Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-04-19 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 19, 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. 2755 El Camino Real [16PLN-00464]: Recommendation on Applicant's Request for Approval of a Site and Design Review to Allow Construction of a 57 Unit Multi-family Residence at the Project Site. The Project Also Includes a Request for a Zoning Code Text Amendment Ordinance to Create a New Workforce Combining District and a Zoning Map Amendment Ordinance to Apply the New District to the Project Site. Council Will Consider These Ordinances Along With the Site and Design Review Application. Environmental Assessment: An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was Published for Public Comment on January 19, 2018 and Circulation Ended on February 20, 2018. Zoning District: Public Facilities (PF). For More Information Contact the Project Planner Claire Hodgkins at Claire.Hodgkins@cityofpaloalto.org. 3. PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 3945 El Camino Real [16PLN-00374]: Request for Approval of a Major Architectural Review to Allow an Exterior Remodel of an Existing Two-Story Hotel Building at 3945 El Camino Real. Environmental Assessment: The _______________________ 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. Project is Exempt from CEQA per Guideline Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Zoning District: RM-30/CS. For more information, contact the project planner Phillip Brennan at phillip.brennan@cityofpaloalto.org Study Session Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,3 Approval of Minutes Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker.1,3 4. Draft Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes for February 15, 2018. 5. Draft Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes for March 1, 2018. 6. Draft Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes for March 15, 2018. Subcommittee Items 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 # 9126) Report Type: City Official Reports Meeting Date: 4/19/2018 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 rotate throughout the year. 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. 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. 4 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 No action is required by the ARB for this item. Attachments: x Attachment A: ARB Meeting Schedule Assignments (DOCX) x Attachment B: Staff Approvals (DOCX) x Attachment C: Tentative Future Agendas (DOCX) 1 Packet Pg. 5 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 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 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 July August September October November December 1.a Packet Pg. 6 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 1 2 6 : 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 installation on non-illuminated wall sign. Applicant: Kevin Griffin Address: 395 Page Mill, 18PLN-00107 Approval Date: April 11, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 25, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the installation one non-illuminated wall sign. Applicant: Fook Hong Sham Address: 2221 El Camino Real, 18PLN-00038 Approval Date: April 11, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 25, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for landscaping changes. Applicant: Chad Machinski Address: 3400 Hillview Ave., 18PLN-00032 Approval Date: April 6, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 20, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the removal and replacement of one tree and addition of one tree. Applicant: Chad Machinski Address: 3251 Hanover Street, 18PLN-00082 Approval Date: April 4, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 18, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow the removal of two dead trees and replacement with seven. Applicant: James Brandenburg Address: 488 W. Charleston Ave.,18PLN-00027 Approval Date: April 4, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 18, 2018 Project Description: ARB staff level review to allow for the installation of three wall mounted signs. Applicant: Lavender Fung Address: 2209 El Camino Real., 18PLN-00061 Approval Date: April 4, 2018 Request for hearing deadline: April 18, 2018 1.b Packet Pg. 7 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 1 2 6 : 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 May 3 x Various Sites: Prelim for 16 AT&T Small Cell Nodes x 565 Hamilton Ave: Prelim for Mixed Use Project x 3406 Hillview: Two Store Office/R&D Building May 17 x Various Site: 10 Viculums/Verizon Small Cell Nodes x 4115 El Camino Real: Mixed Use with 7 Units (1st Formal) x 375 Hamilton: Parking Garage 1.c Packet Pg. 8 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 1 2 6 : C i t y O f f i c i a l R e p o r t ) Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID # 9060) Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/19/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: 2755 El Camino Real: Site and Design for 57 Units (3rd Formal) Title: PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 2755 El Camino Real [16PLN-00464]: Recommendation on Applicant's Request for Approval of a Site and Design Review to Allow Construction of a 57 Unit Multi-family Residence at the Project Site. The Project Also Includes a Request for a Zoning Code Text Amendment Ordinance to Create a New Workforce Combining District and a Zoning Map Amendment Ordinance to Apply the New District to the Project Site. Council Will Consider These Ordinances Along With the Site and Design Review Application. Environmental Assessment: An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was Published for Public Comment on January 19, 2018 and Circulation Ended on February 20, 2018. Zoning District: Public Facilities (PF). 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) take the following action(s): 1. Consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration included in Attachment K together with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan included in the Record of Land Use Action in Attachment B. 2. Recommend approval of the Site and Design Application to Council based on the findings and subject to conditions of approval included in the Record of Land Use Action in Attachment B. Report Summary 2 Packet Pg. 9 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 The subject project was previously reviewed by the ARB on two other occasions. The municipal code encourages the Architectural Review Board to make a recommendation on projects after three public hearings. Earlier staff reports include background information, project analysis and evaluation to city codes and policies; these reports are available online; a copy of the most recent staff report without prior attachments is available in Attachment C. Links to the previous ARB staff reports and associated attachments are included below. June 15, 2017: https://tinyurl.com/First-Staff-Report-2755-ECR March 15, 2018: https://tinyurl.com/2nd-ARB-Staff-Report-2755-ECR 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 is modified to reflect recent project changes. A location map is included in Attachment A; the updated Project Plans are included in Attachment I. The ARB is encouraged to make a final recommendation to approve, conditionally approve or deny the project. Background On March 15, 2018 the ARB reviewed the project. A video recording of the Board’s meeting is available online: https://tinyurl.com/2755-ECR-2nd-ARB. The Board’s comments and the applicant’s response are summarized in the following table: ARB Comments/Direction Project Revisions Roofline: Revise the design to include a more defined “top” to the building in order to better define the base and body from the top in accordance with the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. The walls on all four sides of the building have been modified to incorporate alternate materials and colors to better define the top of the building. In addition, on the southerly facing walls (facing El Camino Real and Page Mill Road) a sun shade feature has been added in conjunction with these color and material changes. On the north facing walls (facing interior lot lines) a decorative band has been added along the roofline in conjunction with these color and material changes. Staff’s analysis of these changes is discussed below. Ground Floor Units: Provide more clarity on the relationship of the public right-of-way to Two sections have been added on Sheets 27 and 28 of the project plans to show the 2 Packet Pg. 10 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 the first floor units by providing a clear section of that area. Consider raising the height of the ground floor as much as possible to provide separation between the public right-of-way and the ground floor residential units. relationship of the ground floor units to the adjacent right-of-way along Page Mill Road. The height of the first floor has been revised to be two feet, six inches above the grade of the adjacent public right-of-way (12 inches higher than shown on the previous plans). Landscaping: Provide a landscaping plan that includes more detail, particularly for landscaping at the entrance, landscaping on the roof deck, and landscaping at the rear of the building. Include shading for some of the deck. Sheet L3 has been added to show landscaping details for the main entrance at the corner, along the rear of the property, and on the roof deck. The new sun shade feature wraps around to provide some shading on the roof deck. Umbrellas have also been added. Staff’s analysis of these revisions is included below. Circulation: Provide more clarity regarding the circulation plan and planned restrictions along the El Camino Real curb between Sheridan and Page Mill. In particular, some ARB members noted that it was unclear where a car could temporarily park for delivery/pick-up. A circulation diagram has been added on Sheet 43 of the plan set to show the proposed bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle access points on the site. In addition, the location of the 30 minute loading/pick up zone along El Camino Real is shown. Fence: One board member noted that there is an existing tiled wall at the site along the rear lot line and asked the applicant to reconsider whether a fence in front of this wall was really necessary. It was confirmed that the height of the existing walls along both interior lot lines meet the performance criteria requirement outlined in 18.23.050 of providing a solid wall or fence between five and eight feet in height between adjacent residential uses. Therefore, the proposed fencing has been removed. Brick/Plaster Detail: The ARB requested a detail that explained the termination of vertical brick elements at plaster soffits; noting that the brick should return, such that the veneer edge is thoughtfully obscured. A detail has been provided on Sheet 29 of the plan set. All brick veneer surfaces will be detailed such that, at their termination, L-shaped returns and channels are used as to give them a sense of substance and detail. Wood Façade at Corner and Windows: At least one member of the ARB asked that the applicant consider windows above the entrance in lieu of the wood panel. In addition, one board member asked for more windows to further break up the massing. The wood panel has been removed and windows are proposed in its place. In addition, on other walls facing the interior lot lines additional windows have been added to further break up the massing. Privacy film will be used on interior facing windows, as shown on the plans, to ensure privacy is still maintained. 2 Packet Pg. 11 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 Consistency: At least one ARB member noted that the civil plans showing the first floor elevation was not consistent with the elevation or section drawings. The ARB asked that the applicant ensure that the plan set is revised for consistency. The plan set, particularly the civil sheets, has been updated for consistency with the other architectural plan sheets. Analysis1 Following is staff’s analysis of the design changes proposed by the applicant to address the ARB’s comments at the March 15, 2018 hearing. Comments from the ARB with respect to clarity or consistency of the plan set have been addressed, as noted above, and are not discussed further below. Roofline Although staff notes that an even more defined roof may be more desirable, the combination of color and material changes, the decorative banding, and the sun shade feature further define the body from the top of the structure in accordance with the ARB comments and in a manner that retains the overall design intent. Staff previously concluded that the project, on balance, was consistent with the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. With, these changes, the project would be more consistent with Guideline 4.1.5; therefore, staff concludes that the project, on balance, is still consistent with the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. Ground Floor Units The applicant has raised the elevation of the first floor by one foot to create a two foot, six inch separation between the first floor and the grade at the adjacent sidewalk along Page Mill Road. To accommodate for this change, the parapet at the top has been slightly reduced to ensure that the building does not exceed the height limit. The parapet would still properly screen HVAC equipment. The added sections on Sheets 27 and 28 of the project plans provide clarity regarding the relationship of the ground floor units to the street. As shown in the sections, the proposed planters and trees are designed to keep pedestrians 7’3” to 9’6” from the unit window. The vegetation within the planters creates a 5 foot tall planting buffer. Raised window sills are also used at the ground level to prevent direct line of site into the units from the sidewalk. Staff believes that the proposed changes to the height of the ground floor helps to address the ARB’s concern with respect to creating a greater sense of privacy and separation between the first floor residents and the public right-of-way. No changes were proposed to the vegetation along the frontage with the exception of the 1 foot height increase; however, staff believes that 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. 12 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5 the sections provided more clarity to the ARB as to the relationship of these units to the sidewalk. Landscaping The applicant has provided more detailed plan sheets to clearly show the proposed plant detailing on the roof deck, at the entrance, and at the rear of the building. It should be noted that the applicant has also provided more planting behind the short-term bicycle parking as well as adjacent the porte cochère than was previously proposed. Staff previously found that the project was consistent with Architectural Review Finding #5. These added plan sheets simply provide more clarity as to the details of the planting. With these additional details, staff still finds the project to be consistent with the Architectural Review Finding #5. The wrap-around sun shade feature and added umbrellas also provide for a more useable open space given the southern exposure on the roof deck. In addition, they provide more visual interest and evidence of habitation, consistent with guidelines specified in the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines and the context-based design criteria. Fence The existing masonry walls on the neighboring properties are between 5’6” and 6’6” tall. Because these walls meet the requirements outlined in PAMC Section 18.23, performance criteria, for visual separation between uses, no additional fence is necessary to address this requirement. Therefore, to address the ARB’s concerns regarding covering up the existing walls and artistic tiles, the proposed redwood fencing has been removed. To ensure that this requirement is met if existing conditions change prior to final inspection, a condition of approval has been added that would require a fence in the event that the wall is removed. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Area Plans, and Guidelines2 A consistency analysis with specific goals and policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan is included in the findings outlined in the Record of Land Use Action in Attachment B. As outlined in the previous staff report and in the findings, based on consistency with the land use designation, the housing element, and consistency with other policies and goals outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, staff finds that, as conditioned, the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive Plan Policies N-5.4 requires that all potential sources of odor and/or toxic air contaminants be adequately buffered, or mechanically or otherwise mitigated, to avoid odor and toxic impacts that violate relevant human health standards. As discussed in the environmental analysis, Volatile Organic Compounds that may be present in the soils could be impactful to future residents if a vapor mitigation system is not installed in the subterranean 2 The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan is available online: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/topics/projects/landuse/compplan.asp 2 Packet Pg. 13 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6 garage. In addition, Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC) screening levels were determined to exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Managagement District’s thresholds and could be impactful to future residents if not addressed. In order to ensure compliance with Comprehensive Plan Policy N- 5.4, conditions of approval 10 and 11 are included in the Record of Land Use Action. Zoning Compliance3 As outlined in the previous staff report, staff has performed a detailed review of the project’s consistency with the zoning standards that would be applicable to the proposed project. Provided City Council adopts the Zoning Code Text Amendments to establish the workforce combining district and apply the combining district to the project site, the proposed project would comply with all applicable requirements outlined in the municipal code. A detailed review of the project’s consistency with the development standards of the new combining district is included in Attachment D. The PTC has recommended support for, and Council will consider, the proposed ordinances following ARB recommendation on the Site and Design application. Staff is addressing minor revisions to the Zoning Code Text Amendment ordinance based on additional input from members of the public and the PTC during the PTC hearing in January, which will be included in the staff report for Council. These revisions would not affect the site design or the project’s consistency with the regulations that would be established under the new zoning code text amendment. Context-Based Design Criteria The proposed development requires that the City make the findings outlined in PAMC section 18.12.060, Multi-family Context-Based Design Criteria. A detailed review of the proposed project’s consistency with these context-based design criteria is included in Attachment E. Changes to create a more defined top to the building through color, materials, and other design features as well as changes to various walls to further break up the massing by adding more windows results in a project that is even more consistent with design criteria 1, massing and building facades, of the multi-family context-based design criteria. In addition, the added shade features for the deck open space provide for a more useable open space area for residents, consistent with design criteria 3, project open space. Therefore, staff’s conclusion that the project is consistent with context-based design criteria has not changed. Performance Criteria The project is subject to the performance criteria outlined in Section 18.23 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC). An analysis of the project’s consistency with the performance criteria is included in Attachment F. As noted above, fencing was previously proposed to ensure consistency with PAMC Section 18.23.050, which requires a visual buffer between five and eight feet in height between the site and adjacent uses. However, based on the ARB’s comments regarding covering up the existing walls on the property line, which already provide this required buffer, the good neighbor fence has been removed from the project plans. However, to ensure that the project is code compliant at the time of final inspection, a condition of 3 The Palo Alto Zoning Code is available online: http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/palo-alto_ca 2 Packet Pg. 14 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 7 approval has been added to require fencing if, prior to final inspection, the existing walls along the property line are removed. South El Camino Real and El Camino Real Design Guidelines The project is subject to the South El Camino Real and El Camino Real Design Guidelines. An analysis of the project’s consistency with the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines is included in Attachment G. As discussed in the previous staff report, staff found that the project, on balance, is consistent with the South El Camino Real design guidelines but suggested that the project could have more clear definition between the base, body, and roof (Guidelines Section 4.1.5). The ARB also commented on the project’s consistency with this guideline. As discussed above, staff believes that the revision to the colors and materials as well as the addition of the sun shade feature and decorative pattern help to better define the “top” of the structure. This results in a project that is more consistent with guideline 4.1.5. Therefore, staff believes the project, on balance, would still be consistent with the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. As noted in the previous ARB staff report, the project is also consistent with the El Camino Real Design Guidelines. In particular, automobile parking and HVAC equipment is screened from the public right-of-way, the project does not use bright colors intended to attract attention, there is not superfluous detail added in the architecture, and perimeter landscaping as well as the required good neighbor fence is provided. 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, a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated on January 19, 2018 and circulation ended on February 20, 2018. A link to the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, which was previously provided to the ARB for the March 15, 2018 hearing, is included in Attachment H. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan is included in Exhibit A of the Record of Land Use Action in Attachment B. 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 April 6, which is 13 days in advance of the meeting. Postcard mailing occurred on April 9, which is 10 days in advance of the meeting. Public Comments Public comments were summarized and/or attached in the previous staff report for the March 15, 2018 hearing with the ARB. No additional public comments were received during or since that hearing. Alternative Actions 2 Packet Pg. 15 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 8 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 Claire Hodgkins, Associate Planner Jodie Gerhardt, AICP, Planning Manager (650) 329-2116 (650) 329-2575 claire.hodgkins@cityofpaloalto.org jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments: x Attachment A: Location Map (PDF) x Attachment B: Draft Record of Land Use Action (DOCX) x Attachment C: March 15, 2018 ARB Staff Report w/o Attachments (PDF) x Attachment D: Zoning Consistency Analysis (DOCX) x Attachment E: Context Based Design Criteria (DOCX) x Attachment F: Performance Criteria (DOCX) x Attachment G: South El Camino Real Design Guidelines (DOCX) x Attachment H: Environmental Analysis (DOCX) x Attachment I: Project Plans (DOCX) 4 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org 2 Packet Pg. 16 2 A B GRANTAVENUE SHERIDANAVENUE PEPPER AVENUE PAGE MILL ROAD PAGEMILLROAD ELCA MINO RE AL PAGE MILL ROAD ELCAMINOREALELCAMINOREAL ELCAMINORE AL F S3) PF CN CN PC-2293 PC-4 354 PC-446 3 PC- R GM CS PC-4831 CS(D) This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Special Setback abc Known Structures Tree (TR) abc Zone District Notes Zone Districts Curb Edge abc Zone District Labels 3URMHFW6LWH 0' 126' 2755 El Camino Real 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, 2018-01-19 10:36:09 (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Personal\chodgki.mdb) 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 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Attachment B APPROVAL NO. 2018- RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION FOR 2755 EL CAMINO REAL: SITE AND DESIGN REVIEW, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN [FILE NO 16PLN-00434] On , 2018, the City Council adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Approved the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as well as the Site and Design Review to allow construction of a multi-family residential housing building totaling 39,220 square feet (sf) with both below and at-grade parking located at 2755 El Camino Real making the following findings, determination, and declarations: SECTION 1. BACKGROUND. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City Council”) finds, determines, and declares as follows: A. On December 23, 2016, Windy Hill Property Venture applied for a Site and Design review [16PLN-00464] for the development of an exclusively multi-family residential building on a 0.449 acre parcel (APN 132-36-084) to replace a vacant parking lot formerly used by the Valley Transit Authority (VTA) as a park- and-ride lot. Surrounding uses include office, retail, public recreation (soccer fields), and multi-family residential housing primarily in areas Zoned Planned Community (PC). B. Staff has determined that, with adoption of the Ordinance in Attachment C, which creates a new Workforce Housing Combining District under 18.30(J) and applies that combining district to the project site at 2755 El Camino Real through a Zoning Map Amendment, the proposed project is in compliance with the applicable development standards of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. C. Following staff review, the Planning and Transportation Commission reviewed the project and considered the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) and recommended adoption of the MND, approval of the MMRP, and approval of the Site and Design on January 31, 2017 subject to conditions of approval. D. Following staff and Planning and Transportation Commission review, the Architectural Review Board (ARB) reviewed the project and considered the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) and recommended adoption of the MND, approval of the MMRP on April 19, 2018 subject to conditions of approval. E. On , 2018, the City Council reviewed the project design and the MND and MMRP. After hearing public testimony, the Council voted to adopt the MND and MMRP and approve the Site and Design subject to the conditions set forth in Section 7 of this Record of Land Use Action. SECTION 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. In conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan approved by the City Council on , 2018. The Mitigated Negative Declaration concluded that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment with mitigation as proposed. The MND is available for review in Attachment K and all mitigation measures as stated in the approved Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. The MMRP is included in Exhibit A of this Record of Land Use Action. 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) SECTION 3. SITE AND DESIGN OBJECTIVE FINDINGS. The project is consistent with the Site and Design Objective Findings outlined in Chapter 18.30(G).060 of the PAMC. Objective (a): To ensure construction and operation of the use in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites. Surrounding uses immediately adjacent to the site include a high density multi-family residential condominium complex and a high density senior living facility both zoned Planned Community (PC). Uses across Page Mill Road and El Camino Real include soccer fields as well as office and retail uses, including Palo Alto Square and the nearby Stanford Research Park, both of which provide extensive job opportunities within the City of Palo Alto. The project site is also located within close proximity (200 feet or less) of extensive bus services provided primarily by the Valley Transit Authority (VTA) as well as within 0.5 miles of the California Avenue Caltrain Station. The proposed project is consistent with Objective A because it provides high density housing in an area adjacent similar high density uses as well as in close proximity to transit opportunities, services, and job opportunities, consistent with several goals and policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. Use of this transit- oriented site for multi-family residential housing with lower parking requirements reduces anticipated traffic that would be generated from most other potential uses of the site such as office or retail. Given the high volume of traffic at this intersection and high density uses surrounding the site, this use would be very compatible with other adjacent uses. In addition, most parking is provided below ground and vegetation screening space is provided between the project and adjacent sites. The project also dedicates land needed by the County of Santa Clara to develop a long-sought right-hand turn lane from Page Mill Road onto El Camino Real and a potential future bike lane along Page Mill Road. Revisions to the curb along El Camino Real and Page Mill would also create a tighter turn radius to slow traffic turning onto El Camino Real and provide more sidewalk area, making the intersection safer for pedestrians. The street trees, wider sidewalk area, vegetation planting on site, and improved bus stop also improve the pedestrian experience at this corner. The building also activates this corner, a long-sought goal in the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines for the continuation of the pedestrian experience between pedestrian nodes and corridors. Therefore, construction and operation of the use would be in a manner that is orderly, harmonious and compatible with existing developed uses of adjoining and nearby sites. Objective (b): To ensure the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities, or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent areas. As currently zoned, the project site has limited uses and the site continues to be used as a vacant parking lot for surplus parking. High density multi-family housing in close proximity to existing business would generate greater use of retail services and provide opportunities for nearby office employees to live in close proximity to work, ensuring the desirability of investment, as well as the conduct of business and research in adjacent areas. Further, workforce housing, as proposed by the applicant, provides an opportunity for more affordable housing for those that would typically have to live and spend money in nearby cities with more affordable housing opportunities. Objective (c): To ensure that sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance shall be observed. The proposed project is consistent with Objective C in that the project situates housing in a location close to extensive transit opportunities as well as adjacent retail and office uses, which helps to reduce vehicle miles traveled from the project site. An extensive Transit Demand Management plan also encourages increased transit use, providing VTA EcoPasses and the Caltain GoPass to all residents, as well as a bike share program, carpool matching services, and other services. It includes reduced parking that is unbundled, in order to discourage residents from having more than one vehicle, again reducing overall vehicle miles traveled to and from the project site. The building is also designed to comply with Calgreen Tier 2 requirements and includes drought resistant, low water-use plantings. The project will comply with C3 and MWELO requirements. Although several trees on site are planned to be removed, none are protected and more trees will be added. 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) Objective (d): To ensure that the use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project is consistent with Objective D in that the project promotes medium density residential development within the El Camino Real corridor and areas in close proximity to transit. As outlined in Table 1 below, the project is consistent with several policies and goals outlined in the Housing Element, Natural Element, Land Use and Design Element, and Transportation Element. With implementation of conditions of approval, which require design features to reduce exposure to air contaminants from the California-Olive-Emerson plume and air contaminants from vehicles and generators on El Camino Real, the project would be consistent with Policy N-5.4, which requires that toxic air contaminants be mitigated. Therefore, the proposed use of the site, with the conditions of approval, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Table 1: Comprehensive Plan Analysis 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 Major Institution/Special Facilities (MISP) In accordance with the 2017 Comprehensive Plan Update, appropriate land uses in the MISP designation include higher density multi-family residential uses in some locations, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s encouragement of housing near transit centers. The proposed development includes a high density multi- family residential use on a site zoned MISP that is located in close proximity to extensive VTA transit opportunities and within 0.5 mile of a Caltrain station stop. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with this land use designation. Housing Element Policy H2.1: Identify and implement strategies to increase housing density and diversity, including mixed-use development and a range of unit styles, near community services. Emphasize and encourage the development of affordable and mixed-income housing to support the City’s fair share of the regional housing needs and to ensure that the City’s population remains economically diverse. The proposed municipal code amendment included as part of the project would eliminate the maximum housing density requirement for projects on PF zoned parcels within specific transit oriented areas. The proposed development includes 57 small sized residential units in a transit rich area with nearby community services. It also includes a workforce housing component which would make at least some of the units more affordable to residents. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with this policy. Program H2.1.1: To allow for higher density residential development, consider amending the zoning code to permit high-density residential in mixed-use or single use projects in commercial areas within one-half a mile of fixed rail stations and to allow limited exceptions to the 50-foot height limit for Housing Element Sites within one- quarter mile of fixed rail stations. The project includes an amendment to the zoning code to permit high density residential on PF Zoned properties. The project site is located adjacent to the California Avenue Business District and within one-half a mile of fixed rail transit. Therefore, the project is consistent with this program. 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) Program H2.1.2: Allow increased residential densities and mixed use development only where adequate urban services and amenities, including roadway capacity, are available. The project allows for increased residential densities in close proximity to urban services and amenities. Additionally, the project will improve the existing road conditions by dedicated a new right turn lane. Program H2.1.4: Amend the Zoning Code to create zoning incentives that encourage the development of smaller, more affordable housing units, including units for seniors, such as reduced parking requirements for units less than 900 square feet and other flexible development standards. The proposed code amendment would eliminate the maximum density requirements for exclusively residential projects in some areas while still limiting FAR and height in order to encourage the development of smaller, more affordable housing units. Other flexible development standards include such things as reduced parking requirements in comparison to current standards and more flexibility in setbacks based on adjacent uses. Program H2.1.10: As part of planning for the future of El Camino Real, explore the identification of pedestrian nodes consistent with the South El Camino Design Guidelines, with greater densities in these nodes than in other areas. The project is located in one of the key nodes identified in the South El Camino Real design guidelines as a target area for improving pedestrian connections and increasing pedestrian activity. The proposed project would increase density at this node consistent with this policy. Land Use and Community Design Element Policy L-1.1: Limit future Urban development to currently development lands within the urban service area. The proposed project includes urban development for a desired use within the city within the urban service area. Policy L-1.5: Encourage land uses that address the needs of the community and manage change and development to benefit the community. The project encourages the development of multi-family housing units that are smaller and that include a workforce housing component in order to make housing more affordable. More affordable housing addresses a need of the community. The project, including the ordinance and the development, is also designed to reduce single-occupancy vehicle use, a benefit to the community. Policy L-2.3: As a key component of a diverse, inclusive community, allow and encourage a mix of housing types and sizes designed for a greater affordability, particularly smaller housing types, such as studios, cottages, clustered housing… The proposed project includes smaller, and therefore presumably more affordable, units. Although this housing time may not be desirable to all types of residents, it includes housing sought by some demographics, for example, young tech workers that may be employed nearby at Stanford Research Park. Therefore, the project is consistent with this policy. Program L2.4.7: Explore mechanisms for increasing multi-family housing density near multi-modal transit centers. Support the creation of affordable housing units for middle to lower income level earners, such as City and school district employees, as feasible. The project is a mechanism for increasing multi-family housing near multi-modal transit centers. Although the project as proposed does not include a preference to specific employees, it includes housing units offered at lower than market rate prices and includes preference for local employees or students. 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) Policy L-3.4: Ensure that new multi-family buildings, entries and outdoor spaces are designed and arranged so that each development has a clear relationship to a public street. The proposed development includes an entry located on the corner of El Camino Real and Page Mill Road, activating the corner in a manner consistent with the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. The planned outdoor space also increases eyes on the street. Policy L-4.13: Recognize El Camino Real as both a local serving and regional serving corridor, defined by a mix of commercial uses and housing. The project includes proposed housing in an area with extensive service and office uses along El Camino Real. Policy L-6.1: Promote high-quality design and site planning that is compatible with surrounding development and public spaces. The project is located in an area with adjacent, similar, high density residential uses as well as extensive services and employment opportunities. The project includes landscape screening between uses and is oriented toward the street with parking provided below ground or behind the building. Therefore the project is compatible with surrounding development. Policy L-9.2: Encourage development that creatively integrates parking into the project, including by locating it behind buildings or underground wherever possible…encourage other alternatives to surface parking lots that minimize the amount of land devoted to paring while still maintaining safe streets, street trees, a vibrant local economy and sufficient parking to meet demand. The project creatively integrates parking by providing it primarily underground, with a few at-grade parking spaces provided for guest use behind the building. The project looks at appropriate parking requirements based on the use and encourages the minimization of parking in transit-oriented areas, offering a robust TDM program and methods to both discourage use of a car while encouraging use of alternate transportation. Therefore, the project is consistent with this policy. Transportation Element Policy T-1.3: Reduce GHG and pollutant emissions associated with transportation by reducing VMT and per-mile emissions through increasing transit options and through the use of zero-emission vehicle technologies to meet City and State goals for GHG reductions by 2030. The proposed project encourages transit-oriented development and preference to local employees/students/retired individuals to reduce overall vehicle miles traveled. Policy T-1.9: Continue to encourage the provisions of amenities such as seating, lighting and signage, including real-time arrival information, at bus and shuttle stops and train stations to increase rider comfort, safety and convenience. The project includes improvements to the existing bus VTA bus stop in front of the project site. Policy T1.19.1: Provide facilities that encourage and support bicycling and walking. The proposed development encourages and supports bicycling and walking by providing housing in a transit oriented location close to nearby services and employment. It also includes both long-term and short- term bicycle parking that is provided at grade and includes a robust TDM plan that includes transit passes and other methods to encourage alternative methods of transportation. 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) Policy T-3.11: Consider the objectives of the Grand Boulevard Initiative and the South El Camino Boulevard Design Guidelines when designing roadway and pedestrian improvements along El Camino Real. The proposed project includes increased street trees, wider sidewalks, a tighter curb radius, and overall activates the corner in a manner that is consistent with specific goals outlined in the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines for this specific site. The above mentioned right-of-way improvements are called out as encouraged improvements the Green Boulevard initiative and the South ECR Guidelines. Therefore, the project is consistent with these policies. Policy T-5.1: All new development projects should manage parking demand generated by the project, without the use of on-street parking, consistent with the established parking regulations. As demonstrated parking demand decreases over time, paring requirements for new construction should decrease. Program T5.1.1: Evaluate the need to update parking standards in the municipal code, based on local conditions, different user’s needs and baseline parking need. Allow the use of parking lifts for office/R&D and multi-family housing as appropriate. Program T5.1.4: Study the feasibility of unbundled parking for…multi-family residential developments that are well-served by transit and demonstrated walking and bicycle connections Based on research of other similar projects in the region, including one within the City of Palo Alto transit oriented development is demanding lower parking requirements than those currently identified by the City of Palo Alto. The proposed project includes reduced parking requirements that are still projected to be higher than the actual project need. The project includes unbundled parking in order to further discourage residents from owning a vehicle and encourage their use of provided, free transit services. Program T6.6.6: Improve pedestrian crossings by creating protected areas and better pedestrian and traffic visibility. Use a toolbox including blub outs, small curb radii, high visibility crosswalks and landscaping. The project includes improvements to the corner of El Camino Real and Page Mill Road the provide for more visibility for pedestrians while also serving to calm traffic turning onto El Camino Real from Page Mill Road. Therefore, the project is consistent with this program. Natural Environment Element Goal N-4: Water Resources that are Prudently Managed to Sustain Plant and Animal Life, Support Urban Activities, and Protect Public Health and Safety. The project is required to comply with the all public works engineering requirements with respect to soil management prior to and during construction to ensure that stormwater runoff does not degrade water quality in the area. Policy N-21: Reduce pollution in urban runoff from residential, commercial, industrial, municipal, and transportation land uses and activities. 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) SECTION 4. ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD 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. The project is consistent with Finding #1 because: As detailed above under Objective D of the Site and Design Findings, the proposed project is consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. In particular, the Comprehensive Plan Housing Element emphasizes the need to explore and implement strategies that increase housing densities in close proximity to services as well as in close proximity to transit. The Housing Element also encourages amendments to the zoning code to create zoning incentives that encourage the development of smaller, more affordable housing units such as reduced parking requirements for units less than 900 square feet. The proposed project includes smaller units, a workforce housing component, and reduced parking requirements with unbundled parking, all of which serve to make units more affordable and available to local workers. The proposed project requires Zoning Code Text Amendments to create a new combining district as well as a Zoning Map Amendment to apply that combining district to the project site as detailed in the staff report. With adoption of the ordinance in Attachment B, the proposed project would be consistent with the zoning code. There are no coordinated area plans that encompass the project site. The proposed project is consistent with the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines, the performance criteria in PAMC Section 18.23 and the context-based design criteria for multi-family housing. Although not a requirement, the project is also consistent with recommendations outlined in the Grand Boulevard Initiative for development along El Camino Real, an initiative led by Caltrans. 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. The project is consistent with Finding #2 because: The proposed development activates a high-visibility corner of the City within an identified transit-oriented pedestrian node along El Camino Real, converting a completely paved parking lot to a high-density multi- family residential use and thereby enhancing living conditions on the site. The proposed development includes a four- story building with 57 units. Adjacent uses include high density residential condominiums and senior living complexes that are zoned PC. These are three and four stories high, respectively, and therefore similar in height to the proposed development. Across El Camino and Page Mill the Palo Alto Square Complex is ten stories in height. Landscape screening is provided between adjacent uses and above grade portions of the building are set back approximately 20 feet or more in most locations from the adjacent development. Therefore, the proposed project provides harmonious transitions in scale, mass and character to adjacent land sues and land use designations. The existing conditions on site include some non- native species of trees that would be replaced with lower water use trees and landscaping. As discussed above, outlined in the staff report, and detailed in Attachment G, the proposed project is consistent with the 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) context-based design criteria of the applicable zoning district. The design of the proposed project also creates an internal sense of order and desirable environment for occupants, visitors and the general community in that it includes increased perimeter landscaping along the street and interior lot lines, activates the corner with a clearly defined entrance, provides extensive at grade bicycle parking to encourage bicycle use, and provides for housing close to transit, services and job opportunities. Although the total amount of open space is lower than what is typically required, the space provided is quality and appropriate for the site, based on its location. 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 uses a varied palette and greenery, including street trees and planters, to create visual interest and to break up the massing. Materials and details on the exterior include a stucco veneer with various colors, balconies, sunshades, and a deck with umbrellas, which are appropriately incorporated into the design of the building. The colors are not bright, in accordance with the El Camino Real Design Guidelines, and the main entry, sidewalks, and landscaping reinforce the pedestrian scale of the project. The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site as discussed further under criteria #2. Construction techniques avoid the use of pile driving, opting for less noise alternatives to construction of the below- grade parking, as discussed further in the environmental analysis. 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: The proposed project design is functional and allows for ease and safety of vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Specifically the project includes all bicycle parking at grade and includes shared bicycles for resident’s use. In addition, the project includes pedestrian friendly features such as wider sidewalks and a tighter curb radius at the corner of Page Mill and El Camino, which provide better safety and visibility for pedestrians. It also includes a TDM program to incentivize use of transit and makes improvements to a bus stop currently located at the site. The project would also include the necessary dedications to the County of Santa Clara needed to complete long-sought improvements at this intersection. These improvements are intended to improve vehicle flow turning onto or crossing El Camino Real, but would also allow for a new bicycle lane, improving safety for bicyclists along Page Mill Road/Oregon Expressway. The property includes vehicle access to the site in the same location it is currently provided. As outlined in the Traffic Impact Analysis, this location is appropriate to ensure the safe circulation of vehicles entering and exiting onto El Camino Real. Most parking is provided below grade and lift system parking has been provided in three separate systems to allow for multiple cars to be accessed simultaneously. The open space is proposed in a manner that helps to reduce massing and increases eyes on the street. Specific signage is not proposed as part of the project; however, the proposed concept for signage shows that it would be pedestrian oriented. 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. 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) The project is consistent with Finding #5 because: The building materials, textures and colors are complimentary to the environmental setting and the landscape design utilizes drought tolerant and native plants that are appropriate to the site. All of the plant material proposed will be drought tolerant and locally adaptive to the region. The planting plan will comply with the Modified Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) and water budget, to include MAWA and ETWU calculations. Native species will be included and used appropriately as well as a few non-native species to reflect suitable site conditions (e.g. grows well in areas with limited soil [planters] or limited options for street trees that meet County or Caltrans requirements) and hydrozones. The extensive number of proposed trees would provide appropriate screening. Low waste, drip irrigation for shrub planting and bubblers for trees will be the standard of care for irrigation procedures 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: In accordance with the City’s Green Building Regulations, the building will satisfy the requirements for CALGreen Mandatory + Tier 2. The project will use low water-use, drought resistant plants and will comply with C3 and MWELO requirements. SECTION 5. Conditions of Approval. PLANNING DIVISION 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS. Construction and development shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "2755 El Camino Real, Palo Alto, California,” stamped as received by the City on February 20, 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 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. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program associated with the project and attached here as Exhibit A is incorporated by reference and all mitigation measures shall be implemented as described in such document. 6. WORKFORCE HOUSING: The applicant shall lease 10 percent of the units, for a total of six (6) units, at 140% of Area Median Income (AMI) and shall lease 10 percent of the units, for a total of six (6) units, at 150% of AMI. As required in accordance with the 18.30(J).090, all workforce 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) housing units provided shall be subject to a deed of trust, and/or regulatory agreement recorded against the property for execution by the City Manager in a form approved by the City Attorney, to ensure the continued affordability of the workforce housing units. All workforce housing units shall remain affordable to the targeted income group for 99 years. 7. ENFORCEMENT OF WORKFORCE HOUSING RESTRICTIONS AND LOCAL PREFERENCE: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant and the Director of Planning and Community Environment shall agree to a process for monitoring, reporting, and validating workforce housing obligation in compliance with Condition of Approval 6 as well as the preferential leasing requirements, as required in compliance with the workforce housing combining district ordinance. The applicant shall monitor and report on these requirements, as agreed upon, annually for no less than five years. After three (5) years of successful monitoring, the applicant may request, in writing, from the Director of Planning and Community Environment a modified reporting schedule for compliance. 8. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT: The applicant shall implement the approved TDM plan in order to achieve the goal of reducing motor vehicle trips to the site by a minimum of 35%. As outlined in the plan, the applicant shall submit monitoring reports to the Transportation Division to show compliance. Where the monitoring reports indicate that performance measures are not met, the Director of Planning and Community Environment may require program modifications and may impose administrative penalties if identified deficiencies are not addressed within six months. 9. PENALTIES FOR NON-COMPLIANCE: Failure to meet any code requirements or conditions of approval of this project shall result in non-compliance and are subject to the City of Palo Alto’s Administrative Penalty Schedule. 10. TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANTS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: To comply with Comprehensive Plan Policy N-5.4 the applicant shall implement the following measures to reduce exposure of proposed residences to toxic air contaminants emissions from vehicles on El Camino Real: a. Submit to the City of Palo Alto a ventilation proposal prepared by a licensed design professional for all on-site buildings that describes the ventilation design and how that design ensures all dwelling units would be below the excess cancer risk level of 10 in one million established by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. b. If the proposed buildings would use operable windows or other sources of infiltration of ambient air, the development shall install a central HVAC system that includes high efficiency particulate filters (a MERV rating of 13 or higher). These types of filters are capable of removing approximately 90 percent of the DPM emissions from air introduced into the HVAC system. The system may also include a carbon filter to remove other chemical matter. Filtration systems must operate to maintain positive pressure within the building interior to prevent entrainment of outdoor air indoors. c. If the development limits infiltration through non-operable windows, a suitable ventilation system shall include a ventilation system with filtration specifications equivalent to or better than the following: (1) American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air- Conditioning Engineers MERV-13 supply air filters, (2) greater than or equal to one air exchanges per hour of fresh outside filtered air, (3) greater than or equal to four air exchanges per hour recirculation, and (4) less than or equal to 0.25 air exchanges per hour in unfiltered infiltration. These types of filtration methods are capable of removing approximately 90 percent of the DPM emissions from air introduced into the HVAC system. d. Windows and doors shall be fully weatherproofed with caulking and weather-stripping that is rated to last at least 20 years. Weatherproof should be maintained and replaced 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) by the property owner, as necessary, to ensure functionality for the lifetime of the project e. Where appropriate, install passive (drop-in) electrostatic filtering systems, especially those with low air velocities (i.e., 1 mph) f. Ensure an ongoing maintenance plan for the HVAC and filtration systems. Manufacturers of these types of filters recommend that they be replaced after two to three months of use. g. The applicant shall inform occupants regarding the proper use of any installed air filtration system. 11. VAPOR MITIGATION SYSTEM: The developer shall comply with the recommendations in the final RMP prepared by ICES (ICES 2014; included in Appendix E of this Initial Study) to mitigate vapor intrusion and reduce exposure to future occupants. These include: a. Installation of a vapor membrane system that envelops the below grade portion of the proposed building, including areas below and above the groundwater table. b. Design and operation of the HVAC system to control air flows from sub-grade parking levels upward into occupied levels. c. Ventilation of the sub-grade parking level with a fan triggered by CO sensors d. Maintaining a positive pressure in the residential space relative to the sub-grade parking levels e. Design and build elevator hoistways within the building to have air relief vents f. Conduct post-construction Indoor Air Monitoring, quarterly for a minimum of two years with potential to reduce frequency to semi-annually following the initial two years 12. FENCING. At the time of final inspection, if the existing walls along the shared interior property lines are found not to be present or not to meet the 5 to 8 foot barrier requirement under the context-based design criteria, a fence or similar visual barrier shall be installed to meet code requirements. If the existing walls are present and found to meet the 5-8 foot height requirement from finished grade, no new fencing is required. 13. GUEST PARKING: Parking shall be unbundled from the rental price of the units, as outlined in the TDM Program. Lift parking shall be designed to accommodate at least two guest parking spaces. 14. LIFT SYSTEM: The applicant shall submit an analysis and report, prepared by a qualified professional, for review and approval by the Director of Planning and Community Environment that demonstrates the effectiveness of the proposed parking lift system with respect to operational details, regular and emergency maintenance schedule, and procedures and backup systems prior to building permit issuance. 15. EASEMENT RECORDATION: The proposed dedication along Page Mill Road to the County of Santa Clara in order to accommodate a future right hand turn lane from Page Mill to El Camino Real shall be recorded with the County prior to issuance of a building permit. 16. SIDEWALKS: The applicant shall coordinate with Caltrans, the County, and the City of Palo Alto Public Works Engineering Department, as appropriate, to reduce sidewalk closures during construction and ensure that a safe path of travel is maintained for pedestrians in this area. 17. NOISE: In accordance with PAMC Section 9.10.040 no person shall produce, suffer or allow to 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) be produced by any machine or device, or any combination of same, on commercial or industrial property, a noise level more than eight dB above the local ambient at any point outside of the property plane. 18. 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. 19. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES: Development Impact Fees, currently estimated in the amount of $1,235,900; Residential In-lieu fees in the amount of $602,920.00; plus the applicable public art fee, per PAMC 16.61.040, shall be paid prior to the issuance of the related building permit. 20. 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. 21. 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, Claire Hodgkins at claire.hodgkins@cityofpaloalto.org to schedule this inspection. PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING 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. 22. The applicant shall include an offer of dedication for a public access easement for the additional dimension of sidewalk between the property line and back of walk and/or building edge that meets the El Camino Real Master Plan requirements. 23. 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 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) 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. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. 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 27. GRADING & EXCAVATION PERMIT: An application for a grading & excavation permit must be submitted to Public Works when applying for a building permit. The application and guidelines are available at the Development Center and on our website. 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 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. 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 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) 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. 29. 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. 30. STORMWATER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: The applicant shall designate a party to maintain the control measures for the life of the improvements and must enter into a maintenance agreement with the City to guarantee the ongoing maintenance of the permanent C.3 storm water discharge compliance measures. The maintenance agreement shall be executed prior to the grading or building permit issuance. The City will inspect the treatment measures yearly and charge an inspection fee. 31. 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.” 32. 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. 33. 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. 34. Applicant shall submit a copy from Caltrans and Santa Clara County for the work proposed within their right- of-way, prior to issuance of a City permit. 35. Based on the City’s GIS there may be plume monitoring wells within the project site. However, based on coordination with the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), none of these wells are actively used for monitoring. Plot and label the wells on the plans and identify wells to be removed. Removal of these wells shall be done in coordination with the RWQCB and the SCVWD. Destruction of these wells shall be implemented by a qualified contractor and the applicant, owner, or designee shall file and obtain the required well destruction permits from the SCVWD for well destruction and provide evidence of said permits to PWE prior to Building permit issuance. 36. Where applicable, please call out the City standard detail number (i.e. “Palo Alto City Standard Detail 313 – Storm Manhole”), and include a sheet with all applicable City standard details in the plan set. 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) 37. STORM WATER HYDRAULICS AND HYDROLOGY: 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-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. 38. STORM DRAIN 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 directions to paint the logos on the construction grading and drainage plan. Include maintenance of these logos in the Hazardous Materials Management Plan, if such a plan is part of this project. For any new public catch basins in the public road right-of-way, applicant shall place medallions next to the inlets. Medallions are also available from Environmental Compliance Division. 39. Please provide VTA’s approval of proposed bus stop relocation on El Camino Real. PUBLIC WORKS UTILITIES DIVISION 40. Proper clearance for the transformer, including 3 feet on each side and 8 feet at the front shall be provided. The plans shall be revised accordingly. PUBLIC WORKS URBAN FORESTRY DIVISION PRIOR TO DEMOLITION, BUILDING OR GRADING PERMIT ISSUANCE 41. BUILDING PERMIT SUBMITTAL- PROJECT ARBORIST CERTIFICATION LETTER. Prior to submittal for staff review, attach a Project Arborist Certification Letter that he/she has; (a) reviewed the entire building permit plan set submittal and, (b)* verified all his/her updated TPR mitigation measures and changes are incorporated in the plan set, (c) affirm that ongoing Contractor/Project Arborist site monitoring inspections and reporting have been arranged with the contractor or owner (see Sheet T-1) and, (d) understands that design revisions (site or plan changes) within a TPZ will be routed to Project Arborist/Contractor for review prior to approval from City. 42. PLAN SET REQUIREMENTS. The final Plans submitted for building permit shall include the following information and notes on relevant plan sheets: a. SHEET T-1, BUILDING PERMIT. The building permit plan set will include the City’s full-sized, Sheet T-1 (Tree Protection-it's Part of the Plan!), available on the Development Center website at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/31783. The Applicant shall complete and sign the Tree Disclosure Statement and recognize the Project Arborist Tree Activity Inspection Schedule. Monthly reporting to Urban Forestry/Contractor is mandatory. (Insp. #1: applies to all projects; with tree preservation report: Insp. #1-7 applies) b. TREE REMOVAL OR PLANTING—PROTECTED & RIGHT-OF-WAY TREES. Existing trees (Publicly- owned or Protected) to be removed, as shown accurately located on all site plans, require authorization by a Urban Forestry Tree Care Permit prior to issuance of any building, demolition or grading permit. This will also be referenced in a separate Street Work Permit from Public Works Engineering. Complete the applicant information portion, and sign the Public Tree Care Permit for 2.b Packet Pg. 32 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) planting of a new street tree. Submit via email or over the counter at the Development Center with an 8 ½” x 11” copy of the site plan for our records – this may be completed at building permit stage. Find the application here: http://cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pwd/trees/. c. ADD PLAN NOTE. For each tree to be removed or planted that states, “Tree Removal. Contractor shall obtain a completed Urban Forestry Tree Care Permit # (contract or to complete) separate from the Building or Street Work Permit. Permit notice hanger and conditions apply. Contact (650-496-5953).” 43. NEW RIGHT-OF-WAY TREES—PERFORMANCE MEASURES. New trees shall be shown on all relevant plans: site, utility, irrigation, landscape, etc. in a location 10’ clear radius from any (new or existing) underground utility or curb cut. a. Add note on the Planting Plan that states, “Tree Planting. Prior to in-ground installation, Urban Forestry inspection/approval required for tree stock, planting conditions and irrigation adequacy. Contact (650-496-5953).” b. Landscape Plan tree planting shall state the Urban Forestry approved species, size and using Standard Planting Dwg. #604a, and shall note the tree pit dug at least twice the diameter of the root ball. Wooden cross-brace is prohibited. c. Add note on the Planting & Irrigation Plan that states, “Irrigation and tree planting in the right-of- way requires a street work permit per CPA Public Works standards.” d. Landscape plan shall include planting preparation details for trees specifying digging the soil to at least 30-inches deep, backfilled with a quality topsoil and dressing with 2-inches of wood or bark mulch on top of the root ball keeping clear of the trunk by 1-inch. e. Automatic irrigation bubblers shall be provided for each tree. Standard Dwg. #513a shall be included on the irrigation plans and show two bubbler heads mounted on flexible tubing placed at the edge of the root ball. The tree irrigation system shall be connected to a separate valve from other shrubbery and ground cover, pursuant to the City's Landscape Water Efficiency Standards. Bubblers mounted inside an aeration tube are prohibited. 44. NEW TREES—SOIL VOLUME. Unless otherwise approved, new right-of-way trees each new tree shall be provided with a minimum volume of rootable soil area. Rootable soil shall mean compaction of less than 90% over the area, not including sidewalk base areas except when mitigated. For trees in narrow parking lot islands, sidewalk or asphalt areas, mitigation may use an Alternative Base Material underlayment [in lieu of compacted base rock] method such as structural grid (Silva Cell) or engineered soil mix (ESM). Design and manufacturer details shall be added to relevant civil and landscape sheets. Note: this expectation requires coordination with the engineer, arborist and landscape architect. 45. SPECIAL PLAN NOTES: In addition to showing TPZ fencing, add the following Notes on the specified Plan Sheets. a. Note #1. Apply to the site plan stating, "All tree protection and inspection schedule measures, design recommendations, watering and construction scheduling shall be implemented in full by owner and contractor, as stated on Sheet T-1, in the Tree Protection Report and the approved plans”. b. Note #2. “Pruning Restrictions. No pruning or clearance cutting of branches is permitted on City trees. Contractor shall obtain a Public Tree Permit from Urban Forestry (650-496-5953) for any work on Public Trees” DURING CONSTRUCTION 2.b Packet Pg. 33 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) 46. TREE PROTECTION VERIFICATION. Prior to any site work a written verification from the contractor that the required protective fencing is in place shall be submitted to the Urban Forestry Section (derek.sproat@cityofpaloalto.org). The fencing shall contain required warning sign and remain in place until final inspection of the project. 47. EXCAVATION RESTRICTIONS APPLY (TTM, Sec. 2.20 C & D). Any approved grading, digging or trenching beneath a tree canopy shall be performed using ‘air-spade’ method as a preference, with manual hand shovel as a backup. For utility trenching, including sewer line, roots exposed with diameter of 1.5 inches and greater shall remain intact and not be damaged. If directional boring method is used to tunnel beneath roots, then Table 2-1, Trenching and Tunneling Distance, shall be printed on the final plans to be implemented by Contractor. 48. PLAN CHANGES. Revisions and/or changes to plans before or during construction shall be reviewed and responded to by the (a) project site arborist, (David L. Babby, arborresources@comcast.net), or (b) landscape architect with written letter of acceptance before submitting the revision to the Building Department for review by Planning, PW or Urban Forestry. 49. TREE PROTECTION COMPLIANCE. The owner and contractor shall implement all protection and inspection schedule measures, design recommendations and construction scheduling as stated in the TPR & 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. Project arborist approval must be obtained and documented in the monthly activity report sent to the City. The mandatory Contractor and Arborist Monthly Tree Activity Report shall be sent monthly to the City (pwps@cityofpaloalto.org) beginning with the initial verification approval, using the template in the Tree Technical Manual, Addendum 11. 50. 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 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. 51. 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. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY 52. URBAN FORESTRY DIGITAL FILE & INSPECTION. The applicant or architect shall provide a digital file of the landscape plan, including new off-site trees in the publicly owned right-of-way. A USB Flash Drive, with CAD or other files that show species, size and exact scaled location of each tree on public property, shall be delivered to Urban Forestry at a tree and landscape inspection scheduled by Urban Forestry (650-496-5953). 53. LANDSCAPE CERTIFICATION LETTER. The Planning Department shall be in receipt of a verification letter that the Landscape Architect has inspected all trees, shrubs, planting and irrigation and that they are installed and functioning as specified in the approved plans. 54. PROJECT ARBORIST CERTIFICATION LETTER. Prior to written request for temporary or final occupancy, the contractor shall provide to the Planning Department and property owner a final inspection letter 2.b Packet Pg. 34 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) by the Project Arborist. The inspection shall evaluate the success or needs of Regulated tree protection, including new landscape trees, as indicated on the approved plans. The written acceptance of successful tree preservation shall include a photograph record and/or recommendations for the health, welfare, mitigation remedies for injuries (if any). The final report may be used to navigate any outstanding issues, concerns or security guarantee return process, when applicable. POST CONSTRUCTION 55. MAINTENANCE. All landscape and trees shall be maintained, watered, fertilized, and pruned according to Best Management Practices-Pruning (ANSI A300-2008 or current version) and the City Tree Technical Manual, Section 5.00. Any vegetation that dies shall be replaced or failed automatic irrigation repaired by the current property owner within 30 days of discovery. Building Division 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.: 56. On the ground floor, the emergency escape for dwelling unit occupants with bedrooms facing the interior court will travel through the driveway tunnel. This will be allowed with the conditions that the tunnel is open on three sides to allow the escape of smoke and gases and is sprinklered and is built with fire-resistive construction consistent for an exit passage. The applicant will submit an Alternate Methods and Material application for the above conditions to the Building Division for review and approval. 57. 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. Watershed Protection Division The following conditions 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.: 58. DISCHARGE OF GROUNDWATER: The project is located in an area of suspected or known groundwater contamination with Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). If groundwater is encountered then the plans must include the following procedure for construction dewatering (PAMC 16.09.170, 16.09.040): Prior to discharge of any water from construction dewatering, the water shall be tested for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) using EPA Method 601/602 or Method 624. The analytical results of the VOC testing shall be transmitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) 650-329-2598. Contaminated ground water that exceeds state or federal requirements for discharge to navigable waters may not be discharged to the storm drain system or creeks. If the concentrations of pollutants exceed the applicable limits for discharge to the storm drain system then an Exceptional Discharge Permit must be obtained from the RWQCP prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer system. If the VOC concentrations exceed the toxic organics discharge limits contained in the Palo Alto Municipal Code (16.09.040(m)) a treatment system for removal of VOCs will also be required prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer. Additionally, any water discharged to the sanitary sewer system or storm drain system must be free of sediment. 59. CARWASH: In accordance with PAMC 16.09.180(b)(11) New Multi-family residential units and residential 2.b Packet Pg. 35 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) development projects with 25 or more units shall provide a covered area for occupants to wash their vehicles. A drain shall be installed to capture all vehicle wash waters and shall be connected to an oil/water separator prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer system. The oil/water separator shall be cleaned at a frequency of at least once every six months or more frequently if recommended by the 60. manufacturer or the Superintendent. Oil/water separators shall have a minimum capacity of 100 gallons. The area shall be graded or bermed in such a manner as to prevent the discharge of storm water to the sanitary sewer system. This requirement can be exempted if no washing is allowed on-site via rental/lease agreement and any hose bibs must be fitted with lock-outs or other connections controls and signage indicating that car washing is not allowed. 61. UNPOLLUTED WATER: Unpolluted water shall not be discharged through direct or indirect connection to the sanitary sewer system (PAMC 16.09.055). And PAMC 16.09.175 (b) General prohibitions and practices Exterior (outdoor) drains may be connected to the sanitary sewer system only if the area in which the drain is located is covered or protected from rainwater run-on by berms and/or grading, and appropriate wastewater treatment approved by the Superintendent is provided. For additional information regarding loading docks, see section 16.09.175(k) 62. COVERED PARKING: Drain plumbing for parking garage floor drains must be connected to an oil/water separator with a minimum capacity of 100 gallons, and to the sanitary sewer system (PAMC 16.09.180[b][9]) 63. ARCHITECTURAL COPPER: Per PAMC 16.09.180(b)(14) on and after January 1, 2003, copper metal roofing, copper metal gutters, copper metal down spouts, and copper granule containing asphalt shingles shall not be permitted for use on any residential, commercial or industrial building for which a building permit is required. Copper flashing for use under tiles or slates and small copper ornaments are exempt from this prohibition. Replacement roofing, gutters and downspouts on historic structures are exempt, provided that the roofing material used shall be prepatinated at the factory. For the purposes of this exemption, the definition of "historic" shall be limited to structures designated as Category 1 or Category 2 buildings in the current edition of the Palo Alto Historical and Architectural Resources Report and Inventory. 64. CONDENSATE FROM HVAC: Per PAMC 16.09.180(b)(5) Condensate lines shall not be connected or allowed to drain to the storm drain system. 65. COPPER PIPING: Per PAMC 16.09.180(b)(b) Copper, copper alloys, lead and lead alloys, including brass, shall not be used in sewer lines, connectors, or seals coming in contact with sewage except for domestic waste sink traps and short lengths of associated connecting pipes where alternate materials are not practical. The plans must specify that copper piping will not be used for wastewater plumbing. 66. MERCURY SWITCHES: Per 16.09.180(12) Mercury switches shall not be installed in sewer or storm drain sumps. 67. COOLING SYSTEMS, POOLS, SPAS, FOUNTAINS, BOILERS and HEAT EXCHANGERS: Per PAMC 16.09.205(a) It shall be unlawful to discharge water from cooling systems, pools, spas, fountains boilers and heat exchangers to the storm drain system. 68. Storm Drain Labeling: Per PAMC 16.09.165(h) Storm Drain Labeling Storm drain inlets shall be clearly marked with the words "No dumping - Flows to Bay," or equivalent. 2.b Packet Pg. 36 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) UTILITILES- WATER, GAS, WASTEWATER Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 69. The applicant shall submit a completed water-gas-wastewater service connection application - load sheet for City of Palo Alto Utilities. The applicant must provide all the information requested for utility service demands (water in fixture units/g.p.m., gas in b.t.u.p.h, and sewer in fixture units/g.p.d.). The applicant shall provide the existing (prior) loads, the new loads, and the combined/total loads (the new loads plus any existing loads to remain). 70. 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. 71. The applicant must show on the site plan the existence of any auxiliary water supply, (i.e. water well, gray water, recycled water, rain catchment, water storage tank, etc). 72. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading the existing utility mains and/or services as necessary to handle anticipated peak loads. This responsibility includes all costs associated with the design and construction for the installation/upgrade of the utility mains and/or services. 73. The applicant's engineer may require submitting flow calculations and system capacity study showing that the on-site and off-site water and sanitary sewer mains and services will provide the domestic, irrigation, fire flows, and wastewater capacity needed to service the development and adjacent properties during anticipated peak flow demands. Field testing may be required to determined current flows and water pressures on existing water main. Calculations must be signed and stamped by a registered civil engineer. The applicant is required to perform, at his/her expense, a flow monitoring study of the existing sewer main to determine the remaining capacity. The report must include existing peak flows or depth of flow based on a minimum monitoring period of seven continuous days or as determined by the senior wastewater engineer. The study shall meet the requirements and the approval of the WGW engineering section. No downstream overloading of existing sewer main will be permitted. 74. 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. 75. An approved reduced pressure detector assembly is required for the existing or new water connection for the fire system to comply with requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive (a double detector assembly may be allowed for existing fire sprinkler systems upon the CPAU’s approval). Reduced pressure detector assemblies shall be installed on the owner's property adjacent to the property line, within 5’ of the property line. Show the location of the reduced pressure detector assembly on the plans. 76. All backflow preventer devices shall be approved by the WGW engineering division. Inspection by the utilities cross connection inspector is required for the supply pipe between the meter and the assembly. 77. Existing wastewater laterals that are not plastic (ABS, PVC, or PE) shall be replaced at the 2.b Packet Pg. 37 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) applicant’s expense. 78. 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. 79. 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. 80. A separate water meter and backflow preventer is required to irrigate the approved landscape plan. Show the location of the irrigation meter on the plans. This meter shall be designated as an irrigation account an no other water service will be billed on the account. The irrigation and landscape plans submitted with the application for a grading or building permit shall conform to the City of Palo Alto water efficiency standards. 81. A new water service line installation for domestic usage may require. For service connections of 4-inch through 8-inch sizes, the applicant's contractor must provide and install a concrete vault with meter reading lid covers for water meter and other required control equipment in accordance with the utilities standard detail. Show the location of the new water service and meter on the plans. 82. A new water service line installation for irrigation usage is required. Show the location of the new water service and meter on the plans. 83. A new water service line installation for fire system usage is required. Show the location of the new water service on the plans. The applicant shall provide to the engineering department a copy of the plans for fire system including all fire department's requirements. 84. A new gas service line installation is required. Show the new gas meter location on the plans. The gas meter location must conform to utilities’ standard details. 85. A new sewer lateral installation per lot is required. Show the location of the new sewer lateral on the plans The applicant shall secure a public utilities easement for facilities installed in private property. The applicant's engineer shall obtain, prepare, record with the county of Santa Clara, and provide the utilities engineering section with copies of the public utilities easement across the adjacent parcels as is necessary to serve the development. 86. Where public mains are installed in private streets/PUEs for condominium and town home projects the CC&Rs and final map shall include the statement: “Public Utility Easements: If the City’s reasonable use of the Public Utility Easements, which are shown as P.U.E on the Map, results in any damage to the Common Area, then it shall be the responsibility of the Association, and not of the City, to Restore the affected portion(s) of the Common Area. This Section may not be amended without the prior written consent of the City”. 87. All existing water and wastewater services that will not be reused shall be abandoned at the main per WGW Utilities’ procedures. 88. 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 unless otherwise reviewed and approved by CPAU. New water, gas or wastewater 2.b Packet Pg. 38 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) services/meters may not be installed within 10’ or existing trees unless otherwise approved by CPAU. Maintain 10’ between new trees and new water, gas and wastewater services/mains/meters. Applicant’s engineer to provide profile drawings for all proposed WGW utility services/lateral crossing other existing utilities mains/services. 89. To install new gas service by directional boring, the applicant is required to have a sewer cleanout at the front of the building. This cleanout is required so the sewer lateral can be videoed for verification of no damage after the gas service is installed by directional boring. 90. All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto utility standards for water, gas & wastewater. 91. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Caltrans for all utility work in the El Camino Real right-of-way. The applicant must provide a copy of the permit to the WGW engineering section. 92. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Santa Clara county department of transportation for all utility work in the county road right-of-way. The applicant must provide a copy of the permit to the WGW engineering section. 93. The applicant shall obtain a construction permit from Santa Clara county valley water district if required for the utility service line to be installed by the City of Palo Alto Utilities. GREEN BUILDING 94. CALGreen Checklist: If the project is a new construction residential building, then the project must meet the California Green Building Code Mandatory requirements outlined in Chapter 4, (with local amendments) plus Tier 2 minimum pre-requisites and electives outlined in Appendix A4* (with local amendments). The project must hire a Green Building Special Inspector for a pre-permit third-party design review and a third-party green building inspection process. The project must provide a preliminary GB-1 sheet for planning entitlement approval. Submittal requirements are outlined on the Development Services Green Building Compliance webpage. http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/ds/green_building/compliance.asp PAMC 16.14.080 (Ord. 5393 § 1 (part), 2016) *Note: Projects subject to Tier 2 shall not be required to fulfill any requirements outlined in Appendix A4.2 Energy Efficiency. All energy efficiency measures are found in the 2016 California Energy Code and the Palo Alto Energy Reach Code PAMC 16.17 & 16.18. 95. EVSE Transformer Location: If the project triggers the EVSE requirements in Part B of these comments, then applicant must identify transformer requirements associated with EVSE mentioned and show the appropriate transformer location and size on the Planning Application. The applicant must contact the Electric Engineering Department within Utilities to confirm the any transformer requirements associated with the proposed EVSE. For questions, contact the Electric Engineering mainline at 650- 566-4500. Local Energy Reach Code for Residential Projects 96. Energy Efficiency Option 1: No Photovoltaic System. If the project includes new construction, then the project triggers the Local Energy Efficiency Reach Code. For all new single-family residential and multi- family residential, non-residential construction, the performance approach specified within the 2016 California Energy Code shall be used to demonstrate that the TDV Energy of the proposed new-single family residential or multi-family construction is at least: 10 percent less than the TDV Energy of the Standard Design if the proposed building does not include a photovoltaic system. (Ord. 5383 § 1 (part), 2.b Packet Pg. 39 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) 2016) Green Building Requirements for Residential Projects 97. CALGREEN CHECKLIST: If the project is a new construction residential building, then the project must meet the California Green Building Code Mandatory requirements outlined in Chapter 4, (with local amendments) plus Tier 2 minimum pre-requisites and electives outlined in Appendix A4* (with local amendments). The project must hire a Green Building Special Inspector for a pre-permit third-party design review and a third- party green building inspection process. The project must select from the City’s list of approved inspectors found on the Green Building Compliance Webpage. PAMC 16.14.080 (Ord. 5393 § 1 (part), 2016) *Note: Projects subject to Tier 1 or Tier 2 shall not be required to fulfill any requirements outlined in Appendix A4.2 Energy Efficiency. All energy efficiency measures are found in the 2016 California Energy Code and the Palo Alto Energy Reach Code PAMC 16.17 & 16.18. *Note: Projects subject to Tier 1 or Tier 2 shall not be required to fulfill any requirements outlined in Appendix A4.2 Energy Efficiency. All energy efficiency measures are found in the 2013 California Energy Code and the Palo Alto Energy Reach Code PAMC 16.17 & 16.18. 98. MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE: If the new residential development project has an aggregate (combined) landscape area equal to or greater than 500 square feet, the project is subject to the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) and the project will require a separate permit for Outdoor Water Efficiency. See Outdoor Water Efficiency Submittal Guidelines and permit instructions at the following link. http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/ds/green_building/outdoor_water_efficiency_.asp 99. RECYCLED WATER INFRASTRUCTURE FOR LANDSCAPE: If the project is either a new construction or a rehabilitated landscape and is greater than 1,000 square feet, then the project must install a dedicated irrigation meter related to the recycled water infrastructure. PAMC 16.14.230 (Ord. 5393 § 1 (part), 2016). The project applicant shall indicate the requirements on the Permit Plans. If the project is outside the boundaries of the recycled water project area and is greater than 1,000 square feet, then the project must install recycled water infrastructure for irrigation systems. PAMC 16.14.230 (Ord. 5393 § 1 (part), 2016). The project applicant shall indicate the requirements on the Permit Plans. 100. CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION: For residential construction projects subject to Tier 1 or Tier 2 requirements, the project must meet the enhanced construction waste reduction at 80% construction waste reduction. PAMC 16.14.260 (Ord. 5393 § 1 (part), 2016) The project shall use the Green Halo System to document the requirements. https://www.greenhalosystems.com 101. EVSE: If the project is a new multifamily residential project, then the project must comply with the City of Palo Alto Green Building Ordinance 5393. For resident parking, the project must supply one EVSE-Ready Outlet or EVSE Installed for each residential unit in the structure. For guest parking, the project shall provide Conduit Only, EVSE Ready Outlet, or EVSE Installed for at least 25% of the guest parking, among which at least 5% (and no fewer than one) shall be EVSE installed. See PAMC 16.14.420 for definitions on the types of EVSE parking. (Ord. 5393 § 2, 2016). 102. EVSE: If the project is a new multifamily residential project, with attached parking, then the project must comply with the City of Palo Alto Green Building Ordinance 5393. For resident parking, the project must supply one Conduit Only, EVSE-Ready Outlet or EVSE Installed for each newly constructed residence in a multi-family residential structure featuring (1) a parking space attached to the residence and (2) a shared electrical panel between the residence and parking space (e.g. a multi-family structure with tuck-under garages). See PAMC 16.14.420 for definitions on the types of EVSE parking. (Ord. 5393 § 2, 2016) 2.b Packet Pg. 40 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) 103. EVSE TRANSFORMER LOCATION: If the project triggers the EVSE requirements, then the applicant must identify transformer requirements associated with EVSE mentioned and show the appropriate transformer location and size on the Permit Plans. The applicant must contact the Electric Engineering Department within Utilities to confirm the any transformer requirements associated with the proposed EVSE. For questions, contact the Electric Engineering mainline at 650-566-4500. SECTION 6. Term of Approval. Site and Design Approval. 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 Site and Design 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. PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: Senior Assistant City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment 2.b Packet Pg. 41 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 R e c o r d o f L a n d U s e A c t i o n ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l) ) MIT I G A T I O N MON I T O R I N G + R EP O R T I N G PRO G R A M PR O J E C T N A M E 27 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l M u l t i - f a m i l y R e s i d e n t i a l Pr o j e c t AP P L I C A T I O N N U M B E R 16 P L N - 0 0 4 6 4 Wi n d y H i l l P r o p e r t y V e n t u r e s ( T o d S p i e k e r ) 53 0 E m e r s o n S t r e e t , S u i t e 1 5 0 Pa l o A l t o , C A 9 4 3 0 1 DA T E Ja n u a r y 1 9 , 2 0 1 8 AP P L I C A N T Th e D r a f t 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 f o r t h e 2 7 5 5 E l C a mi n o R e a l M u l t i - f a m i l y R e s i d e n t i a l P r o j e c t i d e n t i f i e s t h e mi t i g a t i o n m e a s u r e s t h a t w i l l b e i m p l e m e n t e d t o r e d u c e th e i m p a c t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e p r o j e c t . T h e C a l i f o r n i a En v i r o n m e n t a l Q u a l i t y A c t ( C E Q A ) w a s a m e n d e d i n 1 9 8 9 t o a d d Se c t i o n 2 1 0 8 1 . 6 , w h i c h r e q u i r e s a p u b l i c a g e n c y t o a d o p t a mo n i t o r i n g a n d r e p o r t i n g p r o g r a m f o r a s s e s s i n g a n d e n s u r i n g c o m p l i a n c e w i t h a n y r e q u i r e d m i t i g a t i o n m e a s u r e s a p p l i e d to p r o p o s e d d e v e l o p m e n t . A s s t a t e d i n se c t i o n 2 1 0 8 1 . 6 ( a ) ( 1 ) o f t h e P u b l i c R e s o u r c e s C o d e , “ . . . t h e p u b l i c a g e n c y s h a l l ad o p t a r e p o r t i n g o r m o n i t o r i n g p r o g r a m f o r t h e c h a n g e s m a d e to t h e p r o j e c t o r c o n d i t i o n s o f p r o j e c t a p p r o v a l , a d o p t e d in o r d e r t o m i t i g a t e o r a v o i d s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t s o n t h e e n v i r o n m e n t . ” Se c t i o n 2 1 0 8 1 . 6 a l s o p r o v i d e s g e n e r a l g u i d e l i n e s f o r i m p l e m en t i n g m i t i g a t i o n m o n i t o r i n g p r o g r a m s a n d i n d i c a t e s t h a t sp e c i f i c r e p o r t i n g a n d / o r m o n i t o r i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s , t o b e e n f o rc e d d u r i n g p r o j e c t i m p l e m e n t a t i on , s h a l l b e d e f i n e d a s p a r t of a d o p t i n g a 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 . Th e m i t i g a t i o n m o n i t o r i n g t a b l e l i s t s t h o s e m i t i g a t i o n m e a s u r e s t h a t w o u l d b e i n c l u d e d a s c o n d i t i o n s o f a p p r o v a l f o r t h e pr o j e c t . T o e n s u r e t h a t t h e m i t i g a t i o n m e a s u r e s a r e p r o p e r ly i m p l e m e n t e d , a m o n i t o r i n g p r o g r a m h a s b e e n d e v i s e d w h i c h id e n t i f i e s t h e t i m i n g a n d r e s p o n s i b il i t y f o r m o n i t o r i n g e a c h m e a s u r e . Ex h i b i t A 2. b Pa c k e t P g . 4 2 Attachment: Attachment B: Draft Record of Land Use Action (9060 : 2755 El Camino Real: Site and Ci t y o f P a l o A l t o Œ Mi t i g a t i o n M o n i t o r i n g + R e p o r t i n g P r o g r a m P a g e | 2 En v i r o n m e n ta l Im p a c t Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e Re s p o n s i b l e f o r Im p l e m e n t a t i o n Ti m i n g o f Co m p l i a n c e Ov e r s i g h t o f Im p l e m e n t a t i o n BIO L O G I C A L RES O U R C E S BI O -1 : N e s t i n g B i r d Pr o t e c t i o n Ne s t i n g B i r d S u r v e y s a n d A v o i d a n c e . Co n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e pr o j e c t a n d a n y o t h e r s i t e di s t u r b i n g a c t i v i t i e s t h a t w o u l d i n v o l v e ve g e t a t i o n o r t r e e r e m o v a l , s h a l l b e p r o h i b i t e d d u r i n g t h e g e n e r a l av i a n n e s t i n g s e a s o n ( F e b r u a r y 1 – A u g u s t 3 1 ) , i f f e a s i b l e . I f ne s t i n g s e a s o n a v o i d a n c e i s n o t f e a s i b l e , t h e a p p l i c a n t s h a l l r e t a i n a q u a l i f i e d b i o l o g i s t , a s a p p r o v e d b y t h e C i t y o f P a l o A l t o , t o co n d u c t a p r e c o n s t r u c t i o n n e s t i n g b i r d s u r v e y t o d e t e r m i n e t h e pr e s e n c e / a b s e n c e , l o c a t i o n , a n d a c t i v i t y s t a t u s o f a n y a c t i v e n e s t s on o r a d j a c e n t t o t h e p r o j e c t s i t e . T h e e x t e n t o f t h e s u r v e y b u f f e r ar e a s u r r o u n d i n g t h e s i t e s h a l l b e e s t a b l i s h e d b y t h e q u a l i f i e d bi o l o g i s t t o e n s u r e t h a t d i r e c t a n d i n d i r e c t e f f e c t s t o n e s t i n g b i r d s ar e a v o i d e d . T o a v o i d t h e d e s t r u c t i o n o f a c t i v e n e s t s a n d t o p r o t e c t th e r e p r o d u c t i v e s u c c e s s o f b i r d s p r o t e c t e d b y t h e M B T A a n d CF GC , n e s t i n g b i r d s u r v e y s s h a l l b e p e r f o r m e d n o t m o r e t h a n 1 4 da y s p r i o r t o s c h e d u l e d v e g e t a t i o n c l e a r a n c e a n d s t r u c t u r e de m o l i t i o n . I n t h e e v e n t t h a t a c t i v e n e s t s a r e d i s c o v e r e d , a s u i t a b l e bu f f e r ( t y p i c a l l y a m i n i m u m b u f f e r o f 5 0 f e e t f o r p a s s e r i n e s a n d a mi n i m u m b u f f e r o f 2 5 0 f e e t f o r r a p t o r s ) s h a l l b e e s t a b l i s h e d ar o u n d s u c h a c t i v e n e s t s a n d n o c o n s t r u c t i o n s h a l l b e a l l o w e d wi t h i n t h e b u f f e r a r e a s u n t i l a q u a l i f i e d b i o l o g i s t h a s d e t e r m i n e d th a t t h e n e s t i s n o l o n g e r a c t i v e ( i . e . , t h e n e s t l i n g s h a v e f l e d g ed an d a r e n o l o n g e r r e l i a n t o n t h e n e s t ) . N o g r o u n d d i s t u r b i n g ac t i v i t i e s s h a l l o c c u r w i t h i n t h i s b u f f e r u n t i l t h e q u a l i f i e d b i o l o g i s t ha s c o n f i r m e d t h a t b r e e d i n g / n e s t i n g i s c o m p l e t e d a n d t h e y o u n g ha v e f l e d g e d t h e n e s t . N e s t i n g b i r d s u r v e y s a r e n o t r e q u i re d f o r co n s t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s o c c u r r i n g b e t w e e n A u g u s t 3 1 a n d F e b r u a r y 1. Ap p l i c a n t o r de s i g n e e / C o n s t r u c t i o n co n t r a c t o r Pr i o r t o a n d du r i n g Co n s t r u c t i o n CP A P l a n n i n g De p a r t m e n t CUL T U R A L RES O U R C E S CR -1 : R e s o u r c e Re c o v e r y P r o c e d u r e s Re s o u r c e R e c o v e r y P r o c e d u r e s . In t h e e v e n t t h a t a r c h a e o l o g i c a l or p a l e o n t o l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e s a r e u n e a r t h e d d u r i n g p r o j e c t co n s t r u c t i o n , a l l e a r t h d i s t u r b i n g w o r k w i t h i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f t h e fi n d m u s t b e t e m p o r a r i l y s u s p e n d e d o r r e d i r e c t e d u n t i l a n ar c h a e o l o g i s t o r p a l e o n t o l o g i s t h a s e v a l u a t e d t h e n a t u r e a n d si g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e f i n d . A f t e r t h e f i n d h a s b e e n a p p r o p r i a t e l y mi t i g a t e d , w o r k i n t h e a r e a m a y r e s u m e . A N a t i v e A m e r i c a n re p r e s e n t a t i v e s h a l l b e r e t a i n e d t o m o n i t o r a n y m i t i g a t i o n w o r k as s o c i a t e d w i t h N a t i v e A m e r i c a n c u l t u r a l m a t e r i a l . Ap p l i c a n t o r de s i g n e e / C o n s t r u c t i o n co n t r a c t o r Du r i n g Co n s t r u c t i o n CP A P l a n n i n g De p a r t m e n t CR -2: H u m a n R e m a i n s Re c o v e r y P r o c e d u r e s Hu m a n R e m a i n s R e c o v e r y P r o c e d u r e s . If h u m a n r e m a i n s a r e un e a r t h e d , S t a t e H e a l t h a n d S a f e t y Co d e S e c t i o n 7 0 5 0 . 5 r e q u i r e s th a t n o f u r t h e r d i s t u r b a n c e s h a l l o c c u r u n t i l t h e C o u n t y C o r o n e r ha s m a d e t h e n e c e s s a r y f i n d i n g s a s t o t h e o r i g i n a n d d i s p o s i t i o n Ap p l i c a n t o r de s i g n e e / C o n s t r u c t i o n co n t r a c t o r Du r i n g Co n s t r u c t i o n CP A P l a n n i n g De p a r t m e n t 2. b Pa c k e t P g . 4 3 Attachment: Attachment B: Draft Record of Land Use Action (9060 : 2755 El Camino Real: Site and Ci t y o f P a l o A l t o Œ Mi t i g a t i o n M o n i t o r i n g + R e p o r t i n g P r o g r a m P a g e | 3 En v i r o n m e n t a l Im p a c t Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e Re s p o n s i b l e f o r Im p l e m e n t a t i o n Ti m i n g o f Co m p l i a n c e Ov e r s i g h t o f Im p l e m e n t a t i o n pu r s u a n t t o t h e P u b l i c R e s o u r c e s C o d e S e c t i o n 5 0 9 7 . 9 8 . I f t h e re m a i n s a r e d e t e r m i n e d t o b e o f N a t i v e A m e r i c a n d e s c e n t , t h e co r o n e r h a s 2 4 h o u r s t o n o t i f y th e N a t i v e A m e r i c a n H e r i t a g e Co m m i s s i o n . TC R -1 : U n a n t i c i p a t e d Di s c o v e r y P r o c e d u r e s Un a n t i c i p a t e d D i s c o v e r y o f T r i b a l C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . In t h e ev e n t t h a t c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s o f N a t i v e A m e r i c a n o r i g i n a r e id e n t i f i e d d u r i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n , a l l e a r t h d i s t u r b i n g w o r k w i t h i n th e v i c i n i t y o f t h e f i n d m u s t b e t e m p o r a r i l y s u s p e n d e d o r re d i r e c t e d u n t i l a n a r c h a e o l o g i s t h a s e v a l u a t e d t h e n a t u r e a n d si g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e f i n d a n d a n a p p r o p r i a t e N a t i v e A m e r i c a n re p r e s e n t a t i v e , b a s e d o n t h e n a t u r e o f t h e f i n d , i s c o n s u l t e d . I f th e C i t y d e t e r m i n e s t h a t t h e r e s o u r c e i s a t r i b a l c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e an d t h u s s i g n i f i c a n t u n d e r C E Q A , a m i t i g a t i o n p l a n s h a l l b e pr e p a r e d a n d i m p l e m e n t e d i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h s t a t e g u i d e l i n e s an d i n c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h N a t i v e Am e r i c a n g r o u p s . T h e p l a n w o u l d in c l u d e a v o i d a n c e o f t h e r e s o u r c e o r , i f a v o i d a n c e o f t h e r e s o u r c e is i n f e a s i b l e , th e p l a n w o u l d o u t l i n e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e t r e a t m e n t o f th e r e s o u r c e i n c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h t h e a r c h e o l o g i s t a n d t h e ap p r o p r i a t e N a t i v e A m e r i c a n t r i b a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . Ap p l i c a n t o r de s i g n e e / C o n s t r u c t i o n co n t r a c t o r Du r i n g Co n s t r u c t i o n CP A P l a n n i n g De p a r t m e n t GEO L O G Y A N D SOI L S GE O -1 : G e o t e c h n i c a l De s i g n C o n s i d e r a t i o n s Ge o t e c h n i c a l D e s i g n C o n s i d e r a t i o n s . Th e p r o j e c t a p p l i c a n t s h a l l im p l e m e n t a l l m e a s u r e s a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s s e t f o r t h i n t h e Ge o t e c h n i c a l I n v e s t i g a t i o n p r e p a r e d b y R o m i g E n g i n e e r s , I n c . i n Ja n u a r y 2 0 1 3 . T h e s e i n c l u d e b u t a r e n o t l i m i t e d t o : i Fo u n d a t i o n d e s i g n ( m a t f o u n d a t i o n , b a s e m e n t w a t e r pr o o f i n g , l a t e r a l l o a d s , a n d s e t t l e m e n t ) i Fo u n d a t i o n h o l d d o w n a n c h o r s i Ba s e m e n t w a l l s i Sl a b s - o n - g r a d e ( g e n e r a l s l a b c o n s i d e r a t i o n s a n d e xt e r i o r fl a t w o r k ) Ea r t h w o r k ( c l e a r i n g a n d s u b g r a d e pr e p a r a t i o n , m a t e r i a l f o r f i l l , te m p o r a r y s l o p e s a n d e x c a v a t i o n s , b a s e m e n t e x c a v a t i o n s u p p o r t , te m p o r a r y d e w a t e r i n g f o r b a se m e n t e x c a v a t i o n , s u r f a c e dr a i n a g e , a n d c o m p a c t i o n ) Ap p l i c a n t o r de s i g n e e / C o n s t r u c t i o n co n t r a c t o r Pr i o r t o i s s u a n c e of t h e g r a d i n g pe r m i t ; s h a l l b e sh o w n o n t h e bu i l d i n g p e r m i t CP A P u b l i c W o r k s De p a r t m e n t HAZ A R D S A N D HAZ A R D O U S MAT E R I A L S HA Z -1 C o n s t r u c t i o n Ri s k M a n a g e m e n t Mi t i g a t i o n Co n s t r u c t i o n R i s k M a na g e m e n t M i t i g a t i o n . Th e d e v e l o p e r s h a l l co m p l y w i t h t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d t a s k s i n t h e f i n a l R M P pr e p a r e d b y I C E S ( I C E S 2 0 1 4 ; i n c l u d e d i n A p p e n d i x E o f t h i s I n i t i a l Ap p l i c a n t o r de s i g n e e / C o n s t r u c t i o n Co n t r a c t o r Pr i o r t o b u i l d i n g pe r m i t a n d d u r i n g Co n s t r u c t i o n CP A P l a n n i n g De p a r t m e n t 2. b Pa c k e t P g . 4 4 Attachment: Attachment B: Draft Record of Land Use Action (9060 : 2755 El Camino Real: Site and Ci t y o f P a l o A l t o Œ Mi t i g a t i o n M o n i t o r i n g + R e p o r t i n g P r o g r a m P a g e | 4 En v i r o n m e n t a l Im p a c t Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e Re s p o n s i b l e f o r Im p l e m e n t a t i o n Ti m i n g o f Co m p l i a n c e Ov e r s i g h t o f Im p l e m e n t a t i o n St u d y ) t o r e d u c e e x p o s u r e o f c o n s t r u c t i o n w o r k e r s a n d su r r o u n d i n g r e c e p t o r s t o c o n t a m i n a t e d o n - si t e s o i l , g r o u n d w a t e r an d s o i l v a p o r d u r i n g d e v e l o p m e n t . T h e d e v e l o p e r s h a l l : i De v e l o p a S i t e H e a l t h a n d S a f e t y P l a n t h a t i n c l u d e s pr o v i s i o n s t o m o n i t o r a n d p r o t e c t c o n s t r u c t i o n w o r k e r s fr o m b e n z e n e o r T C E - c o n t a m i n a t e d s o i l v a p o r ex p o s u r e ; i De v e l o p a S t o r m W a t e r P o l l u t i o n P r e v e n t i o n P l a n f o r co n s t r u c t i o n t o p r e v e n t o r m i n i m i z e p o t e n t i a l co n t a m i n a t e d r u n o f f f r o m o n - s i t e s o i l s ; i Ob t a i n t h e r e l e v a n t u n d e r g r o u n d c o n s t r u c t i o n p e r m i t s an d a p p r o v a l s t o e n s u r e t h a t d e w a t e r i n g o f co n t a m i n a t e d g r o u n d w a t e r a n d s u b s e q u e n t d i s p o s a l or re u s e o f g r o u n d w a t e r i s c o n d u c t e d i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h lo c a l a n d s t a t e r e g u l a t i o n s ; i Fo l l o w r e c o m m e n d e d d u s t c o n t r o l m e a s u r e s t o re d u c e wo r k e r a n d p u b l i c e x p o s u r e t o o n - s i t e c o n t a m i n a n t s th a t m a y b e a t t a c h e d t o a i r b o r n d u s t p a r t i c l e s ; i Co n d u c t r e c o m m e n d e d s i t e p r e p a r a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s , in c l u d i n g m o n i t o r i n g w e l l d e s t r u c t i o n , i n a m a n n e r th a t en s u r e s c r o s s - c o n t a m i n a t i o n o f s i t e s w i l l n o t o c c u r ; i Co m p l y w i t h e x c a v a t i o n an d s h o r i n g g u i d e l i n e s re g a r d i n g t h e p r o p e r h a n d l i n g , s t o r a g e , a n d d i s p o s a l of co n t a m i n a t e d a n d / o r w e t i m p a c t e d s o i l t o e n s u r e t h a t wo r k e r s o r n e a r b y r e s i d e n t s w o u l d n o t b e e x p o s e d sh o u l d s u c h s o i l s b e e n c o u n t e r e d ; i Ch a r a c t e r i z e a n d p r o p e r l y r e u s e o r d i s p o s e o f ex c a v a t e d so i l t o e n s u r e t h a t c o n s t r u c t i o n w o r k e r s o r n e a r b y re s i d e n t s a r e n o t e x p o s e d t o c o n t a m i n a t e d s o i l ; Co m p l y w i t h g r o u n d w a t e r e x t r a c t i on a n d d i s p o s a l g u i d e l i n e s i n or d e r t o m i n i m i z e t h e v o l u m e o f e x t r a c t e d g r o u n d w a t e r a n d en s u r e t h a t a p p r o p r i a t e r e m e d i a t i o n oc c u r s . NOI S E N-1 : C o n s t r u c t i o n - Re l a t e d N o i s e Re d u c t i o n M e a s u r e s Co n s t r u c t i o n - R e l a t e d N o i s e R e d u c t i o n M e a s u r e s . Th e a p p l i c a n t sh a l l a p p l y t h e f o l l o w i n g m e a s u r e s d u r i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e pr o j e c t . i Mu f f l e r s . Co n s t r u c t i o n e q u i p m e n t s h a l l b e p r o p e r l y ma i n t a i n e d a n d a l l i n t e r n a l c o m b u s t i o n e n g i n e d r i v e n ma c h i n e r y w i t h i n t a k e a n d e x h a u s t m u f f l e r s a n d e n g i n e Co n s t r u c t i o n co n t r a c t o r Du r i n g Co n s t r u c t i o n CP A P l a n n i n g De p a r t m e n t 2. b Pa c k e t P g . 4 5 Attachment: Attachment B: Draft Record of Land Use Action (9060 : 2755 El Camino Real: Site and Ci t y o f P a l o A l t o Œ Mi t i g a t i o n M o n i t o r i n g + R e p o r t i n g P r o g r a m P a g e | 5 En v i r o n m e n t a l Im p a c t Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e Re s p o n s i b l e f o r Im p l e m e n t a t i o n Ti m i n g o f Co m p l i a n c e Ov e r s i g h t o f Im p l e m e n t a t i o n sh r o u d s , a s a p p l i c a b l e , s h a l l b e i n g o o d c o n d i t i o n a n d ap p r o p r i a t e f o r t h e e q u i p m e n t . D u r i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n , a l l eq u i p m e n t , f i x e d o r m o b i l e , s h a l l b e o p e r a t e d w i t h cl o s e d e n g i n e d o o r s a n d s h a l l b e e q u i p p e d w i t h pr o p e r l y o p e r a t i n g a n d m a i n t a i n e d m u f f l e r s , c o n s i s t e n t wi t h m a n u f a c t u r e r s ’ s t a n d a r d s . i El e c t r i c a l P o w e r . El e c t r i c a l p o w e r , r a t h e r t h a n d i e s e l eq u i p m e n t , s h a l l b e u s e d t o r u n c o m p r e s s o r s a n d si m i l a r p o w e r t o o l s a n d to p o w e r a n y t e m p o r a r y st r u c t u r e s , s u c h a s c o n s t r u c t i o n t r a i l e r s o r c a r e t a k e r fa c i l i t i e s . i Eq u i p m e n t S t a g i n g . A l l s t a t i o n a r y e q u i p m e n t s h a l l b e st a g e d a s f a r a w a y f r o m t h e a d j a c e n t s e n i o r l i v i n g ce n t e r a n d m u l t i - f a m i l y r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t a s fe a s i b l e . i Eq u i p m e n t I d l i n g . C o n s t r u c t i o n v e h i c l e s a n d e q u i p m e n t sh a l l n o t b e l e f t i d l i n g f o r l o n g e r t h a n f i v e m i n u t e s w h e n no t i n u s e . i Wo r k e r s ’ R a d i o s . A l l n o i s e f r o m w o r k e r s ’ r a d i o s s h a l l b e co n t r o l l e d t o a p o i n t t h a t th e y a r e n o t a u d i b l e a t se n s i t i v e r e c e p t o r s n e a r c o n s t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t y . i Sm a r t B a c k - u p A l a r m s . M o b i l e c o n s t r u c t i o n e q u i p m e n t sh a l l h a v e s m a r t b a c k - u p a l a r m s t h a t a u t o m a t i c a l l y ad j u s t t h e s o u n d l e v e l o f t h e a l a r m i n r e s p o n s e t o am b i e n t n o i s e l e v e l s . A l t e r n a t i v e l y , b a c k - u p a l a r m s s h a l l be d i s a b l e d a n d r e p l a c e d w i t h h u m a n s p o t t e r s t o en s u r e s a f e t y w h e n m o b i l e c o n s t r u c t i o n e q u i p m e n t i s mo v i n g i n t h e r e v e r s e d i r e c t i o n . i Di s t u r b a n c e C o o r d i n a t o r . T h e a p p l i c a n t s h a l l d e s i g n a t e a di s t u r b a n c e c o o r d i n a t o r w h o s h a l l b e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r re s p o n d i n g t o a n y l o c a l c o m p l a i n t s a b o u t c o n s t r u c t i o n no i s e . T h e n o i s e d i s t u r b a n c e c o o r d i n a t o r s h a l l de t e r m i n e t h e c a u s e o f t h e n o i s e c o m p l a i n t ( e . g . , st a r t i n g t o o e a r l y , b a d m u f f l e r , e t c . ) a n d s h a l l r e q u i r e th a t r e a s o n a b l e m e a s u r e s w a r r a n t e d t o c o r r e c t t h e pr o b l e m b e i m p l e m e n t e d . A t e l e p h o n e n u m b e r f o r t h e di s t u r b a n c e c o o r d i n a t o r s h a l l b e c o n s p i c u o u s l y p o s t e d at t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n s i t e . i Ad d i t i o n a l N o i s e A t t e n u a t i o n T e c h n i q u e s . D u r i n g t h e de m o l i t i o n , s i t e p r e p a r a t i o n , g r a d i n g , a n d b u i l d i n g ph a s e s o f c o n s t r u c t i o n , t e m p o r a r y s o u n d b a r r i e r s r a t e d to S o u n d T r a n s m i s s i o n C l a s s 2 0 o r h i g h e r s h a l l b e 2. b Pa c k e t P g . 4 6 Attachment: Attachment B: Draft Record of Land Use Action (9060 : 2755 El Camino Real: Site and Ci t y o f P a l o A l t o Œ Mi t i g a t i o n M o n i t o r i n g + R e p o r t i n g P r o g r a m P a g e | 6 En v i r o n m e n t a l Im p a c t Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e Re s p o n s i b l e f o r Im p l e m e n t a t i o n Ti m i n g o f Co m p l i a n c e Ov e r s i g h t o f Im p l e m e n t a t i o n in s t a l l e d a n d m a i n t a i n e d f a c i n g t h e n o r t h w e s t e r n a n d no r t h e a s t e r n b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e p r o j e c t s i t e . T e m p o r a r y so u n d b a r r i e r s s h a l l b l o c k l i n e o f s i g h t b e t w e e n n o i s e - ge n e r a t i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n e q u i p m e n t a n d a d j a c e n t re s i d e n t i a l w i n d o w s a n d s h a l l b e p l a c e d a s c l o s e t o t h e so u r c e e q u i p m e n t a s f e a s i b l e . M o b i l e s o u n d b a r r i e r s ma y b e u s e d a s a p p r o p r i a t e t o a t t e n u a t e c o n s t r u c t i o n no i s e n e a r t h e s o u r c e e q u i p m e n t . D u r i n g t h e b u i l d i n g co n s t r u c t i o n p h a s e , t e m p o r a r y s o u n d b a r r i e r s s h a l l b e ap p l i e d t o g e n e r a t o r s a n d c r a n e s u s e d o n - s i t e . Mo n i t o r i n g . T h e a p p l i c a n t s h a l l r e t a i n a q u a l i f i e d a c o u s t i c en g i n e e r t o m o n i t o r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e c o n s t r u c t i o n n o i s e d u r i n g a l l ph a s e s o f c o n s t r u c t i o n . T h e a c o u s t i c e n g i n e e r s h a l l d o c u m e n t ho u r l y n o i s e l e v e l s a t t h e p r o j ec t s i t e b o u n d a r y a d j a c e n t t o se n s i t i v e r e c e p t o r s a n d p r o v i d e t h i s d a t a t o t h e C i t y . I f m e a s u r e d ho u r l y n o i s e l e v e l s f r o m c o n s t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t y e x c e e d 7 0 d B A b y at le a s t 1 0 d B A f o r t w o o r m o r e h o ur s i n a d a y , t h e a c o u s t i c en g i n e e r s h a l l n o t i f y t h e C i t y w i th i n 2 4 h o u r s , a n d t h e a p p l i c a n t sh a l l i m p l e m e n t a d d i t i o n a l n o i s e a t t e n u a t i o n m e a s u r e s s u f f i c i e n t to a c h i e v e t h i s n o i s e s t a n d a r d . TRA N S P O R T A T I O N /T RA F F I C T-1: B u s S t o p R e l o c a t i o n Co o r d i n a t i o n Bu s S t o p R e l o c a t i o n C o o r d i n a t i o n . Th e a p p l i c a n t s h a l l c o o r d i n a t e wi t h t h e C i t y o f P a l o Al t o , t h e S a n t a C l a r a C o u n t y V a l l e y Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n A u t h o r i t y , a n d t h e S t a n f o r d M a r g u e r i t e S h u t t l e op e r a t o r t o r e l o c a t e t h e b u s s t o p d u ri n g c o n s t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s t o mi n i m i z e d i s r u p t i o n t o t r a n s i t o p e r a t i o n . Ap p l i c a n t o r d e s i g n e e Pr i o r t o a n d du r i n g co n s t r u c t i o n CP A P l a n n i n g De p a r t m e n t 2. b Pa c k e t P g . 4 7 Attachment: Attachment B: Draft Record of Land Use Action (9060 : 2755 El Camino Real: Site and Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID # 8910) Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 3/15/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: 2755 El Camino Real: Site and Design (2nd Formal) Title: PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 2755 El Camino Real [16PLN-00464]: Recommendation on Applicant's Request for Approval of a Site and Design Review to Allow Construction of a 57 Unit Multi-family Residence at the Project Site. The Project Also Includes a Request for a Zoning Code Text Amendment Ordinance to Create a New Workforce Combining District and a Zoning Map Amendment Ordinance to Apply the New District to the Project Site. Council Will Consider These Ordinances Along With the Site and Design Review Application. Environmental Assessment: An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was Published for Public Comment on January 19, 2018 and Circulation Ended on February 20, 2018. Zoning District: Public Facilities (PF). 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) take the following action(s): 1. Consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration included in Attachment K together with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan included in the Record of Land Use Action in Attachment B. 2. Recommend approval of the Site and Design Application to Council based on the findings and subject to conditions of approval included in the Record of Land Use Action in Attachment B. Report Summary The applicant requests approval of a four-story multi-family residential building with 57 3 Packet Pg. 69 2.c Packet Pg. 48 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 dwelling units and one level of below grade parking. The project is intended to test the idea of smaller, “workforce” housing units in transit served areas and is located on a former VTA Park and Ride lot, which is zoned Pubic Facilities (PF) and designated as Major Institution/Special Facilities in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The project is subject to Site and Design review. The Major Institution/Special Facilities (MISP) land use designation allows for higher density multi-family housing close to transit centers. However, the City of Palo Alto Zoning Code does not currently allow multi-family housing on PF zoned properties. In addition, the project would not conform to the development standards of the PF zone district, particularly with respect to density or residential floor area. Therefore, the applicant also proposes the following legislative actions, which would be required to accommodate the proposed development: 1. Amendment of the Zoning Code to create a new combining district that could be applied to PF zoned properties within 0.5 miles of major fixed rail transit; and 2. Amendment of the Zoning Map to apply the new combining district to the subject site. The draft ordinances for these requested legislative actions are subject to the Planning and Transportation (PTC) and Council’s purview. Consistent with other development projects, the ARB’s recommendations focuses on whether the project is consistent with the ARB findings, which are outlined in Attachment B. Following preliminary reviews by the City Council, PTC, and ARB, the applicant has made a number of project changes, which are presented later in this report. The updated analysis section below reflects these changes. Key issues for the ARB to consider as they provide comments and a recommendation to the City Council include the following: x Consistency with the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines x Consistency with the Context-based Design Criteria x Prominence of the corner entrance design x Relationship between the building and the street x Overall massing/articulation Background In October 2017, the City Council adopted the City’s Comprehensive Plan with updated transportation, land use, and housing policies. A week later, the Council endorsed a colleagues’ memo seeking to advance housing related policies to encourage diverse housing near jobs, transit and services (Attachment C). On February 12th, the Council endorsed a Housing Work Plan (https://tinyurl.com/Housing-Work-Plan) with some minor amendments. Included in this plan is a task to advance a workforce housing ordinance that eliminates unit densities and explores car-light housing projects near transit served areas. This project and the accompanying ordinances advance this housing policy. 3 Packet Pg. 70 2.c Packet Pg. 49 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 The concept of the subject project and ordinance was discussed by the City Council in September 12, 2016 when it considered a prescreening application for the project. The subject project has been termed a “pilot” project to allow a workforce housing development and to evaluate the effectiveness of reaching the intended tenant mix, transportation demand management (TDM) strategies, and on-site parking at a ratio of approximately one space per unit. Such a project would necessarily require modification to base district zoning regulations. The subject application was filed in December 2016. The PTC conducted a study session on June 14, 2017 to provide preliminary feedback on the parameters of the Zoning Code Text Amendment and the Site and Design Application. The PTC subsequently reviewed the revised plans and the proposed ordinances on January 31, 2018 and recommended that Council approve both ordinances as well as the Site and Design application. The staff report from that meeting can be found online at: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63062. A video recording of the meeting is available at: http://midpenmedia.org/planning-transportation-commission-63/. The ARB conducted a study session on June 15, 2017 to provide preliminary feedback on the proposed design. An earlier staff report, which includes background information on the site and the neighborhood context, is included in Attachment D. The complete report is also available online at: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/58267 and a video recording of the meeting is available at: http://midpenmedia.org/architectural-review-board- 64/. The Board’s comments and associated changes to the project are summarized in the following table. Staff’s analysis of these changes is included in the analysis section. ARB Comments/Direction Project Revisions Open Space: Several board members expressed concern about the podium open space at the rear of the building, which would be shaded by the proposed building and could create privacy concerns between the site and adjacent properties. Multiple board members indicated support for a rooftop deck to provide open space. The applicant has revised the project by removing the podium open space. Some open space is now provided at the rear of the building at grade and other space is provided on a rooftop deck located above the third level. Areas for landscape planting are also provided along the interior lot lines. Page Mill Road Streetscape: Board members expressed concern about the streetscape along Page Mill Road. Specifically, they commented on the proximity of the ground floor balconies to the public sidewalk and about the lack of articulation along the ground floor as the building transitioned toward the adjacent Silverwood complex. The streetscape along Page Mill Road has been revised. The previous design included a blank wall immediately abutting the sidewalk and with windows approximately six feet above grade. It also included patio areas for some of the first floor residents located behind an approximately one foot deep planter. The new design includes three feet of landscaping between the sidewalk and the planter along the length of the building as well as a planter of more 3 Packet Pg. 71 2.c Packet Pg. 50 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 than three feet in depth along the length of the building. Ground floor balconies have been removed. Landscape Screening: Board members expressed concerns about the underground garage extending to the property line along the interior lot lines and how this affected landscaping. The basement has been redesigned to allow three to five feet of landscaping along all portions of the interior lot lines. Bicycle Parking: Several board members identified access to below grade bicycle parking as a significant concern. Many felt that the sloped driveway access to bike parking would be dangerous. One board member noted that short-term bicycle parking spaces would more likely be used for long-term bicycle parking given their convenience. Bicycle parking has been revised to be located at grade, as discussed further below. Vehicle Parking: Board members asked several questions about the lift parking and the functionality of the system. At least one board member noted that they would not be supportive of all spots being provided in a lift system configuration. Board members were not supportive of the tandem configuration. Several noted that there should be space for short-term pick-up and drop-off options (such as for uber/lyft or delivery services). Additional details regarding the lift parking systems are provided on Sheets 38 and 39 of the plans. Vehicle parking count, configuration, and the overall design of travel has been revised as discussed further below. Additional guest parking spaces have been added and a short-term pick- up/drop-off along El Camino Real is proposed. Roofline: Board members noted that the adjacent buildings have sloped roofs and felt that the project could be more responsive to the neighborhood if a roof, or appearance of a roof were provided given the neighborhood context. It was noted that the design did not provide clear distinction between the body and the roof, as recommended in the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. The roofline has not been revised. See further discussion below under the analysis with respect to the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. Exhaust Fan Tower: Board members expressed concern about the exhaust fan tower located one foot from the property line between the site and the adjacent Silverwood condominium complex. It was noted that this would likely discourage use of the corridor between the two sites. The exhaust fan has been removed and incorporated into the building design that vents to the roof. Massing and Floor Area: Board members The applicant revised the project to reduce 3 Packet Pg. 72 2.c Packet Pg. 51 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5 commented on the overall size of the project, recommending that the FAR and overall massing be reduced. One member noted that the dark brown stucco should be broken up more to reduce massing. the overall floor area ratio to 2.0:1 (previously 2.4:1) by reducing the size of some of the units, providing more studio units, and providing a total of 57 units versus the originally proposed 60 units. Revisions were made on all four sides of the building to break up the massing of the walls through articulation, changes in materials, the addition of windows, and the addition of vegetation/planters. Glass for Hallways: One board member noted that adding glass at the end of the long hallways would help to bring more natural light into the building. Additional glass has been added at the hallway ending along the interior lot line to bring more natural light into this hallway and break up massing. Glass has not been added for the hallway ending at the stairs along the rear of the building. Entrance: One board member noted that he liked the overall design but he felt the entrance at the corner of El Camino Real could be more prominent to really make a statement at this intersection. One commissioner voiced this same comment at the most recent hearing. It was also noted that the entrance doors were too small. The entrance has been redesigned to include more greenery, more bicycle parking, and create a better space through the use of planters and a bench. The curb at the corner would be tightened to create more space for pedestrians. Daylight/Air: Board members expressed concern about allowing reasonable daylight/air for adjacent residences. The building has been pulled back approximately 20 feet from the rear property line (previously about 6 feet), providing more space for daylight and air between the project site and the adjacent Silverwood condominium complex. The majority of the building paralleling the Sunrise Assisted Living complex is also set back more than 20 feet from the property line. Where it is closer than 20 feet at the second level (above the porte cochère), the third and fourth level are set back further. Project Description As shown in the plan set and discussed in the applicant’s project description in Attachments N and M respectively, the applicant is proposing to construct a 50-foot tall, four-story, multi- family apartment building that would include 40 studio units and 17 one-bedroom units (57 total units). A location map of the project site is included in Attachment A. 3 Packet Pg. 73 2.c Packet Pg. 52 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6 All units would be for rent (i.e. they would not be for sale as condominiums). Twelve (12) units would be deed restricted for a period of 99 years; six would be restricted at 140% of the County’s Average Median Income (AMI) and six would be restricted at 150% of AMI.1 Forty-five units would not be deed restricted, but would be designed to accommodate members of the local workforce. In addition to deed restricted units, the applicant would pay an affordable housing impact fee, estimated to be approximately $603,000. The building includes a below-grade parking garage with 64 parking spaces; 60 of these spaces would be provided via automated “puzzle parking” lift systems. Four additional at grade parking spaces are provided. A Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 2.0:1 is proposed for the project. The applicant also proposes to dedicate an easement to the County of Santa Clara to allow for the future buildout of a right-hand turn lane and bike lane on Page Mill Road. Analysis2 The subject property is currently a vacant parking lot located at the northeastern corner of El Camino Real and Page Mill Road. Adjacent zoning and land uses include the four-story Sunrise Assisted Living Senior Housing Facility to the northwest and the three-story Silverwood Condominium Complex to the northeast, both of which are located on parcels zoned Planned Community (PC). The PC Ordinance for these adjacent developments allow for a higher density, height, and FAR than what would have been allowed under the previous zoning regulations at these sites, which was CN and RM-40 for the Sunrise Assisted Living and RM-40 for the Silverwood Condominiums. Across El Camino Real is the PF zoned Mayfield Soccer Complex; across Page Mill Road there are retail uses, including a two-story AT&T building, and a recently approved mixed-use development project on parcels zoned Service Commercial (CS) at 425 Page Mill. The ten-story Palo Alto Square Office complex in the southwest corner of El Camino Real and Page Mill Road is zoned PC. Palo Alto Square and the nearby Stanford Research Park provide extensive employment opportunities within the City of Palo Alto. The project is located within 0.5 mile of the California Avenue Caltrain Station and within 200 feet of extensive VTA transit options (See Attachment E). Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Area Plans, and Guidelines3 The project site is designated ‘Major Institutions/Special Facilities’ in the Comprehensive Plan, 1 The AMI for a family of four is used as a baseline and is currently $113,300. However, for smaller units with one or two person occupancy, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) calculates median income at $79,300 and $80,560, respectively. As discussed later in this report, there is no standard definition of “workforce housing” in State law, however California Government Code Section 65008 defines “middle income housing” as 150 percent of the median in the County and this has been considered synonymous with the term workforce housing in the proposed ordinance. 2 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 The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan is available online: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/topics/projects/landuse/compplan.asp 3 Packet Pg. 74 2.c Packet Pg. 53 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 7 which is defined as “institutional, academic, governmental, and community service uses and lands that are either publicly owned or operated as non-profit organizations. Examples are hospitals and City facilities. Consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s encouragement of housing near transit centers, higher density multi-family housing may be allowed in specific locations.” Multi-family housing near a transit center would be consistent with this land use designation. Density allowances for housing within this land use designation are not defined. The subject property is not publicly owned or operated by a non-profit organization; it is privately owned. Goals and programs outlined in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourage housing within proximity to public transit, employment opportunities, and commercial areas as well as a range in types of units to support the City’s fair share of regional housing needs. In particular, Housing Program H2.1.1 encourages consideration of amendments to the zoning code to allow high-density residential for mixed use or single use projects in commercial areas within one-half mile of fixed rail stations. The project would encourage high-density housing within one-half mile of transit and in close proximity to adjacent commercial uses, consistent with this program goal. In addition, Program H2.1.2 encourages high density residential development close to urban amentities and where there is sufficient roadway capacity. The proposed development would be located within close proximity to a wide variety of urban amenities, transit, and employment opportunities and there is sufficient roadway capacity. Comprehensive Plan Policies N-5.4 requires that all potential sources of odor and/or toxic air contaminants be adequately buffered, or mechanically or otherwise mitigated, to avoid odor and toxic impacts that violate relevant human health standards. As discussed in the environmental analysis, Volatile Organic Compounds that may be present in the soils could be impactful to future residents if a vapor mitigation system is not installed in the subterranean garage. In addition Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC) screening levels were determined to exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Managagement District’s thresholds and could be impactful to future residents if not addressed. In order to ensure compliance with Comprehensive Plan Policy N- 5.4, conditions of approval 10 and 11 are included in the Record of Land Use Action. The findings in the draft Record of Land Use Action in Attachment B include a complete consistency analysis with the City of Palo Alto 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project, as conditioned, was found to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Compliance4 The Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) does not currently have a zoning designation that would allow for the proposed development. The project site is in the Public Facilities (PF) zone district. The PF district is designed to accommodate governmental, public utility, educational, and community service or recreational facilities. Multi-family housing is not a permitted or conditionally permitted use in the PF Zone District, though the new Comprehensive Plan encourages consideration of zoning amendments to encourage housing near transit centers. 4 The Palo Alto Zoning Code is available online: http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/palo-alto_ca 3 Packet Pg. 75 2.c Packet Pg. 54 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 8 During the Council prescreening, some councilmembers expressed concerns regarding rezoning the site from a PF Zone. In response to this concern, the applicant has proposed to maintain the underlying zoning of the site but has requested a Zoning Code Text Amendment to create a new combining district that would permit residential uses in the PF Zone and test strategies for development of workforce housing. Provided City Council adopts the Zoning Code Text Amendments to establish the workforce combining district and apply the combining district to the project site, the proposed project would comply with all applicable requirements outlined in the municipal code. A detailed review of the project’s consistency with the development standards of the new combining district is included in Attachment F. The PTC has recommended support for, and Council will consider, the proposed ordinances following ARB recommendation on the Site and Design application. Staff is addressing minor revisions to the Zoning Code Text Amendment ordinance based on additional input from members of the public and the PTC during the PTC hearing in January, which will be included in the staff report for Council. These revisions would not affect the site design or the project’s consistency with the regulations that would be established under the new zoning code text amendment. Context-based Design Criteria The text for the new combining district would require compliance with the context-based design criteria for multi-family residential developments, which are outlined in PAMC Section 18.13.060. A detailed review of the project’s consistency with the context-based design criteria is included in Attachment G. As detailed in the analysis, the proposed project provides appropriate transitions between adjacent uses, which are similar in nature and/or complement the proposed use. Parking is provided primarily below-grade and designed to avoid views of parking from the public right-of-way as well as adjacent uses. It should be noted that several improvements were made since the June 2017 ARB hearing to improve the project’s consistency with the context-based design criteria. In particular, the landscaping along Page Mill Road provides better separation between ground floor residences and the public right-of- way while also improving the pedestrian experience by breaking up massing through the addition of vegetation (trees, grass, and planters) and better defining the base and body of the structure while still maintaining evidence of habitation. However, the project could still be more consistent with criterion 1, “massing and building facades,” in that the ground floor of the building does not include many windows or doors on the ground floor that are oriented toward El Camino Real and the roof line does not accentuate significant elements of the building such as the entry. Although further design considerations could be made for greater consistency with this criterion, staff believes that the findings for consistency with this criterion can be made, as outlined in Attachment G. Therefore, staff concludes that the project, on balance, is consistent with the context-based design criteria. Performance Criteria The text for the new combining district requires compliance with the performance criteria, consistent with the intent of PAMC Section 18.23.010, which requires the criteria for all developments in the multi-family, commercial, and industrial zones. A detailed review of the 3 Packet Pg. 76 2.c Packet Pg. 55 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 9 project’s consistency with the Performance Criteria is included in Attachment H. As detailed in the analysis, the proposed project appropriately locates noise producing equipment and the refuse enclosure so as to reduce noise and vibration; provides parking below grade; improves vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle access at and around the site; and provides appropriate lighting, consistent with the performance criteria. Therefore, staff concludes that the project is consistent with the performance criteria. South El Camino Real Design Guidelines and El Camino Real Design Guidelines The project is subject to the requirements of both the South El Camino Real and El Camino Real Design Guidelines and the El Camino Real Design Guidelines. In addition, this site is located within the California Avenue Strategic Site Pedestrian-Oriented Node and is specifically identified as a “strategic site for implementation of the City’s vision of El Camino Real, serving as a critical anchor for extending the momentum of the California Avenue intersection down to Page Mill Road.” The guidelines note that buildings on the corner of Page Mill Road and El Camino Real should feature a prominent corner, extensive windows, and pedestrian amenities such as canopies, seating, and planters. In addition, it states that the former VTA site, in particular, should be redeveloped with a more intensive use of the site, and that a mixed-use building with structured/subsurface parking would be desirable. The proposed project does not include a mixed-use building but proposes a more intensive use of the site in a manner that is consistent with other City housing goals. A complete analysis of the project’s consistency with the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines is included in Attachment I. On balance staff believes the project to be consistent with the El Camino Real design guidelines. However, staff noted that the following changes could improve the project’s consistency with specific sections of the guidelines: x Guidelines Section 3.3.4: The transformer could be better screened; however, staff notes that the applicant has made significant revisions based on staff’s comments to reduce the visibility of the transformer by moving it from the frontage along El Camino Real to the rear of the building along Page Mill Road. Given the required clearance space for the transformer and City of Palo Alto utility’s restrictions on the placement of the transformer, further screening of the transformer would be difficult. All other equipment, including noise producing equipment such as HVAC is screened. x Guidelines Section 4.1.5: The project could have more clear definition between the base, body and roof. However, it is noted that revisions such as the addition of the roof deck above the third level, revisions to building setbacks, the addition of planters and other greenery, and changes to the driveway entrance have improved the overall definition between the base, body, and the roof. x Guideline Section 4.3.2: Greater transparency could be provided along the El Camino Real façade. Staff had also suggested in the PTC staff report that improvements to the design could be made for consistency with Guidelines Section 3.3.3 by further breaking up massing above the porte 3 Packet Pg. 77 2.c Packet Pg. 56 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 10 cochère and above the main entrance. The plans submitted since the PTC review include additional windows above the porte cochère facing the interior lot line and a change in material above the entrance to break up these walls. Although staff would prefer additional greenery to help break up the massing, these also serve to reduce massing in these identified locations and improve consistency with this section of the guidelines. The project is also consistent with the El Camino Real Design Guidelines. In particular, automobile parking and HVAC equipment is screened from the public right-of-way, the project does not use bright colors intended to attract attention, there is not superfluous detail added in the architecture, and perimeter landscaping as well as the required good neighbor fence is provided. Open Space Design As noted previously, board members expressed concerns for the podium open space design and shaded open space area. The revised plans have addressed these concerns by eliminating the podium design for open space and perimeter landscaping. Much of the open space area is now provided on a roof deck above the third floor. Privacy is still maintained for adjacent residences at the Silverwood Condominium by providing landscaping along the northeastern edge of the deck area for screening. The deck also helps to break up the massing along Page Mill Road as well as at the rear of the property facing the Silverwood Condominiums and the height limit is still maintained. Parking In response to input from the ARB, PTC and Council, vehicle parking has been revised significantly. The previous plans included 45 parking spaces for a total of 60 units (30 studio and 30 one bedroom units). The current plans include 68 parking spaces for 57 units, including 40 studio units and 17 one bedroom units. Under conventional zoning code requirements, the proposed development would require 94 parking spaces (75 parking spaces for residents [1.25 per studio and 1.5 per one-bedroom] and 19 parking spaces for guests [33 percent if parking is assigned]), which could be reduced by up to a 30 percent using available adjustments, for a total of 65 spaces. Where all spaces were previously provided in a lift system, some spaces have now been provided outside the lift system for guest parking to address comments from the ARB. The workforce housing combining district regulations would require one space per unit, including guest parking. The applicant proposes a total of 68 parking spaces in total, equivalent to 1.2 spaces per unit, which exceeds this requirement. Sixty-four (64) of these spaces are provided below grade and four are provided at grade. In accordance with condition of approval 12, six spaces would be provided for guests, including two within the lift system and four at grade. Parking Design Sixty of the vehicle spaces are provided via three individual lift systems located below-grade. The separate lift systems allow for concurrent use of the different lifts so that more than one 3 Packet Pg. 78 2.c Packet Pg. 57 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 11 car can park or be retrieved at a given time. PAMC Section 18.54.020(b) allows for off-street parking to be provided via a lift system when used for multi-family residential uses. Based on previous comments from the ARB, the lifts have been redesigned so that the systems do not include tandem spaces. The project is consistent with parking screening requirements and lift stall size requirements outlined in this section of the code. In accordance with PAMC Section 18.54.020(b)(4)(D), additional information is required to be submitted to address proposed maintenance, emergency procedures, and backup systems for the lift system. Condition of Approval 13 is included to address this requirement. Bicycle Parking A total of 57 long-term and six short-term bike parking spaces are required under the PAMC and would continue to be required with the combining district overlay. The applicant is providing 69 long-term bike parking spaces, including one cargo bicycle parking space, and sixteen short-term spaces, an increase in both in comparison to the previous plans. All bicycle parking is provided at grade, consistent with board member’s recommendations, making it more easily accessible and convenient for residents to use. Overall the number of bicycle parking spaces, both short term and long term have increased Multi-Modal Access The project proposes right-turn in/right-turn out access on El Camino Real via a drive aisle leading to four at grade parking spaces for guest parking and 64 below grade parking spaces. The proposed vehicular site access is in approximately the same location as the existing site access along El Camino Real and the curb cut at Page Mill Road would be removed. The main entrance is at grade, making it pedestrian and bicycle friendly. The applicant has proposed to dedicate for public access a portion of the existing property to the County of Santa Clara and to upgrade the curb to facilitate future improvements proposed by the County. These improvements include adding a new right-turn lane, which would help to reduce congestion at this intersection, as well as a new bicycle lane, improving safety for cyclists. Additional curb improvements are proposed at the corner of Page Mill and El Camino to tighten the curb radius, thereby allowing for more sidewalk space and calming traffic turning onto El Camino Real. This change also reduces pedestrian crossing time at this intersection. This change would not negatively affect any current or planned bicycle lanes, nor would it affect traffic patterns on El Camino, which is already wide enough to allow parking and a bus stop in front of the project site. As discussed in the TIA and shown in the project plans, the project will also improve the existing bus stop along the El Camino Real frontage, placing it slightly closer to the intersection, which was agreed upon in coordination with VTA. An improved bus stop bench with a shelter is also proposed by the applicant to replace the existing bus stop bench. A space for easy pick-up and drop-off for transportation network companies (e.g, lyft and uber) or delivery services will be provided immediately north of the drive aisle on El Camino in the location of the existing bus stop. The Traffic Impact Analysis is included as Appendix G of the environmental analysis in 3 Packet Pg. 79 2.c Packet Pg. 58 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 12 Attachment K. As summarized in this analysis and incorporated into the environmental analysis, the project would not have a significant impact on traffic or circulation. Transit Demand Management A Draft Transit Demand Management (TDM) Program is included in Attachment J. The TDM program includes the following key components: x Caltrain GoPasses for all residents x Valley Transit Authority EcoPasses for all residents x Bicycles for resident use x Carpool Matching Services x Parking unbundled from the housing unit x Stipend ($100 monthly) to use toward transportation network companies (e.g. uber, Lyft) for those that do not own a car In addition to what is proposed in the TDM program, the City’s transportation division has included Conditions of Approval of the project outlining additional components that must be included in the TDM program. The URBEMIS model is used to analyze estimated potential trip reductions. As outlined in the TIA, a nine percent reduction in vehicle trips is assumed in accordance with Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority‘s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines based on the project’s proximity to transit. As stated in the TDM plan prepared by Nelson Nygaard, the TDM plan is anticipated to reduce vehicle trips by an additional 35 percent. The local preference required in accordance with the new ordinance would likely further reduce single-occupancy vehicle use and VMT by requiring the applicant to lease to tenants based on proximity of the housing to the resident’s place of employment. Consistency with Application Findings As outlined in Attachment B, Record of Land Use Action, the project is consistent with the Architectural review findings. In particular, the proposed development activates a high-visibility corner of the City within an identified transit-oriented pedestrian node along El Camino Real, converting a paved parking lot to a high-density multi-family residential use. The use of the site is consistent with goals outlined in the comprehensive plan for the City, which generally encourage housing in transit-oriented locations. As discussed above, staff also finds the project to be consistent with the context based design criteria, performance criteria, and the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. The PTC has also found the project to be consistent with the Site and Design findings included in Attachment B, which are included for the ARB’s reference. 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, a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was 3 Packet Pg. 80 2.c Packet Pg. 59 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 13 circulated on January 19, 2018 and circulation ended on February 20, 2018. The Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration is included in Attachment K. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan is included as Exhibit A in the Record of Land Use Action in Attachment B. Mitigation has been included, in particular, to reduce construction noise; to ensure the safety of workers and nearby residents from contaminants that may be present in soils; and to ensure the proper treatment of any cultural or tribal cultural resources in the unlikely event that they are found to present during construction. With the incorporation of mitigation, all impacts have been reduced to a less than significant level. It should be noted that the proposed project, as designed, would not have a significant impact on traffic circulation. However, a retail commercial or office use in this same location would command increased parking and likely result in increased single-occupancy vehicle trips to the area, which would be more impactful on traffic than the proposed project. 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 2, which is 12 days in advance of the meeting. Postcard mailing occurred on February 28, 2018 which is 15 days in advance of the meeting. Public Comments Twelve oral comments were received during the prescreening with Council on September 12, 2016. The minutes from the prescreening hearing include a transcript of these oral comments and can be found here: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/54337. Some comments expressed support for the project primarily due to its contribution to new housing stock within the City. Comments that expressed concerns related primarily to traffic impacts, parking (both parking loss and concerns with reduced parking for the units), rezoning from a public facilities zoning, and the project’s inconsistency with the adjacent condominiums. Two additional oral comments were received during the PTC hearing on June 14, 2017 and no public comments were received during the ARB study session on June 15, 2017. Comments received during the PTC hearing are included in the transcript from the hearing at: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/61559. At the formal PTC hearing on January 31, 2018 there were an additional fifteen speakers expressing various opinions about the project and the proposed ordinances, many of which were similar in nature to the comments received at Council in 2016. A Transcript of these oral comments can be found here: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/ptc/default.asp. An additional 137 written comments (including one comment letter signed by 123 individuals) were received regarding the proposed project. Several comments noted concerns related to re- zoning of the property and parking/traffic and several t expressed general support for some of the ideas but offered advice as to other considerations that should be required as part of the 3 Packet Pg. 81 2.c Packet Pg. 60 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 14 proposal. The other 124 comments expressed support for the project and urged the support of additional transit-oriented housing. These written comments are included in Attachment L. Alternative Actions In addition to the recommended action, the Architectural Review Board may: 1. Recommend approval of the project with modified findings or conditions; 2. Continue the project to a date (un)certain; or 3. Recommend the project be denied based on revised findings. Report Author & Contact Information ARB5 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: x Attachment A: Location Map (PDF) x Attachment B: Draft Record of Land Use Action (DOCX) x Attachment C: Colleagues Memo (PDF) x Attachment D: June 15, 2017 ARB Staff Report w/o Attachments (PDF) x Attachment E: Public Transportation Map (PDF) x Attachment F: Zoning Comparison Table (DOCX) x Attachment G: Context-Based Design Criteria (DOCX) x Attachment H: Performance Criteria Consistency (DOCX) x Attachment I: South El Camino Real Design Guidelines (DOCX) x Attachment J: Transit Demand Management Plan (PDF) x Attachment K: Environmental Analysis (DOCX) x Attachment L: Public Comments (PDF) x Attachment M: Project Description (PDF) x Attachment N: Project Plans (DOCX) 5 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org 3 Packet Pg. 82 2.c Packet Pg. 61 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t C : M a r c h 1 5 , 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 ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 Un i t s ( 3 r d ATTACHMENT D ZONING COMPARISON TABLE 2755 El Camino Real, 16PLN-00464 Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.30(J) (WORKFORCE HOUSING COMBINING DISTRICT ) Regulation Required Existing Proposed Minimum Site Specifications Site Area (ft) None required 19,563 sf (.0049 ac) No change Site Width (ft) 113 No change Site Depth (ft) 188 No change Minimum Setbacks Front Yard (ft) Subject to decisionmaking body (1) No structures existing 11 feet, 9 inches Rear Yard (ft) 10 feet(2) N/A (parking lot) 18 feet, 9 inches to building; 3 feet to subterranean garage/ramp Interior Side Yard 5 feet(2) N/A 5 feet Interior Side Yard if abutting residential zone district (ft) (other than an RM-40 or PC zone) 10 feet N/A N/A Street Side Yard (ft) Subject to decisionmaking body (1) N/A 8 feet, 2 inches at closest point Maximum Site Coverage None Required None Required None Required Landscape/Open Space Coverage 20% (3) N/A 27% Usable Open Space 75 square feet (sf) per unit N/A 77 square feet per unit Maximum Height (ft) Standard 50’ N/A 50’ 2.d Packet Pg. 62 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 n s i s t e n c y A n a l y s i s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Within 150 ft. of a residential district (other than an RM-40 or PC zone) abutting or located within 50 feet of the site 35’, except as limited by applicable daylight plane requirements N/A N/A Daylight Plane for lot lines abutting one or more residential zoning districts 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 Maximum Residential Density (net) None Required N/A None Required Maximum Residential Floor Area Ratio (FAR) – Residential-Only Projects 2.0:1 Parking Lot 2.0:1 Vehicle Parking Parking requirements shall be no less than one space per unit or bedroom, whichever is greater. The decisionmaking body may reduce this standard based on a parking study. Any incidental retail shall be subject to the parking requirements outlined in Section 18.52. 34 existing 68 parking spaces provided (~1.2 per unit, inclusive of guest parking) Bicycle Parking Bicycle parking requirements shall be in accordance with Section 18.52.040. All bicycle parking must be provided at grade. (for proposed project: 57 long-term; 6 short term) N/A 69 long term [including 1 cargo]; 16 short term TDM Plan A transportation demand management (TDM) plan shall be required and shall comply with the TDM pursuant to Section 18.52.050(d) and associated administrative guidelines. N/A See TDM plan in Attachment J 2.d Packet Pg. 63 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 n s i s t e n c y A n a l y s i s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Notes: 1. A 12-foot sidewalk width is required along El Camino Real frontage. 2. In order to encourage below-grade parking, garage ramps and subterranean structures may encroach into the required setback provided that sufficient landscaping is still provided between the project site and adjacent properties. 3. Landscape/Open space may be any combination of landscaping or private and common open spaces. 4. Useable open space includes a combination of common and private open space. 2.d Packet Pg. 64 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 n s i s t e n c y A n a l y s i s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Attachment E Context-Based Design Criteria 2755 El Camino Real 16PLN-00464 Pursuant to PAMC 18.13.060(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 multi-family residential district. The purpose is to encourage development in a multi- family residential district to be responsible to its context and compatibility with adjacent development as well as to promote the establishment of pedestrian oriented design. 1. Massing and Building Facades Project Consistency Massing and building facades shall be designed to create a residential scale in keeping with Palo Alto neighborhoods and to provide a relationship with street(s) Given the busy roadways adjacent the project site, the project is appropriately set back from both Page Mill Road and El Camino Real in a manner that is consistent with recommendations for exclusively residential projects along El Camino Real, as outlined in the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. The building orients the main entrance and entrance courtyard toward the corner to activate it, as is recommended in the guidelines for this specific project site as well as other corner sites in general. Projecting porches provide a human scale and signify habitation; however, these are appropriately placed so as not to be located too close to the sidewalk, which could impact the privacy and safety of future residents. Landscaping provides appropriate buffering while still maintaining a human scale to these ground floor residences. The project includes a flat roof, which is consistent with the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines. 2. 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 site is located adjacent PC Zoned properties that allow for higher density and higher Floor Area Ratio than in most areas of the city, similar to the proposed development. The projects adjacent the site are also three to four stories tall (approximately 45 feet and approximately 39 feet for the Sunrise Assisted Living and Silverwood condominiums, respectively), where the project is four stories tall (approximately 49 feet) with a portion of the fourth floor being a roof deck, which reduces massing along the frontage and adjacent to the three-story building along Page Mill Road. 3. 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 can be made in the affirmative in that the project provides open space with private balconies for most of the residents and a large roof deck. The roof deck provides a better location for common open space than an at grade facility at the rear of the building because it provides more solar access and views of the City. The roof deck and balconies are oriented toward the street to increase eyes on the street in accordance with the context- 2.e Packet Pg. 65 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : C o n t e x t B a s e d D e s i g n C r i t e r i a ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) based design criteria. Landscaping is provided along the north side adjacent the Silverwood condominiums to maintain privacy for residences at the condominium. Planters, trees, and use of colored pavers are all proposed as part of the common open space design. 4. Parking Design Parking needs shall be accommodated but shall not be allowed to overwhelm the character of the project or detract from the pedestrian environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project’s parking is located and accessed at the rear of the site, and the majority of parking spaces are located within a below-grade garage. Existing landscape screening at the Sunrise Assisted Living Center complex site as well as the new proposed landscaping provided along the perimeter of the proposed development provides screening between these existing sites and the four above grade parking space proposed along the interior of the building. 5. 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; the project site is less than one-half acre. 6. Housing Variety and Units on Individual Lots Multifamily projects may include a variety of unit types such as small-lot detached units, rowhouses/townhouses, and cottage clusters in order to achieve variety and create transitions to adjacent existing development Not applicable. The project is a multi-story rental project located on a single existing lot rather than many units on individual lots. The proposed 49’3” tall building is in keeping with the scale of the adjacent Sheridan building at approximately 45 feet with a stair tower at a maximum height of 50’ 3” and the adjacent Silverwood Condominium complex is approximately 40 feet. 7. Sustainability and Green Building Design Project design and materials to achieve sustainability and green building design should be incorporated into the project. Green building design considers the environment during design and construction. Green building design aims for compatibility with the local environment: to protect, respect, and benefit from it. In general, sustainable buildings are energy efficient, water conserving, durable and nontoxic, with high- quality spaces and high recycled content materials. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project is subject to the California Green Building Code (CalGreen, Tier 2) and includes a variety of sustainable elements. 2.e Packet Pg. 66 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : C o n t e x t B a s e d D e s i g n C r i t e r i a ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Attachment F Performance Criteria 18.23 2755 El Camino Real 16PLN-00464 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 or Site and Design 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 includes placement of the trash/recycling enclosure within the underground parking garage and within appropriately sized containers. This enclosure is located as far from abutting residences as reasonably possible. The site includes chutes for all three waste streams from all floors as well as accessible access to the enclosure for all users. 18.23.030 Lighting To minimize the visual impacts of lighting on abutting or nearby residential sites and from adjacent roadways. The proposed exterior lighting is sufficient to provide safe circulation and is directed downward to reduce glare and impacts to adjacent residents. The footcandles along all property lines are generally 0.1 or less. 18.23.040 Late Night Uses and Activities 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 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. The project is exclusively multi-family residential; therefore this requirement is not applicable. 18.23.050 Visual, Screening and Landscaping 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 The project is adjacent to residential uses within nonresidential zones and therefore provides cypress trees along the interior lot lines between the site and adjacent uses. In addition, vines will be used along the rear of the building to increase greenery and visually reduce massing. Mechanical equipment is screened in that it is primarily located 2.f Packet Pg. 67 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t F : P e r f o r m a n c e C r i t e r i a ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) provide privacy screening between properties where appropriate. within the building on the first floor/basement or otherwise located on the roof and screened by parapet walls 18.23.060 Noise and Vibration 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 parking for the project is primarily located below ground with all lift systems enclosed so as to reduce noise for adjacent residential uses. All refuse storage and equipment is also located within the basement with only HVAC equipment provided on the roof. The CEQA analysis outlines noise levels and concludes that noise levels from this equipment would be less than significant; they would not have a distinguishable effect on existing noise levels at the site. 18.23.070 Parking The visual impact of parking shall be minimized on adjacent residentially zoned properties or properties with existing residential uses located within nonresidential zones. The project’s parking is located below grade with only guest parking provided at grade. These guest parking spots are located along the interior lot line and screened from adjacent uses with planned trees, as well as existing trees on the adjacent property. 18.23.080 Vehicular, Pedestrian and Bicycle Site Access 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 site circulation facilitates easy access for all modes of transportation. The project includes short- term and long-term bike parking at grade. The project eliminates a curb cut along Page Mill Road/Oregon Expressway creating a safer pedestrian experience. The project will also dedicate land to the right-of-way to facilitate the County’s plan to include a new right turn lane and a new bike lane along Page Mill Road to improve bike safety. 18.23.090 Air Quality The requirements for air quality are intended to buffer residential uses from potential sources of odor and/or toxic air contaminants. No proposed uses on the project site would produce odor or toxic air. Future uses are required to comply with these performance standards. 18.23.100 Hazardous Materials 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 1. The proposed residential use does not include storage of hazardous materials. 2.f Packet Pg. 68 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t F : P e r f o r m a n c e C r i t e r i a ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Attachment G South El Camino Real Design Guidelines 2755 El Camino Real, 16PLN-00464 The South El Camino Real Design Guidelines are intended to provide additional standards to be used in the design and evaluation of developments along South El Camino Real. The purpose of the guidelines is primarily to provide a set of guiding principles to anticipate, evaluate, and encourage appropriate development. The guidelines are intended to create a dynamic mixed-use corridor that serves the diverse needs of the City and to enhance the desirability of the proposed developments for the site residents and users and for abutting neighbors and businesses. South El Camino Real Guideline Project Consistency Section 2.2 Pedestrian Oriented Nodes, Section 2.2.1., California Avenue Area District Vision: Development in the California Avenue Segment of El Camino Real should reinforce the area's origin as an historical node with an urban, pedestrian-oriented design approach that takes advantage of California Avenue's relatively high levels of pedestrian activity. x New Buildings should front El Camino Real with prominent facades. Street level facades should have numerous pedestrian amenities. x Renovations of existing buildings should support the area as an activity node with carefully-conceived pedestrian amenities, and improved materials and signage. The proposed project is a new building along El Camino Real and includes a prominent entrance area at the corner of El Camino Real and Page Mill. The project includes balconies and windows facing El Camino Real though few are on the ground floor due to the proposed design. The project includes low planter walls that can also serve as seating areas as well as a new, sheltered bus stop. New street trees provide improvements to the pedestrian experience along the right-of-way. Section 2.2.1.2 California Avenue Area Strategic Sites: Page Mill Road/El Camino Real Corner. Buildings should feature a prominent corner to anchor the large-scale intersection. The El Camino Real frontage should feature extensive windows, as well as pedestrian amenities such as an arcade or canopy, seating, and planters. Valley Transit Authority Transit Center at the corner of Page Mill Road and El Camino Real/Former Nursery site. Existing park-and-ride use should be incorporated into a more intensive use of the site that would take advantage of the prominent location. A mixed-use building with structured/subsurface parking would be desirable. Aggregation of adjacent underutilized parcels such should be encouraged. The El Camino Real frontage at this site features planters and includes a canopy around the entrance area. The design also includes low planter walls that could serve as seats as well as an improved bus stop shelter with bench and a small bench at the entrance. The design does not include extensive windows along the El Camino Real frontage, which may be more desirable. Although there is no arcade proposed, the revised design includes a porte cochère that leads to parking in the rear instead of including a parking garage entrance, which is more desirable and breaks up massing along the frontage. Consistent with the recommendations for this specific lot, this is a more intensive use of the site. Although a mixed-use building was identified as being desirable, more recently, Council has expressed an interest in encouraging more residential uses at this site given the proximity to existing offices (PAS and SRP) and transit. Parking is subsurface, consistent with the guideline. Aggregation of adjacent parcels is unlikely given the existing active uses of adjacent sites. 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 : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 3.1.1 Effective Sidewalk Width: In order to create a 12-foot effective sidewalk width along El Camino Real, buildings should be set back from the El Camino Real property line sufficient to maintain 12 feet of effective sidewalk width, inclusive of the existing width of the public sidewalk (measured from the back-of-curb to the building face). The project provides an effective 12 foot sidewalk width, consistent with this policy. Note that the building is set back further in accordance with guidelines for exclusively residential projects. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.1.2 Sidewalk Setback Design: The design of the sidewalk setback should create an urban "downtown" character. The sidewalk must be at least 12 feet wide, typically paved continuously from curb to building face. The sidewalk area should feature amenities such as street trees with tree grates, planters, benches and removable cafe furniture. Tree wells with ADA-compatible metal grates should be consistently located within the effective sidewalk area adjacent to the buildings. Street trees with ADA compatible grates are provided both on El Camino Real and Page Mill Road. The bus stop is being relocated and improved along the El Camino Real frontage to provide covered seating for bus/shuttle users. A small gathering area identifies the entrance at the corner of Page Mill and El Camino Real and provides planters, benches, and short-term bicycle parking. The building is set back further, consistent with guidelines for exclusively residential projects. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.1.3 Build-to lines: Buildings should be built up to the sidewalk to reinforce the definition and importance of the street. It is recommended that buildings be designed with "build-to" lines, where the building mass/façade is built up to the setback line continuously, except for articulation such as doorways, recessed window bays, small plazas, driveways, and small parking areas to the sides of buildings. Where the facade is set back from the built-to line, low walls and hedges are encouraged to maintain the continuity of the streetscape. The project is not built up to the sidewalk; however, the project meets the guidelines under Section 7 for exclusively residential projects. The guidelines for exclusively residential projects require that the build-to line be set back 20 to 24 feet from El Camino Real. Landscaping and a defined entrance gathering area at the corner of Page Mill Road and El Camino Real help to maintain the continuity of the streetscape both along the frontage and along the street side yard facing Page Mill Road. Sufficient sidewalks as well as street trees improve the streetscape in comparison to existing conditions. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.1.3a: On parcels located in node areas, a minimum of seventy-five percent of the El Camino Real frontage must be comprised of building mass built up to the build-to/setback line. More than 75 percent of the El Camino Real frontage is built up to the build-to/setback line of 20-24 feet. The project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.1.4 Corner Parcels: For corner parcels, the building should be built up to the setback line in order to define the corner. The remaining portion of the side street frontage should include features such as low walls, trellises and hedges to continue the street wall. The main entrance is located at the corner of Page Mill Road and El Camino Real. The building is built up to the exclusively residential setbacks at this corner and provides a well-defined entrance area with low planter wall seating and landscaping. Along the side street, low walls with landscaped planters provide privacy for the residential units while still defining the streetscape. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.1.4a: In node areas, the building should continue at the side street setback line for a minimum of fifty percent of the side street setback property frontage The side street setback used for exclusively residential projects is between 8-12 feet for the first 50 feet and 16 feet thereafter. The project is located between 8-12 feet from the property line along Page Mill Road and then transitions further back as it transitions to the adjacent development. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. 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 : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 3.1.5 Minimum Height: Buildings should have a minimum height of 25 feet in order to provide a presence in scale with El Camino real. The proposed building is 49’3” tall where the adjacent Sheridan building is approximately 45 feet with a stair tower at a maximum height of 50’ 3” and the adjacent Silverwood Condominium complex is approximately 40 feet. The project is consistent with this guideline in that the proposed project provides a presence along El Camino Real. Section 3.1.6 Entries: All buildings should have entries facing El Camino Real. Recessed entries that provide space for seating and gathering are encouraged. The entrance faces the corner of El Camino Real and Page Mill Road. The entrance area includes landscaping and provides low planter walls that also serve as temporary seating area. Although this area could include more seating to better serve as a "gathering space" the proposed space is appropriate for the exclusively residential use given the high-volume traffic at this intersection. The project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.1.7. Increased setback: Increased setbacks are permitted only if the additional setback provides a public amenity such as a wider sidewalk, outdoor seating or outdoor dining. If a building is to be set back beyond the recommended dimension, the setback should not exceed 20 feet so that a comfortable pedestrian environment and well defined streetscape is established. Low walls should be used to define streetscape along the edge of the increased setback. The majority of the project is set back 20-24 feet along El Camino Real in accordance with Section 7 of the guidelines, which addresses exclusively residential projects. The majority of the building is set up to the 20- 24 foot build to line. A small portion of the frontage is dedicated to an activated corner with the entrance to the building, landscaping, a bench, and low walls to define the courtyard entrance area. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.1.8 Relationship to context: New buildings should relate to and compliment surrounding buildings and street frontages. Projects should relate to adjacent buildings with complimentary building orientations and compatible landscaping Most of the building is set back approximately 20 feet or more from the adjacent residences to provide daylight/space between the existing adjacent buildings and the proposed project. This is also designed so that the building is built up to the recommended street setbacks in order to define the streetscape. The new building is similar in height to the adjacent buildings. Mature landscaping has been provided on adjacent residences and new landscaping is proposed along the streetscape and interior lot lines for screening purposes. This landscaping would be compatible with adjacent landscaping. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.1.1 Limited Driveway Access From El Camino Real: New developments should minimize driveways and curb cuts to reduce impacts on El Camino Real traffic flow and on-street parking. Where curb cuts are unavoidable, width should be minimized, and their impact lessened by extending the sidewalk paving material across the driveway. Although the project includes driveway access from El Camino Real, this would not be a change from existing conditions at the project site; which already include a curb cut to access the existing parking lot. The curb cut along Page Mill Road will be removed. Staff explored options for the driveway in coordination with transportation and determined that maintaining the driveway on El Camino Real was preferred for traffic flow. The curb cut for this drive aisle is the minimum necessary to accommodate access. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. 2.g Packet Pg. 71 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 3.2.2 Shared driveways: Where two parking lots abut and it is possible for a curb cut and driveway to serve several properties, owners are strongly encouraged to enter into shared access agreements. The agreements must include deed restrictions so that the shared access is transferred to future owners Not applicable; the driveways for adjacent sites could not be shared with the proposed project. Section 3.2.3 Side Street Driveway Access: Where possible, driveway access to frontage properties should be from intersecting side streets Although the proposed project includes access to and from El Camino Real; the adjacent side street is also a major thruway rather than a smaller side street. Transportation evaluated traffic flow options and indicated that maintaining the access along El Camino Real rather than Oregon Expressway was preferred. Therefore, although a different location would be more consistent with the guidelines, it is not the preferred design choice for traffic flow and the project is still consistent with this guideline. Section 3.2.5 Limitation on parking Lot frontage: Surface parking areas, including driveways, should not occupy more than 50 percent of a property frontage along El Camino Real, and continuous parking lot frontage may not exceed 120 feet. The project includes parking primarily below grade and the access driveway does not occupy more than 50 percent of the frontage along El Camino Real. Access to the garage and at grade parking would not be visible from El Camino Real or Page Mill Road. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.2.6 Landscape Treatment of Parking Setback: The landscape setback for surface parking areas should be planted with trees and shrubbery that provide a strong visual edge along the street. Trees should be spaced no less than 20 feet on center to achieve a canopy effect. Low walls and shrubs can also provide an effective way to screen the lower portion of parked cars from the sidewalk. Not applicable. Only four parking spaces are provided at grade and these parking spaces are not visible from the street. The perimeter of the site is landscaped with trees to provide a visual buffer and greenery. Section 3.2.7 Ample Landscaping: landscaping such as trees, shrubs, vines, or groundcover should permeate parking areas. Open parking areas should have a 6-foot landscape buffer along adjacent properties. Every six spaces should be separated by 4-foot minimum width landscape "fingers" planted with trees. Landscaping is provided along the property line. Only four surface parking spaces are proposed, therefore, landscape fingers are not necessary. Although six feet of landscaping would be preferred, it is not feasible, and the 5 foot landscaping buffer meets the intent of this guideline. Section 3.2.8 Architectural Elements: Architectural elements such as pergolas, arcades and low fences can further enhance the function and appearance of parking areas. Care should be taken to maintain sight lines within surface parking areas, with landscaping no higher than 30 inches in height. The design includes a porte cochère that leads to parking in the rear. Additional parking is provided below grade. Landscaping at the entrance maintains the line- of-sight triangle and provides only low shrubs or trees with a canopy taller than 10 feet to avoid line of site concerns. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.2.9 Easily Understood Wayfinding: Parking lots should be arranged so that drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians can find their ways easily. Generously scaled pathways should traverse parking areas so that pedestrian access is clear, safe, and pleasant. The grade level drive aisle and guest parking is located in an easily accessible area and all bicycle parking and pedestrian access is provided at grade. The four parking spots at grade level have easy access to the adjacent lobby and bike parking area. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. 2.g Packet Pg. 72 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 3.2.10 Pedestrian Passageways: Pedestrian passageways leading from rear parking areas to the El Camino Real sidewalk are encouraged. Passageways should be animated with features that provide interest such as windows, trellises, benches and planting. The porte cochère that leads to the rear parking is also easily accessible for pedestrians and bicyclists. However, urban forestry has recommended adding climbing vines to the exterior of the porte cochère. Landscaping is provided between the adjacent property and the proposed access from El Camino Real. Section 3.2.11 Shared Use Agreements: Property owners are encouraged to enter into agreements for the shared use of parking spaces. Where peak demand differs and spaces can be shared, the number of required spaces could be reduced at the discretion of the City, as permitted in the Zoning Ordinance. Where peak demand is effectively the same, the required number of spaces should still be provided, but by agreement, access between parking lots can be "shared" allowing people visiting one business to remain parked and walk to other businesses in the area. Not applicable; the proposed project does not include multiple uses to allow for shared parking. Immediately adjacent uses are similarly residential so shared use of those parking spaces would not be appropriate. Section 3.3.1 Usable Amenities: Landscape and hardscape features should not just be visually appealing, but also function as open space amenities to be used and enjoyed. Open Spaces such as plazas, seating areas and activity areas should be located at building entries, along or near well- travelled pedestrian routes to encourage frequent and spontaneous use. Amenities should be functional as well as visually appealing, with seating, tables, canopies and covering trellises. Landscape and hardscape features create privacy for the residential use but also provide a relationship with the street. Although the project open space (other than landscaping) is not located on the ground level along well traveled pedestrian routes, the common space is appropriately designed given the high-volume traffic at this intersection. The amenity space is functional as well as visually appealing, with seating, a BBQ, a fireplace, and landscaping. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.3.2 Site Landscaping: Landscaping should permeate the site, creating "outdoor rooms." The site plan should treat the site as an integrated building and landscape composition, rather than a building surrounded by obligatory strips of landscape buffer. Parking areas, spaces between buildings and property edges should be designed with the same care that is given to prominent areas. Given the size of the site and required setbacks, minimal space is available for creating "outdoor rooms." However, the applicant has created a useful entrance area that is defined through the use of a canopy, low planter walls with vegetation, and a bench. Landscaping screening is provided between interior lot lines and where more space is available at the rear a pet play area is provided. Street trees are also provided, consistent with these guidelines. Section 3.3.3 Property Edges: Property edges and spaces between buildings should be designed with the same care that is given to prominent areas. Consideration has been given to all sides of the property; however, staff would recommend increased greenery, particularly above the entrance and on the porte cochère, particularly between lot lines. Section 3.3.4 Screening: All mechanical equipment should be screened from view from all public right-of-ways, pedestrian paths and adjacent residences. Screens should be designed to be consistent with the building architecture in form, material and detail, as well as the site's landscape elements. All mechanical equipment is well screened, with the exception of the transformer, which has been revised from its previous location on El Camino Real. The applicant has explored multiple locations for the transformer and has located as far from El Camino Real as feasible. Although further screening of the transformer from Page Mill would be desirable; the required eight feet of clearance in front of the transformer is required. 2.g Packet Pg. 73 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 3.3.5 Low Walls: Low walls should be used for screening parking areas and mechanical equipment, for providing spacial definition and for providing seating areas near entries. Low walls provide spacial definition; creating privacy for residential units while still maintaining a connection with the streetscape. It can also be used for seating along the frontages and adjacent the site entrance. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.3.6 Materials: Wall materials should be consistent and compatible with building materials. High quality, durable materials such as masonry, cement, stucco and decorative metal railing is encouraged. The project uses high quality building materials and materials for the low walls for planters throughout the project site. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 3.3.7 Paving: Accent paving at plazas, seating areas, driveway entries and pedestrian pathways is strongly encouraged. Internal streets and drives are encouraged to use pavers and other accent paving to minimize impervious surface and for visual appearance. Although the project does not include accent paving for the driveway entry; which could be an improvement, the project does include accent paving at the site entrance to improve and activate the corner. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. 3.3.8 Cooperative Design Approach: A cooperative, rather than defensive design approach is encouraged when adjacent uses are compatible. As more properties engage in a cooperative design approach, areas will feel more like a neighborhood or district, as opposed to a collection of individual projects, and will experience more efficient and effective pedestrian and vehicle circulation. Given the design of the existing adjacent sites, a more cooperative design approach would be difficult while still providing appropriate screening. The applicant explored options for providing a pathway between the project site and Sheridan Avenue, connecting into the existing pathway at Sunrise Assisted Living; however, the owner at the adjacent property expressed concerns for the safety of their residents, some of which suffer from dementia, if gates are unsecured. 3.3.9 Privacy of Adjacent residential uses: Privacy of existing residential properties must be protected through screening and landscaping. Fencing, shrubbery, trellises and high windows should be used to protect views into residential properties. Fencing along the property line and screening trees help to protect views into residential properties. The common deck area also provides landscaping along the northeastern side facing the Silverwood condominiums to allow use of the deck without creating privacy concerns for adjacent residences. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.1.1 Rear daylight plane: Buildings abutting established residential areas shall have a rear daylight plane. For buildings abutting established residential areas, no structure except for television and radio antennas, chimneys and flues, shall extend above or beyond a daylight plane measured five feet above the rear property line and an angle of forty-five degrees (consistent with zoning regulations). Not applicable. Although the adjacent use along the rear of the property is residential; the site is not zoned residential. The adjacent property is a PC zone and the use of the site is high density and three levels. The building on the project site is set back further than the building on the adjacent property (10 feet) and no daylight plane is required for that adjacent property. The new ordinance would require that the daylight plan match those on adjacent properties (consistent with what is already required on PF Zoned properties). Section 4.1.2 Side and Front Daylight Planes-No requirement: it is recommended that buildings in the south El Camino Real area not to be required to have front and side daylight planes (this is a proposed modification to current zoning regulations). The project does not include a front or side daylight plane, consistent with the proposed zoning development standards. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.1.3 Reinforce the definition of the street: Building mass should reinforce the definition and importance of the street. Buildings shall conform to the build-to lines as outlined in Section 3 of the design guidelines to create a consistent streetwall. Not applicable. The project follows setbacks consistent with Section 7 of the design guidelines, which include different build-to lines for exclusively residential projects. 2.g Packet Pg. 74 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 4.1.4 Building Composition: Building mass should be articulated to reflect a human scale, both horizontally and vertically. Examples of such building elements include articulated facades, corner elements, inset windows, highlighted entry features and prominent cornices and rooflines. There is a primary entry feature that reinforces the definition of the street and provides a human scale and easy access for pedestrians and bicyclists in particular. Some variation is provided along all sides of the building and balconies help to further break up the massing. Urban forestry has recommended that greenery, such as trellises/green walls be used more to break up the massing and provide further visual interest. Overall, the applicant has made significant improvements to break up massing on all four sides of the building through various approaches, including planters, variation at different levels, articulation, and variation in materials and color. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.1.5 Articulated facades: Base, Body and Roof: In order to create a cohesive streetscape, building facades should be articulated with a building base, body and rood or parapet edge. This creates a shared point of reference that allows different buildings to relate to each other, regardless of individual architectural styles or approaches. The proposed project includes a canopy and landscaping at the ground level to define the base of the building. The roof deck on the third floor along page mill helps to provide definition from the fourth level and but the body and roof could use further definition. Section 4.1.6 Orientation: Buildings facing El Camino Real should be oriented parallel to the El Camino Real right-of-way to create a cohesive, well-defined streetscape. The project entrance opens to the corner to better define the corner, consistent with the guidelines. The building parallels both El Camino Real and Page Mill Road with a well-defined entrance. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.1.7 Corners: Corners should be addressed with special features such as prominent entries, massing and architectural elements. As noted above, a well-defined entrance at the corner of Page Mill and El Camino Real is provided. This is set apart through canopies, landscaping, low walls, and special paving materials. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.1.8 Expression of Use: Building forms should be articulated as an expression of the building use. For example, the various uses in a mixed-use building should be apparent through the pattern or scale of entries and windows, and through building elements such as arcades, awnings and balconies. The project is exclusively residential and balconies, windows and a large deck provide eyes on the street to show evidence of habitation. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.2.1 Relations of entries to the street: Buildings should have entries directly accessible and visible from El Camino Real. Buildings with the main entry on the side should include architectural elements that make the entry visible from El Camino Real and include a generously proportioned sidewalk from the street to the entry. In multi-use buildings, each building use and ground floor tenant space should have at least one functional entrance directly visible and accessible from the street. This exclusively residential building includes a clear entrance at the main intersection corner and generously proportioned sidewalks. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.2.2 Architectural expression of building entries: Entries should be marked by architectural features that emphasize their importance. Features such as tall building features, projecting overhangs, special lighting, awnings and signage can signify the location and importance of an entry. The entrance is clearly marked by a large projecting overhang and signage. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. 2.g Packet Pg. 75 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 4.3.1 Façade transparency: Building facades should animate the street, providing visual interest to passers-by. "Transparency" means that one can see or have a sense of what is behind a building façade, creating an interesting and lively street face. The façade transparency could be improved, particularly along El Camino Real. However, it should be noted that windows along the El Camino Real frontage would show views into bicycle parking and a storage closet; which may not be desirable. Improved transparency into the bicycle shop may be more desirable though. Section 4.3.2 Wall Openings: Transparent doors and windows must extend at least 75% of ground floor facades facing El Camino Real or side streets, and 50% of second floor facades. Facades should have ample, articulated doors and windows to create visual interest and allow one to see inside. No more than 20% of window space may be covered by window signs. As outlined in the staff report, this project is not consistent with this guideline. However, the guideline appears to be oriented toward a commercial retail or office use rather than an exclusively residential use where transparency of this scale may not be as desirable. Section 4.3.3 Glazing: Glazing should not prevent one from seeing inside a building. The use of reflective or dark-tinted glass is discouraged, especially at ground level, because it prohibits transparency and lacks the visual interest of clear window openings. The project includes glazing in some locations on the ground floor. However, this seems appropriate in some locations based on the use. Staff will look to the architectural review board to provide further guidance on whether the project should be improved for better consistency with this guideline. Section 4.3.5 Expression of Habitation: Residential or mixed- use residential projects should incorporate elements that signal habitation such as entrances, stairs, porches, bays and balconies that are visible to people on the street. This residential project includes elements that signal habitation, including entrances, balconies, and a deck. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.3.6 Design consistency on all facades: All exposed sides of a building should be designed with the same level of care and integrity. Buildings should be attractive and visually engaging from all sides, unless in a zero lot-line condition. The project considers all sides of the building, making them attractive and visually engaging. Improvements could be made to increase articulation through use of greenery or other methods, consistent with urban forestry’s recommendations. However, there is consistency in the quality of design on all facades. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.3.7 Architecturally Valid Details: Architectural details and features should be architecturally valid, not just decorative. Features should be related to the building's structure, function and/or engineering, rather than "tacked on" or arbitrary. The project does not include "tacked on" features. All balconies, windows, and other details of the façade are architecturally valid. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.3.8 Articulation and Depth: Building elevations should have variation and depth, rather than a false front treatment. Varied massing, projections and recesses can be used to create a sense of articulation and depth. Structural elements such as columns, parapets, rooflines and window fenestration can inform building design, as can functional elements such as location of entries, circulation spaces and special rooms. The building design includes varied massing and recesses to create articulation. The roofline could be improved to provide further articulation; however, overall the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.3.9 Rhythm and Scale: Building facades should be designed to have a rhythm and pattern measured according to human movement and scale. Architectural elements such as expressed structural bays and individual display windows (as opposed to continuous bands of glazing) can contribute to the rhythm and pattern of the facade, creating visual interest and an inviting pedestrian environment. Vertical proportions of doors, windows and projections should achieve human scale. Doors and windows achieve human scale and the project does not include continuous bands of glazing. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. 2.g Packet Pg. 76 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 4.3.10 Street Frontage Character: The street frontage should have continuous ground floor commercial uses characterized by display windows, recessed entries, and amenities such as arcades, awnings and seating areas. Grade- level and partially subgrade parking should be fronted with habitable building space such as storefront and building lobbies. The building lobby leads out to the main intersection corner and is clearly defined. The project is exclusively residential and therefore does not include ground floor commercial uses. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.4.1 Amenities: Building design should offer amenities to users and the public such as protection from the elements and places for people to gather or retreat. Elements such as arcades, balconies, awnings, roof gardens and seating areas enhance the user's experience and provide architectural interest. The project includes a clear entrance with a green canopy above as well as an improved, covered bus stop bench and cover to protect transit users from the elements. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.4.3 Disabled Access: Disabled access should be seamlessly incorporated into the building design. Facilities should be designed to provide inviting access that all users will want to use. Disabled access is seamlessly incorporated into the design. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.4.4 Integral to Building Structure and Use: Amenities and functional requirements should be integrated into the overall project design. For example, awnings should be individually placed in bays and over windows, as opposed to a continuous horizontal awning that ignores building structure or use. Code and functional requirements such as life safety, disabled access, servicing and security provisions should blend into the overall design, rather than appearing added on as an afterthought. Awnings and disabled access seemed blended into the overall design rather than added as an afterthought. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.4.5 Screening of Service, Trash and Utility areas: Service, trash and utility areas should be screened or enclosed in structures that are consistent with the building design, in terms of materials and detailing. These are provided in the basement and will be wheeled out to a designated area at the front of the property for pickup and wheeled back down by property management. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.5.1 Flat roofs and parapets encouraged: Flat roofs with parapets are strongly encouraged. Gabled and hip roofs are generally discouraged except when mixed use or residential projects are reflecting an appropriate residential character based on surroundings or adjacent building forms. Although the project includes a parapet, as is encouraged, more articulation could be provided in the roofline to better reflect similar roofs at the two adjacent properties. Section 4.5.2 Parapet Design: Parapets should be provided to articulate flat roofs and hide roof mounted equipment. Parapets should have strong cornice detailing to provide scale and visual interest. A parapet roof is provided to hide HVAC equipment. However, strong cornice detailing does not appear to be provided. Section 4.5.3 Functional Integrity of roofline: Roofs and architectural elements should have functional integrity and should not be used primarily to create a "style" or "image." False roof structures such as mansards are strongly discouraged A false roof is not provided. The parapet hides HVAC equipment, providing a functional use. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. 4.5.4 Roof Lines Consistent with Building and Context: Roof Lines and roof shapes should be consistent with the design and structure of the building itself as well as with roof lines of adjacent buildings. The roof line is consistent with the proposed style of the building, which has a more modern appearance; however, it is inconsistent with adjacent rooflines. 2.g Packet Pg. 77 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 4.5.5 Roof Forms Reflect Façade Articulation: Roof forms should reflect the façade articulation and building massing, as opposed to a single-mass roof over an articulated façade. The proposed roof could be improved to provide better articulation. Section 4.5.6 Roof Materials: Roof materials should reflect the character and use of the buildings. Highly reflective or brightly colored roof materials are strongly discouraged. The project uses roof material that reflects the character of the building. No bright colors are used. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.5.7 Screening or Rooftop Mechanical Equipment: Rooftop Mechanical equipment should be screened with either an equipment screen or penthouse. The Screen or penthouse should have a material and form similar to the building. The project includes HVAC equipment on the roof that is screened by a parapet. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.8.1 Materials Integrity and Durability: Exterior Building material and finishes should convey a sense of integrity, permanence and durability. The selection of appropriate materials and finishes has a powerful impact on the perception of quality. The project uses high quality building materials (See materials board). Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 4.8.2 Mix of Materials: Juxtaposition of contrasting materials, such as masonry and glass, can create interest when carefully integrated. Thoughtful attention should be given to the selection of the full range of materials in a project--from the wall finishes, paving and roofing to window frames and door hardware. The project uses quality materials and uses appropriate materials for windows, doors, and paving finishes. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. 4.8.3 Materials Reflect Articulation of Building Elements: Change in materials should be used to articulate building elements such as base, body parapets caps, bays, arcades and structural elements. Change in materials should be integral with building facade and structure, rather than an application. Materials should not change at outside corners or in the same plane of the facade. The project includes changes in color and material along different planes of the façade to create visual interest. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 5, Signage Not Applicable. Signage is not currently proposed as part of the project; although the minimal signage being considered is shown for reference purposes. Any specific future signage proposed would be required to meet all of the guidelines under Section 5. Section 7.1 El Camino Real Residential Setback: Exclusively residential projects are required to be setback between 20 to 24 feet from the El Camino Real curb. The majority of the project is built to approximately 21- 22 feet, 3inches from the El Camino Real Curb. Only the entrance area, which provides an open, pedestrian friendly area to define the corner is set back slightly further. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 7.1.2 El Camino Real Setback Design: The 20-foot El Camino Real setback on exclusively residential buildings shall include an effective sidewalk measuring at least twelve feet wide, lined by double rows of trees. Low screen walls and shrubbery may be used to create privacy between the sidewalk and adjacent residences. The project provides a 12' effective sidewalk width and includes street trees and low screen planter walls to define the sidewalk. Vegetation screening is also provided between property lines. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. 2.g Packet Pg. 78 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 7.1.3 El Camino Real Build-To Line: The 20 to 24-foot El Camino Real setback required for exclusively residential project shall also serve as the build to line. This will ensure that new projects contribute to the overall continuity of the streetscape. Buildings may only be set back from the setback/build-to line if the additional set-back provides amenities such as a wider sidewalk or outdoor seating. In no cases should an increased setback have a frontage greater than twenty feet. The majority of the project is built to approximately 21- 22 feet, 3inches from the El Camino Real Curb. Only the entrance area, which provides an open, pedestrian friendly area to define the corner is set back slightly further. Therefore the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 7.1.4 Sidestreet setback: on corner properties, exclusively residential projects are required to be setback 16 feet from the sidestreet property line, with a sidewalk measuring at least eight feet wide lined by double rows of trees. Low screen walls and shrubbery may be used to create privacy between the sidewalk and adjacent residences. Stoops and porches may project eight feet into the setback. Although the project is not built 16 feet from the side street property line, guideline 7.2.1 encourages the project to be built up to 8-12 feet from the property line for corner properties. The project is consistent with this guideline. Low screen walls are used to define the sidewalk. Section 7.1.5 Parking: Parking must be located behind buildings or in underground or podium structures. Parking should be accessed from side streets where possible, and should have a minimum appearance on streetscape and function. The proposed parking garage entrance is not visible from El Camino Real or Page Mill Road. The at-grade parking spaces are also not visible from the public right-of-way. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline Section 7.2.1 50-foot "boulevard Character" Zone: The portion of a residential project within fifty feet of the El Camino Real setback shall have a prominent massing and presence appropriate to the scale and importance of the thoroughfare. Buildings in this zone should have a dignified character, with units grouped below a single or large scale roof forms. The side street build-to line within the Boulevard zone shall range from eight to twelve feet. The project provides an 8’7” setback along the Boulevard zone, consistent with this guideline. Section 7.2.2. Transitional Zone: The portion of a residential project beyond the fifty-foot Urban Character Zone should be designed to provide a transition between the urban character of El Camino Real and the more residential character of adjacent neighborhoods. Buildings in this zone should transition from the scale of El Camino Real development to a scale compatible with adjacent existing residences. Row houses and apartments with balconies and stoops can provide an appropriate transition in many instances. Units may be grouped into a single building but should feature individual entries, porches and balconies. Where adjacent existing development is urban in character, this zone may take on a similarly urban character. Although the project does not transition to provide individual unit entrances, as outlined in this guideline, the project is consistent with the nature of the site. Adjacent uses along Page Mill Road are not low density residential neighborhoods. The adjacent use is similarly a high density residential use subject to PC zoning. In addition, the side street is a high traffic volume County thruway rather than a smaller, residential street. Therefore the project is appropriately designed based on the context of the site. Section 7.2.3 Side street Build-to lines: On Corner properties, the side street build-to line within the Boulevard Zone shall be 8 to 16 feet from the property line. The side street build-to line within the transitional zone shall be 16 feet. This will ensure that the corner is well defined and that a transition is made to existing adjacent residential properties. A request may be made for a Design Enhancement Exception (DEE) for the 8' to 16' setback. The portion of the project within the boulevard zone is located 8'7" from the property line, consistent with this guideline. Although the project does not transition to 16 feet, the adjacent use is similarly a high density residential use subject to PC zoning rather than a low density residential use. Therefore the project is appropriately designed based on the context of the site. 2.g Packet Pg. 79 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 7.2.4 El Camino Real entryway: Exclusively residential buildings shall each have a prominent pedestrian entryway facing El Camino Real. The entryway should include elements such as overhangs, awnings, columns, low walls, steps and ramps to create a strong presence. The proposed project includes an entrance at the corner of the site. The entry includes a green canopy as well as low planter walls and decorative pavers to define the entrance and create a strong presence. The change in material at the entrance also helps to define the entrance. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 7.2.5 Entry design: Building and unit entries should be the most prominent feature of the façade. The importance of the entry should be emphasized through unique massing, level of detail, and materials. Design should be compatible with the overall building design. The project is designed such that the most prominent feature is the entrance at the corner at El Camino Real and Page Mill. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 7.2.6 Entry Scale: Building and unit entries should have a scale appropriate to the context and number of units provided access. Entries facing El Camino Real, providing access to a number of units, should have an appropriately prominent scale and high level of design. Side street and internal entries with access to a smaller number of units or just one unit, should have a more residential scale. The entry facing el Camino Real provides access to a number of units and, in turn, is prominent in scale and includes a high level of design. Other access points are more pedestrian in scale. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 7.2.7 Active Street frontage: Residential Project should maintain an active ground-floor street frontage. Uses such as lobbies, community rooms, and habitable outdoor terraces and plazas should be situated along ground floor street frontages. Windows and doorways should be designed to create an interesting streetscape. The lobby has been revised to be provided at grade and a large entrance area activates the corner. The entrance includes doorways to the bike kitchen and bicycle parking as well as the lobby. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 7.2.8 Architectural Character and Scale: The architecture which fronts El Camino Real in the Boulevard Zone should be substantial in character and scale with a strong presence. Buildings should have a dignified character, and should address the street to provide a strong street edge. Building and detail scale should be appropriate to the boulevard-scale of El Camino Real. The proposed project within the boulevard zone is built up to the recommended build-to line to define the streetscape. The detail scale is appropriate to the boulevard scale of El Camino Real. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 7.2.9 Roof Forms: Flat roofs with parapets are strongly encouraged along El Camino Real to provide a cohesive appearance. Roofs in the transitional zone may be either flat or gabled, depending on the neighborhood contact, and should be articulated to indicate individual units. Parapets on flat roofs should be articulated with well-designed details. Roofs over corners and major entries should be more strongly articulated for architectural legibility. The proposed project includes a flat roof, consistent with the recommendation of this guideline. An additional sun shade feature and detailing is added along the roofline to create a “top” to the building. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 7.2.10 Façade Articulation: Building massing should be articulated to create a strong rhythm in the building facades and should emphasize groupings of units. Typically, facades in the urban character zone will emphasize groups of units, while facades in the Transitional zone will emphasize individual units. Facades should be articulated with bays, terraces, balconies, awnings, stoops and recessed openings to provide visual interest and scale. The façade along both the El Camino Real right-of-way and the Page Mill Road right-of-way are articulated by balconies to provide visual interest and scale. And emphasize individual units. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. 2.g Packet Pg. 80 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Section 7.2.11 Partially-Recessed or Underground Garage treatment: Where parking is provided in a partially- submerged/split-level garage, the ventilated garage façade should be completely screened with architectural and landscape devices. Ventilation opening size should be minimized and screened with decorative grillwork and landscaping. Stoops should extend beyond the garage facade, particularly on side street frontages, and be spaced no more than 50 feet apart. Screening of the podium should not rely entirely on landscaping. Exposed podiums may not extend more than 5 feet above grade along any frontage. The proposed project is raised four feet above grade at the residences. However, the entrance is provide at grade, consistent with staff’s recommendations. Landscaping and low walls screen the podium along the streetscape. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. Section 7.2.12 privacy of street-level residences: Residences at or near street level should be designed to ensure privacy of the residents from passersby. Low walls (no more than four feet in height), hedges and grade changes should be used to create privacy while maintaining a relationship to the street. Where the grade change (including partially submerged parking) is used, the raised portion should be designed to read as the base of the building, with an architectural treatment consistent with the rest of the building. The project includes a grade change, along with low walls and landscaping to create privacy between the ground level residences and the public right-of-way. Therefore, the project is consistent with this guideline. 2.g Packet Pg. 81 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : S o u t h E l C a m i n o R e a l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Attachment H Environmental Documents Hardcopies of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration were previously provided to Boardmembers and at libraries at the March 15, 2018 hearing. These documents are available to the public by visiting the Planning and Community Environmental Department on the 5th floor of City Hall at 250 Hamilton Avenue. Directions to review Environmental Documents online: 1. Go to: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/planningprojects 2. Go to the “Pending Projects” webpage 3. Search for “2755 El Camino Real” 4. Review the record details and click on the address for more details A direct link to the project page is also provided here: https://tinyurl.com/2755-El-Camino-Real 2.h Packet Pg. 82 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t H : E n v i r o n m e n t a l A n a l y s i s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Attachment I Project Plans Hardcopies of project plans are provided to Boardmembers. 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 “2755 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: https://tinyurl.com/2755-El-Camino-Real 2.i Packet Pg. 83 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t I : P r o j e c t P l a n s ( 9 0 6 0 : 2 7 5 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l : S i t e a n d D e s i g n f o r 5 7 U n i t s ( 3 r d F o r m a l ) ) Architectural Review Board Staff Report (ID # 8128) Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/19/2018 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2442 Summary Title: 3945 El Camino: Comfort Inn Hotel Renovation (1st Formal) Title: PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 3945 El Camino Real [16PLN-00374]: Request for Approval of a Major Architectural Review to Allow an Exterior Remodel of an Existing Two-Story Hotel Building at 3945 El Camino Real. Environmental Assessment: The Project is Exempt from CEQA per Guideline Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Zoning District: RM-30/CS. For more information, contact the project planner Phillip Brennan at phillip.brennan@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 findings and subject to conditions of approval. Report Summary The application is a request for architectural review for a proposed exterior remodel of an existing two-story hotel building (currently the Comfort Inn) located on El Camino Real. The scope-of-work includes extensive changes to the appearance of the building including updated exterior material and finishes, building color scheme and structural changes to the lobby and stairway rooflines, and a reduction in parking along with a TDM program to ensure sufficient capacity remains on-site. The project is subject to architectural review findings, the Service Commercial District’s (CS) context-based design criteria and compliance with the El Camino and South El Camino Design Guidelines. As proposed, the project meets the applicable zoning requirements; draft findings and conditions are included with this report. The Board is encouraged to review the project and provide comments as necessary to further refine the overall design. Background 3 Packet Pg. 84 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 2 Project Information Owner: Rajen Shah Architect: Shawn Alexander Representative: N/A Property Information Address: 3945 El Camino Real Neighborhood: Ventura Lot Dimensions & Area: Varied: (width) 99.88-100.64 feet; (length) 387.81 to 392.72 feet; 39,077 square feet Housing Inventory Site: Yes; Realistic Capacity of 18 units Located w/in a Plume: No Protected/Heritage Trees: Yes; two (2) street trees located in public ROW and one (1) coast live oak along the shared north side yard property line Historic Resource(s): No Existing Improvement(s): Two-story (23 feet 3 inches tall), 24,576 sf hotel building built in 1963 Existing Land Use(s): Hotel Adjacent Land Uses & Zoning: North: PF (Ventura Center) West: CS and RM-30 (Glass Slipper Inn Hotel and Merrilee Terrace Apartments) East: CS (Keys Middle School) South: CN (commercial retail center and Valero gas station) Aerial View of Property: 3 Packet Pg. 85 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 3 Source: Google Maps Land Use Designation & Applicable Plans Zoning Designation: Medium Density Multi-Family (RM-30)/ Service Commercial (CS) Comp. Plan Designation: Multi-Family and Commercial Service Context-Based Design Criteria: Yes 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): Yes; South of El Camino Real and El Camino Real Design Guidelines Proximity to Residential Uses or Districts (150'): Site is dual zoned with the CS front portion of the lot abutting the RM-30 rear half of the lot. 3 Packet Pg. 86 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 4 Prior City Reviews & Action City Council: None PTC: None HRB: None ARB: None Project Description The project proposes an exterior remodel of an existing 24,972 square foot (sf), two-story hotel building built in 1963 and located on a 39,077 sf lot. The building was approved for its last significant exterior remodel in 1998 (present condition) and is not designated as a historic resource. The primary aspects of the project include a comprehensive exterior remodel of the hotel comprised of a redesigned roof that will maintain the existing roof’s height of 23 feet 3 inches, replacement of one of three existing stair towers with a reconfigured stairway design, new landscaping, a new covered trash enclosure, repaving and restriping of the parking lot, and a new outdoor seating area intended to serve as an amenity for guests. The project also includes interior remodel work that will not increase the floor area total for the site. The remodel is part of rebranding of the existing Comfort Inn hotel into a more refined higher- end lodging accommodation. The proposed design utilizes a contemporary aesthetic featuring varied material and exterior finishes such as painted cement plaster walls, corrugated metal panels, decorative screening and a stone mosaic wall feature. The proposal also includes a new metal standing-seam shed roof for the front lobby portion of the structure and stair towers. Requested Entitlements, Findings and Purview: The following discretionary applications are being requested: x 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. x Parking Adjustment: In accordance with PAMC Section 18.52.050, automobile parking requirements may be adjusted by the Director of Planning and Community Environment in limited instances, when in his/her opinion such adjustment will be consistent with the purposes of the chapter, will not create undue impact on existing or potential uses adjoining the site or in the general vicinity, and will be commensurate with the reduced parking demand created by the development, including for visitors and accessory facilities where appropriate. 3 Packet Pg. 87 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 5 Analysis1 Neighborhood Setting and Character The project site is located in an urbanized section of the Ventura neighborhood along the El Camino Real northbound corridor. It is bounded by the Glass Slipper Inn to its left and Keys School to the right. The project has been reviewed for compliance with zoning regulations and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and all applicable policy documents and design guidelines as described in the following sections. 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 land use designation for the project site is Service Commercial with Multi-Family towards the rear of the property. As stated in the Plan, the purpose of the commercial land use designation is for citywide and regional services and relying on customers arriving by car. These uses do not necessarily benefit from being in high volume pedestrian areas such as shopping centers or Downtown. Typical uses include auto services and dealerships, motels, lumberyards, appliance stores, and restaurants, including fast service types. In almost all cases, these uses require good automobile and service access so that customers can safely load and unload without impeding traffic. A review has been performed to ensure the project’s consistency with the applicable goals and policies. That evaluation has been provided in Attachment B. El Camino Design Guidelines The project is subject to the 1979 El Camino Design Guidelines (ECR) with respect to trees, signage, architecture and building colors. The ECR Guidelines were intended in part to encourage landscaping along the El Camino Real extending from Page Mill Road to the southern city limits. The proposed scope includes new landscaping comprised of both native and adaptable ornamental grass species of along the front property between the building structure and trash enclosure. There are two existing mature street trees (Red oak and London plane) located adjacent to the building frontage and large coast live oak located along the shared 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. 2 The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan is available online: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/topics/projects/landuse/compplan.asp 3 Packet Pg. 88 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 6 northern side yard that will be protected during the remodeling construction. A planter strip measuring six inches high and approximately 50 feet long by 3 feet wide will be constructed along the lobby and outdoor patio area and feature low-profile landscaping. The described landscaping and proposed narrowing of the driveway width will aid in screening the off-street parking area from street view as instructed by the ECR Guidelines. South El Camino Design Guidelines The project site is located in the Barron-Ventura area, which is characterized by moderately dense development, with a large portion of buildings situated near the street. The project design is consistent with the stated Barron-Ventura area district vision of maintaining the neighborhood servicing commercial node and proposed remodel work that enhances the overall visual appearance of the area with improved massing, façade transparency and materials. The main entry design features extensive floor to ceiling glass treatment that improves transparency and promotes visual interest at the pedestrian level. The proposed roofline maintains the overall maximum height of the existing structure (23 feet 3 inches). However, the leading roof edge is slopped downward toward El Camino Real and may increase perceived scale and height discrepancies between the proposed building and the immediately adjacent two-story structures from street level. Zoning Compliance3 The subject lot is divided by two zoning districts near its mid-point with the front portion (42% fronting El Camino Real) zoned as Service Commercial District (CS) and rear portion (58%) zoned as Medium Density Multi-family Residence District (RM-30). Pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.08.080, in instances where a lot is divided by differing zoning districts, the provisions of the zoning regulations applicable for each district shall apply to each respective lot sections accordingly. A detailed review of the proposed project’s consistency with applicable zoning standards has been performed. A summary table is provided in Attachment D. Project Uses Since the time of issuance of its original use permit (62-UP-2) in 1962, the subject site existed in two zoning districts; Service Commercial and Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (formerly called RM-4 and now RM-30). The division of the zoning districts occurs approximately 175 feet back from the front property line with the multi-family zoning district in the rear half of the lot. Motel or hotel use is not a permitted land use in the RM-30, but is covered by the “grandfather” clause provided by PAMC Section 18.13.070 (2)(C) in the zoning ordinance that allows for its continued use in this capacity indefinitely so long as the number of rooms or floor area of the building is not increased. Part of the project scope includes the creation of a larger covered trash and recycling enclosure to replace the existing smaller and uncovered enclosure currently on site. The larger covered 3 The Palo Alto Zoning Code is available online: http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/palo-alto_ca 3 Packet Pg. 89 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 7 enclosure would bring the site into compliance with Solid Waste Management and Stormwater Pollution Prevention requirements. By definition the new covered enclosure would count toward the site’s gross floor area total (~216 sf), but is exempt per the provisions outlined in PAMC Section 18.04.030 (65)(B)(iv). As such, it is not increasing the project’s degree of non-compliance and is not in conflict with the terms of the aforementioned original use permit. Development in the CS zoning district requires that the City make the findings outlined in PAMC Section 18.16.090, Context-Based Design Criteria. The proposed project satisfies the stated context-based design considerations and findings such as the promotion of walkability by extending the 12-foot wide sidewalk segment along El Camino Real; providing bike rack amenity on-site which promotes active transportation options for hotel guests and staff; strongly connecting the street façade to the sidewalk through re-oriented main lobby access that provides access off the sidewalk; and retaining the street-facing balcony that helps indicate habitation and visibility from the street and sidewalk. A review of the projects consistency with the Context-Based Design Criteria is included in Attachment E. Performance Criteria The proposed project is located within a CS zoning district and would therefore be subject to the performance criteria outlined in PAMC Section 18.23. A review has been performed to ensure the project’s general compliance with the applicable performance criteria. That evaluation has been provided in Attachment F. Parking Requirement The last approved project for this site (Building Permit #99-1590) on file with the City, dates back to October 1999. The data summary table of that plan indicates 67 guest units to 67 parking spaces, including four accessible stalls. Of the 63 standard spaces, 25 are indicated as “compact” stalls that measured 7 feet 6 inches in width as was permitted at that time. The existing parking lot currently does not provide the required 1:1 off-street parking space per guestroom parking ratio. The hotel currently has 69 guestrooms and provides 60 parking spaces, including 57 standard spaces and three accessible spaces. City records do not account for the existing discrepancy in guestroom to parking space ratio currently present on the lot. The new project’s scope-of-work includes interior remodeling that would decrease the total number of guestrooms to 67 and a reduction of three parking spaces to accommodate the proposed outdoor patio seating resulting in 57 total spaces (54 standard; 3 accessible). The applicant is proposing to use 8.5 foot by 17.5 foot “uni-class” sized stalls as prescribed for the parking stall angle (90 degree). In order to meet the required minimum aisle width between stall lines, the applicant is utilizing a provision in PAMC Section 18.54.040 (h) that allows for up to two feet of bumper overhang into the planter or landscape area. Parking Reduction Parking for this project is based on the 1:1 guest room to parking space ratio per PAMC Section 18.52.040. The project as proposed would provide fewer parking spaces (57 spaces) on-site 3 Packet Pg. 90 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 8 than required (67 spaces) per Municipal Code. As such, the applicant has requested a 15 percent parking reduction to reduce the required parking count by 10 spaces. PAMC Section 18.52.050 allows the Planning Director to approve a parking adjustment when effective transportation and parking alternatives are provided such as a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program or other innovative strategies intended to site specific reduce parking demand. The applicant contracted the services of a transportation planning consultant to create a TDM plan to reduce and manage the number of single-occupant motor vehicle trips generated by the project. The consultant performed a peak parking demand analysis that looked at 13 lodging establishments along the Peninsula that catered to primarily business travelers similar to the Comfort Inn. The resulting analysis indicated the peak parking demand for the Comfort Inn was 0.62 occupied spaces per occupied room, which was slightly less than the average (0.66) demand. To ensure the proposed project’s parking could adequately accommodate a higher parking demand, the higher average was utilized and 100 percent occupancy was assumed resulting in a projected peak parking demand of 45 vehicles after the remodel. As proposed, the project would provide 12 more parking spaces than the projected peak parking demand, and therefore the site’s proposed 57 parking spaces would be expected to be more than sufficient. Although, the analysis indicates the proposed 57 parking spaces would sufficiently accommodate peak parking demand, in accordance with PAMC Section 18.52.050 Table, the applicant has proposed additional TDM strategies to reduce parking demand on-site as summarized below: x Transit Subsidy. The hotel will provide monthly bus passes to employees who wish to commute using public transportation. VTA bus stops are located immediately adjacent to the project site along El Camino, providing transit services via Local Route 22. x Taxi or Ride-Share Subsidy. The hotel would provide guests with a $20 subsidy for rides using a local taxi service or ride-share service (e.g. Uber or Lyft). The project already has a working relationship with a local taxi service that would aid in this implementation. x On-Site Bicycle Parking. The project scope includes nine (9) short-term bicycle racks which will provide up to 18 bicycle spaces on site. Further details related to the proposed TDM Plan and Parking Study can be found in Attachment H. Loading Space The originally approved project did not provide a dedicated loading space. Current municipal parking standards require one off-street loading space to be provided for a hotel of this size. As it exists, the hotel is legal noncomplying and would not be required to provide the off-street loading space so long as the proposed maintenance and repair (i.e. remodel) of the hotel does not increase the degree of noncompliance; see PAMC Section 18.70.090. Staff has concluded 3 Packet Pg. 91 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 9 requiring the hotel to comply with the current standard would not be appropriate based on the limited extent of the proposed remodel work, existing site limitations, and hotel use. Multi-Modal Access The proposed project incorporates design aspects meant to enhance the pedestrian and bicycle environment. The project scope includes nine designated short-term bicycle parking racks located in the rear of the lot that supports multi-modal transportation options for hotel guests and staff. Additionally, a portion of the existing landscaped planter area along the southwest corner of the lot is proposed for partial removal and replacement with a widened concrete pathway to continue the 12-foot wide sidewalk network along this segment of El Camino Real. The sidewalk area adjacent to where the building fronts, narrows with the proposed landscaping acting as a buffer between the building and the public right-of-way. Egress sight- lines are increased by the proposed notched main lobby entry, which should result in better visual clearance for drivers exiting the driveway and improved pedestrian safety. Consistency with Application Findings Overall, the design and architecture of the proposed improvements, as conditioned, complies with the required Findings for Architectural Review as required in Chapter 18.76 of the PAMC. Draft findings substantiating how the project satisfied each required finding is provided in Attachment B. 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 exempt from the provisions of the CEQA in accordance with Guideline Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). 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 April 6, 2018, which is 14 days in advance of the meeting. Postcard mailing occurred on April 9, 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; or 3. Recommend project denial based on revised findings. 3 Packet Pg. 92 City of Palo Alto Planning & Community Environment Department Page 10 Report Author & Contact Information ARB4 Liaison & Contact Information Phillip Brennan, Associate Planner Jodie Gerhardt, AICP, Planning Manager (650) 329-2493 (650) 329-2575 phillip.brennan@cityofpaloalto.org jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org Attachments: x Attachment A: Location Map (JPG) x Attachment B: Draft ARB Findings (DOCX) x Attachment C: Conditions of Approval (DOCX) x Attachment D: Zoning Comparison Table (DOCX) x Attachment E: Context-Based Design Criteria Compliance (DOCX) x Attachment F: Performance Criteria (DOCX) x Attachment G: Applicant's Project Description Letter (PDF) x Attachment H: Parking Study and TDM Plan (PDF) x Attachment I: Project Plans (DOCX) 4 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org 3 Packet Pg. 93 3.a Packet Pg. 94 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 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n ATTACHMENT B ARB FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL 3945 El Camino Real 16PLN-00374 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. The project is consistent with Finding #1 because: In conformance with the following Comp Plan Goals and Policies, the project will include high quality design compatible with surrounding development. Comp Plan Goals and Policies How project adheres or does not adhere to Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the site is Multiple Family and Service Commercial. The project continues the Service Commercial land use. Land Use and Community Design Element 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 proposed remodel of the existing hotel either adheres to or increases compliance with the applicable design guidelines, development standards, and performance and context-based criteria established for development in the CS zoning district. Policy L-1.11: Hold new development to the highest development standards in order to maintain Palo Alto’s livability and achieve the highest quality development with the least impacts. 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 project scope includes widening a section of sidewalk along the subject site’s frontage bordering El Camino Real to 12 feet, which enhances the pedestrian environment and encourages active transportation options along this service commercial corridor. Policy L-2.2: Enhance connections between commercial and mixed use centers and the surrounding residential neighborhoods by 3.b Packet Pg. 95 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 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) promoting walkable and bikeable connections and a diverse range of retail and services that caters to the daily needs of residents. Policy L-2.11: Encourage new development and redevelopment to incorporate greenery and natural features such as green rooftops, pocket parks, plazas and rain gardens. The project increases the amount of landscaping on the site by providing new greenery along the frontage and adding interior landscaping including six new trees located in existing planters and parking islands. Goal L-6: Well-designed buildings that create coherent development patterns and enhance city streets and public spaces. The proposed remodel replaces the existing roofline with a shed style roof that has its highest point away from the street, providing a more pedestrian-scaled frontage along El Camino Real. Additionally, the front-entry opens towards the sidewalk and is notched back to provide additional visual clearance for pedestrians and guests exiting the site’s parking lot. Policy L-6.6: Design buildings to compliment streets and public spaces; to promote personal safety, public health and well-being; and to enhance a sense of community safety. Transportation Element Goal T-3: Facilities, services and programs that encourage and promote walking and bicycling. The project as proposed provides more (9 bike racks) bicycle parking than required (one short- term space per 10 guestrooms; 67 room = 7 bike racks) as required per municipal code. The provision of these facilities implicitly promotes active modes of transportation for hotel workers that may utilize bicycles to travel to work, shopping, or services. Policy T-1.16: Promote personal transportation vehicles an alternative to cars (e.g. bicycles, skateboards, roller blades) to get to work, school, shopping, recreational facilities and transit stops. Policy T-1.19: Provide facilities that encourage and support bicycling and walking. 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. 96 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 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) The project is consistent with Finding #2 because: The finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project forwards a coherent contemporary design that enhances the existing streetscape and includes amenities such as an outdoor seating area intended to serve as an inviting gathering area for hotel guests. The proposed shed style roof above the main lobby slopes upward from the street toward the lot’s interior which serves to visually reduce the scale and mass of the remodeled hotel from El Camino Real. The proposed scope of work does not negatively impact 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. The project is consistent with Finding #3 because: The finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project proposes a compatible contemporary architectural design that utilizes clean and simple building lines and forms. The exterior material and color palette includes a mixture of modern and rustic materials such as standing metal seamed roofs, corrugated metal accents, Prodema cladding, painted wood rafter tails, aluminum louver treatments, and a combination of warm earth tone and neutral colors on painted cement plaster. Taken as a whole, the proposed remodel project will benefit the surrounding area aesthetic. 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: The finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project includes functional design aspects intended to enhance the pedestrian environment, increase safety, and allow convenient access to on- site facilities. The project provides a widened section of sidewalk to continue the existing 12 foot wide segment of sidewalk in front of Keys School, creating a friendly environment for those walking in the area. The proposed remodel includes a street facing lobby entrance that is jogged back to provide both a covered entry, as well as to increase visibility of pedestrians and sightlines for drivers exiting the hotel driveway. The proposed covered trash enclosure will be sized to accommodate the current level of service and allow easy access for waste recovery crews. 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: 3.b Packet Pg. 97 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 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) The finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed landscape design integrates into the building design and site’s functions. Six new 24 inch box trees will be planted in new and existing planter areas on the site to break up sightlines and provide shading along the expanse of the parking lot. Smaller landscape improvements to include native and adapted drought tolerant species along the site’s frontage, buffers between the ground floor guest rooms and parking area, and the courtyard. The extensive row of mature dense shrubs along the south side yard property line will be maintained to provide screening for hotel guests and students at the adjacent school. 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: In accordance with the City’s Green Building Regulations, the building will satisfy the requirements for CALGreen Mandatory + Tier 2. A summary of the project’s compliance is shown on sheet GB-1 of the plan set. In addition, the project proposes drought tolerant species of shrubs and groundcover in planter areas throughout the site. 3.b Packet Pg. 98 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 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) ATTACHMENT C CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 3945 El Camino Real 16PLN-00374 ________________________________________________________________________ PLANNING DIVISION 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS. Construction and development shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "ASCEND PALO ALTO_3945 El Camino Real,” stamped as received by the City on April 6, 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 limited to; 3.c Packet Pg. 99 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 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) materials, landscaping and hard surface locations. Contact your Project Planner, Phillip Brennan at phillip.brennan@cityofpaloalto.org to schedule this inspection. TRANSPORTATION DIVISION In addition to the peak parking demand reduction strategies outlined in the approved Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan dated October 12, 2017. The following standards and procedures apply: 8. Required measures identified in the TDM plan shall remain in full force for the life of the project unless altered by the Director of Planning and Community Environment. 9. Monitoring reports shall be submitted to the Director two years after building occupancy and again every year thereafter; see PAMC 18.52.050(d)(2). Prior to conducting required monitoring activities, the applicant shall engage a qualified third party professional and submit a draft scope of work to the Chief Transportation Official for approval. The draft report shall then be submitted to the Chief Transportation Official for review, and if necessary, revision. 10. If, based on the results of the ongoing monitoring program, peak parking demand exceeds 60 parking stalls, the Director of Planning and Community Environment may require implementation of the alternative parking plan described in the TDM plan, changes to the TDM program to meeting parking demand targets, or impose administrative penalties if identified deficiencies are not addressed within six months (PAMC 18.52.050 (d)(4)). PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING The following comments are provided as a courtesy and shall be addressed prior to any other permit application submittal. This includes Building Permit, Excavation and Grading Permit, Certificate of Compliance, Street Work Permit and Encroachment Permit but after the Planning entitlement approval. 11. EASEMENT: Indicate all existing easements on lot. 12. UTILITIES: Note that all above ground utilities, such as transformer, backflow preventer, gas meters, etc., shall be located within project site but accessible from the street. Any new or relocated utilities will correspond with approved locations from City Utilities Department. 13. WORK IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY: The plans must clearly indicate any work that is proposed in the public right-of-way, such as sidewalk replacement, driveway approach, or utility laterals. The plans must include notes that the work must be done per City standards 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. 3.c Packet Pg. 100 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 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) 14. Provide the following note on the Site Plan and adjacent to the work within the Public road right- of-way. “Any construction within the city’s public road right-of-way shall 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.” 15. Provide the following note on the Site Plan and/or 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. 16. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION: The City's full-sized "Pollution Prevention - It's Part of the Plan" sheet must be included in the plan set. Copies are available from Public Works on our website http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/2732 17. 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. PUBLIC WORKS URBAN FORESTRY SECTION Strictly comply with all recommendations contained in the tree protection report. There is a duty for the project applicant/developer to protect neighboring trees. 18. OBLIGATION TO MONITOR AND PROTECT NEIGHBORING TREES. Project site arborist will protect and monitor neighboring protected oak during construction and share information with the tree owner. All work shall be done in conformance with State regulations so as to ensure the long term health of the tree. Project site arborist will request access to the tree on the neighboring property as necessary to measure an exact diameter, assess condition, and/or perform treatment. If access is not granted, monitoring and any necessary treatment will be performed from the project site. 19. EXCAVATION RESTRICTIONS APPLY (TTM, Sec. 2.20 C & D). Any approved grading, digging or trenching beneath a tree canopy shall be performed using ‘air-spade’ method as a preference, with manual hand shovel as a backup. For utility trenching, including sewer line, roots exposed with diameter of 1.5 inches and greater shall remain intact and not be damaged. If directional boring method is used to tunnel beneath roots, then Table 2-1, Trenching and Tunneling Distance, shall be printed on the final plans to be implemented by Contractor. 20. 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 3.c Packet Pg. 101 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 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) after demolition if necessary to increase the tree protection zone as required by the project arborist. 21. 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 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. 22. TREE PLANTING. The applicant shall notify the Urban Forestry Section (650.496.5953) 24-48 hours prior to installation of any new trees on site for the purpose of inspection and ensuring compliance with tree planting standard detail #604 or approved alternate. 23. 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. 3.c Packet Pg. 102 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 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) ATTACHMENT D ZONING COMPARISON TABLE 3945 El Camino Real, File No. 16PLN-00374 Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential & Service Commercial Zoning Districts Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.13 & 18.16 (RM-30 & CS DISTRICTS) Regulation Required Existing Proposed Minimum/Maximum Site Area None 39,077 sf (0.90 acres) 39,077 sf (0.90 acres) Minimum/Maximum Site Width None Varies: 99.85; 100.52 feet Varies: 99.85; 100.52 feet Minimum/Maximum Site Depth None Varies: 387.81; 392.72 feet Varies: 387.81; 392.72 feet Maximum Site Coverage None 12,256 sf 12,426 sf Maximum FAR 2.0:11 24,972 sf 24,927 sf2 Front Yard Setback (El Camino Real) 0-10 feet to create an effective 8-12 foot effective sidewalk width 2 feet 4.5 inches to 5 feet 2 feet 4.5 inches to 12 feet to provide an 8 to 12 foot wide effective sidewalk Rear Yard Setback 10 feet3 15 feet 4 inches 15 feet 4 inches Build-to-Lines 50% of frontage built to setback on El Camino Real 52% 52% Interior Side Yard Setbacks CS RM-30 RM-30 Portion of Building RM-30 Portion of Building None 10 feet 4 feet 2 inches to 6 feet 5 inches (north side yard); 11 feet 10 inches (south side yard) 4 feet 2 inches to 6 feet 5 inches (north side yard); 11 feet 10 inches (south side yard) Maximum Height 35 feet4 23 feet 3 inches 23 feet 3 inches Side or Rear Daylight Planes5 None None None 1. FAR of 2.0:1 permitted for hotels in the CS zoning district 2. Proposed covered trash enclosure excluded from total FAR per PAMC Section 18.04.030 (65)(B)(iv) 3. Portion of building located in the RM-30 zoning district requires a minimum 10 foot setback; the proposed building maintains the existing building’s 15 foot 4 inch setback at the second-floor walkway 4. Maximum permitted height is 35 feet when within 150 feet of a residential district (other than an RM-40 or PC zone) abutting or located within 50 feet of the site (otherwise 50 foot height maximum) 5. Daylight plane for lot lines abutting one or more residential zone districts other than RM-40 or PC zone will utilize the initial height and slope of the most restrictive residential zone abutting the site line in question. The rear portion of the subject lot is zoned RM-30 and abuts an RM-30 zoning district parcel. However, since the subject lot’s width is greater than 70 feet wide it has no side or rear daylight plane per PAMC Section18.13.040 – Table 2. 3.d Packet Pg. 103 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 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) Table 2: CS ZONING DISTRICT OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS Land Use (Hotel) Requirement Proposed 1 vehicle space per guestroom; 67 guestrooms = 67 spaces 57 spaces (including three accessible spaces) 10,000-99,999 sf Hotel Use = 1 loading space Existing non-compliant Total 67 spaces Requesting 15% Parking Reduction (10) Total Proposed Parking Spaces 57 spaces Table 2: CHAPTER 18.52 BICYCLE FACILITY REQUIREMENTS Land Use (Hotel) Requirement Provided Spaces 1 space per 10 guestrooms6; 67 guestrooms/10 = 6.7 spaces 9 short-term bicycle racks provided 6. 100% short-term bicycle spaces as defined in PAMC Section 18.54.060 (a)(1) 3.d Packet Pg. 104 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 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) Attachment E: Context-Based Design Criteria 3945 El Camino Real, 16PLN 00374 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 This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project provides short-term bike racks on-site; a widened sidewalk along the building frontage that provides a better pedestrian walking environment; ground floor lobby entrance design that increases visual sight-lines for drivers exiting the lot, which will serve to provide a safer environment for pedestrians. 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 This finding can be made in the affirmative in that project includes extensive floor-to-ceiling windows at the ground floor lobby which improves transparency and engages visual interest from pedestrians at the street-level. 3. Massing and Setbacks Buildings shall be designed to minimize massing and conform to proper setbacks The project work includes replacing the existing low-profile hipped roof with a downward slopping shed roof. While the shed style roof places the highest point of the roof structure further back from street-level, the wide roofline provides a broader overall looking structure. The proposed scope-of-work does not include substantial structural changes or new articulation to the building’s façade or exterior walls. 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 This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed new stair towers in the portion of the lot abutting residential development maintain the existing vertical dimensions and scale of the structures being replaced. The proposed project does not include any work that would impact privacy of 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 can be made in the affirmative in that the project proposes a new outdoor patio space intended to serve as an amenity for hotel guests. 3.e Packet Pg. 105 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : C o n t e x t - B a s e d D e s i g n C r i t e r i a C o m p l i a n c e ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F or m a l ) ) 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 This finding can be made in the affirmative in that while the general parking layout design remains the same, the proposed changes include an outdoor patio area that will be visible to pedestrians at street level and trash enclosure that will also serve to screen views of the parking lot from the public right-of-way. 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 as the subject site is less than one acre (~0.90 acres). 8. Sustainability and Green Building Design Project design and materials to achieve sustainability and green building design should be incorporated into the project This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project is subject to the California Green Building Code (CalGreen, Tier 2). 3.e Packet Pg. 106 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t E : C o n t e x t - B a s e d D e s i g n C r i t e r i a C o m p l i a n c e ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F or m a l ) ) Attachment F Performance Criteria 18.23 3945 El Camino Real 16PLN-00374 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. 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 includes a redesigned covered trash enclosure that is expanded to accommodate the current level-of-service and covered as per the Trash Enclosure Area Guidelines. To minimize the visual impacts of lighting on abutting or nearby residential sites and from adjacent roadways. The proposed exterior lighting is sufficient to provide safe circulation and is directed downward to reduce glare and impacts to the project’s residents. 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 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. Current project proposal does not include late night uses or activities. Future commercial tenants that would like this will need to file for a Conditional Use Permit, as required per the Zoning Code. 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 scope of the remodel project does not increase privacy impacts on the adjacent residential property (apartment complex). No mechanical equipment is visible to public view. The existing tall shrubs that run the length of the south side yard property line will be maintained to ensure privacy screening between the hotel and school properties. 18.23.020 Trash Disposal and Recycling Project Consistency 18.23.030 Lighting 18.23.040 Late Night Uses and Activities 18.23.050 Visual, Screening and Landscaping 3.f Packet Pg. 107 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t F : P e r f o r m a n c e C r i t e r i a ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) 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. While there will be temporary noise increase associate with construction, the project’s scope-of-work does not intensify the existing hotel use and therefore will not result in long-term increased noise and vibration levels. The visual impact of parking shall be minimized on adjacent residentially zoned properties or properties with existing residential uses located within nonresidential zones. The proposed work includes elongating an existing planter area along the lot’s frontage and will include new landscaping. The redesigned planter also narrows the driveway entrance which will aid in shielding views to the off-street parking lot. 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 site circulation provides access for all modes of transportation. The project includes widening a large segment of the sidewalk along the building frontage to enhance the pedestrian environment along El Camino Real, removal of a monument sign from the driveway and notched lobby entrance to increase visual sight-lines for drivers exiting the lot. The requirements for air quality are intended to buffer residential uses from potential sources of odor and/or toxic air contaminants. The project will be conditioned to abide by the air quality requirements outlined in PAMC Section 18.23.090. 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. This is not applicable to the proposed uses associated with the project. 18.23.060 Noise and Vibration Project Consistency 18.23.070 Parking 18.23.080 Vehicular, Pedestrian and Bicycle Site Access 18.23.090 Air Quality 18.23.100 Hazardous Materials 3.f Packet Pg. 108 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t F : P e r f o r m a n c e C r i t e r i a ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l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±+RWHO8VH 3URSRVHGXVH±+RWHO8VH $77$&+0(17*3.g Packet Pg. 109 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : 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 L e t t e r ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r ma l ) ) $1(;3/$1$7,212)352-(&7'(6,*1&21&(37 7KLVSURMHFWLQFOXGHVWKHUHPRGHORIWKHH[LVWLQJKRWHOFRQVWUXFWHGLQWKH¶V7KH 2ZQHUKDVIRXQGLWLQFUHDVLQJO\GLIILFXOWWREHFRPSHWLWLYHZLWKQHZHUKRWHOVLQWKHDUHD ZKLFKRIIHUDJUHDWHUUDQJHRIJXHVWDPHQLWLHVVXFKDVIRRGRIIHULQJVDQGRXWGRRU ORXQJHUHOD[DWLRQVSDFHV7KHUHPRGHOGHVLJQLQWHQGVWRDGGUHVVH[LVWLQJGHVLJQ GHILFLHQFLHVE\ (QKDQFLQJWKHH[WHULRUGHVLJQRIWKHEXLOGLQJWRSURPRWHFRPSDWLELOLW\ZLWKWKH FKDQJLQJQHLJKERUKRRG 3URYLGLQJRXWGRRUORXQJHDQGSDWLRVSDFHVIRUKRWHOJXHVWUHOD[DWLRQ 3URYLGLQJLQFUHDVHGJXHVWDPHQLWLHV 3URYLGHELF\FOHSDUNLQJWRHQFRXUDJHJUHHQWUDQVSRUWDWLRQDOWHUQDWLYHV ,PSURYHWKHJXHVWFRPPXQLW\H[SHULHQFHZKLOHYLVLWLQJ3DOR$OWR  7KHSURSHUW\LVFXUUHQWO\DURRPKRWHO,QRUGHUWRDFKLHYHWKH2ZQHU¶VJRDOVIRUWKH SURMHFWWKHRZQHULVFRQYHUWLQJJXHVWURRPVDQGRIILFHWRDQH[SDQGHG/REE\ IXQFWLRQVSDFH7KHSURSHUW\ZLOOFRQWLQXHWRRSHUDWHDVDKRWHO  7KHVLWHLVORFDWHGLQWKH&6&RPPHUFLDO=RQLQJ'LVWULFWDORQJ(O&DPLQR5HDO7KH &RPPHUFLDO=RQLQJ'LVWULFWVDUHLQWHQGHGWRFUHDWHDQGPDLQWDLQVLWHVIRUUHWDLO SHUVRQDOVHUYLFHVHDWLQJDQGGULQNLQJHVWDEOLVKPHQWV  7KHH[LVWLQJEXLOGLQJDHVWKHWLFLVRXWGDWHGDQGYLVXDOO\XQLQYLWLQJWRWKHSXEOLF,WLV LQFRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKHFXUUHQW(O&DPLQR5HDO'HVLJQ*XLGHOLQHV7KHSURSRVHGGHVLJQ LQWHQWLVWRPDNHWKHKRWHO¶VDUFKLWHFWXUHWRDSSHDUPRUHFRQWHPSRUDU\UHOHYDQWDQG FRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKHGHVLJQYRFDEXODULHVRIPRUHUHFHQWEXLOGLQJGHVLJQVZLWKLQWKH(O &DPLQR5HDO'HVLJQ'LVWULFW7KHQHZGHVLJQHOHYDWHVWKHDUFKLWHFWXUHWRSURYLGH JUHDWHUVWUHHWDSSHDOZKLFKHQKDQFHVWKHRYHUDOOXVHUH[SHULHQFHDORQJ(O&DPLQR 5HDOIRUERWKKRWHOJXHVWVDQGWKHFRPPXQLW\    3.g Packet Pg. 110 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t G : 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 L e t t e r ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r ma l ) ) Memorandum Date:October 12, 2017 To:Mr. Rajen Shah, Comfort Inn Palo Alto From:Michelle Hunt Ricky Williams Subject:Parking Study for the Proposed Comfort Inn Remodel at 3945 El Camino Real in Palo Alto, California Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. has completed a parking study for the proposed Comfort Inn remodel at 3945 El Camino Real in Palo Alto, California. The project site is located on the east side of El Camino Real, midblock between Ventura Avenue and El Camino Way. Currently, the hotel has 69 rooms and 60 parking spaces, including 57 standard spaces and 3 accessible spaces. The remodeling project would increase the size of the existing lobby by removing two rooms. The remodel would also reduce the number of parking spaces on site to 57 spaces, including 54 standard spaces and 3 accessible spaces. Thus, the proposed project would result in 67 rooms and 57 parking spaces. Both the existing and proposed on-site parking do not meet the City of Palo Alto’s parking requirement of one space per guestroom (Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.52.040). The purpose of this memo is to determine the adequacy of the proposed on-site parking lot to serve the hotel’s parking demand. This memo provides an analysis of the peak parking demand at the existing Comfort Inn and the peak parking demand observed at similar hotels and motels in the area. These surveyed parking ratios at area hotels were used to estimate the number of parking spaces necessary to serve the project. Peak Parking Demand Hexagon conducted peak parking counts at thirteen comparable hotels and motels in Palo Alto and nearby cities to determine the peak parking demand per occupied room. The number of vehicles parked at each hotel and motel were counted at midnight on two to three typical days. The hotel management were contacted to determine the number of rooms occupied on each survey date. These lodgings were chosen because they are similar in location to the Comfort Inn and serve primarily business travelers. Based on the peak parking counts conducted at the surveyed hotels/motels, parking demand was consistently found to be below the City’s code requirement of one space per room (see Table 1). The average parking demand at the thirteen locations was determined to be 0.66 occupied spaces per occupied room. Hotel/motel occupancy at the time of the counts was between 90 and 100 percent at most sites. The trend of ride-sharing gaining in market share and a decline in the use of rental cars may partially explain why there is less than one vehicle parked per occupied room. Hexagon conducted a count of the number of vehicles parked at the existing Comfort Inn at midnight during three typical weekdays (September 26-28, 2017). The count data is attached. The hotel owner also provided data on the number of rooms occupied on the date of the counts (see 3.h Packet Pg. 111 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t H : P a r k i n g S t u d y a n d T D M P l a n ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) 3945 El Camino Real - Comfort Inn Parking Study October 12, 2017 Page | 2 Table 1). The peak parking demand for the Comfort Inn was found to be 0.62 occupied spaces per occupied room, which is slightly less than the typical peak parking demand observed at other hotels/motels in the area. Proposed Parking Supply The proposed project would have 67 rooms and 57 parking spaces on site following the remodel for a parking ratio of 0.85 spaces per room. Based on the City’s parking standards, the remodeled Comfort Inn would be required to provide 67 parking spaces (one space per guestroom). The proposed project would be ten spaces short of this requirement. Although the on-site parking would not meet the City’s code requirement, parking occupancy counts at the existing Comfort Inn and other comparable hotels in the area indicate that the proposed parking would meet the projected parking demand. The average parking ratio observed at comparable hotels/motels (0.66 occupied spaces per occupied room) was used to estimate the proposed project’s peak parking demand. This is a conservative assumption since the parking counts at the existing Comfort Inn revealed that it experiences a slightly lower parking ratio (averaging 0.62 occupied spaces per occupied room). Assuming 100 percent occupancy of 67 rooms, the project is expected to experience a peak parking demand of 45 vehicles after the remodel. As proposed, the project would provide 12 more parking spaces than the projected peak parking demand. Therefore, the 57 parking spaces provided is expected to be more than adequate to serve the site. Transportation Demand Management In an effort to further reduce the peak parking demand on site and to support a lower parking ratio, the project would implement various transportation demand management (TDM) strategies. These strategies would reduce the need for employees to park on site as well as allow travelers to get from the hotel to various destinations without requiring a vehicle of their own. These strategies are described below: Transit Subsidy. The project would provide monthly bus passes to employees who wish to commute using public transportation. VTA bus stops are located immediately adjacent to the project’s El Camino Real frontage, providing transit services via Local Route 22. This route provides northbound and southbound service between the Palo Alto Transit Center and Eastridge Transit Center on 15-minute headways during both the AM and PM peak hours. Taxi or Ride-Share Subsidy. The project would provide guests with a $20 subsidy for rides using a local taxi service or Uber ride-shares. This subsidy would only be provided to guests using taxi or ride-share to travel to and from the airport, and could not be used by guests who accessed the site via personal vehicle. The subsidy would be offered at the time of booking when determining the guest’s mode of transportation to the hotel during their stay. The subsidy is intended to provide hotel guests an incentive not to rent or use a personal vehicle that would have to be parked at the hotel. The project already has a working relationship with a local taxi service to support this subsidy. Bicycle Parking. The project will provide 9 bicycle racks, which will provide 18 Class II bicycle parking spaces to encourage employees to bike to work. Employees also may use bicycling as a last-mile connection between the project site and the California Avenue or San Antonio Caltrain stations, which are approximately 1.5 and 2 miles from the project site, respectively. 3.h Packet Pg. 112 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t H : P a r k i n g S t u d y a n d T D M P l a n ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) 3945 El Camino Real - Comfort Inn Parking Study October 12, 2017 Page | 3 The TDM strategies listed above and additional measures the hotel will take to reduce parking demand on-site are described in further detail in the projects Transportation Demand Management Plan, produced by Hexagon and dated 10/12/17. Conclusions Based on parking counts from similar hotels and motels, and the existing parking occupancy observed at the Comfort Inn, the proposed project would be adequately served by the parking provided on site. After remodel, full occupancy of 67 rooms is estimated to result in a peak parking demand of 45 vehicles, which would be well served by the 57 spaces provided on site. In addition, the project will implement TDM strategies that would discourage the use of a personal automobile. 3.h Packet Pg. 113 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t H : P a r k i n g S t u d y a n d T D M P l a n ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) 39 4 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l - C o m f o r t I n n P a r k i n g S t u d y O c t o b e r 1 2 , 2 0 1 7 Pa g e | 4 Ta b l e 1 Ho t e l / M o t e l P e a k P a r k i n g D e m a n d s Ho t e l C i t y R o o m s Ho t e l Oc c . 1 Pk g Sp a c e s Oc c . Sp a c e s pe r O c c . Ro o m Ho t e l Oc c . 1 Pk g Sp a c e s Oc c . Sp a c e s pe r O c c . Ro o m Ho t e l Oc c . 1 Pk g Sp a c e s Oc c . Sp a c e s pe r O c c . Ro o m Di n i n g O p t i o n s Lo s P r a d o s 2 Sa n M a t e o 1 1 6 9 2 % 5 5 0 . 5 2 9 5 % 5 2 0 . 4 7 9 1 % 5 8 0 . 5 5 0 . 5 1 C o m p l e m e n t a r y B r e a k f a s t Ba y L a n d i n g 3 Bu r l i n g a m e 1 3 0 9 5 % 7 6 0 . 6 2 9 6 % 7 2 0 . 5 8 9 5 % 7 8 0 . 6 3 0 . 6 1 C o m p l e m e n t a r y B r e a k f a s t Hi l t o n G a r d e n I n n 3 Sa n M a t e o 1 5 7 9 9 % 6 4 0 . 4 1 9 8 % 6 8 0 . 4 4 9 9 % 6 7 0 . 4 3 0 . 4 3 Th e G a r d e n G r i l l e & B a r , P a v i l i o n P a n t r y Hi l t o n G a r d e n I n n 3 Bu r l i n g a m e 1 3 2 9 4 % 4 6 0 . 3 7 9 6 % 4 4 0 . 3 5 7 9 % 4 9 0 . 4 7 0 . 4 0 Gr e a t A m e r i c a n G r i l l , P a v i l i o n P a n t r y Ho l i d a y I n n 4 Be l m o n t 8 2 7 9 % 3 9 0 . 6 0 8 3 % 5 5 0 . 8 1 n / a n / a n / a 0 . 7 1 C o m p l e m e n t a r y B r e a k f a s t Fa i r f i e l d I n n & S u i t e s 5 Sa n C a r l o s 1 2 0 6 8 % 6 6 0 . 8 0 5 8 % 8 8 1 . 2 8 n / a n / a n / a 1 . 0 4 C o m p l e m e n t a r y B r e a k f a s t Hi l t o n G a r d e n I n n 6 Mt V i e w 1 6 0 9 7 % 1 1 5 0 . 7 4 9 8 % 1 2 5 0 . 8 0 n / a n / a n / a 0 . 7 7 Th e G a r d e n G r i l l e & B a r , P a v i l i o n P a n t r y Sh e r a t o n I n n 6 Su n n y v a l e 1 7 3 7 2 % 8 8 0 . 7 0 9 5 % 1 4 6 0 . 8 9 n / a n / a n / a 0 . 8 0 Fa z R e s t a u r a n t & L o u n g e Co u r t y a r d M a r r i o t t 6 Su n n y v a l e 1 4 5 5 7 % 5 5 0 . 6 7 9 9 % 1 0 7 0 . 7 4 n / a n / a n / a 0 . 7 1 Th e B i s t r o Al o f t H o t e l 7 Cu p e r t i n o 1 2 3 1 0 0 % 76 0 . 6 2 9 8 % 6 7 0 . 5 5 n / a n / a n / a 0 . 5 9 Re s t a u r a n t , C a f é , & L o u n g e Su p e r 8 8 Pa l o A l t o 3 6 1 0 0 % 2 4 0 . 6 7 1 0 0 % 2 2 0 . 6 1 1 0 0 % 2 1 0 . 5 8 0 . 6 2 C o m p l e m e n t a r y B r e a k f a s t Qu a l i t y I n n 8 Pa l o A l t o 5 0 1 0 0 % 3 6 0 . 7 2 1 0 0 % 3 5 0 . 7 0 1 0 0 % 4 3 0 . 8 6 0 . 7 6 C o m p l e m e n t a r y B r e a k f a s t Ze n H o t e l 8 Pa l o A l t o 3 7 9 5 % 2 3 0 . 6 6 1 0 0 % 2 8 0 . 7 6 1 0 0 % 2 4 0 . 6 5 0 . 6 9 C o m p l e m e n t a r y B r e a k f a s t 0. 6 6 Co m f o r t I n n 9 Pa l o A l t o 6 9 1 0 0 % 4 3 0 . 6 2 1 0 0 % 4 6 0 . 6 7 9 7 % 3 9 0 . 5 8 0 . 6 2 C o m p l e m e n t a r y B r e a k f a s t No t e s 1. H o t e l O c c u p a n c y r e p r e s e n t s t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f r o o m s o c c u p i e d a t t h e t i m e o f t h e c o u n t 2. D a t a f r o m c o u n t s c o n d u c t e d b y H e x a g o n o n 3 / 7 - 9 / 2 0 1 7 3. D a t a f r o m c o u n t s c o n d u c t e d b y H e x a g o n o n 5 / 1 6 - 1 8 / 2 0 1 7 4. D a t a f r o m c o u n t s c o n d u c t e d b y H e x a g o n o n 3 / 3 0 / 2 0 1 6 a n d 4 / 2 / 2 0 1 6 . 5. D a t a f r o m c o u n t s c o n d u c t e d b y H e x a g o n o n 4 / 7 / 2 0 1 6 a n d 4 / 9 / 2 0 1 6 . 6. D a t a f r o m c o u n t s c o n d u c t e d b y H e x a g o n o n 4 / 3 0 / 2 0 1 6 a n d 5 / 2 / 2 0 1 6 . 7. D a t a f r o m c o u n t s c o n d u c t e d b y H e x a g o n o n 6 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 4 a n d 6 / 1 4 / 2 0 1 4 . 8. D a t a f r o m c o u n t s c o n d u c t e d b y H e x a g o n o n 8 / 2 6 - 2 8 / 2 0 1 3 9. D a t a f r o m c o u n t s c o n d u c t e d b y H e x a g o n o n 9 / 2 6 - 2 8 / 2 0 1 7 . N o t i n c l u d e d i n t h e c a l c u l a t i o n o f a v e r a g e p a r k i n g r a t e s f o r a l l c o m p ar a b l e h o t e l s . Av g . Sp a c e s pe r O c c . Ro o m Co u n t 1 Co u n t 2 Co u n t 3 Av e r a g e R a t e f o r A l l C o m p a r a b l e H o t e l s : 3. h Pa c k e t P g . 1 1 4 Attachment: Attachment H: Parking Study and TDM Plan (8128 : 3945 El Camino: Comfort Inn Hotel Memorandum Date: October 12, 2017 To: Mr. Rajen Shah, Comfort Inn Palo Alto From: Michelle Hunt Ricky Williams Subject: Transportation Demand Management Plan for the Proposed Comfort Inn at 3945 El Camino Real in Palo Alto, California Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is a combination of services, incentives, facilities, and actions that reduce single-occupant vehicle (SOV) trips to help relieve traffic congestion, parking demand, and air pollution problems. The purpose of TDM is to (1) reduce the amount of traffic generated by new developments; (2) promote more efficient utilization of existing transportation facilities and ensure that new developments are designed to maximize the potential for alternative transportation usage; (3) reduce the parking demand generated by new developments and allow for a reduction in parking supply; and (4) establish an ongoing monitoring and enforcement program to guarantee the desired trip and parking reductions are achieved. This TDM Plan was developed at the request of the City of Palo Alto. As proposed, the project would be providing fewer parking spaces on-site than required by the City’s parking code for hotel uses. The City has requested that the project submit a formal TDM Plan along with the project application for approval. Project Description The project site is located on the east side of El Camino Real, midblock between Ventura Avenue and El Camino Way. Currently, the hotel has 69 rooms and 60 parking spaces, including 57 standard spaces and 3 accessible spaces. The project is proposing to remodel the existing hotel to increase the size of the existing lobby by removing two guest rooms. The remodel would reduce the number of parking spaces on site to 57 spaces, including 54 standard spaces and 3 accessible spaces. Thus, the proposed project would result in 67 rooms and 57 parking spaces. The project site plan, provided to Hexagon in December 2017, in shown on Figure 1. The project site is located in close proximity to numerous employment centers and Stanford University, and is catered towards business travelers. Additionally, the site is within walking distance to bus transit stops, and various bicycle facilities that will provide additional travel options for hotel guests to reach their destinations. The site location relative to transit services and bicycle facilities are shown on Figures 2 and 3, respectively, and described below. 3.h Packet Pg. 115 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t H : P a r k i n g S t u d y a n d T D M P l a n ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) Fi g u r e 1 Si t e P l a n 39 4 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l - C o m f o r t I n n T D M P l a n 3. h Pa c k e t P g . 1 1 6 Attachment: Attachment H: Parking Study and TDM Plan (8128 : 3945 El Camino: Comfort Inn Hotel 34 9 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l - C o m f o r t I n n T D M P l a n Fi g u r e 2 Ex i s t i n g T r a n s i t S e r v i c e s Alm a S t Park B l v d El C a m i n o R e a l Wilki e W a y Mat a d e r o A v e Lo s R o b l e s A v e W M e a d o w D r Ma r g a r i t a A v e W h i t c l e m D r E C h a r l e s t o n R d El Camin o W a y Ma y b e l l A v e Mac l a n e S t = S i t e L o c a t i o n LE G E N D = L o c a l B u s R o u t e 2 2 22 22 22 = B u s S t o p 3. h Pa c k e t P g . 1 1 7 Attachment: Attachment H: Parking Study and TDM Plan (8128 : 3945 El Camino: Comfort Inn Hotel 34 9 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l - C o m f o r t I n n T D M P l a n Fi g u r e 3 Ex i s t i n g B i c y c l e I n f r a s t r u c t u r e Alm a S t Par k B l v d El C a m i n o R e a l Pa g e M i l l R d E M e a d o w D r E C h a r l e s t o n R d Los R o b l e s A v e Wilki e W a y Mat a d e r o A v e May b e l l A v e Lag u n a A v e S C a l i f o r n i a A v e M o n r o e D r Ore g o n E x p y La m b e r t A v e Ma r g a r i t a A v e W M e a d o w D r W h i t c l e m D r S a n A n t o n i o R d El Camin o W a y Macl a n e S t Ha n s e n W a y Hansen Way Ha n s e n W a y Ha n o v e r S t Hanover St Ha n o v e r S t Bol-Park B i k e P a t h B o l -P a r k B i k e P a t h Bol-Park B i k e P a t h Ara s t r a d e r o R d Arastradero Rd Ara s t r a d e r o R d = S i t e L o c a t i o n LE G E N D = C l a s s I I B i k e L a n e s = C l a s s I I I B i k e R o u t e s = C l a s s I B i k e P a t h = B i c y c l e B o u l e v a r d 3. h Pa c k e t P g . 1 1 8 Attachment: Attachment H: Parking Study and TDM Plan (8128 : 3945 El Camino: Comfort Inn Hotel 3945 El Camino Real - Comfort Inn TDM Plan October 12, 2017 Page | 5 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the project include on-street bicycle lanes (Class II facilities) and shared vehicle/bicycle lanes (Class III facilities). In addition to these facilities, the City of Palo Alto has designated certain roadways as bicycle boulevards. Bicycle boulevards consist of Class II or Class III facilities on roadways with especially low traffic volumes and speeds, with bicycle priorities such as stop signs on only cross streets and wayfinding features. Class I facilities also exist within the project vicinity including the Bol-Park Bike Path and the Wilkie Way/Miller Avenue bicycle and pedestrian bridge. Class II bicycle lanes include: x Meadow Drive x El Camino Way, between El Camino Real and Meadow Drive x Park Boulevard, bicycle boulevard north of Lambert Avenue x Arastradero Road/Charleston Road x Page Mill Road, west of El Camino Real x Hansen Way, between Page Mill Road and El Camino Real x Hanover Street Class III bicycle facilities include: x Los Robles Avenue x Wilkie Way, between Maclane Street and Monroe Drive x Maclane Street, between Wilkie Way and Park Boulevard x Park Boulevard, between Lambert Avenue and Whitclem Drive x Matadero Avenue/Margarita Avenue, bicycle boulevard between Laguna Avenue and Park Boulevard Sidewalks are present along both sides of all nearby roadways. Signalized crosswalks with pedestrian push buttons are provided across all legs at the nearby intersection of El Camino Real/El Camino Way. At the El Camino Real/Ventura Avenue intersection, signalized crosswalks are present on the south and east approaches. Transit Service The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) provides bus services to the immediate project area via bus stops immediately adjacent to the project’s frontage on El Camino Real, serving Local Route 22. This route provides service between the Palo Alto Transit Center and the Eastridge Transit Center via El Camino Real. Northbound and southbound service is provided throughout the day and night with 10-15 minute headways during peak hours. Local Route 22 provides transit connections to Caltrain, VTA Light Rail, the Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) train, Capital Corridor trains, SamTrans busses, and the Marguarite Shuttle (operated by Stanford University). TDM Strategies The hotel is suited to promote non-single-occupancy-vehicle modes of transportation, including transit, bicycle, and ride-sharing. The project’s location and service of primarily business travelers also assist in reducing the peak-hour vehicle trips to and from the site. The project will implement several TDM strategies that will promote these alternative transportation trips during peak commute hours with the goal of reducing single-occupancy vehicle trips to and from the site by 15 percent. 3.h Packet Pg. 119 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t H : P a r k i n g S t u d y a n d T D M P l a n ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) 3945 El Camino Real - Comfort Inn TDM Plan October 12, 2017 Page | 6 Location Based Measures The following TDM measures would not need to be implemented by the project itself. Instead, they are features of the project’s location that would likely result in fewer vehicle trips to and from the project site than other hotels in a typical suburban setting. x Proximity to Transit. The project is located immediately adjacent to bus stops along El Camino Real. These bus stops support one local bus route that runs throughout the day and provide frequent and reliable transit service to and from nearby employment centers, retail areas, and transit hubs. x Proximity to Retail Uses. The proposed project is located within walking distance to various retail and restaurant uses along El Camino Real. It can be expected that some hotel guests will access these nearby uses via walking, which will reduce the number of vehicle trips. Proposed TDM Measures As discussed in the project’s Parking Study (produced by Hexagon and dated December 13, 2017), the hotel currently experiences a peak parking demand of only 0.62 occupied spaces per occupied room, which is less than the proposed parking ratio (0.85 spaces per room) and less than the parking ratio required in the City’s zoning code (1.0 spaces per room). The purpose of these new TDM measures would be to further reduce the demand for on-site parking at the hotel. These measures include: x Taxi or Ride-Share Subsidy. The project would provide guests with a $20 subsidy for rides using a local taxi or rider share service (e.g. Uber). This subsidy would only be provided to guests using taxi or ride-share to travel to and from the airport, and could not be used by guests who accessed the site via personal vehicle. The subsidy would be offered at the time of booking when determining the guest’s mode of transportation to the hotel during their stay. The subsidy is intended to provide hotel guests an incentive not to rent or use a personal vehicle that would have to be parked at the hotel. The project already has a working relationship with a local taxi service to support this subsidy. x Transit Subsidy. A VTA Eco Pass will be provided to all employees of the hotel. The Eco Pass will provide employees with unlimited rides on VTA busses, light rail, and express bus service seven days a week. The Eco Pass includes an Emergency Ride Home Program in which employees would be provided with a guaranteed ride home from work in the event of an emergency. x Bicycle Parking. The project will implement and maintain bicycle parking facilities as required by the City code. The project will install 9 bicycle racks, which will provide 18 Class II bicycle parking spaces (short-term bicycle parking) to encourage employees to bike to work. Employees may also use bicycling as a last-mile connection between the project site and the California Avenue or San Antonio Caltrain stations, which are approximately 1.5 and 2 miles from the project site, respectively. x Alternative Parking Plan. Based on the results of the TDM monitoring report, the project may be required to implement an alternative parking plan to meet on-site parking demand. The project would provide valet or other, similar parking management operations as required by the Director. Figure 4 shows a sample site plan showing how the project would 3.h Packet Pg. 120 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t H : P a r k i n g S t u d y a n d T D M P l a n ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) 3945 El Camino Real - Comfort Inn TDM Plan October 12, 2017 Page | 7 be able to satisfy the zoning code parking requirement on site though the implementation of valet parking. TDM Monitoring The project will produce two monitoring reports and submit them to the City of Palo Alto for review. These reports will be produced two and five years following the project’s entitlement and will include a description of the TDM measures implemented and parking counts relative to the occupancy of the hotel at the time counts were conducted. If the monitoring report and parking counts show that the parking demand fills or exceeds the supply, implementation of additional TDM measures and/or an alternative parking plan may be required. 3.h Packet Pg. 121 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t H : P a r k i n g S t u d y a n d T D M P l a n ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) Fi g u r e 4 Sa m p l e V a l e t P a r k i n g P l a n No t e s : Va l e t p a r k i n g c o u l d p r o v i d e u p t o 7 0 t o t a l pa r k i n g s p a c e s o n - s i t e , i n c l u d i n g 5 7 ve h i c l e s p a r k e d i n d e s i g n a t e d s p a c e s an d 1 3 v e h i c l e s p a r k e d i n t h e d r i v e a i s l e . 39 4 5 E l C a m i n o R e a l - C o m f o r t I n n T D M P l a n 3. h Pa c k e t P g . 1 2 2 Attachment: Attachment H: Parking Study and TDM Plan (8128 : 3945 El Camino: Comfort Inn Hotel ATTACHMENT I 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: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pln/current/default.asp 2. On the left hand side click “Development Proposals” 3. In the drop down window click “Pending Projects” 4. Scroll to find “3945 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://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/64370 3.i Packet Pg. 123 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t I : P r o j e c t P l a n s ( 8 1 2 8 : 3 9 4 5 E l C a m i n o : C o m f o r t I n n H o t e l R e n o v a t i o n ( 1 s t F o r m a l ) ) City of Palo Alto Page 1 Call to Order/Roll Call Present: Chair Wynne Furth, Board Member Alexander Lew, Robert Gooyer, Osma Thompson Absent: Vice Chair Baltay Chair Furth: Good morning and welcome to the meeting of the Architectural Review Board. Find my agenda shortly. Could you call the roll, please? Oral Communications Chair Furth: Now is the time for anybody who wishes to speak to us on an item not on the agenda. Is there anybody? I don’t have a speaker card. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions Chair Furth: So, agenda changes, additions and deletions? Ms. Amy French, Chief Planning Official: None. 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. Chair Furth: Does anybody on the Board have any comments? I mean the only comment if you look at item one which has future agendas you will see that March would seem to be a fairly intense month in terms of agenda items. Ms. French: There are some changes to those items. Chair Furth: Thank you. Ms. French: We have one additional item for March 1st, that’s the Junior Museum and Zoo and that’s proposing to modify the roof materials. On March 15th the Tier Three, Cluster Two for Vinculums Verizon will not be coming to you. Chair Furth: Thank you. Let’s see, do I – is this… Board Member Gooyer: (inaudible) ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD February 15, 2018 City Hall/City Council Chambers 250 Hamilton Avenue 8:30 AM City of Palo Alto Page 2 Chair Furth: Is this a request to speak during oral communication? Oh, ok. Good enough, I never remember which Lot is which letter. Action Items 2. PUBLIC HEARING/QUASI-JUDICIAL. 375 Hamilton Avenue [17PLN-00360]: Consideration of an Architectural Review Application for a Five-Level, Nearly 50-Foot Tall Parking Structure, With One Below Grade Parking Level Providing 338 Public Parking Spaces. Environmental Assessment: A Draft Environmental Impact Report is Being Prepared for Publication in Late February 2018 for a 45-Day Public Comment Period. Zone District: PF; Public Facilities. For More Information Contact Chief Planning Official Amy French at amy.french@cityofpaloalto.org. Chair Furth: Alright, then I think we’re onto item two, a public hearing, its quasi-judicial, the site is 375 Hamilton Avenue, it’s a consideration of an Architectural Review Application for a five-level, nearly 50- foot tall parking structure, with one below grade parking level providing 338 public parking spaces. It also has retail space, it would eliminate one existing public restroom and is designed to comply not with the current Public Facilities Ordinance zoning standards but with proposed new standards which were considered by the Planning and Transportation Commission recently. The draft environmental report is still in preparation. This agenda says late February but I believe that Staff will tell us that date has been moved back. Could we have the Staff report, please? Ms. French: Thank you. Amy French, Chief Planning Official overseeing the process on this project. Excuse my voice today, I’ve had Laryngitis since Sunday. The project is indeed a garage that would provide parking spaces for the public, as well as retail space; a small amount. I will note that on the future notice for this project we will includes the words retail space in the notice. Today the purpose is to learn about the project and the statues and the timeline to understand that, to receive the architect’s presentation, ask questions of Staff and the applicant and the architect and provide guidance for the next plan set that would come to you. We’re targeting April 19th as the next agenda date for this. Board Member Baltay did provide written comments that were distributed to the Architectural Review Board yesterday. Again, we want to continue the public hearing for several reasons. One is that we have not yet published the draft Environmental Impact Report and the target date is now – timeline is now the end of March. So, we want to have some comments – public comments in the public record at the Architectural Review Board hearing in April. This gives an overview that is contained in the Staff report. You saw this project last year, you – a different constitution of the ARB – in September. Those minutes were excerpt minutes were forward by email to the Board and there was a link in the Staff report as well. As noted, the Planning and Transportation Commission on January 19th – January 31st recommended the proposed zone changes that were requested with the Sherman Avenue garage and Public Safety Building project. Those are to modify -- to allow Council to approve case by case each project modified zoning standards for Public Safety or essential Public facilities and public parking garages within downtown and California Avenue in the PF zone. Those included height, lot coverage, setbacks and including the special setback. I’m going to kind of skip through because I’m getting a tired voice here. As you can see I’m handling both projects so I don’t want to walk you through this but this is what I’m faced with personally. It is to get both – there really are three projects; the public parking garage on Sherman, the Public Safety Building and this project through the process to the Council for them to approve the final EIRs and the two projects and the zone code change. We have some flexibility for the number of parking spaces actually in the garage through the Council said how many to put into the garage. We do have some flexibility because we are proposing to remove the mailbox that’s in the public right of way – City right of way that people drive by to put their mail across the street. That would introduce more parking spaces on the street. In addition, the Council – some Council Members noted their interest in having lift parking in this downtown garage and so that’s being explored and that’s the reason for the delay in the draft EIR. This drawing on this slide shows a concept that our transportation division Staff has put forward as to improve the pedestrian experience through the garage from Hamilton towards the proposed pedestrian alley. I’m getting tired. Our discussion today is, of course, to provide guidance on this project. Some questions have been raised, particularly about the pedestrian experience at the back to the building near City of Palo Alto Page 3 CVS and that interface and the questions about landscaping and seating. In the Staff report we recommended some additional tension there with taller landscaping along that façade. Another question was raised about when the parking system goes in with those gates preventing cars from going through without paying in the future. Where would the pedestrians go who are parked at the back of that garage when they want to go to CVS? So, that was a question that was raised and it’s a good one so exploring that now. The special setback, again this is dating back to the 1950s. We think it was about the cars came – giving more space to the cars and that we would widen the street at some point. Well, our thinking has changed and we prefer narrower streets to calm traffic so in any case it’s been recommended. The contextual setback in this area is of interest and certainly the AT&T building next door is a 7-foot setback but this proposed project does have a building separation essentially providing a 20-foot setback for the first 15-feet of the building next to the AT&T building. So, there’s – there is a 20-foot setback for some distance but the remained would be on the lot line. Now to compensate for that, the project has a wider sidewalk proposed and so the other consideration was – has – Chair Furth mentioned the removal of the public restroom. There are nearby retailers including CVS that have restrooms for their customers. I’m going to move forward. I do have a slide for the Downtown (inaudible) Design Guide -- Hamilton Avenue District, if you want to see it later, let me know. I’m going to switch over to the applicant now. Thank you. Ms. Holly Boyd: Good morning Board Members. My name is Holly Boyd, I’m a Senior Engineer in Public Works, and I’m the project manager for this garage. I just wanted to introduce some members of our design team who are here. We have Michelle Wendler from Watry Design and Genaro Morales from Watry Design and we also have Ken Hayes who is our lead architect on the project and he will be giving the presentation so I’ll ask him to come up now. Chair Furth: Good morning Mr. Hayes, the rules give you ten minutes. Mr. Ken Hayes: Alright, thank you. Good morning Chair Furth and Members of the Board. Welcome Board Member Thompson. My name is Ken Hayes with Hayes Group Architects and I’ll be making the presentation on behalf of the team. We’re actually working for Watry Design Group, the experts in parking garage design on this project and thank your introducing everybody Holly. So, Council’s direction for the redevelopment of Lot D, the existing parking lot, was five levels above ground, one level below ground, 338 parking stalls, bikes spaces, a retail space on Waverly – excuse me – as well as future photovoltaic panels on the roof. The project site, I think we’re all very familiar with it. It’s a 29,00-square foot project site and a little more context here shows the project in the center. It’s currently zoned PF, it’s surrounded mostly by CDC, GF with a P; pedestrian overlay zoning district. Although the AT&T building is a PF, the post office is a PF and the post office is also a historic Category I. We have a historic Category III at the Palo Alto Toy World on Waverly. As well as a Victorian house next to that and the Decker Oak building on the corner of University and Waverly as well, it’s also a historic building. You can see here the 7-foot setback across the front. We will be widening the sidewalk on Hamilton and reconfiguring the drop off for the mail. This sidewalk will be 12-feet, the sidewalk along Waverly at this location will be about 18-feet so we’re going to extend those out and create a little bit more generous area. Lane 21 enters here and exits onto Bryant Street. It is one way in that direction from Waverley to Bryant Street. Just some images of the surrounding buildings I showed you back in September. The AT&T building is about 25-feet taller than our building. The All Saints Episcopal Church, 400 Hamilton, is all clad in brick and then we have the historic post office image there with its arcade across the front. When we were here in September we showed you three options and there was some focus essentially on Options One and Three. Option One and Three had a strong arcade at the ground floor level both on Waverly and on Hamilton. They had one or the other perforated metal panels above or metal fins that add interest to the garage but also allowed for the ventilation that’s required. This is an unventilated garage at the upper levels. They all had a corner plaza as well as a larger welcoming stair than this option here. So, we focused our – what you see today on kind of a combination of Options One and of Options Three. Some of the changes that were expressly made based on feedback from you, this is a detail of the corner. Originally, we had a 28-foot deep retail space and I think everyone thought that was a little bit shallow. So, we’ve now made that 35-feet so we’ve increased the depth. We’ve also increased the area by about 450-square feet. There was some concern about how you see into the garage from the street frontages City of Palo Alto Page 4 and so before it was just a single path from Hamilton. You really couldn’t see through in this direction so the idea was to reconfigure this corner plaza. Make it a little bit more generous, push the elevator back so that we can actually create a clean pathway here and one coming in from Waverly Street so that no matter where you’re coming, you can see into the garage. That helps I think in terms of wayfinding and also safety. Walking down Waverly, this was one of the comments and this really applied to Option Three but is there a way to make sure that the post office is afforded as much view opportunity as possible. So, the option we have today basically has pulled everything back that went into the corner plaza so as you approach the corner on that ground floor, you do see the post office as soon as possible; the main entrance there. Then we wanted to create a walkway to CVS and we really like transportations suggestion at the expense of some parking so now we’re at 334 spaces instead of Council’s directions for 338 but it does create a great way to come into the garage. You’d be walking along were all the bike racks would be. I think we can expand that bike rack area to include areas for people with strollers or bike trailers so we’ve increased the potential for parking. It’s not on your plan but it’s on the slide that you see here. Then having right angle crossing that would send you right to the stairways that then comes from four levels above and feeds into this pedestrian connection that we have here, as well as the alley connection that is behind the building that faces onto Waverley Street. So, we get a little synergy here which I think would be really great and it reinforces people coming down, it’s a circulation point. It will probably be used more frequently than the one over here on the corner. Then future underground parking and adjacent lots, there was concern about – Elizabeth Wong and Brad Ehikian parcels. So, the thinking is that from the basement level, we could actually plan into the structural walls of that basement ways for block out panels to take place to allow connections here. At grade level, the proposal with the alley in the back actually is wider than what they have now on those parcels because what they have now is just a drive aisle of the parking lot. That drive isle now is going to become an alley and so we’re about 2-feet wider than the free space that they have right now for garbage collection and pumping of the grease interceptor and that sort of thing. Can we reduce the 10-foot pedestrian alley to provide greater setback along Hamilton? We can if we want to get rid of about seventy cars, alright. Our advice is to not do that, to really put some attention into the detail and the amenities of this pedestrian alley. So, the garage is down at the bottom of the screen, this is Elizabeth Wong’s building, and this is Brad Ehikian’s building. This is what we’re proposing as that connection – that linkage. We need it for ventilation for the garage. We need 10-feet, anything less doesn’t work and so if it’s less than that, we’re going to have to go to a mechanically ventilated garage and in my opinion that would be a waste of energy. This actually terminates with a view corridor towards the All Saints sort of open area of their front yard. Then in this direction here it becomes the alley, we have a combined trash enclosure here and we have provisions for them to be able to get to those trash encloses. To get behind their buildings and to do any kind of servicing that they need to do at the grease interceptors and that sort of thing and like I said, more room than they have today if there’s cars parked in the parking lot that is. This is the street façade. Here you can see the AT&T building is quite a bit taller than our building. Our building is at about 49-foot 10 to the top of the railing. This is a larger view of the front of the building. You see the arcade or the rhythm of columns and openings that are along Hamilton. Each of those openings is filled with a bench for seating, an integral planter into the building and a ray of vine wires to give some plant material to – excuse me – plant material to fill those openings; as well as some decorative metal and the idea of the decorative metal throughout the garage is to celebrate some of the decorative metal you see in the historic buildings in the vicinity. We have a combination of the metal fins above to provide some interest. They’re controlled by a metal frame that wraps around them and then erode the corner at the end to highlight the elevator core. The stair becomes an enclosed stair now with perforated metal around it, before it was an open stair and one of the suggestions was to make that an enclosed stair. However, the stair sort of descends out of that volume so that you see people moving up and down quite easily to the plaza here. The perforated metal denotes the entrance there, it also denotes the entrance here and it denotes the stair at the back when you walk down the alley. This is the façade for Waverley and again we’re trying to pick up on the two-story rhythm and heights of the buildings of that block. This is the historic building here – I’m sorry, one more building down is the historic building but we’re trying to relate to the cornice line essentially of that building there. Then the retail space below that you see there with the glass and then above that would be again a decorative metal screen that would conceal the cars but bring that color, that texture of the metal into the project. The view from Hamilton looking I guess west and you see the corner façade here. The materials are a sandblasted concrete for the arcade and City of Palo Alto Page 5 we’re really trying to bring in the color that you find in the Sienna or Terracotta Tile Roofs, the brick on the corner building so I think one of the strongest ways to relate to context is through color. You can see the perforated metal here and again, we’re thinking that all the metal is some kind of a bronze color so it's dark. It’s not anodized aluminum in any kind of an aluminum color. This is if we add the solar panels on top and what that could look like. Then a view from above and across. You can see the perforated metal again back here and that’s there that you see when you look through. We have the solar panels above and then some detail of the plaza itself and 30-seconds and I’m there. Chair Furth: Take what time you need, you’re the only agenda item. Mr. Hayes: We want to bring that decorative metal quality into the stair work and so you see it coming down to the plaza and that would wrap up and through this perforated metal screen. This would a detail of the benches and the back slopes so that you can be comfortable there. The integral planters here and this is where the vines would infill those areas. Then we have the metal – decorative metal screen behind that as well. Just some detail of the fins with the metal work around them and then what that could look like on the right-hand side when the PV (inaudible) is added. Then lastly this is the alley, you see beyond the destination, the stair, the metal screen again because it isn’t an entrance identity. Then if you walk down that stair and look back, you can see how we could start to animate that alley with plant material. We have been opportunities and then some kind of interesting lighting. So, I think it could be a really interesting space and if you want to see a space that’s similar scale, go to Chop’s new building on the corner of Hamilton and High. Look at the alley between the Palantir cafeteria building and his new building, it’s almost identical. I think we could really enhance that space and it could be a nice space. That’s my presentation, we all look forward to your comments. Thank you. Chair Furth: Thank you. I have a number of public comment cards and if or members of the public wishing to speak, if you haven’t submitted a card, would you please. Brad Ehikian to be followed by Elizabeth Wong. Mr. Brad Ehikian: Thank you. We have Jaime Rodriguez here who would like to combine Elizabeth’s and my card for the full time for the presentation that we have. Chair Furth: Untangle me a little bit more. What – who – what – I’m fine to have you speak in whatever order you would like. I have four cards here, Elizabeth Wong, Jamie Wong, Jamie Rodriquez and Brad Ehikian and Andrew Wong. What would you like? Mr. Ehikian: We would like to combine them for one presentation. Chair Furth: That’s fine with me. Sure, feel free, that… Mr. Ehikian: Thank you. Chair Furth: …gives you… Mr. Jamie Rodriquez: I’m going to go ahead and get started. My name is Jamie Rodriquez, I’m with Traffic Patterns and I’m a traffic engineering firm providing services to a couple of the property owners adjacent to this particular project. Our peer review of the places for the garage really focuses on the operations of the existing buildings, the businesses that operate within those buildings and the long-term impacts both during construction and after. So, here’s a quick site plan, again your architect already showed this to you. This is Waverley and Hamilton, the garage – the existing surface lot on Hamilton, Lot D showing down towards the bottom right. We’re here working with two of the property owns, Manhattan Associates who’s represented by Brad Ehikian behind me and they’re basically the building that is owned where Prolific Oven is. Elizabeth Wong with Waverley Post, also behind me, is the building right next to that where the Tai Pan Restaurant is. So, those are the two buildings that are most immediately impacted by the construction of the garage itself. For the people that are home that haven’t had a chance to read the letter that was provided to you just yesterday, I’m going to walk through the City of Palo Alto Page 6 presentation so that people later can view this at home on their own to get a high overview of what some of the design issues are that we’re requesting additional accommodations on (inaudible) part of this project. Most important and specifically is the issue of grease clean outs. For people at home and for you who don’t understand that grease clean outs include two elements. There’s basically an underground storage tank that stores grease and other debris that gets generated in kitchens and they also include what is called clean outs. Cleanouts are where vehicles or vacuums are accessing that debris to basically vacuum it out of the ground to take it away for recycling or for cleaning. This is an example of what it takes to clean out these grease traps. Basically, they (inaudible) what they call a vacuum truck and the City Staff uses these around the City to clean out storm drains. They are used all over Palo Alto and other restaurants to pull out that debris and they are cleaned on a weekly basis at the restaurant at Tai Pan. What we’re seeing right now is that the only feasible way for both these buildings to access grease pits that exists and others that are being planned right now in construction in Brad’s building. You guess have a new application for a restaurant that will be building a second grease trap so you have to have a much higher ground floor. There’s no way that these vacuum trucks can connect the additional hoses and vacuums to vacuum out all this debris from these two kitchens from the alleyway. You have to have access from where it takes place today, the equivalent of the lot on the ground floor. That would require a much higher ground floor, I think right now you’re at about 11 ½-feet. You probably need closer to a 16-foot ground floor ceiling height to accommodate any of these services vehicles that came in and clean the grease trucks and potentially trash removal vehicles. Regarding parking, 550 and 552 is Prolific Oven and currently has two parking spaces. One is kind of dedicated to the space formally and they operate a second parking space that they use regularly informally. Informal versus formal, that’s still parking that’s used by these buildings that will get lost both during construction and post-construction. 558 and 560 Waverley where Tai Pan is doesn’t have any formal spaces but they use one space regularly every day for different operations. So, we talking about immediately three spaces that are going to get lost and what we’re seeing in the plans that were provided by the City is that only one parking space is being provided back to the Prolific Oven building. There’s an inequity in the parking distribution back to the Tai Pan Restaurant building with no parking and so that’s definitely been a concern for the team. What we’re suggesting that the City consider is to dedicate additional spaces within the ground floor of the garage immediately behind the buildings. There are six spaces that are shown on what is the northeast corner of the building. We would request that two spaces get provided per building, as well as a dedicated commercial loading zone with that higher 16-foot ground floor. Service vehicles can get in there, remove trash bins from the garage if you add second double doors sets on the inside of the garage to pull the trash out; as well as the vacuum trucks to clean out the grease pits from the Tai Pan Restaurant and the Restaurant that’s going to built at 558 or 552. Preferably, if that’s not something that the City is open to doing then we would just request that you provide a 24-foot alleyway around both sides of the building that maintains a two-way access to get vehicles in and out. That’s those buildings preserved their existing parking but that would have some significant impacts to the project and so we think that a really good kind of halfway point is dedicate those spaces back to the building owners. Regarding future development of the buildings, the architects mentioned that there were going to be accommodations to be able to punch through at the basement level of the garages future underground parking for the buildings if they were ever to get redeveloped. That’s a great idea but what’s really missing in the plans we have now is how that’s going to happen. If this was a development project, this – you guys at the City would want to see details about how that future construction is going to happen but that lacks today. So, there’s just a big concern from our clients that it’s great that the note is there but there’s no accommodation or design details. It may be found later on that (inaudible) feasible because the design doesn’t actually accommodate for it. We really think that this need to really get taken care of at this design phase so there’s not an issue later in construction. In addition, in order for that to happen, any developer would have to have agreements that are handed to the City that say that we’re going to work with another entity to give access to somebody else to move through our site. That actually hasn’t happened for these projects so as great as it is that we’re getting kind of notes on the plans that show future access connection points. What’s most important is that you have the dedicated access agreements agreed upon between the City and the project property owners, as well as the temporary construction easements or TCEs that allow them later to kind of punch through that wall. In addition, the long-term parking lost impacts from those walls punching through to provide the underground access, needs to be documented and accounted for in the parking stall count for the project because you’re City of Palo Alto Page 7 going to start out with a certain project space now. Then you’re going to lose that later on when you provide that access so the public really needs to understand what that long-term effect is going to be. Regarding trash operations, it’s really good that the garage has a combined trash bin kind of to the north but that provides some significant impacts to the two buildings. It’s great for the building behind Prolific Oven because the trash bins (inaudible) their location but for the Tai Pan Restaurant, it introduces almost a 100-foot walk to actually take trash and other debris into the trash enclosure. That’s a little bit of a concern for the property owner and the businesses because that introduces an opportunity for there to be injuries taking debris that far. It introduces blockages to the pedestrian alleyway that the City is trying to create while that trash (inaudible) relocated. It introduces the opportunity for a spillage and other kind of impacts to whatever decorative pavers you’re trying to create by that trash being hauled away. So, the more you minimize the distance from the buildings to those trash bins, the better in the long term for the community. What we would recommend is that you consider creating two dedicated trash enclosures, one that’s dedicated to the Prolific Oven building and a second that’s dedicated to the Tai Pan building. Both located immediately adjacent or behind each building to reduce that walking distance. Those though would need to be preferably remove the bins from the inside of the garage so that you’re not worrying about then taking debris and spilling other trash and liquids in the alleyway and staining that long-term and creating a long-term impact. What we think would work best is if you dedicate those spaces -- create those dedicated bins and you might have a one parking space impact but in the long run you’re going to end up with a much cleaner operating pedestrian alleyway and a much clearer operating garage. Regarding the shade study for the project, our clients are still evaluating that. We’re not going to provide too much specifics on the engineering side but we did want to make some specific notes that did bounce out to us. One is that both clients where already in the process of looking at the installation of solar panels to help reduce the operation cost of those buildings. We think that with those buildings coming in with their solar panels, that’s going to block the ability of sun to hit the panels that gets installed on these buildings. So, that’s a long-term impact that we’re still trying to figure out but we wanted to make that note to you. If the buildings were just to get pushed back 24-feet on either side to allow two-way alleyways, that would protect the ability of both of these buildings for our clients to get good sun exposure for their solar panel systems. Regarding the alleyway, we’ve already expressed concerns to the City that as great of an idea as the alleyway is, you’re basically creating an alleyway behind up to three kitchens now and those kitchens do generate noise, they generate trash and order that we don’t think are going to be really amenable towards pedestrians wanting to dwell in that space. The other issue is the issue how dark it is and just from this example in the architect’s rendering, you can see the alleyways are already dark, kind of (inaudible) at almost all times of the day. What really bounced out to us is that the average foot candle lightening of the alleyway is only one-foot candle. That’s the same footcandle design the City uses for its public streets that all the residents complain that are too dark at night. So, you can tell from here if it’s dark in the evenings, it’s going to be worse in the – if it’s dark in the dust period, it’s going to be worse in the evening for residents. The architect’s presentation showed a really nice examples of lighting kind of stretching between two buildings but that’s actually not what is proposed on the plans. All that’s proposed is string lights kind of on the garage side of the building and so with that you’re not going to get the type of lighting that both buildings feel is going to require or improve the safety of their employees in the buildings, as well as the public traveling on the back side. The other things is that we would request the removal of anything that would encourage people to dwell and sleep and kind of congregate in that back area for vandalism issues. Regarding the issues of the grease traps, again we showed you how those grease traps need to be accessed. You got to think that vacuum truck and those big vacuum hoses need to push them from the garage on the first floor through openings on the ground floor through the back doors of the buildings and into the kitchens. The trees that are shown, the planters that are shown, those all conflict with those long-term operations. This building as shown will kill the operations of both businesses and any planned businesses at both of these buildings. The only way to do that is to remove the trees that are shown which is highlighted in green and remove the planter wall and provide more access space for service vehicles to be able to get in there and maintain those buildings. A couple other issues regarding construction, you’re basically going to be building a pit when you construct the garage and that’s just part of construction. The applicant or the developer just don’t understand how grease trap operations need to get maintained but there’s an impact in cost, they are requesting that the City project take on the burden of removing that grease trap during the construction phase. Also because of the fact that all the loading happens from the back of the City of Palo Alto Page 8 buildings today, they are also requesting that during the construction phase that all of the parking or the majority of the parking along the frontage of Waverley Street be converted to loading zones so that service vehicles can continue to maintain those buildings. If possible, create some type of a parkette or some type of enclosure that let’s all the trash bins be stored there. So, that services vehicles can come in and grab that trash before -- then take it out after the project is done and move towards the hopefully preferably two storage bins on the ground floor if the garage. We’re also looking to hopefully request weekly cleanings of the buildings. You’re going to be generating a lot of dust and debris and any private developer would be required to do that. They do it on their own outside of the City but in this case the City has to take on that responsibility. The other issue that we didn’t see addressed in the plans is the issue of drainage from both buildings. Both buildings have rooftop drains that either spill into underground storm drain systems or spill into the alleyway and with the dark and loss of light to dry up that water that generates from the rooftops in the day and in the winter. We’re seeing an issue of potential rodents and kind of moss generated in the pedestrian alleyway. So, again, if you push the building back 24-feet, then that allows the sun exposure to come in and dry all that out during the day. In regards to these issues all that we’re asking is that you let us sit down with the City Staff more, Seth has met with the developers – with the clients in the past but they haven’t responded to the issues. So, these issues aren’t new to the City, it’s just issues that haven’t been addressed. That’s the end of our presentation. Chair Furth: Thank you very much. Is there anybody else who wishes to speak? Alright -- Roxy? Mr. Rapp. Mr. Roxy Rapp: Thank you. Good morning. Two ideas, one is across the street you have the post office and one of the problems with the development of the post office is they want to stay while you develop it and bring it up to seismic, clean out all the asbestos, etc. etc. which is impossible to do a good job. Especially in a historical building and my suggestion is for this Board to encourage the City to work with the US Postal Service and have them move across the street to the retail. It fits beautifully because it’s a very narrow retail spot so you can have all of the post office boxes and we really don’t need as big of the post office as we have now because that use to be the main post office. It no longer is so I think that would be terrific to move the post office across the street and that would find them a new home for where you can redo the existing post office. That’s number one and number two is as most of you know, I developed with Jim Bear 250 University, where we have the alleyway which didn’t come out as nice as I pictured it but someday maybe it will get changed. We do have a trash room in the alleyway and it’s a tough situation to do. Looking at the plans that Ken just shared with me, my first suggestion would be to move the doors -- that you move out the trash and move those doors to open up early in the morning to the alley itself for the – they can pull the containers into the alley. Right there the dumpster can pick it up and dump it and then you can move it back in. What I’m worried about is you move them out those existing doors and then you hit into Brad’s new building there. Then also you have that electrical box underground and I don’t care how careful you are, those dumpsters leak. So, then you would have all the smells of the different garbage etc. going down into the electrical boxes under the ground that has a grade on top of it so that would stop two things there. In regards to dumping the trash for the retailer, I would go ahead and keep a side door so the retailer doesn’t have to go down into the alley to dump their existing trash. So, you would actually have a set of doors or one door, a wide door, that they would open up to dump their trash from the retail operation. Thank you. Chair Furth: Thank you. Would the applicant that is the City like to respond? It’s your turn. Ms. Boyd: I would just like to say that we received the letter from Brad Ehikian and Elizabeth Wong for the neighboring property owners yesterday and I believe it was sent to you as well. There are some existing issues that we have met with these neighbors in the past, a couple times and we’re working out some of the issues. There are some new issues that were brought up in this letter that we have not heard before. I do want to say that I think you also received a letter that was sent from our Attorney’s Office… Chair Furth: From Albert Yang? City of Palo Alto Page 9 Ms. Boyd: …from Albert Yang on Monday. So, our attorney, the City’s Attorney’s Office, and the neighbor’s attorneys are in communications and ask that City Staff continue meeting with these neighbors to work out these issues but we would still like to hear comments about the building. We’re not asking for recommendations of approval today but we’d like to hear comments from the Board regarding this project. Chair Furth: Thank you so just to go over it, we have the correspondence in the packet, we have the Valentine’s Day letter from Ms. Wong and Mr. Ehikian and we have a pretty long memo from our colleague Peter Baltay about his comments on the first round and his subsequent response. I think those are all available to the public. Ok, it’s over to us, any questions of Staff before we go on? Board Member Lew: I just – I have one question so there’s an existing bus stop on Hamilton near the mailboxes and is that proposed to stay in the various scenarios where the bulb out gets wider or we retain street parking and what not? Ms. Boyd: Yes, the bus station or the bus stop will stay in the same location. Board Member Lew: Ok but if there’s – if you widen the sidewalks in that – on Hamilton, is the – does that mean the bus stop is going to block traffic? Ms. Boyd: It will temporarily block traffic. That was the recommendation by our – the transportation division to leave it there. Board Member Lew: Great, thank you. Chair Furth: Any other questions before we start? Robert. Board Member Gooyer: I just have one question. The comment was brought up about an informal parking space. What exactly is that? Is that sort of a hey, we’re here first thing in the morning so it’s ours? I mean I can understand – from what I understand or what I heard was there was one, I guess, parking space that was sort of dedicated to the adjacent property owner and the second one was an informal dedication. Chair Furth: It’s parallel. I think (inaudible) (crosstalk) Board Member Gooyer: (inaudible) Ms. French: A formal… Chair Furth: Substandard standard space. Ms. French: I would try to answer that to say a formal parking space would be one that meets the City’s codes and as far as… Board Member Gooyer: I mean the idea being that it’s – I don’t want to say owned by them but they can – they park it there and nobody else can park there? The formal one. Ms. French: I’m not clear on it but I imagine it’s on their property, not on the City’s property where they are parking… Board Member Gooyer: Ok, obviously if it’s on their property (inaudible)(crosstalk) Ms. French: … in a way that doesn’t comply with a standard parking space size or access. City of Palo Alto Page 10 Chair Furth: Perhaps we could ask Mr. Rodriguez to elaborate because I was looking at it this morning and I was thinking of it. Just identify which property and which spaces you are talking about maybe looking at the site plan. Board Member Gooyer: Also, if you could, could you show where your grease inceptor is located? Mr. Rodriquez: I’ll try and do my best here so I’ll walk you through what we mean by formal and informal spaces. Let me get this going real quick. Even with glasses, I can barely see that. The way the site works today, this is your typical scenario every morning is we see all the service vehicles that are coming in and parking in the spaces of the lot. Those vehicles also park adjacent to the building so it’s very common at both buildings for delivery trucks to park right up to the sides of the buildings here. So, they do temporary blockage of the alleyways or the isles but that’s how the informal parking spaces work and they are used mostly as commercial loading zones for pulling food out of them or dropping materials within the buildings. Here another view, here you see the formal parking spaces at 90-degree head in space kind of adjacent to this wall for the Prolific Oven building and here’s that informal, second, kind of parallel parking space that’s used regularly by the building. So, all in all, there’s about a three-parking space loss because there’s (inaudible) in those two buildings. There are more service vehicles here out in the back-dropping things off during the day. Chair Furth: Thank you. Board Member Gooyer: Then also if you could answer where exactly is your grease interceptor located? Ms. Elizabeth Wong: Good morning. My name is Elizabeth Wong and my family and I own 560 Waverley Street. The grease traps are inside the kitchen, they are two below the floor grease traps and they are in the middle and frontage of the restaurant. Board Member Gooyer: Ok, all I needed to know was just whether they were inside or outside. Ok, thank you. Ms. Wong: You’re welcome. Board Member Gooyer: That’s it right now. Chair Furth: Thank you all for your informative presentations. We appreciate them. Complicated project. Complicated site. Do you want to just start with an additional round of comments or do you want to sort out the issues first? Start with comments first – general comments first? Board Member Lew: Can we do two rounds (inaudible)? (inaudible) Chair Furth: Let’s do two rounds. Yeah, let’s talk about site issues first. Robert. Site plan issues. Board Member Gooyer: I like the idea, but I guess this has been floated than lately other than what we’ve seen, is more of an access or an alley, whatever you want to call it, between the AT&T building and the project. I think having been down there quite a bit, you’ll see there’s a lot of traffic that moves back and forth from Gilman across to Lane 21 so I think that’s a good idea. I can see the point that I think one of the Board Member’s mentioned we should set the building back a little bit further but you get to a point where based – I mean parking spaces have a certain set requirement so you can’t just say well, we’ll shrink the building by 8-feet because that, as was mentioned, could emulate a whole row of parking. I’m ok with it the way it is. In the other direction, like I said if we do a – one away from AT&T that would only lose a couple of parking spaces so I’m ok with that. I think other than that, the fact that we’re providing a trash enclosure for them or to assist the adjacent property owners, I think is a great idea. I mean that’s a very generous way to do it. I mean I’ve been in situations where just because a property has had a convenience situation in respect to either a vacant lot next door or whatever the case is for 20-30-years. Doesn’t mean that’s a god given right. It just means that you happen to have been City of Palo Alto Page 11 lucky for 20 or 30-years so with this building being placed right next to those existing buildings is going to cause some hardships. I’m well aware of that but I don’t really see changing the whole design based on that. In fact, the – to give them what they requested basically makes the building almost -- I don’t want to say useless but I mean it really doesn’t allow it to do the function it needs to do. So, as far as the layout like this, I’m fairly happy with it. There were some questions I noticed on Board Member Baltay’s comment about going two floors down and cutting the height of it a little bit. (Inaudible) that’s not really layout but I think that would be a great idea but obviously, any layer that you go down, increased the cost tremendously so I can understand why – that’s it for me at the moment. Chair Furth: Alex. Board Member Lew: Great so I do want to thank Staff and the architects. I think the set and the Staff report where very – where all very clear and every – it was very thorough and it was very easy to understand what you were trying to do. The – with regard to just with the site issues, the – my main struggle is with the – with encroaching into the 7-foot special setback. I looked at it again this morning to try to see if I – just to help try to make my mind about it. At the moment I’m thinking it’s a mistake and we’ve done it before on their projects like 278 University, Chop’s building, your building here and I supported all of those at that time. I think those were – that was the right decision or decisions. I feel very differently about this one because it’s a different block. It’s a superblock, it’s that block of – goes from Waverly to Bryant, it’s twice as long, the façade length is fairly long and all the other buildings are complying with the 7-foot special setback. So, this is going to be the only one for three or four blocks that are going to – I think it’s going to stick out. I think it’s going to look like a mistake and that’s my take on it. Earlier this morning I was trying to – I was wondering if the lower floors could stick in if the upper two floors where setback. I was trying to figure out a way to minimizing the parking reduction. Mr. Hayes: It’s all about – right, it’s all about the parking (inaudible). Board Member Lew: I’ve been going – I’ve trying to rack my brain about this. Mr. Hayes: Well, that’s what we did at 240, if I may? So, at 240 the building at the upper levels actually encroach into the 7-foot special or the 6-foot special setback there but on the ground floor, we pushed it back so that you do have – it does acknowledge the 7-foot or 6-foot setback at 240. You’d lose this parking along Hamilton. Board Member Lew: Yeah, I know. I guess at the end of the day I’m trying -- I’m wondering is the site to small for what we’re trying to put -- what the City is asking you to put on there and maybe it is. Mr. Hayes: I had – may I just, through the Chair… Board Member Lew: Please. Mr. Hayes: … just ask a question? I did not understand Board Member Gooyer’s comment about the walkway along AT&T. We’re you proposing a 10-foot walkway along the AT&T building? Board Member Gooyer: That’s what I was thinking is… Mr. Hayes: Because that has the same effect on the parking then, right? Board Member Gooyer: Well yeah but it shrinks it this way so you only lose a couple space as compared to a whole row. Mr. Hayes: No, I think we’d lose the whole row. I mean unless you went closer to the Tai Pan building and got rid… Board Member Gooyer: Well, what’s…. City of Palo Alto Page 12 Mr. Hayes: We’d lose that whole row Board Member. You could just lose it on the ground floor if we kept the upper floor but that would be a very dark and I don’t think that would be a very good space though. Chair Furth: What were you thinking (inaudible)? Mr. Hayes: (crosstalk) So, part of the concern… Board Member Gooyer: (inaudible) Mr. Hayes: …. was that when we – looking at Board Member Baltay’s comment on the 10-foot alley we have along Tai Pan, he was saying that would be a very unwelcoming and perhaps dangerous space. It’s got a two-story building on one side and a five-story building on the other. This would have a 75-foot story building on one side and a five-story – I’m sorry, 75-foot and a 50-foot building on the other side. So, I don’t know how that could be a good amenity if the alternative walkway is not a good amenity. Chair Furth: Ok. Mr. Hayes: Right so… Chair Furth: We’ll continue our… Mr. Hayes: Just trying too… Chair Furth: No, (crosstalk) I think it’s useful to do this in a slight study session format because this is a complicated project. We’ve got a little time, we should be thinking about this. It’s a big deal and appreciates that and we’ll keep going with the comments. I’m sure we’ll have you up here answering questions again. Osma, please. Board Member Thompson: Regarding site, I find that many parking garages suffer from not advertising bicycle parking adequately. So, the concept of bringing more attention to where the bike station is, pedestrian attention, the diagram that we saw today in the presentation that brings circulation through there I think is a good choice. Mainly because I think it will bring more attention to bike parking because otherwise in parking garages it tends to get very lost. I also – I hope that’s also like as the project progresses that that’s considered in terms of wayfinding and all that. The loading issue behind Lot 84 and 85 is certainly something needs to be addressed. Mainly in that, it would be – these areas are sort of meant to have these retail spaces thrive and if we’re siphoning off something that’s essential for their operation then I think that’s a mistake. I’m not sure, it seems that the pedestrian access to Lane 21 is being reconsidered and potentially as that is being reconsidered these concerns also ought to be integrated. Perhaps reconfigured a little bit so that these spaces can stay operational and we can still have a pedestrian pathway that works. I mean as it is looking at the plans, having the trash enclosure on one side and the back of house of these restaurants on the other side, that in itself isn’t an ideal alley in terms of program. Potentially there’s a way to shift things so that the back of house is on one side and the pedestrian amenity access is on the other side. I’m not sure what the solution is but I do think it needs a further look and potential reconfiguration on that side. Not just for what they need but loading and stuff. This is a commercial area and loading is an important part of that and I don’t really see any solutions there. Those are my comments for site. Chair Furth: Thank you. Well, I share Osma’s view that I don’t know what the solution is but I do see a problem. The problem tends to be about what is gained and what is lost because there are all these unofficial, practical uses of these spaces. I know that this isn’t a dedicated alley and that historically these buildings probably didn’t have any kind of official access down there. Could you explain to me Staff, what’s the situation with Lot 84 with what we call the Prolific Oven? Are there dedicated spaces behind that building that are entitled to some kind of access or not? I’m confused. City of Palo Alto Page 13 Ms. Boyd: There is one dedicated space for their entitlement which is why we included the Lot 84 space (inaudible). Chair Furth: That dedicated space essentially had an easement and necessity over the City parking lot? I mean how where you suppose to access it? We have no idea, you just could. Ms. Boyd: I’m not sure. Chair Furth: Ok, it’s like a lot of sewer easements actually. So, let me tell you what I don’t consider to be a problem and what I do consider to be a problem. I mean anything that makes it more difficult for a business to thrive is, of course, a real problem but things that are historic hangovers that would not be allowed and haven’t been allowed for 20 or 30-years I’m less inclined to try to solve. These buildings should all have, as Mr. Rapp’s building does, interior trash places. I mean we don’t – these alleys are not intended to be used to store trash bins, though most of them are and it’s a long-term project to get that changed and get that storage off the alley and into other places. I think that using some of this space to solve that alley problem is a great idea. I realize that it takes more time and energy to go to a slightly removed – to go to somewhat removed central place. If those buildings come down and get rebuilt, perhaps they’re going to have to do interior storage so we need to think about how that would access the alley for collection. I think we need some more thought about the whole – it might be useful to think some more about the whole trash problem in both parts of that alley because it’s a mess with the exception of one property. See if we can come up with a more comprehensive solution which would be a benefit to the City but it would also be a considerable benefit to the private property owners. I’d like to see some more thinking about that. I mean maybe more dedicated trash space so that we could really clean up that area. We’re not going to get them all in there but make that a much more attractive block because we do have this problem of the superblock that has had this informal access because of the parking lot but isn’t going to anymore. I’m not in favor of 24-foot alleys around this project or on either side. I’m not in favor of curb cuts on Waverly so I think we need to be looking for other kinds of solutions as you have been. I think pedestrian access is a big deal. I’m really pleased with your bicycle provisions. As you know I’m really pleased to see benches with handrails so I can stand up when I’m even more frail and elderly or just on the weeks that I’m carrying a heavy child or something around. I don’t know what the solution is for good pedestrian access. I’m sure lighting has a lot to do with it. I’m sure design has a lot to do with it. I’m not convinced with that long alley. I ran into Alex this morning as we were both checking out the sight one more time and that is a long way along the Tai Pan frontage. That is a deep building and I would rather this building were closer. I don’t like violating the 7-foot setback because I think it’s a real built setback. It’s not just some historic artifact. You know Stanford got itself a really good campus architect after it put the Business School in the wrong place and realized they’d messed up the line of sight down towards the Quad. Well, this is not at that level but this is a problem. I know when we talked about this before you said with a 5-foot alley would need a different kind of ventilation design but you weren’t positive. You would – I did not understand that to mean you needed mechanical ventilation but I don’t think that’s going to be a very good space and I don’t think – I think that intrusion is a problem for the findings we have to make. On low lighting level, I’m sure you can handle that. Drainage, I’m sure you can handle that. The fat, oil and grease FOG service, I don’t know what the solution is but I think there are a lot of restaurants that don’t have big backstage access for big backstage trucks so I’d like to know more about what’s possible. I do know that it’s a big issue for the City and we own our sewers and we want it to work as much as the property owners do. I don’t think solar access is something I expect this project to not interfere with. We don’t have a law in this town that protects ancient lights and there’s a proposal to put substantial solar on the top of this building. So, I would consider that a legitimate trade-off. I don’t know if my colleagues would agree. Dust management, construction adverse impacts management, I think that’s always our obligation and it’s going to be difficult. These things always are. Those are my comments at the moment. Board Member Gooyer: Let me ask you then, what you’re saying is push the whole building towards Lot 85? Ok, that’s what I thought. City of Palo Alto Page 14 Chair Furth: I do like the better retail. I do like the better earlier chance to look at the post office. I did go on about that entryway a lot last time, I apologize. Shall we talk about design? Robert. Board Member Gooyer: Well, I wasn’t here for the last or the first presentation of this and when I started reading over this and the thing is basically or the – what I’m reading is it says that you wanted to relate to the Church across the street. To me, I don’t know, I’m not a big fan of sort of 70’s, brutalist architecture which I think that comes into. Now whether that’s right or wrong or whatever, I don’t know if that’s the appropriate thing to emulate. I – although there is a -- the Wells Fargo building across the street which is brick, the AT&T building has brick in it. I don’t know, to me that would be something a little bit better to emulate than the – not that I’m a big fan of the AT&T building, especially that elevation but I’m talking about just the materials involved. Also, the fact that the Wells Fargo buildings steps back at the corner. I know we talk about you should highlight a corner but in this particular case, I’d rather do the opposite and have it step back at that corner to open up that intersection. It allows better view of – actually of the Church, also of the post office and I just think it works better that way. Because of that, I’m not a big fan of the stair tower right at the corner. I don’t think that’s doing anything and the reality of it is when I first looked at – which is it? Basically, elevation or your sheet or your page – I guess Hamilton Elevation One. Man, I swear that thing looks like a prison. I mean it – because it is all just to uniform. I mean all the metal framing is going vertical like – I mean is the – there’s – I mean I’ve seen metal mesh used and I – and you have too I’m sure. It looks a little bit more creative. There’s some design in it. The mesh is basically intended to create a form and yet still keep an open space and that sort of thing but it doesn’t have to be done in this. I mean the only thing I can say in this is you copied the brutalism of the building across the street which I don’t think is a good thing on this particular case. It creates a massive volume that I don’t think needs to be there. It – so, I like the way you opened up the corner so you did it on a horizontal plane but you didn’t do it on a vertical plane. I’d prefer to see that corner opened up like you did and then also step back. Actually, the -- on this, like I said I wasn’t (inaudible) there last time but Option Three or even One where that stairway is open, I think works better than enclosing it. I don’t think you’re doing – I mean it’s not like you’re doing weather protection. To me it’s not really doing anything. Right now, stairways that are glass enclosed are very popular but that’s make it work in this particular case. Let’s see, what else? Like I said I agree that I think the building ought to be pushed back and it should line up at least with the AT&T building which will – which would make everybody happier here as far as obtaining the full 7-feet. I agree, like I said earlier, I don’t – you know the alleyway would be nice or the pedestrian access but it’s not critical as long as we come up with something that does it from the Hamilton to Alley 21, whatever it’s called – Lane 21. I think there needs to be some access there that needs to be developed and I understand just taking – it doesn’t even need to be adjacent to the building. (Inaudible) through the building or something that is highly accented. I mean it – for example, Mountain View has on Castro Street has these sorts of walkways in between the buildings that have been very nicely done. I’m not saying you need to emulate that but they’ve given it some – where it actually shows some thought was given to get from Point A to Point B. Not we’re sneaking through the parking garage to get to the alley. I think that’s it for right now. Chair Furth: Thank you. Alex. Board Member Lew: On the design, I think you’ve done a very good job. I like – yeah, like a second-floor cornice element to align with the smaller scale buildings. I like the -- I think the fins work well. I like the revisions you’ve made around the corner stair access. I like the – I think the retail – the deeper retail space makes a lot of sense and I like the – I guess (inaudible) like the setback and awnings that you’ve done near the AT&T building. You tried to break the mass and changed the materials and I think that’s all working. I think the integral planters and benches I think are working really well. So, I can support – I think I can support all of those elements design wise. The – I have a question and I don’t think I need an answer today but is the garage going to be painted? So, on some of the other garage that has come to the Board from Stanford, they said that they weren’t going to paint them. Mostly based on a sustainable design criterion, it’s just less paint, less – you know less off-gassing but then when I went to see them, low and behold they were all painted. I don’t know exactly what happens with those but I do know on other projects at Stanford they’ve had problems with the concrete. So, they are pathing the concrete because of the popcorn texture and I don’t know if that’s the – exactly what happened but I guess I City of Palo Alto Page 15 would like some sort of thought about that because I think it does make a difference. Yep, great. On the landscape design, I think I am concerned about the Ginkgo’s and the pedestrian walkway. I mean I think there’s typically require full sun and I don’t think you’re going to get it in the shade of a – on the north side of a tall building. Same thing with the vines on the north side. I mean most vines require full sun or at least part sun. I think there’s like creeping fig that doesn’t require – doesn’t need – doesn’t like full sun but then it doesn’t need a green screen, either right? It just needs – it would prefer to grow on a wall so I’m not sure that all of that – the landscaping is working in the pedestrian walkway area. If the walkway area is only 10-feet wide, I think my – my hunch is that the best thing to do is try to keep everything as open as possible and not try to hide the building. Yeah so… Mr. Hayes: So, the building -- you’ll be able to see into the building as you walk along the alley so it’s – there’s an elevation I think in your packet. Board Member Lew: I guess I’m concerned about the green – mostly the tall greenscreen panels. Is – if that’s really going to work. Mr. Hayes: Oh, I see. Board Member Lew: Even if the plants don’t do well there, I mean I think the green screen is a nice enough material. I think you had also proposed maybe stainless-steel wires… Mr. Hayes: Right. Board Member Lew: …as an alternative as well. Mr. Hayes: You mean you’re saying that as a texture alone without the plant material? Board Member Lew: Yeah so even – well, so – maybe the best thing to do is plant it but even if it fails, I think it’s still ok. I’ve – so I’ve had that – I’ve had that problem… Mr. Hayes: The garage is painted except where the concrete is on the two street frontages. That’s a sandblasted concrete and that will just have a clear sealer, like a Siloxane sealer or something on it. Board Member Lew: Ok, thank you for that. I think that’s all that I have on the building design. I think you’ve done a really good job. Mr. Hayes: Great, thank you. Board Member Lew: I don’t necessarily agree with the programming and setbacks and all of that. I would also just disclose that I did watch the Council meeting on January 22nd about the California Avenue garage but they referenced this one as well. So, I’m kind of curious to see where this – where the Council ends up on this particular project. Mr. Hayes: Thank you. Board Member Lew: Ok. Chair Furth: Osma. Board Member Thompson: I would say that my views on this probably more closely align with Board Member Gooyer’s views. It is – the idea that it looks like a prison is not inaccurate. It does seem quite overbearing. Unlike my fellow Board Member, I am actually very much a big fan of brutalist architecture but it needs to be done well. Brutalist architecture does well when there is a lot of green like a lot of planting. Also, when there are more interesting forms than just the orthogonal and materialities is also a big part of it. I’m unconvinced, in at least in the renders, how the sandblasted concrete and the metal City of Palo Alto Page 16 fins pertain to the historic – I saw a note that the metal fins pertain to the historic context and it’s very unconvincing right now how that is the case. I do appreciate the concept to include a lot of greenery in it. I think greenery definitely softens the brutalist architecture but like Board Member Lew says, it does have to succeed. I disagree or at least I’m unsure if it does fail, what that screen is? Is it just kind of a cage? I feel like there is a green screen product but I’m not sure if that’s what you’re specking here and I’m also unconvinced if that is what you’re spec’ing if that will actually look good. I think some more thought to the overall appearance does need to be considered. I am also not a fan of the stair tower as it stands. It seems under designed in that the relationship between the edges and the floor and the stair are sort of out of sync. I think those datums and planes that you’re creating don’t mesh well and create a really awkward space as you’re exiting from the stair. I am concerned about the façade behind the existing lots. Currently, in render, they look blank, so I’m looking at the aerial view at Waverley on ARB sheet 3.6. On the elevation – like the façade is very much present on Hamilton but given that this building is so tall, its likely that we’ll see some it from behind and so it seems like that back of the back-alley area is ignored. The building as it stands as its designed will – if we’re trying to make that alley nice, it’s definitely being ignored right now. I do like the PV panels. I think they actually add something architecturally that the building doesn’t have right now. So, what that says, I don’t know, that maybe that sort of break down of mass or texture is something to consider. Those are my comments. Chair Furth: Thank you. I still like the idea that you have a two-story element along most of it. I agree with Osma that it looks better with a lid on. It looks better with the PV panels in place, at least in this drawing. I don’t know what the street experience would be but it becomes a better-looking building I think. It also keeps the stair enclosure from sort of appearing detached in an unpleasant way. I’m really perplexed by the staircase. I know that in September I was complaining that we have other unsuccessful open staircases on parking garages which are wet when it rains and too hot when it’s sunny and look like they are crooked as you walk down the sidewalk. I don’t know what the answer is but smaller, lighter, less obtrusive I would be supportive of. I think that open is better. I don’t know how you design the staircase to get that. I suspect you don’t do a spiral the way we did over on what, Alma and… Board Member Lew: The Joe Bellomo project. Chair Furth: Yeah, Joe Bellomo’s but at least it was compact and the poetry is good. I think this has become too big and that there’s a better solution that a skilled architect can figure out. I don’t know what it is. I don’t know how these vertical fins are going to look. I don’t know if it’s going to look like a City of Quartz jail or if it’s going to look differently. It is very vertical and just – you took a comb and you went like this and as we were talking I was thinking well what if it didn’t just go like this? Maybe it becomes impossibly complex to design and execute and maintain but as it stands it looks oppressively linear, not at all playful. Garages are a problem, we all know this, we’re a little embarrassed by them but they can be beautiful because they are big spaces. How high is the ceiling on the ground floor? Ms. Michelle Wendler: The ceiling height underneath the beams is 8 ½-feet and then the beam pocket is about 2 ½-feet so in between beams it's taller. So, the story (inaudible)… Chair Furth: If I’m walking through it, what do I experience? Ms. Wendler: You’ll experience every 18-feet there’s a beam so in between it’s about 11-feet and then it’s 8 ½-feet where the beams occur. Chair Furth: Ok. Board Member Lew: Can I ask a question? Chair Furth: Sure. Board Member Lew: Can I ask a follow-up question about that? About the ceiling heights? There are – I’m thinking like Santa Row, the first-floor height of the garage, I think my recollection is that it’s taller. City of Palo Alto Page 17 Ms. Wendler: The one that’s up against Winchester? Board Member Lew: Yes, or something like – I’m just thinking that that – I’m thinking that there are other garages where they’ve done a taller first floor to make it more open. Am I… Ms. Wendler: (inaudible) Board Member Lew: No, no, no. Ms. Wendler: There’s different – 11 ½ is the most normal… Board Member Lew: Normal. Ms. Wendler: …height we do. It’s really about the ramp to get… Board Member Lew: Right, the longer… Ms. Wendler: When you raise it up you need a longer ramp to get to… Board Member Lew: Do you have a – if you had a 16-foot ceiling, is it like a 1 to 20 ramp? Ms. Wendler: The ramp we have now is about – is 18% on the main slope with blends top and bottom to get up the 11 ½-feet that we have now. So, it’s (inaudible)(crosstalk). Board Member Lew: Right so you’d have to increase – right but to go up to a 16-foot ceiling, you’re going to have to increase the ramp somewhere like 40%... Ms. Wendler: We need more length. Board Member Lew: … a lot and probably like – probably doesn’t work I would think. Ms. Wendler: We would lose parking space to somehow do that to make a circulation. I’m not sure exactly how we would do it right now. Or the – yeah because it’s going to cut into the retail space. There’s so little floor plate left. Board Member Thompson: So, what’s the – is that bottomless structure, does that continue to the retail so that the retail height would be – if there was a drop ceiling, it would be about 8-feet? Ms. Wendler: In the retail space we’ve been able to remove those beams so it goes all the way to the bottom of the slab which is about 11-feet. Board Member Thompson: Ok, thanks. Chair Furth: I guess I was thinking that I hope it’s as high as we can make it because it has a big impact on the experience of walking through that space. I’m trying to think of garages I enjoy walking through and there are some. By the way, do you have a materials board that we could see? Mr. Hayes: I thought – (inaudible) indicated you had it. Board Member Gooyer: I’ve just got a couple more questions. Can I jump in or are you… Chair Furth: Absolutely. Board Member Gooyer: A couple of things and I – it’s funny because I thought the same thing with the panels and I think the reality of it is it’s the old adage about a building should have a base, a middle and City of Palo Alto Page 18 top. This building seems to have a base and a middle and there’s no top. It just sort of dies at the top and the panels I think create that. The other thing that I was thinking is I still think there needs to be some sort of a link, like I said, across there but I understand what you’re talking about with the parking. So, my thought was the alley that is or the walkway, alley, whatever you want to call it, in between the existing neighbors like 48 or 84 and 85 and the AT&T building. That alleyway basically -- what if that just continues straight down towards Hamilton? You know so basically, you’re losing four parking spaces. Mr. Hayes: Right, we were talk – but… Ms. Boyd: It also (inaudible)(crosstalk) Board Member Gooyer: I mean whatever but I mean that’s still a whole lot less than – and you could do that on one floor, just that one. Mr. Hayes: It’s just the conflict with the ramp. Ms. Boyd: Yeah, the ramp starts to go up… Board Member Gooyer: Yeah but the… Mr. Hayes: Everybody coming up and down the ramp. Ms. Boyd: Yeah, there would be a conflict in elevation between the pedestrian, alley, and the ramp going up to the floors. Board Member Gooyer: No – well, ok, I mean maybe it needs to jog – whatever, all I’m saying is if you do it in the middle of the building like that, you can get that and still not lose a whole row of parking. Mr. Hayes: Correct. If we didn’t have the ramp, it would be a lot easier. So, I do have… Chair Furth: I don’t know, those mechanical lifts are sounding better and better. Mr. Hayes: There is a way through the building, right? Board Member Gooyer: Let me ask one other question seeing though this is somewhat of a – we have 130,000-square foot building here and we’ve got 2,000-square feet of retail space. How – I mean I don’t know, retail space in parking structures to me have always been sort of used to hide as you’re walking past. I mean seeing as though do we really need the extra 2,000-square feet or would we be better having another ten parking spaces? Ms. French: That’s per the Council. Ms. Boyd: Yeah so Council directed us to include the retail on the Waverley frontage. Board Member Gooyer: What, supposedly like gosh, we’re hiding the parking structure behind this 2,000- square foot of retail space? Come on. You know you've got a four-story building with… Mr. Hayes: I actually think it’s about just the retail continuity for the experience along Waverley, the sidewalk. Chair Furth: We actually have quite successful retail in a parking garage over on Lytton. Board Member Gooyer: I don’t know for that 2,000 to 130,000 ratio it seems kind of -- ok. City of Palo Alto Page 19 Chair Furth: Well, let’s see if we get some coherent direction or at least clues. Yes, go ahead Commissioner… Board Member Thompson: Sorry, I just had some follow up comments after look at the material board… Chair Furth: Oh, yes, please, from everybody. Board Member Thompson: …and I have one question. For the perforated metal panel, in the material board there’s a pressed in image from the De Young Museum and then there’s that metal sample. So, they are quite different so which one – is it going to be the metal – the silver with the different circles? Mr. Hayes: No, actually the drawings indicate that it’s a bronze colored perforated metal. However, there’s been a discussion with the Art Commission and the artist that’s Amy Landsburg, she would like to be able to use this mesh as her backdrop for the public art. Chair Furth: Which mesh? Mr. Hayes: So, we wanted to come before you today without the public art, we don’t know what it is yet exactly, but if this notion of the perforated metal on that stair tower is not something that you think is supportable because it’s too overbearing, then we’re going to need to rethink that. I was not proposing the clean anodized finish. We are proposing a finish that is more consistent I think with the historical context in terms of color. I also think the metal fins in terms of color is where I was relating to the historical context. Not in terms of the material or the shape of the metal fin, it’s the color. Board Member Thompson: So, in light of that, the – I mean I did also note here that the N1 channel color as you have it on there appears to me far too dark but perhaps there’s a way that it can be reintegrated. That might be more convincing. I find that what the De Young president where they had an image that they water jet cut over a bunch of metal panels. That’s very successful and that’s not communicated in your drawings. In your drawings, it looks like a big wall but when it has that level of complexity it becomes really exciting. I would almost say like that level of – depending on how you work with your artist, instead of using the metal fins, that would be really exciting to have across the whole garage depending on how you do it. Mr. Hayes: That was one of the options that we had in September… Board Member Thompson: Ok. Mr. Hayes: … but thank you. Chair Furth: Our thinking is evolving. Board Member Thompson: I think it’s a matter of representation because I didn’t read that off of this but once I looked at your material board, that’s instantly already way more exciting in terms of a prospect for down here. Mr. Hayes: Thank you. Chair Furth: Let’s see if we can get some clarity. So, on the site plan, we have three people who would support an increased setback on Hamilton. Everybody but Osma, is that right? Board Member Gooyer: Yeah. Board Member Thompson: I can support that as well. City of Palo Alto Page 20 Chair Furth: Ok which is a very difficult design issue but we think it’s important. In terms of any direction, we want to give on pedestrian access through the building? Just figure it out. We think it’s important. Board Member Gooyer: I still think there needs to be some link from Hamilton to across, yeah. Chair Furth: From – essentially from Hamilton back to CVS. That it is a good route, one that looks good, safe, inviting, people want to do it. We would like as high as a ceiling on the ground floor as possible – as feasible to make it a better pedestrian experience. Board Member Gooyer: The other possibility is instead of the actual slab being different is the framing being different so you don’t end up with a 3 ½-inch deep beam but you have either more beams or a space closer together. That way the – the biggest thing is when you’re looking down you perceive the 8 ½-foot level, not the ceiling. So, if we could change that 8 ½ to 10-feet and have the framing much more tighter increment it would make it visually look a whole lot taller. Even if it’s just for a certain portion or a certain bay… Chair Furth: Even just to highlight the pedestrian way. Board Member Gooyer: …which would be the one where you walk through. You can keep the other framing the way it is. Chair Furth: I’m sure that made sense to the technically skilled. We want the perception of height. Mr. Hayes: So, going through the garage is an option in your mind for this pedestrian pathway? It doesn’t have to be something that opens to the sky? Board Member Gooyer: Right. No, no, no, I agree. Right… Chair Furth: Yes. Board Member Gooyer: … it just has to be something and that’s why I was thinking in between that one set of bays that I mentioned. If you change the framing just for that first floor, it’s not going to be radically different but then it will – the perception – if you get that up to 10-feet, I don’t think anyone would have a problem -- and it’s well lite -- walking through that garage area. Obviously, it’s not the full length, it’s only the (crosstalk) – right. Chair Furth: I think – we all think it could be on the first floor of the garage, is that correct? A pedestrian through way and I think the point that we’re trying to make is that it should be attractive, it should feel safe and it shouldn’t feel like an afterthought. It should feel like something you designed in from the beginning so you don’t (crosstalk) just think you’re… Board Member Gooyer: (inaudible) not dodging… Chair Furth: … doing something you shouldn’t be doing. Mr. Hayes: So, straight. Chair Furth: Ok what else can we agree on? What do we think about the staircase? Opened? Closed? Covered? Somewhere else entirely? Board Member Gooyer: I don’t really care if it’s opened or closed. I just think its too dominant right on the corner. Chair Furth: What would you do with it? City of Palo Alto Page 21 Board Member Gooyer: I don’t know I’m not the architect. Chair Furth: I understand that. You mean it shouldn’t be on – you’re saying you don’t like the corner as a location for the staircase? Board Member Gooyer: No, no, no the location is fine. All I’m saying is I don’t like the massive bulk of it. Chair Furth: It’s too big. Board Member Gooyer: That’s why if you get rid of the screen around it, it automatically reduces the volumetric bulk of it. Board Member Lew: Can I ask a question for Ken? The volume of the perforated screen is larger than the staircase. Mr. Hayes: That’s correct. Board Member Lew: So, you have extra space in there. Mr. Hayes: (inaudible), there’s extra space there. Board Member Lew: You’ve obviously done that for a reason so I was wondering if you could explain the rationale? Mr. Hayes: We wanted it to feel like you were actually in a space when you duck under that volume and you sort of – I’m not going to say it’s a celebration but you’ve got this larger space that you’re looking up into which could be quite interesting. As opposed to it just enclosing what’s required for the stair (inaudible). Board Member Gooyer: Would it be worth any – even in something like that having the first floor at the same footprint that you have now and then it tapers inward or something? Then it has a perception of reduction of volume? Mr. Hayes: Yeah, I would have to – we’d have to study it. Board Member Gooyer: I’m just saying if the (crosstalk) – then still it gives what I’m more interested in as a step back effect. Mr. Hayes: Right. Board Member Gooyer: Even if it’s the screen that does the stepping back, it still has that… Mr. Hayes: Right because right now it’s about 20-something feet back from the façade on Waverley but it’s not nearly that far back from the other side. Yeah so if we turn it… Chair Furth: What’s the top? Is it open to the sky? Mr. Hayes: No, no, it’s enclosed. We had a skylight up there originally but I think from a cost standpoint that’s been illuminated. Chair Furth: So, what is it? Mr. Hayes: It’s just a solid roof. Chair Furth: So, it’s going to be dark? City of Palo Alto Page 22 Mr. Hayes: Well, no so this perforated – it’s going to have this perforated membrane around it so it’s going to feel light and at night will glow. Oh, that may not be a good thing. Chair Furth: Ok. Mr. Hayes: If there was this wonderful way to create a design in the perforated panel, it could be really exciting. Chair Furth: If you make it fabulously beautiful we’ll probably say yes. We have been talking about the fact that seeing the art – public art as something that comes late in the process is really unfortunate and of course, it’s impossible to make everything happen at once. I think that in this case particularly it may be really important. Do we have any consensus on the stairway and its treatment or stairwell and the treatment, Alex? Board Member Lew: I would just – I think Ken is very talented and I think he hears that we think it may be too big so I would just think – yeah, show us some options and we’ll see. If there are any conceptual sketches from the artist by the next meeting, I think that – usually the Board here can make the leap. We did that for the Junior Museum and I think we asked for – at the very end of the project we sort of asked for it to come back to the Board just because they weren’t sure where the art was exactly going to be placed. Then they came up with a sketch and I think everybody was happy with it. Mr. Hayes: Ok. Board Member Lew: I think I’m fine with the staircase conceptually. Board Member Thompson: I think if you’re going to use the material in the way that we’ve discussed and make it fabulously beautiful with the perforation and with the artist. I think the next time you show this to us it might be worst considering the representation so that… Mr. Hayes: Absolutely. Board Member Thompson: … we actually see what you’re designing instead of a big old block. Mr. Hayes: Well, this was just massing. We weren’t asking for approval today. Thank you for the comment. Board Member Thompson: Sure. Chair Furth: Do we have comments on the trash enclosure issue? We have requests from the neighbors, we have proposals from the City so do we have any guidance we want to give? Board Member Lew: I know this is a tricky one. I’ve done some historical analysis of the site and so it seemed like the parking was added later. There’s never been an official alley behind Prolific Oven or Tai Pan so it’s sort of like a defector alley. I would say we would normally require the trash enclosures to be inside on their own property and it’s not – why are we giving them a freebie garbage space inside the garage because then everybody is going to want one? So, it seems to me difficult because the – because we don’t really have necessarily a trigger until they start to do a project. Once they start doing a project – and I’ve seen this – I think they’ve seen the sign out there from the Toy and Sports World but then we can require it inside. It seems to me if the buildings are staying as is then I think it kind of makes sense for the City to have space in the garage. I don’t think we need to have two. I think we do have other restaurants that do transport their garbage elsewhere. I think Ken, you had mentioned that the Mills Florist site and that the garage is not on the property so it happens. It’s not ideal, it’s not desirable but it happens. So, I’m thinking long term and what is the right decision for a long period of time? It seems to me short term I could live with any – I could probably live with any solution so yeah, Robert? City of Palo Alto Page 23 Board Member Gooyer: Yeah, no, I was going to say the same thing. I think this is the City being a nice guy and providing that. I agree that they could just say you’ve had a real – you’ve been real lucky for the last whatever umpteen years and now you’re going to have to do what everybody else has to do. So, I agree that anything that fits within the criteria of the project is ok. Board Member Thompson: I think – I mean I agree that may be providing the trash enclosure isn’t the solution but I do think that loading is important and giving them the access that they need in order to function is important. Maybe that is a closer analysis on how they currently – what their current inner workings are in terms of trash and it’s just a matter – I do think that corner needs reconfiguration in general. I do think it works as it stands. Chair Furth: I would say that essentially, it’s good for the City to accommodate this need. I’m sure that they’ll listen to the potential future users and thinking about how and where it should be designed. This is valuable space and how the City wants to use it is essentially its choice. I look forward to seeing what came be done and I look forward to hearing about what – how these – when this is construction, how the FOG removal can be handled in a reasonable way. Yes? Board Member Lew: Can Staff provide a – maybe transportation can provide a – what do you call that? A truck turning diagram for getting – for the Apple Store because I’ve seen trucks behind there. Oh, maybe it’s already in the packet. Ok, I missed it. Ms. Boyd: Its included in the packet on the last page. Mr. Hayes: The last page. Board Member Lew: Awe, that’s why I didn’t see it. Ms. Boyd: This is the green waste garbage truck. Chair Furth: (Inaudible) before you got there. Board Member Lew: Ok so you’re saying it works. Chair Furth: Where is it? Board Member Gooyer: Where is it? Ms. Boyd: Very last page. Board Member Lew: Last page. Chair Furth: The last page I have is a bunch of cuts. Oh, there it is. Board Member Lew: Thank you for that and that’s taking into account all the trash enclosures? Ms. Boyd: That’s modeled for green waste – the garbage collector – the hauler the City uses. Their garbage trucks. Board Member Lew: Awe, ok. Board Member Gooyer: I think that’s fine. Board Member Lew: I was actually thinking of the – I’ve seen delivery trucks bringing stuff to the Apple Store and then they double park in the alley so I was just trying to figure out… City of Palo Alto Page 24 Chair Furth: There’s a lot of double parking in that alley. Board Member Lew: Yeah so, I was just trying (crosstalk)(inaudible) Chair Furth: (inaudible) Board Member Lew: Ok but a truck can actually get through there. Although it’s… Chair Furth: It’s very tight. Board Member Lew: Yeah, ok, thank you. Chair Furth: Any comments on landscaping before we go? Board Member Lew: I don’t think it works in the pedestrian walkway area on the north side. Board Member Gooyer: It’s too dark. Board Member Thompson: It could just be a different landscape that’s required there. Chair Furth: Ok so we’re unconvinced but – excuse me – would you like to respond? Mr. Hayes: No, I missed Alex’s comment. You don’t favor the trash opening? Board Member Lew: How do you – on the pedestrian walkway area for all the plants that are in the shade of the building on the north side, have you had discussions about how… Chair Furth: Are we going to have grow lights? Board Member Lew: …viable they are? Then… Mr. Hayes: The landscape architect with Merrill and Morris, John Potis, who couldn’t make it today. I’d like him to address that (crosstalk) (inaudible) Board Member Gooyer: (inaudible) Chair Furth: We’re talking about rethinking that whole thing. Board Member Gooyer: To accommodate that extra 7-feet? Chair Furth: Yep, we are. Board Member Gooyer: So, that means that area – that alley is going to get a lot narrower… Chair Furth: I think our point is… Board Member Lew: Well, not necessarily. Board Member Gooyer: … (inaudible) a lot. Board Member Lew: Well, no, I think there are two issues. I mean there’s the (inaudible) walkway and the other issue is the setback. You could make a garage smaller and lose spaces. You could make the garage smaller and add motorcycle parking. There are other… Board Member Gooyer: Yeah but I mean making – shrinking the width of that garage by 7-feet. City of Palo Alto Page 25 Chair Furth: We’ve given them a project. Board Member Gooyer: Ok. Board Member Lew: I’m not – this – there’s a 7-foot special setback and they’re encroaching 5-feet into it and that’s not to say that they couldn’t… Mr. Hayes: We’re actually going all the way. Ms. French: The columns go all the way to the property line. Board Member Lew: Awe so I think I read the 5-feet somewhere in the… Mr. Hayes: You did. Board Member Lew: I would say we have other building downtown, you’ve done some of them, that have encroached a little bit; like 278 encroaches… Mr. Hayes: 278 is the only building on that entire block of Bryant that encroaches and we have a display window as you’re walking down the sidewalk towards (inaudible)(crosstalk) Chair Furth: For the benefit for those of us who can’t remember all the addresses, which is 278? Mr. Hayes: That’s Keene Shoes. Chair Furth: Got it. Board Member Lew: So, Bryant and University and so sometimes it can work. My take on it… Mr. Hayes: At 240 we actually set the first floor back… Board Member Lew: Back, yes. Mr. Hayes: …so that you have the wide sidewalk but the upper floors did not respect the setback and we got a variance for that. Chair Furth: If this were not being coupled with a rezoning, this would be a variance full application and instead the City is proposing to change the Public Facilities District Standards. I think you’ve heard the aesthetic comments. Public art may save us all. We do not like this extent of encroachment into a built setback on a big street and we don’t think that the landscaping as proposed on the dark side of the building is likely to flourish. We think that the -- well, the staircase may or may not be terrific but I think you’ve heard all our thoughts on that. You’ve got Board Member Baltay’s thoughts in his letter which I’m sure will be shaped also by the hearing today. Anything else before we quit? Thank you all for indulging us in a rather freeform discussion. I think we want this project – it’s a big project. The City is sitting here in three different – at least three different aspects, it’s the client, it’s the Staff, and it’s the reviewing Board. We have had good participation from the public which we appreciate. We look forward to seeing you again. Board Member Lew: We need to make a motion. Chair Furth: So, you want us to continue this to a date certain or to a date uncertain? Ms. French: It can be to a date uncertain. That’s fine because we have – we’re going to re-advertise anyways. City of Palo Alto Page 26 Chair Furth: Would somebody make a motion? MOTION Board Member Lew: I will make a motion that we continue this item to a date uncertain. Chair Furth: Is there a second? Board Member Gooyer: Second. Chair Furth: Robert seconds. All in favor? Opposed? None. MOTION PASSES WITH A VOTE OF 4-0 WITH VICE CHAIR BALTAY ABSENT Chair Furth: Anything else before we adjourn? Study Session Approval of Minutes Chair Furth: Do we have minutes to approve? No, we don’t do we? I didn’t read any minutes. Ok, we are adjourned. Subcommittee Item Board Member Questions, Comments, Announcements Adjournment