy retail district. The Ground
Floor combining district is intended to modify the uses allowed in the CD district and sub districts
to allow only retail, eating and drinking and other service-oriented commercial development uses
on the ground floor.
The mixed use project includes permitted uses: grolUld floor retail use with two floors of offices
and one floor of residential.
Proj ect Description
The project is the demolition of an existing 7,000 square foot, two-story commercial building and
the construction of a four-story, 50-foot tall, mixed-use building with a floor area of 15,000 square
feet, via "bonus" floor area including the use of Transferrable Development Rights (TDRs). The
ground floor would be retail with office space occupying floors two and three. The fourth floor
would be entirely residential consisting of two residentiallUlits. Four on-site parking spaces would
be provided for the two residential lUlits. The parking spaces would be provided in a garage
located one level below grade.
The total floor area in the completed project would be 15,000 sq. ft. This includes 11,527 sq. ft.
for con1lllercial uses on the first, second and third floors and 3,473 sq. ft. within two residential
lUlits on the fourth floor. The total floor area breakdown for the project site is as follows:
Office Retail Residential
First Floor: 400 sf 2,337 sf 201 sf
Second Floor: 4,395 sf 134 sf
Third Floor: 4,395 sf 134 sf
Fourth Floor: 3,004 sf
Total: 9,190 sf 2,337 sf 3,473 sf
Building Total: 15,000 sf
The building would have a one story retail base set back from the second and third floors by
approximately seven feet along Hamilton Avenue and three feet along Ramona Street. The ground
floor would provide a rhythm of clear storefront glass, recesses and awnings to reinforce the
pedestrian experience. The second and third floors would function as the "architectural block"
that defines the commercial office portion of the building. The fourth floor, would be
predominantly clad in windows and would be smaller and set back from the second and third
floors, to reduce the apparent height and mass of the building.
13PLN-OOOOO-00006 Page 2 of 8
The applicant has requested a variance to encroach into the required seven foot special setback
along Hamilton Avenue, and to encroach into the required six foot special setback along Ramona
Street. Further discussion on the variance request is provided below.
Additional project details are included in the applicant's project description included as
Attachment G and H.
Sustainable Design
The proj ect would incorporate a variety of sustainable design and transportation friendly concepts
that would help the development achieve both Cal Green Tier II requirements for the commercial
portion of the project and meet Build it Green, Green Point Rated requirements for the residential
portion of the project. In addition, in an effort to reduce overall energy consumption all spaces
will be designed around maximizing daylight through the use of various transparent elements.
DISCUSSION
Floor Area Ratio/Transferred Development Rights
The project includes a request to utilize floor area bonuses in the form of "Transferable
Development Rights" (TDRs), to be transferred from an off-site historical rehabilitation project.
A total of 5,000 square feet ofTDRs would be purchased and transferred to the site, from 230-232
Homer Avenue, where the TDRs were acquired through both a seismic and historic rehabilitation
of the building. The proposal would also utilize a one-time, 200 square foot bonus, as provided in
PAMC Section 18.18.070. The bonus floor area is considered "exempt" from having to provide
the parking spaces otherwise associated with an expansion of conmlercial floor area. The parking
provisions for the project are discussed later in this report section.
Setback Variance
The zoning map shows a seven foot special setback and a six foot special setback along certain
streets in the core of the Downtown, as imposed by the special setback map. A seven foot special
setback is applied along the Hamilton Avenue side of the subject property, and a six foot special
setback is applied along the Ramona Street side of the project site. The seven foot special setback
exists on both sides of Hamilton Avenue, extending from Waverley Street to Alma Street. The six
foot special setback only exists at two locations in the core of Downtown; 1) along eastern edge of
Bryant Street between Hamilton and Channing Avenues, and 2) along Ramona Street between
Hamilton and Forest Avenues. Furthermore, there are only two corners in all of Downtown where
both a seven foot and six foot special setback are applied; 1) at the northeastenl comer of
Hamilton Avenue and Bryant Street (Washington Mutual building), and 2) at the northwestern
corner of Hamilton Avenue and Ramona Street (project site). The applicant has requested a
Variance for: 1) a three foot encroachment into the required six foot special setback along
Ramona Street, and 2) a seven foot encroachment into the required seven foot special setback
along Hamilton Avenue. It should be noted that only nine feet of the 45 foot wide building wall
along Hamilton Avenue would encroach seven feet into the special setback (for the pUrposes of
accommodating an enclosed stairwell). The remaining 36 feet of building wall would encroach
approximately five inches into the special setback. The current sidewalk between the existing
building and Ramona Street is six feet wide, which is consistent with the sidewalk adjacent to
existing buildings on Ramona Street between Forest and Hamilton Avenues. The current sidewalk
13PLN-OOOOO-00006 Page 3 of 8
width between the existing building and Hanlilton Avenue is eight feet, which is consistent with
the width of sidewalk adjacent to existing buildings on Hamilton Avenue between Ramona and
Emerson Streets.
F or purposes of determining the setback, the measurement is taken at the property line and not the
face of curb. As it is currently situated, the existing building is on the property line on both the
Ramona Street and Hamilton Avenue sides of the project. If the special setbacks were applied to
the development, the result would be a 15 foot wide sidewalk along Hamilton Avenue and a 12
foot wide sidewalk along Ramona Street, both of which would result in significantly increased
sidewalk widths that would be inconsistent with the sidewalks imnlediately adjacent to the project
site.
The requested Variance would allow the project to provide a sidewalk width of approximately 11
feet along Hamilton A venue, and 10 feet along Ranl0na Street, both of which meet or exceed the
sidewalk width requirements in the Downtown. The wider sidewalk and more importantly, the
shift of the building mass, would improve the pedestrian experience and enhance the opportunity
for retail activity along Hamilton Avenue.
Approval and implementation of the Variance request would result in the new building not being
as deeply set back from the adjacent buildings on the same side of the block. This would help
maintain the existing continuity. The applicant has requested the special setback encroachments to
reduce the loss of valuable ground floor retail square footage and to reduce the gap between the
other commercial buildings on Hamilton A venue and Bryant Street.
Parking/Circulation
As noted, the site is within the Downtown Assessment District. Currently, the project site
provides no on-site parking spaces. There are six off-site parking spaces directly adjacent to the
site. Three of the six spaces are located along Hamilton Avenue. The renlaining three spaces are
located along Ramona Street. There will be a net deficiency in the number of off-site parking
spaces directly adjacent to the site, due to the proposed curb cut along Ramona Street for the
purpose of creating a new driveway for the underground parking lot. The loss of two curbside
parking spaces may incrementally add to parking concerns in the downtown and surrounding
neighborhoods. Those impacts, however, will not cause significant increases in congestion or
deterioration in air quality. The loss of the two off-site parking spaces will be offset by the
applicant's provision of in-lieu payments for two parking spaces. Staff is currently working with
the applicant to further study the possibility of reducing the size of the loading zone in front of the
project site along Ramona Street for the purpose of providing one additional off-site parking
space.
The proposed project is only required to provide three parking spaces for the two residential units
located on the fourth floor. The project is providing four spaces. The renlaining three floors of
non-residential floor area, consisting of 11,527 square feet of floor area, is not associated with a
requirement for provision of off-site parking spaces for the following reasons:
1. The existing 7,000 square feet of commercial floor area is grandfathered in the Downtown
Assessment District (assessed previously for 20 parking spaces. See Attachment H,
13PLN-OOOOO-00006 Page 4 of 8
Exhibit 2) and as such is not required to provide parking spaces on site for the existing
amount of floor area;
2. 4,327 square feet of commercial floor area would be transferred to the site, via a Transfer
of Development Rights (TDR) from a valid sender site to an eligible receiver site. These
are valid, recorded Transferable Development Rights (TDR). The first 5,000 square feet
of floor area transferred to a receiver site is exempt from the otherwise applicable on-site
parking requirements for new floor area.
3. The remaining 200 square feet of commercial floor area (7,000 sf + 4,327 sf + 200 sf =
11,527st) is exempt from parking due to a one time allowable 200 square foot bonus, per
PAMC 18.18.070.
Due to limited space, the four residential parking spaces would be two, tandem "stacking" parking
spaces. The proposed parking configuration would also eliminate the need for shared or attendant
parking between the two units. The stacking system would have a below grade space as well as
two above grade spaces so that there are three locations for two vehicles. This means a single
operator can raise or lower a car out of the way of his or her vehicle thereby eliminating the need
for an attendant or for coordination between roommates. Rather than entering the covered garage
parking spaces facing into the building and then backing onto Ramona Street and crossing the
sidewalk in reverse and with dangerous, unclear vision, drivers would enjoy a vehicle rotating
turntable (Attachment I Sheet A2.1). The turntable would allow any car exiting the project site to
be spun around so that it exits facing onto Ramona Street, therefore providing better visibility of
the Ramona Street sidewalk and pedestrians.
Downtown Floor Area Cap
An annual monitoring report on the Commercial Downtown zoning area is mandated by the
Comprehensive Plan Programs L-8 and L-9 that require reporting of non-residential development
activity and trends within the CD zone district. These reports are also required as a result of final
action on the Downtown Study adopted by the City Council in 1986. The Downtown Study
incorporated a growth limit of 350,000 square feet of additional floor area over the total floor area
existing in 1986, and provided for a re-evaluation of the CD regulations when new development
reaches 235,000 square feet.
Since 1986, a total of 223 ,21 0 square feet of non-residential floor area has been added in the
Downtown CD-C zoned area. In the past two monitoring cycles from 2009-2011, approximately
34,650 square feet of net new commercial floor area was added with a few major contributing
projects such as 524 Hamilton Avenue and 265 Lytton Avenue. In this current cycle, 2011-2012,
approximately 49,860 square feet of net new commercial floor area has been added through one
major project, 335-355 Alma st. (aka; 101 Lytton Ave.). Based on this recent monitoring, an
additional 11,790 square feet of new non-residential development remains for development before
the re-evaluation limit of 235,000 square feet growth limit is reached.
The existing building consists of 7,000 square feet of non-residential floor area. The proposed
project would add an additional 4,527 square feet of non-residential floor area, which would
minimally contribute towards the limit of 350,000 square feet of additional floor area.
Context Based Design Criteria
The proposed building design appears to be consistent with many of the requirements of the
Context-Based Design Criteria as outlined in Section 18.18.110 of the Zoning Code. In summary,
13PLN-OOOOO-00006 Page 5 of 8
the project would provide pedestrian walk-ability, a bicycle-friendly environment, connectivity
through design elements, and street facades having a strong relationship with the sidewalks and
the street to support and encourage pedestrian activity. Bicycle storage is to be provided in the
below grade parking garage as well as at grade along both Hanlilton Avenue and Ramona Street.
The ground floor design is intended to be an attractive streetscape design with a combination of
clear frameless glass, porcelain tile and stainless steel canopies above each entrance along
Ramona and Hamilton. Separate entrances would also be provided for each use along the first
floor including the main lobby area.
The building would minimize massing with increased setbacks at the first floor in addition to
other design elements, such as a recessed entry and canopies that would be located above the
primary entry points. The first floor design employs different materials and colors, including
porcelain tile, clear frameless glass and cedar cladded garage door. Floors two through three are
designed to function as the "architectural block" that distinguishes the commercial office portion
of the building from the rest of the building. This area would primarily consist of a structural
glazed curtain wall with a combination of clear dual glazed glass and translucent lanlinate glass.
The area would be outlined by a cream colored limestone wall. The residential units on the fourth
floor would be set back from the block face below. The units would be capped with a hip roof
composed of metal and outlined by a composite metal panel. The elevator shaft and stairwells
would be white cement plaster.
The parking design is consistent with the design criteria in that the parking spaces would be
located below grade and is concealed from public view by a recessed garage door.
Downtown Urban Design Guide
The Downtown Urban Design Guide is meant to advise the applicant, staff and the ARB regarding
development and design in the downtown area. The Downtown Urban Design Guide divides the
dowiltown area into districts, each having a unique identity and design characteristics. The site is
located within the Hamilton A venue District according to the Downtown Urban Design Guide.
The Hanlilton Avenue District is a nlixed office/commercial/retail district with sonle residential
uses. The primary goal of the Hamilton Avenue District is to promote Hamilton Avenue as an
active mixed use district with a pleasing, tree-lined pedestrian experience. The development of
three or more story buildings surrounding Civic Center Plaza are encouraged to help create a
stronger urban edge within this area.
The proposed project is consistent with the recommendations for this district. Staff finds that this
project, with its extensive use of storefront glazing, first floor recesses and canopies, and
pedestrian friendly amenities such as sunshades, street trees and ample sidewalk widths, would
contribute significantly to the goal of creating an exciting pedestrian environment. The guidelines
also encourage additional height for buildings at comers. The proposed building of 50 feet is
consistent with both the Zoning Code and the Downtown Urban Design Guide.
Trees/Landscape Plan
The existing project site is a completely built out site that contains no open space or any
significant landscaping. There are six regulated street trees located around the perimeter of the
13PLN-OOOOO-00006 Page 6 of 8
subject property. Two Flowering Pear trees are located in the public right-of-way along Hamilton
Avenue. The remaining four trees are located along Ramona Street and include· three Japanese
Pagoda trees and two London Plane trees. The City Arborist has recommended removal of all six
trees. The existing trees would be replaced with five new street trees. The City Arborist is
currently working with the applicant to determine the appropriate species type and location.
Open space for the developn1ent would be provided as a combination of six terraces and ground
floor recessed areas. On the fourth floor, four terraces (two for each residential unit) totaling 1,114
square feet would be provided, where the minimum requirement is 200 square feet of usable open
space for each residential unit. There would also be two identically sized terraces on each of the
second and third floors, totaling 71 square feet each. Additional open space is provided along the
ground floor in the forn1 of recessed areas beyond the 10 feet of sidewalk along both Hamilton
A venue and Ramona Street. Additional information pertaining to open space requirements can be
found in the zoning comparison table provided as Attachment D.
Signage
Signs are not included in this ARB application. The proposal for signage would be a separate
architectural review application and depending on the level of detail, would be reviewed by the
ARB or staff on behalf of the ARB. The applicant has been requested to indicate potential
locations on the building for signage. Currently, blade signs are not allowed unless they are
placed underneath a canopy or a Sign Exception is requested and approved for such signage.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project is subject to environmental review under provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
have been prepared and circulated, with a required 20-day public review and comment period
beginning on May 10, 2013 and ending on May 30, 2013. Mitigation measures are proposed to
address biological resources, seismicity and noise. To date, no comments have been received on
the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. The project would not have an impact on fish or
wildlife habitat, nor would it impact cultural or historic resources. The use is appropriate for the
site and the development would not result in an adverse visual impact.
ATTACHMENTS
A. ARBN ariance Findings
B. Conditions of Approval
C. Location Map
D. Zoning Compliance Table
E. Conformance with Comprehensive Plan Policies
F. Draft Initial Study and Negative Declaration
G. Applicant's Project Description
H. Applicant's Submittal Packet (Board Members only)
I. Plan Set received January 7, 2013 (Board Members only)
13PLN-OOOOO-00006 Page 7 of 8
COURTESY COPIES
Sal Giovanotto, Owner
Ken Hayes, Architect! Applicant ___ h
Prepared By: Jason M. Nortz, Senior Planntr I
Manager Review: Amy French, Chief Planning OffiCi~
13PLN-OOOOO-00006 Page 8 of 8
ATTACHMENT A
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AND VARIANCE
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
240-248 Hamilton Ave. / File No. 13PLN-00000-00006
The design and architecture of the proposed project, as conditioned, complies with the Findings
for Architectural Review as required in PAMC Chapter 18.76.
(1) The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project
incorporates quality design that recognizes the regional and historical importance of the
area as described in the Comprehensive Plan and reinforces its pedestrian character. The
proposed project for a new mixed use building is consistent with the land use
designation. The project is also consistent with The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan
policies related to business and economics. The Comprehensive Plan encourages
owners to upgrade or replace existing commercial properties so that these commercial
areas are more competitive and better serve the conununity. The commercial properties
could be redesigned to be more attractive and inviting for pedestrians;
(2) The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site. This finding can
be made in the affirmative in that the project is located at a prominent comer of the
commercial downtown in an environment with other large retail/office buildings. The
project is designed as a four-story, 50 foot building that is adjacent to similarly sized
buildings. The building has been designed to encourage pedestrian activity;
(3) The design is appropriate to the function of the project. This finding c'an be made in the
affirmative in that the design would accommodate the proposed retail, office and
residential uses. The proposed building would have ample storefront glass, recesses, and
awnings to create an inviting retail and pedestrian environment. The design is also
consistent with the requirements and recommendations of both the Context Based
Design Criteria and the Downtown Urban Design Guide;
(4) In areas considered by the board as having a unified design character or historical
character, the design is compatible with such character. This finding can be made in
the affirmative in that the overall design is consistent with the Downtown Urban Design
Guide guidelines in the following ways:
a. The project creates enhanced vehicular and pedestrian entries;
b. The project provides varied building mass and height;
c. The project maintains Hamilton Ave. as pleasing, tree-lined pedestrian
environment with complimentary outdoor amenities.
(5) The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between
different designated land uses. This finding is not applicable in that this project is not
,situated in a transition area between different designated land uses;
240 Hamilton Ave 13PLN-00006 Page 1
(6) The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site. This
finding can be made in the affirmative in that the new building is compatible with the
existing context of the retail/commercial downtown environment;
(7) The planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an
internal sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and
the general community. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the building
location is shifted three feet away from the Ramona St. curb and four feet away from
Hamilton Ave. to provide wider sidewalks to encourage pedestrian activity .down
Hamilton Ave;
(8) The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate to the design and the
function of the structures. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the
building has provided an adequate amount or recesses to the zoning requirements of the
"P" overlay and the intent to add interest at the ground floor for pedestrians.
Additionally, the project provides sufficient open space for the residential component in
the form of four rooftop terraces;
(9) Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support the main functions of the project
. and the same are compatible with the project's design concept. This finding can be
made in the affirmative in that project includes sufficient automobile and. bicycle
parking, and common open space areas. The project includes widening the walkable
area for the sidewalks on both Ramona St. and Hamilton A ve. to enhance vehicular and
pedestrian safety;
(10) Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for pedestrians,
cyclists and vehicles. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project has
been designed to encourage pedestrian activity with its greater setback on Ramona St.
and Hamilton Ave. The project also creates an effective and safe automobile
ingress/egress point for the residential occupants;
(11) Natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project. This
finding can be made in the affirmative in that the existing city street trees adjacent to the
proposed building will be removed and replaced with new street trees that are consistent
with other street trees in the direct vicinity;
(12) The materials, textures, colors and details of construction and plant material are
appropriate expression to the design and function. This finding can be made in the
affirmative in that the proposed colors and materials are will add detail and interest and
are compatible with the commercial retail environment.
(13) The landscape design conceptfor the site, as shown by the relationship of plant masses,
open space, scale, plant forms and foliage textures and colors create a desirable and
functional environment. This finding is not applicable in that there is no proposed
landscaping.
240 Hamilton Ave 13PLN-00006 Page 2
)
!i
3. The granting of the application is consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and
the purposes of this title (Zoning).
The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (Policies, Programs and Goals)
as outlined in Attachment E of the Staff Report.
4. The granting of the application will not be injurious to property or improvements in the
vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare, or
convenience.
The proposed setbacks of three feet along Ramona S1. and no setback to 6.5 feet along
Hamilton Ave. will improve the existing sidewalk width by adding four additional feet in
width to the sidewalk to Ramona S1. and three feet additional sidewalk width to Hamilton
Ave. The increased sidewalk widths will provide for a better overall pedestrian friendly
experience with the Hamilton Ave. District of Downtown. The requested encroachments
into the special setback would not result in a detrimental impact as it is an improvement
over the existing situation which is a zero setback in this location.
240 Hamilton Ave 13PLN-00006 Page 5
Planning
Attachment B
Conditions of Approval
240-248 Hamilton Avenue/ 13PLN-00006
1. The cover sheet lists the assessor's parcel as 139-96-797. Our records indicate the assessor's
parcel number is 120-27-010.
2. The project shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plans and related documents
received January 7, 2013 except as modified to incorporate these conditions of approval.
3. The Conditions of Approval document shall be printed on all plans submitted for building
permits related to this project.
5. The current project is approved to use the one-time 200 square foot FAR bonus, as permitted per
PAMC 18.18.070(a)(1), and cannot utilize this bonus again for any future development.
6. New construction and alterations in the CD-C zoning district shall be required to design ground
floor space to accommodate retail use and shall comply with the provisions of the Pedestrian (P)
combining district.
7. The proposed project requires 5,000 square feet of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). Prior
to building permit submittal, the applicant shall provide sufficient information so that the
Director of PI am ling and Comnlunity Environment can issue written confirmation of the transfer,
which identifies both the sender and receiver sites and the anl0unt of TDRs which have been
transferred. This confirmation shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder prior to the
issuance of building permits and shall include the written consent or assignment by the owner( s)
of the TDRs where such owner(s) are other than the applicant
8. Development Impact Fees, estimated at $262,671.82 shall be paid prior to the issuance of the
project's building permit.
9. F or anyon-street parking spaces that are removed to accommodate the project's driveway curb
cut, the applicant shall be required to pay parking in-lieu fees for the number of spaces lost. This
fee shall be due to the City prior to the issuance of the project's building permit.
10. All future signage for this site shall be submitted for Architectural Review.
11. The project approval shall be valid for a period of one year from the original date of approval. In
the event a building permit(s), if applicable, is not secured for the project within the time limit
240 Hamilton Ave Page 1
specified above, the ARB approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect. Application
for extension of this entitlement may be made prior to the one year expiration.
12. Government Code Section 66020 provides that project applicant who desires to protest the fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project must initiate the
protest at the time the development project is approved or conditionally approved or within
ninety (90) days after the date that fees, dedications, reservations or exactions are imposed on the
project. Additionally, procedural requirements for protesting these development fees,
dedications, reservations and exactions are set forth in Government Code Section 66020. IF
YOU FAIL TO INITIATE A PROTEST WITHm THE 90-DA Y PERIOD OR TO FOLLOW
THE PROTEST PROCEDURES DESCRIBED m GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66020,
YOU WILL BE BARRED FROM CHALLENGING THE V ALIDITY OR
REASONABLENESS OF THE FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, AND
EXACTIONS.
13. This matter is subject to the Code of Civil Procedures (CCP) Section 1094.5, and the time by
which judicial review must be sought is governed by CCP Section 1094.6.
14. To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its
City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the "indemnified parties") from and against any
claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the
applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project,
including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorney's fees and costs incurred in
defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action
with attorneys of its own choice.
Transportation
1. Car stacker system should provide enough width and depth for full size SUV. Provide
details, etc. of the system for further review.
2. Long term bike parking for office use is not apparent. Please identify. Long term bike
parking for office cannot be shared with residential unless separate lockers.
3. Parking reductions assumed. Significant credits/reductions assumed could be opposed.
Consider providing underground parking, possibly with a vehicle elevator (instead of ramp)
to achieve additional parking.
4. Include loss of on-street parking due to new garage.
Public Works Urban Forestry
1. Provide optimum public tree replacement for loss of public trees # 1-6.
240 Hamilton Ave Page 2
2. Six publicly owned trees are growing in the right-of-way along the Han1ilton and Ramona
streets. Parking garage ramp and other in-ground elements that will limit new tree growth
potential shall be identified. As mitigation to offset the net loss for years of public resource
investments and minimize the future years to parity with infrastructure benefits (Co2
reduction, extended asphalt life, water mgmt., etc.) currently provided by the trees, the new
frontage should be provided maximum streetscape design and n1aterials to include the
following elements:
• Consistency with the Public Works Departn1ent Tree Management Program.
Provide adequate room for tree canopy growth and root growing volume
resources.
• Utilize city-approved best management practices for sustainability products, such
as permeable ADA sidewalk, Silva Cell planters, engineered soil mix base, and
services due to being situated within the public right-of-way.
Public Works Engineering
1. SIDEWALK, CURB & GUTTER: As part of this project, the applicant must replace those
portions of the existing sidewalks, curbs, gutters, curb ramps or driveway approaches in the
public right-of-way along the frontage(s) of the property that are broken, badly cracked,
displaced, or non-standard, and must remove any unpem1itted pavement in the planter strip.
Contact Public Works' inspector at 650-496-6929 to arrange a site visit so the inspector can
determine the extent of replacement work. The site plan submitted with the building permit
plan set must show the extent of the replacement work or include a note that Public Works'
inspector has determined no work is required. The plan must note that any work in the right
of-way must be done per Public Works' standards by a licensed contractor who must first
obtain a Street Work Permit from Public Works at the Development Center.
2. STREET TREES: The applicant may be required to replace existing and/or add new street
trees in the public right-of-way along the property's frontage(s). Call the Public Works'
arborist at 650-496-5953 to arrange a site visit so he can detem1ine what street tree work, if
any, will be required for this project. The site plan submitted with the building permit plan
set must show the street tree work that the arborist has determined, including the tree species,
size, location, staking and irrigation requirements, or include a note that Public Works'
arborist has determined no street tree work is required. The plan must note that in order to do
street tree work, the applicant must first obtain a Permit for Street Tree Work in the Public
Right-ol-Way from Public Works' arborist (650-496-5953).
3. SUBDIVISION: A parcel/condo map will be required if there are any units that are proposed
"for sale". The developer will be required to provide a preliminary parcel map and a parcel
map for city review and approval. The Grading/Excavation and Building permits will not be
issued until the parcel map is recorded.
240 Hamilton Ave Page 3
4. STEET RESURFACING: The developer will be required to resurface the entire frontage of
each street adjacent to the property out to the centerline of the street upon completion of
onsite construction. The resurfacing will consist of a slurry seal or grinding 2" of the existing
asphalt and overlaying 2" asphalt pavement per Public Works' standards. Public Works will
make the determination between slurry seal and grind/overlay by inspecting the condition of
the road and estimating the construction impacts. Thermoplastic striping of the street(s) will
be required after resurfacing.
The following comments are provided to assist the applicant at the building permit phase. You
can obtain various plan set details, forms and guidelines from Public Works at the City's
Development Center (285 Hamilton Avenue) or on Public Works' website:
www.cityofpaloalto.org/depts/pwd/forms~ermits.
Include in plans submitted for a building permit:
5. BASEMENT DRAINAGE: Due to high groundwater throughout much of the City and Public
Works prohibiting the pumping and discharging of groundwater, perforated pipe drainage
systems at the exterior of the basement walls or under the slab are not allowed for this site. A
drainage system is, however, required for all exterior basement-level spaces, such as
lightwells, patios or stairwells. This system consists of a sump, a sump pump, a backflow
preventer, and a closed pipe from the pump to a dissipation device onsite at least 10 feet from
the property line, such as a bubbler box in a landscaped area, so that water can percolate into
the soil and/or sheet flow across the site. The device must not allow stagnant water that
could become mosquito habitat. Additionally, the plans must show that exterior basement
level spaces are at least 7-3/4" below any adjacent windowsills or doorsills to minimize the
potential for flooding the basement. Public Works recommends a waterproofing consultant
be retained to design and inspect the vapor barrier and waterproofing systems for the
basement.
6. GARAGEIBASEMENT SHORING: Shoring for the basement excavation, including
tiebacks, must not extend onto adjacent private property or into the City right-of-way without
having first obtained written permission from the private property owners and/or an
encroachment permit from Public Works.
7. DEWATERING: Basement excavations may require dewatering during construction. Public
Works only allows groundwater drawdown well dewatering. Open pit groundwater
dewatering is disallowed. Dewatering is only allowed from April through October due to
inadequate capacity in our storm drain system. The geotechnical report for this site must list
the highest anticipated groundwater level. We recommend a piezometer to be installed in the
soil boring. The contractor must determine the depth to groundwater immediately prior to
excavation by using the piezometer or by drilling an exploratory hole if the deepest
excavation will be within 3 feet of the highest anticipated groundwater level. If groundwater
is found within 2 feet of the deepest excavation, a drawdown well dewatering system must be
240 Hamilton Ave Page 4
used, or alternatively, the contractor can excavate for the basement and hope not to hit
groundwater, but if he does, he must immediately stop all work and install a drawdown well
system before he continues to excavate. Public Works may require the water to be tested for
contaminants prior to initial discharge and at intervals during dewatering. If testing is
required, the contractor must retain an independent testing firm to test the discharge water for
the contaminants Public Works specifies and submit the results to Public Works.
8. Public Works reviews and approves dewatering plans as part of a Street Work Permit. The
applicant can include a dewatering plan in the building permit plan set in order to obtain
approval of the plan during the building permit review, but the contractor will still be
required to obtain a street work permit prior to dewatering. Alternatively, the applicant must
include the above dewatering requirements in a note on the site plan. Public Works has a
sample dewatering plan sheet and dewatering guidelines available at the Development Center
and on our website.
9. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN: The plan set must include a grading & drainage plan
prepared by a licensed professional that includes existing and propos~d spot elevations and
drainage flow arrows to demonstrate proper drainage of the site. Adjacent grades must slope
away from the structure a minimum of 2%. Downspouts and splashblocks should be shown
on this plan, as well as any site drainage features such as swales. Grading will not be allowed
that increases drainage onto, or blocks existing drainage from, neighboring properties. Public
Works generally does not allow rainwater to be collected and discharged into the street
gutter, but encourages the developer to keep rainwater onsite as much as feasible by directing
runoff to landscaped and other pervious areas of the site.
10. GRADING & EXCA V ATION PERMIT: An application for a grading & excavation permit
must be submitted to Public Works when applying for a building permit if the total cubic
yardage of dirt being cut for the garage lift and elevator pit is more than 100 cubic yards. The
application and guidelines are available at the Development Center and on our website.
11. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION: The City's full-sized "Pollution Prevention
-It's Part of the Plan" sheet must be included in the plan set. Copies are available from
Public Works at the Development Center or on our website.
12. STREET TREES: Show all existing street trees in the public right-of-way. Any removal,
relocation or planting of street trees; or excavation, trenching or pavement within 10 feet of
street trees must be approved by Public Works' arborist (phone: 650-496-5953). This
approval shall appear on the plans. Show construction protection of the trees per City
requirements.
13. WORK IN THE RIGHT-Of-WAY: The plans must clearly indicate any work that is
proposed in the public right-of-way, such as sidewalk replacement, driveway approach, or
utility laterals. The plans must include notes that the work must be done per City standards
240 Hamilton Ave Page 5
and that the contractor performing this work must first obtain a Street Work Permit from
Public Works at the Development Center. If a new driveway is in a different location than
the existing driveway, then the sidewalk associated with the new driveway nlust be replaced
with a thickened (6" thick instead of the standard 4" thick) section. Additionally, curb cuts
and driveway approaches for abandoned driveways must be replaced with new curb, gutter
and planter strip.
14. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA: The project will be creating or replacing 500 square feet
or more of impervious surface. Accordingly, the applicant shall provide calculations of the
existing and proposed impervious surface areas with the building permit application. The
Impervious Area Worksheet for Land Developments form and instructions are available at the
Development Center or on our website.
15. SIDEWALK ENCROACHMENT: Add a note to the site plan that says, "The contractor
using the city sidewalk to work on an adjacent private building must do so in a manner that is
safe for pedestrians using the sidewalk. Pedestrian protection must be provided per the 2007
California Building Code Chapter 33 requirements. If the height of construction is 8 feet or
less, the contractor must place construction railings sufficient to direct pedestrians around
construction areas. If the height of construction is more than 8 feet, the contractor must
obtain an encroachment permit from Public Works at the Development Center in order to
provide a barrier and covered walkway or to close the sidewalk."
16. LOGISTICS PLAN: The contractor must submit a logistics plan to the Public Works
Department prior to commencing work that addresses all impacts to the City's right-of-way,
including, but not limited to: pedestrian control, traffic control, truck routes, material
deliveries, contractor's parking, concrete pours, crane lifts, work hours, noise control, dust
control, storm water pollution prevention, contractor's contact, noticing of affected
businesses, and schedule of work. The plan will be attached to a street work permit.
Public Works Environmental Services
Please note the following issues must be addressed in building plans prior to final approval by this
department:
General Comments:
• Consider providing separate service for residential and commercial units
• Trash rooms located in garage will require bins to be placed curbside on collection day or
pull-out service at an additional charge.
1. P AMC 18.23.020 Trash Disposal and Recycling
(A) Assure that development provides adequate and accessible interior areas or exterior
enclosures for the storage of trash and recyclable nlaterials in appropriate containers, and that
trash disposal and recycling areas are located as far from abutting residences as is reasonably
240 Hamilton Ave Page 6
possible. (B) Requirements: (i) Trash disposal and recyclable areas shall be accessible to all
residents or users of the property. (ii) Recycling facilities shall be located, sized, and designed to
encourage and facilitate convenient use. (iii) Trash disposal and recyclable areas shall be
screened from public view by masonry or other opaque and durable material, and shall be
enclosed and covered. Gates or other controlled access shall be provided where feasible. Chain
link enclosures are strongly discouraged. (iv) Trash disposal and recycling structures shall be
architecturally compatible with the design of the project. (v) The design, construction and
accessibility of recycling areas and enclosures shall be subject to approval by the architectural
review board, in accordance with design guidelines adopted by that board and approved by the
city council pursuant to Section 18.76.020.
2. P AMC 5.20.120 Recycling storage design requirements
The design of any new, substantially remodeled, or expanded building or other facility shall
provide for proper storage, handling, and accessibility which will accommodate the solid waste
and recyclable materials loading anticipated and which will allow for the efficient and safe
collection. The design shall comply with the applicable provisions of Sections 18.22.100,
18.24.100, 18.26.100, 18.32.080, 18.37.080, 18.41.080, 18.43.080, 18.45.080,,18.49.140,
18.55.080,18.60.080, and 18.68.170 of Title 18 of this code.
All Services:
a) Collection vehicle access (vertical clearance, street width and turnaround space) and
street parking are common issues pertaining to new developments. Adequate space
must be provided for vehicle access.
b) Weight limit for all drivable areas to be accessed by the solid waste vehicles (roads,
driveways, pads) must be rated to 60,000 lbs. This includes areas where permeable
pavement is used.
c) Containers must be within 25 feet of service area or charges will apply.
d) Carts and bins must be able to roll without obstacles or curbs to reach service areas
"no jumping curbs"
3. Garbage, Recycling, and Yard Waste/Compostables cartlbin location and sizing
Office Building
The proposed commercial development must follow the requirements for recycling
container spacel . Project plans must show the placement of recycling containers, for
example, within the details of the solid waste enclosures. Collection space should be
provided for built-in recycling containers/storage on each floor/office or alcoves for the
placement of recycling containers.
• Enclosure and access should be designed for equal access to all three waste streams -
1 In accordance with the California Public Resources Code, Chapter 18, Articles I and 2
240 Hamilton Ave Page 7
garbage, recycling, and compostables.
• Collection cannot be performed in underground. Underground bins locations require a
minimum of77" of vertical clearance. Pull out charges will apply. In instances where push
services are not available (e.g., hauler driver cannot push containers up or down ramps), the
property owner will be responsible for placing solid waste containers in an accessible·
location for collection.
• All service areas must have a clearance height of 20' for bin service.
• New enclosures should consider rubber bumpers to reduce ware and tear on walls.
For questions regarding garbage, recycling, and compostables collection issues, contact
Green Waste of Palo Alto (650) 493-4894.
4. PAMC 5.24.030 Construction and Demolition Debris (eDD)
. Covered projects shall comply with construction and demolition debris diversion rates and
other requirements established in Chapter 16.14 (California Green Building Code). In
I. addition, all debris generated bya covered project must Qaul1 00 percent of the debris not
salvaged for reuse to an approved facility as set forth in this chapter.
Contact the City of Palo Alto's Green Building Coordinator for assistance on how to
recycle construction and demolition debris from the project, including information on
where to conveniently recycle the material.
Utilities Electrical Engineering
1. The Utilities will require space on the private property for installing a pad mounted
transformer to serve the proposed building at the above location.
2. Pad mounted transformer location must be shown on the plans. Utilities will require a
minimum clearance of 8' in the front and 3' around the transformer.
3. Public Utility Easements shall be granted as required by the City.
4. Any extension of the power distribution lines/relocation of existing utilities or offsite
modification that needs to be done for providing electric service to the building will be at
applicant's expense. Any non-standard installation requested by the applicant shall be
treated as a "Special Facilities" and in that case special facility charges will become
applicable.
5. Applicant shall provide preliminary electric load calculations for sizing the transformer.
Transformer procurement lead time is 6-8 months.
6. Utilities will provide detailed comments and cost estimates when plans are submitted to
240 Hamilton Ave Page 8
the Building Department for review and approval
Utilities Water Gas Wastewater
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF DEMOLITION PERMIT
1. Prior to demolition, the applicant shall submit the existing water/wastewater fixture unit
loads (and building as-built plans to verify the existing loads) to determine the capacity
fee credit for the existing load. If the applicant does not submit loads and plans they may
not receive credit for the existing water/wastewater fixtures.
2. The applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all utility services and/or meters
including a signed affidavit of vacancy. Utilities will be disconnected or removed within
10 working days after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued by the
building inspection division after all utility services and/or meters have been disconnected
and removed.
FOR BUILDING PERMIT
3. The applicant shall submit a completed water-gas-wastewater service connection
application -load sheet for City of Palo Alto Utilities. The applicant must provide all the
information requested for utility service demands (water in fixture units/g.p.m., gas in
b.t.u.p.h, and sewer in fixture units/g.p.d.). The applicant shall provide the existing
(prior) loads, the new loads, and the combinedltotalloads (the new loads plus any
existing loads to remain).
4. The applicant shall submit improvement plans for utility construction. The plans must
show the size and location of all underground utilities within the development and the
public right of way including meters, backflow preventers, fire service requirements,
sewer mains, sewer cleanouts, sewer lift stations and any other required utilities.
5. The applicant must show on the site plan the existence of any auxiliary water supply, (i.e.
water well, gray water, recycled water, rain catchment, water storage tank, etc). The
applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading the existing utility mains
andlor services as necessary to handle anticipated peak loads. This responsibility includes
all costs associated with the design and construction for the installation/upgrade of the
utility mains andlor services.
6. The applicant's engineer shall submit flow calculations and system capacity study
showing that the on-site and off-site water and sanitary sewer mains and services will
provide the domestic, irrigation, fire flows, and wastewater capacity needed to service the
development and adjacent properties during anticipated peak flow demands. Field testing
may be required to determined current flows and water pressures on existing water main.
240 Hamilton Ave Page 9
Calculations must be signed and stamped by a registered civil engineer. The applicant is
required to perform, at hislher expense, a flow n10nitoring study of the existing sewer
main to determine the remaining capacity. The report nlust include existing peak flows or
depth of flow based on a minimum monitoring period of thirty continuous days or as
determined by the senior wastewater engineer. The study shall meet the requirements and
the approval of the WOW engineering section. No downstream overloading of existing
sewer main will be permitted.
7. For contractor installed water and wastewater mains or services, the applicant shall
submit to the WOW engineering section of the Utilities Department four copies of the
installation of water and wastewater utilities off-site improvement plans in accordance
with the utilities department design criteria. All utility work within the public right-of
way shall be clearly shown on the plans that are prepared, signed and stamped by a
registered civil engineer. The contractor shall also submit a complete schedule of work,
method of construction and the manufacture's literature on the materials to be used for
approval by the utilities engineering section. The applicant's contractor wIll not be
allowed to begin work until the improvement plan and other submittals have been
approved by the water, gas and wastewater engineering section. After the work is
complete but prior to sign off, the applicant shall provide record drawings (as-builts) of
the contractor installed water and wastewater mains and services per City of Palo Alto
Utilities record drawing procedures. For contractor installed services the contractor shall
install 3M marker balls at each water or wastewater service tap to the main and at the City
clean out for wastewater laterals.
8. An approved reduced pressure principle assembly (RPP A backflow preventer device) is
required for all existing and new water connections from Palo Alto Utilities to comply
with requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605
inclusive. The RPPA shall be installed on the owner's property and directly behind the
water meter within 5 feet of the property line. RPPA's for domestic service shall be lead
free. Show the location of the RPP A on the plans.
9. An approved reduced pressure detector assembly is required for the existing or new water
connection for the fire system to comply with requirements of California administrative
code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive (a double detector assembly may be
allowed for existing fire sprinkler systems upon the CPAU's approval). reduced pressure
detector assemblies shall be installed on the owner's property adjacent to the property
line, within 5' of the property line. Show the location of the reduced pressure detector
assembly on the plans.
10. All backflow preventer devices shall be approved by the WOW engineering division.
Inspection by the utilities cross connection inspector is required for the supply pipe
between the meter and the assembly. Inspection by the utilities cross connection inspector
is required for the supply pipe between the meter and the assembly.
240 Hamilton Ave Page 10
11. Existing wastewater laterals that are not plastic (ABS, PVC, or PE) shall be replaced at
the applicant's expense.
12. Existing water services that are not a currently standard material shall be replaced at the
applicant's expense.
13. The applicant shall pay the capacity fees and connection fees associated with new utility
service/s or added demand on existing services. The approved relocation of services,
meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the cost of the person/entity
requesting the relocation.
14. Each unit or place of business shall have its own water and gas meter shown on the plans.
Each parcel shall have its own water service, gas service and sewer lateral connection
shown on the plans .
. 15. A separate water meter and packflow preventer is required to irrigate the approved
landscape plan. Show the location of the irrigation meter on the plans. This meter shall
be designated as an irrigation account an no other water service will be billed on the
account. The irrigation and landscape plans submitted with the application for a grading
or building permit shall conform to the City of Palo Alto water efficiency standards.
16. A new water service line installation for domestic usage is required. For service
connections of 4-inch through 8-inch sizes, the applicant's contractor must provide and
install a concrete vault with meter reading lid covers for water meter and other required
control equipment in accordance with the utilities standard detail. Show the location of
the new water service and meter on the plans.
17. A new water service line installation for irrigation usage is required. Show the location
of the new water service and meter on the plans.
18. A new water service line installation for fire system usage is required if existing service is
not nleeting current standards. Show the location of the new water service on the plans.
The applicant shall provide to the engineering department a copy of the plans for fire
system including all fire department's requirements.
19. A new gas service line installation is required. Show the new gas nleter location on the
plans. The gas meter lo.cation must conform with utilities standard details.
20. A new sewer lateral installation per lot is required. Show the location of the new sewer
lateral on the plans
21. The applicant shall secure a public utilities easement for facilities installed in private
240 Hamilton Ave Page 11
property. The applicant's engineer shall obtain, prepare, record with the county of Santa
Clara, and provide the utilities engineering section with copies of the public utilities
easement across the adj acent parcels as is necessary to serve the development.
22. Where public mains are installed in private streetslPUEs for condominium and town
home projects the CC&Rs and final map shall include the statement~ "Public Utility
Easements: If the City's reasonable use of the Public Utility Easements, which are shown
as P. UE on the Map, results in any damage to the Common Area, then it shall be the
responsibility of the Association, and not of the City, to Restore the affected portion(s) of
the Common Area. This Section may not be amended without the prior written consent of
the City". All existing water and wastewater services that will not be reused shall be
abandoned at the main per WGW utilties procedures.
23. Utility vaults, transformers, utility cabinets, concrete bases, or other structures can not be
placed over existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services. Maintain l' horizontal
clear separation from the vault/cabinet/concrete base to existing utilities as found in the
field. If there is a conflict with existing utilities, Cabinets/vaultslbases shall be relocated
from the plan location as needed to meet field conditions. Trees may not be planted
within 10 feet of existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services or meters. New water,
gas or wastewater services/meters may not be installed within 10' or existing trees.
Maintain 10' between new trees and new water, gas and wastewater
services/mains/meters.
24. To install new gas service by directional boring, the applicant is required to have a sewer
cleanout at the front of the building. This cleanout is required so the sewer lateral can be
videoed for verification of no damage after the gas service is installed by directional
boring.
25. All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto utility standards
for water, gas & wastewater.
26. For contractor installed water and wastewater mains or services, the applicant shall
prepare and submit to the WGW engineering section of the Utilities Department as-built
drawings at the completion of construction of the installation of water and wastewater
utilities to be owned and maintained by the City in accordance with:
1. Two sets of as-built drawings (hard copies).
2. As-built drawings in 2008 or 2010 AutoCAD format.
3. As-built drawings in .tiff format.
4. Survey points in .csv format for all new utility features.
Note: All survey data shall be collected by a California Licensed Land Surveyor. The
surveyor is responsible to setup all control points needed to perform the survey work.
240 Hamilton Ave Page 12
The accuracy for all survey data shall be +/ -1 cm.
Survey data to be collected (what's applicable):
1. Collect horizontal and vertical data for:
1. Sanitary sewer manholes (rinl and invert elevations and depth)
2. Storm drain manholes and catch basins (rim and invert elevations and depth)
3. Water valves (cove~ and stem elevations)
Fire Department
1. Provide a Fire Apparatus Access Plan. Show elevations and how P AFD Ladder Truck
will be utilized.
2. Provide an egress plan.
Public Work Water Quality
We have reviewed the site floor plans for this project. Please note the following issues
must be addressed in building plans prior to final approval by this department:
1. PAMe 16.09.170, 16.09.040 Discharge of Groundwater
Prior approval shall be obtained from the city engineer or designee to discharge water
pumped from construction sites to the storm drain. The city engineer or designee may require
gravity settling and filtration upon a determination that either or both would improve the
water quality of the discharge. Contaminated ground water or water that exceeds state or
federal requirements for discharge to navigable waters may not be discharged to the storm
drain. Such water may be discharged to the sewer, provided that the discharge limits
contained in Palo Alto Municipal Code (16.09 .040(m)) are not exceeded and the approval of
the superintendent is obtained prior to discharge. The City shall be compensated for any costs
it incurs in authorizing such discharge, at the rate set forth in the Municipal Fee Schedule.
2. P AMC 16.09.180(b )(9) Covered Parking
Drain plumbing for parking garage floor drains must be comlected to an oil/water separator
with a minimum capacity of 100 gallons, and to the sanitary sewer system
3. PAMe 16.09.180(b)(10) Dumpsters for New and Remodeled Facilities
New buildings and residential developments providing centralized soiid waste collection,
except for single-family and duplex residences, shall provide a covered area for a dumpster.
The area shall be adequately sized for all waste streani.s and designed with grading or a berm
system to prevent water runon and runoff from the area.
4. PAMe 16.09.180(b)(14) Architectural Copper
On and after January 1, 2003, copper metal roofing, copper metal gutters, copper metal down
240 Hamilton Ave Page 13
spouts, and copper granule containing asphalt shingles shall not be permitted for use on any
residential, commercial or industrial building for which a building permit is required. Copper
flashing for use under tiles or slates and small copper ornaments are exempt from this
prohibition. Replacement roofing, gutters and downspouts on historic structures are exempt,
provided that the roofing material used shall be prepatinated at the factory. For the purposes
of this exemption, the definition of "historic" shall be limited to structures designated as
Category 1 or Category 2 buildings in the current edition of the Palo Alto Historical and
Architectural Resources Report and Inventory.
5. PAMC 16.09.180(b )(5) Condensate from HV AC
Condensate lines shall not be connected or allowed to drain to the storm drain system.
6. 16.09.215 Silver Processing
Facilities conducting silver processing (photographic or X-ray films) shall either submit a
treatment application or waste hauler certification for all spent silver bearing solutions. 650-
329-2421.
7. PAMC 16.09.180(b )(b) Copper Piping
Copper, copper alloys, lead and lead alloys, including brass, shall not be used in sewer lines,
connectors, or seals coming in contact with sewage except for domestic waste sink traps and
short lengths of associated connecting pipes where alternate materials are not practical. The
plans n1ust specify that copper piping will not be used for wastewater plumbing.
8. PAMC 16.09.220(c)(1) Dental Facilities That Remove or Place Amalgam Fillings
An ISO 11143 certified an1algam separator device shall be installed for each dental vacuum
suction system. The installed device must be ISO 11143 certified as capable of removing a
minimum of95 percent of amalgam. The amalgam separator system shall be certified at flow
rates comparable to the flow rate of the actual vacuum suction system operation. Neither the
separator device nor the related plumbing shall include an automatic flow bypass. For
facilities that require an amalgam separator that exceeds the practical capacity of ISO 11143
test methodology, a non-certified separator will be accepted, provided that smaller units from
the same manufacturer and of the same technology are ISO-certified.
9. 16.09.215 Silver Processing
Facilities conducting silver processing (photographic or X-ray films) shall either submit a
treatment application or waste hauler certification for all spent silver bearing solutions. 650-
329-2598.
10. 16.09.180(12) Mercury Switches
Mercury switches shall not be installed in sewer or storm drain sumps.
11. PAMC 16.09.205(a) Cooling Systems, Pools, Spas, Fountains, Boilers and Heat
Exchangers
240 Hamilton Ave Page 14
It shall be unlawful to discharge water from cooling systems, pools, spas, fountains boilers
and heat exchangers to the storm drain system.
12. PAMC 16.09.165(h) Stornl Drain Labeling
Storm drain inlets shall be clearly marked with the words "No dumping -Flows to Bay," or
equivalent.
Undesignated Retail Space:
13. PAMC 16.09
Newly constructed or improved buildings with all or a portion of the space with undesignated
tenants or future use will need to meet all requirements that would have been applicable
during design and construction. If such undesignated retail space becomes a food service
. facility the following requirements must be met:
Designated Food Service Establishment (FSE) Project:
A. Grease Control Device (GCD) Requirements, PAMC Section 16.09.075 & cited
Bldg/Plumbing Codes
1. The plans shall specify the manufacturer details and installation details of all
proposed GCDs. (CBC 1009.2)
2. GCD(s) shall be sized in accordance with the 2007 California Plumbing Code.
3. GCD(s) shall be installed with a minimum capacity of 500 gallons.
4. GCD sizing calculations shall be included on the plans. See a sizing calculation
example below.
5. The size of all GCDs installed shall be equal to or larger than what is specified on the
plans.
6. GCDs larger than 50 gallons (100 pounds) shall not be installed in food preparation
and storage areas. Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health prefers
GCDs to be installed outside. GCDs shall be installed such that all access points or
manholes are readily accessible for inspection, cleaning and removal of all contents.
GCDs located outdoors shall be installed in such a manner so as to exclude the
entrance of surface and stormwater. (CPC 1009.5)
7. All large, in-ground interceptors shall have a minimum of three manholes to allow
visibility of each inlet piping, baffle (divider) wall, baffle piping and outlet piping.
The plans shall clearly indicate the number of proposed manholes on the GCD. The
Environmental Compliance Division of Public Works Department may authorize
variances which allow GCDs with less than three manholes due to manufacture
available options or adequate visibility.
8. Sample boxes shall be installed downstream of all GCDs.
9. All GCDs shall be fitted with reliefvent(s). (CPC 1002.2 & 1004)
1. GCD(s) installed in vehicle traffic areas shall be rated and indicated on plans.
240 Hamilton Ave Page 15
ExampleGCD
Sizing Calculation:
Note:
Quantity
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
4
Drainage Fixture & Item Number
Pre-rinse sink, Item 1
3 compartment sink, Item 2
Prep sinks, Item 3 & Floor sink, Item 4
Mop sink, Item 5
Floor trough, Item 6 & tilt skillet, Item
7
Floor trough, Item 6 & steam kettle,
Item 8
Floor sink, Item 4 & wok stove, Item 9
Floor drains
1,000 gallon GCD minimum sized
DFUs Total
4 4
3 3
3 6
3 3
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 8
Total: 30
• All resubmitted plans to Building Department which include FSE projects shall be
resubmitted to Water Quality.
• It is frequently to the FSE's advantage to install the next size larger GeD to allow for
more efficient grease discharge prevention and may allow for longer times between
cleaning. There are many manufacturers of GCDs which are available in different shapes,
sizes and materials (plastic, reinforced fiberglass, reinforced concrete and metal)
.• The requirements will assist FSEs with FOG discharge prevention to the sanitary sewer
and storm drain pollution prevention. The FSE at all times shall comply with the Sewer
Use Ordinance of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. The ordinances include requirements
for GCDs, GeD maintenance, drainage fixtures, record keeping and construction projects.
240 Hamilton Ave Page 18
The City of
Palo Alto
ATIACHMENT C
Location Map
240-248 Hamilton Ave.
This map is a pnxluct of the
City of Palo Alto GIS
-.
ATTACHMENT D
ZONING COMPLIANCE TABLE
240-248 Hamilton Avenue / File No. 13PLN-00006
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ZONE PROPOSED
FOR CD-C(GF)(P) ZONE DISTRICT DISTRICT PROJECT
STANDARD
Site coverage (building footprint) None required 5,000 sq.ft
Floor area (gross floor area) 1.0:1 15,000 sq. ft.
3: 1w/ allowed
floor area
bonuses for
mixed use=
15,000 sq.ft.
Building setback
Front (Hamilton Ave.) 7' 0' -6.5'
Special setback requirement special setback
Rear 0' -commercial 0'
10' -residential 10'
Interior Side 0' 0' i
Street side (Ramon St.) 6' 3'
Special setback requirement special setback
Building height
50' 50'
Landscape Open Space Coverage 20% or 1,000 sf 35% or 1,789
Usable Open Space 200 sf/unit or 1,114 sf
400 sf
CONFORMANCE
N/A
conforms
Variance requested
for 7 foot to 5 inch
encroachment
conforms
conforms
Variance requested
for 3 foot special
setback
encroachment
conforms
conforms
conforms
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ZONE PROPOSED CONFORMANCE
FOR CD-C(GF)(P) ZONE DISTRICT DISTRICT PROJECT
I
STANDARD
Parking:
Commercial 11250 sf N one required -conforms
a) additional
floor area
fron1 TDR
(5,000 sf)
and seismic
bonus are
exempt from
parking
requirements
b) 7,000 sf of
existing floor
area that is
not parked is
grandfathered
In
Residential 1.5 spaces/unit
or 3 spaces 4 spaces conforms
Bicycle 2 long term 2 long term conforms
3 short term 4 short term
ATTACHMENT E
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TABLE
240-248 Hamilton Avenue / File No. 13PLN-00000-00006
Program L-19: Support implementation of
the Downtown Urban Design Guide. The
Downtown Urban Design Guide is not
mandatory but provides useful ideas and
direction for private developn1ent and public
improvement in the Downtown area.
Policy L-23: Maintain and enhance the
University A venuelDowntown area as the
central business district of the City, with a
mIX of commercial, civic, cultural,
recreational and residential uses. Promote
quality design that recognizes the regional
and historical importance· of the area and
reinforces its pedestrian character.
Policy L-48: Promote high quality, creative
design and site planning that is compatible
with surrounding development and . public
spaces.
The project incorporates many of the goals of
the Downtown Urban Design Guide including:
(1) Promote Hamilton Ave. as an active
mixed use district which comfortably
accommodates larger scale commercial
office, civic, and institutional buildings.
(2) Maintain Hamilton Ave. as a pleasing,
tree-lined pedestrian environment.
The project incorporates several design
considerations contained In the Downtown
Urban Design Guide in that the project design
would: (1) complement the design of
surrounding buildings In scale, proportion,
materials (2) maintains a human scale to its
street fayade, 3) provides pedestrian friendly
amenities such as recessed entries, canopies, and
new street trees.
The design of the new building fits well with the
retail pedestrian environment of the downtown
commercial district.
Policy L-49: Design buildings to revitalize The project is consistent with this policy in that
streets and public spaces and to enhance a the proposed building would incorporate a
sense of community and personal safety. rhythm of clear glass windows, recessed
Provide an ordered variety of entries, porches, entryway, and metal canopIes on both the
windows, bays and balconies along public Hamilton Avenue and the Ramona Street
ways where it IS consistent with frontages.
neighborhood character; avoid blank or solid
walls at street level; and include human-scale
details and massing.
Policy H-4: Encourage mixed use projects as The proposed mixed use project provides two
a means of increasing the housing supply housing units.
while promoting diversity and neighborhood
vitality.
ATTACHMENT F
240-248 Hamilton Avenue·
240-248 Hamilton Avenue
Initial Study
Prepared by
City of Palo Alto
May 10,2013
Page 1 Negative Declaration
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
City of Palo Alto
Department of Planning and Community Environment
PROJECT DESCRIPTION Request by Ken Hayes of Hayes Group Architects on behalf of
Forest Casa Real LLC. for Major Architectural Review Board review for the demolition of an existing
5,000 square foot, two -story commercial building and the construction of a four-story, 50 foot, mixed
use building with a new floor area of 15,000 square feet on a site located at 240-248 Hamilton Avenue.
Environmental Assessment: an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared.
Zone District: Downtown Community Commercial (CD-C)(P)(GF) with Pedestrian Shopping and
Ground Floor combining districts.
1. PROJECT TITLE
240-248 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94301
2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
City of Palo Alto
Department of Planning and Community Environment
250 Hamilton Ave.
Palo Alto, CA 94303
3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER
Jason Nortz, Senior Planner
City of Palo Alto
650-617-3137
4. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS
Ken Hayes
2657 Spring StreetRedwood City, CA 94063
5. APPLICATION NUMBER
13PLN-00006
6. PROJECT LOCATION
240-248 Hamilton Avenue
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 2 Negative Declaration
Palo Alto
Parcel Numbers: 120-27-010
The project site is located in the northern section of the City of Palo Alto, in the northern part of Santa
Clara County, west of U.S. Highway 101 and east of State Route 82 (El Camino Real), as shown on
Figure 1, Regional Map. The parcel is contained within the city block bounded by Hamilton Avenue to
the northwest Ramona Street the northeast, Emerson Street to the southwest and Forest Avenue to the
southeast, as shown on Figure 2, Vicinity Map.
7. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
240-248 Hamilton Avenue is designated as Regional Community Commercial in the Palo Alto 1998 -
2010 Comprehensive Plan. This land use designation includes office, retail, and residential land uses.
Examples include Stanford Shopping Center, Town and Country Village, and University
A venuelDowntown district.
8. ZONING
The site is zoned Downtown Commercial with a Ground Floor and "Pedestrian" comBining district CD-C
(GF)(P). The CD-C (GF)(P) zone district is intended to be a comprehensive zoning district for the
downtown business area, accommodating a wide range of commercial uses serving citywide and regional
business and service needs, as well as providing for residential uses and neighborhood service needs.
The Pedestrian combining district is designed to help foster the continuity of retail stores and display
windows and to avoid monotonous pedestrian environment in order to establish and maintain economic
viability for a healthy retail district.
The Ground Floor combining district is intended to modify the uses allowed in the CD district and
subdistricts to allow only retail, eating and drinking and other service-oriented commercial development
uses on the ground floor.
The mixed use project is a permitted use in this zone district in that it proposes to provide a ground floor
retail use with two floors of office and one floor of residential.
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of an application for Major Architectural Review Board review for the demolition of
an existing 7,000 square foot, two -story commercial building and the construction of a four-story, 50
foot, mixed-use, building with a floor area of 15,000 square feet. The ground floor would be retail with
office space occupying floors two and three. The fourth floor would be entirely residential consisting of
two residential units. Four on-site parking spaces would be provided for the two residential units. The
parking would be provided in a one level below grade parking garage. The project proposes to utilize
floor area bonuses in the form of "Transferable Development Rights" (TDRs) from an off-site historical
rehabilitation project. A total of 5,000 square feet ofTDR would be purchased and transferred from 230-
232 Homer Avenue where the TDR was acquired through both a seismic and historic rehabilitation of the
building. The proposal would also utilize the one-time 200 square feet bonus as provided in P AMC
Section 18.18.070. The total tloor area in the completed project would be 15,000 sq. ft. This includes
11,527 sq. ft. for commercial uses on the first, second and third floors and 3,473 sq" ft within two
residential units on the fourth floor.
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 3 Negative Declaration
A variance is requested to encroach into the required seven foot special setback along Hamilton
Avenue and to encroach into the required six foot special setback along Ramona Street.
10. SURROlTNDING LAND USES AND SETTING
240-248 Hamilton Avenue is located close to the southern edge of the Commercial Downtown zone
district (see Figure 2, Vicinity Map). The site is 50 feet wide by 100 feet deep and is located at the
southern comer of the Hamilton A venuelRamona Street intersection. Surrounding land uses include
office, restaurants, and retail. Directly east of the project site on the eastern side of Ramona St. is the eight
story Palo Alto City Hall building. Directly adjacent to the project site along the western side of Ramona
st. is a two-story office building. Also directly adjacent to the project site along the southwestern side of
Hamilton Ave. is a two-story restaurant. Across the street on the northern side of Hamilton Ave. is three
story commercial building occupied by ground floor retail, a restaurant and a hotel lobby. The hotel
occupies the remaining two floors. A four-story commercial building with ground floor retail and office
uses on the uppers floors in located kitty comer to the project site.
11. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES
• County of Santa Clara, Office of the County Clerk-Recorder
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
I) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by
the infonnation sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. [A "No Impact"
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does
not apply to projects like the one involved (e. g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No
Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general
standards (e. g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).]
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative
as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has detennined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers
must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than
significant. Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be
significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the detennination is made,
an EIR is required.
4) "(Mitigated) Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less
than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how
they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier
Analysis," may be cross-referenced).
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 4 Negative Declaration
5) may to program or CEQA process, an
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative Section 15063 (C)(3) (D). In
case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier state
~ ~ ~
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state "', .. , ....... "' ...
such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For than Measures Incorporated,"
.,......, .. n-,,, .• ,..,, ... measures were or document
extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6)
· ....... "'OI"'1"c (e.g. to a or ""'""1-C1I"1.o. -"" ........... J ..
should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is sut,stantiated.
7) sources or individuals
8) The explanation
a) or if any, to
b) the .. u'Ur; ...... A'-" .. measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
rtOlio a~~ ee._ r~(y--"": QI~v...,
240-248 Hamilton Avenue
Menlo P,]f'1(
•
.R @
8 1 Eas! PotoAllo
n..WliY,1I$.
u
Palo Alto
'\ ~~
lO$AJlos
H)hj
P ')jlo
~O'54n'~
CliraCOUI!'tY ..
T~EI
LosA/tO$
Figure One: Regional Map
Page 6 Negative Declaration
....
"
j Ff
~.-
~
~OO"; I' ./
" .•. f
,/ -(Mo ll ""'"" m .j ,
~,-.... 1":'!:ri!I
, .. ..., --.-c_
240·248 Hamilton Avenue
\
•
. " ! • "'>"
H t::;=-~
..... 1:
• L)1!Cfl PIJ,~
S
" '" " ,,-0.
e--~
,(
, Y'''' ,..
13
/-_ .. -,,' ...-..-n , "-B ~ •• J
" J .'
Figure Two: Vicinity Map
Page 7
,.-' ... ,. ••
13
,
.'
.'
/ -.. ~·-e -
."
Negative Declaration
0/" /
, " ... '"
.'
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
The following Environmental Checklist was used to identify environmental impacts, which could occur if the
proposed project is implemented. The left-hand column in the checklist lists the source(s) for the answer to each
question. The sources cited are identified at the end of the checklist. Discussions of the basis for each answer and
a discussion of mitigation measures that are proposed to reduce potential significant impacts are included.
A. AESTHETICS
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Resources Significant Significant Significant Impact
Issues Unless Impact
Wou1d the project: Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Substantially degrade the existing visual X
character or quality of the site and its 1,6
surroundings?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
public view or view corridor? 1,2,6 X
MapL4
c) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock X
outcroppings, and historic buildings within 1,2,5
a state scenic highway? MapL4
d) Violate existing Comprehensive Plan 1,2,6
policies regarding visual resources? X
e) Create a new source of substantial light or X
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
1, 6
f) Substantially shadow public open space 1,6 X
(other than public streets and adjacent
sidewalks) between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00
p.m. from September 21 to March 21 ?
DISCUSSION:
The subject site is located one block over from a view corridor (University Avenue) as identified in the
Comprehensive Plan 1998 -2010. The project is not large enough or close enough to impede the view
through the corridor. The project is subject to final review by the Architectural Review Board (ARB),
which will ensure a design that is aesthetically pleasing and compatible with its surroundings. The
project has been designed to be compatible with the scale of the surrounding development in the
downtown area and is compatible with zoning requirements for height and daylight plane
Mitigation Measures: None
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 8 Negative Declaration
Significance after Mitigation: NA
B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may
refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California
Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and I Monitoring Program of the California X Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural 1,2,
use, or a Williamson Act contract? MapL9, X
c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of 1 X Farmlano, to non-agricultural use?
DISCUSSION:
The site is not located in a "Prime Farmland", "Unique Farmland", or "Farmland of Statewide Importance" area,
as shown on the maps prepared for the Fannland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency. The site is not zoned for agricultural use, and is not regulated by the Williamson Act.
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
c. AIR QUALITY
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Conflict with or obstruct with implementation X
of the applicable air quality plan (1982 Bay 1
Area Air Quality Plan & 2000 Clean Air Plan)?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute X
substantially to an existing or projected air 1
quality violation indicated by the following:
i. Direct and/or indirect operational 1 X
emissions that exceed the Bay Area Air
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 9 Negative Declaration
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
criteria air pollutants of 80 pounds per day
and/or 15 tons per year for nitrogen oxides
(NO), reactive organic gases (ROG), and
fine particulate matter of less than 10
microns in diameter (PMIO);
ii. Contribute to carbon monoxide (CO) 1, 10 X
concentrations exceeding the State
Ambient Air Quality Standard of nine
parts per million (ppm) averaged over
eight hours or 20 ppm for one hour( as
demonstrated by CALINE4 modeling,
which would be performed when a) project
CO emissions exceed 550 pounds per day
or 100 tons per year; or b) project traffic
would impact intersections or roadway
links operating at Level of Service (LOS)
D, E or F or would cause LOS to decline to
D, E or F; or c) project would increase
traffic volumes on nearby roadways by
10% or more)?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an X
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions which 1
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors )?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial levels
e)
f)
of toxic air contaminants? 1 X
i. Probability of contracting cancer for the 1 X
Maximally Exposed Individual (MEl)
exceeds 10 in one million
ii. Ground-level concentrations of non-1 X
carcinogenic T ACs would result in a
hazard index greater than one (1) for the
MEl
Create objectionable odors affecting a X
substantial number of people? 1
Not implement all applicable construction 1 X
emission control measures recommended in the
Bay Area A ir Quality Management District
CEQA Guidelines?
DISCUSSION:
The subject site is in an area of mixed uses including commercial retail, office and residential uses in
Downtown Palo Alto. According to the Comprehensive Plan, the property is not located in an area that
contains uses or activities that are major pollutant emitters. The project is not expected to result in a
significant impact on air quality.
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 10 Negative Declaration
The project will result in temporary dust emISSIons during demolition, grading and construction
activities. The impacts are expected to be greatest during demolition. Therefore, the following
conditions of approval will be incorporated as part of an approved demolition and construction
management plan secured before building permit issuance.
• Demolition activities shall be conducted in such a manner that will minimize dust and another
airborne particulate matter. The contractor or builder shall water debris during demolition and before
transport to an off-site facility.
• Areas of exposed earth surfaces during demolition, grading and construction shall be watered in the
early morning and early evening.
• Avoid overloading of trucks so· that potential spillage in the public right-of-way is minimized. The
contractor shall be required to clean up all spillage in the public right of-way.
• Submit a plan for the recovery/recycling of demolition waste and debris before the issuance of a
demolition permit.
The standard conditions would result in impacts that are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOlTRCES
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or regional 1,2, plans, policies, or regulations, or by the MapN1 X California Department of Fish and Game or
u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, 1,2, X
policies, regulations, including federally MapN1 protected wetlands as defmed by Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
c) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or 1,2 X migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use MapN1 of native wildlife nursery sites?
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 11 Negative Declaration
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
d) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances X
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or as defined by the City of 1,2, 5,13
Palo Alto's Tree Preservation Ordinance
(Municipal Code Section 8.1 O)?
e) Conflict with any applicable Habitat 1, 2, 13 X
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
DISCUSSION:
There are six regulated street trees located around the perimeter of the subj ect property. Two Flowering
Pear trees are located in the public right-of-way along Hamilton Avenue. The remaining four trees are
located along Ramona Street and include: three Japanese Pagoda trees and two London Plane trees. The
City Arborist has recommended removal of all six trees. The existing trees would be replaced with five
new street trees.
The trees would be protected to the satisfaction of the Planning Division and Public Works Department
Arborists, based upon the requirements of the City of Palo Alto's Tree Technical Manual. Any damage
to the trees would be treated in accordance with the Tree Technical Manual.
Mitigation Measures: Bl: provide optimum public tree replacement for loss of public trees #1-6.
Six publicly owned trees are growing in the right-of-way along the Hamilton and Ramona streets.
Parking garage ramp and other in-ground elements that will limit new tree growth potential shall be
identified. As mitigation to offset the net loss for years of public resource investments and minimize the
future years to parity with infrastructure benefits (Co2 reduction, extended asphalt life, water mgmt.,
etc.) currently provided by the trees, the new frontage should be provided maximum streetscape design
and materials to include the following elements:
• Consistency with the Public Works Department Tree Management Program. Provide
adequate room for tree canopy growth and root growing volume resources.
• Utilize city-approved best management practices for sustainability products, such as
permeable ADA sidewalk, Silva Cell planters, engineered soil mix base, and services due
to being situated within the public right-of-way along El Camino Real and Monroe Drive.
Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the loss of public trees impacts to a less than
significant level.
Significance after Mitigation: Less than significant
E. CLTL TLTRAL RESOURCES
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 12 Negative Declaration
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Directly or indirectly destroy a local cultural X
resource that is recognized by City Council 1,2,6
resolution? L7
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource 1,2 X
pursuant to 15064.5? MapL8
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique 1,2 X
geologic feature? MapL8
d) Disturb any human remains, including those 1,2
interred outside of formal cemeteries? MapL8 X
e) Adversely affect a historic resource listed or X
eligible for listing on the National and/or
California Register~ or listed on the City's 1,2,6
Historic Inventory? MapL7
f) Eliminate important examples of major periods 1,6 X
of California history or prehistory?
DISCUSSION:
The project site is located in an area of moderate to high sensitivity in terms of archaeological resource
areas, as indicated in the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, 1998-2010.Based on existing
conditions and the extent of the proposed project, no significant impacts are expected. If approved, the
project would contain conditions in the form of instructions in the case of the discovery of any cultural
resources during demolition or construction. The standard conditions would result in impacts that are
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
F. GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the See
risk of loss; injury, or death involving: below
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, X
as delineated on the most recent
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 13 Negative Declaration
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on 7
other substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 2,
MapN10 X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction? 2 X
M@NS
iv) Landslides? 2 X
MapNS
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss X
of topsoil? 1, 6
c) Result in substantial siltation? 1,6 X
d) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
. a result of the project, and potentially ·X
result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral 2,
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or MapNS
collapse?
e) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building X
Code (1994), creating substantial risks to MapNS
life or property?
f) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
altemativewaste water disposal systems 1
where sewers are not available for the X
disposal of waste water?
g) Expose people or property to major 4 X
geologic hazards that cannot be mitigated
through the use of standard engineering
design and seismic safety techniques?
DISCUSSION:
The entire state of California is in a seismically active area and the site located in a strong seismic risk
area, subject to strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. Seismic ground failure, including
liquefaction and subsidence of the land are possible, but not likely at the site. No known faults cross the
project site; therefore fault rupture at the site is very unlikely, but theoretically possible. The site is
located in an area of expansive soils. All new construction will be subject to the provisions of the most
current Uniform Building Code (UBC), portions of which are directed at minimizing seismic risk and
preventing loss of life and property in the event of an earthquake.
The City'S required standard conditions of approval ensure that potential impacts on erosion and soil will
not be significant. Project conditions of approval will require the applicant to submit a final grading and
drainage plan subject to review by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of any grading and
building permits.
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 14 Negative Declaration
Mitigation Measures: F-l: Prior to final approval of any development plan and prior to building permit
issuance the applicant will be required to retain a geotechnical engineer to 1) perfonn a final
geotechnical investigation once site development plans are complete, 2) review the final construction
plans and specifications, and 3) observe the earthwork and foundation installation
Significance after Mitigation: NA
G. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either 1,5,7 X
directly or indirectly, that may have a I
significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or 1,5,7 X
regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose
of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
DISCUSSION:
The San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB) is currently designated as a nonattainment area for
state and national ozone standards and national particulate matter ambient air quality standards.
SFBAAB's non attainment status is attributed to the region's development history. Past, present and
future development projects contribute to the region's adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis.
By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size to,
by itself, result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project's individual
emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project's
contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable, then the project's impact on air quality would be
considered significant.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District's (BAAQMD) approach to developing a Threshold of
Significance for Green House Gas (GHG) emissions is to identify the emissions level for which a project
would not be expected to substantially conflict with existing California legislation adopted to reduce
statewide GHG emissions needed to move us towards climate stabilization. If a project would generate
GHG emissions above the threshold level, it would be considered to contribute substantially to a
cumulative impact, and would be considered significant.
The Thresholds of Significance for operational-related GHG emissions are:
• For land use development projects, the threshold is compliance with a qualified GHG reduction
Strategy; or annual emissions less than 1,100 metric tons per year (MT/yr) of C02e; or 4.6 MT
C02e/SP/yr (residents + employees). Land use development projects include residential, commercial,
industrial, and public land uses and facilities.
• For stationary-source projects, the threshold is 10,000 metric tons per year (MT/yr) of C02e.
Stationary-source projects include land uses that would accommodate processes and equipment that emit
GHG emissions·and would require an Air District permit to operate. If annual emissions of operational-
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 15 Negative Declaration
related GHGs exceed these levels, the proposed project would result in a cumulatively considerable
contribution of GHG emissions and a cumulatively significant impact to global climate change.
The BAAQMD has established project level screening criteria to assist in the evaluation of impacts. If a
project meets the screening criteria and is consistent with the methodology used to develop the screening
criteria, then the project's air quality impacts may be considered less than, significant. For a "General
Office building" land use, the facility would need to be 53,000 square feet or larger to have a significant
impact for Green House Gases (BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, 06/2010; Table 3-1,
Operational-Related Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Screening Level Sizes). For a "Single-family"
dwelling unit would need to exceed 56 dwelling units to have a significant impact for Green House
Gases. The proposed project does not exceed the significance thresholds established by the BAAQMD;
the proposed project is 15,000 square feet, of which 11,527 square feet is commercial space and two,
residential dwelling units totaling 3,473 square feet.
Mitigation Measures: None Required
H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Note: Some of the thresholds can also be dealt with under a topic heading of Public Health and Safety if the
primary issues are related to a subject other than hazardous material use.
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X
environment through the routing transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials? 1,6,12
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the X
release of hazardous materials into the 1,6,12 environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or X
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or 1,6, 12
proposed school?
d) Construct a school on a property that is subject X
to hazards from hazardous materials
contamination, emissions or accidental release?
e) Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a 1,2,6 X result, would it create a significant hazard to MapN9 the public or the environment?
t) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or X
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 16 Negative Declaration
public use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in 1
the project area?
g) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working the 1 X project area?
h) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency response 1,2, 12 X
plan or emergency evacuation plan? MapN7
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury, or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to X urbanized areas or where residences are 2 intermixed with wildlands? MapN7
j) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 1 X
environment from existing hazardous materials
contamination by exposing future occupants or
users of the site to contamination in excess of
soil and ground water cleanup goals developed '"
for the site?
DISCUSSION:
No known conditions exist on the site regarding existing materials that may be deemed harmful or
.hazardous. The site is not located near any known hazardous materials facilities.
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
I. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorp_orated
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements? 1, X
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or X
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit
in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the production 2 rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to MapN2 . a level which would not support existing land
uses or planned uses for which permits have
been granted)?
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 17 Negative Declaration
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a
manner which would result in substantial X erosion or siltation on-or off-site? 1,6
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result 1, 6, 10 X in flooding on-or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide X substantial additional sources of polluted 1, 10 runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 1,5, X
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard
area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or
other flood hazard delineation map? 1,6,2 X
MapN6
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect 2 X flood flows? MapN6
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involve flooding,
including flooding as ares ult of the failure of a 2, 7
levee or dam or being located within a 100-year MapN6 X flood hazard area? N8
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 2, 7 X
MapN6
N8
k) Result in stream bank instability? 1,6 X
DISCUSSION:
The site is in Flood Zone X, which is not a special flood hazard zone. During demolition, grading and
construction, storm water pollution could result. Runoff from the project site flows to the San Francisco
Bay without treatment. Nonpoint source pollution is a serious problem for wildlife dependant on the
waterways and for people who live near polluted streams or baylands. Therefore, conditions of approval,
incorporated as part of an approved demolition and construction management plan (secured before
building permit issuance) would include the following:
• Before submittal of plans for a building permit, the applicant shall subn1it a drainage plan which
includes drainage patterns on site and from adjacent properties.
• The Applicant shall identify the Best Management Practices (BMP's) to be incorporated into a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the project. The SWPPP shall include both
temporary BMP's to be implemented during demolition and construction.
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 18 Negative Declaration
The standard conditions would result in impacts that are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
J. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Physically divide an established community? 1,6 X
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not X
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an 1,3,6 environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community 1,2 X
conservation plan? MapN1
d) Substantially adversely change the type or 1, 2, 3, 6 X
intensity of existing or planned land use in the
area?
e) Be incompatible with adjacent land uses or with 1, 6 X
the general character of the surrounding area,
including density and building height?
f) Conflict with established residential, 1, 6 X
recreational, educational, religious, or scientific
uses of an area?
g) Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or 1 X
farmland of statewide importance (farmland) to
non-a§icultural use?
DISCUSSION:
The site is designated for Regional/Community Commercial use in the City of Palo Alto's
Comprehensive Plan, 1998-2010. This land use provides a variety and depth of goods, services and uses
usually not available in the neighborhood shopping areas. The replacement of an office/retail building
with a mixed use building with ground floor retail is consistent with this land use and the surrounding
area. The site is located within the Hamilton Avenue District according to the Downtown Urban Design
Guide. The Hamilton Avenue District is a mixed office/commercial/retail district with some residential
uses. The primary goal of the Hamilton Avenue District is to promote Hamilton Avenue as an active
mixed use district with a pleasing, tree-lined pedestrian experience. The development of three or more
story buildings surrounding Civic Center Plaza are encouraged to help create a stronger urban edge
within this area. The proposed project is consistent with the recommendations for this district. The
project is subject to final review by the Architectural Review Board, which will ensure a design that is
aesthetically pleasing and compatible with its surroundings.
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 19 Negative Declaration
A variance is requested to encroach into the required seven foot special setback along Hamilton Avenue
and to encroach into the required six foot special setback along Ramona Street. The exception is being
requested in order to maintain the existing streetscape and setbacks that the other properties adjacent to
the subject site follow. Findings for Variance requests will need to be reviewed and approved by the
Director of Planning as part of the overall project approval
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
K. MINERAL RESOURCES
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents ofthe state? 1, X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan 1, X or other land use plan?
DISCUSSION:
The project will not impact known mineral or locally important mineral resources.
Mitigation Measures: None Required.
L. NOISE
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources PotentialJy Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise X
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or 1,2,6
applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of X
excessive ground borne vibrations or ground 1,2,6
borne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels 1, 5,9 X
existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in X
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 20 . Negative Declaration
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project? 1
e) For a project located within an airport land use X
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels? 1
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private X
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to 1
excessive noise levels?
g) Cause the average 24 hour noise level (Ldn) to 6 X
increase by 5.0 decibels (dB) or more in an
existing residential area, even if the Ldn would
remain below 60 dB?
h) Cause the Ldn to increase by 3.0 dB or more in 6 X· ..
an existing residential area, thereby causing the
Ldn in the area to exceed 60 dB?
i) Cause an increase of3.0 dB or more in an 6 X
existing residential area where the Ldn
currently exceeds 60 dB?
j) Result in indoor noise levels for residential 6,9 X
development to exceed an Ldn of 45 dB?
k) Result in instantaneous noise levels of greater 6,9 X
1)
than 50 dB in bedrooms or 55 dB in other
rooms in areas with an exterior Ldn of 60 dB or
greater?
Generate construction noise exceeding the 6 X
daytime background Leq at sensitive receptors
by 10 dBA or more?
DISCUSSION:
The project site is located in an area with an existing noise level ranging between 65-70dBA. This noise
level is typical for commercial districts and residential areas located in close proximity to commercial
districts. Sources of environmental noise at the site include sirens from fire trucks associated with the
Alma Fire Station, vehicles on local roadways, nearby CalTrain station and associated noise from
adjacent eating and drinking establishments.
Noise from the proposed mixed use would primarily be generated by roof top mechanical equipment.
This will consist of HV AC equipment on top of the fourth floor only. All mechanical equipment is
required to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance (PAMC Chapter 9.10).
Grading and construction activities will result in tenlporary increases in local ambient noise levels.
Typical noise sources would include mechanical equipment associated with excavation, grading and
construction, which will be short term in duration. Standard approval conditions would require the
project to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance (PAMC Chapter 9.10), which restricts the timing and
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 21 Negative Declaration
overall noise levels associated with construction activity. Short-term construction that complies with the
Noise Ordinance would result in impacts that are expected to be less than significant.
Demolition and Construction Activities will result in temporary increases in local ambient noise levels.
In addition, there may be increases in ground-borne vibrations resulting from demolition and
construction. Therefore, conditions of approval, incorporated as part of an approved demolition and
construction management plan (secured before building permit issuance) would include the following:
• Require implementation of and compliance with the City of Palo Alto's Noise Ordinance (PAMC
9.10). In addition, construction hours shall be established as per the construction management plan
to minimize disturbance to surrounding residents, visitors, and businesses.
Mitigation Measures N-l: In order to meet the indoor noise level criteria, sound rated exterior facades and
windows shall be required. The windows and facades shall meet the STC rated recommendations as provided in
the Noise Assessment by Charles M. Salter Associates, Inc.
Mitigation Measures N-2: In order to mitigate noise impacts associated with outdoor mechanical equipment
mitigation"-measures will be -required. These may include a combination of selecting quiet units; maintain,
minimum distances to property lines, and physical barriers and/or enclosures. The applicant shall work with staff
during the design phase to determine to specific requirements.
Significance after Mitigation: NA
M. POPITLATION AND HOUSING
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potential1y Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
IncorI>orated
a) Induce substantial population growth in an X
area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for 1,6
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure) ?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing X
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? 1
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, X
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere? 1
d) Create a substantial imbalance between 1 X
employed residents and jobs?
e) Cumulatively exceed regional or local I X
population projections?
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 22 Negative Declaration
DISCUSSION:
The project is for a new four-story mixed use building. The fourth floor would consist of two, two
bedroom residential units.
Population in Palo Alto's sphere of influence in 1996, according to Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan was
58,000 people. This is projected by the City's Comprehensive Plan to increase to 62,880 by 2010. The
project, by adding to the housing stock by 2 units, would cumulatively contribute to population in the
area. The average household size in Palo Alto is 2.24 persons, which would mean the project could
generate a total of 4.5 people. The projects cumulative impacts for the purposes of CEQA are also
considered to be less than significant, as the impact from the project alone is not "considerable", and is
di minimus, as environmental conditions would essentially be the same whether or not the project is
implemented (as per CEQA Guidelines §15355 and §15064). This incremental increase in population
generated by the proposed project would not be considered a significant impact. City development
standards, development fees (including impact fees) and standard conditions of project approval reduce
potential negative impacts of the project to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
N. PUBLIC SERVICES
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
I Incorporated
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered govermhental
facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? 12 X
Police protection? X 1
Schools? X 1
Parks? X 1
Other public facilities? X 1
DISCUSSION:
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 23 Negative Declaration
There would not be any substantial change in required services, including Fire, Police, Schools, Parks
and other public facilities as a result of the proposed project.
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
o. RECREATION
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks or X
other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the 1,5 facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational X
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the 1, 5 environment?
DISCUSSION:
The development project would be subject to payment of impact fees for parks, libraries and community
facilities. The project in total would therefore not have any significant impact on existing parks, nor
include or require construction of recreational facilities. No mitigation is required.
There would not be a significant change to the demand of recreation services as a result of the proposed
project. The development project includes a proposal for separate common areas for both the residential
and the commercial portions of the project.
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
P. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is
substantial in relation to the existing traffic
load and capacity of the street system (Le., 1, 11
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 24 Negative Declaration
result in a substantial increase in either the X
number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections )?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively,
a level of service standard established by the
county congestion management agency for 1, 11 X
designated roads or highways?
c) Result in change in air traffic patterns, X
including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in location that results in 1
substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a X
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible 1,6
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 1,11 X
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 1, 11
X
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or X
programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., pedestrian, transit & 1,
bicycle facilities)?
h) Cause a local (City of Palo Alto) intersection 1, 11 X
to deteriorate below Level of Service (LOS)
D and cause an increase in the average
stopped delay for the critical movements by
four seconds or more and the critical
volume/capacity ratio (V /C) value to increase
by 0.01 or more?
i) Cause a local intersection already operating at 1, 11 X
LOS E or F to deteriorate in the average
stopped delay for the critical movements by
four seconds or more?
j) Cause a regional intersection to deteriorate 1, 11 X
from an LOS E or better to LOS F or cause
critical movement delay at such an
intersection already operating at LOS F to
increase by four seconds or more and the
critical VIC value to increase by 0.01 or
more?
k) Cause a freeway segment to operate at LOS F 1, 11 X
or contribute traffic in excess of 1 % of
segment capacity to a freeway segment I
already operating at LOS F?
1) Cause any change in traffic that would 1, 11 X
increase the Traffic Infusion on Residential
Environment (TIRE) index by 0.1 or more?
m) Cause queuing impacts based on a 1, 11 X
comparative analysis between the design
queue length and the available que~e storage
capacity? Queuing impacts include, but are
not limited to, spillback queues at proj ect
access locations; queues at tum lanes at
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 25 Negative Declaration
intersections that block through traffic;
queues at lane drops; queues at one
intersection that extend back to impact other
intersections, and spillback queues on ramps.
n) Impede the development or function of 1, 11 X
planned pedestrian or bicycle facilities?
0) Impede the operation of a transit system as a 1, 11 X
result of congestion?
p) Create an operational safety hazard? 1, 11 X
DISCUSSION:
The proposed project is anticipated to generate less than 50 net new peak hour vehicle trips, which is
below the City's threshold for requiring a focused traffic analysis, and less that than the local congestion
management agency's (CMA) threshold for a detailed traffic impact analysis (100 trips). Based on the
relatively low traffic generation estimates, the project is not anticipated to result in significant peak hour
or daily traffic impacts.
Parking in and of itself is not· considered an environmental impact, but rather the related vehicle
emissions that are generated by the project's patrons, who have to drive around looking for parking. The
proposed project is only required to provide three parking spaces for the two residential units located on
the fourth floor. The project is however providing four spaces. The remaining three floors of non
residential floor area consisting of 11,527 square feet of floor area is not required to provide parking for
the following reasons:
1. The existing 7,000 square feet of commercial floor area is grandfathered in and as such is not
required to provide parking;
2. 4,327 square feet of commercial floor area has been transferred via a Transfer of Development
Rights from a valid sender site to an eligible receiver site from a valid, recorded Transferable
Development Right( (TDR). The first 5,000 square feet of floor area transferred to a receiver site
is exempt from the otherwise applicable on-site parking requirements.
3. The remaining 200 square feet of commercial floor area (7,000 sf+4,327 sf+200 sf= 11,527st) is
exempt from parking due to a one time allowable 200 square foot bonus.
There will, however, be a net deficiency in the amount of off-site parking spaces directly adjacent to the
site due to a new curb cut along Ramona Street for the purposes of creating a new driveway for the
underground parking lot. The loss of those parking spaces may incrementally add to parking concerns
in the downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. Those impacts, however, will not cause significant
increases in congestion or deterioration in air quality. The loss of the two off-site parking spaces will be
offset by providing an in-lieu payment for two parking spaces.
An annual monitoring report on the Commercial Downtown zoning area is mandated by the
Comprehensive Plan Programs L-8 and L-9 that require reporting of non-residential developn1ent
activity and trends within the CD zone district. These reports are also required as a result of final action
on the Downtown Study adopted by the City Council in 1986. The Downtown Study incorporated a
growth limit of 350,000 square feet of additional floor area over the total floor area existing in 1986, and
provided for are-evaluation of the CD regulations when new development reaches 235,000 square feet.
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 26 Negative Declaration
Since 1986, a total of 223,21 0 square feet of non-residential floor area has been added in the Downtown
CD-C zoned area. In the past two monitoring cycles from 2009-2011, approximately 34,650 square feet
of net new comnlercial floor area was added with a few major contributing projects such as 524
Hamilton Avenue and 265 Lytton Avenue. In this current cycle, 2011-2012, approximately 49,860
square feet of net new commercial floor area has been added through one major project, 335-355 Alma
Street. Based on this recent monitoring, an additional 11,790 square feet of new non-residential
development remains for development before the re-evaluation limit of235,000 square feet growth limit
is reached.
The existing building consists of 7,000 square feet of floor area. The proposed project would add an
additional 4,527 square feet of non-residential floor area which would minimally contribute towards the
limit of 350,000 square feet of additional floor area.
Temporary impacts to transportation, traffic and pedestrian circulation will result from demolition and
construction activities. Therefore, conditions of approval, incorporated as part of an approved
demolition and construction management plan (secured before building permit issuance) would include
the following:
• Traffic control measures during demolition and construction
• Removal of demolition debris
• Delivery of construction materials
• Retention of parking spaces for construction workers and on.:.site staff.
Mitigation: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
Q. lTTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incor)!orated
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Quality X
Control Board? 1,6,114
b) Require or result in the construction of new X
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant 1,6,14
environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new X
storm water drainage facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental 1,6,14
effects?
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 27 Negative Declaration
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources PotentialJy PotentiaHy Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to X
serve the project from existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded 1,6,14
entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater X
treatment provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has inadequate
capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing 1,6,14
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient X
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs? 1
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes X
I and regulations related to solid waste? 1
h) Result in a substantial physical deterioration 1 X
of a public facility due to increased use as a
result of the proiect?
DISCUSSION:
The proposed project would not significantly increase the demand on existing utilities and service
systems, or use resources in a wasteful or inefficient manner. As standard conditions of ARB approval,
the applicant shall be required to submit calculations by a registered civil engineer to show that the on
site and off site water, sewer and fire systems are capable of serving the needs of the development and
adjacent properties during peak flow demands. Trash and recycling facilities are proposed in the project
to accommodate the expected waste and recycling streams that would be generated by the expected uses
within the building. The development project would be subject to all conditions of approval that would
be provided by all applicable city departments including but not limited to Utilities Electrical
Engineering and Utilities Water, Gas, Wastewater,.
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
R. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 28 Negative Declaration
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources PotentiaJly Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal X
community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major 1,2
periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a X
project are considerable when viewed in
connection 'with the effects of past projects, 1,2 . r'-
the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects X
on human beings, either directly or 1,2
indirectly?
DISCUSSION:
The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a
rare or endangered plant or animal. The proposed project would not eliminate and important example of
CalifoTI1ia history.
The project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable nor does
it have substantial environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings
either directly or indirectly. The project is located within the City's commercial downtown area where
there are other projects that are under review and planned for the future. These projects are
redevelopment proj ects where existing buildings are either rehabilitated or demolished and replaced.
This infill development does not result in considerable effects to the environment.
240-248 Hamilton Avenue Page 29 Negative Declaration
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the X
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. . ,
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis
as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,
but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and
(b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
Project Planner
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
240-248 Hamilton Avenue
Date
Date
Page 31 Negative Declaration
" "':
-"~ .
. PAiLG ~£f,O;' '~il'U~~
·.~ .. '4: • . 'l:'~'(I,
ATTACHMENT G
" .. : ,:'.',
~5 "~':1,~ .. :
\
C I TV OF Architectural Review Board
Agenda Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
'5' T
June 6, 2013
Architectural Review Board
Margaret Netto, Contract Planner
Staff Report
Department: Planning and
Community Environment
2209-2215 EI Camino Real [12PLN-00404]: Request by Karen Kim on behalf
Tai Ning Trading & Innovations Co. for Preliminary Architectural Review of a
new three story, mixed use development on a 5,392 square foot lot. The formal
application would include a Design Enhancement Exception (DEE) request to
allow the building to encroach into the 20-foot required setback at the rear alley
way. Zone District: CC (2).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) conduct a preliminary architectural
review and provide comments on the design to staff and the applicant. No formal action may be
taken at a preliminary architectural review public hearing. Comments made at a prelinlinary
architectural review public hearing are neither binding on the City nor the applicant.
SITE INFORMATION
The 5,392 square foot (52' x 103'-6") project site is located in the CC · (2) (Community
Commercial Sub-district) zoning district. The site is located on the southeast comer of El Camino
Real and College Avenue (Attachment A) and is also bounded by Sedro Lane at the rear. The
existing uses include a restaurant known as R & B Seafood Restaurant, and a general business,
Peninsula Locksmith. There are five parking spaces located on the site behind the buildings,
adjacent to the Sedro Lane alleyway. The one story buildings on the site were constructed in 1950
and are deemed potentially eligible for the California Register of Historic Places. The site is not
located in the flood zone.
The First Republic Bank is located just south of the site on the comer of El Camino Real and
Cambridge Avenue; the two-story building also houses offices on the second floor. To the north
of the property, across College Avenue, is the Ananda Church of Self Realization, a single story
building with bell tower. Directly east, across Sedro Lane, is the Wesley United Methodist
Church, a two-story building that includes office space, and on-site parking. Farther southeast,
across Cambridge Avenue and also adjacent to Sedro Lane, is a two-story public parking garage.
Across El Camino Real, to the west, is a Shell gas station.
12PLN-00404 Page 1 of5
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project concept is a new three-story building having approximately 9,780 square feet of floor
area. The proposed ground floor retail use, and upper floor offices and residential use would be
consistent with uses allowed within the CC (2) district. The proposal includes retail space and a
parking facility on the ground floor with the second floor to be used as office and residential and
third floor to be used as primarily residential. At the street level, the retail storefront would be
angled and set back from the comer. Anodized aluminum frames would support the entry, with
solar panels above forming a prominent entry at the ground floor and providing shade and weather
protection. Residential and secondary uses would be clad in a lighter weight siding, stepped back
from the northeast (rear) site boundary. The building would also incorporate solar and other
building features for energy collection. Access to outdoor open space is available at every floor,
the building provides several planting areas and inset planting pockets. on the fayade. The third
level is terrc:tced back with a wood deck patio area. Exterior n1aterials would include limestone
panels, wood siding, and stainless steel round railings.
A total of 23 vehicle parking spaces would be associated with this development. Five of these
spaces would be located on the site, facilitated by a parking lift. A total of 18 of the 23 spaces are
currently provided through the California A venue parking assessment district. The nearest public
parking garage fronts on Cambridge Avenue. The number of proposed parking spaces meets the
minimum parking requirements for the proposed uses. The five spaces would consist of two
covered and three uncovered parking· spaces (including the parking lift and handicap accessible
space) at the rear of the property with access off of College A venue and the Sedro Lane. The
design concentrates parking along the alleyway and shields it from public view along College
Avenue. Bicycle parking would be located at grade level· on the side of the building facing EI
Camino Real.
Total Floor Area Ratio (FAR) would be 1.83 with office (1,686 square feet), retail (2,461 square
feet), residential use (3,076 square feet) and common area (2,557). The formal application would
include a Design Enhancement Exception (DEE) request. The DEE, if granted, would allow the
building to encroach into the 20-foot required setback at the rear alley way.
DISCUSSION
Building, Height, Mass
The proposed building would be more than twice the size of the existing building. The maximum
height of the building would be 37-feet. The project height would be consistent with the adjacent,
First Republic Bank building. The third level would be stepped back with a green terrace area in
front of the 2-bedroom unit, breaking up the third level fayade. Staff requests the ARB comment
on how the building would fit onto the existing street context.
Rear (alley) Setback
The CC (2) zone regulations require a 20-foot setback from the alley. The applicant has proposed
a 6-foot setback from the alley, keeping the same setback as the existing building, while
maintaining the five on-site parking spaces. There is no clear pattern established by adjacent
12PLN·00404 Page 2 of5
buildings following the 20-foot setback on the alley. The ARB is requested to comment on this
setback encroachment concept.
Context-Based Design Criteria
According to Section 18.16.090 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code "compatibility is achieved when
apparent scale and mass of new buildings is consistent with the pattern of achieving a pedestrian
oriented design and when new construction shares general characteristics and establishes design
linkages with the overall pattern of buildings so that the visual unity of the street is maintained".
The proposal does achieve a pedestrian-oriented design with aanodized aluminum frame around
the entry, and solar panels above forming a pronlinent entry at the ground floor. The proposed
building is consistent with pattern of buildings along this street section of El Camino Real. The
First Republic Bank building on the comer of Cambridge Avenue and El Camino Real is very
similar in height, mass and articulation. The scale of the street is generally pedestrian oriented.
One element that the proposed building does have in common with the some of the taller
buildings in close proximity is a recessed entry.
The proposal generally appears to be compliant with the nlajority of the Context-Based Design
Criteria. The proposal provides appropriate transitions to the surrounding buildings. The project
appears to be compatible with the apparent scale and mass, achieving a pedestrian oriented design.
The project shares general architectural style with the overall pattern of buildings on the street
creating a visual unity of the buildings.
EI Camino Real Development
Three guidelines are applicable to this site: (1) El Camino Real Design Guidelines (ECR
Guidelines), (2) South El Camino Real Guidelines, recommended by ARB in 2002 (South ECR
Guidelines), and (3) El Camino Real Master Schematic Design Plan, 2003 Draft (Design Plan).
South ECR Guidelines: The project is located within the California Avenue Pedestrian-Oriented
Node as defined on page 13, as a "small infill site"-where the design should "stitch surrounding
buildings together to create a coherent streetscape" and have numerous, pedestrian amenities. The
project is successful in screening the parking lot behind the building and minimizing the driveway
curb cut to 17-feet (Guideline 3.2.1), where 25 feet would be allowed. There are no opportunities
for a shared driveway.
ECR Guidelines: The project is subject to the 1979 guidelines with respect to street trees, signage,
architecture and building colors.
Trees: ECR Guidelines call for street trees every 25 feet (Page 2, top) or 30 feet (page 2, bottom);
whereas the Design Plan call for London Plane street trees in this segment of El Camino Real,
planted 22 to 23 feet at center, in 4' x 6' tree wells, and pruned to provide 14 feet of clearance
below to allow for truck and bus traffic. The concept plan does not indicate proposed street trees.
The arborist report (Attachment B), prepared by Ray Morneau, states that most of the trees are in
poor condition, and should be replaced. Two of the four street trees are considered to be in poor
condition and may need to be removed and replaced. Any new street trees should be indicated on
plans submitted with a formal ARB application.
12PLN-00404 Page 3 of5
Signage: There are a few good statements, such as -"Signs on ECR are limited to 'l2 to 2/3 the
maximum size permitted by the sign ordinance'; "Wall signs should appear as though the building
and the sign were designed together. The sign should not appear as if it were attached as an
afterthought"; "Three signs one on each elevation, are usually not approved!" No signs are
proposed at this time. The location of signage should be shown on the formal ARB plans to ensure
integration.
Architecture: "In neighborhood commercial zones, the design should be pedestrian oriented;
signs should not be primarily auto-oriented." Also, "when possible buildings should be set back
from the front property line, with landscaping or a people oriented plaza in front." This is
something to keep in mind when comparing guidelines. The n1ain entry is located on the comer,
angled and set back to provide a pedestrian oriented entry.
Colors: "More than three colors on a structure will make it incompatible with the surroundings.
U sing bright colors, such as reds, yellows and purples and greens as predominant color on a
structure may it incompatible with the surroundings. The ARB usually feels these colors are used
to attract attention."
HISTORIC
The existing structure was built in 1950, the site is deemed potentially eligible for listing on the
California Register of Historic Places. The applicant will need to submit an evaluation performed
by a qualified architectural historian, for CEQA review in conjunction with the discretionary
application that involves demolition of the existing building.
OTHER DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW
The applicant has received comments from the Utilities Department's Water, Gas & Wastewater
Division, Public Works Environmental Compliance Division, and Utilities' Electric Engineering
Division,Green Waste, and Fire. To date there are no significant comments received that would
preclude the project from moving forward (Attachment C).
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
The purpose of this preliminary Architectural Review is to introduce the proj ect to the ARB and
the public, and to provide feedback early on in the design process. Subsequent to preliminary
ARB, the applicant intends to submit a formal Architectural Review application. Planning staff
requires that all project applicants review and provide pertinent items required in the City's
Architectural Review submittal requirements list available on the City's website. Adherence to
the submittal requirements list would facilitate timely review of projects.
GREEN BUILDING REQUIREMENTS
At the formal Architectural Review application stage, the applicant is required to submit a Green
Point Rated Checklist for the residential portion to show intent for compliance with Build It
Green, Green Point Rated (GPR) standards. For the commercial portion of the project, the
applicant has submitted a CalGreen tier 2 mandatory compliance worksheet (Attachment D).
12PLN-00404 Page 4 of5
ENVRIONMENTAL REVIEW
No environmental review is required for this preliminary architectural review application, as it is
not considered a project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Staffhas not received any public comments as of the publication of this staff report: Neighboring
property owners within 600 foot radius will have received notice cards regarding the ARB public
hearing.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C:
Attachment D:
Attachment E:
Attachment F:
Project Location Map
Arborist Report
Department Comment Letters
CALGREEN Building Program Worksheet
Applicant's Project Description
Preliminary Development Plans (Board Members Only)
COURTESY COPIES
Karen Kam (applicant), 668 Barber Avenue, Milpitas, CA 95035
Prepared by: Margaret Netto, Contract Planner
Reviewed by: Amy French, AICP, Chief Planning Officia~
12PLN-00404 Page 5 of5
The City of
Palo Alto
Alronch,2013-05-3111:39:53
Building. w/treo. (\lcc·map.lgisSlgi.ladmlnlmolalviow.mdb)
This map is a product of the
City of Palo Alto GIS
2209-2215 EI Camino Real ffi -. 0' 64'
This document Is a graphic representation only of best available source •.
Tho City of Palo Alto .ssuma. no rosponsibility forony errors. 4:>198910 2013 City of Palo Alto
ATIACHMENTB
Ray Morneau, Arborist 2: ISA Certif. #WE .. 0132A 650.964.7664
Certified Arborist' s
Pre-Construction Tree Inventory
&
Tree Protection Report
Data Date: April 24, 2013 Report Date: April 30, 2013
Prepared for:
Tony Rinella
Director
April 30, 2013
Prepared by:
Ray Morneau
ISA Certified Arborist #WEw0132A
PNWISA Certified Tree Risk Assessor #1188
Outline
1.0 Introduction & Assignments
2.0 Executive Sumnlary & Report Nattative
3.0 Inventory Tree Data with Legend
4.0 Tree Preservation Guidelines: General
5.0 Tree PreServation Guidelines: Basic
Site:
bimSCORE Project
2211 EI Camino Real
Palo Alto, CA 94306
6.0 Tree Preservation Guidelines: Site-Specific TP Measures
7.0 Certification & Use Statement
8.0 Tree Disclosure Statement .
Arborist's Inventory & Rep0l1: 2211 EI Camino Real, PA. Page #1 of J 1.
Ray Morneau, Arborist ·lSA Certif. #WE .. 0132A 650.964.7664
1.0 Ii1troduction & Assignment
Introduction: I am.an ISA Certified Arborist with experience providing construction
consultations~ arborlst's reports, 'and site monitoring in the City of Palo Alto. I have worked
smoothly with this CitY's current Planning Division, as well as those from other jurisdictions.
Assignment: I have been retained by Tony. Rinella I bimSCORE to provide the at'borist services
require9 for the project at 2211 Ei Camino Real in Palo Alto.
I have reviewed the, "Site Plan.& ProjeCt Info" Sheet Al (re'ceived Apri123,2013) and I include
an image marked' up with my tree'numbers below.
2.0'Executive Summary.: Tables & Narrative
Executiye· SUlOmary ,
I inspected the 9 trees associated with this site and present their data my .spreadsheets b~low .
T'# Name, Common
April 30, 20t3
... .¥J!i s: CIt 2 e t-.!! ,0
Overall Condition Chart
Overall C'onditi.on Chart
rtage Range Text'DeSCriPtlon Quantity
,0% DEAD 0 , __ ~ __ ~~ __ ~ __ m~~~ ____ ~ ______ _
1 % to 26%, Very Poor, 1 ----~1O-4~9~%~--~--~p~oo--r----4
~50 % to 10% Fai'r 0
9
Arborist's Inventory & Report: 2211 El Camino Real, PA. Page #2· of 11.
Ray Morneau; Arborist ISA Certif. #WE-0132A 650.964.7664
B
T _ ..
On .. o-;~
Overall Tree Frequency Chart . r··_··_··_··-··-.. -.. -.. _ .. _ .. -.. -.. -~ ---I"":---~ L City of Palo Alto Regulated Tr~.!.= :.. •• _ •• _I Not Reg-I Total Alii
~8" C;~~~t~r-I !~ I
.,. ..........~o+--........ --a .. _ .. __ L_ _ .. ~ __ 1_-,
. -_ .. ~ .. _ .. -.. -.. -." -" ... -. a. Street b1. Protected: *11.6" b2. Protected: -otal 6 0 0 --!!!r,cel 4 .............. ~Il ............ 0 .... dIPNM ................
rhans 1 0 0 _ ....
i ............... INtP ............... " 9
Sorted Alphabetically by Botanical Name
Ce~ls 0lnansl8 1 Hacl<berry; ChineSe' • '~l Olea euro a·· ... _-4 Olive _ .... -. -.
Pla~an~.!1irifolla :~=_. 4 lq~on Plane "'-. ---.
9
~\.'.~'
Arborist's Inventory & Report: 2211 El Camino Real, PA. Page #3 of) 1,
Ray Morneau I Arborist ISACertif. #WE-0132A 650,964.7664
Narrative Summary
This residential rebuild will replace the existing building(s) with new. Mos~ of the trees are ill
such poor condition that they should be . removed/replaced, too. .
Even.the street trees will be a challenge to work. around and preserve. Perhaps the #1 and #2
plane trees could remain and #3 and #4 on the College Avenue side be removed/~eplaced.
3.0a Tree Data
TTili I .--e~ s I -· ...... ·--llr~·1
'I § .m 1 0::: (3 a -B e ~ ~ Additional Comments '0 0
it ~ ~ Os ~ i ~ 5 ~ c3 ~ m ~. ~5_ $:;1 8=8", ts ::t 0 ';f!. '#. '#. ~o: e~ .l:=T~n~;;;;--"-e-r II ..... 'iii4X4 sldew.."'ik'Ci1CiUt~roperty llne~ubly n. ill
an s 7.1" 12' 28' Dom. 65% 180% 72% F~t-side prlned to fit between existing. building and street. 'fOl~ ~ . i Good print Minor sycamore anthracnose caus!ng some foliage I ST
I
Lond PI ne 'Ii' I . In 4x4 sidewalk cut out; 1S-feet to· property line .. DOubly ....
2 (Plat~~us a la.3!! 18' 35' Doni. 68%' .80% 74% Fo~t-side p~ned to fit between'exlsting ~ullding and street. 'I
Bce",'fJ JI,\ GoOd pl'i t Minor sycamore anthraonose oauslng"some foliage . STJ'
,1 'OIlS" n crown dleback. . . .
o ~~""....... i ... "" .. "t--................ !---........... ...,' .... "'-_.:t-..... ,-' I in 4x4 sidewalk C"uToot; ·1 ~:f;;rto P, rope~y' iin;~D'O'UbIY .. -I ~u ane 14 . .0,1. 71 22" Dom. 68% 80% 74% 1 Fori t-si~e prlned to flt between existing building and street. . II ~ If S) i f I Good ~nt Minor syoamore anthraonose causing some foliage ST
Oli a t I J :t Pfl crown dieback,' ! Lond~~;lane . " ..a--... _."..... ·····t .-In I~ 4x4 sidewalk Ou~t;'~e~ to p~perty .line-:-" Doubly
4 (Platanus 6611 12' 381 Dom 65% 80% 72% Foot-.s,'de prln$d t~ fit betw, aen existing bUilding and street. ST
fOlia)' . Good pri t Minor sycamore anthracn,?se. causing some foliage --t~:~::'. ... .. ----n crowndleback. ____ ........... ... _ _ __
I or I Tree' , 45~ In In small parking lot planter area, 4-feet to corner of
print Misshapen by ,se~ere pruning and pa:rklng lot scrapes.
9.6" 10' 22' I 70 In II')'smaliparking'lotPianterarea,4~feettoexisting
. (Dies europa'@3IsuPP..45% 30% ~ ~; Foot· building walt. Co..dominant trunks wlth weak attachment' No I
'I 0 ,print at 3 .. feet. ExtenSive twiggy deadwood. --"-------t---t.--r--1~-1r-_t--~1_--~~~-------------~~----~----------~--_4
7 Olive, Tree@4.33f116'11'SUPP.50%30% 40% F~n t .. In small parking lot planter area, a..feet In two directions
(Olea europa) Poor pr~t to existing building walls. Parking lot curb at 1-fOot.,
8 7~~~ !:~aJ ............. 8._3_" .... '· .7 ... '-t-1_8~ Supp. 49% 30% ~: ~~:; In tri:~ular-Sh=,~.~~er' :~~ . .=~ J
""-iCeiti~' 'it' , . . 1 OO/c V Street tree at 463 Col1ege In 4x6 sldewalk cutout, 15·feet
9 I (Hackberry; 7.2" 7' 18' Dom; 5% 20%lv p; L~ry t,o Sedro Lane apron. Rectangular root barrier at 6· ST
.... _.l..Chine!!L,._..l_ ._. ____ J ' .. , . ~ .. ~!,~. Severe!.Y...~L~.a· •. _ . \ .* .. , __ ---'
No
April 30, 2013 Arbol'ist's hlventory & Report: 2211 El Camino Real, PA. Page #4 of 11.
Ray Morneau, Arborist ISA Certif .. #WE-013ZA 650.964.7664
3.0b Tree Inventory Legend: Headers
==~===:iO::==:~~==~---.J . ence based on those observations and data.
,.................. tU .lp ... I' ....... ' ... 111 ••• "'iIMd~M"$I" .... m".n.' "~""~"'iIIII)
:e~=~':=~=I=:li=~::~~~:~~~~
discretionary development of the property., The gathered data vvas entered into a Mcrosoft® Excel database. ' I
;::;I=~:::;;:~ng~~~:._~~~seJJ
E--I Sequent""'TaiiY" asSigrBnree rUnbEntrOm 1 to 9. A 1" by 3" alurrinum lag is stapled "iO'ElIiChl
T":~!!L~=~~~;~~~~~~
r"--'--· We employ the jnitia~ names-from MCMnn:'W"IISteqt ot~setroni"s __ m. __ -t:: __ ~~;~~=~~~~.~~
r~~IIU,""",,,N~mWMI"''''~~MJDII'IIIfII~'''I''l&",,~ttHMR~'''''I~~~''''''''INIUlUU~lMM~~_'I~
I-. Diameter at Breast Height: This measu~ is the trunk diameter measured at the standard
height defined by the jurisdiction in vmich the tree trunk graNS. The industry standErd is 54
! inches above ground level, taken Wth a standard surveyor's diameter tape, recorded in inches.
DBH: Exceptions to the 5+inch level are embraced industry-wde for multi'-trunked trees. Here
measurements vere taken below the, 'ICMeSt branch ~nng,andlor individual stems at 54 "
inches, or an average, depending on which height measurement is deemed to produce the best
L-,,",~ w ","._~~~~~~:!~ure !:~~~~i~~~ ex~~~ ~.i~~~:~~~."'_~ ___ '~M.J
April 30, 2013 Arborist's Inventory & Report: 2211 EI Camino Real, PA. Page #5 of 1 1.
Ray Morneau, Arborist ISA Certif. #WE·0132A 650.964.7664
r~~· .. -·-·~··~ rating"asSeSSing the tr~i~~:mretitig~·in8ects!a;:;ases:·alci--mm~,
Condierati structural defects., Relative text rating included in 1he same cell as: Excellent, Good. Fair Poor I I 'on:. " I, . I Very Poor. . .
-........ _ ..... l. This correspondsto the ItCadtion Percentage" factor in tree·valuations per the Council of II
Tree and LandscapeAppraisers (eTLA) system used by'the International Society of
Arborirutu"e.' (eTLA 1992.) It combines foliage, branches, limbs, trunk, and root rati.·I'gS. irto al
composite concition score. This rating is used in the calculation of,these trees' appraised value
n uired ' the . of Palo Mo.' .' I
••• ,. .............1 r ! ifil ... m~
!~I;;'" "&iiiders ~s CaldItion '(vigOr 00d Structure11~ege. 'adaPtaalllY. and ~. Preservati: This rating takes into account any atTlOlI'lCed intentions c:! changes in areaIlot use. Degrees:
.. Hgh, Moderate, Low, Very Low.
~. Hgh: Tree in great oatd'ition IJId tnJ EIlCisting defects or sbessas are !riner or can be easily rritigaIed.
• tvbderate: Notablevigor and/or stability problems but Vlhich.can be rnxIerated. Wth ~nt &lor I
' i~ tree protection zone. .
• LCMr. Significant problerrlh includilla, shorter Jife expectancy. Difficult to retain but potential Wth rrt.JCh i
larger tree proteclion zone. " . " " I
;-Very LON. Substantial el<isting problems, defed$, stresses. Unlikely to survive irrpact of any project. I L~au'I"lml'JlIIIIIUtH~ntWHIIIU'IMltI~~"'~~~.~"'~_",,_ I .' II ___ ",IUMlnInMlIt
~-NOtatiooortreei$'StatUS as a liReg:iatOCi iref:i; per the Pal"o)Uo'Tree Tedirli~i7vtir;Liai~(pp7;~1
~1 .. 5", or xiv). Some Palo Alto trees are "Protected"~ oaks 11.5-inchdameter or ~reater r311.51111) and .
~8"; recM.oods 18-inch diameter or greater ('318/1"). Others may be "Designated" (liD') for regulation
Designated: by the atyl induding as:r; tree that is part of a prqect on a modem dscre1ionary development
review site, likely only after these VtSe develope;J~ A third type d regulated tree 'AOOId be I
L
"Street Trees" (81) on many projects. {NB: as needed on non-Pal,o Alto sites, various I ___ -=-~~==:~trees~be~rejto~~~J .
April 30. 2013 Arborist's Inventory &. Report: 2211 EI Camino Real, PA. Page #6 of 11.
Ray Morneau, Arborist ,~ =tp rSA Ce.rtlf. #WE-0132A 650.964.7664
4.0 Tree Preservation Guidelines: General
If development of these properties were ever to be considered, the June 2001 publication of the
City of Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual --Standards and Specifications provides extensive
detail that now governs trees on construction projects in Palo Alto. By municipal ordinance, this
book is now the local tree law or "tree bible". Many construction situations involving trees are
addressQd. It is available from the Municipal Development Center, 285 Hamilton Avenue, Palo
Alto, CA ,94301 or on-line at: http://www.cityofpa[oalto.orglcivicaxlfilebankldocuments/6436
(last accessed 4/0812013). '
To a large extent, this Manual provides Developers, Designers, Owners, Project Managers, and
all on-site personnel with the information they need to develop, design, and work near trees. For
the Project Arborist, it is a framework from which tree issues can be raised and clarified as
necessary.
At the risk of duplicating material in the Manual, I have set out some particular Tree Preservation
Guidelines in §6 and §7 below. Neither the Manual nor my report is intended to be all-inclusive.
Clarification and/or more specific measures can be provided as needed.
5 . .0 Tree Preservation Guidelines: Basic
5.1 These Tree Preservation Guidelines in §4, §S and §6 contain practical tree information,
which helps project team members to know what to expect regarding site trees. They
help everyone coordinate between various sub ... projects within the whole. They help
minitnize construction impacts and :stresses on the trees. ,
These need to be included as palt of the construction docl1ments so that everyone Who
has a set of drawings also knows what tree protection measures they are required to
follow here. Including them as a sheet in the blueline drawings is a typical and
straightfolWard way to accomplish this. The Palo Alto standard uses its publishe.d T .. l
sheet -downloadable: http://www.city.palo .. alto.ca.uslciv icaxlfllebankldocuments/6460,
5.2 Usually a plan to provide supplemental waterlog is required. Root zone moisture under
the mulch can be monitored and a deep-soaking can be applied if the upper three inches
become dry.
5.3 Ifpruning is needed, ANSI A .. 300 standards apply. The general contract<?r and the tree
care contractor both need to be communicating with the Project Arborist as to the
pruning spec,iii,cations. .
5.4 All project tree work perfornled before, during, or after construction is to be done by a
qualified tree care contractor with a current, active C611D49 license issued by the
California State Contractors' Licensing Board. This especia.lly includes all pruning,
April 30, 2013 Arborist's Inventory &. Report: '2211 El Camino Real, PA. Page #7 of 11.
Ray Morneau, Arborist ISA Certif. #WE·0132A 650.964.7664
removals (including stump removals) within driplines of trees to-be preserved~ root
pruningJ and repair .or remedial.measures.
That company must have experience on similar projects. The crew must include
WCISA Certified Tree Workers who can perform the work under tne supervision 'of an
ISA Certified Arborist (or equival~nts,ifthey possess sufficient skill for approval by ,
Project Arborist). .
5.5 The Tree Technical Manual, 'Section 2.30, requires the following Project Arborist,site
monitoring inspections, with summary monthly reports submitted to City of Pal.o Alto
Planning Department (typically, faxed to Planning Division Arborist, Dave Dockter). • Tree Protection Fence. Inspect placement ofTPFs and Qther,preRconstruction
protections' (e.g. mulch, 'signs) b~fore start of project.
• Pre .. col1struction meeting. B~fore commencement of construction, the applicant or
contractor'shall arrange site meeting, attended by, jo b site superintendentt g!'8d ing
equipment operators, ,subcontractors, Project Arborist and City Arborist.
• Inspection of Rough Grading. Project Arborist rieeds a minImum of 48-hours notice
to insp.ect rough grading issues in or adjacent ,to TPZs. Not applicable in this case.
'. Project Arboristmonthly site monitoring inspections are, with summary monthly
reports submitted to City of Palo Alto Planning Department (typically_ faxed to
Planning Division Arborist, Dave Dockter).
• Special Activity within any Tree Protection Zone. Work in the tpZ requires direct
on~site supervisory monitoring by the Project Arborist (48~hours minimum prior
notice required).
• Landscape Architect Inspection. Depending on the level of landscape architect
involvement, his final inspection may be required. This will not be needed for this
project -but ProJect Arborist can provide one last inspection at the titne .of
contractor; s need to remove tree protection fence.
6.0 Tree Preservation Guidelines:
Site-Sp~cific Tree Protection Measures .(2211 EI Camino Real, PA)
Fence locations, modificationst adjustments, and stagings must be discussed 'at the pre
construction meeting called out in Section 5.5, above. -Other/additional root Zone
protection mf\.y be needed for this project, such as mulch or .other root preservation
materials (plywood, trench plates, .geogrid, other?) and shall be discussed at that
pre-construction Ineeting, too.
6.1 Fencing [TPF]
6.1.1 Before any equipment arrives or project site work commences, Foot zone
protection must be in place.
6.1.2 Tree Protection Fence [TPF] locations for this project can/will be further .
April30~ 2013
identified as additional infonnation is made available~ Fence placement should be
a Type I, ~ut mostly Type II will be used due to the close proximity of necessary
Arborisf s·lnvel1tory & Report: 2211 EI Camino Real, P A. Page #8 of 11.
Ray Morneau, Arborist ISA Certif. #WE-0132A 650.964.7664
work.
The Project Arborist n1ust be contacted to advise reMpositioning ofTPF, ifrelocatioll
becomes necessary.
6.1.3 Palq Alto typically requires fence material is to be 6' high chain link. At the
contractor's option~ depending on site conditions, driven posts shall be preferred.
Alternatively, pipe or concrete base supports may be set on top of the ground with
sufficient anchorage to prevent moving the fencing.
TPF locations are to be sketched on the Site Plans. Palo Alto requires signs on
the fences, warning of penalties in the event fencing is moved or removed
prematurely. Language. available per Tree Technical Manual-or per City standard
T .. l Sheet referred to above -or "Protected tree -before working in this area,
COl1tact the Project Arborist at _-_-__ or City Arborist at (650) 496-5953.
Noncompliance ls subJect to $500 fine per day".
6,1.4 All root ~one protection shaH remain. in-place and effective until final inspection.
6.2 Fencing is often the first noted tl'ee protection measure [TPM]. However, wood chip
mulch is a common root zone buffer (often in combination with other materials -such as
plywood, trench plates, geogrid) other?) and is required here, 4-to 6 ... inches deep over
unprotected root zones. Further, other TPMs are noted throughout this report.
6,3 Prohibited Acts & Requirements
6.3.1 No parking or vehicle traffic may travel over any, root zones, unless using buffers
approved ~y Project Arborist.
6.3.2 Have a certified arborist repair any tree damage promptly. And promptly notify
Project Arborist.
6.3.3 . No pouring or storage of fuel, oil, chemicals, ol'~hazardo~s Inatelials under these
foliage canopies.
6.3.4 Any telnporary construction site utilities shaH be placed so as not to affect foliage
crowns or root zones. This includes electric, water, communication, portable toilets,
etc. Infringement on any t .. ee~ s space requires Project Arborist consultation.
6.3.5 No storage of construction materials under any foliage canopy without prior
Project Arborist approval.
6.3.6 No trenching within any tree protection zone without Planning or Project
Arborist review. Consult Project Arborist before any trenching or root cutting
beneath any tl'ee~s foJiage canopy.
6.3.7 Any work inside of Tree Protection Fences and/or encountering roots of 1 .. inch-
or"g.'eater dhl.meter requires the notice to the Project Arborist to arrange for on-site
monitoring. Typically, 48~hours pdor notice is acceptable.
6.3.8 No -clean out of trucks, tools, or other equipment over any root zone. Keep this
debris outside of any existing or future root zone.
6.3,9 No attachment of signs or other construction apparatus to these trees.
Apr1130, 2013 Arborist's Inventory & Report: 2211 El Camino Real, P A. Page #9 of 11.
Ray At.'0rneau # Arborist :1'4;
. ISA .certif.#WE-0132A 650.964.7664
7.0 Certification & Use Statement
I ,certify that all the statements of fact 'in this· report are true, complete, and correct to the best of
my knowledge, ability, and belief, and are made. in good faith.
The instant report is applicable to this project at 2211 BI' Camino Real and may not be adopted
without site .. specific updates/revisions/adaptations by this Project Arborist.
Respectfully submitted,
~hR/,-r~~~
RaYlnond J. Morneau
ISA Certified Arborist #WE-0132A
PNW .. [SA Certified Tree rusk Assessor # 1188
8.0' Tree Disclosure Statement (next/final page)
Apl'il3{),2013 Arbo1'ist~s Inventory & Report: 2211 El Camino Real, PA. Pag.e #10 of 11.
TREE DISCLOSURE STArEMENT CITY OF PALO ALTO
Planning Division, 250 H~mllton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650) 329M2441
http;/IWww.cltvofpaloalto.org
Palo Alto Municipal Code, Chapter 8.10.040, requires disclosure and protection of certain trees located on private and public
property, and that they be shown on submitted and approved site plans. A comp,leted tree disclosure statement must accompany ,
all permit applications that include exterior work, aU dem~lItlon or grading permH applications, or other development activity.
PROPERTY ADDRESS: -....;.. _____________________ ~
1 Are there Regulated trees on or adjacent to the property? YES NO (If no, proceed to Section 4)
[Sections 1 .. 4 MUST be completed by the applicant. Please circle and/or check where applicable.]
1. Where are the trees? Check those that apply. (Plans must be submitted shOWing all trees over 4" diameter)
o On the property o On adjacent property overhanging the project site
Oln the City planter strip or right--of-way easement wIthin 30'of proPerty line {Street Trees)""
I .
·Street trees requ~re special protection by a fenced enclosuJ'c, per the attached instruotions. Prior to receiving any permit, you mllst provide
an authorized Street Tree Protection Verification fonn. Contact Public WOlks Operations at (650) 496 .. 5953 for inspeotion of type I. II or III
fencing (see attached Detail #60S) required for all street trees.
1 1 2. Are there any Protected or Designated Trees? YES (Check where applicable) NO
IJ Protected Tree (s)
IJ Designated Tree (8) o On or overhanging the property
YES NO 2 3. Is there activity or grading within the drlpline? (radius 10 Umes the trunk dIameter) of these trees?
/fYea, a Tree PI'(!..vervatlon Report must be prepared by an ISA aIrlifted arbor/Sf and mwmltledfor staff review (lee 11M I Se'Clfon 6.25).
Attach this report to ShlJel T"i,:Tree Prolection, its Part a/the Plan''', per Site Plan Requirements.
4. Are the SIte Plan Requirements •• completed? YES NO
** PI ans. Protection of Regulated trees during development require the following: (1) Plans must show the measured tnmk diamc:;ter and canopy
dlipline; (2) Plans m\lst denote, as a bold dashed line, 8 fenced enolosure area out to the dripline, per Sheet T -1 and Detail #605 -
1 httll:llwww.oityo.!?aloaUQ.qrgltrtl$i§lforms.htm (See also TIM • Section 2.15 fur area to be fenced)
I, the undersi.gned, agree to the conditions of this disclosure. I understand that knowingly or negligently providing false or
misleading 'information In response to this disclosure requirement constitutes a violation of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Sect/on
8.10.040. which can lead to criminal and/or civil legal action.
Signature: _=-_______ _
(Prop. Owner or Agent)
Print: ____________ _ Date: ____ _
I'--~ FOR STAFF USE: --
Prote-ctlve Fencing I Sections 5wS must be compieted by staff for the Issuance of any development permit (demolitIon, grading or building permit).
I 5. Protected TreeS. The specified tree fencing is In place. A written statement js attached verIfYIng that i protecHve fencing is 9Qrrectly In place around protected and/or designated trees, YES NO
! (N/A If there are no protected trees, check here D) la. SIreet Trees. A signed Public Works Street Tree Protection Verification form Is attached. YES NO
(N/A If there are no street trees, cheek he~ 0). ,-------------------------, ------1 Regulated Trees -a) Street 1.recII-trees on public property; b) Protcotcd trees -Coast Live ORks or Valley Oaks which are 11. S" in diameter or larger, Coast
Redwoods which are 18" in diameter or larger, when measured 54" above paturnl gmde; Rnd Heritage trees aloe tl'ocs dcslgllated by City Co\lneil~ Rnd e)
Desi81Ulted Trees -commercial Of non-residontial property trees, which are part afan approved Jandaoape plnn. 2 .
Palo Alto TI'ee Teohnical Manual (T1'M) contains instruotions for all requirements on this fonn, 8vllilllble at WWW.CilYOQ:l.illoaltoorg/lreesltcqhQ!oo!.ml!l!ual btmJ
S:IP\.AN\PLAOlVIAdvance Plannlng'IArborl'&t\Tree Program Informalion\Tree DlsdolUl1l Slatemant(lDS)\Trea Olsclosuro SlalementFlnaLS·07.doC) RrwiMd 03104/07
ATTACMENTC
2209 EI Camino Real Preliminary Fire Comments:
Fire comments include a need to (1) confirm areas where the Fire Department will be able to
deploy aerial fire apparatus for rooftop emergency operations, (2) include fire sprinklers and a
fire alarm system, (3) submit documents to the Fire Prevention Bureau for these systems and for
the underground fire supply line, (4) direction of discharge from the sprinkler main shall drain to
an impoundment device or a system that will attenuate the annual test flow to the sanitary system
or allow the water to percolate into the soil under the property, (5) ensure the elevator and lobby
areas are capable of accommodating a 24 by 84 inch ambulance gurney attended by two
emergency responders, without lifting or tilting of the gurney.
~\IJ~ ~ ~ ---11_\\~_""""" __
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
ATTACHMENT C
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
WATER -GAS -WASTEWATER ENGINEERING
1007 ELWELL COURT, PALO ALTO, CA 94301
MAIN PHONE: 650/566-4501; FAX: 650/566-4536
Subject Address: 2209 EI Camino Real, Application #12PLN-404
Reviewed By: Roland Ekstrand, WGW Util. Eng. Phone: 650/566-4511
Reviewed date: May 31,2013
WATER, GAS & WASTEWATER UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF DEMOLITION PERMIT
1. Prior to demolition, the applicant shall submit the existing water/wastewater fixture unit
loads (and building as-built plans to verify the existing loads) to determine the capacity
fee credit for the existing load. If the applicant does not submit loads and plans theymay
not receive credit for the existing water/wastewater fixtures.
2. The applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all utility services and/or meters
including a signed affidavit of vacancy. Utilities will be disconnected or removed within
10 working days after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued by the
building inspection division after all utility services and/or meters have been disconnected
and removed.
FOR BUILDING PERMIT
3. The applicant shall submit a completed water-gas-wastewater service connection
application -IQad sheet for City of Palo Alto Utilities. The applicant must provide all the
information requested for utility service demands (water in fixture units/g. p.m., gas in
b.t.u.p.h, and sewer in fixture units/g.p.d.). The applicant shall provide the existing (prior)
loads, the new loads, and the combined/total loads ~he new loads plus any existing
loads to remain).
4. The applicant shall submit improvement plans for utility construction. The City would
prefer serving the water, gas and sewer from College Avenue (not EI Camino Real).
Please note that the existing Sewer main in College Avenue is only 5.4" and the
largest allowable sewer lateral is a 4" lateral. The plans must show the size and
location of all underground utilities within the development and the public right of way
including meters, backflow preventers, fire service requirements, sewer mains, sewer
cleanouts, sewer lift stations and any other required utilities.
5. The applicant must show on the site plan the existence of any auxiliary water supply, (Le.
Page 1 3
water well, gray water, recycled water, rain catchment, water storage tank, etc).
6. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading the existing utility mains
and/or services· as necessary to handle antiCipated peak loads. This responsibility
iflcludes all costs associated with the design and construction for the installation/upgrade
of the utility mains and/or services.
7. The applicant's engineer shall submit flow calculations and system capacity study
showing that the on-site and off-site water and sanitary sewer mains and services will
provide the domestic, irrigation, fire flows, and wastewater capacity needed to service the
development and adjacent properties during anticipated peak flow demands. Field
testing may be required to determined current flows and water pressures on existing
water main. Calculations must be signed and stamped by a registered civil engineer. The
applicant may be required to perform, at his/her expense, a flow monitoring study of the
.existing sewer main to determine the remaining capacity. The report must include
existing peak flows or depth of flow based on a minimum monitoring period of seven
continuous days or as determined by the senior wastewater engineer. The study shall
meet the requirements and the approval of the WGW engineering section. No
downstream overloading of existing sewer main will be permitted.
8. For contractor installed water and wastewater mains or services, the applicant shall
submit to the WGW engineering section of the Utilities Department four copies of the
installation of water and wastewater utilities off-site improvement plans in accordance
with the utilities department design criteria. All utility work within the public right-of-way
shall be clearly shown on the plans that are prepared, signed and stamped by a
registered civil engineer. The contractor shall also submit a complete schedule of work,
method of construction and the manufacture's literature on the materials to be used for
approval by the utilities engineering section. The applicant's contractor will not be
allowed to begin work until the improvement plan and other submittals have been
approved by the water, gas and wastewater engineering section. After the work is
complete but prior to sign off, the applicant shall provide record drawings (as-builts) of
the contractor installed water and wastewater mains and services per City of Palo Alto
Utilities record drawing procedures. For contractor installed services the contractor shall
install 3M marker balls at each water or wastewater service tap to the main and at the
City clean out for wastewater laterals.
9. An approved reduced pressure principle assembly (RPPA backflow preventer device) is
required for all existing and new water connections from Palo Alto Utilities to complywith
requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605
inclusive. The RPPA shall be installed on the owner's property and directly behind the
water meter within 5 feet of the property line. RPPA's for domestic service shall be lead
free. Show the location of the RPPA on the plans.
10. An approved reduced pressure detector assembly is required for the existing or new
water connection for the fire system to comply with requirements of California
administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605. reduced pressure detector
assemblies shall be installed on the ovvner's property adjacent to the property line, within
5' of the property line. Show the location of the reduced pressure detector assembly
on the plans.
Page 2 3
11. All backflow preventer devices shall be approved by the WGW engineering division.
Inspection by the utilities cross connection inspector is required for the supply pipe
between the meter and the assembly.
12. Existing wastewater laterals that are not plastic (ABS, PVC, or PE) shall be replaced at
the applicant's expense. Existing VCP laterals can be pipe burst.
13. The applicant shall pay the capacity fees and connection fees associated with new utility
service/s or added demand on existing services. The approved relocation of services,
meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the cost of the person/entity
requesting the relocation.
14. Each unit or place of business shall have its own water and gas meter shown on the
plans. Each parcel shall have its own water service, gas service and sewer lateral
connection shown on the plans.
15. A separate water meter and backflow prevente'r is required to irrigate the approved
landscape plan if the planting area will exceed 1,500 SF. Show the location of the
irrigation meter on the plans. This meter shall be designated as an irrigation account an
no other water service will be billed on the account. The irrigation and landscape plans
submitted with the application for a grading or building permit shall conform to the City of
Palo Alto water efficiency standards.
16. A new gas service line installation is required. Show the new gas meter location on the
plans. The gas meter location must conform with utilities standard details.
17. All existing water and wastewater services that will not be reused shall be abandoned at
the main perWGW utilties prC?cedures.
18. Utility vaults, transformers, utility cabinets, concrete bases, or other structures can not be
placed over existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services. Maintain l' horizontal
clear separation from the vault/cabinet/concrete base to existing utilities as found in the
field. If there is a conflict with existing utilities, Cabinets/vaults/bases shall be relocated
from the plan location as needed to meet field conditions. Trees may not be planted
within 10 feet of existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services or meters. New water,
gas or wastewater services/meters may not be installed within 10' or existing trees.
Maintain 10' between new trees and new water, gas and wastewater
services/mains/meters.
19. To install new gas service by directional boring, the applicant is required to have a sewer
cleanout at the front of the building. This cleanout is required so the sewer lateral can
be videoed for verification of no damage after the gas service is installed by directional
boring.
20. All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto utility standards for
water, gas & wastewater.
21. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Caltrans for all utility work in the
EI Camino Real right-of-way. The applicant must provide a copy of the permit to lhe
WGW engineering section.
Page 3 of 3
Date:
To:
October 19,2012
Russ Reich
ATTACHMENT C
Public Works Department
Environmental Services Division
Watershed Protection Group
PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS
From:
Phone:
Kirsten Struve, Manager, Environmental Control Programs
(650) 329-2421
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application Number:
Company Name
Project Address: 2209 EI Camino Real
Palo Alto, CA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have reviewed the site floor plans for this project. Please note the following issues must be
addressed in building plans prior to final approval by this department:
PAMC 16.09.170, 16.09.040 Discharge of Groundwater
The project is located in an area of suspected or known groundwater contamination with Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs).
If groundwater is encountered then the plans must include the following procedure for construction dewatering:
Prior to discharge of any water from construction dewatering, the water shall be tested for volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
using EPA Method 6011602 or Method 624. The analytical results of the VOC testing shall be transmitted to the Regional
Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) 650-329-2598. Contaminated ground water that exceeds state or federal requirements
for discharge to navigable waters may not be discharged to the storm drain system or creeks. If the concentrations of pollutants
exceed the applicable limits for discharge to the storm drain system then an Exceptional Discharge Permit must be obtained
from the RWQCP prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer system. If the VOC concentrations exceed the toxic organics
discharge limits contained in the Palo Alto Municipal Code (l6.09.040(m)) a treatment system for removal ofVOCs will also
be required prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer. Additionally, any water discharged to the sanitary sewer system or storm
drain system must be free of sediment.
PAMC 16.09.180(b)(10) Dumpsters for New and Remodeled Facilities
New buildings and residential developments providing centralized solid waste collection, except for single-family and duplex
residences, shall provide a covered area for a dumpster. The area shall be adequately sized for all waste streams and designed
with grading or a berm system to prevent water runon and runoff from the area.
PAMC 16.09.180(b)(14) Architectural Copper
On and after January 1,2003, copper metal roofmg, copper metal gutters, copper metal down spouts, and copper granule
containing asphalt shingles shall not be permitted for use on any residential, commercial or industrial building for which a
building permit is required. Copper flashing for use under tiles or slates and small copper ornaments are exempt from this
prohibition. Replacement roofmg, gutters and downspouts on historic structures are exempt, provided that the roofmg material
used shall be prepatinated at the factory. For the purposes of this exemption, the defmition of "historic II shall be limited to
structures designated as Category 1 or Category 2 buildings in the current edition of the Palo Alto Historical and Architectural
Resources Report and Inventory.
Page 1 of4
PAMC 16.09.175(k) (2) Loading Docks
(i) Loading dock drains to the storm drain system may be allowed if equipped with a fail-safe valve or equivalent
device that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during periods of loading dock operation.
(ii) Where chemicals, hazardous materials, grease, oil, or waste products are handled or used within the loading
dock area, a drain to the storm drain system shall not be allowed. A drain to the sanitary sewer system may be allowed if
equipped with a fail-safe valve or equivalent device that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during periods of
loading dock operation. The area in which the drain is located shall be covered or protected from rainwater run-on by berms
and/or grading. Appropriate wastewater treatment approved by the Superintendent shall be provided for all rainwater contacting
the loading dock site.
PAMC 16.09.180(b)(5)Condensate from HVAC
Condensate lines shall not be connected or allowed to drain to the storm drain system.
PAMC 16.09.180(b)(b) Copper Piping
Copper, copper alloys, lead and lead alloys, including brass, shall not be used in sewer lines, connectors, or seals coming in
contact with sewage except for domestic waste sink traps and short lengths of associated connecting pipes where alternate
materials are not practical. The plans must specifY that copper piping will not be' used for wastewater plumbing.
PAMC 16.09.205(a) Cooling Systems, Pools, Spas, Fountains, Boilers and Heat Exchangers
It shall be unlawful to discharge water from cooling systems, pools, spas, fountains boilers and heat exchangers to the storm
drain system.
PAMC 16.09.165(h) Storm Drain Labeling
Storm drain inlets shall be clearly marked with the words "No dumping -Flows to Bay," or equivalent.
Undesignated Retail Space:
PAMC 16.09
Newly constructed or improved buildings with all or a portion of the space with undesignated tenants or future use will need to
meet all requirements that would have been applicable during design and construction. If such undesignated retail space
becomes a food service facility the following requirements must be met:
Designated Food Service Establishment (FSE) Project:
A. Grease Control Device (GCD) Requirements, PAMC Section 16.09.075 & cited BldglPlumbing Codes
1. The plans shall specifY the manufacturer details and installation details of all proposed GCDs. (CBC 1009.2)
2. GCD(s) shall be sized in accordance with the 2007 California Plumbing Code.
3. GCD(s) shall be installed with a minimum capacity of 500 gallons.
4. GCD sizing calculations shall be included on the plans. See a sizing calculation example below.
5. The size of all GCDs installed shall be equal to or larger than what is specified on the plans.
6. GCDs larger than 50 gallons (100 pounds) shall not be installed in food preparation and storage areas. Santa Clara
County Department of Environmental Health prefers GCDs to be installed outside. GCDs shall be installed such that
all access points or manholes are readily accessible for inspection, cleaning and removal of all contents. GCDs located
outdoors shall be installed in such a manner so as to exclude the entrance of surface and stormwater. (CPC 1009.5)
7. All large, in-ground interceptors shall have a minimum of three manholes to allow visibility of each inlet piping, baffle
(divider) wall, baffle piping and outlet piping. The plans shall clearly indicate the number of proposed manholes on
the GCD. The Environmental Compliance Division of Public Works Department may authorize variances which allow
GCDs with less than three manholes due to manufacture available options or adequate visibility.
8. Sample boxes shall be installed downstream of all GCDs.
9. All GCDs shall be fitted with reliefvent(s). (CPC 1002.2 & 1004)
10. GCD(s) installed in vehicle traffic areas shall be rated and indicated on plans.
B. Drainage Fixture Requirements, P AMC Section 16.09.075 & cited BldglPlumbing Codes
Page 2 of4
Note:
Prep sink
Mop/Janitorial sink
Floor drain
Floor sink
ExampleGCD
Sizing Calculation:
3
3
2
2
Quantity
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
4
90
172
216
Drainage Fixture & Item Number
Pre-rinse sink, Item 1
3 compartment sink, Item 2
1,250
1,500
2,000
Prep sinks, Item 3 & Floor sink, Item 4
Mop sink, Item 5
Floor trough, Item 6 & tilt skillet, Item 7
Floor trough, Item 6 & steam kettle, Item 8
Floor sink, Item 4 & wok stove, Item 9
Floor drains
1,000 gallon GCD minimum sized
DFUs . Total
4 4
3 3
3 6
3 3
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 8
Total: 30
• All resubmitted plans to Building Department which include FSE projects shall be resubmitted to Water Quality.
• It is frequently to the FSE's advantage to install the next size larger GCD to allow for more efficient grease discharge
prevention and may allow for longer times between cleaning. There are many manufacturers of GCDs which are available
in different shapes, sizes and materials (plastic, reinforced fiberglass, reinforced concrete and metal) .
• The requirements will assist FSEs with FOG discharge preve~tion to the sanitary sewer and storm drain pollution
prevention. The FSE at all times shall comply with the Sewer Use Ordinance of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. The
ordinances include requirements for GCDs, GCD maintenance, drainage fixtures, record keeping and construction projects.
Page 4 of4
250 Hamilton Avenue
Fax: (650) 3292154
Phone: (650) 329244 f .
:~~~
Route D'ate: ATTACHMENT C
~roject: 2209 EL CAMINO REAL, PALO ALTO, CA 94306
Description: Submitted:
Request by Karen Kim on behalf Tal Nlng Trading & Innovations Co. of for a preliminary
architectural revJew of a new 3 sotry mixed use development at ~()9..2215 EI Camino Real.
Zone Dlst: CC(2)
APN:
Components:
To Do:
1 .. Please bring comments to the ORC meeting, on
2. Please e-mail commentsto:russ.reich@ciWofpaloalto.org
These comments may be quoted In a staff report to the Architectural Review Board, Planning Commission, or City Council.
If you have questions, please contact the project manager, RUSS REICH, at 650-617-3119
. Recipients:
o BAAQMD ..................... :............................. DEREK WHITWORTH . GZI PW Engineering ....................................... .
~ Building Inspection..................................... MAC SABERI 650-329-2368 b2I PW Operations ....................................... .. o Community Services; .............................. .. o Economic Resources Planning................. THOMAS
FEHRENBACH 65()..
329-2604 bZI Fire........................................................... KARL SCHNEIDER
650-617·3184 o Other .•• ~ ............................................... · •.••••
0 Palo Alto Open Space .............................. .
D·PASCO ..................................................... . o .Plannlng (Arborist) ................................... . o Planning (EI Camino RealI Baylands) ..... ..
b2I PW Operations Recycling ......... , ............. ..
bZl PW Operations Trees ............................. .
[;1 PW Water QuaDty ................. : ................. ..
D Real Estate ............................................. ..
SCVWD ................................................... .
[;1 Transportation .. ; ............................... : ....... .
10/04/12
124-32-019
12PLN-00404
MIKe NAFZIGER 650~
617-3103
MATT RASCHKE 650-
496-5937
ANDREW SHELTON
65()..798-5899
DAVID DOCKTER 650-
617~3145
KEN TORKE 650.329~
2421
DONNA HARTMAN
650-32Q..2677
SUE TIPPETS 408-
265-2607
JAIME RODRIGUEZ
650-329-2136 o Planning (Housing I Historic) ..................... . o Police ....................................................... .
D Utilities Marketing .................... ; ................ .
(~ .. l)~II~:~rji~~~g .(l:.~~~~)~~ ................ E~~.'EN~INEERING
650·5664sod
Rpt6394
bZl Utilities ERglneerlng (WGW)..................... WGW ENGINEERING
650-566-4501 D Water Quality Control Board .............. ~...... . DALE BoWYER
Print Date 10116112 Page 1 of1
CITV OF PALO ALtO
UTILITIES
PROJECT DATA
Project Address
Project Description
Submittal(s)
Date submitted
Contact Person'
, Address
Telep.hone #
Fax # 1 Email Address
Reviewed by:
Date Reviewed:
ELECTRIC ENGINEERING DIVISION
Conditions of Approval/Comments
2209 El,Camino Real
Mix used building
Conceptual Drawing
10/24/2012
, Russ Reich
,City Of Palo Alto
, .
Henry Nguyen .' ,
10/25/2012
The project islis not approved: See pomments below.
GENERAL
1. 'The applicant shall comply with all the Electric Utility Engineering Department service
requirements noted during plan review. '
2. The applicant shall be responsible for identification and lo'cation of aJl utilitie$, both public and
private, within the work area. Prior to any excavation work at the site, the applicant shall
contact Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-800-227-2600, at least 48 hours prior to
beginning w?rk.
3.' The applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all existing utility services and/or meters
including a signed affidavit of vacancy, on the form provided by the Building Inspection
Division. Utilities will be disconnected or removed within 10 working days aft~r receipt of ' ,
request. 'The demolition permit will be issued after all, utility services and/Qr meters have been
disconnected and removed.
THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE INCORPORATED IN SUBMITTALS FOR ELECTRIC SERVICE
1. A completed Electric Load Sheet and a full set of plans must be included with all appliCations
involving electrical work. The load sheet must be included with the preliminary submittal.
I '
2. Industrial and large commercial customers must allow sufficient .Iead-time for Electric Utility
Engineering and Operations (typically 8-12 weeks after advance engineering fees have been
paid) to design and construct the electric service requested.
3. " Only one electric service lateral is permitted per parcel. Utilities Rule & ,Regulation #18.
PaOA 1 of4
4. If this project requires padmount transformers, the location of the transformers shall be shown
on "the site plan and ~pproved by the Utilities Department and the Architectural Review Bo'ard.
Utilities Rule & Regulations #3 & #16 (see detail comments below). ' .
5. Th~ developer/owner shall provide space for installing padmount equipment (Le. transformers
switches, and interrupters) and associated substructure as req~ired by the City. .'
6: The customer shall install all electrical substructures (conduits, boxes and pads) required from
the service point to the customer's switchgear. The design and installation shall be according to
the City standards and shown' on plans. Utilities Rule & Regulations #16 & #18.' '
7. ,l~cation of the electric panel/switchboard shall be shown on the site plan and approved by the
" Architectural Review Board and Utilities Department. .
8. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backflow preventers, and any other required equipment
shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show that no conflict will occur
between the utilities and landscape materials. In addition, all aboveground equipment shall be
screened in a manner that is consistent with the building design and setback requirements.
9. For services larger than 1600 amps, the customer will be required to provide a transition cabinet
as the interconnection point between the utility's padmount transformer a'nd the customer's main
switchgear. ,The cabinet design drawings must be submitted to the'ElectricUtility Engineering
Department for'review and approval.
10. For underground services, no more than four (4) 750 MCM conductors per phase can be"
connected to the transformer secondary terminals; otherwise, bus duct must be used for
connections to padmount transformer$. If customer installs a 'bus duct directly between the
transformer secondary terminals and the main switchgear, the installation of a transition cabinet
will not be required.
. .
11," The customer is responsible for sizing the service conductors and other req~ired equipment
according to the National Electric Code requirements and the City standards. Utilities Rule &
Regulation #18.
12. If the customer's total load exceeds 2500 kVA, service shalf be provided at ~e primarY voltage
of 12,470 ~olts and the customer shall provide the high voltage switchgear and transformers.
13. For primary services, the standard service protection is a pad-mountJault interrupter owned an
maintained by the City, installed at the customer's expense. The customer must provide and
install the pad and associated substructure required for the fault interrupter.
14. Any additional facilities and services requested by the Applicant that are beyond what the u,tility
deem$ standard facilities will be subject to Special Facilities charges! The Special Facilitie$
charges include the cost of installing the add~tional facilities as well as the cost of ownership.
,Utilities Rule & Regulation #20. .' .
15. Projects that require the extension of high voltage primary distribution lines or reinforcement of
offsiteelectric facilities will beat the customer's expense and must be coo~inated with the
Electric Utility.' .
Paae 2 of4
DURING CONSTRUCTION
1. Contractors and developers shall obtain permit from the Department of Public Works before
digging in the street right-of-\o/ay. This includes sidewalks, driveways and planter strips.
2. At least 48 hours prior to starting any excavation, the custor:ner mu~t call Underground Service
Alert (USA) at 1-800 .. 227~2600 to have existing"underground utilities located and marked. The
areas to be check by USA shall be delineated with white paint. All USA markings shall be'
removed by the customer or contractor when construction is complete. _.
3. The ~ustomer is resp~nsible. for installing all on-site substructures (conduits, boxe~ and pads)
required for t~e electnc service. No more than 270 degrees of bends are allowed In a
secondary conduit run. All conduits must be sized according to National Electric Code
requirements and no 1/2 -inch size conduits are permitted. All off-site substructure Work will
be constructed by the City at the customer's expense. Where mutually agreed upon by the
City and the Applicant, all or part of the off-site substructure work may be constructed by the
Applicant. -" .
4. All primary electric conduits shall be concrete encased with the top -of the encasement at the
depth of 30 inches. -No more than 180 degrees of bends are allowed in a primary conduit run.
Conduit runs over 500 feet in length require additional pull boxes.
5. All new underground conduits and substructures shall be installed per City standards and shall
be inspected by the Electrical Underground Inspector before backfilling,.
6. The customer is responsible for installing all underground electric service conductors, bus duct
-transition ,cabinets·, and other required equipment. The installation shall meet the National' '
Electric Code and the City Standards.'
7. Meter and switchboard requirements ,shall be in accordance with Electric Utility Service
Equipment Requirements Committee (EUSERC) drawings accepted by Utility and CPA
standards for meter installations.
8. Shop/factory drawings for switchboards (400A and greater) and associated hardware 'must be
submitted for review and approval prior to installing the switohgear to:
Gopal Jagannath, P.E.
Supervising Electric Project Engineer
UtiliUes Engineering (Electrical)
1007 ElweU Court
Palo Alto, ,CA 94303
9. Catalog cut sheets may not be substituted for factory drawing submittal.
10. All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Building
Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before energizing.
AFTER CONSTRUCTION & PRIOR TO FINALIZATION
1. The customer shall provide as-built drawings showing the location of all switchboards. conduits
(number and size), conductors (number and size), splice boxes, vaults and switch/transformer
pads.
Paae 3 of4
PRIOR TO'ISSUANCE OF BUILDING ,OCCUPANCY·PERMIT
1. The applicant shall secure a Public Utilities Easement ,for facilities installed on private property
for City use. . , ,
2. All required 'inspections have been completed and approved by both the Building Inspection
Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector.
3. All fees must be paid. .
4. All Special Facilities contracts or other agreementsn~ed to be s~gned by the City and
applicant. '
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
• At the time of this ARB review. the panel size is·not known. Any electrical service
size of 400 amps" and up has to be an underground service and 'fed by a pad-mount '
transformer. In which case CPAU requires an easement on the property to install a
pad-,mount transformer. The transformer will require a cle~rance of 8 feet in the
front and 3 feet all other sid~s. .
• CPAU will require 1 0'x1 0' Public Utility Easements for this transformer and 5'
easement for the conduit route to'the transformer.
• 'The,conceptual drawing showing no utility poles on Sedro lane. This will require
conduit and vaults to be installed on Sedro lane.' It will come with a 'cost to upgrade
all the existing electric, telephone and cable services from over-head to
underground. CPAU can provide an estimate cost for the electric portion of this
cost. The owner of 2211 EI Camino Real will have to work with AT&T and Comcast
to work out the detail cost and implementation 'for their portions.,
• The main panel is preferred to be at the ground floor and outdoor for 24/7 access.
Paae 4 of4
., ........ va liiJ ..... II I .. UIG "i'lJ'V"'''i'I "I ...... """,,",litCU UClitlyn UC1U"U UIC
minimum code requirements.
ATIACHMENT D
MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS CHECKLIST
NEWLY -CONSTRUCTED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS AND RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS OVER SIX STORIES
(INCORPORATE THIS FORM ONTO THE PLANS)
2209 .. 2215 E) Camino Real, Palo Alto, CA 94306 :' . ~ . , ~. . .' . .'" . ' :' .'
Project Address: :;<.~; '""'''-.:''''''' .": .. ,.;.!:..:." .. ",;;,.:.,:.,,,.::.:.; .. : .. :,.,.,.,,: •• "".:,;".\'.:.";, .. : . ./.~,.,,,.:;,: .. ;: ... ,:·,.i~' .. ,-\:, Date: _2_0_13_-0_4_-2_5 ____ _
REFERENCE
SHEET COMMENTS
(Sheet # or (e.g. note # or detail #)
ITEM CODE
# SECTION REQUIREMENT
N/A)
2, 5.106.4.1 Short-term bicycle parking E-1J K-l
3 5.106.4.1 Long-term bicycle parking NI A
4 5.106.5.2 Destpated parkin~ N/A
5 5.106.5.3.1 Electric vehicle supply wi rin a . N/A
6 5.106.8 Liaht pollution reduction L-l
7 5.106.10 Gradinl and Paving K-l
.,::":;,. :'.' '~'.';.',.;.' .,,)·::·<:'i:·: ;,~~~~~(f¢t.~~(rf.· .. ",,:;'··, '::::,{.:;,:' '>:':' .. .-.;",. .. ... " " .:',"" ~', ... '.: ::..::,:.,.,>.:~, .... ": ~~" ',~:.
8 5.210.1 ENERGY STAR equipment and appliances L-1
9 5.211.4 Prewirinl for future solar NI A
10 5.211.4.1 Off grid prewiring for future solar NI A .:.: .. ,;:/: .. : .. ; .... :~.~ .:.::.-;; . }{ '.' :.' .. w.~._: ,",." . '~" . .'·~·,C9~.V.~.O~. ".:.: . ' .. , ..
11 5.303.1.1 Buildings in excess of 50,000 square feetlsubmeter N/A
12 5.303.1.2 Exeess consumption N/A
13 5.303.2 10 Percent Savings G-1
14 5.303..2.1 Multiple showerheads serving one shower N/A
15 5.303.4 Wastewater reduction N/A
17 5.304.1 Water'budaet
18 5.304.2 Outdoor potable water use Nt A
·19 5.304..3 Irrigation desiln NI A
Sprinklers NI A
Roof overhangs and recesses entries M-l
Nonabsorbent interior fmisbes M~ 1
Construction waste diversion 0-1
Excavated soil and land clemn! d.ebris OM 1
Recycling b-y occupants O~ 1
Commissioning (> 10,000 sq ft.) NI A
-Owner's Proiect Reouirements (OPR) N/A
Page lof2
Revised 01-10-2011 WWW.ladbs.org
minimum code requirements.
REFERENCE
ITEM CODE REQUIREMENT SHEET COMMENTS
# SECTION (Sheet # or (e.g. note # or detail #)
N/A)
28 5.410.2.2 -Basis of Design (BOD) N/A
29 5.410.2.3 -Commissioning plan N/A
30 5.410.2.4 -Functional performanee testing N/A
31 5.410.2.5.1 -Systems manual N/A
32 5.410.2.5.2 -Systems operations training N/A
33 5.410.2.6 -COJDmissioning report N/A
34 5.410.4 Testio2t adjustin2 and balancinl « 10,000 sq ft) 0-1
35 5.410.4.2 -Systems
36 5.410.4.3 -Procedures
37 5.410.4.3.1 -HV AC balaneing
38 5.410.4.4 -Reporting
39 5.410.4.5 -Operation and maintenaitce manual
40 5.410.4.5.1 .-Inspections and reports
~.: ---: ..... :.:,} (.'. : .. ' ~.: . .' ,":' :·-::M.:YJ.K(l"ft~"~·ntf.;&'l·lTY: . . . ' ' '. .. . . :', :,' . ,' . . '-:; .'. ',~., '.':: ... ' :':";': .~:~: ·:'L ~; : :'i, ,.
" .: .... :' .. : .... ' .... ::: ...... i." .. ",:' '. . '" ',. .':' ,M .. . ' , ..... ' . _.
41 5.503.1 Fireplace N/A
42 5.503.1.1 Wood stoves N/A
43 5.504.3 Covering of duct openings and protection of
mechanical equipment during construction
44 5.504.4 -Finish material pollutant control
45 5.504.4.1 -Adhesives, sealanis, and caulks
46 5.504.4.3 -Paints and coatings
47 5.504.4.3.1 -Aerosol Paints and Coatings
48 5.504.4.3.1 -Verification
.49 5.504.4.4 Carpet systems
50 5.504.4.4.1 Carpet cushion
51 5.504.4.5 Composite wood products
52 5.504.4.6 Resilient flooring, systems
'53 5.504.5.3 Filters
54 5.504 .• 7 Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) control
5S 5.505.1 Indoor moistuFe control
56 5.506.1 Outside air delivery
57 5.506.2 Carbon dioxide (C02) monitorinl(
58 5.507.4 Acoustical control
59 ' Exterior noise· transmission for roof
60 5.507.4.1 Exterior noise transmission for waDs
61 Exterior noise transmission for windows
61 5.507.4.2 Interior sound
63 5.508.1 Ozone depletion and global warming reductions
64 5.508.1.1 CFCs
65 5.508.1.2 Halons
Page 2of2
Revised 01-10·2011 WWw.ladbs.org
TAl NING TRADING & INVESTMENT CO., INC.
668 BARBER LANE, MILPITAS, CA 95035 ATTACHMENT E
Proposal for Development Project: 2209 .. 2215 EI Camino Real, Palo Alto 94306
The development proposal for 2209 -2215 EI Camino Real is to replace the existing single story structure
on EI Camino at College, currently housing a restaurant and small retail space, with a new multi-story
mixed-use building providing retail, office, and residential space. ,
The new building will continue massing and height proflle on this block of EI Camino Real while
presenting residential uses facing buildings further up College Avenue. The aesthetic design is conceived
to harmonize with Immediate surroundings and the vocabulary developing in other projects in the
vicinity.
Stone cladding provides a substantial appearance for retail and entry functions at the ground floor level,
and continues to the primary office space on the second floor. The corner entrance Is angled to address
Ananda Center and new structures projected to the west. Residential and secondary uses are clad In a
lighter weight siding, and stepped back from the northeast (rear) site boundary. The building will also
incorporate sqlar and other building featuresj for example} we are in the process of selecting a solar
energy collection system. Access to outdoor open space is available at every floor, and the building has
several green planting areas and inset planting pockets on the fa~ade. The design concentrates parking
along the alleyway and shields it from public view along College Avenue.
We are interested in all commentary from the Architectural Review Board, especially those relating to
the fit of this proposed building into the surrounding and how best to enhance the surrounding
community. The 'team designing this project will also be a tenant for the office space within the building.
We are committed to green building, effiCiency, and want to be a good citizen of this community.
Sincerely,
~<(ltllJA (~ , (t,-.25 ~ ~Ol~
Karen Kam ( \I. P. ~ ) JiCU-tat.~ ') date
1'1lL! N ~IA.~ Trru:lJ~ ~ b.v '-o;.tlLU2.lA.l: c..o '/ !~c..,
2013-04-25 Page lofl