HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-02-03 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 or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Architectural Review Board
Regular Meeting Agenda: February 3, 2022
Virtual Meeting
8:30 AM
****BY VIRTUAL TELECONFERENCE ONLY***
https://zoom.us/join Meeting ID: 965 6189 1491 Phone number: 1 669 900 6833
To prevent the spread of Covid-19, this meeting will be held by virtual
teleconference only, with no physical location. The meeting will be broadcast live
on Cable TV and through Channel 26 of the Midpen Media Center at
bit.ly/MidPenwatchnow.
Members of the public may comment by sending an email to
arb@CityofPaloAlto.org or by attending the Zoom virtual meeting to give live
comments. Instructions for the Zoom meeting can be found on the last page of
this agenda. Visit bit.ly/PApendingprojects to view project plans and details.
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) Tentative
Future Agenda items and 3) Recent Project Decisions
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. 300 Pasteur [21PLN-00235]: Recommendation
on Applicant's Request for Approval of a Major Architectural Review to Allow an
Addition of Approximately 37,000 sf to an Existing Stanford Hospital Building to Meet
Seismic Standards and Enable Renovation of Existing Patient Rooms, and Associated
_______________________
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 or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Landscape Changes. Zoning District: HD. Environmental Assessment: Certified EIR for
the Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project
(Council Resolution No 9168). For More Information Contact Project Planner Emily
Foley at emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org.
3. ARB Awards: Consider the Eligible 11 Projects and Associated Photographs Taken by
Board Members, and Decide on a List of Award Categories and Award Winners
Subcommittee Items
Election of Vice Chair
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 or less 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 Osma Thompson
Boardmember Peter Baltay
Boardmember David Hirsch
Get Informed and Be Engaged!
View online: http://midpenmedia.org/category/government/city-of-palo-alto/ or on Channel
26.
Public comment is encouraged. Email the ARB at: arb@CityofPaloAlto.org.
Material related to an item on this agenda submitted to the ARB after distribution of the
agenda packet is available for public inspection at bit.ly/paloaltoARB.
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.
_______________________
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 or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
Public Comment Instructions
Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email,
teleconference, or by phone.
1. Written public comments may be submitted by email to arb@CityofPaloAlto.org
2. Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the
teleconference meeting. To address the Board, click on the link below. Please read the
following instructions carefully.
• You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in-browser. If
using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up-to-date browser.
• You will be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you
identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify
you that it is your turn to speak.
• When you wish to speak on an agenda item, click on “raise hand”. The
moderator will activate and unmute attendees in turn. Speakers will be notified
shortly before they are called to speak. The Zoom application will prompt you to
unmute your microphone when it is your turn to speak.
• When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted.
• A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments.
3. Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted through the
teleconference meeting. To address the Council, download the Zoom application onto
your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID
below.
4. Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When
you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to
speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted.
https://zoom.us/join
Meeting ID: 965 6189 1491
Phone number: 1 669 900 6833
(you may need to exclude the initial “1” depending on your phone service)
Architectural Review Board
Staff Report (ID # 13986)
Report Type: City Official Reports Meeting Date: 2/3/2022
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services
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) Tentative Future Agenda items and 3) Recent
Project Decisions
From: Jonathan Lait
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) review and comment as appropriate.
Background
The attached documents are provided for informational purposes. The Board may review and
comment as it deems appropriate. If individual Boardmembers anticipate being absent from a
future meeting, it is requested that be brought to staff’s attention when considering this item.
The first attachment provides a meeting and attendance schedule for the current calendar year.
Also included are the subcommittee assignments, which are assigned by the ARB Chair.
The second 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.
Board level Architectural Review approvals can be found on the City’s webpage at
http://bit.ly/PAapprovedprojects.
Administrative staff-level Architectural Review approvals can be found on the City’s webpage at
http://bit.ly/PAstaffapprovals. Any party, including the applicant, may request a hearing by the
ARB on the proposed director's decision(s) 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
1
Packet Pg. 5
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services Department Page 2
12.10, or Chapter 12.13 is not eligible for a request for hearing by any party, including the
applicant.
No action is required by the ARB for this item.
Attachments:
• Attachment A: ARB Meeting Schedule Assignments (DOCX)
• Attachment B: Tentative Future Agendas (DOCX)
1
Packet Pg. 6
Architectural Review Board
202 2 Meeting Schedule & Assignments
2022 Schedule
Meeting Dates Time Location Status Planned Absences
01/20/2022 8:30 AM Virtual Meeting Regular
02/03/2022 8:30 AM Virtual Meeting Regular
02/17/2022 8:30 AM Virtual Meeting Regular
03/03/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
03/17/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
04/07/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
04/21/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
05/05/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
05/19/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
05/20/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
06/02/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
06/16/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
07/07/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
07/21/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
08/04/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
08/18/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
09/01/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
09/15/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
10/06/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
10/20/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
11/03/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
11/17/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
12/01/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
12/15/2022 8:30 AM TBD Regular
2022 Ad Hoc Committee Assignments
Assignments will be made by the ARB Chair on the day of the hearing
January February March April May June
July August September October November December
1.a
Packet Pg. 7
Architectural Review Board
2022 Tentative Future Agenda
The Following Items are Tentative and Subject to Change:
Meeting Dates Topics
February 17, 2022 • 525 E Charleston: Supportive Housing
1.b
Packet Pg. 8
Architectural Review Board
Staff Report (ID # 13790)
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/3/2022
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650) 329-2442
Summary Title: 300 Pasteur: SUMC Nursing Pod Extension (1st Formal)
Title: PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 300 Pasteur [21PLN-
00235]: Recommendation on Applicant's Request for Approval
of a Major Architectural Review to Allow an Addition of
Approximately 37,000 sf to an Existing Stanford Hospital
Building to Meet Seismic Standards and Enable Renovation of
Existing Patient Rooms, and Associated Landscape Changes.
Zoning District: HD. Environmental Assessment: Certified EIR
for the Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal
and Replacement Project (Council Resolution No 9168). For
More Information Contact Project Planner Emily Foley at
emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org.
From: Jonathan Lait
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) take the following action(s):
1. Recommend approval of the proposed project to the Director of Planning and
Development Services based on findings and subject to conditions of approval.
Report Summary
This is the first formal ARB hearing for the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) Nursing
Pod Extension. The ARB previously reviewed the Preliminary application on April 15, 2021. The
applicant proposes a 38,000 square foot (sf) expansion, separated into two structures on the
existing building, and landscaping and improvements to the existing below grade courtyards
and promenade space. The project does not increase the overall capacity of the hospital, the
purpose is to facilitate the state-mandated replacement of non-seismically safe portions of the
existing hospital.
Background
Project Information
2
Packet Pg. 9
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services Department Page 2
Owner: Stanford University
Architect: Perkins Eastman
Representative: Molly Swenson, Stanford Healthcare Department of Planning, Design, and
Construction
Legal Counsel: N/A
Property Information
Address: 300 Pasteur Drive
Neighborhood: Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) -Hospital District
Lot Dimensions & Area: The overall SUMC area is approximately 66 acres: the approx. 56-
acre Main SUMC site and the approx. 9.9-acre Hoover Pavilion site.
Housing Inventory Site: N/A
Located w/in a Plume: N/A
Protected/Heritage Trees: Yes, adjacent to proposed construction and renovation
Historic Resource(s): Yes, adjacent to but not involved in proposed construction and
renovation
Existing Improvement(s): Existing Nursing Pods D, E, and F.
134,029 sf, 4 stories (includes basement), 77.5 feet height, built 1983
Existing Land Use(s): Hospital
Adjacent Land Uses &
Zoning:
Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital, Advanced Medicine Center, New
Stanford Hospital, Falk Cardiovascular Research Center, Existing
Stanford Hospital - All HD (Hospital District)
Aerial View of Property:
2
Packet Pg. 10
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services Department Page 3
Source: Google
Land Use Designation & Applicable Plans
Zoning Designation: HD (Hospital District)
Comp. Plan Designation: Major Institution/Special Facility
SUMC Design Guidelines: Applies, see discussion below
Context-Based
Design Criteria: N/A
Downtown Urban
Design Guide: N/A
South of Forest Avenue
Coordinated Area Plan: N/A
Baylands Master Plan: N/A
El Camino Real Design
Guidelines (1976 / 2002): N/A
2
Packet Pg. 11
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services Department Page 4
Proximity to Residential
Uses or Districts (150'): N/A
Located w/in Airport
Influence Area: N/A
Prior City Reviews & Action
City Council: None
PTC: None
HRB: None
ARB: April 1, 2021: ARB Preliminary Review Minutes:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-
reports/agendas-minutes/architectural-review-board/2021/5.6-
arb_draft-minutes-approval.pdf
Staff Review: 20PLN-00057 – Limited façade improvements to Nursing Pod D
20PLN-00299 – pending - Blake Wilbur Road extension
Project Description
SUMC is proposing to remodel and expand the 1983 Nursing Pod buildings at the existing
Stanford Hospital, which is known as the “Nursing Pod Extension” project. This portion of the
SUMC project remains generally consistent with the SUMC original entitlement, Development
Agreement and Conditional Use Permit, in that it does not exceed the total allowable number
of hospital beds.
The expansion includes 38,000 square feet (sf) on four levels, one of which is below grade, plus
an equipment penthouse. The height, approximately 41 feet from grade to the roof and 61 feet
to the top of the equipment penthouse, is consistent with the plate heights of the existing
building. Window and material changes are consistent with a previous staff-level approval (file
20PLN-00057). The project also includes landscaping in the below grade courtyards, and
adjacent to the existing promenade, and lighting improvements. Visual simulations and floor
plans of the existing Nursing Pod buildings and the proposed renovation and additions can be
found in the project plans (Attachment D).
Requested Entitlements, Findings and Purview:
The following discretionary applications are being requested:
• Architectural Review – Major (AR): The process for evaluating this type of application is
set forth in PAMC 18.77.070. AR applications are reviewed by the ARB and
recommendations are forwarded to the Planning & Development Services 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.
2
Packet Pg. 12
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services Department Page 5
Analysis1
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Area Plans and Guidelines2
There are no Comprehensive Plan policies that directly impact the SUMC. The primarily
regulatory documents for the SUMC are:
• Development Agreement (Ordinance No 5124)
• Architectural Review and SUMC Design Guidelines (City Council Resolution No 9171)
• Conditional Use Permit (Record of Land Use Action 2011-03)
• Environmental Impact Report and the Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program
(City Council Resolution No 9168)
This project is a part of necessary updates to existing buildings. It is consistent with the uses
permitted by the CUP, and the construction will meet the approval conditions and
requirements of the MMRP. This project is not part of the Development Agreement.
This project meets the intent of the Design Guidelines in the following manners:
• The proposed design enhances the existing promenade, by providing additional seating
and gathering spaces, as well as additional landscaping. The promenade is the primary
open space and circulation through the campus.
• While the addition increases the massing of the existing nursing pods building, it is
expected to maintain the visual hierarchy between the main hospital and the existing
building, per SUMC Design Guidelines page 54.
• The addition does not add height to the building, maintaining the height hierarchy
shown on SUMC Design Guidelines pages 60-61.
• The primary massing technique is “staggering” as shown on SUMC Design Guidelines
page 68. The building is enhancing the “daylight basement” shown on page 71.
• The proposed materials and colors are within the palette shown on SUMC Design
Guidelines page 82.
Zoning Compliance3
The HD zoning district has minimal zoning standards, as the majority of the development
standards were established through the Design Guidelines, Conditional Use Permit, and
Development Agreement. The proposed project complies with all applicable codes.
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 The Palo Alto Zoning Code is available online: http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/palo-alto_ca
2
Packet Pg. 13
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services Department Page 6
The CUP includes a temporary allowance for the possibility this project will make the overall
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) increase above what is allowed, to facilitate moving between older and
newer buildings without disrupting operation. However, this project will not cause the FAR to
be above what is allowed. In addition to the main hospital being slightly smaller than originally
approved, parts of the 1959 Stone Complex building will be decommissioned as a part of this
project. See the Gross Floor Area Summary on page G0.1 of the plan set.
Multi-Modal Access & Parking
Although this project includes an increase in building square footage, the parking ratio for
hospitals is tied to the number of beds. The bed count is not increasing and therefore there is
no impact on parking.
Response to ARB Preliminary Comments
The ARB provided the following preliminary comments, which the applicant responded to in
this formal application:
The “canted”, windowless walls facing the
promenade lack visual interest
Two additional windows have been added to
each floor of both pods.
The canted panels have been replaced with a
horizontal ribbed panel, see sheet A4.5 and
materials samples.
The proposed fence is very long (450 ft) and
needs more variety
It is a necessary function of this project to
screen the below-grade courtyards. The
proposed fence is a high-quality laser cut
steel panel fence, which will be partially
screened by landscaping.
Building extensions appear too close and too
tall to the promenade
The existing width of the paved promenade is
not changing, and the useable space at the
southernmost end is increasing, though the
plaza at the northern end will decrease.
There will be 45’6” of open space between
the proposed extension and the roof canopy
of the hospital building across the
promenade. See sheets A1.0 and A1.1
Paving materials should be included in the
formal application
See sheet L2.3
Mechanical penthouse dimensions,
materials, visibility, and requirements, should
be further detailed
The mechanical enclosures are a necessary
part of hospital operations and are proposed
at the required specifications for this use.
Interpretive panels should be visually light,
low on text, and may be nicer if they include
physical texture
Specific details of the interpretive panels
have not been provided at this time.
2
Packet Pg. 14
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services Department Page 7
Consistency with Application Findings
Staff finds the project to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and SUMC
project documents as referenced earlier in the report. Draft findings of approval have been
included in this staff report as Attachment C.
Environmental Review
This project is designed to be in compliance with the SUMC EIR City Council Resolution No 9168,
the original EIR for the overall SUMC project. This project is consistent with the SUMC EIR goal
to update hospital, to be seismically safe, and does not increase the floor area or hospital bed
count above what is allowed by the EIR.
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 Daily Post
on January 24, 2022. Postcard mailing also occurred on January 24, 2022.
Public Comments
As of the writing of this report, no project-related, public comments were received.
Alternative Actions
In addition to the recommended action, the Architectural Review Board may:
1. Approve the project with modified findings or conditions;
2. Continue the project to a date (un)certain; or
3. Recommend project denial based on revised findings.
Report Author & Contact Information ARB4 Liaison & Contact Information
Emily Foley, AICP, Associate Planner Jodie Gerhardt, AICP, Planning Manager
(650) 617-3125 (650) 329-2575
Emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org
Attachments:
• Attachment A: Location Map (PDF)
• Attachment B: Draft ARB Findings (DOCX)
• Attachment C: Draft Conditions of Approval (DOCX)
• Attachment D: Applicant's Project Description (PDF)
• Attachment E: Project Plans (DOCX)
4 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org
2
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment A:
Location Map
2.a
Packet Pg. 16
ATTACHMENT B
ARB FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
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 has been reviewed by staff and found to be consistent with the Palo Alto Zoning
Code, SUMC Design Guidelines, and SUMC CUP.
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.
The project proposes extension of the
hospital in keeping with this designation.
Land Use and Community Design Element
Will be provided via email, ahead of the meeting
The proposed height of the building is 41 feet to the top of the roof and 61 feet to the top of
the equipment penthouse. The maximum allowable height for the HD zone is 130 ft. The
proposed height matches the existing building.
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.
This project extends an existing building through two new “pods” and modifications to the
2.b
Packet Pg. 17
existing below grade courtyards. The building extensions bring the building closer to the
existing promenade – a major pedestrian walkway through the SUMC campus. New benches
and trellises along the promenade provide communal open space amenities, and these
features, combined with landscaping, prevent the safety fence at the top of the below grade
courtyards from being too monotonous or visible.
There are no setback requirements, since this building is located at an interior part of the
overall campus. The proposed extensions will be 45’6” from the nearest adjacent building. Each
pod is 57 ft wide, adding 114 linear feet of building massing to the promenade. There is also
114 feet between the two extensions. The rest of the nursing pod building is approximately 40
feet behind the proposed extension.
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 building will be clad in Taktl panels (a type of “ultra-high performance concrete cladding”).
The primary texture is stucco, with accents in shadow, and ribbed textures. The shadow texture
is used as a secondary accent on the side-facing facades, and the ribbed texture is used on the
side facing the promenade. The window trim and other accents will be a soft-bronze-colored
metal. The trellises will be primarily the same bronze metal color, with rust colored accents.
This color scheme is consistent with the SUMC Design Guidelines.
The mechanical equipment enclosures will be covered in louvered screens, also bronze colored.
These screens will be visible to the public from some vantage points, but are a necessary
function of the hospital. The louvres keep the enclosure visibly “light” compared to a solid wall,
while preventing the equipment from being visible.
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 design will not impact the existing width of the promenade for pedestrians, bicyclists, and
small vehicles used by hospital and university staff (ie golf carts). The plaza at the northern end
of the project is reducing slightly in size, however a similarly sized area with bike racks and
space for tables and chairs is proposed to be added to the southern end.
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 two primary functions of landscaping for this project are to provide beauty to Courtyards D
2.b
Packet Pg. 18
and E, which are viewing gardens for the hospital patients, and provide screening along the
promenade outside of the courtyards. The proposed plant palette includes a variety of small to
medium sized flowering trees and shrubs, tall grasses, and low ground cover. Layered
landscaping will add texture to the spaces.
Existing landscaping will be removed and replaced, primarily Crepe myrtle, Chinese elm, and
Western redbud trees.. No protected trees are proposed for removal.
Finding #6: The project incorporates design principles that achieve sustainability in areas
related to energy efficiency, water conservation, building materials, landscaping, and site
planning.
Overall, the SUMC campus is subject to enhanced energy efficiency standards and waste
reduction requirements through the EIR MMRP.
The proposed landscaping uses primarily low to medium water use plants. The below grade
courtyard and tall buildings on the campus will increase shading in the landscaped areas.
2.b
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment C: Draft Conditions of Approval
PLANNING DIVISION
1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS: Construction and development shall conform to the approved plans
entitled, "Stanford Hospital General Bed Renovations,” stamped as received by the City on January 10,
2022 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 through OSHPD and meet any and all conditions of the
Planning, Urban Forestry, and Zero Waste departments.
3. BUILDING PERMIT PLAN SET: A copy of this cover letter and conditions of approval shall be printed on
the second page of 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. CONFORMANCE WITH PRIOR APPROVAL. The project remains subject to Ordinance No 5124
(Development Agreement), City Council Resolution No 9171 (Architectural Review), Record of Land Use
Action 2011-03 (Conditional Use Permit), and the Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program in City
Council Resolution No 9168 (Environmental Impact Report for the Stanford University Medical Center
Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project).
6. PERMIT EXPIRATION. The project approval shall be valid for a period of two years from the original date
of approval. Application for a one year extension of this entitlement may be made prior to expiration.
7. ENTITLEMENT EXPIRATION. The project approval shall be valid for a period of two years from the date
of issuance of the entitlement. If within such two years period, the proposed use of the site or the
construction of buildings has not commenced, the Planning entitlement shall expire. Application for a
one year extension of this entitlement may be made prior to expiration.
8. LANDSCAPE PLAN. Plantings shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan set and shall be
permanently maintained and replaced as necessary.
9. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP), prepared for the overall SUMC project site in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), shall be incorporated by reference as conditions of approval. The applicant shall
comply with all specified mitigation measures in the timelines outlined in the project’s MMRP.
10. NOISE PRODUCING EQUIPMENT: All noise producing equipment shall be located outside of required
setbacks, except they may project 6 feet into the required street side setbacks.
2.c
Packet Pg. 20
11. NOISE THRESHOLDS ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. In accordance with PAMC Section 9.10.040, No
person shall produce, suffer or allow to 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.
12. NOISE REPORT PRIOR TO INSPECTION. Where the acoustical analysis projected noise levels at or within
5 dB less than the Noise Ordinance limits, the applicant shall demonstrate the installed equipment
complies with the anticipated noise levels and the Noise Ordinance prior to final Planning inspection
approval.
13. FINAL INSPECTION: A Planning Division Final inspection will be required to determine substantial
compliance with the approved plans prior to the scheduling of a Building Division final. Any revisions
during the building process must be approved by Planning, including but not limited to; materials,
landscaping and hard surface locations. Contact your Project Planner, Emily Foley,
emily.foley@cityofpaloalto.org to schedule this inspection.
14. ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE: Development Impact Fees, currently estimated in the amount of
$3,307,578.00 plus the applicable public art fee, per PAMC 16.61.040, shall be paid prior to the issuance
of the related building permit.
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. SIGN APPROVAL NEEDED. No signs are approved at this time. All signs shall conform to the requirements
of Title 16.20 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (Sign Code) and shall be subject to approval by the Director of
Planning.
2.c
Packet Pg. 21
18. REFUSE. All trash areas shall be effectively screened from view and covered and maintained in an orderly
state to prevent water from entering into the garbage container. No outdoor storage is allowed/permitted
unless designated on the approved plan set. Trash areas shall be maintained in a manner to discourage
illegal dumping.
PUBLIC WORKS ZERO WASTE
The following comments below are part of the Palo Alto Municipality Code and cut-sheets for the internal and
external containers, related color-coded millwork, and colored-coded pictorial signage must be included in the
building plans prior to receiving approval from the Zero Waste Department.
19. As per Palo Alto Municipal Code 5.20.108 the site is required to have color-coded refuse containers,
related color-coded millwork, and colored-coded pictorial signage at each refuse disposal area. A refuse
disposal area must include a recycle (blue container), compost (green container), and garbage (black
container), three containers total. Applicant shall present on the plan the locations and quantity of all
internal and external refuse containers and any millwork containing refuse containers. Signage to be
placed on the containers shall be included as well. This requirement applies to any external or internal
refuse containers located in common areas such as lobby, hallways, reception, conference rooms,
restaurant, lounge, breakrooms, etc. except for restrooms. Millwork to store the color-coded refuse
containers must have a minimum of four inches in height, wrapping around the full width of the
millwork. Signage must be color coded with photos or illustrations of commonly discarded items.
Restrooms must have a green compost container for paper towels and an optional black landfill
container if applicable. Please refer to PAMC 5.20.108 and the Internal Container Guide. Examples of
appropriate signage can be found in the Managing Zero Waste at Your Business Guide. Electronic copies
of the signage can be found on the Zero Waste Palo Alto’s website,
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Public-Works/Zero-Waste/What-Goes-
Where/Toolkit#section-2 and hard copies can be requested from the waste hauler, GreenWaste of Palo
Alto, (650) 493-4894.
PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING
20. PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD CONDITIONS SHEET: The Department of Public Work’s full-sized "Standard
Conditions" sheet shall be included in the improvement plans and the applicant shall comply with all
conditions listed in the sheet. The sheet can be obtained from a staff member of Public Works
Engineering Services or at the following link under “Public Works Plan Review Documents”:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Public-Works/Engineering-Services/Forms-and-Permits
21. EXCAVATION & GRADING PERMIT: An Excavation and Grading Permit may be required per PAMC
Chapter 16.28 if the combined quantity of cut and fill exceeds 100 cubic yards. The permit application
and all required documents shall be submitted to Public Works Engineering. The application can be
obtained from a member of Public Works Engineering Services or at the following link:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Public-Works/Engineering-Services/Forms-and-Permits
URBAN FORESTRY
22. 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.
2.c
Packet Pg. 22
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.
24. 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, Trenching and Tunneling Distance, shall be printed on the final plans to be implemented
by Contractor.
25. TREE PROTECTION VERIFICATION. Prior to any site work verification from the contractor that the
required protective fencing is in place shall be submitted to the Urban Forestry Section. The fencing shall
contain required warning sign and remain in place until final inspection of the project.
WATERSHED PROTECTION
The following conditions are required to be part of any Planning application approval and shall 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. as further described below.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY BUILDING PERMIT:
26. Stormwater treatment measures
a) All Bay Area Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit requirements shall be followed.
b) Refer to the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program C.3 Handbook
(download here: http://scvurppp-w2k.com/c3_handbook.shtml) for details.
c) For all C.3 features, vendor specifications regarding installation and maintenance should be
followed and provided to city staff. Copies must be submitted to Pam Boyle Rodriguez at
pamela.boylerodriguez@cityofpaloalto.org. Add this bullet as a note to the building plans.
d) Staff from Stormwater Program (Watershed Protection Division) may be present during
installation of stormwater treatment measures. Contact Pam Boyle Rodriguez, Stormwater
Program Manager, at (650) 329-2421 before installation. Add this bullet as a note to building
plans on Stormwater Treatment (C.3) Plan.
2.c
Packet Pg. 23
July 30, 2021 Emily Foley Department of Planning & Community Environment
City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Major Architectural Review for Stanford Health Care Nursing Pod Extensions Property Location: 300 Pasteur Drive Zoning District: Hospital District APN: 142-23-017 Dear Emily,
Stanford Health Care (“SHC”) has prepared the enclosed materials in support of its application for Major
Architectural Review for a proposed addition to the existing Stanford Hospital at 300 Pasteur Drive.
Background
Stanford Hospital is comprised of facilities constructed over a number of years: at 300 Pasteur Drive, the
original 1959 complex designed by Edward Durell Stone (known as the “Stone Complex”); the 1973
expansion of the original facility (known as the “Phase 1 Central Core Expansion”); the 1989 addition
(known as the “Hospital Modernization Project,” including Nursing Pods “D,” “E,” and “F”); and most
recently, at 500 Pasteur Drive the new adult Hospital, which opened to patient care in 2019.
Stanford Health Care, together with Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital and the Stanford University
School of Medicine (known collectively as Stanford Medicine), have over the past nearly 10 years been
engaged in a facilities renewal and replacement project known as the Stanford University Medical Center
Renewal Project (“Renewal Project”). Driven by a growing demand for healthcare services, state-
mandated seismic safety requirements, and the need to replace outmoded facilities with modern,
technologically advanced spaces, the Renewal Project scope includes new hospital, clinic, research, and
laboratory facilities, as well as the renovation of existing hospital and clinic facilities. In order to facilitate
this important work, in 2011 the Stanford Medicine parties entered into a Development Agreement with
the City of Palo Alto, committing to provide a range of community benefits in exchange for vested
development rights and a streamlined process for obtaining subsequent project approvals. The Renewal
Project approvals allow for approximately 1.31 million square feet of net new development on the main
Stanford Medicine campus and Hoover Medical Campus over a 30-year period.
Below is a brief summary of elements of Stanford Medicine Renewal Project elements completed to date:
• Welch Road Improvements: Widening of Welch Road and installation of surface improvements
and below-grade utility infrastructure;
2.d
Packet Pg. 24
• Hoover Medical Campus: Renovation of the Hoover Pavilion, and construction of a new medical
office / clinical building (approximately 78K net new square feet) and an approximately 1,075-stall
parking structure;
• Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital: Construction of a new Main hospital building adjoining the
preexisting facility (approximately 366K net new square feet);
• New Stanford Hospital: Construction of a new adult hospital adjacent to the preexisting facility
(approximately 670K net new square feet) and an approximately 900-stall parking structure;
• School of Medicine: Construction of replacement laboratory / research space (approximately
197K square feet) to replace a portion of the 1959 Stone Complex, which will be vacated in
anticipation of its planned demolition.
For Stanford Health Care, three of the key Renewal Project goals were to meet existing and projected
demand for patient care (including relieving inpatient bed shortages), achieve timely compliance with
state seismic safety requirements (including replacement of the original 1959 Hospital in its entirety), and
to provide modern, state-of-the-art facilities designed to deliver high-quality health care services
(including transitioning from shared patient rooms to private rooms). Accordingly, SHC planned to
construct a new Hospital which would enable an increase in inpatient bed capacity from 456 to 600 beds,
and to relocate the 188 beds within the original 1959 Hospital to seismically compliant facilities. Further,
upon completion of the new Hospital, SHC planned to renovate the nursing pods within the 1989 portion
of the existing hospital, and to convert shared patient rooms to private patient rooms; this would reduce
the bed capacity of the 1989 facility by 80 beds.
Today, as Stanford Health Care begins its renovation program of the 1989 facility as planned, the
Hospital is meeting its planned 600-bed count. However, the upcoming conversion of shared patient
rooms to private rooms would reduce this capacity as noted above, and because the recently completed
adult hospital at 500 Pasteur is smaller than originally contemplated in the Renewal Project approvals
(and thus has a lower bed capacity), SHC is seeking to reach the desired 600-bed count through two
minor additions to its existing nursing pods at the 1989 facility. The proposed additions, known as the
“Pod Extensions,” would provide a net addition of 57 licensed beds, thereby allowing SHC to maintain the
600-bed count upon completion of its renovations.
Project Description
The proposed scope, referred to as the Pod Extensions, entails two additions to the western façade of the
1989 Hospital building, totaling approximately 38,000 square feet. The proposed additions draw on the
architectural language of the adjacent new Stanford Hospital at 500 Pasteur, and a recladding of the
balance of the existing western façade of the 1989 structure would serve to seamlessly integrate the
additions into the overall surroundings.
The design of the Pod Extensions is consistent with the SUMC Design Guidelines approved by the City of
Palo Alto in 2011. Specifically, the siting of the additions fits within the visual hierarchy, density pattern
and context identified for the Pasteur Mall District in the guidelines, adding to the existing composition of
legible building forms that serve to break down the overall scale of the Medical Center complex. The
proposed massing and building composition follow the “staggering” massing technique identified in the
guidelines, and create an opportunity for private courtyard view gardens which would be visible from the
patient rooms within the Pod Extensions, the existing 1989 building, and the new adult hospital. The
color and material palette is consistent with that set forth in the guidelines, and serves to tie the Pod
Extensions visually together with the rest of the Medical Center.
2.d
Packet Pg. 25
The Pod Extensions would abut the Medical Center Promenade, the main north-south pedestrian axis of
the Medical Campus, and accordingly offer the opportunity to enhance the character of the Promenade,
transforming it into an even more important connector between destinations, and even allowing the
Promenade to become a destination in itself. The proposed improvements along the Promenade include
a series of trellises along the length of the eastern edge with bench seating beneath, interpretive stations
providing a history of Stanford Medicine, as well as receptacles, pedestrian lighting, and a screen wall to
provide visual separation between the Promenade and the patient care areas beyond. At the southern
end of the Promenade, a new “terrace” space would provide the opportunity for an additional node of
activity opposite the retail and cafeteria spaces of the new adult hospital; loose seating and market
umbrellas would be provided in this location, and various programs would be offered by Stanford Health
Care, such as health screenings, farmers markets, and art installations.
The new proposed improvements along the Promenade would reinforce the existing nodes of activity
concentrated at the northern and southern terminuses, and would provide new spaces and opportunities
for resting and quiet, contemplative activities in between those nodes.
Response to Preliminary Architectural Review Feedback
In December 2020, SHC submitted its Nursing Pod Extension proposal to the City of Palo Alto for
Preliminary Architectural Review, and received feedback from both City staff and members of the
Architectural Review Board. Such feedback has been incorporated into the current plans, as described
further in the enclosed matrix.
Submittal Materials
In support of our application, we have enclosed the following materials:
• Signed Planning Review Application Form;
• Plan set describing the proposed improvements;
• Response to comments matrix identifying changes made in response to Preliminary Architectural
Review feedback;
• Materials board (to be delivered separately).
Please do not hesitate to contact me if any additional information is required.
Sincerely,
Molly Promes Swenson Sr. Program Manager Planning Design + Construction Stanford Medicine
2.d
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment E
Project Plans
During Shelter-in-Place, project plans are only available online.
Directions to review Project plans online:
1. Go to: bit.ly/PApendingprojects
2. Scroll down to find “300 Pasteur Dr.” and click the address link
3. On this project specific webpage you will find a link to the project plans and
other important information
Direct Link to Project Webpage:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-Articles/Planning-and-Development-Services/300-Pasteur-21PLN-
00021
Materials Boards:
During Shelter-in-Place, color and material boards will be available to view in the display case
outside of City Hall, on the exterior elevator near the corner of Hamilton Ave. and Bryant St.
2.e
Packet Pg. 27
Architectural Review Board
Staff Report (ID # 13988)
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/3/2022
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
(650) 329-2442
Summary Title: ARB Awards: Fifth Discussion (cont.from 1/20)
Title: ARB Awards: Consider the Eligible 11 Projects and Associated
Photographs Taken by Board Members, and Decide on a List of
Award Categories and Award Winners
From: Jonathan Lait
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB):
1. Discuss the ARB Design Awards, including possible awards categories, and timeline for
awards,
2. Review photographs of eligible/completed projects, and
3. Decide on award winners
Report Summary
The list of potential projects has been reduced to 11 locations. The goal for this meeting is to
develop award categories and decide on winning projects. Each board member should come
ready to the hearing with information about a handful of projects they would like to nominate.
Background
ARB Bylaws
The ARB bylaws Article 8, Design Awards, sets forth the following:
• Design Awards for outstanding built projects may be awarded every five years beginning
in 2005. Award-winning projects shall be selected from those reviewed by the ARB and
completed since the last awards were made.
• Criteria and number of awards shall be determined by the awarding board.
• Winning projects may be displayed in the City Hall lobby for one month following the
presentation of awards. The ARB shall request that the Mayor of the City of Palo Alto
issue an appropriate proclamation.
Purpose
3
Packet Pg. 28
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services Department Page 2
The Architectural Review Board (ARB) awards were established to express appreciation for
architects’ efforts to help create and maintain Palo Alto's unique visual character through their
creative and responsive designs of public and private spaces, which contribute to the well-being
and healthy environment of our city.
Past ARB Awards Background
• 1998: five awards went to five projects built prior to mid-1997.
• 2005: five awards went to five projects constructed between mid-1997 and mid-2004.
The eligible projects list was comprised of 70 major projects constructed prior to 2005;
with criteria as follows: (1) Innovative, creative and authentic, (2) Enriches the quality of
the built environment in Palo Alto, (3) Respectful of its context and the environment, (4)
Well-built, well-detailed and durable.
• 2010: ten awards went to ten projects from an eligible list of over 100 projects
constructed prior to 2010. The ARB determined the number of awards could be
increased to ten, to include ‘honorable mention’ awards for a variety of projects.
• 2015: five awards went to five projects from an eligible list of over 34 projects
constructed prior to 2015. The awards were presented in November 2015 and followed
the same criteria set in 2005. The five main projects included the Hoover Pavilion on
Quarry Road, Rinconada Library, Apple Store on University Ave, and Magical Bridge
Playground; the Mitchell Park Library also received a special sustainability award, and
Paris Baguette Remodel on University received a small project category award.
Discussion
Eligible Projects Documentation and Followup
Staff suggests boardmembers review the revised list and photos that were taken to determine
what projects are award winning and what categories of awards should be given out.
The ARB may also wish to consult past ARB members to assist in the selection and write-ups of
award winners. Staff typically contacts the award winners with an official letter, and prepares
the proclamation for Council.
Display of Winning Projects
The bank of televisions in the City Hall lobby will again be an option to display the winning
projects, as well as the City’s webpages. In previous years, a reception was held in the lobby
and community meeting room of City Hall prior to the Council meeting where the awards were
presented to the winning teams.
ARB1 Liaison & Contact Information
Jodie Gerhardt, AICP, Planning Manager
1 Emails may be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: arb@cityofpaloalto.org
3
Packet Pg. 29
City of Palo Alto
Planning & Development Services Department Page 3
(650) 329-2575
jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org
Attachments:
• Attachment A: 2020 ARB Award Eligibility List 1-12-22 (PDF)
3
Packet Pg. 30
# File #
Address Project
Description Short Title Year Approved/
2021 Status Type Planner Researcher
Second
Straw
Poll
Initial
Straw
poll
Notes Proposed Category Architect Notes
22 19PLN-00103 375 University Avenue Modifications to a ex
Exterior Renovations
(Cheesecake) 2019 Commercial Emily Peter 5 Yes DH, ODT, PB Storefront
good proportions, exterior façade,
human scale, urban experience
15 15PLN-00129 4175 Manuela Avenue Request by CongregCongregation Kol Emeth 2016 Assembly Use Ranu Osma 4 Yes ODT, GL, DH,
Institutional /
Sustainability Leed Platinum
25 16PLN-00135 701 Welch Minor Architectural R
Lucile Packard Children's
Hospital Medical Alex 4 Yes AL, DH, GL
Institutional / Human
Scale
large broken down/detailed bldg,
honorable mention?
8 16PLN-00263
799 Embarcadero
Road Request by Shah Ka
Fire Station #3 Replacement
Project 2017/Complete Public Facility Amy Osma 4 Yes Instutitional / Concept
context, urban design, landscape,
tree preservation, materials
17 17PLN-00147 1451 Middlefield Road Request by Sarah VJunior Museum and Zoo 2018/Complete Public Facility Amy David 4 Yes DH, PB, ODT
Institutional / Site
Planning street experience, site planning
13
16PLN-00190
17PLN-00225
3223-3251 Hanover
Street Allow the ConstructioR&D Building 1 & 2 2018/Complete R&D Graham Grace 4 Yes ODT, DH, GL
Commercial / Site
Planning
saved trees, sustainability, site
planning, concept, bike path
19 13PLN-00188 1400 Page Mill Allow the constructioOffice 2013/Complete R&D Clare Grace 3.5 Yes AL, PB, ODT Sustainability - Net Zero net zero by Stanford, removed trees
3 13PLN-00213 611 Cowper Request by Ken HayFour story mixed use 2013/Const 2016 Mixed Use Clare David 3 Yes PB, AL, DH
materials, concept
realized Ken Hayes already got AIA award
20 14PLN-00074 1050 Page Mill Road Request by Allison K
287,000sf R&D/Office, Sand Hill
Prop 2014/Const 2019 R&D Jodie Grace 3 Yes AL, GL, ODT Design Concept Form 4 nice courtyard
21 15PLN-00237 355 University Major Architectural R
Design Within Reach
(seismic/façade) 2016/Complete Commercial Rebecca Peter 2 Yes PB, DH, GL material, urban design Ken Hayes
seimic bonus, open basement,
storefront
11 17PLN-00171 180 Hamliton Avenue Allow for Exterior ImHotel / Nobu Facade Change 2017/Complete Hotel Samuel David 0 Yes PB, ODT, GL
material, exterior
renovation
2020 ARB Awards Eligibility - 1/12/22
Projects must have completed construction to be eligible
3.a
Packet Pg. 31