OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Redwood City Planning Commission Meeting - December 5, 2023

Planning CommissionTuesday, December 5, 2023
BodyRedwood City, California
SessionPlanning Commission
DateTuesday, December 5, 2023
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

Or there was needs of the city where your expertise may be uh called on that that it's possible to add things, or does is this very sort of is it is this a ceiling or a floor?

0:12

I would say it's a floor.

0:14

Um there are multiple instances where outside of our regular meetings, um just a couple of weeks ago, one of our um one of our committee members since they lives out in the shores was asked to review a mock-up of one of the building, you know, one of the project pieces and was to come back to us with the recommendations.

0:37

In other words, was this meeting our expectations or not?

0:40

And that's that I remember standing out there looking at the colors of the of the theater project when it was going in, you know, it's with Charles Jenny way back when.

0:51

Um so yes, there are often where we'll have um additional study sessions or extracurricular activities like that that will come up.

1:03

And um, so yeah, I would say this is the floor.

1:06

Um it's a high floor, but um we actually haven't been meeting as often, you know.

1:15

We we're generally scheduled to meet twice a month, but if there's nothing on the agenda, there's been multiple months where we've skipped, and that's that's actually been a problem for committee members because we're trying to plan our lives and we sort of have set those times off, and then when it doesn't happen, it's like but then when it does happen, oh I didn't happen the last two months, and now it's happening, so I gotta be available.

1:39

So the attendance policies have been a bit of a challenge.

1:42

I think one of our um one of our losses was uh kind of over that actually, where the person felt that it was unfair the attendance policy, it was a bit too rigid, so I don't know.

1:58

Commissioner Lazarus Thank you, Mr.

2:02

Chairman.

2:02

Um thank you uh for the presentation and thank you again for your commitment to this issue.

2:08

I'm dovetailing on what the vice chairman was talking about.

2:12

I'm wondering if instead of maintain or achieve what you're trying to say is seek, we seek a balance because it's never there.

2:20

You're always looking.

2:22

And the future just is the future.

2:24

Things come and maybe they get maybe they get built, maybe they don't, maybe they we change the way we build.

2:30

You know, it's always about um I I also have some um I have some other thoughts I think could be relevant to when you said you don't know what's happening.

2:44

Uh Commissioner, maybe this is the time for clarifying glasses.

2:47

Thank you.

2:47

So I will reserve I want to just put a pin in that and we'll reserve for our the proper time.

2:52

I think that's a you know good suggestion.

2:56

Okay.

2:57

Uh okay, with um with that, I will now open the public hearing.

3:01

I have no speaker cards.

3:03

Um I did see some people just recently come in.

3:05

So uh does anyone is anyone in the audience um seeking to comment on the AAC work plan?

3:12

I see no hands.

3:14

Uh so therefore I will close the public hearing and now um open up for uh commissioner discussion and comments.

3:21

And um so I'll look for light, Commissioner.

3:25

Thank you, Chair Hunter.

3:28

There it is.

3:29

Thank you so much for the presentation.

3:32

Um I probably should know this, but I don't.

3:38

What determines a project comes to AAC?

3:45

Because I know they don't allow it.

3:48

So it's really part of the zoning administrator and but generally we look at larger projects um mostly commercial but occasionally residential, um, especially if they're controversial.

4:02

Um, and when I say larger, it that's in context because it it could be like a small hotel on the corner where the gas station was, but there's residential right next to it, or it could be the entire triangle between Main Street and El Camino Real, you know.

4:20

So there's um and or the Stanford Project, or you know, there's you know, again, I've been around long enough where I watched that whole area where the Stanford Project is transformed from just tilt-up warehouses to multi um multi-tenant buildings of which now have gone away to the Stanford campus.

4:40

So but those are the kinds of things um, you know, generally the bigger, more development-based projects, but um, you know, sensitive downtown stuff.

4:50

Anytime I forgot to mention, any time something is a deviation from the downtown specific plan, right?

5:00

Then we would actually need to see that as well and and weigh in on the deviations, which we really rely on staff, Apollo and the other planners to help us weave through that document, and they lay out very nicely for us.

5:13

Here's what's supposed to happen, here's what the architect's proposing, yay or nay, you know, so that works out.

5:19

Commissioner Coke, if I may, uh Apollo Rojas also I think can tell you what is in the current um resolution for what the AAC reviews.

5:28

Thank you, Apollo.

5:30

Uh yes, thank you, uh Ms.

5:32

Xline.

5:32

Uh you know, as uh Chair Spatorno mentioned, um larger development, so not necessarily single family, not uh uh you know, single story um you know, multi-family, we're talking about multi-story, multi-family, uh larger commercial projects.

5:48

And basically the purview uh we advise the planning commission, right?

5:53

So uh things that we know are gonna go to the planning commission for new construction.

5:58

So as I mentioned, there was also uh the idea of uh forwarding updated project review criteria to be a little bit more clear.

6:06

So, you know, I I think it's very common to ask that question what is large, what is sensitive?

6:12

So trying to have more defined guardrails so that uh everybody knows projects that go to the planning commission are are likely also going to go to the uh AAC if it's new construction.

6:24

Thank you, Apollo.

6:25

That helps a lot.

6:29

Commissioner Chill.

6:31

Um just oh sorry, uh just thinking about the the objective design.

6:34

Well, first of all, thank you for a lovely uh presentation, and and this is a fantastic work plan.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Land Use Planning█████████████████████████████████████████████46%
Procedural██████████10%
Community Engagement██████████10%
Public Safety████████8%
Affordable Housing███████7%
Parking Management██████6%
Public Health██████6%
Transportation Safety████4%
Public Comment███3%
Summary of Proceedings

Redwood City Planning Commission Meeting

On December 5, 2023, the Redwood City Planning Commission convened to consider multiple items, including the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC) work plan, the adoption of the 2024 meeting calendar, and the approval of Stanford in Redwood City Phase 2 developments. The meeting lasted from 2:30 PM to approximately 5:30 PM, with Commissioner Chu recusing herself from the Stanford item due to a conflict of interest.

Architectural Advisory Committee Work Plan

  • The commission reviewed and discussed the AAC's proposed two-year work plan for fiscal years 2023-24 and 2024-25. The plan includes updates to objective design standards for multifamily residential development, professional development for committee members, and recruitment of qualified members. Commissioner Lazarus suggested using the word "seek" instead of "maintain" or "achieve" regarding balance in design. The commission unanimously approved the work plan (6-0).

2024 Meeting Calendar

  • The commission adopted the proposed 2024 regular meeting calendar without discussion. The motion passed 6-0.

Stanford in Redwood City Phase 2 – Block C (505 Broadway)

  • Staff Presentation: Staff introduced the proposal for two office buildings (228,000 sq ft, up to 5 stories/88 ft tall), 26,000 sq ft of amenity space, and 905 parking spaces. The project also includes a reduction in parking from 3 spaces per 1,000 sq ft to 2.5 spaces per 1,000 sq ft (15% reduction) based on a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan and trip generation analysis. Staff recommended approval with conditions.
  • Applicant Presentation (John Donahoe, Stanford University): The applicant noted the project aligns with the 2013 Precise Plan and Development Agreement. The existing phase one buildings were fully occupied before the pandemic; parking demand has been lower, supporting the reduction. The commission asked clarifying questions about bike parking (long-term/short-term split), current employee commuting patterns, and tree planting along Highway 101. Staff confirmed the bike parking count will be maintained at pre-reduction levels.
  • Public Comment: No public speakers.
  • Commission Discussion: Commissioners expressed strong support, noting the project faithfully fulfills the Precise Plan and creates a pedestrian-friendly, bike-friendly campus. Commissioner Chu recused herself. The motion to approve the Planned Community Permit and Tentative Map for Block C passed 5-0-1 (one recusal).

Stanford in Redwood City Phase 2 – Block E (440-510 Broadway)

  • Staff Presentation: Staff presented a 265,000 sq ft medical office building (9 stories, up to 150 ft tall), three-story parking garage (650 spaces), 184 surface parking spaces (834 total), and a pedestrian bridge. The building height exceeds the Precise Plan's 120-ft limit by up to 30 ft, which is allowed for one building per block subject to city approval. A 30% parking reduction (from 5 spaces per 1,000 sq ft to 3.5 spaces per 1,000 sq ft) was supported by a TDM plan and parking demand analysis. Staff recommended approval.
  • Applicant Presentation (Molly Swenson, Stanford Medicine): The medical office building will include cardiovascular health, urology, LGBTQ clinic, and same-day access clinic, with 180,000 sq ft of clinical space and 60,000 sq ft shelled for future growth. The parking demand on the existing outpatient center (3.8 spaces per 1,000 sq ft) consistently remains below capacity. The commission praised the project's design and its contribution to community health access.
  • Public Comment: No public speakers.
  • Commission Discussion: Commissioners commended the project's architecture and community benefits. The motion to approve the Planned Community Permit and Tentative Map for Block E passed 5-0-1.

Phase One Parking Reduction

  • Staff Presentation: Staff requested approval to reduce the approved phase one parking for blocks A, B, and part of C by 15%, consistent with the parking analyses and TDM program. The actual parking demand in phase one is significantly lower than originally projected.
  • Applicant Presentation: The reduction is supported by ongoing annual parking monitoring and aerial photography showing low occupancy.
  • Commission Discussion: Commissioners noted the reduction aligns with observed demand and the TDM program's flexibility. The motion to approve the reduction passed 5-0-1.

Key Outcomes

  • AAC Work Plan: Approved unanimously (6-0).
  • 2024 Meeting Calendar: Approved unanimously (6-0).
  • Stanford Phase 2 Block C (PC2020-001, TM2020-004): Approved with conditions, 5-0-1 (Commissioner Chu recused).
  • Stanford Phase 2 Block E (PC2019-003, TM2019-005): Approved with conditions, 5-0-1.
  • Phase One Parking Reduction: Approved, 5-0-1.

Meeting adjourned at approximately 5:30 PM. The next regular meeting is scheduled for January 16, 2024.

Meeting Transcript

Or there was needs of the city where your expertise may be uh called on that that it's possible to add things, or does is this very sort of is it is this a ceiling or a floor? I would say it's a floor. Um there are multiple instances where outside of our regular meetings, um just a couple of weeks ago, one of our um one of our committee members since they lives out in the shores was asked to review a mock-up of one of the building, you know, one of the project pieces and was to come back to us with the recommendations. In other words, was this meeting our expectations or not? And that's that I remember standing out there looking at the colors of the of the theater project when it was going in, you know, it's with Charles Jenny way back when. Um so yes, there are often where we'll have um additional study sessions or extracurricular activities like that that will come up. And um, so yeah, I would say this is the floor. Um it's a high floor, but um we actually haven't been meeting as often, you know. We we're generally scheduled to meet twice a month, but if there's nothing on the agenda, there's been multiple months where we've skipped, and that's that's actually been a problem for committee members because we're trying to plan our lives and we sort of have set those times off, and then when it doesn't happen, it's like but then when it does happen, oh I didn't happen the last two months, and now it's happening, so I gotta be available. So the attendance policies have been a bit of a challenge. I think one of our um one of our losses was uh kind of over that actually, where the person felt that it was unfair the attendance policy, it was a bit too rigid, so I don't know. Commissioner Lazarus Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um thank you uh for the presentation and thank you again for your commitment to this issue. I'm dovetailing on what the vice chairman was talking about. I'm wondering if instead of maintain or achieve what you're trying to say is seek, we seek a balance because it's never there. You're always looking. And the future just is the future. Things come and maybe they get maybe they get built, maybe they don't, maybe they we change the way we build. You know, it's always about um I I also have some um I have some other thoughts I think could be relevant to when you said you don't know what's happening. Uh Commissioner, maybe this is the time for clarifying glasses. Thank you. So I will reserve I want to just put a pin in that and we'll reserve for our the proper time. I think that's a you know good suggestion. Okay. Uh okay, with um with that, I will now open the public hearing. I have no speaker cards. Um I did see some people just recently come in. So uh does anyone is anyone in the audience um seeking to comment on the AAC work plan? I see no hands. Uh so therefore I will close the public hearing and now um open up for uh commissioner discussion and comments. And um so I'll look for light, Commissioner. Thank you, Chair Hunter. There it is. Thank you so much for the presentation. Um I probably should know this, but I don't. What determines a project comes to AAC? Because I know they don't allow it. So it's really part of the zoning administrator and but generally we look at larger projects um mostly commercial but occasionally residential, um, especially if they're controversial. Um, and when I say larger, it that's in context because it it could be like a small hotel on the corner where the gas station was, but there's residential right next to it, or it could be the entire triangle between Main Street and El Camino Real, you know. So there's um and or the Stanford Project, or you know, there's you know, again, I've been around long enough where I watched that whole area where the Stanford Project is transformed from just tilt-up warehouses to multi um multi-tenant buildings of which now have gone away to the Stanford campus. So but those are the kinds of things um, you know, generally the bigger, more development-based projects, but um, you know, sensitive downtown stuff. Anytime I forgot to mention, any time something is a deviation from the downtown specific plan, right? Then we would actually need to see that as well and and weigh in on the deviations, which we really rely on staff, Apollo and the other planners to help us weave through that document, and they lay out very nicely for us. Here's what's supposed to happen, here's what the architect's proposing, yay or nay, you know, so that works out. Commissioner Coke, if I may, uh Apollo Rojas also I think can tell you what is in the current um resolution for what the AAC reviews. Thank you, Apollo. Uh yes, thank you, uh Ms. Xline. Uh you know, as uh Chair Spatorno mentioned, um larger development, so not necessarily single family, not uh uh you know, single story um you know, multi-family, we're talking about multi-story, multi-family, uh larger commercial projects.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com