Redwood City Planning Commission Approves 9-Townhome Project at 77 Birch Street on May 21, 2024
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Redwood City Planning Commission Meeting – May 21, 2024
The Redwood City Planning Commission held a regular meeting on May 21, 2024, starting at 6:30 PM and adjourning at 7:30 PM. The sole public hearing item was a proposal to demolish an existing single-story office building at 77 Birch Street and construct two four-story buildings containing nine for-sale townhome units. The Commission voted unanimously (6-0) to approve the Architectural Permit, Vesting Tentative Map, Condominium Permit, and Planned Development Permit, subject to conditions of approval.
Consent Calendar
- No items were on the consent calendar.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Glenn Babbitt (in-person speaker): Expressed strong support for the project, noting it is a “delightful change” to replace office space with housing and stated the design will fit well into the eclectic neighborhood.
- Janet Paul (email read into record): Owner of a duplex at 68 Arch Street, directly to the rear of the project site. Opposed the project, stating that a four-story building would completely block sunlight and privacy for her tenants, cause noise during construction, and reduce property value. She also noted two mature trees on her property that cannot be trimmed.
- Wayne & Jennifer Deutscher (email read into record): Owners of 80 Arch Street, rear neighbors sharing a property line. Opposed the project, citing concerns about permanent shading from the proposed 40-foot-tall building located approximately 20 feet away. They requested a daylight plane study to ensure adequate natural light reaches their property before moving forward.
Discussion Items
- Staff Presentation: Assistant Planner James Dotson presented the project, describing the site’s existing conditions (16,640 sq. ft. lot, currently a multi-tenant office), the proposed demolition and construction, and the use of a Planned Development Permit to reduce front and rear setbacks in order to preserve a mature 46-inch-circumference Coastal Redwood tree on the rear of the property. The project achieves a density of 24 dwelling units per acre (allowed up to 40), includes 18 parking spaces (2 per unit in attached garages), and increases pervious area from 5% to 29.5%. Staff recommended approval, finding the project consistent with zoning and General Plan policies.
- Applicant Presentation: Kriselle Rodrigues, associate at Dahlin Architecture, presented the design rationale, emphasizing the preservation of the redwood tree, the staggered building frontages, and the high-quality materials. She clarified that the rear setback reduction is nine feet for the balcony and 13.5 feet for the building wall, and that the project qualifies for a parking exemption under AB 2097 due to proximity to transit.
- Commission Clarifying Questions: Commissioners asked about the upper story setback, the bioretention basin, bike parking, and the tree protection measures. Staff explained that the project qualifies for a parking exemption under AB 2097. Commissioner Koch questioned the applicant about the driveway surface (asphalt, not permeable). Chair Hunter asked why the project did not go to the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC); staff responded that, due to the Housing Accountability Act, they opted to reduce hearings for this housing project.
- Commission Deliberation: All commissioners expressed strong support. Vice Chair Crnogorac praised the preservation of the large tree and the conversion of an office/blacktop site into housing with increased permeability. Commissioner Koch noted the design fits well in the eclectic neighborhood and called the project a “wonderful guidepost.” Commissioner Chu highlighted the ADA-compliant unit and the elevators in every unit, allowing aging in place, and noted that while shadows are a concern, the trade-off for nine homes is worthwhile. Commissioner Lazarus echoed the sentiment, adding that shade is increasingly valuable. Chair Hunter voiced concern about shadows but did not propose changes, acknowledging the discretion over setbacks had been exercised for tree preservation.
Key Outcomes
- Motion: Vice Chair Crnogorac moved to adopt Resolution 24-04 approving all requested permits; seconded by Commissioner Koch.
- Vote: 6-0 (all commissioners present in favor).
- Conditions of Approval: The project must comply with 56 conditions covering project conformance, fees (parks impact fee ~$327,742, affordable housing fee ~$564,275, water/sewer fees ~$82,427), landscaping, tree protection, stormwater management, construction parking, and final map requirements.
- Next Steps: The project will proceed to building permit issuance. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for June 4, 2024, to discuss zoning code updates.
Meeting Transcript
I think we can start. Recording in progress. Good evening. And thank you for joining our May 21st, 2024 Planning Commission meeting. As a reminder, items will be taken in the order in which they are listed on the agenda. Before we get started, I wanted to briefly go over the public comment procedures for the meeting for those who may be joining us for the first time. Public comments on items not on the agenda will be taken during item number two on this evening's agenda, and comments on other agenda items will be taken only when that item is called. We are continuing to offer in-person and remote options for our planning commission meetings. However, due to continued recent disruptions during public comment at open meetings throughout our region and state, we've modified our public comment procedures. We have not. Thank you. Item three is approval of minutes. There are no minutes for approval at this time. So we'll now move on to item four consent calendar. And there are no items on tonight's consent calendar. We will now move on to the public hearing item, and that is 77 Bird Street. This is a request for architectural permit, vesting tentative map, condominium permit, and planned development permit to demolish an existing single story office building, and to construct two four-story buildings containing nine for sale townhome units within the R5O multifamily high density with an overlay office overlay zoning district. Is there a staff presentation? Yes, there is. Thank you, uh Chair Hunter. Good evening, members of the public, council members, our commissioners, and uh those joining us virtually. My name is James Dotson. I'm the project planner 477 Birch Street condominium project. So an overview of the project. Uh we're here today because this project does exceed three stories and 35 feet in height, which does trigger um the requirement for planning commission to review and um as the uh review body for this project. Um in addition to that, there's a planned development permit uh which is being utilized to uh modify some development standards, architectural permit, which is standard for new development in Redwood City, and tenative map and condominium map, which are uh necessary to subdivide the the units for to be for sale units. Uh here's a uh context of the neighborhood. Um it is in the Mount Carmel area on Birch Street and between Hopkins and Whipple. Um surrounding uses do include residential uses, which I've highlighted in the purple outline, um, and then office uses and a medical or nursing home use uh across the street. The existing conditions on the site, this is a 16,640 square foot lot. Um it is in the R5 residential zoning district, which is for multifamily, and it has an overlay for office uses, which allows for professional and medical offices through a use permit. Um the existing structure is a 4,900 and 18 square foot multi-tenant office building. There's uh personal service in there, um medical office, and professional office as well, so uh real estate um office currently in this building. Uh it is access by two or access by one driveway for entrance and then one driveway for exit, as you could see on the sides of the property there, which I've highlighted with arrows. Um, and then there is an on-site tree. There's one on-site tree, which is a 46-foot circumference, redwood tree, I believe. Uh hopefully I got the number right. Um, but there's a mature redwood tree in the rear of the property, which I've circled with the green outline there on the rear of the property. Uh, here's the proposed site plan. Um, as I stated, we do have a planned development permit, which does allow for modifications to development standards uh for this particular project. They are looking to modify the front and rear setbacks and and conversations with staff. We recommended this as a way to preserve these uh mature large redwood tree in the rear of the property, as you can see with the um opaque circle, green circle there. Um, in addition to that, uh allowing for the reduced setbacks, we do create uh more usable open space in the rear of the property as well for the the tenants of the space. Uh this project consists of nine uh four sale town units. Um the one in the rear that is perpendicular to the rest of the the sites or the rest of the units is uh proposed to be a uh ADA compliant um unit there. Um this site does remove the two driveways on the side of the um on the sides of the property and is consolidated into a one driveway down the middle of the lane which accesses the the nine units. The maximum height or the height being proposed for this site is about 45 feet and five inches. Provides some human scale or pedestrian scale with the the change in colors the ground floor being a gray, and then above that you have a lighter or a off-white with some uh brown and reds in there. So with this uh the materials and the the color variation uh creates good um or it avoids monotony in the appearance of the elevations. Um of the the openings present recession, so it creates articulations in those uh uh facades as well.
openpublica.com