Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We're all set for 6 PM, Vice Chair.

You go home and come back.

Today.

Today. That's right. Sprint out of my office.

It was.

Okay.

Good evening. Let's call to order the special planning commission meeting. Study session of July 13, 2026 at 6 PM. The city doesn't tolerate disruptive behavior in our meetings. The planning commission meeting is considered a limited public forum, which means the commission can regulate the time, place, and manner of speech. Speaker comment must be limited to the agenda item being considered by the commission. If a speaker's comments are not related to an agenda item, the presiding officer will rule the speaker out of order. A speaker will not be ruled out of order because of a disagreement with the content of their speech. Location and online meeting details are available on the planning commission agenda. Use the show caption button to view captions on Zoom. Following the study session, the regular planning commission meeting will begin. We encourage the public to stay tuned and participate in the regular meeting. Recording officer, may we please have the roll call?

Commissioner Cerrone?

Present.

Commissioner Davis? Present. Commissioner Pine?

Present.

Commissioner Segura? Present. Chair Iglesias?

Present.

Vice Chair Shukla?

Present.

We have six commissioners present. Commissioner Fagoni is absent.

Thank you. Moving on to our first item, 26-0658. its proposed related applications on a four parcel totaling 1.04 acres. Special development permit to demolish the existing 10,038 square feet a bank building and construct 110 unit multifamily housing development, which includes 109 affordable unit plus one manager's unit within a five-story building, four levels of housing on top of one level of podium parking. Tentative map to create one lot from four existing parcels. The location is 295 South Matilda Avenue. This item is a study session. The study sessions are scheduled to provide in-depth information to the commission about a project or a topic. No motions are made or votes taken during a study session. Is there a staff presentation?

Yes.

Thank you.

Good evening chair, vice chair, planning commissioners and members of public. My name is Mary Jay Prakash. I'm the planner on this project. The proposal is for a special development permit and tentative parcel map to build affordable housing development. This project is subject to planning Commission review for approval, the site is to the north of mckinley and between Charleston until the avenue the site is across Maxwell development and surrounded by single family homes on other sites. The project site is over one acre. It consists of four parcels. The zoning is DSP block 16. The general plan designation is very high density residential. This is a former Wells Fargo bank site. The building still stands. The parcels are owned by the city. City has an agreement with Midman Corporation to develop this site for affordable homes. This is the original proposed project. This project has come a long way. The first submittal, planning submittal was made in May 2024 and we had an informal open house in July 2024. We did a property tour of Edwin Benner Plaza and Fair Oaks Plaza in October 2024. with interested neighbors we did a formal outreach in October 2025. the original design submitted to the city is what you see in the slides in this slide it included 126 units and a building and the building was six stories tall and the project proposed 67 parking spaces We have been receiving multiple concerns from community. These are key feedbacks we received. So the biggest one is the cumulative construction impact because of construction has been going on on the street for quite a while. Now, and also one of the concerns is guest parking and traffic. The project does meet state density bonus requirements. So the project proposes 65 as it stands now, but the state density bonus requirement was 55. The project proposes less DSP required parking spaces and lesser than special housing required parking per Sunnyvale Municipal Code. However, the project is within half a mile radius of a major transit stop. For that reason, there's not needed to provide minimum parking. Building mass, the building is designed as a good balancing act because it's right next to one-story single-family homes, whereas it is allowed to exceed minimum height along Charles, which is the requirement is maximum 30 feet and along Matilda is maximum 50 feet. But because of its location within half a mile radius, it is allowed to exceed three additional stories or 33 feet. There are concerns on safety and privacy. To address that, the design is carefully made such that the windows do not overlook the single-family homes along Charles and as much as possible to reduce the massing along Charles. So this is the updated proposed project. Here the proposal is 110 affordable rental housing. We had multiple city council hearings, city council meetings in 2025, and in early 2026, we had some city council meetings. the meetings were about the contract city has with midpen but along the way because of concerns with concerns that the neighbors raised on the project there were some discussions about the design made and the revised project is as a result of community concerns and direction by the city council So it is reduced from six to five stories. The overall building height is also reduced. Reducing the number of units also improved the proposed parking ratio. The proposal also enhanced the building design to improve massing along Charles Street. This is a site plan. So it's a proposed five-story building with ground floor podium parking. It also has uncovered parking. The site design is such that no resident vehicles enter the building through Charles Street to maintain the peace of the street. So the vehicles enter only through McKinley. And pedestrian access is through the corner of McKinley and Matilda Avenue. There is no pedestrian access along Charles Street. Building height and setback along Charles are also designed mindful of the single family homes along Charles. So the building is stepped up as you move away from the street. This is the elevation from West McKinley Avenue. I'll let the architect talk about the colors and materials of the building. This is rendering along Charles and McKinley. Here, the three-story roofline is designed to transition well with the nearby single-family homes and to mimic the roofline of Maxwell Building, which is right across the street. This is elevation from Matilda. Here you see the lobby and office area or to the left that are easily distinguishable with the use of different materials. This is rendering providing closer look of Matilda frontage. The project is allowed a maximum of four concessions through state density bonus law, these are the four concessions that they are requesting. lockable storage it's a common deviation for affordable housing projects and parking lot shading it does require only for uncovered spaces. The applicant will talk more about these conditions, how they are addressing them. I'll talk about the transformer concession and about the last one, the vision triangle. The transformer has to be underground when it's between the building and the street. But PG&E in this project didn't allow undergrounding. So they do decide on a case-by-case basis. So to address that, they are providing screening. Sorry, you can see the slides now. So the screening, you can see that the screening that they are providing is helping the screening with the hedges and screening with decorative metal fence. Staff is supportive of this concession because they have been reasonably addressed here. and the concession about vision triangle we do not allow structures within the vision triangle especially structures over three and a half feet here the project is proposing a 20 foot 20 inch diameter column which is 10 foot tall but we have we have allowed a tree if the lowest tree branch and foliage is over 10 feet above the ground So for this reason, staff is supportive of this concession as well. We are requesting your feedback on the revised project. We are doing environmental analysis. We are doing class 32 exemption. We have environmental consultants working on that. That will be complete in a couple of months. So once that is complete, we will schedule planning commission hearing. And we have the applicant mid-pens team here. And we also have key staff from housing and public works here to answer any questions you may have. We did receive some support letters through emails and that are added as last minute items to the attachments. This concludes my presentation. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation. And we have questions from my colleagues. So Commissioner Davis, please.

Thank you for the presentations. I have a few kind of technical questions. I don't know. I could probably predict I was going to ask these. I ask them every time. So what is the specific zoning for this parcel? Is it R4?

It is DSP block 16. It's a high density residential, so it might would be equivalent to R4. You're right.

Okay, so it's a special downtown, special plan. Okay. And what is the allowed density for that zoning?

The allowed density, I can pull that information quickly.

This is something like 56, I think.

Okay. OK. It's 54 is allowed density.

OK.

They are providing.

And so the state density bonus is they're utilizing that.

Yes, they are utilizing that.

OK. that that makes perfect sense I just want to get that in the record um so so this was submitted or this application was submitted over two years ago yes okay um it's affordable housing I know that it it takes time to assemble the financing so I may have some questions for the applicants on that um I was looking at the parking um without the density bonus and and uh just according to normal Sunnyvale statute, how much parking would have been required?

So normal Sunnyvale, so there are two normal Sunnyvale standards. One is through DSP and the other one is through the special housing developments requirements. The special development housing requires 168 and DSP. 158? 168.

168, okay.

And DSP requires 185. But as you see, because it's within half a mile radius of a major transit stop, they are exempt from minimum parking requirements.

Yeah, I just like to get it into the record of how much the state is overriding our local rules, right? So in this case, we're getting because of state uh state law we're getting 123 less so state density bonus has its parking requirements as well and they do meet that so that requirement is uh 55 while they're providing 65. okay um i i just i just want to get this into the record so um so they're providing 62 spots right and 65. 65 okay i thought i saw six um so yeah so um if if sunnyvale laws were able to apply in the situation we'd be looking at 120 more spaces is is kind of the now it's a separate debate as to whether or not we require too much parking um but but we know it's moot um i just want to get it into the record that You know, the state is overriding us. I had a question about the EV spots. It looks like there's seven. Is that correct?

I remember. So, yes, seven.

Okay. And I may be stealing Commissioner Cerrone's thunder here. It looked like six of the seven are accessible. Are these six all of the accessible parking spaces?

The six are accessible parking spaces. I would let the applicant confirm that information.

Okay. But that's what I recall. Give you a little foreshadowing. We always ask about the accessible parking spaces and yes um you get the idea um i had some questions about the concessions because we don't see 100 affordable very often and really around the legal framework around this uh so so what is the state law and what is um i guess what are the standards right we're used to seeing the one concession and unlimited waivers exactly right so what is it for a hundred percent affordable

It is unique for 100% affordable housing developments. So here, the requirement is they are allowed four concessions. Four is the maximum they could get. They are not allowed any waivers.

Okay.

If they want waivers, they have to really make the case on that. That would be hard-fetched. But anyway, they're not applying for waivers here. Yeah.

Okay, it's interesting. You can tell these laws are developed independently of each other, right? Okay, so which state law is this, by the way?

I can look up on the government code number.

Okay. It's a study session, so we could save that for the regular hearing.

Yes, you're right.

sorry about that all right i said it's a study session so we could save that for the regular hearing all right commissioner what was your question which state law are you referring to um what's uh what's granting the four concessions and then oh okay that would be under like state density bonus law did you want the okay okay so this is density bonus law yeah okay uh and then i saw that pg e is no longer allowing undergrounding of Transformers?

That's the case. But here and there, I do see projects where they are allowing. But for this one, we did meet with them through our public works department, and they're not allowing.

Okay, so it's not a blanket prohibition?

If I can add to that, there is a nationwide shortage of underground transformers, which is what's driving the design now to have them be placed above ground. Our understanding from PG&E is that There might be some special situations where they could approve above ground, but the standard requirement is that they have to be, I'm sorry, I'm going to say that again. There are unusual situations where if site constraints prohibit it, they do allow it to be placed underground. But that is the exception rather than the rule. and the rule is that they need to be placed above ground. That has been PG&E's statement in the last year or two. So I think you're going to see that even more until they solve the issue about the shortage.

Okay, so this is more of a policy thing then. If we have the requirement that they need to be undergrounded, but PG&E has Perhaps with good reason, but unilaterally decided that no, they're not going to permit it. They will have to figure something out, right? It doesn't need to impact this project. I was just curious about that. Yeah.

And if I could just add to that as well. So one of the design solutions that we've tried to work out is to place transformers within the envelope of a building. That helps to reduce the deviation for having it be placed in between a building and a street. Sometimes based on site constraints like this one where there is really not much of a setback and there are space constraints with parking, that design solution is not available.

Okay, okay. I'm sure this will come up again. I just wanted to make sure I understood. Those are all my questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. The next one is Commissioner Cerrone, please.

Thank you, Vice Chair, and thanks for the presentation. So let's see, following up on some of the things Commissioner Davis mentioned and some other things, like the concessions, is the vision triangle requirement an aesthetic requirement or is it a safety issue?

It is a safety requirement. The reason why I mentioned that staff is willing to support this is because we do have exemption. Say if it's a tree, we do have exemption when the lowest foliage or a branch starts 10 feet above. So we do allow a clearance of 10 feet from the ground. So in this case, if we consider If we compare that exemption, this is something that we can allow.

If I could add to that as well. So the intent of a vision triangle requirement is so that when a car is rounding the corner, there's no physical obstruction so that they might not see a pedestrian or a car. So this is something that we've been working with our public works division for quite some time for the last two years to see if from a traffic perspective of a car rounding the corner, is there going to be an obstruction? And the advice that we got from them is that it is similar to a tree in terms of where the bulk of the building mass starts. It starts on the second floor. So the only obstruction you're going to see is a column. from when a car is rounding the corner. And in their professional opinion, it was not going to create a safety hazard.

OK. All right. Well, good. I mean, there would be ways to mitigate that. And sometimes you see mirrors or something to slow the, because they're going to be hitting that turn from Matilda, right, coming very fast. So if they can't see what's there, could be, and it could be a bicyclist or something. At the very least, it seems like you'd want to minimize the diameter of the post while making it structurally adequate, but maybe not put a lot of decorative things around it.

Exactly. And if you have any further questions, the applicant can answer that. But there was definitely a design iterative that we had to go through to make sure that staff felt comfortable that the design of the column was really the minimum needed to support the structure from above.

Okay. So the project description letter states that the design will also provide a widened pedestrian zone along Matilda Avenue. First of all, are there any downtown specific plan requirements for the width of pedestrian zone?

So not for the requirement from the DSP, but they do have to, there is no setback requirement as well. The setback is zero at Matilda.

um yes we can look up the minimum set sorry sidewalk width the downtown specific plan does have specific blocks where sidewalks are required to be wider you'll see that alongside some of the new projects that have been built and then also across the street at city line so we could look up that distance requirement okay i just found out sorry

So DSP Table 7-1 asked for a streetscape sidewalk configuration of 14 feet. And there was an objective design standards table as well, asked for a maximum setback of 10 feet. So we are meeting that because the minimum we are providing is 16 feet. So we do meet the minimum 10 feet and minimum 14 feet. So two sets of requirements we have, one by DSP and another one by ODS, Objective Design Standards. One is 14, one is 10, but they are providing 16. So they meet that.

So this is, but this is just obviously along the, you know, the width of the, project as it faces Matilda, that you're doing that. Walking around over there, I was kind of alarmed at how narrow the walkway is along Matilda. I mean, you can barely pass one person on that sidewalk. It seems kind of dangerous, but I don't know what we can do about it. Certainly, doing it for this project is a start, and maybe down the road, the other Things can get expanded because it almost seems dangerous. Does the downtown specific plan have any active ground floor or transparency requirements along Matilda?

I don't.

You know, active ground floor or?

Yeah, I have not flagged any of those in my initial review, but I did flag the other sidewalk ones. I can check that again, but I can check against the DSP to see if there is anything. But I don't see anything in my initial review.

Because across the street, they definitely have full glass on all those newer buildings.

Yeah, typically there's a condition of approval when you have frontages that are non-residential, like a retail frontage or an office frontage, where we restrict the amount of film or opaqueness that they add to try to allow for more of the see-through. Typically for residential projects, that doesn't exist, but we'll make sure that we add a note in our staff report if there's anything like that.

Uh, on another subject, is there a, uh, parking permit program in place for Charles street residents? Uh, and how far does it extend? It looks like, uh, Charles street South of McKinley now requires permits, but not the portion of the other side of, uh, um, McKinley, the, uh, North side of McKinley, uh, and that portion, which is where this project is going to be.

Thank you. We do have Lillian Singh here from the Department of Public Works or Transportation and Traffic Division who can answer that question.

Hi, I'm Lillian Singh, Public Works Transportation and Traffic Division. So currently on Charles Street, the segment between McKinley and Evelyn, there is an existing residential parking permit that's been in place for many years. That's part of the Caltrain. That was adopted as part of the Caltrain parking and it has a seven hour parking permit restriction on Monday through Fridays.

Between McKinley and Evelyn?

Correct, on Child Street.

Okay.

And then south of McKinley, Council recently approved a residential parking permit between McKinley and Iowa for 24 hours, seven days a week, parking restriction with a permit.

Right, right. You're saying there's a, it's not a parking permit, it's a limitation of seven hour parking?

It is a residential parking permit area on Charles Street between McKinley and Evelyn.

Evelyn, okay. Correct. All right. I did not see that over there. Are there signs that indicate that?

Yes, there are.

All right. Good. Okay. Regarding the parking, as Commissioner Davis already brought up, there's 228 bedrooms there and 65 parking spaces provided. And as mentioned, the normal Municipal Code would have, did you say 168, 158? Yes, 168. Spaces. So now we can't really blame MidPenn for this because this is exactly what the state wants us to be doing, even can do it with no parking at all. Now, the law does not say they must provide minimal parking or no parking. And some developers, certainly for market rate projects close to transit, they still decide what they think they will need in terms of offering parking in order to rent the units. But maybe more significantly, I believe the state funding for affordable housing developments does not want to pay for parking or locked storage or anything that does not have a person living in it. So that's where we are. So, since state laws absolve the developer from any responsibility regarding overflow parking and impact on neighboring residents, it seems like it falls to the city to address these issues that, you know, we could ignore it or we can deal with it. Are there any plans to by the city to provide for offsite parking? Are we budgeting for increased parking enforcement by DPS?

Not that I am aware of. I know that the city is studying parking minimums right now. That is a study that I believe is expected to come before the Planning Commission and City Council towards the end of the year to just examine our parking rates to see if they make sense given the current environment. But there's not... a city-owned parking lot or anything like that that the city is studying for additional parking. I do just want to add some context about the parking rate that they're proposing. So they're proposing 0.59 parking spaces per unit. You may recall that MidPenn has two other projects on Sonora Court, 1171 and 1178, and those parking rates were about 0.5 per unit. So this one is proposing slightly over, just slightly.

Right. So there's a house at 259 South Matilda Avenue. And do we know what's going on with that house? This house will be kind of in a cave once this is built. It is right, it is surrounded on two sides by this multi-story project. Before the project was- I hope they're aware of this.

Yeah, before the project started in full swing, there was discussion to buy that property off so that we can have a wholesome site plan, including that property as well. But I think then it fell through, that proposal didn't work. So the house continued to stay as a single family home. which is allowed, they can do that, but they chose not to take part, not to sell off, which is okay as well.

So you're saying there was an attempt to buy that, but they didn't want to sell it. All right. And it wasn't obvious to me that there were all these drawings that show shading, and it called out the percentage for the ones on Charles Street, but it didn't. mentioned this, although you could see it in the drawing, it looks like it was going to be in shade a lot of the time. But it's not it's not DSP.

Yeah. So downtown specific land properties are exempt from shading requirements. Because it is in a high density area, and all of DSP properties are exempt from shading requirements, the 10% shading that we look for in other properties.

OK. All right. OK, that's all I have for now. Oh, I just had a comment that already came up that if PG&E no longer allows these underground transformers, maybe we should get rid of that as a requirement if it's not possible. But you clarified that, that it's not a hard rule. It's a preference, and in some situations you do it. So I guess we might as well leave that in place. And as mentioned, the EV parking, if the accessible units are the only EV parking and only people who need accessible units can use it, then there's really no EV charging for most of the residents there. So it's just not the first time we've seen this. It just seemed like a bad plan given the state's All right, thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Our next one is Commissioner Sigura, please.

Thank you, guys. Thank you for the presentation. I have a few questions and a few clarification. Charles Street is a street with single residential homes. And I know that we went lower in that side. However, did we take all measures to make sure that the privacy of the people on Charles Street will be stayed? Because I know it's a big concern of people who's living there because of the height and possibility to look into the yards and their houses. And I was wondering if there is any, measures maybe using landscape landscape that can be done to most likely landscape that can be done to create like a green screen which will look nice but also keep the privacy of the residents on charles street um Another thing that I would like to get clarification on about the transformer, so the transformers that are going to be inside the buildings, is that correct?

no no the transform so that that's an option um that we we study in generally in all projects that option didn't work here because there's already too many other uses that are happening at the back side of the wall on the other side so this design couldn't afford to give up an interior space for transformer So we did try that, but it didn't work here.

Okay, but the big transformers can be a pollution, a noise pollution. There's any sound walls that are going to be built around them or something to that extent?

So noise is anytime when there is a transformer or any equipment, we do check against the operational noise standards of the city. And in this aspect as well, we did ask them to provide what would be the noise at the property line of adjacent homes so that it doesn't exceed. And they seem to comply with the noise requirements.

Okay. So the EV chargers, are those going to be a parking or limited just for charging? Because I would assume as time goes by more and more people will have more EV car or more EV vehicles. So is that going to be just a parking to charge or somebody can come because he has an EV can park his car and then other people will suffer without the ability to charge?

It looks like seven of the vehicle spaces will have a Level 2 EV charger. And the remaining spaces will have installed receptacles? Is that what your question is? Whether or not they will have EV ready spaces?

I wanted to know if somebody that has an EV charger, a car that is EV can come and just park in front of the charger whether it is charging or not. Or there would be a certain period of time that somebody allowed to come park, charge, and then have to find a different parking spot?

Yeah, I think that is more of a parking management question that we can certainly defer to the applicant to explain how those spaces will work.

Okay. And the last thing I looked at... Everybody's talking about the parking and it's a big deal, obviously. So when I look at the plans and we have the boiler room and next to it we have the dumpster room, then we have like three parking. Did we have any consideration of moving the parking a little bit down, create it to a one-way street, like if you would come in, you would make a right instead of those parking spots? go all the way down and make it like a one-way and then actually gain another about six or eight parking spots on the other side so you're giving up like three in favor of getting about one two three four five six seven eight nine spots

I know that there was a lot of discussion about what's competing for space on the ground floor with regards to designing around parking and try to maximize it as much as possible. I think that's really more of a question for the applicant as well, because there are definitely some changes to the design that was floated. Okay.

Last thing that has nothing to do with this particular project, but many other projects that are happening in northern San Diego, I just wanted to bring it out there. We're building more housing, which is great. And we have a unit with three bedrooms that obviously or probably will have small families there. the kids will get to obviously middle school high school what about schooling system do we take those things in consideration as well to make sure that more people in this city that will have more spaces for obviously education like fremont high this housing will be belong probably to fremont high and my two kids are going to fremont high and um I know how packed the school is. There is any consideration, any things that you guys working together because of more and more housing with the school system to make sure that there are a place for those kids?

Yeah. School impacts is a little bit tricky. There's actually some schools and school districts that are seeing a decrease in enrollment. That's tricky considering we see so many housing projects before us. But we do work collaboratively with the school district. The law is if you are proposing housing, you have to pay your impact to the school. So if a project gets approved during the building permit phase, they have to figure out which school district they're in, and they pay an impact fee based on number of units, and that is meant to mitigate their impact to the schools.

Okay, perfect. Thank you so much.

Thank you, I don't see any other hand from the Commissioners. So. Is there an applicant report?

um may i quickly um there was a question about government code section i looked it up it is 65915 thank you hi can you guys hear me okay

hi my name is jennifer liu and i'm the pen's project manager for the proposed affordable housing at 295 south matilda avenue with me today is lori moffett fellberg from dollin architects as well as molly neighbor and nevada merriman also from midpen and they are available here for questions as commissioners may know midpen is a non-profit affordable housing developer we own and operate affordable housing all across the bay area but our home base is right here on the peninsula We have 11 affordable communities right here in Sunnyvale, including the R.D. Hall Square affordable community over at the Lawrence Station area, which just completed construction and is now fully leased. We're now here to share our proposal for 295 South Matilda. Grab this clicker. This community will be 110 units of affordable housing, serving households making up to 70% of the area median income. 25% of the units will be reserved to serve unhoused Sunnyvale families. There will be a local preference that applies to this project. So to answer one of the questions that came up before, we do believe that many of the kids who will ultimately live at this community already are part of the Sunnyvale School District, as well as Mary's comment that Lawrence comment that this project will pay all of our school fees, just like any market rate development. We are located across the street from the downtown core and it's great amenities, uh, including being about a 10 minute walk from the Sunnyvale Caltrain station and a three minute walk to our closest VTA stop. Uh, this site has a walk score of 89 and it's an area that's, uh, known it's what's known as the highest resource area, which makes it really competitive when we go out for state level housing funding. This block of Matilda is meant to function as a transition between I'm sorry, I went the wrong direction. This block of Matilda is meant to function as a transition between the downtown core and the lower density residential areas to the west. That context has really shaped our design, which as you'll see in a moment is a five story building that faces the downtown side, that then steps down to a three story building that faces the Charles Street side. This project has also been shaped by community feedback. Over the past couple of years, we've conducted multiple community meetings. We've held MidPen property tours with our property management team. We've met directly with individual neighbors and stakeholders and heard comments that were made at various city council hearings. The design feedback that we heard, by and large, fell under the themes of height, density, and its impact on privacy. architectural character on Charles Street, concerns about parking, transportation and traffic, and a preference for more studio units. In response to community feedback, this project has evolved quite a lot over the past couple of years. There were many refinements, but the major milestones were at the top you'll see is actually our very first original massing concept before we submitted it to the city. It was a seven-story building with up to 140 units, which would have had just shy of 0.5 parking. based on neighbor feedback we then reduced that scope in 2025 to be a six-story building with 122 to 126 units and 65 parking spaces which would be just above a 0.5 parking ratio and then earlier this year city council then voted to support proposal from mipen to further reduce the scope of the project to now be a five-story building with 110 units and more studio units with 65 parking spaces which is the 0.59 parking ratio at that time we also did discuss the possibility of adding more parking and the direction we got from council at that time was to proceed with the proposal for 65 parking spaces this five-story building at the bottom of this slide is the current design and with that i'll hand it over to lori to walk through

Thanks, Jennifer. So we're actually very excited about the process that we've been through on this because it's been a lot of listening and a lot of input. And so, as Jennifer was saying, where we've landed is a building that we think does a lot of the things that both the neighbors, the council, the city in general, and working with staff has come forward with is create a building that has an interface with the Charles neighborhood, which we've done through the mass reduction. The shape of the building is actually a C, where just the skinny parts of the C address Charles. The bulk of the building is pushed towards Matilda. We've mixed up the materials a little bit now, so they're warmer. We've introduced things like cementitious lap siding and brick. All of our community amenities for the residents are up on the second floor. You can see in the image on the right hand side of the slide and pushed away from Charles. So there's no noise from that for the Charles residents as well. There was a question earlier about screening along Charles. And so we've got a double row of trees. We've got some walls and fencing that create that sense of privacy. And then as you can see in that image, oops, where am I going here? We also don't have large windows for living rooms facing that area. We just have some high windows for light, but everything else is facing off to the side. And so we've been listening to those concerns. This is actually the Matilda side where we have Uber across the street. It's a couple of really big buildings. but we're downtown and so we brought that brick around to that downtown we also created a transparency along this edge and you can see it in the corner there's a couple of two-story bays of brick brick is a human material it just feels like you're in downtown but they're also very transparent we've got the lobby and mail room we've got management offices and then we've got a really large bike room that also has a lot of transparency to it as well This is that corner plaza. We do have that column within the vision triangle that we really analyzed with staff working very, very closely from a safety standpoint with public works and with planning. And it's roughly a 20 inch column to support the building. And because of where the cars are even coming around the corner from Matilda, making a right onto that street, they're actually quite a ways away from the building. And so you're really ahead of that whole vision triangle by the time you even hit the corner. So we're working again very closely with staff on that. But this creates that interface between very big downtown buildings and then starting to break down as we go towards Charles. um i want to address a couple things on this there there is a towards the page north end of the site we're closing off a vehicular access point that currently operated with the bank we're also creating a public drop-off package delivery um loading space on charles that's not just for us it's to give back to the neighborhood as well and so residents have that opportunity for their amazon deliveries their fedex their ups to use that space so we we felt like that was giving back to the community our vehicular access is all from the page south not on charles so it's from mckinley um And then I wanted to point out that big green square in the upper corner along South Matilda. That's a big bike room for over 120 spaces of bicycle parking. So that provides and it's going to have, you know, EV charging and things like that for our electric bikes in there as well. So we're trying to really create a mobility system versus just cars. Do you want to go back to the concessions real quickly? Sure.

So the project is requesting, as mentioned earlier, the four concessions and no waivers. The first one is a waiver from the individual lockable storage, which, as required, would call for 22,000 cubic square feet of built space above and beyond the building code. So given the high cost of construction in the bay, we are instead focusing on efficient unit layouts that have an adequate amount of personal storage within each unit. As mentioned earlier, we're also requesting a concession from the parking lot shading requirements. There is a small area of the ground floor parking area that is open to the sky. And if we were to shade that by pulling the concrete podium out to cover it, it would not only be expensive, it would also make the building feel a lot taller on Charles Street. So instead, we are planting some trees on the other side of the pedestrian height fence along Charles. They'll provide some coverage. And of course, once the building is built, the building itself will actually provide shading for a majority of the day on that area. For the other two concessions, which is about the transformer and the vision triangle, I think that's been discussed a lot. So in the interest of time, I'll skip over my remarks there, as well as our remarks about the schedule. But we are here and happy to take any questions that you guys may have.

Thank you. Okay, so we have a chair, Iglesias, please.

Thank you for the presentation. Really excited to see a project like this. I think when I see something like this, it feels like a gift in many ways to the community. I think the location of it, next to such a special part of Sunnyvale, walking distance like that is an absolutely exciting place to be. I recognize the challenge of limited parking, but of all places to have limited parking, adjacent walking distance to Caltrain, adjacent you can walk to grocery stores. And then also call out that there are also walking distance to multiple fast chargers for electric vehicles. So I think that I think there are some ways to have it be a compromise. And I think that was exciting. My first question for you was, could you walk me through your approach, your blend from three bedroom to two bedroom to one bedroom to studio. I thought it was interesting because it seems like it's fairly balanced across that. If you could talk to me about what brought you to that being the right blend for this space for Sunnyvale.

Yeah, the unit mix was always intended to address Sunnyvale's goal to have family housing at this site. And in particular, when we started out this partnership with the city, it was made known that the city wants to prioritize housing for unhoused Sunnyvale families. So that unit mix does, you know, that implies a certain unit mix. Now, when we get to the wonky side of this conversation, when we go for state-level funding for tax credits, if you're going in as family housing, you must be at minimum a certain unit mix, so a certain percentage of three bedrooms, two bedrooms, and so on and so forth. So that really lays the framework. So specifically it's at minimum 25% three bedrooms, 25% two bedrooms, and the rest can be ones. And based on the preferences of the local community, we have done a split to include both one bedrooms and studios.

Okay. um thank you and then with respect to the units um are you planning on having parking directly connected to any of the units for instance do the three bedrooms get preference church parking or what's what's going to be your parking strategy

Yeah, so all the parking will be assigned and because we have less than one to one parking, it is basically a lottery. However, there are ways for us to prioritize the larger family size units, we'll be able to have a little bit more preference in that assignment of parking.

Okay, and then I know that there's limited number of EV charging, but are the other spots coming EV charging ready? Would it be possible for that to be installed later?

Yes, absolutely. So there are eight spots that have actual chargers installed. And that will we expect that to meet the need that we'll see immediately when the building opens, but the rest of the units will be easy ready, meaning they'll have a receptacle and we can always go in and install an actual charging station as demand arises. So we're not paying for EV chargers upfront when the demand might not be there. But it will be very easy to install them down the road because the infrastructure is always already there.

Okay, thank you. Next question. So regarding the other projects that you've had in the area, could you speak to any lessons learned regarding the amount of parking and the parking ratios that you have for those sites and any issues that you've either uncovered or maybe determined didn't exist?

Yeah, actually, you know, from our most recent project that came online at 1178 Sonora or IRD Hall Square over in the Lawrence Station area that has a parking ratio of 0.7 something. And that has worked out well. The lesson that we actually learned from that property is. The bike storage is incredibly well used there. And based on that information, we actually drastically increased the bike parking count here. I think we started out with close to 0.5 and now we're well over 1.1 bike parking. We just find that community, even though they're actually not next to downtown, they are using their bikes to go to school, go to work, run their errands. And so we took those lessons and applied it to our mobility strategy here.

All right. And then my last point is a comment, not a question. It's just wanted to commend the approach of dedicating space for drop off, given the fact that this is something that we've seen as an issue with other projects. And if you have a lot of people in an area, there's going to be Amazon drop offs, there's going to be Uber pickups, there's going to be DoorDash deliveries, there's going to be all these things that can cause chaos in the neighborhood. So I see this as being a very proactive way of helping to prevent that. So thank you. No further questions.

Thank you, Chair. Our next one is Commissioner Payne, please.

Thank you, Chair. So the chair actually stole most of the questions I was going to ask, but I just wanted to ask when this comes back for a public hearing, would it be possible to get either diagrams or visualizations of the Vision Zero area that are actually from the street, like from the perspective of the vehicles that are trying to see other vehicles that are cross traffic?

Are you referring to a diagram as it relates to the division triangle? Yes. Yes, we can absolutely do that.

Thank you. Because the diagrams you've got have kind of been looking at the corner kind of not at a vehicle angle, just like from the person on the other corner kind of angle. And I think it would really help to kind of see what are the actual vehicles looking at? How much are they obstructed? What is just a very visceral feel of what the safety impact would be? It's not that I disbelieve anything I've heard tonight about the safety impact of this project, but I'm also just looking at this even from a precedential angle because I do not want to be in the habit of handing out visions. Vision triangle waiver slash concessions. It is a very significant safety issue, and I just want to be. I want to be very locked lockdown saying I can give the concession in this case, because we have Because in this case, I have demonstrated very demonstrable evidence on the record to say that it will not be a safety issue like that. So that's just where I'm going there. So this so but yeah, I was I'm happy to see the to see to see the drop off site. I'm happy to see the additional bike parking. I'd note that since we are in fact, this is actually significantly closer to a lot more to a lot of amenities. then at Lawrence, I can imagine that the bikeability, I think it's just in general more bikeable area. So I think that's a good decision. Frankly, I'd have been happier just to see the 30 affordable units that have gotten dropped over the years back here, because this is such an ideal area for for affordable housing, for transit access. The one thing that the one transit point that's here did not mention was that this is also really close to the Sunnyvale Transit Center from a VTA perspective. So you're covered east-west on the Caltrain, but you're also pretty well covered north-south with VTA. So you act so... Unlike a lot of sites in the city, you can actually get through all the compass directions using transit in a reasonable manner. So that's all. The other thing is that I'm a little sad that the timeline, and this is not meant as a criticism of anybody present tonight, but I'm a little sad that this won't be coming online until 2030, because frankly, the sooner this can get built, the better, in my opinion. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next one is Commissioner Cerrone, please.

Thank you, Vice Chair, and thanks for the presentation. So I think we may be covering some ground that we've already talked about for other projects. But anyway, regarding the parking, have you considered a mechanical parking system? I know I've asked this before, but.

yeah the question of mechanical parking is one that mipin has talked about internally we generally don't do those because of the safety hazard and they also tend to break down over time which then becomes kind of problematic for the residents that depend on it so we just don't find it to be dependable enough for our residents okay yeah they are putting them in some other

projects, but I hope they don't break down right away. But I think it says somewhere giving preference to individuals who do not own a car. Can you elaborate on how does that work? Somebody signs a paper that says they don't own a car or do you follow up on it or can they sign it and then buy a car the next day or lease a car?

Yeah, so a no vehicle preference is something that we've implemented at other MIPIM properties successfully to help manage parking demand. So that is roughly how it works. An applicant would attest that they don't know the vehicle at the time of signing the lease. They could in the future decide to purchase a car or otherwise have a car. And no, we couldn't stop them from doing that. That being said, they wouldn't have a parking spot at the property. we do you know the the way we work with residents is at the time of leasing we make it really clear that there's less than one-to-one parking our property team does you know in addition to just generally managing the property we have a resident services team we have on-site property management and part of their job is to help with things like connecting to public transit trip planning education making known the very good local transit resources that are nearby.

You're also giving allocating some number of units to unhoused individuals, right? And I know a council that's come up that like at Agri D Hall, none of the none of those unhoused people were from Sunnyvale and they want to know why Why not? And I think I know the answer, but can you explain how that works, how you determine who the in-house people are who get preference?

Yeah, so RRD Hall Square has a slightly different model than what we have here at 295 South Matilda. 295 South Matilda is the units will be reserved to serve homeless families and they don't have to be from county quarantine entry. At RRD Hall, those units were specifically reserved for folks with permanent supportive needs. And those units are supported by the county in terms of case management services, rental vouchers, because if you have a permanent supportive need, you're not really expected to ever potentially be able to have a full-time job and be able to pay the full rent, so that unit really needs to be supported by a county rental subsidy. And because it's supported by county subsidies, those units can't have the local preference applied, which is not to say that a Sunnyvale resident couldn't live there. it's just they don't have preference over everybody else and it just happens to be in in the case of rd hall that the folks refer to the property from county coordinated entry which mipen does not have control over none of those folks had a prior known address in in sunnyvale at 295 south matilda we're not taking uh referrals from county coordinated entry those units won't be supported by the county so the local preference would apply in this case

So for, uh, that's very interesting for I already hauled the, uh, you're saying the county is providing some of the funding. So you have to use the office of supportive housing, their, uh, assessment and their, uh, referrals. But, uh, this project is, uh, is not the same. And then, so how will you, uh, determine who, uh, who in Sunnyvale will make that call?

Yeah, so we have homeless properties that don't take referrals from county-coordinated entry. We actually do have many of these properties mostly from many years ago before state funding sources started requiring that projects that take state sources take referrals from county-coordinated entry. This is definitely not new territory. We could, for example, go to local housing homelessness agencies and get referrals from the local homeless agency. In that case, those agencies don't have, they're not funders. They don't have any power to say, you can't apply the local preference. And so the local preference will apply.

Okay. So you're saying you could go to somebody like Sunnyvale Community Services and get referrals from them?

Yes.

Okay. Well, that's very interesting. um good um so uh and we've talked about the uh let me quickly on the ev charging just to be clear the uh these are the accessible spaces so if it whether you're a resident or you you come from someplace else and use the charger and you don't have a uh a sticker an accessible sticker then your uh or card your car can be towed away and ticketed right

So not in a privately managed parking lot, which is what we have. So of our seven EV spots, two are ADA, and those will be actually not assigned because they're ADA spots. So the priority there is whoever needs that ADA spot will be able to park in it. They don't have to have an EV. Obviously, if there was someone, if there were two cars with ADA needs and one of them is an EV and one of them is not, we would probably encourage the non-EV to park in one of the other ADA spots to not take up that spot, that issue has not come up. The demand for EV and for ADA spots just have not collided in that way for it to be a demand problem.

Okay. I mean, you can't really know if it has happened, right? Nobody necessarily calls you if, hey, I couldn't charge my car, but... okay i mean this is kind of becoming common practice i think it's a doubling up on the accessible and the ev charging is i just think it's not necessarily a good idea but uh i i think it's um building code is why we have these specific numbers okay um so um yeah we talked about uh you know the how much parking might be needed if we didn't have this density bonus. And there have been some newspaper stories about San Jose Project that is having trouble renting units, mostly vacant, and they have very low parking and they're not able to rent them because people have cars. Are you concerned about that? I'm guessing maybe not because these are subsidized below market units that

Yeah, based on the experience of our property management team, the 0.5 parking ratio or just above 0.5 parking ratio works really well here. We don't foresee an issue leasing up these units at the rents that we have given the unit mix and given our location.

Can you comment a little bit on the the funding issue with respect to the amount of parking and the locked storage. And I mean, my understanding is it's difficult to get funding from the state for affordable housing projects that they don't want to fund parking and locked storage and things like that.

Yeah, so basically state funding applications are competitive. It's the same way that Sunnyvale's funding applications are. And there are specific metrics that the state cares about. One of them actually is just how big is your project they do prior. They see favorably really large projects because of the economies of scale. And two is the cost per unit. So if you're providing... fewer units that cost more, for example, because you have some costs due to the land or due to the parking that's going to downgrade your competitiveness.

Okay, thank you. I think that's a really important point we should all be aware of. So just a comment, not having a car may work for some people, mostly. professional individuals with flexible schedules and no kids. I'm a little surprised at the emphasis on families, which is good. We need housing for families, but I sometimes hear the comment from developers that low-income residents don't need cars because they can't afford them. To me, that's like saying, you know, they don't need much food because they can't afford to buy it. I question that reasoning. One of the disadvantages of low-income jobs is that you have little control over your hours and little flexibility. And these individuals and families still need to buy groceries, need to get to work, and they may not work on the train line. Get to a doctor, take their kids to school or to daycare, and the time required to ride a bike or make multiple transit connections is significant. and so I guess you know in this scenario the Sunnyvale train station is going to be very busy kids people you know using this for all these all these things although VTA does go the other direction but Midpen knows all this better than I do so So we should definitely try and reduce car trips and dependency on audible wheels, but without making a significant investment in transportation, including protected bike lanes and just making it difficult to own a car, I don't think is really a solution. And right now we're just trying to hang on to the transportation the public transportation we have without degrading it or closing stations or whatever. So it's a very difficult scenario. I mean, nevertheless, in my opinion, we cannot deny a project like this. We desperately need the housing, especially affordable housing. And this location is as good as it's going to get for this kind of a project. But on the other hand, I think the city of Sunnyvale should acknowledge that the state has handed us another unfunded mandate And the city should, which apparently has already been done, but get permits in place for the neighborhood around there or find alternative parking solutions. And there is a lot of parking across Matilda, but anyway. And maybe the on-demand shuttle will help. I'm sure it'll help some. So what I would hate to see is that we approve this and then it's built and the residents show up complaining and we tell them, well, OK, we have a process and we'll get to it in a few years. Who knew? Because we can all see this coming right now and we know what's going to happen and we should be taking steps in parallel to address it instead of, you know, pretending that we're all going to be riding bikes in five years so um but i do appreciate the how much work you've done with the community i've attended a lot of meetings and you have made a lot of changes to this project it's been a lot of hard work and uh i agree with commissioner pine i hope we can get this going as soon as possible thank you thank you uh next is commissioner davis please

Thank you, Vice Chair. Welcome back. So it's always nice to see you guys. I really appreciate You guys do fantastic work. Midpen does fantastic work. And I think not intentionally, I think every level of government makes your life, makes your job more difficult. And yet you still manage to do a wonderful, you still manage to produce and manage wonderful properties. Thank you for that. I think this is yeah, this is about as good a location as you're going to find for affordable housing in Sunnyvale. And I'm a little bit distressed that the original proposal was 170 units and we lost 60. So the original proposal is more than 50% larger than what we're than the final proposal. That's And this is not directed at Midpen. I'd say as Californians collectively, including myself, we need to have some attitude changes really fast unless we just want this state to be nothing but rich people. I would hope that the response would be, this is a great location. I love your idea. When you come up with 170 of someone, just say, could you do 255? Could you do 340? Because that's the kind of action we need to have to actually make this state livable for the people. OK, off the soapbox a little bit. So the enhanced pedestrian area along Matilda, that's fantastic. And I don't know if this is the right project, but the United States, maybe Canada, are kind of alone in the developed world in that we put walkways next to 50 mile an hour traffic without any kind of protection for pedestrians. So if there's any way to put any kind of protection Uh, I don't care if it tears up the car, if they run into it, learn to drive. Um, that would be fantastic. Um, that's very much a nice to have. It certainly wouldn't impact my vote in any way. Um, I was curious, uh, when commissioner Cerrone was asking about the EV chargers, how are electric utilities handled? Uh, in your, in your developments and how would it, how would that be handled for an EV charger as well?

In terms of how the cost of EV charging is handled and built to resonance?

Yeah. Is every unit separately metered? And then would the EV charger be routed to that meter somehow?

It's not separately metered, but there are basically advanced technologies in EV that I think our architect could maybe speak a little bit more to if needed. But basically, we can virtually figure out who's charging. uh they have an account with the um yeah with the ev charger uh uh manufacturer or the company it's usually charge point or something like ev match and so uh the resident will pay directly to that company to pay for the electricity use okay excellent okay uh just a curiosity i had i really really like um

the increase in the bike facilities. This is a great area. It's close to parks. It's close to library. It's close to downtown. It's close to the train. It's a Caltrain. Yeah, we're not going to see a better site in the city, certainly not with this higher resources. So I really love that you're going forward with more bike facilities. As far as the aesthetics, I think I commented on one of your last projects that I guess one of the worries you have is that that affordable housing is instantly recognizable as affordable housing. It looks like everything else, right? So that's a positive. Yeah, and I guess my one question is, is there anything the city can do to help expedite the timeline?

I guess an approval on this project would be fantastic. We are hoping to get entitled in Q3 of this year, and that will set us up for financing applications in 2027. State financing applications generally come but once a year, so we do want to make sure that we're ready for that next funding cycle so that we can hit the ground running and actually have units delivered in 2030.

Okay, well, I feel very confident in saying you won't have problems getting a quorum on the Planning Commission, so meetings won't be delayed. Yes, I really like this project, highly support it. Would like to see you guys as soon as possible. Thank you.

Next one is Commissioner Figoni, please.

Hi, thank you for your presentation. And all the hard work you put into this couple observations. So I do appreciate my fellow commissioners bringing up the parking disabled parking. Thank you. I've been kind of quietly listening to this. 1 of the questions I had was. Someone's going to park in a handicapped spot. They might be there for a couple of days. So, what are you going to do about that with the EV chargers? So somebody else will be able to use them. Because if somebody is disabled, they may not be moving as much. They parked their vehicle there. They don't want to move it. Maybe, you know, especially if they're not working, they might leave it there for a couple of days. So that's going to take up a resource there. It's one thing to consider. The other thing too is This is just my personal opinion. I think it sets a bad precedence when you mix the disabled parking and the EV parking. Even though it's on private property, I understand what you're saying, that it's not enforceable. But we're talking about behavior here with people, that if they're able to park in a disabled parking spot, even on private property, that sets a precedence that they could do that anywhere. So just something to consider. Disabled spots are not very common. They're getting more and more less of them out there, especially as the population increases. So that is one thing to consider is that if there's some way. I would always question, why are they being combined with the EV spots? Is it because of where the electricity location is? Because generally, disabled spots are closer to the door, closer to the entrances. And unfortunately, that's where the electrical is. But if a few spots could be moved away from the EV and actually have those as one or two fully dedicated disabled spots, and then you get actually 100% EV spot for people. And they're not fighting over, you don't have your residents getting in disputes, hey, your car's been there too long, and I can't get my EV car charged up. So I would just hate to see that happen. But I'm always looking for a creative way to get around this. I understand the challenges. But I think we're just trying to squeeze too much in one spot. So if there's any way you can look and maybe move a few of them around the complex in different spots, that might be a better way. And it benefits everybody. So that was just my comment.

So the number of EV ADA spots are actually required by California building code. So it's not something we as the applicant move around. The EV ADA spots actually aren't assigned as ADA spots. They will always become, they will always be available first and foremost to folks who need the ADA spot. I think that's a very astute comment that as the demand for EV rises, are people going to be clamoring over these spots? We do expect that the demand for EV is going to rise over time. So over the course of time, as that demand rises, instead of having people argue over why is that EV spot unused at that EV space, we would install more chargers because all of the spaces at this property are EV ready. They may not have an actual charger installed, but all of the infrastructure is there. The transformer, all of the systems are already sized, assuming that there might be an EV charger at every single spot. So that's ready to go. We just have to install the actual charging station.

Yeah, go ahead. Yeah, I just, I think there's one other really salient point that I'm hoping I'm understanding your question, but the ADA applicability Trump's EV charging. And so in order to park in those ADA stalls, you already have to be an ADA placarded parker. So someone who just wants to charge there, who's not meeting an ADA stall, can't do that. So ADA is the primary use. And then two of the ADA stalls have EV charging.

But you're saying it's not enforceable because it's on private property, right?

Because I think that is enforceable by our property because of ADA law. What's not enforceable is I think there was a concern that if you have a non EV in an ADA spot, if that car has an ADA placard, could they be towed? Because there is some provision of state law that says you can't park in an EV charging spot if you're not an EV. That piece is not enforceable because we are privately managed parking.

Okay, thanks for the clarification. Appreciate that.

Thank you. So first of all, I want to comment on your project from where it was and where you are now. It's a big transformation because you have juggled with the community and listened to everybody around the streets and came up with the design. I have a question about a project on 377 South Matilda, just at the end of the block, there was another affordable housing unit project. Do you have anything to do with that or they are,

it is they have the same roof line as you have but they are at the bottom vice chair um vice chair may it's over here okay um so this hearing was noticed for the project at 295 south matilda and so we shouldn't be talking about other i'm not saying referencing to that that that

That one is affordable project with 99 units, 90 units, affordable units. And I just, the design, what I, I'm going to talk about that, that techniques, that how they, urban design principles, that it feels like you took it from the roof they have. And it's like, you have it on the, on the, your roof and the material variation. So it's real. And they, it's an award-winning project. So I don't know. I'm just saying that. You have done a great transformation from where to where, and I'm not talking about that specific project detail, but that's affordable project on the same street. And so I see a lot of people when they're standing outside, they don't have a bench because I, I drive by there all the time. So I was wondering that, is there a way that in your lobby or somewhere outside or something, because people will be waiting there to. buses go there or they are waiting for their guests and in your lobby or anywhere, I don't think, I mean, there is a great courtyard you have. So that is a wonderful that you have protected from traffic inside. So it has a, you know, it's a sound, it's a very good design of the courtyard, but wondering that, is there a way that you can provide some permanent furniture outside in that lobby. I don't know, will it come in vision triangle or not? Or can it be inside or something? Because I see all the people on that project standing outside on the road because they're waiting for some ride to come or they're waiting for bus. So sometimes they sit on the sidewalk, three, four people. And there is morning sun comes in that direction on that street. So just giving you some idea as I'm passing by.

Yeah, so our lobby is actually on that corner of West McKinley and South Matilda. So that's our main lobby, we will have some furniture in there for folks who are waiting for a pickup transit or wherever that they're waiting for. In addition, there is some area outside. That's a bit of a plaza on that corner, I guess. And I guess we'll take a closer look to see if we could put something there that's not going to be in conflict with the vision triangle.

that would be nice yeah and if it's possible so thank you but I I want to ask the staff if you is there a way to find out that the project we did on the 397 South Matilda Avenue And is there a way to get some, because it's affordable unit projects, 90, yeah.

Yes. That project has already been completed. The affordable housing developer was related and the architect was Steinberg Hart.

Yeah. That's why I know, because I've seen the buildings and drawings and everything, but I wanted to know the statistics, like, because it's a new project, it's like three years or something old, three years. I mean, it got approved before I joined planning commission, which is four years now. So I wanted to like, just get some statistics on in that, like, when did it, when we approved it and how long it took them to build and is it filled up or is it that does it have a space available? Because it's just on the same block and we have no data. So I think it would be just nice to have a presentation about that.

Yeah, that is something that we can try to work with our housing division to get that information. It's not readily available at our fingertips.

So do we, if I need to find out, do I call the, do I like find out from the housing element group?

No, that I don't. Well, I guess the short answer is I don't know how to get that data right away. That's something that we would need to speak to our housing division to see if that is information that they can obtain quickly. So let us get back to you on that.

Okay, thank you. I hope some public is listening. Maybe they have something. because if you are dealing with people from there and if you're, so I think it would be nice to share the resources between these two projects. Just giving that information.

Vice Chair Shukla, if I can clarify, the data that you were requesting is how long it took to construct that project and occupancy, is that correct? I'm requesting two types of data.

One is like that, how long it took them to, from approval to building or, you know, that's so then we have some idea that this project might take based on the fundings or whatever the reasons. Other data I would like to have is then, is that filled up? All the 90 units are all empty, filled up. and they're parking like how they, what they are dealing with it because it's just one block and we have no data on it. I mean, I can go and collect it too.

Okay. We will try our best to see if we can get that information. Thank you.

That's why. And also I wanted to comment on the variations of materials and I want to give feedback on the design and the step back. of your stories so I really think that you have done a great job aesthetic wise and also the enhancing the pedestrian pathway and uses and all other things my my fellow members said so I think um I'm happy that you also have provided three two bedroom and three bedroom units for the low income family because there are people with the large family and then so I think I appreciate all the all the things and um the store I was concerned last time about the the storage requirements but the the units have enough space that they can store that things enough so but that's it these are my questions and let me see anybody else want I'll go ahead and open for the public I don't see okay so i will go ahead and open the public comment on this specific item this is the item we are talking about is the the multi-family housing development affordable units with a five-story buildings on 295 south matilda avenue Please submit a speaker card to the recording officer. Raise your digital hand now or dial star nine on the telephone to indicate you wish to speak. I will call on members of the public participating in person first, followed by remote participant. Speakers will have three minutes to speak. And we have the first one here is Gabriel.

Hi, I'm Gabriel. I live in downtown Sunnyvale. I'm excited to see a new multifamily development right next door. We badly need to build new homes and this project will help. We absolutely must approve it. That said, I do have a couple concerns. Firstly, I of course wish that were larger. It's quite unfortunate that the developer reduced the proposal size over the past few years. but specifically i'm also disappointed that it includes no market rate units we need more market rate units to fulfill on that demand and provide price competition uh against saris regis the existing market rate developments in downtown sunnyvale are already almost fully leased a mix of market rate units and government subsidized units i think would work well here More important, though, than that is the glut of unnecessary parking in the area. I see that the developer proposes 65 new parking spaces in an area that transit serves very well. Just a couple blocks away are two massive public garages with thousands of empty spaces that are both free as in available and free as in costing zero dollars. There's no need to build yet more parking here that will go unused. There's already far more parking supply than demand in downtown Sunnyvale. I'm happy that state law reduced the parking minimum somewhat because Sunnyvale's usual requirements are excessive. We have an opportunity to do even better here since statutorily my understanding that there's no legal minimum given the way state law applies here. And to fill that space with additional units that sunnyville desperately needs perhaps we could make up some of the 50 or so units that we already sadly lost from the original proposal regardless of those concerns any new multi-family development is great to see and i urge that the funding commission approve it approve at least the units that the developer has already proposed thank you thank you next one is marie bernard please

Good evening, staff and commissioners. My name is Marie Bernard. I'm executive director at Sunnyvale Community Services. And I'm here to support MidPenn. MidPenn and Sunnyvale Community Services were both founded back in 1970. So we've grown up together. And I want to underline how close the relationship has been and how supportive each of us are. We don't build housing. We try to keep people housed and keep and move them into housing. and MidPenn for decades has supplied that. Last year we helped 767 unhoused people with one or more services. It could have been they came for a meal or they came for help with moving into housing. And also every month we sell out of 330 VTA passes that we have to sell for 25 bucks. and every month people have to stand in line. They sell out, if not in a day, by day two. they're all gone. They're used for teens as well as adults getting to make medical appointments, getting to jobs. So I know we're painfully under with affordable and accessible transit, but we know people still are desperate to use it. And so I want to underline that as much as there are holes in so many of the plans that we have, this is a wonderful investment for us intervention that we're doing here, and I know it's taken two long years. It seems painful, but I'm also very proud of how our city, our citizens, our residents, and MidPenn came together to make it as good as possible with all of the other powers that be. We're looking forward to referring clients. We also want to be able to support clients. We've been working with residents from Carol Inn who come to us for groceries, with Onizuka Crossings, people who moved in who had been formerly unhoused, with people at the Sonora Court, the Ira D. Hall, and other NIDPEN facilities that are around in Sunnyvale. It's an amazing partnership. It's not enough. But 110 units are going to house 262 residents. And we will be very, very proactive in referring as well as combining forces. People may need still help in getting the money to even do move-in costs. We'll be right there. And if people need ongoing help to get connected to benefits and services, this is one big partnership that we look forward to. So thank you for your care. And I also want to underline what Commissioner Davis said, this is this is a time to get an attitude change. So let us know if you need help with that. Because we have attitude. And after 56 years, we I think we we know what we're doing. Thank you.

Thank you. And we have manual.

Hi, good evening. My name is and I will be speaking on behalf of SV at home. 1st, I'd love to say that we're really proud to support this housing projects. We've been trying to help them out over the course of feels like probably 2 years now. It's gone through a lot of changes, a lot of iterations. We probably would have liked to see the higher density. However, we understand the community concerns. and we do appreciate when developer partners are working with the community working with the city council the planning commissions in order to give a product type give it homes really because these aren't just units these are going to be homes uh to the people that most need them so really happy with what you know has been so far uh you know the current proposal really reflects a genuine effort to respond to community feedback while preserving the opportunity to deliver much needed affordable housing As I noted before, the project will create 110 permanent affordable homes, housing people between 30 to 70% of the Airbnb income. Stepping back for a second, what that really means is it means a lot of Sunnyvale residents that are working, living in the community, and that really do need these homes. People like teachers, librarians, city employees, retail workers, et cetera, et cetera. they're going to be receiving homes and they really do deserve to live in the community and not be displaced so i'm really happy that you know a lot of affordable developers specifically you know midpen in this case have been working hard to make sure that people don't get unhoused and don't have to leave the community projects like 295 matilda are also essential if sunnyville is going to meet its housing element and rena commitments including facilitating the construction of apparently i believe it's like 4 600 low and very low income homes by 2031 and its location in the downtown specific plan area close to transit other amenities is a wonderful opportunity for this type of development So, you know, as you provide, well, you already did provide your feedback, but as you continue providing your feedback this evening, we really do encourage you to continue supporting the current proposal and help position it for a successful entitlement hearing. I believe I heard NINPN say that they're going to be going in for entitlements in Q3, and that should position them to go in for, you know, tax credit and other funding sources by early 2027. and it's a really competitive market um housing is really hard to get built state and federal grants are over subsidized so the more you know you can support this project champion it through the legislative process and get it entitled to the absolute better so thank you for your time and i truly hope you will help champion this project thank you thank you um does anyone want to speak on this item before we hear from remote speakers

Okay, so remote speakers are warned to limit their comments to the agenda item being considered. Speakers who are ruled out of the order will not be given another chance to speak on this item. The title of this item is the special development permit on 295 South Matilda Avenue. Recruiting officer, do we have any remote participants willing to speak on this item?

Yes, we have two hands raised. First, we'll hear from Uday.

Thank you. I'm Uday. I live on Charles Street, and I have met with the Midpen team, and we've been working with the city over the last, I would say, seven to eight years. Charles Street, where this project is being built, has seen an incredible amount of increase in density. We have in two block area, three high density homes, that is Maxwell, Meridian and 480, which is right in front of the city hall building. And over the last five years, we have seen a lot of the assumptions being made here. to be broken right one of the you know Councilman here commented about low income housing requiring more parking and not less parking we see that with Meridian we live on the street with a lot of individuals that a lot of families that live in Meridian they have work trucks and that they required to be parked and they were using the street parking. And now they have moved down the street from our block to the next block. But the assumption that was made, the thesis that was given to us five years ago when we were in a similar planning commission meeting for the Meridian is that nobody requires cars. We are in downtown downtown area. We are very close to a transit zone. and 0.5 parking spots or 0.7 parking spots is enough. And that community actually has, I think, 0.7 or 0.8 parking spaces. And it is already evident that that many parking spots were not enough for Meridian. Right next door, now we are proposing a new high density housing with even lower parking requirements. this is a problem we're already seeing and i expect in everyone here expects that this problem will continue to have and i think instead of trying to solve it once the problem happens it would be beneficial for the city for the applicant for everyone involved to think through this and to understand why and why the assumptions are wrong and what we can do to prevent the same problem from happening We live on Charles Street. We have experienced this. One of the other persons were asking for statistics. I'm sure if you look at what Meridian, what we have gone through, we have taken city staff through our street and now you can see in front of the proposed building, the road is completely blocked. If you walk by now, I'm standing right here, if you walk by now, you will not see any parking spot available in the 200 block of Charles Street. And now we are putting 290 to 300 more individual residents into that street without giving adequate parking. It feels like we are making, you know, misjudgment.

Thank you.

Your time is up.

sorry thank you thank you for the time thank you next we'll hear from s okay can you hear me i just uh just to add to what apologies um s will speak first and then steve c s you have the floor

Okay. Hi, I'm also a resident near the new development that's going to take place. I want to also second the opinion that parking situation is likely going to get worse. Some observed that the Charles Street is the one, the 300 block got the permit parking, but that doesn't solve the problem. That shifts the problem from one place to the other. and now we see that on mckinley avenue right in front of where the new development is going to be so we would like i would like the commission here to consider perhaps providing extra resident parking permits along these lines too and if the builders are confident they can probably support this thing that the new residents won't need extra parking beyond what they are already offering and if you are confident with that i think it'll be nice if the commission can support additional resident parking to be enforced in the neighbor and the neighboring streets so that's point number one the other point i wanted to make is the trash pickup in this is along child street And the trash pickup happens frequently and is quite noisy if you witness it on a daily basis. It'll be nice if some of that is moved to Matilda Avenue, where some of this noise doesn't matter, not on the resident side. And sometimes these trash trucks come at like 6.30 or 7 a.m. Some of them are very proactive workers, which is great, but that disrupts and it's pretty noisy. The third point I want to make is safety. I think safety must be the very first priority for any project. And from what we know, this site has an underground single walled tank from a prior gas station. um and i there is no record of it being closed as far as we know and so we would want this planning commission to perhaps pay attention to safety and have it be properly mitigated if it requires to be removed now is the time to remove it before the entire building goes in and god forbid to forbid something uh worse takes place down the line. So now is the time before the building goes in is to fix and mitigate that is to either remove it or permanently close it according to what California state requires. And state also provides funding for some of these things to be properly mitigated because safety is of utmost importance. So I want you to consider parking and provide residential parking. Second, safety and small building changes to move trash on the other side. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we'll hear from Steve C. All right.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay, good.

So, yeah, I want to reiterate what Uday and my neighbor Shiva has also commented on. Based on, and we've been dealing with this for, you know, eight to 10 years of construction from 481 to right into Maxwell and now mid pen. And I really, really, really want this commission to do a little bit more due diligence and go check out some of the other properties that Midpen has, the new property that they have. We've actually gone and spoke to the neighbors and also the people that live there about the parking, and it seems to be a bit of a disaster. um and um as well as some of the other projects that we went to that they took us to they weren't apples to apples comparisons they were different completely different and also checking with the neighbors and individually talked with the neighbors. They also said that parking was not sufficient and was a bit of a disaster as well. We've lived it for the last two years with the Meridian and the Maxwell, and it was horrific. I mean, from things that we've seen in terms of more garbage in the streets, drug dealing, um oil on i mean expired cars etc it's been it's been a bit of a mess and and parking was absolutely unbearable um since then we were able to get permit parking which has been fantastic but it is creating a shift and if you look at what meridian is what what midpen is offering um you're going to have close to 590 people based on the based on how many people can live in these units and um with only 60 65 parking spots that's going to be disastrous and it's going to create more projects and we need to be a little bit more proactive and not reactive to this and it starts with commissions it starts with the city and i think we need to take a take a hard look at You know how Midpen can dig down, go down deeper and make this livable for the neighbors because it's really unbearable. And this is our city. And I've lived here for 61 years on this street for 30 years. And it went from great to unbearable to now it's getting back to what it should be. based on the parking permits. And to answer Mike Cerrone's question about the parking that's on the 100 and 200 block, those are only seven hours based on the fact that it was for the train station. Now you're adding over 1,000 people on this street from all the developments, and all the parking is going to shift to the 100, 200, and 400 blocks. It should be absolutely 24-7. No parking, and it should be residential parking that are on to keep that. So I really, really the commission looks at that and considers that to make this a level.

Thank you. So, uh, is there anybody else? Uh, we have, um, a commission. Sorry you want to say something? Yeah, so now is there anybody else we have it online?

have no further hands okay so now i'll close the public comment and um do do we have anything else to you want to yeah i just uh would ask it uh when this comes back can we uh clarify uh the question about that uh underground tank uh this came up in earlier discussions we were talking about you know could you dig down for another layer of parking and and uh um And part of the issue was there's a tank of unknown condition or whatever under there, and they didn't want to do that. So I'm just asking when this comes back, can we include that in the presentations? Clarify if there is or is not a safety issue with that contamination.

Yes, the city has known of that issue for years now, and that is being considered in our environmental analysis.

Okay, great thanks.

Thank you, thank you. I don't see any other hands and nobody wants to speak, so the meeting meeting is adjourned at 754 and regular planning Commission meeting will start at 8pm. Thank you.

Are you ready? Good evening. Let's call to order the Planning Commission meeting of July 13th at 8 p.m. The City does not tolerate disruptive behavior in our meetings. Sunnyvale prides itself on the rich diversity of our residents, and we are committed to creating a culture of belonging where our members of our diverse community feel included, safe, and respected. The Planning Commission meeting is considered a limited public forum, which means the Commission can regulate the time, place, and manner of speech. Speaker comments must be limited to the agenda item being considered by the Commission for consent, calendar, or public hearing items. Speaker comments during oral communications must be limited to matters within the commission's authority, which is generally referred to as within the commission's subject matter jurisdiction. If a speaker's comments are not related to an agenda item, the presiding officer will rule the speaker as out of order. The speaker will not be ruled out of order due to a disagreement with the content of their speech. Location and online meeting details are available on the planning commission agenda. Use the show captions button to view captions on Zoom. Comments on matters not on the agenda must be submitted prior to the time I call the item for oral communications. Comments on agenda items must be submitted prior to the time I close the public hearing on the agenda item. Speakers are requested to keep their comments to the time period set for public comments for the agenda item, which will be strictly enforced. Guidelines are posted on the city's website and on the Planning Commission meeting agenda. Please join me with a salute to the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Recording officer, may we please have the roll call?

Commissioner Segura? Present. Vice Chair Shukla?

Present.

Commissioner Pine? Present. Chair Iglesias? Present. Commissioner Cerrone?

Present.

Commissioner Davis?

Present.

Commissioner Pagoni?

Present.

We have seven commissioners present.

Thank you. This brings us to oral communications. This is the public's opportunity to address items not on tonight's agenda. This section is limited to 15 minutes and may be extended or continued after the public hearings general business section of the meeting. Individuals may only speak once during oral communications. This planning commission meeting is a limited public forum, and the commission can regulate the time, place, and manner of speech. Speaker comments during oral communications must be limited to matters within the commission's authority, which is known as the commission's subject matter jurisdiction. If a speaker's comments are outside the commission's subject matter jurisdiction, the presiding officer will rule the speaker as out of order. This allows the commission to conduct its business in a reasonably efficient manner and protects the rights of other speakers. A speaker will not be ruled out of order because of a disagreement with the content of their speech. Please submit a speaker card to the recording officer, raise your digital hand now, or dial star nine on a telephone to indicate you wish to speak. I will call members of the public participating in person first, followed by remote participants, and speakers will have three minutes to speak. Would anyone who's present like to speak? Okay, seeing none. Because of the nature of remote community commissions, speakers who are rolled out of order will not be given another chance to speak on this item. Therefore, speakers are warned to limit their comments to subjects that fall within the commission's authority to decide or take action. Recording officer, do we have any remote participants wishing to speak on oral communications?

No, we do not, Chair.

Thank you. I'll go ahead and close or communications. This brings us to the consent calendar. I will go ahead and open public comment on the consent calendar item. Please submit a speaker card to the recording officer. Raise your digital hand now or dial star nine on a telephone to indicate that you wish to speak. I'll call members of the public participating in person first, followed by remote participants and speakers will have three minutes. Would anyone like to speak on content calendar items before we hear from remote speakers? Seeing none, recording officer, do we have any remote participants wishing to speak on this item?

No, we do not.

All right, thank you. I will go ahead and close public comment and I will now ask for a motion from my colleagues. Commissioner Davis.

Make a motion to move forward the... I'm sorry, I'm a little tongue-tied. Let's approve the minutes in the consent calendar. Thank you.

Okay, as written. And then Commissioner Pine. Second. Thank you. Recording officer, please connect to vote.

The motion passes with seven yeses.

Thank you so much all right, this brings us to tonight's public hearing general business, we have several topics, the first topic we have is item 26 dash 0520 it's a proposed project related to the application. On a 0.26 acre site it's a special development permit to conduct construct for townhouses townhomes and associated site improvements and maintain the existing single family home a heritage resource, the location is 434 crescent avenue is there a staff presentation.

Yes. Good evening planning commissioners. My name is Margaret Netto, senior planner. This is a residential project at 434 Crescent Avenue. The project proposes a .26 acre residential, sorry, the project proposes redeveloping a .26 acre residential parcel. The existing historical home will be retained and four new townhomes will be constructed along with associated improvements. A special development permit is required for the development of the multifamily project. in the R3 PD zoning district. A tentative map is required for the creation of five residential lots and one common lot. On July 1st, 2026, a resource alteration permit was approved by the Historic Preservation Commission to modify the existing historic resource with the development of four three-story townhomes in the rear and the retention of the historic home. This is the neighborhood context. The project site is located between Sunnyvale, Saratoga Road and Manette Drive. Surrounding land uses consists of multifamily and single family homes. And here's the site plan access to the access to the site is provided via 24 foot wide ingress egress easement. Each townhome includes a two car garage. Parking for the historic home is located between the historic residents and the new townhomes. Additionally, two guest parking spaces are provided at the rear of the driveway. The project meets the parking requirements. A little bit of background. The project site is zoned R3 medium density residential and proposes 19 dwelling units per acre. The surrounding area was originally developed as part of the Easter Gables subdivision, which was historically characterized by narrow deep parcels of approximately one acre in size. These lots typically featured bungalow style homes at the front of the property with poultry buildings and agricultural uses located in the rear. Here's the existing home. The existing 900 square foot home was constructed in 1930 as a Craftman style bungalow. A building permit for the historic structure was approved on a like for like basis in accordance with the secretary of the interior standards for the treatment of historic properties. The single story residence is situated on the Northern portion of the lot and fronts Crescent Avenue. The applicant proposes relocating one protected tree, tree from the rear of the lot to the front of the property. The project complies with the citywide design objective standards, design guidelines. No deviations are requested. The existing home, as noted, will be retained as part of the proposed development. Here's a rendering of the front elevation with the new townhomes behind. This is a side view along the west elevation and you can see in the little box that's the existing single family home. And here are some aerial elevations of the project. the neighborhood impact. The site will no longer provide appearance as a poultry farm. The historic home will maintain visible presence and historic historic resource will be continued to be enjoyed. The proposed townhome buildings will be similar height and density to surrounding multifamily developments. There will be sufficient separation and landscaping will be maintained around the historic resource to preserve its integrity. The community outreach, A neighborhood community outreach meeting was held on January 8, 2026, during which four members of the public expressed concerns related to building height, privacy, and construction noise. In response to these concerns, the project design was modified to reduce the overall building height from 33 feet 5 inches to 31 feet. Additional design features included recessed balconies and offset window placement have been incorporated to minimize direct views into the adjacent properties and reduce visual privacy impacts. Also, a study session was held with the Planning Commission on March 9, 2026. Overall, the Planning Commission was supportive of the project. noting the applicant addressed neighborhood concerns and the project does not request any deviations from the development standards. This concludes my presentation and the applicant is also here to make a presentation. Thank you.

Thank you very much. At this point, we'll open it up to commissioners to ask the staff any questions. We'll start off with Commissioner Segura, please.

thank you thank you for the presentation my understanding that the driveway to the photon houses is about eight feet is that true yeah no it's 24. yes okay sorry so but that will allow uh two-way traffic or only one at a time two-way traffic okay What is the impact on the front house as far as the front house is more of a historical building and has the old look where I know that you staggered or whoever was doing the plan staggered the units to give it some distance and some privacy. And I saw that they took some of the roof shape kind of to match to the older house. But would they do anything on the siding? Because I did not see too much data about covering the face of the house, like the facade. So are they going to match the side that goes towards the old house with the same facade or not? Or is it going to be something different?

yeah the the sighting is similar so when the applicant um does their presentation you can see the architectural detail on how it you know complements the historic home but back to your question um commissioner segura about the impact of the project to the heritage resource so that is why this project was referred to the heritage preservation commission last month in june because the question that they had to answer was Is there a negative impact on the heritage resource? And their conclusion was no, that the project still respectfully is integrated into the development and meets the state requirements for preservation. And so the directive that you have tonight is on the redevelopment.

And my understanding that it will be separated to two different lots, right?

correct there are several lots the the historic home will sit on its own and then each of the town homes will also have their own and then the driveway is a common lot okay thank you thank you commissioner segura next we have commissioner cerrone uh thanks shara i just had uh

Well, a couple of things. So I went by the property and I did not see a sign noticing this meeting. Is there a reason for that?

So it is a city policy that a notice board be posted on site. We will confirm with the applicant. The last we understood is that a notice board was put up. So we'll confirm.

Okay. And I had a question about the, maybe this is, I'll save it for the applicant.

Thanks. Thank you, Commissioner Cerrone. Next we have Commissioner Davis.

I think each here, thank you for the presentation, I just want to make sure I understand that. This is kind of a bog standard development there no waivers there's no concessions there is SP 330 applying.

sb 330 applies with regards to how an application is processed and that we can use objective design standards but i think your question was does the state density bonus law apply for waivers and concessions and the answer is no yeah no i know i saw there no affordable units um maybe it wasn't 330 there's one one of the laws limits the number of of hearings you can have Correct. Yeah, that is the SB 330.

Okay. And is that applying here?

Yes.

Okay. Okay. And so this is probably our final, our last bite at the apple then in terms of the numbers of hearings?

We will confirm that.

Okay. All right. Thank you. That's it. Thank you, Mr Davis. Seeing no other Commissioner hands, I will go ahead and open the public hearing on this specific item. Wait, I'm sorry, I got it myself. There's one applicant. There are 10 minutes that are provided at the beginning of the public hearing to address the planning commission along with five minutes at the end of the public hearing. Is there an applicant presentation?

Yes. Applicant, the floor is yours.

Okay, go ahead. Hi, are you able to hear us?

We can hear you.

Hi, how are you? Good evening. I'm Gordon and this is Evan. And we're here on behalf of the owner and we're GKW Architects. Tonight we would like to briefly present a slideshow for this wonderful townhouse project. We got a couple of updated renderings to kind of express how we did the, we took all the detail of what we heard from the historical preservation consultant and also the neighbors of how we want to reduce the height and get the the privacy screening. So this rendering here shows how we did that. We reduced the height about 28 inches. We also inset all the porches, balconies some more. We put horizontal slats to make sure it's not a see-through so it's more of a barrier and put more landscaping. This is kind of the view to show that. Okay, next slide. Next slide. Here's just the overall zoning density and how we're trying to match and the historical properties on the lower left corner. We've got neighbors on the right. We've got all the fire apparatus and safety measures figured out and we maintained all the historical details of the windows, the hip gable. We've integrated that into the project to make sure we retain the looking character of the neighborhood. Next slide. This is the overall four units. The one on the far right was reduced more to make sure we got integrated parking so that we make all the parking measures. Next slide. This 1 is showing how our project we were taking measures to the adjacent neighbors, making sure we got enough separation between the town homes, the historical existing house and the neighbors to the left. We have 9 foot 1 separation from the 1st and 2nd floor to the historical home 14 feet on the 3rd floor. Next slide. Here's the 1st level floor plan next slide. Second floor, and you can see the inset balconies there, the horizontal slats. Next slide. Here's the top floor. Next slide. And here's the overall roof plan. We max out at 31 feet, 1 inch. We've reduced the height about 28 inches to make sure that we feel that we're more respectful to the neighbors in terms of what we're planning. We try to set it further back in as we went up in height and inset where the balconies are. Next slide. Here's some overall elevations of all 4 sides again, the lower right corner is the 1 adjacent to the neighbor and that's we're trying to articulate more so that it sets and gets more privacy next slide. Um, here's another 1 next slide. That's before and after, right? Yeah. And here's the overall look of the project. So that's. The historical project in the front, and we're trying to get that horizontal flat fence incorporated into the whole project and also have a clear depiction of what is historical. And what is the new part of the project? We tried to make the historical pop out a little more to be to retain the character of of the original building.

Okay, next slide please.

Yeah, here's just overall 3D rendering of the encapsulation of all the properties that were affecting both left and right. And next slide. This is the other side facing the neighbor. Again, you can see the portraits and balconies and the historical project in the front. And that's it. Thank you. We're here to answer any questions.

Thank you. Thank you so much for your presentation. To kick us off, we have Commissioner Cerrone.

Thank you, Chair. So looking at the property, it looks like the driveway, as envisioned here, is already paved along with storm drains and some underground infrastructure, as if the project was already approved, which surprised me a little bit. But I guess as long as you don't need a... permit or whatever you can do that is, or was that done in conjunction with the neighboring site? I was just surprised to find that driveway already completed. It looks very nice, but.

Oh, I see. So the driveway was originally there. That's for the, whoever developed the right half of the property had already put that driveway down. So we're going to have to sock up that and repair the driveway. And we have to coordinate with the neighbors when we put the utilities in. And we plan to do all that.

But isn't that driveway on your property? Correct. The neighboring property?

Correct. Half of that driveway on your... That's right. All right. That's how the property was purchased when the owners came.

Okay. Yeah. The... restoration of the historic house exterior looks great. And I saw a drawing in the, in the drawings, I guess the interior is going to be restored or has it been restored?

It's already been restored. Uh, we put, we kept all the original windows locations. We didn't move a single one. We've got all updated mechanical, electrical, plumbing, sewer, all incorporated. Um, it will have all the landscape and a migrated Oak tree in the front when we're done.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Charney. Are there any other commissioners that would have questions? All right, seeing none, at this time, I will go ahead and open the public hearing on this specific item. Please submit a speaker card to the recording officer, raise your digital hand now, or dial star nine on a telephone to indicate that you wish to speak. I will call members of the public participating in person first, followed by remote participants, and speakers will have three minutes to speak. Would anyone like to speak on this item before we hear from remote speakers? All right, seeing none, remote speakers are warned to limit their comments to the agenda item being considered. Speakers who are ruled out of order will not be given another chance to speak on this item. Recording officer, do we have any remote participants wishing to speak on this item?

No, we do not, Chair.

All right, thank you so much. I will go ahead and close the public hearing, and I'll ask for a discussion or motion for my colleagues. Point of order. Please, Commissioner Kahn.

Applicant has five minutes.

Thank you, Hurd. All right, to the applicant, even though you didn't use all your time, you now have five minutes to really talk about whatever you'd like to about your project. You don't have to, but you do have five minutes.

I think we're good. Thank you so much.

I appreciate everyone coming out. Mr. Pine's point. Thank you. Thank you. I didn't think it was, but we have the requirement. Noted and appreciated. Go ahead, Steph.

Now is a good time to confirm with the applicant that the notice board was posted. We sent a message but haven't received a response yet. Is that something we want to confirm now?

We want to look back and check as well.

Mayor Mrakas, Sorry, if the applicant doesn't know if the notice board was posted and we can't take emotion on the item tonight, because we need to confirm.

Mayor Mrakas, isn't it a question for stuff isn't there part of the process for filing your permit you take a picture of the posting and you submit it to the city staff.

yes that's typically the requirement there's um a mailer that goes out a newspaper article and then the on-site posting and they're supposed to confirm that that's done there's actually a verification form that's required okay and then a follow-up question for the city staff so if that was done and if they didn't follow that process and it was that's as an example it's gone for any purpose but they did follow those processes would what would happen with tonight That is more of a legal requirement, I would say.

Had this come to our attention earlier, we would have continued the item to make sure the public notice was properly given as required under the code. So unless, I mean, maybe we could take a few minutes. Can the applicant confirm if you take five minutes

Oh, they're not someone give us five to take a look and double check back check.

Thank you. All right. Well, you do have five minutes, so you could use your five minutes for that. All right. And during that period, we are not on recess. We're just not going to be talking.

Would it be in? Oh, okay. Would it? I'm going to propose something kind of convoluted. So please feel free to tell me this is out of order. Would it be in order to close the public hearing, lay this item on the table, proceed to items, items, any item, any or more of items three through five, and then take this item back off the table, reopen the public hearing and proceed from there.

That seems kind of a complex process. And so can we just take five minutes first and see if the applicant can figure out what the answer is? That's what I would suggest.

Okay. I'm just, there are either, I was just trying to figure out if we could.

I can also take these five minutes to refer to the rules of procedure, if you would like.

I'm fine with that.

Actually, I could take this five minutes to answer a question that was asked about the number of public hearings or meetings that the city can hold. So as you know, SB 330 limits it to five. That includes public outreach meetings, planning commission, study sessions, going to the Heritage Preservation Commission. and we so including tonight this is the fourth fourth out of five that's allowed one of the meetings did not count that went to the heritage preservation commission because there was a lack of quorum and um public the public testimony wasn't taken so that does not count so this is the fourth is there any way for you to verify that they did submit the process of taking a picture of the posting in front of the location staff is trying to do that now this project has been ongoing for a couple of years now and i know that there were some issues with continuances we had to continue it at hpc we had to continue it at planning commission and so we're trying to track that information as well understood thank you thank you

Usually they don't put up a sign from a study session. That's.

Yes.

What do you got?

Kevin, can you get the hello? Can anybody hear us? Can you guys hear us? OK, so we double check. We haven't we weren't given any notice to put a sign up, so it hasn't been done yet. So where would you go? I'd like to know where we could get where we can go from here. We weren't happy to put the sign up. We weren't aware that it was time to do that.

All right. Abhinav, give us just one second to consult and respond. Sure.

Two weeks? The 27th?

I don't know.

I'll make it work. Okay. All right. So, Chair Glaces, we'll have to actually continue the item. It looks like the staff planner can make it to the July 27th. So if we continue it to a date certain. What's that? Oh, I know. And we need to check with the applicant.

if um the applicant confirmed the july 27th date yeah i think we can do that yeah that was i'm sure what day was that again we're okay doing that 27th yes okay so then we need to push it we do need a motion um is that sufficient time for the posting to be done yes it's sufficient time for the posting to be done

So the code requires the posting to be on site at least 10 days prior to the hearing. So that leaves you just a few days to put that up. So Margaret will put together the board for you that you would then print and post on site within 10 days.

no no so so it's within what like four days or three or four days sorry yeah it needs to be posted on site um at least 10 days before the hearing correct yes so if we're continuing the hearing to the two weeks you have just very short period to get that prepared okay three days the the applicant right yeah yes i understand thank you i was looking at that

okay so does the applicant understand the directions are given and that your planner will work with you thank you thank you okay thanks so much all right at this point then um I'll be looking for a motion from one of the commissioners uh Commissioner Davis point of order uh Commissioner pine I believe the motion would not be in order until after you close the public hearing I think I already closed public hearing did I not already close public hearing

Well, public comment.

This has been a very memorable last. All right. I will go ahead and close the public hearing, public comment on this item. Do we have any discussion or motion from my colleagues and Commissioner Davis?

yeah i'm ready to make a motion if there's no one wanting go ahead to discuss um yeah make a motion to uh continue to a date certain is that the right term um which would be july 27th uh and yeah and we can handle this then all right thank you commissioner pine second all right thank you commissioner davis to your motion I yeah, I think I think some things got lost in the shuffle between the different continuances. And so let's get this one. Let's give the applicant the time that they need and get the eyes dotted and the t's crossed and and get them on their way next time. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Davis and Commissioner pinder second, I partly agree.

But I do have actually a really annoying question for staff, which is that, uh, what would be the ability for an appeal from the, what would be the, would there still be an ability for an appeal from the decision of the planning commission following the continuance, given that that would be the fifth hearing? We did open for public comment on this item.

I think that would be an issue Commissioner Pine and I think kind of highlights the need to I think procedurally we need to be a little bit tighter at number one and then also reserving that we thought I think we were reserving an extra hearing but perhaps we're reserving two extra hearings

Thank you. I just wanted to flag that issue because, but I don't think we have a better alternative at this point. So please, so I'll be supporting the motion. And I also, frankly, given what we've seen of the project, I would be really surprised if there was a reason to appeal or call this up. But anyway, please vote yes.

Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Pine. All right, recording officer, please connect to vote.

The motion passes with seven yeses.

Thank you so much, and what are the next steps for this project.

We will come back to you in two weeks on July 27.

All right, thank you so much, this brings us to our next item. This is item 26 dash 0651 selection of a chair staff, please provide the Commission with an overview of the selection process.

Yes, Chair. I will outline the procedure for Chair and Vice Chair selection outlined in Administrative Policy Chapter 1, Article 15, Boards and Commissions. The Chair will open the floor for nominations for the Office of Chair. Any member may say, I nominate, to nominate another member. Members are not permitted to nominate themselves for the role of Chair or Vice Chair. No second is necessary for nominations. A member is not permitted to nominate more than one individual for either Chair or Vice Chair. The nominated member will need to accept or decline the nomination. You will repeat these steps until there are no further nominations for chair. If there is only one nomination, the chair shall declare that individual to be elected chair by general consent. If there is more than one nomination for chair, nominees will be voted on in the order taken. Each commissioner can only vote to support one of the nominees. If the first nomination receives the necessary majority vote, the member is elected. There will be no need to conduct a vote on any additional nominations. The commissioner will then repeat the process for the Office of Vice Chair.

all right thank you so much um so just so that the commissioners understand um we're going to go through the whole opening for public comment first and then after we close public comment it'll be clear that's when we will be soliciting your nominations um so i will before we do that um there's an opportunity for uh commissioners to ask any questions of staff about the process All right, seeing no questions, I'll go ahead and open the public hearing on this specific item. Please submit a speaker card to the recording officer. Raise your digital hand now or dial star nine on a telephone to indicate that you wish to speak. And I will call members of the public participating first, followed by remote participants and speakers will have three minutes to speak. Would anyone like to speak on this item before we move to remote speakers? Seeing none, remote speakers, recording officer, do we have any remote participants wishing to speak on this item?

No, we do not, Chair.

OK, thank you so much. I will go ahead and close the public hearing. And at this point, we will start accepting nominations for the role of chair. Are there any nominations for the office of chair? Commissioner Davis.

Sue might get mad at me. I know she's watching, but I nominate Mike Cerrone.

chair all right thank you mike stroney nominated for chair are there any further nominations for the office of chair i'm sorry excuse me um commissioner cerning are you willing to serve in the capacity of chair yes i am all right thank you are there any further nominations for the office of chair all right seeing none i will three two one we do not need to character vote congratulations you have been you are the new chair this brings us to agenda item 4-260652 selection of vice chair moving on to our next item i will ask for questions from my colleagues if everyone understands how the process works no nominations yet and commissioner davis do you intend to have your hand up okay All right, I will go ahead and open the public hearing on this specific item. Please submit a speaker card to the recording officer. Raise your digital hand now or dial star nine on telephone to indicate that you wish to speak. I will call on members of the public participating person first, followed by remote participants, and speakers will have three minutes to speak. Would anyone like to speak on this before we move to remote participants? All right, seeing none. Recording officer, do we have any remote participants wishing to speak on this item?

We do not.

Okay, thank you. I will go ahead and close the public hearing. And I will now open nominations for the Office of Vice Chair. Are there any nominations for the Office of Vice Chair and Commissioner, Vice Chair Shukla?

I would nominate Commissioner Davis, please.

All right. Thanks so much. And Commissioner Davis, are you willing to serve in that capacity?

Yes, I am.

Thank you. Are there any further nominations for the Office of Vice Chair? three oh three two one congratulations Commissioner Davis you are now the vice chair all right thank you so much for those um and now we move to item 26-0653 the selection of seats uh was the staff going to guide that process as well

i believe it'll be up to the um chair the new chair and vice chair to select their seats but i think we would also first give preference to any accommodations so if commissioner fogoni would like to remain where he is at then that would be first and then we would just go in the order of seniority okay so i'm gonna move don't wait i'm gone um do you just wanna switch If it helps, I'll also go ahead and put up the spreadsheet that we have so we can visually see it. One moment.

Oh, I see, yeah. Regular order. I'm sorry, what? Oh, here we go with the... And what you have displayed is reversed, correct?

This is the current order. So I believe seat four would now be Commissioner Cerrone. So we'll go ahead and make that change. next the vice chair i believe has a choice to sit at either seats three or five okay and i just want to confirm commissioner fogoni will remain at his current seat is that right commissioner fogoni can i stay here Yes, we can do that. so that leaves um well we have we can go ahead and start with i believe commissioner pine would choose first uh yeah thank you i'd like c3 please and i'd also note that uh chair cerrone's name has two r's oh thank you details Bear with me, I believe Chair Curran.

I'll have seat six, please.

There we go. OK, next we have Vice Chair Shukla. You can choose seat two or you can choose seat one if you'd like. Okay, all right, then let's go ahead and add that in this is our these are seats, I believe, we can just agree by general consent unless anybody has any.

Any objections they realize that we didn't open this up for public comment let's do that, so this is proposed. At this point we'll go ahead and open this up for public comment as individuals who are in person will be allowed to speak first seeing none hurting officer do we have any remote persistent participants wishing to speak on this item.

no we do not right i think i will go ahead and close public comment and then this will pass by general consent okay so that brings us to non-agenda items and comments um are there any commissioner comments commissioner pine thank you uh two things first of all i this is late this is late i should have done this with item two but uh uh can we just as a commission just hold on to our sheets for the uh Creston Avenue project to avoid having to thank you well just just it feels like just a giant waste to just be getting the same thing two weeks from now yeah I think that's fine okay thank you you guys want to keep them I just want to close that a second uh it has been 13 days since sp79 came into effect has the city received any sp79 applications

not as of today thank you I will congratulate us for having a more sensible housing policy than Palo Alto noted any other commissioner comments before we move to staff all right uh staff comments uh just on uh July 30th um to annual chair and vice chair training for board and commission chairs and vice chairs And it's mandatory for new chairs and vice chairs. And there'll be more information from the city clerk on June 25th. Thanks so much.

All right. Thanks so much. This brings us to adjournment. This meeting is adjourned at 8.44 p.m. And I want to thank everyone for participating tonight.