Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-04-05 Architectural Review Board Agenda Packet_______________________ 1.Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2.The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3.The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to two minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Architectural Review Board Regular Meeting Agenda: April 5, 2018 Council Chambers 250 Hamilton Avenue 8:30 AM Call to Order / Roll Call Oral Communications The public may speak to any item not on the agenda. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,2 Agenda Changes, Additions, and Deletions The Chair or Board majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management. City Official Reports 1.Transmittal of 1) the ARB Meeting Schedule and Attendance Record, 2), Administrative Staff-Level Architectural Review Approvals, and 3) Tentative Future Agenda items. Action Items Public Comment is Permitted. Applicants/Appellant Teams: Ten (10) minutes, plus ten (10) minutes rebuttal. All others: Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,3 2.PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 3265 El Camino Real [15PLN-00312]: Request for Architectural Review for a new Three Story Mixed Use Project with 282 Square Feet of Commercial Space and Three Residential Units (4,492 Square Feet). The Applicant Also Seeks a Variance to the Minimum Mixed-use Ground Floor Commercial Floor Area Ratio and Design Enhancement Exception to Reduce the Required Driveway Width From 20-Feet to 16-Feet six-Inches. Environmental Assessment: An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was Circulated for Public Comment From March 23, 2018 to April 23, 2018. Zoning District: CS (Service Commercial). For More Information Contact the City’s Consultant and Project Planner Adam Petersen at APetersen@m-group.us. 3.PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 620 Emerson Street (17PLN-00331): Recommendation on Applicant's Request for Approval of a Minor Architectural Review to Allow Demolition of an Existing Single Story Building and Construct a New Two Story 4,256 Square Foot Commercial Building for the Expansion of Nobu _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to two minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Restaurant. The Project Includes Replacement of Three On-Site Parking Spaces with Five In-Lieu Spaces in the Downtown Parking Assessment District. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the Provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Guideline Section 15303 (New Construction). Zoning District: CD-C(GF)(P) (Downtown Commercial). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Samuel Gutierrez at samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org. 4. PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 180 El Camino Real [18PLN-00055]: Request by Jason Smith, on Behalf of the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, for Minor Board Level Architectural Review of Façades and Signage Changes for new Tenant, Jeffrey, in Building J at Stanford Shopping Center. Environmental Assessment: Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guideline Section 15301. Zoning District: Community Commercial (CC). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Samuel Gutierrez at samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org. Study Session Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,3 5. QUASI-JUDICIAL. 695 Arastradero Road (18PLN-00046): Request for Preliminary Architectural Review of a Proposed new One-Story, 5,400 Square Foot Reception Pavilion With a Partial Storage Basement on a Central Portion of the Alta Mesa Cemetery. Environmental Assessment: Not a Project. The Formal Application Will be Subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review. Zoning District: RE (Residential Estate). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Claire Hodgkins at Claire.hodgkins@cityofpaloalto.org Approval of Minutes Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,3 6. Draft Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes for December 7, 2017 and February 1, 2018. 7. Draft Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes for February 15 and March 1, 2018. Subcommittee Items 8. 3001 El Camino Real [16PLN-00097]: Subcommittee Review of a Previously Approved Project That was Conditioned to Return With Project Changes Related to Roofline Changes and the Stair Enclosure Design. Environmental Assessment: Mitigated _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to two minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Negative Declaration (MND) was adopted on October 23, 2017. Zoning District: RM- 30 (Medium Density Multiple-Family Residence District) and CS (Service Commercial). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Claire Hodgkins at clairehodgkins@cityofpaloalto.org 9. 180 Hamilton Avenue [17PLN-00171]: Subcommittee Review of a Previously Approved Project That was Conditioned to Return With Project Changes Related to Landscaping and Lighting. Environmental Assessment: Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Guideline Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Zoning District: CD-C(GF)(P) (Downtown Commercial). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Samuel Gutierrez at samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org. Board Member Questions, Comments or Announcements Adjournment _______________________ 1. Spokespersons that are representing a group of five or more people who are identified as present at the meeting at the time of the spokesperson’s presentation will be allowed up to fifteen (15) minutes at the discretion of the Chair, provided that the non-speaking members agree not to speak individually. 2. The Chair may limit Oral Communications to 30 minutes for all combined speakers. 3. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak to two minutes to accommodate a larger number of speakers. Palo Alto Architectural Review Board Boardmember Biographies, Present and Archived Agendas and Reports are available online: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/architectural/default.asp. The ARB Boardmembers are: Chair Wynne Furth Vice Chair Peter Baltay Boardmember Robert Gooyer Boardmember Alex Lew Boardmember Osma Thompson Get Informed and Be Engaged! View online: http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city-of-palo-alto/ or on Channel 26. Show up and speak. Public comment is encouraged. Please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Board Secretary prior to discussion of the item. Write to us. Email the ARB at: arb@cityofpaloalto.org. Letters can be delivered to the Planning & Community Environment Department, 5th floor, City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. Comments received by Noon two Wednesdays preceding the meeting date will be included in the agenda packet. Comments received afterward through 3:00 PM the day before the meeting will be presented to the Board at the dais. Material related to an item on this agenda submitted to the ARB after distribution of the agenda packet is available for public inspection at the address above. Americans with Disability Act (ADA) It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329-2550 (voice) or by emailing ada@cityofpaloalto.org. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID # 9043) Report Type: City Official Reports Meeting Date: 4/5/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: City Official Report Title: Transmittal of 1) the ARB Meeting Schedule and Attendance Record, 2), Administrative Staff-Level Architectural Review Approvals, and 3) Tentative Future Agenda items. From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) review and comment as appropriate. Background The attached documents are provided for informational purposes. The Board may review and comment as it deems appropriate. If individual Boardmembers anticipate being absent from a future meeting, it is requested that be brought to staff’s attention when considering this item. The first attachment provides a meeting and attendance schedule for the current calendar year. Also included are the subcommittee assignments, which are determined by the ARB Chair. The second attachment transmits administrative staff-level Architectural Review approvals since the Board’s last meeting. Any party, including the applicant, may request a hearing by the ARB on the proposed director's decision by filing a written request with the planning division. There shall be no fee required for requesting such a hearing. These approvals are also posted on the City’s webpage at http://bit.ly/staffARdecisions. However, pursuant to 18.77.070(b)(5) any project relating to the installation of cabinets containing communications service equipment or facilities, pursuant to any service subject to Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 2.11, Chapter 12.04, Chapter 12.08, Chapter 12.09, Chapter 12.10, or Chapter 12.13 is not eligible for a request for hearing by any party, including the applicant. The third attachment is a Tentative Future Agenda that provides a summary of upcoming projects or discussion items. The hearing dates for these items are subject to change. 1 Packet Pg. 5 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 No action is required by the ARB for this item. Attachments:  Attachment A: ARB Meeting Schedule Assignments (DOCX)  Attachment B: Staff Approvals (DOCX)  Attachment C: Tentative Future Agendas (DOCX) 1 Packet Pg. 6 2018 Schedule Architectural Review Board Meeting Schedule & Assignments Meeting Dates Time Location Status Planned Absences 1/5/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Cancelled 1/18/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 2/1/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 2/15/2018 /17 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular Baltay 3/1/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 3/15/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 4/5/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 4/19/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular Gooyer 5/3/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 5/17/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 6/7/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 6/21/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 7/5/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 7/19/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 8/2/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 8/16/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 9/6/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 9/20/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 10/4/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 10/18/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 11/1/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 11/15/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 12/6/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 12/20/2018 8:30 AM Council Chambers Regular 2018 Subcommittee Assignments Assignments will be made by the ARB Chair on the day of the hearing January February March April May June 1/18 Baltay/Lew 4/5 Lew/Gooyer July August September October November December 1.a Packet Pg. 7 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t A : A R B M e e t i n g S c h e d u l e A s s i g n m e n t s ( 9 0 4 3 : C i t y O f f i c i a l R e p o r t ) Architectural Review Board Staff Approvals Project Description: ARB staff level review to accommodate a new secondary egress. Applicant: Michele Charles Address: 725 Welch Road, 18PLN-00021 Approval Date: March 28, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 11, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the installation of one blade sign. Applicant: Judy Kleinberg Address: 500 Pasteur Drive Street, 17PLN-00226 Approval Date: March 28, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 11, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the installation of one blade sign. Applicant: Judy Kleinberg Address: 355 Alma Street, 18PLN-00036 Approval Date: March 23, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 6, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the removal of three Magnolia trees. Applicant: Greg Bryan Address: 670 San Antonio Road, 18PLN-00048 Approval Date: March 20, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 3, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the installation of one internally-illuminated face lit letter display sign. Applicant: Phil Hottinger Address: 525 University Avenue, 17PLN-00460 Approval Date: March 21, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 4, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the installation of a new solar awning structure. Applicant: John Salmon Address: 4045 Transport Street , 18PLN-00062 Approval Date: March 20, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 3, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the installation of a new solar awning structure. Applicant: John Salmon Address: 4047 Transport Street , 18PLN-00063 Approval Date: March 20, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 3, 2018 1.b Packet Pg. 8 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : S t a f f A p p r o v a l s ( 9 0 4 3 : C i t y O f f i c i a l R e p o r t ) Architectural Review Board Staff Approvals Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the installation of a new solar awning structure. Applicant: John Salmon Address: 4061 Transport Street , 18PLN-00065 Approval Date: March 20, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 3, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the installation of a new solar awning structure. Applicant: John Salmon Address: 4045 Transport Street , 18PLN-00064 Approval Date: March 20, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 3, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the installation of a one non-illuminated monument sign. Applicant: Marco Aguirre Address: 2290 Birch Street, 18PLN-00078 Approval Date: March 16, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: arch 30, 2018 1.b Packet Pg. 9 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : S t a f f A p p r o v a l s ( 9 0 4 3 : C i t y O f f i c i a l R e p o r t ) Architectural Review Board 2018 Tentative Future Agenda The Following Items are Tentative and Subject to Change: Meeting Dates Topics April 19  2755 El Camino Real: Site & Design for 57 Units (3rd Formal)  3945 El Camino Real: Comfort Inn Renovation (1st Formal) May 3  4115 El Camino Real: Mixed Use with 7 Units (1st Formal)  Various Sites: Prelim for 16 AT&T Small Cell Nodes  565 Hamilton Ave: Prelim for Mixed Use Project 1.c Packet Pg. 10 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : T e n t a t i v e F u t u r e A g e n d a s ( 9 0 4 3 : C i t y O f f i c i a l R e p o r t ) Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID # 9033) Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/5/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: 3265 El Camino Real: New Mixed Use (3rd Formal) Title: PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 3265 El Camino Real [15PLN-00312]: Request for Architectural Review for a new Three Story Mixed Use Project with 282 Square Feet of Commercial Space and Three Residential Units (4,492 Square Feet). The Applicant Also Seeks a Variance to the Minimum Mixed-use Ground Floor Commercial Floor Area Ratio and Design Enhancement Exception to Reduce the Required Driveway Width From 20-Feet to 16-Feet six-Inches. Environmental Assessment: An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was Circulated for Public Comment From March 23, 2018 to April 23, 2018. Zoning District: CS (Service Commercial). For More Information Contact the City’s Consultant and Project Planner Adam Petersen at APetersen@m-group.us. From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) take the following action(s): 1. Consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration included in Attachment G together with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan included in the Findings in Attachment B. 2. Recommend approval of the proposed project to the Director of Planning and Community Environment based on findings and subject to conditions of approval. Report Summary The subject project was previously reviewed by the ARB on two other occasions. Earlier staff reports include background information, project analysis and evaluation to city codes and policies; these reports are available online: 2 Packet Pg. 11 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 June 1, 2017 ARB Hearing Report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/58031 Video: http://midpenmedia.org/architectural-review-board-63/ Minutes: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/61780 December 15, 2016 ARB Hearing Report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/55206 Video: http://midpenmedia.org/architectural-review-board-54/ Minutes: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/55450 The purpose of this report is to restate the comments made by the Board and detail the applicant’s response to those comments. The analysis section below builds upon the information contained in earlier reports and modified to reflect recent project changes. Background The ARB last considered this project on June 1, 2017. The Boards’ comments and the applicant’s response are summarized in the following table: ARB Comments/Direction Applicant Response Color and Materials Board: The Board asked if there was a materials and color board for the project at the June 1, 2017 hearing. The applicant has provided a color and materials board for the project. Breezeways: The Board asked how the breezeway works. The breezeways on the second and third levels provide access to the respective units. These breezeways have not changed. Driveway Width: The Board expressed concerns about the 16-foot wide driveway providing access to the building. The driveway width has not changed. It remains as 16-feet. However, the project provides a clear vision triangle as shown on Sheet SP 1. Rear Deck: The Board expressed concern about a deck over the drip line of the tree. The deck has been removed, and no structures are located under the drip line of the tree. Floorplans: The Board noted the floorplan of the first unit along El Camino Real may not be practical. The project retains the window along the right side of the building, providing light into the stair well and has opened up the area above the kitchen by removing the playroom. There are now two bedrooms in this unit as shown on Sheet A1.2. Garage Opening at Open Space: The Board commented that the opening from the garage onto the rear outdoor area and the rear back-up space may adversely affect residents’ safety. The opening from the garage to the rear outdoor area is screened with a metal garage door that matches the front garage door. The applicant has removed the trees from the planter at the back of the garage. The backup space provides 24-feet from the garage door, to 2 Packet Pg. 12 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 the property line, with approximately two-feet over the planter area. Commercial Retail Space: The Board discussed the square footage of the commercial retail space, and the possibility of eliminating the requirement of commercial space given that the project provides only an accessible space to satisfy the commercial requirement. As discussed at the June 1, 2017 hearing, the commercial space cannot be eliminated because it is a requirement of a mixed-use project. While the project provides an accessible space on-site for the commercial use to meet minimum requirements, there is also on-street parking along El Camino Real. Proximity to One-Story Restaurant: The Board expressed concern about the proximity of the project to the adjacent one- story restaurant, and requested an architectural feature or definition. The eastern elevation adjacent to the restaurant contains four windows and a recess with lap siding. The project also employs a stucco finish with score lines to enhance this portion of the proposed building. Residential Entrance: The Board requested a more prominent entrance for the residential uses. The applicant has provided a separate entrance for residents on the left hand side of the front elevation. This entrance is framed in stone veneer, with a vestibule, and illuminated address signage. El Camino Real Window Proportions: The Board commented that there were different proportion windows along El Camino elevation. Simplify and find consistency; have a constant vocabulary While the residential and commercial entrances are unique for each use, the windows and doors are proportionate in size. Similarly, the second and third story windows also employ a similar vocabulary in terms of their dimensions. Analysis1 This is the third hearing for the subject project. The primary issue facing the project at the first hearing was that the existing heritage tree was dictating the design and increased the mass of the building. The applicant subsequently revised the project to its proposed level of programming, thereby retaining the tree and accommodating a mixed-use project. The Board evaluated the second proposed design at the June 1, 2017 hearing, which was generally received favorably. However, the Board had questions and concerns about certain subject areas. The applicant has responded to these concerns and is now requesting a recommendation for approval given the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, South El Camino Real Design Guidelines and Palo Alto Municipal Code. The project now provides defined entry ways that distinguish the pedestrian entrance from the commercial entrance. Further, the commercial windows consist of rectangular glass panels that are similar in proportion to the door for the residential entrance and in similar proportion for 1 The information provided in this section is based on analysis prepared by the report author prior to the public hearing. The Architectural Review Board in its review of the administrative record and based on public testimony may reach a different conclusion from that presented in this report and may choose to take an alternative action from the recommendation in this report. 2 Packet Pg. 13 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 the windows on the residential units. The project has addressed the safety concerns related to the interaction of the parking area and the open space area. The project incorporates a metal lattice screen between the garage parking area and the rear yard open space. Additionally, the project has removed any decking from under the drip line of the tree. The applicant has also revised the floor plan of the residential unit along El Camino Real. The playroom and open space area is now a vaulted ceiling above the kitchen with a wrapped stairwell. Two areas of the project the Board commented on at the June 1, 2017 hearing have not been altered. These are the reduced commercial square footage and the width of the driveway. These issues were addressed in the June 1, 2017 staff report and are noted here as well. Driveway Width – Design Enhancement Exception The applicant requests a Design Enhancement Exception (DEE) for a reduction to the width of the driveway. The PAMC requires a 20-foot wide driveway for this project; the applicant is proposing a 16-foot wide driveway. To grant the DEE, the Director must find that:  There are exceptional circumstances that do not apply generally to the property in the same zone district.  The DEE will enhance the appearance of the site and preserve an existing or proposed architectural style.  The DEE is related to minor architectural feature. The DEE is requested to comply with the PAMC and the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. The Design Guidelines include a build-to-line that requires 50-percent of the buildings street frontage to be constructed at the front property line. The project is not able to comply with this requirement and still provide a 20-foot wide driveway and pedestrian access given the narrow width of the lot. Therefore, the DEE ensures that the building enhances the appearance of the site by placing as much massing as is possible along the street frontage while maintaining safe and adequate ingress and egress with the 16-foot wide driveway. Commercial Square Footage - Variance The project provides 282 square feet of commercial space. This is less than the required amount of 15-percent of the site area, which would trigger the need for 1,124 sf. of commercial tenant space. As discussed in the June 1, 2017 staff report, the applicant cannot provide parking in the form of a subterranean garage nor can the site accommodate at-grade parking as a result of the heritage tree. The reduced commercial square footage alleviates the parking demand for the site, and reduced the overall mass of the building creating a more compatible design for the project. As a result, the variance is necessary to achieve a compatible design for the project. The project site is subject to physical constraints that deprive it of privileges enjoyed by properties in the similar zone. Specifically, the heritage tree onsite makes strict application of the Zoning requirements for commercial area and therefore parking infeasible. The site cannot 2 Packet Pg. 14 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5 accommodate the commercial square footage required by the PAMC while also providing parking for the commercial use. The granting of the variance does not affect compliance or constitute a grant of special privilege. The project provides one onsite parking space for the proposed commercial use, consistent with the requirements of the PAMC. Lastly, as discussed in the Findings in Attachment B, the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. Environmental Review The subject project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. An initial study and mitigated negative declaration (IS/MND) was prepared for the project. The comment period for the IS/MND concludes on April 22, 2018. To date, staff has not received comments on the IS/MND. A copy of the Mitigation Monitoring Report is included as Attachment G. Public Notification, Outreach & Comments The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires notice of this public hearing be published in a local paper and mailed to owners and occupants of property within 600 feet of the subject property at least ten days in advance. Notice of a public hearing for this project was published in the Palo Alto Weekly on March 23, 2018 which is 12 days in advance of the meeting. Postcard mailing occurred on March 26, 2018, which is 10 in advance of the meeting. Public Comments As of the writing of this report, no project-related, public comments were received. Alternative Actions In addition to the recommended action, the Architectural Review Board may: 1. Approve the project with modified findings or conditions; 2. Continue the project to a date (un)certain; or 3. Recommend project denial based on revised findings. Report Author & Contact Information ARB2 Liaison & Contact Information Adam Petersen, Senior Planner Jodie Gerhardt, AICP, Planning Manager (408) 340-5642 x 106 (650) 329-2575 apetersen@m-group.us jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments:  Attachment A: Location Map (PDF)  Attachment B: Draft ARB Findings (DOCX)  Attachment C: Performance Criteria (DOCX)  Attachment D: Zoning Comparison Table (DOCX) 2 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org 2 Packet Pg. 15 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6  Attachment E: Draft Conditions of Approval (DOCX)  Attachment F: Applicant Project Description (PDF)  Attachment G: June 1, 2017 Excerpt ARB Minutes (PDF)  Attachment H: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (DOCX)  Attachment I: Project Plans (DOCX) 2 Packet Pg. 16 2.a Packet Pg. 17 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t A : L o c a t i o n M a p ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) ATTACHMENT B ARB FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL 3265 El Camino Real 15PLN-00312 Section A: CEQA Findings The Director of Planning and Community Environment (Director) makes the following findings: The environmental effects of the Project have been analyzed in an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA). 1. The IS/MND identified one or more potentially significant effects of the Project on the environment as well as mitigation measures that would reduce the significant effects to a less than significant level. The Project applicant, before public release of the draft MND, has made or agreed to make revisions to the Project that clearly mitigate the effects to a less than significant level as demonstrated through the adoption of the related Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). 2. The Director has independently reviewed and considered the IS/MND, together with any public comments received during the public review process and other information in the record, prior to acting upon or approving the Project. 3. The IS/MND reflects and represents the independent judgment and analysis of the City of Palo Alto as lead agency. 4. Based on the whole record of proceedings, the Director hereby finds that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment, and does hereby adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and related Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared for the Project. 5. The Director of Planning and Community Environment at the Director’s Office at 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94301 is the custodian of records and documents of proceedings on which this decision is based. Section B: Architectural Review Findings The design and architecture of the proposed improvements, as conditioned, complies with the Findings for Architectural Review as required in Chapter 18.76 of the PAMC. Finding #1: The design is consistent with applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, coordinated area plans (including compatibility requirements), and any relevant design guides. 2.b Packet Pg. 18 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) The project is consistent with Finding #1 because:  The project promotes mixed-use development in the El Camino Real corridor.  The design of the three-unit development is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the City’s Comprehensive Plan in that the site is designated Multiple Family Residential and the Comprehensive Plan Table indicates compliance with the applicable policies. The proposed project is generally consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan, including the following goals and policies: Comp Plan Goals and Policies How project adheres or does not adhere to Comp Plan The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the site is Service Commercial (CS). The project consists of a new mixed-use development, which the Comp Plan states may be appropriate (page 32). Land Use and Community Design Goal L-1 A compact and resilient city providing residents and visitors with attractive neighborhoods, work places, shopping districts, public facilities and open spaces. The project retains the City’s compact nature because it occurs on a site that is infill and provides an attractive development because it is consistent with the City’s design criteria. POLICY L-1.2: Limit future urban development to currently developed lands within the urban service area. The boundary of the urban service area is otherwise known as the urban growth boundary. Retain undeveloped land west of Foothill Expressway and Junipero Serra as open space, with allowances made for very low-intensity development consistent with the open space character of the area. Retain undeveloped land northeast of Highway 101 as open space. The project is an urban infill development proposal in the urban service area of the city. Because it proposes development on a previously disturbed parcel, it preserves undeveloped land as open space. The project is compatible with the surrounding uses and the overall scale and character because it consists of a building that is only one story higher than the adjacent two story hotel and is further the same height as a structure located northwest of the site along El Camino Real. The project provides three residential units to the community which the City is in need of. POLICY L-1.3: Infill development in the urban service area should be compatible with its surroundings and the overall scale and character of the city to ensure a compact, efficient development pattern. POLICY L-1.6: Encourage land uses that address the needs of the community and manage change and development to benefit the community. 2.b Packet Pg. 19 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Goal L-2 An enhanced sense of “community” with development designed to foster public life, meet citywide needs and embrace the principles of sustainability. The proposed project is consistent with the policies that implement Goal L-2 thereby fostering public life, meeting city needs and embracing the principles of sustainability. As noted in Finding #6, the project implements numerous sustainable development techniques. Further, the project meets the City’s housing need by providing three units to the housing stock and fosters public life by providing housing and therefore residents in a commercial and urban area of the City that will sustain local businesses. POLICY L-2.4: Use a variety of strategies to stimulate housing, near retail, employment, and transit, in a way that connects to and enhances existing neighborhoods The project consists of a mixed-use development along El Camino Real, which contains commercial development. A bus stop is located approximately 260 feet northwest of the project site. Therefore, the project provides housing near retail, employment, and transit. POLICY L-2.6: Create opportunities for new mixed use development consisting of housing and retail. The project implements this policy by providing a mixed-use project. POLICY L-2.8: When considering infill redevelopment, work to minimize displacement of existing residents. The project is an infill project on a previously disturbed site in an urbanized area. It will not displace existing residents, but will provide housing for new residents. Goal L-4: Inviting pedestrian scale centers that offer a variety of retail and commercial services and provide focal points and community gathering places for the city’s residential neighborhoods and employment districts. The project is consistent with Policy L-4.15 by providing a mixed-use development along El Camino Real comprised of residential and commercial uses. The project therefore contributes to enhancing El Camino Real as a local serving corridor. The project is consistent with Goal L-4 because it implements Policy L- 4.15. El Camino Real POLICY L-4.15: Recognize El Camino Real as both a local serving and regional serving corridor, defined by a mix of commercial uses and housing. 2.b Packet Pg. 20 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Goal L-3: Safe, Attractive Residential Neighborhoods, Each With Its Own Distinct Character and Within Walking Distance of Shopping, Services, Schools, and/or other Public Gathering Places. The project is consistent Policies L-12 and L- 14, and therefore implements Goal L-3. The project provides direct connections from the entrances to the sidewalk and street. These features establish a defined primary frontage along Oxford Avenue. The project preserves the character of the residential neighborhood by providing a residential use that is similar in scale, silhouette and materials as the adjacent structures. Further, the project is located across the street from a new mixed-use development with commercial and service type uses along El Camino Real. Therefore, the project fulfills Goal L-3 of creating safe, attractive residential neighborhoods in walking distance of shopping and services. POLICY L-12: Preserve the character of residential neighborhoods by encouraging new or remodeled structures to be compatible with the neighborhood and adjacent structures. POLICY L-14: Design and arrange new multifamily buildings, including entries and outdoor spaces, so that each unit has a clear relationship to a public street. Goal L-6: Well-designed buildings that create coherent development patterns and enhance city streets and public spaces. The project is a high-quality design that is compatible with the surrounding development. The project is similar in scale, silhouette and materials as the surrounding buildings. The project employs board and batten siding, composition roofing and metal roofing on a mid-story roof. These high- quality materials are found in the surrounding structures. Similarly, the dimensions of the building, including the height, are representative of buildings on the adjacent sites. The project provides entry ways that are human scaled along the Oxford Avenue frontage with covered porches, and all facades are articulated and incorporate windows. These features avoid blank walls and create a building with human-scaled details and massing. Therefore, the project creates a coherent development pattern and enhances City streets and public spaces. POLICY L-48: Promote high quality, creative design and site planning that is compatible with surrounding development and public spaces. 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. Transportation Element Goal T-3: Maintain an efficient roadway network for all users The project supports a pedestrian-friendly design by providing direct connections from 2.b Packet Pg. 21 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) POLICY T-3.7: Encourage pedestrian-friendly design features such as sidewalks, street trees, on-site parking, gathering spaces, gardens, outdoor furniture, art, and interesting architectural details. the sidewalk to the front door. The project enhances the pedestrian environment by providing new street trees that buffer the sidewalk from the street. The project also contains locations for bike parking, on-site parking, and architectural details. Providing these features encourage and promote walking and bicycling, and therefore fulfills this Goal and Policy. Goal T-5: Encourage attractive, convenient, efficient and innovative parking solutions for all users. The project fulfills this goal by being consistent with Policy T-5.6. It provides convenient, efficient, and innovative parking by incorporating a mechanized lift. The parking configuration is convenient, efficient and innovative because it is utilizes a mechanical lift, is accessible to two the residential units and offers independently accessible parking spaces. POLICY T-5.6: Strongly encourage the use of below-grade or structured parking, and explore mechanized parking instead of surface parking for new developments of all types while minimizing negative impacts including on groundwater and landscaping where feasible. The project employs mechanized parking lift systems for four spaces instead of surface parking. Natural Environment Element Goal N-2: A thriving urban forest that provides public health, ecological, economic, and aesthetic benefits for Palo Alto. The project is consistent with Goal N-2 because it preserves the tree onsite and offsite thereby contributing to the urban forest that promotes public health, ecological, economic and aesthetic benefits. POLICY N-2.7: Strive toward the aspirational, long-term goal of achieving a 50 percent tree canopy cover across the city The project retains the oak tree onsite that contributes towards the overall tree canopy in the City. 2.b Packet Pg. 22 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Goal N-6: An environment that minimizes the adverse impacts of noise. As discussed in the initial study and mitigated negative declaration, the project will not adversely impact the noise environment with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures. POLICY N-6.9: Continue to require applicants for new projects or new mechanical equipment in the Multifamily, Commercial, Manufacturing or Planned Community districts to submit an acoustical analysis demonstrating compliance with the Noise Ordinance prior to receiving a building permit The project has prepared an acoustical analysis that demonstrates compliance with the City’s Noise Ordinance. POLICY N-6.11: Continue to prioritize construction noise limits around sensitive receptors, including through limiting construction hours and individual and cumulative noise from construction equipment. The project will comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance, which will limit construction hours and noise from construction equipment. The project has also been reviewed for conformance with the development standards in the zoning code and found to be in compliance with the intent and regulations contained therein. A comprehensive review of the project to applicable development standards is included in the administrative record. The project is subject to the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. Specifically, the project is located in the Cal-Ventura area, which calls for buildings to front El Camino Real with prominent facades, entries, and accessibility to pedestrians with pedestrian friendly design. The project is consistent with Cal-Ventura area vision because it locates the building mass at the front façade facing El Camino Real. Further, the project provides a defined pedestrian entry through a front door framed by stone along the El Camino Real façade of the building. The project is further consistent with the following applicable South El Camino Real design guidelines:  3.1.1 – The project provides a 12-foot wide effective sidewalk along El Camino Real by setting back the building to create the 12-foot wide sidewalk.  3.1.2 – The 12-foot wide sidewalk is paved continuously from curb to building face.  3.1.3 – The building is located at the back of the 12-foot wide sidewalk. This design feature is consistent with Guideline 3.1.3 which states that buildings should be built up to the sidewalk to reinforce the definition and importance of the street. o The project is further consistent with Guideline 3.1.3.b by providing 33.5 feet of the required 24.97 feet of the building façade on the first floor along El Camino Real.  3.1.5 – The project satisfies the minimum height requirement of 25- feet by providing a building measuring 38 feet three-inches. 2.b Packet Pg. 23 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) )  3.1.6, 4.2.1, and 4.2.2 – The project provides a building with pedestrian and commercial entries along El Camino Real, which is consistent with Design Guideline 3.1.6 and 4.2.1. The entries are also consistent with Guideline 4.2.2 which encourages marking entries with architectural features. The signage and metal awning over the commercial entrance and stone veneer wrapped around the residential entrance provide architectural features that mark building entrances.  3.3.2 – The rear portion of the project complies with Design Guideline 3.3.2 because it the project is designed to provides an outdoor room with the open space area at the rear of the site.  The stone and glass surrounds on the pedestrian and commercial entrances, respectively, comply with Design Guideline 4.1.4. These features create a building with human scale. Further, the stone veneer along the first floor, stucco finish on the second and third, and metal cap and band at the parapet reflect the base, body and roof, design outlined in Guideline 4.1.5. Further, these materials represent a variety of long lasting materials as encouraged by Design Guideline 4.8.1 and 4.8.2.  The commercial entrance and windows are glass and extend a minimum of 75-percent of the vertical façade of the commercial portion of the project consistent with Design Guideline 4.3.2.  The balconies and windows on the second floor provide an indication of residential uses consistent with Design Guideline 4.3.5.  The building incorporates stucco, lap siding, aluminum windows, metal railings and lattices which are consistently applied on each elevation, pursuant to Guideline 4.3.6.  The project is consistent with Design Guideline 4.5.1, which strongly encourages a flat roof and parapets. Rooflines on the project are horizontal and parapets have a metal cap and band. These rooflines are consistent throughout the building, pursuant to Design Guideline 4.5.4. Further, they conceal mechanical equipment as encouraged by Guideline 4.5.7.  The project incorporates two locations for signage for the commercial tenant. These locations are logical as they are either above or to the side of the commercial tenant entrance. This design is consistent with Design Guideline 5.1.1 which encourages locations of signage to be an integral part of the building. The proposed signs do not cover or obscure any part of the building and is shown as part of the elevations. Finding #2: The project has a unified and coherent design, that: a. creates an internal sense of order and desirable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community, b. preserves, respects and integrates existing natural features that contribute positively to the site and the historic character including historic resources of the area when relevant, c. is consistent with the context-based design criteria of the applicable zone district, d. provides harmonious transitions in scale, mass and character to adjacent land uses and land use designations, e. enhances living conditions on the site (if it includes residential uses) and in adjacent residential areas. 2.b Packet Pg. 24 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) The project is consistent with Finding #2 because: Identifiable elements, such as entrances, are positioned to be easily identified and dramatic. They lead to comfortable circulation throughout the project that allows users and visitors a pleasant path while meandering path is simultaneously recognizable to unit entrances and outdoor spaces. The attempt to provide simple yet nuanced order and environment allows for privacy and an open environment at the same time. The project preserves the Heritage Oak Tree and street trees on- and off-site. These natural features are the main historic and cultural features of this small site. Both have been preserved and integrated with the design. Careful attention has been paid to appropriate scale, massing and material usage to meet the aspects of the zoning code and comments provided by various city departments and the architectural review board. The project is consistent with the massing requirements because it complies with the PAMC and the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. Proper buffering from El Camino Real and placement of open space at the rear is intended to enhance the living experience. In addition, the El Camino Real façade is provided with deep recesses and other shielding to eliminate any undesirable effects of the street. These features enhance the living conditions on the site. Pursuant to PAMC 18.16.090(b), the following context-based design considerations and findings are applicable to this project. These context-based design criteria are intended to provide additional standards to be used in the design and evaluation of development in a commercial district. The purpose is to encourage development in a commercial district to be responsible to its context and compatibility with adjacent development as well as to promote the establishment of pedestrian oriented design. 1. Pedestrian and Bicycle Environment The design of new projects shall promote pedestrian walkability, a bicycle friendly environment, and connectivity through design elements The project promotes pedestrian walkability by providing the area necessary for a 12-foot wide walk along El Camino Real. This 12-foot wide sidewalk enhances the pedestrian environment and promotes walkability because there is adequate space and setbacks for pedestrians from El Camino Real. 2. Street Building Facades Street facades shall be designed to provide a strong relationship with the sidewalk and the street (s), to create an environment that supports and encourages pedestrian activity through design elements The project provides a strong relationship with the sidewalk by locating two building entrances, one for the residential use and one for the commercial use, at the back of the required 12-foot wide sidewalk. Pedestrian activity is encouraged by mixing residential and commercial uses and locating the primary access points at the front entrance to the building. 3. Massing and Setbacks Buildings shall be designed to minimize massing and conform to proper setbacks 2.b Packet Pg. 25 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) As demonstrated in Attachment C, the project conforms to the height, setback, and floor area requirements. Accordingly, its massing is minimized and conforms to the proper setbacks. 4. Low Density Residential Transitions Where new projects are built abutting existing lower scale residential development, care shall be taken to respect the scale and privacy of neighboring properties The project does not directly abut a lower scale residential development. A parking lot and trees buffer the site by approximately 90-feet from an existing residential use. The combination of the distance and obscuring of the structure by trees, screens, protects the privacy, and buffers the project from the residential use. 5. Project Open Space Private and public open space shall be provided so that it is usable for the residents and visitors of the site The project provides approximately 1,718 sf. of open space, or 572 sf. per unit which exceeds the code requirement of 200 sf. per unit. The open space is provided in the form of private open space on decks, patios, and a larger usable open space at the rear of the site. The project also provides approximately 2,200 sf. of landscaping on-site. Public open space is facilitated in the form of the wider sidewalk along El Camino Real. The project has forgone developable area by providing sidewalk width. For these reasons the project satisfies the finding requiring private and public open space that is usable for the residents and visitors. 6. Parking Design Parking shall be accommodated but shall not be allowed to overwhelm the character of the project or detract from the pedestrian environment The project conceals parking design by wrapping the building around the parking spaces and placing two spaces below grade in mechanical lifted parking. Two other spaces are located in a garage at the rear of the structure. This configuration results in parking that is not visible from the public right-of-way or surrounding properties. Further, the mass of the building and its corresponding design are reduced by the below grade parking spaces. By locating the spaces below grade, the buildings volume and massing is reduced because the parking spaces are not filling the corresponding space above grade. Further, the parking design preserves the pedestrian environment because access to the parking is provided through an existing curb cut on the property and the project provides clear vision triangles for motorists exiting the parking area. Therefore, the parking design does not overwhelm the character of the project or detract from the pedestrian environment. 7. Large Multi-Acre Sites Large sites (over one acre) shall be designed so that street, block, and building patterns are consistent with those of the surrounding neighborhood The project is not a large multi-acre site. Therefore this criteria is not applicable. 8. Sustainability and Green Building Design 2.b Packet Pg. 26 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Project design and materials to achieve sustainability and green building design should be incorporated into the project The project is design and materials achieve sustainability and green building design. The project’s consistency with this criteria is noted in Finding #6. In accordance with the City’s Green Building Regulations, the building will satisfy the requirements for CALGreen Mandatory + Tier 2. Finding #3: The design is of high aesthetic quality, using high quality, integrated materials and appropriate construction techniques, and incorporating textures, colors, and other details that are compatible with and enhance the surrounding area. The project is consistent with Finding #3 because: The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site in that the building is located in a service commercial zone district where other buildings of similar size and scale are common. The design is a reflection of its mixed-use. Individual entries and detailed materials reinforce a pedestrian scale for both the residential and commercial business entrances. The forms are modern reflecting the character of the building to the northwest along El Camino Real. The project employs high quality materials embodied in the use of stone veneers, stucco, metal and lap siding. These features employ appropriate textures, colors, and details. The stucco is a light sand finish, the color scheme employs neutral earth tones and is not garish, and appropriate use of details in metal railings, and entrance awnings. The design concentrates the massing along the street edge, yet contains elements at the entries that contribute to the pedestrian scale. The stepping design creates a harmonious transition between the street and the building. The design is compatible with the sidewalks, roadway, utilities and other existing improvements. Further, the project as conditioned is consistent with the South El Camino Real design guidelines, which ensures a high aesthetic quality. Finding #4: The design is functional, allowing for ease and safety of pedestrian and bicycle traffic and providing for elements that support the building’s necessary operations (e.g. convenient vehicle access to property and utilities, appropriate arrangement and amount of open space and integrated signage, if applicable, etc.). The project is consistent with Finding #4 because: All departments have vetted the proposed design for safety and proper access to functional and utilitarian elements. There are no comments related to the layout of the project concerning the safety of pedestrian and bicycle traffic from the Transportation or Fire Department. The project provides four long term bicycle parking spaces in lockers which promotes the safe storage of bicycles. As conditioned, the project will screen equipment along the street frontage. This will enhance the pedestrian environment because screening the equipment improves the aesthetic quality of the streetscape. The parking design preserves the pedestrian environment because access to the parking is provided through an existing curb cut on the property and the project provides clear vision triangles for motorists exiting the parking area. 2.b Packet Pg. 27 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Finding #5: The landscape design complements and enhances the building design and its surroundings, is appropriate to the site’s functions, and utilizes to the extent practical, regional indigenous drought resistant plant material capable of providing desirable habitat that can be appropriately maintained. The project is consistent with Finding #5 because: The size and location of the existing Oak is a dominant element in the landscape. The landscape design uses predominately native planting compatible to the Oak Tree to create an urban oasis and promote increased wildlife habitat. Narrow growing plants and vines are used in the narrow spaces to complement the architecture and provide visual interest. The circular patio area planting is designed to create a comfortable space with sense of privacy within the urban environment. Finding #6: The project incorporates design principles that achieve sustainability in areas related to energy efficiency, water conservation, building materials, landscaping, and site planning. The project is consistent with Finding #6 because: The project retains the heritage oak tree on the site. Maintaining the tree on the site contributes to shade and improves air quality through photosynthesis. The project consists of infill development which encourages walkability which reduces automobile dependency and use of fossil fuels. The project is water efficient because the landscape planting incorporates native planting and is extremely water efficient. Plants are grouped into similar water use zones, increasing water efficiency. The irrigation system incorporates a weather based controller with bubblers, and three-inches of mulch discourage weeds and evapotranspiration. The planting has been spaced to minimize any pruning and over growth in to paved spaces. These design features enhance water efficiency. Lastly, all plumbing equipment will meet California requirements for efficiency which are close to consistency with the majority of the LEED requirements. In accordance with the City’s Green Building Regulations, the building will satisfy the requirements for CALGreen Mandatory + Tier 2. Section C: Design Enhancement Exception Findings The design and architecture of the proposed improvements, as conditioned, complies with the Findings for Design Enhancement Exception as required in Chapter 18.76.050 of the PAMC. Finding #1: There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or site improvements involved that do not apply generally to property in the same zone district; The project is consistent with Finding #1 because: The project is subject to extraordinary circumstances and site improvements that do not apply generally apply to other properties in the same zone. The property is subject to the development 2.b Packet Pg. 28 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) standards of the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines as well as the Palo Alto Municipal Code. These requirements create a conflict on the lot because its width is less than 50-feet. The South El Camino Real Design Guidelines require that the front building façade comprise 50-percent of the lot width and the PAMC requires a 20-foot wide driveway for access. The site is also required to provide access for emergency purposes which necessitates that the building be setback on one side. The combination of the 50-percent building frontage and access requirements on this lot which is less than 50-feet wide creates a situation where the driveway width cannot be satisfied. Therefore, the narrow lot width represents the extraordinary circumstance and the site improvements to the site are unique for this subject property in the zoning district. Finding #2: The granting of the application will enhance the appearance of the site or structure, or improve the neighborhood character of the project and preserve an existing or proposed architectural style, in a manner which would not otherwise be accomplished through strict application of the minimum requirements of this title (Zoning) and the architectural review findings set forth in Section 18.76.020(d); and The project is consistent with Finding #2 because: The requested DEE is necessary for consistency with the frontage requirements for buildings along El Camino Real. The South El Camino Real Design Guidelines require that the front façade of buildings along the street edge extend for 50-percent of the lot width. In this case the lot width measures less than 50 feet. The combination of a 20-ft wide driveway with pedestrian and emergency access requirements would result in a building that is inconsistent with the development standard contained in the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. Further, the project proposes to retain an existing curb cut and access point to the site, and would therefore not deteriorate an existing condition. The exception allows for the building to satisfy the 50-percent requirement, which instead of creating a driveway and auto dominant design, results in an enhanced architectural structure by positioning the front façade along 50-percent of the width of the site. Finding #3: The exception is related to a minor architectural feature or site improvement that will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience. The project is consistent with Finding #3 because: The reduction of the driveway width requirement from 20-feet to 16-feet is a minor architectural feature that enhances the design of the building. The reduced driveway width provides for a building to extend along 50-percent of the street frontage. The proposed reduced driveway width will not be detrimental or injurious to the property or the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience as well. The project would utilize n existing curb cut that is used by visitors at the adjacent hotel. The project incorporates visibility triangles which enable those exiting the site to clearly see pedestrians and cyclists. Therefore, the project will preserve the existing auto circulation and create a design that is not detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience. 2.b Packet Pg. 29 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section D: Variance Findings The design and architecture of the proposed improvements, as conditioned, complies with the Findings for a Variance as required in Chapter 18.76.030 of the PAMC. Finding #1: Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including (but not limited to) size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the requirements and regulations prescribed in this title substantially deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and in the same zoning district as the subject property. Special circumstances that are expressly excluded from consideration are: (A) The personal circumstances of the property owner, and (B) Any changes in the size or shape of the subject property made by the property owner or his predecessors in interest while the property was subject to the same zoning designation. The project is consistent with Finding #1 because: The subject property is physically constrained by a tree onsite which makes strict application of the Zoning requirement for commercial square footage infeasible. The project cannot implement the parking requirements commensurate for the required for the size of the commercial use because of the heritage tree located onsite. The PAMC does not provide a mechanism for removal of the tree, and the applicant cannot provide subterranean parking garage because of the root structure of the tree. These conditions constitute a special circumstance where strict application of the requirements for commercial space deprives the property of providing a larger commercial space than is proposed. Finding #2: The granting of the application shall not affect substantial compliance with the regulations or constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district as the subject property, and The project is consistent with Finding #2 because: The project is substantially compliant with regulations and does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity. As demonstrated in Attachment G, the project is consistent with the development standards of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan as demonstrated by Finding #1 of the Architectural Review. The variance for reduced commercial square footage does not constitute a grant of special privilege because the site is physically constrained by the presence of a heritage oak tree. Accordingly, the site cannot accommodate the parking area for a commercial use that complies with the area requirements. This reduction in the required area for a commercial use is not inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity. Finding #3: The granting of the application is consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of this title (Zoning), and 2.b Packet Pg. 30 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) The project is consistent with Finding #3 because: As demonstrated in Finding #1 of the Architectural Review, the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and in Attachment G, the purpose of the Zoning Code. The project establishes a mixed-use development, with reduced commercial square footage. The overall programming of the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. Therefore, Finding #3 can be made in the affirmative for the project. Finding #4: The granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience. The project is consistent with Finding #4 because: The reduced commercial square footage will not be detrimental or injurious to the property, nor will it be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience. The reduced square footage of the commercial space would result in fewer detriments to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience because the area would not generate the demand for commercial services that a larger space would. A larger commercial space would facilitate a larger amount of customers than the smaller space proposed by the project. The larger space would require additional parking and therefore additional interactions between vehicles and pedestrians and cyclists, thereby increasing the frequency of interactions and therefore likelihood of detrimental effects. Contrary, the smaller space encourages pedestrian activity, fewer vehicle trips and fewer interactions between cars and pedestrians. This design reduces the potential of detrimental impacts to the public’s health, safety, general welfare and convenience. 2.b Packet Pg. 31 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Attachment C Performance Criteria 18.23 3265 El Camino Real 15PLN-00312 These performance criteria are intended to provide additional standards to be used in the design and evaluation of developments in the multi-family, commercial, and industrial zones. The purpose is to balance the needs of the uses within these zones with the need to minimize impacts to surrounding neighborhoods and businesses. The criteria are intended to make new developments and major architectural review projects compatible with nearby residential and business areas, and to enhance the desirability of the proposed developments for the site residents and users, and for abutting neighbors and businesses. 18.23.020 Trash Disposal and Recycling Project Consistency Assure that development provides adequate and accessible interior areas or exterior enclosures for the storage of trash and recyclable materials in appropriate containers, and that trash disposal and recycling areas are located as far from abutting residences as is reasonably possible. The project provides adequate and accessible interior areas for the storage of trash. The project provides an enclosed trash storage area located at the rear of the building which will then be stored near the front of the building for pickup. Each location is enclosed. The trash areas are located more than 100 ft. from the closest residence. Given the narrow lot dimensions and tight constraints onsite, the rear location provides area to accommodate the trash enclosure. Therefore, the proposed location of the trash enclosure is as far as reasonably possible from the adjacent resident. 18.23.030 Lighting Project Consistency To minimize the visual impacts of lighting on abutting or nearby residential sites and from adjacent roadways. The project site is not adjacent to abutting residential sites. The project includes a photometric plan on sheet L-7.3 that demonstrates light will not spill over the rear property line nor the front property line into the street. 18.23.040 Late Night Uses and Activities Project Consistency The purpose is to restrict retail or service commercial businesses abutting (either directly or across the street) or within 50 feet of residentially zoned properties or properties with existing residential uses located within nonresidential zones, with operations or activities between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Operations subject The project does not propose late night uses or activities. Future late night uses or activities would be subject to requirements when proposed. 2.c Packet Pg. 32 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : P e r f o r m a n c e C r i t e r i a ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) to this code may include, but are not limited to, deliveries, parking lot and sidewalk cleaning, and/or clean up or set up operations, but does not include garbage pick-up. 18.23.050 Visual, Screening and Landscaping Project Consistency Privacy of abutting residential properties or properties with existing residential uses located within nonresidential zones (residential properties) should be protected by screening from public view all mechanical equipment and service areas. Landscaping should be used to integrate a project design into the surrounding neighborhood, and to provide privacy screening between properties where appropriate. The project has concealed all mechanical equipment in an enclosed equipment cabinet. The proposed landscaping along the perimeter of the site is integrated into project design by serving as a buffer between the site and adjacent uses. The project is conditioned to screen backflow devices along the street, and trees located along the rear property would screen any views to and from the site thereby providing privacy for all residents. 18.23.060 Noise and Vibration Project Consistency The requirements and guidelines regarding noise and vibration impacts are intended to protect residentially zoned properties or properties with existing residential uses located within nonresidential zones (residential properties) from excessive and unnecessary noises and/or vibrations from any sources in abutting industrial or commercially zoned properties. Design of new projects should reduce noise from parking, loading, and refuse storage areas and from heating, ventilation, air conditioning apparatus, and other machinery on nearby residential properties. New equipment, whether mounted on the exterior of the building or located interior to a building, which requires only a building permit, shall also be subject to these requirements. The project proposes roof mounted HVAC equipment. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration concluded that noise will conform to the City’s noise requirements by emitting less than eight decibels above ambient at the adjacent commercial property lines. Further, implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 will ensure that adjacent property uses are not adversely affected during project construction. 18.23.070 Parking Project Consistency The visual impact of parking shall be minimized on adjacent residentially zoned properties or properties with existing residential uses located within nonresidential zones. Parking is concealed from view inside covered, enclosed spaces. This configuration obscures views of parking from any adjacent properties, regardless of use. 2.c Packet Pg. 33 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : P e r f o r m a n c e C r i t e r i a ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) 18.23.080 Vehicular, Pedestrian and Bicycle Site Access Project Consistency The guidelines regarding site access impacts are intended to minimize conflicts between residential vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle uses and more intensive traffic associated with commercial and industrial districts, and to facilitate pedestrian and bicycle connections through and adjacent to the project site. The project proposes long-term bicycle parking on-site for future uses and will improve pedestrian circulation by providing a widened sidewalk. The project locates pedestrian entrances at the northwestern end of the site while the auto entrance is located at the southeastern end of the El Camino Real frontage. This site design minimizes interactions of cars and pedestrians by isolating the uses from each other to the best ability afforded to the site. 18.23.090 Air Quality Project Consistency The requirements for air quality are intended to buffer residential uses from potential sources of odor and/or toxic air contaminants. The project will not produce odors or toxic air contaminants because it consists of a mixed- use project. Odors and/or toxic air contaminants are not normally associated with mixed-use buildings. Any mechanical equipment will conform to manufacturer requirements designed to protect human health. 18.23.100 Hazardous Materials Project Consistency In accordance with Titles 15 and 17 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, minimize the potential hazards of any use on a development site that will entail the storage, use or handling of hazardous materials (including hazardous wastes) on-site in excess of the exempt quantities prescribed in Health and Safety Code Division 20, Chapter 6.95, and Title 15 of this code. The project will not involve the storage, use or handling of hazardous materials because the project consists of a mixed-use development comprised of residential and an office or commercial use. These uses are not associated with hazardous materials beyond standard daily operations. 2.c Packet Pg. 34 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : P e r f o r m a n c e C r i t e r i a ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT D ZONING COMPARISON TABLE 3265 El Camino Real / 15PLN-00312 Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.16.060 (CS DISTRICT) Mixed-Uses Regulation Required Existing Proposed Minimum Site Area, width and depth None 7,489.5 sf 7,489.5 sf Minimum Building Setback Minimum Front Yard 0-10 feet to create an 8-12 foot effective sidewalk width (1), (2), (8) N/A 4 ft 2 in Rear Yard 10 ft for residential portion; no requirement for commercial portion N/A 47 ft 7.5 in Rear yard abutting residential zone district (ft) 10 ft N/A N/A Interior Side Yard if abutting residential zone district (ft) 10 ft N/A N/A Street Side Yard (ft) 5 ft N/A N/A Build-to-Lines 50% of frontage built to setback (1) 33% of side street built to setback (1) N/A 26.17 ft. or 52.3% Side street setback not applicable because lot is an interior lot Maximum Site Coverage 50% 0% 3,744.0 sf or 50% Landscape/Open Space Coverage 30% N/A 2,291 sf or 47% Usable Open Space 20 sf per unit for 5 or fewer units (2) N/A 1,718 sf or 572 sf per unit Maximum Height (w/in 150 ft. of an abutting residential zone) 50 ft Project is not within 150 ft of a residential zone district abutting or located within 50 ft. of the side, in which case the height shall not exceed the height limit of the abutting residential district. (Max of 35 ft) 0 ft. 42 ft Daylight Plane for lot lines abutting one or more residential zoning districts or a residential PC district Daylight plane height and slope shall be identical to those of the most restrictive residential zoning district abutting the lot line N/A N/A – the project does not abut a residential zone along any lot lines Residential Density (net) (3) 30 du/ac 0 du/ac 17.6 du/ac 2.d Packet Pg. 35 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t D : Z o n i n g C o m p a r i s o n T a b l e ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 2 of 2 Maximum Residential Floor Area Ration (FAR) 0.6:1 0 0.59:1 Maximum Nonresidential Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.4:1 0 0.04:1 Total Mixed Use Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.0:1.0 0 0.63:1 Minimum Mixed-Use Ground Floor Commercial FAR (6) 0.15:1 0 0.04:1 Variance requested (1) Twenty-five-foot driveway access permitted regardless of frontage; build-to requirement does not apply to CC district. (2) Required usable open space: (1) may be any combination of private and common open spaces; (2) does not need to be located on the ground (but rooftop gardens are not included as open space); (3) minimum private open space dimension six feet; and (4) minimum common open space dimension twelve feet. (3) Residential density shall be computed based upon the total site area, irrespective of the percent of the site devoted to commercial use. (4) For CN sites on El Camino Real, height may increase to a maximum of 40 feet and the FAR may increase to a maximum of 1.0:1 (0.5:1 for nonresidential, 0.5:1 for residential). (5) For sites abutting an RM-40 zoned residential district or a residential Planned Community (PC) district, maximum height may be increased to 50 feet. (6) Ground floor commercial uses generally include retail, personal services, hotels and eating and drinking establishments. Office uses may be included only to the extent they are permitted in ground floor regulations. (7) If located in the California Avenue Parking Assessment District. (8) A 12-foot sidewalk width is required along El Camino Real frontage. 18.16.080 Performance Standards. In addition to the standards for development prescribed above, all development shall comply with the performance criteria outlined in Chapter 18.23 of the Zoning Ordinance. All mixed use development shall also comply with the provisions of Chapter 18.23 of the Zoning Ordinance. 18.16.090 Context-Based Design Criteria. As further described in Attachment B, development in a commercial district shall be responsible to its context and compatible with adjacent development, and shall promote the establishment of pedestrian oriented design. Table 2: CONFORMANCE WITH CHAPTER 18.52 (Off-Street Parking and Loading) for Mixed-Use Developments Type Required Existing Proposed Vehicle Parking Office: 1 space per 250 sf. = 1 parking space Residential: 2 spaces per unit = 6 spaces 0 Commercial – 1 space accessible Residential – 6 spaces; 4 in lifts, 2 in a garage Bicycle Parking Office: 80% long term, 20% short tern: 1 LT space Residential: 100% long term, 1 per unit: 3 LT spaces 0 Long Term: 4 Short Term: 0 Loading Space Zero for commercial space that is 0 - 9,999 sf. Project is 382 sf 0 0 2.d Packet Pg. 36 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t D : Z o n i n g C o m p a r i s o n T a b l e ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 1 ATTACHMENT E CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 3265 El Camino Real 15PLN-00312 ________________________________________________________________________ PLANNING DIVISION 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS. Construction and development shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "El Camino Multi-Family,” stamped as received by the City on February 2 ,2018 on file with the Planning Department, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. BUILDING PERMIT. Apply for a building permit and meet any and all conditions of the Planning, Fire, Public Works, and Building Departments. 3. BUILDING PERMIT PLAN SET. The ARB approval letter including all Department conditions of approval for the project shall be printed on the plans submitted for building permit. 4. PARKING SECURITY GATE: Any parking security gate shall be reviewed by Planning during the Building permit process. The gate shall remain open during normal business hours and residents shall be given a garage door opener, to ensure cars may safely and quickly exit the travel lane when entering the property, so as to not back-up traffic on El Camino Real. 5. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: All modifications to the approved project shall be submitted for review and approval prior to construction. If during the Building Permit review and construction phase, the project is modified by the applicant, it is the responsibility of the applicant to contact the Planning Division/project planner directly to obtain approval of the project modification. It is the applicant’s responsibility to highlight any proposed changes to the project and to bring it to the project planner’s attention. 6. PROJECT EXPIRATION. The project approval shall be valid for a period of two years 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 a one year extension of this entitlement may be made prior to the permit expiration. 7. INDEMNITY: 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 for its actual attorneys’ 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. 2.e Packet Pg. 37 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 2 8. IMPACT FEE 90-DAY PROTEST PERIOD. California Government Code Section 66020 provides that a 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 WITHIN THE 90-DAY PERIOD OR FOLLOW THE PROTEST PROCEDURES DESCRIBED IN GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66020, YOU WILL BE BARRED FROM CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OR REASONABLENESS OF THE FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, AND EXACTIONS. If these requirements constitute fees, taxes, assessments, dedications, reservations, or other exactions as specified in Government Code Sections 66020(a) or 66021, this is to provide notification that, as of the date of this notice, the 90-day period has begun in which you may protest these requirements. This matter is subject to the California Code of Civil Procedures (CCP) Section 1094.5; the time by which judicial review must be sought is governed by CCP Section 1094.6. 9. FINAL INSPECTION: A Planning Division Final inspection will be required to determine substantial compliance with the approved plans prior to the scheduling of a Building Division final. Any revisions during the building process must be approved by Planning, including but not limited to; materials, landscaping and hard surface locations. Contact your Project Planner, Adam Petersen at apetersen@m-group.us to schedule this inspection. 10. The proposed equipment in front of the commercial use shall be screened with appurtenances, to the satisfaction of the Planning and Community Environment Director. Mitigation Measures 11. BIO-1 Nesting Bird Protection. To avoid disturbance of nesting and special-status birds, activities related to the project, including, but not limited to, vegetation removal, ground disturbance, and construction and demolition shall occur outside of the bird breeding season (typically February through August in the project region). If construction must begin within the breeding season, then a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted no more than 3 days prior to initiation of ground disturbance and vegetation removal activities. The nesting bird pre-construction survey shall be conducted within the Project Boundary, including a 300-foot buffer (500-foot for raptors), on foot, and within inaccessible areas (i.e., private lands) afar using binoculars to the extent practical. The survey shall be conducted by a biologist familiar with the identification of avian species known to occur in the area. If nests are found, an avoidance buffer (which is dependent upon the species, the proposed work activity, and existing disturbances associated with land uses outside of the site) shall be determined and demarcated by the biologist with bright orange construction fencing, flagging, construction lathe, or other means to mark the boundary. All construction personnel shall be notified as to the existence of the buffer zone 2.e Packet Pg. 38 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 3 and to avoid entering the buffer zone during the nesting season. No ground disturbing activities shall occur within this buffer until the avian biologist has confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed and the young have fledged the nest. Encroachment into the buffer shall occur only at the discretion of the qualified biologist. 12. BIO-2 Tree Preservation and Protection Plan. To avoid disturbance and injury to the protected on-site tree, the project applicant shall develop recommendations for, and implement, tree preservation in a revised arborist report. These recommendations include, but are not limited to, tree protection fencing to enclose as much of the tree protection zone (TPZ) as feasible around City trees on El Camino Real, no grading encroachments closer than six (6) inches to the tree trunk diameter, and periodic inspections by the Site Arborist during construction activities. 13. CR-1 Resource Recovery Procedures. In the event that archaeological or paleontological resources are unearthed during project construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find must be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist or paleontologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. A Native American representative shall be retained to monitor any mitigation work associated with Native American cultural material. 14. CR-2 Human Remains Recovery Procedures. If human remains are unearthed, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition pursuant to the Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission. Additional surveys will be required if the Project changes to include un- surveyed areas. 15. N-1 Construction-Related Noise Reduction Measures. The applicant shall apply the following measures during construction of the project. Mufflers. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and all internal combustion engine driven machinery with intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, as applicable, shall be in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. During construction, all equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers’ standards. Electrical Power. Electrical power, rather than diesel equipment, shall be used to run compressors and similar power tools and to power any temporary structures, such as construction trailers or caretaker facilities. Equipment Staging. All stationary equipment shall be staged as far away from the adjacent commercial restaurant. 2.e Packet Pg. 39 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 4 Equipment Idling. Construction vehicles and equipment shall not be left idling for longer than five minutes when not in use. Workers’ Radios. All noise from workers’ radios shall be controlled to a point that they are not audible at sensitive receptors near construction activity. Smart Back-up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back-up alarms that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels. Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction. Disturbance Coordinator. The applicant shall designate a disturbance coordinator who shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site. Additional Noise Attenuation Techniques. During the demolition, site preparation, grading, and building phases of construction, temporary sound barriers rated to Sound Transmission Class 20 or higher shall be installed and maintained facing the northern, eastern, and western boundaries of the project site. Temporary sound barriers shall block line of sight between noise-generating construction equipment and adjacent residential, hotel and restaurant windows and shall be placed as close to the source equipment as feasible. Mobile sound barriers may be used as appropriate to attenuate construction noise near the source equipment. During the building construction phase, temporary sound barriers shall be applied to generators and cranes used on-site. Mobile construction equipment shall not operate during restaurant business hours (11 AM – 2 PM and from 4 PM to 10 PM). Monitoring. The applicant shall retain a qualified acoustic engineer to monitor representative construction noise during all phases of construction. The acoustic engineer shall document hourly noise levels at the project site boundary adjacent to sensitive receptors and provide this data to the City. If measured hourly noise levels from construction activity exceed 69 dBA by at least 10 dBA for two or more hours in a day, the acoustic engineer shall notify the City within 24 hours, and the applicant shall implement additional noise attenuation measures sufficient to achieve this noise standard. PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF EXCAVATION AND GRADING PERMIT: 15. STORM WATER HYDRAULICS AND HYDROLOGY: Plans provided do not show if the existing site drainage has a direct discharge into the existing system. Provide an analysis that compares the existing and proposed site runoff from the project site. Runoff shall be based on City of Palo Alto Drainage Design Standards for 10 year storm event with HGL’s 0.5 foot below inlet grates elevations and 100-year storm with HGL not exceeding the street right- 2.e Packet Pg. 40 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 5 of-way. As described on the City of Palo Alto Drainage Design Standards. Please provide the tabulated calculations directly on the conceptual grading and drainage plan. This project may be required to replace and upsize the existing storm drain system to handle the added flows and/or depending on the current pipe condition. The IDF tables and Precipitation Map for Palo Alto is available County of Santa Clara County Drainage Manual dated October 2007. The proposed project shall not increase runoff to the public storm drain system. 16. Sheet C2.0 shows a storm drain running under the proposed building. This is generally not good practice as it prohibits/severely limits the repair and maintenance of the storm drain line. Please revise plans to show this outside of the building footprint. In addition, plan shows a pump pumping storm water from the site into thru curb drains onto El Camino Real. This is not allowed. Please revise plans to show either pumping to a bubble box in an onsite vegetated area or gravity flow leaving the site. As COA 1 mentions, calculations will need to be provided to confirm no increased flow is proposed for the site in the post development condition. Any excess flow from pre-project condition will need to be detained on site. 17. MAPPING: As described, this project will trigger a Minor or Major Subdivision Application. Five parcels would trigger a major subdivision. Public Works’ Tentative Maps and Preliminary Parcel Maps checklist must accompany the completed application. All existing and proposed dedications and easements must be shown on the submitted map. The map would trigger further requirements from Public Works, see Palo Alto Municipal Code section 21.12 for Preliminary Parcel Map requirements and section 21.16 for Parcel Map requirements. If a Map is required, it shall be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit or excavation and grading permit. 18. PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT: Owner shall create a public access easement for the additional area behind the property line needed to create a 12-foot wide sidewalk along El Camino Real. Plot and label the Public Access Easement along El Camino Real that provides the 12- foot wide sidewalk. Please show this easement on all plans. Please note, a planter is proposed within this area and will need to be removed to provide the 12’ sidewalk area. 19. Subdivision Improvement Agreement is required to secure compliance with condition of approval and security of improvements onsite and offsite per PAMC Section 21.16.220. 20. Please verify if the existing sub-surface transformer within the sidewalk will continue to serve the development. If the existing transformer cannot serve the project then a new transformer upgrade may be required. The new transformer shall be located completely within private property. Plot and label the location of the new transformer, if needed. Or provide a note on the plans that indicate existing transformer to be used and if a new one is needed it will be located within private property. 21. OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS: Submit a copy of the off-site improvement plans that includes the replacement of curb, gutter, sidewalk, utilities, landscape, etc. Provide Caltrans 2.e Packet Pg. 41 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 6 standard details along the project frontage. Plans shall include the proposed public access easement, grades along the conforms. The project driveway entrance shall not extend into the neighbor’s property frontage. 22. Submit a construction cost estimate associated with the off-site improvements. 23. Map shall be recorded prior to issuance of a Building Permit or Grading and Excavation Permit 24. LOGISTICS PLAN: The contractor must submit a logistics plan to the Public Works Department prior to building permit demolition 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. Plan shall include the following, but not limited to, construction fence, construction entrance and exit, stockpile areas, equipment and material storage area, workers parking area, construction office trailer, temporary bathroom, measures for dewatering if needed, crane location, working hours, contractor’s contact information, truck traffic route, setbacks from environmentally sensitive areas, erosion and sediment control measures to be implemented during construction. In addition, applicant will need to coordinate with nearby construction projects to ensure logistics are coordinated between sites. 25. DEMOLITION PLAN: Place the following note adjacent to an affected tree on the Site Plan and Demolition Plan: “Excavation activities associated with the proposed scope of work shall occur no closer than 10-feet from the existing street tree, or as approved by the Urban Forestry Division contact 650-496-5953. Any changes shall be approved by the same”. Also plot and label the tree protection zone. 26. GRADING PERMIT: The grading and drainage plan must include an earthworks table with the estimated cut and fill volumes. If the total is more than 100 cubic yards, a grading permit will be required. An application and plans for a grading permit are submitted to Public Works separately from the building permit plan set. The application and guidelines are available at the Development Center and on our website. 27. Provide a Rough Grading Plan for the work proposed as part of the Grading and Excavation Permit application. The Rough Grading Plans shall including the following: pad elevation, basement elevation, elevator pit elevation, ground monitoring wells, shoring for the proposed basement, limits of over excavation, stockpile area of material, overall earthwork volumes (cut and fill), temporary shoring for any existing facilities, ramps for the basement access, crane locations (if any), etc. Plans submitted for the Grading and Excavation Permit, shall be stand-alone, and therefore the plans shall include any conditions from other divisions that pertain to items encountered during rough grading for example if contaminated groundwater is encountered and dewatering is expected, provide notes on 2.e Packet Pg. 42 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 7 the plans based Water Quality’s conditions of approval. Provide a note on the plans to direct the contractor to the approve City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map, which is available on the City’s website. 28. Provide the following note on the Rough Grading Plan and the Final Grading Plan: “In my professional judgement, the highest projected groundwater level to be encountered in the area of the proposed basement in the future will be ______ feet below existing grade.” 29. BASEMENT 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 or Caltrans. 30. 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. 31. DEWATERING: Proposed underground garage excavation 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 1 through October 31 due to inadequate capacity in our storm drain system. The geotechnical report for this site must list the highest anticipated groundwater level; if the proposed project will encounter groundwater, the applicant must provide all required dewatering submittals for Public Works review and approval prior to grading permit issuance. Public Works has dewatering submittal requirements and guidelines available at the Development Center and on our website: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pwd/forms_and_permits.asp 32. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN: Provide a separate Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by a qualified licensed engineer, surveyor or architect. Plan shall be wet-stamped and signed by the same. Plan shall include the following: existing and proposed spot elevations, earthwork volumes (cut and fill in CY), pad, finished floor, garage elevation, base flood elevation (if applicable) grades along the project conforms, property lines, or back of walk. See PAMC Section 16.28.110 for additional items. Projects that front directly into the public 2.e Packet Pg. 43 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 8 sidewalk, shall include grades at the doors or building entrances. Provide drainage flow arrows to demonstrate positive drainage away from building foundations at minimum of 2% or 5% for 10-feet per 2013 CBC Section 1804.3. Label the downspouts, splashblocks (2-feet long min) and any site drainage features such as swales, area drains, bubble-up locations. Include grate elevations, low points and grade breaks. Provide dimensions between the bubblers and property lines. In no case shall drainage across property lines exceed that which existed prior to grading per 2013 CBC Section J109.4. In particular, runoff from the new garage shall not drain into neighboring property. For additional grading and drainage detail design See Grading and Drainage Plan Guidelines for Residential Development. http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/2717 33. STAIRWELLS AND LIGHTWELLS: 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 separate 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. 34. Based on the project size this project does not trigger a full C3 Stormwater Treatment Maintenance Agreement. However, this project triggers the California Regional Water Quality Control Board’s revised provision C.3 for storm water regulations (incorporated into the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Section 16.11) that apply to residential land development projects that create or replace between 2,500 and 10,000 square feet of impervious surface area. The applicant must implement one or more of the following site design measures on the grading and drainage plan:  Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse.  Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas.  Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas.  Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas.  Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces.  Construct driveways, and/or uncovered parking lots with permeable surfaces Plan shall include the details for the proposed design. Provide a table with the proposed areas of permeable pavement. Label the disconnected downspouts, vegetated areas, etc. 2.e Packet Pg. 44 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 9 35. Applicant shall be aware that the project may trigger water line and meter upgrades or relocation, if upgrades or relocation are required, the building permit plan set shall plot and label utility changes. If a backflow preventer is required, it shall be located within private property and plotted on the plans. Similarly if a transformer upgrade or a grease interceptor is required it shall also be located within the private property. Plot and label these on the Utility plan. 36. 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 and/or Caltrans standards and that the contractor performing this work must first obtain a Street Work Permit from Public Works at the Development Center and from Caltrans. If a new driveway is in a different location than the existing driveway, then the sidewalk associated with the new driveway must 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. 37. CALTRANS: Caltrans review and approval of this project is required. Caltrans right-of-way across El Camino Real extends from back-of-walk to back-of walk. The City has a maintenance agreement with Caltrans that requires the City to maintain the sidewalk and to issue Street Work Permits for work done on the sidewalks by private contractors. Caltrans has retained the right to review and permit new ingress/egress driveways off El Camino Real as well as the installation of Traffic Control devices as part of this project. Submit a permit from Caltrans to perform the proposed work. 38. The following note shall be shown on the plans adjacent to the area on the Site Plan: “Any construction within the city right-of-way must have an approved Permit for Construction in the Public Street prior to commencement 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.” 39. Provide the following note on the Site Plan and Grading and Drainage Plan: “Contractor shall not stage, store, or stockpile any material or equipment within the public road right-of- way.” Construction phasing shall be coordinate to keep materials and equipment onsite or within private property. 40. SIDEWALK, CURB & GUTTER: As part of this project, the applicant must replace all existing sidewalk, curbs, gutters and driveway approaches in the public right-of-way along the frontage(s) of the property. The site plan submitted with the building permit plan set must show the extent of the replacement work (at a minimum all curb and gutter and sidewalk along the project frontage) 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 2.e Packet Pg. 45 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 10 Work Permit from Public Works at the Development Center. Include the 12-foot wide dimension on the plans and verify that the sidewalk is unobstructed. 41. 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 determine 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-of-Way from Public Works’ arborist (650-496-5953). 42. “NO DUMPING” LOGO: The applicant is required to paint the “No Dumping/Flows to Matadero Creek” logo in blue color on a white background, adjacent to all onsite 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 grading and drainage plan. Similar medallions shall be installed near the catch basins that are proposed to be relocated. Provide notes on the plans to reference that medallions and stencils. 43. OIL/WATER SEPARATOR: Parking garage floor drains within covered levels shall be connected to an oil/water separator prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer system. The oil/water separator shall be located within private property. Plot and label the proposed location. 44. 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. The sheet is available here: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/2732 45. 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. WATER-GAS-WASTEWATER PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF EXCAVATION AND GRADING PERMIT: 46. Update plans per WGW site plan red-lines and resubmit to other departments for review; no resubmittal to WGW required unless utilities are impacted. 2.e Packet Pg. 46 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 11 47. The applicant shall submit a completed water-gas-wastewater service connection application - loadsheet per unit 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 new total loads 48. 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. 49. 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. Plans for new wastewater lateral need to include new wastewater pipe profiles showing existing potentially conflicting utilities especially storm drain pipes electric and communication duct banks. Existing duct banks need to be daylighted by potholing to the bottom of the ductbank to verify cross section prior to plan approval and starting lateral installation. Plans for new storm drain mains and laterals need to include profiles showing existing potential conflicts with sewer, water and gas. 50. The applicant shall be responsible for 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. 51. The gas service, meters, and meter location must meet WGW standards and requirement 52. An approved reduced pressure principle assembly (RPPA 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 RPPA on the plans. 53. An approved reduced pressure detector assembly is required for the new water connection for the fire system to comply with requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive. 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. 54. 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. 2.e Packet Pg. 47 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 12 55. 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. 56. All existing water and wastewater services that will not be reused shall be abandoned at the main per WGW utilities procedures. 57. Utility vaults, transformers, utility cabinets, concrete bases, or other structures cannot be placed over existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services. Maintain 1’ 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. 58. All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto current utility standards for water, gas & wastewater. PUBLIC WORKS URBAN FORESTRY SECTION PRIOR TO DEMOLITION, BUILDING OR GRADING PERMIT ISSUANCE 59. No new landscape shall be planted within 10 feet of the protected Valley Oak identified as tree #2 in the tree protection report. Show tree protection fencing perimeters and type on the site plan sheet SP-1, grading sheet C2.0, and landscape plan sheet L-1.1. Input the tree protection report as sheets T-2, T-3, etc. Strictly adhere to all recommendations in the tree protection report. Removal of invasive species, including Black Acacia and Ailanthus, on site is approved. Replacement of removed trees as proposed in the landscape plan is sufficient. It is recommended to secure a long-term maintenance and monitoring agreement from a certified arborist for the protected Valley Oak. 60. TREE PROTECTION COMPLIANCE. The owner and contractor shall implement all protection and inspection schedule measures as a condition of the building permit, Sheet T-1, and is subject to code compliance action pursuant to PAMC 8.10.080. The required protective fencing shall remain in place until final landscaping and inspection of the project. The fencing shall contain required warning sign and remain in place until final inspection of the project. Tree fencing shall be adjusted after demolition if necessary to increase the tree protection zone as required by the project arborist. 61. TREE DAMAGE. Tree Damage, Injury Mitigation and Inspections apply to Contractor. Reporting, injury mitigation measures and arborist inspection schedule (1-5) apply pursuant to TTM, Section 2.20-2.30. Contractor shall be responsible for the repair or replacement of 2.e Packet Pg. 48 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 13 any publicly owned or protected trees that are damaged during the course of construction, pursuant to Title 8 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and city Tree Technical Manual, Section 2.25. 62. GENERAL. The following general tree preservation measures apply to all trees to be retained: No storage of material, topsoil, vehicles or equipment shall be permitted within the tree enclosure area. The ground under and around the tree canopy area shall not be altered. Trees to be retained shall be irrigated, aerated and maintained as necessary to ensure survival. PUBLIC WORKS UTILITIES ELECTRIC ENGINEERING PRIOR TO DEMOLITION, BUILDING OR GRADING PERMIT ISSUANCE 63. Below are the specific comments for this project. a) Service Voltage shall be 120/208V. b) 24” min between Gas and Electric trench. c) Customer will be responsible for a new easement around transformer 7175 in order to use this transformer as service point. 64. The applicant shall comply with all the Electric Utility Engineering Department service requirements noted during plan review. 65. The applicant shall be responsible for identification and location of all utilities, 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 work. 66. Only one electric service lateral is permitted per parcel. Utilities Rule & Regulation #18. 67. If this project requires padmount transformers, the location of the transformers shall be shown on the site plan and approved by the Utilities Department and the Architectural Review Board. Utilities Rule & Regulations #3 & #16 (see detail comments below) 68. The developer/owner shall provide space for installing padmount equipment (i.e. transformers, switches, and interrupters) and associated substructure as required by the City. 69. The location of the electric panel/switchboard shall be shown on the site plan and approved by the Architectural Review Board and Utilities Department. 70. 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. 2.e Packet Pg. 49 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 14 71. The customer is responsible for sizing the service conductors and other required equipment according to the California Electric Code requirements and City standards. 72. If the customer’s total load exceeds 2500 kVA, service shall be provided at the primary voltage of 12,470 volts and the customer shall provide the high voltage switchgear and transformers. 73. For primary services, the standard service protection is a padmount fault interrupter owned and 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. 74. Any additional facilities and services requested by the Applicant that are beyond what the utility deems standard facilities will be subject to Special Facilities charges. The Special Facilities charges include the cost of installing the additional facilities as well as the cost of ownership. Utilities Rule & Regulation #20. 75. Projects that require the extension of high voltage primary distribution lines or reinforcement of offsite electric facilities will be at the customer’s expense and must be coordinated with the Electric Utility. 76. The applicant shall secure a Public Utilities Easement for facilities installed on private property for City use. SUBDIVISION PROJECTS 77. There may be other conditions applicable to your project that can be found in previous sections of this document. 78. Only one electric service lateral is permitted per parcel. 79. The developer/owner shall provide space for installing padmount equipment (i.e. transformers, switches, and interrupters) and associated substructure as required by the City. In addition, the owner shall grant a Public Utilities Easement for facilities installed within the subdivision as required by the City. Consideration should be made for possible future electric load growth. 80. The civil drawings must show all existing and proposed electric facilities (i.e. conduits, boxes, pads, services, and streetlights) as well as other utilities. 81. The developer/owner is responsible for all substructure installations (conduits, boxes, pads, streetlights system, etc.) on the subdivision parcel map. The design and installation shall be according to the City standards and all work must be inspected and approved by the Electrical Underground Inspector. 2.e Packet Pg. 50 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 15 82. The developer/owner is responsible for all underground services (conduits and conductors) to single-family homes within the subdivision. All work requires inspection and approval from both the Building Department and the Electrical Underground Inspector. 83. The tentative parcel map shall show all required easements as requested by the City. The following comments are required to be addressed prior to any future related permit application such as a Building Permit, Excavation and Grading Permit, Certificate of Compliance, Street Work Permit, Encroachment Permit, etc. These comments are provided as a courtesy and are not required to be addressed prior to the Planning entitlement approval: 84. Industrial and large commercial customers must allow sufficient lead-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. 85. A completed Utility Service Application and a full set of plans must be included with all applications involving electrical work. The Application must be included with the preliminary submittal. 86. 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 after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued after all utility services and/or meters have been disconnected and removed. 87. 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. 88. Contractors and developers shall obtain permit from the Department of Public Works before digging in the street right-of-way. This includes sidewalks, driveways and planter strips. 89. At least 48 hours prior to starting any excavation, the customer must call Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-800-227-2600 to have existing underground utilities located and marked. The areas to be checked for underground facility marking shall be delineated with white paint. All USA markings shall be removed by the customer or contractor when construction is complete. 90. The customer is responsible for installing all on-site substructures (conduits, boxes and pads) required for the electric service. No more than 270 degrees of bends are allowed in a 2.e Packet Pg. 51 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 16 secondary conduit run. All conduits must be sized according to California Electric Code requirements and no 1/2 – inch size conduits are permitted. All off-site substructure workwill 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. 91. 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. 92. All new underground conduits and substructures shall be installed per City standards and shall be inspected by the Electrical Underground Inspector before backfilling. 93. For services larger than 1600 amps, a transition cabinet as the interconnection pointbetween the utility’s padmount transformer and the customer’s main switchgear may be required. See City of Palo Alto Utilities Standard Drawing SR-XF-E-1020. The cabinet design drawings must be submitted to the Electric Utility Engineering Division for review and approval. 94. For underground services, no more than four (4) 750 MCM conductors per phase can be connected to the transformer secondary terminals; otherwise, bus duct or x-flex cable must be used for connections to padmount transformers. 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. 95. The customer is responsible for installing all underground electric service conductors, bus duct, transition cabinets, and other required equipment. The installation shall meet the California Electric Code and the City Standards. 96. 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. 97. Shop/factory drawings for switchboards (400A and greater) and associated hardware must be submitted for review and approval prior to installing the switchgear to: Gopal Jagannath, P.E. Supervising Electric Project Engineer Utilities Engineering (Electrical) 1007 Elwell Court Palo Alto, CA 94303 98. For 400A switchboards only, catalog cut sheets may be substituted in place of factory drawings. 2.e Packet Pg. 52 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Page 17 99. All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before energizing. 100. 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. 101. The follow must be completed before Utilities will make the connection to the utility system and energize the service:  All fees must be paid.  All required inspections have been completed and approved by both the Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector.  All Special Facilities contracts or other agreements need to be signed by the City and applicant.  Easement documents must be completed. BUILDING DEPARTMENT The following comments are required to be addressed prior to any future related permit application such as a Building Permit, Excavation and Grading Permit, Certificate of Compliance, Street Work Permit, Encroachment Permit, etc. These comments are provided as a courtesy and are not required to be addressed prior to the Planning entitlement approval: 102. The trash/recycling area(s) shall be located on an accessible path and include truncated dome warning devices and an accessible door at the enclosure entrance. 103. Separate submittals and permits are required for the following systems and components if utilized: EVSE, P.V., and Solar Hot Water systems. 104. “Shut-off controls, timer controls, override controls, occupancy sensors, relays, or other similar controls shall not be installed on Emergency lighting and means of egress illumination that is intended to be energized during an emergency”. 105. Plans shall include adequate details for fire rated assemblies and continuity of the assemblies. 106. An analysis of the neighboring restaurant wall will be required to be submitted with the plans for permits showing the construction of the existing wall is not impacted for fire resistance based on the new constructed wall distance to it. This shall also include opening protections. 2.e Packet Pg. 53 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) 3265 El Camino Real Plan Review 15PLN-00312 APN 132-38-20 Project Description December 19, 2017 Preface There are several alterations to the project since our last submittal and presentation. Per planning, the residential square footage required the units to be downsized and backflow preventer locations have been altered. Per ARB there were comments we have hopefully heard and integrated into the project. Outside the loss of unit square footage, we first highlight the changes we have incorporated since the last ARB meeting. Then, the overall Project description follows • The bowed windows at the second level front façade have been altered to be consistent with the remaining window systems. • We have provided an alteration to the residential entry on El Camino. The entry has moved forward to the setback and aligned to the garage entry. The commercial portion steps back in a plane break and somewhat an entry alcove. The door now has a transom equal to the commercial portion and contains a decorative glass element for visual privacy and an aesthetic upgrade suitable for the residential portion. • The rear garage entry no longer needs backup space (per transportation). Therefore, we created a decorative Parasoleil metal screen with a man door. As a technical aspect, we want to allow light into the garage and we also want the garage to be considered as open air and eliminate the requirement for mechanical ventilation. o We are coordinating with Landscape for complimentary screens that will be used for climbing vines at the walls of the building. o In addition, the same material and coordination will be incorporated into the garage door entry and railing systems on the project. (The elevations do not indicate the panel design but the renderings and materials indications provide this information). o Finally, the decorative glass element at the residential entry is intended to be complimentary to the metal screening. • The curb cut will be rebuilt to meet the city requirements. • We looked at altering the detailing of the lap siding, but feel a more contemporary approach is desired in this semi-urban condition. Therefore, we have kept the “panelized” siding detailing with substantial metal reveals. • Several concepts for the louvered tall window at El Camino were explored. Though the South El Camino Real Guidelines do not encourage this approach, we feel that many contemporary applications – such as Stanley Saitowitz’s 1234 Howard Street project in San Francisco - are very successful with this solution along a busy street condition. 2.f Packet Pg. 54 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t F : A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Parcel Information and Project Description The site is an undeveloped parcel on the East side of El Camino Real one lot north of Lambert and several blocks south of Page Mill Road. The property is bounded on 3 sides - Indo Restaurant to the south, a parking lot to the east, and Travelodge to the north. The lot is 49.49 ft. wide at El Camino by 150 ft. in depth for a total of 7,489.5 sq. ft. or 0.17 acres. There is parallel street parking on El Camino Real. The site is flat with a heritage Oak at the rear. The heritage Oak will be kept and protected during construction. There is one curb cut at the south end of the property. This curb cut will be used as site access. There is one deciduous street tree that will remain and be protected during construction. Indo restaurant and Travelodge have built structures up to the side property lines, but not entirely along these lines. Zoning The zoning is CS – Service Commercial. The proposed project proposal falls under the mixed use zoning requirements for the CS zone. Commercial and residential uses are allowed with size limitations on office use. Project Data, zoning and building provisions, requirements, and limitations are included on the General Information sheet in the drawing set. The city has requirements involving the Heritage Oak tree. We have chosen to keep this Oak. Because of the location and required surrounding protection, allowances for less commercial space is included. Context The project is part of the Cal – Ventura Corridor Area of the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. As such, it is anticipated this area will remain auto-centric and perform as a link between the California Avenue and Baron-Ventura nodes. However, increased pedestrian use is sought and the building design should support this goal. The Stanford Research Park development of the western side of El Camino includes an “expansive” and open air surface parking lot along El Camino. While this project may remain as is for an indefinite time, the goal for the project’s eastern side of the street is to create an atmosphere where both pedestrians and autos exist comfortably. Therefore, while this site’s current context lacks density, height, has varied setbacks, and is somewhat random in development, the vision for the area is increased density with more pedestrian friendly conditions yet keeping some autocentric features as a link between more “urban/pedestrian” zones. Proposed Building Type, Use and Plan The site and zoning constraints essentially determined “what the building wants to be”. In many ways the building has designed itself. The proposed building will be mixed use commercial/office with residential uses. The building will be of Type VB construction and may include Type I at the ground level. There is one small commercial spaces and (3) residential units proposed with 7 covered parking spaces (2 stacked parking spaces for a total of 4 stacked spaces -2 units will have the stacked spaces). The El Camino façade incorporates the residential entry, the commercial space, and the garage entry. The residential entry/portal aligns with the 3 story portion at the garage entry. The depth is intended to create a strong presence for the primary use of the building. The commercial space steps back and has a storefront style entrance with a simple awning over the doorway. The garage entrance is a deep recess to minimize its’ presence and allow for cars to be off street while 2.f Packet Pg. 55 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t F : A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) waiting to enter or leave. The minimum 50% build-to requirement is met with this 3-story section of the building. The ground level program is the commercial space, parking and residential stair/elevator within a rectangular podium and a generous rear yard. The podium is carved out at the east edge to allow for planting at the garage level and to limit lot coverage. Atop the podium is a 2-story unit at the front (El Camino) of the lot. This is joined to the stair/elevator. This part of the building provides the desired street edge. A separate section sits on the podium and contains 2 flats. The flats are accessed from the stair/elevator tower through an exterior path at the podium deck to the lower unit and a bridge to the upper unit. A strong element of this design is the circulation and connection from El Camino to the rear. From the street and all units a free flowing access to the rear common open space wraps around the heritage oak. Each unit also has substantial private open space with decks and balconies. Architecture Massing and Fenestration The city’s desire for strong massing at El Camino, limited height, and strongly articulated and stepped side elevations led to the 2 separate buildings atop the podium. Each building in turn is carved and stepped to provide further articulation. The square footage limitation has allowed for generous open space at the podium level which provides the breaks at all elevations except El Camino. Proper fenestration is provided by use and location on site. For instance, the stair ascending at the unit enfronting El Camino Real allows for a large window to provide light into the unit, while providing privacy for the living area to the rear of the unit. Smaller recessed and cloistered openings are provided at the 2 secondary bedroom, while a bowed recess pulls the dining area from the face while still addressing El Camino. Openings at the South facing El Camino facade are provided with opportunity for privacy and to limit solar heat gain with louvers, operable shutters and a deep recessed door to a protective balcony. These elements serve to shield the building from both the commotion of El Camino and the intense sun along this side. Limited openings are provided along the West Elevation building facades that are in close proximity to the property line. However, the substantial building breaks counter the smaller openings of this façade. The east façade is dual natured. The El Camino side is built to the property line. Indo Restaurant is also built to the property line and abuts the podium level throughout. The 2-story unit contains a break to allow for interior light as well. The wall does mimic the stair window of the front elevation, but the recess hints toward the rest of the project by bring siding into this recess as well as the building jog recess. The rear building is significantly set back and fenestration is provided for ample light and air to the rooms facing this direction. The rear north façade significantly steps to allow for a relatively large open area at the podium level. The 2-story unit is significantly back from the podium edge. Individually it has ample patio and balcony space that picks up on views of the heritage oak preceded by planting coming up 2.f Packet Pg. 56 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t F : A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) through the podium opening. The flats provide living spaces directly opening to the sizable rear yard and Heritage Oak. Large openings and balconies take advantage of this setting. Style and Material A more contemporary look has been applied to the building. Contextually, there is little reference, but as new buildings arise along El Camino, fitting in with the current era has seemed the appropriate response. As a result, stone and stucco with a mix of metal dominates the El Camino façade for both a proper urban approach and durability. The building transitions to a contemporary applied siding scheme with painted Hardie lap siding divided by strong aluminum reveals. Aluminum windows throughout are meant to compliment the metals used elsewhere. Landscape The landscape plans take advantage of the strong circulatory connection between the entry to the rear yard. Planting and common open space nodes enhance the path to the substantial rear yard and common space. The rear open space in the shade of the Oak Tree provides a gathering area and fire pit for the residents. 2.f Packet Pg. 57 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t F : A p p l i c a n t P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 1 Call to Order/Roll Call Present: Chair Alexander Lew, Board Member Wynne Furth, Robert Gooyer, Board Member Peter Baltay Absent: Vice Chair Kyu Kim 5. PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 3265 El Camino Real [15PLN-00312]: Request for Architectural Review for a New Three Story Mixed Use Project With 275 Square Feet of Commercial Space and Three Residential Units (4,435 Square Feet). The Applicant also seeks a Variance to the Minimum Mixed-Use Ground Floor Commercial Floor Area Ratio and Design Enhancement Exception to Reduce the Required Driveway Width From 20-feet to 16 Feet and six-Inches. Environmental Assessment: Pending Further Review. Zoning District: CS. For More Information, Contact the Project Planner Adam Petersen at APetersen@m-group.us Chair Lew: Item number five a public hearing for a quasi-judicial matter for 3265 El Camino Real. Request for architectural review for a new three-story mixed use project with 275-square feet of commercial space and three residential units of 4,435- square feet. The applicant also seeks a variance to the minimum mixed-use ground floor commercial floor area ratio and a Design Enhancement Exception to reduce the required driveway width from 20-feet to 16 Feet and six-inches. Environmental assessment is pending further review and the zone district is CS. We have Adam Petersen our project planner. Welcome, Adam. Mr. Adam Petersen, Project Planner: Alright, good afternoon Chair Lew, members of the Architectural Review Board. I am Adam Petersen from the Planning and Community Environment Department. I am here to present the project at 3265 El Camino Real. This was a project that was heard by the ARB as more of a sort of informational item in December of 2016. The ARB provided comments and the applicant went back to the drawing board and made some changes to the plans. Mainly they removed the ground floor and sort of second-floor office space that was fronting El Camino Real. They replaced that with a ground floor commercial space at 275-square feet and then some mass to the front of the building and still have three residential units but sort of moved the massing around a little bit. We are here today for the ARB to review the proposed project, provide comments and continue the item to a date uncertain. As indicated, the project is located on El Camino Real; it’s right here. There is a two-story hotel, three-story mixed-use building and then a one-story restaurant that sort of flanks the site. Really quickly I am going to dive through the or just sort of skim through the ARB’s comments or key comments from that December 2016 hearing. Number one the ARB was concerned about the narrow driveway when the applicant was proposing a 16-foot 6-inch driveway. The transportation division reviewed this and they are supportive of that reduced driveway width with the Design Enhancement Exception. The trash location was moved to the back of the building and the applicant proposed to roll out service for that. The applicant has reduced the mass of the building by approximately 2,600-square feet and really one of the main – one of the ARB’s main comments was that the tree and the parking were really driving the design of the building. Staff worked with the City arborist to evaluate the tree and also the City code. The City ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD EXCERPT DRAFT MINUTES: June 1, 2017 City Hall/City Council Chambers 250 Hamilton Avenue 8:30 AM 2.g Packet Pg. 58 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 2 code says that you can pull out the tree if it’s dead, dangerous and a nuisance or if twenty-five percent of the buildable area of the site is being taken up by the tree. Unfortunately, in this case, the tree is neither dead, dangerous or a nuisance and doesn’t take up twenty-five percent of the site so the site is stuck with this tree. The applicant needed to come up with a design that respected the tree and also met the City’s requirements. What the applicant did has they basically changed the office space to the ground floor to a commercial space, which thereby reduced the parking. The applicant does have two stacked parking stalls for the project that’s consistent with the parking requirements. Moving on, there were comments regarding the architecture and the design. The applicant has updated the architecture to include hardy lap siding, strong aluminum reveals, metal railings and stucco stone veneer and this is applied consistently throughout the project. The ARB was also concerned about unfriendly pedestrian – an unfriend pedestrian entrance. There are two pedestrian entrances to the project and located immediately behind the commercial use is sort of a lobby for the project. Really quickly a walk through the floor plan. Again, we have the pedestrian entrance at the front on El Camino Real. This is the commercial space. We have a pedestrian entrance on either side which leads to a lobby here. Above this -- above each level are residential units. The renderings will sort of illustrates what those look like. We have one acceptable space, which technically meets the parking requirements for the City and that is for the commercial use. There are two stacked parking here for four parking and then finally two pad parking places in the back. The design – the trees is preserved in the back of the site with a staircase that wraps down from an upper-level sort of balcony area down to an open space in the back. Really quick, I just want to walk you through the renderings for the site. Again, this is the entrance with the garage, commercial space, and then two pedestrian entrances that flank either side of the commercial space. You can see that the applicant has reduced the mass along this sort of reading portion of the building. There is more sort of these independent residential units towards the back and it moves the mass up front too. Moving along, this is the front along El Camino Real and the rear of the building. This is again, another rendering of the rear of the building that shows that the design does respect the tree. Again, just to reiterate, this project requires architectural review. There is a Design Enhancement Exception, which the Transportation Staff has been supportive of. The variances used to respect the tree and provide adequate parking on this site by reducing the ground floor commercial and office requirement. Again, the motion before the ARB is to review the proposed project, provide comments and continue the application to a date uncertain. Thank you and I am available for any comments that the ARB may have. Chair Lew: Great, thank you, Adam, and so now is the time for the applicant presentation and you have 10-minutes. Mr. Bob Iwersen: Thank you for a member of the Architectural Review Board. I am impressed with your stamina today. I am tired just watching. Much of what I would like to reiterate is included in the Staff report so I would like to try and make this brief. Let me see if I can go forward here. Chair Lew: Could you – I am sorry to interrupt. Just state your name for the (inaudible) (crosstalk) Mr. Iwersen: Oh, I’m Bob Iwersen with Hunt Hale Jones Architects. When we last met, our proposal was clumsily attempting to fit too much program into a highly constrained site. Planning and the design team then met and with the goal to create a building that would comfortably fit the site, respect context, provide livability, meet zoning and maintain the heritage oak. Your previous comments guided this and they were that the project is too tall and massive. Especially along the tall wall along the west property line, which is going to be highly visible for the foreseeable future. Too dense and urban, lacking residential and livability feel, and no relationship to the open space and most challenging is that we need to simultaneously meet the desires of the zoning density and strong street façade, future context and the present context. We have tried to address these items and make all of the aspects of the project knit together to create a comfortable holistic project. The workspace needed proper street frontage. The residences need clear and pleasant interiors with strong connections to the private and common open spaces. Parking needed reasonable proximity to all these uses and circulation needed to tie all this together in a clear understandable form. At the same, we tried to create fenestration and materials and detailing to reflect the variety of uses while maintaining a coherent project. For instance, we needed to simultaneously create a strong, durable street façade of at least 25-feet in height while providing a softer 2.g Packet Pg. 59 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 3 residential life in the rear or simple stealing of elements from presidents but rather all decisions are meant to support the entire concept. For example, the recesses of the El Camino façade are further protected by balconies and awning and railings and appropriately located louver system. In contrast, while using the same railings and window system, the rear generously opens towards our more substantial open space than we had before. The community open spaces are increased significantly. Circulation through the project or through the site is intended to strengthen the massing and create a comfortable way through the project. An identifiable residential entrance provides a short path to the stair elevator system. From here, a flowing path meanders to unit entrances and various open spaces and culminates in a circular stair to the common open space in respecting the oak tree and its form. The massing result is intended to provide a highly residential feel at the rear with a strong front and additionally allows for great access to light and air for the residents. The fenestration and materials and detailing are going to be contemporary in nature but hopefully intricate enough to create depth and richness to the building. As previously mentioned, we are not simply borrowing president but we are applying and adjusting these examples to support the circumstances of the site. Layer of the front façade intends to create depth to this elevation while providing privacy where needed. The railing will incorporate a design that provides – that promotes privacy but allows for glimmers of light and depth. The stone will be sleek and tight but a varied coursing and dimension. The siding will be a varied exposure and panelized, disguising the building from typical single-family topologies while recognizing residential living. Finally, we intended to create passive sustainable features within the design and provide some more active features what would appeal to the tech. savvy residents. Opportunity for cross and stacked ventilation at the units created by the massing. Proper protection at the south and west windows but open to the east and north will hopefully enhance livability. Operable mechanical shutter is provided and space for solar systems will be available for future use. Once again, thank you very much and I am willing to answer any questions. I think the Staff report did an excellent job so I’m more than willing to react to any commentary. Chair Lew: Great, thank you. I don’t have any speaker cards for this particular item so I will bring it back to the Board for the question. Board Member Baltay: Question, do we have any material samples? Mr. Iwersen: Not at this point, no. Board Member Baltay: I mean any more detailed specification on what these finishes will be? Mr. Iwersen: Just the images that I have included in the drawings. Board Member Baltay: Thank you. Mr. Iwersen: I can go into more enhanced images I think, which I have here. Chair Lew: Any other questions? No. Board Member Furth: I have one question which is how the breezeway works? Are those – each of them an access way to a separate unit or (inaudible)(crosstalk) Mr. Iwersen: One – the breezeway is an access to only one unit. Each unit has its own, basically private entrance and so the breezeway itself accesses only one unit. The other two are accessed on the ground floor of the podium deck. Board Member Furth: Thank you. Chair Lew: Yes, Wynne, why don’t you start then on Board Member comments. Board Member Furth: Oh, I think it’s much improved. No further comment from me. 2.g Packet Pg. 60 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 4 Chair Lew: Robert. Board Member Gooyer: Well, it’s definitely a big improvement over what we saw the first go around. I’m still a little -- I mean this I being called a mixed-use but we’re talking about the equivalent of a one car garage for a commercial area and the rest of it is all residential. I am having a hard time classifying this as mixed use. I don’t have that big of a problem with the 16-feet but the only thing is, when you are coming down El Camino at the rate of flow that traffic is going, you have to usually stop fairly quickly and make a tight turn so the wider the better. I would be a whole lot happier with 20-feet. I mean it’s definitely, like I said, a big improvement over what it was. It’s just that to me, it’s still asking for a whole lot of variations and it just seems like it’s inappropriate to put three full-blown housing units right in the middle of a commercial district where it is. That’s all I have at the moment. Mr. Iwersen: Can I respond or not? Can I respond at this point or not? No? Ok. Chair Lew: Well, I think we’ll get there. I think we’re going to get there in a minute. I might have a question for you regarding that. Peter? Board Member Baltay: I share my previous Board Member’s comments. I think it’s a much-improved design. It fits the site much better. Just a couple of things on the floor plan that I am trying to puzzle out because the more I look at it, the more I see things that I just want more information I guess. As I pull in the parking space, the last two spots there, how do I back the vehicle up and get back out again without… Mr. Iwersen: That is that little deck that is provided out in the back is also intended as backup space. Board Member Baltay: So, that’s underneath the drip line of the tree. So, you’re sort of pulling outside the building through that big opening at the back underneath the tree and then coming forward. That doesn’t seem to work very well. If you’re supposed to stay away from the tree, then you can’t have cars driving underneath it. I am sure there is a way to lay it all out correctly but it just seems odd to have such a large garage opening onto this public outdoor space. If it really is going to be this beautiful outdoor garden that you so nicely described, then I am not sure I want to see a 20-foot opening into a parking garage from that and I would want to have car occasionally backing up where my child is playing, for example. You’d really want more of a barrier. What I am left thinking is I wish you could just sink that parking area down even just half a story or something to get more separation. I know you are close to the tree but you’re already doing it for the mechanical lifts anyway. If you could just get it more separated, I think it would work better as a whole. Then I was just glancing through the floor plans for the building and I noticed you have a fairly interesting window on the El Camino elevation on the right. It’s a very tall building window and I was sort of wondering what is going on? It turns out you have a stair wrapping… Mr. Iwersen: It’s with the stair system, yeah. Board Member Baltay: So, the stairs wrap sort of between the kitchen counter and the window going up like that and it’s certainly innovative and genius but I wonder if it’s really all that practical. Mr. Iwersen: Well, I think it’s to allow light into that unit and eventually, what I think I would like to do is poke a little hole and put an operable window in there to allow for some more ventilation up through the stair. I think it’s just a way of allowing light into the unit without overheating the unit. Board Member Baltay: As I – let me finish if I could. As I finish -- as I dive into the floor plan more, I realize that it’s a dramatic stair and what it’s really going up to is just sort of a small room up on the third floor with no – it’s just a room up there without any sort of any larger space. There’s no bathroom and it’s not connected to anything. I hope I am miss reading it but if I am not, it doesn’t make sense. Chair Lew: There’s something –no, it’s the whole – there are three bedrooms. 2.g Packet Pg. 61 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 5 Mr. Iwersen: It’s a three bedroom, yeah. It goes up to three bedrooms. Board Member Baltay: Is there a doorway through there, is that what I am missing? Board Member Furth: Yes. Board Member Baltay: Oh, I am sorry. Chair Lew: They are kind of drawn slightly… Board Member Baltay: Oh, so you go up to that third level and then I can carry into – oh, I’ sorry. I didn’t – my mistake. Mr. Iwersen: That’s just a play area at the top of the stairs. Board Member Baltay: Now that makes perfect sense then. So, it’s not really for us to question the details of your layout and stuff but I don’t think that it gives you the opportunity to have a nice vertical element on El Camino, which I applaud so more power to you. Then the last one just gets to that I was looking at one of the renderings of the back of the building and it just caught my eye as being very tall and narrow. Mr. Iwersen: The rendering is actually inaccurate on that. If you look at the actual elevation, it’s a split window system that – it’s a taller room in that case. It’s a living room that we punched up and… Board Member Baltay: So again, if you could let me finish, please. On Sheet A-4.2, the rear elevation, when I look at that it kind of scares me. It’s just really ill proportion and I look at the elevation and I think that’s got some promise to it. Board Member Gooyer: You’re saying the A-2.1 is actually the way that it will be? Mr. Iwersen: Let me check on that. I’m not sure if I’ve… I’m trying to find that sheet. Let me – darn it. I’ll have to take a look and see. I don’t know if I have that particular sheet. Board Member Baltay: Well, what I am left – I guess what I am trying to comment on so that my fellow Board Members can hear is that the more that I look at it, the more I see small questions that aren’t starting to add up to – my first reaction to this whole thing was why aren’t we approving this right now? Then the more I look at it, the more I see little things that just don’t jive so I look at that rendering and it scares me. I look at the elevation and maybe it’s good. I ask you for some idea about what the materials are and I get nothing so we’re not trying to get it approved right away so that’s fine. I guess I am saying that I’m still… Mr. Iwersen: I think our intent was to come here and try and get a – rather than go down the road we did last, with the full-blown presentation and get sent back to the drawing board. We wanted to see if we were on the right track and that’s kind of where we are going. Board Member Baltay: Fair enough. Chair Lew: This is the third scheme that they’ve presented so there was a scheme before this. Board Member Baltay: So, then I – let me just say that I think you are on the right track. I think the building has great potential and is certainly approvable. Mr. Iwersen: By the way, 2.1 is the correct – the rendering just didn’t pick up on it. I’m trying to – we don’t have the in-house rendering and trying to get them to match it up has a bit of a – more of a struggle than we anticipated. 2.g Packet Pg. 62 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 6 Board Member Baltay: I think I will be able to support this at some point but right now there are still a few questions. The biggest one has to do with the parking and its relationship to the backyard and it it’s not possible to get a little more separation psychologically. Ok, thank you. Mr. Iwersen: Yes? Board Member Furth: Hi, so looking at A-4.2, which is the renderings. So, what is happening to the left of the descending staircase? Mr. Iwersen: We have a preliminary landscape plan for that and that is more just a planting wall, I believe. If you go to sheet L-1.1, that would be a more accurate description. There is a planting area adjacent to a – there is a little bit of height change down at that point. It descends in the rear so that’s a little bit of a ramp that goes down from that deck on down. Board Member Furth: I’m sorry. I’m having, even more, trouble reading it than that. I am exposing all kinds of ignorance. So, I see that there’s a deck and there’s a staircase coming down from it. Mr. Iwersen: The staircase is above. Board Member Furth: The staircase is coming down, right? Mr. Iwersen: Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Board Member Furth: To the left of that, what am I seeing behind the deck? Mr. Iwersen: Well, that’s why I was trying to push you towards L-1.1. Board Member Furth: Right. Mr. Iwersen: That is a ramp down from the deck. It’s a wooden boardwalk in a way. Board Member Furth: Right and behind the boardwalk? Mr. Iwersen: Probably about a foot and a half. Board Member Furth: What looks like a car gleaming… Chair Lew: It’s a doorway. Board Member Furth: There’s a big –what looks like a garage door with a car in it. Chair Lew: It’s a garage doorway so that the car can back out over the wood deck. Board Member Furth: Is that what we are talking about? This is the backup space? (Crosstalk) Got it. Didn’t realize that deck was at ground level. Thank you. Chair Lew: Let's go back to the – I think you had – Robert, you had a comment about the mixed-use, right? The lack of – the small level of office space. I just wanted to go back to that so our zoning requires a certain amount on the ground floor and … Board Member Gooyer: What is that number, by the way? Chair Lew: Ten – fifteen percent. Mr. Petersen: Yeah, fifteen percent is the required amount. 2.g Packet Pg. 63 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 7 Board Member Gooyer: Of the entire project? Mr. Petersen: Of the site area. Board Member Gooyer: Oh, the site area, ok. Chair Lew: That’s a lot of floor area. Mr. Iwersen: It comes out to 1,124-square feet and what – as a result of – by putting that much on the ground floor, it pushes everything back into the tree. That’s where the problem comes in and so that is how we worked with planning to try and establish some sort of compromise between the hardship for the tree and the requirement – the fairly large requirement for ground floor space of the commercial. Chair Lew: Right and we would not normally allow an all residential project in zoning. Mr. Iwersen: Yes. Chair Lew: That’s how our code reads and yes? Mr. Iwersen: Can I just present this? This is a little exhibit about small shops and such but (inaudible) Chair Lew: Can you use the microphone, please? Mr. Iwersen: They are all in one location, however, if you were too… Board Member Gooyer: (Inaudible) Mr. Iwersen: Well, if you could extrapolate that… (inaudible) Board Member Gooyer: (Inaudible) in the middle of nowhere. Mr. Iwersen: … over to a – you know, there are other examples of one small shops (inaudible). Board Member Gooyer: So, how far are you off? Chair Lew: Way off. Mr. Iwersen: Way off, yeah. Chair Lew: 1,000-square feet? Mr. Iwersen: 1,000-square feet. Board Member Gooyer: Oh, ok. Board Member Baltay: Do we have the option of just not requiring commercial? Is that within our purview? We can just reduce the amount but we can’t eliminate the requirement? Ms. Gerhardt: The project is asking for a variance from that development standard. Board Member Baltay: Can we make the variance a complete elimination of that standard? Board Member Gooyer: No, because I don’t think then you can classify it as a – you could probably vary how much it is but this way, it would still be a commercial or a mixed use. 2.g Packet Pg. 64 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 8 Board Member Baltay: So, we are right back where we were an hour ago. This is a non-useful building with no parking. I mean non-useful commercial space and there is not parking. The only parking space is the handicap spot. Mr. Iwersen: I would argue that that space is useful. (crosstalk) Board Member Baltay: We do have the option to approve a variance for it? Board Member Gooyer: You mean by eliminating (inaudible). Board Member Baltay: Just illuminate it. Call it what it is. Ms. Gerhardt: There is the – as Alex stated, there is a prohibition on full residential project so we would have to explore that further and we can bring that back to you. Chair Lew: That was a Council level discussion so it wasn’t – I don’t think – my recollection was that discussion was more for – was more based on – after Arbor Real and not necessarily for a very, very small site. Board Member Baltay: They just start this (inaudible). Mr. Iwersen: I would still argue that while it’s small, I think it’s still a useful spot. I think that can – there will be a potential for a tenant to come in there. Board Member Gooyer: But the other thing is also, that there is no parking for it. Mr. Iwersen: No, there is. Yeah. They’ve got a spot. Board Member Gooyer: Yeah, one handicap or one accessible space that theoretically you can’t park unless you have a plaque. Board Member Baltay: Unless you are selling wheelchairs in this spot. Board Member Gooyer: I mean really, you don’t have a parking space for it. I mean yes, there is a physical space but you can’t use it. Chair Lew: Ok. Board Member Gooyer: I mean, I’m just trying to be realistic. Mr. Iwersen: Yeah, yeah. I’m not sure… Board Member Gooyer: If we are talking about a variance, that needs to be part of it that also – that – it goes more to the tune of just saying can you get rid of it altogether because that also eliminates the issues of the… Board Member Baltay: The tree gives you intense room for requesting a variance. It’s significantly difficult in developing this project. Chair Lew: Ok, so let’s just list stuff to deliberate on. We’re not making a decision on this today and let them see if there is a way on (inaudible). Board Member Gooyer: No, but I am not a big fan of variances. Never have been. Chair Lew: Well, it’s not our – it’s not the Board decision, right? 2.g Packet Pg. 65 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 9 Board Member Gooyer: Ok, but it is my decision to vote yes or no. Chair Lew: You can have an opinion. Yes, and you can have an opinion. Board Member Gooyer: Ok, fine. Chair Lew: Whether or not it meets the variance findings is the Director’s decision. Ok, Wynne, did you have something? Board Member Furth: Oh, if we are going down a list, my principle concern at this point is the safety – is modifying the backup on those two garage spaces for returning so that there’s a barrier between the backing up and the use of that outdoor space. Whether it’s a circular bench on the edge of the deck or whatever but so that… Mr. Iwersen: We could easily put that in there. Board Member Furth: … it’s safer. I would be curious as to – there’s not garage door there now, is that right? Mr. Iwersen: There is no garage there. Board Member Furth: I tend to think that it would be better with one. One of the things that might do is give me a sound signal when it goes up for example. Chair Lew: So… Board Member Furth: Yes? Ms. Gerhardt: Where are you suggesting the garage door? Mr. Iwersen: On the rear. Board Member Furth: At the back on the rear two spaces and one of the things about having a garage door is that you can signalize it so that it beeps when it opens. (Inaudible) Board Member Gooyer: Well the neighbors are a restaurant and (inaudible) (crosstalk) Board Member Furth: (Inaudible) this site, Mr. Iwersen: Can I also address the – we’re keeping the existing curb cut on El Camino, which is wider than the 16-feet. It’s the garage door itself that is 16-feet 6-inches and we have a little bit more space than that as you pull up to the garage door by the return, just on the right side actually but not by much. I think we’re about 17-feet as you pull in underneath the building. Chair Lew: Ok, thank you for that. So, I have a couple of other comments. One went to the garage door in the back. I have seen that done in San Francisco where there is a garage door on the front and the back and at least in San Francisco it’s very (inaudible). Just for security because people will go up and over and all around to break into buildings in San Francisco. Having the back door is useful there but I don’t know it really makes much sense here but it’s been done. It’s – on the project that I have seen, it was – it does affect the backup space but it’s still done. I can support the DEE for the driveway width because you have a very small lot. The window that Peter was asking about, I just want to caution you that in our El Camino Design guidelines, it discourages louvers and screens on the windows… Mr. Iwersen: Oh, it does? 2.g Packet Pg. 66 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 10 Chair Lew: … and I think it was intended for much – like a large office – we have some large office building from the 60’s that have all – the entire window is covered with a screen. I think that was the intent and I am not sure that this one architectural feature that you have has to be – what do I want to say? That it couldn’t have a screen. I just wanted to caution you. (crosstalk) (Inaudible) Mr. Iwersen: Well, I was – yeah. We could go to a Cal. Wall system or something like that with at punched opening in it maybe or something along those lines. It’s more or less – it’s more to filter light through and protect from heat gain rather than… Chair Lew: I think what my main thing is though, is that because you are building up against the property line against a one-story restaurant. I want some sort of architectural feature or definition there and it’s tricky because it’s a fire condition. To me, making something attractive there at that corner is more important than the guidelines restriction on screening – solar screening. Generally, I can support the project and I think that’s all that I have or let me – I think I have one more comment. Oh, yes, I have one more comment. The residential entrance is off to the left and you have you have a wood slated gate. If there was a way of making that more prominent, I would be interesting in see if there were options because right now, you have very small commercial space with the bigger entrance and you have three units which, in Palo Alto, would be – should be very high end just given the square footage and the way the prices are now but are making them through what looks like a little smalls side gate. Anyway, if you have ideas, I would be interested in seeing them. Mr. Iwersen: Well, no, that’s a – that’s mostly what we are looking for is input on that level to see how we enhance certain aspects. Chair Lew: I think it doesn’t necessarily have to be big but I mean, in terms of quality and materials and whatnot, it could be very attractive. Anyway, I think that you are on the right track. I look forward to seeing this one come through. Mr. Iwersen: Anything specific as far as the material and the skin that you – or the fenestration, besides the louvers aspect, that you would think would help this project when we go forward? Chair Lew: I would say that in the past if we – I was just looking at your front façade, the Board has often wanted to see a change in plan anytime there was a different material because otherwise, it’s just like a Zee flashing between them. Mr. Iwersen: Right now, if you saw the section, I have a larger stone element that gives a little water table effect at that point. Would you rather see something stronger, I guess is the case? Chair Lew: This is right above the garage entrance? Mr. Iwersen: Yeah, it’s above the garage. If you go to the wall sections. Chair Lew: Can I – yeah. Mr. Iwersen: It ties in with that awning over the residential. Chair Lew: Yep. Mr. Iwersen: It’s meant to tie in with those. Chair Lew: I guess it would be on really how – it’s the actual profile because the faux stones are -- I don’t know. They are pretty thin so I guess it depends on how it’s detailed and on the – I had I think a similar 2.g Packet Pg. 67 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 11 question as Peter about the siding. If it was hardy; like quarter inch thick Hardy panels versus – I don’t know, metal siding with a deep rib or … Mr. Iwersen: Hardy is coming out with this more premier version… Chair Lew: Yeah, I’ve seen that. Mr. Iwersen: … that is thicker. We could do that or we could switch over a metal siding with a great relief to it. Chair Lew: I don’t know – it seems to me that the hardy siding is the environmentally preferable material. I think when – we have buildings with metal sidings and then it really comes down to the details like all the corner details, where its lapped and the screws – you know, if the corners are mitered or whatnot so we have some projects that have really beautiful metal siding details that I think are nice but I think your standard airport or bus terminal level of metal siding detail probably won’t cut it. Mr. Iwersen: Our intent is definitely not to go that route but to be off higher quality on all levels. Chair Lew: I would say, just based on the neighborhood, you would either way. A lot of the area around Fry’s site, where all railroad warehouses so they were corrugated metal, utilitarian buildings so you could tie into that or you could make something else on El Camino so yeah, I don’t – I think you could either way on that. I think I’m really more concerned about just the quality and the details and we have some projects that have – there’s the mixed-use building on Birch Street, where we had a – it was a debate with the developer whether or not to use granite cladding on the first floor or porcelain tile and there were two architects on the team. They were sort of arguing amongst themselves on which one to use and I think they went with the porcelain tile, which didn’t look so great because it looks thin. I think the issue is just trying to make – if you are trying to do a stone, just to make it look robust. Mr. Iwersen: Yeah, definitely you’re not trying to make it look thin. You know, that’s a… Chair Lew: Ok, that’s all that I have. I think you are on the right track. Any last comments? Board Member Baltay: Let me throw out – you were asking and I am looking at you El Camino elevation a little more critically now and I’ll throw a couple things at you. It seems every window has a different proportion and there’s not enough consistency. The commercial entrance as square transoms above it, whereas the residential stuff is very tall, narrow windows. The one to the right is more deeply recessed and you have this curved piece as well and it’s a little bit too much. You want to simplify and find a consistency there. Yeah? I think that the horizontal siding is a very attractive thing. You see that a lot of high-end contemporary homes where they are using Ipe or Teak even or cedar and things like that. They are incredibly high maintenance and very difficult to put in well. Mr. Iwersen: That’s why we were going hardy. Board Member Baltay: So, we’ve also used, in my firm, hardy board stuff. The premium one, which I think 5/8s or 7/8 is really quite attractive. The devils in the details and you really want to miter those corners. Hardy Board is not a very easy material to work with when it comes to mitering corners. What they give you is a metal piece that you nail on top of it, which looks pretty tacky. You want to think hard about what your approach is going to be but that deep shadow line on the horizontal lines can look really attractive but then I wouldn’t want to see – it looks like you have some sort of a reliever or a regulate divided up. Mr. Iwersen: Yeah and that’s what I am wondering if maybe those for the corners instead and makes this more of panelized item than… 2.g Packet Pg. 68 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 12 Board Member Baltay: I would think less is more and you want a constant vocabulary. If you are going for a horizontal series of shadow lines, then I wouldn’t try to put a vertical element to it. I am just challenging you that a lot of architect’s want to use that heavy hardy board stuff and the devil is in the corner. We’ve done it where we’ve has the guys us bondo and it’s a labor of love to get that looking good and lasting because it cracks. The same thing on your roof soffit up in the very top. Again, it’s just how you detail that out more. A little bit more detail when you come back to us is really very helpful to us. What I found is not a series of hard technical details but rather just zoomed in images and stuff that are showing what you are really intending is very useful. Mr. Iwersen: We will definitely do that. Board Member Baltay: If I could, I wanted to come back once more because I want to be sure that you are hearing at least me on this, that what I am seeing on the parking on this, the more I look at it, the more I think it doesn’t really function. You have two trees in the parking area and a landscaping in the parking sort of mirroring the opening above it and at least last time that I have had a project go through the Transportation Department, they gave us a lot of grief about backup space and turning radius and I can’t see them approving this. Mr. Iwersen: Well, actually, I think it’s – the landscape area does not mimic the opening above. It’s much tighter. Once again, we have to get the landscape architect more involved on this point. Board Member Baltay: In my firm, we are working a similar scale project and we’ve tremendous challenges getting the parking to really work and it’s wishful thinking sometimes what you’ve drawn here. In the reality is that you are going to be forced to make it really function smoothly and well. Mr. Iwersen: We have more than enough backup space there for us to get a planting are along that edge underneath that opening. Board Member Baltay: I’m just cautioning you to take it seriously and put some effort into really figuring it out. Make sure the City’s Transportation Department is on board when it comes back to use, we’re going to have to say yes or no. It’s the third time back so I would really appreciate – I want you to hear strongly what I am saying about this parking and several Board Members have said now that the big garage opening to the backyard is a question of whether you can back up or not. I am cautioning you that you are proposing to drive under neither a heritage oak tree. Last, I checked, you just can’t do that in Palo Alto. Don’t go down that road and found out that your whole design is contingent upon the need of that backup space. Mr. Iwersen: Thank you. I agree. Board Member Gooyer: Please, take a look at that carefully. Thank you. Chair Lew: Ok… Board Member Gooyer: One quick question, what’s a utility consultant? Mr. Iwersen: That would be the Joint Trench, typically. Board Member Gooyer: The what? Mr. Iwersen: Joint Trench. Board Member Gooyer: Ok. 2.g Packet Pg. 69 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 13 Mr. Iwersen: In this case [Terar] but they worked on the previous project and we didn’t – we were coming through with a full-blown proposal, they’d have already vetted it as well and that’s why we didn’t want to go down that road of a full blown consultant. Board Member Gooyer: That’s fine. I just had never heard of it before. Ms. Gerhardt: Board Members, if I may? I think we only heard from two people about the driveway opening. The 16-feet that needs a DEE so if we could get some clarification on that. Board Member Baltay: I am perfectly fine with granting a DEE for that. Board Member Furth: I am too. Chair Lew: I said I was ok before. Ok, we need a motion. I think the Staff wants to us to continue to a date uncertain. MOTION Board Member Baltay: Ok, I move that we continue this project to a date uncertain. Board Member Gooyer: I’ll second. Chair Lew: Ok, motion by Baltay and seconded by Gooyer, all in favor? Opposed? None. So, that’s a 4-0 Kim absent. MOTION PASSED 4-0 WITH VICE CHAIR KIM ABSENT 2.g Packet Pg. 70 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Attachment H Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) Hardcopies of project plans are provided to Board members. These IS/MND is available to the public online and/or by visiting the Planning and Community Environmental Department on the 5th floor of City Hall at 250 Hamilton Avenue. Directions to review Project plans online: 1. Go to: www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pln 2. On the left hand side click “Development Proposals” 3. In the drop down window click “Pending Projects” 4. Scroll to find “3265 El Camino Real” and click the address link 5. On this project specific webpage you will find a link to the IS/MND and other important information Direct Link to Project Webpage: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=3867&targetID=319 2.h Packet Pg. 71 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t H : I n i t i a l S t u d y / M i t i g a t e d N e g a t i v e D e c l a r a t i o n ( 9 0 3 3 : 3 2 6 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : N e w M i x e d U s e ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID # 8956) Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/5/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: 620 Emerson: Nobu Annex (2nd Hearing) Title: PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 620 Emerson Street (17PLN-00331): Recommendation on Applicant's Request for Approval of a Minor Architectural Review to Allow Demolition of an Existing Single Story Building and Construct a New Two Story 4,256 Square Foot Commercial Building for the Expansion of Nobu Restaurant. The Project Includes Replacement of Three On-Site Parking Spaces with Five In-Lieu Spaces in the Downtown Parking Assessment District. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the Provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Guideline Section 15303 (New Construction). Zoning District: CD-C(GF)(P) (Downtown Commercial). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Samuel Gutierrez at samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org. From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) take the following action(s): 1. Recommend approval of the proposed project to the Director of Planning and Community Environment based on the findings and subject to the conditions of approval attached to this report. Report Summary The subject project was previously reviewed by the ARB. An earlier staff report includes extensive background information, project analysis and evaluation to city codes and policies; that report is available online: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63068. A copy of the report without prior attachments is available in Attachment E. 3 Packet Pg. 73 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 The purpose of this report is to restate the comments made by the Board and detail the applicant’s response to those comments. The analysis section below builds upon the information contained in the earlier report and modified to reflect recent project changes. Background On February 1, 2018, the ARB reviewed the subject project. A video recording of the Board’s meeting is available online: http://midpenmedia.org/architectural-review-board-74/. The Board’s comments and the applicant’s response are summarized in the following table: ARB Comments/Direction Applicant Response Add pedestrian friendly seating New public seating added within the recessed front façade Clarifications on the renderings Additional renderings (daytime) included Clarifications regarding the existing and proposed FAR Updated FAR table and diagrams included on Sheet A1.03 Landscape plan should be clarified and more native plants should be included Landscape plan updated accordingly (Sheet L1.11 The green roof should more clearly indicate if it is to be accessed by the adjacent hotel The green roof has been revised and a new railing plus curb has been added to the plans, limiting access from the adjacent building. Awning size and location should be looked at again Awning has been shortened to follow the window widths rather than the building width Indicate the location of future signage Location shown on plans Recess entry should be opened up, draw more attention for pedestrians, planters should be integrated into the building. The entry wall is softened by the addition of a planter box. The proposed benches within the recessed window areas make the building more engaging for pedestrians Revisit the roof top equipment, screening and noise Roof top equipment is now screened via a louvered screen. Analysis1 The ARB had a number of comments for this project during the first hearing and the applicant has revised the plans to address many of these comments. The façade now incorporates bench seating on the newly proposed recessed windows. These benches can be utilized by the public 1 The information provided in this section is based on analysis prepared by the report author prior to the public hearing. The Architectural Review Board in its review of the administrative record and based on public testimony may reach a different conclusion from that presented in this report and may choose to take an alternative action from the recommendation in this report. 3 Packet Pg. 74 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 and would address the comment from the ARB regarding street furniture. The applicant has also indicated the location for future signage to be place on the proposed awning. The ARB had comments regarding the awning design and the connection to 180 Hamilton. The awning has been revised and is now shortened to only span across the buildings window frames as opposed to spanning the width of the building. The previous awning design was at level with the adjacent hotel awning, causing confusion as to the connection between the two sites. The change in awning design better distinguishes the project as an individual site, rather than a full extension of the adjacent hotel. The recessed entrance has been revised to include a small planter box with bamboo to soften the entry for patrons. The green roof has been revised and now includes a railing and raised planter to separate the project site from the hotel patrons on the second floor of 180 Hamilton. The floor area of the project has been revised and shown to be 4,063 square feet (FAR 1:1) in compliance with the applicable zoning district. The rear of the building has been slightly altered to better accommodate the stairs leading to the upper level storage room and stay within the maximum allowed FAR for the site. Parking The ARB also expressed some concern regarding the use of in-lieu parking fees. Transportation Division has reviewed several parking configurations for this site and determined that on-site parking cannot be accomplished in a safe manner. The use of in-lieu parking spaces is therefore recommended to address the removal of the three existing parking spaces and the need for two additional spaces given the addition of gross square footage. Environmental Review The subject project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. Specifically, the project is categorically exempt from the 3 Packet Pg. 75 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 provision of the CEQA as it falls under a Class 3 exemption (CEQA Guidelines Section 15303) for “new construction or conversion of small structures.” The project meets the criteria for this exemption as it is a new building that is below 10,000 square feet in area and is located within an urban area with a proposed use that is permitted within the CD-C zone district. Public Notification, Outreach & Comments The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires notice of this public hearing be published in a local paper and mailed to owners and occupants of property within 600 feet of the subject property at least ten days in advance. Notice of a public hearing for this project was published in the Palo Alto Weekly on March 23, 2018, which is 14 days in advance of the meeting. Postcard mailing occurred on March 26, 2018, which is 11 days in advance of the meeting. Public Comments As of the writing of this report, no project-related, public comments were received. Alternative Actions In addition to the recommended action, the Architectural Review Board may: 1. Approve the project with modified findings or conditions; 2. Continue the project to a date (un)certain Report Author & Contact Information ARB2 Liaison & Contact Information Samuel Gutierrez, Associate Planner Jodie Gerhardt, AICP, Planning Manager (650) 329-2225 (650) 329-2575 samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments:  Attachment A: Location Map (PDF)  Attachment B: ARB Findings for Approval (DOCX)  Attachment C: Conditions of Approval (DOCX)  Attachment D: Zoning Comparison Table (DOCX)  Attachment E: February 1, 2018 ARB Staff Report w/o Attachments (PDF)  Attachment F: Project Plans (DOCX) 2 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org 3 Packet Pg. 76 120-26-073 120-27-023 120-27-013 120-26-081 120-26-074 120-27-016 120-27-024 120-27-035 120-27-036 120-27-026 120-26-082 120-26-097 120-26-075 120-26-073 120-27-022 120-26-083 120-26-080 120-26-079 120-27-003 120-27-039 120-27-002 120-27-004 120-27-005 120-26-084 120-27-025 120-27-020 120-27-009 120-27-071 120-27-084 120-27-074 City Hall Peninsula Creamery Mac's S mokeshop Wasson Building 100.0' 125.0' 75.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5' 100.0' 12.5' 125.0' 112.5' 225.0' 100.0' 125.0' 112.5'125.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5' 100.0' 75.0'100.0' 75.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 90.0' 25.0' 90.0' 25.0' 90.0' 50.0' 90.0' 50.0' 100.0' 2.5'10.0' 47.5' 90.0' 50.0' 50.0' 100.0' 112.5' 0' 50.0' 148.0' 100.0' 0' 0' 100.0' 75.0'100.0' 75.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 95.0' 20.5'5.0' 79.5' 90.0' 150.0' 105.0' 275.0' 275.0' 105.0' 100.0' 105.0' 100.0' 105.0' 37.5' 100.0' 37.5' 100.0' 62.5' 100.0' 62.5' 100.0' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 50.0' 102.5' 50.0' 102.5' 25.0' 102.5' 25.0' 102.5' 18.0' 102.5' 23.0' 97.5' 7.1' 45.0' 97.5' 7.1' 40.0' 102.5' 125.0' 102.5'125.0' 102.5' 40.0' 102.5' 25.0'2.5' 15.0' 100.0' 85.0' 100.0' 85.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 40.0' 102.5' 40.0' 102.5' 30.0' 102.5' 30.0' 102.5' 30.0' 102.5' 30.0' 102.5' 50.0' 102.5' 50.0' 102.5' 25.0'7.5' 40.0' 102.5' 65.0' 95.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 102.5' 50.0' 102.5' 50.0' 102.5' 50.0' 102.5' 75.0' 125.0' 75.0' 125.0' 225.0' 218.0' 400.0' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 90.0' 225.0' 200.0' 102.5'110.0' 122.5' 25.0' 50.0' 102.5' 50.0' 102.5' 50.0' 102.5' 50.0' 102.5' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 25.0' 90.0' 12.5' 16.8' 101.2' 25.0' 101.3' 16.8'12.5' 112.5' 25.0' 112.5' 25.0' 112.5' 15.0' 112.5' 15.0' 112.5' 25.0' 112.5' 25.0' 112.5' 25.0' 5040.0' 100.0'114.0' 50.0 100.0' 100.0' 100.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0'100.0' 150.0' 175.0' 112.5' 50.0' 37.5' 25.0' 25.0' 200.0' 2000 105.0' 50.0' 105.0' 50.0' 105.0' 50.0' 105.0' 50.0' 105.0' 50.0' 50.0' 22 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 100.0' 100.0' 100.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 200.0' 100.0' 12.5' 100.0' 125.0' 85.0' 59.0'85.0' 59.0' 85.0' 66.0'85.0' 66.0' E M ERSO N STREET E M E RS O N STREET R EET HIGH STREETHAMILT O N A VEN UE H A MILT O N A VEN UE E M ER S O N STR EET F O R EST AVE NU E R A M O NA STREET LAN E 7 EAST LA N E 5 EAST LANE 6 EA ST 12 W EST LA N E 11 W EST ALM A STRE ET VEN UE PC-29 CD-C (P) PF PF PF C D-S(P) RT-35RT-50 CD-C (P) CD-C(GF)(P) C D-S(GF)(P) This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Historic Site Special Setback Near Creek (SCVWD) abc Known Structures Tree (TR) Zone Districts abc Zone District Notes Curb Edge Current Features 0' 111' 62 0 E m e r s o n S t r e e t CITY O F PALO A L TO I N C O R P O R ATE D C ALIFOR N IA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f A P RIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2016 City of Palo Alto sgutier, 2018-01-03 12:46:54 (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Personal\Planning.mdb) 3.a Packet Pg. 77 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t A : L o c a t i o n M a p ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) ATTACHMENT B ARB FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL 620 Emerson Street 17PLN-00331 The design and architecture of the proposed improvements, as conditioned, complies with the Findings for Architectural Review as required in Chapter 18.76 of the PAMC. Finding #1: The design is consistent with applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, coordinated area plans (including compatibility requirements), and any relevant design guides. On balance, the project has been found in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies. Comp Plan Goals and Policies How project adheres or does not adhere to Comp Plan The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the site is Regional Commercial. The project continues the Regional Commercial land use. Land Use and Community Design Element GOAL B-6: Attractive, vibrant retail centers, each with a mix of uses and a distinctive character. POLICY B-6.1 Support and enhance the University Avenue/ Downtown area as a vital mixed use area prioritizing retail, personal service, small office, start-ups, restaurant, residential and arts and entertainment uses. Recognize the importance of an appropriate retail mix, including small local businesses, to the continued vitality of Downtown. The proposal would result in no net loss of retail as the proposed restaurant use is considered retail like, maintaining a similar mixture of uses in the indicative of the Downtown area. GOAL L-4: Inviting pedestrian scale centers that offer a variety of retail and commercial services and provide focal points and community gathering places for the city’s residential neighborhoods and employment districts. POLICY L-4.4: Ensure all Regional Centers and Multi-Neighborhood Centers provide centrally located gathering spaces that create a sense of identity and encourage economic revitalization. Encourage public amenities such as benches, The new building would have large windows that connect the proposed restaurant to the street and will provide a large awning that spans the length of the building, creating a more pleasant pedestrian environment. The project will create a new building with a new restaurant use which includes new pedestrian furniture for public use on private property, maintaining the Downtown area’s pedestrian 3.b Packet Pg. 78 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : A R B F i n d i n g s f o r A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) street trees, kiosks, restrooms and public art. POLICY L-4.7: Maintain and enhance the University Avenue/Downtown area as a major commercial center 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-4.8: Ensure that University Avenue/Downtown is pedestrian-friendly and supports bicycle use. Use public art, trees, bicycle racks and other amenities to create an environment that is inviting to pedestrians and bicyclists identity. The large windows that allow clear views into the proposed restaurant. This design feature is consistent with the existing design of the businesses along Emersion that also have large open windows that reinforce the pedestrian characteristic of Downtown Palo Alto. The project includes new street furniture (bench seating) within the recessed window area of the façade and will install a new bike rack within the public right of way, enhancing the pedestrian and bicycle friendly environment of the area. POLICY L-6.1: Promote high-quality design and site planning that is compatible with surrounding development and public spaces. The project proposes a new building that is in scale with the adjacent single story buildings along Emerson Street and will include the use of high quality materials such as bronze and stone. POLICY L-9.10.2: Encourage the use of compact and well-designed utility elements, such as transformers, switching devices, backflow preventers and telecommunications infrastructure. Place these elements in locations that will minimize their visual intrusion. The project locates new backflow preventers within the façade via hidden cabinets, removing them from public view. The project would be consistent the Downtown Design Guidelines as it involves an active retail-like use (eating and drinking use) and the new façade materials are consistent with those listed in the Guidelines. The new façade provides a recessed entry, a new awning, and glass windows with bench seats that fit the character of the smaller store front pattern and setbacks of the adjacent buildings. These features will also help to activate the street. The proposed green roof would further enhance views from the adjacent hotel and other taller buildings in the area. Finding #2: The project has a unified and coherent design, that: a. creates an internal sense of order and desirable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community, b. preserves, respects and integrates existing natural features that contribute positively to the site and the historic character including historic resources of the area when relevant, c. is consistent with the context-based design criteria of the applicable zone district, d. provides harmonious transitions in scale, mass and character to adjacent land uses and land use designations, e. enhances living conditions on the site (if it includes residential uses) and in adjacent residential areas. 3.b Packet Pg. 79 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : A R B F i n d i n g s f o r A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) The project is proposing a new building with a façade that will enhance the immediate neighborhood and patrons of the local businesses alike. The design of the new building is consistent with the context- based design criteria within the CD-C(GF)(P) zone, as further described below. In addition, the project will integrate the exterior ground floor façade of the adjacent hotel, as it expands the existing restaurant from 180 Hamilton Avenue to 620 Emerson Street. The proposed façade would also better connect the building with the existing character and streetscape along Emerson Street. The new building will be built to the property lines similar to other existing buildings in the area and would preserve the pedestrian scale of the area. In addition, new bench seats are proposed within the window recesses and new bicycle racks will be installed in the public right way, improving the pedestrian and bicycle environment of the area. Pursuant to PAMC 18.16.090(b), the following context-based design considerations and findings are applicable to this project. These context-based design criteria are intended to provide additional standards to be used in the design and evaluation of development in a commercial district. The purpose is to encourage development in a commercial district to be responsible to its context and compatibility with adjacent development as well as to promote the establishment of pedestrian oriented design. 1. Pedestrian and Bicycle Environment Project Consistency The design of new projects shall promote pedestrian walkability, a bicycle friendly environment, and connectivity through design elements The project will have the same scale as the existing buildings in the area, maintaining the areas pedestrian environment and scale. The project includes benches along its front façade to promote a pedestrian friendly environment. 2. Street Building Facades Street facades shall be designed to provide a strong relationship with the sidewalk and the street (s), to create an environment that supports and encourages pedestrian activity through design elements The proposed building includes a recessed entry and awning that will function as a shelter for pedestrians. The project also includes new seating that can be utilized by the public supporting pedestrian activity. The proposed building will have large clear windows that connect the interior of the building to the sidewalk and street, promoting pedestrian activity. 3. Massing and Setbacks Buildings shall be designed to minimize massing and conform to proper setbacks The proposed project will not substantially increase the existing massing or setbacks from the street. 4. Low Density Residential Transitions Where new projects are built abutting existing lower scale residential development, care shall be taken to respect the scale and privacy of This finding does not apply. 3.b Packet Pg. 80 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : A R B F i n d i n g s f o r A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) neighboring properties 5. Project Open Space Private and public open space shall be provided so that it is usable for the residents and visitors of the site This finding does not apply. 6. Parking Design Parking shall be accommodated but shall not be allowed to overwhelm the character of the project or detract from the pedestrian environment The proposed project will remove existing on- site parking and replace them via the Downtown Parking Assessment Districts in-lieu fee, which provides parking off site within walking distance of the site. 7. Large Multi-Acre Sites Large sites (over one acre) shall be designed so that street, block, and building patterns are consistent with those of the surrounding neighborhood This finding does not apply 8. Sustainability and Green Building Design Project design and materials to achieve sustainability and green building design should be incorporated into the project The project will be constructed in accordance with current green building energy efficiency requirements. The project will also utilize a green roof that would reduce runoff from the roof and lower the heat absorption of the building, leading to lower demands on the HVAC systems. Finding #3: The design is of high aesthetic quality, using high quality, integrated materials and appropriate construction techniques, and incorporating textures, colors, and other details that are compatible with and enhance the surrounding area. The project involves materials which are durable and of high quality finishes consisting of bronze and stone. The new façade will have a light colored textured stone finish that will better fit with the existing character of the area and will enhance the surrounding area. Finding #4: The design is functional, allowing for ease and safety of pedestrian and bicycle traffic and providing for elements that support the building’s necessary operations (e.g. convenient vehicle access to property and utilities, appropriate arrangement and amount of open space and integrated signage, if applicable, etc.). The proposed building will maintain the pedestrian scale of the area and promote a pedestrian friendly environment by including benches along its front façade. A recessed entry and awning that will 3.b Packet Pg. 81 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : A R B F i n d i n g s f o r A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) function as a shelter for pedestrians are proposed and would provide a refuge for pedestrians from the elements. The proposed building will also have large clear windows that connect the interior of the building to the sidewalk and street, promoting pedestrian activity. The project includes new utilities which will be easily accessible via hidden panels within the façade keeping them out of the public right of way and out of sight. The site is located within the downtown parking assessment district which allows for more convenient parking options. Additionally, the site has access to a rear alleyway which can be utilized by service and delivery vehicles that support the day to day operation of the proposed restaurant. Finding #5: The landscape design complements and enhances the building design and its surroundings, is appropriate to the site’s functions, and utilizes to the extent practical, regional indigenous drought resistant plant material capable of providing desirable habitat that can be appropriately maintained. The project includes new planters along the sidewalk and a green roof which can be viewed partially through the open skylight within the building and will be clearly visible to patrons within the adjacent hotel and other taller buildings in the area. The green roof and new planters will contribute to the overall character of Downtown. Finding #6: The project incorporates design principles that achieve sustainability in areas related to energy efficiency, water conservation, building materials, landscaping, and site planning. The project will comply with all applicable green building codes for energy efficient buildings such as the use of energy efficient lighting and the construction debris diversion rate requirement minimizing trips to landfills. The proposed green roof will reduce runoff and reduce the heat island effect while providing additional green space over a more traditional roof. 3.b Packet Pg. 82 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : A R B F i n d i n g s f o r A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) ATTACHMENT C CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 620 Emerson Street 17PLN-00331 ________________________________________________________________________ PLANNING DIVISION 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS. Construction and development shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "NOBU PA 620” stamped as received by the City on March 2nd, 2018 on file with the Planning Department, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. BUILDING PERMIT. Apply for a building permit and meet any and all conditions of the Planning, Fire, Public Works, and Building Departments. 3. BUILDING PERMIT PLAN SET. The Architectural Review (AR) approval letter including all Department conditions of approval for the project shall be printed on the plans submitted for building permit. 4. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: All modifications to the approved project shall be submitted for review and approval prior to construction. If during the Building Permit review and construction phase, the project is modified by the applicant, it is the responsibility of the applicant to contact the Planning Division/project planner directly to obtain approval of the project modification. It is the applicant’s responsibility to highlight any proposed changes to the project and to bring it to the project planner’s attention. 5. PROJECT EXPIRATION. The project approval shall be valid for a period of two years 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 AR approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect. Application for a one year extension of this entitlement may be made prior to the expiration. 6. PARKING IN-LIEU FEES: Parking in-lieu fees shall be paid for five (5) parking spaces prior to issuance of Building permits at the rate set, per in-lieu space, at the time of payment. 7. BICYCLE PARKING: One new short term bicycle rack shall be installed within the public right of way, along with one long term bicycle to the satisfaction of the Chief Transportation Official. 8. TRASH ROOM: The trash room shall be used solely for the temporary storage of refuse and recycling that is disposed on a regular basis and shall be closed and locked during non-business hours. 9. ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE: Estimated Development Impact Fees in the amount of $340320.34 , shall be paid prior to the issuance of the related building permit. 10. REQUIRED PUBLIC ART. In conformance with PAMC Chapter 16.61, and to the satisfaction of the Public Art Commission, the property owner and/or applicant shall select an artist and receive final approval of the art plan, or pay the in-lieu fee equivalent to 1% of the estimated construction valuation, prior to 3.c Packet Pg. 83 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) obtaining a Building permit. All required artwork shall be installed as approved by the Public Art Commission and verified by Public Art staff prior to release of the final Use and Occupancy permit. 11. IMPACT FEE 90-DAY PROTEST PERIOD. California Government Code Section 66020 provides that a 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 WITHIN THE 90-DAY PERIOD OR FOLLOW THE PROTEST PROCEDURES DESCRIBED IN GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66020, YOU WILL BE BARRED FROM CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OR REASONABLENESS OF THE FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, AND EXACTIONS. If these requirements constitute fees, taxes, assessments, dedications, reservations, or other exactions as specified in Government Code Sections 66020(a) or 66021, this is to provide notification that, as of the date of this notice, the 90-day period has begun in which you may protest these requirements. This matter is subject to the California Code of Civil Procedures (CCP) Section 1094.5; the time by which judicial review must be sought is governed by CCP Section 1094.6. 12. INDEMNITY: 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 for its actual attorneys’ 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. 13. FINAL INSPECTION: A Planning Division Final inspection will be required to determine substantial compliance with the approved plans prior to the scheduling of a Building Division final. Any revisions during the building process must be approved by Planning, including but not limited to; materials, landscaping and hard surface locations. Contact your Project Planner, Samuel Gutierrez at samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org to schedule this inspection. PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING 14. Teak planters proposed in the right-of-way shall be removable and moved out of the right of way at the end of each business day. 15. SIDEWALK, CURB & GUTTER: As part of this project, the applicant must replace those portions of the existing sidewalks, curbs, gutters 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 unpermitted 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. 16. STREET TREES: The applicant may be required to replace existing and/or add new street trees in the 3.c Packet Pg. 84 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) 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 determine 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-of-Way from Public Works’ arborist (650-496-5953). 17. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN: The plan set must include a grading & drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional that includes existing and proposed spot elevations and drainage flow arrows to demonstrate proper drainage of the site. Adjacent grades must slope away from the house 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. See the Grading & Drainage Plan Guidelines for New Single Family Residences: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/2717 18. GRADING PERMIT: The site plan must include an earthworks table showing cut and fill volumes. If the total is more than 100 cubic yards, a grading permit will be required. An application and plans for a grading permit are submitted to Public Works separately from the building permit plan set. The application and guidelines are available at the Development Center and on our website. 19. 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. The sheet is available here: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/2732 20. 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. 21. 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 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 must 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. 22. 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. 23. STORM WATER TREATMENT: This project may trigger the California Regional Water Quality Control 3.c Packet Pg. 85 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) Board’s revised provision C.3 for storm water regulations (incorporated into the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Section 16.11) that apply to residential land development projects that create or replace between 2,500 and 10,000 square feet of impervious surface area. The applicant must implement one or more of the following site design measures:  Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse.  Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas.  Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas.  Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas.  Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces.  Construct driveways, and/or uncovered parking lots with permeable surfaces. 24. 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.” 25. 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. a. The applicant will further explain how they will ensure additional care and attention is taken during construction to protect the adjacent Historic buildings terracotta façade and tiled roof. PUBLIC WORKS ZERO WASTE 26. Trash enclosure must be large enough to accommodate at least 2 bins and a cart. UTILITIES ENGINEERING 27. Industrial and large commercial customers must allow sufficient lead-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. 28. A completed Utility Service Application and a full set of plans must be included with all applications involving electrical work. The Application must be included with the preliminary submittal. 29. 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 after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued after all utility services and/or meters have been disconnected and removed. 3.c Packet Pg. 86 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) 30. 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. 31. Contractors and developers shall obtain permit from the Department of Public Works before digging in the street right-of-way. This includes sidewalks, driveways and planter strips. 32. At least 48 hours prior to starting any excavation, the customer must call Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-800-227-2600 to have existing underground utilities located and marked. The areas to be checked for underground facility marking shall be delineated with white paint. All USA markings shall be removed by the customer or contractor when construction is complete. 33. The customer is responsible for installing all on-site substructures (conduits, boxes and pads) required for the electric service. No more than 270 degrees of bends are allowed in a secondary conduit run. All conduits must be sized according to California 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. 34. 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. 35. All new underground conduits and substructures shall be installed per City standards and shall be inspected by the Electrical Underground Inspector before backfilling. 36. For services larger than 1600 amps, a transition cabinet as the interconnection point between the utility’s padmount transformer and the customer’s main switchgear may be required. See City of Palo Alto Utilities Standard Drawing SR-XF-E-1020. The cabinet design drawings must be submitted to the Electric Utility Engineering Division for review and approval. 37. For underground services, no more than four (4) 750 MCM conductors per phase can be connected to the transformer secondary terminals; otherwise, bus duct or x-flex cable must be used for connections to padmount transformers. 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. 38. The customer is responsible for installing all underground electric service conductors, bus duct, transition cabinets, and other required equipment. The installation shall meet the California Electric Code and the City Standards. 39. 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. 40. Shop/factory drawings for switchboards (400A and greater) and associated hardware must be submitted for review and approval prior to installing the switchgear to: Gopal Jagannath, P.E. 3.c Packet Pg. 87 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) Supervising Electric Project Engineer Utilities Engineering (Electrical) 1007 Elwell Court Palo Alto, CA 94303 41. For 400A switchboards only, catalog cut sheets may be substituted in place of factory drawings. 42. All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before energizing. 43. 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. 44. The follow must be completed before Utilities will make the connection to the utility system and energize the service:  All fees must be paid.  All required inspections have been completed and approved by both the Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector.  All Special Facilities contracts or other agreements need to be signed by the City and applicant.  Easement documents must be completed. BUILDING DIVISION 45. For the proposed property line openings from 620 Emerson St into 180 Hamilton Ave, provide a recorded restricted covenant on both properties that assures that the proposed openings will not be increased at any time and will be filled in with solid rated walls as required by the 2016 or most recent California Building Code once the ownership and/or tenant vacates either structure prior to the issuance of the building permit. 46. The proposed restaurant occupancy use of A-2 from the former M (florist shop) occupancy is considered a change of occupancy to a higher risk category. When a change in occupancy results in a structure being reclassified to a higher risk category, the structure shall conform to the seismic requirements for a new structure of a higher risk category. A seismic evaluation of the existing structure will be required for the change of occupancy for the submittal of the building permit. (CBC Part 10 Existing Building Code Section 407.4) 47. If the proposed tenant improvement of less than 5,000 s.f. also includes the replacement of at least two of the following: HVAC system, building envelope, not water system, or lighting system, then this project shall comply with the CALGreen Mandatory + Tier 1 requirement when submitting for the building permit. The City of Palo Alto GB Mandatory + Tier 1 plan sheets can be downloaded from the following website address: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/ds/green_building/compliance.asp 48. The review and approval of this project does not include any other items of construction other than those written in the ARB project review application included with the project plans and documents under this review. If the plans include items or elements of construction that are not included in the written description, it or they may not have been known to have been a part of the intended review and have not, unless otherwise specifically called out in the approval, been reviewed. 3.c Packet Pg. 88 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) WATERSHED PROTECTION Designated Food Service Establishment (FSE) Projects: A. Grease Control Device (GCD) Requirements, PAMC Section 16.09.075 & Cited Building/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 relief vent(s). (CPC 1002.2 & 1004) 10. GCD(s) installed in vehicle traffic areas shall be rated and indicated on plans. B. Drainage Fixture Requirements, PAMC Section 16.09.075 & Cited Building/Plumbing Codes 1. To ensure all FSE drainage fixtures are connected to the correct drain lines, each drainage fixture shall be clearly labeled on the plans. A list of all fixtures and their discharge connection, i.e. sanitary sewer or grease waste line, shall be included on the plans. 2. A list indicating all connections to each proposed GCD shall be included on the plans. This can be incorporated into the sizing calculation. 3. All grease generating drainage fixtures shall connect to a GCD. These include but are not limited to: a. Pre-rinse (scullery) sinks b. Three compartment sinks (pot sinks) c. Drainage fixtures in dishwashing room except for dishwashers shall connect to a GCD d. Examples: trough drains (small drains prior to entering a dishwasher), small drains on busing counters adjacent to pre-rinse sinks or silverware soaking sinks e. Floor drains in dishwashing area and kitchens f. Prep sinks g. Mop (janitor) sinks h. Outside areas designated for equipment washing shall be covered and any drains contained therein shall connect to a GCD. i. Drains in trash/recycling enclosures j. Wok stoves, rotisserie ovens/broilers or other grease generating cooking equipment with drip lines 3.c Packet Pg. 89 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) k. Kettles and tilt/braising pans and associated floor drains/sinks 4. The connection of any high temperature discharge lines and non-grease generating drainage fixtures to a GCD is prohibited. The following shall not be connected to a GCD: a. Dishwashers b. Steamers c. Pasta cookers d. Hot lines from buffet counters and kitchens e. Hand sinks f. Ice machine drip lines g. Soda machine drip lines h. Drainage lines in bar areas 5. No garbage disposers (grinders) shall be installed in a FSE. (PAMC 16.09.075(d)). 6. Plumbing lines shall not be installed above any cooking, food preparation and storage areas. 7. Each drainage fixture discharging into a GCD shall be individually trapped and vented. (CPC 1014.5) C. Covered Dumpsters, Recycling and Tallow Bin Areas PAMC, 16.09.075(q)(2) 1. Newly constructed and remodeled FSEs shall include a covered area for all dumpsters, bins, carts or container used for the collection of trash, recycling, food scraps and waste cooking fats, oils and grease (FOG) or tallow. 2. The area shall be designed and shown on plans to prevent water run-on to the area and runoff from the area. 3. Drains that are installed within the enclosure for recycle and waste bins, dumpsters and tallow bins serving FSEs are optional. Any such drain installed shall be connected to a GCD. 4. If tallow is to be stored outside then an adequately sized, segregated space for a tallow bin shall be included in the covered area. 5. These requirements shall apply to remodeled or converted facilities to the extent that the portion of the facility being remodeled is related to the subject of the requirement. D. Large Item Cleaning Sink, PAMC 16.09.075(m)(2)(B) 1. FSEs shall have a sink or other area drain which is connected to a GCD and large enough for cleaning the largest kitchen equipment such as floor mats, containers, carts, etc. Recommendation: Generally, sinks or cleaning areas larger than a typical mop/janitor sink are more useful. E. GCD sizing criteria and an example of a GCD sizing calculation (2007 CPC) Sizing Criteria: GCD Sizing: Drain Fixtures DFUs Total DFUs GCD Volume (gallons) Pre-rinse sink 4 8 500 3 compartment sink 3 21 750 2 compartment sink 3 35 1,000 Prep sink 3 90 1,250 Mop/Janitorial sink 3 172 1,500 Floor drain 2 216 2,000 Floor sink 2 Example GCD Sizing Calculation: Quantity Drainage Fixture & Item Number DFUs Total 3.c Packet Pg. 90 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) 1 Pre-rinse sink, Item 1 4 4 1 3 compartment sink, Item 2 3 3 2 Prep sinks, Item 3 & Floor sink, Item 4 3 6 1 Mop sink, Item 5 3 3 1 Floor trough, Item 6 & tilt skillet, Item 7 2 2 1 Floor trough, Item 6 & steam kettle, Item 8 2 2 1 Floor sink, Item 4 & wok stove, Item 9 2 2 4 Floor drains 2 8 1,000 gallon GCD minimum sized Total: 30 Note:  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 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, GCD maintenance, drainage fixtures, record keeping and construction projects. Plastic Foam and Non-Recyclable Food Service Containers and Packaging Items A. Prohibitions on the Use of Plastic Foam and Non-Recyclable Plastics, PAMC 5.30.020 1. Except as provided by PAMC Section 5.30.030, Food Service Establishments are prohibited from providing prepared food in Disposable Food Service Containers made from Plastic Foam or other Non-Recyclable Plastic; 2. Except as provided by PAMC Section 5.30.030, Retail Service Establishments are prohibited from selling, leasing or otherwise providing Plastic Foam Products; 3. Except as provided by PAMC Section 5.30.030, all City facilities and vendors at City sponsored events or City owned facilities are prohibited from using Disposable Food Service Containers, packaging or other products made from Plastic Foam or Non-Recyclable Plastic; 4. Nothing in PAMC Section 5.30 shall be interpreted to restrict the use or sale of any form of fiber or paper disposable food service container, or the use of any form of biodegradable or plastic food service container meeting ASTM Standards or other products authorized by Administrative Regulation. B. Exemptions to the Prohibitions on the Use of Plastic Foam and Non-Recyclable Plastics, PAMC 5.30.030 1. The following exemptions shall apply: i. Foods prepared or packaged outside the City of Palo Alto are exempt from the provisions of PAMC Section 5.30. Purveyors of food prepared or packaged outside the City of Palo Alto are encouraged to follow the provisions of this PAMC Section 5.30. ii. The Director of Public Works, or his/her designee, may exempt a Food Service Establishment, Retail Service Establishment or City facility/vendor from the requirements of this Ordinance for a period of up to one year, if the applicant for such 3.c Packet Pg. 91 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) exemption can demonstrate that the conditions of this Ordinance would cause an undue hardship. An “undue hardship” includes, but is not limited to situations unique to the applicant where there are no reasonable alternatives to Plastic Foam Products or Non-recyclable Plastic Disposable Food Service Containers and compliance with PAMC Section 5.30 would cause significant economic hardship to that applicant, or cause them to be deprived of a legally protected right. iii. A Food Service Establishment, Retail Service Establishment or City facility/vendor seeking an exemption application shall include all information necessary for the City to make its decision, including but not limited to documentation showing the factual support for the claimed exemption. The Director may require the applicant to provide additional information to permit the Director to determine facts regarding the exemption application. iv. Emergency Supplies and Service Procurement. City facilities, Food Service Establishments, Retail Service Establishments, City contractors and vendors doing business with the City shall be exempt from the provisions of PAMC Section 5.30, in a situation deemed by the City Manager to be an emergency for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety. 3.c Packet Pg. 92 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT D ZONING COMPARISON TABLE 620 Emerson Street, 17PLN-00331 Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.18 (CD-C DISTRICT) Exclusively Non-Residential Development Standards Regulation Required Existing Proposed Minimum Setbacks Front Yard None Required 0 ft 0 ft Rear Yard None Required Varies (0 to 5 ft) Varies (0 to 5 ft) Interior Side Yard None Required 0 ft 0 ft Street Side Yard None Required N/A N/A Special Setback (Pursuant to Code Section 20.08) None Required N/A N/A Minimum street setback for sites sharing a common block face with any abutting residential zone district Note 4 N/A N/A Minimum yard (ft) for lot lines abutting or opposite residential zone districts 10 feet (Note 1) N/A N/A Maximum Site Coverage None Required 4,000 sf 3,883 sf Maximum Height 50 ft 23 ft 7 in 23 ft 4 in Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.0:1 (4,063 sf) 4,000 sf 4,063 sf Maximum Size of New Non- Residential Construction or Expansion Projects 25,000 sf of gross floor area or 15,000 sf above the existing floor area, whichever is greater, provided the floor area limits set forth elsewhere in this chapter are not exceeded N/A 4,063 sf project conforms Daylight Plane for lot lines abutting one or more residential zone districts Initial Height at side or rear lot line (Note 2) 23 ft 7in 23ft 4 in Slope (Note 2) N/A N/A Notes 1) The yard shall be planted and maintained as a landscaped screen, excluding area required for site access. 2) The initial height and slope shall be identical to those of the residential zone abutting the site line in question. 3.d Packet Pg. 93 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t D : Z o n i n g C o m p a r i s o n T a b l e ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) Page 2 of 2 3) The maximum height within 150 feet of any abutting residential zone district shall not exceed the height limit of the abutting residential district. 4) The minimum street setback shall be equal to the residentially zoned setback for 150 feet from the abutting single-family or multiple family development. 5) FAR may be increased with transfers of development and/or bonuses for seismic and historic rehabilitation upgrades, not to exceed a total site FAR of 3.0:1 in the CD-C subdistrict or 2.0:1 in the CD-S or CD-N subdistricts. 18.18.100 Performance Standards. In addition to the standards for development prescribed above, all development shall comply with the performance criteria outlined in Chapter 18.23 of the Zoning Ordinance. All mixed-use development shall also comply with the provisions of Chapter 18.23 of the Zoning Ordinance. 18.18.110 Context-Based Design Criteria. As further described in a separate attachment, development in a commercial district shall be responsible to its context and compatible with adjacent development, and shall promote the establishment of pedestrian oriented design. Table 2: CONFORMANCE WITH CHAPTER 18.52.040 (Off-Street Parking and Loading) for Downtown University Avenue Parking Assessment District Type Required Existing Proposed Conforms? Vehicle Parking (within the Downtown Parking Assessment District) PAMC 18.52.040 Table 2 All uses except residential: 1 space per 250 sf 16 spaces 3 on-site and 11 in- lieu spaces 16 in-lieu spaces (5 net new) Yes Bicycle Parking (within the Downtown Parking Assessment District) PAMC 18.52.040 Table 2 All uses except residential: 1 space per 2,500 sf 40% Long Term (LT) 60% Short Term (ST) 2 spaces 1 LT 1 ST 0 1 Long Term 1 Short Term Yes Loading Space The project is not required to provide a loading space because it is and eating a drinking services use of less than 4,999 sf. 3.d Packet Pg. 94 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t D : Z o n i n g C o m p a r i s o n T a b l e ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID # 8690) Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/1/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: 620 Emerson: Nobu Restaurant Annex (1st formal) Title: PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 620 Emerson Street (17PLN-00331): Recommendation on Applicant's Request for Approval of a Minor Architectural Review to Allow Demolition of an Existing Single Story Building and Construct a New Two Story 4,256 Square Foot Commercial Building for the Expansion of Nobu Restaurant. The Project Includes Replacement of Three On-Site Parking Spaces with Five In-Lieu Spaces in the Downtown Parking Assessment District. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Guideline Section 15303. Zoning District: CD-C(GF)(P) (Downtown Commercial). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Samuel Gutierrez at samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org. From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation It is recommended that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) take the following action(s): 1. Recommend approval of the proposed project to the Director of Planning and Community Development based on findings and subject to conditions of approval. Report Summary The proposed project seeks to demolish the existing building and construct a new 4,256 square foot (sf) building to accommodate the expansion of Nobu restaurant, which currently occupies the neighboring hotel. This new building will include such improvements as a trash room and roof garden. In addition, the project will eliminate the three existing on-site parking spaces and pay in-lieu fees for these and additional spaces within the Downtown Parking Assessment District. The proposal is currently 177 sf over the allowed FAR, as further described below, and would need to be reduced by this amount prior to approval. 3 Packet Pg. 32 3.e Packet Pg. 95 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : F e b r u a r y 1 , 2 0 1 8 A R B S t a f f R e p o r t w / o A t t a c h m e n t s ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 Background Project Information Owner: PA Hotel Holdings, LLC Architect: Montalba Architects, Inc. Representative: NA Legal Counsel: NA Property Information Address: 620 Emerson Street Neighborhood: Downtown Palo Alto Lot Dimensions & Area: 40’ wide by 100’ & 4,063 sf Housing Inventory Site: Not Applicable Located w/in a Plume: Not Applicable Protected/Heritage Trees: Two street trees Historic Resource(s): Reviewed and determined not to be historically significant Existing Improvement(s): 4,000 sf; Single Story; 23’7” in height; year built: 1940 Existing Land Use(s): Retail (Vacant) Adjacent Land Uses & Zoning: North: CD-C(GF)(P) (Retail/ General Office) West: CD-C(GF)(P) (Hotel) East: CD-C(GF)(P) (Retail) South: CD-C(P) (Residential/General Office) Aerial View of Property: 3 Packet Pg. 33 3.e Packet Pg. 96 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : F e b r u a r y 1 , 2 0 1 8 A R B S t a f f R e p o r t w / o A t t a c h m e n t s ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 Source: google maps Land Use Designation & Applicable Plans Zoning Designation: CD-C(GF)(P); Downtown Commercial Comp. Plan Designation: CC Context-Based Design Criteria: Yes Downtown Urban Design Guide: Yes South of Forest Avenue Coordinated Area Plan: Not Applicable Baylands Master Plan: Not Applicable El Camino Real Design Guidelines (1976 / 2002): Not Applicable Proximity to Residential Uses or Districts (150'): Yes Located w/in the Airport Influence Area: Not Applicable Prior City Reviews & Action City Council: None PTC: None HRB: None ARB: None Project Description The proposed project seeks to demolish the existing building located at 620 Emerson Street and replace it with a new building of similar stature for expansion for the existing Nobu restaurant located at 180 Hamilton Avenue. This will be achieved via two new interior openings that will connect the project site with the neighboring hotel/Nobu restaurant. The new building sought 3 Packet Pg. 34 3.e Packet Pg. 97 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : F e b r u a r y 1 , 2 0 1 8 A R B S t a f f R e p o r t w / o A t t a c h m e n t s ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 to utilize 200 sf of additional floor area over the site maximum per an exemption allowed under PAMC 18.18.070(a)(1). However, during the course of review, it was determine this exemption is only allowed for existing buildings that are not eligible for Historic or Seismic Bonuses, meaning the proposed project is currently 177 sf over the allowed FAR. This has been brought to the attention of the applicant and we anticipate they will bring a solution to the hearing for the ARB’s consideration. The majority of the new building mass will be similar to the existing Existing Building Proposed Building 3 Packet Pg. 35 3.e Packet Pg. 98 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : F e b r u a r y 1 , 2 0 1 8 A R B S t a f f R e p o r t w / o A t t a c h m e n t s ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5 building’s height at 23 feet 4 inches. The massing of the building will slightly increase as the footprint will extend to the rear property line and a roof garden will be added. The existing building has three on-site parking spaces that are accessed via the rear alley. These spaces will be removed and replaced with in-lieu parking spaces in the Downtown Parking Assessment District. In place of the on-site parking will be a new trash room that will reduce the number of trash bins located within the rear alley and improve the cleanliness of this area. The exterior facade is proposed to match the recently approved facade at 180 Hamilton Avenue (17PLN-00171). The design of the project will incorporate a modern stone exterior with large glass windows that run the length of the façade under the awning to the ground. The façade will have a textured stone material within the proposed recess entry way and will have the same stone with a smooth tiled finish along the exterior of the building. The project will also have a new awning that will run the length of the building and will provide down lighting as well as up lighting for the upper portions of the façade. The new building will include a green roof that is visible to the adjacent hotel patrons. The façade is proposed to have two planters made of teak with ornamental small trees along the sidewalk. Requested Entitlements, Findings and Purview: The following discretionary applications are being requested: x Architectural Review – Minor (AR): The process for evaluating this type of application is set forth in PAMC 18.77.070. AR applications are reviewed by the ARB and recommendations are forwarded to the Planning & Community Environment Director for action within five business days of the Board’s recommendation. Action by the Director is appealable to the City Council if filed within 14 days of the decision. AR projects are evaluated against specific findings. All findings must be made in the affirmative to approve the project. Failure to make any one finding requires project redesign or denial. The findings to approve an AR application are provided in Attachment B. 620 Emerson 180 Hamilton 3 Packet Pg. 36 3.e Packet Pg. 99 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : F e b r u a r y 1 , 2 0 1 8 A R B S t a f f R e p o r t w / o A t t a c h m e n t s ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6 Analysis1 Neighborhood Setting and Character The project site is located in Downtown Palo Alto just south of the Hamilton Avenue and Emerson Street intersection. The project site has an area of 4,063 square feet and is located within the Downtown Parking Assessment District. The existing building was constructed in 1940 and has long been utilized as a retail business known as the Stanford Florist. The building has been analyzed for its historic potential through a Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) and has been determined not to be historically significant. The single story building is 27 feet 3 inches tall with a single recessed entry and rear access via an alley way. There is one large street tree in front of the site with a new smaller street tree located just south of the site on Emerson Street. The area surround the site consists of a mixture of single story to multi-story buildings ranging from one to eight stories. To the north, there is contemporary three-story mixed use building with ground floor retail and office spaces above, west of the site there is the eight story Nobu hotel and restaurant, and to the east is an single story Category 3 historic building that consists of restaurants and retail businesses. The existing building on the project site is nearly built out to the property lines. 1 The information provided in this section is based on analysis prepared by the report author prior to the public hearing. The Architectural Review Board in its review of the administrative record and based on public testimony may reach a different conclusion from that presented in this report and may choose to make alternative findings. A change to the findings may result in a final action that is different from the staff recommended action in this report. View Along South Emerson Category 3 Historic Building 3 Packet Pg. 37 3.e Packet Pg. 100 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : F e b r u a r y 1 , 2 0 1 8 A R B S t a f f R e p o r t w / o A t t a c h m e n t s ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 7 The design of the new building is an improvement over the existing and would be compatible with the ground level façade of 180 Hamilton. The compatibility with the character of the neighborhood heading south along Emerson is not as consistent. For example, when looking to the adjacent historic building at 635 Emerson with a decorative terracotta façade, the proposed façade may seem flat and without complimenting features. The proposed façade does have textured stone within the recessed entry that adds additional architectural character along with up-lighting on the proposed awning. The up-lighting will illuminate the upper façade during the evening and night, however, it would not provide the same effect on the façade during the day. Architectural Review Board comments regarding the compatibility of the proposed design with the surrounding area would be valuable, especially regarding the upper portions of the proposed façade. Zoning Compliance2 A detailed review of the proposed project’s consistency with applicable zoning standards has been performed. A summary table is provided in Attachment C. The proposed project would comply with all applicable Codes, provided 177 square feet of gross floor area is removed and, as conditioned, a bicycle rack for short term parking is provided. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Area Plans and Guidelines3 The Comprehensive Plan includes Goals, Policies, and Programs that guide the physical form of the City. The Comprehensive Plan provides the basis for the City’s development regulations and is used by City staff to regulate building and development and make recommendations on projects. Further, ARB Finding #1 requires that the design be consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the project site is Regional/Community Commercial, which allows for a wider variety of goods and services than neighborhood shopping areas. This project is proposing a new restaurant use which the designation of the site. On balance, the project is consistent with all other policies in the Comprehensive Plan and therefore fulfills the goals of the Plan. A detailed review of the project’s consistency is provided in Attachment B. Downtown Design Guidelines The proposal in relation to the guiding principles of the Downtown Guidelines has a compatible building mass as the building will match the height of the adjacent single story buildings in the area. The design maintains the smaller store front pattern and setbacks of the adjacent buildings. The proposal also includes a green roof design which will provide an improved view for the adjacent hotel guests and occupants of other taller buildings in the area. The materials for the façade are consistent with those listed in the Downtown Guidelines along with the recessed entry, full length awning and glass windows. A condition has been added to ensure 2 The Palo Alto Zoning Code is available online: http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/palo-alto_ca 3 The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan is available online: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/topics/projects/landuse/compplan.asp 3 Packet Pg. 38 3.e Packet Pg. 101 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : F e b r u a r y 1 , 2 0 1 8 A R B S t a f f R e p o r t w / o A t t a c h m e n t s ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 8 additional care and attention is taken when the new building is constructed in order to protect the adjacent Historic buildings terracotta façade and tiled roof. Staff asks the ARB to review the proposed plantings located at the front of the building. Though the addition of these planting along the sidewalk would contribute to the pedestrian environment, it is unclear if the proposed planters would compatible with both the design of the building and the surrounding area. Multi-Modal Access & Parking The site is accessible for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists from Emerson Street. The site has a large sidewalk which is frequented by pedestrians throughout the day and there are bicycle racks adjacent to the site. The existing site has paid into the Downtown parking assessment district for an equivalent of eleven spaces and has provided three parking spaces on site that are accessed from the rear alley way. The proposed project involves removing the on-site parking spaces and adding additional square footage to create space for a new trash room and kitchen, resulting in the requirement to pay for five additional parking spaces in the assessment district through an in-lieu fee. Environmental Review The subject project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. Specifically, this project is categorically exempt from the provision of the CEQA as it falls under a Class 3 exemption (CEQA Guidelines Section 15303) for “new construction or conversion of small structures.” The project meets the criteria for this exemption as it is a new building that is below 10,000 square feet in area and is located within an urban area with a proposed use that is permitted within the CD-C zone district. Public Notification, Outreach & Comments The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires notice of this public hearing be published in a local paper and mailed to owners and occupants of property within 600 feet of the subject property at least ten days in advance. Notice of a public hearing for this project was published in the Palo Alto Weekly on 1/18/2018, which is 14 days in advance of the meeting. Postcard mailing occurred on 1/19/2018, which is 13 in advance of the meeting. Public Comments As of the writing of this report there have been three project-related comments submitted. One comment expressed concerns over the storage and access to the waste receptacles along the rear alley way and wishes to have them securely stored to minimize rummaging at night. The other comment voiced opposition to the proposal as there is a civil dispute between the current and former property owners. Lastly, concerns were raised regarding the purchase of new in-lieu parking spaces. Alternative Actions 3 Packet Pg. 39 3.e Packet Pg. 102 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : F e b r u a r y 1 , 2 0 1 8 A R B S t a f f R e p o r t w / o A t t a c h m e n t s ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 9 In addition to the recommended action, the Architectural Review Board may: 1. Approve the project with modified findings or conditions; 2. Continue the project to a date (un)certain; or 3. Recommend project denial based on revised findings. Report Author & Contact Information ARB4 Liaison & Contact Information Samuel Gutierrez, Associate Planner Jodie Gerhardt, AICP, Planning Manager (650) 329-2225 (650) 329-2575 samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments: x Attachment A: Location Map (PDF) x Attachment B: Draft ARB Findings (DOCX) x Attachment C: Draft Conditions of Approval (DOCX) x Attachment D: Zoning Comparison Table (DOCX) x Attachment E: Applicant's Project Description (PDF) x Attachment F: Project Plans (DOCX) 4 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org 3 Packet Pg. 40 3.e Packet Pg. 103 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : F e b r u a r y 1 , 2 0 1 8 A R B S t a f f R e p o r t w / o A t t a c h m e n t s ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) Attachment D Project Plans Hardcopies of project plans are provided to ARB Members. These plans are available to the public online and by visiting the Planning and Community Environmental Department on the 5th floor of City Hall at 250 Hamilton Avenue. Directions to review Project plans online: 1. Go to: www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pln 2. On the left hand side click “Development Proposals” 3. In the drop down window click Pending Projects. 4. Scroll to find “620 Emerson” and click the address link 5. On this project specific webpage you will find a link to the project plans and other important information Direct Link to Project Webpage: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=4164&TargetID=319 3.f Packet Pg. 104 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t F : P r o j e c t P l a n s ( 8 9 5 6 : 6 2 0 E m e r s o n : N o b u A n n e x ( 2 n d H e a r i n g ) ) Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID # 8928) Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/5/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: 180 El Camino Real: Jefferys Storefront in Building J Title: PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 180 El Camino Real [18PLN-00055]: Request by Jason Smith, on Behalf of the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, for Minor Board Level Architectural Review of Façades and Signage Changes for new Tenant, Jeffrey, in Building J at Stanford Shopping Center. Environmental Assessment: Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guideline Section 15301. Zoning District: Community Commercial (CC). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Samuel Gutierrez at samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org. From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation It is recommended that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) take the following action(s): 1. Recommend approval of the proposed project to the Director of Planning and Community Development based on findings and subject to conditions of approval. Report Summary The proposed project includes removal of the existing façade at the subject tenant space within Building J of the Stanford Shopping Center and construction of a new façade for the opening of a new retail store named “Jeffrey”. The project does not involve changes in floor area nor will the project result in changes to parking or circulation at the site. Background Project Information Owner: The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University Architect: Darren Machulsky Architects Representative: Jason Smith – Land Shark Development 4 Packet Pg. 105 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 Legal Counsel: N/A Property Information Address: 180 El Camino Real Neighborhood: Stanford Shopping Center Lot Dimensions & Area: Various, 52.81 acres Housing Inventory Site: N/A Located w/in a Plume: N/A Protected/Heritage Trees: Various throughout the site Historic Resource(s): N/A Existing Improvement(s): 1,361,751 sf; 1 to 3 stories; 37’ height max Existing Land Use(s): Retail, Personal Service, Commercial Recreation Adjacent Land Uses & Zoning: North: PF (Government Facilities) West: CC(L)/PF(D) (Multi-Family Housing) East: HD (Medical Offices and Supportive Services) South: CC (Retail) Aerial View of Property: 4 Packet Pg. 106 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 Source: Google Maps Land Use Designation & Applicable Plans Zoning Designation: Community Commercial (CC) Comp. Plan Designation: Regional/Community Commercial Context-Based Design Criteria: Applicable, see analysis below Downtown Urban Design Guide: Not Applicable South of Forest Avenue Coordinated Area Plan: Not Applicable Baylands Master Plan: Not Applicable El Camino Real Design Guidelines (1976 / 2002): Applicable, see analysis below Proximity to Residential Not Applicable 4 Packet Pg. 107 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 Uses or Districts (150'): Located w/in the Airport Influence Area: Not Applicable Prior City Reviews & Action City Council: None PTC: None HRB: None ARB: None Project Description Request by Jason Smith for Minor Board level Architectural Review on behalf of Jeffrey to allow exterior facade improvements to an existing 13,447 sf tenant space within Building J the Stanford Shopping Center. The project is located at the north western portion of the Stanford Shopping Center with the store front facing El Camino Real. The project involves replacing the existing colonnade façade of the tenant space with a modern minimalist white glass façade with dark metal trim pieces and mullions. While not within ARB purview, the façade facing the interior of the mall will also be modified to match the new exterior facing façade. The renovation includes new signage consisting of a single moniker sign reading “Jeffrey” that is made of internally illuminated individual letters mounted directly to the facade over the recessed entries to the tenant space. Requested Entitlements, Findings and Purview: The following discretionary applications are being requested:  Architectural Review – Major (AR): The process for evaluating this type of application is set forth in PAMC 18.77.070. AR applications are reviewed by the ARB and recommendations are forwarded to the Planning & Community Environment Director for action within five business days of the Board’s recommendation. Action by the Director is appealable to the City Council if filed within 14 days of the decision. AR projects are evaluated against specific findings. All findings must be made in the affirmative to approve the project. Failure to make any one finding requires project redesign or denial. The findings to approve an AR application are provided in Attachment B. Analysis1 1 The information provided in this section is based on analysis prepared by the report author prior to the public hearing. The Architectural Review Board in its review of the administrative record and based on public testimony may reach a different conclusion from that presented in this report and may choose to make alternative findings. A change to the findings may result in a final action that is different from the staff recommended action in this report. 4 Packet Pg. 108 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5 The project is located within Building J in the Stanford Shopping Center in a tenant space that faces El Camino Real. The project is subject to the requirements outlined the Master Tenant Façade and Sign Program approval (Program, 15PLN-00040). The Program for the Stanford Shopping requires a Planning entitlement if any standalone buildings or tenant spaces that face a public right of way are proposed to have exterior changes. The requirement for Board Level review involves tenant spaces with outward facing façades greater than 35 ft long, while tenant spaces with façades under 35 ft long are subject to staff level Architectural Review. Tenant spaces with façades not visible from the public right of way do not require Planning entitlements for renovation but are still required to comply with the Program for the Shopping Center and obtain any necessary Building permits. The proposed project involves a façade over 35 ft in length and facing El Camino Real, therefore, Board Level Architectural Review is required. The proposed project would have an exterior façade length of 99 ft 6 in and 22 ft tall. The existing façade consists of a pillar and colonnade design with tan color stucco and arched display windows. The colonnade is centered along the exterior façade and projects outward providing a roofed canopy structure for pedestrians to walk through. The tenant space was the location of a previous retail business and has been vacant for a number of years. Existing Exterior Facing Façade 4 Packet Pg. 109 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6 Proposed Exterior Façade Facing El Camino Real The proposed tenant will be an apparel retail business named “Jeffery”. The proposed design for the new façade would remove the existing colonnade stucco storefront, replacing it with a new white glass façade and dark metal trim pieces and mullions. The new store front would have larger windows within the existing display area of the tenant space and would preserve the recessed entrance. As such, the project is compatible with the Shopping Center as the existing scale and massing of the building are maintained. The Stanford Shopping Center Program allows for a wall, blade/banner, and a canopy sign on a primary tenant façade and one wall or emblem sign on a secondary façade for a maximum of 4 signs for each tenant, as outlined in Attachment D. The project includes two new signs, each located above the entrances to the tenant space. The signs read “Jeffrey” and will be internally illuminated acrylic letters that are directly mounted to the façade. The letters are one inch thick and have a two inch black thick stainless steel base. Each sign will be approximately 24 inches tall and a total of 26.25 sf. The design and materials of the new signs are compatible with the modern minimalist design of the new façade. The signage is not over powering and is in proportion with the façade. The materials also follow the white glassed theme of the new façade. 4 Packet Pg. 110 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 7 The proposed facade fits within the varied storefront designs along the El Camino Real facing portion of the Shopping Center. The minimalist design of the proposed facade is framed by the large tree canopies from the mature landscaping located directly in front of the project space. The tree are proposed to remain and will be protected during construction. The adjacent tenant façades consist of range of colored stone, stucco and wood. The sign designs vary business tenant to tenant based on the business, all of which are indicative of the Shopping Center mixture of tenants. The project would maintain the existing height of the building; maintain the consistent height of this area of the Shopping Center. A stand out characteristic of the project and the other tenant spaces is that each tenant space has its own identity, drawing attention to the products and services offered at each tenant space while having a cohesive relationship within the Stanford Shopping Center. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Area Plans and Guidelines2 The Comprehensive Plan includes Goals, Policies, and Programs that guide the physical form of the City. The Comprehensive Plan provides the basis for the City’s development regulations and is used by City staff to regulate building and development and make recommendations on projects. Further, ARB Finding #1 requires that the design be consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the Stanford Shopping Center as a regional center with a land use designation for the project site is Community Commercial. For example, the project will renovate and vacant tenant space for a new exclusive retailer that will strengthen the Stanford Shopping Center position as a premiere regional shopping center with distinctive businesses. On balance, the project is consistent with the policies in the Comprehensive Plan and therefore fulfills the goals of the Plan as well. A detailed review of the project’s consistency with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan is provided in Attachment B. Zoning Compliance3 The Palo Alto Municipal Code states that the maximum floor area for the Stanford Shopping Center is limited to not add more than 80,000 square feet of floor area to the total amount of floor area of the shopping center existing as of June 14, 1996, 1,332,362 square feet, for a total square footage not to exceed 1,412,362 square feet per section 18.16.060(e)(3). This project does not result in any changes in regards to floor area or building height. A detailed review of the proposed project’s consistency with applicable zoning standards has been performed. A summary table is provided in Attachment D. The proposed project complies with all applicable codes within the Zoning Ordinance. Consistency with Application Findings 2 The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan is available online: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/topics/projects/landuse/compplan.asp 3 The Palo Alto Zoning Code is available online: http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/palo-alto_ca 4 Packet Pg. 111 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 8 The project is consistent with the required findings as shown within the provided draft finding in Attachment B. The project will not increase the floor area of the site or increase parking demand, as further described below. Additionally, the proposed renovation will widen the adjacent sidewalk through the removal of the large projecting colonnade structure, creating a better pedestrian environment. Finally, the project maintains the existing scale of the Stanford Shopping Center and the proposed land use is consistent with the surrounding land uses within the site. Multi-Modal Access & Parking The site can be accessed by pedestrians, bicyclists, private automobiles, and public transit (VTA, Caltrain Downtown Palo Alto Station, and SAMTRANS). The site is accessed primarily via El Camino Real and the pedestrian walkway from El Camino Real to the site. A number of pedestrian amenities such as outdoor seating areas, planters, fountains, interactive maps, pedestrian level lighting, and public art are provided on the site. The project does not involve any increase in floor area and is not a use that is more parking intensive as the Shopping Center has a mixed parking ratio for all uses of 1 parking space per 275 sf. As a result, the project will not impact existing parking (5,438 parking spaces) and multi-modal access to the site will remain. Environmental Review The subject project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. Specifically, the project is categorically exempt from the provision of CEQA as it falls under a Class 1 or an “Existing Facilities” exemption (Categorical Exemption 15301). This project meets this exemption due to the scope of work that is limited to exterior alterations to the façade. Public Notification, Outreach & Comments The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires notice of this public hearing be published in a local paper and mailed to owners and occupants of property within 600 feet of the subject property at least ten days in advance. Notice of a public hearing for this project was published in the Palo Alto Weekly on March 23, 2018, which is 14 days in advance of the meeting. Postcard mailing occurred on March 26, 2018, which is 10 days in advance of the meeting. Public Comments As of the writing of this report, no project-related, public comments were received. Alternative Actions In addition to the recommended action, the Architectural Review Board may: 1. Approve the project with modified findings or conditions; 2. Continue the project to a date (un)certain; or 3. Recommend project denial based on revised findings. 4 Packet Pg. 112 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 9 Report Author & Contact Information ARB4 Liaison & Contact Information Samuel Gutierrez, Associate Planner Jodie Gerhardt, AICP, Planning Manager (650) 329-2225 (650) 329-2575 samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments:  Attachment A: Location Map (PDF)  Attachment B: Draft ARB Findings (DOCX)  Attachment C: Draft Conditions of Approval (DOCX)  Attachment D: Zoning Comparison Table (DOCX)  Attachment E: Applicant's Project Description (PDF)  Attachment F: Project Plans (DOCX) 4 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org 4 Packet Pg. 113 4.a Packet Pg. 114 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t A : L o c a t i o n M a p ( 8 9 2 8 : 1 8 0 E l C a m i n o R e a l : J e f f e r y s S t o r e f r o n t i n B u i l d i n g J ) ARB Findings will be provided under separate cover. 4.b Packet Pg. 115 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : D r a f t A R B F i n d i n g s ( 8 9 2 8 : 1 8 0 E l C a m i n o R e a l : J e f f e r y s S t o r e f r o n t i n B u i l d i n g J ) Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT C CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 180 El Camino Real 18PLN-00055 ________________________________________________________________________ PLANNING DIVISION 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS. Construction and development shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "Jeffrey at Stanford Shopping Center” stamped as received by the City on March 23th, 2018 on file with the Planning Department, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. BUILDING PERMIT. Apply for a building permit and meet any and all conditions of the Planning, Fire, Public Works, and Building Departments. 3. BUILDING PERMIT PLAN SET. The ARB approval letter including all Department conditions of approval for the project shall be printed on the plans submitted for building permit. 4. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: All modifications to the approved project shall be submitted for review and approval prior to construction. If during the Building Permit review and construction phase, the project is modified by the applicant, it is the responsibility of the applicant to contact the Planning Division/project planner directly to obtain approval of the project modification. It is the applicant’s responsibility to highlight any proposed changes to the project and to bring it to the project planner’s attention. 5. PROJECT EXPIRATION. 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. 6. INDEMNITY: 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 for its actual attorneys’ 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. 7. FINAL INSPECTION: A Planning Division Final inspection will be required to determine substantial compliance with the approved plans prior to the scheduling of a Building Division final. Any revisions during the building process must be approved by Planning, including but not 4.c Packet Pg. 116 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 2 8 : 1 8 0 E l C a m i n o R e a l : J e f f e r y s S t o r e f r o n t i n B u i l d i n g J ) Page 2 of 2 limited to; materials, landscaping and hard surface locations. Contact your Project Planner, Samuel Gutierrez at samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org to schedule this inspection. PUBLIC WORKS ZERO WASTE 1. Public area restrooms must have color-coded labeled compost service for paper towels and garbage service for any diaper changing stations. BUILDING DIVISION 1. The proposed building façade changes will require a building permit using the current applicable codes and meet the requirements of the current Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for the altered building envelope. 4.c Packet Pg. 117 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : D r a f t C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 8 9 2 8 : 1 8 0 E l C a m i n o R e a l : J e f f e r y s S t o r e f r o n t i n B u i l d i n g J ) ATTACHMENT D ZONING COMPARISON TABLE 180 El Camino Real, 18PLN-00055 Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.16 (CC DISTRICT) Exclusively Non-residential Development Standards Regulation Required Existing Proposed Minimum Site Area, width and depth No Requirement 2,300,402 sf No Change Minimum Front Yard (El Camino Real) 0-10 feet to create an 8-12 foot effective sidewalk width (1), (2), (8) 180 ft No Change Rear and Side Yard No Requirement Varies No Change Special Setback 24 feet from Sand Hill, Arboretum and Quarry Roads – see Chapter 20.08 & zoning maps N/A N/A Max. Site Coverage No Requirement N/A N/A Max. Building Height 37 feet (4) Varied, Max 37 feet No Change Max. Net Square Footage (leasable) PAMC 18.16.060 (e)(3) 1,412,362 sf 1,360,859 sf No Change Daylight Plane for lot lines abutting one or more residential zone districts other than an RM-40 or PC Zone None (6) N/A N/A (1) No parking or loading space, whether required or optional, shall be located in the first 10 feet adjoining the street property line of any required yard. (2) Any minimum front, street side, or interior yard shall be planted and maintained as a landscaped screen excluding areas required for access to the site. A solid wall or fence between 5 and 8 feet in height shall be constructed along any common interior lot line.. (4) As measured to the peak of the roof or the top of a parapet; penthouses and equipment enclosures may exceed this height limit by a maximum of five feet, but shall be limited to an area equal to no more than ten percent of the site area and shall not intrude into the daylight plane. (6) The initial height and slope shall be identical to those of the most restrictive residential zone abutting the site line in question. (8) A 12 foot sidewalk width is required along El Camino Real frontage Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.16 (CC DISTRICT) continued Exclusively Non-residential Development Standards Topic Requirement Proposed Hours of Operation (18.16.040 (b)) Businesses with activities any time between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. shall be required to obtain a conditional use permit. The director may apply conditions of approval as are deemed necessary to assure compatibility with the nearby residentially zoned property No Change Office Use Restrictions (18.16.050) Total floor area of permitted office uses on a lot shall not exceed 25% of the lot area, provided a lot is N/A 4.d Packet Pg. 118 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t D : Z o n i n g C o m p a r i s o n T a b l e ( 8 9 2 8 : 1 8 0 E l C a m i n o R e a l : J e f f e r y s S t o r e f r o n t i n B u i l d i n g J ) permitted between 2,500 and 5,000 sf of office use. The maximum size may be increased with a CUP issued by the Director. Outdoor Sales and Storage (18.16.060 (h)) In the CC district and in the CC(2) district, the following regulations shall apply to outdoor sales and storage: (A) Except in shopping centers, all permitted office and commercial activities shall be conducted within a building,… (B) Any permitted outdoor activity in excess of 2,000 square feet shall be subject to a conditional use permit. (C) Exterior storage shall be prohibited… N/A Recycling Storage (18.16.060 (i)) All new development, including approved modifications that add thirty percent or more floor area to existing uses, shall provide adequate and accessible interior areas or exterior enclosures for the storage of recyclable materials in appropriate containers. 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. No change - Stanford Shopping Center has common trash and recycling facilities Employee Showers (18.16.060 (j)) Employee shower facilities shall be provided for any new building constructed or for any addition to or enlargement of any existing building as specified in Table 6. Retail Services, Personal Services, and Eating and Drinking Services uses over 100,000 sf shall provide 4 showers. No change - Stanford Shopping Center has common showers for employee use 18.16.080 Performance Standards. All development in the CC district and within 150 feet of low density residential uses (R-E, R-1, R-2, RM or PC district permitting single family or multi-family development) shall comply with the performance criteria outlined in Chapter 18.23 of the Zoning Ordinance, including all mixed use development. The proposed project is more than 150 feet from such zoning districts. 18.16.090 Context-Based Design Criteria. As further described in a separate attachment, development in a commercial district shall be responsible to its context and compatible with adjacent development, and shall promote the establishment of pedestrian oriented design. Stanford Shopping Center Master Sign Program Sign Types, Number, and Locations Sign Requirement Number Maximum Size Proposed Primary sign (wall sign) Required 1 Maximum height 24 in and otherwise proportional to logo characteristics; Stacked signs not to exceed 36 in height; no sign closer to 24 in from demising wall or building corner. Primary facade - The letter height of 24 in, length of 10 ft 6 in. lower case “y” is offset and creates the overall sign area with a height of 30 in by 10 ft 6 in, for a total sign area of 26.25 sf. 4.d Packet Pg. 119 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t D : Z o n i n g C o m p a r i s o n T a b l e ( 8 9 2 8 : 1 8 0 E l C a m i n o R e a l : J e f f e r y s S t o r e f r o n t i n B u i l d i n g J ) *Maximum Allowable Sign Area for Wall Signs. Wall signs and sign area are defined in PAMC 16.20.010. Canopy and awning signs erected parallel to a building face are also considered wall signs. The maximum total allowable sign area of a single wall sign or the combined total maximum allowable area of multiple wall signs per building face shall be consistent with the sign area limits outlined in PAMC 16.20 Table 3. Staff level architectural review is required for any sign at the shopping center exterior that requires approval of an exception to these sign area limits. Logos are considered wall signs and can be utilized as a primary wall sign or can be a component of a primary wall sign. Logos shall not exceed the maximum height of a stacked sign, which is 36-inches. Logos shall be included in calculations of maximum wall sign area limits. Table 2: CONFORMANCE WITH CHAPTER 18.52 (Off-Street Parking and Loading) for Shopping Centers Type Required Existing Proposed Vehicle Parking 1/275 sf of gross floor area for a total of 5,438 parking spaces 5,438 spaces No Change Bicycle Parking 1/5,500 sf (20% long term and 80% short term) equals 95 spaces 265 spaces (93 long term, 172 short term) No Change 4.d Packet Pg. 120 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t D : Z o n i n g C o m p a r i s o n T a b l e ( 8 9 2 8 : 1 8 0 E l C a m i n o R e a l : J e f f e r y s S t o r e f r o n t i n B u i l d i n g J ) 4.e Packet Pg. 121 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : A p p l i c a n t ' s P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n ( 8 9 2 8 : 1 8 0 E l C a m i n o R e a l : J e f f e r y s S t o r e f r o n t i n B u i l d i n g J ) Attachment F Project Plans Hardcopies of project plans are provided to Board members. These plans are available to the public online and/or by visiting the Planning and Community Environmental Department on the 5th floor of City Hall at 250 Hamilton Avenue. Directions to review Project plans online: 1. Go to: www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pln 2. On the left hand side click “Development Proposals” 3. In the drop down window click “Pending Projects” 4. Scroll to find “180 El Camino” and click the address link 5. On this project specific webpage you will find a link to the project plans and other important information Direct Link to Project Webpage: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=4103&TargetID=319 4.f Packet Pg. 122 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t F : P r o j e c t P l a n s ( 8 9 2 8 : 1 8 0 E l C a m i n o R e a l : J e f f e r y s S t o r e f r o n t i n B u i l d i n g J ) Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID # 8938) Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 4/5/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: 695 Arastradero Road: New Reception Pavilion at Alta Mesa Memorial Park (Prelim) Title: QUASI-JUDICIAL. 695 Arastradero Road (18PLN-00046): Request for Preliminary Architectural Review of a Proposed new One-Story, 5,400 Square Foot Reception Pavilion With a Partial Storage Basement on a Central Portion of the Alta Mesa Cemetery. Environmental Assessment: Not a Project. The Formal Application Will be Subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review. Zoning District: RE (Residential Estate). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Claire Hodgkins at Claire.hodgkins@cityofpaloalto.org From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB): 1. Review and provide informal comments. No formal action is requested. Report Summary The subject application is a request for preliminary review. No formal direction is provided to the applicant and Boardmembers should refrain from forming and expressing opinions either in support or against the project. As a preliminary review application, the Planning and Community Environment Department has only performed a cursory review of the project for compliance with the Zoning Code. A comprehensive review of a future project to applicable codes would follow the submittal of a formal application. Accordingly, there may be aspects of this preliminary review application that do not comply with municipal regulations or require additional discretionary applications beyond architectural review. 5 Packet Pg. 123 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 Similarly, there has been no comprehensive review of the project to the Comprehensive Plan or other policy documents. Such review will occur upon the filing of a formal application. The purpose of this meeting is to provide an applicant an opportunity to present a conceptual project to the Board and receive initial comments. Boardmembers may identify aspects of the project that are appropriate given the neighborhood context and consistent with city policies or areas of concern that the applicant may want to reconsider in a formal submittal. Community members are also encouraged to provide early input to the project. Background Project Information Owner: Alta Mesa Improvement Company Architect: John Barksdale, Architect Representative: John Barksdale Legal Counsel: None Property Information Address: 695 Arastradero Road Neighborhood: Green Acres Lot Dimensions & Area: 2,064,003 square feet (approximately 47.38 acres) Housing Inventory Site: Not Applicable Located w/in a Plume: Not Applicable Protected/Heritage Trees: Not Applicable (note that some protected trees are located at Alta Mesa Memorial Park; however, none would be impacted by the proposed project) Historic Resource(s): Adjacent buildings older than 50 years could be historic but have not yet been evaluated. No existing buildings would be removed or altered as part of the proposed project. Existing Improvement(s): There are nine existing buildings on site totaling approximately 99,110 square feet in total, most are single story buildings of varying heights and constructed in various years. The Alta Mesa Funeral Home (office) is a two story building. Existing Land Use(s): Alta Mesa Memorial Park (cemetery) Adjacent Land Uses & Zoning: North: R-1 and RM-30 Zoning (school and multi-family residences) West: RM-40; R-2; and PF Zoning (Gunn High School and Multi- family residential land uses) East: Adobe Creek and City of Los Altos Single family residences) South: R-1 (1,000) and R-1 (2,000) Zoning (single family residential land uses) Aerial View of Property: 5 Packet Pg. 124 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 Land Use Designation & Applicable Plans Zoning Designation: RE (Residential Estate) District Comp. Plan Designation: Open Space Controlled Development Context-Based Design Criteria: Not Applicable Downtown Urban Design Guide: Not Applicable South of Forest Avenue Coordinated Area Plan: Not Applicable Baylands Master Plan: Not Applicable El Camino Real Design Guidelines (1976 / 2002): Not Applicable Proximity to Residential Uses or Districts (150'): Applicable (see discussion below) Located w/in Airport Influence Area: Not Applicable Prior City Reviews & Action City Council: None 5 Packet Pg. 125 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 PTC: None HRB: None ARB: None Project Description The applicant proposes to construct a new 5,400 square foot one-story building with a partial basement at the existing Alta Mesa Memorial Park. The ground floor would be used for funeral services that cannot be accommodated in either the existing administration/mortuary building or the existing chapel in the adjacent mausoleum. It includes an entry foyer, bathrooms, a catering kitchen, a reception room, and two open courtyards contiguous to the main reception space. The basement level would be used for storage and would be constructed to a depth of 11 feet, eight inches. The project site is zoned RE (Residential Estate) which allows cemetery uses with approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The site is designated as Open Space/Controlled Development in accordance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Land designated as Open Space/Controlled Development is identified in the City’s Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element as “land having all the characteristics of open space but where some development may be allowed on private properties…uses such as agricultural, recreational and non-residential uses may be allowed consistent with the protection and preservation of the inherent open space characteristics of the land.” The proposed building would provide additional space for services at the cemetery, consistent with this land use designation and with the previously approved Conditional Use Permit (59-UP-14) for the site, included in Attachment B. In addition, Attachment B includes a letter dated May 10, 1974 provided by the Zoning Administrator at the time. This letter confirms that future improvements associated with the mortuary use at the site would not require amendments to the Conditional Use Permit but rather Architectural Review Board approval would be required. The property line along Arastradero Road is approximately 150 feet from the nearest single family residence; however, the proposed project is located within the Alta Mesa Memorial Park and would not be visible from the public right-of-way and would be well beyond 150 feet from the closest residence. There are several existing buildings (mausoleums and columbarium) on the project site. The mausoleums are single story poured-in-place concrete exterior walls with built-up membrane roofing. The columbarium is also single story with granite slab exterior walls, poured-in-place concrete fascia and a natural slate pitched roof. The funeral home is two stories with stucco walls, wood windows and eaves, and a mission tile roof. The proposed project uses concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls, limestone plaster parapet, and includes extensive windows. There is no vegetation in the area of the proposed development. The proposed project would include landscaping around the proposed building, as shown on Sheet L1.1. Anticipated Entitlements: The following discretionary applications are anticipated: 5 Packet Pg. 126 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5  Architectural Review – Major (AR). The process for evaluating this type of application is set forth in PAMC Section 18.77.070. Major AR applications are reviewed by the ARB and recommendations are forwarded to the Planning & Community Environment Director for action within five business days of the Board’s recommendation. Action by the Director is appealable to the City Council if filed within 14 days of the decision. AR projects are evaluated against specific findings in the PAMC. All findings must be made in the affirmative to approve the project. Failure to make any one finding requires project redesign or denial. The findings to approve AR applications are provided in Attachment C. Discussion Preliminary review applications receive a cursory review for compliance with zoning regulations and consistency with the comprehensive plan or other applicable policy documents. This information was previously transmitted to the applicant. A more comprehensive review will occur upon formal submittal, which may reveal other code or policy concerns. At this point in project development, the ARB is encouraged to provide objective feedback to the applicant on the preliminary drawings. The Board may want to consider comments that relate to:  Scale and mass  Transitions in scale to adjacent properties  Relationship to the neighborhood setting and context  Pedestrian-orientation and design  Access to the site  Architectural design, theme, cohesiveness, and quality of materials  Preservation of existing native or mature landscaping or features, if any Zoning A zoning comparison table is provided in Attachment D, comparing the project to the RE zone district requirements. As shown in the location map in Attachment A, the Alta Mesa Memorial Park is comprised of six parcels totaling approximately 72 acres. All of the cemetery buildings, including the proposed new Reception Pavilion, are located on parcel 167-03-019. Although the cemetery is comprised of all six parcels, which have been dedicated for cemetery use through a dedication with the County of Santa Clara, the zoning consistency analysis conservatively assesses the project information (e.g., lot coverage, FAR, etc.) in comparison only to the parcel (47.38 acres) on which the project is located. Based on the basic information provided for this preliminary review, the project appears to be generally consistent with the zoning ordinance. Parking and Circulation The proposed on-site vehicle circulation would not change with the proposed project; all existing roads on the site would remain. Cemetery uses are required to provide one space for each four seats or four-person capacity, plus funeral procession queue capacity of five cars. 5 Packet Pg. 127 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6 There are several existing buildings on site totaling 99,110 square feet and the proposed building is 5,400 square feet; therefore all buildings would total 104,510 square feet in floor area. The total capacity of these buildings is 558 seats, including 304 seats for the existing funeral home and 254 seats for the new building. Note that the mausoleums count toward floor area but are used to house tombs and are not used for events; therefore, the floor area is not counted toward capacity for parking requirements. Accordingly, there are currently 76 parking spaces (one per every four seats) and one loading space provided for the existing funeral home. A total of 64 parking spaces are required for the new building. There are a total of 69 parking spaces shown on the site plan as proposed, including three additional Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant spaces adjacent to the building. The proposed number of parking spaces and ADA spaces would be consistent with the requirements outlined in PAMC Chapter 18.52 for off-site parking. However, additional information would be required as part of the formal submittal to show that the new parking spaces comply with the dimensions and other design requirements outlined in PAMC Section 18.54. Two short-term bicycle parking spaces are also proposed for the building in accordance with PAMC requirements, which would bring the project into compliance. Next Steps There is no further action required by the ARB after its discussion. The applicant may elect to file a formal application. Environmental Review The subject review involves no discretionary action and is therefore not a project and not subject to review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). If a formal application is filed, an analysis of the project to CEQA will be performed. Report Author & Contact Information ARB1 Liaison & Contact Information Claire Hodgkins, Associate Planner Jodie Gerhardt, AICP, Planning Manager (650) 329-2116 (650) 329-2575 claire.hodgkins@cityofpaloalto.org jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments:  Attachment A: Location Map (PDF)  Attachment B: Existing Conditional Use Permit (PDF)  Attachment C: ARB Required Findings (DOCX)  Attachment D: Zoning Comparison Table (DOCX)  Attachment E: Applicant's Project Description (PDF)  Attachment F: Project Plans (DOCX) 1 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org 5 Packet Pg. 128 Mausoleum #2 Mausoleum #1 Adobe CreekMausoleum Terman Middle School Arastradero West Apartments Student Activities Center QUAD Math & Science Office (MS-6) World Languages &English- Social Studies Offices LOCKERS Bowman International School Science Arastradero Station TitanGym 47.7' 133.7' 68.9' 33.5' 156.4' 42.0' 156.4' 14.7' 94.9' 126.3' 58.0' 126.3' 78.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0'115.0' 83.4' 123.6' 68.2' 118.8' 92.0' 118.8' 77.0' 116.0' 92.0' 116.0' 77.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 11 33.0' 145.0' 43.1' 32.1' 63.8' 105.8' 20.0' 11.0' 34.6' 20.0' 105.8' 95.0' 114.2' 60.0' 114.2' 70.0' 116.7' 108.0' 83.0' 4.2'87.0'34.6' 22.6' 14.5' 32.9' 116.7' 70.0' 120.0' 60.0' 926.7' 233.7' 1177.1' 523.1' 225.4' 13.7' 567.8' 267.4' 31.1' 418.5' 62.0' 109.1' 65.1' 85.9' 38.7' 50.0' 115.0' 84.0' 133.7' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0'11.5' 114.2' 71.3' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 37.0'24.3' 115.0' 70.0' 110.3' 9.0'55.0' 110.3' 70.0'25.0' 116.9' 54.4' 116.9' 72.7' 42.0' 119.2' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 115.0' 70.0' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 27.8'23.6'9.4' 110.0' 102.2' 126.1' 52.0' 110.0' 77.0' 112.8' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 64.4' 126.1' 91.6' 34.0' 128.3' 47.3' 134.3' 72.0' 132.5' 65.7' 140.0' 19.5' 65.4' 134.3' 45.0' 143.9' 59.3' 53.4' 140.0'46.6' 112.8' 61.5'18.0'18.6' 143.9' 128.3' 108.0' 80.0' 108.8' 65.0' 109.1' 70.0' 109.5' 70.0' 108.8' 70.0' 110.2' 70.0' 109.5' 70.0' 110.9' 70.0' 110.2' 70.0' 111.7' 70.0' 110.9' 70.0' 112.4' 70.0' 111.7' 70.0' 113.1' 70.0' 112.4' 61.5'9.6'9.1' 113.3' 70.2' 113.1' 68.6' 16.4' 15.1' 77.6' 61.3' 113.3' 45.5' 58.0' 63.0' 33.7' 20.3'8.4'9.1'5.0' 20.0' 77.0' 66.0' 60.0' 58.0' 45.5' 5.0'24.9' 36.8' 13.8'14.5'100.0' 61.0' 115.8'7.0' 77.0' 20.0' 43.5' 7.4'115.8' 92.6' 97.1' 100.0' 30.5' 47.8' 80.2' 62.0' 100.0' 62.0' 100.0' 61.0' 100.0' 61.0' 100.0' 61.0' 100.0' 61.0' 100.0' 61.0' 100.0' 61.0' 100.0' 61.0' 100.0' 61.0' 100.0' 122.2' 61.5' 102.4' 14.6' 14.5'33.4' 49.4' 102.4' 73.3' 13.7' 78.5' 25.0' 36.5' 25.0' 78.5' 80.0' 15.0' 128.3' 16.6'15.3' 128.3' 65.0' 99.5' 32.7' 99.5' 120.0' 119.1' 38.9' 119.1' 59.0' 84.0' 114.6' 16.9' 14.5' 28.9' 114.6' 74.7' 120.4'36.7'120.4' 61.0' 99.6'36.0' 61.0' 100.0' 61.0' 100.0' 61.0' 100.0' 61.0' 100.0' 25.9'33.7' 100.0' 70.0' 102.8' 14.1'26.0' 102.8' 90.0' 108.0' 31.4' 12.3' 37.0' 70.7' 119.2'58.0' 108.0' 115.0' 115.0'62.4'7.6' 70.0' 132.5' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 87.0' 112.2' 65.0' 110.0' 82.8' 123.9' 62.0' 112.2' 70.0' 99.9' 31.4' 50.2' 123.9' 24.0'26.3'31.4' 98.9' 70.0' 113.9' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0' 70.0' 110.0'49.0'40.5' 113.9' 49.6' 110.0' 110.6' 66.0' 109.3109.3 70.0' 1 124.2' 62.0' 110.6' 126.8' 31.4' 50.2' 124.2' 75.0' 122.5' 54.5' 115.0' 34.2'40.5' 131.0' 50.0' 122.5' 50.3' 31.4' 98.0' 72.3' 131.0' 72.3' 111.4' 31.4' 50.2' 117.5' 93.0' 117.5' 62.0' 114.2' 96.9' 105.0' 86.9' 15.7' 95.0' 32.4' 24.9' 40.7' 92.2' 130.0' 96.9' 130.0' 70.0'70.0' 15.7' 86.9' 74.0' 121.9' 85.0' 47.0' 92.2' 47.0'85.0' 121.9' 74.0' 92.2' 128.5' 125.5' 244.7' 104.2' 71.6' 108.8' 36.6' 54.0' 21.0' 21.0' 177.7'263.5' 26.0' 77.0' 239.2' 157.7' 256.9' 125.5' 154.5' 263.5' 774.4' 247.9' 83.8' 58.7' 71.1' 133.8' 70.3' 61.4' 125.3' 75.0'125.3' 75.0' 125.3'75.0' 125.4' 75.0' 125.3'75.0' 125.5' 75.0' 125.4' 75.0' 75.0' 125.6' 75.0' 125.5'75.0' 125.7' 75.0' 125.6'75.0' 125.7' 75.0' 125.7'75.0' 125.8' 75.0' 125.7'29.2' 45.9' 127.3' 75.0' 125.8'60.6'14.9' 135.8' 75.0' 127.3' 142.5' 89.9' 46.5' 97.3' 65.0' 92.1' 28.5' 66.5' 9.6' 142.5' 70.8' 75.0'125.0' 75.0'125.0' 75.0' 125.0'75.0' 125.0' 75.0' 125.0'75.0' 125.0' 75.0' 125.0' 124.1' 54.3'113.1' 118.7' 73.0' 38.4' 82.3' 75.2'93.0' 118.7' 127.0' 16.5' 60.9' 124.1' 77.0' 81.7' 25.3' 83.7' 127.0' 84.2' 154.0'82.3' 44. 142.2' 94.4'170.0' 78.0' 159.2' 75.8'142.2' 9.9' 64.6' 156.9' 69.0'159.2' 75.4' 206.2' 46.0' 156.9' 70.7' 73.3' 206.2' 54.2' 40.1' 41.9' 18.1'49.7'52.1' 2'29.2' 31.6' 41.6'104.3'28.4' 49.0' 92.0' 28.0' 104.8' 27.8' 191.0' 62.2' 141.0'169.2'121.5' 567 131.6' 28.5' 79.2' 131.6' 230 96.7' 125.9' 40.8' 21.2'22.3' 29.2 31.6' 42.7' 47.2' 39.6'22.6' 90.8' 83.0' 48.0' 13.8' 136.8' 83.0' 90.8' 38.8' 81.2' 38.4' 191.0' 29.0' 92.4' 80.5' 114.7' 83.8' 114.7' 59.1' 31.4' 116.2' 80.5' 154.5' 134.4' 73.4' 53.7' 92.4' 120.0' 64.0' 120.0' 80.9' 83.5' 10.3'98.8' 124.2' 96.0' 124.2' 98.8' 148.1' 124.8' 41.6' 62.7' 70.6' 58.8' 117.5' 82.5' 110.9' 68.0' 82.5' 66.0' 76.6' 98.3' 83.2' 74.6' 96.4' 78.5' 70.6' 49.5' 87.8' 26.4' 79.2' 35.6'62.0' 40.3' 107.6' 85.8' 79.2' 166.3' 54.8' 84.5' 75.2' 161.0' 46.2' 102.3' 70.6' 33.0' 77.9' 85.1' 63.4' 178.2' 104.9' 37.0' 134.6' 147.2' 67.3' 1557.2' 66.7' 1451.0' 133.3' 300.0' 124.8' 41.6' 62.7' 70.6' 58.8' 117.5' 82.5' 110.9' 68.0' 82.5' 66.0' 76.6' 98.3' 83.2' 74.6' 96.4' 78.5' 70.6' 49.5' 87.8' 26.4' 79.2' 35.6'62.0' 40.3' 107.6' 85.8' 79.2' 166.3' 54.8' 84.5' 75.2' 161.0' 46.2' 102.3' 70.6' 33.0' 77.9' 85.1' 63.4' 178.2' 104.9' 37.0' 134.6' 147.2' 67.3' 1557.2' 66.7' 1451.0' 133.3' 300.0' 124.8' 41.6' 62.7' 70.6' 58.8' 117.5' 82.5' 110.9' 68.0' 82.5' 66.0' 76.6' 98.3' 83.2' 74.6' 96.4' 78.5' 70.6' 49.5' 87.8' 26.4' 79.2' 35.6'62.0' 40.3' 107.6' 85.8' 79.2' 166.3' 54.8' 84.5' 75.2' 161.0' 46.2' 102.3' 70.6' 33.0' 77.9' 85.1' 63.4' 178.2' 104.9' 37.0' 134.6' 147.2' 67.3' 1557.2' 66.7' 1451.0' 133.3' 300.0' 61.9'.3'.3'.2'62.1' 41.6' 62.7' 70.6' 58.8' 117.5' 82.5' 110.9' 68.0' 82.5' 66.0' 76.6' 98.3' 83.2' 74.6' 96.4' 78.5' 70.6' 49.5' 87.8' 26.4' 79.2' 35.6'62.0' 40.3' 107.6' 85.8' 79.2' 166.3' 54.8' 84.5' 75.2' 161.0' 46.2' 102.3' 70.6' 33.0' 77.9' 85.1' 63.4' 178.2' 104.9' 37.0' 134.6' 147.2' 67.3' 1557.2' 66.7' 1451.0' 133.3' 300.0' 124.8' 41.6' 62.7' 70.6' 58.8' 117.5' 82.5' 110.9' 68.0' 82.5' 66.0' 76.6' 98.3' 83.2' 74.6' 96.4' 78.5' 70.6' 49.5' 87.8' 26.4' 79.2' 35.6'62.0' 40.3' 107.6' 85.8' 79.2' 166.3' 54.8' 84.5' 75.2' 161.0' 46.2' 102.3' 70.6' 33.0' 77.9' 85.1' 63.4' 178.2' 104.9' 37.0' 134.6' 147.2' 67.3' 1557.2' 66.7' 1451.0' 133.3' 300.0' 129.7' 149.4'10.2'287.4' 139.9' 139.1'149.4' 129.7' 149.4' 129.7' 149.5' 97.4' 32.5'151.8' 129.7' 287.4' 10.2'149.5' 129.7' 136.9' 139.9' 389.4' 230.8' 41.0'251.0' 134.0' 36.2' 259.0' 87.3' 64.0'41.0'185.0' 91.0' 169.1' 121.0' 166.4' 30.6' 90.6' 102.9' 644.6' 15.9'270.0' 75.0' 330.0' 25.5' 75.0' 270.0' 63.6' 139.1'46.7'101.0' 80.6' 101.0' 46.7' 139.1' 86.3' 25.9'220.2'608.1' 102.9' 330.0' 106.1' 220.2'25.9'25.0' 40.0' 136.9' 114.6' 158.3' 45.8' 41.0' 230.8' 41.3' 103.4' 168.8' 137.7' 124.9' 155.5'152.4' 32.0' 109.4'96.7' 55.7' 31.0' 41.0' 22.9'20.9' 20.3' 649.0' 180.0' 91.2' 37.6' 107.3' 168.8' 92.5' 28.6'184.9' 314.5' 27.1' 243.9' 146.4' 143.2' 226.5' 226.1' 240.0' 95.1' 305.2' 20.0' 30.0' 20.0' 30.0' 20.0' 40.7' 161.6' 94.0' 157.3' 89.0' 161.6' 36.7' 214.1' 36.4'143.0' 50.4' 46.3' 69.7' 43.1' 214.1' 35.3'7.5'38.9' 143.0' 1.9'2.2' 76.8' 199.3'10.0'199.3' 76.8' 62.7' 125.4' 62.7' 66.0' 164.8' 312.3'10.0'312.3' 164.8' 104.3' 114.2' 564.5' 163.6' 27.0' 45.5'48.8' 136.7' 7.1'20.0'31.4' 160.8' 23.2' 243.5' 107.4' 10.3' 163.6' 7.2' 38.6' 134.4' 245.0' 160.0' 245.0' 160.0' 34.4' 238.9' 60.0' 157.2' 1.9'2.3' 26.3' 28.5' 180.0' 143.9' 87.0'36.4'31.4' 101.5' 92.3' 83.0' 155.4' 81.1' 143.9' 152.4' 5.0' 100.3' 155.4'123.4' 50.6' 132.0' 136.9'48.4' 24.6' 76.7' 152.4' 272.3' 437.6'515.4' 101.8' 131.0'102.4' 97.6' 193.4' 3.2' 130.7' 147.8' 131.0'23.1' 135.7' 15.0'186.6' 190.3' 45.0' 340.6' 102.4' 147.8' 130.7' 114.2' 186.7' 114.3' 186.6' 138.2' 102.5' 138.2' 102.5' 138.2' 109.7' 22.7'124.1' 123.8' 48.5' 226.3' 93.5' 150.2' 45.0' 76.0' 170.3' 115.4'32.6' 105.4' 135.5' 118.6' 153.2' 118.6' 153.0' 109.6' 170.3' 82.0' 179.9' 149.0' 167.0' 31.4'36.4' 219.6' 83.1' 110.0' 179.9' 77.0'9.2' 170.3' 7.9'8.2' 150.8' 150.2' 252.4' 412.8' 239.1' 351.3' 276.0' 283.8' 450.0' 212.0' 283.8' 494.1' 226.1' 300.0' 150.0' 300.0' 150.0' 692.6' 351.3' 276.0' 212.0' 450.0' 240.0' 1357.5' 48.7' 108.0' 62.0' 139.0'53.1' 193.4' 224.3' 268.9' 49.7' 134.0' 147.9' 121.0' 15.9'41.0'64.0' 31.6' 37.0' 7.3'32.1'1.2'1.9'16.0'11.5'10.5' 64.5' 16.0' 2.1'1.0'35.7'3.1'16.0'50.0' 16.0' 3.1'28.4'3.4'32.3' 14.2' 181.5' 44.2' 53.1' 7.4'8.5'9.4' 10.9' 33.7'17.0' 170.0' 35.0' 130.2' 178.0' 70.0' 82.2'136.2' 125.0' 110.0' 87.5' 93.0' 21.7' 120.0'51.0' 54.0'136.2' 27.8' 68.0' 31.1'14.1'31.4' 37.0'122.2' 41.0' 26.9' 309.0' 307.9'139.5' 140.1' 264.4' 100.0' 100.0'99.6'99.6' 44.4' 43.9' 264.0' 308.8' 68.8' 54.6' 265.0' 99.5' 189.5' 265.0' 327.6' 92.2' 40.7'24.9' 32.4' 96.9' 105.0' 96.9' 95.0' 307.3' 536.0' 438.4'438.4' 291.5' 7.6' 447.9' 204.1' 309.0' 358.9' 311.0' 203.2' DONALD DRIVE WILLMAR DRIVE ARASTRADERO ROAD YNIGO WAY HUBBARTT DRIVE GEORGIA AVENUE ARASTRADERO ROAD POMONA AVENUE O R OAD MIRANDA AVENUE GEORGIA AVENUE HUBBARTT DRIVE CROSBY PLACE GEORG IA AVENU E A RAST RADERO RO A D F O OTHIL L EXPRESSW A Y MIRAN D A AVENU E ELA COURT MANUELA AVENUE MESA AVENUE MANUELA AVENUE MANUELA AVENUE FO O T HILL E XPRESSW A Y MIRANDA AV E N U E F O OT HILL E X P R E S S WAY FO O THIL L E X P R ESSW A Y MIR A N DA GREEN ARROYO COURT WALLIS COURT GLENB R O O K D RIVE T E R M A N D R I V E A R A S T R ADERO ROAD M A N U E L A A V E N U E MESA C O U R T Adobe Creek R-2 PC-2666 PC-2666 R 1(10000) RE RM-40 R-1(20000) RM-30 R-1(10000) R-1 PF This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Assessment Parcel abc Known Structures Zone Districts Project Site Water Feature 0' 439' 695 Arastradero Road CITY O F PALO A L TO I N C O R P O R ATE D C ALIFOR N IA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f A P RIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors ©1989 to 2016 City of Palo Alto chodgki, 2018-02-12 21:15:23 (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Personal\Planning.mdb) 5.a Packet Pg. 129 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t A : L o c a t i o n M a p ( 8 9 3 8 : 6 9 5 A r a s t r a d e r o R o a d : N e w R e c e p t i o n P a v i l i o n a t A l t a M e s a M e m o r i a l P a r k ( P r e l i m ) ) 5.b Packet Pg. 130 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : E x i s t i n g C o n d i t i o n a l U s e P e r m i t ( 8 9 3 8 : 6 9 5 A r a s t r a d e r o R o a d : N e w R e c e p t i o n P a v i l i o n a t A l t a M e s a M e m o r i a l P a r k ( P r e l i m ) ) 5.b Packet Pg. 131 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : E x i s t i n g C o n d i t i o n a l U s e P e r m i t ( 8 9 3 8 : 6 9 5 A r a s t r a d e r o R o a d : N e w R e c e p t i o n P a v i l i o n a t A l t a M e s a M e m o r i a l P a r k ATTACHMENT C ARB FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL 695 Arastradero Road 18PLN-00046 In order for the ARB to make a future recommendation of approval, the project must comply with the following Findings for Architectural Review as required in Section 18.76.020 of the PAMC. Finding #1: The design is consistent with applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, coordinated area plans (including compatibility requirements), and any relevant design guides. Finding #2: The project has a unified and coherent design, that: a. creates an internal sense of order and desirable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community, b. preserves, respects and integrates existing natural features that contribute positively to the site and the historic character including historic resources of the area when relevant, c. is consistent with the context-based design criteria of the applicable zone district, d. provides harmonious transitions in scale, mass and character to adjacent land uses and land use designations, e. enhances living conditions on the site (if it includes residential uses) and in adjacent residential areas. Finding #3: The design is of high aesthetic quality, using high quality, integrated materials and appropriate construction techniques, and incorporating textures, colors, and other details that are compatible with and enhance the surrounding area. Finding #4: The design is functional, allowing for ease and safety of pedestrian and bicycle traffic and providing for elements that support the building’s necessary operations (e.g. convenient vehicle access to property and utilities, appropriate arrangement and amount of open space and integrated signage, if applicable, etc.). Finding #5: The landscape design complements and enhances the building design and its surroundings, is appropriate to the site’s functions, and utilizes to the extent practical, regional indigenous drought resistant plant material capable of providing desirable habitat that can be appropriately maintained. Finding #6: The project incorporates design principles that achieve sustainability in areas related to energy efficiency, water conservation, building materials, landscaping, and site planning. 5.c Packet Pg. 132 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : A R B R e q u i r e d F i n d i n g s ( 8 9 3 8 : 6 9 5 A r a s t r a d e r o R o a d : N e w R e c e p t i o n P a v i l i o n a t A l t a M e s a M e m o r i a l P a r k ( P r e l i m ) ) ATTACHMENT D ZONING COMPARISON TABLE 695 Arastradero Road, 18PLN-00046 Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.10 (RE DISTRICT) Regulation Required Existing Proposed Minimum Site Area (ft2) (2) None None No change All lots except flag lots (1) 1 acre 47 acres No change Site Width (ft.) 100 ft 70 ft No change Site Depth (ft.) 100 ft ~1,555 ft No change Maximum Lot Size Lot Area (sf) None N/A N/A Minimum Setbacks Setback lines imposed by a special setback map pursuant to Chapter 20.08 of this code may also apply. Special setback on Arastradero Road (24 feet) No change Front Yard 30 ft ~375 ft No change (new building more than 650 ft from the front yard) Rear Yard 30 ft >30 ft No change (new building >630 ft from the rear yard) Interior Side Yard 15 ft 15 ft No change (new building 125 feet from interior side yard) Maximum Height (measured at peak) 30 ft varies 19 ft for new building Side Daylight Plane (side lot lines) Initial Height 10 feet, then 45 degree angle Complies Complies Front Daylight Plane (front setback line) Initial Height 16 feet, then 60 degree angle Complies Complies Rear Daylight Plane (rear setback line) Initial Height 16 feet, then 60 degree angle Complies Complies Maximum Site Coverage 25% 4.8% 5.1% Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR)2 0.45 for first 5,000 sf, then 0.30 for square footage in excess of 5,000 sf (618,713.40 sf) 99,110 sf 104,510 sf (addition of 5,400 sf) Maximum house size (ft2) 6,0005 N/A N/A Residential Density Minimum Site area permitting two units 1 acre N/A N/A 5.d Packet Pg. 133 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t D : Z o n i n g C o m p a r i s o n T a b l e ( 8 9 3 8 : 6 9 5 A r a s t r a d e r o R o a d : N e w R e c e p t i o n P a v i l i o n a t A l t a M e s a M e m o r i a l P a r k (1) Minimum Lot Size: Any lot less than the minimum lot size may be used in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.40. (5) Maximum House Size: The gross floor area of attached garages and attached accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units are included in the calculation of maximum house size. If there is no garage attached to the house, then the square footage of one detached covered parking space shall be included in the calculation. This provision applies only to single-family residences, not to duplexes allowed in the R-2 and RMD districts. Table 2: CONFORMANCE WITH SECTION 18.12.060 and CHAPTER 18.52 (Off-Street Parking) for Mortuaries Type Required Existing Proposed Vehicle Parking 1 space for each 4 seats or 4-person capacity, plus funeral procession queue capacity of 5 cars (140 spaces) 76 spaces 145 spaces Bicycle Parking 2 spaces (100% ST) None 2 Short term spaces Loading Space As determined by the Director (1 space) 1 space 1 space 5.d Packet Pg. 134 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t D : Z o n i n g C o m p a r i s o n T a b l e ( 8 9 3 8 : 6 9 5 A r a s t r a d e r o R o a d : N e w R e c e p t i o n P a v i l i o n a t A l t a M e s a M e m o r i a l P a r k John Barksdale architect PROJECT DESCRIPTION FOR A NEW RECEPTION PAVILION AT ALTA MESA MEMORIAL PARK THE PROJECT The proposed Project is a new one-story building with a partial storage basement to be used to conduct funeral services which cannot be accommodated in either the existing administration/mortuary building or the existing chapel in the adjacent mausoleum. The new facility will be approximately 5,400 square feet with a 3,200 square foot storage basement and will have two partially covered courtyards contiguous to the main reception space. Besides the reception room, there will be an entry foyer, men’s and women’s restrooms, a catering kitchen and stairs and service elevator to the basement. The new building will be located in the center of the cemetery on an undeveloped parcel of land adjacent to the cemetery’s original mausoleum. THE DESIGN CONCEPT Visitors come to Alta Mesa Cemetery to either visit their deceased loved ones, family members and friends or to participate in ceremonies of laying them to rest. They appreciate that the cemetery and its facilities convey a feeling of permanence and eternity. Some of the visitors are in a fragile state of mind and it is important to provide them with a comfortable environment at the same time giving them a joyful and uplifting experience. To this end, the proposed architecture is designed to create a feeling of solidity and permanence and to be compatible with the existing surrounding cemetery buildings, primarily mausoleums and a columbarium. These adjacent buildings are monolithic concrete and natural stone structures with minimal openings. The design concept of this proposed reception pavilion starts with a floating roof bordered with a parapet of smooth limestone plaster aligning with the top of the walls of the adjacent buildings. This roof structure is supported at two of the corners with substantial limestone plaster columns and by natural stone-clad monolithic elements protruding beyond the edges of the parapet at the other corners. Significantly recessed from the edge of the roof and between these stone-clad elements are full height glass walls open to the main Reception Room. 5.e Packet Pg. 135 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : A p p l i c a n t ' s P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n ( 8 9 3 8 : 6 9 5 A r a s t r a d e r o R o a d : N e w R e c e p t i o n P a v i l i o n a t A l t a M e s a M e m o r i a l P a r k Page 2 This configuration along with low niche walls and the corner columns creates exterior courtyards on each side of the building which are open to the sky with trellised openings in the roof above. The Reception Room will consequently feel protected and private between the stone clad elements yet allowing an openness and connectivity to the beautiful landscaping of the surrounding cemetery. PARKING REQUIREMENTS The entrance to the Pavilion faces the cemetery’s main entrance to welcome guests while a secondary entrance on the opposite side for service functions faces the adjacent mausoleum. The proposed building will primarily be used for memorial services. 80% of the funeral services at Alta Mesa are for internment of cremations, rather than burials, and therefore not requiring the traditional funeral procession. No other local funeral homes use Alta Mesa’s built facilities therefore further reducing the need for funeral processions. Visitor parking will be traditional cemetery parallel parking along the adjacent cemetery internal road system. On-site parking is calculated using the Palo Alto Zoning Code for mortuary uses. The building will seat 254 and will require a total of 64 parking spaces which includes accessible ninety-degree parking spaces at the front entrance to the building. Alta Mesa provides “managed parking” by their employees for services to keep the roadways clear and open at all times for the regular cemetery visitors and cemetery operations. The locations of these designated parking spaces are shown on the Parking Site Plan. SITE IMPROVEMENTS The Project site is undeveloped and has no vegetation or other improvements and is encircled entirely with internal cemetery roadways and grave sites. The roadways and curbs will not be altered except for providing the perpendicular handicap parking. Existing utilities are underground within an adjacent internal roadway and new services to the building will all be underground. New landscaping will make an appropriate transition between the new building and the existing roadway and cemetery. See the attached Statement of Design Intent provided by the landscape architect. 30 joaquin road portola valley california 94028 650.867.4228 john@woodsonbarksdale.com 5.e Packet Pg. 136 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : A p p l i c a n t ' s P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n ( 8 9 3 8 : 6 9 5 A r a s t r a d e r o R o a d : N e w R e c e p t i o n P a v i l i o n a t A l t a M e s a M e m o r i a l P a r k Attachment F Project Plans Hardcopies of project plans are provided to board members. These plans are available to the public online and by visiting the Planning and Community Environmental Department on the 5th floor of City Hall at 250 Hamilton Avenue. Directions to review Project plans online: 1. Go to: www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pln 2. On the left hand side click “Development Proposals” 3. In the drop down window click “Pending Projects” 4. Scroll to find “695 Arastradero” and click the address link 5. On this project specific webpage you will find a link to the project plans and other important information Direct Link to Project Webpage: https://tinyurl.com/695-Arastradero 5.f Packet Pg. 137 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t F : P r o j e c t P l a n s ( 8 9 3 8 : 6 9 5 A r a s t r a d e r o R o a d : N e w R e c e p t i o n P a v i l i o n a t A l t a M e s a M e m o r i a l P a r k ( P r e l i m ) ) Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID # 9006) Report Type: Subcommittee Items Meeting Date: 4/5/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: 3001 El Camino Real: Subcommittee Review of Roofline and Stair Enclosure Material Title: 3001 El Camino Real [16PLN-00097]: Subcommittee Review of a Previously Approved Project That was Conditioned to Return With Project Changes Related to Roofline Changes and the Stair Enclosure Design. Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was adopted on October 23, 2017. Zoning District: RM-30 (Medium Density Multiple- Family Residence District) and CS (Service Commercial). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Claire Hodgkins at clairehodgkins@cityofpaloalto.org From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) Subcommittee take the following action(s): 1. Discuss and provide direction or approve project revisions. Background On October 23, 2017, the City Council approved the subject project. The Board had previously reviewed the project on October 5, 2017 and recommended that Council approve the project. At the Board’s recommendation, a condition was imposed that required certain project elements return to the ARB subcommittee. Below are the items that were requested to return to the Subcommittee and the applicant’s response to the ARB’s comments: Site and Design Condition of Approval #11: ARB SUBCOMMITTEE. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall return to the ARB subcommittee for approval of the following items, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Community Environment: a. Remove the six inch tall recessed band along the roofline. 8 Packet Pg. 141 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 b. Reconsider the proposed material for the stair tower enclosures. Applicant’s Response: The applicant’s summary of these changes and how they address the ARB’s comments is included in Attachment A. In summary, the six inch tall recessed band along the roofline was removed and the stair enclosures have been redesigned, as shown in the plan set (Attachment C). It should be noted that based on further analysis, revisions were needed to the elevator location to ensure compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. Therefore, the revisions to the rear of the mixed-use building adjacent Acacia also reflect the removal of the elevator at this location. The elevator access will be provided closer to the front of the building where access from El Camino was previously provided via a stairwell. This change will not affect the façade of the El Camino Real frontage. Staff Analysis/Feedback: Staff believes the proposed changes to the design are consistent with the requested changes from the ARB, which generally expressed concern over the material being used to enclose the staircases. The new design uses less mesh wiring and more glass or is otherwise designed to simply be more open to bring in more light. A video recording of the Board’s last meeting on this project is available online: http://midpenmedia.org/architectural-review-board-71/. An excerpt of the minutes is also included in Attachment B. The ARB subcommittee is encouraged to provide direction to staff and the applicant as to whether the proposed changes are sufficient or require further refinement. Other Revisions Although not a Subcommittee item, staff would like to make the ARB aware of the applicant’s intent to submit an application for changes to the RM-30 building design. The design revisions, which have not yet been formally requested, are anticipated to include revisions to the circulation to eliminate the elevator as well as provide individual stoop entrances to all first floor units, which, in turn, would revise the layout of the landscaping along the frontage. Based on basic information provided to staff from the applicant, these revisions would eliminate the need for a shared parking reduction, reduce the peak height of the building, reduce massing on the left side of the building as seen from Acacia, maintain the approved FAR, and provide the desired stoop design that was originally recommended by the ARB. However, it would also reduce the number of units from the 20 approved units for this building to 16 units; some of the approved units would be larger than originally proposed. Although no formal request has been made for these changes to the RM-30 building, staff is providing this information to the Subcommittee because the applicant has provided two designs for the new stairwell; one of which shows the new design of the stairwell at the RM-30 building with the currently approved layout as well as one of which shows the design of the stairwell that reflects these other anticipated revisions. 8 Packet Pg. 142 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 Report Author & Contact Information ARB1 Liaison & Contact Information Claire Hodgkins, Associate Planner Jodie Gerhardt, AICP, Planning Manager (650) 329-2116 (650) 329-2575 claire.hodgkins@cityofpaloalto.org jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments:  Attachment A: Applicant's Response to Conditions of Approval (DOCX)  Attachment B: October 5, 2017 Excerpt ARB Minutes (DOCX)  Attachment C: Project Plans (DOCX) 1 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org 8 Packet Pg. 143 March 21, 2018 Robert Tersini The Sobrato Organization 10600 N. De Anza Blvd. Suite 200 Cupertino, CA 95014 Re: 3001 El Camino Real Dear Robert, With respect to the City of Palo Alto ARB Committee comments regarding the 3001 El Camino Real Project, the following revisions are being proposed. ARB Comment Proposed Revisions Remove the six inch tall recessed band along the roofline The recessed band along the roofline has been removed Reconsider the proposed material for the stair tower enclosures After hearing the ARB comments describing the previous stair tower design and materials as too dark and heavy, we revised the finishes to be more in character with the existing building architecture by carrying over the wood paneling, storefront glazing, and exterior plaster. The reduction of the metal mesh and steel allows the stair masses to blend in, while allowing the main building programming (retail, lobby, residential) to be highlighted as the focal points. After making the change we feel the new design is an improvement and a better fit for the overall project. Sincerely, MVE + Partners, Inc. Leila La Fontaine Architect 8.a Packet Pg. 144 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t A : A p p l i c a n t ' s R e s p o n s e t o C o n d i t i o n s o f A p p r o v a l ( 9 0 0 6 : 3 0 0 1 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f R o o f l i n e City of Palo Alto Page 1 Call to Order/Roll Call Present: Chair Alexander Lew, Vice Chair Kyu Kim, Board Member Wynne Furth, Robert Gooyer, Peter Baltay Absent: 2. PUBLIC HEARING/QUASI-JUDICIAL. 3001 El Camino Real [16PLN-00097 and 16PLN- 00220]: Recommendation on Applicant's Request for Approval of a Site and Design Review to Allow for Construction of a Four-Story Mixed-Use Development With 19,800 Square Feet of Retail and 30 Residential Units in the CS Zone as Well as a Three-Story Multi-Family Residential Building With 20 Units in the RM-30 Zone. The Project Also Includes a Request for a Preliminary Parcel Map for a Lot Merger to Allow for the Proposed Development, a Design Enhancement Exception, and a Parking Adjustment for Shared Parking. Environmental Assessment: A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was Circulated for Public Review from July 3, 2017 to August 2, 2017. Zoning District: CS (Service Commercial), RM-30 (Multi-family Residential), and R-1 (Single-family Residential). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Claire Hodgkins at claire.hodgkins@cityofpaloalto.org Chair Lew: Then we can move onto the first item which is number two, a public hearing for a quasi-judicial item for 3001 El Camino Real. Recommendation on applicant's request for approval of a Site and Design Review to allow for construction of a four-story mixed-use development with 19,800-square feet of retail, 30 residential units in the CS zone, as well as a three-story multi-family residential building with 20 units in the RM-30 zone. The project also includes a request for a Preliminary Parcel Map for a lot merger to allow for the proposed development, a Design Enhancement Exception, and a parking adjustment for shared parking. The environmental assessment is a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for public review from July 3, 2017, to August 2, 2017. The zone district is Service Commercial, RM-30, and R-1. Our Project Planner is Claire Hodgkins, welcome. Ms. Claire Hodgkins, Project Planner: Thank you, good morning Board Members; Claire Hodgkins, Project Planner. The proposed project is located at 3001 El Camino Real and just a brief overview, 19,800-square feet of commercial retail and 50 residential rental units. It includes two separate building, one in the CS zone that’s mixed-use and one in the RM-30 that’s multi-family residential. The site is located on three parcels so it would be merged into one as part of Preliminary Parcel Map. It includes split zoning so it’s partially CS, partially RM-30 and partially R-1 and it also has split land use designations. It’s currently developed with 9,100-square feet of retail commercial surrounded by surface parking. This is just a brief overview of the project site with the zoning. Key project changes, I won’t go into detail on these I know the applicant will in their presentation but the applicant further defined the base, body and roof of the CS building, lowered the elevation of the RM-30 building, added more bike parking at grade, added indigenous plants and increased the planting on El Camino Real, added details as requested for balconies and awnings and provided an improved materials board that’s located over here. Then key considerations, the project provides multi-family residential rental housing on a housing inventory site which fulfills a need for the City. It’s also close to office and transit and this use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan vision for this area. There are two ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD EXCERPT DRAFT MINUTES: October 5, 2017 City Hall/City Council Chambers 250 Hamilton Avenue 8:30 AM 8.b Packet Pg. 145 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : O c t o b e r 5 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 0 6 : 3 0 0 1 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f R o o f l i n e a n d S t a i r City of Palo Alto Page 2 requested exceptions, one for a parking adjustment and one for a Design Enhancement Exception to allow the garage ramp to encroach into the rear set back. Just briefly on the process, the PTC recommended approval of the project on July 12th. We’re going for ARB recommendations and this is a Site and Design Review so Council will make the ultimate decision on the project. Staff recommends that the ARB take the following actions, consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting plan and recommend approval of the Site and Design Applications, parking adjustment and Design Enhancement Exception to City Council based on findings and subject to the conditions of approval included in the record of land use action and that’s all for me. Chair Lew: Great, thank you, Claire, and now we have 10-minutes for the applicant’s presentation. Mr. Rob Steinberg: Good morning. Good morning, I’m Rob Steinberg and it’s good to be back with you again. Last time we met there were six items in the motion that you asked us to go back and look at and we can kind of go through those one by one. I think the most important was to try to lower the CM building so that the first finish floor was no more than 6-feet above grade. We were asked to look at the parapet detail on the El Camino building. There was – even though it’s not required, we were asked to see if we could have relocated some of the bicycle long-term parking above grade. We were asked to enhance and bring a little bit better material board to you. We were asked to see if we could add a little bit more landscaping on El Camino and widen the planters a little bit and then lastly, there was a request to see some of the details and to study those a little bit further. We have done all of that and I hope you like what you see. Let’s start with number one which is we have shown the grades around the building. This is Acacia and you can see that the lowest grade on Acacia is 31.6-feet and our finish floor is 37.5 so we have basically lowered the building another approximately 18-inches to respond to the request so that’s number one. Number two on the expression of the top of the building, there is sort of two responses here, one is we’ve modified the elevations a little bit. When we started studying the details we realized that we needed a solid panel to separate one balcony from the other balcony. So, what – first observation is there’s a base to the building, there is a middle which is sort of capped out here where there’s the solid panel, the railings that go across and then drop off on the top which gives a top to the building. Then in addition to that, we’ve developed a detail where the parapet stops and it steps back so we get an extra shadow line and an extra horizontal – a little bit of detail, a little bit of expression at the parapet so there’s a two-step response to item number two. The third item was, is it possible to put some of the long-term bicycle parking above grade? We’ve shown you an illustration of the long-term bike and we have been able to do that. We’ve been able to locate one on Olive, one near the retail and the vertical axis and we’ve been able to locate two lockers along Acacia. Each of the lockers accommodates two bikes so we have been able to respond to that request as well. We have – next, to Jonathan we have our color board and we are using a fairly simple pallet and materials. We are keeping the continuity between the two building which we think is important. The only comment that I would make about this is that the metal will be a darker grey then we’re showing. We’re showing you a mill finish and that’s only because it’s very hard to get a custom color for a little sample so I think that actually will be part of this sort of more subtle refined, quite elegant palette so that’s number four, our color and materials. Number five, there were two things, there was the request to see if we could increase the native planting as compared to the ornamental planting. We have been able to revise that proportion and increase the native planting by thirty percent and the green is the non-native and the -- or olive or brown color is the other and you can see those proportions. We basically have changed the proportions of about thirty percent to respond to that request. Then I just wanted to tell you that we also added the width to the planters in the front of the building and increased the amount of planting on El Camino. This was actually – sounded like a little thing but it turned out to be fairly complicated because we had to look at the parking and where the car doors open and how people got out and where the existing trees where. Then the additional width of the planting – the planters that you did ask us to increase a little and the City likes 8-feet through (inaudible). So, we had to work with the City to kind of get this meandering 8-feet in order to make all of these pieces work but we have been able to accomplish that as well. Then lastly you asked about some of the details and to just look at those a little bit more carefully so there are several sheets here. We can look at first the storefront and you can see that we’re alternating between the planters, which are widened to 2-feet and some – introducing the wood-like material and the benches so that we’re not obscuring the view into the retail. We’ve looked at the balcony railings and how they’re being fastened and trying to get a common vocabulary between all of the details. We’re trying to balance the water penetration to the decks so they’re 8.b Packet Pg. 146 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : O c t o b e r 5 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 0 6 : 3 0 0 1 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f R o o f l i n e a n d S t a i r City of Palo Alto Page 3 being fastened on the verticals compared to the horizontal. We’re letting the rail sort of float and it all has one common vocabulary and then a similar sort of strategy on the balcony framing and details for the building further back on Acacia. The privacy wall and opening it up; if you remember, there was some cross bracing that we’ve altered a little bit so that everything is one family. We’ve applied that same strategy both to the canopies at the motor court over here where we’ve got sort of free-standing columns and overhang to give a sense of arrival and finally to the stairs as well. Those are the six items that you asked for and we have been through a lot of back and forth together. This is our third time visiting with you and we are pleased what we have to present to you. I feel good about putting my name on it and I hope you will support us so we can move forward today, thank you. Chair Lew: Great, thank you, Mr. Steinberg. Now we do want to open this up for public comment but I don’t have any speaker cards at the moment so are there any Board Member questions? Peter. Board Member Baltay: Yes, good morning and for the architect, I just want to be clear that the metal mesh, you mentioned if I understood correctly that it will be dark metal finish and not the shiny metal that we see in front of us? Mr. Steinberg: Yes, that’s correct. Board Member Baltay: I just want to really be clear that this metal finish is going to be dark metal like a mill finish? The mesh itself? Mr. Steinberg: It is – it’s going to be a medium grey and right now it’s a little – I can’t quite see what you’ve got but I believe it’s a mill finish. Currently, it’s a little shiny and a little unfinished and it will be darkened up a little bit. Board Member Baltay: Thank you. Chair Lew: Wynne, do you have any questions? Board Member Furth: Yeah, just a minor one, (inaudible)… Chair Lew: Microphone, please. Board Member Furth: Looking at, I guess it’s sheet 3.2, the sketched labeled one, there’s a tree up there. Is there really a tree up there in the staircase element? At least there’s something pink and green with stems. Mr. Steinberg: (Inaudible- off mic) come on up and -- we’ll have our landscape architect to address that. Board Member Furth: Right. Mr. Steinberg: Thank you. Mr. Nick Samuelson: You’re looking at – that’s some planting that’s on the second level terrace in the back so there’s a planter up there that has a row of trees. Board Member Furth: Ok, thank you. I would see them on the plan… Mr. Samuelson: Yeah, the plan – I don’t know if you have the plan to plant… Board Member Furth: I don’t think we have a second level… Mr. Samuelson: Oh, that’s really the second-page rendering – I think – is that in there? I don’t think that’s in this set. Board Member Furth: I don’t know that if we have a second level architect – landscape plan. 8.b Packet Pg. 147 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : O c t o b e r 5 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 0 6 : 3 0 0 1 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f R o o f l i n e a n d S t a i r City of Palo Alto Page 4 Mr. Samuelson: It’s in the submittal drawing but… Chair Lew: We do. Board Member Furth: I have looked at it if you have it. Mr. Samuelson: If it’s the full set that was submitted it’s on 4.2. Board Member Furth: L-102? Mr. Samuelson: 4.2. Chair Lew: We do have the landscape – the second-floor landscape up at the podium. (crosstalk) Board Member Furth: (Inaudible) landscaping on this building. Ms. Hodgkins: So, L-4.2 has the landscape plan for the upper podium and then on the second sheet of the one that we were just looking on A-3.2, you can see the opposite side which would be looking at it from the parking lot, essentially looking at the podium. Board Member Furth: Got it. I’m looking at it from Olive, got it. Thank you. Chair Lew: Any other questions? I have a question for Staff. I think the Staff report asks us to comment on the Mitigated Negative Declaration or just the mitigation measures for that and I think, if I understand it correctly, that the PTC did that. Then I don’t think that we have the attachment for that. I was looking for it yesterday and I didn’t see it. Ms. Hodgkins: (Inaudible) Chair Lew: With the mitigation measures or are they incorporated – are they completely incorporated into the conditions of approval? Ms. Hodgkins: They are – so they will be incorporated as conditions of approval but the (inaudible -mic off). Chair Lew: Ok and then is that – so in our condition of approval it mentions Exhibit A but we haven’t – I just want to – I haven’t seen – I haven’t read an Exhibit A and I don’t see it in here. I just wanted to make sure – just clarify that. It seems to me that it’s being reviewed else – by… Ms. Hodgkins: I – say that one more time? Chair Lew: If we go to the conditions of approval which is page 26 and so like number five. Ms. Hodgkins: I’m not finding it. Chair Lew: It mentions the mitigation monitoring and reporting program. Ms. Hodgkins: Yeah. Oh… Chair Lew: It says its attached here as Exhibit A and I just want to clarify that I haven’t seen it. I don’t see it in here and I might have missed it. Ms. Hodgkins: I apologize. Chair Lew: I just wanted to clarify that. 8.b Packet Pg. 148 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : O c t o b e r 5 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 0 6 : 3 0 0 1 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f R o o f l i n e a n d S t a i r City of Palo Alto Page 5 Ms. Hodgkins: Thank you, yeah it should have been attached as Exhibit A. We also did include it as a separate attachment with links to it, along with the mitigation monitor or sorry, along with the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The final – I think as we were preparing this in draft form Council… Chair Lew: Sure. Ms. Hodgkins: …and we’ll be attaching it to the record of Land Use Action. Thank you Board Member Furth: What does CEQA require that as an advisory body do with respect to the environmental review? Ms. Hodgkins: Consider the environmental document. Board Member Furth: Thank you. Chair Lew: Any other questions? No, ok, comments? Peter. Board Member Baltay: Thank you for the modifications and I think it’s a really handsome building. I’d like to focus on just two items that I think maybe we could consider a small adjustment. One is the modification to the parapet cap as the architect called it along El Camino and I don’t think that’s very successful. I think what we had before was a cleaner design and I know I was the source of requiring something or requesting some sort of base, middle and top. However, I think that particular detail will just cause water to run down the façade a little bit and stain things and it just looks fussy to me. I’m happy when I look at the corner elevation in the rendering to consider that the heavy roof form on the corner at least is clearly the top element. I would prefer just to not have that detail on the middle pieces; that’s easy enough. The second thing is really sort of a concern with these stair tower features at the corner. I’m looking at the corner rendering on A-4.1 which can also be seen on aerial view on sheet A-3.8, drawing number one. I have to say that looking at this new rendering it doesn’t look very residential or very welcoming. It looks sort of like a parking garage or a prison honestly; a staircase inside a metal mesh. I think the colors are fine and I think that the balconies with the same treatment will be quite successful but as I understand it, you have three different places with this stair tower enclosed in a wire mesh like this. Maybe I’ll just say to my fellow Board Members that I would be very interested to see what everybody else thinks about that. I definitely don’t want that to slow down the project but it’s just something that catches my eye. Aside from that, I’d like to see what everybody else has to say, thank you. Chair Lew: Great, thank you. Robert. Board Member Gooyer: Thank you. I think it’s a nice building but I guess the biggest concern having sat up in – up here for a while and in other municipalities also, is that I’m really getting tired of seeing flat roof buildings. I mean I understand that that’s become sort of the way we have to deal with things because you can only go up a certain amount of distance and so you’re trying to get the full capacity that you can. So, you end up with a flat roof and that’s very understandable but the problem is that after a while that’s all you ever see is a flat roof building. They change slightly and this one, although well done, is really no different than a lot of other ones or at least similar to a lot of other ones coming in. It – I’m not blaming the architect for doing that but he has to do it within the set of perimeters that he has. I’m just tired of seeing it and after a while, every new building that comes in is almost the same sort of shape, it’s got the – what I call the sort of mirror architecture where you take various sections, you plop them next to each other and there you go, you’ve got another new building. It’s – in itself I think you’ve done a nice job and I do agree the mesh makes it look a little prison looking. There’s also – not that I’m – it really needs to have a strong bottom, middle and top but I think here the middle and the top aren’t that much different. I don’t think that’s really as successful but I’m really sort of on the fence with this one. Again, nothing based on what you’ve done, you followed the instructions that you had too and based on the requirements that the City has but like I said, I’m just tired of seeing these buildings. 8.b Packet Pg. 149 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : O c t o b e r 5 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 0 6 : 3 0 0 1 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f R o o f l i n e a n d S t a i r City of Palo Alto Page 6 Chair Lew: Kyu. Vice Chair Kim: Thank you for sticking through the process and coming back to us for the third time. I think I was pleased with the last iteration and I know that we asked for some minor reconsiderations. I thank you for clearly laying that out and explaining to us the new changes that have been made. I also agree that the recessed parapet detail is a little too much. I think I was one that I said I was fine with the base, middle and top as it was. The recessed parapet really, to me doesn’t look right and I agree with Board Member Baltay that perhaps we could just go back to the previous design. I also felt that the auto court area and the stairs for the bar building on the right and then I guess also for the building on the left, it being that dark grey with a lot of the wire mesh just doesn’t feel quite as welcoming. I agree that we don’t want to hold up the process but I don’t know if there’s something that can be done to reconsider either the amount of wire mesh material or if maybe the color can be changed. I think we want this to have more a residential feel and the way that the stairs look right now, I don’t think it looks like too much of a place where you’d want to take the stairs. I think we want to encourage people to take the stairs wherever possible so perhaps there can be just a little bit of re-looking at that and maybe that can come back to us as a subcommittee item. Overall, I’m very pleased with the changes that you’ve made and that little bit of 18-inches that you’ve dropped the bar building, to me makes a huge difference. I know maybe to some it seems only like a foot and a half but I think it will make a really big difference in the long run; especially as the building gets built. I do have kind of one thing that I noticed which doesn’t bother me but I did just want to put it out there is that it looks like on the original renderings for the main entrance to the bar building along Acacia that the portion of the lobby with the glass and the upper railing I think to use to be glass. At least that’s what it looked like in the renderings and I know that it's changed to the wire mesh. I know that it ties in with the wire mesh of the stair tower but perhaps it can be re-looked at, especially if we’re looking at the amount of wire mesh. Maybe the glass does enough to make it feel a little bit more refined and less standoffish but thank you for providing the aerial renderings. I think that’s also something that I asked for previously and also, I noticed some other modifications to the below-grade parking in the main building. I think overall, I know it goes to Council but I don’t have any hesitation of recommending approval for the project, thank you. Chair Lew: Wynne. Board Member Furth: A question for Staff, what’s the bicycle parking requirement for a residential unit? Ms. Hodgkins: Hold on one second. I think it’s – I want to say it’s one per unit but let me just verify that. Let’s see, yeah, it’s one per unit and then… Board Member Furth: That’s long-term? Ms. Hodgkins: Then one per every ten units for guest parking as well. Board Member Furth: Ok, so 1.1. Ms. Hodgkins: Yeah. Board Member Furth: Thank you. Thanks for the well designed and informative materials. I was really impressed with the information that you provided about landscaping, even if I had trouble reading one of the plans. I think this – it looks like the project is going to work really well on El Camino. I agree with Robert that we’re losing a really – we’re losing a sense of place along El Camino when I think of the series of projects that we’ve approved and how many of them have similar rhythms in materials. I wonder how we’re going to figure out which block we’re on. We probably don’t want the extreme sense of place provided by some of our more eccentric motels but this is going to be interesting. This does, however, look like something that’s going to work well on the street. I appreciate how hard it is to design street furniture that works around that 8-foot clearance and the swinging doors and the trees and I’m grateful that you made the effort because I think it makes a huge difference. It comes up with every single project we look at and of course, it has nothing to do with us but it’s the Council and the applicant but the use you’re proposing seems to be one that’s a great benefit to the City as a whole. I don’t think the change to the top is particularly useful. I am concerned about the stairwells or the stair towers and you come up the stairs and you go 8.b Packet Pg. 150 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : O c t o b e r 5 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 0 6 : 3 0 0 1 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f R o o f l i n e a n d S t a i r City of Palo Alto Page 7 outside on the third level and go back inside, is that right? There’s a balcony that then takes you around to the corridor that links the units. Ms. Hodgkins: You can go outside, you don’t have to go outside but yeah, at the second level you can go outside. Board Member Furth: So, there is a balcony space there? Ms. Hodgkins: Yeah. Board Member Furth: I don’t think it works as it stands. Actually, when I saw your shiny metal I thought oh, that will make it a little less forbidding but I understand that’s not what you intend. I think those stairwells need more work. I don’t know if you can take advantage of the fact that you have that outdoor space adjacent to one. I’m particularly concerned about the one on the residential building. It does not seem to me to be particularly well integrated into the rest of the building and it’s a surprisingly big element. So, if anybody has any thoughts about how to make that work better, by which I mean more attractive and more welcoming and lighter, I would be interested but with that exception, I think the project is a good one. Ms. Hodgkins: Just to clarify, when you say one on the RM-30 building, are you referencing the staircase or the outdoor area or … Board Member Furth: (Inaudible) Ms. Hodgkins: Ok, thank you for clarifying. Chair Lew: I think it’s a little confusing because the plans show it as the deck area is being open to the lobby below, am I reading that correctly? Vice Chair Kim: I think that’s the first floor because it’s kind of a split level. (crosstalk) Chair Lew: (Inaudible) ok, so it’s just – it’s on the upper -- ok, thank you for that. Thank you, Wynne. I can support the project. I think it’s very handsome and I think it’s what you can do on this particular site given the way the height limit – within 150-feet of a residential – single-family residential zone and that makes you step down the height. So, I think you are forced into having the large mass on El Camino. I think to Robert’s point about the flat roofs, I think we’ve talked about this before on other projects or maybe actually on this one, is that the – there is a height limit but there’s also the El Camino Design Guidelines that actually recommend flat roofs and discourage – yeah, but I think that if – in the past at some of our retreats I’ve shown images of boulevards – beautiful boulevards in other Cities and they do have pitched roofs and false – there are a whole bunch of what we call fake decorative elements and to me they work. I think that we should have a separate discussion that if there’s something – if we think that there is something wrong or it those – all the buildings are looking to similar, which I would think that I probably agree with, then we should go ahead and work on… Board Member Gooyer: You see I’m fine with that. I wasn’t going to pick out just this one particular one, I just… Chair Lew: Right, that’s why I’m saying… Board Member Gooyer: …when you drive down or pass any building these days, you can almost -- without even looking at it say we’ll it’s going to have a flat roof and it does. Chair Lew: I think we should continue the discussion and we’ve had it before but have not really ever recommended making a change to the guidelines. On the – on the plans – thank you for all the changes, I think it looks good. I think you’ve been very responsive to the Board’s comments and I think the project has gotten better. I just have a couple comments, that I think last time the Staff had asked us to comment on 8.b Packet Pg. 151 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : O c t o b e r 5 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 0 6 : 3 0 0 1 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f R o o f l i n e a n d S t a i r City of Palo Alto Page 8 the DEE for – at least for the garage ramp and the screening required for the – to the adjacent house and I didn’t comment on it last time. I do want to say that I support the substantial sizes pittosporum hedge being proposed and the setbacks and there’s aren’t that many windows looking directly down into the house so that I can – I can support that. On the findings I did have some comments for Staff, on page 20, the second to last sentence of the paragraph it says that the project has been designed to highlight natural materials which is wood and the colors are subdued in accordance with the El Camino Design Guidelines. I think I might just rephrase that and I think the El Camino Design Guidelines discourage having – was it more like having three bright colors but I wouldn’t say black or dark grey and white is subdued. I would just sort of say that it’s not – there are no bright colors on there. On the next page, on page 21 under finding three which is about the design quality. You do have a sentence in there that says the design (inaudible) setbacks substantially provide space between the proposed buildings and nearby single-family residential uses. I think that you actually already have that in the – under finding two so I think it’s just a – it may be a – I think it’s just not needed there because I think it’s already covered before there. Mr. Jonathan Lait, Assistant Director of Planning: Just to be clear, are you striking – you are suggesting (crosstalk)(inaudible)… Chair Lew: I was just saying striking it because it’s – yeah, because the setback isn’t really about materials, right? The setback is about finding two and making transitions. Mr. Lait: Ok, we may want to add a little bit more if we’re going to be replacing that sentence. Chair Lew: Then on the next page, page 22, on the very first – on the very top of the page it says that the project would not impact the existing bike path along El Camino and I don’t know what that is. So, we don’t let bike lines – are we just saying that existing bicycle uses or was that maybe referencing Park Boulevard/Bicycle Boulevard? Ms. Hodgkins: It’s actually two things and I mean I guess it’s saying that it wouldn’t impact the ability to use the bike lane but more importantly, it doesn’t impact the potential for a larger bike lane to be built – a class two bike lane along that road. That’s something that Cal Transit is looking at in the future; I’ll clarify that. Chair Lew: So, you’re saying – right, so you’re sort of saying no bulb-outs that would sort of protrude into the right of way? Ms. Hodgkins: There are going to be bulb-outs but we’re designing them to be only 4-feet so it would allow that space. Chair Lew: Yes, Wynne? Board Member Furth: I agree with you that there is no existing bike path. Chair Lew: Well, but there are – I would say there are bicyclists that use it. Board Member Furth: Yeah but that’s not a bike path. It seems to be misleading to talk about an existing bike path. Mr. Lait: So, we’ll strike the existing and replace it with a future. Chair Lew: Great. Then under finding five which is about plants, it says the plant species proposed are primarily indigenous, approximately seventy percent indigenous as shown on sheet L-4.11 and I don’t think that’s quite – I think that could be read incorrectly. I think it would say – if you look at the plant list and it does have (inaudible) which ones are native and which ones are not native. If you’re just looking by species type, it’s in the minority but if you’re looking at plant quantities, it could be in the majority so I would just make that distinction under there. Then I think also I had mentioned previously under the mitigation monitoring, which is a condition of approval five, is that I think the Board has not seen Exhibit A. My 8.b Packet Pg. 152 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : O c t o b e r 5 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 0 6 : 3 0 0 1 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f R o o f l i n e a n d S t a i r City of Palo Alto Page 9 understanding is that this went to the planning – this got approved by the Planning and Transportation Commission and they reviewed all of the environmental documents. So, that’s all that I have on this one and I would support if the Board wants to modify the parapet cap and the stair towers. I would be willing to go along with that. On exterior stair towers, I think that – the thing that I’ve noticed on the buildings that I’ve worked on is that the -- it may – it could look good at – in the daytime and then at night time all of the exit lighting shows and it can look completely different. I think the interior colors of the stair tower and just any design that happens in there is actually important in how they look. I don’t necessarily think that the building has to look residential. I think in this area it all use to be railroad warehouses and it has kind of an industrial look; the neighboring Equinox building and the Fry’s Maximart site. All of those are fairly industrial looking and I think it’s ok to tie into some of that. Board Member Gooyer: Now, do you want to bring that back to… Chair Lew: Subcommittee? I don’t think the Board – I think the Board is pretty clear. (Crosstalk) (inaudible). I think there’s a majority – I think – it sounds like we’re on the same page about that. Any other follow up comments? Does somebody want to try to make a motion? MOTION Board Member Furth: If you’ll coach me, I would move that the Board recommend approval of this project based on the findings and with the conditions set forth in the Staff report, with the following changes. On page 22, the project would not impact a future bike path in line one and then down in finding number three, last paragraph, rather than the plant species proposed, are the planting proposed is primarily indigenous. What was your first one? Mr. Lait: There where two other changes to the findings. Finding one had a change to replace subdued colors with not bright colors and finding number three striking the… Board Member Furth: Redundant. Mr. Lait: …third sentence in that paragraph. Board Member Furth: Exactly and adding a condition that the design of the – did you call those stair towers and the cornice? The upper – the roof element? Roof parapet is referred to a subcommittee for further review and approval – recommendation. Chair Lew: I just want to clarify that it’s a recommendation to Council and not the Planning Director; at least not this time. Board Member Furth: Included in that is our recommendation of approval to the Design Enhancement Exception and our review of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Board Member Baltay: I can second that. Chair Lew: All in favor? Opposed? None and that passes 5-0. MOTION PASSES 5-0 Chair Lew: Thank you and congratulations and we’ll see you at the Council. Ok and then we’re ready for the next item. We’ll take a 2-minute break for them to get set up. 8.b Packet Pg. 153 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t B : O c t o b e r 5 , 2 0 1 7 E x c e r p t A R B M i n u t e s ( 9 0 0 6 : 3 0 0 1 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f R o o f l i n e a n d S t a i r Attachment C Project Plans Hardcopies of project plans are provided to board members. These plans are available to the public online and by visiting the Planning and Community Environmental Department on the 5th floor of City Hall at 250 Hamilton Avenue. Directions to review Project plans online: 1. Go to: www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pln 2. On the left hand side click “Development Proposals” 3. In the drop down window click “Pending Projects” 4. Scroll to find “3001 El Camino Real” and click the address link 5. On this project specific webpage you will find a link to the project plans and other important information Direct Link to Project Webpage: https://tinyurl.com/3001-Subcommittee-Plans 8.c Packet Pg. 154 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : P r o j e c t P l a n s ( 9 0 0 6 : 3 0 0 1 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f R o o f l i n e a n d S t a i r E n c l o s u r e M a t e r i a l ) Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID # 9097) Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/5/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: 180 Hamilton: Subcommittee Review of Landscaping and Lighting Title: 180 Hamilton Avenue [17PLN-00171]: Subcommittee Review of a Previously Approved Project That was Conditioned to Return With Project Changes Related to Landscaping and Lighting. Environmental Assessment: Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Guideline Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Zoning District: CD-C(GF)(P) (Downtown Commercial). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Samuel Gutierrez at samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org. From: Hillary Gitelman Recommendation Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) take the following action(s): 1. Discuss and provide direction or approve project revisions. Background On December 7th, 2017 the Architectural Review Board (ARB) recommended approval of the exterior renovations for 180 Hamilton as presenting in the staff report with a recommended return to Subcommittee. At the Board’s recommendation, a condition was imposed that required certain project elements return to the ARB subcommittee. Below are the items that were requested to return to the subcommittee and the applicant’s response to the ARB’s comments: Architecture Review Condition:  Landscaping design for the planter area and planter boxes along the street frontage shall return to the ARB subcommittee for approval. Applicant’s Response: 9 Packet Pg. 155 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2  The applicant has provided a landscape plan for the ARB to review. This plan includes the proposed trees and shrubs within the public and private planter areas. Staff Analysis/Feedback: The submitted landscape plan indicates the location and species of plants proposed. Previously the approved project lacked this level of detail in regards to landscape. The plan includes a new Catalina Ironwood street tree to be planted along the Emerson frontage as required by the conditions of approval. The plan also proposes nine species of shrubs to be planted within the planting area around the existing street tree, as well as the proposed planter areas within project site, located at the intersection of Hamilton Avenue and Emerson Street. Architecture Review Condition:  Lighting design, in particular, the LED strip down lighting of the façade shall return to the ARB subcommittee for approval. Applicant’s Response:  The applicant has produced a physical sample of the proposed light fixture to allow the ARB to determine if the output of the light fixture would be appropriate for the intended use. Staff Analysis/Feedback: The Architectural Review Board had some concerns regarding the functionality of the proposed lighting of the façade (down lights). The applicant has provided a physical sample of the proposed light fixture to demonstrate its’ built quality and illumination. Staff believes this would allow the Subcommittee to evaluate the light fixture and determine if said fixture is appropriate for the project. A video recording of the Board’s last meeting on this project is available online: http://midpenmedia.org/architectural-review-board-73-2/ The Board is encouraged to provide direction to staff and the applicant as to whether the proposed changes are sufficient or requires further refinement. Report Author & Contact Information ARB1 Liaison & Contact Information Samuel Gutierrez, Associate Planner Jodie Gerhardt, AICP, Planning Manager (650) 329-2225 (650) 329-2575 samuel.gutierrez@cityofpaloalto.org jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments:  Attachment A: Revised Landscape Plan (DOCX) 1 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org 9 Packet Pg. 156 Attachment A 180 Hamilton Project Plans Links to previous hearing and actions are posted on the City website. These are available to the public online and by visiting the Planning and Community Environmental Department on the 5th floor of City Hall at 250 Hamilton Avenue. Directions to review Project plans online: 1. Go to: https://paloalto.buildingeye.com/planning 2. Search for “180 Hamilton” and open record by clicking on the green dot 3. Review the record details for Application Number: 17PLN-00171 and open the “more details” option 4. Use the “Records Info” drop down menu and select “Attachments” 5. Open the attachment named “NobuPA L1-01 LDSP-PLAN.pdf” and dated March 28, 2018 9.a Packet Pg. 157 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t A : R e v i s e d L a n d s c a p e P l a n ( 9 0 9 7 : 1 8 0 H a m i l t o n : S u b c o m m i t t e e R e v i e w o f L a n d s c a p i n g a n d L i g h t i n g )