Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

up. I think Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

down. Hey

Hallelujah.

Hey, hey, hey.

recording in progress.

through the chair. We're ready to begin. Thank you. Welcome to the regular meeting of the planning commission this Tuesday evening, March 24th. I now call this meeting to order. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. HVA, could you please call the role?

Chair Patel, here. Vice Chair Cla here. Commissioner Bush, Commissioner Shaml here, and Commissioner Williams here.

Good evening and welcome. We are excited to be here in person with options for virtual participation. Thank you for your cooperation and for helping us maintain an efficient and accessible meeting environment. There are several ways to participate. 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 each specific item. For members of the public watching on YouTube who wish to provide live public comment, please note that you must join the meeting through the Zoom webinar using the access information listed on the agenda. 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 council from taking action on any matter not on the agenda. Your comments may be referred to staff for followup. This public comment section 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. If needed, an opportunity for additional public comment may also be provided later in the agenda. Haleva, could you please tally the total number of requests to speak on general public comment

through the chair? There are no public commenters at this time.

Okay, I'm going to go ahead and close the public comment period. The next item on our agenda is a public hearing. Item number one, 715 North San Monteo Drive, new multifamily residential development, PA-2025-031. We will start with a staff presentation and public comments. Members of the public are 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. Once the public hearing is closed, the chair may ask staff to respond to any public comments and the commission will ask clarifying questions, deliberate, and render a decision. Finally, if a decision is made tonight, the decision of the planning commission can be appealed to the city council within 10 days, 10 calendar days. All right, let's go ahead and um start with our staff presentation.

Uh thank you, Madam Chair. Um Joanna Winter, planning manager. Um, I wanted to introduce to you Greg Powell, who is our consulting uh, planner on this project. Um, and he's also joined by Steven Lzarago, who's been assisting on this project as well. And Greg will be uh, giving the staff presentation.

Good evening. Uh, at any time you can't if I'm speaking too fast or you can't hear me, just feel free to let me know and I'll adjust. But thank you. So, I'll be giving the the staff presentation for the uh proposed six-story multif family residential building at uh 715 North San Monteo Drive. U first I'd like to give a an overview of what I'm going to be presenting tonight. Uh the first is just a quick project history. You know, what happened before today, what city staff did, what the neighborhood applicant did. um a highle view of the location, project description, required entitlements, uh and then a summary of the public notice, updates to the agenda materials, which I'll provide at the end of the meeting um to update you on city, sorry, conditions of approval that will need to be amended, and then the staff recommendation. So, this project first came to the city when the applicant submitted an SP330 preliminary application in November of uh 2024. Later they held a neighborhood meeting in February of 2025 and then on April 15, 2025 they submitted their formal application. Um from that point until early January the city reviewed the project for completeness for consistency and u up to that point the review included review by the building department, public works, police, fire and planning to ensure compliance with the uh municipal code general plan and then state law. And uh the review also resulted in conditions of approval to ensure compliance with these rules and uh policies. So the the site the sites at the northern edge of San Mateo uh this view shows you the the boundary line between San Mo and Berlingame the Calra corridor the Cal Train station then Berlingame that's just under a half a mile from the site. Uh and the site is shown in

yellow. It's currently comprised of four parcels. um along North Sanonteo Drive with State Street at the top and Villa Terrace at the bottom of the site. Have a few images of the site. Um top left is the view of the site from Santo Drive at State Street looking across and kind of to the south uh east. The next view is looking straight on the site and this shows one of the two auto related uses or buildings that are on the site today. Uh the bottom left is the existing two-story duplex that's at 247 Villa Terrace. And then finally to the bottom right is the view of the site kind of at the intersection of Villa Terrace and Samonteo. Walking you around the vicinity. Um the top left image shows a housing project that was completed I 10 to 12 years ago and it's the 888 North Sanonteo Drive project. It's multif family housing, three-story building. And then across the site is across Sonteo Drive, autorelated uses. That's predominantly the land use pattern in the area. So there was an auto use or dealer. Another auto use is the Ducky's car wash and extending uh towards Villa Terrace. Uh the the neighborhood changes at Villa Terrace. If you look to the bottom right, there's a three-story multif family building. And um I'm going to go on to the next slide. I chose this view to illustrate again kind of a more zoomed out view of the the area that the project's located in. And and in red you'll see one of the 10 general plan study areas. Uh these study areas were chosen to increase the density, increase the building height. Um, and this projects were located and then was and and it's I I have this slide here to illustrate that there's a a big change that was put in place by the journal plan and then uh brought into effect when measure T was approved. So the zoning before measure T allowed

two or three story buildings kind of a continuation of what's there today. With Measure T and this one of these 10 planning areas, the building development, I don't want to say double, but it's six stories is allowed. the density is much different. So now looking at the project, this is a view, bird's eye view sort of of the uh villa side of the building. This shows the courtyard um and the residential building u residential wings on the right and the left. The building is roughly 258,000 ft, 181 dwellings. In in the project, there'll be 19 very low-income household dwellings. uh the building six stories which complies with the general plan and the applicant is providing 180 parking stalls. Included along with the dwellings will be residential amenities, uh pool, fitness room, lots of different um open space options either on the podium or on the sixth floor. Um next I'd like to just highlight the u the breakdown of the dwellings. their studio, the urban one bed that you probably have seen with other projects, then one, two, and threebedroom units. And then how the breakdown between the very low income and then the marker rate. So, as I said before, there are 19 very low income and there's 162 marker rate for a total of 181 dwellings. So, this is a view of the ground floor. So, State Streets to the left, North Sanos at the top of the image, and Villaas to the right. I chose this slide to illustrate that the access to the site is off Villa Terrace and there's this arrow which maybe I can if anybody has any question but the garage access is off Villa Terrace and the ground floor is wrapped with dwellings along Villa Terrace residential lobby and the co-working space is the next thing you see and then more dwellings and then going down State Street is the utility. So that's where the garbage, trash, recycling, electrical and mechanical

rooms are located. Uh inside the building is the parking. So there's parking at grade and then parking in the basement. Um I'd like to illustrate one of the first elements of the project that changed after they submitted. So the application came in through feedback through the community. Um they revised the design affecting the ground floor in the basement to set the building back from the property line to protect these trees. So there's a really large coastlive oak, sorry, coastal redwood at State Street and then there's a Doug fur further in and they revised the plan and in the process lost a few parking spaces, but they changed the project to ensure that those trees would be preserved and those changes were all influenced by an arborist. So they listened to what the arbor said and then they implemented it. Uh so uh the planning commission is asked tonight to look at this project from for site plan and architecture review. There's a site development permit application that's required because of the loss of trees and then there's the vesting tenative map and that's just to merge the parcels and the city's process is if you merge parcels go from four to one plan commission is the review authority. So we'll move on to the general plan. I've got an image here that shows the site in yellow. The the measure T upzoned area is the res residential medium too. The residential low is the residential neighborhood to the sort of the south uh east or sorry southwest of the site. General plan allows six stories. Project proposes six stories. Project proposes 181 dwellings, which is more than the general plan allows, but with state density bonus law, the project's compliant. Quick overview on the zoning. Um, the site's unusual. There's two different zoning classifications that apply and the way they look at development standards is slightly different. So,

this is kind of a a lot of information on this table, but just quick, the floor ratio would be exceeded by the project. There's requirements for unobstructive yards or buffers and there's buffers for landscaping. There's open space at grade. And each of the top four standards I mentioned, the floor area, the buffers, and then the open space, uh, the project wouldn't comply, but with the dens state density bonus, the project can request the waiverss, and that's part of your consideration tonight. The project has 180 parking spaces, but because it's within a half a mile of the Berling game um, Cal Train Station, the city can't require parking. So, there's a lot of parking spaces that would otherwise be required, but state law prohibits the city from asking for those spaces. Uh, the project would have bike parking, uh, 12 spaces in the rideway and then 196 spaces in a secure room, a bike parking room that's just off the lobby. And then the required loading spaces off State Street. So, state densonous law, you've probably seen this on a few other projects. If a project includes the right number and the right affordability of dwellings, they're entitled to a bonus on units, concessions, which this project would allow up to three concessions and then an unlimited number of waiverss. The applicant hasn't requested any concessions, but they're taking the full of the bon well, not quite the full. The project could have 182 dwellings. They're only proposing 181. And then the waivers. And as I mentioned earlier, the waiverss would be for floor ratio, the buffers or yards, buffers for landscaping, parcel covers, open space, and then one objective design standard, that's the blank wall standard, and I have an image of that in just a moment. Um, a few other state laws that are worth bringing up. Uh if anybody's been following development over the last few years, the uh intrusion of the state into the local planning, we have more

things to say about what the state says about housing than sometimes in the zoning ordinance. But this project's housing accountability act project. So the planning commission's perview is limited by that. The housing crisis act is is a is a factor. It freezes development standards and and the fee structure. And then something new that happened while this project was being reviewed last summer was AB130 changed the SQA process and the timeline for review. And uh finally, I mentioned earlier the prohibition on parking if you're within a certain distance of a transit stop. That also applies. So this this project's also subject to the city's inclusionary requirements. It exceeds them. You know, it has 15% for very low-income households. And the city also asked that this the units be distributed throughout the project.

Can you shut the front door?

If there's a question about where they are. I have an image I can show you that later. But just quickly, the units are distributed on each floor throughout the building. They're equivalent in size, number of bedrooms, access to private open space. Now, let's talk about design. So, aside from the blank wall standard that I mentioned a moment ago, the project complies with all other objective design standards. and we'll look at the um elevation drawings now. So this is the view from North San Mateo Drive uh kind of going from the left at at Villa Terrace to the right at State Street. There would be a a few dwellings on the ground floor, residential lobby in the prime access to the building. Then more dwellings wrapping uh the street front towards State Street. Uh the building would then have upper floor dwellings from floors two through six. There's balconies um and building variation that we'll look at in just a moment. This is the view along State Street. This is the sort of the utility and mechanical equipment side of the building. There's one dwelling on the corner, a secondary pedestrian access point into the building. And then the the site loading and I think the ride share would also be loc share might be located along State Street. Uh Villa Terrace. So this is the elevation that shows the the courtyard. There's an internal courtyard that goes from the second floor to the sky. The the garage parking is to the left. More dwellings and uh they have a another amenity, the the dog washing thing that you might see in a lot of housing projects is located to the very left of the site right here. So this is the rear of the building. Uh, it's hard to tell in the elevation drawing what's happening, but in this view, there's a a property line fence that the applicant intends to install in consultation with the neighbors. The building podium is set back 2 feet and then the upper floors of the building, floors 2 through six, the setback varies from 10 to 16 feet from

the shared property line. So in here it's hard to tell but two foot for the first bit of the building and then from there there's variation on each uh not on each floor but as you go across the floor plate there's setback variations and then balconies that break up this facade. This is a close-in view that I wanted to highlight. Um this is the second kind of substantive change that the applicant made after submission and that's to um address a feeling of blankness on the on the rear wall. So they've proposed and these plantings would extend along the full extent of the building facing the residential neighborhood to the west. So there'd be trailing vines coming down from the podium level. They've done some decorative pyasters that are shown here in sort of a charcoal gray to break up as they can what is really the the structural wall separating the the parking garage and supporting the building from the from the neighbors to the west. So continuing with the design comments, this is a a rendering of the Villaas and San Pablo corner. It is divine corner treatment. There's a base, middle, and top present in the building. And then you can also get a sense for the recessed balconies that are on the upper floors that serve the dwellings. Uh this is another view along State Street, excuse me, San Monteo. And you get a sense of the the change in the colors, the variation in the building setbacks, and then the variation in the the the building edge at the top where it's set back at the upper floors and comes out with a cornice. We've looked at this before, the internal courtyard. Um, and I'm just go through some more views. Uh, this is a a pedestrian scale view along North Sanonteo Drive showing the residential lobby and getting a sense of the landscaping that would be proposed, the 12 short-term bike parking spaces that are in the rideway and the pedestrian

scaled, you know, storefront systems that give some variety and u relief as you're walking along San Mo Drive. two slides about open space and I chose them because the project has a a good variety of open space and I want to highlight that the open space on the podium level extends from Villa Terrace to the south all the way to State Street. So it it's to the benefit of the community, but then in the community that lives in the building, but then from a neighbor's view when you're walking along State Street or Villa Terrace, you can look up and there's opening. There's uh relief from the building. There's planting and landscaping that's visible. So it's kind of privately owned but vis publicly visible open space. And within the open space for the tenants, there's active, there's a pool, there's passive, there's plantered area, planted areas, there's garden areas, paths, a little bit about materials. Um, there's two different types of brick that would be proposed. We've got a color board up front that you can look at if you want to get more detail. There's two different tones of stucco. There's a wood-like material. And then there's the black used for the steel windows and well not steel windows but the the railings. And then the black's also used for the window systems. Uh a key component of the of this project and this is in your staff report is the project subject to city development impact fees. And um these are estimates. Some of them may change be when the city completes its review of the uh park and loop credit that's available. Um they could also change like for public art it's not provided here because we don't know the valuation and it could change dramatically between now and uh when the building's constructed. So these are estimates and they're also estimates that increase with time but they're limited by what SB330 says about vesting fees as of application date. So I mentioned earlier AB130 came into

effect kind of mid-stream while we were reviewing this project. Um, the city's responded. You know, the AB130 has mandated timelines for review. The city's compliant with that. It mandates that there's tribal consultation. Tribal consultation occurred and conditions of approval that were part of that consultation process or part of your um resolution. And then finally, we just want to say that the AB130 says that the city needs to deem the project exempt from SQA. And it's a statutory exemption, which is different than categorical. And I don't want to go into the weeds on it, but it's a it's a more defensible and it's also more of a mandate. The city's not really able to have discretion of is it isn't it is statutory exempt because it meets the strict uh requirements. Um so public noticing uh there was a neighborhood meeting as I mentioned earlier uh last February. Um 40 people attended and comments were related to parking, traffic, construction impacts, the size of the building. I'd like to take a moment and talk about that that the parking adequacy. Well, the applicant has 180 spaces where the zoning or can't require any because of AB uh 2097. Um traffic traffic's limited under SQA. There's not the typical traffic study prepared, but there is there was a local traffic assessment done to ensure compliance with the city's general plan. And then construction impacts. there's conditions of approval that are in your packet that um the city puts on projects like this to ensure that to the extent the city can control things worker parking noise use of the public rideway etc is it's highly regulated um the next thing on this slide is the public noticing and this project has the typical noticing that in the site daily journal it's mailed to not uh all residents and owners within a thousand feet published to the notify list. And then unique to

this project because of the map, it's posted in three public facilities as well as along each street frontage. That was a lot. Now, I'm going to get kind of into the nitty-gritty here. There's five slides that talk about various things that staff needed to do to change the conditions after we publish this. And we did everything we could to not have this happen tonight. But in working with the applicant, working with public works, there's five slides to change some of the conditions. And the first one I'd like to highlight is there was some concern that anytime the city talked about fees that the wording would point towards something that might not be consistent with SP330. So the first change is anytime in in the reszo that says in ineffective at the time of building submitt, we're not going to say that anymore. Um the next one is condition number 59. you can see on the screen, but there was additional wording added at the request of the applicant and and approved by public works to ensure that the condition is very specific and um I don't know ambiguous at the billing permit stage. Same goes for con number 60. And would you like me to read it or do you feel like it's okay to read it on your own screens? I don't want to.

I think we can read it on our Thank you for that moment to read it.

Yeah. Yeah. Should I go up? this one. Good. Okay. I mean, I'm happy to read it, but it's also could be tedious. And I'm happy to answer questions about this. And we also have the city uh public works representative John Thompson available if there are any questions about this. Good with this one. Okay. it actually the the changes you might say get more detailed as you go on. So I'll give you some time with this one. Um maybe for the benefit of the folks in the audience I guess you have the screen so I don't need to we good on this one. Um yeah. Okay. Thank you. Um, I'll highlight the last two conditions and say that condition 106 is being proposed to change to strike this wording because this wording wasn't presented in other like projects. And so at the applicant's request, we looked at and said, "Yeah, yeah, we want to treat you just like we did the last three projects that have been through review." So you can see we we struck two sentences from condition 106. Same goes for 108, although it was all of it. Um, I will say that the conditions have change underlying some of these conditions is is wording in the Munich code that require certain lighting requirements to ensure that the police department feels the building is safe and secure. And so even though the conditions aren't proposed to be in here anymore, we believe that the m the satell code will provide the framework for the pl the police department to review the project to make sure it's safe. And then thank you for your patience. I hope I didn't exceed my limit. I probably did.

Um so the recommendation for the planning commission tonight is to first find that the project's exempt from SQA and then approve site plan architectural review. the site development planning application, the vesting tenative map to then permit the construction of the new multif family residential building. Thank you. I'm here for questions. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much. Um I think next we have our applicant presentation if the applicant has prepared one. team is represented here as well led by Jeff Gibson of Winder Gibson Architects. Uh Jeff will be walking you through the project design momentarily. Other members of the team are also here and can be called upon as necessary to address any specific questions that may come up. Um, we're all very we all very much appreciate the opportunity to discuss the project proposal located at 7:15 North Sonteo Drive. Staff covered quite a bit in its staff report and Greg did as well in his presentation. Uh, and on that point, we did want to take the opportunity to thank staff for their efforts to get us here this evening. Um, we're certainly pleased uh to be bringing this multifamily housing

proposal to you. Uh and our hope, our aim is to advance beyond tonight through permit documents, through city plan check, and ultimately construct and deliver the 181 new housing units at the heart of our proposal. Uh before turning the presentation over to Jeff, I did want to provide a brief word on Prometheus. As you know, we're active locally. We're a family-owned private company and our history dates back over 50 years. And over those years, our primary focus has been housing as both a long-term provider and operator here in San Monteo and throughout the South Bay. Also worth mentioning is we typically develop for the long term, meaning we keep what we build and remain a vested stakeholder within communities. Here in San Monteo, that commitment is self-evident. We've maintained our corporate headquarters here locally for decades. And we've recently moved into our newly constructed brickline building with its mix of uses which we believe will will further catalyze investment and economic activity in and around downtown. On the screen, um we've included several of our Sanonteo properties and planned developments in and around downtown, including Brickline. Uh again uh pleased to be with you. Uh and with that I'll turn the presentation over to Jeff Gibson who will speak uh to the project design in greater detail. Thank you.

Hello commissioners. Hello everyone. I'm Jeff Gibson from Winder Gibson Architects. Um really pleased to present this project to you. That was a great presentation. Greg, I feel like I could probably just go home but I won't. I'll talk a little bit. Um, I think as Greg did, you know, positioning this project within the really important work that San Mateo planning commission, planning department have been doing with the general plan and measure T and all of that. Um, it's really what makes this kind of housing production possible. We're really excited about it. And also, I'm going to touch on some of the objective design standards elements of the project as we go through the presentation. And it's a great document and I want you guys to sort of see our project as that document in play like that document actually working in the real world. Um we always start our multif family projects with a site analysis combined with local code legislative and architectural analysis. Um here we're located between downtown San Mato and downtown Berling game with access to both train stations uh and other transit bike lanes walkable businesses. Our site is really long and thin um bounded on three sides by streets as you guys have seen um with a long frontage right on North San Monteo Drive. Um I want to talk to you a little bit about the partee of the project like the conceptualization of the project because I think it helps sort of rally many of the design decisions and the ODS decisions around it. Um, as we sort of analyzed the site, we felt like the prevailing winds were really coming in from the west and southwest. We wanted to temper those a little bit, especially in the usable outdoor spaces, but then we wanted to capture all day sun, but modulate some of the stronger like summer sun, summer afternoon sun. Um, and then with this sort of long site, we felt like it was important to make a clear street wall kind of urban gesture along North San Mateo. But then inside

the project, we wanted to take cues from biophilic design, which is a sort of a an understanding that natural places uh put ourselves at at ease and that if we can design in a way that sort of works with nature or creates a natural setting, we can sort of live a better life. basically. And so we wanted to create this sort of restful natural place at the core of the building. Um we wanted this natural place to actually sort of break through to bust through and to connect all the way through to the to State Street and then also to Villa Terrace so that it wasn't just like a hidden oasis in the middle of the building, but it actually sort of reached beyond it um visible from the public realm. And so that led us to this linear courtyard scheme. Kind of an atypical multif family development like parti but I think it's going to be a really beautiful space um for the residents and beyond. um that linear courtyard daylights at both streets and then especially on the villa side at the south uh west corner of our site. We carved back initially we had both bars of the building sort of extend all the way through and then as we started to place the pool we kind of carved back um to really invite the all day light into the pool area make that really usable and then have this more shaded and peaceful linear courtyard that sort of stretches up lots of units facing it. So, that's sort of the origin of of the design. Here you'll see a couple of the slides. Greg sort of showed these as well of what this inner courtyard will look like. Um, the courtyard is activated by an exterior walkway on the west side for access to the single loaded bar of units on that side. So, there's a sort of skinny single- loaded bar of units on the west and a double loaded thicker bar of units on the north San Mato side on on the east. Um, we placed a lot of the larger sort of more

familycaled units into that single loaded bar on that side. You actually get to those units by walking on these outdoor walkways to your unit door. So, it's very kind of activates the whole courtyard. It's quieter. It's more peaceful on that side. And then along North San Monteo, we have this double loaded set of units. Um, and included in that are some really wonderful stoop units at the ground floor. We're thinking of this especially for like dog owners or people who just like to get out for a walk often. Um and those kind of help activate the sidewalk. Um we've got a lot of parking in the building, way more than we're required to have, but we've really worked hard at sort of hiding that concealing it. So we stuff it into the middle of the first floor floor plate. We put it underground. It's hidden from view everywhere. It's wrapped by good program all the way around it. Um, the garage entry is located on Villa Terrace, which is the longer of the two side street frontages. We did not want to have the garage entry off of San Mateo. Too busy. Um, too busy a street, just not not a good place to put that. Um, trash collection is on State Street with other utilities kind of across from an automotive use. This is like felt a little better. Um, mitigating, you know, any sort of conflicts with trash collection right on North San Mateo. Um, so that's kind of like the logic of the building. So here I'm going to jump into a couple of the ODS um standards. This was our first project utilizing your new ODS document. It's a great document. It's really legible. It's really understandable. Um and it was really invaluable to us even as early as schematic design like before any first meetings with planning. It allowed us to submit a project that was already substantially compliant and then to work really closely with staff on sort of refinements on sort of just knocking it into place and on

documentation to demonstrate that compliance. Um stylistically this is a you know it's a contemporary building but we've wanted to take certain like material uh touchstones that connect with prevalent Mediterranean styles uh found in San Mato. We have the creamy stucco, iron railings, two tones of brick, and really lovely wood tone siding that we're mostly using at the inner courtyard and a little a little flex of it in other areas kind of connecting to that bophilic design. So, um, we treated the ODS as a requirement but also as a guiding light. So in many cases you know in addition to providing strict objective compliance with a certain required number of points we've also integrated other aspects from other points as well. So it's it's not sort of an all or nothing approach. Um for example on this one that's up on the slide 4.1.2 two, we like officially provided A and E to satisfy the requirement, but we also incorporate balconies, carefully designed window recesses, select horizontal moldings. We maybe don't have those items as extensively as you would need to officially check that box, but we took the whole document as like informing the design. So, it's it's not just okay, what's the minimum we can do to sort of move along here. Um, in other areas like um like this section um all requirements must be met and we've really sought to do that with both the letter and intent of the law. And and I think this is where you start to see how the ODS results in a really varied but also cohesive design. It's a big long building. It's a large building. The ODS really spurs us on to provide that sort

of activation and variety um that makes a large building successful. Um 4.1.6 is another example of how we used the ODS to help guide our design decisions really early on. Um we began by integrating aspects of many of these suggested techniques and then sort of submitted that especially at the SB330 level worked with staff to understand the you know what is the letter of the law what does full compliance look like and then we were sort of able to sort that out and select four of these to be in official compliance again with many of the other ones also sort of partially provided. Um and I think that's a nice way of working. And no, you you can't. We had all these talks with staff like, can we provide half of this one and half of that one? Like no, you have to fully comply on certain ones, but you know, I think just reading the whole document together is the way to use it. Um, from the outset, we felt like the corners of this long thin site were going to be really important. Um, there's a change of feel that happens as you turn the corner from North San Monteo onto States or Villa Terrace. We designed the corners to reflect this as outlined in the ODS and just in in good design practice. Um, and also really paying attention to vision corners and safety issues and those kinds of things. So, that concludes my presentation. Thank you to planning staff and the whole Samonteo team for working with us really closely throughout the whole process. Um, we're honored to be working with Prometheus. They're just a dream come true developer. Their sort of long-term commitment is amazing. Um, we're really excited to bring this project to Sonteo and of course I'm here to answer any questions about anything. Thank you everyone.

Thank you so much. Um, next is public comment on this item. So, I'm going to go ahead and open the public comment on this project. Members of the public who wish to speak on this item and are in person, please turn in your yellow request to speak slip now. Members of the public who are watching online on Zoom, please raise your hand to speak now. HVA, do you know how many um requests to speak that we have?

Through the chair, we only have two inerson public commenters.

Okay, great. Um based on our speaking guidelines, each public commenter will then have three minutes to speak. We will begin with Steve Carlson and to follow Kathy this project and there's an awful lot in there. Um but I disagree with the staff. I don't think it complies with many aspects of the general plan. Doesn't comply with this community development block grant priority area which this is in. It will result in I think harm to the community through putting upward pressure on rents and pushing out many of the workingclass people that live in the neighborhood. We've already experienced that when there were some upgrades on buildings in the El Camino Rial area a couple of years ago. But I think the project primarily is incomplete in terms of its uh discussion that was excuse me let me back up. Um it's not ripe for review. Uh it's incomplete adequacy comes from the project description which is lacking particularly in the notice. It doesn't even include all the entitlements that are required that you see before you in your staff report. Additionally, we received a 73page transportation study that was intended to be attached to the staff report was not included. We didn't receive that because I noticed it sent a comment to staff. They did respond and it was a copy was made available online on yesterday midday. That's that's just an unreasonable amount of limited amount of time to try to look at a 73page uh transportation study. There's limited analysis by staff within its staff report. I think it consists of two

paragraphs and there's no way that one could surmise what that means. Um there's a number of issues that were raised was mentioned neighborhood meeting. There's nothing that staff well there's nothing about u the on street parking impact. That's one of the primary concerns that it's limited. This neighborhood was redeveloped in the 1960s. Everyone relies on street parking. There's almost no spaces available on Villa Terrace and other areas. What's happening now is, and many of these are working-class people, they have two and three cars per household. They're having to shuffle cars around. With this building, there's no visitor parking spaces. And while it does only provide half, it's not enough. I think um I mean, I gave you a page a five-page summary. I don't had a chance to read that. I have more extensive I've been spending two weeks writing 20 pages on how this thing does not comply. My primary concern about the building is all the exceptions that they're requesting. They're not complete. The open landscaped areas are not allowed by your zoning code. In fact, under E2, all uses in the building have to be fully enclosed. So, it doesn't comply. They may want to add another zoning code variance. It creates harm not only for the gentrification, but also by close proximity of the building to the adjacent residences. By grading and excavation, each of those owners is responsible for shoring up their own property at their own expense to protect their properties.

Thank you, sir. Your time is up. Thank you.

First, I want to say thank you to Steve Pollson for my fellow resident who has concern about this project and has very good input. Um, I must express that I'm somewhat discouraged to be here tonight as many of us in the neighborhood participated in the meeting with the Prometheus group a year ago. Yet, despite our comments, no changes were made to the proposed project. At that time, we spent our evening sharing feedback on the North Samonteo Drive project. And as residents, we were very thorough on outlining our our size and parking concerns for the project. Our comments then focused on several key issues. The project's height and density, the lack of parking, and the insufficient setback in the architectural style, which is not in line with the character of the neighborhood. Unfortunately, it appears that none of these concerns were addressed in the current design. We are now asked to spend another evening providing feedback. And I must be honest that our comments remain largely the same as before. Now, I have learned that our feedback does not matter because the city and its residents have lost their right to request any changes due to state presidents for housing, which give developers the right to build despite design, height, and parking wishes of the neighborhood and its residents. As residents of Sanonteo Heights, our input reflects our traffic and parking experiences and our commitment to maintaining the quality of life in this neighborhood. We respectfully urge the planning commission to advocate for the community's best interests. As currently proposed, this project would negatively impact the neighborhood and significant adjustments are needed to ensure it contributes positively to the area. Specifically, I appeal the following considerations. The driveway should be relocated to Sam North Sanonteo Drive to reduce impact on the single family

homes. Each dwelling should have at least two parking spaces plus guest parking. Building height at scale should align with surrounding structures. Adequate setbacks should be maintained the same as the houses have front yards. There should be adequate setback for this building. Also, the scale should align with um let's see and and the architectural style should reflect the neighborhood's existing character such as arts and crafts, Spanish and Victorian styles. As part of safety, the project should contain adequate parking even if it is not required by state standards. I'm saying safety because safety because residents already do not have adequate parking and are experienced frustration in parking on a daily basis which sometimes leads to great conflicts and can impact safety in the neighborhood. The residents should great would greatly appreciate your attention to these recommendations for the project. We hope that these concerns are taken seriously and addressed in the project's revisions. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any more requests to speak?

Yes, we have one more public commenter via Zoom. Okay. Helen, you may unmute yourself and speak. Hi everyone, my name is Helen Browman. Let me see if I can get my Am I allowed to be live on the camera or is that something you control? Sorry, it'll be audio only.

Oh, okay. That's fine. My name is Helen Brazman. I've lived in this uh residential area for 25 years. I'm at the corner of Woodside and Villa Terrace. I walk this area every day. And I was appalled at the the first of all the presentation's great, all these pretty pictures, but the reality is I took a walk this afternoon and I stood at the corner of Villa Terrace and North Sanonteo Drive and there is nothing charming about looking up and envisioning six stories amongst this neighborhood. If I look north, south, east, and west, everything it that you can see above a house, a charming house is two stories or three stories. There is nothing in the area that is six stories. So, the word charming is out the window. The parking is already horrendous in this neighborhood. And I see these neighbors that are jacking around their cars trying to put their garbage cans there to save the space. But while they run the kid to the school, I have a garage. It's not a worry to me, but I see what my neighbors are do having to do. And when I look at the number of units and the reality of the number of adult parkers that will be in this residence, the real number is 270 at minimum. So parking for 180 spaces is is going to be a very big impact on this community. Now I don't know if the Sanonteo Planning Commission has any concern about the freeway traffic, but you have

half of these people going to Peninsula Avenue and half of them going to Popppler and it's already a terrible congestion for the commuters. The backup on 101 to exit the freeway is horrendous in Berlingame. It's very scary to be thinking you might be hit on the freeway. And I have brought this to the attention of the planning commission and I've not heard any reply to my email. So those are my thoughts. Thank you for your comment. through the chair. Those are all our public commenters.

Okay, great. I'm going to go ahead and close the public comment at this time. So, the applicant has the option to have five minutes to respond to any of the public comment if they wish.

Good evening, uh, Chair Patel and planning commissioners. I'd like to just address the parking details a little bit more, um, if I have a quick moment. I'm Jonathan Stone with Prometheus uh real estate group. And with regards to the parking and the 180 parking spaces that are uh planned, there's a rationale behind that from from our perspective. Um when we plan parking within multifamily projects, we study uh usage rates relative to proximity to transit. Um we own and manage over 13,000 thousand units and so have a good deal of um of data on this and to see what usage patterns are. At the roughly half mile distance mark, we see a a usage ratio of um roughly one one and that's what's being implemented here with the 180 uh parking spaces. As you get closer to uh a transit station, say quarter mile, that drops to about a 0.5 usage ratio. um we see that within our projects here in Samo. Um so that's the rationale behind that. With regards to some of the off- streetet parking related matters, um the existing off- streetet parking spaces uh in place, there are are 10 identified by the city. The design of the proposed project uh increases that by one. Um, so it gets to 11, but that's also inclusive of the sidewalk uh and streetscape design guidelines that enhance that pedestrian streetscape. Uh, implement the ADA curb cuts at the intersections uh that are per code. Um, as well as the street uh plantingcape standards as well. So, there's a lot that factors into that, but just wanted to paint that picture and provide some background there.

Okay. Thank you. Next up, we have clarifying questions from the planning commission. Um, Chair Patel, if I could also add, um, online, we have John Thompson um, with the public works department and also, um, Zack Doll, community development director. So, if there are any questions to be directed to them, they are available. Great. Thank you so much. Which of my fellow commissioners would like to go first? Commissioner Williams,

I can start. I always pick on you as often. I do. Um, but I might have other questions as we go along, but I I'll start with a couple. Um, related to the parking question. Um, so I found it helpful to well, first of all, I should say I did meet with the applicants um, last week, I guess it was, and got an overview of the project. And then I've been to the site and walked the neighborhood and also walked across the street at the um 888 Sanonteo Drive project which I found useful to kind of compare in terms of the the sidewalk and streetscape and stuff. So I have questions about kind of that kind of thing. Um starting with parking. Um I guess this is just a um I I had a You know, it was a little hard to see all the detail on the um basement level parking plan just to be sure. I guess my question is is there anything elective in that basement level or on either of the parking levels that um in other words that you know could be um that are sort of nice to haves that could be um eliminated in in lie of parking spaces. I mean, we're hearing that and I guess the question is, are all of the programmed spaces on the parking levels like required spaces like mechanical rooms, electrical rooms, elevators?

The the majority of those are requirements by code. Um, there are some, I would say, Prometheus programmatic elements that are within that space. There's a maintenance room on the State Street side. uh but that's uh maintenance space that we provide to make sure that the building is maintained. So we have a program of a certain amount of space related to x amount of units that provides space for employees as well as tools in order to maintain that. So um

we've studied this that it will certainly be something continued to be studied as we move from this point into working drawing development. So there there is the ability for further refinement that may result in additional parking spaces, but we can't confirm that at this time. And then um additionally related to that, the carve out for that heritage tree that's kind of midway in the in the lot in the rear lot that how many spaces did you lose by by providing that carveout for that tree? So between the there's two tree carveouts. There's the one uh at the State Street edge and then the one that's more midb block if you will. Um

and the the result of both of those um was a loss of roughly six spaces in order to make that adjustment. Mhm.

So we had 186 at the beginning of the application process and through the adjustment and the refinement of those uh protective measures for the trees uh it we lost uh reduced the garage by about six spaces. Okay, that was an interesting balancing act on what is what's the most important. Um, so that's something to think about. Um, I mean, I don't know if it's something to think about. It's something I thought about. Um, let's see what else did I have. Uh I guess the other thing that I would ask Oh, there was a comment made that shoring is the responsibility of the neighboring property owners. Isn't shoring the responsibility of the project?

That's correct. Okay. So that is a really big deal. I think that should be clarified that shoring is going to be provided by your project. Yes, that's correct.

Okay. Um that was really surprising. Um, and then I guess again going back to 888 Sanonteo Drive, which is across the street in EPA block, I thought it was interesting to look at their sidewalk and the trees, which I think you had mentioned previously. Um, what can does anybody know I should have taken a tape measure, I guess. Does anybody know how your project compares to that sidewalk? you know what will you know right now it's a comfortable sidewalk in front of 888 Sanail drive although there are you know residences right there at grade as well but we can our landscape architect is on the line we can

how do those two projects compare and our civil engineers here so give us a moment on on that we can certainly answer it but there were um that was certainly studied there's also within the streetscape design guideline master plan if I have that uh titled correct in the appendix there are I believe it's 12 different appendix examples that are referenced and there and used as examples depending upon the type of property and the location of the city and I'm forgetting the exact if it was A8 um

but there there is one that is determined to be used and within it it has a cross-section of the different portions of the streetscape. Right. Okay. So that's applied here and then it's applied within the context of the site. So the there's a planting zone, a through zone, and a buffer zone. Yeah. And so that's applied here and that cross-section is shown. Okay. It's A5.

So along Sato Drive, this is Scott Shark, there's a 10 foot walkable distance between the building and a followed by a 5 and a half foot section that's interspersed with um and that's in this project with trees and a plant strip. Okay. Yes. And we can pull what's across the street as well. I believe our BKF may have worked on that previously, but we we did some comparison. Okay. Yeah. I mean, they're similar, I guess, is the point. They're not I looked at that when we very first started the project. It's very similar. It's not any smaller than that. I'm assuming driven by the city standards.

Well, it's the city standards that you implement and it's again that cross-section and how you implement it. Okay. All right. Well, that I mean and with that the tree species falls into that or the tree location and dimension between trees. So there's a a rhythm and pattern and all that was studied at length with planning and public works throughout the process.

Okay. So that answers my question. I just wanted to be sure it was sort of comparable so that you know we can get an idea by walking across the street and get a sense of what that will be like. Um I think my I I have one other minor question. Can we can we make a recommendation for the type of you know it's a trailing vines which in my mind that seems like might I I have a suggestion that it could be like a creeping fig I think it's called which is a compact evergreen you know hugs attaches itself to a surface like a fence or stuck a wall and I think it should be a plant like that instead of a trailing vine that is going to not hold up as well in a space that's not easily maintained

uh for the the blank wall for the wall. So I think we would certainly consider that we would want to check on maintenance related matters so that that species does not damage or cause maintenance issues. One of the things we want to make sure is we have a a plant that is productive and spills over. Sometimes the climbing ones want to go up and not down. Yeah. So we want to ensure that we have something that provides the coverage that gravity is going to take with it if that I guess I'll leave that to the landscape architect. They'll know but noted we but I think you know something it's a very good species. Yeah. We just want to make sure down. Okay. That's all I have for now. Thank you.

We can. Anyone else? Commissioner Shaml do you have any questions? First off to thank Greg for the presentation. Um, very informative and uh um just a couple questions uh for staff. Just considering the red lines that were on the conditions of approval, will those be struck um indefinitely for future like projects or is this a case by case depending on the project?

Um I can speak to that a bit. Um we are actually working on doing a bit of an overhaul to our um conditions of approval just to make sure that everything is consistent across all of them. Um and so that change that we made uh that that we were recommending that removes the building permit um at building permit stage um will be removing from from future ones as well.

Got it. Thank you. Um for the question for the applicant um I didn't see too much mechanical on the rooftop. um the what was shown on the renderings uh seemed very limited for a project this size. Is there were those renderings accurate for how much mechanical would be on the roof and is there sufficient screening for those? I can do that. Sure. And and there's a roof plan which referenced this as well, but yes. Yeah. No, we actually we did uh put up the right number of condensers there. Um especially on the double loaded Sam North Sanonteo Drive side of the building. It's it's pretty deep floor plate, so we're able to keep those condensers kind of

centered over the building, so it's sort of naturally screened. Like we did view angle studies, you just can't see them anyway, so we don't need to provide additional screening. Um, but yeah, it's it's an accurate count. Thank you. Yeah. Um, just I think you answered most of the questions regarding the parking, but um, were there any considerations made uh for guest parking at at any part? I know the 180 is um more than what is required. Um is there any was there any consideration for that?

Guest parking is certainly um something we always consider it and there are ways to um create guest parking within behind what will be the parking gate. Um so there's technologies now that allow guests to be able to arrive and access spaces inside. We haven't gotten to the programming of that yet, but as we get to the place where we understand what the total usage is, we may see usage less than the one to one and therefore have the ability to create more guest parking. But that's sort of an operational decision once we understand how the building is ultimately being used. Got it. Understood. Thank you. Those are my questions.

Commissioner Clerfter, do you have any questions?

Uh, yeah. I think I might just have two questions. I had asked a question. Uh thank you also for both presentations and everyone who spoke. And um I should also uh start off by disclosing that I uh did have a meeting prior to this with the uh applicant. Um, I uh I had asked a question uh to staff about the trees on particularly on North Sano Drive and and Joanne I think you had answered my question earlier about um the tree species and I think you'd said that because I'd asked I'd said that that the species which is actually indicated on the plans right now is actually differs from the street tree master plan and then you indicated that there might still be some discussion about the exact species that ends up getting planted.

Yeah, that's right. Um the applicant had actually proposed a a different tree, a London plane tree to be consistent um with the um the 888 project that you were talking about. um that is not consistent with the street tree master plan, but we um did want to allow for um some potential consideration of another species that might be appropriate and um maybe more in scale with the size of the building that's being proposed. So, um we did include a condition of approval in there that would allow some flexibility for that to be determined at a later date.

Okay, thanks. Uh, and then I actually had a question that just came up because we were talking about the lighting and everything and I suddenly was thinking about the uh I think this is probably a question for the architect uh um about the uh lighting. Um, I was thinking about those few units which are on the back side. Um, and they have the there's a there's a couple units which have small sort of rear decks and there's indication of lighting there. And I just wanted to um ask if there's been some thought about because I I think they're slightly up above the level of the units existing building immediately behind there. They're kind of looking down and in. So, I just wanted to ask that ask if there's some consideration about the kind of lighting there. So, just to make sure that it doesn't shine into those windows which are kind of a little bit lower down.

Absolutely. I mean, we want to abide by dark sky requirements in general. There is a building code requirement for a certain amount of lighting at all exterior doorways, but we we have proposed a fixture that's like down lighting only and it's quite tight like hugging the building. So, it's really just going to cast a code compliant pool of light there at the door, but it's sort of not designed to like have a party out there in the nighttime or to shine towards anybody. You know, I can't say that there won't be any reflection of light, but it's we're we're doing the absolute minimum we need to do for code compliance there. Yeah. Great. Yeah. Thank you.

I think that those are the questions I had right now.

Great. Um I also want to disclose that I met with the applicant and received an overview of the project. Um I do not have any questions beyond what my fellow commissioners have already asked. Do we have any final questions? Seeing none, should we go ahead and open it up for comments and discussion? Do any of my fellow commissioners have comments about this project that they would like to share or anything they want to discuss? Um, I feel like my comments are kind of all over the place. um they're not as organized as I would like um because there's a lot of elements to this project. So um you know I mean thank you I should start by saying thank you for the presentations both of both of them and uh and all of the attention and care in this project. Um, I also always like to thank the public speakers because I, you know, learn a lot about, you know, what's going on in the neighborhood, who lives there, and and I really, um, you know, I do feel like we need to do what we can to within our within our li within the limited means that we can to to, you know, to satisfy all the aspects of the project. But as we know that's almost impossible to do to do it all. Um so I guess I find it a little frustrating sometimes to be in this position because we are really um you know uh we're being held to this the requirements by the state and of course applicants are you know provided with the opportunity to create a lot of housing opportunity which is a really positive thing. Um, and this is our

venue to talk about, you know, how we'd like to see that work. But, you know, starting with the parking, there's really very little I can say other than, you know, I think it's important to push for as much as we can. And I understand that you really don't have to do any parking. So, um, I think one parking per unit is, you know, would be great. We're not quite there. I would just love to like even just get to one parking per unit, one parking space. But anyway, um I I appreciate that you've done what you you know what you can to provide quite a lot of parking. Um I think it's a great project in a lot of ways. I I do like the uh architecturally I think that it's um a nice blend of materials. I was a little bit concerned that as to whether or not I was having a clear understanding of the elevation from the interior courtyard side. From the exterior from the street elevations, there's a lot of um articulation. There's a lot of different materials. And then, you know, does should that be more balanced on the inside of the of the space? Um uh I think um I I don't you know I guess I don't I know that part of it was an effort to um as we see on a lot of buildings you know we've got a long expanse a block long and so you've got an effort to break it up as much as possible. Um, so I guess I wouldn't mind, you know, seeing a little maybe balancing on the interior, but I'm just going to leave that at that. Um, let's see. Uh,

I think the TR I I'm I really like what you've talked about with the um the trees that would be a similar effect to 888 uh Samonteo Drive. And I think that that pedestrian um way along the front of the building, yeah, it will be a six-story building and you know that's that's great in a lot of ways, but it sounds like a really big massing, but I think that um the sun studies show that you're really not affecting anybody um anybody's daylight and sun um except for very, you know, limited time frames. frames. Um, and then the trees I think will create a nice pedestrian way there. Uh, um, with regards to the garage as uh, garage access, um, I do agree that Villa Terrace is the appropriate place um, as opposed to on busy Sato Drive. I did sort of take a little I was sort of noodling around to see like what would happen if it was moved closer to the corner. Um, I don't I don't know if that's what the implic I was going to ask what are the implications of that, but um but I also don't know that it changes that much. I mean, you'd still have some parking spaces along that very end of Villa Terrace and then um you know it it it's the short side of the building. So, um I again I think that that's the appropriate place to put it. Um I mean I guess those are really generally my um my thoughts. I think it's I think it's a good building. Yes, it's a big building. I always want to

try to air on, you know, some restraint, a little bit less space, more um a little bit less units and more open space. But you have a lot of open space and it is um I think it'll be really desirable open space. There's um you know there's sort of private shady you know spaces along the interior. There's the big sunny open um pool area which really helps reduce the massing of the building on Villaas and I think that'll go a long ways to to to lessening the impact to that the residents on that street. Um, and then yeah, and then you've got the additional breakout areas on the other on the upper floor. So, um, so I think it's I think it's a great project and, um, wish there was a little bit more parking just because I do agree one one space per unit would I guess you're essentially at one space per unit. So maybe that's a good thing. That's my comments. Thank you.

Commissioner Shunkle, do you have any comments?

Yeah, I do. Uh, as a lifelong Sanill resident, um I think this project is a good fit for um that uh that parcel there. Um those familiar with that parcel probably noticed throughout the years, it's always been a little bit more dilapidated of a dealership than the other ones that are further down into Berling game. Um, so, um, it wasn't always a friendly sight to see, um, the condition that that property was in, as well as the, uh, the sense that you got from that dealership or, u cars that were parked there. Um, so I do appreciate that this would be adding some beautifification to that part of Satel. uh like to thank Prometheus for being a long-standing Satel shareholders and being here in our community and wanting to assist with um not only adding value by u bringing a nice project like this to our city but also providing uh the much needed housing. Um and um with that being said, um in view of our uh compressed and limited, uh discretion and purview, um I just like to also echo uh Commissioner Williams in regards to the parking, which there was some um other means that we could or other avenues that we could look at for providing um this much needed parking. And I think it's all throughout San. not just uh relative to this project, but I think it's going to be um something that we are going to have to constantly wrestle with. And so I do appreciate the consideration of adding parking where you guys did not have to. Um uh although I I still do hear the community voice and um their need and their want for for more parking to be done, but um that's about all we can say and and do on on the parking. Um, I do appreciate once

again echoing Commissioner Williams the uh avoiding the queueing of cars on Samill Drive and taking it off to uh uh the side street there. And um I think that's one thing that could help alleviate some of the concerns of uh of our neighbors in that in that uh neighborhood. And so um I like the project. I think it's um a good-look project. I do appreciate the bofilic design. I could use some of that in my house. Um and um that's those are my comments. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Clafter.

Yes. Thank you. Um I would yeah again echo the comments of my fellow commissioners um particularly with regards to uh this commission's discretion, our ability to respond to uh neighborhood concerns. you know, I mean, I I certainly read every comment that uh we receive and um you know, my general feeling these days is, you know, it's like I just don't you know, I'm not sure what we are able to to do constructively um at at some of these sessions and um you know, it is it is going to be an ongoing thing just to kind of respond to the various neighborhood concerns. As as Commissioner Shunkle said, parking is a concern. uh in every neighborhood when these when these larger developments uh are are coming in um noise, construction noise, light air. I mean, you know, it's a it's a common it's a common uh concern of the neighbors and and um you know, that being said, um uh you know, we as I said, you know, paying attention to these things and and do what we can. Um, with regards to the addressing the project directly and the design, um, I do have to say I, um, uh, with regards to this project, uh, I really do think the design is is, uh, excellent overall. Just looking at the project by itself, um, uh, I I think that, uh, there are some things here that are are I wish I could see in more projects of the scale. Um the uh as I said the biohilic design this this kind of you know passage all the way through the the project is uh is really really interesting. The smaller uh terraces on the upper floors

um the uh the way that they were able to get dual aspect units. Um where we have the the those rear units with the you know windows on two sides. you can get, you know, cross breezes and lighting and and more, you know, more bedrooms and all those sorts of things. I mean, that's really uh uh great to see. I wish uh we were seeing that more frequently. Um and uh the materiality, the way the podium, I think the the podium uh kind of the base of the project, the massing is really really uh it's really nice. Um, so overall I just uh I think it's uh you know I do think it will definitely um uh be a fantastic improvement on North Santo Drive there. As Commissioner Shunkle said, I've also been driving back and forth and and walking back and forth past this site for many many years and um uh I will not miss uh the parking lot. So, um, uh, want to see if anything else to say? Um, yeah, I know I, uh, just like I said, I think I think the design is very strong. Um and and also uh you know the willingness on the part of the applicant to have a larger number of different floor plans uh and and do all these things which are again didn't have to do but it is in service of the design uh and having a more interesting uh design of the overall project and uh so I just wanted to recognize that. Thank you.

Commissioner Patel may I make one other comment?

Of course. Um I uh meant to ask um staff Gre uh Greg rather um there was a comment made about I think it somebody made a comment about um the concerns about construction noise dust abatement you know all of these things and I guess I would like to just kind of reiterate that you know as you had said it was you know it's very regulated but it's really at the building department level not at the planning department level. We're certainly not at planning commission level. And and so, you know, I think it really will be addressed all those construction concerns about noise and um hours of construction and all of those kinds of things are typically handled during building permit process. Am I correct in that assessment?

Uh yeah, that that's correct. And I want to give some support to the planning commission can has those conditions in front of you and they're part of your action tonight to adopt those and you know should in the future you have any feedback you can let us know if you think that there's some tweaks that could be made to those conditions. Um, but there's what I'll call kind of extensive and pretty state-of-the-art to address the things you mentioned of noise, the use of the public ride ofway hours, um, posting of the site so the neighbors can know who to talk to if there's a concern. Um, thank you.

All right. If there are no other comments from my fellow commissioners, I will go ahead and give my comments. Um, I have one nitpicky comment and then a few broader comments. So, my one very nitpicky comment is that um as you get farther along in the construction drawings and you are specifying your public uh bicycle facilities, I would urge you to consider um a bike rack that supports ebikes and ecooters because we're really seeing an explosion in the adoption of those two things. And ebikes tend to have fatter tires that don't fit inside the bike racks like the kind that were shown on the rendering. And e- scooters just have a, you know, completely different shape entirely. And so it can be difficult to figure out how to lock an e- scooter to a bike rack. So I would just encourage um exploring the hardware a little bit and finding something that's a little bit more accommodating of the myriad forms of personal transport devices that we see coming onto the field. I think my broader comment is that I I want to reiterate some of what my fellow commissioners have said. You know, we heard quite a few public comments today about the size and the density um of this building, the amount of parking, the architectural design. And when it comes to housing projects, those decisions have largely been taken out of the hands of local jurisdictions. um between the housing accountability act which uh makes it illegal to deny a housing project unless there are specific or adverse impacts to public health and safety between um SB330 which locks in the rules at the time of submission and AB130 which exempts these infill projects from SQA. We are just seeing more and more discretion getting taken away from local jurisdictions. And so there is not a lot that the planning

commission can do that planning staff can do to require certain changes or design guidelines of these projects. That said, I do want to point out that this project is in conformance with our general plan. We spent six years developing a general plan trying to figure out how we want our city to grow over the next 20 years. We decided as a city, as a community, we wanted to accommodate 20,000 new people in line with our expected allocations from the state of how many new housing units we would have to build. We decided which 10 study areas we wanted to focus on. We decided that in this study area, we wanted to go up to six stories. And that is what this project does. So those decisions were already made with input from the community over a long period of time. And I I don't want to do too much like um making the state the boogeyman here because we did as a community decide that we want to move in a direction of higher height limits and more density along this corridor. And um I understand that there's concerns that this project may cause harm to the neighborhood, but I also want to be clear that it is providing a huge benefit, which is more housing for a community and a city and a region that is in a housing crisis. And that will be of a great benefit to the people who can't afford to live here um who want to live here and want their children to be able to live here someday. So, I want to echo my fellow commissioners in thanking Prometheus for being such a great partner in bringing housing to San Mateo. Um, I think the design of this project is very unique. I I've never quite seen um a interior prominade like

what you've designed at that scale and and I'm excited to see it come online. Um, so I I agree with my fellow commissioners that this is a great project for the community. And with that, can we have the language of the resolution up on the screen? Would one of my fellow commissioners like to motion? yours isn't already. Uh uh I'll make a I'll make a motion that the planning commission adopt a resolution to find that the project is exempt from further review under SQA and approve the site plan and architectural review SPAR site development planning application SDPA and vesting tenative parcel map the ETM to permit the construction of a new multif family residential building with 181 dwellings and associated site improvements at 7:15 North Sonteo Drive based on the findings for approval and subject to the recommended conditions of approval.

Second. And through the chair, may I just add that by using the phrasing the recommended conditions of approval that reflects the conditions as noted during the staff presentation? Yes. Agreed. Hello. May we please have a roll call vote? Commissioner Williams. Yes. Commissioner Shaml, yes. Vice Chair Clafter, yes. And Cher Pelle, yes. Motion passes 40.

Thank you. I will go ahead and close this item. The next item on our agenda is reports and announcements. Do we have any reports and announcements from staff or the city attorney? Sorry for you checking for announcements. Yes, sorry. Chatting over here. Um, uh, the only announcement that I have is, uh, a reminder to anyone who hasn't submitted your form 700 on the commission to please do so ASAP before the deadline. Thanks. Which I believe is April 1st. Is that correct?

Yes. Yes. Thank you. Um, do we have both meetings on the agenda agendaized for April? Yes, we are planning on both. Um, I believe it's April 14th and April 28th. Okay. I would like to um let my fellow commissioners and the public know that today uh the city posted the applications for the boards and commission seats. And so those applications are available online. Um my term is ending so there will be one opportunity to apply for a planning commission seat and anyone who's interested should check out that application and apply.

Does your term end at the end of June? Yes. Oh yeah. That's right. My first term. And then uh Commissioner Shan Cole, I'm going to put you in the hot seat. You attended the planning commissioners academy. Yes. I wanted to ask um how that went or if you had anything to share.

Yeah, just a little brief report. I I I was uh at the planning commissioner training academy. That was very uh it's like drinking from a fire hydrant. So, it's like a lot of it was uh but it was very informative nonetheless. Um uh once again I think they really drove home um our now compressed purview and limited um you know discretion that we have uh as far as it comes when it comes to housing. And so um a little uh you know I walked away from that a little somber and thinking about wow what could we still do but um yet you know uh I learned a lot about our objective design standards and how we could strengthen those and um that is our ability to try to um put these standards in place uh for these applicants when they when they come into um build in San Montel. So, um I thought that that was still um walking away with the silver lining in in it all. Um but yeah, was able to network with some people um and uh said hello to as many people as I could. I didn't I didn't get a chance to play the bingo game that they were that they were doing.

Um it seemed a little much cuz I saw people scrambling trying to get it accomplished and um yeah, I had enough on my plate just trying to drink in what they were uh providing at the during the the breakouts. But yes, uh I did enjoy it and I learned a lot. U fortunately I didn't bring my notes with me to highlight some of the things that I thought were um good updates for us. If you if I could get a chance to share them at the next um planning commissioner, uh I'd love to I think there are some important things that we could all learn and I'll just um go through those um as I have them on my notes. I could add one um one of the sessions that was also like a fire hose was um the final one about uh all of the proposed legislation. There's there's a lot as always.

Um that is often the most exciting session at the fire hose. Yeah. Any other notes or announcements? All right. I will go ahead and adjourn this meeting. Thank you everyone. Heat. Heat.