shown on the following page.

Similar documents
September 30, 2014 Ms. Lorraine Weiss Department of Community Development City of San Mateo 330 West 20th Avenue San Mateo, CA

DRAFT. 10% Common Open Space

Town Center (part of the Comprehensive Plan)

A. WHAT IS A GENERAL PLAN?

Tonight s Agenda. Summary Presentation Open House. Group Discussion Next Steps: online community wide survey

V. Urban Design A. INTRODUCTION B. CITY IMAGE

Metro. Activity Center Design Guidelines. Recommendations For Developing Focused, Mixed-Use Commercial/Residential Centers

Bayshore Boulevard Home Improvement District Design Guidelines

Subject: 30 Otis Street, Evaluation of Shadow on Proposed 11th and Natoma Park

Community Design Plan

Slot Home Task Force Meeting #5 Phase 2 June 8, 2017

Residential Commons at Barry s Corner. Boston civic design commission February 5, 2013

Tips on Writing to the Planning Commission

WEST LOOP DESIGN GUIDELINES CHECKLIST

Mr. Craig Young, Managing Principal Tidewater Capital 25 Taylor Street San Francisco, CA October 27, 2014

(DC1) Direct Development Control Provision DC1 Area 4

INSTITUTIONAL USE DESIGN COMPATIBILITY TECHNIQUES

appendix and street interface guidelines

PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THIS CHAPTER PUBLIC REALM

Chapter II: Building Placement, Massing and Access

III. Design Principles

general corridor design guidelines gen-0.0

City of Sugar Hill Planning Staff Report CBD Design Review

Tim Heron, Design and Historic Resource Reviews ,

el camino real master plan

Walnut Creek Transit Village Design Guidelines. Part Three III - 25

Lehigh Acres Land Development Regulations Community Planning Project

Policies and Code Intent Sections Related to Town Center

Urban Design Brief. 875 Wellington Road. Proposed One-Storey Fast Food Restaurant and Two-Storey Restaurant. Wellington Harlech Centre Inc.

12600 S Existing Conditions

CHAPTER 6. COMMUNITY CHARACTER

Future Five. Design/ Development Guidelines. January 2008 Amended June 08 per City Council motion

DRAFT Concept Alternatives

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

PROPOSED WATERFRONT DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS

REZONING GUIDE. Zone Map Amendment (Rezoning) - Application. Rezoning Application Page 1 of 3. Return completed form to

ELMVALE ACRES SHOPPING CENTRE MASTER PLAN

Millbrae TOD #2 Project Analysis

Buildings may be set back to create small plazas provided that these setbacks do not substantially disrupt the street wall s continuity.

ECR. el camino real master plan. settings and opportunities. The City of San Mateo SMWM. Adopted by the San Mateo City Council September 18, 2001

VISION AND GUIDING DESIGN PRINCIPLES

CRYSTAL CITY BLOCK PLAN # CCBP- G 1 DRAFT

QUEEN-RIVER SECONDARY PLAN

North Downtown Specific Plan MEMORANDUM

Installed Hardiness Zone 9b

HILLSDALE STATION AREA PLAN COMMUNITY WORKSHOP 2 City of San Mateo

VILLAGE OF SKOKIE Design Guidelines for Mixed-Use Districts NX Neighborhood Mixed-Use TX Transit Mixed-Use CX Core Mixed-Use

DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT

WELLINGTON HOSPITAL DESIGN GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS

GUIDING PRINCIPLES IN THIS CHAPTER

POLICY AMENDMENT AND LAND USE AMENDMENT TUXEDO PARK (WARD 9) CENTRE STREET N AND 26 AVENUE NE BYLAWS 36P2017 AND 234D2017

Community Mixed Use Zone Districts (CMU)

EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

This Review Is Divided Into Two Phases:

OCEANSIDE DEVELOPER S CONFERENCE. 1. 9:30-10:30 a.m. Proposed hotel on a 12,000 sq. ft. site at the northeast corner of Topeka St. and Tremont St.

La Veranda Summary Notes from DRAC meeting 4/05/16

WELCOME and introduction

Community Design. Our Use of Land. Introduction

MIDTOWN MIXED-USE VILLAGE. TECHNICAL DATA SHEET COMPONENT C-1 FOR PUBLIC HEARING - PETITION NUMBER Project No RZ1.1. Issued.

DRAFT. October Wheaton. Design Guidelines

WATERFRONT DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS

WINDSOR GLEN DESIGN GUIDELINES

Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit Transit Oriented Development (BRTOD) Helmo Station Area Plan

The Village. Chapter 3. Mixed Use Development Plan SPECIFIC PLAN

Incentives Bonus Height RequirementsProgram:: Proposed Mandatory and Elective Building Components


FRUITVALE TRANSIT VILLAGE (Phase 2) Residential Project

STIKEMAN ELLIOTT. Stikeman Elliott LLP Barristers & Solicitors

DRAFT Northeast Quadrant of Kipling Avenue and Highway 7 DRAFT AUGUST 29, Goals Land Use. The goals of this Plan are to:

Horizon 2035 Land Use and Transportation Element

Architectural Standards

Description of Preferred Alternative

3.1 community vision. 3.3 required plan elements

Public Frontage Regulations Map

Elderberry, Pioneer, Junction

Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment - Phase II Overview. I. Phase II Overview. November 7, 2005 I - 1

PLANNING BOARD REPORT PORTLAND, MAINE

Bloor St. W. Rezoning - Preliminary Report

MIXED-USE VILLAGE OVERLAY FLOATING DISTRICT

Nick Podell, Principal Nick Podell Company 22 Battery Street, Suite 404 San Francisco, CA June 4, 2015

DENVER DESIGN DISTRICT GDP

The Baileys Planning District portion of the Comprehensive Plan contains site design recommendations for both the Baileys Crossroads Community

HIGHLAND VILLAGE GREEN URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES/GUIDELINES

Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 4360, 2004, Amendment Bylaw No. 4897, 2016 (Sewell s Landing)

TSAWWASSEN TOWN CENTRE REDEVELOPMENT BLOCK A 004

September 25th, 2018 $2000 fee pd CC

THE COUTURE AT A GLANCE $122 MILLION TOTAL PROJECT COST 44 STORIES / 700,000 SQUARE FEET PUBLIC PLAZAS, PARK & PEDESTRIAN BRIDGES 302 MARKET RATE

SP # Carlin Springs Road The Springs

Town Center. Block 5 Existing multifamily residential units are expected to remain.

Google Earth A City Planners Best Friend

TOWN COUNCIL / PLANNING COMMISSION

CPD Rules and Regulations. Arapahoe Square Zoning and Design Standards/Guidelines

NEC of Central Avenue and Indian School Road

Planning Board Briefing

5 TOWN OF MARKHAM OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 144 MILLIKEN MAIN STREET SECONDARY PLAN

Good Design Guidelines for Downtown. Preliminary Findings and Recommendations

PINE CURVE REZONING. BACKGROUND Purchased as two parcels in 2001 and 2002

Uptown Rideau Street Secondary Plan [Amendment #166, January 12, 2016]

Design Guidelines. Roosevelt. Mike Podowski DPD Design Guidelines Ordinance ATT 13 August 13, 2012 Version #1

Historic Resources. San Mateo has a Historic Building Survey that identified roughly 200 historically significant

Transcription:

ARCHITECTURE PLANNING URBAN DESIGN May 5, 2016 Ms. Tricia Schimpp Department of Community Development City of San Mateo 330 West 20th Avenue San Mateo, CA 94403-1388 RE: Hillsdale Terrace Dear Tricia: I first reviewed this project two and a half years ago when staff met with the applicant to discuss the initial design approach, and suggested some potential improvements. In February of this year, I reviewed a complete application and prepared a review letter with recommendations. Since then staff has worked with the applicant to address the issues that were raised. I have now finished a thorough review of the new application drawings. I am familiar with the site through past visits. My comments and suggestions to staff are as follows: NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT The site is one half block in size spanning along El Camino Real from 27th to 28th Avenue. It is bordered at its rear by a large multifamily residential complex. Commercial uses in the area are characterized by one story structures with substantial surface parking. An air photo of the site is shown below. Additional photos of the site and nearby buildings are shown on the following page.

Hillsdale Terrace May 5, 2015 Page 2 The site from 27 th Avenue Development immediately across El Camino Real Adjacent multifamily development Nearby recent multifamily development

Hillsdale Terrace May 5, 2015 Page 3 Concerns and Recommendations The proposed project is contained within a single structure that spans the full block frontage from 27th to 28th Avenue, as shown in the air photo context illustration below. The project s design has evolved a great deal from the original drawings that I saw over two years ago. While the initial approach was of concern to the Planning Commission because they felt that it seemed rigid and repetitive along its full length, the full submission in February had much more visual variety, and the current submittal has further refined the design. Major refinements have focused on the El Camino Real ground floor frontage and the design of the 28th Avenue building corner. Overall, the design should provide a distinctive addition to El Camino Real. The illustrations below and on the following page show the previous El Camino Real frontage treatment and the currently proposed design. Previous El Camino Real frontage

Hillsdale Terrace May 5, 2015 Page 4 Currently proposed El Camino Real frontage Previous El Camino Real frontage Currently proposed El Camino Real frontage

Hillsdale Terrace May 5, 2015 Page 5 In my current review, I identified only a few issues that staff and the Planning Commission may wish to discuss further with the applicant. 1. Corner Plazas The corner at El Camino Real and 28th Avenue will be a strong focal point by virtue of the future extension of 28th Avenue to Bay Meadows II. Yet, the Public Corner Space as currently shown appears to accommodate very few tables if it were to be used as an outdoor dining terrace. And the walls and planters at the edges of the space does not give the area an open and inviting public appearance - see the illustrations below.

Hillsdale Terrace May 5, 2015 Page 6 Recommendation: Modify the edge design of both the 28 th and 27 th Avenue Public Open Spaces to provide a more open and inviting feeling- see example photos below. Corner Plaza example: Santa Monica 2. Public Art A public art piece is shown located at the rear of the property adjacent to the proposed ground floor open space. In that location, it would be seen by only a small number of the public. Recommendation: Consider moving the public art piece to a more publicly visible location.

3. Potential Sound Impact Hillsdale Terrace May 5, 2015 Page 7 There is a ground floor open space proposed at the rear of the site. The design, as currently shown, would construct an elevated platform with stepped seating to accommodate several tables and chairs as a significant gathering space. It is unknown how much use this space might be used in the evening since residents of the building also have access to a rooftop deck. However, any substantial activity here could have an impact on the residential units in the adjacent apartment building with frontage on this site. Recommendation: Staff should discuss the use and design of this open space to minimize any potential sound impacts. STRUCTURE HEIGHT AND DESIGN ARTICULATION The proposed building would be located adjacent to El Camino Real in a zone designated by the City s General Plan policies for a maximum building height of 40-55 feet. A building height in excess of 40 feet and up to 55 feet is allowed only for lots over 100 feet in depth. For lots more than 100 feet deep, heights up to 55 feet are permitted for projects which meet the following criteria and are approved by the City Council: a. The project provides amenities such as landscaped plazas, covered parking, setbacks from the street, stepbacks of upper stories, and public improvements substantially in excess of City requirements; b. The building has high design quality which is enhanced by additional building height; c. Increased building heights are visually related to surrounding building heights and promote the creation of a coherent City image; d. Increased building heights are compatible with surrounding land uses and will not create adverse shadow or visual impacts on surrounding residential uses; and e. The City s infrastructure is adequate to accommodate the proposed development. Since the building is currently proposed with a height greater than 40 feet, affirmative findings would be required for the five criteria above.

Hillsdale Terrace May 5, 2015 Page 8 The City s recently adopted Mid and South El Camino Real 40-55 Foot Building Height Design Criteria provides examples and details to promote consistency in the project review and approval process for applicable projects seeking building heights along El Camino Real greater than 40 feet and up to 55 feet. Features of the this project which seem to meet the criteria include: The ground floor use and design along with well integrated landscaping will contribute positively to the pedestrian environment on el Camino Real. The planning of the project will replace surface parking along the El Camino Real frontage with commercial and public open space uses. Parking will be located below grade. The structure is designed with a great deal of facade variety with regard to horizontal and vertical articulation and colors. The El Camino Real facade steps down at both corners to provide a transition to smaller scale development on adjacent blocks. The structure has a fully developed design on all facades. The corners at both the 28 th and 27 th Avenue intersections with El Camino Real have been designed with public open spaces capable of featuring restaurants with outdoor seating. Public art is provided to enrich the pedestrian experience. With the changes that have been made, I believe that this project is consistent with the Mid and South El Camino Real 40-55 Foot Building Height Design Criteria. Tricia, please let me know if you have any questions, or if there are specific issues of concern that I did not address. Sincerely, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Larry Cannon