Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-09-03 Architectural Review Board Agenda PacketARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Thursday, September 03, 2026 Council Chambers & Hybrid 8:30 AM   Architectural Review Board meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attend by teleconference/video conference or in person. To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can choose to participate from home or attend in person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting is located at the end of the agenda. Masks are strongly encouraged if attending in person. The meeting will be broadcast on Cable TV Channel 76, live on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen Media Center https://midpenmedia.org. Visit https://bit.ly/PApendingprojects to view project plans and details. Board member names, biographies, and archived agendas and reports are available at https://bit.ly/paloaltoARB. VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/96561891491) Meeting ID: 965 6189 1491 Phone: 1(669)900-6833   PUBLIC COMMENTS General Public Comment for items not on the agenda will be accepted for up to three minutes or an amount of time determined by the Chair. In-person comments will be heard at the beginning of the agenda and remote comments will be heard at the end of the agenda. All requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutes after the staff’s presentation. Written public comments can be submitted in advance to arb@PaloAlto.gov and will be provided to the Board and available for inspection on the City’s website three days before the meeting. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subject line. 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. The Chair may limit Public Comments to thirty (30) minutes for all combined speakers. The Chair may reduce the allowed time to speak for Study Sessions and Action Items to two (2) minutes or less to accommodate a larger number of speakers. PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted only by email to arb@PaloAlto.gov at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received, the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strong cybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are not accepted. Signs and symbolic materials less than 2 feet by 3 feet are permitted provided that: (1) sticks, posts, poles or similar/other type of handle objects are strictly prohibited; (2) the items do not create a facility, fire, or safety hazard; and (3) persons with such items remain seated when displaying them and must not raise the items above shoulder level, obstruct the view or passage of other attendees, or otherwise disturb the business of the meeting. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL   AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS The Chair or Board majority may modify the agenda order to improve meeting management.   IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. 1-3 minutes depending on number of speakers. In-person comments will be heard at the beginning of the agenda and remote comments will be heard at the end of the agenda.   CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS   1.Director's Report, Meeting Schedule, and Upcoming 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. 2.PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 180 El Camino Real [26PLN-00186]: Recommendation on Applicant’s Request for a Minor Board-Level Architectural Review to Allow Storefront Modifications Including Refinishing Façade and New Signage for a Relocated Tenant, Victoria’s Secret (Building C, Space #16B), at the Stanford Shopping Center. CEQA Status: Exempt per CEQA Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Zoning District: CC (Community Commercial) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Public Comment is Permitted. Three (3) minutes per speaker. 3.Draft Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes for August 6, 2026 BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s).   VIRTUAL PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. 1-3 minutes depending on number of speakers. In-person comments will be heard at the beginning of the agenda and remote comments will be heard at the end of the agenda. ADJOURNMENT   INFORMATIONAL REPORT The materials below are provided for informational purposes, not for action or discussion during this meeting’s agenda. Written public comments may be submitted in advance and will be provided to the Commission and available for public inspection on the City’s website three days before the meeting. A.Public Comments AD HOC COMMITTEE   4.3200 Park Boulevard [22PLN-00287]: Ad Hoc Committee Review of the Paseo Width and End Unit Design. Environmental Assessment: A Revised Final EIR was Certified on September 12, 2023. Zoning District: RM-30.   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@PaloAlto.gov. 2.Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Board, click on the link below to access a Zoom-based meeting. 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: Chrome 30, Firefox 27, Microsoft Edge 12, Safari 7. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. ◦You may 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 Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called 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 Board, download the Zoom application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions above. 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. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Board. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN Meeting ID: 965 6189 1491 Phone: 1-669-900-6833 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@PaloAlto.gov. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. Item No. 1. Page 1 of 2 Architectural Review Board Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: September 3, 2026 Report #: 2608-6693 TITLE Director's Report, Meeting Schedule, and Upcoming Agenda Items RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) review and comment as appropriate. BACKGROUND This document includes the following items: ARB meeting schedule Upcoming ARB agenda items Recently submitted and pending projects subject to ARB review Board members are encouraged to contact Samuel Tavera (Samuel.Tavera@PaloAlto.gov) to notify staff of any planned absences one month in advance, if possible, to ensure the availability of an ARB quorum. Approved projects can be found on the City’s Building Eye webpage at https://paloalto.buildingeye.com/planning. Any party, including the applicant, may request a hearing by the ARB on the proposed director’s decision(s) within the 10-day or 14-day appeal period by filing a written request with the planning division. There shall be no fee required for requesting such a hearing. However, there is a fee for appeals. 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. No action is required by the ARB for this item. Item 1 Item 1 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 5     Item No. 1. Page 2 of 2 UPCOMING ARB AGENDA ITEMS The following items are tentative and subject to change: 950 Page Mill Road: Master Sign Program The following new ARB project was submitted: Tier 2 Wireless Communication Facilities (WCFs) Request by NextEdge Network Holdings LLC, on behalf of AT&T Mobility for Review of Three WCFs to Collocate Three (3) 5G Antennas on Wood Utility Poles Near 804 Boyce Avenue (Pole 5919), 670 Guinda Street at Forest Avenue (Pole 6023) and 754 Homer Avenue (Pole 6010). Attachment A: 2026 Meeting Schedule & Assignments : ARB Liaison1 & Contact Information   Steven Switzer, Senior Historic Planner   (650) 329-2321   Steven.Switzer@PaloAlto.gov 1 Emails can be sent directly to the ARB at the following email: ARB@PaloAlto.gov Item 1 Item 1 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 6     Architectural Review Board 2026 Meeting Schedule & Assignments 1 2 2 7 4 2026 Meeting Schedule Meeting Dates Time Location Status Planned Absences 1/1/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled 1/15/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Adcock, Hirsch 2/5/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled 2/19/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled 3/5/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 3/19/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 4/2/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled Rosenberg 4/16/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 5/7/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Jojarth 5/21/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 6/4/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Chen 6/18/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled Adcock, Chen, Rosenberg 7/2/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Cancelled Adcock 7/16/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 8/6/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 8/20/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 9/3/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 9/17/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 10/1/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 10/15/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 11/5/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 11/19/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 12/3/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular 12/17/2026 8:30 AM Hybrid Regular Adcock Assignments will be made by the ARB Chair January February March April May June July August September October November December Item 1 Attachment A - 2026 Meeting Schedule & Assignments     Packet Pg. 7     Item No. 2. Page 1 of 7 Architectural Review Board Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: September 3, 2026 Report #: 2607-6537 TITLE PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 180 El Camino Real [26PLN-00186]: Recommendation on Applicant’s Request for a Minor Board-Level Architectural Review to Allow Storefront Modifications Including Refinishing Façade and New Signage for a Relocated Tenant, Victoria’s Secret (Building C, Space #16B), at the Stanford Shopping Center. CEQA Status: Exempt per CEQA Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Zoning District: CC (Community Commercial) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) recommend approval of the proposed project to the Director of Planning and Development Services (PDS) based on findings and subject to conditions of approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The application is a request for Minor Board-Level Architectural Review to allow façade modifications to Space #16B in Building C at the Stanford Shopping Center, as shown on the Location Map in Attachment A. The project includes refinishing the front façade and installing new signage for Victoria’s Secret, which is relocating from Space #1220 in Building CC. The current tenant in Space #16B, Peloton, will relocate to another tenant space. The Master Tenant Façade and Sign Program (MTFSP) for the Stanford Shopping Center requires an Architectural Review of exterior changes to tenant spaces more than 35 feet in width and facing public right-of-way. BACKGROUND Project Information Owner:The Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University Architect:Shremshock Architecture, Inc. Representative:Jason Smith – Land Shark Development Item 2 Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 8     Item No. 2. Page 2 of 7 Property Information Source: Google Satellite Maps Item 2 Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 9     Item No. 2. Page 3 of 7 Land Use Designation & Applicable Plans Yes Yes Yes (2008/2005) (1976) (1993) (2002) (2005) (2000)(2003) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Architectural Review – Major (AR): The process for evaluating this type of application is set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) 18.77.070. AR applications are reviewed by the ARB, and recommendations are forwarded to the PDS Director for action within Item 2 Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 10     Item No. 2. Page 4 of 7 five business days of the Board’s recommendation. Action by the Director is appealable to the City Council if the appeal is 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 single finding requires project redesign or denial. The findings to approve an AR application are provided in Attachment B. Neighborhood Setting and Character The project is located within the Stanford Shopping Center on the northeast portion of the site off El Camino Real. The Stanford Shopping Center is defined within the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.16.030 (d) as “all properties zoned CC and bounded by El Camino Real, Sand Hill Road, Quarry Road, and Vineyard Lane”. The site is situated to the west of Stanford University Medical Center and is surrounded by various retail and multi-family uses. Stanford Shopping Center has an open-air pedestrian environment characterized by a mixture of retail, dining, professional and general business offices, and personal service uses. ANALYSIS Staff has analyzed the proposed project for consistency with relevant plans, policies and regulations as well as the Architectural Review findings for approval. Overall, staff finds the project to be consistent with all relevant plans, policies, regulations and findings, as discussed herein, and recommends that the ARB recommend approval of the proposed project. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Area Plans, and Guidelines1 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 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. Policy L-50 of the Comprehensive Plan encourages “…high-quality signage that is attractive, appropriate for the location and balances visibility needs with aesthetic needs”. The façade size of the project's tenant space is typical of other Shopping Center façade sizes. The proposed signage on the upper façade and the blade sign is constructed with high-quality durable materials and features high-quality illuminations. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the Stanford Shopping Center as a regional center with a land use designation of Community Commercial. On balance, the project is consistent with the policies in the Comprehensive Plan and therefore fulfills the goals of the Plan. Attachment B provides a detailed review of the project’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Compliance2 PAMC Section 18.16.060(e)(3) states that the maximum floor area for the Stanford Shopping 1 The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan is available online: bit.ly/PACompPlan2030 2 The Palo Alto Zoning Code is available online: bit.ly/PAZoningCode Item 2 Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 11     Item No. 2. Page 5 of 7 Center is limited to 1,412,362 square feet. The proposed project would not result in an overall change to the existing floor area of 1,323,547 square feet. A spreadsheet of all Shopping Center building areas has been provided on Sheet A00.04 as shown in Attachment F. No site plan changes are proposed under this project. Master Tenant Façade and Sign Program Signage The League of American Bicyclists. The project does not include any change in square footage and therefore does not affect the existing bicycle parking for the site. Item 2 Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 12     Item No. 2. Page 6 of 7 Throughout the site there are additional pedestrian amenities such as outdoor seating areas, planters, fountains, interactive maps, pedestrian level lighting, and public art. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS ATTACHMENTS Item 2 Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 13     Item No. 2. Page 7 of 7 Report Author & Contact Information Nishita Kandikuppa, Associate Planner (650) 838-2806 Nishita.Kandikuppa@paloalto.gov ARB Liaison5 & Contact Information Steven Switzer, Senior Historic Planner (650) 329-2321 Steven.Switzer@PaloAlto.gov 5 Emails can be sent directly to the ARB using the following address: ARB@PaloAlto.gov Item 2 Item 2 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 14     24 24 24 25 24 24 7 7 7 7 7 24 25 24 University Avenue _Train Station Sheraton Palo Alto American_Red Cross Fire_Station # 1 Arboretum Children's Center Rescue_Air GARAGE Tower_Well Lytton Square Senior Center Everett Manor Quarry_Substation A_Research_Institute PAMF Lytton Gardens Senior Residence Building JRH Building AA ELECTIONEER COURT Building BB Building CC Building DD Building D THE GARDEN WALK The PlazaBloomingdales Building V SAND HILL WALK Building H THE PAVILION Building E Building F LADY ELLEN PL Building K Macy's Building N THE PLAZA Building M Building W P F Chang's Bank of_America Wilkes -_ Bashford Bldg P Parking Structure Sand Hill Station The Westin Hotel Gym Lot R Parking Garage City of Palo Alto Comerica Bank Pizza My Heart Peninsula_Creamery Mac's Smokeshop Wasson Building Center________Skilled Nursing Living Building C 13-190Neuroscience_Health Center 13-040CENTER FOR ACADEMIC MEDICINE Everett House Nordstrom's Crate & Barrel_______The Container_Store Building ONeiman-Marcus Building L AZMOOR PLACE 90-925 Pediatric_Ambulatory Care Center 90-935R Old_Winery 13-019 PSYCHIATRY_ACADEMIC &_CLINIC BLDG. Hoover Pavilion Garage Fleming's Prime_Steakhouse_& Wine Bar 13-045CAM Parking Garage Entrance 74.0' 74.0' 54.0' 54.0' 37.5' 37.5' 36.7' 36.7' 64.0' 64.0' 112.5' 49.7' 112.5' 49.7' 76.0' 94.5' 26.0' 87.4'54.1' 161.5' 175.0' 75. 112.5' 100.0' 12.5' 125.0' 112.5' 225.0' 100.0' 125.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5' 100.0' 75.0'100.0' 75.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 90.0' 25.0' 90.0' 25.0' 90.0' 50.' 90.0' 50.0'90.0' 50.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 100.0' 112.5' 100.0' 112.5' 25.0'12.5'25.3' 112.5' 50.3' 100.0' 50.0' 112.5' 25.0'12.5'25.0' 125.0' 125.0' 225.0' 99.5' 27.7' .5' 72.3' 25.0' 125.0' 44.0' 25.0' 25.0' 72.3' .5'27.7'50.5' 99.6' 48.9' 81.0' 48.9' 57.5' 25.0' 125.0' 50.0' 125.0' 50.0' 125.0' 50.0' 125.0' 50.0' 148.0' 100.0' 160.0' 88.0' 17.0' 100.0' 75.0'100.0' 75.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 95.0' 20.5'5.0' 79.5' 90.0' 23.0' 193.0' 112.5' 193.0' 112.5' 100.0' 225.0' 100.0' 225.0' 100.0' 75.0'100.0' 75.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0'52.1' 44.1' 28.3' 25.0' 31.3'25.0' 68.7' 50.0' 100.0' 25.0' 100.0' 25.0' 68.7' 25.0'31.3' 50.0' 50.0' 100.0' 28.3' 44.1' 105.0' 50.0' 225.0' 93.0' 12.5' 37.5' 112.5'130.5' 125.0' 143.0' 112.5' 50.0' 12.5' 93.0' 100.0' 125.0' 100.0'125.0' 100.0' 125.0' 25.0' 125.0' 25.0' 125.0' 25.0' 125.0' 25.0' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 112.5' 112.9' 12.5' 112.5' .8' 99.9' 225.8' 25.0' 90.0' 12.5' 16.8' 101.2' 25.0' 101.3' 16.8'12.5' 112.5' 25.0' 112.5' 25.0' 112.5' 15.0' 112.5' 15.0' 112.5' 25.0' 112.5' 25.0' 112.5' 100.0' 25.0' 100.0' 25.0' 46.0' 100.0' 100. 100.0' 50. 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 150.0' 100.0' 150.0' 100.0' 100.0' 85.0'100.0' 85.0' 175.0' 112.5' 50.0' 37.5' 25.0' 25.0' 100.0' 50.0' 55.0' 125.0' 55.0' 125.0'38.0' 75.0' 50.0' 37.5'50.0' 12.5'38.0' 125.0' 37.5' 112.5' 37.5' 112.5' 37.5' 112.5' 37.5' 112.5' 93.0' 50.0' 93.0' 50.0' 93.0' 62.5'93.0' 62.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 100.0' 112.5' 25.0' 112.5'125.0' 225.0' 93.0' 62.5'93.0' 62.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 37.5' 112.5' 37.5' 112.5' 93.0' 162.5' 93.0' 162.5' 12.5'25.0' 112.5' 75.0' 100.0' 50.0' 43.0' 100.0' 43.0' 100.0' 50.0' 75.0' 50.0' 75.0' 45.0' 112.5' 45.0' 112.5'30.0' 112.5' 30.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 25.0' 100.0' 25.0' 100.0' 75.0'100.0' 75.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 50.0' 102.2' 50.0' 102.2' 50.0' 97.5' 50.0' 97.5' 193.0' 105.0' 193.0' 105.0' 40.1' .6'1.0'10.5' 33.8'7.7' 35.6'4.0' 6.4'4.8' 27.0'11.5' 75.0' 100.0' 25.0' 100.0' 22.8'50.0' 4.7' 50.0' 17.5' 41.5' 72.2' 35.0' 112.5' 35.0' 112.5' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 162.5' 220.0' 162.5' 220.0'26.0' 101.0' 31.5' 68.2' 5.5' 32.8' 33.8' 32.8' 5.5' 68.2' 27.5' 68.2' .8'32.8' 25.0' 32.8' .8' 68.2' 29.5' 68.2' 3.7' 32.8' 33.8' 32.8' 3.7' 68.2' 27.5' 68.3' 2.7' 32.7'32.7' 2.7' 68.3' 31.5' 94.5' 10.2'22.3' 31.5' 101.0' 26.0' 32.8' 5.5' 68.2' 27.5' 68.2' 5.5' 32.8'33.8' 32.8' .8' 68.3' 29.5' 68.3' .8' 32.8'25.0' 32.7' 3.7' 68.2' 72.0' 29.7' 72.0' 29.7' 72.0' 31.9' 72.0' 31.9' 47.8' 51.6' 70.2' 173.3' 64.0' 63.0' 54.0' 162.0' 37.5' 112.5' 37.5' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5' 65.0' 112.5' 15.0'18.5' 50.0' 131.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 94.0' 50.0' 94.0' 15.0'7.0' 150.0' 7.0' 25.0'7.0' 125.0' 100.0'100.0' 12.5' 50.0' 112.5' 278.0' 220.0'278.0' 220.0' 50.0' 30.8' .6'10.5'1.0'.6' 40.1' 37.8' 33.2' 30.8'33.2' 30.8' 46.8' 27.0' 4.8' 6.4'4.0' 35.6' 23.2' 30.0' 100.0' 30.0' 100.0'50.0 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 35.0' 100.0' 35.0'200.0' 110.0' 49.3' 100.0' 70.0'100.0' 70.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0'100.0' 25.0' 100.0' 25.0' 100.0' 75.0'100.0' 75.0' 95.0' 50.0' 25.0' 200.0' 110.0' 200.0' 110.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 100.0' 2.5'16.0' 47.5' 116.0' 50.0'50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 50.0' 190.0' 34.0' 87.5' 16.0' 102.5' 75.0' 40.0' 75.0' 40.0' 75.0' 66.0'75.0' 66.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 75.0' 106.0' 75.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0'50.0' 68.6' 50.0' 68.6 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 45.0' 106.0' 45.0' 106.0' 30.0' 106.0' 30.0' 106.0' 25.0' 106.0' 25.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5'50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5'50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5'50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 125.0' 50.0' 125.0' 50.0' 125.0' 50.0' 125.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5'50.0' 32.5' 5.0' 80.0' 45.0' 112.5' 5.0' 80.0' 5.0' 80.0' 130.0' 36.9' 130.0' 36.9' 130.0' 75.6' 130.0' 75.6' 64.0' 37.5'64.0' 37.5' 50.0' 75.0' 50.0' 75.0'36.0' 112.5' 50.0' 75.0' 14.0' 37.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 150.0' 100.0' 50.0' 12.5' 100.0' 112.5' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 68.0' 47.6'68.0' 47.6' 64.0' 32.3' 64.0' 32.3' 64.0' 32.3' 64.0' 32.3' 64.0' 32.3'64.0' 32.3' 40.0' 116.0' 40.0' 116.0' 72.0' 30.3' 72.0' 30.3' 72.0' 32.5' 72.0' 32.5' 72.0' 32.5' 72.0' 32.5' 72.0' 32.5' 72.0' 32.5' 72.0' 32.5' 72.0' 32.5' 31.5' 68.2' 2.7' 32.8'22.3' 10.2' 94.5'27.5' 68.2' 3.7' 32.7'33.8' 32.8' 2.7' 68.2' 70.2' 51.6'70.2' 51.6' 54.0' 63.0' 54.0' 63.0' 25.0' 55.0' 25.0' 55.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 45.0' 112.5' 45.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 93.0' 50.0' 93.0' 50.0' 93.0' 75.0'93.0' 75.0'150.0' 112.5' 110.0' 90.0'110.0' 90.0' 55.0' 10.0'5.0' 100.0' 50.0' 110.0' 33.0' 100.0' 33.0' 100.0'160.0' 110.0' 10.0' 28.0' 10.0' 19.2' 34.4' 35.8' 105.6' 193.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 68.0' 55.0'68.0' 55.0' 58.2' 50.0'58.2' 50.0' 68.0' 54.4'68.0' 54.4' 126.1' 43.0' 126.1' 43.0' 43.0' 79.0' 43.0' 79.0' 43.0' 33.5'43.0' 33.5' 9 10 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50. 57.'57.0' 43.0' 100.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 35.0' 150.0' 35.0' 150.0' 40.0' 150.0' 40.0' 150.0' 37.5' 150.0' 37.5' 150.0' 143.0' 100.0' 43.0'50.0'67.0' 50.0' 33.0' 100.0' 43.0' 50.0'43.0' 50.0' 110.0' 50.0' 110.0' 50.0' 37.5' 100.0' 33.0' 100.0' 110.0' 50.0' 193.0' 100.0' 12.5' 150.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 200.0' 5.6' 35.8' 34.4'35.8' 10.0' 200.0' 50.0'200.0' 50.0' 200.0' 50.0'200.0' 50.0' 200.0' 50.0' 50.0' 100.0' 50.0' 100.0' 64.0' 32.3'64.0' 32.3' 64.0' 34.4'64.0' 34.4' 65.0' 150.0' 100.0' 75.0' 190.0' 75.0' 190.0' 140.0' 60.0' 140.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0'50.0' 190.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 190.0' 50.0' 40.0' 116.0' 40.0' 116.0' 40.0' 116.0' 40.0' 116.0' 40.0' 116.0' 40.0' 116.0' 65.0' 65.0' 65.0' 65.0' 65.0' 65.0' 65.0' 65.0' 65.0' 65.0' ' 50.0'.4' 50.0'112 37.5' 11 37.5' 50.0'70.0' .0' 73.0' 30.0' 73.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 200.0' 100.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 65.8' 5.4' 55.9' 71.5' 107.9' 150.0' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 542.81' 10 760.5' 76.0' 819.5' 77.3' 97.6' 39.0' 671.1' 657.0' 593.6' 188.0' 333.6' 370.0' 372.1' 357.8' 31.4'34.6' 41.2' 358.5' 370.0' 156.2' 136.5' 347.5' 655.8' 114.4' 333.6' 576.4' 372.1' 655.8' 403.7' 38.0' 136.5' 156.2' 118.8' 30.0' 235.9' 568.3' 21.1' 25.8' 49.1' 612.6' 71.8' 519.0' 588.3' 51.3' 79.0' 30.0' 69.9' 31.6' 70.0' 31.6' 54.3'30.0' 27.7' 74.5' 39.2' 486.4' 32.9' 122.4' 5.3' 977.6' 144.5' 410.6' 135.6' 136.5' 626.5' 137.1' 148.3' 147.7' 114.0' 37.8' 64.0' 136.5' 135.6' 66.4' 55.8' 40.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 514.7' 149.8' 55.0'14.4'10.2'41.8' 19.3' 15.5'13.2'17.3' 133.6' 436.5' 42.4' 49.6' 338.1' 64.5' 73.8' 14.4'.0'.2'6.8'.8'.9'.0'1.3'.8'.9'.8'.7'.8'1.1'12.1'9.8'17.2' 23.9' 177.8' 66.1' 24.2' 566.5' 45.7' 7.0' 329.0' 135.0' 336.8' 143.1' 60.0' 602.1' 229.8'43.9' 124.5' 68.1' 195.1'77.2' 204.2' 118.8' 52.0' 65.5' 129.5' 39.0' 97.6' 156.3' 137.1' 121.9' 30.0' 118.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 45.0' 114.5' 45.0' 114.5' 25.0' 6.0'25.0' 99.4' 50.0' 95.4' 60.0' 171.5' 60.0' 171.5' 171.5' 44.8' 171.5' 44.7' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 288.7' 335.5' 235.2' 254.7' 85.8' 89.8' 111.5' 89.7' 111.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 100.0' 112.5' 100.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5'275.0' 77.1' 147.0' 35.4' 128.0' 112.5' 35.4' 147.0' 35.4' 147.0' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 75.0'75.0' 75.0' 150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5' 785.2' 56.2' 202.6' 10.9'10.0' 10.0'11.9' 84.5' 336.8' 143.1' 329.0' 135.0' 84.5' 21.4'10.8'10.6' 124.9' 112.0' 25.2' 31.7' 17.7' 9.6' 9.2' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5'150.0' 112.5' 89.7' 60.0'89.7' 60.0' 125.0' 54.0' 125.0' 54.0' 125.0' 54.0' 125.0' 54.0' 66.5' 54.0' 66.5' 54.0' 150.2' 54.0' 150.0' 54.0' 37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0'37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 37.5' 75.0' 37.5' 75.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 69.5' 108.0' 6.0' 139.5' 48.7' 164.5' 42.7' 25.0' 48.7' 164.5' 48.7' 164.5' 48.7' 164.5' 48.7' 164.5' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 65.0' 100.0' 65.0' 100.0' 85.0' 150.0' 85.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0'100.0' 150.0' 100.0' 150.0' 198.6' 106.5' 235.2' 100.0' 135.2' 53.2' 153.4' 50.0' 50.0' 153.4' 50.0' 50.0' 150.0' 50.0' 150.0' 98.6' 150.0' 120.0' 128.7' 26.3' 48.7' 112.5' .3' 52.0'49.2' 164.5' 45.0' 112.5' 54.0' 44.3' 54.0' .3' 112.5' 50.0' 52.5' 2.0' 60.0'48.0' 112.5' 37.5' 75.0' 39.5' 60.0' 2.0'15.0' 98.6' 150.0' 120.0' 128.7' 26.3' 98.6' 150.0' 120.0' 128.7' 26.3' 98.6' 150.0' 120.0' 128.7' 26.3' 98.6' 150.0' 120.0' 128.7' 26.3' 98.6' 150.0' 120.0' 128.7' 26.3' 98.6' 150.0' 120.0' 128.7' 26.3' 98.6' 150.0' 120.0' 128.7' 26.3' 98.6' 150.0' 120.0' 128.7' 26.3' 98.6' 150.0' 120.0' 128.7' 26.3' 55.0' 114.5' 50.4' 114.6' 350.0' 250.0' 350.0' 250.0' 250.0' 100.0' 250.0' 100.0' 65.0' 50.0'65.0' 50.0' 150.0' 150.0' 50.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 50.0' 106.0' 150.0' 100.0' 150.0' 100.0' 150.0' 100.0' 150.0' 100.0' 150.0' 100.0' 150.0' 100.0' 34.' 35.6' 161.6' 26.1' 14.6' 19.6' 40.3' 112.5' 50.0' 112.5' 100.0' 112.5' 75.0' 112.5' 125.0' 31.1' 129.5' 30.0' 77.6' 77.6' 93.2' 93.2' 100.0'100.0' 100.0' 45.0' 90.0' 14.3' 34.0' 18.0'18.0' 18.0'18.0' 18.0'18.0'18.0'18.0' 18.0' 18.0' 18.0' 75.0' 55.0' 25.0' 55.0' 25.0' 112.5'125.0' 112.5' 75.0' 55.0' 25.0' 55.0' 25.0' 112.5'125.0' 112.5' 75.0' 55.0' 25.0' 55.0' 25.0' 112.5'125.0' 112.5' 75.0' 55.0' 25.0' 55.0' 25.0' 112.5'125.0' 112.5' 75.0' 55.0' 25.0' 55.0' 25.0' 112.5'125.0' 112.5' 75.0' 55.0' 25.0' 55.0' 25.0' 112.5'125.0' 112.5' 75.0' 55.0' 25.0' 55.0' 25.0' 112.5'125.0' 112.5' 18.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0'50.0' 50.0'58.0' 58.0' 50.0' 54.5' 189.0' 67.0' 64.7' 147.7' 147.1' 115.0 115.0' 147.7' 397.4' 356.5'154.8' 30.0' 157.5' 192.0' 644.0' 222.9' 8' 228.4' 226.4' 220.4' 116.2' 142.6' 238.3' 169.5' 12.5' 164.1' 109.3' 519.0' 71.8' 612.6' 49.1' 25.8' 21.1' 568.3'198.0' 198.0' 242.3' 134.0'133.8' 392.1 373.9' 176.0' 176.0' 182.3' 256.9' 136 610 116-122 150 535 529 525 542 516 140 102 116 164 158156 10 1 440 444 436 432 427 425 117 119 180 508 500 170 172 174 542 544 411 425 429 185 165 181 412 250 420 245 171- 169 441- 445 2 250 251 485 255 271 281 271 281 252 270 240-248 202- 216 223- 229 209 215 247-259 240 232230 311-317 347 265 272-278 418 319 321- 341 328 330 325 330 332 1&2 330 1-3 324 326 316 318 373- 377 361 313 333 325 326 321 335 379 310 332 378 -390 360 - 1A - 1C 360 - 2A - 2C 360 - 3A - 3C 360 - 4A - 4C 360 - 5A - 5C 360 - 6A 805 700 600 730 130 312 318 324 317 301 186 192 323 329 151 325 329 334 131 129 202 158 180 165 147 143 125 149 101 150 170172 165 167 169 171 252 247 244 250 177 220 261 251- 257 205 245 231 225 213 205 170 210- 216 246 129 160 116 112 180 - 180A 171 219 197 208 210 212 216 220 281 400 335 328 330 345 230 302 306 308 312 316 301 50 120 207 345 200 398 539 115 550 321 461 650 9989 87 320 322 346 115 264 430 211 213 401 440 691 755 202 262 201 303 401 403 254 401 91 40 575 301 146 217 510 127 502 504 506 455 301 25 192 124 163 145 566556 167 528 151 115 125 135 514 575 530- 534 536 540 552 177 156 541- 547 205 201 203 451449 209 219 221 233 235 450 460 470 442 444 420 430 435- 439 346344 333 335 342 344 431 460 450 530 220 220 B 222 240 259- 267 520-526 228226 234 238 244242 210- 216 228- 234 251 344 326 340 400 420 332330 314 305 300- 310 401 366 369 335 319 301 315 307- 311 303301 229 336 308 310 312 316 318 311 331 315 319 317 347-367 369-379 404 313 325 327 333 385 155 600 623 675 49 41 711 100 625 395 520 217 222 148 171 421 101 301 235 258 212 163 115 291 247 131 141 145 150 210 201 207 164 101- 119 121 123 129 139 235 251249 172 206 234 240 183 251 270 241- 247 215- 237 124 124A 132 144 152 147 221- 243 275 220 219 235 262 202 245 254 252 250 151 159 203 215 221 313-317 318 220- 224 238 188190 251- 293 180 202 206 275 539 201 27 168 408 412 303 305 307 309 95 445 324 211 315 200 280-290 150 162 164 132 127 180 528 336 227 255 167 351 451 551 4 12 103 548 423 323 471 117 218 398 119121 120 101 470 215 401 355 365 111 121 213 100 143 379 453 215 211 331 San Francisquito Creek PC-1992 R PC- 3266 HD CN PC- 4182 PF CS PC-4465 CS CD-C (P) PC-4612 CC PF CC RM-30 PF RM-30 PC-4063 PC- PF CD-C (P) PC-4374 PF PF PF CD-N (P) PF PC-3111 PF PC-4262 PC-4243 RM-20 RMD(NP) PC-3429 CD-N (P) CD-C (P) CD-C (P) PC-4611 CC(L) PC-4053 RMD(NP) PF PC-2049 PC-3102 RM-30 PC-4339 RM-30 RM-30 CD-C(GF)(P) PC-5158 PF(D) El Camino Park El Camino Park Lot A Lo Lot O Lot P Lot C Lot K Cogswell Plaza Lot K Lytton Plaza Stanford Shopping Center El Palo Alto Park Bryant / Lytt Parking Garag Tract No. 5447 El Palo Alto Park Ti ARBORETUM GROVE Lot S Lot N Lot R Lot Q Cogswell Plaza This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Project Site 0'508' Attachment A: Location Map CITYOF PALOALTO I NC O R P O R A TE D CALI FORNIA P a l o A l t o T h e C i t y o f APRI L 1 6 189 4 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors ©1989 to 2016 City of Palo Alto chodgki, 2022-08-04 15:02:21 (\\cc-maps\Encompass\Admin\Personal\Planning.mdb) Project Location Item 2 Attachment A - Location Map     Packet Pg. 15     ATTACHMENT B 180 El Camino Real [Building C Suite #16B] 26PLN-00186 In order for the ARB to make a future recommendation of approval, the project must comply with the following Findings for Architectural Review as required in Chapter 18.76.020 of the PAMC. The project would be consistent with the zoning requirements and the Master Façade and Sign program for the Stanford Shopping Center. Additionally, the project would need to be found in conformance with the following Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies How project adheres or does not adhere to Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the site is Regional Commercial. The project continues the Regional Commercial land use. Land Use and Community Design Element 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. The proposal has been reviewed against the Palo Alto General Plan, the PAMC, the Stanford Shopping Center Master Tenant Façade and Sign Program as well as applicable design guidelines to determine consistency with all regulations and standards. Proposed materials and colors have also been reviewed for consistency with Palo Alto’s design quality standards. The proposal has been found to be consistent with standards and will result in a high-quality development. The proposal will replace an existing retail tenant with another retail tenant proposing to modify the exterior façade of the tenant space. No new areas of the overall site would be disturbed, thereby lessening potential impacts from the project. Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Findings for Approval     Packet Pg. 16     Policy L-4.1: Encourage the upgrading and revitalization of selected Centers in a manner that is compatible with the character of surrounding neighborhoods, without loss of retail and existing small, local businesses. The proposed project would upgrade an existing tenant space within the Stanford Shopping Center and is cohesive and compatible with existing designs found throughout the center. This location was previously a retail use and will remain a retail use; therefore, no loss of retail would occur. Program L-4.2.3: Explore and potentially support new, creative and innovative retail in Palo Alto. The proposed project would replace an existing retail tenant by adding a new retail tenant to the Stanford Shopping Center and will provide additional variety to its patrons. Policy L-4.9: Maintain Stanford Shopping Center as one of the Bay Area’s premiere regional shopping centers. Promote bicycle and pedestrian use and encourage any new development at the Center to occur through infill. The proposed project would modify the exterior storefront of one (1) existing retail tenant space and replace it with a new retail tenant. The proposed modifications to the exterior of the storefront are cohesive and consistent with designs found throughout the center and would further enhance the El Camino Real entry into the Shopping Center, helping to maintain the Center’s regional significance. Business and Economics Element Policy B-6.3: Work with appropriate stakeholders, leaseholders, and Stanford University to ensure that the Stanford Shopping Center is sustained as a distinctive, economically competitive and high-quality regional shopping center. The proposed project has also been reviewed by Stanford University and Simon Mall Management in order to ensure consistency with the Master Tenant Façade and Sign Program as well as ensure consistency with the existing Shopping Center. The project design has been found to be consistent with the Master Program standards and cohesive with the overall Shopping Center. 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, Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Findings for Approval     Packet Pg. 17     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. Pursuant to PAMC 18.16.090(b), the following context-based design considerations and findings are applicable to this project. These context-based design criteria are intended to provide additional standards to be used in the design and evaluation of development in a commercial district. The purpose is to encourage development in a commercial district to be responsible to its context and compatibility with adjacent development as well as to promote the establishment of pedestrian oriented design. 1. Pedestrian and Bicycle Environment Project Consistency The design of new projects shall promote pedestrian walkability, a bicycle friendly environment, and connectivity through design elements. The project includes exterior façade improvements only. The project has been reviewed for adequate walkway widths and conforms to Palo Alto and Stanford Shopping Center requirements, thereby maintaining connectivity throughout the area of the tenant space and the center overall. The proposed improvements will not impede on the required sidewalk clearance of 8 feet. Existing bike racks provided by the landlord for the Shopping Center are located in the sidewalk in the front of the tenant space entry doors. Additionally, the Center provides a number of seating opportunities including bench seating throughout the site. 2. Street Building Facades Street facades shall be designed to provide a strong relationship with the sidewalk and the street (s), to create an environment that supports and encourages pedestrian activity through design elements. The project proposes a new façade with colors and materials that are appropriate . This project also includes repainting of the existing metal storefront portal entry and entry door mullions, and new signage that are well designed and in scale with the pedestrian environment of the Shopping Center. The relocation of this retail tenant within the Shopping Center would encourage pedestrian activity while maintaining some elements of the existing building exterior. 3. Massing and Setbacks Buildings shall be designed to minimize massing and conform to proper setbacks The proposed project will not change the existing building setbacks or massing. 4. Low Density Residential Transitions Where new projects are built abutting existing lower scale residential This finding does not apply. Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Findings for Approval     Packet Pg. 18     development, care shall be taken to respect the scale and 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 does not apply. 6. Parking Design Parking shall be accommodated but shall not be allowed to overwhelm the character of the project or detract from the pedestrian environment This finding does not apply. 7. Large Multi-Acre Sites Large sites (over one acre) shall be designed so that street, block, and building patterns are consistent with those of the surrounding neighborhood This finding does not apply. 8. Sustainability and Green Building Design Project design and materials to achieve sustainability and green building design should be incorporated into the project The project will utilize energy efficient LED lighting on proposed signage and interior improvements. The project will also conform to Green Building Energy codes for commercial businesses and will require detailed review at the time of building permit application. 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 proposed façade design integrates high-quality exterior materials and finishes that are balanced in the design. The existing illuminated black metal portal frame and doors will remain and be repainted to align with the new tenant’s branding palette. The existing glazing will also remain. The façade will be refinished to Texston “VS” stucco in shade Tuscany. The proposed primary wall sign will include black edge-lit channel letters, pin mounted to the exterior of the façade and above the entry doors. A blade sign is also proposed on the west side of the tenant façade. The proposed signage provides a high-end appearance that is aesthetically pleasing, typical of the Shopping Center, and consistent with the Master Façade and Sign program for the Shopping Center. 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.). Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Findings for Approval     Packet Pg. 19     The subject building is existing, and the project does not propose any modifications to the Shopping Center’s roadways or sidewalks; therefore, the existing circulation improvements will remain in place. The signage is well placed and consistent with the MTFS Program signage regulations providing signage that is in scale with both pedestrians and automobiles entering the Shopping Center from El Camino Real. The black lettering with edge-lighting located on the façades of the building along with the blade sign provide excellent contrast and are easily visible to patrons of the Shopping Center. 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 does not include any landscape improvements. The existing mall planters located along the adjacent parking fields and along pedestrian pathways will remain and will add to the overall landscaped area of the tenant space. 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 proposed project includes materials that consist of metals, stucco, and clear glazing, many of which are readily recyclable. The project is also subject to the local energy and recycling codes. The proposed signs are illuminated and made of durable long-lasting materials and are subject to the green building energy regulations. The project does not include any landscape improvements. Item 2 Attachment B - Draft Findings for Approval     Packet Pg. 20     8 9 3 8 ATTACHMENT C 180 El Camino Real [Building C Suite #16B] 26PLN-00186 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS. Construction and development shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "VS&Co”, uploaded to the Palo Alto Online Permitting Services Citizen Portal on August 24, 2026, on file with the Planning & Development Services 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 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. USE AND OCCUPANCY PERMIT. A valid Use and Occupancy permit issued by the Building Department is required for the “Victoria’s Secret” retail tenant operation. The operator shall ensure the building’s permitted occupancy is not exceeded at any time. 5. SIGNAGE. Newly approved signage is also included in the overall approval and consists of the following signage: a. Primary wall sign – 25’ 2 1/8” x 1’ 11” edge-lit black channel letters that will read “Victoria’s Secret” located on the east elevation. The maximum height of this wall sign shall be 24”; and, b. Blade sign – 24” x 15” projecting blade sign that will read “Victoria’s Secret”. 6. 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. 7. PROJECT 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. 8. 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 Item 2 Attachment C - Draft Conditions of Approval     Packet Pg. 21     8 9 3 8 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. Building Department Item 2 Attachment C - Draft Conditions of Approval     Packet Pg. 22     ATTACHMENT D 180 El Camino Real [Building C Suite #16B] 26PLN-00186 Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.16 (CC DISTRICT) Exclusively Non-residential Development Standards Regulation Required Existing Proposed Minimum Site Area, width and depth No Requirement 52.8 Acres No Change Minimum Front Yard 0-10 feet to create an 8–12-foot effective sidewalk width (1), (2), (8) Varied No Change Rear Yard No Requirement N/A No Change Interior Side Yard No Requirement N/A No Change Street Side Yard No Requirement Varied No Change Min. yard for lot lines abutting or opposite residential districts or residential PC districts 10 feet (2)N/A Not Applicable Build-to-lines 50% of frontage built to setback; 33% of side street built to setback (7) N/A NO Change Special Setback 24 feet – see Chapter 20.08 & zoning maps Varied No Change Max. Site Coverage No Requirement N/A Not Applicable Max. Building Height 50 feet (4)Varied No Change Max. Floor Area Ratio (FAR)N/A (9)~1,361,751 net sf No Change Daylight Plane for lot lines abutting one or more residential zone districts other than an RM-40 or PC Zone None (6) (1) No parking or loading space, whether required or optional, shall be located in the first 10 feet adjoining the street property line of any required yard. (2) Any minimum front, street side, or interior yard shall be planted and maintained as a landscaped screen excluding areas required for access to the site. A solid wall or fence between 5 and 8 feet in height shall be constructed along any common interior lot line. (4) As measured to the peak of the roof or the top of a parapet; penthouses and equipment enclosures may exceed this height limit by a maximum of five feet, but shall be limited to an area equal to no more than ten percent of the site area and shall not intrude into the daylight plane. (6) The initial height and slope shall be identical to those of the most restrictive residential zone abutting the site line in question. (7) 25-foot driveway access permitted regardless of frontage, build-to requirement does not apply to CC district. (8) A 12-foot sidewalk width is required along El Camino Real frontage (9) Stanford Shopping Center shall not be permitted to add more than 80,000 square feet of floor area to the total amount of floor area Item 2 Attachment D - Zoning Consistency Analysis     Packet Pg. 23     of the shopping center existing as of June 14, 1996, 1,332,362 square feet, for a total square footage not to exceed 1,412,362. Any hotel or mixed-use development for the Stanford Shopping Center shall only be included if approved as part of a Development Agreement for the site. Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.16 (CC(2) DISTRICT) continued Exclusively Non-residential Development Standards Topic Requirement Proposed Hours of Operation (18.16.040 (b)) Businesses with activities any time between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. shall be required to obtain a conditional use permit. The director may apply conditions of approval as are deemed necessary to assure compatibility with the surrounding uses. Not Applicable Outdoor Sales and Storage (18.16.040 (h)) Except in shopping centers, all permitted office and commercial activities shall be conducted within a building, except for: (i) Incidental sales and display of plant materials and garden supplies occupying no more than 2,000 square feet of exterior sales and display area, (ii) Outdoor eating areas operated incidental to permitted eating and drinking services or intensive retail uses, (iii) Farmers’ markets that have obtained a conditional use permit, and (iv) Recycling centers that have obtained a conditional use permit. Stanford Shopping Center is a “shopping center” as defined in Title 18, therefore this regulation does not apply. Recycling Storage (18.16.040 (i)) All new development, including approved modifications that add thirty percent or more floor area to existing uses, shall provide adequate and accessible interior areas or exterior enclosures for the storage of recyclable materials in appropriate containers. The design, construction and accessibility of recycling areas and enclosures shall be subject to approval by the architectural review board, in accordance with design guidelines adopted by that board and approved by the city council pursuant to Section 18.76.020. The project does not propose any floor area changes; however, adequate recycling storage is provided within the larger shopping center. Employee Showers (18.16.040 (j)) Employee shower facilities shall be provided for any new building constructed or for any addition to or enlargement of any existing building as specified in Table 6 of 18.16.040(j)) Not Applicable. Proposed project is renovation of an existing building. Office Use Restrictions (18.16.050) Total floor area of permitted office uses on a lot shall not exceed 25% of the lot area, provided a lot is permitted between 2,500 and 5,000 sf of office use. The maximum size may be increased with a CUP issued by the Director. Not Applicable. Proposed project is a retail tenant. 18.16.080 Performance Standards. All development in the CC district shall comply with the performance criteria outlined in Chapter 18.23 of the Zoning Ordinance, including all mixed use development Item 2 Attachment D - Zoning Consistency Analysis     Packet Pg. 24     18.16.090 Context-Based Design Criteria. As further described in a separate attachment, development in a commercial district shall be responsible to its context and compatible with adjacent development and shall promote the establishment of pedestrian oriented design. Table 2: CONFORMANCE WITH CHAPTER 18.52 (Off-Street Parking and Loading) for Retail Services* Type Required Existing Proposed * On-site employee amenity space is exempted from the parking requirements Table 3: Stanford Shopping Center Master Sign Program Sign Types, Number, and Locations Sign Requirement Number Maximum Size Location Consistent? Item 2 Attachment D - Zoning Consistency Analysis     Packet Pg. 25     Advertising graphics and signs (optional)Not limited None None Proposed N/A Digital images and digital signage (optional)Not limited 42” measured diagonally None proposed N/A *Maximum Allowable Sign Area for Wall Signs. Wall signs and sign area are defined in PAMC 16.20.010. Canopy and awning signs erected parallel to a building face are also considered wall signs. The maximum total allowable sign area of a single wall sign or the combined total maximum allowable area of multiple wall signs per building face shall be consistent with the sign area limits outlined in PAMC 16.20 Table 3. Staff level architectural review is required for any sign at the shopping center exterior that requires approval of an exception to these sign area limits. Logos are considered wall signs and can be utilized as a primary wall sign or can be a component of a primary wall sign. Logos shall not exceed the maximum height of a stacked sign, which is 36-inches. Logos shall be included in calculations of maximum wall sign area limits. Item 2 Attachment D - Zoning Consistency Analysis     Packet Pg. 26     MASTER TENANT FAÇADE & SIGN PROGRAM Effective Date: April 23, 2015 Program Approval 15PLN-00040 Edited PCE 7/10/2018 and 12/16/2022 Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 27     2 4 'S e t b a c k24'S e t b a c k Vin e y a r d L a n e Ar b o r e t u m R o a d Sand H i l l R o a d Quarry Road El C a m i n o R e a l Shopping Center Way Pe a r L a n e Lo n d o n Pl a c e Wa y Sw e e t O l i v e W a y Plum Lan e Orchard L a n e Pistache Place STOR STOR RE C Y C L E CO M P A C T O R A R E A TR A S H CO M P A C T O R A R E A NO P A R K I N G NO P A R K I N G NO P A R K I N G NO P A R K I N G CANOPY CANOPY CA N O P Y CANOPY APP R O X I M A T E E X T E N T O F " P R O T E C T E D " W A L L M U R A L . NO T E N A N T ' S D E S I G N E L E M E N T S P E R M I T T E D . LOA D I N G LOADING LOADING LOADING LO A D I N G LOADING LOADING LOA D I N G LOA D I N G LOAD I N G D O C K DOCKLOADING DOC K LOAD I N G D O C K LOAD I N G DOCK TENANTTRUCKFACILITY LOADING LO A D I N G LOADING Fire P i t Portico Way The P l a z a Az m o o r P l a c e Lady Ellen Place Cl a r i o n C o u r t Az m o o r P l a c e Pa l a n t i n e C o u r t Sand Hill Walk Quarry Walk Portico Way El C a m i n o W a l k Arbo r e t u m W a l k El e c t i o n e e r C o u r t Quarry Road El C a m i n o R e a l Arb o r e t u m R o a d Orchard L a n e Pavilion 5 Pavilion 2 Pavilion 3 Pavilion 4 El e c t i o n e e r Co u r t Street MarketPlaza BIO S W A L E BIOSWALE BIO S W A L E BIO S W A L E BIO S W A L E BIO S W A L E BIO S W A L E BIO S W A L E BIO S W A L E BIO S W A L E BIORETENTIONBASIN BIORETBASIN BIORETENTIONBASIN BIORETENTIONBASIN BIO R E T E N T I O N / LA N D S C A P I N G BIORETENTION BASINBIORETENTION BASIN BIORETENTION BASIN BIORETENTION BASIN BIORETENTION BASIN BIORETENTIONBASIN Plan t e r Plant e r Plan t e r Plan t e r PlanterPots Planter Pots Planter Pots LANDSCAPING PatioArea1,768sf PatioArea1,527sf PatioArea1,473sf 60 ' C D L F N M H E V P K W D AA BB CC DD (Fld Typ) 60' (Fl d T y p ) 60' 61' (Fld T y p ) 60' (Fld T y p ) 61 ' (F l d T y p ) 60' (Fld T y p ) 36'24' 36'24' 40' 30' 44 ' 24' 25 ' 15 ' 36 ' 25 ' 25' 25 ' 32' 30' 24' 28' (Fld Typ) 60' STOP STOP STOPSTOP STOP STO P STOP STO P STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STO P STOP STOP STOP ST O P ST O P ST O P ST O P ST O P ST O P ON L Y ST O P ST O P STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP BIKES BIKESEQUIP ENCL EQUIP ENCL SB T SB T T EQ T EQUIP ENCL T VLT TMTR PA C I F I C B E L L E A S E M E N T FI B E R O P T I C C A B L E CITY OF PALO ALTO UNDERGROUND UNILITY CITY O F P A L O A L T O P U B L I C U T I L I T Y PUBL I C U T I L I T Y P A R C E L 2 PUBL I C U T I L I T Y PARC E L 3 CIT Y O F P A L O A L T O P U B L I C U T I L I T Y IN G R E S S E G R E S S & U T I L I T Y 250' 30 0 ' 86.1 ' 32 . 1 ' 37 ' 21' 112 ' 43.5 ' 17.6 ' 39.7' 86.1 ' 32 . 1 ' 37 ' 21' 86.1 ' 37' 32.1'32.1' 84' 10 3 . 4 ' 11 7 . 6 ' 80'21.8' 53 ' 88.2'88.8' 16 3 . 9 ' 125.9 ' 24' 37.8' 56 . 1 ' 60.1' 185' 22 5 ' RAMP UPRAMP DN Parking Garage 2 Ramp Below Grade LevelFirst Level Second Level Total 56 463 511458 1488 Parking Garage 1 Grade LevelFirst LevelTotal 448 402850 RAMPUPRAMP UP BI O R E T E N T I O N BA S I N BI O R E T E N T I O N BA S I N BIORETENTIONBASIN BIO R E T E N T I O N BA S I N BIORETENTIONBASIN BIORETENTIONBASIN BIO R E T E N T I O N BA S I N PARC E L T W O 5.739 ± A c r e s PARCEL ONE 53.864± Acres PARC E L T H R E E 10.10 5 ± A c r e s LL01A Lease LL02 Lease LL02Lease0.459 ± A c r e s Parce l F o u r LL04 Lease EV T T T EV T SW Pedestrian Paseo Building EE Line of ExistingBuilding J(LaBelle Day Spa) COVEREDINNER CIRCLEARCADE Bike Rack Bike Rack 60 ' Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 28     For the Tenants whose elevation is located on facades other than those listed above, review by the Architectural Review Board might be required depending on if the storefront is visible from the public right of way. Tenants are required to receive Landlord’s approval prior to filing for ARB approval. However, approval by the Landlord does not guarantee ARB approval. Furthermore, all comments provided by the ARB must be addressed and Tenant shall file promptly for resubmittal. Any deviation from Master Tenant Façade and Sign Program must receive Landlord’s prior written approval prior to submitting drawings to the ARB or for Planning Approval. Architectural Review Processing Procedure. The architectural review processing procedure for Stanford Shopping Center tenants shall be as follows: 1. The Landlord and Stanford University conduct architectural review of non-anchor tenant signs and facades for those locations within the shopping center interior to ensure that they conform to the Tenant Design Manual. 2. Planning staff and/or the ARB shall conduct architectural review of tenant signs and facade applications for locations at the shopping center exterior. a. Any façades or architectural components that extend beyond the height of the existing parapet wall or increase gross or net floor area shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Board (ARB). b. Two-story tenant facades intended for single tenant occupancy shall have a façade that is continuous between the first and second stories. If separate tenants occupy the first and second stories, the design of each façade shall be reviewed by the ARB. c. Tenant facades that are 35-feet in width or greater are reviewed by the ARB. Architectural review for tenant facades that are less than 35-feet in width may be conducted by Planning Staff. d. If there are no tenant façade changes and the proposed tenant signs are consistent with the Master Tenant Sign Program, Planning review at the staff- level occurs as part of building permit applications. Any signs that require an exception to the Master Tenant Sign Program shall be reviewed by Planning staff or the ARB. Examples of tenants that have continuous façade vs those that do not have continuous facades Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 29     STOREFONT ELEVATIONS GLOSSARY OF TERMS GENERAL: • Base Building: Base Building Shell construction, common and service areas, including all work that is the responsibility of the Landlord. • Design Control Zone: The area of the store extending from the storefront lease line into the store, at a minimum of five feet (5’-0”), in which the Landlord controls design components. The Design Control Zone shall extend across the entire width of the store. • Neutral Pier: An architectural element separating two adjacent Tenant storefronts or a Tenant storefront from a finish controlled by the Landlord. • Vitrine: Shallow wall mounted display cases on the exterior of the façade and can house vignette displays, merchandise or seasonal graphics. The illumination of any vitrine shall be similar in color and intensity to the remainder of the Tenant storefront displays. All vitrines must be incorporated into the design aesthetic of the storefront vocabulary. Stanford Shopping Center is an upscale Lifestyle Center and requires Tenants to create a unique and contemporary storefront design. Tenants shall take advantage of the garden setting by creating storefront designs that bring a sense of the outdoors into their space. Tenants are required to present their businesses with distinctive architectural designs using the highest quality of materials and workmanship, and with creative lighting and signage designs. Typical Tenant storefronts extend between adjacent storefront finishes and shall extend to the height of the roof parapet. STOREFRONT DESIGN CRITERIA General Design Criteria Storefront The Tenant’s entire storefront, as per Zone, shall be designed, fabricated, constructed, installed and maintained by the Tenant at the Tenant’s expense. The storefront design shall work in concert with, and be respectful of, the Landlord’s building façade, thematic architectural expression, and landscaping. Tenant storefronts shall meet the base building parapet height and shall not exceed the parapet in overall height. Storefronts shall maintain a consistent height on each building. Tenants are required to extend their storefront design along all building facades. Approved architectural finishes, façade details, and additional components such as lighting and graphics, will visually activate all side of each Building. At a minimum, Tenants shall extend their exterior color palette across the solid portions of the exterior wall. A combination of super-graphics, showcase windows and/or vitrines are required and shall be the foundation of the Tenant’s aesthetic interpretation of the exterior walls. Closed Doors Tenant spaces shall be designed for closed-door operation as this is an open-air center. Tenant storefront doors shall remain closed during normal mall hours. Landlord piers or columns in the Tenant’s storefront that are clad or otherwise designed as part of the Landlord building architecture shall be preserved without alteration by the Tenant. Unclad piers or columns in the Tenant’s storefront shall be incorporated into the Tenant’s storefront design. The Tenants storefront windows and other large glazed areas shall include provisions for mullion articulation beyond a basic extruded aluminum profile. This may be achieved through applying cap and pan elements to the basic window assembly to add relief and dimension. Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 30      Doors within the storefront assembly may be articulated in a similar manner or may include further customized elements to enhance the overall design and building identity.  No alterations, additions, changes, or modifications to the Base Building finishes or construction shall be permitted without obtaining Landlord’s prior written approval (such approval must be requested by Tenant under separate cover from Tenant’s drawings). If permitted, all work shall be performed by Landlord at Tenant’s expense.  All Tenant construction, including storefronts, must be of non-combustible materials. Treated fire-resistive materials are permitted only with approval by local jurisdictional authorities.  All Tenant storefronts and floors shall be watertight and must properly slope to drain and to meet flush with Landlord’s finishes and/or pavements at the storefront. All exterior Tenant storefront materials must be suitable to outdoor weather, use, and wear.  Pedestrian and security lighting shall be of the lowest intensity and energy use adequate for its purpose and shall be designed to focus illumination downward to avoid excessive illumination above the light fixture. Architectural lighting that project upward shall be directed so as not to affect abutting land uses. Floodlights on tenant facades are discouraged. Storefront Finishes Tenants shall maximize the use of glazing with the storefront area having a minimum of 70% transparency, measured across the width of the Premises. Full height opaque areas of the storefront shall be minimal. Where possible, a constant height opaque sign band, extending across the entire storefront width, is not acceptable. Varied glazed show window heights and/or projections should be incorporated. Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 31     All storefront materials shall be high quality, durable, exterior grade finishes with minimal maintenance requirements. Acceptable Finishes:  Stainless Steel, Solid Brass and Copper  Wrought Iron, Cast Iron and Steel  Marble, Granite, Limestone, Brick, Textured Masonry  Finished/protected premium grade hardwoods  Precast Concrete, Cast Stone, GFRC, GFRG  Homogenous porcelain tile  Sandblasted, frosted, etched, textured, leaded glass, spandrel glass (in limited quantities)  Glazing (tempered) *Additional finishes not listed are subject to Planning Department review and approval Discouraged Finishes:  Simulated Brick, Wood, Stone  Plastic Laminates, Metal Laminates, Plastic Panels  Mill finish  EIFS  Plexiglas or plastics  Field painted metals  Ceramic, glass or quarry tile, used as a field or background. Note: Storefront canopies and marquees must conform to project location specifications and will be reviewed for conformance with material and color selection, location, projection and overall design effect. Fabric awnings are not generally permitted. Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 32     Each Tenant shall provide a solid canopy above their entry. Canopies are to be a minimum of 3’-0” deep and must at lease cover the width of the entry alcove. The finish of the canopy is to compliment the Tenant’s overall storefront design aesthetic. Storefront and glazing graphics, film, animation techniques and projection techniques must be clearly shown on Tenant’s Drawings and are subject to Landlord’s approval. Entrance Alcoves & Closures Store closure is limited to hinged or pivoting doors only. Out-swinging or pivoting doors cannot extend beyond the storefront Lease Line. Coiling grilles and shutters are prohibited. Doors glazed with true divided slites are encouraged, as are doors or clear tempered glass and doors with decorative leaded or patterned glazing. Tall entrance doors of 8’-0” height or higher are encouraged; standard height doors with overhead transoms are also permitted. The following requirements shall apply without exception:  Tenant is responsible for exterior floor finish within the entry recess and must provide a minimum transition of less than ½ inches from the sidewalk elevation to Tenant floor finish.  Tenant is solely responsible for the design and construction of the slope in the recessed entry area, as well as compliance with any applicable code requirements for same. Exterior floor shall have positive drainage to the sidewalk at a minimum 1% and maximum 5% slope.  Tenant’s recessed entrance shall meet or exceed the finish specifications in the Design Criteria and Design Control Zone. The finish must be Tenant’s own material - matching Landlord’s sidewalk finish will not be permitted.  Recessed entrance location, presentation and temperature control are subject to Landlord approval. Tenant’s drawings shall include details for drainage, foundations, interior /exterior slab conditions, weatherproofing and finishes. Landlord shall not be responsible for ponding water in the recessed entry. All storefront doors must be framed. Frameless glass doors will not be allowed due to outdoor environment. Each Tenant shall display the space number posted in accordance per the local Fire Code and per City of Palo Alto Building Department Standards and shall install the mall standard ADA address plaque, provided by the Landlord’s designated vendor. Tenant shall ensure the signage complies with current codes and regulations. Storefront Bases The storefront base shall be a minimum of six inches (6”) in height. The base shall be constructed from highly durable non-porous material appropriate for exterior use, such as stone, tile, substantial gauge metal with a powder-coated finish, stainless steel, or other material as approved by Landlord. Storefront base material must be specified to withstand contact with cleaning equipment and solutions as well as exposure to the elements. Entry Floor Floor finishes at the entry shall be hard, high-quality, durable materials. At the entry, the floor finish shall be a non-slip material. Vinyl and/or rubber-resilient flooring or sealed/stained concrete systems are not allowed in the design control zone. If carpeting is proposed, 32 oz. nylon fiber minimum specification is required. The finished elevations at the store entrance must align with Landlord’s finished and/or pavement elevation of the exterior walkway, with a weather-proofed threshold of minimal thickness (not to exceed ½”) provided at the doors. The use of vinyl or metal reducer strips is prohibited. Tenant should provide a metal-embedded transition strip flush with the hard surface flooring at all transitions to other flooring types. No trip hazards such as reducer strips, thresholds or other noticeable transition devices shall be permitted between different flooring materials. Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 33     Storefront Lighting Tenant Interior Lighting – Tenant interior lighting shall be designed to minimize nighttime glow visible from and/or intruding into nearby properties Tenant Exterior Lighting – Pedestrian and security lighting shall be of the lowest intensity and energy use adequate for its purpose and shall be designed to focus illumination downward to avoid excessive illumination above the light fixture. Architectural lighting that project upward shall be directed so as not to affect abutting land uses. Floodlights on tenant facades are discouraged. Bird-Friendly Facades Tenant facades with glazing covering a large area shall utilize a bird-safe glazing treatment. The bird-friendly treatment can be invisible to the human eye. Typical treatments include fritting, netting, permanent stencils, frosted glass, exterior screens, and physical grids placed on the exterior of glazing or UV patterns visible to birds. Vertical elements of the window patterns are generally at least 1/4 inch wide at a minimum spacing of 4 inches, or have horizontal elements at least 1/8 inch wide at a maximum spacing of 2 inches. Noise Producing Equipment Any noise producing equipment should be screened from public view and must comply with noise limits. Storefront Design Control Zone The Tenant Storefront Design Control Zone is the area of the store extending from the storefront lease line into the store at a minimum of five feet (5’-0”) across the entire width of the store. Since the appearance of this zone is critical to the overall store appearance, design solutions, and materials are expected to be of the highest quality and will be closely reviewed by Landlord. Tenant music systems, speakers and sound systems are not permitted to be installed within the Design Control Zone. Speakers/ sound systems located behind the first 5’-0” of the entry shall have a separate volume control that can be set to the Mall Managers’ specified level. The backs of Emergency Exit signage/lights (over the entry doors) shall not be visible from the exterior. Storefront security systems, if used, shall be unobtrusively incorporated into the Tenant’s Design Control Zone. Storefront security system design and installation details shall be included in the Tenant storefront design and drawings submitted to the Landlord for approval prior to installation. Security grilles or gates behind storefront show windows or entrance doors are strictly prohibited. All walls within the Design Control Zone shall be provided with high quality finish material – plain painted surfaces are not permitted. Materials such as stone, tile, wood panels, the use of trim and other decorated treatments shall be utilized. Slat wall and grid wall are not permitted. All plants shall be shown on Tenants drawings, and identified by species as well as whether living or artificial. Plants on storefronts shall have photographs submitted as part of Tenant’s drawing submission to Landlord for approval. Depressed or slab-level plantings are prohibited. All plants installed by Tenant shall be properly maintained by Tenant at Tenant’s expense. (Self-watering pots with a bladder system shall be used to ensure no leakage onto the hardscape). Gross Floor Area. Permanently covered tenant patio spaces count toward gross floor area, but uncovered tenant spaces do not. Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 34     Store Display and Merchandising Within the Design Control Zone, the side walls and show windows shall be dedicated for use as a high-quality show window display. A creative display is required – standard merchandise racks, and wall finishing materials such as slat wall and prepackaged wall-mounted grid systems are prohibited. Distinctive, high-quality and appropriate display techniques which best showcase the Tenant’s merchandise must be used. At the storefront entry, display fixtures and merchandise must be placed at least 3’-0” behind the Tenant’s entry door/ closure line. Merchandise rack and display features must not block customer traffic flow in and out of the store. Television monitors proposed to be installed at the storefront or within the Design Control Zone require specific approval by the Landlord, and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. If approved, monitors shall be incorporated into the overall storefront design and are to be encased within attractive display fixtures to conceal all surfaces except for the screen surface. They must be mounted a minimum of 3’-0” behind the storefront glass and must incorporate slow fade type graphics with no sound, animation is not permitted. Maximum screen size is 42” measured diagonally. All cables and wiring must be concealed from view. Show Window Safety Logos Repetitive safety symbols (graphically designed) or lettering may be applied to the inside face of storefront glazing as approved by Landlord for identifying transparent surfaces for customer safety purposes. Emblems, logos, and lettering must not exceed 3” in height and the font shall be Circular Pro, black vinyl, maximum letter is not to exceed 3” in height. Tenant shall ensure the signage complies with current codes and regulations. Tenant shall provide signage at the exterior side of the service entrance. Font shall be Circular Pro, black vinyl, maximum letter is not to exceed 2” in height. The length of the sign shall be proportionate to the sign height limit. Tenant shall ensure the signage complies with current codes and regulations. General Sign Criteria Building permits are required for all illuminated signs and the Tenant shall be responsible to obtain any and all permits as may be required by the local jurisdiction. Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 35     Sign Requirement Number Max Size Location Primary Sign (Wall Sign) Required 1 Max Height 24” and otherwise proportional to logo characteristics; Stacked signs not to exceed 36” in height. Signs discouraged closer than 24” to demising wall or building corner Banner or Blade Sign (Projecting Sign) Required 1 Banner: 24” projection x 60” in height Blade: 24” projection x 15” in height either under an awning or a façade wall not directly adjacent to an existing sign) Canopy Sign characteristics Super Graphic Optional Not Limited None Flexible Emblem Optional 1 (where applicable) characteristics Emblem: max. height is 24” in any direction Advertising Graphics and Signs Optional Not Limited None Only on inside plane of storefront windows, Digital Images and Digital Signage Optional Not Limited 42” measured diagonally Only in storefront windows Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 36     In additional to the criteria herein, Tenant signage shall comply with the current version of the City of Palo Alto’s Municipal Code and the City of Palo Alto’s Design Guidelines. All signage shall be of the highest quality design and construction. Tenant signage shall be designed to be proportionate in scale to the elevation to which it is affixed. Sign design and placement shall be well integrated with the tenant façade and hall be designed to complement the storefront design and general building design. Wall signs and sign area are defined in Palo Alto Municipal Code (PMAC) 16.20.010. Canopy and awning signs erected parallel to a building face are also considered wall signs. The maximum total allowable sign area of a single wall sign or the combined total maximum allowable area of multiple wall signs per building face shall be consistent with the sign area limits outlined in PAMC 16.20 Table 3. Staff level architectural review is required for any sign at the shopping center exterior that requires approval of an exception to these sign area limits. When wall area exceeds 5,000 square feet, sign area may be increase by seven (7) square feet for each additional 500 square feet of wall area, but no sign shall exceed 203 square feet. All attachment hardware which supports and or powers the signage must be concealed from view and be weather resistant. Sign illumination must be connected to a 7-day / 24 hour time clock to be set to the hours specified by Mall Management Acceptable Primary Storefront Sign Types (required): Dimensional wood, metal, glass, or other material with a permanent appearance, internally illuminate only. Flood lights are prohibited. Reverse channel letter with halo illumination, opaque letter-sides and faces and non-reflective background. Internally illuminated individual channel letters with acrylic faces. (removed 5/6/24 at landlord's request) Signs that are incised, cast into or carved out of an opaque material, indirectly illuminated. Sculptural iconographic elements contextual to the storefront design, internally illuminated. *Additional finishes not listed are subject to Planning Department review and approval Discouraged Primary Storefront Sign Types: Box or cabinet type signs. Signs employing audible equipment, and/or moving, flashing, or blinking lights Signs employing exposed raceways, ballast boxes, or transformers Luminous vacuum-formed type plastic letter signs Exposed neon Cloth, paper, cardboard signs or signs of other temporary or non-durable materials Signs using highly reflective finish materials (i.e. polished brass, chrome, etc.) Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 37     Blade Signs Tenants can elect to use a variety of media for their signs; however, blade signs are required to meet the following criteria:  Sign panels can be a maximum of 3” thick and constructed of wood, metal, glass or other solid surface material. Plastics are not permitted.  Sign panel shall be supported by a bracket attached to the Tenant’s storefront or under an awning with a complimentary design, color and finish. At no time may the blade sign panel be attached to the Landlord’s neutral pier or building facade.  Perimeter of the sign should fall within a 24” (h) x 15” (w) envelope, including the support bracket. Tenant shall determine a creative sign shape.  Minimum clearance height to sidewalk is 9’-0” above the sidewalk plane.  Wording of the blade sign is limited to the Tenant’s trade name (DBA) and logo.  Tenant’s customary signature or logo, hallmark, insignia, or other trade identification will be respected and reviewed on a case by case basis for use as the blade sign design.  The graphic element of the sign may be paint, enamel, appliqué, dimensional graphic/lettering or may be pushed out of the panel material for a three- dimensional appearance (routed or incised is also approved).  Blade signs may be illuminated by concealed methods only. Building Mounted Banners and Projected Signs (optional – in lieu of Blade Sign) This type of sign is vertically oriented and is mounted high and perpendicular to the building and may or may not be illuminated. Maximum width or projection shall be 24” from the face of the Tenant storefront and the height cannot exceed 60”. Bottom of banner must be 9’’-0” clear ground plane. Signage of this type, if permitted, is usually restricted in number and location. Projecting banner signs shall not be placed in a manner that will allow the banner sign to exceed the adjacent parapet height. Canopy Signs (optional) Canopies are defined as heavy-framed protective and/or decorative structures over entrances. Tenant may elect to use the canopy sign as their primary storefront sign. The sign shall conform to the “Acceptable Primary Sign Types” as indicated above. The canopy sign may be illuminated internally only. The maximum height of any capital letter of a canopy sign shall not exceed 9” in height. Traditional fabric awnings are not permitted, however, taught contemporary awnings shall be allowed only with prior Landlord approval. Show Window Graphics (optional) Vinyl lettering and/or logos may be applied to the face of storefront glazing, provided that the sign communicates the Tenant Trade Name only. Advertising panels, banners or signs with opaque backdrops are prohibited. Signage Approval Process Landlord’s approval of Tenant’s storefront signage shall be based on the size and style of the sign and lettering, the location of the sign within the storefront, and the cohesive integration of the sign into the overall storefront design. Approval of the Tenant’s preliminary design or Working Drawings by the Landlord shall not constitute review and approval of the Tenant’s signage. Tenant shall submit one (1) set of the Tenant’s sign shop drawings for review and approval by Landlord. Fabrication or installation of the Tenant’s signage shall not commence before the Landlord’s approval of the sign shop drawings. Item 2 Attachment E - Master Tenant Facade and Sign Program     Packet Pg. 38     If you need assistance reviewing the above documents, please contact the Project Planner or call the Planner-on-Duty at 650-617-3117 or email planner@cityofpaloalto.org Project Plans In order to reduce paper consumption, a limited number of hard copy project plans are provided to Board members for their review. The same plans are available to the public, at all hours of the day, via the following online resources. 1. Go to: bit.ly/PApendingprojects 2. Scroll down to find “180 El Camino Real” and click the address link 3. On this project-specific webpage you will find a link to the project plans and other important information https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Current-Planning/Projects/180-El- Camino-Real-Victorias-Secret A Materials Board will be brought to chambers during the ARB hearing. Item 2 Attachment F - Project Plans     Packet Pg. 39     Item No. 3. Page 1 of 1 Architectural Review Board Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: September 3, 2026 Report #: 2608-6694 TITLE Draft Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes for August 6, 2026 RECOMMENDATION Staff Recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) adopt the meeting minutes. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Minutes of August 6, 2026 AUTHOR/TITLE: ARB Liaison1 & Contact Information   Steven Switzer, Senior Historic Planner   (650) 329-2321   Steven.Switzer@PaloAlto.gov 1 Emails can be sent directly to the ARB at the following email: ARB@PaloAlto.gov Item 3 Item 3 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 40     Page 1 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MEETING DRAFT MINUTES: August 6, 2026 Council Chamber & Zoom 8:30 a.m. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL Present: Chair Mousam Adcock, Vice Chair Kendra Rosenberg, Board Member David Hirsch, Board Member Marton Jojarth, Board Member Yingxi Chen Absent: None. Chair Adcock welcomed all to the meeting. The clerk called roll and declared there was a quorum. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS Senior Historic Planner Steven Switzer stated no changes were planned. IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENT None. CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 1. Director’s Report, Meeting Schedule, and Upcoming Agenda Items Mr. Switzer announced that recent projects came in for 4103 Old Trace Road for a major architectural review and tentative map to subdivide the property and develop 16 units and the for Stanford shopping mall for a façade upgrade of the Peloton store to relocate Victoria’s Secret. The next ARB meeting would address the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Skyline Field Office and 3997 Fabian Way for an early streamlined housing review for 273 units. Planned absences should be directed to staff. The remaining 2026 meetings were listed on a slide. Mr. Switzer introduced the summer intern. Chair Adcock welcomed the intern. Chair Adcock planned to be absent from the last 2026 meeting. Board Member Chen asked, related to the 2 upcoming projects, if there was a difference between preliminary review and early review. Mr. Switzer answered that a preliminary review was not seeking a formal recommendation and that an early review would be to get it before the board for early feedback and to perhaps seek a recommendation to continue to a further meeting. Board Member Hirsch inquired if Board Member Chen was referring to the Trace building and asked staff if the project to be reviewed at the next meeting was for the same site that had been reviewed. Board Member Chen clarified that the reference was to the projects listed for the next meeting. Mr. Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 41     Page 2 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 Switzer replied that the project to be reviewed at the next meeting was for the same site that had been reviewed, and the applicant had submitted a revised scope, which prompted a new application. Chair Adcock asked if Skyline Boulevard recently came in and if it would be a preliminary informative item and if staff completed the review for the Fabian Way project. Mr. Switzer confirmed that Skyline Boulevard would be a preliminary informative item. Staff would complete the Fabian Way review before preparing the meeting packet. Board Member Hirsch queried if Fabian Way was on the same site the ARB addressed in the past. Mr. Switzer believed it was the same site. ACTION ITEMS 2. Recommendation on Process and Design Standards for Tier 2 and Tier 3 Wireless Communication Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way. CEQA Status: Not a Project Chair Adcock noted that staff recommended developing new review criteria and process to support more efficient review of future Tier 2 and 3 wireless communication facilities in the public right-of-way using previous objective standards as a foundation and recommended adoption of the proposed review criteria and process by City Council. Associate Planner Nishita Kandikuppa mentioned that the discussion on this item was to request a formal recommendation on the review process and criteria. This was a follow-up to the May 19, 2025, Council hearing, and Council’s motion was provided on a slide. Staff had not hired a consultant but did connect with the Data team after the July 16 study session. Ms. Kandikuppa outlined what had occurred at the July 16 ARB study session and the Ad Hoc Committee review on July 21. The Ad Hoc Committee provided a redlined document suggesting edits to past standards, which could be found in Attachment A, and Chair Adcock had requested additional items be discussed as a part of the presentation. The code did not have a definition for “immediately adjacent,” but Palo Alto Municipal Code 1877080 had a definition of “adjacent properties.” There was not a standard design definition; however, objective standards referred to standard designs following the objective design standard criteria. The City relied on General Order 95 National Electric Safety Code and other acceptable utility practices to arrange equipment and attachments to existing or new poles, and the City did not offer preapproved designs for standard designs. A question raised in the redlined document was the feasibility of undergrounding vaults to house radio equipment, and staff had consulted with AT&T representatives to understand what was typically provided during the plans and review processes. Ms. Kandikuppa stated that AT&T had confirmed that undergrounding active radio equipment was generally treated as infeasible. Undergrounding might be appropriate for passive elements like fiber or power conduit but might not be as appropriate for radio units. The redlined document brought up the feasibility of decreasing the diameter of the antenna and the shroud being less than 15 inches, and AT&T representatives had explained that the antenna diameter was driven by the equipment placed inside it and that it was not a design preference. Combining low band and higher capacity bands into one antenna might require a diameter of up to 16 inches. In terms of antenna placement of radios on wood utility poles, lowering the antenna placement might mean the sought coverage would not be met. Midpole placement would reduce the antenna's effectiveness and might make it harder to meet the identified service gap. Antenna height on wood poles should generally be evaluated in relation to the Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 42     Page 3 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 carrier's coverage objectives, so on more of a case-by-case basis. Ms. Kandikuppa explained why lower antenna placement on metal street light poles was challenging. Antenna height was important for maintaining compliance with federal radio frequency exposure limits, and an applicant had to meet certain thresholds. Decorative poles of 30 feet might allow for more design flexibility. Generally, antenna placement should be evaluated case by case and based on pole height, coverage need, and RF exposure analysis. Ms. Kandikuppa noted that there had been a question if power usage by each wireless facility was being metered separately and where the meters would be located. The Utilities team had responded that the City did not require a physical meter for such installations and that the overall footprint was generally reduced because of that. The energy usage was billed through the City's unmetered electric rates for each facility, and the City did not have or accept underground or subsurface electric metering. Before the objective standards went into place in 2019 and were repealed in 2025, there was an analysis done by staff on the distance threshold at the 100-foot mark from residential structures from the residential zone of exclusion and a 300-foot distance from schools, which staff had reviewed in more detail, and a slide was furnished identifying what percentage of wood utility poles would be excluded with the setbacks. Council had previously indicated that excluding wood utility might not be feasible. Over 70 percent of the poles would be excluded if a 35-foot setback was maintained. Staff recommended that the ARB develop new review criteria and process as revised in attachment A and forward it to the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) for consideration and recommendation to Council. Representatives from AT&T and the City Utility team were present at the meeting. Board Member Hirsch questioned if the drawings had been approved by the City. Ms. Kandikuppa answered that the drawings were of streetlight poles and wood utility pole wireless installations that were approved between 2017 and 2020. Board Member Hirsch asked if this was the first time ARB was seeing some of the details of the elements that were part of the approval process, if the City had approved the shape and look of the items, if such was part of what staff was requesting, and if the items shown were a part of ARB’s responsibility. Ms. Kandikuppa answered that the provided samples were being viewed for the first time. One Tier-2 application came for review in October 2025. There was curry not a request to approve a formal application. The City reviewed one public ride-of-way project in in October 2025. This analysis was to look at the review framework that staff wanted to establish for Tier 2 and 3 wireless applications and the public right-of-way. Assistant Director Jennifer Armer replied that the items shown were not part of ARB’s responsibility. The items were provided as illustrations of the types of details with this type of application. The purpose was to help the ARB understand the types of height and size of representative antennas. The ARB was not reviewing the plans, only the written document. Board Member Hirsch stated part of the ARB’s responsibility was the look of the items in the street, buildings, etc., and questioned if the ARB would review that or if it had been approved by staff. Ms. Kandikuppa responded that staff would review any wireless project, but there were no formal applications, except the one in 2025. Mr. Switzer added that the plans sent in ranged from projects dating from 2017 to 2020 and had gone through staff review and were built. The discussion for this meeting was geared toward what level of criteria and review process should be in the standards and, if the board wanted to hone in the process, what projects would come before the ARB’s review versus Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 43     Page 4 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 staff's review, so making the distinction between what could be handled at the staff level versus there being a deviation from those standards that would come to the ARB. Chair Adcock clarified that the purpose for this ARB meeting was to develop the framework for future projects coming to the ARB. The examples were to help the ARB understand what kind of projects were previously submitted, and likely similar ones would be submitted in the future. Those in the 2017 to 2020 range were staff reviewed before the previous objective standards, and, at the time, there was no ARB review, only staff review. Board Member Chen asked if there had been any underground applications in the past decade and if the feasibility study checked with only AT&T or all 3 major providers. Ms. Kandikuppa answered that staff was not aware of any applications for undergrounding. They were evaluated on a case-by-case basis, so staff would need to go back case by case to see if specific conditions were deemed feasible. Staff was not aware of any undergrounded equipment. The feasibility study was with AT&T only. Chair Adcock asked why the 100-foot study included only wood poles. Ms. Kandikuppa replied that when the analysis was completed the data points were only for electric utility poles. They were mapped out, and staff did the analysis using existing poles. There was preliminary data on streetlight poles having wireless infrastructure, but it was not as robust. The wood utility poles were used as a good example to start the analysis. It was a few years outdated as it was completed in 2019. Staff had not done another analysis to look at streetlight poles or any new infrastructure that might have been added on wood utility poles. Chair Adcock inquired if those were for all building types. Ms. Kandikuppa thought the general analysis was done for all structures, not only residential. Staff did not have a way to exclude all residential. The schools and the residential zone of exclusion was very specific for residential zones and school facilities. Board Member Hirsch noted that the drawings showed replacement poles moved from one area to another close by and queried if in the not-downtown areas the companies determined that they would use traditional poles in some locations versus metal poles and if there was a substitution in the look of the poles within neighborhoods. Ms. Kandikuppa answered that staff had criteria for downtown and El Camino Real with specific design guidelines on how the poles should look. They were specifically for streetlight poles. Many of the poles in the examples were before that criteria went into effect. The designs in the plans were before the guidelines were in effect, so the designs might not align with the streetlight guide that had the streetlight pole design standards. Board Member Hirsch queried if the design standards for the street light poles that were not in the specific areas Ms. Kandikuppa mentioned would all look the same and if Middlefield Avenue, for example, had a guideline that would require traditional-looking poles. Ms. Kandikuppa responded that the existing poles were not swapped out, so if a new project required a replacement pole, it would be replaced based on the standards set by the guidelines, otherwise any existing polls would remain. It was possible that there would be an inconsistency in how the streetlights appeared. Ms. Kandikuppa referenced the street style guide and noted that the downtown area extended a little further along Middlefield. It was not only concentrated in what was identified as a downtown neighborhood. Ms. Kandikuppa believed it would be consistent only along Middlefield but would check the map. Ms. Armer added that parts of town had more detailed, decorative style required for the new ones, so they would Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 44     Page 5 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 transition as replacement was needed. Other areas had only the standard requirements that had been used in the past. Board Member Hirsch noted that items for the 5G poles had a different look than the pole itself. Mr. Switzer noted that the street guideline standard for that map was displayed on the screen. Ms. Kandikuppa pointed out that there was a little segment on Middlefield that extended outward from downtown and where downtown streetlight guidelines would apply. Board Member Hirsch asked if there would be a change for areas along Middlefield, for example, and if Area 2 on the map included a piece of Middlefield. Ms. Kandikuppa confirmed there would be a change for areas along Middlefield that would not follow the streetlight design guidelines. Area 2 on the map included a piece of Middlefield, but it was part of California Avenue/California Park design guidelines and was a very small segment. Chair Adcock voiced that there were 3 design guideline standards and asked if the previously approved standards would apply to streetlights for other streets and if a replacement pole would match the existing street if it did not fall within the 3 zones. Ms. Armer affirmed that was correct but would not be as decorative as the examples. Board Member Hirsch queried if the wood poles were 30 feet tall. Ms. Kandikuppa responded that the poles were approximately 30 feet tall. Board Member Hirsch believed some wood poles were higher than 30 feet and questioned if it should be corrected relative to wood poles. Ms. Kandikuppa would look at the data points to determine the average height of the poles. Some older utility poles were taller than others, and some of the replacement poles were 30 to 35 feet. Examples of 40 to 45-foot poles had been observed, but it was not clear if they were neighborhood specific or if the poles were older. Staff had not seen any new wood utility pole replacements recently, especially through a wireless project, so the data points might not be accurate. Board Member Hirsch queried if staff had considered neighborhoods that did not have undergrounding for the whole system, not these particular items on poles, and a neighborhood having metal poles at some point that would be of different heights related to the wireless facility. Board Member Hirsch asked who would take the responsibility if there was a decision to change a neighborhood to metal poles. Jennifer Armer answered that there was an agreement when antennas were being put on City property and facilities. There would usually be an agreement that the carrier would be responsible for relocating their equipment if a pole needed replacement. There were usually agreements that would cover broader efforts being conducted by the City or if a motorist hit a pole, for example, and it needed to be replaced. Utilities Chief Operating Officer Terry Crowley added that the City did change out poles. The choice of a metal or a wood pole would be decided at the time of design and what was most economical. It was intended that poles without electric facilities be 35 feet. Poles with secondary or high voltage wires would be taller, and the total pole length of some could reach 60 to 65 feet, although 10 percent of that pole plus 2 feet would be in the ground subsurface. In some areas, there would be a need for General Order 95 National Electric Safety Code to have a taller pole to maintain space between attaching utilities. Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 45     Page 6 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 Board Member Hirsch remarked that it was strange that the ARB would approve something called design standards, as the ARB had not looked at the units that would be installed on the poles. Chair Adcock reminded Board Member Hirsch that the ARB requested the information as examples to get a sense of previously installed projects. Chair Adcock understood that at the time of the review, it was not part of the ARB review. Ms. Armer noted that wireless facilities had come to the ARB for review in the past, and she provided details of such a procedure. Similar with design guidelines for buildings, getting these in place, even if there was not a current project, helped staff consider the process, make sure timelines would be met, and have standards to ensure community-look consistency. PUBLIC COMMENT Marc Grabisch, Site Acquisition Manager at AT&T Mobility, appreciated the City developing guidelines and standards, as it helped AT&T develop design standards. The original sites AT&T built for small cell in Palo Alto went through the ARB. The board members could not come to an agreement on the placement of the radios on the pole, so AT&T changed the design a few times to try to anticipate what would be approved, which lengthened the timelines deploying those sites. Adopting standards would provide for successful application within time frames. At a past ARB meeting, Mr. Grabisch presented proposals, which met the previous objective standards and took into account the review obtained at the October ARB hearing. Tasha Stack, Senior Real Estate and Construction Project Manager at AT&T Mobility, offered to answer questions related to potential future applications. Chair Adcock suggested addressing the objective standards. Chair Adcock and Board Member Hirsch had provided the markups and categorized some items in the previous objective standards, which were not part of ARB’s purview, so it was suggested that those be addressed later in the meeting. Chair Adcock marked and made notes on 7 items that were in ARB's purview and suggested the board make comments. Chair Adcock had marked the items on Packet Page 11 as not being in ARB’s purview. Board Member Chen asked if public and private schools should be included, not only public schools. Mr. Switzer noted that there was a record of all public and private schools, and the locations would be noted. Vice Chair Rosenberg inquired if the City had a record of home daycares and preschools. Mr. Switzer replied that was a different use type, and he asked what the board wanted to do about private schools and daycare centers. The City had record of the facilities. Ms. Kandikuppa added that the map had been discussed with the Data team, and home daycares were harder to map because they were not always state licensed, but if it was a state licensed establishment, it would be in the City’s record. Chair Adcock queried if that should be included. Vice Chair Rosenberg expressed that it would be good to include them, but the City would rely on the records it had, and if something was under the table, the City would not be aware of it, and they should take up the responsibility. Chair Adcock questioned if it could be noted as public and private schools and licensed childcare facilities, and she stated the ARB would not opine on the distances. Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 46     Page 7 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 Board Member Jojarth asked why expand the scope to include other facilities and if the towers were potentially harmful. Vice Chair Rosenberg responded that there should be caution for all school facilities. There was a reason to not place the equipment on residential homes, but the ARB did not know why. Out of an overabundance of caution, care should be taken around children. Board Member Jojarth wanted to be cautious about the ARB making a change as the ARB consisted of laypeople. Vice Chair Rosenberg commented there was a public school boundary, which would be defined as public and private. All schools should be protected. Jennifer Armer added that the intention was that ARB focus on the aesthetics. It was fine if the ARB wanted public and private schools to be considered, but it should not go beyond the aesthetics. Vice Chair Rosenberg commented there was a note and an exception for being more cautious around schools, so public and private schools should not be separated. Chair Adcock voiced that this objective standard was not in effect, so the ARB was to recommend future objective standards, and areas that were not part of ARB’s purview should be blocked out. The ARB’s recommendation could be to include public and private schools and licensed childcare facilities. It was not for the ARB to determine if the item should remain in the objective standards. Vice Chair Rosenberg stated the ARB could recommend certain items be stamped good to go and those that should be looked at again. Any time facilities were being installed near children, it should be looked at a second time. The school boundary should remain. Board Member Jojarth agreed with taking a second look, but that could include removing the school restriction or reducing the distance because of technological progress or scientific research. The second look should not be limited to making it more restrictive. Vice Chair Rosenberg inquired why separate public from private schools. Board Member Jojarth replied that a second look was a good point, but public schools could be removed too. Chair Adcock suggested that Council review whether the item stay in the standard, and, if so, the ARB recommend that private and licensed childcare facilities be included at whatever distance. Vice Chair Rosenberg agreed. Chair Adcock addressed the residential zone exclusion and stated it could be a guideline but recommended such be addressed on a case-by-case basis. It was slightly arbitrary to exclude the middle 50 percent. It was not in the ARB’s purview, but it was subjective. Board Member Hirsch felt the intention was to locate poles at property lines and suggested including that language. Vice Chair Rosenberg thought the intent was that streetlight poles not be in front of residential center front doors, so this would allow flexibility. It was a little arbitrary, but she had no issues with it. Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 47     Page 8 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 Chair Adcock asked who would do the review to determine if a recommendation was appropriate for a particular location. Ms. Kandikuppa responded that Planning reviewed exclusion zones. Board Member Hirsch stated that wood poles within the 50-percent area would pose a conflict. Vice Chair Rosenberg felt such an issue should return to the ARB. Board Member Hirsch questioned whether the projects should return to the ARB. Board Member Jojarth noted that the standards reflected not placing equipment on poles within the exclusion zone. Vice Chair Rosenberg did not think a new wireless facility was allowed to include a pole where one did not previously exist in the 50 percent. Vice Chair Rosenberg explained why replacing existing poles in the 50-percent area should return to the ARB. New poles should not be built in the 50 percent. Board Member Jojarth agreed that existing poles being replaced in the 50-percent area should return to the ARB. Chair Adcock stated this would meet the objective standards, and if an installation within the 50 percent was desired, it would have to return to the ARB. Board Member Chen noted that the map reflected R1 zoning, but the title was residential zone, so it should be clarified which zones it would apply to. Ms. Kandikuppa commented that in general it had been applied across all residential and multifamily zones. It reflected zone, not use, so it was possible for it to be commercial zoning with residential as a grandfathered use, so the board might want to discuss zone/use. Chair Adcock expressed that zone was appropriate in all residential zones, as it was hard to pinpoint use. Jennifer Armer mentioned that uses changed. Board Member Jojarth asked if a cell antenna would be permissible in front of a large multifamily building. Chair Adcock remarked that there were CS and other zones with residential use. Jennifer Armer stated that, as currently written, a mixed-use building, for example, in a commercial zone would not be subject to this regulation, but other regulations. Keeping it from the center 50 percent of the property only applied to residentially zoned neighborhoods, which often had smaller lots, so protecting that 50 percent was a higher priority. Board Member Jojarth was concerned about multifamily apartment buildings having antennas within a few feet of upper-story windows. Chair Adcock stated if this were applied to residential use zones, the 50-percent zone of each property would be excluded. Board Member Jojarth felt there needed to be a different rule and wondered what other cities did as far as placement only on street corners, etc. Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 48     Page 9 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 Vice Chair Rosenberg stated it could be plus or minus 10 feet to either side of a property line, which equated to being as close to in between buildings as possible. Board Member Jojarth voiced that could work. Ms. Kandikuppa commented that staff would investigate how other cities dealt with such issues. It could be phrased as a zone where residential uses were permitted. Chair Adcock recommended leaving it in the residential zone, so there would be guidance for smaller properties. Placement of wireless facilities on expressway arterials, etc., pushed it away from smaller residential streets. Chair Adcock moved to Packet Page 12, skipping building structure setback, distance between facilities, etc., since such was not in the ARB’s purview. Chair Adcock questioned “immediately adjacent” referenced for historic district sites and structures. The “immediately adjacent” definition of across the street and diagonally across was accepted. In regard to underground design, the previous standards had a preferred option of undergrounding, but that did not appear feasible. Chair Adcock inquired if AT&T had a history of installing radio equipment below ground. Mr. Grabisch answered that in 17 years AT&T had not installed radio equipment underground. Chair Adcock asked if it should be stricken as a preferred option or if the entire section should be stricken and having the top-mounted design as the option. If underground design was stricken, the text at the top of Page 13 would be removed, and there would be only one option. Vice Chair Rosenberg replied that it should not be addressed if it was not feasible. Board Member Jojarth understood that only antennas were at the top of a pole and that radios were on the side of the pole. Vice Chair Rosenberg expressed that it depended on the design. Board Member Hirsch mentioned that it was mixed, some had radios at the top and others below. Mr. Grabisch remarked that the antenna was always at the top. Vice Chair Rosenberg asked if the radio equipment and the antenna would ever be separated. Mr. Grabisch responded there were hybrid radio antenna units integrated into one unit and others where radios were attached to an antenna via cable. Typically, in that case, the antenna would be at a higher elevation than the radios. AT&T tried to get radios close to antennas for signal strength. Chair Adcock noted that the October presentation indicated and some of the examples reflected that the radio equipment needed maintenance access, so it needed to be lower on the pole versus the antenna at the very top, and she queried if the radio could be high on the pole. Mr. Grabisch answered that the RF engineers wanted minimal distance between the radios and the antennas. Operations/Maintenance wanted them lower on the pole. Either would work, but there would be a tradeoff between signal loss and ease of maintenance. Chair Adcock asked what text was under the gray box on the slide. Ms. Kandikuppa would determine what text was under the gray box. Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 49     Page 10 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 Board Member Hirsch voiced that the radios should all be located next to each other and the antennas separate items. There were alternatives to the design assembly for the radio units that were not being discussed at this meeting. Chair Adcock recommended the text read that antennas be located within a shroud at the top of the pole and radio equipment placed at the highest possible location on the pole to be out of visible range and as close to the antenna as possible. Ms. Kandikuppa commented that antennas were typically placed at the top of the pole to attain maximum coverage, and it was encouraged. Board Member Hirsch expressed there were designs for radios being lower in a vertical box, and he did not want to discourage them from being easily accessed for maintenance. Board Member Chen questioned how frequently they needed maintenance, the percentage of hybrid equipment being used and percentage of using separated equipment, and if the hybrids were large compared to the others. Mr. Grabisch replied that the millimeter wave technology typically used a hybrid and explained why that was not deployed as much. The low-band and mid-band spectrum used radios attached to antennas via cable. The size of the hybrids depended on the coverage need. They could be larger for more capacity and higher power or smaller for a shorter reach. More facilities would be needed for smaller higher-powered radios to fill service gaps. Maintenance frequency varied from a couple to a few times a year. Board Member Jojarth understood that the ARB wanted to locate the radios and antennas together within a shroud at the top of the pole. Chair Adcock wanted to keep both options. Chair Adcock asked Ms. Kandikuppa Nisha to make note of the revised language. Chair Adcock stated that antennas should be enclosed within a shroud at the top of the pole. Mr. Grabisch mentioned that, in some cases, there could be dual deployments on a single pole. Board Member Hirsch inquired if that meant there would be smaller radios in the antenna enclosure and if in other situations a separate location lower down would be used for radios. Mr. Grabisch affirmed that was correct. Chair Adcock asked if the second sentence would cover a situation of antennas and radios being higher up and close together. Mr. Grabisch answered that typically a hybrid unit needed to be mounted below the top of the pole if there was a separate antenna connecting to radios. Board Member Hirsch remarked that there was an example in the drawings that had what appeared to be a collection of radio units that did not have antennas above them. Board Member Hirsch asked if radios and antennas could be put in the same mechanism and be compact with a vertical element coming from it. Mr. Grabisch replied that other carriers deployed sites with hybrid antennas and radio units mounted to the pole, which had been done above the pole or below the luminaire arm. It had different coverage and capacity and was specifically meeting that carriers need versus AT&T’s need. Chair Adcock requested that the language to be universal and not aimed at a specific carrier. Regarding minimal shielding design, it should be clarified that all associated cabling, wiring, and conduits must be fully concealed within one contiguous shroud. Mr. Grabisch stated that radio equipment being enclosed Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 50     Page 11 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 within 1 or 2 sunshields not exceeding 8 inches in width would be too restrictive to enclose radios and the associated equipment. Chair Adcock wanted to clarify that there would be no loose wiring or cable on the pole. Vice Chair Rosenberg suggested separating how radio equipment would be shielded and how cable and wiring would be concealed. Board Member Hirsch noted that the possibility of separate radio enclosures would be excluded as shown in some of the Verizon systems. Vice Chair Rosenberg stated that enclosing radio equipment in an 8-inch/0.75 cubic-feet space was restrictive and suggested that it read radio equipment be enclosed in the smallest possible footprint. Board Member Hirsch stated, regarding metal poles, it should go up the pole and connect into the units themselves. Ms. Stack discussed design options for metal and wood poles, and AT&T wanted to know which option the ARB preferred. Board Member Hirsch preferred that each radio be within its own enclosure and arranged around the pole (metal or wood). Board Member Chen wanted to avoid language such as “smallest size possible.” Specific numbers should be listed. Mr. Switzer suggested specifying a standard that staff could implement and that subjective language be avoided. If a project should not meet the standard, then it would come before the ARB. Chair Adcock outlined the different dimensions referenced. Assistant City Attorney Aylin Bilir clarified that the top categories in the original objective standards were design options to capture the overall appearance. There were dimension and shrouding requirements and design quality standards, which would apply to all projects regardless of design. The standards should not be duplicated within the design element. Chair Adcock questioned if there was guidance on minimum or maximum shield size. Ms. Kandikuppa would have to refer to the approvals of streetlight poles and wooden utility poles to determine the sizes, but each project was different. Ms. Bilir provided details of the equipment adjustment standard for any project. Board Member Hirsch asked why some radios were included in the antenna enclosure and some below the light fixture connection. Ms. Bilir thought the project design was dictated by the applicants and what was feasible for the project needs. The City was looking at what had been presented and if it met the total design and volume standards. Mr. Grabisch noted that the smallest enclosure AT&T had for a streetlight solution to conceal both radios was 3 cubic feet, which was significantly less cubic feet than individually shrouding radios separately, and that was for one particular type of technology. If different radios were required, it would be slightly larger. Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 51     Page 12 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 Chair Adcock commented that the shrouding dimensions should remain further down on the document, that radio equipment should be enclosed within sunshields mounted directly to the pole, and associated antenna be placed in a shroud at the top pole, so no mention of dimensions. There should be another item related to cabling, wiring, and conduits on metal poles being fully concealed within the adjacent shroud. Chair Adcock asked if a sunshield should be at least 12 feet above ground level. Board Member Hirsch voiced that a sunshield should be at least 12 feet above ground level. Board Member Jojarth noted that there was an application for a sunshield to be 8½ feet on a wood pole. Ms. Kandikuppa clarified that the provided plan sets were before the objective standards went into effect, so it was possible that the placement of the equipment was at different heights. Ms. Stack inquired if the text in red indicated that all associated cabling, wiring, and conduits must be fully concealed in one contiguous shroud for wood poles. Chair Adcock answered that the text would be replaced with the word adjacent. The section title should be Cabling, Wiring, and Conduits on metal poles. Ms. Bilir queried if it was specific to the minimal sunshield design only, as there was a standard for WCF wires and cabling on Packet Page 39 that separated streetlight poles and wood utility poles, and she wondered if the language should be added to that section if it applied to all designs. The language was relocated to the bottom of Page 39. Chair Adcock requested comments on existing signage design, antenna shroud dimensions, and design quality, and there were none. Chair Adcock addressed the equipment adjustment section and asked if there was a preference for radio equipment being installed around the pole or stacked vertically on one side of the pole. Board Member Hirsch preferred it be toward a property line versus the street. Board Member Jojarth expressed that installing it on the side of the pole meant it would be shielded by the pole 50 percent of the time. Being inside the pole, it would be seen 100 percent of the time. Board Member Hirsch noted that it would depend on the width of the pole and asked why try to hide it. Board Member Jojarth thought proposals were typically for it being parallel to the street and preferred it not be any other way – as shown on Sheet P3. Chair Adcock noted that Sheet A4 showed it on the side and asked if placement mattered as it related to access, etc. Mr. Grabisch stated the orientation of a hybrid unit was dependent on needed coverage. The location on a pole for a solely radio unit would not matter. Chair Adcock stated the section would be left as it was and without a preference. Ms. Kandikuppa asked if the red text added should be in the WCF design quality section. Chair Adcock confirmed that was correct. Chair Adcock requested opinions on the equipment adjustment for streetlight poles. Vice Chair Rosenberg asked if 2 feet below the light mast referred to the light unit. She believed it should be above the light fixture. Vice Chair Rosenberg suggested striking that and the reference to Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 52     Page 13 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 wood and questioned why the paragraph existed and if such a scenario was likely to happen. Mr. Grabisch thought the 2 feet below referred to hybrid units and that the scenario would be an antenna mounted on top of a pole and then hybrid radios mounted below the luminaire arm, which was the design within the downtown area. Ms. Bilir explained stated the standard design was top mounted only, so if it did not fit within only top mounted, there could be a separate radio as long as it was not lower than 2 feet below the mast arm. Vice Chair Rosenberg inquired if in theory the radio and the antenna should be at the same level. Mr. Grabisch answered that it would depend. The designs AT&T wanted to move forward would have a radio mounted in an enclosure lower on the pole. It might not be structurally feasible to mount radio equipment on top of the pole with an antenna on top of that. If it was structurally feasible, the antenna and the radio should be close together at the top of the pole, but if it was not structurally feasible, the radio equipment would be lowered and the antenna would be at the top of the pole. Chair Adcock mentioned that the first section of the standards gave an option for an antenna and a radio being separated and an option for an antenna and a radio at the top, which covered the requirements. Chair Adcock recommended the portion be stricken. Ms. Armer would take the recommendation, and if there were any concerns upon doing the full review, staff would identify those when recommendations were presented to the ARB and to Council. Mr. Grabisch noted that Verizon provided an example of hybrid antenna radios mounted on the pole top that extended significantly above the pole versus there not needing to be extra height if mounted below the luminaire arm. Chair Adcock had no comments on curb clearances and noted that the section regarding wiring and cable was sufficient. Chair Adcock referenced the power disconnects section and stated it should be clarified that it would be labeled and placed in an “underground” vault. Mr. Grabisch clarified that there were no underground connections for wood utility poles. Chair Adcock queried if a disconnect switch would be mounted on the side of wood poles at reach height. Mr. Grabisch affirmed that was correct. Chair Adcock addressed pole replacement and had added red text to clarify when an existing pole should be replaced. Ms. Kandikuppa noted that the Utilities team reviewed replacing poles on a case-by- case basis, and there was a footnote describing it. If standards were met, there would be no need for ARB review. It could be kept as it was. Ms. Kandikuppa asked if the intent was for the ARB to review an existing poll being replaced if it was not able to be used. Chair Adcock replied the intent was to add the text because without the red text, it appeared that proposals for installation on an existing pole would require a new pole. Ms. Kandikuppa found the red text to make sense since it was case by case. Vice Chair Rosenberg added it should be the same with a wood pole. Chair Adcock moved to the section related to Tier 1 and 2 installations meeting objective standards not needing to be heard by the ARB but that deviations from objective standards should be reviewed by the ARB, and the board agreed with the statement. Vice Chair Rosenberg thanked the Ad Hoc for their work. Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 53     Page 14 of 14 Architectural Review Board Meeting Draft Summary Minutes: 8/6/26 Board Member Chen thanked staff for preparing the examples. Chair Adcock voiced that the recommendation was to request adoption of the proposed review criteria and process by Council. Ms. Armer suggested there be a motion to make the recommendation, and it could then be presented to PTC for their review and recommendations, and then it could be presented to Council. MOTION: Chair Adcock moved to forward the revised objective standards, with the edits made at this meeting, to PTC and Council for adoption, seconded by Board Member Chen. VOTE: Motion carried, 5-0 (Board Member Chen, Board Member Jojarth, Board Member Hirsch, Vice Chair Rosenberg, Chair Adcock) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chair Adcock declared there were no meeting minutes to review. VIRTUAL PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Grabisch thanked the ARB and staff for their time. BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, OR FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS None. ADJOURNMENT Chair Adcock adjourned the meeting. Item 3 Attachment A - Minutes of August 6, 2026     Packet Pg. 54     Item No. 4. Page 1 of 3 1 0 4 4 3 Architectural Review Board Staff Report From: Planning and Development Services Director Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: September 3, 2026 Report #: 2608-6623 TITLE 3200 Park Boulevard [22PLN-00287]: Ad Hoc Committee Review of the Paseo Width and End Unit Design. Environmental Assessment: A Revised Final EIR was Certified on September 12, 2023. Zoning District: RM-30. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) Ad Hoc Committee: 1. Discuss and provide direction; or 2. Confirm the revised project meets the full ARB’s direction and recommend the Director find that Condition of Approval #10 is satisfied. BACKGROUND The ARB held an initial hearing for this project on April 6, 2023, and recommended approval of the project on June 15, 2023. As part of its recommendation, the ARB requested modifications to the paseo width and modifications to the design of the end unit closest to Olive Avenue and that these modifications be presented to the ARB Ad Hoc Committee consisting of Vice Chair Rosenberg and Boardmember Chen. The elements to be reviewed and discussed further by the Ad Hoc Committee are noted below, along with the applicant’s response. ANALYSIS The Ad Hoc Committee is encouraged to consider whether the revised submittal (Attachment A) meets the condition of approval that was incorporated into the approved Record of Land Use Action for the project. The condition of approval is discussed below with the applicant’s response and staff’s analysis. The Ad Hoc Committee should provide direction to staff and the applicant if the submittal requires further refinement. Item 4 Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 55     Item No. 4. Page 2 of 3 1 0 4 4 3 Condition of Approval #10 Prior to issuance of the building permits for the townhomes, the applicant shall return to the ARB Ad Hoc Committee for approval of the following items, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Development Services. Applicant’s Response: Staff Analysis: Item 4 Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 56     Item No. 4. Page 3 of 3 1 0 4 4 3 ATTACHMENTS Report Author & Contact Information Claire Raybould, AICP, Current Planning Manager (650) 329-2116 Claire.Raybould@PaloAlto.gov ARB Liaison1 & Contact Information   Steven Switzer, Senior Historic Planner   (650) 329-2321   Steven.Switzer@PaloAlto.gov 1 Emails can be sent directly to the ARB at the following email: ARB@PaloAlto.gov Item 4 Item 4 Staff Report     Packet Pg. 57     If you need assistance reviewing the above documents, please contact the Project Planner or call the Planner-on-Duty at 650-617-3117 or email planner@cityofpaloalto.org Project Plans Hard copies of the ad hoc plans are provided to the ARB ad Hoc members for their review. The same plans are available to the public, at all hours of the day, via the following online resources. 340 Portage Ave/3200 Park Blvd – City of Palo Alto, CA Item 4 Attachment A - Project Plans for Ad Hoc Items     Packet Pg. 58