Before we get started, I wanted to briefly go over public comment procedures for the meeting for those who may be joining us for the first time.

Public comments on the matters of commission and committee interest and items not on the agenda will be taken during item number three.

Comments on the agenda items will be taken only when that item is called.

In-person speakers will be called first, followed by virtual attendees.

For in-person speakers, please fill out one of these speaker cards in the front.

Um council chamber and bring it to staff on the side.

For those joining us virtually, you may be able to raise hand feature on Zoom to speak.

If you're joining us with a teleconference by phone, you may raise your hand by dialing star nine and star six to unmute your microphone when prompted.

Please only raise your hand at a time when the item on which you're speaking is called.

Each speaker will be allotted two minutes, but the time may be adjusted if there are many speakers.

For in-person speakers, there will be a light on the podium to let you know how much time you have left in a buzzer when the time is up.

For virtual speakers, there will be a timer on the screen.

Lastly, we want to know lastly, we know that each uh person brings a different perspective to the discussion, and we want to be sure that everyone has a chance to be heard without interruption.

Planning commission welcomes public comment on items within our purview.

Any speaker whose comments are on topics not under commission's purview will be warned and then removed if necessary, in order to allow for the planning commission to conduct their business.

Well, thank you for your attention and coordination during this process.

Um I will not turn it over to staff for the roll call.

Commissioner Bond.

Present.

Commissioner Cornejo.

Here.

Commissioner Finch.

Here.

Commissioner Hunter?

Here.

Uh Commissioner Robinson is joining virtually, but he has not yet joined, as far as I can tell.

I'll just do one more check.

Commissioner Robinson, are you online?

Okay.

Vice Chair Koch is absent.

And Chair Sernakaratz.

Present.

And for the Architectural Advisory Committee.

Committee member Devitovitz.

He's not here.

He's not here.

Committee member Jenkins.

Committee member King.

He's not here.

Absent.

And Vice Chair Stewart.

Here.

And um Chair Tanaka Tsubell.

Present and youth committee member Perettis.

Is absent the question.

For the purpose of this meeting, I'm Sue Xline.

I'm the assistant community development director and staff liaison to the commission to planning commission.

Other staff attending this evening.

Rick Jarvis is our consultant city attorney.

Evelyn Garcia is the associate planner and the AAC liaison.

William Chu is our senior planner.

Lindy Chan, Principal Planner, and Christina Mateo, administrative secretary and meeting host.

Thank you, Ms.

X Lion.

Item number two, the next item on the agenda is AB two four four nine notifications and considerations.

Do we have any remote participation notifications or requests from the commission to consider?

No, we do not.

And I did want to just note that I failed to mention that Barbara Coutz is also here.

She's our consultant city attorney as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, let's move on to the next item on the agenda.

Item number three is public comments.

So public comments on the approval of minutes, consent items, matters of commission interest and items not on the agenda.

We will take time to take public comments from those joining us in person or through Zoom.

As a reminder, public comments should be on topics within planning commission's purview.

Um let's see.

Do we have any in-person cards for items not on the agenda?

Are there any Zoom speakers who would uh wish to speak and raise their hand at this time?

Oh sorry, no, not the same.

No, no, they're not.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So if there's no objection, seeing there are no speakers, I will now close the public comment for the items not on the agenda.

And moves straight into item number four, which is a public hearing.

It's a request for a study session on the proposed site and building design for the 910 Marshall project, a downtown planned community permit application for a state licensed senior residential care facility with a total of 222 units, consisting of 188 market rate independent living units, 19 assisted living units, and 15 memory care units.

1,210 square foot of retail and 95 parking spaces.

The applicant is seeking waivers under the state density bonus law, including the height, 234 feet to the roof and 21 stories, and several other developmental standards in the downtown precise plan.

This is informational only, and no action will be taken tonight.

William Chuy, our senior planner, will give a presentation on this item.

Thank you, Chair Cernegaretz.

Good evening to the planning commission.

Good evening to the architectural advisory committee.

So to reiterate, uh the purpose of tonight's meeting is a planning commission and AAC study session.

And the focus of the meeting is the proposed site and building design for the project, and we are not requesting any action tonight, um, only feedback.

The outline of the presentation tonight will go over kind of the study session questions that staff has for the planning commission and AAC's consideration.

Um a background on the project site, project description, and then discussion on the current proposed design of the project.

Um a different looking or different uh larger project on this project site at some point, but that project was withdrawn.

Uh the project you're looking at tonight is the current and proposed project here.

So these are the study session questions that staff uh wants to kind of pose in front as you have them keep them in mind during the presentations.

One uh general question just to weigh in on the overall thoughts on the building design and tower design.

Uh, two, your thoughts on the site design with the lobby setback, porco share, and the spring street design frontage.

Um three, uh the should the applicant continue to kind of break up the length of the massing with different design approaches, and then four, uh, where are the opportunities to create a signature building?

So this is the project site.

Uh address is 910 Marshall, highlighted here, approximately 1.08 acres.

Uh, is located in the downtown precise plan.

It has frontages on Marshall Street, Walnut, and Spring, and then to the south is a one-story commercial building.

The proposed project would demolish the existing one-story medical building on the site and construct a state licensed senior residential care facility with 222 units.

The majority of those would be market rate independent living units, but there will be a 19 assisted living units and 15 memory care units as well.

Uh there is 1,200 square feet of retail on the ground floor.

Um, and no affordable housing units are proposed at this time, and under state law, uh senior care facilities.

Um we can't the city cannot require senior care facilities to provide affordable housing.

But as a senior care facility, there would be a kind of a comprehensive care package that they would provide.

It'd be uh things like meals, housekeeping, personal care, and the wide range of amenities to support um uh seniors.

And then there'd be some parking in terms of uh 95 parking spaces that include some ballet and some tandem and then 36 bicycle parking spaces.

So this is a view from uh kind of Broadway and Maple Spring Street in the foreground here.

The proposed building is a 21-story um 234 feet tower that uh but overall 258 feet to the top of the elevator overruns and mechanical equipment on top.

The tower steps down to a two-story uh 35 foot approximately podium.

Uh, this would be structured parking, and then on top of that podium, you can see there'd be a landscape terrace for uh common open space for the residents.

As mentioned, the entitlement is a downtown plan community permit, but at the same time, there is also a request for state density bonus of additional 20%, and then also state density bonus law waivers of development standards.

As of right now, the request uh includes approximately 14 waivers of development standards, um including maximum height.

Um, as a senior housing project, the L project is eligible for the requested density bonus of 20%.

Uh, but um staff are currently still evaluating whether the waivers meet state density bonus law and the key waiver being the height waiver to increase height from 92 feet maximum to 258 feet approximately.

Uh city staff have also requested assistance from the California housing community uh development department on the height waiver.

Um, but the purpose of tonight's meeting to reiterate is the uh robust design discussion on the proposed project at this stage.

So looking at the site plan, the uh main component of the Marshall Street frontage is uh the aforementioned porcochare.

It's over the recessed main lobby.

Um the retail space is on the corner of Marshall and Walnut, and then along Marshall Street, there would also be a two-lane driveway to access the parking garage and an eight-foot sidewalk.

So the lobby itself is recessed approximately 42 feet from the sidewalk, um, exceeding the maximum 10 feet setback, and then the proposed sidewalk width is also less than the required 12 feet.

Um this is kind of one of the areas staff is requesting feedback on.

Um we think the wider sidewalk could potentially provide more uh for pedestrian activity and also accessibility needs for the residents.

And then similarly, the recess setback.

Um, you know, the idea of the maximum setback and the precise plan is for buildings to be close to the sidewalk for a downtown urban environment.

Um along the string street side, the frontage consists of the two-story above ground parking podium, and it'd be uh currently proposed to be screened with perforated metal panels and in-ground planters.

Uh staff similarly request input here for kind of additional consideration for more uh visual or pedestrian interest or kind of uh ideas to decrease the scale of the garage face.

Spring Street um is particularly challenging, so just want to provide some context uh here.

The section that highlights on the screen is the new streets map in the downtown precise plan.

And the focus is on the project site and also the surrounding area.

So you see the project site is highlighted in red there.

Uh you can see spring sheet to the west side of the site, and it's identified in gray.

And what that means is that the DP the TTPP calls for the street to be removed in order to establish a more um standard street grid.

In green to the north of the site is um the recently approved 1900 Broadway project, which was a gatekeeper project, and they are um implementing part of that DTPB vision, and we'll request that the portion of Spring Street that runs through their project site be vacated, and they will develop the entirety of that site and what is highlighted there.

Staff currently is evaluating opportunities to close the additional segment of Spring Street, but wanted to note that the that would be once the improvements to the 1900 Broadway project uh are completed, and also noting that the closure of Spring Street is not proposed as part of the 910 project.

But that would be a helpful context to guide the kind of Spring Street frontage design discussion.

So this is the proposed project design.

Uh it mainly consists of a single tower on top of a two-story podium.

The podium covers the project site with the tower oriented on the east side of the site.

Uh the tower is rectangular, it spans the length of Marshall Street.

And staff has been working with the applicant on the proposed design.

We had identified some concern with the initial submittal that it was emphasizing both the length and the height, suggested some vertical breaks in the massing.

And similarly, as uh the tallest building in Redwood City.

Um, staff also suggested that this may be an opportunity for uh unique landmark design providing kind of unique architecture and visual interest.

So this in response, this is the applicant's resubmittal and is requesting feedback from the Planning Commission and AAC.

Uh Seth did find that the current design as proposed is starting to break up the massing vertically horizontally.

Um due to the height, it doesn't neatly align with some of the DTPP's kind of base middle and top requirements.

But you can see some of those elements are represented.

Um the building base is the kind of vertical pilasters, the building middle is the primary building facade for the residential units, and it's kind of represented by those white pre-cast elements that represents the frame around the windows, and this is repeated both vertically and horizontally.

And those elements are also popped out slightly from the building base below.

And then there's also a vertical circulation element that runs up the entirety of the uh the tower.

And then the vertical brakes are recessed, they use different materials, they also have balconies, and then um the sides of the tower are shown on the right here.

And then the sides of the tower are shown on the right here.

They include kind of the same materials and approach, however, uh they provide a little bit more architectural interest by vertically offsetting the separated massing elements.

And the top is the um glazing that's recessed from the building middle below, and that's capped by a um metal flat roof on one side.

Uh wanted to provide a couple of perspectives of the project from around the city.

Uh, this is looking east on Jefferson and El Camino.

This is a view of the project from Bretterans looking west.

There are uh additional perspectives as well as other parts of the cities, the those are uh linked in your staff report.

And lastly, so to conclude, staff is requesting input from the planning commission and AC on the overall project design as proposed.

Um as mentioned, staff is finding that the project is starting to respond to staff's comments, but we still think this the design could be uh strengthened and improved.

Um some examples we think you know the project could explore utilizing the same as asymmetrical massing organization on the length of the massing.

Um maybe other materials or color transitions, um use of different patterns, or maybe even the differentiate the you know the popped-out elements or circulation elements more distinctly.

Uh similarly with those questions, we were wondering if there's kind of improvements to both the Marshall Street and Spring Street at the ground level, and then you know, lastly on kind of landmark architecture, um, suggest there could be more done to set the building apart architecturally.

So finally, again, no action requested tonight.

Um that concludes staff's presentation.

Happy to answer any clarifying questions.

Thank you, Mr.

Churi for your presentation.

Um are there any clarifying questions that the commission or the committee members would like to ask staff?

Committee members to I don't have any questions right now.

Oh, I'm sorry, I saw your light.

Oh, sorry.

No worries, committee member um Tanakatsuba.

So this is to staff.

The diagonal uh destruction of Spring Street and that massing of that beautiful block.

Um and the fact that 1900 is going to be asking for the removal and vacated uh Spring Street.

Why at this point is this not a stronger element?

Um either from the city's direction to the applicant or um uh as a mandate of this is going to be dealt with as an entire block, um, because we will be vacating Spring Street because we're going through a lot of serious design compromises in order to handle this diagonal that's created by Spring Street, and I'm curious as to why it there isn't a stronger move on part of uh the city to get rid of it.

Yeah, it's a very good question.

Um, I think we are at this point still evaluating um options to close this segment of Spring Street.

Um yeah, as you see, it's a very small segment of Spring Street.

Um, but we just want it's unfortunate it's not part of the project details at this time, but the city has staff and the applicant have been working uh and talking and discussing Spring Street, but what we know right now is that we have kind of right-of-way rights, but um but beyond that, we um beyond that uh we are still looking at options and uh it's an ongoing discussion.

I uh I also have a question related to that on Spring Street.

Uh I know that uh this particular potential closure of Spring Street was proposed in DTP plans, which were passed you know more than 15 years ago, so it's much before my time.

Uh given that the wording is potential.

Uh I'm curious whether it as currently stands as a street, as the frontage is considered an active street and will have and any implementation will have to follow the current DTP standards in terms of development regulations on that particular uh frontage.

I'm sorry, would you be able to repeat that question?

So the DDPP proposes a potential closure of Spring Street, but currently it's an active street with active uses and active pedestrians on the sidewalk.

So I'm curious as it stands right now, any proposed projects on that remnant lot that's that's currently there that's being proposed by the applicant.

Does it currently have to follow all the relevant DTP standards related to that frontage?

Uh along Spring Street for the project frontage.

Yes.

There are there are no um there are no requirements in the precise plan specifically for Spring Street because of its contemplated.

I mean, general requirements for all the streets within the DTPP.

Um sorry, I'm not sure I'm understanding the question fully.

Yeah.

So for example, um one of the requirements of the DTPP in terms of um pedestrian activation of a frontage of a particular building within DTP.

For example, we uh or at least the way I read the the the standards is uh for a two-story uh for for any parking structure, for example, we cannot be facing an active use uh on within the DDPP because it could consider downtown and a highly activated pedestrian use.

Um so in this particular case, would that requirement which is for all streets within DTP be applicable to this block?

Good evening, Chair Lindy Chan, principal planner.

Just gonna jump in on the the question and and working closely with William on this.

The downtown precise plan identifies different street types and it falls back on the streets for the requirements in accordance with the street types because this is called out for a street to be removed, it doesn't call for any requirements because it's not establishes any particular street.

Um therefore it it's not something that the city had even contemplated.

Um but in terms of the requirement, um I believe the applicant would be waiving the requirement for them to remove that portion of String Spring Street from their proposal.

So um it it is a little bit difficult because that it doesn't model the downtown precise plan as it was adopted.

Um we are also evaluating a greater downtown area plan, so this could be part of a larger consideration given the proposal that we have.

Um all of these are considerations that we're we're thinking through.

Got it.

Thank you, Mrs.

Chen.

Um Commissioner Hunter.

Or were you done?

Uh I have one more question, but you can go ahead.

I don't know.

Um I guess I just um I think it's hopefully a quicker question of regarding Spring Street also.

Um so now that Spring Street no longer go no longer goes all the way through to Marshall because of the um the the approved project on the uh Wall Spargo site.

Um is is the plan on unless the staff or the city does something else, is the current plan that that short block walnut would still be active as a street.

So Spring Street would, you know, you could go down Spring Street and then turn right onto Walnut to get to uh to Marshall?

Yeah, Walnut Street would be a would be a new city street as part of the precise plan uh vision.

But Walnut it's would run through both the project site for 1900 Broadway and then or sorry, would have a frontage on the pro 1900 Broadway site and then would also have a frontage on the um 19 project site.

Um does Walnut continue on um South, I guess, and it doesn't, does it?

So there's only like a short block, right?

Trying to pull it up.

Between Spring and Marshall.

It's a private round.

Yeah.

Yeah, so it doesn't go anywhere.

So really that's all that's all walnut would be is just uh more little short block.

Oh one uh sorry.

One more do you mean this the segment highlighted in orange there?

No, yeah.

So at the bottom of that, um I don't think walnut goes through.

Does it well it shows it there?

Okay, all right, yeah, yeah.

I'm looking at a picture here.

It doesn't look like that.

Okay, okay.

Um that was just uh informational question.

Um this might be uh question um for the uh for the city attorney.

So does this study uh session count toward that uh five-meeting limit under the housing accountability act?

It does.

It does.

Oh okay.

Thank you.

Um could you you you put up a list of four questions to get us to think about our our input for you?

Um I don't understand the last question.

Uh I think we are.

No, for this project itself.

You know, if there's an opportunity to create a signature-looking building for this proposed project, and where are those opportunities on you know the the tower or the the building itself to meet really distinct and unique?

Okay, but but that's but but the uh the the uh preface of the of the sentence is that's still assuming that it's still gonna be a tower.

Right.

Tall tower.

Okay.

Um that's all I had for the thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Hunter.

Commissioner Corneo.

Thank you.

Um given that the building is um being proposed to be really, really tall.

I'm trying to get an understanding of what is it compared to the tallest building in downtown Redwood City.

Um which would which is that building now?

And I I don't know if you have like a picture or something, but I want to to see like a side-by-side.

Let's see here.

Okay.

I think we think the tallest building, at least, is the county like dome.

But that is in the you know the Central County building, but in terms of the downtown, the maximum height is 12, it's a 12-story zone in different parts of the towntown.

Um potentially, I think the box building might be the tallest.

Or uh the indigo residential project is also, I think, in a 12-story zone.

So Indigo um box, and then you said the county building?

The the top of the dome for the county courthouse.

Oh, the courthouse.

Okay.

Got it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Indigo and box are both 12.

Okay.

Thank you, Commissioner Cornejo.

Um Commissioner Pott.

What is yours?

Yeah.

Um thank you for the presentation.

Um I also had a question about the the fourth question from staff questions.

Um is this under consideration by the applicant to move the site or I guess I'm trying to what is the what is the purpose of that question?

Are they looking to different locations?

No, no, sorry for the confusion.

I think the the intent of the question is that you know the building itself, as proposed, would be the tallest building in Redwood City, potentially the tallest building in the entire peninsula.

So we thought there would be an opportunity for a unique design, a unique kind of landmark building.

And so the quest the intent behind the question is just if there are additional opportunities to push the architecture of the building more.

I'll go back to you if I have questions about that.

I'm sort of processing that.

Thank you, Commissioner.

But Commissioner Finch.

Um following up on um uh Commissioner Hunter's questions.

Um is the is the section is redoing the section of Walnut Street from Spring Street to Broadway.

Would that would the would this developer be doing that?

Or would that be the city doing that at a later time?

Uh but some of the improvements are part of the 1900 Broadway project.

Oh, oh, okay, okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Butt.

Commissioner's uh committee member Stewart.

Yes.

Um I'm just wondering about the five meeting limit.

Uh there seemed to be a lot of questions that you are gonna look into with the state and the whole thing with walnut.

I'm just wondering if we're being too early and looking at a design, because if you take walnut out and I think that what's that other little triangle on the other side of Walnut is that a park or uh sorry small retail streets.

Pretty small little, yeah, the little triangle, but if you square the site off, this design really wouldn't apply.

And it's it that that's an existing uh retail use that it could be part of this project too, right?

Um it would be it's under different ownership at this time, so not putting at least if you took walnut, then the site would be bigger and maybe there would be a different design other than what we're looking at, and if there's only a five meeting limit, you know, we could propose a lot of questions here that need to be uh re-looked at I don't know how you can do that in five meetings if if we're already counting one of them is a meeting here already.

I'm just wondering if we're if we're too early.

Because uh I can't remember what the exact questions were, but there were questions about state law and how it applies to I think the height and uh the uh elderly housing or something like that.

So that that's a question in my mind.

Thank you, commitment member stewart.

Um, response yeah, okay.

Uh, can I just to the um question from from uh commissioner stewart?

The um it's a good question.

There are five meetings limits for once the project's been deemed complete.

So this has already gone to a study session with the city council while it wasn't reviewed and in incomplete, so that did not count.

Um one of the feedback from the council when they provided feedback, and if you've had a chance to oper an opportunity to review, is to really get broad community input on the project design.

And so this is why we're holding a joint meeting with both the AAC and the planning commission is an opportunity to really air this out in early fashion to really understand what the community's interest is in a building of this this height, um, and because it is so tall for the Redwood City and asking for such a large waiver.

So this was a really good opportunity early on in the process, just to make sure that we're getting input from the community and from um both commissions this evening.

So just wanted to put that there and I don't know if Sue, if you had anything else you wanted to add.

No, okay.

Okay, great.

No, thank you.

I I did just want to add that um Commissioner Robinson has joined us a few minutes ago now, and um I don't know if you are able to see when he has his hands raised.

And so I cannot, so please do let me know.

No, that's yield the floor to Commissioner Robinson.

Just wanted to beg that for your attention.

Great.

Uh thank you.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Very well.

Apologize technology security controls for all of you getting in properly.

Um I just wanted to uh talk about a paragraph at the bottom of page nine or page six, depending on uh where you are in the package building design.

So um I I used to work in the foster city metro tower, which I think is the tallest building on the peninsula, and that is a completely planned area of the tower, which is office, additional office buildings around it, housing, um commercial and shopping, that kind of thing.

It is all a very cohesive design.

Obviously, we can't do that in downtown Redmid City, an old city.

Um uh but I was so I'm I'm very focused on the design aspects, and it says that the architectural styles allowed Mediterranean Neoclassical Art Deco Victorian, um, but this appears to be contemporary.

Um I would assume that indigo is also contemporary.

Are there any examples of tall buildings that we would you know might look at that would constitute for the downtown historic character aspect that are Mediterranean or Neil's classical or art deco?

I can't personally think of any, but when I when I look at the proposed design, I think it's it'll be very important that we get this right because of how visible that is.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner uh Robinson.

Um Mr.

Chui, would you um like to respond?

Or um the yeah, the the downtown precise plan has different character areas that permit different parts of uh different types of architecture throughout the city.

Um and the indigo project is in the portion of the downtown does that does permit contemporary, um whereas this doesn't.

Um and so some of those uh the design and architectural styles are specifically curated for where they are in the precise plan itself.

So and then they're also curated for um potentially the uh the maximum height limits.

So I I don't know if there's any good example would be any good examples, at least in the downtown itself of kind of tall Mediterranean buildings or tall Victorian or Art Deco buildings, but um and there are probably there may be examples throughout other parts of the you know that we can look at.

Right.

Um thank you, Mr.

Um Chewy.

I do have uh a couple of follow-up questions before Mr.

Bot.

Relating to height, do we have the height of the proposed 1900 Broadway project which is adjacent to this proposal?

It's also in a 92 feet zone, so it's 92 feet.

Okay.

And then the other question that we uh put from residents as well is that a proposed housing unit is being for senior living count towards the uh the worst city contribution for uh arena lot and food cycle.

I'm not sure I know the answer to that question, Sue.

Sorry, could you repeat it?

I'm having a little bit of a hard time hearing you.

Well, that's okay.

Uh the proposed housing unit is being senior living, do they count towards the city's contribution towards the arena allotment for the cycle?

Um so uh that's still being fully evaluated, but that is that is our hope and intention that the at least the independent living units will count.

The um facility is broken up into different units.

So we are hoping that those at the very least do count.

Great.

Thank you.

Um Commissioner Bott.

Yeah, just to follow up on the um uh just to follow up on the design.

Um so the the staff report on that same page that um Commissioner Robinson pointed out, um, says that uh two of the main things that staff raised concerns about were the project height and building design.

And as I understand it, is do we have any examples in the area of a Mediterranean neoclassical RDC or Victorian housing tower?

Is this something that is feasible or is this a requirement that categorically excludes what's being proposed?

Thank you, Commissioner, but I think that's very much along the lines of uh question from Mr.

Robertson from Commissioner Robinson.

Um I think that well, I'm not gonna answer the question for you, but uh Mr.

Chew senior planner may decide to reiterate the answer.

Yeah, we we I mean there are examples downtown of Mediterranean residential buildings, just uh not or other type of styles of that are residential, but just not um that nothing that was contemplated at this current height.

Right.

Certainly non-member of the city, of course.

There are examples in San Francisco or San Jose, some of these tiles, but not within our city boundaries.

Commissioner Cornell.

I have two questions.

My first one is um a follow-up to what was shared.

Um I'm sorry, I don't remember the other staff members' uh name.

Lindy.

I'm sorry, what is it?

Lindy.

Libby Lindy.

Lindy.

Oh, okay.

Sorry, Lindy.

Um I wanted to um, as I was reading the report and it sh and um when it was brought to the council in 2025, um, the council expressed concerns or shared that they wanted a heavy um outreach and community engagement given the the scale of the project.

And I know we're having this meeting um and we've received public comment and there's people here.

What other approaches have you all taken um to make sure that we get as much community outreach?

Because even though I I we received emails from people, I was expecting just a lot more.

Um but anyways, I wanted to hear your thoughts on that.

I may I'll start.

The applicant um the applicant has done uh a good amount of community outreach.

They can speak to what they have done and some of the the results and of you know their outreach efforts.

Yeah, they they've uh they've done that on their as part of the response to city council.

Okay, so will that be in the presentation?

Yes, so they can speak to it.

Yes.

Okay, got so then I'll just wait there.

And then my next question um is on the design and the height.

How will this affect like when I walk around all downtown Rabbit City, there's places where there's a lot of sunlight, and then there's certain places where there really isn't any.

So how will this affect just the sunlight, the shadows?

Um what will uh what would that look like?

Yeah, that's a good question.

The um the precise plan has a specific shadow impact um that uh standard or threshold is maybe is the best way to say it.

Um we're still I think we've asked the applicant to provide that as part of their application materials to show if it has a specific shadow impact, but specifically what the precise plan um considers a shadow impact, at least is a is a specific time and specific amount of shadow that's cast over public historic resources or parks or whatever it is.

So um, and that's during the spring equinox.

But uh they would have the applicant is we've requested a shadow study as part of their project plan.

So that's something that we um have seen partially of, but not we haven't seen the full um kind of limit and shadow them uh at least based on that threshold of the precise plan has.

Okay, yeah, because even when I walk through box between box and limon, that street never I never really see any sunlight.

So I don't I'm I don't know um why that is, but anyways, um thank you.

Sorry.

Thank you, Commissioner Cornejo.

Um committee member Jenkins.

Thank you.

Is there a comprehensive list of the 14 exceptions that are being requested?

Um staff has has that list, yes.

Um if I can try to grab that for you if you are looking for um that full list okay.

Um Commissioner Jenkins just also want to speak to the fact that uh the city is still evaluating all of the waivers.

Um it's 14 at this time.

There may be more.

So I just want to focus the attention on the design and the exterior, not so much on the waivers per se, but the ones that we've called your attention to is what we want to focus on.

Um and then high-level preliminary design feedback.

There will be a subsequent opportunity where we will ask the architectural advisory committee to formally weigh in on on each of those requests and formally provide a recommendation on the design.

I think we didn't want to provide too much detail at this phase because it it is a lot of information, um, but trying to keep the discussion high level.

Um but I'll I'll also just see if there's anything else that William wants to add.

No, I think that's it for now.

But if there's any kind of maybe specific thing you're thinking of in terms of what's requested, uh maybe happy to summarize, but otherwise I think um agreed.

The focus of the the meeting is kind of the overall design.

And uh question.

Yeah.

Uh thank you.

Uh committee member um Stewart.

Yes.

Yeah.

Uh I'm just thinking of the precedent that this could set.

Because there's probably other sites that are similar to this.

And if this gets approved, do we end up with a city that's you know 200 feet tall.

Uh is that been considered?

Uh I mean, there's nothing unique about this site that says that this is the one that's gonna be the tallest building because it could be a whole city of these, right?

Is that true?

Or um may ask for some legal input on this particular question.

Um it's not so much a question.

Hi, I'm Barbara Couts.

I'm special counsel to the city, and thank you for having me.

Uh it's not so much that the that the project sets a precedent, but that density bonus law allows developers to request an unlimited number of waivers from local development standards.

And although there's some question about um about how that applies to the height requested here, which is why the city has asked um the Department of Housing and Community Development for uh you know, for their opinion or for technical advice.

Um in general, uh waivers can only be denied if there's a specific health and safety problem caused by the waiver that can't otherwise be mitigated, or the waiver violates state or federal law, or um it has an adverse impact on a historic building listed on the California Register.

Um for instance, this building was actually proposed to be much higher, but the federal government, the FAA said it was too high for a building near the San Carlos Airport.

But it does require generally you know, either uh effect on a historic building or a violation of state or federal law, or a specific health or safety impact to turn down a waiver.

So the the legislature has made it you know really quite difficult for cities to maintain their design standards and vision.

Thank you.

Um last question before I would like to uh give the the um applicant also a chance to present just to um that's that's fine.

I was going to follow up on that with a question that I had intended to ask later, but it would have been in response to that.

But why don't we wait?

Yeah, I will I want to give the chance for the applicant.

That was my attempt.

All right.

Commissioner Robinson, please join us.

Uh yeah, I'm I'm still focused on building design, so I think we've talked about residential towers and and that kind of thing.

But the actual podium itself.

So this is something that's going to be at street level.

What what is the proposed design style that I'm looking at in figure four, Spring Street frontage?

And that's back on page nine.

Because I think you know, the the tower is one thing.

We're all gonna see that from a distance.

At street level, the podium needs to integrate with the surrounding architecture, which is very close to some of our historic buildings, for example.

Um but what do what am I seeing in the what do you guys call the podium design now?

Is that contemporary?

Is that the the like first three stories of glass, etc.?

Thank you.

Yeah, uh it's a good question.

I'm not sure uh we've contemplated maybe the design style, but in terms of what it's represented, is that it's you know the parking podium, but then uh there's kind of perforated screening panels for the garage itself.

There's some planters along the streetscape, but that is maybe the extent of what at least is shown on uh the project design for that that piece.

So figure I'm sorry, figure six that is showing um the backside of the podium, which will be a parking structure and screening.

Is that what I'm seeing?

Yes, yes, Spring Street perspective.

Yes.

Okay.

Um and then other than that, it's just the pedestrian sidewalk.

All right.

And then in figure seven, the Marshall Street ground floor, um sidewalk shape with trees, and then the um the glass and the other uh appearance.

Um but that's the Marshall Street ground floor is the tower.

It goes straight up from there.

Is that right?

Yes.

Okay.

Um was there any contemplation of that being uh the tower being stepped back a little bit further within the triangle so that it doesn't create such a uh a straight up there?

So uh there's no so what I'm seeing then on Marshall Street is there there is no real step back from Marshall Street.

For example, on El Camino Real, when many um new uh multifamily rental apartment buildings went up.

Um the first two or three stories um are at street uh street frontage, but then they step back a little bit.

Um was there any contemplation on on the Marshall Street for the tower being stepped back?

Thank you.

I think the applicant will touch on some of their uh design approach uh as part of their presentation and what they've looked at and what they've explored.

Thank you, Mr.

Chuy, for answering our plethora of questions has been um quite exhausting, but we're gonna have our um applicant uh their presentation, and we'll follow up with our further questions.

Thank you.

I'm not exhausted, but evening AAC members and planning commissioners.

My name is Steven Reller with RM properties, the applicant for 910 Marshall Street.

I grew up on the peninsula and have spent most of my life here, raised my family here and hope to spend the rest of my life here.

I can't imagine living anywhere else.

First, I want to thank you for your time reviewing this project tonight, and especially to thank planning staff, particularly Lindy and William, who have worked with us closely for over two years to get us where we are tonight.

Kevin Dang with HGA Architects will present the project, but I wanted to take a minute to introduce myself and talk about the need for the project.

This year, the baby boom generation begins to turn 80.

The coming decades will bring a demographic shift unlike anything we've ever seen before.

And Redwood City will feel it acutely.

Over the next 20 years, Redwood City's population is expected to grow only about 4%.

However, in that same time period, the number of residents over the age of 70 will increase by roughly 70%.

Almost 20 times faster than the population as a whole.

This translates to over 8,000 more residents over 70 than there are today in Redwood City.

This isn't a distant trend.

It's already underway and will be a massive change.

Some seniors will choose to age in place.

Many others will want or need to move.

But in the last 20 years, Redwood City has built only about 300 similar senior housing units, a small fraction of what's needed.

Without action, this shortage will only get worse and will force many seniors to move from the city they call home.

But one critical development type that has been ignored is senior housing.

Thank you.

Yeah, just let me know.

Okay.

Um you can go to the next slide.

And the next one.

Okay.

Um thanks, Steve.

So it's first I want to say it's a special honor tonight to present to both the architectural advisory committee and the planning commission in the same evening.

Uh we truly appreciate the opportunity for this study session.

Um next slide, sorry.

Well, tonight's uh focus is the building design.

It's important first to ground the project within this within the city's broader uh priorities.

This proposal directly supports key downtown goals around housing, transportation and mobility, and children and youth.

That intergenerational connection between seniors and their community.

Next slide, please.

The site's downtown location is central to the project's success.

It offers immediate access to services, transit public life, and everyday amenities that are essential to senior independence, dignity, and long-term well-being.

Next slide, please.

The site is connected to the fabric of the city.

As we shared during our city council presentation last fall, senior housing presents unique challenges.

Staff retention and meaningful participation in communities are critical to the facility's success.

These are not operational issues alone.

They are design drivers, and they shape our wellness-centered approach to the project.

Next slide, please.

These conditions led us to a set of core design values, urban integration, resident wellness, and access to natural light and air at every level.

Next slide, please.

The site is captured by urban density and height on one side and by a gateway pedestrian scale corridor on another.

Our response is a building that participates in an existing urban rhythm while leveraging solar orientation to create generous, highly usable common open space.

Unfortunate that the slide doesn't show very well.

Next slide, please.

The massing evolves directly from that urban environmental response.

At the lower levels, entries, services, and amenities help articulate the building's relationship to the street.

The tower form is refined to optimize resident views, daylight access, facade composition, and an articulated silhouette.

Next slide, please.

An active ground floor experience is critical along Marshall Street, while Spring Street also serves as an important gateway into downtown.

These precedents help frame our thinking around potential programs, materials, and formal gestures that reinforce a vibrant pedestrian realm.

Next slide, please.

On the third floor, we've dedicated an entire amenity level organized around a large outdoor terrace.

These shared spaces are fundamental fundamental to the mental and physical well-being of our residents, offering multiple ways to connect with one another and with nature directly from their homes.

Next slide, please.

The residential floors prioritize access to natural light and views, not only within the units, but also within the shared circulation spaces and common areas.

These everyday moments of daylight are essential to cut to comfort, orientation, and quality of life.

Next slide, please.

That design intent now comes together in the architecture itself.

Next slide, please.

Here's the ground floor plan.

At Plan North, a generous drop-off in Court Courtier along Marshall Street provides a dignified arrival sequence while screening parking from the primary frontage.

Back of house services functions are efficiently organized along Walnut Street to the west.

Next slide, please.

The third floor amenity level contains a wide range of dedicated program and activity spaces and dining areas.

The south facing edge is intentionally porous, creating both visual connection to open spaces and direct pedestrian access to the outdoor terrace.

Next slide, please.

At the typical residential level, you can begin to see how facade articulation and unit mixed planning are working together in an efficient floor plate.

The design maximizes daylight through into both the units and the shared hallways and elevator lobby, while many residences also include private balconies to further reinforce an access to light, air, and outdoor connections.

Next slide, please.

Here's a building section illustrating the distribution of programs.

Next slide, please.

This is the project we submitted last year.

I won't spend too much time here, but I do want to acknowledge that the next several images differ from what was formerly submitted.

We've been working closely with planning staff on the facade evolution, and while it took longer than we anticipated, we deeply appreciate that collaborative process, and I believe the result is significantly stronger because of that partnership.

Next slide, please.

Here is the current proposed design of the project.

The most significant evolution is the shift from a predominantly horizontal expression to a more vertical architectural language, one that better reinforces the building's proportion, presence, and relationship to the surrounding sky skyline.

Next slide, please.

Along Marshall Street, the frontage emphasizes pedestrian rhythm and material depth.

Next slide, please.

At Spring Street, green walls and ornamental perforated metal panels screen the garage levels below the terrace while contributing texture and softness to the streetscape.

Next slide, please.

Looking down, Marshall, additional massing articulation distinguishes the north and south portions of the tower.

Next slide, please.

And finally, close-up street level views highlight pedestrian scale materials.

Next slide, please.

Detailing, and the quality of the public realm experience.

Next slide, please.

And next slide, please.

The architectural expression draws from warm tones and timeless materials.

Concrete, metal, and wood applied through high performance facade systems, consistence consistent with contemporary Class A urban buildings.

The goal is a building that feels both durable and welcoming.

Next slide, please.

Next slide, please.

With our art with that architectural framework established, I'd like to briefly connect the design back to the downtown precise plan.

Next slide, please.

I won't read the slide in detail, but it's important to acknowledge that as a state density bonus project, we are employing waivers for several DTPP standards related to facade composition, disposition type, architectural character, and height.

That said, our team does understand the underlying urban design intent of those standards, and our goal has been to meet that intent through altern and an alternative but rigorous architectural response.

Next slide, please.

While the building does not align neatly with this with the prescribed tower disposition type in the DTPP, the massing is still carefully sculpted and appropriate to its context for tall billing.

Next slide, please.

Similarly, while the facade does not follow a literal base middle top or prescribed vertical brake framework, it still establishes a strong compositional hierarchy, rhythm, and depth.

Next slide, please.

At the base, we remain fully aligned with the spirit of the DTPP.

Pedestrian scale design gestures, transparency into active uses, expressed structural base, as well as landscaped elements all work together to soften the building edge and enrich the public realm.

Next slide, please.

While we do not express a conventional middle zone as outlined in the TTPP, the facade still uses a disciplined and highly articulated panel system with familiar compositional logic.

This is intentionally not a glass box.

It is a refined architectural system with depth, texture, and a composed repetition of parts.

Next slide, please.

And at the top, the building culminates in a distinctive south facing canopy that gives the tower a recognizable skyline identity while also reinforcing solar responsiveness.

Next slide, please.

Thank you.

Thank you so much for your presentation.

At this time, are there any clarifying questions that the commission or committee would like to ask the applicant?

Committee member Tanakasubo.

So in working with staff and having to also work with the downtown precise plan.

Did you feel at any time that it was forcing you as the architect to address all these issues in a prescriptive manner as opposed to having the freedom to maybe address them differently if you weren't hemmed in by prescriptive requirements?

That's hard to say.

use those as a platform to make design decisions knowing that we would um you know be working within what was expected of um the dtp as in terms in terms of style um if you're saying if the dtp didn't exist at all and we've just came to the city with a project um perhaps perhaps we would make different decisions were there were there areas uh prescriptively within a uh downtown Pacific uh precise plan rather that you would have liked some freedom to be able to really push the envelope or kind of maybe color outside the line uh with their understanding that it still conceptually met the intent I don't think so um I mean the the that we were our understanding of a state density bonus project allowed us to make use of waivers but we didn't want to fully uh abandon the spirit of the TCPP uh language to essentially do what we wanted um I think we we use those DTP guidelines and and their spirit of what they wanted to achieve urbanistically and our understanding of that to make those decisions so I I'm I'm not trying to put you in a spot believe um I'm just trying to get a sense of how much um more the envelope you would push uh if given the opportunity understanding you've worked a long time with staff yeah and and staff quite conscientiously uh working with you to stay uh within the intent um and not just the specific guideline but also the intent of of these precise plan guidelines I guess I'm not really sure what uh what the question is I think we have done um what the the design of the project meets a whole host of of goals and targets not only from the city but from our own sort of architectural ambitions as well as our uh clients' ambitions I don't know that we would make significantly different decisions if uh the downtown precise plan were not um sort of in our laps from the beginning um and that may also be cut be because we've worked in the city before and we know you know what is successful here and what uh certain elements are um are appropriate for areas like the downtown so uh I think we did make the the correct decisions and we would not have made such different or wildly different uh gestures in the architecture if that's what you're asking yeah um I I'll get more into the specifics later as we as we go around the table I was just trying to get a sense of uh the overall environment in which um your firm and uh your client felt they had to work within so thank you thank you commit member um commissioner cuneho thank you for the presentation I'm just curious on your thought process or um how did you land on like 21 stories or a building that high with in that um that high given that in this city that isn't really that's not a common um look for us so I'm just curious on why 21 stories it's a good question um and as I think was mentioned previously we did contemplate a different project and to a different tower um much of it is coming from the metrics of the base case study which was submitted um and that is a particular yield of um of number of units uh of gross area things of that nature for an as of right project and so you kind of multiply that up and that gets you a kind of rough target for areas and average unit sizes and and number of units um that starts to become part of the recipe of putting a of a uh an overall project together and once you get into um other aspirations for the project for example the open terrace on the third floor um for um for common use things of like nature that starts to push and and evolve that massing into the number of stories that you need to achieve uh the the development goals essentially dictated by that base case got it yeah um just following up on on your comments um I don't think that the residents are excited for a building that high in downtown Redwood City I I do hear that a lot of people love how Redwood City has evolved but still maintain that kind of homey feel that it had before um and just by looking at the building it kind of reminds me of like Miami City or something completely different from perhaps what we're used to so just I just wanted to know how you landed on 21 so thank you for that thank you Commissioner Cornejo I have actually a similar question as a follow up uh I know in downtown we follow I guess form based uh code in terms of the dwelling density on a particular parcel so you know your design choices were for a podium of a two or three store or two stories uh and then a tower of twenty one so

Um and just by looking at the building, it kind of reminds me of like Miami City or something completely different from perhaps what we're used to.

So just I just wanted to know how you landed on 21, so thank you for that.

Thank you, Commissioner Corneho.

Um I have actually a similar question as a follow-up.

Uh I know in downtown we follow, I guess, form-based uh code in terms of the dwelling density on a particular parcel.

Uh so you know, your design choices were for a podium of a two or three store or two stories, uh, and then a tower of 21.

So we're alternative design choices that would, for example, have a larger box, like a 12-story box and then an uh rooftop um open space amenities for the residents not meet the goals of the project, or at least the what we were hoping to implement in terms of this particular application, like in a different geometrical form that I mean.

Sure.

Um I I think I know what you're asking.

And uh we did explore different um massing typologies, let's call them.

Um they became problematic in different ways, and it would maybe take a little while to explain, but um there are many different pressures for this particular typology of residential use related to the way that residents make their way through the facility, but also how they arrive and depart the facility that make let's say different typologies of housing somewhat inappropriate for this population that required a kind of consolidation of core elements, circulation, drop-off, that kind of thing that that drove us or or resulted in this solution.

Okay.

I think that's fair.

Uh and then the next question I have, it's maybe a little esoteric is that I I know at some point I may have viewed um maybe the very early proposal that involved a neighboring parcel in addition to the one acre parcel you're currently considering.

So is there a reason why the applicant hasn't thought about potentially expanding the footprint dimension of this project to have you know half the height of the particular tower with similar amenities and similar orientation and open space just over a larger footprint area to make a less of a uh strategic impact onto the downtown core?

Uh I might have to pass that one to the owner.

Um I don't think we have contempt once we abandoned the parcel merging uh project, we didn't really think about um the revisiting it, I guess.

I don't know if there's more to it than that.

Yeah, I'll I'll just say when the when the project got smaller, the economics changed.

Um using more property would add more cost.

Um and there's also a tenant in the in that property next door in Davida that has a uh a lease.

So there's that an option really.

Got it.

Thank you so much for the answer.

Uh Commission member Finch.

Um I um I I saw in the survey that uh there was um uh some uh questions about like transportation and like alternative means of transportation.

Um is the um is the applicant considering any kind of like TDM measures at this point, such as like um like I think a shuttle was mentioned in the survey, but uh maybe also like uh unbundled parking or transit passes or something like that.

There there is a TDM plan in the application.

Um there is on unbundled parking.

There will plan to be a shuttle.

Um there's also a host of other um transportation measures that will be available for residents um outlined in that TDM plan.

Um I believe there's plans to have rideshare programs or even potentially a fleet of vehicles available for use for the residents.

Um what am I missing?

I think that covers most of it.

But yeah, it there will be a TDM plan uh um uh uh submitted.

Okay.

Oh that that's yeah, that's great to hear.

Yeah, because I know one concern is uh is uh traffic of uh of uh the people living there.

And then um one other question is on the east side of the property.

Um it doesn't look like it on the design, but is there any kind of pedestrian through access on the in the east side of the parcel?

There is a minor separation between the property line and the building facade, uh, but it's not meant for pedestrian access.

Okay, okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Commissioner Hunter.

Thank you.

Um you tell me how many.

I couldn't find this anywhere, it may have been there, but uh could you give me how many units there are of each bedroom type?

Oof.

From studio up to three men.

Let's see if I can read it.

My um project designer printed this out for me.

Uh where am I here.

So of the assisted living or the building unit types, uh assisted living, there are four one bedroom units, there's 15 studios.

Well, like the second four one.

Okay.

Uh the memory care units, there are 15.

Those are sort of naturally studios without kitchens.

Um of the independent unit building of the independent living units, there are 12 one bedrooms.

No.

Well, we split this up into different categories, so it's a little bit tricky for me to follow.

But um 12 one bedrooms, one baths, 32 one-bedroom, one and a half baths, 13 one bedrooms, one and a half baths plus dens.

There's 82 two-bedroom and two baths.

There's 47 two-bedroom, two baths, and dens, and there are two three-bedroom units.

If you could follow all that.

Correct.

Okay.

And then two bedroom units is 83 plus 47.

82 plus 47.

Pardon me.

82 plus 47.

Okay.

And uh in the independent living, no studios?

There are no studios.

Okay.

Thank you for that.

Oh, sorry.

I turned.

Since we're getting feedback, I turned that off.

Thank you for that.

Um I have a question.

This is probably for the uh for the owner, but um can you talk about the what what is the business model for the project?

In other words, um, you know, units can be ownership or rentals.

Um I got the impression from having watched the uh city council meeting um that uh that instead of those two things it's actually a buy-in or an entrance fee model.

Yeah, it's it hasn't been a hundred percent determined.

It's it's it's not a it's not a purchase.

It's a it's a rental, um, and sometimes those can have entrance fees that are you know lower fees and higher rents or higher entrance fees with lower rents.

Generally those entrance fees are refundable.

The bulk of them are refundable, but again, those if you look at models across the state or country, they're they're kind of all over the place, but some of them they can be a hundred percent refundable um or or zero percent refundable.

Um so that's not determined quite yet.

Well, understanding that it's not uh determined yet.

What would you estimate would be the range of the uh entrance fees?

Oh I I we have not even talked about that.

It's more the the rental we it's probably in the five to fifteen thousand range, don't quote me, but but this also isn't just rent, this is rent, this is meals, this is health care, this is uh entertainment, um you know, everything uh transportation, so it's it's not just it's not just a rent number.

Okay.

Um so the people in the um independent living units, which is by far the majority of the units.

Um they would have meals provided?

Yes.

Oh, okay.

I didn't know if that only applied to the uh assisted clothing.

Yeah, they'd be they'd be available.

There's a there's a full commercial kitchen with a large, I think 150 or to 200 seat dining room.

So we expect most people get the bulk of their meals there, but they'd also have kitchens and they'd also um you know be eating downtown.

Okay, good, thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Hunter.

Commissioner Cornejo.

Yeah, I just um have some follow-up questions on on that about the rent range and um I I agree that we need to support our senior population.

I mean, they're one of our vulnerable communities, and I I like the idea of this a building being in downtown Redwood City.

I've been to some of the other senior homes in Redwood City, and they're not great.

So I I like that um quality of life that could be presented to them.

Um but I'm curious since there's no affordable housing here.

I'm trying to picture like what kind of person would afford living there, and um and I want to make sure that it's as equitable as possible, and there are opportunities for us to serve all seniors throughout Redwood City and San Mateo County.

So just want to hear your your thoughts on that.

Um you know, there are obviously different size units.

Um so there's a variety of of prices.

What makes this particularly difficult is is the fact that it's a the whole bundle of services, health care meals, everything I I listed before.

So you know, as uh affordable subsidizing all those things just becomes very difficult.

Um of course density bonus is the state, the city actually is also recognized that senior projects aren't required to provide affordable um, I would have presumably because they've they've seen seen the need that's gonna be common that's here that is gonna continue to grow.

Okay, yeah, I and I get that.

I'm just thinking about some of the seniors that I know that live in North Fair Oaks, just you know, a couple minutes from here, um, who would benefit from being closer to downtown and all these amenities.

So I just want to make sure that when we're moving projects forward, we're thinking about all kinds of um all kinds of people that are able to experience these kinds of things.

Thank you, Commissioner Cuneho.

Committee member Stewart.

Uh I was wondering if you considered any other designs besides the tower idea.

For instance, if you did a courtyard kind of building where the residential went all the way out to the edges of the property, uh perhaps you could lower the height of the building.

And you know, it kind of feels like it's two separate buildings to me now.

So you've got the tower and then you've got the three-story building.

And then the amenity that you have on the third floor, you could put it on the roof.

The views would be fantastic from up there.

And I think the major objection from what I've heard from people on the street is the height.

So if you could lower the building, you know, by I don't know, make it 150 feet tall and instead of 200.

Uh I think it would go a long way to appease the neighbors and I'm really worried about the precedent of you know, the thing looking like Beverly Hills uh, like you said, or Miami.

But after one project gets approved, then somebody else is gonna go on.

I could buy a piece of land and what I thought would be a hundred or ninety-two feet tall is gonna be twice that so that kind of scares me.

So that's my concern.

And I I guess the question is that everything that I've seen has this narrow tower who accentuates the height because it's so narrow.

Whereas if it was more spread out, you know, w it wouldn't feel so tall.

But did you consider anything like that or right from the get-go, you were thinking tower or well, we it was it's related to the previous question about different massing typologies, and I think there were many different pressures to other program elements to the project that essentially drove us to this solution.

Um the other question is there's no underground parking, right?

Correct.

Is that because of the water table or correct?

Yeah.

That's a shame.

I I don't know if there's a way around that.

It's a building is actually to waterproof.

A foot above your your base floodplain elevation, uh, which also makes it very challenging to set your billing elevation that far up the street.

Um partially why the building entry is set back so far from the street uh is to get to that elevation.

So thank you, committee member.

Thank you.

Um commission uh chair Setagaretsky.

Yeah.

Commissioner Robinson is that's has had this head raised.

Thank you.

Um before I get to uh Commissioner Robinson, I do have a similar question is about you know parking structure, and I know that you are limited because of the floodplain and no underground parking, and currently spaced uh and placed geographically towards Spring Street, and it really shows the back towards the that part with those perforated walls.

Um I know there's currently 95 parking uh spaces, and many other people living here maybe you know, assisted living situations may not be able to drive or or license to drive.

Um how did you arrive to that number?

I know you you have to come to that particular um had to come up with a particular number, um, and whether other ways of trying to reduce the footprint of that part to you know reduce the impact on the streetscape like stackers or uh there are other technical solutions to reduce the overall volume of that parking garage and how it impacts the the streetscape.

Yeah, um stackers present a particular challenge um and it's somewhat of a technical challenge uh for the for the equipment as also as well as fire protection and all those kinds of things that make it challenging.

Um that's not to say that we could not potentially do it, but um that's not in the project right now.

Um reducing the number of parking spots.

So currently the project is sort of supplemented by a valet system, given that we kind of don't know how many residents will bring a car or won't or won't.

Our intent or our hope is that as autonomous driving and all these kind of rises services evolve and begin to grow, that the uh the demand for having an individual owned car reduces, and there are opportunities to use that space for something else.

Um but currently I think it was a market-driven demand for you know people that want to have their cars uh as of you know today or a year from now, a few years from now.

Is the design plan for a potential future adaptive use of those?

That's not something that we can particularly plan for uh architecturally, but I think that is the hope in the future.

Thank you.

Commissioner Robinson, uh your floor is yours.

Thank you.

Uh regarding the height, um 20 years ago when I was on the housing and human concerns committee, and we were uh the city was updating the downtown precise plan.

I had commented that the tallest building that our high school students would look at uh at Sequoia High School, for example, was the jail.

So we've we've done a good job embracing hype.

Um I I'm less concerned about the height now because I think we need to take bold steps since you uh very well articulated the demographics of what we're seeing with baby boomers.

I know an 80-year-old woman in Redwood City who uh worked at Sequoia Hospital most of her career and then retired from Kaiser Hospital just a block or so from this proposed project.

That woman is physically totally disabled now and dependent upon uh caregivers um intermittently coming to the home.

That's my mother.

I also know many neighbors um who I believe um would be more likely to sell their home at some point, and that will free up single family homes that are occupied by one or two occupants for new families to move into.

I don't expect this to be affordable to lower modern income residents.

Um I know the cost of this type of care.

This is a very high cost building, etc.

So that's just simply my commentary on you know, kind of perspective where I'm at on this project.

Um I do though, I did hear you say you wanted some feedback, and so um I'm gonna go back to uh the Spring Street um base portion of it and say I know this well because there's a little Mediterranean building across the street that I think currently is a dispensary that used to be a branch of mid-Peninsula Bank.

And then um I'm looking at it now on screen, I see, oh, there's some arches there in the design in the windows.

And then the I guess that's the proposed building where the old Wells Fargo is, and that has a step down um on Broadway, and there looks like there's some arched facade at street level.

Um what I'm seeing on the base of this building, even though it has you know the chain link with the uh greenery growing upon it.

Um frankly, from my perspective, and I'm not an architect, I'm just a city resident.

It's it's flat, um, it's not interesting, um, it doesn't it doesn't look welcoming as uh since this is just off Broadway, you know, one of the entrances to our city.

And I think we saw this done by the county parking garage down at another prominent corner on veterans that I think could have been done better.

So that's just simply my feedback on that elevation.

Commissioner Robinson, I just want to say thank you so much for your feedback.

I think at this point we're uh asking clarifying questions from the applicant, and we'll have uh ample time to to uh provide feedback both for the applicant and the staff uh on this particular project.

Um worries, sorry.

I'm gonna uh I'm gonna let the um Commissioner Bud also ask any follow-up clarifying questions.

Yeah.

Um I will also save my more detailed feedback for after the public has a chance to speak.

Um but uh one of my questions I had written down from earlier was um Commissioner Hunter's question, so thank you about asking engines fees.

Uh the second was that we were presented with this uh this packet of survey results both online and in real life.

Um I noticed that you said that you had 21,000 mailers and 60 meeting attendees.

Um I do have some concerns that this is not exactly a representative sample.

Um can you just talk about like the these meetings?

Where it was was all one meeting where you got together, asked people questions, had them raise their hands, or what is the style of gathering the sample?

I don't know if we want to take this one.

It was a couple of events um on site.

Yeah, there I there's a slide that I think we sent, but late.

Um but I think maybe you have it in your packet.

Um we did um setting out 21,700 mailers, had an in-person meetings.

The meetings were on site in I think November and December.

Um there were two two meetings.

Um yeah, roughly 30 people attended each over three hours.

It was kind of chilly out there.

Um collected over 120 surveys.

Um that's that's really where they came from.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner.

But um, maybe the last two questions we'll have Commissioner Cornejo.

Yeah.

I I'm just um is are we gonna talk about community engagement?

I know some um staff said that you were gonna mention it in your presentation.

I'm just wondering if if I'm like missing a step.

Or is this is this the presentation?

Um as far as I'm aware, maybe um Mr.

Chuby can provide some feedback.

I think uh this this meeting is about uh high-level uh opinions or at least the feedback about the form and the structure of the particular proposed project and building.

Um there'll be ample uh multiple future meetings evaluating the project, its purpose.

Uh so I'll just hold my feedback on that then for now or uh perhaps these are clarifying questions on the presentation and the slides provided.

So perhaps maybe during the open discussion.

Okay, I'll do that.

Thank you.

Uh committee member uhsuba, yeah.

This is to the development team.

Have you developed a senior project of this scale or close to it previously?

No, we haven't.

Um I'm I'm a partner in Palo Alto Commons, which is uh roughly 180 units in Palo Alto.

Um that was built 35 years ago, the Avant, which is part of that is another 44 units that was built 10 to 15 years ago.

Um I've not built anything of this scale uh before.

Uh only because it's uh it's such a whole different world.

I I was involved in uh being on the board of a board and care facility for quite a few years and uh it I understand the a lot of the programmatic uh components that the architecture uh has put in here.

So I'm just curious as to uh how much experience uh from uh senior care facilities were part of the programming.

Yeah, um I mean so I'm not the operator, we have the operator here, Steve Sandholtz with Wellquest living, he he's the operator of Palo Alto Commons.

Um they operate, I think roughly 30 communities in in California of different sizes and shapes.

Um he could answer quite specific operational questions if you no, I I don't have any specific operational questions.

I just wanted to get a sense of where the base um programming data for what ends up becoming your building and the architecture got it to.

Right, okay.

I thank you.

Thank you, committee member uh community Jenkins.

You had one thank you.

I have some questions.

Um I was curious about the material, the kind of the shiny kind of copper material.

I'm sorry, I've got my back to um is that something that would patina?

Is that I I was trying to marry that to the material board and kind of figure out which use.

Yeah, I think the the intention is that it has some weathering uh as part of its character, yes.

Uh to a brown or uh that hasn't been decided yet.

Okay, I think there was some intention or design intention around that, but the specific material and and treatment of it and uh care of it and detailing of it hasn't yet been decided.

I have a similar question about the the vertical tower, I think at your kind of elevator bank.

What is that material?

That was intended to be exposed concrete.

Uh that is actually the core element as a structural element of the building.

Um it's just treated with a kind of fluted uh texture to it.

It looks shinier in the image than it actually will be.

And then uh I'm looking at the base of the previously proposed project where you have kind of the rust colored material that that was on the south side, kind of on Spring Street, but then also on the on the east side.

Um but in the new proposal um the east side.

I'm I'm trying to understand what what that adjacency is on the side that's that's facing us.

We've got a pretty blank wall there now.

Um one of the diagrams showed kind of a teal colored strip along that edge, and uh I thought it was implying that it was adding a lane.

So is that is that actually gonna be vehicular through there or is it pedestrian?

What is that edge?

Uh what you're seeing on the screen now is the existing driveway entry to the adjacent uh property.

Um so there really isn't any um program between our building face and the adjacent property.

There's some separation um just for construction tolerances as well as um uh the allowance of a very limited amount of openings for the garage uh to be somewhat naturally ventilated ventilated, although it is mechanically ventilated.

But do you have a property line condition there which is requiring the solid wall yes, you you within a certain distance of a shared property line, you can't have uh more than I think 15% of openings.

So that's the limitation that's why we have a solid wall.

Yes.

And then on um the aerial view on uh sheet 20 Marshall Street.

What is the is there in fact uh an accessible green roof?

What is the the chartreuse color at the roof?

So it I and I don't know that I can get to it from where I am sitting, but uh there is an intention to put uh sedum trays on the top of the building to um have some amount of bioretential and stormwater treatment.

Okay, but the the top top of the building is not meant to be accessible for anyone other than maintenance.

Um there are other levels as shown kind of in this image where there are um outdoor spaces for residents.

Okay.

So if I I'm looking at the architectural package that was linked.

Yeah.

Okay, those are all my questions.

Thank you.

Sure.

Thank you, Committee Member Jenkins.

Um thank you for your presentation and ask and answering all of our questions much appreciated.

I would like to open uh now the public hearing um in order to see how many speakers we have.

I ask for everyone who wishes to speak on the Adam.

Please raise your hand in Zoom now.

Um and if you're in person, please fill out the speaker's card and give it to the staff.

We will call your name in the order that we received, and you can make your way to the podium to speak.

I will call in-person speakers first, and the staff liaison will call the Zoom speakers.

How many?

Do we know how many people have online?

Um we have let me just give it one more second.

Uh we have six hands raised online.

Six.

All right.

Um loss two minutes per person.

Uh and we first have in-person speaker Mike uh Bolander, followed by Michael Umisa Cruz, I think.

Sorry if I mispronounced the names.

Good evening.

My name is Mike Bolander.

I live and work here in Redwood City, and I'm here to support senior housing at this site.

Um, our seniors are our neighbors, our family members, the people who help build this community, and frankly, we'll all be one uh one day.

They deserve the chance to stay here and age in place with dignity, support, and connection to the city they love.

What stands out about this location is that it's situated in the greater downtown area with easy access to grocery stores, medical care, and Caltrain, all of which can make a huge difference in someone's daily life.

It means independence and staying connected.

It also is clear that the community recognizes this need and surveys 92% of respondents said senior housing is vital for Redwood City's future.

So I urge you to approve senior housing at this site and support the people who have given so much to this community.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Mr.

Bollander.

Um we have Michael Cruz followed by Nicholas Kennan.

All right, uh hello, my name is uh Michael Arusak Cruz.

Um I'm here to speak in support of um the senior housing development at 910 Marshall Street.

The story of our housing crisis right now um essentially is the story of the Bay Area's population graph looking like a line going up and to the right, but the number of homes that we have built in order to accommodate all of the people coming to the Bay Area and joining our communities has not remotely kept pace.

Uh reason for that is that oftentimes whenever housing developments are proposed, they're either outright denied or um altered to reduce the total number of units.

And this problem is compounded over time to the point where we are nowhere close to meeting our housing needs right now and have a lot of ground that we need to cover.

As others have mentioned, we are also in the midst of a growing elderly population, especially in the Bay Area, that is only going to continue to grow.

That is also a line that goes up and to the right, and I worry that if we don't start to ensure that we're building not just enough housing but enough senior housing, we're going to have compounding crises of not enough housing for most people, and also not enough housing for seniors that can actually support the needs that um their needs.

So I fully support this development.

I think the location is great near downtown in services.

And I urge Plan Commission to move the study session forward and um consider the development.

Seriously.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Cruz.

Uh, we have Nicolas Kennan followed by Brett Weber.

Good evening.

Uh my name is Nick Kennan.

I'm a Rabbit City resident in District 6.

I'm here to strongly urge all commission members to support the 910 Marshall Project.

Um City has only built about 200 residential care facility for the elderly units in the past 30 years.

Not a sustainable number number given the um population aging.

Um 910 Marshall is a sorely needed addition to those paltry numbers.

And I don't think we should be intimidated by the size and height of this project.

I find the renderings to be charming, especially the outdoor terrace.

I think everyone should have access to green spaces where they live.

I think from an architectural standpoint, it would be beautiful.

A beautiful welcoming addition to the city.

It's position in the downtown core precisely where it should be, concentrated with all the other tallest buildings in the area.

And this is not a brand new novel venture that's being attempted here.

Bay Area cities like Santa Clara, San Francisco, and Oakland have all built large, you know, 20 plus story senior housing towers.

And if they're able to get these projects approved and build, then I don't see any reason why we can't follow their lead and also get it done.

So I strongly uh urge you all to support this as it winds its way through the um approval process, and thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr.

Cannon.

We have Brett Weber followed by Thomas Gomez.

Um I also like to reiterate public that we're in a study session, so no formal decisions will be taken tonight.

We're just uh reviewing.

I do appreciate everyone's feedback.

I have two minutes, two and a half, three minutes.

Five.

Um I'm Brett Weber.

I'm uh with Kidder Matthews.

I live in Redwood City.

I live 200 yards from the project.

I'm deeply opposed to this project.

I just want to be clear.

I've spent since 2011, actually 2005, fixing up buildings on Redwood City.

Medical building, built one, helped Redwood City get one of their affordable housings, 134 units on Main Street, fixed up the POPIC furniture buildings, also the the old Young's furniture um Young's automotive building.

But here's my concern.

You guys built or you guys created a downtown precise plan that I thought worked fabulous.

Our town works and thrives.

Here's our problem.

When you put a monolith, drop it in your city to destroy and make everything uneven to the city, it ruins it.

I am a senior citizen.

Here's the other problem I have.

And I'm sorry I'm saying this to the owner, but when you build a 22-story building that's not a hundred and two hundred and thirty feet, but it's 260 feet at the top, and I'm walking to grocery store outlet and thinking, wow, there's a plane coming down.

Is that 250 feet or 350 feet?

We don't know.

So I hope that you guys, when you're gonna research all this, that you're gonna demand that this developer determines without notice to the FAA or anyone at the San Carlos Airport, what is gonna be the height of those planes that are coming directly over this site?

I could just imagine since I'm 65 years old, I'm gonna be sitting on the top floor because I might buy one of these or rent that little place.

And I'm gonna sit looking out the window, having a cup of coffee, even though I only drink tea, and I'm gonna say, hmm, here comes the plane.

Oh my gosh.

I'm gonna see his face because he's gonna be that close.

So it's really important that you gotta realize that there's a lot of problems.

Last things than I'm gonna leave.

Is our fire department well?

Are they capable of going up there and grabbing somebody in the event of fire?

How much will the city have to pay to have the necessary equipment to be able to save somebody in the event of fire?

Is it a million?

Is it two million?

We gotta research this.

I just want to say I'm against it.

I do want a lot of I know I gotta go.

Thank you, Mr.

Weber.

He does own adjacent properties.

Join his other property, lower the height, and I think this would be a good opportunity, but I'm flat out against it.

Thank you, Mr.

Weber, for your for your comments.

Really appreciate it.

Next we have Thomas Gomez, followed by online speakers.

Good evening.

My name is Thomas Gomez, a lifelong resident of Broadway City.

I'm just uh encouraging the commission to approve the building.

Um I think it's a good building.

Our seniors need more help, maybe different.

Like you saying a different model, but definitely to go forward.

Uh thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr.

Gomez, for uh your public comment.

Uh Ms.

Xline, please uh follow with the public speakers that we have joining us via Zoom.

The first speaker I have is Jordan Grimes.

Um Jordan, go ahead if you want to unmute and I'm gonna try the next speaker just to see if it's a problem.

Um we'll come back to you, Jordan, if um we're able to get the next speaker to speak and see if it's on your side or our side.

Uh the next speaker is Adrian Brandt.

Hello, good evening.

Can you hear me?

We can hear you, thank you.

Okay.

Yeah, my name's Adrian Brandt, and uh I wanted to speak out uh in support of the height and the location.

I think it's uh really ideal in terms of um walkability, and uh it'll do a lot, I think, for our downtown.

I'm not um worried about the height, but I uh uh do um have some concerns about the frontages being um not uh not very pedestrian-friendly, uh not promoting sort of good urban design, uh especially the wall along Spring Street that a couple of the uh committee members have asked questions about, but um I find that to be a very cold, harsh, um sort of deadening um uh length of sort of nothingness uh facing spring.

Now, if spring turns into something else, I don't know, but um I really uh would love to see uh all of that parking depressed into the ground.

I know there was a comment about groundwater, and uh I would just point out it's just a matter of cost in San Francisco and Mission Bay and all over the Bay Area.

There's numerous places where uh the developers have uh been able to put um significant underground structures and garages and whatever um in place.

Uh but I realize I'm not a developer and maybe it doesn't pencil out for this particular developer's um you know balance sheet to do that, but it's certainly possible.

There's no reason why um uh it couldn't be undergrounded so that um that nice green activity level that we see from the aerial views on the second level or third level could be more at street level and kind of solve that problem of having the blank wall.

Um and then lastly, I just wanted to point out that this is obviously gonna be an expensive project.

Uh my mother-in-law just moved out of uh the Avant, the project that uh the developers are associated with, and her rent for a two-bedroom unit went up to $17,000.

And so um just have to know that that's the monthly cost for a very premium unit.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm gonna try Jordan Grimes, I guess, one more time.

Jordan, are you there?

All right, we'll move to Nate.

Hello.

Yes, we can hear you.

Awesome.

So I'm speaking in support of this plan.

My grandparents moved to the U.S.

from Germany after being persecuted and lived in Redwood City for a very long time.

After finally finding a home as they grew older, they realized that unfortunately there was no senior living available for them in in Redwood City.

They were unable to find a place to live after they retired, and so they had to move away from the city that had taken them in.

I believe that it is imperative that we make more senior living available in Redwood City.

And I believe that this is a fantastic first step in that process.

Many things that that those that are aging or elderly will need.

And as he continues to age, there's uh a very high likelihood that he will retire and want to live in Redwood City after many years of service um within the county and that kind of a thing.

So I I think it is imperative that we have uh areas within Redwood City for people to retire and to live the rest of their life out.

Um I've done research.

I've seen how I've seen how much how the population that is aging and and and growing older than boomers and in the peninsula, how many there are and how important it is that we have senior living available for them for their retirement.

Um so thank you.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Florence.

Hi, good evening, uh commissioners.

I wanted to speak as someone who works closely with families across Redwood City.

I encourage you to move forward, um, move this project forward.

Uh older adults play an important role in raising and supporting our families, and as their roles shift, they continue to be, you know, close loved ones, and so they should be able to stay um in our community while having the independence and support that they need.

So um, I hope that this project can um continue to will can address the the growing growing need here.

Um and also if we can continue to prioritize um options that are accessible for um seniors, that would be great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next speaker is um O'Rion Jenkins Shell.

Hello.

I would like to speak in support of the project.

I think um that senior housing is one of the most pressing needs in our region.

Nearly 25% of Redwood City residents are 55 or older, and that population is expected to grow a lot in the near future.

Our elders um and people I in my family need a spot to live, and um I think that 910 Marshall would give seniors a spot that um is respectable, is dignified, and one that they would appreciate.

I think the location is really good.

I work actually at the nearby coffee bar, and um, we get a lot of older people who come in walking and enjoy the area.

Um in planning surveys that I've checked, it's above 90% of respondents said that senior housing is vital for Redwood City's future, and I think that denying this project or postponing it is only gonna hurt the population and um prospects for a cared-for future.

And that's all I needed.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Alana Ballon.

Good evening, thank you for the opportunity to speak.

My name's Anna Caden Ballin, and I have been in the community for over a decade.

Um I work very closely with our families, especially the school age population, and I want to say that I support this project.

Um it's a very unique piece of land, and I am happy to see that there'll be it could be put to good use as our population continues to age.

We are hopeful that we can free up some of our housing for our families and that we can create additional job opportunities for our families here in Redwood City.

Um, I continue to want to focus on how we can ensure that there is affordability so that we're not necessarily creating a V-like um community in Redwood City because we want to make sure that we're also providing housing staff for people who live here.

I think that approving project like this in the future and not waiting um is essential to allow us to continue to grow and thrive as a community.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Patty Ortiz.

Patty, can you hear us?

Okay.

Can I move to the next person, Cheryl?

Cheryl, are you can you hear us?

Oh, how's that?

I can hear you now, yes.

Okay, great.

I'm sorry.

I'm always not good at unmuting.

Okay.

As a recently retired homeowning resident of Redwood City, I am writing in support of the proposed project at 910 Marshall.

I am the demographic the developers have in mind when designing this project.

I'm not ready yet, but there will come a time when I no longer want the responsibilities of maintaining a home, and the right thing to do would be to pass this home on to a new family.

Unfortunately, if I wanted to relocate to a senior community in Redwood City right now, I can confidently say there is not a single facility that I would consider.

The facilities are not geared toward active seniors.

What's missing?

A facility with state of the art safety features, a facility large enough to support a community with a variety of interests, a community that welcomes active seniors as well as those requiring assisted living or memory care.

A location close to restaurants, shopping, entertainment, and public transportation, and a location that is walkable and safe, not on El Camino or Woodside Road.

From reading the literature and listening to the presentations, it's my understanding that 910 Marshall will meet these needs.

My mother lives in a wonderful senior community in Portland, Oregon.

And at some point I'd love to have her move here.

And I have toured most of the senior facilities in the area.

None of them are suitable.

I would not feel safe putting my mother in any of them.

And that's why I'm excited about this new vibrant senior community.

As to how tall it should be, I remember when the box building went up, and we were shocked.

Ten years later, it's an accepted part of the skyline.

In order to provide homes for more people downtown, we must take advantage of the vertical space.

We need options for the ever growing senior population.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I don't think the last two speakers were able to unmute, but I'll give it one last try.

Jordan Grimes.

Yes, good evening.

Can you hear me, Commissioner?

We can hear you.

Go ahead.

And stick.

All right.

Uh thank you so much, staff.

Good evening, everyone.

My name is Jordan Grimes.

I am with Greenbelt Alliance.

We are an environmental organization working throughout the nine county Bay Area on sustainable land use policy, climate resilience and conservation.

We are excited to be in support of this project from a climate standpoint, from an environmental standpoint, building tall, dense housing near our existing public transit stations in our existing communities is one of the best things that we can do.

Getting people out of cars, getting people living near public transit in downtowns, close to services, close to hospitals, close to all the things that people need is really really important.

And in terms of affordability, I I want people to think of housing as an ecosystem.

Because that is that is functionally what it is.

That means that people are going to be in living in you know older single family homes.

They're not able to get out.

When those people are able to age into different and smaller units, they free it up for uh new families.

Those people free up the apartments that they're living in.

So this really is actually uh a critical step for Redwood City in terms of affordability.

Um very supportive of uh the height, I think, like others have mentioned.

Um when it comes to intensity, there was at one point nothing here.

Um over time things change, and that is just the reality of the peninsula.

When you can't build out anymore, and we really should not be building out anymore, you build up.

Um so we're excited about this project, supportive of it and look forward to seeing it built.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

That's all of our speakers.

Thank you, Miss Xline.

I will if there's no objection, I will now pull the public hearing.

Um and I will open the meeting for commission and committee discussion.

Uh Commissioner Finch.

Uh thank you.

Uh I just first wanted to disclose that I met with the applicant and uh was present for um uh downtown neighborhood association meeting where they also presented on the project, but I didn't learn anything that was not included in the presentation tonight.

Um I um yes, lots of thoughts.

I uh I think uh I'm so glad to hear you guys are considering the T DM plan.

I think that's that's great.

The unbundled parking is that's awesome.

I think um uh that uh combined with the shuttle, I think that will all help mitigate the um the increase in traffic that we might see in downtown, um, which is which is great.

Um I um I I know at the um at the council meeting there was kind of a question about the community's openness to a building of this height.

Um and I found it it just interesting in the survey and the comments tonight.

Um it seems like there's at least some some openness too um to the height, which is um which is uh uh great to hear.

Um so I think that's that's a good data point, and I really appreciate uh the applicant for doing the uh the outreach.

Uh and uh you know uh 21,000 mailers is is really great.

Um you know it it's uh it would have been nice to get more than the the 83 um the survey submitted, but I there's only so much you can do, and 21 mail 21,000 mailers is a lot.

So I think we've heard from the community and there is there's there's openness to it.

Um and um uh yeah, I think my main concern is around the the kind of pedestrian experience.

Um and I I think there there was a question in the questions that we're considering about um the um the kind of driveway and entrance being set back um from uh walnut street.

Um and I think that is I I'm I'm personally fine with that just because um as the building the on the upper floors it looks like the building does still hug pretty close to the street.

And so I think that's kind of in keeping with the spirit of of that requirement from the DTP, uh DTP.

Um and I think that would still uh have a good pedestrian experience on that street.

I think yeah, I'm a little bit more worried about the Spring Street side and how it is just kind of the the wall of the parking garage.

Um it would be great to I mean there's really if you can't underground it, there's really not that much you can do.

Um it would be it would be nice to have some kind of pedestrian through access on the eastern side of the property.

Um and um and then yeah, as for Spring Street, um I think the city should move forward with like still getting rid of Spring Street and still kind of closing it off to vehicles, especially with the other section of Spring Street already being closed.

Uh and I think that that could serve as a great place to um it could serve as open space, uh it could serve as a nice community gathering point.

Um I like that the project has um some ground floor retail on the one corner.

Um it would be nice if there was more, but I think that uh if Spring Street were closed, maybe that could also serve as a place where there is retail in the form of um uh maybe little kiosks or uh little um just street vendors kind of in the in the park space there.

Um and so I think that could all kind of tie together and and and if Spring Street were closed and turned into some kind of park, that could also, as uh uh one of the commenters mentioned, kind of mitigate uh maybe uh some of the impacts of the the Spring Street Spring Street fronted just being the the back of the parking garage.

Um and yeah, I think that was all my comments.

So yeah, if the if the applicant is looking for opportunities for community benefits, uh maybe a park along Spring Street could be uh could be something, adding to the green space that's uh included in the project.

Um yeah, thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Finch, Commissioner Bott.

Yeah.

Uh thank you to everybody who spoke today.

This is a good amount more public comment than I'm used to on this commission.

Um, one of the questions the staff posed to us was about the tower design, and that's something I was I've been thinking about too about like is a tower necessary and good here.

So as part of my research on that, I took a trip to Channing House, um, which is in Palo Alto, it's a senior living facility.

Um I I believe it's 11 stories tall.

And at the time the chanting house was built, I believe everything around it was two stories and maximum.

Um and there was uh in the historical records I've been looking at, there was a similar amount of concern about this is too tall for the surroundings.

Now I I actually I asked a friend in Channing House if I could take a trip inside, and he said yes and talk to the residents.

And many of them were very supportive of the idea of the tower in the first place.

These floors serve different purposes.

And you don't get the same community aspect, or at least that's what I've been told, when it's a much more spread-apart design.

So that is just something that I I it was a novel perspective to me about why a tower would be a good thing here.

And for the fourth question that staff is asking us about where are additional opportunities to create a building of this sort.

I actually believe that a building right in our downtown is perfect.

Many seniors are, as we heard tonight, and as we probably all know from experience, um, probably want to be downsizing.

They probably want to be living um in a much smaller place to take care of.

Maybe they're losing some of their facilities to maintain a big house, and maybe some of them don't want to be driving in the first place or but see it as a necessity.

And for a building to be located in downtown on this like parcel of land that's close to grocery outlet, Caltrain Station, every the entire downtown, which we all think is great, um, is I think an amazing location for this project.

Thank you, Commissioner.

But I really appreciate your comments.

Uh Commissioner Cornejo, are we ready for some feedback?

Oh sorry, I was just writing some stuff down.

Um I let me get gather myself here.

I um like I shared in some of my past comments.

I think and believe that we need to support our seniors.

And I have visited some of the other locations in Redwood City.

I've been I've done outreach through senior homes for other projects when I was um working for the county of San Mattel.

And it has been a mortifying experience to see that we have seniors living under those conditions.

Like I said, I I love the project, I love the location.

I live in downtown Redwood City, so I'm able to enjoy all the walkability, and I think that everybody should be able to do that, especially seniors and low-income seniors.

Um in my culture, a lot of the seniors just end up coming to live with the kids because they can't afford um services.

So that's where I come from with those thoughts and questions.

I am a little bit concerned about the height of of the building.

I'm curious from past from the um when Redwood City was building out the process for box and indigo, I'm curious on the level of community engagement that they did because I I don't think 120 surveys is enough.

I I would love to see much more community involvement for a project this large, especially um something that high.

I I would love to to see more engagement.

Um but those are my thoughts.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Cornejo.

Um I myself also share uh many of the opinions that have been um shared and as part of the feedback from the other commissioners.

Uh I do think that I'm generally not opposed to a tower in downtown Rebood City, even the size of 21 stories.

Uh I believe this particular um location for this particular use is also a very good match, mean mainly because I think seniors should be close through amenities uh uh that are as plentiful as in downtown Redwood City and not put someone on the edge of town in a in a place that it's rarely visited.

Um the senior housing is a very low intensity use, so a lot of the concerns about traffic and interactions and all that uh I think kind of follow by the wayside, which makes me think that it's it's it's a pretty good fit uh here.

I do appreciate the the massing towards the north side of the parcel uh that would uh I guess move away the shadows as far away from the main pedestrian uh spine of our city, which is Broadway.

Um, you know, of course, it does there's there's a there's a drawback if you give your residents east-west orientation with plentiful side lights, someone else is not gonna have the sunlight in this case, you know, it's a commercial building north of that and somehow a little bit of a Kaiser um property, you know, which is not ideal.

Uh I would like to see these shadow studies when the formal proposal comes before the planning commission.

Um I like the Po Crochier uh and the Marshall Street frontage overall uh and the use of materials uh in that particular area.

Um also appreciate individual balconies and open space for for the residents uh to be able to enjoy in addition to the large walking path on the third floor.

I don't know if that pool in the in the um presentation is gonna happen, but having pool also on site um for for um for the residents is a plus.

And the one thing I want to bring up, and I think is the the biggest disappointment in this particular design so far is the Spring Street frontage.

Uh this currently is proposed in all street trees, uh and their passive 30-foot wall uh that kind of presents the pedestrians on that's on that region, and there's no eyes on the streets.

Uh it will be kind of like a dead zone that is very much avoided by majority of the people.

So it it it's very much the back of the building that is not, I feel it could be integrated better into the urban fabric.

Um, I don't know what solution would that be in some kind of reorientation of the internal garage.

Uh or I know the garage only represents 50% of the frontage of that wall.

Uh the other side is uh some kind of uh fire-related uh pools and uh you know generators and a few other things that are much more of a technical nature.

I don't know how would one improve uh you know the surf the the streetscape interaction with such utilitarian uses uh but anything other than uh you know a blank wall.

I mean I know it's you're gonna have perforated, but you know, I walk by the county garage at six stories, six stories high perforated wall, and it's not a super fun experience.

Uh it's certainly not an interactive one.

Um so that's that's my main comment is that I'm really currently disappointed with this uh the Spring Street frontage, and I know it's the back of the building, but I think it could be dealt with much better.

Um Commissioner Finch.

Uh yeah, I I I think um for me, I I don't mind the Spring Street frontage being kind of utilitarian and just like in you know narrow sidewalk and just the back of the wall.

As long as like once if Spring Street is closed and turned into something else, like I'm I because it's a triangular parcel that's fairly small, I'm kind of thinking that it would just end up as a park or something.

Umce it becomes that, I feel like it's not as much of a problem that the the Spring Street frontage is is fairly um is you know just the back of the parking garage and uh not a very wide sidewalk.

Um but yeah, I guess my concern would just be in the in the interim there between uh when this building goes up and then later when when Spring Street turns into something else.

And that interim could be a decade, so that that's the real concern.

Um I'm gonna pass my gavel to uh committee uh member Seneca Suba.

I have a previous engagement, so I do apologize.

Um what I would prefer to do is uh um uh Commissioner um uh Rick, would you um finish the go around with the the Planning Commission comments, and then what I like to do is then have the architectural advisory committee um relate their concerns uh after hearing planning commission and then uh given that we have the limited number of uh public hearings, uh I'm going to try and see if we can't craft a list of of cohesive comments that the design team and the architect or the project um development team and the architect can take back and work on since they've only really got one shot to come back in front of the AAC.

So if if you wouldn't mind.

Okay.

Um I was not prepared to do this, but no problem.

Your microphone was on.

Sorry.

I have uh I have the mic.

Um so the only people who have not uh commented yet are myself and um Commissioner Um Robinson is I don't know.

Commissioner Robinson, do you think that's the same?

Yeah, I well I I did make my comments um unfortunately at the wrong part of the agenda.

So reiterating um what I had said, the Spring Street uh elevation is uh three like any three-story building, um that facade is problematic.

And I think that echoes what some of the others have said.

So thank you.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Um so I will make my comments now.

Um before I make my specific uh comments um on the project.

Um I will like to have uh maybe a little dialogue with the city attorneys about um what we actually have the authority to do and not do.

Um you said earlier, so um you said earlier that we basically have no discretion at all in whether in in denying a request for a waiver, um, unless it's for health and safety, and I know those are very high bars that you know you're you're never going to meet.

Um as I read it in the um in in the staff report, um the project uh as a senior housing project, it's eligible for waivers from development standards that are needed to accommodate the permitted density, and I focus on that that are needed to accommodate the permitted density.

So I'm assuming that the permitted density means 222 units, which is what would be allowed under the uh downtown precise plan plus 20 percent.

Yes, that that's the permitted density.

Um I think many cities initially, because of the language of the way the waiver provision is written, required developers to show that they needed, you know, that they needed the waivers in order to accommodate to accommodate the density they were entitled to.

Uh but there was a case about two or three years ago, uh Bankers Hill 150 v City of San Diego, where the uh court basically said that waivers had unless one of the three findings could be made, waivers had to be granted, even if it was possible to get the same number of units without waivers.

So it it so that language about so they interpreted that language about waivers being needed to physically uh you know that would otherwise physically preclude the building, you know, the project to mean physically preclude the project as designed.

So if somebody designed a project that required waivers cities and counties were required to approve them unless they could make one of the three findings.

Is that subtle law or is it?

Yeah, that's a published case.

I wonder if that has been I mean to me, and I don't I don't want to take our time with that, but it it just of course just doesn't really make any sense.

It basically makes our zoning and even general plan meaningless.

Yes.

However, uh I think as the architect said, we do see developers attempting to accommodate, you know, cities and coming up with a better design.

So I think, you know, in terms of you know, you know, you may not have authority to deny the project, but I think you have authority to encourage the developer and the architect to do a better job and you know come closer to meeting the city's standards.

And the developer here has been willing to modify the design.

Right.

So I think I think the particularly for this meeting, which is a study session, you know, that you're not making a decision.

I think indicating, you know, areas in which you'd like improvements is perfectly reasonable.

Right.

Yeah, and I do appreciate it.

It it definitely does seem like the developer has been working very well with our city staff to make this the best project possible.

And and I appreciate that.

And I know uh I have no doubt that they are coming at this with goodwill and uh you know, trying to make trying to improve our city.

Um that being said, I do think, I mean, in my mind, this project is way too tall.

That that's that's my opinion.

Um, and I think that uh we need to have more um outreach in the community about about that.

Um but the question is that you know if if it would be if it would be better for the city and and equally profitable and equally uh for the developer, um, you know, equal in other ways to have say two 11-story towers instead of one 21-story tower, um there there is no way to insist on that.

Um if the developer says no, we like the we like what we've done, correct?

Um that appears to be the case.

As I as I said earlier, there for the case where there's um in your downtown you have a form-based code, you don't have a maximum density.

So with that, there's a uh a provision in the uh density bonus statute that says that the uh that the bonus project is supposed to maintain the same average unit size as in the base project is in a project that would conform, which this does, and also other project details.

So, you know, in many ways here the uh proposed projects very different from the you know a what a conforming project, how that would look and be masked.

But um that's where the city has asked uh the Department of Housing and Community Development for technical advice.

The developers attorney has written a letter about why this should be um included.

And so the city said, well, you know, is the project eligible for the height that's that's being requested.

But if the project is eligible, then the city really has to find one of the make one of the three findings.

Okay, good.

Thank you so much for your uh for your um elucidation of that.

It's a complicated area, I know.

Um so um I believe that this is is is too tall.

It will stand out like a sore thumb.

Um that's my opinion, and I and many people's opinions, but I know obviously many people have different opinions.

Um I would like to really know what the community thinks.

And I know this came up at the um at the city council study session too, is you know, what does the community think?

This is a very big it's it's it's a it's a huge thing that can rede project that could redefine downtown, it can redefine Redwood City.

It is you know that much bigger than other things here.

And so we want to we want to get it right.

And if the community says yes, it's it's so it's important enough to have the senior housing that we support that, then that's that's fine.

But um so that's all kind of a long-winded way of getting it that I think we really need some exceptional community outreach and and engagement.

Um and maybe this needs to be run by the city, whether paid for by the developer or not.

Um because it this is a landmark project if approved that would redefine the city.

Um in in so many projects, and I've been on the planning commission for a long time, seen a lot of city council meetings where um the most the most common request is for more committee outreach or community outreach, um, and that's always a good thing.

Um but you know, I almost kind of roll my eyes sometimes.

It's like, okay, that's that that that's what you always that that that's what you always want, it's more community outreach.

In this case, I think it's particularly important because it is such a landmark um decision.

So my um I get I guess my um re request um for for that would be that um we really or that the city or and or the city and the developer together um really do a comprehensive community outreach um to determine is this what the community wants you know the this this um the this height um you know which is which is very high, but in exchange for very much needed um uh senior housing.

Um the rest of my comments are actually uh a lot uh a lot uh easier and quicker than that.

Um I would personally like to see uh more um studios and one bedroom apartments and fewer two and three bedroom apartments.

I mean most of the residents uh in this facility would be uh um single, uh single seniors or couples.

There I imagine there will be very few uh families more than more than of more than two.

And so um the more one bedrooms there are as opposed to two and three bedrooms, um I think the more affordable the project could be for the residents.

Um and also um possibly it could it can the it the project could be reduced somewhat in in size um because the average size of a one-bedroom would be would be smaller.

Um so I would like to consider that.

Um the staff report talked about the side the Marshall Street, I think, sidewalk that was only eight feet wide, and the downtown precise plan has a minimum requirement of twelve feet.

I would strongly want to have at least the 12 feet because um the people in this development will be um seniors with accessibility needs, and many of them I imagine would be in wheelchairs or at walkers, and so I think a wider sidewalk would be uh essential for people with accessibility needs.

Um I I echo what uh many of my uh colleagues have said about Spring Street, that since it will no longer go through to Marshall, um, it would be great if that section was removed and converted to a better use, such as a park.

Um then this uh is really not really common on what we can what you can do, but um I would note that um two very important issues would be um the San Carlos Airport, which um Mr.

Weber uh um talked about.

Um and there is a uh San Carlos San Carlos Airport Land Use Commission.

And um I imagine I I don't know if they're even in conversation with them yet, but I I'm sure once the project is further on, you will you you will need to be.

Um and then also the analysis of uh fire safety.

Um I thought it was interesting that in the uh city council meeting um the uh Baraka Carter, the fire chief said that this would be the first of its kind in Redwood City and on the peninsula, and he said, and as far as he knows, in the State of California, um, and they don't really have a uh knowledge right now of how to develop evacuation plans for a senior facility um of of that height.

And so um I I imagine that you will be working very carefully with the fire department.

Um and with that I uh uh I I ced it to uh to the uh AAC.

Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, Commissioner uh Finch.

Oh, thank you.

Uh yeah, I just I just wanted to ask the applicant about the community outreach that they had already um conducted.

Uh just because I I'm also in favor of getting more community outreach.

Um, but I just my j my concern is um that they have sent out you know, 22,000 mailers.

Um they've done online advertising, I believe they had two in-person um meetings at the site.

Um I I guess maybe a question for you is do you how do you think the um community outreach could get more comprehensive?

I'm sorry, the public hearing is closed.

We'd have to open it again.

Oh, perfectly happy to do so to answer questions, yes.

Oh, for asking the applicant?

Okay.

So um I would open the public hearing again just so we can hear from the applicant.

Okay, thank you.

Yes, that would be great.

Or I can I not ask them.

That's okay.

We're just talking about it.

I um do you I mean there was a uh closing of the public hearing.

Um I think it could be reopened.

This is not a formal public hearing, it's a workshop, so some of the formal rules don't really apply as much here.

So if if notwithstanding the uh closing of the public hearing, I think we could reopen it if the chair wouldn't be.

I have no problem with asking the uh applicant or anyone else if if they care to respond to what your question is.

Please.

Thank you for your deliberation of that.

Um Adam Alberti, I'm with Singer Associates, and we're the public outreach consultant to the project here.

And I want to first say that the outreach uh that you see in this report is an iterative process.

Uh there was outreach that happened before uh on a different project, and even before that, on what the right use of the site might be.

And uh all that outreach has guided us on the senior housing path and where we are today.

The project's changed since some of that outreach is done, and we'll have additional outreach that happens from here until we get to the point of project completion, including going to neighborhood associations, uh additional community meetings, additional paid advertising to ask people to give us the feedback that we're asking for.

So thank you very much.

That's great to hear.

Okay, unless there are any additional planning commission uh comments.

I'm gonna open this up um for discussion with the AAC in our conventional manner of going around, and then I'll try and give my comments as final and and see if I can coalesce your comments into something.

Uh at least as cohesive as we can present to the uh applicant and the architectural team.

I guess I'll I'll lead it off.

Uh I agree.

I think the building's too tall to go from 92 to double that.

And I'm really concerned about what that means for the future.

It's not only this building, it's every other building.

And I know we're doing uh, I forget what it's called, uh rework of the downtown plan from Whipple to Woodside Road and El Camino to uh uh the 101 and what these rules from the state mean for all that planning and all that effort that's gonna go into the uh you know uh a comprehensive plan for what we want in our city, and then the state can just say throw that all out the window, and you know, and being an architect and being on a commission and then having been told before when I was on uh architectural review committee in San Carlos, I was pulled in there in the attorney's office and saying you can't say that, you know.

So it's like at some point, what do we do in here?

You know, just give people a building permit and be done with it.

But I think there's other configurations for this property, like I mentioned, where you could lower the height and still get the density that they need to make it the economics work.

And for sure, I agree with everybody's comments on Spring Street.

You know, to have a parking garage with a screen.

I don't believe you could even grow all those plants because it impedes the ventilation into the parking garage, but uh and not having a resolution of what's going to happen to Spring Street is really a kind of a shame because it should be an integrated uh design.

So those are basically my comments, and um I I can just leave it at that, I guess.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um I like the building.

I I'm okay with the height also.

Um I I've been in Robert City for since the late 90s, and I remember when the DTPP was passed and and um the community feeling around height and density at that time, and now how everybody's feeling about about downtown um I think is very positive.

Um I think that this type of density is the way that the that we're leaning in terms of some of these arena numbers that we need to try and accomplish and how we're gonna move the needle on residential if if we don't build density.

So I'm in support of extra height on the building.

I feel like the redesign is more successful.

Um it's it seems counter to think that kind of adding verticality to a building will kind of make it feel smaller, but I do think that this kind of massing approach and this kind of layering of materials does kind of lighten the overall building.

Um and I do appreciate how the I'll call them kind of the bay window elements, the kind of um punch opening elements in white kind of stop short of the roof line, it kind of lightens the top of the building as well.

And I do like the roof element.

Um I think that there's a lot of refinement to do.

I think um developing the design is is something that you're gonna continue to do.

Um so these uh um concrete elements, the elevator towers feel uh feel um kind of less detailed than the rest of the building, and maybe there's some kind of texture or some other way to um detail that so it it feels as thoughtful.

Um I like the I'm looking at this list of questions that we're supposed to answer here.

Hold on.

Okay, so those are my thoughts on kind of the overall design and massing.

Um I like I I do like that the lobby and and kind of the Marshall Street frontage at at grade.

I I think it actually expands your experience in the streetscape, having the kind of drive-thru and Port Cochere kind of detail there, especially since it's a fairly tall kind of opening along the front.

I do like the colonnade, um, the opportunity for some kind of landscape transition between uh the sidewalk and the and the driveway as you pull in.

Um and I think the I I do like the the metal canopy material.

I'm just curious how that's gonna look over time.

Um the one thing that um feels a little odd to me, I think um this three-story kind of colonnade that is focused around that kind of drive-through entry experience and the shape of the um the top of the kind of flat arch that kind of peaks in the middle, it feels a little pinched in terms of its proximity to the bay window elements above, you know, kind of having a little bit more space um for that expression um might be a little bit more successful.

Um see.

I think there's a lot going on.

Um so I I think also still looking forward to kind of the detail in terms of specifics on the materials and where those are applied.

I do appreciate the amount of texture um and articulation on the on the facade overall.

I think that's it.

That's my comment.

Thank you.

Committee Man King, thank you.

I think it's a nice design, but it seems to be a bit tall when you compare to like uh when I listen to the man talk about the the flight pattern and you know that smaller airplanes coming in here, I do have concern about that because you look at San Jose, the tallest building around that airport is 18 stories.

And uh this is would be quite a bit higher than that.

And uh a building of this type too, uh that he said it's really never been done for the the elderly and the evacuation process, that would be a concern too.

But um I know that they have to increase the height to make it more economy make it worthwhile to do it.

Um I think there's other ways to do it though.

The the unit size seems to be a bit large for the elderly.

If if like I can imagine my mom going into a a unit like this, she wouldn't need two so two rooms or three rooms, you know.

It would it would just need to be a lot smaller of a space, and she she wouldn't be able to afford you know the 17,000 or whatever it would be to live there too, either.

So I think that they looked at more units that are a little bit smaller than possibly they wouldn't have to go up so high and make it more of a reasonable project to go further with.

As far as um some of the materials and that that are used now, they could be I know they're gonna look into it more and enhance things more, but it doesn't have to look like a garage structure entry to go into it.

You could dress up a wall any way you want, look at the walls around this this space right here.

They're not just flat white walls.

They're you know, you put color into them, you put design, you know, lines, different patterns.

You can make it look a lot nicer and not appear the uh that's just the back of the building, you know.

Why does it why does the building have to have a back?

Why can't they all have to have equal sides?

You know and that's about it for right now.

Thanks.

Can I get it back to you?

Okay.

Sorry.

I did um forget to comment on the um three-story facade on um uh Spring Street and then also the east side.

Um, can we ask staff to pull up the uh renderings?

Yeah.

Um because you were commenting on the the flat arch and I pulled it up here on my computer and went, oh yeah.

So that would be uh it was slide uh 23, maybe I don't know if it's the same packet, is it?

Yeah, more important, yeah.

So just while we wait for that, the um I think the previous iteration on the design felt more friendly at the base.

Um there was a different color utilized there in kind of the more um kind of uh core 10 kind of looking material and it wrapped all the way around.

So you didn't feel like there's a blank wall on one side and then some articulation on walnut stream.

Um so I agree that I think there just needs to be a little bit more work at that lower level.

I'm not gonna start to try and suggest any one direction, but I think kind of maybe warmer materials.

Um, we see a lot of blank walls in Redwood City that have um murals on them.

You know, if it's gonna be kind of an alley um kind of condition, is there any way to kind of brighten and lighten that up without adding too much expense?

Um and how do we feel about that in the context of the overall building?

Um I think we see those arches now.

Uh actually there's uh the perspective from the other end of the building showed it a lot better.

Um there you go.

Yeah, that yeah, there you go.

Why are those even arched?

There's no other arches on the building, right?

Make it straight.

I don't mind the shape.

I I it just felt like the the point in the center was getting real close to kind of the bay windows above, and if we're gonna do that, then maybe it just needs a little bit more space.

Um it feels tenuous, yes.

Oh, and I guess um I've gone through this process before in terms of height and airport land use compatibility, and there is an FAA application that you you know, you the ALUC has maps and heights.

You kind of go for that first and then add the FA application and then they'll confirm whether the heights allowed.

Um is that what you went through?

Okay.

So this is what it is.

Yeah.

I know that we we did uh a four-story project in uh in Revushurst, and they said it's too tall.

We ended up taking off a story.

So I'm going to go through a a list of items.

And before I start, I want to acknowledge that the development team and the architectural design team, you I understand how much work you you guys have put in.

So uh please take my comments not as a criticism at all of the work you've done.

Um but uh part of this relates to um projects of the scale that I've been involved with in the past and how we got caught with things we forgot about or we didn't give consideration to, and we ended up having to do some major shifts.

The other part of it relates to a comment I'm gonna make regarding your uh parking, the spring street elevation.

So can I ask staff to uh pull up the ground floor plan on the presentation?

It's um yeah, design everything there we go.

What's no wrong one?

We'll get into this later.

You know which page is it is yeah, it's uh it was on page 14 at least on the staff report that uh there we go.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Um the issue I have uh well, first of all, the it's a difficult side.

It it's a triangle, and then those are always tough.

But when I look at the floor plan, only really Marshall Street is the only uh elevation of this building or side of the building that presents itself to the public.

Uh turn the corner on Marshall and come down walnut, and it's a loading dock and utility rooms, and you come further, turn the corner on Spring Street and more utility rooms and an entire dead zone of parking.

I think there's enough room to manipulate pulling the parking up, creating another different aisle in another direction, and pulling those utility rooms further down walnut and possibly turn the corner on a Spring Street.

I mean, if we're going to dead zone the spring uh Spring Street, then we should try to move as much as we can away from the other streets that we can have a public and a friendlier frontage to.

The other concern I have is uh my mother-in-law just was taken back by my wife to um where she lives, and it occurs to me that I the last thing I'd want her to do is try to walk from this building across a driveway that has Uber drivers zooming in and out or UPS drivers, as well as other drivers coming in that are residents, and then cross another driveway at the street level to try to get over to Kaiser.

I think by moving or possibly shortening uh the the portico so that uh a person in a walker does not have to navigate across that driveway to get over to Marshall to go to Kaiser, which is one of the strengths of the presentation of this location, would would go a long way.

I don't think we should give we shouldn't give her three chances to get hit by a car.

Um the only other option is she's got to go all the way to the left and still cross two driveways to try to get over to to Kaiser as one of the selling points at this location.

And I know that's reworking a lot of the guts of this building, but uh there's another aspect.

We recently finished um I I no longer am a project architect, uh, but I am a development um manager for an affordable housing developer.

And we recently have finished two projects of um one project was 233 units in San Jose, another one was 124 units here on the peninsula and PG ⁇ E.

I really shouldn't name them, but the utility company that provides power uh because of the concerns related to the number of future power requirements from electric vehicles and everything else related to it, heat pump water heaters and just kind of go all electric buildings, no more natural gas, have upsized their transformers.

And they've also told us on those projects, there's no way these transformers are going in a building anymore, they're not going underground anymore.

And if they do it, so they had us surface mount these transformers.

We ended up putting four transformers for 233 units and three transformers for 124.

They take up a lot of room.

There's a lot of secondary runs that go to it into the building for all everything else.

So I think given the footprint as it currently exists, if you had to put two or three transformers exposed outside with room for PE's access requirements, we're gonna have a serious impact on the spaces you have.

And the small item, uh the mail rooms that we have are twice the size of this one for the 124 unit deal, as well as the package room, which is a thing now, because nobody drives to the mall shop anymore.

It all gets brought in.

And there are issues related to that.

So my question is also in this, how are you made any kind of provisions for the volume of traffic that you're going to see from drop-off delivery services?

It's not just packages, but it's also Lyft and Uber.

Uh at some point, maybe we don't have to worry about all the parking because dad can't drive anymore, neither can mom.

And it's gonna be Uber, you know, lined up and lift and Waymo, there you go, you know.

So I'm less concerned about the parking because dad moves in with this Cadillac, and then six months later loses driver's license, and the car just stays there parked.

And I'm and I'm aware of this because I uh um like I said, I was involved with the senior uh uh nonprofit previously, and those are the kinds of interesting issues that happen.

Oh, and you know, um committeaman king, to your point about the size of the unit.

It the downsizing process is is really traumatic for seniors that move out of their home into a unit.

They've lived in a home forever, and now they gotta move into a unit.

I mean the aspect of having to throw things away is is crazy.

So um it's not like when we were coming out of college and we can put stuff in a couple of crates and you know, orange crates and we're done.

Um our parents have been there for 50 years or longer, and now they're trying to figure out how do I fit all how do I fit a 2,000 or 3,000 square foot house into a 1,200 square foot two bedroom.

I don't know how to do this.

You know, so I'm not that worried about the unit size.

Um that's a lot for for the you know the basic guts of this, and and I know you've also got all the other functional spaces and amenities that you're providing for the seniors.

So I think that's that's absolutely amazing.

Um I would suggest as expensive as it is, you may need one more elevator because they always seem to go out.

And uh my mother-in-law lives in a high-rise building, and they've got six elevators and two are always under repair or under maintenance.

So it's really a four-elevator building.

And these three elevators are effectively going to become just two elevators for the most part.

Uh and it gets even worse when the one elevator uh around the stair tower to uh to the northwest goes down, because then they've got a long way to walk.

I know they're really expensive, but it is what it is.

Um I and I think everybody has covered most of the other comments, especially Spring Street.

We beat that to death, but I think it's uh I think it's a thing.

Now it is it's we've effectively killed it.

And if you want to see what happens to a street when you put a parking garage next to it, walk around the county buildings, you know, at 10 o'clock at night or eight o'clock at night, or even seven o'clock at night, and doesn't matter what's going on downtown, those streets you can she can she can fire down the street, you're not gonna hit anybody.

It's they're just dead.

Um there's uh an office building on the other side, just to the west, I'm gonna call it of the Wells Fargo um block.

That's an office building.

There's all kinds of stuff happening just across the street on Broadway, you cross the street and it's dead.

You know, it there's nothing happening.

So and to staff, I I would highly suggest that you work with engineering or whoever you need to work with and figure out what you can do with Spring Street as soon as possible because it could have a real positive impact on on this development or what happens next later on, but it could also create so many constraints that we're gonna end up with a place that you just don't want to walk down.

I I just see that happening right now.

Um the other aspect is Spring Street could also be converted to right now.

You we've got the loading dock off of Walnut.

Once we remove Spring Street as a shortcut, uh Walnut still it's gonna get impacted and already is a a real a real major thoroughfare as people try to work around all the other streets.

And you know, it might be possible to relocate the loading dock on a Spring Street.

Uh in Spring Street, maybe doesn't get removed entirely, maybe it depends on one-way street.

Um maybe it ultimately just goes one-third of the distance from walnut to serve this building as a loading uh street as well as the whatever happens to the other side of Spring Street at some future time.

Um the rest of it can be, you know, whatever it it ends up being.

But at this point, it it's it's a serious impediment to this project in terms of what they want, what they can do with it.

But if it's going to be kind of a dead zone anyway, then let's let the trucks use it and not impact the adjacent streets.

In terms of height, once we go back past 12 12 stories, yeah, I think it doesn't matter.

Uh you you I mean, you know, uh you can take uh you can take a block of the of the units that you have right now going left to right and turn the corner 90 degrees and stack another six units and try to figure out oh you can just remove maybe two or three floors doing that.

It won't make any difference.

And I understand the issue of costs and 233 units, they need 233 units to or 230 units to make this in pencil.

I mean, you're not going to do this with 120 to 120 units with all of those facilities.

You've got to have enough people to support the food service, uh the amenities, uh, all the other specialties that come with this staff 24-7.

You know, it it requires a lot of units.

So I I don't have an issue with that at all.

Um that doesn't mean that I'm entirely entirely uh it's it's a it's a it's a very well organized exterior skin on the building.

Uh but it is unremarkable.

And depending on where you want to take the height, this is either going to be the tallest building between Foster City and LA, or it's gonna be the third tallest building uh between San Francisco and LA.

It's going to be a major, major element in this in the skyline of Redwood City and here on the peninsula.

So with that said, um Christina, would you mind calling up that other slide that we had?

No, I'm not suggesting that you take your exterior design in this direction, but I would just like to throw out that there could be a whole another vocabulary of how that exterior skin can work, which is why I was asking earlier about how constrained the design team felt with the guidelines of the current uh downtown precise plan.

Um and staff has to work within those guidelines, but the architectural advisory committee has always been willing to push the boundaries of those guidelines, given the positive impacts that could have on the exterior design of a building.

Um yeah, this is not 22 stories, but there's a corner element, there are two different facades, facades, rather.

It could take away the the monotony of having the same concrete floor by floor by floor by floor vocabulary.

Next slide, please.

Very vertical.

Again, I'm not suggesting your design should follow any of these images, but I would like to suggest that maybe even within the confines of the downtown precise plan guidelines, you might still be able to find some other building vocabularies, exterior skinned vocabularies that you might be able to work into the project.

Next slide, please.

One of the things I kind of like about the precise plan was its concept of having corners stand out throughout downtown.

And I think that's been awkward at times, but I also think that's been reasonably successful.

It it helps anchor the building, especially given that it's a whole block.

To have a central element that pulls you to it, I think helps.

Next slide, please.

Again, you know, different ways to handle different elements of the building, uh, change of materials, uh change of fenestration.

Next slide, please.

Uh interesting examples of how what's interesting here is the monotony of the FS out actually works because it's so flat.

Next slide, please.

Not quite to all stories, but I could see this being elevated into a different statement.

Next slide, please.

And colors, umbe there's a possibility of creating some different vertical height forms.

Uh one of the things I was asking, I I know I saw that you had an event room on the upper floor.

Uh is there an opportunity for there to be a roof garden up there also?

Um 22-story building.

I mean, can you imagine being up there with a non-alcoholic beverage?

And and looking out over the San Francisco Bay, you know, towards San Francisco and and across the bay.

Um I don't know, we have pretty good weather.

Redwood City is supposed to have the best weather, right?

Um I think there'd be a great opportunity to do that.

And I understand is expensive to have an exterior roof deck with waterproofing and the detailing and all the other things and the exiting considerations.

However, given the fact that you can't see the bay from the third floor um south facing patio you currently have, uh, you do have an event room up there.

Maybe it would be nice to expand that into a different amenity.

Uh and then finally, I next slide, please.

Um, again, different uh different patterns on the exterior of a building.

You might want to consider uh as a means of taking the curse off a whole block of the same.

Next slide, please.

Um I'm not suggesting you should plant trees like they did in Italy, but but I from what I heard from the Uber, the Uber driver that we we were writing around with, he said that this is the most successful residential building in Milan.

Yeah.

Um and they have they actually have mechanism, the they have an exterior crew that goes and make sure all of those plants are watered all the time and maintained.

Um anyway.

Uh and again, I'm not suggesting that the team should consider this, but I am suggesting that within the confines of the guidelines of the DTP, maybe we can push the envelope a little bit to remove the regimentation of the exterior.

Um that normally um, you know, study session, we just ask questions, but I I think it's important that the development team and design team hear the comments that have come through as really kind of a pass at what we should be looking at next time we see it.

Because I think the next time you come forward formally would be to the architectural advisory committee.

And we make a recommendation to the planning commission, who then makes the recommendation to the city council.

Um these concerns are not addressed, then we may have different things to say about it at that time, but I'm hoping that we've given given you enough direction to think about how you might answer some of these things.

Given that you need the project the way you have.

So I I don't have any concerns of the height.

However, there are um two concerns voiced by committee members of the AC, and maybe there are ways by dealing with the exterior design, you might be able to remove stories, but in any way, make the building feel more comfortable.

I think you heard from uh committee committee committee person Jenkins that generally okay with the building.

Um the height was okay, density is okay, you know.

Uh pedestrian uh the pedestrian um uh the redesign is is was more successful than the original design.

Uh I I will voice the concern about uh only an eight-foot sidewalk uh along um along Marshall.

I think if if you throw in a street tree element, all of a sudden it's not an eight-foot sidewalk anymore.

Becomes a four-foot sidewalk with grates that don't work well with people who have walkers or canes.

Um I also think that asking for uh a couple hundred square feet or a couple hundred feet in height.

We could give some on the horizontal um and add more space to the streetscape for uh not to use the buzzword activation, but just the reality of having older folks walk back and forth, uh people on scooters and all kinds of other things going on.

And you know, and you when you got a cane or in a walker, you take up a lot a little bit more room than people just walking.

Um so I think that would be a can some a consideration to think about in in the adjustment.

Um all the other comments, I can barely read my own writing here because I was writing so fast.

Um that uh committeeman uh committee person Jenkins uh had mentioned, I think it's really critical really important to her points.

Uh small thing, the exterior of that arch getting really thin at the top that just visually feels weird.

Arches don't usually get that thin when it gets to the top of the arch.

And I'm sure structurally it works just fine, but it just feels weird.

It looks strange.

And um in terms of a 21-story building residents um who are not as capable of exiting as quickly as they can.

I would think that working with the fire marshal is going to be really critical.

You may find areas of refuge to being being a lot bigger at your your stairs, which could impact the exterior.

And maybe that's a way to also take away the curse of some of the element that's the sameness of the vertical elements, because it's gonna require certain areas there to to get larger or become a thing unto itself, possibly.

I don't know.

I think there's there's a whole lot given that this site is so tight that you you've got to get right now, and you won't have room to adjust it later.

Um I hope that helps.

So I'll listen to any final comments.

Do you um do you have any any clarifying questions for us?

Either the planning commission or or the architectural advisory committee.

None of the time, we need a lot less to digest.

None of the time a lot to address well thank you for the all the work you've put into this not just for this presentation but leading up to this point.

Oh actually um William wherever you are back there I I assume you have everything you need from us please say yes.

Yes thank you.

So I want to thank uh I want to thank the staff want to thank the applicant um and all of the public commentator commentators um both here and uh and online um you've spent three hours with us and um I thank you very much for all of your input um we do have one more thing which is why I took this um and this is for Sue it's uh uh agenda item number five is matters of commission and committee interest yeah just just really quickly um wanted to remind folks who haven't answered there was a doodle poll sent out regarding a workshop for the Greater Dante area plan for July 21st or 2022 if you could please respond and um set your availability for that date second we even sooner are going to have another uh joint meeting the same group getting together again um to go over objective design standards oh that's right when it's so we are asking for um I'm gonna un unless commissioners are out it is a commission the two dates are commission dates June 2nd or June 16th are the proposed potential dates so let me know if you are planning commissioners if you are uh planning to be out on those days what dates for those but for the AAC folks it's June 2nd and June 16th are the two dates that we are looking at and so just wanted to pull for your availability June 2nd and June 16th they're Tuesdays.

If you're taking note now uh they both seem free to me.

Okay yeah they there are standard uh planning commission dates um so if all I have in my calendar is a planning commission meeting if commissioners were going to be out let me know but otherwise if um the AC if you if you can respond right now great I'll give you another minute but if you need more time 16 doesn't work for me okay uh second works for me that's fine yeah both dates work for me both days yeah both days can also work for me okay so you said sorry um thank you the second does not work for you second is fine does not okay when we have an AAC meeting don't we schedule in June no that it was pretended okay yeah so otherwise both I think I heard otherwise for everybody so um both the second and the sixteenth okay we'll be back in touch if you could hold those for a little bit as we finalize the um schedule and availability for that thank you very much is there anything else on the agenda you have the uh you have the gap I got the gap all the moment yeah the next item is you miss us all right we're good we're out of here that was one of our longest meetings well I was surprised at the