Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Heat. Heat. Recording in progress.

with options for virtual participation. For those attending in person, complete a yellow request to speak slip and hand it to the clerk. If participating remotely, use the raise your hand feature in Zoom and you will be called on at the appropriate time. If calling in via phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and when called upon, press star six to unmute. These options for public comment will remain available until I close the public comment period for that specific item. And finally, we welcome speakers providing public comment, but please be advised this is a limited public forum. As such, speakers must stay on topic if speaking to a particular agenda item. If speakers fail to follow these rules, they will be warned. and if they continue to disregard our rules, their opportunity to speak will be ended. The first item on our agenda is public comment. Members of the public wishing to comment on any item not appearing on the agenda tonight may address the planning commission at this time. State law prevents the commission from taking action on any matter not on the agenda. Your comments may be referred to staff for follow-up. Public comment is generally limited to a total of 15 minutes. However, that is subject to the commission's discretion and can be extended if the commission wishes to do so. I will go ahead and open the general public comment period. Again, this is for items that are not on the agenda tonight. If you wish to speak for general public comment, please submit your yellow speak speaker slip now or raise your hand if participating remotely over Zoom. HVA, do we have any speakers for general public comment

through the chair? We have no inperson public commenters nor via Zoom. Okay, great. I will go ahead and close the public comment period. Moving on to our next item, a public hearing. Hello, would you mind reading item number one?

Item 1, 668 East 3rd Avenue, New Multifamily Residential Development, PA 202525. Thank you. And I will actually um turn the mic over to my fellow commissioner Shankul. Thank you. Uh just in an abundance of caution um and based on and due to the fact that I attended this uh public uhformational meeting on March 19th, 2025 and I did take a position on um the project. I will be recusing myself from this uh agenda item.

Okay. Thank you. We will see you back in chambers after the item. All right. We will start with a staff presentation followed by the applicant's presentation and then public comments. Members of the public will be given two to three minutes to speak depending on the number of speakers. The applicant may also be given five minutes at the end of public comment to respond. Once the public hearing is closed, I may ask the staff to respond to any of the public comments and then the commission will ask clarifying questions, deliberate and render a decision. All right. Good evening, planning commissioners and Sonato community members. My name is Liz Galliardi. I'm an associate planner with the community development department and I will be presenting um for tonight's item. This project is for a proposed eight-story multifamily residential building located at 668 East 3rd Avenue, also referred to as the Gateway project. Quick overview before I dive into the presentation. First, I will cover some background on the project, then move into a code and policy review, wrapping up with a summary of the public notice that was sent out and staff recommendation to the planning commission on this project. Starting with some project history. This

application began with a preliminary application under the Housing Crisis Act or Senate Bill 330 which was filed on November 13, 2024. Then the applicant held the required neighborhood informational meeting on March 19th, 2025, followed shortly after by their first submitt of the formal planning application on April 2nd, 2025. Since that initial submittal, the project has been reviewed by city staff and refined by the applicant to ensure compliance with applicable local codes and state laws. The project is exempt from SQA under assembly bill 130, which is a newer SQA exemption that I will cover some more in the later half of this presentation. So this map here shows the project location in blue, which as you can see is just to the east of downtown Sanonteo and southeast of the downtown Cal Train Station. Zooming in a little bit, the project site in the middle um outlined in yellow is um bounded by East Third Avenue to the north, South Delaware Street to the west, South Elorado Street to the east, and East 4th A to the south. On the project site, there is an existing one-story commercial building which um some photos of are shown on to the left of the screen and this will be demolished. To the south, there are two parcels on the same block as the project site which are not a part of the project scope. These contain an existing office building and gas station which will remain. I've also highlighted to the lower left of the screen a block 21 which is located just across South Delaware Street from the project. This is an improved entitlement that has not yet been built um for a six-story mixeduse building containing office and residential units uh that is currently

um awaiting construction. In addition to block 21, there are several other development projects at various stages of um completion surrounding the project site. So, just wanted to highlight some of those um here on the screen. Block 20 to the southwest of the project site is a sevenstory mixeduse building containing office and residential. Um this is in the pre-application stages. So waiting on a formal submitt. Continuing to the southwest, Kiku Crossing is a completed city-owned sevenstory 100% affordable housing project nearby. Um, moving south from there, Bespoke is a sevenstory, 71 unit affordable housing and office retail mixeduse building, which is currently under review. And then the Drager site is also um in the pipeline as an approved project not yet constructed for a five-story mixeduse building. Then moving to the east of the project site, there's an existing apartment building, the Metropolitan Apartments. And to the northeast is 222 South Fremont. Um, this site is currently vacant with an approved entitlement that has been abandoned. And as you can see to the northwest, um, down the downtown Cal Train station is also close by. So, now that we've looked at the project location, we can dive in a bit to what is proposed. As I mentioned before, the proposed project is eight-story multifamily residential building. It contains 73 covered parking stalls which are split up between one level of belowgrade parking and garage space internal to the building on the ground and second story. The garage entrance and exit are both off of South Elorado Street. The upper floors are entirely residential units containing a total of 128 units in the building. The project also includes some residential

amenities, including a fitness center, some amenity decks on the third and eighth floors, and a common room on the eighth floor. This chart shows some more detail for how those 128 units are broken up throughout the project. So, it includes a mixture of studio, urban one-bedroom, which is another type of studio unit with a small partition wall, um, onebedroom, two-bedroom, and threebedroom units. Of the 128 total units, 108 will be market rate and 20 will be affordable. So, of those 20 affordable units, 10 will be allocated at the very low income level and another 10 at the moderate income level. This just shows the project site plan um with the ground floor configuration. As you can see, the vehicle entrance and exit off of South Elorado um and units oriented along Third Avenue. So for this application, there are two planning entitlements that are required. The first being site plan and architectural review for the new multifamily building. And this does require city council approval since it exceeds 55 ft in height. It also requires a site development planning application for the removal of major vegetation. Um nine trees will be removed including four protected trees. So the project proposes replacement planting of 16 new trees and will be required to pay an inluff fee for any remaining landscape unit value. Moving on to our code and policy review. The project site has a general plan land use designation of mixeduse medium 2 which sets the height and density standards for the project site. Under the general plan, the maximum density is 99 dwelling units per acre, which calculates out to 64 units for the size of this site. Um, and the maximum height is six stories. This project does include a density bonus request pursuant

to state law, which I'll get into more detail on later on in the slides. Um, so they are proposing to double the base density and exceed the height limit with density bonus. The project site is zoned CBDS, central business district support, and it is also located with in within the downtown area plan, specifically in the gateway sub area. Um, this also establishes some additional setbacks and stepbacks um and the development standards for the site which are summarized here in this chart. I'm happy to come back to these and if there are questions later on. In addition to the local codes and policies, there are several state laws that apply to this project. The first one that I'll highlight here is the state density bonus law. This project includes a stacked density bonus. So they're receiving a 50% density increase pro for providing 15% of the base density units at the very low income level and then another 50% density increase for pro for providing an additional 15% of the base density at the moderate income level. Under state density bonus law, the project would be eligible for up to three concessions and unlimited waiverss. And the project proposes to take full advantage of the allowable density increase, effectively doubling the base density of 64 units to provide 128 units. The applicant has not requested any concessions with this project, but has identified several waivers from development standards. This slide includes a summary of the many waivers that are applied for this project. They include waiverss to zoning code standards related to loading birth requirements and turning radius for the parking garage ramps as well as a waiver to the general plan building height standard to accommodate the additional

two stories. And additionally, there are several waivers related to various objective design standards. In addition to state density bonus law, there are several other laws that apply to this project. These include the Housing Crisis Act or Senate Bill 330, which for this project effectively freezes the development standards and fee structure in place at the time that the preliminary application was submitted. So that for this project is November 13, 2024. Additionally, the project is subject to the Housing Accountability Act, which limits the city's ability to deny, reduce the density of, or render housing development projects infeasible if objective standards are met. Additionally, the project qualifies for exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act or SQUA under a more recently passed exemption under Assembly Bill 130. Um, this provides exemption for projects that meet specific qualifying criteria, which this project does meet, um, and also includes provisions for expedited review processes. Finally, this project is also within an area that meets the requirements of Assembly Bill 2097, which is a state law that removes minimum parking requirements for projects within 1 half mile of a major public transit stop. Um, which as you'll recall, this project is quite close to the downtown Calra station, so qualifies for that exemption. In addition to state laws, the project must also comply with the city's below market rate inclusionary program for affordable housing. This project meets the local BMR requirements with the very lowincome affordable units provided. These units are distributed throughout the development and include unit sizes, types, and designs that are proportional to the rest of the development and in

line with our local standards. The moderate units are provided in addition to the local um BMR requirements and those are being used to meet the density bonus. So, moving on to the design review. This project meets several key elements of the city's objective design standards and also includes waiverss for several standards that would otherwise preclude construction of the building. The project is designed with influences from a Mediterranean and Spanish revival style with a contemporary expression. So, I'll zoom into some more detailed views. Um, we'll start here along East Third Avenue where the project has four town home style units which are integrated into the larger building. Um, as you can see here, these units have separate entrances with small front porches, decorative balconies, and planter box landscaping. along the pedestrian um route there. While the project includes waiverss to some of the specific objective design standards for front entries, specifically in the gateway sub area of the downtown specific plan, this design aims to integrate some of these elements to achieve a more pedestrian scale at the frontage along East Third A. Um while also including the high-rise design. This is another more detailed view of um East Third A, those town home style units. So, you can see the front porches and some of the brick um facade that will be proposed there. This view shows the main entry feature at the corner of East Third A and South Delaware Street. As you can see, the design includes some arches, decorative tile um behind the archway features and a cornice above above the arches to further distinguish this main entry feature which is um one of the

requirements of the objective design standards. There are also balconies or Juliet style balconies provided at each unit and step and while the stepbacks do not span the full facade, there are included some massing brakes um particularly looking at that third floor deck area which you can see a little better on this slide which shows the full view um from east third. The project does include a waiver for some of the massing standards. Um, particularly the objective design standards require a distinct base, body and top. And while these are not defined completely across the full facade, they have provided some um stepbacks, different colors and different materials to still break up the facade in that way. This is the view from South Delaware Street. As you can see, some of the same um massing brakes with that porch along the third story. Um the balconies per unit and decks along the top to kind of create that distinctive top feature. This is the other corner feature at East Third A and South Elderorado Street. Um, this has been further def defined through different design iterations to meet our corner treatment requirements of the objective design standards. This is an elevation view from South Elorado Street. As you can see, this is where the vehicle entrance and exit are proposed. And finally the rear elevation the southwest side which faces inter interior to the um other two loss adjacent. This does include a blank wall along the first two stories um which does is one of the waiverss that the project has requested. But as you can see they've included some stucco relief along that blank wall to break it up a bit and it is limited to the parking garage area and facing internally to the

project. So, um there have been efforts made to minimize the impact of that blank wall. Looking at the materials proposed for the project, um the objective design standards do require projects to be built with high-quality materials, um which this project does meet, including stucco, brick veneer at the town home treatments, terracotta roof tiles, metal details through balconies and windows, um and that decorative blue tile that's proposed around the entry feature. Finally, um wanted to highlight some of the impact fees that this project will be subject to. This um slide just includes estimates. So, some of these numbers may be subject to change when we do the full calculations, but the project will be contributing to the city's childcare development fee, park impact fees, wastewater capacity charge, school impact fees, a landscape unit in LO fee for the tree removals, a public art inlue fee, and transportation improvement fee. Finally, the project, as I mentioned before, is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to public resources code section 211080.66. Um, this is that recent um SQA exemption that was enacted under Assembly Bill 130. This became effective as of June 20th, 2025 and requires expedited project review and decision timeline um for projects that qualify. Additionally, there is a tribal consultation requirement built into AB130. Uh the city did send out tribal notice to the tribes affected receiving back one request for consultation and we did engage in the process of consultation with that tribe. For public noticing, the applicant did hold the required neighborhood meeting um in March of 2025. There were 40

attendees and comments received related to parking, traffic and construction impacts and concern around loss of existing business in retail. Prior to this public hearing, notice was sent out um at 10 days in advance of the hearing to the required um thousand foot radius as well as the city's email list and interested parties. Finally, that brings us to our recommendations before the planning commission tonight. There are three conditions of approval that staff are proposing some um modifications to. The first is regarding um curb and gutter. As you can see on the slide here, the language has been adjusted slightly to further specify where um curb and gutter um reconstruction would be required. Additionally, the condition of approval that relates to traffic signal infrastructure. some language has been added to further clarify where these improvements would specifically apply related to this project. And finally, um a condition of approval related to requirements for street lights and infrastructure. This had referenced a photoometric analysis prepared with the planning application and um the city has updated our checklist to defer the phototric plan to building permit submitt. So this language reflects that updated process. So it would be required for submittal um prior to superructure permit. And finally, that brings us to our recommendation before the planning commission tonight um to recommend that the city council adopt a resolution approving the project with the recommended modifications to the conditions of approval. That concludes my presentation. Um thank you. And if you have any questions, I'm happy to go back to slides or answer those.

Thank you so much. Um, next we will have the applicant's presentation. Uh, our project team is represented here as well, led by Alan Jones of Jones Architecture. Allan will be walking you through the project design momentarily. other members of the team are here as well and can be available to address any specific questions that uh may come up here tonight. Uh we all very much appreciate the opportunity to discuss the project proposal located at 668 East 3rd Avenue. Staff covered quite a bit uh in its staff report and in its presentation provided a good overview of the project. Uh Jonathan and I did want to take this opportunity to thank staff for their efforts to get us here this evening. This project has taken uh varying iterations over several years and we're pleased to have settled on this multifamily residential application before you tonight. Uh before turning the presentation over to Alan, I wanted to provide some brief background on Prometheus. As you may know, Prometheus is an active real estate owner, investor, and developer. We're a family-owned private company, and our history dates back for over 50 years. Um over those years our primary focus has been housing as both a longtime provider and owner operator of primarily rental housing. Also we typically develop for the long term uh meaning we remain vested stakeholders within the communities within which we develop.

This commitment is no better exemplified than right here in Sonteo. We've maintained a long-standing corporate and development presence here in Sono. We've res resided in the city for decades and most recently constructed and moved into our downtown brickline building. Um we own and manage over 13,000 apartment homes, most of which are here in the Bay Area and more specifically here in the peninsula and in South Bay. Um can you go to the next screen, Liz? Yeah. And on the screen, we've included sever several of our properties and planned development projects in and around downtown Sonato. These include Brickline as well as projects planned for several of the B Street blocks. Also, we show Metropolitan Apartments. Uh that's one of our earlier local developments which is located across the street from the subject property. Again, I speak for the team in saying we're very pleased to be with you tonight. And with that, I'd like to turn the presentation over to Alan Jones with Jones Architecture who will discuss the project design in greater detail. Thank you. Thanks, Don. Um, Alan Jones, Jones Architecture. Not sure the clickers, can you click for me? Um, here's a map taken directly from the 2040 general plan. Um, the project site is located with the the leader with a blue dot. As you will see, it's within the halfmile radius of the downtown Cal Train station. Um, it's in the zone that is blue, which as Liz mentioned is the mixeduse medium 2 zone. Can you go to the next slide? This map shows the the overlap of the downtown plan area with the blue I'm shown shown in pink and then the blue

outline is the vision of gateway um outline. The project is located with the red area. Um the interesting thing about the overlap of the two zones is that both of the zones require the the use of a Mediterranean um architecture style. That's a style that we fully embraced for the project. Um also just wanted to note the proximity to downtown and the proximity to both Cal Train and the cir circulation patterns was shown in shown in yellow. you go to the next one. Um, as was mentioned by staff, um, this is the view from third and and Delaware. Um, the project, the design team has fully embraced the ODS, um, with the goals of maintaining San Mato's, you know, architectural character. Um, the building is an eight-story building, 128 units. There are 73 parking stalls located fully within the building. Um, this corner view shows the corner plaza that opens up to the residential lobby. To the left of that are the residential town home units that open up to the street. On the right on third are the the parking garage openings that are con fully concealing the the vehicles. Above that are terraces that the amenity spaces and units open up to. Um, the massing of the building has been modulated and the three-part fronts on both of these facades. The cornice lines are varied and a mixture of materials on the upper level really helps break down the mess. Go to the next. This is a vignette of the townhouse units, you know, showing the the clean um contemporary um interpretation of the Mediterranean style. The upper levels of

the building are stucco with bronze colored windows, decorative railings. You can see the third story um cover which is like exposed framing over top of units that open onto the terraces. Then the first two levels of the building are articulated with um a white brick to kind of raise the the character in the pedestrian realm. But you can see the gritted windows, the balconies that are inset on the second story, the groundstory stoops that are recessed within the building, and the layered landscaping. Go to the next. Um, specifically the the project um is required to comply with seven out of 13 um ODS architectural um standards. Um we have designed the project to meet at least eight of those if not more. But the first one are multilevel roofs. So with the articulation of the cornises that vary at the top of the building, we feel like we're meeting that. Um the asymmetrical massing with the way that it's articulated with different color cladding at the top of the building is meeting that. There are arches shown at the lobby. multi-ane pane windows at the um townhouse units. Um we've incorporated decorative tile at the at the corner plaza at the lobby. Um and then ornamental um surrounds are included at the the balconies at the upper level and then deep recessed openings that I'll show you in further slides. Um a site plan that shows the the corner plaza at the corner of third and Delaware where the lobby opens up to. Um the paving is will be rich on a red colored paving that is consistent with the with the crosswalk standards. You can see the new street trees that staff mentioned and then there is a landscape

buffer that fully surrounds the property. Um so all the units kind of open up to a kind of buffered landscape zone. to go to the next. And then a zoomed in view of the of the lobby showing the arches with a decorative tile and the three bays or four bays of glazing that opens into the lobby. Then you can see the townhouse units to the left with the terraces above. If you can go to the next and then a zoomedin vignette that shows the architectural character along third. Um, you can see the brick detailing around the openings, the deep openings, decorative railing, the cover over the balconies, the third story terrace with a warm woodlike roof structure, um, landscaping that's buffering the sidewalk from the building and the raised planters, you know, overall composition that we feel is really enhanced the pedestrian realm. Go to the next. So with that, I'll there we have a lot of plans and specific items in the appendix that I can come back to to answer questions, but I'm going to leave it here for now. If you can go to the next slide and leave it there. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Next, we will have public comment on this item. Uh members of the public will be given two to three minutes to speak depending on the number of speakers. The applicant may also be given five minutes at the end to respond to the public comments. Any members of the public wishing to speak on this item, please turn in your yellow speaker slips now or raise your hand if participating over Zoom through the chair. We have two inerson public commenters. We will start with Lori Watanuki and to follow David Light.

With two total commenters, it should be three minutes per commenter. I will set the timer to three minutes. Uh once you see the timer start before you, you could go ahead and speak.

Thank you. Good evening, Chair Patel and members of planning commission. My name is Lori Watanuki and I live in the central neighborhood. This Spanish revival architecture does blend well into our neighborhood, and we do like the distinct curved arches, the open balconies, and the bronze metal decorative treatments. Although there are fewer trips compared to the previous commercial strip mall, there will be cumulative traffic impacts with the 16 additional projects in the downtown. These projects include 4779th, the Kiku affordable housing project and the public garage, the block 20 and 21, the Fremont terrace and the gateway terrace. There are the two Vcotta buildings, the Nazareth residential project, the Drager's mixed use, uh the Beastpoke project with the Alta Senior Housing, uh the First and B office project, and um the East 4th Avenue project and 180 East Aaron Brothers project, which is the office and retail project on Ellsworth. We would like to see a cumulative traffic study to include these proposed projects. Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you for your comment.

Thank you. Um my name is David Light. Uh thank you uh Chair Patel and uh planning commission. My name is David Light. I live on Fremont Street in the central neighborhood uh very close to this uh this project. I really do like the uh this final version with the especially the Mediterranean Spanish revival architecture and the fact that there's going to be um 20 affordable units with the project. Um however, I continue to be very concerned with the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists in the central neighborhood with all the uh cumulative traffic from this project and other downtown projects. And I'm just requesting or I wonder if Prometheus could provide funding to spend on uh speed humps for traffic mitigation and uh green pedestrian street lights as part of a community benefit for this project. And these would greatly and help uh help improve pedestrian and bike safety in the central neighborhood. Um Fremont already has speed humps and they really do help mitigate the traffic. So, I think we need them uh on more streets in the central neighborhood. Anyway, thank you so much for your consideration.

Thank you for your comment through the chair. We have one, excuse me, one public commenter via Zoom. Okay, go ahead. Rob, you could go ahead and unmute yourself. One second. Hello. Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you.

Perfect. Sorry. Um, thank you so much for your time. I did want to just bring up um as it's been shown in some of the picture, two lots, one across the street, have already been torn down for development and have been stalled. It seems uh ridiculous to approve this, especially since there isn't enough parking for these units. with the I believe the Kiki building that was built nearby. They said, "Oh, it's below um um it's low income, so they won't have as much cars." Yet, every time I walk by that building, there are cars double parked out front, and it's just not enough. With these being a lot of studios, one, two, and three bedrooms, to assume less than one car per unit is just not realistic. There's no grocery store downtown. everyone has cars whether there's public transportation nearby. So, I really think it is not an appropriate approval to have this dense of housing downtown uh when there's already so many empty lots that could be used. Um so, I just I don't think this will add anything to our neighborhood. It'll take away a thriving uh shopping center that we have now that already provides a lot of value. So, that's my two seconds. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment, Rob. through the chair. We do have one more inerson public commenter. I understand we haven't closed it yet. If we accept him to speak.

Yes. Let's go ahead and accept the final comment. And this will be the final comment. Hello everybody. Uh, my name is Daniel Bald and I'm gonna let you all know off the rip. I actually live in Sacramento, but my family does live here in Sanel in the Shore View neighborhood specifically. I'm actually taking a flight tomorrow to SFO out to Mexico to visit my mom. However, for this project, I think it's really great. More housing, more needed in downtown, specifically by the train station. Um, however, what I'm hoping that the planning commission recommends is to add more low-inccome units to it. 15% is great. However, I think going maybe 20 will probably be ideal. That way, we can serve a lot more low-income folks who work in our downtown. And also, um, it's desperately needed to meet the reena numbers, right? So, let's do our best. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment. And with that, we'll go ahead and close the public comment for this item. Would the applicant like five minutes to respond to any of the public comments?

Good evening. Jonathan Stone with Prometheus just to provide a little bit of response and some of what we heard with regards to the traffic concerns in the area. We'd be happy to get a better understanding of uh what those might be relative to the comments that were made. um we're familiar with um the those comments that have been made, but I think given where we currently sit, understanding that context and we'd be happy to have that conversation as some of the next follow-up steps um with regards to parking uh in the project. So again, um 2097 requires no parking. Um we are providing parking uh 73 units, which is at a about a 64 ratio. Um the early iteration of this project had roughly 45 spaces and we've since increased that from 45 or roughly 45 to 73. Um so a significant increase to those numbers. Um we have a great deal of data within our portfolio um regarding parking ratios and usability of projects and proximity to transit. Um many of those or most of those are right at a 0.5 ratio. So that 64 that we're providing um we feel very comfortable with which is why we've readjusted the plans to do so. Um and I think the affordability level is um significant relative to the um provisions of state density bonus law that are um applicable and allowed within the city and state context. So with that, thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Next, I will pass it to my fellow commissioners for any clarifying questions. Who would like to go first? Through the chair. Through the chair. Um, would you mind closing the public hearing? Oh, yes. I will go ahead and close the public hearing. Public comment. Public comment. Oh, sorry. I thought I did that after the last commenter. Yes, public comment is closed. Who would like to go first? I can. All right, Commissioner Williams.

Okay. Uh, I always have questions as you know, just for the sake of making sure just because I dive into the details and uh like to make sure I understand everything. So, I do want to start by just saying thank you to staff for the presentation uh super clear and very complete. I really appreciate that and thanks to the applicants uh for the for highlighting the design. Much appreciated. And I also wanted to note that I did meet with the applicants um and they provided a brief overview of the project to me um recently. Uh I was getting this mixed up with with this site which I think has been talked about in the past. But anyway, I was um you know uh really pleased with the project. I guess it's not comment time, but let me see what my questions were. A lot of them were actually answered over the course of the presentations. Um, okay. I had a couple questions. It's an eightstory. Um, I guess that makes it a mid-rise building. So, what is the structural design of the project? Like generally, I mean, in big picture,

in terms of the construction type, yeah. Well, it's a it's a type three over a type one. So, it's a woodframe building over over a podium.

Okay. I was wondering about So, it's over the podium. Okay. Um I guess that's probably in the documents. I didn't see that. So, um I mean I think I can skip a lot of my questions probably. Uh one of the questions I had was about the windows. Um I know that um you know one of the eight items was that you have deep recessed openings and that applies to some of them but then there's a whole lot of other windows on the building that I don't know what that recess is. Is there are those also recessed to any degree? Hopefully

they are. Um so the the deep recess openings I I think break that up into several sections. I think the the deepest of the openings are at the ground level and the second level with the kind of the colonade and the arches. Then there are the town home units which have very deep openings. Um, I would say the next category of openings are the way that the surrounds are treated at the recessed balconies where those are also a very kind of deep thickened um jam. And then if I if I remember correctly, um, the way that the residential windows are designed in the building, they're it's a 2x6 wall where the windows are set in on a 2x4 buck that that provides additional depth at the the window. be a couple of inches or something.

Correct. Okay, that sounds good. Thank you. Um, uh, I just had a note to myself to look for it and I didn't I didn't go back and look for it. I noted that there's a horizontal separation or at least I think it was noted on the cover sheet and then I didn't really go back. Is that because of the length of the building across the across third or um I mean that's typically for fire exiting, right? Um I'm I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about. Are you Are you So the Are you talking about fire compartment areas on the upper levels of the building or

uh I noted that it was I made a note to myself that it was noted on the cover sheet of the drawings. It It's probably just me diving. I think that it's that sounds like it may have been referring to the fire compartments on the upper level of the building where the building has several fire compartments that are designed that close down in event of a fire. That's sounds like what you're referring to. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I I can go back and look at that, but I I'm sure it will be fully vetted during the building permit process.

Okay. Um I I guess the other thing I would say is um to um during the staff presentation you mentioned that I think this is for staff. Uh you mentioned that you would go back to the the page about setbacks and uh what was the other terminology besides setbacks? It was a different Anyway, and I'm just wondering if you could just like briefly walk us through that to make sure it's clear. I mean, those are waiverss, right? So, yeah, through the chair. Um, if we can pull the presentation back up, um, there we go. So,

yeah, that was the page. This is um summarizing some of the development standards. Um, so here we were looking at setbacks and setbacks. And sorry, just before you get started, I didn't know the term stepbacks. So maybe you can elaborate on that.

Yeah, absolutely. So the setbacks refer to the um distance from the property line to the face of the building. And then a step back is an additional setback required for usually for upper stories above the ground floor. Um so in this case the setbacks and setbacks are actually um established through the gateway sub area of the downtown area plan. Um so that's in that minimum required column. The setbacks are listed in in blue. So it requires a front setback between 15 and 20 ft. Um same thing on the left and right sides and then there's no rear setback established. Um and then the stepbacks are in addition to that setback um the portion of the building over 30 feet would require an additional 8 ft um step back at the front and same thing above 25 ft at the left and right side. Um this project does request a waiver to the setbacks and step back. So, it's proposing um a front setback of around 3 ft, a left side setback of 9 ft, right side setback around 2 and 1/2 ft, and a rear setback around 2 and 1/2 ft. Um so, it does not meet those setbacks and stepbacks of the gateway plan. Um and that's addressed through a waiver.

Okay. Thank you. Those are all the questions I have. Thank you, Commissioner Williams. Can I ask just a quick followup question on what's the front of the building for these purposes? Um, the front for this one is Third Avenue. Okay, thanks. Commissioner Bush, do you have any questions? I opted in there, I guess.

Yeah, you did. Um yeah, I have just a few questions on the um we heard a public comment about um this is for the applicant, I guess, about the number of low-inccome units and um and I think the applicant mentioned that it's in line with the density bonus law. I I also imagine that um that you know you there's like a careful tailoring of the number of low income, moderate income and I don't know what the I guess regular income or averaging high income units to to make something like this pencil. Is that it's like a very close?

Uh yes. So there's a city requirement for affordable units and there's the ability to use or apply the density bonus law and that the law has been changing over the years. The current version of it, a current version of it which is being applied here is what's considered the stacking bonus or the double bonus. So this includes 15% very low in order to get a 50% bonus and then that comes with and I'm forgetting the state law that increased this um or or adjusted the density bonus slop and then if you have 15% very low very low you can then use 15% moderate and gain another 50% bonus. So that's what we did here in order to achieve just frankly the greatest amount of housing which seems to be um in line with the goals of the general plan.

Great. Okay. Thank you all. Um uh oh I I meant to mention I I did have an opportunity to meet with the applicant in advance of the meeting u to get a brief overview as well. Um for the parking deck, the exit for the parking deck uh on I believe it's uh what's it Ellsworth? Elor, thank you. Um uh the car my understanding is the cars can make both a left hand and a right-hand turn out of the deck. Is that is that right? Uh correct. Okay. And and sorry if you don't know the exact number, but do you know that like how many cars can fit on Elorado if they've between Third Avenue and the exit of the parking deck?

There are, I believe, effectively three or four parking spaces at that length. Another measurement that you could use would be um a truck that would be loading, a delivery truck because this is a loading area along with a garbage truck. So, this is also the garbage um or the waste collection staging area. We have an exhibit on that as well if that helps visualize it. Um but there are several and Scott maybe unit four. There's four parking space length there.

Okay, that's helpful. Thanks. Um, we heard we heard a couple of comments about traffic and one one concern I had was about um cars, you know, let's say it's 73 cars, some some number of cars all trying to exit at the same time um from the deck turning left to get to Third Avenue to get to to wherever. Um, so I guess I was curious whether there was any consideration or if this is even the stage at which this type of thing is considered for just having that be a right-hand turn exit out of the parking deck such that they can't turn left onto Elorado.

I'll defer to public works, but the garage entry um analysis was studied at great great length on this project. The early iteration of the garage had an entry point on Delaware. Um, and there's specific code language within the city's codes that say that that could not be done. So, it was moved uh to El Dorado. One version also had two garage entries. This was what has been determined um choice. Okay. Yes. Per code and for numerous reasons, but I'll I would defer to city staff to

Yeah. through the chair. I can also um I believe we have public works staff available if there's more technical questions, but um this project was reviewed um provided trip generation data to evaluate whether further traffic study would be required. And based on the existing land use and the proposed land use, it actually would generate a net negative number of trips. So a reduction in trips during peak hours. Um, so for that reason it wasn't required to go through a more detailed local traffic analysis. Um, and it's assumed that this driveway would be adequate to serve the peak hour trips of the site. Got it. So that that incorporates an an understanding of the like traffic flows at the time or just the vehicle numbers.

Um, yeah. So it would the trip trip generation data just looks at the vehicle numbers, not the specific like movements of the traffic. Okay. Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you. Um I I think those were the questions that I had. Commissioner Cler, you're next.

Thank you through the chair. Um good evening. Um, I should also say up front that I also met with the uh project applicant uh recently to discuss the the project. Um, I was uh had a question about I thought it would be uh useful to have the applicant discuss uh how the parking was determined. But that question uh was answered uh in their response uh a little while ago. Um I also thought uh would be interesting if the applicant could talk about how they um came up with the mix of of units the different sizes uh different numbers of you know one two three bedrooms.

Sure. Um thank you. We study this um on a project specific level given context and proximity to other uh buildings we may or may not manage or or own. In this context, across the street is the Metropolitan Apartments. Those are largely larger units built roughly 20 years ago. So, three uh and twobedroom units make up the majority of that project. Uh there are and very few if any one-bedrooms and no studios in that project. So, studios um and onebedrooms which make up a decent percentage of the proposed project here. Um we know that there's a a market need for given our familiarity with the market. Um and so that's partly why you're seeing the numbers as to what they are here. Form and and volume and F also factor into that, but that's one of the driving factors.

Thank you. Um, I have one more question really for for staff. Uh, I think this is going to be I think this is um I believe this is the first of of several uh SB330 uh projects uh and other projects we're going to be seeing this year. Um and uh I think it would be useful. Um I was looking at the um agenda report and uh I think it would be useful to get a little more just a little more clarification just uh um for not just for ourselves but just for everybody uh watching about the um in particular housing accountability act. Um so I noticed the language in the agenda report where it says the the the HAA limits a local agency's ability to deny reduce the density of or render housing development projects infeasible if objective standards are met. And I was just thought it might be useful if um we could get some additional clarification on uh um uh those limitations.

Sure. Yeah. Through the chair, I can provide a bit more context. Um so the housing accountability act, as you stated, it limits the local agency's ability to deny a housing project. So, um I believe and correct me if I'm wrong over here, staff. Um that this is limited to um essentially the housing project could only be denied if there are specific findings made um related to public health and safety. Um so it it can't be denied um over design or things along those lines. it would need to be um meeting specific rigorous standards for denial.

Great. Thank you. I think those are all my questions. Thank you, Commissioner Clafter. I do not have any additional questions that have not already been asked. Wait, actually, I changed my mind. I have one question that came up when um we were going through the project designs. Um, it looked like there was something that looks like a garage entrance on both El Dorado and Delaware from the facade, but I know that the ramp is only on El Dorado. So, I was wondering if the applicant could explain what the really large bays are on Delaware, the bay doors specifically. Yeah,

I don't The only entrance to the garage is on El Dorado. The openings on Delaware are for those are for transformers, electrical rooms, and then the larger openings that are in the second story are like simulated window openings that provide natural light and ventilation into the second story parking garage. Okay. Thank you. Right. I I do not have any additional questions. Does anyone else have any additional questions? Um, Commissioner Patel, would you like to disclose any meetings with the applicant?

Oh, yes. Thank you. I also met with the applicant and got an overview of the design. Yes. Thank you so much. Um, so that brings us to discussion. Um, shall we go in the same order? Commissioner Williams, do you have any comments?

Sure, I can get I can start. Yeah. Um, let's see. Uh, I'll start by saying that I really like the project. I think that it meets the objective design standards in many ways, not in all ways, but um I I think it's a good use for the site. I know we had a comment about this, but um it currently has just a strip mall and a parking lot on it, and it may be well used at times, but it's not really the best use of this site. So, um um you know, I mean, it's sort of the entry. It is the gateway. It's the entry to our city. And, um you know, asphalt parking lots, although they serve a purpose to get in and out of the the shops there, um I think that this is a a great use for the site. Um and hopefully we can, you know, we can see those businesses relocate uh in other places. So, um, nearby as we have in other projects. Um, so I I really like the white bricks and the, uh, arches, the details like the gates and the balcony balconies. And I'm glad to hear that the bulk of the um rest of the windows will have an approximately 2 in um recess from the face of the stucco because um I I do think that's important and that it'll make a big difference and I hope it doesn't get value engineered out or anything like that because uh that just gives a sense of you know texture and um uh you know I I I think at the street level and the lower levels there's a lot of depth. to the openings, but that large mass that we're going to see, if we can get that texture and those shadows from a little bit of recess, um it'll make a big difference. Um I like the white and the brown or the bronze as

opposed to black that we see so much of. Um, I um I Oh, I actually speaking of color, I guess I'd like to point out that I like the tile at the entry, but it is an opportunity for maybe a little bit of color there. And I would suggest maybe taking a look at some either colorful or artful tile or maybe um maybe something that has a little bit more depth to it than what we're seeing so far. I think that there's an opportunity for a little bit of um deeper color there. my two my two cents on that. Uh would draw a little attention to the entry as well. Um let's see what else. I do um appreciate the parking a lot. I think that um I mean I agree with the comments that people are going to have cars and it's going to affect the nearby neighborhoods, at least this building and all the other buildings. But, you know, you don't have to provide any parking. So, I really appreciate that there is as much parking as there is. Um, not everybody in this building is going to be taking the train or riding a bike. So, I I think that goes a long ways to help the balance that out. Um, yeah. I mean, I think those are my comments basically. I I like the project. I think it's uh I think it's will be a great addition to this um kind of gateway to our city. I think the um Spanish Mediterranean sort of style is a really nice um direction and something that I think people have been kind of wanting to see a little bit of traditional look on uh downtown buildings. So yeah, so thank you. I look forward to seeing it move forward.

Thank you. Commissioner Bush, do you want to go next?

Sure. Um yay. echo uh a lot of Commissioner Williams's comments. I think um the project seems like a good fit. Um I think it's going to look very nice with the uh metropolitan apartments there. Seems like a good um center kind of sort of segue into downtown. Um it might stand out a bit until some of the other development around there is kind of built up, but it's nice to have that connection with the rest of the gateway um down the street. Um, I appreciate the applicants offer to kind of think about how to evaluate traffic. I feel like that was the main concern and um, appreciate the willingness to kind of think about that and dive into to that aspect. And just because I don't know where else to say this, I'll just say I would um, suggest whoever the city or the applicant think about a right-handon turn out of the parking deck. uh with the flow of traffic there, I think it could make sense for reasons I won't describe here, but um something worth thinking about with some of the one-way streets there. I think it could be could be helpful to the folks who live there and to the folks who um live in the neighborhood. But other than that, I'm I'm in support.

Commissioner Cleft,

uh yes, I um again would echo uh many of the comments we just heard from my fellow commissioners. Uh I I like this project. I like the design. I think it's very strong. Um there was some discussion about the the podium, the base of the brick. Uh I do think I do think that one thing that can sometimes be difficult to come across in renderings is you know the texture of brick. Um the small shadows that are created by the the lines of the bricks. I think I think that um uh you know when that finally goes up and we can see the the brick and everything I think that'll you know have a little bit more of a impression like you know we're looking at this uh uh rendering right now on the screen and it just looks kind of washed out. I don't think that's how it'll come across in in person. So um I appreciate that the applicant, you know, went a little above and beyond with the all the different elements of the uh Mediterranean or Spanish revival style. Um I think uh what um Commissioner Williams said about the uh um tile element down there being an opportunity for color. I I immediately thought about the fact that at the other end of third the other sort of this is the gateway from one direction and then at the other end of third you have we have the um uh Bank of America with that fantastic uh very colorful um mosaic mural there. Uh it might be interesting to have a tile uh an interesting tile uh project in there um that kind of uh bookends downtown. Though I I know that the applicant has uh in the past I I believe at the Brickline project uh spent a lot of time and attention on the um getting the tile detail on the entrance there um just right and and so I'm I'm confident that they'll uh you know do something interesting there. So, um yeah, that I think those are my

comments. I again I just uh yeah, I think this will be a um a very nice addition to the neighborhood.

Thank you. Um I don't have much to add beyond what my fellow commissioners said. I think that this is a great project for this location. It is, in my opinion, the highest and best use of the site. I really appreciate that the maximum amount of housing possible on the site is provided and I think the design is really lovely. Um, if I'm not mistaken, this is the first project to come to us specifically after we pass the objective design standards and following the objective design standards and it's quite exciting to see that come to fruition um, as someone who worked on those standards. So um, I think those are all of the comments for me. It's it's a beautiful project and I'm excited to see it come to life. Um, if there are no further comments from my fellow commissioners, going once, going twice. Commissioner Williams. Uh I just actually wanted to add that I I do agree with a comment that was made about you know other projects in the area that have been you know demolition's been done and you know and then they I mean I know we've gone through difficult you know financial times over the last few years but um yeah I so I I meant to ask earlier maybe I don't need to backtrack but just I'm hoping that um you know the project will move forward without being um stalled by after demolition. And I guess that's a question of like you know typically there's a a demo permit issued and then sorry I guess this should have been a question early on. Uh I I guess that's my comment. I'm hoping that the demo permit won't be issued until it's you know more um of a sure project. Thank you.

Okay. Would anyone um like to make a motion? Yes. And I know we have modified language in the conditions of approval that we need to call out as well.

Yeah. Through the chair. Just wanted to see if the commission wanted to adjust the resolution to allow for the flexibility that was brought up by Commissioner Williams and um Commissioner Bush. Um, I think public works has said that they've already addressed the right turn lane. So, I'm not sure if that's a necessary flexibility, but from Commissioner Williams suggestion like to provide the option to provide that change. Um, it's not a requirement that I think the city is require like I don't think it's the commission is not requiring that change. It's really more the flexibility to provide that change. Which change? Sorry.

Um, about the entry in the tile that Commissioner Williams suggested. So, just a resolution that would allow for the applicant to have that flexibility to make that change.

Uh, I don't really need that to be those were just my comments to the design and applicant team. I don't feel like it needs to be um part of the um part of the motion. I guess maybe let me add a question to that which is what is the degree to which that the selection of that tile is a material that is being approved as part of this planning application and and I didn't ask about this earlier but I know we have some other projects that have used the um the tile work as an opportunity to meet the public art requirement and so I guess I sort of assumed that the tile design itself is not finalized yet and that would come more in the permitting phase. But are we are we locking in that material selection now with the approval of this planning application?

Uh I think that's something that um the applicant may may want to address.

Uh just to clarify that the language being discussed would allow for flexibility to consider this in the future without having to come back and amend an approved application. Correct. Is that Yeah. And and I guess my question is for staff which is would they have to come back in the future if they changed the tile material from what is listed in the planning application today?

Yeah. So through the chair um there is a condition of approval that requires conformance with the approved planning application and it does list um materials. However, there is um language in our zoning code that does allow for modifications. um minor modifications or modifications that are substantially conforming. So I think the that would be reviewed at staff level at a staff level and if it's substantially conforming and not a huge departure um would likely be something that could be swapped out at the building permit stage.

So let me pose that question to the applicant. Would you prefer more flexible language in the resolution? I I think it would be great to give staff the power to work with us to to determine like I think having a little flexibility in the tile would be great. Okay. So I I think what I'm hearing is we would like to add some language to the resolution to provide flexibility in the selection of the tile. So whoever's going to make the motion can Yeah, I totally agree with that. And to the extent I unmuted to make the motion, I shall include it. However, can can we circle back to the right-hand turn thing? Are you saying um what were you saying about public works having already considered it or

uh looks like um public works have already considered it but perhaps Selena can provide more um information on that?

Yeah, I can provide more information. I'm Selena with public works. We initially I think during the first submitt they we did receive a design that had driveways on Delaware and El Dorado but I believe the driveway proposed on Delaware was adjacent to the neighboring property's driveway. So we requested that they remove it due to pedestrian safety concerns because we didn't want pedestrians needing to uh it it just didn't seem as safe having the two driveways right next to each other. This is on the Delaware side with the gas station.

Yeah, thank you. I think my my um suggestion was they consider or have the opportunity to consider without us imposing this requirement on them that the opportunity for if it if it's even at your level or if it's at the city level about making that right-hand only turn. Just for clarification purposes, we're referring to on El Dorado, correct? out of the proposed deck onto El Dorado. Sure. The just the Delaware removal had to do with the level or the designation of the roadway, right, as an arterial versus a local road. And so El Dorado is local. We had to move it over there.

Right versus left. According to public works, we believe it to be close enough to middle of the block given the four parking spaces and loading that's there to allow for a left right. Um but it but we're certainly happy to revisit that. It seems as though greatest flexibility would be the best thing going into the future. Um but we're happy to have an ongoing conversation with public works. That's Yeah, that's definitely something. Sorry. Sorry. That's definitely something we can work with uh Jonathan on.

Great. My my suggestion was just if nobody had thought about it, maybe someone could think about it and just make a make a you know a uh informed decision not to do it. We're happy to keep the conversation going. Okay. I don't think I need to include that in the if I if I could if I could add to that. I I do think that that restricting the exits from that garage to um right-hand turns only could complicate trips a bit if someone is heading west. Um having to take a right and then uh turn basically go around the block.

Totally. Yeah. the I guess I will articulate why I suggest it, which is that if you turn right onto Elorado, then you're at fourth, which is a one-way street. So, you can turn left much more easily onto fourth, and then you just go one block, turn left, turn left. If you turn left onto El Dorado out of the parking deck, then you're at third. And that first lane of third, once you turn left, is a left-hand only turn lane. So, you have to go over two lanes to get into the middle of third. And if you have a line of cars and there's always people coming off 101, then you could imagine a world where there's backup. So it was just just a thought I had I wanted to share. Well thought I would like to move to Why have you thought about so well?

Um do I read the whole thing? Recommend that or recommend what's on the screen here in addition to um the additional flexibility suggested by Commissioner Williams for the tile. I will second that. Thank you. May we have a roll call vote, please? Commissioner Bush. Yes. Commissioner Williams, yes. Chair Patel, yes. And Vice Chair Clafter, yes. Motion passes 40. Thank you. I will go ahead and close that item and we will move on to item two.

Oh yes, actually. Um, may we have a five minute let's do a five minute break and come back at let's say 8:20. Okay. Oh, what I have 8:15. Thank you.

two two item two 1650-1720 South Alet Boulevard multif family residential development PA 20225029 thank you Again, we will start with a staff presentation followed by the applicant presentation and then public comments. Members of the public will be given two to three minutes to speak depending on the number of speakers. The applicant may also be given five minutes at the end of public comment to respond. Once the public comment is closed, I may ask staff to respond to any of the public comments. The commission will ask clarifying questions, deliberate, and then render a decision. If a decision is made tonight, the decision of the planning commission can be appealed to the city council within 10 calendar days. Okay. Could we go ahead and start with the staff presentation, please? Good evening, Chair Patel and members of the planning commission. My name is Sim Zakovan, associate planner and staff planner for n um for item number two before you this evening. This is a public hearing for 1650-1720 South Alet Boulevard for multifamily residential development planning application 2025 029. Here is a quick overview of tonight's presentation. Beginning with the project history, the applicant submitted a preliminary application on December 20, 2022 under Senate Bill 330 or SB 330. Following the preliminary application, they held a neighborhood meeting in March 2025 and then they submitted a formal application in April 2025. The project is located at 1650 South

Alet Boulevard and it is shown here and outlined here in red. This map also shows the Hayward Park Cal Train Station and it is C circled in yellow. The blue dash line indicates that the project is partially located within half a mile of Cal Train Station. The site is currently developed with seven threestory office buildings and one-story commercial building. It is bounded by South Alet Boulevard to to the east, South Grant Street to the west, Leslie Creek to the north, and former Marriott Hotel property to the south. Surrounding land uses include single family residences to the north and west, 101 freeway to the east, and commercial and office uses to the south. The site consists of three parcels and it is up um about 17.5 acre. The general plan land user designation for the site is mixed use medium one and the site is zoned E2-1 for executive office. The site is also located within the rail corridor transit oriented development plan. The project proposes to demo all existing buildings and redevelop the site with 256 for sale residential units. The unit mix includes 64 detached single family homes and 192 town homestyle condominiums. A total of 15% of the units or 38 units will be designated as affordable for moderate income households. The unit mix for affordable uh affordable homes are nine single family homes and 29 town home units. So, here is an overview of the site

plan. The single family homes are outlined here in yellow, and they're primarily located along South Ground Street. The town homes are outlined here in orange, and they're arranged in 31 buildings. All proposed buildings are three stories in height. And the project proposes to subdivide the site to create eight new parcels plus individual lots for each single family homes. The town home units will also be subdivided for condominium purposes. Open space amenities include two dog parks on each side of the site and one centrallylo park which is about point4 acre. Additional landscape areas are provided throughout the site. And in regards to trees, the applicant is proposing to remove 169 trees. 49 of them are heritage trees or protected trees. And the project includes 620 new trees. The project includes two primarily vehicular access along South Grant Street with additional access points on Amphlet Boulevard serving the town home units. In regards to parking, each unit or house will be will be designated a twocar garage with additional 55 parking spaces provided for visitors on site. Also, the project will provide public infrastructure improvements on both s um South Grant Street and Amphlet Boulevard, which will result in additional on street parking. The following entitlements and permits are required for the project. Site plan and architectural review, site development planning application, and vesting tenative map. So this was an overview of the project. Next, I'll dive into analysis of the

various code and policies applicable to the project. This includes both local policies as well as state laws. Beginning with the general plan, the project was reviewed under its land use designation mixeduse medium one and zoning which is executive office. The land use designation allows a maximum residential density of 50 dwelling unit per acre. The project provides approximately 17.6 dwelling unit per acre which is the which is within the allowable density range per the general plan. It is important to note that the city adopted minimum density requirements for certain land use designation after the project submitted a preliminary application. However, the project is vested under the code and policies in effect at the time of the preliminary application. Therefore, those minimum densities are not applicable to this project. The project complies with all applicable standards with the exception of residential landscape buffer along the left side of the site and location of street trees. For both of these, the applicant is requesting waiver through the state density bonus law which I will cover shortly shortly. As shown in this table, the project meets all other development standards and in most cases exceeds the minimum requirement. The project is using the provision of state density bonus law with the 15% units for moderate income category. The project is eligible for 10% density increase, one concession, and unlimited waiverss from development standards. Since the proposed density is below the maximum density by allowed by the general plan, the applicant is not asking to increase the density of the

site, nor they're asking for concession, but they're asking for several waiverss from development standards and objective design standards. Wavers requested for this project includes reducing the landscape buffer along the left side of the site as I mentioned in the previous slide as well as re requesting waiver for the location of street trees. The applicant is proposing to plant the street trees within the private property rather than public right away. And lastly, several waiverss from objective design standards which I will discuss under design review. Other housing laws that are applicable to the project include are housing crisis act or senate bill 330. This freezes development standards and fee structure in effect at the time the preliminary application was submitted. Next is housing accountability act which limits a local agency's ability to deny or render housing development projects infeasible if objective design standards are met. And in this case for this project objective design stand objective standards are met. Next is assembly bill 130 or AB130. This is a new exemption from California Environmental Quality Act which was introduced and became effective last year. The project is eligible for the SQUA exemption and this bill also requires expedited review process and also sets deadlines for agencies on making a decision on house for housing projects. The decision this excuse me the decision deadline for this project is February 22nd, 2026. And lastly, AB 2097, which removes the minimum parking requirements for

projects within half a mile of major transit stops. This project, even though it's within a major transit half a mile of major transit stop, the applicant is voluntarily providing parking that meets our zoning code requirement. The project falls under several other local plans. This includes rail corridor transit oriented development plan. The project is within planning area of this plan and supports me goals and policies of this plan. Next is city's below market rate program which aligns closely with the state density bonus law and in accordance with this program the applicant has provided 15% of the total units for moderate income. Next is next the project is subject to city's objective design standard which I will cover under design review. And lastly, the project includes public rideaway improvements in accordance with the pedestrian master plan and bicycle master plan. So now we are moving to design review. The project was reviewed against the city's objective design standard for multifamily residential. The proposed architectural style is best characterized as contemporary mixed materials such as stockco vertical and horizontal siding and some traditional elements such as asphalt shingle roofing and break and stone veneer are used. Two color schemes or color palettes are provided for each building type and colors incorporate both neutral tones as well as some accent colors such as green and red. All buildings are three stories in height and are classified as lowrise building under ODS.

There are various waiverss that the applicant is requesting from objective design standard or ODS but for the sake of timing I'm I will be just outlining the main ones and a full list is provided in attachment one exhibit B. These images on this slide are single family homes. All single family homes along South Grant Street have a balcony and a porch facing the street. Single family homes that are not facing the South Grant Street have a sun room as their indoor outdoor space. The single family homes that are mostly complying with the ODS requirements in term of massing massing brakes, roof line variation and wall articulation. However, the applicant is requesting waiver from horizontal alignment and vertical alignment of the windows. Now, we are looking at some town homes. Just to give you an idea on how these are oriented on the site plan. The elevations on top are with the garages are facing the internal roadways and the elevations at the bottom with the ped with the pedestrian entrance are facing the um pest cells and walking path. Here is an elevation for 8 unit town home. The the building is designed with a flat and low uh low sloped gable roof form. The top elevations are not facing the internal roadways have wall articulation, roof roof line variation and massing brakes in accordance with ODS. However, the bottom elevations that are facing the um that are not facing the internal roadways are lacking these architectural features and the applicant is requesting waiver.

Also, other waiverss related to site planning standards are in um included in this application and this includes a screening from transformers and utility rooms facing the rightway and amphlet which are outlined here in red. Looking at some renderings. Here is a picture of the central park with amenities such as picnic tables, shade structure, and playground. Here is a rendering of town homes with pesos and landscape between the two rows of buildings. And here is another view from South Grant Street. The project is screened out of vehicle miles traveled analysis requirement by the cal u required by the California environmental quality act because the project is within half a mile of major transit stop for compliance with the city's adopted transportation analysis transportation impact analysis policy. A traffic report was prepared by the applicants consultant and the report indicates that the project will result in net reduction of 1,700 daily trips because of the due to the significant trip reduction. The report concluded that the proposed project will not result in adverse traffic impact or circulation issues. However, there are some sidewalk and crosswalk improvements recommended on the intersection of Betty Lane and South Grant Street as shown on this exhibit. Here is a list of impact fees that the application is subject to. It is important to note that these impact fees are exclusive of any credits that the um the applicant may get because of the existing building.

The project is exempt from SQA per assembly bill AB130. As mentioned under state um under state law section, this bill was introduced and became effective last year. Tribal consultation with Native American tribes is one of the requirements for this exemption and the city conducted the consultation and one tribe participated in the consultation process. Conditions of approval have been built into the project to avoid any significant impact to the contra uh to the cultural resources. Another requirement under AB130 is that the housing units within 500 of the freeways shall not have any balconies facing the freeway. And throughout the review process, the these balconies were removed. The project had originally had some balconies facing the freeway. However, these balconies were removed or converted to sun rooms to be eligible for this squa exemption. With these changes, the project meets all other eligibility requirements for AB130 and therefore it is exempt from SQA. In regards to public comments, 25 neighbors attended the neighborhood meeting that the applicant held in March 2025. They made comments related to traffic construction timeline and ADA accessibility. For tonight's meeting, staff has completed all standard noticing procedures listed on this slide. At the time that the staff report was published, staff received three comments that were included in the agenda packet. And after the agenda was published, we received two additional comments that have been provided to the commissioners. Before concluding the presentation, uh wanted to note a modification that the

staff is proposing to make on condition number 42 in respond to the comment that we received today. Staff is proposing to make the following changes related to speed humps on Grant Street. The proposed condition condition will state that the existing speed humps will need to be replaced and the type of the speed humps will be removed from this condition. With that, staff recommends that the planning commission adopt a resolution approving the site plan and architectural review site development planning application vesting tenative map for the construction of 256 multif family residential units located at 1650 and 1720 South Alet Boulevard and finding that the project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Quality Act based on the findings for approval and subject to the conditions of appro approval with the recommended modifications. This concludes the staff's presentation and I'm available to answer any questions that the commissioner had. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Um we will go ahead and move on to the applicant's presentation. of the planning commission. My name is Andy Beck and I'm very excited to be in front of you tonight to present the Bay Shore Commons project. First, I'd like to thank staff uh for your efforts in guiding this project through the process and as long as they're never easy. So, I appreciate the efforts that uh your team has put into it to get us to where we are today. All right. So, I want to first start by introducing our team. You can't have a great project without a great team. So we've assemble assembled a great team with tremendous local experience and expertise in forale residential development. Fair Pierce, Jet Landscape and Sage Consulting Engineers are all local engineers and designers have been proven track record of designing amazing residential projects around the Bay Area. Uh they are joining us today by Zoom. Dawn Group has 50 years of residential design experience, including recent projects in San Monteo. I'm joined tonight by Lori Felberg, who will tell you more about the design in a few minutes. The site is located near the intersection of Highway 101 and California 92 with and within half a mile of the Hayward Park Cal Train

Station. The surrounding uses include single family, residential, and office The proposed project completes the residential identity of this neighborhood and is a respectful of the existing community context. The existing property consists of eight buildings built in the 1970s on 14 and a half acres. The office park has hosted numerous businesses over its history, but occupancy has been in steady decline since co We appreciate the planning commission and city council's efforts and the hard work over many years to implement the general plan. Therefore, we made sure that the design supports overarching goals of the general plan. First, at just under 18 units an acre, the project fits within the mixeduse medium zoning designation. Secondly, we wanted to the project to align with the general plans vision, including expanding housing options by building more ownership housing, including moderate income homes, enhancing transit oriented housing by adding 256 new homes near Cal Train, and supporting local economy with homeowners to support local businesses. Overall, the project will consist of more than 250 single family attached and detached homes. Since these will be ownership housing, our plan is to partner with a home builder to bring these homes to the market. With that, I'd like to hand it off to Lori to tell you more about the design.

Great. Thank you, Andy. Lori Moffett Felberg, senior vice president of architecture with Dalan. Thank you for having us tonight. Um, as Andy was saying, this is a tremendous opportunity for this much acreage for us to do a new community that really enhances an existing surrounding single family neighborhood. And that's really where we brought our inspiration from looking at the fabric of the community. You can see in the community plan here, the three different colors give you an indication of the single family detached a long grant that gives us those wonderful front doors, the balconies all facing out into the community with the driveways off of the alleys behind. And then you come into our community, we've got that central green space right in the center. Um, and then we have two different types of town homes um kind of on a blockbyblock patterning. And what we liked about the the way this all laid out, it really builds upon that gritted neighborhood character across Grant and to the north of us. And so we felt really good about how this really starts to complement and fill out the neighborhood, if you will. Um, considering right now it's a lot of asphalt and kind of big old u functionally obsolete office buildings. Um, so one other thing I want to point out is we do have our central core, our open space, our amenity space, and then the two dog parks on either end gives people great access to those. And then inside with the POS, we've got short loops of short loop walking, medium walking, longer walking, and then out into the neighborhood with that grid connectivity out to Grant. Do you have the clicker? Oh, there it is. Um, you might say, why did you have three different types of homes here? The single family detached, two different kinds of town homes. We wanted to provide a broad range of opportunities for people moving into this

neighborhood. So, the smaller town homes go down to just over,400 square feet. And then we start working our way through a stratification of size that builds options for people moving in up to over 2200 square feet for the single family detached. We felt this really gives us um broad appeal and it makes a really healthy neighborhood as well. So these are just a couple examples um of the architectural character. This these two images are of the single family detached. You can see we broke up the massing with the roof forms, various um gables and um shapes breaking up that eve line. They have the decks shown. Each of the units has a private deck, the front porch, and then the color blocking and changes of materials that gives you a really rich pallet um across the face of the building. And then these are the two types of towns. Um really the same philosophy of breaking up that ridge line with the gables or the flat uh flat roof components. Um you can see the the decks, the balconies, the front porches at each of the units that will give us a lot of variation as you start to combine these across the site. high quality materials, um stucco, a couple different kinds of um uh orientations of siding, um and then you know the deck railings, the the nice windows, all of that starts to build the community together. So, um, we've we've been here all night listening and obviously parking is of concern uh to folks. And so, as was noted earlier, each of these homes has a two-car garage. We felt that was very important, not only for our residents, but for our community, for our

neighborhood. In addition to those two twocar garage um spaces within the site, we have an additional 55 guest parking spaces and then another 22 or 21 or 22 21 spaces along a we are doing some street improvements along a creates parking where no parking is allowed today. It's red curbs on both sides. So, we're actually bringing that up. So, um let's talk about the landscaping plan for a minute. Um as mentioned, this site's almost entirely paved or building. And we're very excited to be able to say, okay, we're going to bring in almost 6 acres of open space. 41% of the site is now going to be open space. We're adding 659 new trees over six, you know, 616 on site and then the improvements we're proposing along Amlet to help buffer that edge. And we're removing 3.8 acres acres of asphalt. So that we think that's uh pretty important for the overall community, not just for our our neighborhood here. So let's talk about some of the creative design solutions because we are against 101. Um and one of the reasons we oriented the buildings on the site plan itself is to create a scenario where the streets the vehicular access through the alleys and then the uh pedestrian access in the POS ran perpendicular to Amphlet 21. What that does is it pulls the main windows away from the ends of the buildings. But we also had the balconies and so AB130 has the 500 foot

requirement that we don't have any open balconies within 500 ft. So we reached back into a little bit of a historic perspective even though we're a fairly contemporary neighborhood and we said we don't want to lose that indooroutdoor lifestyle. It's California. Let's have some indooroutdoor lifestyle. So, we're creating sun rooms. So, essentially, we're taking the balconies and we're glassing them in. So, you still get the articulation on the outside of the building. You still get the lifestyle for the residents. They're not part of the interior. They have an exterior feel, but they're glassed in like you might see in a really cold climate for winter. So, we thought that was a very creative solution to our our location and the AB130 requirement. In addition, um, all those trees we're talking about adding, we're adding, uh, trees on the east side of Amphlet that helps really create a buffer for us as well. So, that softens that edge. Right now, it's pretty industrial. It's not a place you'd really want to spend any time, but we're pretty confident that it'll have a nice residential feel to it when we get done with that street. Let's talk a little bit more about affordable housing. As we've talked about before, um 15% of the homes will be deed restricted for moderate income families. That complies with the city's um affordable housing guidelines. We've worked closely with staff to distribute those homes throughout each phase, each building, and each floor plan within the site. The red dots indicate the locations of the moderate income homes. uh in the site. And we've worked really hard to make sure that you try to limit the number in each building to one and maybe two uh due to numbers, but spread them out. End units, middle units,

single family, um sun room units and uh balcony units just to have a a nice even spread throughout the community. to talk a little bit about Grant Street. Uh this is a image of the existing street as it is today. During our community meeting, we heard a lot about um from the neighbors about traffic and parking along Grant Street. The commercial nature of this street results in a dead zone on nights and weekends. This really encourages drivers to speed on their way through this area to somewhere else. This is a rendering of the new homes up against Grand Street. And as you can tell, bringing the homes closer to the street really creates a neighborhood feeling. In addition to adding these new homes to create that residential feel, the project also add traffic calming measures and crosswalk safety features. As uh staff had mentioned, this this includes uh the flashing crosswalk signs, enhanced crosswalk uh striping, and even a bulb out that shortens the distance for uh pedestrians when crossing the street. We're also uh replacing the temporary uh speed humps with permanent speed humps or as as public works determines uh through the design process. Um, but really the the new homes closer to the street bring eyes to the street and encourages drivers to drive at a slower speed when driving through the neighborhood. Next, we have Amplet. To be completely honest, in its current form, AMPlet is a huge waste of space. So, you have four lanes of traffic to nowhere and there's no parking on either side. So that 90% of the time this

street looks exactly like this with no traffic. The barren landscape is uninviting and unappealing and does nothing for the community. Our project proposes a much more livable street with fresh landscaping on both sides of the street, narrower, more bike friendly travel lanes and parking. 20 21 brand new parking spaces. Uh the staff report mentioned it, but uh just to recap on uh impact fees, this project will pay its fair share of impact fees to the city and the San Mateo school districts. The fees will total nearly uh $16 million for the community. Finally, I'd like to thank staff and the planning commission for considering our project, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you so much. We will go ahead and move on to public comment for this item. Members of the public will be given two to three minutes to speak depending on the number of speakers and the applicant may also be given five minutes at the end to respond to those public comments. So, any members of the public wishing to comment on this item should make sure and turn in their yellow speaker slips now to our clerk or raise your hand if you are participating virtually over Zoom

through the chair. We have one person in person commenting and we also have two online. Okay, great. with three public commenters. That will be um three minutes per public comment.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Mike Harris. I live on Guilford Avenue within the thousand foot or 100 foot no thousand foot range. Anyway, I've lived in in Samonteo Sunny Bray for 48 years. I have a request and u first of all I want to appreciate the presentation that was made tonight. It answers a lot of my questions but I still have my same complaint. So here it is. I request that as the process moves along that we consider not having any egress from the project onto Grant Avenue. Here's my rationale. I've lived there for over 40 years and there has been no egress on grant from the corporate center that currently exists there. Secondly, lovely speed bumps by the planning department. Um 10 miles an hour by the way, unless you want to throw your groceries out the back deck. Um anyway, that's nice, but in and it was designed to mitigate the speed and the traffic on Grant Avenue. My thought is is that allowing access from this project onto Grant Avenue will increase traffic. I know they've made traffic studies, but they didn't talk to the neighbors. Anyway, um not only that, and I appreciate the AFL Boulevard uh changes, but there is a four-lane road coming out of the project paralleling Highway 101 onto a four-lane road on Concar into a traffic controlled intersection. That is appropriate. It's like having a little freeway in and out of your project. And I would again ask for the uh consideration not to have

the egress on and off the property onto grant. Thank you. Thank you for your comment, Mike.

Through the chair, we do have two additional public commenters via Zoom. We'll begin with Thomas Morgan. You can go ahead and unmute yourself. Good evening. My name is Thomas Morgan. I live also live in Sunny Bray. I also do share concern about opening the driveways onto Grant. It just seems like it's a very uh busy street and they put in some bike bike infrastructure there. So, it just seems having those driveways, it just increases the danger even with the consideration of the safety measures being taken. So, I would really hope that those stay closed because I think it would enhance the project and the neighborhood and uh help them mesh together better. Uh I think down the road there would be a lot of conflict with neighbors and and the people who live here with if they were to be opened. Uh, second, I used to live in the apartments across from here, and there are a ton of workers who park their work trucks, so I didn't hear any consideration taken. But I would hope that as there is a demand for parking that those uh people are given consideration because it's a parking space to many, but it's their their way of living and we should honor that and respect that. Um but otherwise uh looks like a good project. Thank you.

Thank you Thomas. Next we will have Kevin and to follow that will be Sarah and Jordan. Kevin you can unmute yourself. Hello. Yes, we can hear you.

Oh, wonderful. Thank you. Hi, my name is Kevin O'Keeffe. I am a resident on Haden Drive in the Sunny Bray neighborhood in District 3, which is located directly across Leslie Creek from the northern property line of the proposed development. The existing office buildings don't feel as if they loom over Haden Drive because they are well set back from the property line. They are only two stories high and they are screened by multiple very large eucalyptus trees. In contrast, the proposed development will be much closer to the northern property line, will be three stories tall, and will eliminate all of the existing tall trees. My my concern is that the new development will loom over our residences and block out a significant portion of our view of the sky. I'm hoping that staff and the applicant can discuss and perhaps revisit the specifics of the setbacks in the heights on the northern property line compared to the current office buildings and also consider any other mitigations to address these concerns. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment, Kevin.

Sarah, you could go ahead and unmute yourself. Thank you. Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you.

Wonderful. Um, hi, this is Sarah Fields. I live directly across the street from this site on Grant. That's South Grant Street. I don't actually think we have a Grant Avenue. Uh, nonetheless, um, I want to speak in favor of this project. I think it will create an incredible connectivity between Grant Street, uh, the rest of 19th Avenue Park and across the street that's frankly been sort of a a strange and disconnected area. Um, really since CO and maybe even earlier, that business park has felt like a disconnected area and this can really sort of connect uh particularly with the the Marriott closing. Um this has welcomed revenue back to the city. It also is a nice expansion of the neighborhood um after sort of delays with concer passage uh on the other side of uh of the street. Um I I just I think this is a tremendous project. Um it's a great opportunity to bring new residential development um to the neighborhood uh of which there has not been new in quite a long time. And um I want to commend the developer in creating something that looks uh very promising, including the landscaping and the street improvements. Um you know, one of my fellow commenters uh suggested that um that parking is a challenge. Um there are some challenges with parking, but I think that having um entrances and exits from uh South Grant uh from this new development will actually help with traffic calming, help create more awareness, not less. Um and frankly, we could use some of that uh in the in the neighborhood. So, I welcome new development and new neighbors uh across

the street. Thank you for your comment, Sarah. And lastly, we have Jordan Grimes. Jordan, you may unmute yourself.

Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Jordan Grimes. I'm a resident in 19th Avenue Park. So, uh, very close to the project. Um, just wanted to speak in support tonight. Um, as you know, Santo has a significant housing shortage. Uh, the addition of a couple hundred new homes. um while uh you know our shortage is much greater than that um will put uh or will help to put a dent um in that number. I really do think I I know there are some concerns about uh the ingress and egress on grant. I don't think it's a particularly large issue. If we were talking, you know, a couple thousand units uh where you had a couple thousand cars, it might be an issue. Um, I'm not particularly worried about it, especially with the traffic calming that's gone in on the street recently. Um, I, you know, I understand the concerns around looming buildings. However, again, we're not talking about 8, 10, 12tory buildings here. We're talking about mid-rise. Um, so I I think it's a great project overall and uh hope to see it built. Thanks so much.

Thank you for your comment, Jordan. And I believe that was our last public commenter and so I will go ahead and close the public comment period. Would the applicant like five minutes to respond to any of the public comments? Thank you. I just want to thank the commenters for their participation in the process and we uh look forward to uh working with the planning commission and staff on moving forward the project. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Um our next step is to ask any clarifying questions that we may have. Um I keep picking on Commissioner Williams, so I'm going to look to my left this time. Um, how about how about I pick on Commissioner Shankl? Do you have any clarifying questions

through the chair? Thank you. Yes, I do have a couple of um clarifying questions. Um, have there been any significant changes to the project post the March 2025 meeting with the community? Um I will say since March of 2025 the project has continued to evolve. Um one of the key components was um the improvements along a um community presentation. The addition of the sun rooms. Uh we work closely with staff during uh after that meeting um to develop the sun room component of the project. Uh we also have introduced most of those uh traffic and calming and improvement pedestrian improvement concept since that original staff meeting.

Got it. Thank you. And just in full transparency, I did also meet with the applicant um with uh Andy and the team in regards to this project. Um, and I'm happy to hear that the Ampllet East sidewalk is going to be addressed, but that's not going to be a sidewalk. It's just uh is that just vegetation only on the east side is um uh closest to 101. It's going to be all landscape on that side. Anything's better than what's there now. So, it's much better.

Absolutely. Thank you. Um I I believe we addressed this uh during our um our meeting uh but just to re-emphasize the park space will be publicly accessible for adjacent communities to come. That's correct. The the park space uh will be public publicly accessible.

All right. Um, and will there be any negative impacts to the parking right now as it stands on Grand? I know you're adding it on Amplit, but on Grand are will any be reduced on on Grant? Um I will say that um the the construction of the bulbouts for the crosswalks uh may have some impact one or two spaces. Um that's really a qu a question for the design team and for public works as we work through the the final design of that. Um, but what I will say is that all the residential parking for the project is accommodated on site uh with the two parking uh two garage spaces per home and the 55 guest parking spaces. So um although there may be some incremental uh loss of parking to improve the pedestrian experience uh the the project itself will have its sufficient share of parking.

All right. Thank you. And then just one last question just in regards to land use efficiency. I know the current breakdown is about 17 units per acre as as it stands for the proposed project. Um could you just elaborate a little bit on how you guys arrived there? Um were were there considerations during the the design phase to maybe maybe increase that number and how did you guys arrive where where the project stands now?

Yeah, that thank you for that question. Um, so in order to get to the uh unit mix that Lori presented, the 11 uh unit plans, the range of sizes, we uh did a in-depth market study of um the forale home product that's being constructed not only in San Monteo, but around around the area. Uh we also interviewed uh a lot of the home builders that we hope to work with uh that are currently building not only in San Monteo but Foster City and wanted to develop a um a competitive mix of um for sale unit types that we think will meet the demands of the community.

Thank you. And I just want to say I also appreciate the fact that you guys took consideration of uh the inclusionary homes to be spread out throughout the um the project rather than just putting them on the ends or the middle or all on one block. Um I appreciate the the inclusionary consideration. Thank you. Thank you. How about Commissioner Bush next? Sure. Thanks. Um we heard several comments about egress onto grant. Could you just talk a little bit about, you know, why the why the team thinks that's like an appropriate um option rather than getting rid of that egress and having um uh just an amp amp flood egress.

Yeah. Uh thank you. Um so we worked with Faren Pierce, the traffic engineer. Um Alex, I believe is on the Zoom. he may weigh in, but um Faren Pierce uh worked with public works to study ingress and egress. Um and we found that, you know, the the traffic patterns have a natural way of um moving through. What I would what I'd add to that is that having those driveways and those intersections and narrower streets, uh, street parking and and a tighter residential neighborhood actually improves the traffic patterns. It actually calms the traffic, whereas if you have a setback building that's vacant, um, people tend to drive faster. That's been my experience working with fair and pierce and other traffic engineers. Um we've we believe that having that intersection at Betty will actually improve the quality of traffic and you know based on fair and pier study they found that the amount of traffic is less than what an office building would would u contribute. And do you know if that the finding about the amount of traffic I know it it's like the number of vehicles but there was a comment about how the office building currently they can only eress onto Ampllet so in theory that traffic is only over there and not on Grant. Do you know whether it was sort of analyzed the difference on Grant specifically in traffic?

Um I will say that uh Baron Pierce is a lot smarter than I am on traffic. I would defer to the experts on that. Um, but I will say that um, at one point those driveways were open and uh, the property uh, had to make the decision to close those for uh, sort issues related to parking for our tenants. So,

Got it. Okay. Thanks. Um, for the intersection that's going to be with I think it's Betty and Grant it that coming out of the complex. Um, are there uh, you showed the RFB the flashing pedestrian signs. Are there stop signs there or is it just a signal a um uh will you be adding stop signs on grant or it's just a signed crosswalk? I don't believe public works has asked for a stop sign at this point. I just could I couldn't tell. I missed it picture.

I can chime in here. I'm Selena with public works. He's uh he's correct. There's a existing stop sign on Betty, but on Grant we are not implementing new stop signs. We're just implementing the flashing beacon for pedestrian safety. Okay. Thank Thank you so much. Um I just kind of ignorant. I'm curious if you have an answer to this question. What's the um I I saw that the request is to create multiple parcels across the development. What what does that what what is the function of doing that?

Um so the first function is to one address phasing. So, uh, as you know, there's several, uh, occupied buildings, and as we're managing the process of, um, preparing this project for a new use, uh, we're managing the tenants in the building already. So, there's multiple tenants and, uh, their leases all expire at different times. So, um, we've been working with our, uh, property management team over the past three years to work with our tenants to help them in that transition. Um, and part of that is to manage around those um, those u terminations. So, as those leases come up, some of them are longer than others. So, we intentionally uh, parcel the building so that we can uh, sell those to a home builder at different times.

Okay. I see. And does it have any impact on the end development side of how Okay.

No. The other part of it is that um homebuilders uh build and deliver homes in a very um streamlined process where they you know they they build and sell homes in, you know, in a pattern. And part of their process is to um only build as many as they can sell in a period of time. And so that's the other reason for having uh those uh smaller parcels so that we can work with the home builders to u build build the homes and uh deliver those parcels at a pace that they can manage.

Got it. So it might be that some as as the homes are becoming completed, having the multiple parcels allows them to actually sell them before other parts of the development are completed. Correct. Okay. Okay. Thank you all. Um this is a question for for staff. There was a slide about impact fees and and you said I may be misquoting you, but I don't think so. That it was exclusive of credits for the existing building. Could you just explain what that means?

Sure. Yeah. through the chair. Um the applicant will be receiving credits for impact fees for because of the existing buildings. So because they have office buildings, they that means like they've already contributed to some of the impact fees in the past. So those will be deducted from these um impact fees. Okay, got it. So, so it's kind of like the impact fee follows the land and zoning itself. And if there's already something there, a building there that when that building was developed, they paid some amount of those fees appropriate for that type of building. And now when a new development comes in, they pay the difference in depending on that type of development. Is that right?

Correct. Yes. Okay. All right. Those are my questions. Thanks. Thank you, Commissioner Clefer. Thank you. Um through the chair um questions um was think listening to some of the uh public comments um and uh had this question about the speed humps there. What was could you what was the language proposed change based on the public comment? Is is it is it proposing to simply to remove them or to

Yes. So um the we are proposing to remove the type of the speed humps and um Grand Street. We are um proposing to allow flexibility to determine these um the type of the speed pumps um at the time when the project comes for the plan u building permit. Okay. Yeah. cuz I because I've definitely seen in other parts of town where the rubber speed humps were replaced with um asphalt where it allowed vehicles to continue at the like the 25 or the 15 m per hour speed whatever the street is uh in the residential area and I assume that would be under consideration.

Yes. And um I believe Selena with public works is um also here if she want to add anything but my understanding is that um other type of a speed humps are we are considering other types like asphalt cushion as you mentioned. So that's why we are removing the rubber speed pumps.

Okay. Uh and then um in terms of the bulbouts um was there any is was there potentially a ballout considered at uh the Conar and South Grant or they just sort of toward along the middle the the bulbouts which are going to be added on like between Concar like closer to Betty Lane and I believe the the improvements are only for the intersection of Betty Lane and Grant Street But Selena V public works is also here if she want to add anything. Okay. Or correct me if I'm wrong.

I can go ahead and add to this. So yeah, it it's only proposed for this section. I believe your question was are there going to be bouts closer to Concar? Yes, potentially at potentially at uh Concar and uh South Grant. I believe the projects it's a little further down. Oh, that's true. Yeah, sorry. You're right. Beond

there. We didn't There aren't any public improvements at least for this project for that for that intersection. And then um just circling back to the rubber speed humps. So we did revise the language to give us the flexibility to decide during the building permit stage what kind of speed humps we will put in it. We initially had rubber in the condition because the existing is rubber but we're open to modifying this and using the asphalt the asphalt uh speed humps that you were referring to earlier. There's pros and cons to both. Um, so that's why we're leaving the language as the speed hubs need to be replaced instead of specifying that they will be rubber.

Yes. Um, then I guess you have a question for the applicant um about the property line along Leslie Creek there. Um, obviously the the preliminary uh like the planting plan shows um trees along that that edge there. Um, I'm wondering if they could maybe elaborate a little bit more on on the types of trees and what they what they intend for that uh uh what they could envision for that that edge of the property. Uh, thank you for that question. Um, as far as the new trees, I'm not sure if uh Rebecca or um Bruce are on from Jet Landscape, they're they'd be the ones to best speak to the species of trees that we proposed there. But I will say that um uh on that edge condition along the creek, um we that is uh a condition we're going to build that up. So, a lot of the existing trees there um uh are going to are going to be in transition as we uh adjust the site for new construction.

Great. And then actually one more question. Um there was a there was a a comment about uh parking uh for trades during the different phases of construction. And um would that be um resolved by um providing space within existing parking areas of the site during the phasing? Yes. Construction parking for the project would be handled on site.

Yeah. Um as far as um workers parking on the street presently um it is a public street um and the project does not control uh certainly how that park is or how that parking is managed. Yeah. Um I think those are all my questions. So thank you everyone.

Thank you. I only have one clarifying question beyond what my fellow commissioners asked. Um, I believe in the applicant presentation you noted there's there's a lot of questions about parking. Um, and you know, you've already noted that every unit will have two off- streetet parking spaces. Um, but I believe in the applicant presentation you also noted that there's sections of South Grand Street right now that are red curbed and you plan to add street parking where those current red curbs are located. Could you clarify that? And I don't know if you happen to know how many spaces that is that will be added in that section. Sure. Just to clarify, uh we're referring to uh AMPlet.

Oh, you're referring to AMPLET. Sure. And if Could you uh pull up the photo or the uh presentation? Happy to point that that out. just back one or two. Uh how about one more? So this is the existing condition today. Got it.

Uh both sides of this street are uh painted red for no parking. Um so if you move forward, this is the proposed condition that we've been working on with public works, which um uh will have uh two narrow travel lanes and 21 new um parallel parking stalls along the project side of AMPlet. Okay, great. So that's 21 new stalls on Amphlet. Perfect. Correct. That was my only question. Um, any additional questions? I I have a few questions. Yes. Oh, sorry. I skipped right over you. No worries. Please go.

Um, yeah, let's see. Uh, I did meet with the applicants also just um uh to make note of that and that they provided a brief overview of the project to me. Um, one minor thing, well, I guess it's a staff question. Um, for my clarification, on page 174 of the PDF um, packet, there is a note that I think is supposed to say $1.7 million for each tree not planted. And first of all, I think there's a typo because there's extra numbers in there. And then I'm not clear if it's Can you explain to me I don't have the page open. Actually, I should open it um to see what it actually says, but I know the numbers there was an extra number in there. Can you please clarify the landscape um in Luffy and how that's used?

Sure. Through the chair. Um so the landscape in Luffy typically per each tree each heritage tree that is removed there is a land or there's a tree value that it is calculated. So each tree that will be removed it could be replaced either by planting new tree or paying an elo fee. In this case the applicant is subject to both. it's they're proposing to plant new trees and also paying an elo fee for each um trees or portion of the trees that they're removing. Um I apologize for the typo but I believe the the estimated fee should be as the as the applicant also has their on their slide.

Yeah, it's 1 million. It's total right? Yes. 1.7 million. Sorry. Yeah. Okay. I see me that it's not per trees. Sorry about that. Okay, great. No, it's total. Yes.

Um, yeah. And then it had like extra numbers as well. So, I was unclear on all that. Okay. So, the the next question I have is um there was a comment about the height of the buildings. And I kind of assume that the, you know, the old uh commercial buildings that are there, you know, even though they're two-story buildings, I I'm it's possible that they're taller than the new three-story residential or similar close in in height. Does anybody know that offhand what the existing height difference will be? Yeah, to clarify, the existing buildings are threetory.

Oh, they are threetory. Correct. Okay. Somebody made the comment that they were two story. So they are definitely as tall or taller than the new buildings will be. Yeah. Okay. Um let's see. Is a soils report required for this project? Yes. Yes. Okay. Um and then lastly, kind of a personal thing is is there a playground proposed like an enclosed tot lot or anything? you know, kind of a little enclosed area for a play structure. We are proposing a play structure at the um central green. Okay.

Um it is not currently shown as enclosed. Okay. I guess I didn't see it. I just saw the green, you know, the open space. Um I mean, we may have uh on our presentation Well, and I guess what I'll It's part of my comments, I guess, really. But there's one could fit probably in one of the two dog areas if you had one dog area and one tot lot that was enclosed. Just a thought. So,

yeah. Uh the blue area in the presentation is the play area. That makes sense. Yeah. Okay. Um, well, one, well, I think that's it. I think everything else was answered. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Williams. I'm so used to calling on you first that I totally forgot. Um, I meant to call on you last. Um, okay. So, are there any other questions from my fellow commissioners? Yes, Commissioner Clafter. Um, I just wanted to add that I think I may have forgotten to mention during my initial questions that I I also um did have a a meeting with the project applicant um to discuss this prior to this meeting. Me too. And me. Thank you. All right. Shall we move on to comments? Would would you please go first this time, Commission Williams?

Uh, sure. I don't mind unless somebody else wants to, but I'll go ahead. Um I have a bunch of random notes here, but I think um you know, thank you to the uh staff and to the applicants for the presentations um as as with the last one. So much uh so much good information for us that's also in the packet. But um very helpful discussion. Um yeah, I I'll just say I really like the project. It's another great use of a of a site that's like way underutilized. I mean like like as the applicant as um one of the people said, you know, massive amounts of asphalt and these, you know, outdated office buildings. So, um I look forward to seeing this, you know, vibrant new uh community. Uh I think it works nice uh as the um missing middle housing that um you know we want to plan for as part of our general plan. Uh and I will also say that this reminds me of the community where my daughter and son-in-law live in Southern California. Um and I go there now because I have a new grandson. Well, he's not new. He's almost two, but I have a grandson. And that's why I asked about the playground because it's so easy to walk from their place just down similar little kind of po to these choices of like kind of enclosed tot lots and it's just such a nice little feature which I probably wouldn't have thought of before but um so I would consider you know losing a dog lot a dog space. I have a dog too, so I, you know, care about dogs. But I think, um, you know, like a small, uh, toddler size lot might be kind of handy in this community, as

well as, you know, there's lots of spaces for walking your dog. But, um, anyway, so I think that that would be a little bit of everything. I think a dog space and a tot lot and then the larger open space. Um, I, you know, I've been kind of looking at this to see, you know, is there any way to get a bigger open space because in the renderings, I think sometimes, um, I mean, the renderings show that, you know, it's not as huge of a park as we see in other parts of the city. So, a lot of, um, residents here and one central space that could be bigger in my mind. Um, but I, you know, I mean, without losing housing, I think that the way you've addressed the, you know, the amphlet landscaping, the poos I really like. Um, you know, I'm not sure where you'd what you'd squeeze to get out a little bit more space in that central park area, but I think it's worth taking a look at. Um I'm glad to hear about the parking on Amhlet because um I do think um again as a visitor to a similar community if there's no visitor parking you know you I you you would end up walking quite a ways into one of the middle or you know unit that's sort of in the middle of one of the the runs. Um, so having that parking on Amphlet is really important for visitors. Um, like you know, grandparents that are babysitting. Um, let's see, what else was I going to say? I I think, you know, kind of looking through the various waiverss and the differences between the um objective design standards, I think they've been met pretty well. I mean, there's so many

specific things in the um ODS that seem um that I think that you know, you've you've addressed each of them pretty pretty well. Um you know, I mean, just as a for instance, the window alignment thing. Um the window alignment maybe isn't exactly the way it's worded, but yet it's um logical and intentional and makes sense to me. So, um, from story to story on the three-story buildings, um, let's see. I felt like a couple of the elevations from the driveway alleys, um, those elevations seemed a little bit, um, like they didn't have the same they don't have the same amount of articulation and so they're a little bit um, stark, I guess. And considering that they're three stories, I guess they I don't know. I wonder if there's another way to kind of maybe not necessarily break them up, but to provide um um a little interest or something that makes those alleys not quite so stark. So, something to think about. Uh I guess those are my main comments. And I mean, again, generally, I think it's it's exciting. It's like a great community um on what's now this, you know, terrible stretch of amphlet and a bunch of asphalt. So, I I look forward to seeing this project move forward. So, thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Claptor.

Yeah. Um I echo um many of Commissioner Williams comments. I uh really appreciate um thank you for you know the presentations. Uh, first of all, I really appreciate the the uh attention that's going to be paid to Amphlet. When I did visit the site, there was the first thing I thought as I was driving in. I said, you know, this four-lane road seems entirely unnecessary. And I was uh very pleasantly to pleasantly pleased surprised to learn that the uh that was already uh in the works uh to improve that, add street parking. Um, and uh I uh appreciated the uh solution with the sun rooms. I I think that's a very uh clever approach to uh get some outdoor space uh for the units that are closer to uh the 101. um the POS. Um I just now you taking a closer look again at the uh at the plan and noting that there's a the kind of a walk all the way along Leslie Creek um with a stop at the the dog park. Uh and um and of course the central the central park area there. Obviously this this part of town has a few smaller parks. Concord Park, Sunny Bray Park I think are kind of within walking distance as well. But I think I could anticipate this being um very useful to the larger neighborhood uh to have an additional uh play area and these walking paths uh accessible. So I think that that could end up being um a really nice amenity beyond just this development. Um in terms of um the screening along Leslie Creek, there was that comment that was raised. Um I mean there's obviously trees shown on the planting plan. Uh, and I know some of the homes uh have a their the front entrances face onto the creek. Um,

so yeah, I imagine there'll be some some trees and things there. I'm be curious, you know, to kind of I'm assuming that'll be shaded and and things like that. So hopefully those trees will grow up and um along there. In terms of the other comment on the driveways, um I would imagine that you know people who are going to be living on the east side would probably uh to exit are likely to go on to AMlet still and then um people who are living closer to the south side are likely to exit out onto South Grant. Um it won't necessarily be everybody exiting out onto South Grant, I would I would assume. Um certainly that's how I would drive uh if I was uh closer to Amphlet. That'd be the fastest way out. Um so hopefully it won't result in presumably won't result in everybody going in one direction. Um I think that is all the comments I have for now. Um yeah,

thank you. How about Commissioner Shunkle?

Thank you through the chair. I just like to also echo uh Commissioners Williams and uh Commissioner Cler's um comments. Uh I think this is a good project. It's a much needed project. Um saddened to hear that there's not going to be any pickle ball courts incorporated there. Um but the neighbors are probably happy that there's not. So, uh with that being said, um yeah, uh I agree. It enhances the look, feel, and aesthetics of Grant and Amphlet. Um, just it's a overall um positive to the community, I believe. And um I I like the project and looking forward to support it. Thank you, Commissioner Bush.

Yep. I agree with the everything that's been said and I think the to the extent sounds like one of the main concerns is the egress on to grant sounds like the developers work closely with with city staff to come up with ways to mitigate any potential impacts and in fact um that having that egress onto grant might be uh better than than not having it um for the concerns that the commenters raised. So definitely in support. It seems like a great project in a great spot. Thank you. Um I'll go next. I have a couple of comments. Okay. Um wanted to note as we already did that I also met with the applicant and they gave me a preview of the design. Um, so I will say that we have few very large sites in San Mato and there is a part of me that is a little bit disappointed to see this project come in as lower density housing. Um, under state density bonus law could have been over 1,400 units and we're seeing 256. And when I think about our arena target of 7,000 units, you know, this was a huge opportunity site. Um and and so that's a little bit disappointing especially at the density um of 17.7 units per acre. It's not meeting the 30 units per acre minimum density for mixeduse medium one zones located within a transit oriented district. That all said this project is protected by the Housing Accountability Act. it submitted an SB330 pre-application prior to the creation of those minimum residential densities and it conforms with um all of our standards and regulations. So, while it's disappointing um it is a compliant project and I will say it is exciting to see some forale units be built in the city, that's something that has not

happened in a long time and something that we hear our community ask about a lot. And so to your point, Commissioner Williams, this is missing middle housing. And so it is great to get some missing middle housing. And I do think that the um as as I believe it was Commissioner Claptor said, maybe it was Commissioner Shankl, uh it definitely improves the look and feel of Amphlet and South Grant. Uh it it is currently as everyone else has noted an underutilized office park that is a sea of asphalt and it's a little if I may use the word sad uh in that area and I think the vibrancy that will be brought to that part of South Grant will be amazing. It's it's a beautiful project. So um yeah that it I'm I'm excited to see this come to life. I will say that um I'm also somewhat concerned about the proximity of this project to 101. I have long brought up the issue of air quality on the general plan subcommittee and on the planning commission and um you know I was doing some counting during the meeting. There's nine streets and seven poos that are going to have direct line of sight to the highway because there is no soundwall on this part of Amphlet. And so I have concerns um about the outdoor front porches and the exposure to um particulate matter. and I look at this beautiful park and there's two streets in a po that are going to have direct line of sight to the highway from this park. So, that worries me. But again, this project is compliant with all state laws and regulations. So, I don't know that there's anything that we can really do about that. Um, there are a lot of comments about the speed bumps. In general, I'm always a fan of flexibility. So, I support the proposed changes to the conditions of approval

that staff is proposing because um I think it's better to decide at a future date what the right solution is rather than be prescriptive about a rubber speed bump. However, there was a couple of comments from the public that were to the effect of, man, these speed bumps are too good. They're really slowing people down. Yes, that is the point of a speed bump. Um, my family regularly bikes uh past this development to Concar Park, which is my kid's favorite park, and to Trader Joe's. And I will tell you that bike ride has become so much more pleasant since those since those speed bumps went in. And cars do have to slow down to 15 miles an hour, which is at the speed that you are not likely to die if you were hit on a bike. So, um I will say that when my my one ask of the applicant and of staff is when you decide what is the right solution, please do so with the safety of this bike boulevard because that part of Grant is a bike boulevard in mind and not with maximizing the speed of the cars that are going to be driving along that area. Um I'm also glad to hear that we're going to have increased number of parking spaces on Emplet. I think that will provide some additional flexibility for the visitor parking. And I would say one suggestion I would make is to enclose the playground area of the park if there's not a fence around it already. It's hard to tell from the these plans. Um, I think every almost every park or every park that has every playground in San Mateo, not Central Park, but like Concar Park, the parks at Bay Meadows, which are a very similar development. Like every playground, Sunny Bray that's in the area has an enclosed fence. And it's really nice when your kids are toddler age. You don't have to worry about them running out into one of those streets.

You know that they're going to stay pretty contained within the fence. So, I would suggest that you consider enclosing the playground. And then I have a comment for public works which is um I know that this the property boundary as we discussed does not go all the way to Concar um drive but given I think the potential to see increased pedestrian traffic to Concar Passage and the Trader Joe's and the 7-Eleven there I would consider I I would ask public works to consider making pedestrian improvements at that very large intersection um around the time that this project comes online. I think that would make make it much safer for the residents of this development who choose to walk the very short distance to Trader Joe's to grab a dozen eggs or a carton of milk. Um, those are all of my comments. Any comments from anyone else? No. Okay. Um, can we get the resolution language back or actually the approval language back on the screen?

Would anyone like to make a motion? I'll make the motion to adopt a resolution approving the site plan and architectural review SPAR site uh development planning application investing tenative map for the construction of 256 multifamily residential units located at 1650 through 1720 South Alet Boulevard and find that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to public resource code 211080.66 66 based on the findings for the approval and subject to the conditions of approval with the recommended modifications

and through the chair if we could just specify what those re recommended modifications are regarding the speed speed bumps just since there have been some conversation around other ideas which I don't if you want to put the slide up mean condition number 42 South Grant Street the application shall perform a full width 2-in grind and rubberized hot mix asphalt RH MA overlay of South Grant Street along the project frontage with 6in base repairs as needed. Existing speed humps will need to be replaced. The applicant shall remove and replace the existing sidewalk with new sidewalk and landscaping in substantial conformance with the approved tenative map. Thanks.

I'll second. Hello. May we have a roll call vote, please? Commissioner Shaml, yes. Vice Chair Cler, yes. Chair Patel, yes. Commissioner Bush, yes. And Commissioner Williams, yes. Motion passes 5-0. Thank you. And I will go ahead and close that item. Finally on our agenda is notes and announcements. Do we have any notes and announcements from staff?

We do. Um, yes. So, I think as you've heard, the February 24th meeting does not have any agenda items, so that one is canceled. um uh on the the next meeting would be March 10th um where we're anticipating um you will have uh a project at 230 South El Camino on the agenda. Um and we wanted to let you know that on February no February 23rd yes is the study session um the city council study session on the zoning code update. So it we if you are interested you are welcome to tune in online um and and watch that. Sorry, what day again is that? Sorry,

what day again was that? Uh that is February 23rd. Great. Monday, February 23rd. Yeah. And the El Camino project is in March, did you say? Uh March 10th. Okay. Thanks. I have an announcement. Okay. Okay. Uh just uh I believe I will be traveling that day on March 10th to the planning commissioner training. Um it starts on a Wednesday and I'm trying to catch the uh Wednesday morning um session. So I'll be actually leaving on the 10th. Okay.

To get there on time and in time and in one piece. Uh so I will um I don't know. Do I uh This is perfect. Just letting us know now. Okay. Yeah. And um is anyone else traveling on that date? I just want to make sure that we'll have a quorum. Nope. Okay. I will be, but I'm not your quum. Does anyone else have any announcements? Um I think there's a a survey related to the zoning code updates. So, in case anyone hasn't taken it or looked taken a look at it, I haven't taken it yet, but I'm You can find it on the city's social media accounts if you're looking for it.

Oh, yeah. It's on the um Strive San Mo website, the the general plan website. Um so, yeah, thanks for the and anybody who's still watching, you are encouraged to take a look at that survey and take it as well. So, thank you for that. Perfect. If there are no more notes and announcements, I will adjourn this meeting. Thank you.