Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the July 27th, 2026 meeting of the Menlo park planning commission. I am vice chair, Katie Beruzzi. And I thank you for joining us this evening. Established by state law, our city's planning commission is composed of seven volunteer residents of Menlo park appointed to four-year terms by the city council. According to California state law, the planning commission shall do all of the following. Prepare, periodically review and revise as necessary the general plan. Implement the general plan through actions including but not limited to the administration of specific plans and zoning and subdivision ordinances. Annually review the capital improvement program of the city or county and the local public works projects of other local agencies for their consistency with the general plan pursuant to Article 7, commencing with Section 65400. Endeavor to promote public interest in, comment on, and understanding of the general plan and regulations relating to it. consult and advise with public officials and agencies, public utility companies, civic, educational, professional, and other organizations and citizens generally concerning implementation of the general plan. Promote the coordination of local plans and programs with the plans and programs of other agencies. Perform other functions as the legislative body provides, including conducting studies and preparing plans other than those required or authorized by this title. In addition, the commission reviews development proposals requiring a use permit, architectural control, a variance, minor subdivision, as well as the environmental reviews associated with those projects. When applicable, the planning commission reviews below market rate housing agreements associated with these applications. The commission is the final decision-making body for these applications unless appealed to the city council. The commission also serves as the recommending body to the city council for major subdivisions, rezoning, conditional development permits, zoning ordinance amendments, general plan amendments, and environmental reviews associated with those projects. If applicable, the planning commission also reviews and makes recommendations on BMR agreements associated with these projects. Staff in our city's planning division are responsible for processing development applications, as well as for both implementing and amending the general plan, zoning ordinances, and related policies in order to further the goals of the city. We encourage your active participation, whether you are an applicant or an interested member of the public, and there will be an opportunity to speak publicly for each specific agenda item, as well as for general public comment. With that, I will call the roll. Commissioner Erick.

Here. Commissioner Farrick?

Here. Commissioner Headley? Here. Commissioner Schindler? Here. Commissioner Cillian?

Present.

And Chair Silverstein should be joining us remotely from Santa Barbara. Okay. And I am Vice Chair Beruzzi, and I am present. So we have six commissioners in chambers, which is a quorum with Chair Ross Silverstein, as mentioned, joining us remotely from Santa Barbara, California. The next item on our agenda is reports and announcements. Ms. Sandmeier, are there any staff reports or announcements this evening?

Good evening. I don't have any staff reports or announcements, but I'm happy to answer questions. Thank you.

Any questions from commissioners or do any commissioners have their own reports or announcements? Okay, it looks like we're all set. Thank you. With that, I'll move on to item D on our agenda, public comment. This is general public comment. Under public comment, the public may address the commission on any subject not listed on the agenda. Each speaker may address the commission once under public comment for a limit of three minutes. You're not required to provide your name, district, or city of residence, but it is helpful. The commission cannot act on items not listed on the agenda and therefore the commission cannot respond to non-agenda issues brought up under public comment other than to provide general information. Please know that if you're here tonight to comment on one of our agenda items, you'll have a chance to speak later when we get to that item on the agenda. To learn how to participate, I'm going to turn to our clerk this evening, Mr. Ball, and then begin our public comment period.

Thank you, Vice Chair Beruzzi, Matthew Ball, Assistant Planner. During the public comment period, members of the public will have an opportunity to share their comments or questions remotely by clicking on the hand icon on your screen. Staff will introduce you and activate your microphone. For those calling into tonight's meeting, please click star nine on your keypad to notify staff you have a comment. If multiple people are speaking from the same account, please let us know at the beginning of your time and we will make sure each person gets a chance to speak. For those participating in person, please fill out a speaker card located at the back of the room and hand it to me.

Mr. Ball, do we have any requests to speak?

I'm not seeing any raised hands or comment cards, so Vice Chair, you may continue.

Okay, I will now close public comment portion of our agenda. Oh, I see some people in the audience who, hi, are you here to speak on an item on the agenda or to make general public comment? Okay, we'll get to that in a moment. No worries, we're still on item D and then we're going to go to the consent calendar and then we'll proceed at pace. All right, so I'm closing public comment portion of our agenda. We'll now move to the consent calendar. Item E1, approval of minutes from the July 13th, 2026 planning commission meeting. Does anybody have any changes that they want to make to these items before we open it for public comment?

Anybody want to pull this?

Okay. Mr. Ball, could you please call for public comment on the consent calendar?

Thank you again, Vice Chair. We are now taking public comment for this item. As a reminder, for those participating in person, please provide me with the speaker card located at the back of the table, at the back table. For those attending virtually, please press the hand icon. And for those calling into tonight's meeting, please click star nine on your keypad to notify staff you have a comment. I don't see any comments or hands raised, so Vice Chair, you may continue.

OK, I'll close public comment on item E1. Do any commissioners have any discussion on this item, or is anybody willing to make a motion? Yes, Commissioner Schindler.

Thank you, Vice Chair. I would move that we accept the consent calendar.

Okay, so that's a motion from Commissioner Schindler. Is there a second? And we have a second from Commissioner Headley. I'll go ahead and, oh, we have to do a roll call vote because Commissioner Silverstein is remote. So I'll go ahead and call the roll. And this is going to be a fun exercise. I'm just going to go this way, okay? Vice Chair Silverstein.

Yes.

Okay, great. Commissioner Cillian.

Abstain. Abstain.

Commissioner Headley. Yes. Commissioner Farrick. Yes. Commissioner Schindler. Yes. Commissioner Eric. Yes. And I, Vice Chair Beruzzi, am also a yes. So that passes with one abstention and six yeses. Correct?

Yes. Through the Vice Chair, could we take a break? We're trying to figure out how to get Chair Silverstein on the screen full time. Wonderful. Or just pause a few moments. Yes. Thank you.

Yes, let's pause.

Thank you.

All right, to the public, we're going to take a brief break to make sure that we can get chair Silverstein on camera, which is part of the deal when you're dialing in remotely, you need to be visible on camera at all times pursuant to a government code that I don't have off the top of my head, but our city attorney can explain it. Hey, it looks like we have Chair Silverstein now appearing for real in our meeting. Thank you to our city staff for making this happen. I'm going to resume the meeting. Okay, so we had just finished with item E1 and we took a vote. So at this point, I'm going to move on to the public hearing item F1, first public hearing item regarding a use permit and architectural control permit revision at 123 Independence Drive and 138 Constitution Drive. At this public hearing, the commission may consider and adopt a resolution approving use permit and architectural control permit revisions for a previously approved bonus level development project with 432 multifamily dwelling units comprised of 316 rental units, approximately 2000 square feet of commercial space within one five-story apartment building and 116 for sale townhome units across 22 buildings. The proposed revisions include changes to the development phasing of the apartment building and the townhome project components, as well as the phasing and design of a temporary publicly accessible paseo through the townhome site to accommodate pedestrian and emergency vehicle access until the future townhome component is developed. This project site is located in the RMUB zoning district, and we will also be determining that these actions are consistent with the previously certified project final environmental impact report. The staff owner for this project is Mr. Matthew Pruder. And Mr. Pruder, I believe you have a presentation for us this evening, correct?

Okay. Yes, thank you. Vice Chair Beruzzi, Chair Silverstein, planning commissioners, members of the public, Matt Pruder, associate planner. And I'll get into that presentation right now. I think, okay, sorry about that. Thank you very much. So as I stated, we'll be talking tonight about the use permit revisions and the use permit revision and architectural control permit revision for the 123 Independence Drive project. And the entitlements for this project, just as some backstory, were originally approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council in 2023. But since then, the site has been cleared and all previous buildings were fully demolished. And in addition, we currently have a building permit that is under review for the apartment building portion, which is fronting onto Constitution Drive, and another building permit application under review for the publicly accessible paseo for the pedestrians and bicyclists at the site. Both of those technically depend on this approval for how the conditions will affect the progress of those permits in addition to future development on site. If we can move to the next slide, please. OK, thank you. While we're working through the technical matter, we can proceed with the presentation. And so as a brief overview, the approximately 8.15 acre project site is located in the Bayfront, which is between Bayfront Expressway and US 101. And it has been mapped to contain two parcels, where there were several before. One is fronting onto Constitution Drive, and that is now numbered 138 Constitution Drive. And the other is fronting onto Independence Drive, as well as Chrysler Drive. And that is numbered 123 Independence Drive, for which the general project name originates. And you can see that with the blue boundaries there. And in addition to that, with the zoning, it's not depicted here on the drawing, but just to clarify, the subject properties surrounded by RMU-B zoned properties, the same property zoning as the site, all properties between Constitution Drive, Independence Drive, and Chrysler Drive are zoned as RMU-B. So just kind of that block there that's in the middle, all the same zoning properties. And then the properties on the opposite sides of Constitution Drive as well as Independence Drive, so kind of across the streets on both sides of that project site, are zoned as M3X, which means they have conditional development permits that govern their zoning. And we also have the Chrysler pump station, which is kind of sort of top right corner. It's a small little parcel there. That's 1395 Chrysler Drive. That's zoned PF for public facilities. It's a little different there. On the opposite side of Chrysler Drive, so that would be the right side in this drawing, most of the properties are zoned as OB. It's kind of an office bonus zoning. apart from a few RMU B zone properties that are between Constitution Drive and Jefferson Drive. And then lastly, you can see a sort of lighter purple dotted arrow that's cutting across sort of the left side of the site in the property in the drawing. And that actually represents the Paseo area that is based on the zoning and general plan requirements for the site. Go to the next slide, please. And here you can see a drawing on the right here that shows the approved site plan from the 2023 approval. The site as a whole is comprised of 432 dwelling units, of which 316 are rental units in the rental apartment building at 138 Constitution Drive, so the top of the drawing. And in the lower half, sorry, in addition, that same site has a 2000 square foot commercial space within the apartment building on the ground floor. In the lower half of the drawing here, which would be the 123 Independence Drive site, there would be 116 for sale townhome units, which are spread across 22 buildings. To the left of the apartment building, the multicolored kind of Paseo generally in the left center is shown and it would run between Constitution Drive at the top of the drawing to Independence Drive towards the bottom. Go to the next slide, please. And I failed to mention, I'm sorry, that there would be no changes with this current request tonight, excuse me, to the building details or the unit counts. So all of those would be the same in terms of the project buildup. Next on this slide here, the applicant is proposing to have two general sets of revisions for the proposed project as a whole. First, as noted in the bullet at the top, there's a request to make some modifications to the conditions of approval to define a clearer focus on the requirements for the two major components of the development, which we have, again, based on the mapping, we have the apartment building as one component, and then the townhome development, the 22 townhome buildings comprising the second sort of component. And again they're geographically split but also there's a desire with this request to more clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the developers for the two respective components. And so the idea here from the applicant is that the townhome phase would be undertaken likely by another development partner And the other item I wanted to point out, the next bullet there is that there is a desire, a request I should say, for a permanent portion of the Paseo to be constructed as a phase adjacent to the apartment building, with the apartment building. and then a temporary Paseo that is being proposed with this current proposal tonight, where the kind of townhome portion of the Paseo would go. You can kind of see that in this drawing here. Again, in the lower half of the drawing, that is what is being proposed for tonight's meeting until that townhome development is constructed. And then at that time, the remainder of the permanent Paseo would be completed to full build out throughout the townhome site. These requests collectively relate to the desire to separate out the two phases more clearly. And so again, consistency is kind of the goal here and having a very clear set of responsibilities and roles for the two developing parties. Allowing for that future townhome developer to better understand their role as they come online and understand what is expected and when the timing should be for the respective component and the next slide please. And so staff tonight has provided the following recommendation, which is to approve the use permit revision and architect architectural control revision. subject to the conditions of approval that are outlined in the staff report. The sale would offer a considerable amount of the needed elements during the first phase of development in terms of the apartment portion and the temporary portion near the townhome. The condition modifications would allow for the apartment developer to offer more clarity and certainty for any interested townhome developers. So when they're marketing this property in terms of the townhome area, this would be an opportunity for them to be a little clearer on what the expectations will be for the future development of that site. And in addition to that, the proposed project would still continue to be compliant with all the requirements in the R1UB zoning district upon full build out. Upon the decision tonight, the action would be subject to a 15-day appeal period, which is subject to a potential appeal to city council if appealed. And lastly, we can go to the final slide here, and I'll just quickly state Thank you for your time this evening. I'm happy to answer any clarifying questions that you may have. And following that, if preferred, we could have Miss Caroline Layden and Mr. Tim Steele from the Sobrato team join us and they can provide their initial applicant team remarks. If you prefer, I can answer any clarifying questions now or we can have them speak first and then have clarifying questions for both parties. Thank you.

Does anybody have any burning questions for Mr pruder or can we go to the applicant team okay with that i'll Thank you, Mr pruder and invite the applicant team to join us. And you've probably done this before, but just make sure that you've got the microphone pretty close. So that people are joining us remotely can hear you is this okay. A little just make sure. Yeah.

OK, there we go. Hi, everyone. It's nice to meet you. I mean, my name is Caroline Layden and it's a pleasure to be here with you this evening. That wonderfully covered most of what I was going to say. So I'll keep this very brief. First of all, I just want to reiterate that the modifications that we're proposing are really to streamline the development process, both for ourselves, the future townhome developer, and for the city as we go to execute this ambitious plan. in front of you. None of the modifications affect the prior approval. The design is still consistent with what was previously approved, as are the unit counts and the ultimate features of the final build-out of the project. It's really just kind of breaking down the phasing much more clearly, so there are no ambiguous conditions of approval or ambiguous responsibilities for the delivery of the Paseo. Secondly, I would love to thank the city staff for their collaboration. This truly has been a collaborative effort to get to you all today. They helped us tremendously thinking through the design of the Paseo and ensuring that we're delivering a rich community experience, both in the temporary condition and the permanent build out. and bringing up a few considerations that just will really help the project overall, both for the applicant and our partner and the city. So thank you, Matt and Kyle and Tom, if you all are on the line. And with that, I'm here to answer any questions if you have them and look forward to speaking with you soon.

Thank you so much. So with that, I'll check and see if anybody up here on the dais or joining remotely has any questions for either the applicant or Mr. Pruder. And these should be just clarifying questions because then we need to go to public comment. Ah, yes. Chair Silverstein joining us remotely from Santa Barbara.

Thank you. As stated... Is my understanding that the stated impetus for these revisions were due to economic conditions, or at least that's what it wrote. I was just curious if I could get more clarity on what that means. Is it interest rate financing conditions? Is it the housing market locally? What did that imply?

Is this a question for the applicant?

That's a question for either the applicant or staff. And specifically, I'm just reading the line. It says, however, given current economic conditions, the applicant is concentrating. And then it goes on. And I was wondering what that means.

Yeah, Matt, I'm happy to take this one. So we, as Matt stated, we have a building permit submitted for both the configuration of lot one as it's presented to you today and the apartment building. When the project was originally entitled, it contemplated phasing at a very high level through a condition that basically had a blanket statement allowing for phasing of the project. It didn't go into the specific construction logistics and considerations of what would happen if the apartment project went first versus what would happen if the townhome project went first and how would you manage site logistics, staging, and coordination between the two parties, both day-to-day and in the execution of some of the conditions of approval. Based on current market conditions, we are prepared to move forward with the apartment project as soon as we receive our permits. So that might be the comment about current market conditions of the market conditions are benefiting apartment projects to move forward right now. The townhome market varies almost day to day, depending both on local and macroeconomic conditions. And the modifications to the conditions of approval just give us that extra level of flexibility and certainty for a townhome developer to come in and feel confident in the execution of the project. Townhome developers really need that confidence to, feel comfortable pursuing a project given all of the different market idiosyncrasies like wars and supply chains and interest rates and home buyer sentiment that they're dealing with on a daily basis. So these, like I said, these modifications just help us build in that certainty. So some of the logistics and more, you know, project level considerations, don't start muddying the waters along with their complex business plan, if that makes sense.

Thank you.

Anybody else have any questions? Yes, Commissioner Schindler.

Thank you, Vice Chair. I have a clarifying question for staff. I understand that the forward-looking work on this project, including the submitted permits, is all the purview of the planning and building departments. But could you clarify which of the city's departments has been accountable or responsible for sort of overseeing the work that's happened to date? And if my notes are correct, that's more about the demolition and the clearing and the initial stages of utility work. which teams are the collaborators with the applicant on that.

Thank you, Commissioner Schindler. I think it's definitely multifaceted. The building division has been central in terms of issuing permits and working out a lot of the on-site inspections for demolition. When it comes to other aspects, you had hinted at the utility work. That is more in the public works department's engineering division in terms of working out the removal and replacement and relocation of utility equipment and different utility lines and those kinds of things in collaboration with utility providers such as PG&E. There is Rule 20 undergrounding work, I believe, that is a big part of the project's development. And the applicant can speak more to how that's been going and that kind of thing. But in terms of the full site demolition, we've had those components. The mapping modifications have been multifaceted as well, as I mentioned, the image that was shown in the location map and also kind of repeated in the staff report previously was of the newest mapped configuration of the lot, which shows two properties where there once were, I believe, four. And so there was some reconfiguration of property lines, redelineation. and changes in that regard. And that required engineering's work as well as collaboration with planning building staff. And the last thing I would add is that I believe some heritage trees were removed some time ago in the demolition process that were subject to the city arborist requirements, which is also within public works department staff. I would say that's generally the bulk of the staffing effort that's been involved thus far. Thank you.

Thank you for that clarification.

If there are no other clarifying questions, then I'll go ahead and turn to our clerk, Mr. Ball, to open this for public comment.

Thank you again, Vice Chair Bruse. We are now taking public comment for item G1. As a reminder, for those participating in person, please provide me with the speaker card located at the back table. And for those attending virtually, please press the hand icon. For those calling into tonight's meeting, please click star nine on your keypad to notify staff you have a comment.

Mr. Ball, I believe we're on item F1. Oh.

But otherwise once my apologies item F1. This will now be the, this is the final call for item F1. We do have one comment card here for for someone here in the chambers from Don video. So you're welcome to come up and make your comment. And as a reminder, you'll have three minutes to speak.

Thank you. Thank you for taking the public's opinion on this matter. I am a property owner for 138 Jefferson, which is not directly adjacent to Chrysler, but one building across. I'm also speaking on behalf of my neighbor who is directly across on Chrysler. Our buildings are right next to each other. While I understand and support the thoughtful development, I am concerned about the requested revisions to allow infinite project phasing that could significantly extend the impacts without providing neighbor properties owners with adequate provisions or certainty. To date, our property has already been affected by the construction related activities. The recent road work or utility work that I'm understanding occurred. The contractors parked in our parking lots. They unloaded their tractors on our asphalt. And when we asked them to move, they did, but they parked into the street, which is also unallowed in that area. So I respectfully am asking the Planning Commission to consider some of the questions that I provided in the email to you guys regarding the protections of our approval. I simply ask that the flexibility that's being granted here tonight to these applicants is balanced with the meaningful protections for those of us who will continue to live and work besides this project. If the city is allowing extended or infinite phasing schedule, there should also be some clear timelines, enforceable completion requirements and accountability measures to ensure that the temporary conditions do not become permanent burdens on our neighboring properties. And I think, Matthew, thank you for printing my email. There was a few other considerations. Probably not enough time for me to go through them, but you guys have them. If you guys could just help us make sure that things are in place to protect us from the transportation that's going to occur. And Matthew, I also sent you some current pictures of the temporary fencing that's up right now. I'm not sure if you want to share with the rest of the team, but there is like a chain link fencing with the netting across it, which is fine, but it is not maintained, so it's overgrown with weeds. And then the other, the longer side that is in front of the hotel, I believe that's on Constitution. It is a plywood fencing that goes the whole length of the way. Also, it's just not very, I'm concerned that if that's a temporary fencing that's going to stay up right now for an infinite time, that it's not very nice to our neighbors to look at. So you have the pictures of what I sent you guys. Thank you again for your time. I appreciate you guys bringing this up.

Thank you for your comments.

Mr. Ball, do we have any more comments or any hands raised online?

I'm not seeing any raised hands and we have no more comment cards. So Vice Chair, you may continue.

Okay, I'll go ahead and close public comment on this item and move us into commission discussion and ultimately a motion regarding the use permit provision and architectural control permit revision. Who would like to kick us off? Commissioner Schindler.

Thank you, Vice Chair. I would like to, I guess, expand a little bit on Chair Silverstein's question about the driving factors for some of the modifications. So I think this is pretty sure this is a question for the applicant. I was interested in the factors that lead, the reasons for possibly bringing on a different entity as the partner for the townhomes, as a townhome project proponent, distinctly different from, it sounds like distinctly different from the Sobrato organization. Wondering if that's driven by any of the following possible factors or something I haven't thought of. So is it a funding question? Is it a portfolio diversification question? Is it because townhome development is a very specific expertise? Or is there even a different expertise for market rate versus the affordable townhouses? I did note that in the applicant letter the representative from the Soprano organization referenced ongoing conversations with Habitat for Humanity regarding the affordable townhome parcel. So putting all of that together is, you know, what is the potential role of Habitat as the townhome project proponent or Do they fold in with some other entity? So there are a lot of sub-questions in there and I'm hoping you can flesh out some of those perspectives for me.

I'm happy to. And a project of this size is definitely complex and requires a lot of players to come to the table to bring it together. So I'll start out with the Habitat question first. So we are still collaborating with Habitat for Humanity to build the 18 affordable townhomes on lot one, as we're calling the larger townhome parcel. We have a letter of agreement with them that outlines the terms of their involvement. The habitat parcel, which I believe is lot C, once the larger townhome parcel is subdivided via final map by the townhome proponent, will be part of the townhome developer's scope of work and the townhome developer will ultimately inherit our agreement with Habitat for Humanity to fulfill the BMR component for the townhomes, if that makes sense. And I'm happy to elaborate on that more, but Essentially, the plan that was originally proposed to work with Habitat to deliver the affordable townhomes is still the case. Those townhomes are still in the same location within the site as it was originally approved. And we've been actively keeping townhome in the loop on our timeline as well as the timeline to bring on this development partner. And it's a structure that they're familiar with and have even given us ideas on how to make sure it's a streamlined experience for everyone. There are many factors that go into bringing a townhome partner on. This was always our original business plan to partner for this section. One major consideration, which kind of goes along with what I was saying earlier, is townhome developers are really experts in this field. They can do it much faster. faster, more efficiently. They have designs off the shelf that they can pull from. They're just economies of scale, both in the design construction and sale of the townhomes that we as TSO aren't prepared to execute on. We don't have that capability in-house really to do that. And overall, they're able to provide a much better uh experience in that delivery um both for the community and and the ultimate residents of the project um so that's the overarching consideration there are many other details that i could get into but um to sum it all up the original intention was always to have a townhome developer we're just working through the conditions to make that partnership a little bit more streamlined uh and then Habitat for Humanity is still involved in the project and we're setting up a lot of checks and balances in place to make sure they're comfortable with everything we're moving forward with and they continue to stay informed about the timelines, they can be ready to develop the project when the time comes.

Thank you, that's helpful. Let me just merge the final bit of my question with Chair Silverstein's question. I think the original plan was always to have sort of a different rather than TSO sort of own the townhouse development component of things. Was it also sort of the original plan though that they would happen at the same time, even if they were handled by two different entities? And then, as Chair Silverstein alluded to, the economic conditions is what led to a divergence in timeline, or was there anything else that contributed to the divergence in timelines?

Yes. When the master plan was developed, like I said, there was always an intention to bring on this partner. I will say we've been progressing both parts of the project as far as TSO can take the townhome parcel in tandem with our efforts on the apartment parcel. As soon as this, if we receive this approval and our phase one final map is approved at city council which we're kind of in the final stages of finalizing agreements and reviewing agreements with the city attorney. As soon as those two approvals are in place, we intend to take the site out to the market to townhome developers as quickly as possible. They are very financially motivated and do not like money sitting on their books. So as soon as they purchase the site, it's in their best interest to move forward as quickly as possible with the townhome development as well. So really, all of these approvals are... to have the projects run as simultaneously as they can. We're just a little bit further ahead with the apartment project, given there are a few less steps to execute that project. We just have to have the phase one final map approved in our building permits, and we're ready to go where the townhome parcel requires an additional final map to subdivide the parcels further and a few other agreements and designs with the city. So this is all an effort to develop both parcels as quickly as possible. Like I said, it's just a couple more steps for the townhomes.

Thank you. That's very helpful. I'll leave it to other commissioners for more questions.

Yes, Commissioner Headlee. Yeah, I'm curious, this question might be both for staff as well as the applicant. What is in place already to support neighbors in mitigating the construction impacts? And yeah, I'll pause there.

I think I'll start there. Thank you, Commissioner Headlee. So with respect to construction impacts, this project is subject to noise ordinance and the building code and all the requirements we have in our municipal code respectively. And so there is definitely a responsibility of the developing party here to ensure that construction impacts are reduced. We also have the mitigation monitoring and reporting program and existing conditions of approval that apply that involve BMPs best management practices to ensure that these impacts are reduced accordingly. And I think. You know, the main thing here is that if we the city receive any complaints, whether it be for noise or other types of impacts, we definitely investigate them. We work with code enforcement, building division staff, community development staff as a whole, and any other related staff if there's a transportation item or something along those lines to ensure that we are, you know, restoring compliance or perhaps correcting any issues if there are any. Thank you.

I have a follow-up question to that then. What would be the best way for, say, the neighboring properties, if something like this happens in the future, for them to submit a request? Would that be through the ACT app or a particular email?

I believe it would be with the ACT app. I think, you know, I'm the main project planner, so I could certainly be contacted if there are questions about what's going on. But I think in terms of reporting and having action taken, it would probably be through that app, through code enforcement. Thank you.

Yes, Commissioner Sillian.

Thank you. I had two questions, I think, for staff. Regarding the Paseo, I just wanted to better understand, is there... Any sort of safety requirement that's driving the need to build the sale, all the way through both parcels right now, or is that just what the applicant wants to do. As their phasing.

Sure, thank you, Commissioner Sillins. So the main issue here with the PSEO originally is that there was a requirement before the first occupancy of any unit of residence to have the PSEO completely built out 100%. And so we've worked extensively with the applicant team to appropriately consider a modification to that. that allows for a little more flexibility with the townhome adjoining portions of the Paseo, the kind of southern half in terms of how the mapping is, would be seen more as western, closer to the freeway, to the 101, US 101. And that portion, generally speaking, with what is proposed tonight, has a full paved surface running through it, which is close in some ways to what we had approved in 2023. In addition to that, there's significant landscaping and other kind of public types of public serving features and hardscaping, such as benches and those kinds of things for folks to walk and recreate and also bicycles safely. for the entire length of the Paseo between the two streets. In addition to that, it's a little less clear in the images I showed in the presentation, but in the staff report drawings, you can also see that two crosswalks are a part of this equation in that there's a crosswalk close to the Constitution terminus of the Paseo. And there's one directly at the terminus of the Independence Drive. terminus, I should say. There's a crosswalk there as well, so that access is being built out in that same first phase. The second phase of the Paseo would be to further enhance the final elements alongside the edges of the townhomes that are adjacent. In addition to that, enhanced landscaping would occur. One thing that was not noted in the presentation but is, I believe, shown and not really discussed in great detail in the staff report, but shown in the plans is temporary solar powered lighting that would provide adequate lighting. And what we've worked with the applicant on for safety at night so that the Paseo is accessible and safe in the evening hours as well with adequate illumination. We're making sure that in the building permit stage we have the required illumination that is necessary, which will be replaced by a permanent format. And I think the applicant can speak more to when the timing might be of that in terms of overall build out. But that is what we have worked with them on to give us a very nearly complete but not fully complete the sale with this first phase. Thank you.

And as a follow-up question to that, what is intended to be the main use of the Paseo, especially the portion that's in the townhome area? Is it for residents of the apartment building to get quicker access, or is it for other local residents passing through? Was there any study done on that previously to... Was there an intention beyond just access for residents for this sale?

I believe that's the primary focus, but I would also add that the development in this area has increased quite a bit on the fringes of the property, as well as surrounding on the opposite sides of the streets, hence the crosswalk desire as well. And I think there is a general approach that is modeled based on the general plan land use element update that was with Connect Menlo, as well as the overall project build out of these Bayfront properties. You have more residential development that's come in, you have more office development that's also occurred where like Snowflake is, for example. And so there is, I think, a desire to have enhanced pedestrian and bicycle facilities within the community. So there's better accessibility across and through these larger parcels, especially with the sale.

Okay, thank you. The reason I was going down that route with my questions is just because I had a reaction to, you know, a long stretch of Paseo being surrounded by chain link fence for an unknown period of time and that made me... little bit uncomfortable I guess from an aesthetic perspective and also from just like a neighborhood perspective but on the other hand I can see how in this neighborhood it would be nice to have something having spent some time there like on my bike it you know is not exactly like a pedestrian or bike friendly area overall so having something could be better than nothing I'm open to opinions from other commissioners but based on what I've heard I'm Feeling overall comfortable with it, I think. The other question I had was about phasing. Of course, we've had projects before with phasing, like Parkline, for example. So this isn't unusual. I was just curious regarding timing. Is there any time limit for any city projects during which a project can sit vacant? Is there a time limit on that? I guess part of why I'm asking is there's a project around the corner from where I live that's been vacant for, I don't know, since before the pandemic, I think. And it is a bit of an eyesore. It is frustrating. But of course, I understand that You know properties properties so there's not always something we could do about it so i'm just trying to better understand yeah what how the city looks at. vacant lots for long periods of time if that does happen.

it's definitely a concern and I, I believe you're referring to the property located at the corner of Cambridge and El Camino real. 201 El Camino Real, which I had worked on before the pandemic, actually kind of the year of 2020, close enough. But yes, that kind of situation, I think with any project, we establish these conditions of approval, we set up expectations and parameters for a project to succeed and sustainably develop and obviously meet expectations realistically, but at the same time, I think one factor we all must consider is that it is possible for a project to completely stop and not happen like 201L Camino Real ultimately has. But I think the applicant team can speak to this a little more. We have worked with them and collaborated very carefully on setting up expectations with the apartment development. We have some significant progress with mapping updates that have reconfigured the site. That have redefined the boundaries of the site and, you know, set up this apartment property so that it can be, you know, pretty close to a construction phase. You know, and I think a short amount of time this year, perhaps being construction. And I think that is a really important factor in working towards an overall site development, having some You know initial momentum with construction happening on site, I think it is something that the applicant team is very much desirous of. And I think they can speak more towards you know what efforts they're making to work on the town home development getting the town home developers. On the market interested in this development with the opportunities that are granted in the you know conditions of approval that are being reviewed tonight, as well as how the sales going to be coming along.

Thank you. Yeah, I fully believe everything you're saying. Based on tonight, I'm not expecting the slot to stay vacant for a long period of time, but you never know. And I guess when I think about the property mentioned on El Camino, I guess if I could wave a magic wand, obviously I know the city can't take over the property and turn it into a beautiful thing. So I get that, but... Is there any previous history for or are there already conditions that exist for, for example, what one of the public commenters is talking about, like weeds overgrowing the property or fencing getting really unsightly? Are there any requirements in place currently or maybe like annual maintenance of some sort of vacant lots? Is there any... current requirements and or can you speak to any previous conditions of approval that you've seen to that end? Yeah.

Definitely, we do have a few standard conditions of approval that are provided with with any project of the scale that. establish expectations for the site conditions, one is that it's being well kept, it is also about you know, appropriate you know appearance at all times, and so, if there is a very unkempt condition and. there's a concern with too much waste accumulation or perhaps weed overgrowth, that kind of thing happening on the site, I believe that would be out of compliance against what, I forget the exact condition number, but it is a standard condition that we need that as a best management practice basically for any of these developments where you fence off a large portion of land, you have perhaps a little bit of time where not much is happening, there's a little bit of waiting before something comes up, There's a need for the, you know, property owner and developing team to make sure that it's in an appropriate condition. And I think that will be something that they'll need to work on and they'll make sure to continue striving towards that. And, you know, that will be for the whole site. So different stages happening. construction begins on the apartment, there needs to be an appropriate way that that site is treated every day after construction ends for the day and those kinds of things. So I think we will see that being enforced. And if there is a need for reporting that, I definitely welcome anyone to speak with our city staff to work on that.

Thank you. And just so I understand, is it generally a judgment call process? With regards to, you know, if a neighbor sees something like a weed is, you know, a foot tall, but then the applicant says we're going to wait till they're two feet tall. Is it sort of just something there's no like beyond just general language about. keeping a nice appearance. There's nothing more specific than that. Is that fair to say?

I think it's fair to say that it's not extremely descriptive on exact site conditions. I think there's an expectation, but that also goes hand in hand with the work happening on site. If there is activity you know, dust control mitigation measures, for example, the staging of vehicles, how things are stored. There's a lot that goes into that beyond just a weed patch growing, I think, generally. So I think that's probably what lends the language to being a little more broad and a little more open in nature. So I think the fact that it's not as prescriptive also lends an opportunity for anyone concerned to, you know, kind of present concerns with that. If there's an issue, there's a little more They can be more descriptive and explain why it seems like it's not being well kept. It's why it's not in compliance.

Got it. Thank you. I think I feel pretty comfortable with that. And I don't have any more questions right now.

Can I follow up on that? So I'm seeing here in the conditions of approval, project proponent shall keep the property in a clean and sanitary condition at all times, maintain its site in a fashion that does not constitute a public nuisance and does not violate any provision of the City of Menlo Park Municipal Code. But I think what I'm hearing is that there's not a lot of proactive enforcement of that on the part of the staff. And I'm wondering if there's, if we do send out code enforcement or something like that to dormant sites, or if that's something that, you know, given the concerns of people in the neighborhood could be encouraged.

I would say for one, our city staff are a bit limited in terms of resources. So it is harder to make a proactive effort citywide generally. A lot of this is definitely, I'd say more driven by complaints and feedback that we receive. And so we have that concern. We also would be looking at activity of permitting. So there are a lot of other factors in terms of Not only how the site appears that is one important concern, but also if a building permit lapses if something is about to expire. If approvals are about to expire, we may be getting in touch with the applicant on that as well, in addition to we've been hearing reports and concerns. If someone comes to the counter and reports anything planning counter here at City Hall. If they call any staff if they leave an email if they report on the APP to code enforcement, I mean there are a few different avenues that can be taken here that can achieve that you know. feedback being received by the city, and I think that I think it's kind of overlapping with activity progress milestones being met.

So I think to circle back to the email that we got from our public comments tonight, it sounds as though there is nothing that legally obligates a future developer or the current property owner to complete this development as described. But we have conditions of approval that would dictate that it not be left a total mess and that people are, if there are complaints, that staff will follow up.

I think in a general sense that can portray most of what's going on. I think the other part that I would fold into this discussion is that a lot of the conditions now with a more clear delineation between the two phases are more rigid on expectations. And so there's a lot more clarity that will require certain milestones to be met only if other activities have been achieved. So I think there's a lot depending on milestones and progress being made.

Okay, can I ask you quickly too? This is just for my own edification. I noticed that there were conditions of approval that involved transportation improvements, and that was something that the public commenter also referenced. And there's actually a pretty strict timeline of, you know, before building permits are issued, this has to be done. Before occupancy permits are issued, this has to be done. I'm wondering how, if... There's a subdivision or one of the parcels is basically being now built out by a different developer. Is the Sobrato organization still responsible for all of the transportation improvements or are they subdivided or can you explain that? I'm sorry if this was clearly explained somewhere and I didn't see it.

Yes, I can get to that in a moment. I think I'd just like to add a couple of the clarifying points from the previous question as well to start. And so basically, one other thing I wanted to point out is that we have active permits on the site. So we have a lot of active work going on. We have a lot of permits that are under review. And there are certain conditions that talk about expiration and requiring progress to be made in order to keep certain permitting active. For example, the use permit has a one-year expiration date. Applicants are required to apply for a building permit. If the building permit is not approved or issued, merely applying within the one-year window is appropriate, but it has to stay active. The building permit has to continue. In the case of 201 El Camino Real and 612 Cambridge Avenue, that property that Commissioner Sillin referred to earlier, no action was taken on the building permits. Over a year, it lapsed. Everything expired. And then everything in terms of the conditions, the approval, all of that expired. And so I just wanted to clarify that we have expiration dates for a lot of the permitting. We have a lot of language in the conditions that also refer to this issue. And so there's that added layer of expectation that they'll need to deliver. The applicant team will need to provide certain milestones and continue commitments to that. With respect to the transportation related requirements, We do have some items that received a slight modification. And I apologize, I'll just pull it up on my end to clarify further. But what has been, I believe, portrayed in these revisions to the conditions There are a few things you're speaking of like traffic signal completion and those kinds of things. Those are referred to I apologize. I just need to pull up the right condition here to make sure to make sure that we have clarity on the change that occurred, but Basically, it's been set up that The Sorry. One example is that we have fair share contributions that are required for utilities as well as the intersection requirements. And what has been included is it's broken into a few parts. We have the TIF payment, which is broken up. There's a part that the apartment must pay. There's a portion that the townhomes must pay. So both parties will have their own respective amount they'll need to pay for. And then when it comes to I'm just thinking about this intersection of Chrysler Drive and Jefferson Drive. There's supposed to be a traffic signal that's included. And that appears to be dependent on the submittal of the first building permit for the townhome. And that the townhome proponent will be responsible. So I believe one example here that we're looking at with this change is it more clearly outlines a townhome proponent being responsible for that. And I'm going to defer to Mrs. Layton here to explain more.

I'm happy to clarify a couple things. So first, just again, to address a previous comment, we have an on-site superintendent in our trailer on the site five days a week. This is our first time hearing of any complaints about the site, and we would welcome any neighbors in the area to reach out to the contacts listed on our project signage, including our superintendent, Dino Swalding, and myself and Tim and Dino are happy to set up a meeting and walk the site and make sure we're addressing any concerns. We definitely want to be good neighbors and if these concerns were brought to our consideration sooner we definitely would have addressed them prior to this meeting. We also know that there's a fair amount of construction in addition to our project in the neighborhood so we completely understand frustration with just general construction traffic including roadway work. I believe the city recently repaved most of the roads in the area in addition to our project and then Snowflake is doing some tenant improvements down the street. So completely understand concerns about traffic and we will do our part to make sure that we're creating a positive experience for the neighborhood. On the Paseo, we did collaborate with the city both on the lighting layout and the fencing layout to make sure that the configuration of the Paseo provides as rich of a pedestrian experience as possible. The fence, well, it's not your typical chain-link fence. It looks more permanent with kind of more board-like material running along the chain, so you don't feel like you're walking through a chain-link fence. So we really worked with staff to think of the pedestrian level experience, and hopefully that connectivity is helpful for people in the neighborhood while the townhomes project is under construction. The reason for a few of the temporary provisions, including temporary lights in this fencing, is If the townhome developer needed to drive through a portion of this Paseo, which runs through the roadway network of the townhomes, we need a temporary fence for them to open and shut at times to help with construction logistics. The Paseo pretty much borders the backyards of a few towns. and it's not feasible to install permanent trees in portions of the Paseo that won't be impacted by construction. So we just wanted to be mindful of creating a rich experience while putting a few temporary measures in place that help with some construction logistics and ensure that the city and the neighborhood don't have to worry about the Paseo then starting to look like a construction site as construction happens around it and things are inevitably impacted, like more permanent fixtures were potentially negatively impacted. So that's a little bit more of an explanation about some of the temporary measures, including the fencing and the lighting. On the transportation improvements, the conditions approval, modified conditions of approval do divide some of the responsibilities between the townhome and the apartment parcels. The responsibilities were allocated by the traffic impacts that each project creates. So the townhome parcel was what ultimately triggered the need for the lighting upgrade, the intersection improvements. Therefore, they will be responsible for picking up those improvements. The apartment parcel did not trigger those upgrades. Therefore, that's why they're kind of being linked to each of the various projects. Each project will improve their own frontages. So the apartment project will be responsible for frontage improvements along Constitution per original design. Same with the apartment parcel on Chrysler and Independence. And then the apartment parcel, as Matt mentioned, is creating two pedestrian crosswalks, one on Independence, one on Constitution. So the Paseo connects. not only through the parcel but the two adjacent streets. So that's the one traffic improvement that's being linked to the apartments because of this sale requirement.

Thank you. Does anybody else have any clarifying questions? Or sorry, not clarifying questions. Anybody else have any questions for either the applicant or the staff this time? Let me ask one more question of staff. I feel like we've covered this, but I just want to be super clear. So if the neighbors that came here tonight or other neighbors want to speak with somebody concerning their many questions around construction management. I don't think we need to air all of those questions in this public meeting. Who's their go-to person? I think that there was somebody, I think from the applicant, the construction manager. Okay. Okay. All right. So I'll let you all exchange information and take it from there. But I do feel good about knowing that you're willing to speak with them. Yes, Commissioner Farrick.

Just to add a detail, I noted that she also said that the phone number of the superintendents posted on their externally facing placards on the site. So there's multiple ways they can reach the right person if there's any issues going on.

Great, okay, with that, I'm gonna see if anybody has a motion that they'd like to make. Commissioner Schindler.

Yeah, I'll make a motion. And just before I do, I would like to express my appreciation for staff getting into working through the nuances of figuring out how to address introducing a new entity with the townhome developer and how to introduce phasing for the Paseo. that provides a good community experience, a good resident experience without creating a lot of stuff that has to then be removed and undone, which would be both costly and not environmental. So I appreciate temporary solutions that meet the requirements for safety and accessibility. For example, the solar powered lights. I think that's both aligned with the city's values as well as the spirit of the agreement and public safety and accessibility. So thank you for going through that collaboration. I don't purport to have the level of expertise of staff, but what I looked at looked smart and good to me. So I'm not an expert on short-term benches or fencing, so I will defer to staff recommendations there. And then my one other thing is it's very helpful to have the red lines. Thank you for including those in the staff report. It makes it easy to see where things are being changed. And with that, I would move that we... except the resolution included in the SAF report.

Do I have a second? I'll second that. If I can make my own kind of added comment in addition to what Commissioner Schindler noted. Well, I guess you can. Well, thank you. I just wanted to note that this is an important project. I'm glad that there's a collaboration to make sure that these 432 multifamily dwelling units are happening. And so even though it certainly has its complexities, just expressing appreciation for it. Thank you.

All right, with that, I will go ahead and call the roll. Commissioner Eric?

Yes.

Commissioner Farrick?

Yes.

Commissioner Headley? Yes. Commissioner Schindler? Yes. Commissioner Cillian?

Yes.

And Chair Silverstein? Yes. All right. And I'm Vice Chair Berzi. I'm also a yes, so that is seven yeses and zero noes or abstentions. Okay. Okay. And with that Thank you everybody, I will close this item and we'll move on to item G one regarding an architectural control revision at 1540 alchemy new real. and At this public hearing, the Commission may consider and adopt a resolution to approve an architectural control permit revision to make exterior improvements to an existing building at 1540 El Camino Real in the El Camino Real downtown specific planned zoning district. The modifications would include the installation of a walk-up ATM for a proposed mechanics bank surrounded by new dark gray cladding. new exterior light fixtures, and the replacement of a small portion of landscaping with concrete to provide an accessible approach to the proposed ATM within the front setback area. The modifications would not affect the gross floor area. And we will also be asked to determine that this action is categorically exempt under CEQA guidelines 15301's class one exemption for existing facilities. Our staff owner for this item is Mr. Brian Toy, and I believe, do you have any updates to the staff report?

No updates to the staff report.

Okay, and do you have any presentation or comments to make?

The applicant team is online, and I believe a member of the applicant team is going to make some verbal remarks.

Okay, wonderful. I would now welcome the applicant team. Hi, you need to unmute yourself.

Apologies. Hello. Hi. I'm Allison Lorette. I'm with Hercus Harris Design Associates. We are the design firm who was hired by Mechanics Bank for this project. As you guys just went through this, I'll briefly explain the project and the mineral efforts that we're doing to try to keep the project in line with the existing architecture of the building. Um, also with us today, if there's any other questions, Lisa Toomey with Mechanics Bank is here. She's the director of corporate real estate and facilities and Ashley Hart, who is with Coachman Wakefield. She is representing the property owner. So thank you again for taking the time to meet with us this evening. Um, Again, the project's at 1540 El Camino Real, Suite 140. It's the last suite in the existing property of the building. The project includes installing a walk-up ATM and night drop. at the bank's new location. We'll be adding exterior lighting required by California AB 244 to provide safe and secure experience for customers using the ATM. Throughout the design process, our goal was to be to incorporate these improvements into the existing building with as little visual impact as possible. The ATM and night drop will be located within the existing recessed area of the building using the existing gray clad metal panels, which are already a key architectural feature of the building as a backdrop for the ATM and night drop. The new gray metal panels and the required security lighting will be integrated into the design. So the improvements blend naturally with the architecture and look like they've always been part of the building. To provide an ADA compliant walk-up route, we'll be making a very small modification to the portion of existing landscaping that just falls in front of the ATM. and night drop will just be filling that little tiny portion with concrete. We've intentionally kept the amount of landscape being removed to a minimum while still providing the accessible path required by code. Overall, this is a very modest exterior improvement. The character of the building will remain the same, the visual impact, the facade will be minimal. And our goal is to simply improve the functionality, accessibility, and security of the bank while respecting the existing architecture and maintaining the overall appearance to the site. That was it. And I appreciate your time and consideration.

Allison, do you have a visual to show? I do.

I can.

Okay. Thank you.

Am I allowed to share?

Alison, for me, it's the middle green button on the towards the bottom of the screen. Thank you.

Can I just ask for the record who was just additionally speaking? I think that would probably be good to know.

Yes, this is Lisa. It's Lisa Toomey with Mechanics Bank.

I see. Okay. Thank you so much.

Apologies on my struggle here.

So while the applicant is attempting to share something on her screen, does anybody have any questions that they might want to ask staff before? No? OK. All right. Fun vacation plans?

Through the vice chair. I'm not sure. I don't believe. Well, maybe it's working. Panelists. I'm not sure. Panelists. Here we go.

Yeah.

So this is colored elevations that we have. This is the existing facade of the building. This is a portion of glazing that will be removed, and then we'll be replacing with the gray metal cladding with the ATM and night drop here. Nothing else, everything else will remain the same. These three areas will be where the security lighting will be added. And then on the very right hand side, you could see the portion of landscaping that will be removed just within the area that the gray metal cladding will be added to the space.

Thank you. If the applicant doesn't have any other details to share at this time, I'm going to check and see if any of my colleagues once more have any clarifying questions. And otherwise, I would like to open public comment. Mr. Ball, could you open public comment on this item?

Thank you again, Vice Chair Beruzzi. We are now taking public comment for item G1. And as a reminder for those participating virtually, please press the hand icon. And for those calling into tonight's meeting, please press star nine on your keypad to notify staff you have a comment. This will now be the final call for item G1. And I don't see any comments, nor do I have any public comment cards. So vice chair, you may continue.

I'm shocked. All right. Let's turn it over to the dais and see if anybody on the dais has any conversation like to have about this item or if anybody wants to make a motion. Yes. Commissioner Eric.

Not to prevent any other conversation, but I moved to approve this architectural control permit as per the staff report.

Do we have a second? All right, Commissioner Headley, seconding. So we have a motion on the table with a second from, sorry, a motion from Mr. Eric, second from Ms. Headley, and I will go ahead and take the vote if nobody else has anything they want to say about this. And I'm not even sure Silverstein. Okay, so. Sorry, Vice Chair. I knew it was too good to be true.

Commissioner Sillian.

Hello. I guess my only reflection on this is just that until some time in whatever future, there's no bike lane on El Camino. And if I am ever traveling this section by bike, I will be going on the sidewalk, as I'm sure many others do as well. I'm looking at the street view right where the ATM is going. It is recessed to some degree, but there's also like a big planner box on the other side, maybe on the by the curb where El Camino is. And so I do have this potential concern that if there's a bunch of people lining up the ATM, it could cause some backup or collision on the sidewalk. I guess I would just would love to hear from the applicant if that was considered and or if there's an alternate entry point that's possible because I see there's like the big courtyard in the middle there where people could also potentially access this, but I don't know if that's even part of the bank's footprint.

Yes, we did look at alternate options for the ATM. Unfortunately, there was more infrastructure that we'd have to modify, such as sprinkler systems, irrigation, and it was suggested that we add it on the front face of the building and seeing that it was recessed deep enough, we felt that it was still a viable option for the bank to be located in that area without any backup or any, sorry, struggling with the word, you know, lots of people standing in the way where, like you were saying, if a bike comes by and it'd be difficult, I think we'd still be okay with, oh, it's recessed back enough.

Okay, thank you. I voiced my concern. We can proceed with the vote.

Okay, let's go back to the roll call then. Commissioner Erick?

Yes.

Commissioner Farrick? Yes. Commissioner Headley? Yes. Commissioner Schindler? Yes. Commissioner Cillian? No. Chair Silverstein?

Yes.

I have vice chair Bruzee, I'm also a yes. So we have six yeses, one no, and no abstentions and the item passes. So next we'll move on to item H informational items. Ms. Sandmeier, does staff have any informational items they'd like to share with us this evening?

Yes, so the next meeting will be August 10. We have two items on that agenda one, single family home use permit revision, and another is a use permit for a single family home. That includes a variance. Then the next meeting will be August 24. We haven't finalized that agenda yet. And that concludes my updates, but I'm happy to answer any questions.

um question or comment from commissioner eric thank you vice chair um a question for staff at the prior planning commission meeting there was an item that was continued it was regarding a development downtown does staff have any information as to when we're likely to see that item again

Is this the 624 University item? Yes. No, we don't have information on that. That was continued at the applicant's request. So we'll wait to see if they will likely choose to resubmit something, but I don't know when.

Okay. Thank you.

Any other commissioners have informational items they'd like to share? No. In that case, I will go ahead and adjourn the meeting at 8.26 p.m. Thanks, everybody.