East Palo Alto City Council
July 16, 2024

EAST PALO ALTO RESIDENTIAL TDM COMPLIANCE PLAN
The Transportation Demand Management Compliance Plan provides basic information about the project and outlines how the project will comply with the East Palo Alto TDM Ordinance.

The Euclid Improvements TDM Plan incorporates many TDM strategies to reduce traffic impacts and maximize residents' mobility options.

City of East Palo Alto Transportation Demand Management Program In June of 2021, the City of East Palo Alto adopted an update to the TDM Ordinance, which amended Chapter 10.32 of the Municipal Code. The purpose of the TDM Ordinance is to address transportation-related impacts of new and existing developments to establish strategies that decrease the number of daily vehicle trips to and from a property. The East Palo Alto City Council established a 40 percent average daily trip reduction requirement for residential and non-residential development.

New residential developments must comply with the TDM Ordinance by selecting and incorporating TDM Strategies to meet a minimum number of points. Residential development with 100 or more units is required to achieve a minimum of 10 points to meet compliance.

Project Description
The Euclid Improvements site occupies 3.9 acres on East Palo Alto's Westside, northwest of University Avenue, adjacent to Highway 101, and northwest University Circle. Manhattan Avenue, West Bayshore Road, O'Connor Street, and Euclid Avenue contain the project. The project will provide 605 dwellings1. Rental residences will easily walk or bike ride to nearby employment sites, transit access, dining, shopping, and recreation. The concept includes a total of 799,684 square feet of residential, retail, and community space, with up to 3,000 square feet of amenities for residents to enjoy, such as meeting rooms, a business center, common areas, fitness center, bicycle repair stations, and a publicly-accessible neighborhood park.

In addition to rental housing, the development includes retail spaces totaling up to 5,000 square feet. The retail uses will be primarily resident-serving spaces and consist of a café, convenience store, coffee shop, or other neighborhood retail.

Early outreach is a critical juncture at which to educate people about the benefits of alternative transportation. Potential residents and new occupants will be given information about alternative transportation and commute options at the occupancy time. They may be more receptive to this information as their commute patterns have already changed after the relocation.

The future property management will designate a TDM Coordinator to provide residents with information and updates regarding transportation resources and implement many of the measures outlined in the TDM Measure Implementation Table section below. 1 To satisfy the East Palo Alto inclusionary housing ordinance, the applicant is in discussions with the city to provide for affordable housing at an additional location.
358
Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Residential TDM Compliance Plan October 22, 2021

TDM Measure Implementation Table
The Euclid Improvements (Woodland Park Communities) project must achieve a minimum of 10 points through their residential TDM Program strategy.

Table 1 on page 3 shows the TDM measures that the project plans to implement. This table includes various measures left out of the initial draft TDM Ordinance, but the project believes they contribute to significant average daily trip reductions. The "Euclid Proposed Points" column indicates the number of points the project requests for implementing the associated measure. The total points this project anticipates receiving is 17.5. The following section describes each mitigation measure the project intends to implement. 359
Table 1: TDM Measure Implementation Table
Avaliable
Points
Proposed
Points
Affordable Housing 1. 20% Affordable Housing Project

2. 40% Affordable Housing Project 2

3. 60% Affordable Housing Project 3

4. 80% Affordable Housing Project 4

5. 100% Affordable Housing Project 5

6. Orientation, education or materials, distribution of transit, wayfinding and other TDM information and programs to new residents as they move in and annually to all residents (commuter resource flier, resident dashboard, transportation kiosk, instagram)

0.25 0.25

7. Annual transportation fair or event 0.25

8. Resident lease-language/trip reduction pledge form 0.25 TransitScreen and Mobile app 9. Real-time transportation resource, information tracker, and resident app (2 units) 0.25 TDM Coordinator

10. Designate a TDM Coordinator or contact person throughout the life of the project. This may be an individual who is an employee of - or at - the development project; or may be contracted by a third-party provider.

0.25 0.25

11. Less than 0.5 miles to a major transit route (30-min headway) 0.25

12. Less than 0.5 miles to a major transit route (20-min headway) 0.5

13. Less than 0.5 miles to Caltrain/Light Rail Station 2.5

17. Certified participation in Commute.org, or equivalent program such as a TMA 1 1

18. Commute assistance and ride-matching 0.25 0.25

19. Shuttle program/shuttle consortium/fund transit service 2.5

20. Provide free transit passes or carpool/vanpool subsidies to tenants equivalent to 30% of the value of their monthly fare or at least $50 monthly. Transit passes and subsidies provided must be valid for public transportation options, including but not limited to BART, Caltrain, SamTrans, and ridesharing platforms and vanpool subscription (or costs). *Points of this measure are allowed to be prorated if Developer will provide this program to a portion of the residents. The prorated points shall be calculated by using the same percentage number of participated residents that Developer will agree to provide.

EX: 20% of the residents will be provided this program. The points value shall be 2.5 x 20% = 0.5
Bicycle Facilities 21. Bicycle facilities in conformance with CALGreen minimum bicycle parking requirements 0.25 0.25

22. Bicycle facilities (secure, Class I) installed above code/CALGreen 0.25

23. Bicycle Fix-it repair station (one for each building = 2) 0.25 0.25

24. Bicycle Fix-it repair station (one station accessable to the public in corner park) 0.25

25. Scheduled annual bicycle safety seminars 0.25

26. Scheduled on-site quarterly mobile repair services 0.25

27. Design street or roadways that provide multimodal travel choices and give people the option to avoid vehicular traffic congestion. 0.25 0.25

28. Bus pull-out space 0.25

29. Bus shelter 0.25 0.25

30. Visual/electrical Improvements (e.g., lighting, signage) 0.25 0.25

31. Other (e.g., micromobility parking zone, TNC loading zone) 0.25

32. Establish new, or enhance the quality of, pedestrian and bicycle facilities or infrastructures to facilitate active transportation from a project site to existing trails, bikeways, or adjacent streets. Pedestrian improvements should be within 0.5 miles of project site (approx. 10-15 minute walk); bicycling improvements within 2 miles of site (approx. 15-min ride at 10mph).
2 Car Share Program 33. Providing private or public car share memberships to on-site residents 0.5 0.5 Proximity to Car Share 34. Less than 0.5 miles from a car share hub with cars available to on-site residents 0.25 0.25 Designated Car Share Parking
Spaces 35. Provide curbside carpool/vanpool/rideshare loading zones 0.5 0.5 Bicycle/Scooter Share Program 36. Providing private or public bicycle/scooter share memberships to on-site residents 0.25 Proximity to Bicycle Share Site is less than 0.5 miles from a bicycle share hub with bicycles available to on-site residents 0.25
Delivery Amenities

37. Offer delivery-supportive amenities, such as an area for receipt of deliveries, clothes lockers for laundry or dry cleaning, storage for package deliveries or temporary refrigeration for grocery deliveries. Delivery-supportive amenities can help reduce the need for individual vehicle ownership and vehicle trips by consolidating multiple trips at one central location.

0.5 0.5
Family-supportive Amenities

38. To address challenges that families face in making trips without a private vehicle, the property owner shall provide family-supportive amenities, such as on-site secure storage of personal car seats, strollers, cargo bicycles, or other large bicycles. Property owners can also provide shared building equipment, such as shopping carts or cargo bicycles for check out by residents.
1 39. Motorists pay directly for using parking facilities. Parking rates should be at the market rate and not subsidized by property owners or employers. 6.25 6.25

40. Parking reduction to below code 0.25
Developer TDM Fee/TDM Fund

41. Impact fees can be collected from developers, generally on a per-unit or square footage basis, to fund the implementation of TDM programs. These TDM fees can be put in an escrow account for the developer or subsequent property manager to spend to implement programmatic elements of the TDM plan. NOTE: "Double dipping" with the already required "TMA Participation" measure (above) is not allowed. This measure cannot be given credit for TDM fund payment or developer fees already required by fee nexus ordinance by the governing jurisdiction. Credit here may only be given for voluntary TDM fund payment or developer fee negotiated separately with the governing jurisdiction. 1 GreenTrip Certification 42. Achieve GreenTrip certification designation from TransForm 0.25 10 15.5
Paid Parking at Market Rate

0.5 2.5
Participation in Commute. Org, or
Transportation Management
Association (TMA)

0.5 1

0.5 15. Less than .25 miles from: 1. A shopping center consisting of at least three tenant spaces, or 2. Three separate retail/ restaurant/ service/ recreational uses. 1

16. Include active, pedestrian-oriented commercial uses on the ground floor to create more walkable and inviting areas. Provide on-site amenities, such as cafés, gym, retail stores, or bank/ATM.
1 TOTAL
Proximity to Commercial Uses
Table 1: TDM Measure Implementation Table

14. Less than .5 miles from: 1. A shopping center consisting of at least three tenant spaces, or 2. Three separate retail/ restaurant/ service/ recreational uses.

Access Improvements
Transit Pass/Subsidy Programs
Proximity to Transit
TDM Communication
360
Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Residential TDM Compliance Plan October 22, 2021

Residential TDM Measure Descriptions
Affordable housing at 56% (2 points)
The project intends to provide for 56 percent of net new units as affordable housing (160 units rent-stabilized on-site and 89 units income-restricted through an inclusionary partnership). In partnership with Eden Housing, the project will provide for 20 percent of net new units to low-income renters as income-restricted affordable units leased below market.

TDM Communication (0.25 points)
At lease commuter training session or webinar to learn about available transportation resources and signing, property management will invite new tenants to participate in an initial incentives and the site's sustainability goals. In addition, the TDM Coordinator will distribute a commute resource flier to each new tenant. Page 5 shows a sample commute resource flier.

Annual Transportation Event (0.25 points)
The project will host an annual event to promote transit and mobility options to residents. This event can pair with a tenant appreciation event or a regional event like Bike to Work Day.

Residential Lease Language (0.25 points)
At the occupancy, property management will provide all new tenants with Commuter Program information and sustainability goals. They will also ask new tenants to sign the acknowledgment of the project's green mobility goals and tenants' understanding of the site's trip reduction and alternative transportation mode-use goals.

The pledge form will encourage residents to use transit, bike, walk, or carpool as commuter mode options. In addition, resident lease language will inspire tenants to participate in trip reduction programs and engage in periodic commute surveys. 361
Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Residential TDM Compliance Plan October 22, 2021

Image 1: Sample Commute Resource Flier
362
Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Residential TDM Compliance Plan October 22, 2021

Transit Screen and Mobile App (0.25 points)
The project will install a transportation information kiosk in building lobbies. Obvious transportation information will improve the
resident's understanding of available
transportation and commuter resources,
including real-time transportation
information, transit, shuttle arrival times,
bikeshare and scooter options, and ridehailing resources. For example, a TransitScreen kiosk consists of a mobile
app for residents for on-the-go travel
needs. Another alternative could be a wallmounted or floor-standing kiosk containing physical bike maps, train schedules, shuttle
fliers, and other rideshare materials.

TDM Coordinator (0.25 points)
The Euclid Improvements project will assign a staff member to provide Commute Concierge service with responsibilities to implement the alternative commute programs and the elements outlined in this plan. The Commute Concierge may be a part-time employee, property manager, or an outsourced coordinator, who manages the TDM programs and annual reporting.

In addition, the Commute Concierge will be responsible for providing commute program assistance to residents, producing on-site transportation fairs and promotional events, and collaborating with transit and rideshare organizations to maximize on-site resources. Commute industry data supports the notion that a Commute Concierge positively impacts increasing and maintaining alternative mode use.

Less than 0.5-Miles to a Transit Route with 30-Minute Headways (0.25 points) In total, four bus drop-off and pick-up locations are conveniently located very near the project.

Safe, convenient, and well-lit pedestrian paths will show the most direct route to the nearest transit stop from the project. A total of 118 SamTrans transit trips serve the project site.

However, Route 81 operates only during the school year.

Shown in Table 2 below are SamTrans routes 81, 280, 281, and 397, which combine to provide transit headways of less than 30 minutes throughout the day. 363
Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Residential TDM Compliance Plan October 22, 2021

Table 2: Transit Resources Serving Euclid Improvements Community Image 2 below shows the walking route to each of these SamTrans routes. Residents can access each route with a walk of fewer than six minutes.

Image 2: Walking Route to Transit
Route Span of Service Trips per
Weekday Communities Served
81 Samtrans
5 Days/Week
(school year only)
7:10 a.m. - 3:40 p.m.
8 Clarke/Bayshore, Pulgas/O'Connor, Bay/University, Bayshore/Newell, Manhattan/O'Connor, Purdue/Fordham, Onetta Harris/Community Ctr, Newbridge/Carlton, Willow/Nash, and Middlefiled/Ringwood 280
Samtrans
5 Days/Week
5:46 a.m. - 9:46 p.m.
60-minute headways
33 Stanford Shopping Center, Palo Alto Transit Center, Manhattan/ O'Connor, Bayshore/Newell, Pulgas/O'Connor, and Purdue/Fordham 281
Samtrans
5 Days/Week
6:15 a.m. - 10:20 p.m.
30-minute headways
70 Stanford Shopping Center, Palo Alto Transit Center, University/ Woodland, Bay/University, Newbridge/Saratoga, and Onetta Harris Community Center 397
Samtrans
5 Days/Week
12:46 a.m. - 6:17 a.m.
7 Palo Alto Transit Center, University/Woodland, Bay/University, Middlefield/5th, Redwood City Transit Center, El Camino/Hillsdale, El Camino/Burlingame, Millbrae Transit Center, SF Airport Courtyard A, Airport/Linden, Bayshore/Old County, Mission/1st, 11th/Market, and Drumm/Clay
Total SamTrans Bus Trips/Weekday 118
* All buses and trains are lift equipped for handicapped, elderly, or those in need. 364
Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Residential TDM Compliance Plan October 22, 2021

Less than 0.5-Miles from 3 Separate Retail, Restaurant, Recreation, or Service Uses (0.5 points) At least three service and restaurant uses are near the project's location, including La Tiendita Market, Quattro restaurant, and Ladle & Leaf soup restaurant. Within walking distance, these services allow residents to access food or groceries without the need to drive.

On-Site Amenities (1 point)
On-site amenities will provide residents with a full-service living environment. Eliminating or reducing the need for an automobile to make off-site trips decreases average daily trip counts.

Residents often perceive that they depend on the drive-alone mode because of the number of errands and activities carried out in different locations. On-site and nearby amenities help reduce this dependence on a vehicle. In addition, the project offers tenants many convenient amenities.

A list of on-site amenities for the project may include:
• Recreational spaces, picnic and patio areas
• Abundant Class I bicycle parking and community bicycles • Transit and shuttle stop
• Transportation and commute kiosks (TransitScreen)
• Transportation and commuter app (CityMotion)
• Commute Concierge
• Work areas, meeting rooms
• Hardwired infrastructure for Broadband and WiFi
• Comprehensive fitness facilities
TMA Participation (1 point)
Transportation Management Associations (TMA) help businesses, developers, building owners, local government representatives, and others collectively establish policies, programs, and services to address transportation problems. The key to a successful TMA lies in the synergism of multiple groups banding together to accomplish more than any single employer, building operator, or developer could do alone.

In the City of East Palo Alto, Commute.org (formerly the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance) operates as a TMA organization. The project will participate with the Commute.org TMA and its programs. Commute.org provides:
• Shuttle programs
• Transit advocacy
• Carpool and vanpool matching
• Information on local issues
• Parking management programs
• Trial transit passes
• Emergency ride home programs
• Marketing programs
• Enhanced bicycle facilities
• Promotional assistance
• Car and vanpool incentives
• Newsletter
365
Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Residential TDM Compliance Plan October 22, 2021

Commute Assistance and Ridematching (0.25 points)
The Commuter Concierge will provide trip planning assistance and ridematching services to residents interested in taking transit or rideshares. The Commuter Concierge may also promote ridematching apps such as Scoop or Waze Carpool to help residents find carpool partners.

Transit Pass Subsidies (0.5 points)
The project will offer transit pass subsidies to low-income residents. Residents will be able to use these subsidies on SamTrans, Caltrain, and VTA routes.

Bicycle Facilities in Compliance with CALGreen Code (0.25 points) The Euclid Improvements project will install Class I covered and secure bicycle parking spaces in each residential unit. Throughout the project, secure bike parking rooms will also be available for residents. Short-term, Class II bicycle parking spaces will be open throughout the site in public areas near the park or bus shelters.

Enhanced Bicycle Facilities Above Code (0.25 points)
The project intends to provide more bicycle parking than is required per code. A surplus of available bicycle parking relieves concerns about storing a bicycle encouraging residents to make more bicycle trips.

Bicycle Fix-it Repair Stand (0.25 points)
The Euclid Improvements project will install an on-site bicycle Fix-it repair station. The Fixit station will offer bicycle parking and do-it-yourself bike repair tools, and an air pump.

Located in a community's common area, the Fix-it station will include an air pump, working pedestal, and steel braided cables for theft protection.

Public Bicycle Fix-it Repair Stand (0.25 points)
The project will install a publicly accessible bicycle Fix-it repair stand in the on-site park.

Neighboring residents will be allowed to access and use this public amenity.

Annual Bicycle Safety Seminars (0.25 points)
The Euclid Improvements project will coordinate with Commute.org to host an annual bicycle safety presentation. In partnership with a nationally certified League Cycling Instructor (LCI), Commute.org offers free bicycle safety workshops. The workshop covers practical and safety information, including:
• Planning your route, including connections to rail and water transit stations • Equipping yourself and your bike
• Ways to safely and confidently communicate with other road users • Using Google Maps to explore route options
• Other resources include the San Mateo County's bikeways and safe cycling booklet 366
Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Residential TDM Compliance Plan October 22, 2021

Quarterly Mobile Bicycle Repair Services (0.25 points)
The project will schedule periodic mobile repair services for its bike commuters. A mobile repair and service firm, such as Summit Bikes, will travel to the project site and provide on-site repair and maintenance services for resident cyclists who sign-up for this service.

Street Design (0.25 points)
The Euclid Improvements project will provide pedestrian pathways throughout the community. Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle features will include wayfinding signage, lighting, and colored or textured pavement to designate protected walkways. Pedestrian amenities include wide sidewalks with fully accessible curb ramps at driveway crossings and delineated crosswalks. Overhead lighting will illuminate the walkways. The streetscape design reinforces the urban identity of the Euclid Improvements project and establishes a pedestrian environment.

The project adds public open spaces, including a one-acre neighborhood park containing a children's play area, fitness space, bike parking, and tenants' place to hold parties or gatherings.

In addition, street trees, streetscapes, and landscaping will improve the site's quality and aesthetic appeal with pedestrian-oriented facades and wide sidewalks.

Bus Shelter (0.25 points)
The Euclid Improvements
project collaborates with SamTrans and
other local transit providers to discuss
expanded or improved routes to serve the
neighborhood better. The applicant
proposes the construction of a new
sheltered bus stop at the corner of Euclid
and O'Connor. The transit shelter
placement and construction require
coordination with the City and SamTrans to
determine a transit stop's suitability.

The purpose of a transit passenger shelter is to provide rider protection from the weather for those who are waiting to board transit vehicles. An attractive bus shelter that makes waiting for a bus a more pleasant experience encourages more transit ridership Visual Improvements (0.25 points)
Proper lighting and signage will provide a safe, pedestrian-oriented environment that supports bicycle and walking trips. On-site parks and landscaping will provide an appealing setting to walk in. Wayfinding signage will help residents find amenities such as bike parking facilities, repair stands, public open spaces, cafes, passenger loading zones, and more. 367
Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Residential TDM Compliance Plan October 22, 2021

Rideshare and TNC Passenger Loading Zone (0.5 points)
The project will install a convenient and attractive passenger loading zone near a centralized location for residents, visitors, guests, and staff. The loading zone will include appropriate signage and striping to designate the space. A loading/unloading area facilitates disembarking and embarking of guests and rideshare passengers.

Carshare Program (0.5 points)
The project will offer residents that do not own a personal vehicle and carshare program subsidy. Residents can use these subsidies for free or discounted access to nearby carshare vehicles such as Zipcar.

Proximity to Carshare Parking (0.25 points)
The project will consider options to add designated parking for a carsharing vehicle.

Carsharing would provide residents with access to vehicles for any time use. The project may host a parking location (on-site or off-site) for two neighborhood carshare vehicles (e.g., Zipcar) or similar services.

Delivery Amenities (0.5 points)
The project will provide a designated area near lobbies to receive deliveries for tenants. This space will enable tenants to order food, groceries, and packages online rather than making a vehicle trip to and from the site.

Unbundled/Paid Parking (6.5 points)
Property management will charge for parking separately from rent. Residents will pay tiered pricing for on-site parking2. Charging for on-site parking raises the costs of owning a personal vehicle and discourages residents from doing so by making transit and other mobility options more financially appealing.

Parking Reduction (0.25 points)
The project proposes to construct less parking than is required by code. Limiting parking availability discourages residents from owning a personal vehicle.

GreenTRIP Certification (0.25 points)
The project received a conditional GreenTRIP certification for meeting standards and sto reduce vehicle trips, excessive parking, and greenhouse gases trategies (29 percent less GHG).

Criteria include "daily household driving projected to be no more than 35 daily vehicle miles driven per household (44 percent fewer miles per day and 66 percent less driving than the regional average), a parking ratio of 1.5 spaces per unit or less, and the provision of at least one traffic reduction strategy. The project offers long-term and short-term bicycle parking and will participate in GreenTRIP's Transportation and Parking Survey for monitoring." 2 The City may need to change its rules or acknowledge an exception processs to allow this since current municipal code does not allow decoupling.
368
Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Residential TDM Compliance Plan October 22, 2021

369
WOODLAND PARK –

EUCLID IMPROVEMENTS

PARKING AND TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT MEMORANDUM Updated for design revisions submitted February 2024
APRIL 2024
1617 Clay Street
Oakland, CA 94612
(510) 272-9597
370
Table of Contents
Section Page

0.0 PRELUDE TO MEMORANDUM....................................................................................................................1

1.0 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................1

1.1 KEY FINDINGS ...................................................................................................................................................1

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................................2

2.0 GREENTRIP CERTIFICATION........................................................................................................................3

2.1 GREENTRIP BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................................3

2.2 GREENTRIP PROJECT ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................................5

3.0 PROJECT PARKING DEMAND EVALUATION ................................................................................................6

3.1 INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS (ITE) PARKING GENERATION ....................................................................6

3.2 TDM PARKING DEMAND REDUCTIONS ..................................................................................................................8

4.0 CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................................................................................... 11

5.0 ABOUT CHS CONSULTING GROUP............................................................................................................ 11 Table of Figures
Figures Page
FIGURE 1: GREENTRIP CONNECT ANALYSIS RESULTS ...............................................................................................................6 FIGURE 2: ITE PARKING GENERATION ESTIMATE - RESIDENTIAL.................................................................................................7 FIGURE 3: ITE PARKING GENERATION ESTIMATE – NON-RESIDENTIAL ........................................................................................8 FIGURE 4: CAPCOA TDM REDUCTION ESTIMATE...................................................................................................................9 FIGURE 5: PARKING DEMAND REDUCTION ESTIMATE COMPARISON .........................................................................................10 FIGURE 6: PROJECT RESIDENTIAL PARKING DEMAND WITH TDM REDUCTIONS ..........................................................................10 371
1 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024

0.0 PRELUDE TO MEMORANDUM
At the city’s request, this memorandum (which was prepared for the original application) has been updated to reflect the proposed revisions to the entitled project. The numbers in the memorandum have been updated to be consistent with the revision. The evaluation approach is the same as that used for the approved entitled project and the findings remain the same for the revised application.

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this technical memorandum is to provide a peer review of the methodology used by GreenTRIP to estimate parking demand with and without the application of transportation demand management (TDM) measures for the proposed Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements project (proposed project). This memo also provides a preliminary assessment of whether the on-site parking supply and TDM plan would be expected to adequately serve residents without affecting surrounding parking supply on adjacent streets.

The project applicant is seeking a new zoning overlay with a new parking standard. The analysis presented in the memorandum are intended to support an appropriate parking rate for new multifamily housing developments in the proposed new zoning overlay district.

The applicant has submitted a TDM plan and GreenTRIP certification letter to provide a basis for demonstrating the proposed project’s parking supply would adequately accommodate the expected residential parking demand. The GreenTRIP certification letter demonstrates the proposed project, with the implementation of the TDM plan, would result in a residential parking demand that is lower than the proposed parking supply.

1.1 KEY FINDINGS
CHS’s review assessed the estimated project parking demand provided in the GreenTRIP certification letter. Based on this review, CHS concluded that parking demand for the proposed project would be less than both the minimum parking required by East Palo Alto Municipal Code1 and the amount provided by the proposed project. CHS referred to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation Manual to estimate parking demand for the proposed project, which was within five percent of the GreenTRIP estimate for the proposed project without TDM measures. CHS used the methodology and research from the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) 1 East Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 18.30.050 requires multifamily residential developments to provide 1.0 spaces per studio unit, 1.5 spaces per one-bedroom unit, 1.8 spaces per two-bedroom unit, 2.0 spaces per three-bedroom unit, and 0.2 spaces per unit for guest parking.
372
2 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
report, Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures to estimate potential parking demand reductions. CHS determined the proposed project’s TDM plan can reduce parking demand by 20 percent, which was identical to the parking demand reduction presented by GreenTRIP. Therefore, it was determined that the GreenTRIP estimate for project parking demand was accurate and generally aligned with established ITE and CAPCOA data and methodologies. Based on the GreenTRIP and ITE / CAPCOA estimates, the proposed project’s 570 residential parking spaces would accommodate peak parking demand with a surplus of between 81 and 141 spaces.

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Sand Hill Property Company is proposing the Woodland Park – Euclid Improvement project in East Palo Alto. The project site occupies 3.9 acres on East Palo Alto’s Westside, northwest of University Avenue and adjacent to Highway 101. The proposed project is generally bound by Manhattan Avenue, West Bayshore Road, O’Connor Street, and Euclid Avenue. The project site provides easy pedestrian and bike access to nearby employment sites, transit access, dining, shopping, and recreation.

The proposed project would replace several aging, outdated structures containing 160 rent-stabilized housing units and one single-family rental (non-RSO) with new mixed-income buildings containing 550 apartments. Without displacing existing residents, 160 of the 550 units (approximately 29%) would be deed-restricted rent-controlled, replacing the existing apartments one-for-one. The proposed project’s 550 units would consist of 21 studio, 343 one-bedroom, 184 two-bedroom, one threebedroom unit, and one four-bedroom unit. The proposed project would construct 570 on-site parking spaces for resident use in a two structured parking garages for each building (A and B). Building A will use mechanized parking which works in an automated manner to move and stack vehicles to maximize the number of stalls in the available space.2 The project would also provide 72 on-street spaces along the project frontages, increasing existing on-street supply by 20 spaces. Private amenities space will be provided to residents, including meeting rooms, a business center, common areas, fitness center, and bicycle repair stations.

In addition to the rental housing, the proposed project would construct up to 2,609 square feet of ground-level retail uses, approximately 2,500 square feet of public community space, and a 9,355 square foot public park that will be primarily resident-serving spaces. No on-site parking would be provided for the proposed project’s non-residential uses, who would be expected to use the 72 existing on-street parking spaces along the project frontages.
2 Mechanical/stacked parking has been a common and well accepted practice in residential developments since the 1990’s.
373
3 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
The City of East Palo Alto requires a TDM plan and analysis to justify the proposed parking ratio. The TDM plan was developed by TDM Specialists, Inc. The Woodland Park Euclid Improvements TDM Plan dated October 22, 2021, shows the proposed project’s TDM plan earned more than the 10 points required by East Palo Alto. The TDM plan includes TDM communications, a TDM Coordinator, proximity to transit, proximity to commercial uses, participation in Commute.org or Transportation Management Association (TMA), transit pass subsidies for low-income residents, bicycle facilities, access improvements, proximity to carshare, delivery supportive amenities, and unbundled parking. The GreenTRIP certification letter dated April 19, 2022, shows the proposed project would meet the GreenTRIP certification requirements and is expected to generate parking demand for 0.89 spaces per unit with the implementation of the TDM plan, which is below the 1.03 spaces per unit provided by the proposed project.

2.0 GREENTRIP CERTIFICATION

2.1 GREENTRIP BACKGROUND
GreenTRIP is an innovative certification program launched by TransForm in 2008. GreenTRIP staff work with cities, developers, and communities to implement strategies like free transit passes and carshare memberships to reduce driving and prioritize space for people instead of parking. GreenTRIP started in the San Francisco Bay Area, but is developing partnerships, conducting empirical research, and building tools that can support communities throughout California and nationwide.

TransForm was founded in 1997 by Bay Area environmental and social justice groups that recognized the need to negate urban sprawl and redefine transportation in terms of access, health, justice, and sustainability. GreenTRIP initially focused on a certification program that would create new standards for development focused on parking and traffic, similar and complimentary to the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED certification.3
TransForm originally secured funding from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's (BAAQMD) Climate Protection Grant Program and the Rockefeller Foundation in 2008 for a pilot test of GreenTRIP certification. GreenTRIP has since expanded beyond certification program to include research, stakeholder engagement and a parking database. GreenTRIP established an Advisory Committee, 3 The U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification sets goals to reduce building contributions to global climate change, enhance individual human health, protect and restore water resources, protect and enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services, promote sustainability and regenerative material cycles, and enhance community quality of life.
374
4 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
representing a variety of stakeholder groups including city planners, developers, transportation/development consultants, academics, and transportation agency staff.

GreenTRIP conducts a wide range of research including, traffic benefits of affordable housing, transit and affordable housing, travel behavior by income and transit proximity, and transit pass use survey and implementation. The GreenTRIP Connect tool uses these data to predict travel and emissions models for statewide use.

GreenTRIP also hosts a parking database funded as part of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Regional Prosperity Plan. The GreenTRIP Parking Database hosts data on actual parking usage at 80 housing developments around the Bay Area. The publicly available database is intended for use by city staff and leaders, community groups, and housing developers to show how greater affordability, proximity to transit, and strategies like those in GreenTRIP certified buildings reduce the need for parking.

The GreenTRIP certification program benefits from their Parking Database. The use of parcel-level demographic data, detailed street network, transit data, and extensive online spatial platform make the GreenTRIP Connect tool a powerful analytical tool. The parcel-level data allows the tool to provide site specific walk and bicycle access measures. The actual street network can be used to model nonmotorized transportation, such as bicycle networks. This makes the tool useful for modeling appropriate travel alternatives. However, the GreenTRIP parking model only applies in the San Francisco Bay Area and is based on the GreenTRIP Parking Database. The parking model calculations are based on the following building variables:
• Parking supply
• Average rent
• Parking price
• Average bedrooms per unit
• Transit passes
• Carshare memberships
• Neighborhood variables (block size [walkability], job density within 30-minute transit ride, and transit connectivity (frequency of transit)
The parking model also uses the formulas and principals outlined in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) report, Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures4, which is the same document used to form the basis of CalEEMod and other environmental assessment tools. 4 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) August 2010 report, Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures – A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures 375
5 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
The GreenTRIP Connect analysis tool is similar to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Smart Growth model that provides information about transit and pedestrian access to specific employment sites throughout the United States. The challenge for TransForm is to maintain an up-to-date database for travel and demographic data and extending the model to include other states outside of California.

However, the tools are currently applicable to residential developments in California and more specifically municipalities in the Bay Area such as East Palo Alto.

CHS has used the GreenTRIP Connect tool and GreenTRIP Parking Database in the past to estimate parking demand and parking demand reductions for multi-family residential developments around the Bay Area. The data and methodologies used by GreenTRIP are based on empirical studies and observed travel behaviors in the Bay Area region, which provides an accurate assessment of local travel conditions and residential parking demand. The GreenTRIP Connect tool provides a limited set of TDM measures to assess potential reductions, which excludes many TDM measure options available to developers that can further reduce VMT and parking demand. However, the TDM measures GreenTRIP does incorporate (unbundled parking, transit pass subsidies, carshare subsidies, etc.) tend to have the greatest impact on reducing VMT and parking demand, which provides a reasonable assessment for the effectiveness of a development project’s TDM plan.

2.2 GREENTRIP PROJECT ASSESSMENT
GreenTRIP certified the proposed project in an April 19, 2022, certification letter based on the current proposed design and amenities dated October 22, 2021. GreenTRIP certification requires projects in a Neighborhood setting to generate no more than 35 daily vehicle miles driven per household, provide no more than 1.5 parking spaces per unit, and the provision of at least one traffic reduction strategy.

As outlined in the certification letter, the proposed project would provide long and short-term bicycle parking and will participate in GreenTRIP’s Transportation and Parking Survey for monitoring.

GreenTRIP estimates that residents of the proposed project would drive 21 miles per day per household, or 66 percent less than the Bay Area regional average of approximately 62 miles per household per day. GreenTRIP cites the proposed project’s density, location, and proximity to transit as the primary reasons for this reduction in VMT.

The proposed project meets Green Trip certification requirements for residential parking as it will provide less than the 1.5 residential parking space per unit maximum. The proposed project would also meets the GreenTRIP certification requirements of at least 1.0 Class One and 0.2 Class Two spaces per unit. The proposed project would also provide at least one traffic reduction strategy for 40 years, including unbundled parking, subsidized transit passes for low-income residents, and subsidies for carshare memberships.
376
6 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
Figure 1 shows the GreenTRIP Connect tool estimates the proposed project would generate 26.07 miles per day per household and parking demand for 1.03 parking spaces per unit, without TDM measures. With the provision of unbundled parking, subsidized transit passes, subsidized carshare memberships, and on-site bicycle parking, the GreenTRIP Connect tool estimates the proposed project would generate 19.41 miles per day per household and parking demand for 0.89 parking spaces per unit. This equates to a 26 percent reduction in VMT and 20 percent reduction in parking demand.

Figure 1: GreenTRIP Connect Analysis Results
Scenario Parking
Demand1 VMT2
Project no TDM 1.03 26.07
Project with
TDM 0.89 19.41
Difference (%) -20% -26%
Source: GreenTRIP Connect Conditional Certification by TransForm Notes:

1. Parking Demand = demand generated per unit

2. VMT = vehicle miles traveled per day per household
To confirm the validity of the GreenTRIP VMT and parking reduction results, CHS conducted an independent calculation using the GreenTRIP Connect tool. CHS was able to replicate and verify the results as documented in the April 19, 2022, certification letter.

3.0 PROJECT PARKING DEMAND EVALUATION
This section provides an evaluation of the proposed project’s parking supply and demand. To estimate the proposed project’s parking demand, CHS used the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition and CAPCOA report, Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures.

3.1 INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS (ITE) PARKING GENERATION To estimate the proposed project’s residential parking demand, CHS used the Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) land use (ITE Code 221) in a General Urban / Suburban setting with no nearby rail transit.

This land use generates an average parking demand for 0.75 spaces per bedroom. Note that the ITE parking generate rate for the proposed project’s residential land use is inclusive of the private onsite amenities (e.g., coworking library, game room, fitness center, etc.) and guest parking demand. Figure 2 shows the proposed project’s residential use would generate peak parking demand for up to 554 spaces or approximately 1.01 spaces per unit (554 occupied spaces / 550 units). Therefore, the project’s 377
7 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
residential parking supply of 570 spaces would be expected to accommodate the peak residential parking demand for up to 560 spaces with a surplus of at least 10 spaces without TDM measures. 5 Figure 2: ITE Parking Generation Estimate - Residential Land Use Size Unit1 Rate2 Demand
Studio/1BR 364 du 0.75 273
2BR 184 du 1.5 276
3BR 1 du 2.25 2
4BR 1 du 3 3
Total 550 du 1.01 554
Source: ITE Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition; Multi-Family Mid-Rise Residential (ITE Code 221) in a General Urban/Suburban setting with no nearby rail transit (greater than 0.5 miles).

Notes: 1. du = dwelling unit, 2. Occupied parking spaces per dwelling unit CHS also estimated the parking demand for the proposed project’s non-residential land uses, including ground-level retail, public community space, and public park. For the proposed project’s 2,609 square feet of ground-level retail, CHS used the Shopping Center land use (ITE Code 820) in a General Urban / Suburban setting. This land use generates an average parking demand for 1.95 spaces per 1,000 square feet of occupied floor area on weekdays and 2.91 spaces per 1,000 square feet of occupied floor area on weekends. For the proposed project’s 2,557 square feet of public community space, CHS used the Recreational Community Center land use (ITE Code 495) in a General Urban / Suburban setting. This land use generates an average parking demand for 2.07 spaces per 1,000 square feet of occupied floor area on weekdays and 4.00 spaces per 1,000 square feet of occupied floor area on weekends. For the proposed project’s 9,355 square foot (0.215 acre) public park, CHS used the Public Park land use (ITE Code 411) in a General Urban / Suburban setting. This land use generates an average parking demand for 0.47 spaces per acre on weekdays and 1.21 spaces per acre on weekends. Note that CHS conservatively excluded potential internal trip capture reductions from project residents who are expected to use the non-residential land uses onsite and thus do not require additional parking.

Additionally, the land use designations chosen to represent the Project’s non-residential land uses are approximate and generally represent a conservatively high estimate. The project applicant expects many users will walk or bike to the non-residential land uses.

Figure 3 shows the proposed project’s non-residential uses would generate peak parking demand for up to 18 spaces on a typical weekend day, including nearly 8 spaces for retail, 10 spaces for the public community center, and less than one space for the public park. Therefore, the project’s non-residential 5 The adjusted parking ratio increased from 0.98 to 1.02 spaces per dwelling unit due to a change in unit mix, but the ratio remains under the level established for GreenTrip Certification and Project entitlement of 1.03 spaces per unit. 378
8 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
parking demand nearly 18 spaces would be accommodated by the 72 on-street parking spaces along the project frontages. Furthermore, the proposed project’s residential and non-residential land uses are complimentary in terms of parking, as the non-residential parking demand peaks during the midday period when residential parking demand is lowest.

Figure 3: ITE Parking Generation Estimate – Non-Residential Land Use Size Unit
Weekday Weekend
Rate1 Demand Rate1 Demand
Retail 2,609 square feet 1.95 5.1 2.91 7.6
Public Community Space 2,557 square feet 2.07 5.3 4.00 10.2 Public Park 0.215 acres 0.47 0.5 1.21 0.2
Total - 10.8 - 18.0
Source: ITE Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition; Shopping Center (ITE Code 820) in a General Urban/Suburban setting.

Notes: 1. Occupied parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of occupied floor area or per acre

3.2 TDM PARKING DEMAND REDUCTIONS
To evaluate the effectiveness of TDM measures to reduce parking demand, CHS used the CAPCOA report, Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures to estimate the potential parking demand reductions resulting from the proposed project’s TDM plan. The CAPCOA report establishes maximum reduction caps for development projects based on their place type, including urban (75 percent), compact infill (40 percent), suburban center (20 percent), and suburban (15 percent) place types. The proposed project’s location as defined by CAPCOA would be suburban center, as it is located approximately 20 miles or more from a regional central business district, has two-story typical building heights, a typical street grid pattern, somewhat constrained on-street parking, low parking pricing (if priced at all), and bus service with 30-minute headways. Therefore, the proposed project would have a maximum reduction cap of 20 percent due to its suburban center setting.

The CAPCOA methodology also groups TDM strategies into four categories that have their own individual maximum reduction cap, including Land Use / Location (10 percent), Neighborhood / Site Enhancement (5 percent), Parking Policy / Pricing (20 percent), and Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) strategies (15 percent). Despite each of the subcategory maximum reduction caps adding up to a 50 percent reduction, the 20 percent global reduction cap for suburban center applies. Therefore, the proposed project would not benefit from additional TDM measures after reaching the 20 percent global cap. Figure 4 shows the proposed project’s TDM plan is expected to reduce VMT and parking demand by up to 20 percent based on CAPCOA methodology. 379
9 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
Figure 4: CAPCOA TDM Reduction Estimate
TDM Measure / Strategy Reduction
Range
Project
Reduction Description
Land Use / Location
Density 0.8-30% 30% 175 units / acre (7.6 units / acre Suburban avg.)
Diversity 6.7-20% 1% 97% Residential, 1% Retail, & 2% Public Park
Transit Accessibility 0.5-25.5% 1% 2.2 miles to rail transit stop Land Use / Location Subtotal 0-10% 10%
Neighborhood / Site Enhancements
Pedestrian Network
Improvements 0-2% 2% Project provides pedestrian improvements onsite and connecting off-site Carshare Subsidy / Program 0-1% 1%
Carshare membership subsidy and 2
onsite carshare vehicles
Neighborhood / Site
Enhancement Subtotal 0-5% 3%
Parking Policy / Pricing
Unbundled Parking Costs 0-13% 6% $50 / month / space
Parking Policy / Pricing
Subtotal 0-20% 6%
Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Programs
Required CTR Program 4.2-21% 21%
TDM Coordinator, TMA, bicycle facilities,
commute assistance and ridematching,
onsite amenities
Transit Fare Subsidy 0-20% 2% $50 transit fare subsidy to low-income residents (26%)
CTR Marketing 0.8-4% 4%
TDM orientation, education or materials,
distribution of transit, wayfinding, and
other TDM information
Land Use / Location Subtotal 0-15% 15%
TDM Program Total 0-20% 20%
Source: California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) August 2010 report, Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures – A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures; CHS Consulting Group, 2022.

As shown in Figure 4, the proposed project’s Land Use / Location strategies are expected to reduce demand by a combined 10 percent, Neighborhood / Site Enhancement strategies are expected to reduce demand by a combined two percent, Parking Policy / Pricing strategies are expected to reduce 380
10 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
demand by up to six percent, and CTR strategies are expected to reduce demand by up to 15 percent.

However, due to the cross-category and global maximum caps, the proposed project is expected to reduce demand by 20 percent.

Figure 5 compares the results of the ITE and CAPCOA parking demand and reduction estimates to the GreenTRIP results from Figure 1. The GreenTRIP Connect tool estimates the parking demand for the proposed project without TDM would be 1.03 spaces per unit, which is 0.01 spaces per unit or one percent higher than ITE estimates. GreenTRIP estimates the project’s TDM measures would reduce parking demand by 20 percent to 0.89 spaces per unit. Whereas ITE estimates the parking demand for the proposed project without TDM would be 1.01 spaces per unit and with TDM measures would reduce parking demand by 20 percent to 0.81 spaces per unit. Therefore, the GreenTRIP estimate is well within range of the ITE and CAPCOA results with both estimating the proposed project’s TDM plan would reduce parking demand 20 percent.

Figure 5: Parking Demand Reduction Estimate Comparison
Scenario
Parking Demand per Unit
GreenTRIP ITE/CAPCOA
Project no TDM 1.03 1.01
1 Project with TDM 0.89 0.81
TDM Reduction (%) -20% -20%2
Notes:

1. Based on ITE Parking Generation Estimate from Figure 2

2. CAPCOA methodology sets maximum reduction cap at 20% for projects in suburban settings due to limited access to transit and other alternative modes (e.g., walking, biking, etc.) Figure 7 shows the estimated parking demand with TDM from both the GreenTRIP and ITE / CAPCOA methodologies, which shows the proposed project’s 570 residential parking spaces would accommodate peak demand with a surplus of between 81 and 141 spaces.

Figure 6: Project Residential Parking Demand with TDM Reductions Land Use Size Unit
GreenTRIP ITE / CAPCOA
Rate Demand Rate Demand
Residential 550 du 0.89 490 0.78 429
Proposed Residential Parking Supply 570
Surplus / (Deficit) 81 141
Source: CHS Consulting Group, 2022
381
11 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024

4.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of the peer review, CHS concurs that the anticipated parking demand of the proposed project is less than the parking supply proposed for the project. While the unit mix for the project has changed from the original submittal, the parking demand remains less than the proposed supply. Furthermore, the ITE, GreenTrip and CAPCOA methodologies are more accurate in the estimation of future parking demand than reliance on the City’s existing municipal code, which would result in a significant oversupply of parking spaces.

Specifically, the GreenTRIP parking demand estimate without TDM measures is within one percent of the ITE parking demand estimate. Additionally, the 20 percent reduction in parking demand estimated by GreenTRIP methodology from proposed TDM measures is identical to the estimate CHS calculated using CAPCOA methodology.

5.0 ABOUT CHS CONSULTING GROUP
CHS Consulting Group is a Northern California-based multimodal transportation planning and engineering firm that offers more than 20 years’ experience in parking studies, ranging from supply and demand analyses, shared parking, and demand management strategies to revenue and cost effectiveness analyses and concept design. We work with both public agencies and private developers to develop strategies for future development projects, as well as the community’s sustainability and access goals. Understanding the true demand for parking is key to creating more livable communities, achieving reductions in VMT, and ultimately addressing California’s ongoing housing crisis. Our Parking Principal and Proposed Project Manager, Terri O’Connor, offers a broad range of experience in working with local communities such as the Cities of Berkeley and Napa and the Town of Windsor to understand the impact of their current parking regulations and help them draft new ones. She also understands the complexities in planning for transit oriented developments, and her extensive experience in working on regional parking policy development for MTC gives her a well-rounded background in supporting smart growth and pricing mechanisms to support the success of downtown areas and encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation.

The CHS team has a broad range of experience with parking analysis, surveys, and operations, as well as extensive work on parking management and development projects in downtown areas. Key personnel include:

Terri O’Connor, Principal Planner, and Parking and TDM Sector Lead Terri has 20 years of experience as a transportation planner in California and the western United States.

Her consulting work emphasizes a community-based consensus-building process to develop guiding principles, which are used to steer the development of future parking and TDM plans. She has worked 382
12 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
in urban, suburban, small-town, and college town communities, for affordable housing and marketrate developers, as well as public agencies and private employers.

Parking Management Plans & Studies
Terri has worked with many jurisdictions in California on the comprehensive soup to nuts development of parking management plans as well as focused studies including the development of guiding principles, stakeholder engagement strategy, data collection and analysis, strategy development/ recommendations, and implementation plans, which have included demand models, demand management and parking requirement strategies, operational and parking technology, and financial assessments.
• Most recently Terri has provided curb management strategies for the Town of Windsor in advance of the SMART rail service to their downtown area and is putting the finishing touches on a plan focused on shared parking between Napa’s Downtown and Oxbow District which would also connect the district’s destinations and parking supplies with an eShuttle. • Prior to that, she led the grant-funded goBerkeley demand responsive parking study and Berkeley SmartSPACE Residential shared parking pilot (RSPP); both were data- and engagement-intensive studies.

Parking Reform Analysis and Curb Management
• Terri recently completed a project with the City of Berkeley to determine how existing offstreet parking regulations match actual demand. The study included outreach to and a survey of property managers for multifamily housing developments in the City, socioeconomic analysis, site selection, and parking data collection. The results supported the city’s desire to reduce/eliminate minimum parking requirements for multifamily housing • Terri is currently leading a CHS team advising Redwood City as they update their Downtown Precise Plan (DTPP), particularly in the area of parking reform and developing and researching state-of-the-practice for communities that retain/use in-lieu fees to foster favorable shared parking arrangements for the public. This work builds off of the Downtown Parking Management plan effort that Terri led for the City in 2013/4. • Terri is also the parking lead for the Ventura-Cahuenga Boulevard Specific Plan Transportation Project for the LA City Planning Department, where she developed curb management best practices, corridor parking management strategies, and a parking rate strategy based on occupied land use in mixed-use pedestrian-oriented districts.

Transit Oriented Development/Transit Oriented Communities • Terri recently completed a Parking and TDM plan for the Berryessa BART Urban Village for the City of San José. The goal of the plan was to accommodate an aggressively low non-SOV mode split of 35% in support of the Envision San José 2040 General Plan. The plan included a shared 383
13 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
parking district, unbundled parking, parking fees, elimination of parking requirements and several TDM measures (secure bike facilities, transit passes, mobility wallet, carpool matching, etc.) and a TMA business plan.
• Terri has also worked extensively with VTA directly in parking policy development for their TODs and on consultant teams for the upcoming Silicon Valley BART Stations (28th Street/LIttle Portugal, Santa Clara, and Downtown San José) in the right-sizing parking strategy and shared mobility district (SMD) concepts.

Gary Hsueh, Principal Planner and CHS Director of Mobility Gary has 19 years of experience as transportation planner. He leads CHS projects in Transportation Demand Management (TDM), transit, and emerging mobility for CHS. He is currently designing and implementing a mode-shift pilot program for SFMTA that was launched in January 2022. The program has gained substantial number of participants than originally planned and is currently gone through mid-term evaluation and program adjustment. He is also the CHS Project Manager for the Marin County TDM Program. This TDM Program involves both program update and annual monitoring and reporting. This TDM Program uses RideAmigo platform to outreach employees and residents in Marin County and also includes a special target for those who are travelling SR 37 to Marin County. Prior to joining CHS, he directed the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) sponsored Mobility On-Demand Sandbox Demonstration project that involved 4 local cities and created a software platform featuring real time multi-modal trip planning with commute benefits and integrating it with an existing commute management.

Ben Miller, Lead Transportation Planner Parking/TDM Analyst Ben is a transportation planner with 5 years’ experience in providing multi-modal transportation impact analyses, transit service planning, and parking and transportation demand management programs. He has used his expertise in geographic information systems (GIS) and spatial analysis to develop location-specific shared parking demand models for public agencies and ultimately reduce the need for new public parking facilities. He has also done numerous parking and TDM studies for proposed developments, analyzing nearby parking utilization to demonstrate true parking need and avoid negative impacts on adjacent local business owners and nearby residents.

Ben is currently creating a parking model for the John Muir Health team for the redevelopment and master planning of their Concord medical campus. As part of this effort Ben is reviewing the existing campus TDM program to assess the current effectiveness of TDM measures and provide 384
14 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
recommendations to improve effectiveness of each measure and increase overall employee participation.

Ben has also recently helped the City of Napa develop a parking management and mobility strategy based on policy and transportation context and anticipated parking demand in partnership with existing planned efforts in the City’s Downtown and Oxbow neighborhoods. Ben was responsible for developing shared parking models for each neighborhood to analyze the potential impacts of proposed parking management and mobility strategies under existing and future year conditions. 385
15 Woodland Park – Euclid Improvements
Parking and TDM Memorandum
April 2024
170 Maiden Lane, Fifth Floor
San Francisco, CA 94108
(415) 392-9688
1617 Clay Street
Oakland, CA 94612
(510) 272-9597
300 South 1st Street
San Jose, CA 95113
(408) 477-2181
801 South Grand Avenue, 11th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
(602) 885-7481
www.chsconsulting.net
386
June 2024
Woodland Park Euclid Improvements
Community Outreach Summary
The Euclid Improvements received unanimous City Council approval in November 2022. Prior to this approval, we held over 40 community meetings, information booths, and listening sessions, and participated in over 20 public hearings between the Planning Commission, Rent Stabilization Board, and the City Council.

Even after receiving approval, we continued outreach to our residents, neighbors, and community members in the following forms:
- Direct outreach: Meetings with residents, neighbors, and community members to discuss general project updates, the relocation process, and/or the design revisions - Indirect outreach: Communications with residents about project updates - Other community activities: Hosting or participating in local events in which our community engagement team can receive feedback for answer questions All meetings are hosted with bilingual staff and simultaneous English-Spanish translation.

As part of our design revisions, we have been asked to provide a summary of our outreach to residents, neighbors, and community members in the recent past:

Direct outreach
• Euclid Improvements Community Meeting – June 13, 2024 at KIPP Valiant Community Prep. - Meeting to discuss the project and the design revisions and answer questions - Outreach via mail notices to all property owners within 600 feet of development parcels (2x City requirement), posted notices in common areas of all Woodland Park buildings, posted notices in management offices and on signage outside the development area. - Attendance included Woodland Park residents, local property owners / neighbors, other interested community members
- The meeting ran roughly two hours and agenda included review of project history, update on project, and overview of significant changes. Then informal walkthrough of project information, site plans, and renderings with questions & answers afterwards. • Euclid Improvements Info Session (future) – June 26, 2024 at 2041 Euclid Ave. - Meeting to discuss the project, relocation, and potential design revisions. - Outreach via mail and hand-noticing to select Improvement Area households (Phase 3) • Euclid Improvements Info Session – April 16, 2024 at 2041 Euclid Ave. - Meeting to discuss the project, relocation, and potential design revisions. - Outreach via mail and hand-noticing to select Improvement Area households (Phase 2) 387
• Euclid Improvements Info Session – February 27, 2024 at 2041 Euclid Ave. - Meeting to discuss the project, relocation, and potential design revisions. - Outreach via mail and hand-noticing to select Improvement Area households (Phase 1) • Euclid Improvements Info Session – February 4, 2024 at 2041 Euclid Ave. - Meeting to discuss the project, relocation, and potential design revisions. - Outreach via mail and hand-noticing to all Euclid Improvement Area households • Euclid Improvements Community Meeting – Feb 1, 2024 at KIPP Valiant Community Prep. - Meeting to discuss the project, relocation, and potential design revisions. - Outreach via mail and hand-noticing to all Euclid Improvement Area households • Euclid Improvements Notice of Design Revisions Signage – Outside 2001 Manhattan Ave. - Large sign posted in development area with map of site, updated design rendering, summary of design changes, and applicant and City contact information. • Prior Direct Engagement – 2016-2023
- Dozens of meetings to discuss project plans, seek feedback and input, and answer questions from residents, neighbors, and community members.

Indirect outreach
• Winter Newsletter – November 29, 2023
- Posted on door of all Woodland Park units; highlighted Euclid Improvements updates. • Summer Newsletter – June 14, 2024
- Posted on door of all Woodland Park units; highlighted Euclid Improvements updates.

Other community activities
• Celebrating the Village – March 16, 2024 at East Palo Alto Senior Center - Community event with local organizations. Gathered feedback and answered questions. • Community Resource Fair – April 29, 2024 at KIPP Valiant Community Prep - Community event with local organizations. Gathered feedback and answered questions. • Cinco de Mayo Festival – May 5, 2024
- Community event with local organizations. Gathered feedback and answered questions. • Tenant Advisory Committee – meets every two months
- Group of tenants provides advice and feedback related to community engagement, neighborhood improvements, and future development
388
Appendices
Appendix A – Notice of June 13 Community Meeting
Appendix B – Pictures from June 13 Community Meeting
Appendix C – Notice of Design Revisions Signage
Appendix D – Pictures from Previous Community Meetings
Appendix E – Community Involvement Strategy Summary from 2019 389
Appendix A – Notice from June 13 Community Meeting
390
391
Appendix B – Pictures from June 13 Community Meeting
392
393
Appendix C – Notice of Design Revisions Signage
394
395
Appendix D – Pictures from Previous Community Meetings
396
397
398
68 6. Community Involvement Strategy
Date: September 18, 2019
To: Mike Kramer (Woodland Park Communities)
From: Liz Ogbu (Studio O) and Emily Weinstein (Emily Weinstein Consulting) Subject: Community Involvement Strategy Report
Introduction
Just over three years ago, Woodland Park Communities, an affiliate of Sand Hill Property Company, acquired the Woodland Park Apartments in East Palo Alto. As a local, family owned business with a longterm approach, they are committed to the East Palo Alto community and increasing the quality of life for their tenants. As part of this commitment, in 2017, Woodland Park Communities engaged two social impact firms, Studio O and Emily Weinstein Consulting to provide ongoing strategic guidance.

Woodland Park Communities has a deep understanding of the history of the Westside of East Palo Alto and the harmful legacy of the previous property owners. Working with Studio O and Emily Weinstein Consulting (refer to page 78 for more specific information about the team), they have committed to helping rebuild the trust of their tenants by listening and responding to tenants’ needs and launching new community building efforts. As Woodland Park Communities determined there was a need to improve housing and replace certain buildings, this commitment extended to engaging in a community informed planning process for both short- and long-term property improvements, including committing to a No Displacement approach.

This report details our approach to community engagement and the community involvement strategy from 2017 to now, including the strategy around the Euclid Improvements. Specific data around the type of engagement efforts and the number of participants in these efforts can be found on page 74. We and Woodland Park Communities expect to continue the robust community involvement strategy into the future.

Community Engagement Approach at Woodland Park
We know that community engagement tends to have limited effectiveness when it is done as short-term community outreach. Our work with Woodland Park Communities has been rooted in a commitment to relational – as opposed to transactional – outreach rooted in the creation of long-term partnerships with Woodland Park tenants and East Palo Alto residents and organizations. We believe that this is critical to ensuring meaningful improvements to the quality of life on the Westside. This commitment is not just for the sake of the Euclid Improvements application; it is something that Woodland Park Communities has prioritized since they acquired the property and that we have been working to support on an ongoing basis.
399
Euclid Improvements Application – September 2019
nodisplacement.com
Community Involvement Strategy
69 Led by Liz Ogbu and Emily Weinstein and a team of full time, bilingual community engagement staff located on the site, the Woodland Park community engagement approach takes into account the following fundamental principles:
• Listen
• Repair community relationships
• Foster trust
• Create opportunities for community building
• Engage around community informed plans
Listen
In the winter of 2017, Woodland Park Communities embarked on a series of tenant listening sessions.

These listening sessions, of approximately 10-15 tenants provided an opportunity for Woodland Park Communities to learn more about its tenants, their daily habits, their aspirations and their needs in a small group setting. In total, the community engagement staff met with nearly 150 tenants over a three-month period.

In response to the success of the listening sessions, Woodland Park Communities launched monthly “cafecitos,” small morning or afternoon get togethers located in key gathering areas on site. People gather to meet over light refreshments with the Community Engagement Manager to share their ideas and concerns for the property, and learn more about what is happening on site. These monthly gatherings help create an open dialogue between tenants, property management and Woodland Park Communities.

In an effort to continue to listen to tenants and better understand how to respond to their needs, Woodland Park Communities hosts regular community dinners, focused on specific themes such as safety, public spaces, youth and family programming, the future of the Westside, etc. At all the community dinners participants divide up into facilitated discussion groups to ensure collaboration and authentic conversations. It also enables the opportunity for a broader diversity of voices to be heard. We understand that people have different preferences in how to best express their thoughts, so feedback is captured through a variety of tools including comment cards, interactive activities, dot voting, post-its and facilitation guides.

Repair Community Relationships
Based on input from tenants it became clear that the relationship between property management and the tenants was strained in part by a lack of cultural competency and sensitivity around language and cultural needs. As a result, Woodland Park Communities hired new Spanish speaking management staff as well as a new security company with bilingual security guards. The change to bilingual staff has allowed property management to be more responsive to tenants needs and create a more welcoming environment for tenants. The change to a bilingual security company has provided a safer environment for tenants.

In addition to improved on-site relationships, Woodland Park Communities has prioritized forging strong relationships with East Palo Alto-based organizations to improve access to programs and services on the Westside and to improve relationships between property ownership and important community institutions. Our team has worked with Woodland Park Communities to provide on-site programs in 400
Euclid Improvements Application – September 2019
nodisplacement.com
Community Involvement Strategy
70 partnership with community organizations, including the East Palo Alto Family YMCA, EPACENTER Arts, Fresh Approach, the East Palo Alto branch of the San Mateo County Libraries, and the Peninsula Humane Society and SPCA. To further support this work, the Woodland Park Communities Foundation was created.

It is dedicated to funding local non-profit organizations. To date, the Foundation has given more than 30 grants to local organizations and events.

Foster Trust
Fostering a sense of trust between Woodland Park Communities and the tenants is crucial given the historical tension between the community and previous property owners, and tenants’ concerns about housing affordability and gentrification. From the beginning, Woodland Park Communities has been clear about their commitment to No Displacement and backed up this commitment by communicating regularly and consistently and putting everything in writing. We’ve supported Woodland Park Communities in creating a variety of communication materials in Spanish and English including a quarterly newsletter, Frequently Asked Questions, Relocation Commitments for the Euclid Improvements, and Project Handouts.

Additionally, Woodland Park Communities has created Core Principles based on feedback from the engagement process. These principles are intended to respond to the community’s fears around real estate development and ensure that the commitments are well understood by the community. The Core Principles have been emphasized in all written materials:

1. No Displacement

2. Preserve Housing Affordability + Stability*

3. Community Informed Plan

4. Better Parking and Mobility

5. Safer, Healthier Buildings
*This is a new core principle that we’ve added in Summer 2019 based on community feedback during the Pre-Application process.

Create Opportunities for Community Building
A key component of fostering a healthy community is community building. A connected community is a stronger community. And early conversations with tenants revealed a strong desire for more places in which people could come together. Woodland Park Communities has understood that it has an important role to play in providing opportunities for community to come together, and so an important part of the community involvement strategy has been to come up with and implement events and spaces in which that could occur.

From early in its tenure, Woodland Park Communities has hosted events regularly throughout the property. In particular, it has utilized a large site at Newell Street and West Bayshore Road to host quarterly free events for tenants, from Fall Harvest Festivals to an annual Back-to-School event. Additional events/activities including holiday celebrations, summer kick-offs, community resource fairs, and monthly bookmobile visits have been part of the amenities that Woodland Park Communities, led by the Community Engagement Team, has put in place.
401
Euclid Improvements Application – September 2019
nodisplacement.com
Community Involvement Strategy
71 In addition to particular activities, shaping temporary spaces that can support community building has also been an important part of the community involvement strategy. There is no park on the Westside of East Palo Alto. What’s more, other spaces that could help foster healthy living and safe play are located on the east side of the City. Early engagement activities like the Listening Sessions revealed that many tenants desired places to be healthy and active, gather with family and friends, and know that their children could play safely, all that were closer to their homes.

Together with Woodland Park Communities, we identified two underdeveloped spaces that could be converted into temporary popup community spaces. These two sites were co-designed with tenants through interactive activities across several community dinners and events. Since their opening, Boom Pop Park (corner of Donohoe Street and West Bayshore Boulevard; opened September 2018) and Bridge Pop Park (corner of Newell Street and West Bayshore Road; opened August 2019) have been wildly successful. They have also become staging grounds, along with the Cabana on Newell, for a similarly successful partnership with the YMCA, which provides classes at no cost to participants in yoga, Zumba, and boot camp at the sites 5 times a week. In short, there are now places close to tenants’ homes in which to play safely, exercise, and gather.

Engage around community informed plans
The Woodland Park buildings are between 50 and over 100 years old. Though Woodland Park Communities has been making incremental improvements, it has become clear that maintenance and small-scale improvements alone won’t be enough to keep up the buildings and the shared spaces at the high quality that the community deserves. In Summer 2018, Woodland Park Communities began a process of exploring the redevelopment of buildings known as the Euclid Improvements. Since then, our team has helped to establish a dialog between Woodland Park Communities and the Improvement Area tenants, the broader Woodland Park community, and other local stakeholders that focused in particular on a review and discussion of the Westside Area Plan, the development and fulfillment of Core Principles for the project, and key components for the Euclid Improvements. Throughout this process and moving forward, the hope is to make improvements in a way that improves the quality of life for the Improvement Area tenants, all Woodland Park tenants, and the wider East Palo Alto community.

Working from the Core Principles (noted above) we have worked with the tenants to create a preliminary plan for the Euclid Improvements. The plan has included a process for co-creating Relocation Commitments with tenants living in the Euclid Improvement area and community design meetings to influence the Euclid Improvement program and design. Below is a description of these meetings and the main takeaways.

Co-created Relocation Commitments
As noted earlier, fostering trust has been a critical aspect of the community involvement work. We all know that conversations about redevelopment often trigger fears of displacement. From the beginning, Woodland Park Communities has committed to No Displacement, but it also understands that building trust is an ongoing process. And although a formal relocation plan will be developed and submitted to the City when it comes time for project approval, it was important to start to develop a robust set of relocation commitments now. Therefore, through a series of 4 meetings with Improvement Area tenants, a series of relocation commitments were created, vetted, and refined. (A more detailed breakdown of those 402
Euclid Improvements Application – September 2019
nodisplacement.com
Community Involvement Strategy
72 commitments as well as how they were adapted in response to feedback can be found in Section 4 – Tenant Protection and Community Housing Preservation Plan on page 20.) What we heard: Because of previous owners, tenants may be wary to trust our promises about relocation and No Displacement. Additionally, there is a desire to preserve housing affordability and stability, especially for long-time residents.

What we’re proposing:
• Created Relocation Commitments with input from Improvement Area Tenants • Will issue all relocation commitments in writing, signed by the ownership • Have been and will continue to work with the East Palo Alto Rent Board, City staff, Community Legal Services of East Palo Alto, and other stakeholders • Relocation Commitment highlights include
o The right to a replacement apartment at Woodland Park during construction and a right of return to the new apartments
o Guarantees to pay the same rent that they otherwise would be paying and to receive an apartment with the same number of bedrooms
o Moves by a qualified, insured moving company fully paid for by Woodland Park o The complete set of relocation commitments can be viewed at www.nodisplacement.com/committments/
Community Design meetings
From the time that the Pre-Application process started in January 2019, and building off of the meetings that occurred in Summer 2018, there have been a series of 4 meetings to engage tenants and the broader East Palo Alto community in a discussion of key components of the design. Features of the project that people were most engaged in shaping included the new park, community space and neighborhood retail, better parking and mobility options, and increased safety. All of these elements have been incorporated into the plans being submitted as part of the application. The input provided by the community greatly improved the design elements being proposed. Below are the main takeaways from the community design meetings and the way in which Woodland Park has incorporated feedback:
• Parking & Getting Around
What we heard: Tenants and neighbors often find traffic and parking challenging, and alternate transit options tend to be limited and often not convenient.

How we’re responding:
• Planning to work with City to perform full traffic study as part of the Environmental Impact Report
• Will implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan with a variety of transportation options, including ride share
• Working with local agencies to improve transit options and include a new bus stop on site • Making it easier and safer to walk and bike through better street design and amenities • Seeking parking agreements with local property owners that have surplus parking 403
Euclid Improvements Application – September 2019
nodisplacement.com
Community Involvement Strategy
73 • Increasing off-street parking with a central garage, and planning to increase on-street parking in partnership with the City
• Neighborhood Parks and Community Spaces + Retail
What we heard: The neighborhood needs more public spaces, including a park that can host a wide variety of activities from kids’ play area and fitness space to a place for tenants to hold parties. There’s also a desire for more neighborhood-serving retail.

What we’re proposing:
• Including a neighborhood park as part of the Euclid Improvements • Providing additional multiple use public spaces to allow for spaces to be used for a greater variety of activities at different times
• Providing flexible and appropriately sized spaces for both community and retail activities • Designing the community space to open out onto the park to provide greater access to both the community space and the park
• Including neighborhood-serving retail space, with locally focused options like a convenience store, cafe, clinic, or pharmacy.

Conclusion and Moving Forward
The result of these efforts has been a deepening of trust between tenants, Woodland Park Communities and property management and a greater understanding of how to improve the quality of life at Woodland Park in way that is community-centered. Specifically, it has resulted in:
o Co-created Relocation Commitments for the Euclid Improvements o A Euclid Improvement planning application that reflects responses to community input o Increased family resources and programming on site
o Two temporary pop up parks for the communities’ enjoyment o Ongoing communications and community building opportunities As noted earlier, Woodland Park Communities views ongoing proactive and deep community engagement as fundamental part of existing in this community. Looking forward, Studio O, Emily Weinstein Consulting, and the community engagement team will continue to support that work by maintaining the system of community partnerships, engagement materials, events and spaces. Plans are underway to create a tenant advisory council to provide another mechanism for Woodland Park Communities and tenants to be in dialogue. Furthermore, as it relates to the Euclid Improvements, there will be additional community design meetings to inform and get additional input about the overall design, additional meetings with Improvement Area tenants to inform and get input about more specific elements of the design and development process, participation in relevant public hearings, and stakeholder meetings with key community, city, and regional stakeholders.
404
Euclid Improvements Application – September 2019
nodisplacement.com
Community Involvement Strategy
74 Previous and Ongoing Community Engagement
Since Woodland Park Communities purchased the property, they have prioritized community engagement and frequent tenant communications. Below is a partial list of these efforts:

Staffing
• Hired bilingual community engagement team, including full time on-site Community Engagement Manager, Teresa Morales, in 2017.
• Expanded community engagement team in 2018.
• Hired 5 community “promotoras” who are tenant leaders who assist with communications and outreach
Meetings/Engagement Sessions
• Town Hall Meetings. Four (4) meetings in February 2016 to introduce new ownership, hear tenants’ and neighbors’ concerns, and answer questions.
• Listening Sessions. Eighteen (18) focused sessions held between October 2017 and January 2018. We heard from 120 adults and 58 youth. The Listening Sessions offered an intimate setting to better understand tenants’ needs, discuss the issues most pressing to tenants, and create a vision for how Woodland Park can best evolve. • Cafecitos. Twenty (20) small morning gatherings for tenants and neighbors to meet over light refreshments with the Community Engagement Manager and review new materials. They are held monthly both on the north and south sides of University Avenue. To date, we have heard from over 140 adults and 65 youth. The series of cafecitos is ongoing. • Community Dinners. Fourteen (14) catered dinners serving over 900 meals between September 2017 and September 2019. These dinners provided an opportunity for tenants to interact with ownership and management, hear updates about the property, and provide input on programming and improvements, including the Euclid Improvements and the Relocation Commitments. Community dinners will continue be an ongoing feature of our community engagement activities. • Community Design Meetings. Six (6) structured meetings to discuss (a) the future of and vision for the Westside; (b) Westside Area Plan priorities; and (c) concerns and comments on the Euclid Improvements. Approximately 250 unique participants and 950 duplicated participants came to these meetings. The community design meetings will continue throughout the lifetime of the project. • Euclid improvement Area Tenant Meetings. Four (4) meetings were held with the tenants that live within the Euclid Improvement Area buildings. The meetings were focused on co-creating relocation commitments that reinforce Woodland Park Communities commitment to No Displacement and provides an overview of the benefits that tenants will receive through the process. Approximately 90 unique participants and 145 duplicated participants came to these meetings, • Information Booths: Prior to the Euclid Improvement Area Tenant Meetings, Woodland Park Communities held Information Booths throughout the Euclid Improvements area. These booths were 405
Euclid Improvements Application – September 2019
nodisplacement.com
Community Involvement Strategy
75 advertised in advance and allowed tenants to meet with Mike Kramer and Teresa Morales to ask questions, review materials and provide input. Approximately 45 participants came to the information booths.

Community Events
• Special Events and Festivities. Fifteen (15) celebrations commemorating seasonal activities. Our latest events have, on average, attracted between 400-500 participants. Examples of these regular events include the beginning of summer, Back to School, and holiday celebrations. These are times for tenants and neighbors to socialize and get to know each other better. At these events, we also invite community organizations to provide resources to tenants and assist in bringing community services to the Westside.

Partnerships and On-Site Programming
• Fresh Approach. We collaborate to install community gardens throughout the neighborhood and provide gardening and healthy food education.
• East Palo Alto Family YMCA. We partner on a discounted membership program for Woodland Park tenants, free swimming classes for youth, and free weekly exercise classes on-site, including Yoga, Boot Camp and Zumba. To date over 100 tenants have participated in the Woodland Park sponsored YMCA exercise classes on-site.
• Ravenswood School District. We work together to provide access to the Ravenswood schools’ online portal in Woodland Park’s two computer tech centers, which are available to tenants.

East Palo Alto branch of the San Mateo County Libraries. We coordinate to host the monthly bookmobile on-site and maintain small libraries throughout the neighborhood, host the library’s English Conversation Club, and host a Talk, Read, Sing program for young children and their caregivers. • Peninsula Humane Society and SPCA. We host a free summer Animal Camp for Woodland Park youth and provide animal care classes.

Space and Facilities
• Northside Management Office. We opened a new tenant services office on the north side of the neighborhood at Euclid Avenue and East O’Keefe Avenue, to provide our tenants north of University Avenue with convenient access to staff to make maintenance and customer service requests or pay rent conveniently.
• Community Engagement Office. We opened a new office, staffed by our full-time community engagement team, inviting tenants to discuss any ideas, suggestions, or concerns directly with the ownership team representatives.
• Free Technology Centers. We opened two technology centers on-site for use by Woodland Park tenants. The tech centers offer free and accessible computers and printers, and free wi-fi. We have partnered with the Ravenswood City School District to install school software on our computers, so students can work on their homework at the tech centers. 406
Euclid Improvements Application – September 2019
nodisplacement.com
Community Involvement Strategy
76 • Boom Pop Park. We created a temporary pop-up open space for community enjoyment at Donohoe Street and West Bayshore Road. There is space for gathering, play, and exercise. East Palo Alto YMCA instructors teach free weekly fitness classes every Saturday morning. • Bridge Pop Park. Based on the success of Boom Pop Park, we created a temporary pop-up open space for community engagement at Newell and West Bayshore Road. There is dedicated space for exercise, play, family gatherings and is designed to accommodate our large community events with stalls for community groups and resources. YMCA instructors teach free weekly fitness classes every Saturday morning.
• Bus Stop Improvements and Neighborhood Benches. At the location of existing school bus stops, and other selected locations around the neighborhood, we have added improvements to improve the neighborhood quality of life, including new benches and additional trashcans. • Little Free Libraries. To date, we have installed six “Little Free Library” boxes around the neighborhood, where tenants and neighbors can take or leave books in English and Spanish for their enjoyment. We have partnered with the East Palo Alto branch of the San Mateo County Libraries to stock the Little Free Libraries with books for all ages in both English and Spanish. • Community Gardening. We have partnered with Fresh Approach (formerly Collective Roots) to plant garden boxes around the neighborhood with flowers and vegetables for tenants to tend and enjoy. • Cabana. We have offered the use of our on-site “Cabana” off Newell Avenue for select city-related and community events, such as The Primary School’s orientation for Woodland Park parents, East Palo Alto Police Department beat meetings, and a meeting of the Rent Stabilization Board’s Outreach and Education Committee. YMCA instructors teach free weekly fitness classes every Saturday morning and Thursday evening.

Communications
• Newsletters. Quarterly newsletters are distributed to all tenants and a range of local and regional stakeholders. They are written in English and Spanish.
• Euclid Improvement Handouts. Woodland Park communities has created two Euclid Improvement Handouts with detailed information about the project description, guiding principles, timeline and images. The handouts are in English and Spanish.
• Frequently Asked Questions. Throughout the community design process, Woodland Park Communities has been soliciting questions through a variety of engagement strategies and providing written responses in the form of a Frequently Asked Questions document that is provided to all tenants in English and Spanish.
• Euclid Improvement Area tenant mailings. In an effort to engage the tenants that will be most impacted by the Euclid Improvements, Woodland Park Communities does regular mailings to the tenants in the area with up to date information, draft documents including the draft Relocation Commitments and announcements.
• Community dinner and meeting invitations. All community events, dinners and meetings are advertised through a variety of channels including door to door delivery of branded materials. 407
Euclid Improvements Application – September 2019
nodisplacement.com
Community Involvement Strategy
77 Woodland Park Communities Foundation
Woodland Park Communities supports East Palo Alto-based and East Palo Alto-serving organizations and events by providing funding through the Woodland Park Communities Foundation as well as providing financial support for programming on site. A list of the organizations includes (in alphabetical order):
• AbleWorks
• Aim High for High School – East Palo Alto
• Bring Me a Book Foundation / Reading Bonanza at the Park • Canopy
• Catholic Charities for Youth at St. Francis of Assissi • Computers for Everyone
• EPA Children’s Day Committee
• East Palo Alto and Belle Haven Chamber of Commerce
• East Palo Alto branch of the San Mateo County Libraries • East Palo Alto Blues Festival
• East Palo Alto Boxing Club
• East Palo Alto Junior Golf Program
• East Palo Alto Police Activities League
• East Palo Alto Senior Center
• East Palo Alto Tee-Ball and Pitching Machine League
• East Palo Alto YMCA
• East Palo Alto Youth Arts & Music Center
• Ecumenical Hunger Program
• El Concilio of San Mateo / Comite Latino
• EPACENTER Arts
• Free at Last Community Recovery and Rehabilitation Services • Girls to Women
• Hagar Services Coalition
• Housing Endowment and Regional Trust (HEART) of San Mateo County • JobTrain
• Live in Peace
• Mid-Peninsula Athletic Association / Mid-Peninsula Mastodons Football • Nuestra Casa de East Palo Alto
• One East Palo Alto
• Peninsula Humane Society & SPCA
• Project WeH.O.P.E.
• Ravenswood Family Health Center
• Renaissance Entrepreneurship Center Mid-Peninsula, East Palo Alto • StreetCode Academy
• Youth Community Service
408
Euclid Improvements Application – September 2019
nodisplacement.com
Community Involvement Strategy
78 About the Social Impact Consultants
Studio O is a design and strategy consultancy working at the intersection of racial and spatial injustice.

Founded in 2012 and based in Oakland, the practice builds on over 15 years’ experience in the design and social impact sector of its founder and principal, Liz Ogbu. It collaborates with multidisciplinary teams to work on projects with/in historically marginalized communities around the world. With a mission to create or improve systems, services, and places that can heal conditions of injustice, Studio O leverages a combination of community-centered research; dynamic forms of engagement and prototyping; spatially just architecture and planning; and tools to build participatory power and community-centered systems.

In addition to her projects, Ogbu is speaks nationally and internationally on issues of spatial justice, including a widely viewed TED Talk on gentrification and spatial justice.

Emily Weinstein Consulting is a strategic consultant and leader in housing, community development and public engagement. For the past 20 years Emily Weinstein has worked on large scale affordable housing and community development initiatives to transform some of the most economically distressed and underserved neighborhoods in California. Emily Weinstein Consulting works with developers, public agencies, community organizations and design teams to achieve greater economic, social and health impacts by applying a wide set of community-centered strategies throughout the real estate development process. Emily’s passion for marrying real estate and social impact stems from a belief that the built environment has the power to transform lives, and that developers have a responsibility to create equitable, healthy places where people can thrive and children can meet their full potential. Emily Weinstein also served two terms as a Planning Commissioner for the City of Oakland from 2013-2018 and is the pioneer of the Trauma Informed Community Building model. 409
RESOLUTION NO. PC 2024-07

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION

OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO

RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT AMENDMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR A MIXED-USE PROJECT AT 2001 EUCLID AVENUE AND FIND THAT NO SUBSEQUENT EIR IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162 OF THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) GUIDELINES, BASED ON THE SUBSTANTIAL

EVIDENCE INCLUDED IN THE ADDENDUM
(WOODLAND PARK EUCLID IMPROVEMENTS).

WHEREAS, the application for a Design Review Permit Amendment (DR24-001) and Tree Removal Permit (TRP24-008), submitted by Woodland Park Communities/Sand Hill Property Company (“Sand Hill”) pertains to an approximately 3.92-acre project site generally located at 2001 Manhattan Avenue, East Palo Alto, CA; and
WHEREAS, on November 15, 2022, City Council approved a General Plan Amendment (GP19-001) and Development Code and Zoning Map amendments (ZC19-002), Design Review Permit (DR 19-028), Conditional Use Permit (CUP22-003), Tentative Parcel Map (TTM19-001), and Development Agreement to construct a mixed-use residential project containing approximately 605 residential units within three buildings ranging in height from 5 to 13 stories with approximately 625 parking spaces in a structured garage and approximately 2,500 square feet of community function space and 2,215 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail space; and WHEREAS, Design Review Permit Amendment (DR24-001) proposes to construct a mixeduse residential project containing approximately 550 units within two buildings 8 stories in height, 570 parking spaces in two garages, approximately 2,500 square feet of community function space, and 2,619 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail space; and WHEREAS, Tree Removal Permit (TRP24-008) proposes removal of 22 additional protected trees to the 21 approved with the 2022 entitlements; and WHEREAS, the City Council certified that the Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2020040270) on file with the City Clerk was done in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) on October 4, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Plan pursuant to Public Resources Code 21000 and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000) on October 4, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations on October 4, 2022; and
WHEREAS, an Addendum was prepared and determined that the proposed revisions to the project do not require a subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration under CEQA Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164; and WHEREAS, the project is consistent with the development standards and permitted uses in the City’s Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, on June 24, 2024 the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the Design Review Permit Amendment and Tree Removal Permit. 410

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE EAST PALOALTO PLANNING COMMISSION hereby recommends that the East Palo Alto City Council:

1. Approve the proposed design review permit amendment (DR24-001) and tree removal permit (TRP24-008) based on the findings, requirements and conditions of approval attached thereto and incorporated by reference; and

2. Find that no subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report is required pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.

PASSED and ADOPTED on this 24th day of June 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: Allen Fisk, Monette, Sherrard, Brown-Austin, Hernandez, Smith NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT: Mashack, Mendez
SIGNED:

Robert Sherrard, Vice Chair
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Mathew Ball, Planning Secretary John D. Lê, City Attorney 411
TO: City of East Palo Alto Community and Interested Parties DATE: July 5, 2024
SUBJECT: Public Hearing
LEAD AGENCY: City of East Palo Alto
PROJECT TITLE: Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project PROJECT AREA: 2001 Manhattan Avenue and 375 Donohoe Street, East Palo Alto Notice is hereby given that on Tuesday, July 16, 2024, at the hour of 6:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City of East Palo Alto City Council will conduct a hearing on the following item:
• Public Hearing: Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Design Review Permit Amendment • Location/APN: Amendment to a design review permit (DR 19-028) approved by the City Council November 15, 2022, based on the findings, requirements and conditions of approval attached thereto. The 2022 entitlement permitted the demolition of 161 existing units and the construction of 605 new units within three new buildings ranging from five to thirteen stories tall. The proposed amendment (DR24-001) includes the same demolition plan but would construct 550 new units within two new buildings, both of which are eight stories in height. Similar to the 2022 entitlement, the revised project would construct a 1.5-million-gallon steel water storage tank located at 375 Donohoe Street to improve fire flow and pressure to the project and the extended City system. Due to the design changes, the project would also remove an additional 22 protected trees with enhanced replacement of 72 new trees. The Planning Commission reviewed the applications at a public hearing on June 24, 2024, and unanimously voted (6 ayes, 0 noes) to adopt a resolution recommending City Council approve the design review permit amendment and tree removal permit.
• Recommendation: Adopt a resolution approving the proposed design review permit amendment (DR24-001) and tree removal permit (TRP24-008) based on the findings, requirements and conditions of approval which are attachments thereto and incorporated by reference and finding that no subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report is required pursuance to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. • Project Planner: Kelly Beggs, [email protected], (628) 222-5985 • Project Website: https://www.ci.east-palo-alto.ca.us/planning/project/woodland-park-euclid-improvements-designreview-amendment A challenge to the above item(s) in court may raise only those issues which were raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence to the City of East Palo Alto at, or prior to, the public hearing. For further information regarding this item, contact the City of East Palo Alto Planning Division, (650) 853-3189. Requests for disability related modifications or accommodations, aids or services may be made by a person with a disability to the City Clerk's office at (650) 853-3127 no less than 24 hours prior to the meeting as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof.

The City Council will hold this hearing in person. However, members of the public may attend the meeting in person or choose to participate via teleconference/video conference. Members of the public who choose to attend virtually can find information and may provide comments by signing up on the City’s meeting page at https://www.cityofepa.org/citycouncil/page/agenda-and-minutes or by attending the meeting live via Zoom and using the “RAISE HAND” feature when staff calls for public comment. Project questions and comments can also be sent to the project planner per the contact information listed above.

Kelly Beggs, Contract Planner
voltear la página para español
412
PARA: Comunidad de la Ciudad de East Palo Alto y Personas Interesadas FECHA: 5 de Julio del 2024
SUJETO: Audiencia Pública
AGENCIA PRINCIPAL: Ciudad de East Palo Alto
NOMBRE DEL PROYECTO: Proyecto de Mejoramientos de Woodland Park Euclid PROJECT AREA: 2001 Manhattan Avenue y 375 Donohoe Street, East Palo Alto Por la presente se notifica que el martes 16 de julio de 2024, a la hora de las 6:30 p. m., o tan pronto como se pueda escuchar el asunto, el Concejo Municipal de la Ciudad de East Palo Alto llevará a cabo una audiencia sobre el siguiente tema:
• Audiencia Pública: Enmienda al Permiso de Revisión de Diseño de Proyecto de mejoras Euclid de Woodland Park • Ubicación/APN: Sitio de desarrollo de uso mixto: 2001 Manhattan Avenue/063-281-020, -030, -040, -100, -110; 063-282-010, -020, -030, -040, -050, -060, -070, -080 and -090; Sitio del tanque de agua: 375 Donohoe Street/ 063- 148-110, -120, -130
• Propuesta: Enmienda a Permiso de Revisión de Diseño de Proyecto (DR 19-028) aprobado por el Concejo Municipal el 15 de noviembre de 2022, con base en los hallazgos, requisitos y condiciones de aprobación adjuntos al mismo. La autorización de 2022 permitió la demolición de 161 unidades existentes y la construcción de 605 nuevas unidades dentro de tres nuevos edificios de entre cinco y trece pisos de altura. La enmienda propuesta (DR24-001) incluye el mismo plan de demolición, pero construiría 550 nuevas unidades dentro de dos edificios nuevos, ambos de ocho pisos de altura. De manera similar ala autorización de 2022, el proyecto modificado construiría un tanque de almacenamiento de agua de acero con una capacidad de de 1.5 millones de galones, ubicado en 375 Donohoe Street, para mejorar el flujo y la presión contra incendios del proyecto y al sistema extendido de la ciudad. Debido a los cambios de diseño, el proyecto también eliminaría 22 árboles protegidos adicionales y los reemplazaría con 72 árboles nuevos. La Comisión de Planificación revisó las solicitudes en una audiencia pública el 24 de junio de 2024 y votó unánimemente (6 sí, 0 no) para adoptar una resolución recomendando al Ayuntamiento aprobar la enmienda al permiso de revisión de diseño y el permiso de remoción de árboles.
• Recomendación: Adoptar una resolución aprobando la propuesta de enmienda al Permiso de Revisión de Diseño (DR24-001) y al Permiso de Remoción de Árboles (TRP24-008) con base en los hallazgos, requisitos y condiciones de aprobación que se adjuntan al mismo e incorporados por referencia y ladeterminación que no se requiere un Informe de Impacto Ambiental subsecuente o suplementario en conformidad con la Sección 15162 de las Directrices de la Ley de Calidad Ambiental de California. • Planificador de proyectos: Kelly Beggs, [email protected], (628) 222-5985 • Sitio web del proyecto: https://www.ci.east-palo-alto.ca.us/planning/project/woodland-park-euclidimprovements-design-review-amendment Una impugnación del asunto anterior en un tribunal puede plantear solo aquellas cuestiones que se plantearon en la audiencia pública descrita en este aviso o en correspondencia escrita a la ciudad de East Palo Alto en la audiencia pública o antes de ella. Para obtener más información sobre este tema, comuníquese con la División de Planificación de la Ciudad de East Palo Alto, (650) 853-3189. La Ley de Estadounidenses con Discapacidades (ADA, por sus siglas en inglés) requiere modificaciones, adaptaciones razonables y acceso para las personas con discapacidades. Quienes soliciten dicha adaptación deben comunicarse con el Secretario de la Comisión de Planificación al (650) 853-3127 no menos de 24 horas antes de la audiencia, según lo exige la Sección 202 de los Estadounidenses con Discapacidades (ADA) de 1990 y las normas y reglamentos federales adoptados en aplicación de la misma.

El Ayuntamiento llevará a caboesta audiencia de forma presencial. Sin embargo, los miembros del público pueden asistir a la reunión en persona o optar por participar mediante teleconferencia/videoconferencia. Los miembros del público que opten por asistir virtualmente pueden encontrar información y proporcionar comentarios registrándose en la página de la reunión de la Ciudad en https://www.cityofepa.org/citycouncil/page/agenda-and- Minutes o asistiendo a la reunión en vivo a través de Zoom y usando la función “LEVANTAR LA MANO” cuando el personal solicita comentarios del público. Las preguntas y comentarios sobre el proyecto también se pueden enviar al planificador del proyecto según la información de contacto indicada anteriormente.

Kelly Beggs, Planificador
413
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2

EAST PALO ALTO

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 16, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Melvin E. Gaines, City Manager
BY: Yajaira Morales, Housing Project Manager
Karen Camacho, Housing & Economic Development Manager
SUBJECT: FY 24-25 Inclusionary In-Lieu Fee Update
Recommendation
Adopt a resolution updating the Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fees for Fiscal Year 2024- 25, to amounts of $273,400 for Ownership/For-Sale and $299,200 for Rental, or some other alternative approved by City Council.

Alignment with City Council Strategic Plan
This recommendation is primarily aligned with:

Promote Housing, Economic and Workforce Development
Background
414
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
On November 19, 2019, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 425 – Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO), adding Chapter 18.37 to the City of East Palo Alto Development Code. The IHO applies to all new residential development and requires developments of five (5) or more units to provide 20% of the total units at specified levels of affordability.1 The IHO also created an In-Lieu Fee requirement, which applies in the following scenarios:
 Residential developments of fewer than five units;
 Residential developments where the inclusionary requirement results in a fraction of a unit (e.g., in a 7-unit development, the inclusionary requirement would result in 1.4 units, with the fractional unit of .4 requiring an In-Lieu Fee payment); and  Residential developments where an In-Lieu Fee payment is provided as the Alternative Compliance Option, as approved by City Council (Alternative Compliance Options have a 25% inclusionary requirement).

Section 18.37.050 provides for In-Lieu Fees for both rental and for-sale units, which are adopted by the City Council by resolution each year to take effect on or after July 1 of that year (Section 18.37.090.C). The purpose of the In-Lieu Fee is to fulfill the developer’s obligation to produce affordable units; rather than build affordable units, the developer would pay the City with funds for 1.) future development of affordable rental housing or

2.) future subsidy to moderate-income homebuyers.2
An analysis by David Rosen & Associates (DRA) is included in the Inclusionary Housing Guidelines (“Guidelines”) as Chapter 2C, as adopted by the City Council on October 20, 2020, by Resolution No. 141-220 (see Attachment 3).
3 This analysis set the initial
methodology for calculating Inclusionary In-Lieu Fees.4 The first Inclusionary In-Lieu Fees were adopted by the City Council on October 20, 2020, by that same resolution. 1 The inclusionary requirement for for-sale residential developments is to provide: 50% of inclusionary units priced affordable to households at or below median income (80% Area Median Income or AMI) and 50% of inclusionary units priced affordable to households at or below moderate income (120% AMI). The inclusionary requirement for rental developments is to provide: 25% of units at an affordable rent to households at 35% AMI; 50% of units at an affordable rent to households at 50% AMI, and 25% of units at an affordable rent to households at 60% AMI.
2 A developer of a project with 5 or more units must request approval from the City Council to pursue the In-Lieu Fee payment as an Alternative Compliance Option. Development projects for which an Alternative Compliance Option is requested must therefore be approved by the City Council. 3 You can also find Chapter 2C of the IHO Guidelines on the City’s inclusionary housing webpage under “Supporting Documents” at: https://www.cityofepa.org/housing/page/inclusionary-housing. 4 The updated Chapters 2A and 2B for the For-Sale In-Lieu Fee and the Rental In-Lieu Fee methodologies were posted on the City’s inclusionary housing webpage at:
https://www.cityofepa.org/housing/page/inclusionary-housing. 415
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
On July 18, 2023, the City Council adopted a new methodology for calculating Inclusionary In-Lieu Fees and subsequent increases.
5 The data used to calculate the Inclusionary In-Lieu Fees is not released in time to be included in the City’s Master Fee Schedule update which typically occurs in April. For this reason, Inclusionary In-Lieu Fees are considered through a separate resolution each year.

The purpose of this staff report is to update the Inclusionary In-Lieu Fees for both Ownership/For-Sale and Rental and to recommend City Council adoption of the fees for Fiscal Year 2024-25 in light of the analysis by DRA.

Analysis
Inclusionary Housing Guidelines and In-Lieu Fees
The IHO provides direction on the methodology by which In-Lieu fees will be calculated.

The actual In-Lieu Fee calculations are provided in detail in the Guidelines, the companion document to the IHO that clarifies and elaborates upon the IHO requirements.

The Guidelines are intended to assist potential developers and stakeholders by outlining instructions and further clarifying key components of the IHO.

The City Council reviewed and adopted the first edition of the Guidelines on October 20, 2020. Thereafter, pursuant to East Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.37.090(D), the City Manager is authorized to update the Guidelines, including reviewing and approving any changes or updates. If there are any inconsistencies between the Guidelines and the IHO, the IHO takes precedent. The full set of the Guidelines is provided on the City’s website on the Inclusionary Housing page.6
The initial methodology, including the calculation of the first In-Lieu Fees, was outlined in detail in a staff report that was presented at the October 20, 2020 City Council meeting.7 The updated methodology was presented at the July 18, 2023 City Council meeting. 8 Each year thereafter, the City Council adopts the updated Inclusionary In-Lieu Fees at a public hearing, and they subsequently are published on the City’s website. 5 See July 18, 2023 City Council meeting at:
https://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/SplitView.aspx?Mode=Video&MeetingID=1992&Format=Minutes 6 Please see full set of Guidelines under Supporting Documents at:
https://www.cityofepa.org/housing/page/inclusionary-housing. 7 October 20, 2020 staff report available at:
http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/SplitView.aspx?Mode=Video&MeetingID=1285&MinutesID=1192&F ileFormat=pdf&Format=Minutes&MediaFileFormat=mpeg4. 8 July 18, 2023 City Council meeting available at:
https://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/SplitView.aspx?Mode=Video&MeetingID=1992&Format=Minutes 416
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
Since adoption of the IHO, the Inclusionary In-Lieu Fees have been as follows:

Table 1: Inclusionary In-Lieu Fees
Since Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Adoption
FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 Recommended
FY 24-25
Ownership/For-Sale
In-Lieu Fee
$197,880 $190,000 $259,600 $273,400
Rental In-Lieu Fee $255,000 $259,000 $273,400 $299,200
In summary, the FY 24-25 update, the Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee rose from $259,600 to $273,400. This increase was primarily driven by a rise in interest rates from

4.2% to 5.44%. The Rental In-Lieu Fee increased from $273,400 to $299,200 due to a

9.94% rise in the construction cost index (CCI) from 2022 to 2023.

Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee
The Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee represents the gap between the market sales price of a “prototypical” unit in East Palo Alto and the sales price affordable to a household at or below 80% or 120% Area Median Income (AMI). The affordable housing cost is defined as 30% of the maximum household income at the specified income level (adjusted by household size).

An illustrative calculation of the Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee is provided in Chapter 2A of the Guidelines.9 Please note that in Chapter 2A the figures are displayed without decimals and only show the nearest whole number. The In-Lieu Fee is not rounded until the very end of the calculation. The April 27, 2020 DRA memo provided in the Guidelines as Chapter 2C (see Attachment 3) further discusses the For-Sale In-Lieu Fee methodology in detail. However, the updated chapters 2A and 2B (see Attachment 2), provide updated guidelines10 and reflect the most current methodologies and calculations for determining the For-Sale In-Lieu Fee accurately. It's essential to consult these updated guidelines to ensure compliance with the latest standards and practices in calculating the In-Lieu Fees.

The Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee calculation includes the following baseline assumptions: 1.) a household size of 2.5, which reflects an average condominium size using the occupancy standard of number of bedrooms plus one; and 2.) a maximum household income of 100% AMI, which is the average of the two affordability levels required by the IHO. For the calculations in Table 2, below, the 100% AMI amounts used 9 Inclusionary Housing webpage: https://www.cityofepa.org/housing/page/inclusionary-housing. 10 The most recent update to the In-Lieu Fee calculation methodology was adopted on July 18, 2023. 417
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
were $149,300 for a 2-person household and $167,950 for a 3-person household, taken from the 2024 HCD State Income Limits.11
The affordable sales price is a multi-step calculation requiring updated inputs on an annual basis. The initial calculation of the affordable housing cost for a maximum household income at 100% AMI is made separately for household sizes of 2 and 3 persons. To arrive at a single affordable sales price for a 2.5-person household at 100% AMI, a weighted average based on the distribution of prototypical condominium types (1- and 2-bedroom units) is calculated from the 2- and 3-person household AMI.

From this initial income calculation, deductions are made to estimate total monthly housing costs: utilities, HOA fees, insurance, and property taxes. This adjusted affordable housing cost is used to calculate the maximum supportable monthly mortgage amount, assuming a down payment of 5% and a fixed-rate, 30-year amortizing mortgage, with the interest rate taken from the Freddie Mac Mortgage Market Survey, using a three-year average of the first week of January of the previous three calendar years. The three-year average of the 30-year loan term interest rates was adopted in the FY 23-24 guidelines to help reduce volatility.

The market sales price is calculated as a weighted average of condominium sales in East Palo Alto over the previous 3-year period. The difference between the affordable sales price and the market sales price is the In-Lieu Fee.

The updated FY 24-25 Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee is summarized below:

Table 2: Fiscal Year 2024-2025
Ownership/For-Sale Housing In-Lieu Fee Calculation
Affordable Price for 100% AMI Household $505,700*
Market Sales Price $773,700
Gap for In-Lieu Fee (100% AMI) $268,000 per unit
2% Increase Due to Delay $5,400 per unit
Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee $273,400 per unit
Note: Figures are rounded to the nearest hundredth in this table. Note that numbers are not rounded in actual calculation until the end.
*Calculated based on three-year average of 30-year loan term interest rates.

Rental In-Lieu Fee
11 See 2024 HCD State Income Limits, updated May 9, 2024, at: https://www.hcd.ca.gov/grants-andfunding/income-limits/state-and-federal-income-rent-and-loan-value-limits. 418
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
As discussed in the DRA memo, provided in the Guidelines as Chapter 2C, the In-Lieu Fee estimates for rental housing represent the financing gap required to develop housing affordable to households at 35% AMI, 50% AMI, and 60% AMI, in the percentages required by the IHO.

The development and operating cost assumptions were used to calculate the gap for a “prototypical” multifamily housing development in East Palo Alto are based on a review of historical project costs and an analysis of 2017-19 applications for the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program. These can be found in detail in Table A-3 of the DRA memo in Chapter 2C of the Guidelines.

The annual gross rent calculation was based on 30% of the maximum household income at specified AMI levels and household size, less utilities. The final gap calculation, shown in Table A-10 of the DRA memo, also assumes tax credit equity from 4% tax-exempt bonds.

The Rental In-Lieu Fee was previously adjusted annually based on the percentage change in new home prices in San Mateo County, as published in the Northern California Real Estate Construction Report by the Real Estate Research Council of Southern California at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona (RERCSC). For FY 23-24, City Council adopted updating the annual increase adjustment using the Construction Cost Index (CCI), to help reduce volatility by using construction costs, rather than new home prices, as an index. The calculation of the updated FY 24-25 In-Lieu Fee is shown below. For FY 24-25, the fee is 9.42% higher than the FY 23-24 fee, at $299,200.

The Rental In-Lieu Fee and methodology used last year (in FY 23-24) is illustrated below:

Table 4: Rental Housing In-Lieu Fee Calculation in FY 23-24 FY 2022-23 Rental In-Lieu Fee $259,000
December 2021 CCI 12,481
December 2022 CCI 13,175
Percentage Change +5.6%
FY 23-24 Rental In-Lieu Fee $273,400 per unit
Note: Figures are rounded in this chart, but not in the calculation. Rental In-Lieu Fee rounded to nearest hundredth. 419
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
Given that the CCI was adopted last year, the increase for FY 24-25 is set based on the increase in CCI between 2022 and 2023.

Table 5: Rental Housing In-Lieu Fee Calculation in FY 24-25 FY 2023-2024 Rental In-Lieu Fee $273,400
December 2022 CCI 8,823
December 2023 CCI 9,654
Percentage Change +9.42%
FY 24-25 Rental In-Lieu Fee $299,200 per unit
Note: Figures are rounded in this chart, but not in the calculation. Rental In-Lieu Fee rounded to nearest hundredth.

In-Lieu Fee Payments
All In-Lieu Fee payments will be calculated by Housing Division staff based on the fee the Council adopts this evening and must be paid by the developer prior to issuance of a Building Permit for any unit in the development. If there is a requirement to pay an In-Lieu Fee in addition to building units or any other combination of compliance options, then the requirement will be noted in the Inclusionary Housing Agreement, a document that lays out all inclusionary obligations and is recorded against all units in the development.

To date, no developer has paid the In-Lieu Fee under the current Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Most entitled projects have chosen to comply with the IHO by building on-site units or another Alternative Compliance Option.

According to the IHO, In-Lieu Fees collected by the City will be placed into a fund that will be spent in accordance with applicable law.

Next Steps
If City Council adopts the proposed resolution approving the recommended In-Lieu Fees, effective through FY 24-25, staff will publish them on the City’s website. If approved, in summary, the In-Lieu Fees will change to the following:

Table 6: FY 24-25 In-Lieu Fees
For-Sale $273,400
Rental $299,200
The effective date for the In-Lieu Fees is July 16, 2024.

Fiscal Impact
There is no immediate fiscal impact associated with the actions in this staff report. Future residential developments that are subject to the IHO will require the payment of In-Lieu 420
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
Fees if they fit one of the descriptions provided above. In-Lieu Fee payments will not impact the General Fund but will be set aside as affordable housing funds.

Given the current housing pipeline, it is anticipated that significant In-Lieu Fee revenue will be generated in FY 24-25. Additionally, there are several large projects that have been entitled since the In-Lieu Fees came into effect. As these projects proceed to the Building permit stage, the City is expected to receive fee payments. If needed, staff will provide an update on projected revenue for FY 24-25.

Public Notice
The public was provided notice by making the agenda and report available on the City’s website and on a bulletin board located at City Hall: 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto. Public notice was also provided in the June 28, 2024 Daily Newspaper. Additionally, updated Chapters 2A and 2B of the Inclusionary Housing Guidelines detailing the fee calculations were posted as drafts on the City’s website on June 25, 2024.

Environmental
The action being considered by the City Council is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a “project” pursuant to 15378(b)(4) because it is a fiscal activity which does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant impact on the environment.

Attachments

1. Resolution

2. Draft Chapters 2A and 2B

3. Chapter 2C - DRA Report
421
1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. ____ -2024

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
ADOPTING INCLUSIONARY HOUSING IN-LIEU FEES THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 WHEREAS, on November 19, 2019, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 425, lnclusionary Housing Ordinance ("Ordinance"), adding Chapter 18.37 to the East Palo Alto Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Ordinance requires that 20% of all units in new market-rate residential developments be affordable to 35% AMI income households, very low-income, low-income, median- income and moderate-income households; and
WHEREAS, the Ordinance requires, under specified conditions, the payment of a fee to the City in-lieu of constructing rental or for-sale inclusionary units within a residential development ("In-Lieu Fees"); and
WHEREAS, the Ordinance provides that these In-Lieu Fees shall be established and amended from time-to-time by resolution of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Ordinance further provides that In-Lieu Fee payments shall be placed into an affordable housing fund and shall be expended exclusively to provide rental housing affordable to low income households (or below), ownership housing affordable to moderateincome households (or below), and any special needs populations in the City, consistent with the goals and policies contained in the City's Housing Element, and for administration and compliance monitoring of the lnclusionary Housing program, as approved by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on October 20, 2020, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing to adopt the In-Lieu Fee methodology as provided in a report commissioned by the City from David Rosen & Associates and set the In-Lieu Fees through Fiscal Year 2021-22; and WHEREAS, these In-Lieu Fees must be updated on an annual basis and adopted by City Council resolution, to the methodology outlined in the Report and in the Guidelines, which may be updated from time to time by the City Manager; and.

WHEREAS, on July 18, 2023, the City Council determined that the Construction Cost Index (CCI) is a reasonable alternative index for calculating the Rental In-Lieu Fee, which when applied results in a Rental In-Lieu Fee of $299,200 for Fiscal Year 2024-2025; and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2023, the City Council also determined that the three-year average of the 30-year loan term interest rates taken from Freddie Mac Mortgage Market Survey is a reasonable alternative variable for calculating the Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee, which when applied results in an Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee of $273,400 for Fiscal Year 2024-2025.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO THAT IT HEREBY:

1. Finds the foregoing recitals are true and correct, and are incorporated by this reference into 422
2 of 3
this action;

2. Adopts the lnclusionary In-Lieu Fees for Ownership/For-Sale and Rental Units commencing July 16, 2024 through the 2024-25 Fiscal Year, as shown in Exhibit A, attached and incorporated by reference; and

3. Finds that the action being considered by the City Council is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a “project” pursuant to 15378(b)(4) because it is a fiscal activity which does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant impact on the environment.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16
th day of July 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

SIGNED: ________________________
Antonio Lopez, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

James Colin, City Clerk John D. Lê, City Attorney
423
3 of 3
Exhibit A
lnclusionary In-Lieu Fees
Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee $273,400 per Unit
Rental In-Lieu Fee $299,200 per Unit
The lnclusionary In-Lieu Fees shall be updated by resolution by the City Council on an annual basis and published on the City of East Palo Alto website.
424
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING GUIDELINES - FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 Date of Publication: 7.16.2024 1
Chapter 2A Calculation of Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fees - Section 18.37.050 (B) This attachment to the Guidelines describes the method utilized in calculating the ForSale In-Lieu Fee. The figures below reflect the In-Lieu Fee through Fiscal Year 2024- 2025, effective July 16, 2024.

City of East Palo Alto
Ownership/For-Sale Housing In-Lieu Fee Calculation*
Affordable Price for 100% AMI Household $505,700**
Market Sales Price (3-Yr SMC Association
of Realtors Average)
$773,700
Gap for In-Lieu Fee (100% AMI) $268,100 per unit
2% Increase Due to Delay $5,400 per unit
Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee $273,400 per unit
*Figures are rounded in this chart, but not in the actual calculation. Ownership/For-Sale In-Lieu Fee rounded to nearest hundredth. **Note change in methodology to average three-year interest rate for loan term.

Illustrative Calculation for the For-Sale In-Lieu Fee for FY 2024-25 2-Person Household 100% AMI 3-Person Household 100% AMI $149,300 $167,950
The final calculation in Section II below will reflect a household size of 2.5. This will be a weighted average, where the 1-bedroom sales price is weighted as 23% of the total and the 2-bedroom sales price is weighted as 77% of the total based on the assumed distribution of dwelling units by bedroom count in the prototype (See Table A-2 in Attachment 2, Condominium column).

I. Annual 100% San Mateo County Income Limit for a 2 and 3-Person Household DRAFT
425
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING GUIDELINES – FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 Date of Publication: 7.16.2024 2
II. Calculation of the Annual and Monthly 100% Affordable Payment 2-Person Household
100%AMI
3-Person Household
100%AMI
Explanation
$149,300 $167,950 100% of AMI for 2.5-person
household
X .30 X .30 Affordable housing cost not to
exceed 30% of annual income
= $44,790 = $50,385 Maximum affordable payment
Divided by 12 Divided by 12
= $3,733 = $4,199 Maximum monthly affordable
payment
III. Assumptions to Calculate the Affordable Housing Cost for the For-Sale In-Lieu Fee
After the initial adoption of In-Lieu Fees, which were effective through Fiscal Year 2021- 22, the following elements of the affordable housing cost calculation will be assumed each year, based upon relevant data pertaining to each. These elements will be determined by referencing industry standard sources. For Fiscal Year 2024-25, the Housing Division has determined the following values:

ITEM VALUE RARATIONALE/DATA SOURCE SOU O DATE SET
Interest Rate 5.44%
Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage
Market Survey (PMMS)
http://www.freddiemac.com/pmms/
pmms_archives.html
3-Year Average,
first week of
January
Down Payment 5%
Industry standard/David Rosen &
Associates NA
Property
Tax/Special
Assessments

1.2% David Rosen & Associates
NA
DRAFT
426
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING GUIDELINES - FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 Date of Publication: 7.16.2023 3
Homeowner
Associations
Dues (HOA)
$200 Average of monthly HOA dues for
prototypical developments in East Palo
Alto/David Rosen & Associates
Annually, first week
of January
Utilities
$270-
338
Weighted average of monthly estimated
utility costs for County of San Mateo
Housing Authority (by bedroom count)
Annually, first week
of January
Property
Insurance
$100 Includes homeowners insurance (fire,
hazard, etc.)/David Rosen & Associates
NA
IV. Determination of Purchase Related Costs & Affordable Monthly Mortgage Payment (The figures used in this section are based upon the above chart) 2-Person Household
100% AMI
3-Person Household
100% AMI
Explanation
Maximum monthly affordable
payment of $3,733 less:

Maximum monthly affordable
payment of $4,199 less:

See Part II above
[-] $760 [-] $760 Property taxes and
assessments (per month) 1.2%
[-] $200 [-] $200 Homeowner’s association dues
(per month) $200
[-] 270 [-] $338 Utility allowance (per month)
[-] $100 [-] $100 Property insurance (per month)
[-] $1,330 [-]$1,398 Subtract the sum of all housing
related expenses
= $2,403 =$2,801 Remaining amount for
maximum monthly mortgage
payment
DRAFT
427
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING GUIDELINES - FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 Date of Publication: 7.16.2024 4
V. Determination of Affordable Housing Cost (aka Maximum Sales Price) The maximum sales price is calculated by adding the maximum monthly mortgage payment amount to the assumed down payment that will be contributed by the borrower.

The maximum mortgage amount will be based on a fixed rate, 5% down, fully amortizing, widely available owner-occupied loan, and the above calculated maximum monthly mortgage payment allowable. The calculation functions as follows:
2-Person Household
100% AMI
3-Person Household
100% AMI
Explanation

5.44% 5.44% 3 yr avg interest rate, 30 yr loan term
$2,403 $2,801.25
allowed
$426,040.98 $496,648.90
$22,423
$448,464
$26,139
$522,788
prototype
The market-rate sales price is based on a weighted 3-year average of median home prices in San Mateo County provided by the San Mateo County Association of Realtors.

This calculation is shown below.

Maximum monthly mortgage payment
$507,101 affordable sales price for 2.5-person
household (rounded to nearest thousandth)
Weighted average based on condominium
Maximum mortgage amount
Assumed downpayment (5%)
Maximum affordable sales price
This amount is known as the “Affordable Housing Cost” for the purpose of determining the for-sale in-lieu fee amount for FY 2024-25.

VI. Calculation of the Annual Median Sales Price
1) First, utilize information provided by the San Mateo County Association of Realtors to determine the annual median sales price of an attached market rate unit (condominiums) for the most recent completed year and for the two prior years.
2) Utilizing the median sale price for each 12-month period, the Housing Department will calculate the median sale price over the past 36-month period. 3) Below is the current estimate based on sales from calendar years 2021-2023.

DRAFT
428
to
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING GUIDELINES - FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 Date of Publication: 7.16.2024 5
Median Home Prices
City of East Palo Alto 2021-2023
Year Median Price # Sales
Single Family
2021
2022
2023
Weighted Average
$1,021,000
$1,062,500
$960,000
$1,017,000 (rounded to
nearest thousandth)
122
90 80
Condominium
2021
2022
2023
Weighted Average
$767,500
$788,000
$759,500
$774,000 (rounded to
nearest thousandth)
16 17
10 This amount is known as the “Median Sales Price Calculation” for the purpose of determining the for-sale in-lieu fee amount for FY 2024-25.

VII. In Lieu Fee Additional Charges
The Ordinance also allows the Housing Department to collect an administrative fee account for the estimated costs of administration. This administrative fee may be levied as part of the In-Lieu Fee or as a separate charge. In addition, the In-Lieu Fee can account for the estimated cost of increases in the price of housing and construction between payment and the acquisition of land and construction of affordable units.

At this time, the In-Lieu Fee described in this document does not include an administrative fee in the calculation. However, the In-Lieu Fee amount shown at the beginning of this Chapter will include a 2% increase to account for the delay between payment and construction of affordable dwelling units, as illustrated in Section VIII.

DRAFT
429
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING GUIDELINES - FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 6 Calculate the For-Sale In-Lieu Fee by subtracting the Maximum Affordable Price (Step V) from Median Sales Price Calculation (Step VI). The In-Lieu Fee shall be collected on twenty percent (20%) of the total dwelling units in the Residential Development.

Median Sales Price Calculation (Section VI): $773,700
-
Affordable Housing Cost (Section V): $505,700
=
Difference: $ 268,000
+
In-Lieu Fee Additional Charges: $ 0
[Administrative Fee] +
[2% Increase Due to Delay] $5,400
=
In-Lieu fee Per Inclusionary Unit 273,400
Please see the calculation below using an example Residential Development project containing 100 dwelling units:

Total Number of Dwelling Units: 100
X
Multiplied by 25%: .25
=
Units required to pay In-Lieu Fee: 25
X
In-Lieu Fee per Inclusionary Unit: $
=
VIII. Calculation of the For-Sale In-Lieu Fee
Date of Publication: 7.16.2024
DRAFT
$273,400
430
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING GUIDELINES - FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 7 In-Lieu Fee for a Residential Development of
100 Dwelling Units:
$ 6,835,000
Date of Publication: 7.16.2024
DRAFT
431
The Rental In-Lieu Fee is calculated from the financing gap required to build affordable rental dwelling units using 4% Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC or tax credits) assuming a blended affordability of 25% of the Inclusionary Units affordable to households at or below 35% AMI (35% AMI), 50% of the Inclusionary Units affordable to households at or below 50% of AMI (very low-income), and the remaining 25% of Inclusionary Units affordable to households at or below 60% AMI (low-income). This reflects the requirement in Section 18.37.050(2).

II. Calculation of the Rental In-Lieu Fee
The City retained David Rosen & Associates to conduct the analysis for the initial calculation of the Rental In-Lieu Fee, beginning in 2020. The multifamily rental prototype used in this calculation is based on historical data from affordable rental multifamily housing prototypes in East Palo Alto and an analysis of 2017-2019 Low Income Housing Tax Credit applications. Further detailed analysis and methodology can be found in Attachment 2C.

During the FY 2021-2022 and FY 2022-2023 updates, the fees were updated using the percentage change in new home prices in the fourth quarter of the previous two years.

Given that the data source for new home prices was discontinued, for FY 2024-2025, the City opted to update the fees using the Construction Cost Index (CCI). A summary of the current FY 2024-2025 Rental Housing In-Lieu Fees, updated from the FY 2022-23 Rental Housing In-Lieu Fee Calculation, is provided below:
1 Chapter 2B Calculation of In-Lieu Fees – Rental - Section 18.37.080 (B) I. Introduction
Apartments, Structured Parking
Tax Credit Equity per Dwelling Unit $233,000
Permanent Mortgage Financing per
Dwelling Unit
$182,400
Total Sources per Dwelling Unit $415,400
Development Cost per Dwelling Unit $665,000
Gap for In-Lieu Fee (Blended AMI) $250,000 per unit
2% Increase Due to Delay $5,000 per unit
Baseline In-Lieu Fee for Rental (2020) $255,000 per unit FY 2024-25 Rental Housing In-Lieu Fee Calculation*
December 2022 CCI
December 2023 CCI
Percentage Change
2023 Rental In-Lieu Fee
8,823
9,654
+9.42%
$273,400
FY 2024-2025 Rental InLieu Fee (9.42% increase)
$299,200 per unit
City of East Palo Alto
Baseline Rental Housing In-Lieu Fee Calculation (2020)* CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING GUIDELINES - FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 *Figures are rounded in this chart, but not in the actual calculation. Rental In-Lieu Fee rounded to nearest hundredth.

Date of Publication: 7.16.2024
DRAFT
432
•
•
•
35% AMI [25% of dwelling units]
50% AMI [50% of dwelling units]
60% AMI [25% of dwelling units]
Utility cost varies by bedroom count and is based on the utilities allowances from the Housing Authority of San Mateo County. The occupancy standard is 1.5 persons per bedroom.

3. Net Operating Income and Supportable Mortgage amount are calculated based 2 The full calculation of the baseline Rental In-Lieu Fee and subsequent annual increases are described below.

1. The Total Development Cost is calculated based on the following cost assumptions:

Assumption Amount
Land price $16,335,000
Building Hard Construction Cost
(including prevailing wage and structured
parking)
$73,095,000
Soft Costs (including development impact
fees)
$22,033,500 (30%)
Total Development Cost $111,358,500 ($636,334 per unit)

2. The Affordable Rent calculation is based on the maximum household income at the income levels specified below, adjusted by household size, less utilities:
on Affordable Gross Rents less the following:

Assumption
Operating Costs $2,365,078
Replacement Reserves $43,750
Vacancy $182,044 (5%)

4. Tax credit equity from 4% tax-exempt bonds is assumed and added to the Permanent Mortgage Amount to calculate the total sources for the project.

Source Amount
Permanent Mortgage $31,925,408
Tax Credit Equity (4%) $40,803,684
Total Sources $72,729,092

5. The gap between the Total Sources and the Total Development Cost is the InLieu Fee.

Total Sources $72,729,092
Total Development Cost (incl.

Developer Fee and Capitalized
Operating Reserves assumption)
$116,490,147
Gap (In-Lieu Amount) $43,761,056 ($250,000 per unit)
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING GUIDELINES - FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 Date of Publication: 7.16.2024
DRAFT
433
*
III.

Figure rounded to nearest hundredth.

In-Lieu Fee Additional Charges
3 This In-Lieu Fee is effective through FY 2024-25, starting July 16, 2024.

Annual adjustments of the Rental In-Lieu Fee were formerly based on the Northern California Real Estate Construction Report published by the Real Estate Research Council of Southern California at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. The Rental In-Lieu Fee was adjusted based upon the percentage difference in the current completed year new home prices in San Mateo County from the immediately preceding year as published in the Northern California Real Estate Construction Report. Given that the report and data for new home prices is no longer available, the Construction Cost Index (CCI) is used to calculate the Rental In-Lieu Fee adjustment instead.

The updated calculation for annual adjustment is made as follows:
8,823
9,654
831
December 2022 Construction Cost Index
December 2023 Construction Cost Index
Difference:

Divide the difference by the 2022 figure to
determine the % difference of the current year
and the preceding year:

Then multiply the current In-Lieu Fee by 100%
plus this percentage:

9.42%
109.42% x $273,400
In-Lieu Fee per Unit: $299,200*
The Housing Division may collect an administrative fee to account for the estimated costs of administration. This administrative fee may be levied as part of the In-Lieu Fee or as a separate charge. In addition, the In-Lieu Fee can account for the estimated cost of increases in the price of housing and construction between payment and the acquisition of land and construction of affordable dwelling units.

The In-Lieu Fee described in this document does not currently include an administrative fee in the calculation. However, the In-Lieu Fee amount shown at the beginning of this Chapter includes a 2% increase to account for the delay between payment and construction of affordable dwelling units.

Please see the calculation below using an example Residential Development project of 100 dwelling units:

Rental In-Lieu Fee (FY 2024-25)
Total Number of Dwelling Units:

Multiplied by 25%:

Units Required to Pay In-Lieu Fee:

In-Lieu Fee Per Inclusionary Unit
$299,200
100
X
.25
25 X
$299,200
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING GUIDELINES - FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 Date of Publication: 7.16.2024
DRAFT
434
4 In-Lieu Fee for a Residential Development of
100 Dwelling Units:
$7,480,000
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING GUIDELINES - FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 Date of Publication: 7.16.2024
DRAFT
435
April 27, 2020
To: Rachel Horst, Patrick Heisinger, Victor Ramirez
From: Nora Lake-Brown
Subject: Inclusionary Housing In Lieu Fee Update
DRA was retained by the City of East Palo to prepare an analysis estimating the in lieu fee associated with potential new requirements under the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to help inform the City Council’s consideration of the proposed changes. DRA estimates in lieu fees for both rental and owner housing using an analysis of prototypical housing developments appropriate for East Palo Alto, as summarized in the City of East Palo Alto Inclusionary Housing In Lieu Fee Analysis report dated September 19, 2019. This memorandum summarizes DRA’s update of the in lieu fee estimates based on data available through the date of this memo.

The gap calculations are based on the City’s intended use of any in-lieu fees raised.

For the for-sale units, the in-lieu fee is calculated as the difference between affordable prices by income level and the median sales price of single-family detached or condominium units over the past 36 months1. This approximates the gap needed to assist a homebuyer at a target income level to purchase a market-rate home at an affordable housing costs, which is how the City is most likely to use in lieu fees for owner housing. For the rental units, the in lieu fee is calculated from the financing gap required to build affordable rental units using 4% Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC or tax credits) assuming a blended affordability of 25% of the affordable units at 35% AMI, 50% of affordable units at 50% of AMI, and the remaining 25% of affordable units at 60% AMI. The City anticipates using in lieu fees to assist housing developers in developing affordable rental units as part of a new 4% tax credit-financed projects.

The calculated 2020 In Lieu Fees are summarized on the next page. The tables in Attachment A to this memo detail the updated calculations. 1 Calculated as the weighted average median price for 2017 to 2019 from the San Mateo County Association of Realtors.
436
Rachel Horst, et al.

April 27, 2020

Ownership Housing In Lieu Fee Calculation
City of East Palo Alto
April, 2020
Condominium Type
Affordable Purchase Price for 100% AMI Household $477,000 Market Sales Price
(SMC Association of Realtors 3-Yr Average)
$671,000
Gap for In-Lieu Fee (100% AMI) $194,000 per Unit
$227 per Gross SF
Sources: San Mateo County Association of Realtors, David Rosen & Associates Renter Housing In-Lieu Fees per Affordable Unit and per Square Foot City of East Palo Alto
April, 2020
Apartments,
Structured Parking
Tax Credit Equity Per Unit
Permanent Mortgage Financing Per Unit
Total Sources Per Unit
$233,000
$182,400
$250,000
Development Cost Per Unit $665,000
Gap for In-Lieu Fee (Blended AMI) 2 $250,000
$263 per Gross SF
Source: David Rosen & Associates
2 Fee represents a blended affordability assuming 25% of the affordable units at 35% AMI, 50% of affordable units at 50% of AMI, and the remaining 25% of affordable units at 60% AMI. 437
East Palo Alto
Affordability Gap and In Lieu Fee Tables
4/27/20
Attachment A
438
List of Tables
Table
Number Table Title Table Subheading
Page
No.

Table A-1 Summary of Indicated In Lieu Fees Per Affordable Unit and per Affordable Gross Square Foot by Housing Prototype
A-1
Table A-2 Development Prototypes A-2
Table A-3 Development Cost Assumptions and Budgets A-3
Table A-4 Affordable Sales Price Calculations by Income Level Owner Housing A-4 Table A-5 Median Home Prices 2017 to 2019 A-5
Table A-6 Owner Gap and In Lieu Fee Calculation Condominium A-6 Table A-7 Utility Allowances Rental Housing A-7
Table A-8 Affordable Rent Calculations by Income Level Rental Housing A-8 Table A-9 Rental Net Operating Income and Supportable Mortgage Apartments with Structured Parking
A-9
Table A-10 Rental Gap and In Lieu Fee With 4% Tax Credits Apartments with Structured Parking
A-10
439
Table A-1
Summary of Indicated In Lieu Fees Per Affordable Unit and per Affordable Gross Square Foot by Housing P East Palo Alto Affordability Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis Condominiums
Apts. w/ Struct.

Pkg
Tenure Owner Rental
Total Residential Units 175 175
Affordable Residential Units 35 35
Site Area (SF) 108,900 108,900
Residential Net SF 149,500 132,900
Total Net SF 149,500 132,900
Building Efficiency Ratio 80% 80%
Residential Gross SF 186,875 166,125
Approximate Building Stories 4 Stories 4 Stories
100% AMI
Per Affordable Housing Unit $193,964 N/A
Per Affordable Housing Gross Square Foot (GSF) $227.12 N/A Blended Affordability (1) $
Per Affordable Housing Unit N/A $250,063
Per Affordable Housing Gross Square Foot (GSF) N/A $263.42 (1) Assumes the following percentage distribution of affordable rental units by % of AMI:
25% of affordable units at 35% AMI; 50% of affordable units at 50% AMI and 25% of affordable units at 60% AMI. Hard costs in renter gap calculation assume payment of prevailing wages. Assumes leverage from 4% Low Income Housing Tax Credits.

Source: DRA.

Owner Rental
Affordability Gap and In Lieu Fee, Owner Housing
Affordability Gap and In Lieu Fee, Renter Housing
East Palo Alto Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis
April 27, 2020
1 440
Table A-2
Development Prototypes
East Palo Alto Affordability Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis

Condominiums Apts. w/ Struct. Pkg
Total Housing Unit Count 175 Units 175 Units
Tenure Owner Rental
Existing Zoning
Permitted FAR
Total Site Area (Acre) 2.50 Acres 2.50 Acres
Total Site Area (SF) 108,900 108,900
Density (Units Per Acre) 70 70
Construction Type Podium Podium
Parking Type Structured/UG Structured/UG
Approximate Building Stories 4 Stories 4 Stories
Total Gross Building SF (Excl. Pkg.) 186,875 166,125
FAR Based on Gross SF 1.7 1.5
Net Residential Square Feet 149,500 SF 132,900 SF
Net SF Retail/Community Facility 0 SF 0 SF
Net SF Common Space 0 SF 0 SF
Total Net Building SF 149,500 SF 132,900 SF
Building Efficiency Ratio (%) 80% 80%
Unit Bedroom Count Distribution
Studio/Loft 0% 0%
One Bedroom 23% 40%
Two Bedroom 77% 50%
Three Bedroom 0% 10%
Four Bedroom 0% 0%
Total 100% 100%
Units by BR Count
Studio/Loft 0 0
One Bedroom 40 70
Two Bedroom 135 88
Three Bedroom 0 17
Four Bedroom 0 0
Total Residential Units 175 175
Unit Size (Net SF)
Studio/Loft
One Bedroom 700 SF 650 SF
Two Bedroom 900 SF 800 SF
Three Bedroom 1,100 SF 1,000 SF
Four Bedroom
Average Unit Size 854 SF 759 SF
Parking Ratio (Spaces/Unit)
Studio/Loft 1.00 0.00
One Bedroom 1.00 1.00
Two Bedroom 1.50 1.50
Three Bedroom 2.00 2.00
Four Bedroom 2.00 2.00
Average Spaces/Unit 1.39 1.35
Structured/Underground Parking Spaces 243 Spaces 236 Spaces Tuck-Under Parking Spaces 0 Spaces 0 Spaces
Surface Parking Spaces 0 Spaces 0 Spaces
Total Parking Spaces Provided 243 Spaces 236 Spaces
Gross SF/Parking Space (Incl. Circulation) 300 SF 300 SF Total Gross Parking SF 72,900 SF 70,800 SF
Parking SF Underground/Structured 72,900 SF 70,800 SF
Parking SF Tuck Under 0 SF 0 SF
Parking SF Surface 0 SF 0 SF
Source: DRA.

East Palo Alto Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis
April 27, 2020
2 441
Table A-3
Development Cost Assumptions and Budgets
East Palo Alto Affordability Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis 2019
Condominiums Apts. w/ Struct. Pkg
Tenure Owner Rental
Construction Type Podium Podium
Total Residential Units 175 175
Average Unit Size (Net SF) 854 759
Residential Net SF 149,500 132,900
Total Net Building SF 149,500 132,900
Total Gross SF Building Area (Excluding Parking) 186,875 166,125 Total Gross SF Building Area (Including Subt. Parking) 259,775 236,925 Structured/Underground Parking Spaces 243 236
Underground Parking Area (SF) 72,900 70,800
Total Parking Spaces 243 236
Total Parking SF 72,900 70,800
Site Area (SF) 108,900 108,900
Approximate Building Stories 4 4
FAR (Based on Gross SF) 1.37 1.22
Buildable Square Feet 149,500 132,900

ASSUMPTIONS
Development Cost Assumptions
Land Price Per Hsg. Unit $43,560 $93,343
Per Site SF $70 $150
Bldg. Hard Construction Cost Per Net SF (1)
Bldg. Hard Construction Cost (1) Per Net SF $350 $550
Pkg. Costs Incl. In Hard Costs 1=No, 0=Yes 0 0
Underground Parking Construction Per SF Parking Area $0 $0 Hard Cost Contingency % of Hard Costs 0.0% 0.0%
Soft Costs (Incl. Dev. Impact Fees) % of Hard Costs + Cont. 30% 30% Owner Housing Sales Costs % of Gross Sales 5% 5%
Loan to Cost Ratio % of TDC 65% 65%
Equity as a % of TDC 35% 35%
Loan to Value Ratio % of Capitaliz. Value 75% 75%
Debt Coverage Ratio 1.25 1.25
Interest Rate 5.5% 5.5%
Amortization Term Years 30.0 30.0
Capitalization Rate (2)
Return on Cost % of TDC, Incl. Land 12.0% 12.0%
Construction and Sales/Stabilization Period (Months) 36 Months 24 Months

DEVELOPMENT BUDGET
Low Scenario
Land Acquisition $7,623,000 $16,335,000
Construction Hard Costs $52,325,000 $73,095,000
Soft Costs $15,697,500 $21,928,500
___________ ___________
Total Development Costs, Including Land $75,645,500 $111,358,500 TDC Per Gross SF $405 $670
TDC Per Housing Unit $432,260 $636,334
TDC per Net SF Residential Area $506 $838
Total Development Costs, Excluding Land $68,022,500 $95,023,500 TDC per Gross SF $364 $572
TDC Per Housing Unit $388,700 $542,991
TDC per Net SF Residential Area $455 $715
(1) Hard construction costs include parking construction. For renter prototypes, estimated hard costs assume payment of prevailing wages. (2) Based on CBRE "U.S. Cap Rate Survey, Advance Review, H1 2019", July 2019. For San Jose, multifamily infill cap rates are 4.00% to 4.25% for the first half of 2019.

Source: DRA
East Palo Alto Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis
April 27, 2020
3 442
Table A-4
Affordable Sales Price Calculations by Income Level
Owner Housing
East Palo Alto Affordability Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis

Assumptions
2019 Median Income, San Mateo County $143,100
Affordable Mortgage Principal and Interest as a % of Income 30% No. of Bedrooms 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom
Household Size 2.0 Persons 3.0 Persons 4 Persons
Household Size Income Adjust. Factor 80% 90% 100%
Owner Utility Allowance (1) $151 $189 $234
Monthly HOA Fee: Market-Rate Units $200
Monthly Property Insurance $100
Property Tax Rate (2) 1.20%
Mortgage Interest Rate (3) 3.50%
Term (Years) 30
Downpayment (% of Sales Price) 5.00%
Per Unit Affordable Sales Price by Unit Bedroom Count
1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom
100% AMI
Annual Gross Income $114,480 $128,790 $143,100
Affordable Monthly Housing Expense $2,862 $3,220 $3,578 Less: Monthly Utility Allowance ($151) ($189) ($234)
Less: HOA/Maintenance Expense ($200) ($200) ($200)
Less: Property Insurance ($100) ($100) ($100)
________ ________ ________
Available for Principal, Interest, Taxes $2,411 $2,731 $3,044 Less: Property Taxes (4) 1.20% $565 $640 $714
Supportable Mortgage $536,918 $608,180 $677,884
Assumed Assessed Value at Sale 95.00% $565,176 $640,189 $713,562 Available for Mortg. Principal and Interest $1,846 $2,091 $2,330 Supportable Mortgage $411,056 $465,613 $518,977
Plus: Downpayment @ 5.00% $21,635 $24,505 $27,315
Affordable Sales Price (Rounded) $432,700 $490,100 $546,300 (1) Assumes electric heating, cooking, water heating, other electric, water and trash collection. (2) Estimated to include property taxes and assessments. (3) Source: Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey (PMMS) average weekly rate for March 26, 2020 for a 30-year, fixed (4) Property taxes estimated by multiplying the affordable sales price by the property tax rates.

Source: DRA
East Palo Alto Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis
April 27, 2020
4 443
Table A-5
Median Home Prices
City of East Palo Alto
2017 to 2019
Year Median Price # of Sales
Single-Family
2017 $839,000 123
2018 $980,000 112
2019 $965,000 91
Weighted Average
Total
$922,613
326
Condominium
2017 $672,000 15
2018 $750,000 4
2019 $637,500 10
Weighted Average/
Total
$670,862
29 Source: San Mateo County Association of Realtors; DRA.

East Palo Alto Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis
April 27, 2020
5 444
Table A-6
Owner Gap and In Lieu Fee Calculation
Condominium
City of East Palo Alto Affordability Gap Analysis
Income Level No. of BR Unit SF
Maximum
Monthly
Housing
Cost (1)
Affordable
Sales Price
Per Unit (1)
3-Year Trailing
Ave. SingleFamily Median
Home Price (2)
Gap Per
Affordable
Unit
Gap Per
Affordable
Unit SF
% of Total
Units by Unit
Bedroom
Count (3)
70% of AMI 1 700 $2,436 $356,200 $670,862 $314,662 $449.52 23% 80% of AMI 1 700 $2,784 $418,700 $670,862 $252,162 $360.23 23% 90% of AMI 1 700 $3,132 $481,100 $670,862 $189,762 $271.09 23% 100% of AMI 1 700 $2,862 $432,700 $670,862 $238,162 $340.23 23% 120% of AMI 1 700 $3,434 $535,300 $670,862 $135,562 $193.66 23% 70% of AMI 2 900 $2,741 $404,200 $670,862 $266,662 $296.29 77% 80% of AMI 2 900 $3,132 $474,300 $670,862 $196,562 $218.40 77% 90% of AMI 2 900 $3,524 $544,700 $670,862 $126,162 $140.18 77% 100% of AMI 2 900 $3,220 $490,100 $670,862 $180,762 $200.85 77% 120% of AMI 2 900 $3,864 $605,700 $670,862 $65,162 $72.40 77% 70% of AMI
Weighted
Average (1) 854 $2,671 $393,160 $670,862 $277,702 $325.18 100% 80% of AMI
Weighted
Average (1) 854 $3,052 $461,512 $670,862 $209,350 $245.14 100% 90% of AMI
Weighted
Average (1) 854 $3,434 $530,072 $670,862 $140,790 $164.86 100% 100% of AMI
Weighted
Average (1) 854 $3,138 $476,898 $670,862 $193,964 $227.12 100% 120% of AMI
Weighted
Average (1) 854 $3,765 $589,508 $670,862 $81,354 $95.26 100% (1) From Table A-5
(2) Weighted average median condominium sales price for East Palo Alto for 2016, 2017 and 2018. (3) Percent of units by bedroom count for the owner Prototype #1.

Source: DRA.

East Palo Alto Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis
April 27, 2020
6 445
Table A-7
Utility Allowances
East Palo Alto Affordability Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis

No. of Bedrooms Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom Heating
Natural Gas
Electric $14 $17 $21 $26 $31
Cooking
Natural Gas
Electric $6 $7 $10 $13 $16
Water Heating
Natural Gas
Electric $14 $16 $21 $25 $30
Other Electric $18 $22 $32 $45 $58 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Assumed Tenant-Paid Utilities, All Electric (1) $52 $62 $84 $109 $135 (1) Assumes electric cooking, heating, water heating, and other electric.

Source: Housing Authority of the County of San Mateo, effective 11/1/2019.

East Palo Alto Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis
April 27, 2020
7 446
Table A-8
Affordable Rent Calculations by Income Level
Rental Housing
East Palo Alto Affordability Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis Assumptions
2020 Median Income, San Mateo County $143,100
2020 Adjusted Median Income for Calculating Rents (1) $174,000 Affordable Housing Expense As a % of Income (2) 30%
No. of Bedrooms Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom Household Size 1.0 Persons 1.5 Persons 3.0 Persons 4.5 Persons 6.0 Persons Household Size Income Adjust. Factor 70% 75% 90% 104% 116% Renter Utility Allowance (3) $52 $62 $84 $109 $135
Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom
Per Unit Supportable Mortgage By Income Level
35% of MFI
Annual Income Limit $42,630 $45,675 $54,810 $63,336 $70,644 Affordable Monthly Housing Expense $1,066 $1,142 $1,370 $1,583 $1,766 Less: Monthly Utility Allowance ($52) ($62) ($84) ($109) ($135) Affordable Monthly Rent $1,014 $1,080 $1,286 $1,474 $1,631 50% of Median
Annual Income Limit $60,900 $65,250 $78,300 $90,480 $100,920 Affordable Monthly Housing Expense $1,523 $1,631 $1,958 $2,262 $2,523 Less: Monthly Utility Allowance ($52) ($62) ($84) ($109) ($135) Affordable Monthly Rent $1,471 $1,569 $1,874 $2,153 $2,388 60% of Median
Annual Income Limit $73,080 $78,300 $93,960 $108,576 $121,104 Affordable Monthly Housing Expense $1,827 $1,958 $2,349 $2,714 $3,028 Less: Monthly Utility Allowance ($52) ($62) ($84) ($109) ($135) Affordable Monthly Rent $1,775 $1,896 $2,265 $2,605 $2,893 Summary of Affordable Rents Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom 35% of Median $1,014 $1,080 $1,286 $1,474 $1,631
40% of Median $1,166 $1,243 $1,482 $1,701 $1,883
50% of Median $1,471 $1,569 $1,874 $2,153 $2,388
70% of Median $1,775 $1,896 $2,265 $2,605 $2,893
80% of Median $2,384 $2,548 $3,048 $3,510 $3,902
130% of Median $3,907 $4,179 $5,006 $5,772 $6,425
(1) Since the Bay Area is a high housing cost area, income limits for households at 80% of AMI are adjusted upwards from the straight AMI calculations; the effective median income equals $161,400 for a household of four at 100% AMI. (2) Assumes 30% of gross income for rent plus utilities. (3) Assumes tenants pay for electric cooking, heating, water heating and other electric. Based on utility allowances from the Housing Authority of San Mateo County, effective 11/1/2018.

Source: HUD; Housing Authority of San Mateo County; DRA.

East Palo Alto Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis
April 27, 2020
8 447
Table A-9
Rental Net Operating Income and Supportable Mortgage
Prototype 4
Apts. w/ Struct. Pkg
East Palo Alto Affordability Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis No Tax Credits
4% Tax Credits,
Tax Exempt
Bonds No Tax Credits
4% Tax Credits, Tax
Exempt Bonds
Number of Units by Income Level % Units by Income and Unit BR Count 35% AMI 35% AMI 35% AMI
One Bedroom 18 18 25% 25%
Two Bedroom 22 22 25% 25%
Three Bedroom 4 4 25% 25%
40% AMI 40% AMI 40% AMI
One Bedroom 0 0 0% 0%
Two Bedroom 0 0 0% 0%
Three Bedroom 0 0 0% 0%
50% AMI 50% AMI 50% AMI
One Bedroom 35 35 50% 50%
Two Bedroom 43 43 50% 50%
Three Bedroom 9 9 50% 50%
60% AMI 60% AMI 60% AMI
One Bedroom 18 18 25% 25%
Two Bedroom 22 22 25% 25%
Three Bedroom 4 4 25% 25%
Monthly Gross Rents Monthly Rent by Income and BR Count 35% AMI 35% AMI Tax Credit Rents
One Bedroom $19,440 $19,440 One Bedroom $1,080
Two Bedroom $28,292 $28,292 Two Bedroom $1,286
Three Bedroom $5,896 $5,896 Three Bedroom $1,474
50% AMI 50% AMI
One Bedroom $54,915 $54,915 One Bedroom $1,569
Two Bedroom $80,582 $80,582 Two Bedroom $1,874
Three Bedroom $19,377 $19,377 Three Bedroom $2,153
60% AMI 60% AMI
One Bedroom $34,128 $34,128 One Bedroom $1,896
Two Bedroom $49,830 $49,830 Two Bedroom $2,265
Three Bedroom $10,420 $10,420 Three Bedroom $2,605
Annual Gross Rents $3,640,872 $3,640,872
Less: Vacancy ($182,044) ($182,044)
Less: Operating Costs ($1,050,000) ($1,050,000) Total Units: 175 Less: Replacement Reservses ($43,750) ($43,750)
Net Operating Income $2,365,078 $2,365,078 One Bedroom 40% Annual Debt Service $2,056,590 $2,056,590 Two Bedroom 50% Permanent Mortgage Amount $28,585,163 $31,925,408 Three Bedroom 10% Vacancy Rate 5.00% 5.00%
Annual Operating Cost Per Unit $6,000 $6,000
Annual Replace. Reserve/Unit (1) $250 $250
Mortgage Interest Rate 6.00% 5.00%
Debt Coverage Ratio 1.15 1.15
Term (Years) 30 30
Source: DRA
Projections Assumptions
East Palo Alto Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis
April 27, 2020
9 448
Table A-10
Rental Gap and In Lieu Fee With 4% Tax Credits
Prototype 4
Apts. w/ Struct. Pkg
East Palo Alto Affordability Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis No Tax Credits
4% Tax Credits,
Tax Exempt Bonds

SOURCES AND USES
Total Units 175
PERMANENT SOURCES OF FUNDS Acres 2.50
Federal Tax Credit Equity (1) $0 $40,803,684 Unit/Acre 70.00 Permanent Mortgage $28,585,163 $31,925,408 Gross Bldg SF 166,125 Deferred Developer Fee (2) $0 $0
Gap Financing Required $97,026,862 $43,761,056
____________ ____________
TOTAL SOURCES $125,612,025 $116,490,147
Permanent Gap Financing/Unit $554,439 $250,063
Permanent Gap Financing/SF $584.06 $263.42

PERMANENT USES OF FUNDS
Land Acquisition Costs $16,335,000 $16,335,000
Direct Construction Costs $73,095,000 $73,095,000
Soft Costs $21,928,500 $22,033,500
Capitalized Operating Reserve (3) $0 $776,647
Developer Fee/Profit (4) $14,253,525 $4,250,000
____________ ____________
TOTAL COST $125,612,025 $116,490,147
Total Cost Per Unit $717,783 $665,658
Assumptions and Calculations
Tax Credit Basis
Land Acquisition Costs N/A $0 0%
Direct Construction Costs N/A $73,095,000 100%
Soft Costs N/A $9,915,075 45%
Developer Overhead and Profit N/A $4,250,000 100%
____________ ____________
Total Tax Credit Basis N/A $87,260,075 87%
Basis Boost (%) (5) N/A 130%
Total Tax Credit Basis N/A $113,438,098
Tax Credit Rate (Per CTCAC) (6) N/A 3.27%
Annual Tax Credits (7) N/A $3,709,426
Tax Credit Pricing N/A $1.10
Maximum Federal Tax Credit Equity $40,803,684
N/A = not applicable.
(1) Equals annual tax credits multiplied by tax credit pricing multiplied by 10 years. (2) DRA did not estimate the deferred developer fees that could be used to reduce or close the gap. (3) Under California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTCAC), minimum reserve pf 3 months operations plus debt service.
(4) For no tax credit scenario, assumes 15% of hard plus soft costs. For 4% tax credits, equals 15% of eligible basis to a maximum of $2.5 M plus $10,000 per unit per CTCAC Regulations. (5) Projects located in a Qualified Census Tract (QCT) or Difficult to Develop Area (DDA) are eligible for a 30% basis boost. East Palo Alto zip code 94303 is a DDA. (6) 2019 tax credit factors from CTCAC.
(7) Equals total tax credit basis multiplied by tax credit rate.

Source: DRA
Assumptions
4% Tax Credits
% of Cost in Basis (Exluding Land)
East Palo Alto Gap and In Lieu Fee Analysis
April 27, 2020
10 449
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.3

EAST PALO ALTO

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 16, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: John D. Lê, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Introduction of an Ordinance Amending the Salary for Members of the East Palo Alto City Council
Recommendation
By motion, waive the first reading and introduce an ordinance amending Section 2.08.150 of the East Palo Alto Municipal Code increasing the salary for members of the East Palo Alto City Council.

Alignment with City Council Strategic Plan
This recommendation is primarily aligned with:

Priority #4: Ensure Our Financial and Organizational Health.

Background
State Law authorizes cities to enact a local ordinance that provides a salary to councilmembers.

California Government Code section 36516 provides that a city council may, by ordinance, establish a salary based upon the population of the city.

In 1983, the East Palo Alto City Council adopted Ordinance No. 8-83 providing a salary to council members in the amount of $150 per month. In 1985, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 057 providing the same benefits to councilmembers that are paid to City employees. Specifically, Ordinance No. 057 authorized payment of premiums for basic health insurance coverage, supplemental insurance coverage, and a contribution to 401K retirement program.

In 1986, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 75 increasing the City Council salary to $300 per month. These three ordinances (No. 8-83, No. 057 and No. 075) were collectively codified in East Palo Alto Municipal code section 2.08.150.
450
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.3
In 2018, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 418, which increased the salary to $600 per month and eliminated the contribution to a 401K retirement program. Section 2.08.150 now reads:

Article II – Salaries and Benefits

2.08.150 – Established.

A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 36516 (a)(1) of the California Government Code, each council member shall receive as salary the sum of six hundred dollars ($600.00) per month. Such salary shall be payable in the same manner as salaries are paid to other officers and employees of the city.

B. The salaries set forth in this section shall be exclusive of any amount payable to council members as reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of city duties.

1. The city shall pay the premium for basic health insurance coverage for council members in the same amount and for the same coverages as provided for full time, regular city employees.

2. The city shall pay the premium for supplemental life insurance coverage for council members in the same amount and for the same coverages as provided for management and public safety employees.

On June 29, 2023, Governor Newsom signed into law Senate Bill 329 (“SB 329”) which increases the maximum amount of salary that councilmembers may receive. This legislation was intended to increase the compensation schedule for councilmembers in general law cities, which had not been adjusted since 1984. SB 329 allows cities to increase the compensation to adjust for inflation in order to help keep city councils more diverse by allowing people from across different income levels to serve the public and support their families.

Given the City’s population, the statute allows for the annual stipend of certain councilmembers of the City of East Palo Alto to increase to up to $950 per month. Section 36516 reads in relevant part:
(a)(1) A city council may enact an ordinance providing that each member of the city council shall receive a salary based on the population of the city as set forth in paragraph (2).
(a)(2) The salaries approved by ordinance under paragraph (1) shall be as follows:
(A) In cities up to an including 35,000 in population, up to and including nine hundred fifty dollars ($950) per month.
451
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.3
The official April 1, 2020 census determined East Palo Alto’s population to be 30,034. Since then, the population has fluctuated a bit, but remains less than 35,000.

Any retirement, health and welfare, federal social security benefits, or reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses are not included for purposes of determining salary under section 36516.

No ordinance may be enacted or amended to provide automatic future increases in salary. The Council is empowered, however, to adopt an ordinance revising the salary or may submit to the electors the question of whether city councilmembers should receive a salary and the amount of the salary.

SB 329 requires that an ordinance to increase councilmember compensation be considered in an open session with at least two regular meetings. The ordinance must include findings demonstrating the need for increased compensation and there must be at least seven days between the introduction and adoption of the ordinance.

A councilmember may waive any or all of the compensation authorized by the Government Code.

Analysis
The Council’s salary has not increased since the pre-pandemic era (2018). Yet, since that time, general price levels and the overall cost of living have increased to substantially for some time now, especially immediately after the pandemic. Additionally, the aim of SB 329 was to ensure diversity of representation on city councils statewide and how socio-economic status can affect that. For instance, in relevant legislative history in SB 329, which provides cities with authority to raise the annual stipend paid to councilmembers, the bill’s sponsor highlighted the need to adjust councilmember pay, which applies in the City of East Palo Alto:
“City Councilmembers have one of the hardest jobs in California government. They deal with a wide range of issues, from street maintenance to emergency response duties. And all too often, they do this job with very little financial compensation. No one runs for City Council in order to make money. But the low levels of pay make it much harder for them to balance their careers and personal obligations with the calling to serve their community. The Legislature has not raised the base pay amounts for City Councilmembers since 1984. It's time those amounts caught up to the present economic reality, especially with the rapid increase in inflation we've seen recently. Raising the pay will also make it easier for members of marginalized communities to serve. City Councils should be reflective of the communities they represent and I believe raising their compensation is an important step to achieving that equitable outcome.”
452
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.3
Similarly, ensuring that councilmembers represent residents that live, work, and play in the City of East Palo Alto on many levels, including socio-economic facets, is an important purpose of the bill (SB 329) as it applies to general law cities.1 Under Government Code section 36516.5, the proposed stipend increase for up to $950 per month currently before the Council this evening would not take effect until “one or more members of the city council becomes eligible for a salary increase by virtue of the councilmember beginning a new term of office.” In November 2024, several seats will be up for election, so a salary increase may become effective at that time for all councilmembers.

For the reasons set forth in this agenda report, staff recommends that the City Council, by motion, waive the first reading and introduce an ordinance increasing Council salary from its current $600 per month to the statutorily authorized $950 per month, effective the first pay period after the election results are certified and the new terms commence. All councilmembers shall be eligible for the $950 monthly stipend level, unless s/he waives this compensation in favor of some other lower amount.

Fiscal Impact
The annual cost increase by this action would be estimated to be approximately $4,500. There is no budget amendment necessary for the current year budget.

Public Notice
The public was provided notice by making the agenda and report available on the City’s website and on a bulletin board located at City Hall: 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto.

Environmental
The proposed action does not constitute a “project” with the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15378(b)(4) and (5) in that it is a governmental fiscal, organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.

Government Code § 84308
Applicability of Levine Act: No, as the proposed action does not involve an entitlement.

Analysis of Levine Act Compliance: Not applicable.

Attachments

1. Ordinance
1 Cal Cities-sponsored legislation would reduce barriers to elected office, adjust council pay for inflation | Cal Cities (Last Accessed: May 20, 2024).
453
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.3
454
ORDINANCE NO. ______

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
AMENDING SECTION 2.08.150 OF THE EAST PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE

INCREASING THE SALARY FOR MEMBERS OF THE EAST PALO ALTO CITY

COUNCIL
WHEREAS, in 1983, the East Palo Alto City Council adopted Ordinance No. 8-83 providing a salary to council members in the amount of $150 per month. In 1985, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 057 providing the same benefits to councilmembers that are paid to City employees. Specifically, Ordinance No. 057 authorized payment of premiums for basic health insurance coverage, supplemental insurance coverage, and a contribution to 401K retirement program; and
WHEREAS, in 1986, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 75 increasing the City Council salary to $300 per month. These three ordinances (No. 8-83, No. 057 and No. 075) were collectively codified in East Palo Alto Municipal code section 2.08.150; and WHEREAS, in 2018, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 418, which increased the salary to $600 per month and eliminated the contribution to a 401K retirement program; and
WHEREAS, on June 29, 2023, Governor Newsom signed into law Senate Bill 329 (“SB 329”) which increases the maximum amount of salary that councilmembers may receive. This legislation was intended to increase the compensation schedule for councilmembers in general law cities, which had not been adjusted since 1984. SB 329 allows cities to increase the compensation to adjust for inflation in order to help keep city councils more diverse by allowing people from across different income levels to serve the public and support their families; and
WHEREAS, the official April 1, 2020 census determined East Palo Alto’s population to be 30,034. Since then, the population has fluctuated a bit, but remains less than 35,000; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of East Palo Alto’s salary has not increased since the pre-pandemic era (2018). Yet, since that time, general price levels and the overall cost of living have increased to substantially for some time now, especially immediately after the pandemic.

WHEREAS, additionally, the aim of SB 329 was to ensure diversity of representation of on city councils statewide and how socio-economic status can affect that. For instance, in relevant legislative history in SB 329, which provides cities with authority to raise the annual stipend paid to councilmembers, the bill’s sponsor highlighted the need to adjust councilmember pay, which applies in the City of East Palo Alto:
455
“City Councilmembers have one of the hardest jobs in California government. They deal with a wide range of issues, from street maintenance to emergency response duties. And all too often, they do this job with very little financial compensation. No one runs for City Council in order to make money. But the low levels of pay make it much harder for them to balance their careers and personal obligations with the calling to serve their community. The Legislature has not raised the base pay amounts for City Councilmembers since 1984. It's time those amounts caught up to the present economic reality, especially with the rapid increase in inflation we've seen recently. Raising the pay will also make it easier for members of marginalized communities to serve. City Councils should be reflective of the communities they represent and I believe raising their compensation is an important step to achieving that equitable outcome.” Similarly, ensuring that councilmembers represent residents that live, work, and play in the City of East Palo Alto on many levels, including socio-economic facets, is an important purpose of the bill (SB 329) as it applies to general law cities; and WHEREAS, East Palo Alto is a majority minority community with many individuals working multiple jobs to provide for themselves and their families financially; and WHEREAS, providing an increase in Council salary would enable more members of the community to consider participating in its governance, including those with diverse socio-economic backgrounds.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: AMENDMENT TO SECTION 2.08.150 OF EPAMC
The City Council hereby amends 2.08.150 of the East Palo Alto Municipal Code to read as follows (with text in strikeout indicating deletion and underlined text indicating addition). Sections and subsections that are not amended by this Ordinance are not included below and shall remain in full force and effect.

A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 36516 (a)(1) of the California Government Code, each council member shall receive as salary the sum of nine hundred fifty dollars ($600.00950.00) per month. Such salary shall be payable in the same manner as salaries are paid to other officers and employees of the city.

1. The salaries set forth in this section shall be exclusive of any amount payable to councilmembers as reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of city duties.
456

2. The city shall pay the premium for supplemental life insurance coverage for councilmembers in the same amount and for the same coverages as provided for management employees.

SECTION 2: CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
The City Council finds that the proposed action does not constitute a “project” with the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15378(b)(4) and (5) in that it is a governmental fiscal, organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.

SECTION 3: IMPLIED REPEAL
Any provision of the East Palo Alto Municipal Code inconsistent with this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to the extent necessary to effectuate this Ordinance.

SECTION 4: REFERENCES TO PRIOR CODE
Unless superseded and repealed (express or implied), references in City forms, documents and regulation to the chapters and sections of the former City codes, shall be construed to apply to the corresponding provisions contained within this Ordinance.

SECTION 5: SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares it would have passed and adopted this Ordinance, and each and all provisions hereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more provisions may be declared invalid.

SECTION 6: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its adoption. The payment of monthly salary authorized pursuant to this Ordinance shall first issue in January 2025.

SECTION 7: PUBLICATION
Within fifteen (15) days of tis adoption, the Ordinance shall be posted in three (3) public places within the City of East Palo Alto, and the Ordinance, or summary of the Ordinance prepared by the City Attorney, shall be published in a local newspaper used to publish official notice for the City of East Palo Alto prior to the effective date. 457
This Ordinance was introduced at the______________ meeting of the City Council of the City of East Palo Alto.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ______________, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Antonio D. Lopez, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

James Colin, City Clerk John D. Lê, City Attorney
458
"

EAST PALO ALTO

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 16, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Melvin E. Gaines, City Manager
BY: Amy Chen, Director
Elena Lee, Planning Manager
Salifu Yakubu, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Pre-Application for a: 1) Conforming rezoning (Zoning Map Amendment) of a 2.11-acre portion of an existing 2.536-acre parcel at 1933 Pulgas Avenue from R-MD-1 MultipleFamily Medium Density Residential Subzone 1 to R-MD-2 Multiple-Family Medium Density Residential Subzone 2; 2) Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the 2.536-acre parcel into two 2.11-acre and 0.426-acre lots and further subdivide the former into 62 airspace condominium units and common areas for parking, open space and other shared amenities; and 3) Design Review permit to develop a 62 unit single-family attached (rowhouse) project in East Palo Alto, CA 94303. APN 063-492-280 Recommendation
Review the Pre-Application (PRE24-001) for 1933 Pulgas Avenue and provide feedback to the applicant and City staff prior to formal application on the following proposed entitlements:

1. Zoning Map Amendment to rezone a 2.11-acre portion of an existing 2.536-acre parcel from R-MD Subzone 1 to R-MD Subzone 2;

2. Subdivision of the original 2.536-acre parcel into two lots followed by a condominium map for 62 rowhouses on the rezoned portion of the site; and

3. Site Design and Architecture approval of the proposed rowhouse development.

Alignment with City Council Strategic Plan
This recommendation is primarily aligned with:

POLICY AND ACTION ITEM 9.1
459
• Priority: Promote Housing, Economic and Workforce Development Background
Owner/ Applicant: Wawaland LLC/Wa Li/Riyad Ghannam, RG-Architecture Location/ APN: 1933 Pulgas Avenue, East Palo Alto /063-492-280 Existing Use: Super Market, four dwellings and one storage shed.

General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential (12.1 – 22 du/ac) Zoning: R-MD-1 Multiple-Family Medium Density Residential Subzone 1 Surrounding Zoning: North: R-LD Single-Family Residential and PUD Planned Unit Development
East: R-LD Single-Family Residential
South: R-MD-1 Multiple-Family Medium Density
Residential Subzone 1 and MUC-2 Mixed Use
Corridor Subzone 2
West: R-LD Single-Family Residential
Flood Zone: N/A
Public Notice: A public notice was mailed to property owners within 300-feet of the site on July 5, 2024. Additionally, the agenda and staff report were posted on the City’s website and on a bulletinboard located at City Hall: 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto.

The subject site is 110,476 square feet (2.53 acres) in size and is located on the west side of Pulgas Avenue, about 150 feet northerly of the intersection of Pulgas Avenue and East Bayshore Road. The site is generally rectangularly configured, measuring 136-feet wide by 746-feet long with the 145-foot southern end extending approximately 45 feet farther west where a supermarket is located (Figure 1 with site circled). It is currently improved with six structures comprising the Garden Super Market – a 5,551-square-foot grocery store, four one-story single-family dwellings, and one storage shed.

The applicant intends to retain the Garden Super Market (Supermarket) on a 0.426-acre section of the parcel while the remaining 2.11-acres is rezoned from R-MD Subzone 1 to RMD Subzone 2. The Supermarket will remain under the current zoning designation of R-MD Subzone 1. Because that designation does not allow commercial uses the Supermarket would remain a legal non-conforming use as it was developed under the county’s land use and zoning regulations prior to the City’s incorporation in 1983. And since the existing nonconforming use would continue, without alteration, and any new uses proposed by the applicant for the remainder of the property would conform to current code, additional development is permissible and complies with Section 18.74.040 of the East Palo Alto Municipal Code (EPAMC).

The 2.11-acre property will be developed into 62 rowhouses should the rezoning proposal be approved by the City Council. On the other hand, if the Council does not approve the proposal, the applicant could still develop rowhouses under the current zoning, albeit at a smaller density for less than the applicant’s desire for 62 units. The following tables illustrate the inherent POLICY AND ACTION ITEM 9.1
460
development capacities under various scenarios of the current (Table 1) and proposed (Table 2) zones.

Figure 1: East Palo Alto Zoning – R-MD-2 subzones in proximity to R-LD Single-Family Residential zones denoted with red arrows.

Table 1: No Zone Change Alternative
Inclusionary Level, Density Bonus, and Dwelling Unit Yield Worksheet Maintain the current R-MD-1 Multiple-Family Medium Density Residential Subzone 1 (12 - 15 du/ac) for a base yield of 25 – 31 dwelling units.

Scenario
No.

Inclusionary Provided Eligible
Density
Bonus
Base
Units
Density
Bonus
Units
Total
Low Income Moderate Units
Income
1 0% 20%1 15% 31 5 36
2 20% 0% 35% 31 11 47 0% 20% 15% 5
3 20% 0% 35%
31 11
50 0% 30% 25% 8
4 24% 0% 50% 31 16 57 0% 36% 31% 10
Under the No Zone Change alternative, it is possible to develop between 36 and 57 total units under various inclusionary housing levels and corresponding density bonuses. However, according to the applicant, apart from scenario 1, which is based on the City’s 20% 1 City of East Palo Alto 20% Inclusionary Housing
POLICY AND ACTION ITEM 9.1
461
inclusionary housing requirement, the other scenarios are not financially feasible due to the high levels of below market rate (BMR) units (40% BMR for scenario 2, 50% for scenario 3, and 60% for scenario 4).

The proposed project seeks to rezone the current R-MD-1 Subzone to R-MD-2 since, according to the applicant, the former does not provide enough dwelling units for financial feasibility.

A review of the current East Palo Alto zoning map reveals several parts of the City where RMD-2 subzones are situated in proximity to R-LD Single-Family Residential zones similar to the proposed rezoning site (Figure 1). These areas (denoted in Figure 1 with red arrows) include south of Weeks Street between Cooley Avenue and Clarke Avenue, north of Donohoe Street between Cooley Avenue and Clark Avenue, south of Bay Road between Glen Way and University Avenue, north of Runnymede Street between Glen Way and University Avenue, and north of Bay Road at Palo Verde Avenue. Unlike most of these locations, however, the subject site has the advantage of proximity to two major streets in the City - Pulgas Avenue, and East Bayshore Road, while also being near US 101/Bayshore Freeway. Because both the R-MD-1 and R-MD-2 subzones implement the Medium Density Residential General Plan designation, the proposed project is classified as a conforming rezoning and therefore does not require a General Plan amendment.

Table 2 below illustrates a range of inclusionary housing scenarios, the amount of eligible density bonuses and resulting number of total dwelling units. The applicant’s preferred scenario #3 provides 30% inclusionary housing (10% low income and 20% moderate income), for an eligible density bonus of 16 dwelling units and a total project yield of 62 units.

Table 2: Rezoning Project Alternative
Inclusionary Level, Density Bonus, and Dwelling Unit Yield Worksheet Rezone to R-MD-2 Multiple-family medium density residential (12 - 22 du/ac) Scenario
No.

Inclusionary
Provided
Eligible
Density
Bonus
Base
Units
Density
Bonus
Units
Total
Units
Low
Income
Moderate
Income
1 0% 20%2 15% 46 7 53
2 0% 30% 25% 46 12 58
3 10% 0% 20% 46 9
62 0% 20% 15% 7
A full description of the project, including the background and analysis of the site design and architectural concepts of the project, is provided in the April 22, 2024 Planning Commission staff report attached as Attachment 1, and also available on page 34 of the following link:
e078af3d-b714-11ee-bb82-0050569183fa-88739655-4535-4dfb-8d17-688f5e5d89b8- 1713818058.pdf (d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net)
2 City of East Palo Alto 20% Inclusionary Housing Requirement. See Housing webpage:
https://www.cityofepa.org/housing/page/inclusionary-housing POLICY AND ACTION ITEM 9.1
462
Pre-Application Process
The goal of the pre-application process is to allow City staff and partner agencies to work with the applicant and coordinate an early review of major and complex applications. As a Zoning Text Amendment is required, the proposed project, PRE24-001, meets the definition of both a major Project because it proposes more than 20 residential units and a Complex Project because it requires a rezoning per EPAMC Sections 18.82.030(A)(1) (b)(3) and (a)(2)3, and has so far gone through the following outreach efforts:

1. Community Meetings: As required for pre-applications, the applicant provided neighborhood notification and organized an in-person community meeting on March 21, 2024 to discuss the proposed project and to document any community concerns and input. All property owners within 300 feet of the project and community groups and organizations were notified by meeting flyers that were mailed by the applicant on February 28, 2024. Only two people attended the meeting, a property owner of a residential rental property located across Pulgas Avenue from the site, and their grandson. They inquired about the potential impacts of the proposal on the values of other properties in the neighborhood and expressed their initial support for the proposal.

2. Development Review Committee (DRC) Meeting: The Planning staff held a DRC meeting with staff from the Public Works Department, Building and Code Enforcement Division, Police Department, and East Palo Alto Sanitary District (EPASD) on April 17, 2024, to discuss design and development issues associated with the project and its compliance with the Municipal Code and applicable state land use and planning legislation. The applicant was advised to reach out to absentee agencies including Menlo Fire Protection District and Veolia Water for their comments.

3. Planning Commission Study Session: The Commission held a study session on April 22, 2024 with six (6) Commissioners in attendance.

While all three components of the proposed project (Rezoning, Subdivision, and Design Review) were presented by staff and the applicant, the Planning Commission discussion focused primarily on Design Review. The applicant explained that they were seeking feedback on the conforming rezoning request, but also provided some project details. Because it is still early in the process, the applicant was open to hearing design feedback. Most of the study session was spent on project comments from Commissioners, with a few questions being asked of staff or the applicants to clarify aspects of the proposal. Following, is a summary of the Planning Commissioners’ discussion:

A. Automobile traffic and congestion – Concerns were raised that introducing a 62- unit project at this location would exacerbate the existing congestion and possibility overwhelm the capacity of the transportation infrastructure.

B. Parking – Even though the proposal includes enough parking consistent with the requirements of the EPAMC, comments were expressed about the general lack 3 See City Community Outreach Policy: https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/community-outreach-policy POLICY AND ACTION ITEM 9.1
463
of parking in the area, and the possibility of this project making the situation worse. A desire for curbside parking on Pulgas Avenue was expressed.

C. Pedestrian and Bicyclists safety – The Pulgas Avenue corridor is not uniformly improved, exhibiting different widths of right-of-way and amenities from Bay Road to East Bayshore Road. It is characterized as follows:
a. Bay Road to Oakes / Gaillardia Streets – The right of way is improved on both sides with sidewalks, curbside parking, a bike route (class III), and two travel lanes.
b. East side from Oakes / Gaillardia Streets to East Bayshore Road - Pulgas Avenue is improved with a sidewalk, curbside parking, bike lane (class II bicycle facility), and one travel lane.
c. West side from Oakes / Gaillardia Streets to East Bayshore Road – Pulgas Avenue is improved with a sidewalk, curbside parking, and bike lane (class II) up to the Palo Mobile Estates property, from where it becomes a bike route with one travel lane and no sidewalk nor curbside parking past the subject property to East Bayshore Road.

A comment was made to encourage the developer to engage the City, and possibly the Palo Mobile Estates, to find a way to widen and improve Pulgas Avenue with sidewalks, curbside parking, and a bike lane from the Palo Mobile Estate property to East Bashore Road. These right-of-way improvements would improve walkability and enhance the safety of both pedestrians and bicyclists.

D. Infrastructure issues – Statements were made regarding the capacity of the City’s infrastructure systems, particularly portable water, adequate fire-flow and sanitary sewer and the developer was urged to engage the appropriate service providers and the District as early as possible to address any foreseeable issues that might constrain the future development of the proposal.

E. Renewable Energy – Support was expressed for the plan to equip the development with a custom transformer, generate significant amounts of solar electricity, and for the proposed project to be 100%-electric consistent with the City’s Reach Code.

F. Site Design and Building Architecture – Several comments were made on the proposed design of the site and rowhouses. These include:
a. The project contains too many units and ought to be scaled down to respect the surrounding neighborhood context.
b. The common open space on the podium or the first floor deck appears too narrow and should be articulated or segmented to prevent a wind tunnel effect.

POLICY AND ACTION ITEM 9.1
464
c. The existing Garden Supermarket should be continued and renovated to continue serving the surrounding neighborhood.
d. The project looks and feels overly modular, and its somewhat monotonous architecture needs to be refined and differentiated, but in a way that will maintain the cohesion and unity of the proposed architecture.

4. Public Comments: About half a dozen City residents attended the meeting, but only one, a resident of University Square neighborhood, provided comments on the project.

He was concerned about the potential impact of the proposed project on the already congested on-street parking. Additionally, he said the University Square neighborhood suffers frequent power outages and is concerned that the proposed project would worsen the situation. Finally, while he expressed his support for the design of the proposed project, he urged the architect to employ durable architectural materials that would age well.

City Council Review of Proposed Project
This pre-application would allow the City Council to review the applicant’s proposal and provide early input on all of its three components, and to offer any guidance and direction to the applicant. This guidance and/or direction may be instructive in the applicant’s decision to file a formal application based on the current pre-application concept, a modified variant, or, in some cases, a completely different project. In fact, just before the publication of this report, the applicant team has alerted staff of a modified project they have been contemplating in the spirit of wanting the best possible project for the site and in response to comments from the last Planning Commission study session.

This modified variant (Attachment 4) includes the same number of units with a new underground parking facility. It also breaks down the large monolithic building previously proposed into four smaller buildings with intervening multi-use porticoed plazas doubling as emergency/fire-vehicle staging areas. These smaller buildings have a lower building profile adjacent to Palo Mobile Estates, and a generally more neighborhood-friendly building mass.

The applicant will present this variant at the Council study session.

At the completion of Council’s discussion of the project, the applicant would be seeking the following information:

1. What is the Council’s preliminary feedback on the proposal to amend the Zoning Map for the subject property from R-MD-1 (subzone 1) to R-M-D-2 (subzone 2)?

2. What would potentially be the Council’s preference for rezoning and subdividing the property?
a. Rezoning the residential component and subdividing it for 62 air space condominium units? or
b. Subdividing the subject parcel into two lots, with one legal non-conforming lot which houses the Supermarket and one residential lot, and subsequently subdividing the

2.11-acre residential lot into 62 air space condominium units? POLICY AND ACTION ITEM 9.1
465

3. What is the Council’s input on the site and architectural designs (the original design and modified variant) of the proposed 62-unit rowhouse complex, which would include the following state mandated concessions, incentives, and waivers:
a. Concession/Incentive #1: Increase Building Height from a maximum 36-feet to 46- feet.
b. Concession/Incentive #2: Decrease Front Setback from 20-feet to 10-feet after 20- foot dedication for public right-of-way.
c. Concession/Incentive #3: Decrease Rear Setback from 20-feet (first story) and 30- feet (second story) to 10-feet.
d. Waiver #1: Increase maximum Site Coverage from 60% to 64%. e. Waiver #2: Increase maximum Floor Area Ratio from a maximum 0.65 to 1.79. f. Waiver #3: Decrease size of typical Parking Space to 8-feet by 16-feet.

Next Steps
The proposed project is deemed a Complex Project pursuant to the EPAMC Sections

18.82.030(A)(1) (b)(3) and (a)(2)4, and the Zoning Map Amendment (rezoning) is a legislative action subject to City Council consideration and ordinance. Thus, to meet the goals of maximum outreach and review, and for the benefit of the applicant and public, the preapplication should be thoroughly reviewed, and early community input should be provided before the applicant submits a formal application.

After this study session, the next step is for the applicant to submit formal applications for the rezoning and then the design review applications. The formal applications would be subject to additional community outreach, and more Planning Commission and City Council hearings consistent with the Development Code.

Fiscal Impact
This preliminary development application has no fiscal impact on the General Fund.

Public Notice
The public was provided with notice by making the agenda and report available on the City’s website and on a bulletin-board located at City Hall: 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto.

All property owners within 300 feet of the subject project and community groups or organizations were notified of this study session by meeting flyers mailed on July 5, 2024.

The project applicant held an in-person community meeting on March 21, 2024 at the Lewis and Joan Platt YMCA building at 550 Bell Street in East Palo Alto, and the Planning Commission held a study session on April 22, 2024.
4 See City Community Outreach Policy: https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/community-outreach-policy POLICY AND ACTION ITEM 9.1
466
More community outreach and public meetings will be required, per the Community Outreach Policy, if the applicant continues to pursue this development after the study session. Please see the following webpage to learn more:
https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/community-outreach-policy.

Environmental
The Pre-Application is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as its sole purpose is to seek information and is not by itself implementable. However, formal Zone Map Amendment and Design Review applications would qualify as projects. At that time, the projects will be fleshed out to determine the full scope of environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Based on best practice the Zoning Map Amendment may likely qualify to rely on the Environmental Impact Report for the Vista 2035 General Plan for environmental clearance, while the rowhouse project, as an infill development, may qualify for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption, as described below:
15332. In-Fill Development Projects - Class 32 consists of projects characterized as in-fill development meeting the following conditions:
a. The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
b. The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
c. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. d. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
e. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

This class is not intended to be applied to projects which would result in any significant traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality effects.

Government Code § 84308
Applicability of Levine Act: No, at this stage, as an informational meeting only, the proposed action does not yet involve an entitlement.

Analysis of Levine Act Compliance: Not applicable.

Attachments

1. Planning Commission Staff Report
POLICY AND ACTION ITEM 9.1
467

2. East Palo Alto General Plan and Zoning Maps

3. Illustrative Rezoning Plans

4. Illustrative Project Alternative 2
POLICY AND ACTION ITEM 9.1
468

CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO

PLANNING DIVISION
1960 TATE STREET CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO, CA 94303
Planning Commission Report
Date: April 22, 2024
To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Planning Commission From: Salifu Yakubu, Senior Planner
Elena Lee, Planning Division Manager
Subject: Pre-Application for a: 1) Conforming rezoning (Zoning Map Amendment) of a

2.11-acre portion of an existing 2.536-acre parcel at 1933 Pulgas Avenue from RMD-1 Multiple-Family Medium Density Residential Subzone 1 to R-MD-2 MultipleFamily Medium Density Residential Subzone 2; 2) Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the 2.536-acre parcel into two 2.11-acre and 0.426-acre lots and further subdivide the former into 62 airspace condominium units and common areas for parking, open space and other shared amenities; and 3) Design Review permit to develop a 62 unit single-family attached (rowhouse) project in East Palo Alto, CA 94303. APN 063-492-280
Recommendation
Review the Preliminary Application (PRE24-001) for 1933 Pulgas Avenue and provide feedback to the applicant and City staff prior to formal application.

Alignment with City Council Strategic Plan
This recommendation is primarily aligned with:
• Priority: Promote Housing, Economic and Workforce Development Background
Owner/ Applicant: Wawaland LLC/Wa Li/Riyad Ghannam, RG-Architecture Location/ APN: 1933 Pulgas Avenue, East Palo Alto /063-492-280 Existing Use: Super Market, four dwellings and one storage shed.

General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential (12.1 – 22 du/ac) Zoning: R-MD-1 Multiple-Family Medium Density Residential Subzone 1
Surrounding Zoning: North: R-LD Single-Family Residential and PUD Planned Unit Development
East: R-LD Single-Family Residential
South: R-MD-1 Multiple-Family Medium Density
Residential Subzone 1 and MUC-2 Mixed Use
Corridor Subzone 2
Date: 4.22.2024
469
West: R-LD Single-Family Residential
Flood Zone: N/A
Public Notice: A public notice was mailed to property owners within 300- feet of the site on April 10, 2024 and published in the Palo Alto Daily News on April 12, 2024. Additionally, the agenda and staff report were posted on the City’s website and on a bulletin-board located at City Hall: 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto.

Recusal Map: According to the Planning Commission Recusal Map, there are no Planning Commissioners that live within 500 ft. of the project site. The closest Planning Commissioner is at least 750 ft away.

Project Description
Site and Surrounding Area:

The subject site is 110,476 square feet (2.53 acres) in size and is located on the west side of Pulgas Avenue, about 150 feet northerly of the intersection of Pulgas Avenue and East Bayshore Road. The site is generally rectangularly configured, measuring 136-feet wide by 746-feet long with the 145-foot southern end extending approximately 45 feet farther west where a
supermarket is
located (Figure
1). It is
currently
improved with
six structures
comprising the
Garder Super
Market - a
5,551-squarefoot grocery
store, four onestory singlefamily dwellings,
and one storage
shed. It is
oriented in a
north-south axis
along the unimproved westerly section of Pulgas Avenue right-of-way. The structures were built between the mid-forties and sixties, decades before the city’s incorporation in 1983, on a single parcel. The parcel’s current Multiple-family Medium Density Residential zoning designation does not allow commercial uses; therefore, the supermarket is considered a legal non-conforming use as it was developed under the county’s land use and zoning regulations.

The site has been issued 18 code enforcement citations for various violations issued by the City since 2010. The violations included the illegal addition of dwellings, garage conversions, signage, electrical and plumbing works, excessive vehicle storage, and miscellaneous outdoor storage in violation of the East Palo Alto Municipal Code (EPAMC). There have also been instances of the piling of excessive junk and debris, poor maintenance, and general dilapidation of structures, culminating in the City condemning a 3,552-square-foot warehouse Figure 1
Palo Mobilehome Estate
Pulgas Avenue
470
in March 2023 (CE2023-0034). The warehouse was finally demolished after the property owner secured a demolition permit from the city on April 13, 2023. The owner has addressed all the citations noted herein and the site has been free of code enforcement citation since the demolition.

The subject site is surrounded by a mixture of uses to the east (12 single-family dwellings, a mini-storage facility, and tire shop) across Pulgas Avenue, and in clock-wise fashion, a metal fabrication business - Ferro Pacific Erectors, nutrition store, and barber shop to the south, the 131-unit mobilehome
park (Palo
Mobilehome Estates)
and Light Tree
apartments to the
west, and the Palo
Mobilehome Estates
parking area and
University Square
Planned Unit
Development to the
north (Figure 2). The
Light Tree apartment
complex was
redeveloped in 2023
having been rezoned
from R-HD-3
Multiple-Family High
Density Residential subzone 3 to R-HD-5 (subzone 5) by the City Council on February 5, 2019. Following the rezoning, 37 units of the then existing 94-unit apartment complex were demolished, 57 units were rehabilitated, and 128 units in two new five-story buildings to the west and east quadrants of the site were added, resulting in a net increase, in the size of the complex, from 94 affordable apartment units to 185. Four buildings that pre-dated the redevelopment of the complex - two two-story and two three-story apartment buildings - occupy the middle of the site.

Palo Mobile Estates sits in between the Light Tree apartments and the proposed project and fronts on East Bayshore Road. The former and the proposed project, if approved, would bookend the mobilehome park. At 10.32 acres the mobilehome park is almost the size of four residential blocks, typified by the University Square development to the north. With a primary ingress/egress on East Bayshore Road, the mobilehome park has minimal traffic impacts on the existing neighborhood residential uses and amenities.

Analysis
The proposed project has three components:

1. Conforming rezoning of a 2.11-acre portion of the existing 2.536-acre parcel at 1933 Pulgas Avenue from R-MD-1 Multiple-Family Medium Density Subzone 1 to R-MD-2 Multiple-Family Medium Density Residential Subzone 2;
Palo Mobile Estates
Light Tree
Figure 2
Palo Mobilehome Estates
Light Tree
Apartments
University
Square
Residential
Neighborhood
471

2. Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the 2.536-acre parcel into two 2.11-acre and 0.426-acre lots and further subdivide the former into 62 airspace residential condominium units and common areas for parking, open space, and other shared amenities;

3. Design Review permit to develop a 62-unit single-family attached (rowhouse) project in East Palo Alto CA 94303. APN 063-492-280.

The proposed project involves subdividing the subject property into two parcels, one containing the legal nonconforming supermarket and the other a subject of the rowhouse development. The supermarket parcel would include enough area around the building to meet the minimum setback and parking requirements pursuant to the Municipal Code. Table 1 below highlights (in red) the differences between the two subzones of the R-MD Multiple-Family Medium Density Residential zone.

An alternative approach would involve split-zoning of the existing parcel and only subdividing the rezoned 2.11-acre portion into 62 air-space condominium units. This split-zoning approach, while permissible, is not ideal because the continued presence of the grocery store would cause the parcel to remain legal nonconforming even with the new development.

This staff report analyses the 2.11-acre portion of the site, which is the subject of rezoning, and not the remaining portion containing the supermarket. This is considered a conforming rezoning because the proposed designation is consistent with the Medium Density Residential General Plan Land Use Designation, per Vista 2035.

Project Alternatives
The applicant desires to develop the 2.11-acre subject site for 62 rowhouses. Tables 2 and 3 illustrate various inclusionary housing scenarios for a No Zone Change Alternative (maintaining the current R-MD-1 Subzone) and a Rezoning Project Alternative involving rezoning the site from R-MD-1 to R-MD-2.

No Zone Change Alternative:

A “no zone change” alternative considers the applicant’s option if the approvals sought are not approved. As illustrated in Table 2 below, and pursuant to the state density bonus law, Government Code Sections 65915 – 65918, the City’s 20% inclusionary housing requirement entitles the project to a 15% density bonus or five (5) units. The R-MD-1 subzone allows a density range of 12 to 15 dwelling units per acre, translating into 25 to 31 dwelling units for the subject 2.11-acre site. Therefore, the maximum dwelling unit yield of the site, applying the density bonus for a 20% inclusionary housing program, is 36 units, which is 60% of the 62 units desired for financial feasibility. The same applies to a hypothetical 60% inclusionary project (24% low income and 36% moderate income) which yields a maximum of 57 units. This latter scenario is a theoretical exercise and not financially feasible for a market-rate development.

Rezoning Project Alternative:

The Municipal Code divides the R-MD Multiple-Family Medium Density Residential zone into two subzones, R-MD-1 and R-MD-2. Both subzones implement the Medium Density Residential General Plan land use designation, and have the same objective development standards differing in only two areas (see Table 1) – building height of 30-feet (2 1/2 stories) and 36-feet (three stories) and development density of 12 – 15 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) and 12 – 22 du/ac.
472
Table 1: Comparison between R-MD-1 and R-MD-2 Development Standards1 Land Use Designation /
Element
Code Regulations
(R-MD-1)
Code Regulations
(R-MD-2)
General Plan Medium Density Residential Medium Density
Residential
Zoning R-MD-1 Multiple-Family
Medium Density Residential
Subzone 1
R-MD-2 Multiple-Family
Medium Density
Residential Subzone 2
Height R-MD-1: 2-1/2 stories or 30
ft whichever is greater
R-MD-1: 3 stories or 36 ft
whichever is greater
Setbacks Front 20 ft 20 ft
Corner Vision
Triangle
12 ft 12 ft
Side/St Side 10 ft 10 ft
Rear 1st Story 20ft 20ft
Rear 2nd Story 30 ft 30 ft
Min Parcel
Dimensions
Area 5,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft.

Width 50 ft. 50 ft.

Depth 100 ft. 100 ft.

Lot Area | Coverage Allowed 5,000 sf. | 3,000 sf 5,000 sf. | 3,000 sf Site Coverage 60 % 3,000 sf. allowed) 60 % 3,000 sf. allowed) FAR (Floor Area Ratio) 0.65 3,250 sf allowed) 0.65 3,250 sf allowed) Density/Intensity R-MD-1: 12 to 15 du/acre R-MD-2: 12 to 22 du/acre Open Space &
Landscaping
Common OS 250 sq. ft. (min. dimension
[length/width] shall be 15 ft)
250 sq. ft. (min.
dimension [length/width]
shall be 15 ft)
Private OS Ground Fl units: 200 sq. ft.
(The min. dimension
[length/width] shall be six ft)
Ground Fl units: 200 sq.
ft. (The min. dimension
[length/width] shall be six
ft)
Upper Fl units: 100 sq. ft.
(The min. dimension
[length/width] shall be six ft)
Upper Fl units: 100 sq. ft.
(The min. dimension
[length/width] shall be six
ft)
Front yard open space N/A N/A
Parking 3 BR or more – 2
spaces/unit
3 BR or more – 2
spaces/unit

0.2 guest spaces per unit 0.2 guest spaces per unit
1 Differences in Development Standards are highlighted in red. 473
Table 2: No Zone Change Alternative
Inclusionary Level, Density Bonus, and Dwelling Unit Yield Worksheet Maintain the current R-MD-1 Multiple-Family Medium Density Residential Subzone 1 (12 - 15 du/ac) for a base yield of 25 – 31 dwelling units.

Scenario
No.

Inclusionary Provided Eligible
Density
Bonus
Base
Units
Density
Bonus
Units
Total
Low Income Moderate Units
Income
1 0% 20%2 15% 31 5 36
2 20% 0% 35% 31 11 47 0% 20% 15% 5
3 20% 0% 35%
31 11
50 0% 30% 25% 8
4 24% 0% 50%
31 16
57 0% 36% 31% 10
The proposed project seeks to rezone the current R-MD-1 Subzone to R-MD-2 since, according to the applicant, the
former does not provide
enough dwelling units for
financial feasibility. A
review of the current East
Palo Alto zoning map
reveals several parts of
the City where R-MD-2
subzones are situated in
proximity to R-LD SingleFamily Residential zones
similar to the proposed
rezoning site (Figure 3).

These areas include south
of Weeks Street between
Cooley Avenue and
Clarke Avenue, north of
Donohoe Street between
Cooley Avenue and Clark
Avenue, south of Bay Road between Glen Way and University Avenue, north of Runnymede Street between Glen Way and University Avenue, and north of Bay Road at Palo Verde Avenue.

Unlike most of these locations, however, the subject site has the advantage of proximity to three major streets in the City - Pulgas Avenue, East Bayshore Road, and US 101/Bayshore Freeway. Because both the R-MD-1 and R-MD-2 subzones implement the Medium Density Residential General Plan designation, the proposed project is classified as a conforming rezoning and therefore does not require a General Plan amendment.

Table 3 below illustrates a range of inclusionary housing scenarios, the amount of eligible density bonuses and resulting number of total dwelling units. Scenario #3 provides 30% inclusionary housing (10% low income and 20% moderate income), for an eligible density bonus of 16 dwelling units and a total project yield of 62 units. 2 City of East Palo Alto 20% Inclusionary Housing
Figure 3
474
Table 3: Rezoning Project Alternative
Inclusionary Level, Density Bonus, and Dwelling Unit Yield Worksheet Rezone to R-MD-2 Multiple-family medium density residential (12 - 22 du/ac) Scenario
No.

Inclusionary
Provided
Eligible
Density
Bonus
Base
Units
Density
Bonus
Units
Total
Units
Low Income Moderate
Income
1 0% 20%3 15% 46 7 53
2 0% 30% 25% 46 12 58
3 10% 0% 20%
46 9
62 0% 20% 15% 7
Pre-Application Process:

The proposed project, PRE24-001, meets the definition of a Complex Project per East Palo Alto Municipal Code (EPAMC) sections 18.82.030(A)(1) (b)(3) and (a)(2)4. The proposed development, and the required land use entitlements (Zoning Map Amendment and Design Review permit) for the development of 62 airspace condominium units requires a Preliminary Application. In keeping with the requirements for pre-applications, the applicant provided neighborhood notification and organized an in-person community meeting on March 21, 2024 to discuss the proposed project and to document any community concerns and other input. All property owners within 300 feet of the project and community groups or organizations were notified by meeting flyers that were mailed by the applicant on February 28, 2024. Only two people, a property owner and grandson who own a rental house across Pulgas Avenue from the site, attended the meeting. They inquired about the potential impacts of the proposal on the values of other properties in the neighborhood and expressed their initial support for the proposal.

The Planning staff, along with partner City departments/divisions and other districts/agencies participated in a Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting on April 17, 2024, to discuss the project and any potential issues with respect to compliance with the Municipal Code and applicable state land use and planning legislation. Participants included representatives from the City’s Planning, Building, and Engineering (Public Works) Divisions, East Palo Alto Police Department (EPAPD), Menlo Fire Protection District, Veolia Water, and East Palo Alto Sanitary District (EPASD).

The goal of the Pre-application process is to allow City staff and partner agencies to work with the applicant and coordinate an early review of major and complex applications. During this process, feedback is solicited from the community and the Planning Commission, often in the form of a study session, to help identify potential issues and solutions prior to the filing of a formal application.

The following table (Tabel 4) describes the required Development Standards for the R-MD-2 Subzone, and the proposed project’s compliance with these standards:
3 City of East Palo Alto 20% Inclusionary Housing Requirement. See Housing webpage:
https://www.cityofepa.org/housing/page/inclusionary-housing 4 See City Community Outreach Policy: https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/community-outreachpolicy 475
Table 4: Development Standards
Land Use Designation /
Element
Code Regulations
(R-MD-2)
Proposed Complies
General Plan Medium Density
Residential
No Change Yes
Zoning R-MD-2 MultipleFamily Medium Density
Residential sub zone 2
No Change Yes
Height R-MD-1: 3 stories or 36
ft., whichever is greater
3 & 4 Stories
| 46 -feet
Yes5
Setbacks Front 20 ft 10 ft (after 20
ft dedication)
Yes6
Corner Vision
Triangle
12 ft N/A N/A
Side/St Side 10 ft 10 ft Yes
Rear 1st & 2nd
Stories
20ft & 30 ft 10 ft Yes7
Min Parcel
Dimensions
Area 5,000 sq. ft. 92,161 sf Yes
Width 50 ft. 746 ft Yes
Depth 100 ft. 136 ft Yes
Lot Area | Coverage Allowed 5,000 sf. | 3,000 sf 92,161 sf | 58,983 sf
Yes
Site Coverage 60 % 3,000 sf. allowed) 64% Yes8
FAR (Floor Area Ratio) 0.65 3,250 sf allowed) 1.79 Yes9 Density/Intensity 12 to 22 du/acre 29.4 du/acre Yes10
Open Space &
Landscaping
Common OS 250 sq. ft./unit TBD TBD
Private OS Ground Fl units: 200
sq. ft. = 6,000 sf
200x30 =
6,000 sf
Yes
Upper Fl units: 100 sq.
ft. = 3,200 sf
100x32 =
3,200 sf
Yes
Parking 3 BR or more – 2
spaces/unit = 124
124 Yes

0.2 guest spaces per
unit = 12.4
11 Yes11
Because this is a pre-application meeting, the materials provided for Design Review are intentionally conceptual and not as detailed as expected with a formal development application.

Therefore, the proposed development is malleable pending input from the community, Planning Commission, and City Council study sessions. The input gathered would inform the size, site 5 Concession/Incentive #1: Increase Building Height from a maximum 36-feet to 46-feet. 6 Concession/Incentive #2: Decrease Front Setback from 20-feet to 10-feet after 20-foot dedication for public right-of-way.
7 Concession/Incentive #3: Decrease Rear Setback from 20-feet (first story) and 30-feet (second story) to 10-feet.
8 Waiver #1: Increase maximum Site Coverage from 60% to 64%. 9 Waiver #2: Increase maximum Floor Area Ratio from a maximum 0.65 to 1.79. 10 Density Bonus
11 Waiver #3: Decrease size of typical Parking Space to 8-feet by 16-feet. 476
design, and architecture of the proposed project which would then be finalized and presented for design review and entitlement.

Land Use and Housing:

1. General Plan and Zoning Designations:

The subject site has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Medium Density Residential.

This land use designation provides for the development of a wide range of living accommodations, including house-form multi-family structures, row houses, small-scale apartments, and cooperatives. This designation is intended to provide for an increase in housing units in the City to meet affordability and other community goals. It is located in the City to provide a transition between higher intensity residential and commercial areas and low-density residential neighborhoods. A wide variety of building types are allowed in this designation ranging from duplexes to small scale apartment buildings. The designation ensures that new development complements the scale of existing structures and the existing pattern of development.

Allowed land uses include a range of multi-family residential uses such as duplexes, triplexes, quadruplexes, row houses, townhouses, courtyard multi-family buildings and small-scale multi-family buildings. Education, cultural, and public assembly uses are conditionally allowed. Density/Intensity range is 12.1 - 22 units/acre or 40 to 80 persons/acre with a maximum development height of 3 stories and 36 feet.

The R-MD zone is divided into two subzones, R-MMD-1 and R-MD-2, with both intended to implement the Medium Density Residential General Plan. Therefore, the proposal to rezone from one subzone to the other would maintain the parcel’s consistency with the General Plan. However, in analyzing the proposal, it is important to ensure that rezoning the property would maintain a contextual fit and not disrupt the structure, character and cohesion of the surrounding neighborhood. Additionally, that the required City of East Palo Alto Municipal Code (EPAMC) findings for a Zoning Map Amendment can be made. Some of the characteristics that benefit the site include its proximity to: 1) three major streets in the City which ensure convenient vehicular access to the site without significantly affecting the surrounding neighborhood with cut-through traffic, and 2) existing and potential high intensity development at the Light Tree apartments and the mini storage site should it redevelop into a future mixed-use development.

2. Inclusionary Housing Requirement:

The applicant would request a Design Review permit to develop the project if the Zoning Map Amendment is approved. That development would be subject to the requirements of EPAMC Chapter 18.37 - Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO), adopted by the City Council on November 19, 2019. The applicant is proposing a project with 30% (10% low and 20% moderate) inclusionary housing units, which is higher than the required 20%, , in order to gain a cumulative density bonus of 35%. This higher density bonus would result in a total of 62 townhouse units (see scenario 3 of Table 3). While a 30% inclusionary housing project would produce 13.8 affordable units (4.6 low-income units and 9.2 moderate-income units) the applicant has indicated a willingness to provide a total of 16 affordable units (7 lowincome units and 9 moderate-income units). 477

3. State Density Bonus Law:

The State density bonus law requires a city or county to provide a developer who agrees to construct specified percentages of units for lower income, very low income, or senior citizen housing, among others, with a density bonus and other incentives, concessions, and waivers upon request. If the City Council approves the Zoning Map Amendment, the applicant would pursue a Design Review permit and request a density bonus based on including 10% low-come units and 20% moderate-income units. Pursuant to the City’s Affordable Housing-Density Bonus ordinance (EPAMC Chapter 18.36), the project would qualify for a 35% density bonus (20% bonus from the of 10% low-income units and 15% bonus from the 20% moderate-income units). Table 5 shows a breakdown of the affordable and market rate units by scenario.

Table 5: Affordable and Market Rate Units by Scenario
Based on rezoning to R-MD-2 Multiple-family medium density residential (12 - 22 du/ac) Scenario
No.

Inclusionary Eligible
Density
Bonus
Base
Units
Density
Bonus
Units
Total
Units
Units Breakdown
80%
AMI
120%
AMI
80%
AMI
120%
AMI
Market
Units
1 0% 20%12 15% 46 7 53 0 9 44
2 0% 30% 25% 46 12 58 0 14 44
3 10% 0% 20% 46 9
62 5 048 0% 20% 15% 7 0 9
In addition to the density bonus the City would also be required, pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(d), to provide three (3) “incentives”/ “concessions” (one from including 10% low-income units and two from 20% moderate-income units) that may be used to reduce site development standards or modify zoning code or architectural design requirements, such as reduction in setbacks or minimum square footage requirements and others which result in cost reductions. Other forms of assistance or relief which density bonus projects benefit from include, among others, waivers or reductions of development standards, maximum parking requirements, and special parking requirements based on level of affordability and proximity to transit.

The applicant would require the City to grant the following three (3) concessions and three (3) waivers (as noted in Table 4) to accomplish the project. These are:
a. Concession/Incentive #1: Increase Building Height from a maximum 36-feet to 46- feet.
b. Concession/Incentive #2: Decrease Front Setback from 20-feet to 10-feet after 20- foot dedication for public right-of-way.
c. Concession/Incentive #3: Decrease Rear Setback from 20-feet (first story) and 30- feet (second story) to 10-feet.
d. Waiver #1: Increase maximum Site Coverage from 60% to 64%. e. Waiver #2: Increase maximum Floor Area Ratio from a maximum 0.65 to 1.79. f. Waiver #3: Decrease size of typical Parking Space to 8-feet by 16-feet.

Any standards that may physically prevent the project from being built at the permitted density with the granted concessions/incentives must be waived by the city. As of January 1, 2024, Senate Bill SB 713 prohibits cities from requiring reasonable documentation to 12 City of East Palo Alto 20% Inclusionary Housing Requirement. See Housing webpage:
https://www.cityofepa.org/housing/page/inclusionary-housing 478
verify claims of a project’s financial infeasibility when “incentives or concessions” or “waivers or reductions of development standards” are requested.

Findings Required for all Development Code and Zoning Map Amendments. • The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; and
The R-MD-1 and R-MD-2 designations are subzones of the Multiple-family Medium Density Residential zone. The only differences between them are the code standards for allowable density and building height. All other objective development standards are the same. Since they both implement the site’s General Plan land use designation of Medium Density Residential a rezoning from one subzone to the other would maintain the required General Plan consistency without the need for a General Plan amendment. • The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City.

A zoning map amendment would allow additional residential development. . The increased traffic associated with the additional housing may, however, not significantly impact the surrounding neighborhood with congestion or cut-through traffic due to the site’s proximity to primary transportation amenities (US 101 and East Bayshore Road) and Pulgas Avenue, which is a major transit route (Route 280) connecting the Palo Alto train station to University Village at Purdue Avenue and Illinois Street. The project would probably require the preparation of a transportation impact study.

Additional Finding for Zoning Map Amendments.
• The affected site is physically suitable in terms of design, location, operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access, and public services and utilities and is served by highways and streets adequate in width and improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use would likely generate, to ensure that the proposed use(s) and/or development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located.

The proposed project would allow the development of 62 three-story rowhouses with provisions for the required automobile and bicycle parking and open space amenities pursuant to the East Palo Alto Municipal Code (EPAMC). All the amenities and services needed for the project to operate independently, without impacting the surrounding environment, would be provided. Secondly, the site is located in an already developed area of the City with ready access to public and emergency vehicles, and public services and utilities. Finally, the site has good accessibility due to its location in proximity to major transportation infrastructure.
479
Site Design and Building Architecture:

The proposed project would offer a 20-foot dedication to the City, required to complete the Pulgas Avenue right-of-way. Two vehicular access points would be provided at the boundary of the remaining supermarket parcel to the south and the northern edge of the site. The required vehicular and bicycle parking would be accommodated in the parking garage tucked behind the front rowhouses and under the rear units (Figure 4). The southerly access lane would also double as a service lane for garbage collection and various other mechanical equipment.

The proposed project consists of two rows of 62 multistory, single-family dwellings that would share at least one wall with neighboring homes. The front row includes 30 units and the back row 32 units (Figure 5). The dwellings are typical rowhouses – townhouses that share distinctive characteristics with their neighboring units – and are uniform in size and general appearance with similar roof lines and foundations.

Figure 4
480
The front rowhouses are three-stories tall and configured in three banks of gable-roofed units interspersed with two flat-roofed units (8th and 23rd units) strategically located to break up the monotony of a long, homogenous façade. The flat-roofed units would also be finished and painted in a different color than the rest of the rowhouses, for further differentiation and visual interest. The front façade is well articulated, finished in masonry plaster and vertical stained wood slats and vertical sliding windows, and adorned with black colored decorative stormwater pipes (Figure 6). There is a surface-parking garage tucked behind the front rowhouses with the rear three-story units sitting on top, and thus constituting four stories at 46-feet. The two rows of units are arranged to transition from four stories in the rear to three stories upfront so as not to overwhelm the residences along the Pulgas Avenue corridor.

Figure 6
Figure 5
481
Private Open Spaces are provided on top of the parking garage, in-between the front and rear units in the form of landscaped and horizontally articulated alley of spaces (Figure 7).

Common Open Space would be provided by way of community rooms and amenity spaces for urban living.

To view more illustrative Rezoning and Design Review Plans please view the project webpage at: https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/project/1933-pulgas-avenue-pre-application Fiscal Impact
This development application has no fiscal impact on the General Fund.

Public Outreach
The public was provided with notice by making the agenda and report available on the City’s website and on a bulletin-board located at City Hall: 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto. A notice was also published in the Palo Alto Daily News on April 12, 2024.

The project applicant held an in-person community meeting on March 21, 2024 at the Lewis and Joan Platt YMCA building at 550 Bell Street in East Palo Alto. The applicant team, Planning staff, and two (2) interested parties attended the meeting. They were a property owner and grandson who own a rental house across from the site. They inquired about the potential impacts of the proposal on values of other properties in the neighborhood and expressed their initial support for the proposal.

If the applicant continues to pursue this development application, more community outreach and public meetings will be required per the Community Outreach Policy. Please see the following webpage to learn more: https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/communityoutreach-policy.

Figure 7
482
Environmental Review
The Pre-Application is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as its sole purpose is to seek information and is not by itself implementable. However, formal Zone Map Amendment and Design Review applications would qualify as projects. At that time the projects will be fleshed out to determine the full scope of environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Based on best practice the Zoning Map Amendment may likely qualify to rely on the Environmental Impact Report for the Vista 2035 General Plan for environmental clearance, while the rowhouse project, as an infill development, may qualify for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption, as described below:
15332. In-Fill Development Projects - Class 32 consists of projects characterized as in-fill development meeting the following conditions:
a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

This class is not intended to be applied to projects which would result in any significant traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality effects.

Next Steps
Because the proposed project is deemed a Complex Project pursuant to the East Palo Alto Municipal Code (EPAMC) Sections 18.82.030(A)(1) (b)(3) and (a)(2)13, and since the Zoning Map Amendment (rezoning) is a legislative action subject to City Council consideration and ordinance, it is staff’s goal to subject this pre-application to maximum outreach and study, for the benefit of the applicant, prior to formal application. Staff are aware of the time and financial investments involved in the city’s legislative and quasi-judicial land use review processes and the outreach process will ensure early community input. Therefore, in the spirit of transparency and comprehensive outreach, the proposed project would be scheduled to the City Council for feedback and comments following the Planning Commission’s discussion of the preliminary review application.
13 See City Community Outreach Policy: https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/community-outreachpolicy 483
Government Code § 84308
Applicability of Levine Act: No, at this stage, as an informational meeting only, the proposed action does not yet involve an entitlement.

Analysis of Levine Act Compliance: Not applicable.

Attachments

1. East Palo Alto General Plan and Zoning Maps

2. Illustrative Flood Zones Map

3. Illustrative Rezoning Plans
484
485
486
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

COVER SHEET
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
G0.01

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 1 OF 39
UL = Unlimited; NP = Not Permitted; NS = Buildings not equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system; S = Buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1; S13R = Buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2; S13D = Buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.3. a. See Chapters 4 and 5 for specific exceptions to the allowable height in this chapter. b. See Section 903.2 for the minimum thresholds for protection by an automatic sprinkler system for specific occupancies. c. New Group H occupancies are required to be protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.2.5. d. The NS value is only for use in evaluation of existing building height in accordance with the California Existing Building Code. e. Group I-3 occupancies are required to be protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.2.6. f. New and existing Group I-2 occupancies are required to be protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.2.6 .
g. For new Group I-4 occupancies, see Exceptions 2 and 3 of Section 903.2.6. h. New Group R occupancies are required to be protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.2.8. i. See Sections 407.1.1 and 408.1.2 for specific exceptions to construction type, allowable building areas and allowable heights. j. Restraint shall not be permitted in any building except in Group I-3 occupancies constructed for such use(see Section 408.1.2). k. Nonambulatory persons shall be limited to the first 2 stories. l. Nonambulatory persons shall be limited to the first 5 stories. m. Nonambulatory elderly clients are not permitted in buildings of these types of construction. See Sections 435.3.3 and 435.3.4. n. In other than Group A, E, H, I, L and R occupancies, high-rise buildings, and other applications listed in Section 1.11 regulated by the Office of the State Fire Marshal, the S increases for height and stories in Tables 504.3 and 504.4 are permitted in addition to the S area increase in accordance with Table 506.2. o. For Group R-2 buildings of Type VA construction equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, S area increase is permitted in addition to the height and story increase provided the height shall not exceed 60 feet and 4 stories. p. See Section 436.1 for additional regulations for child-care centers and adult day care.

RESIDENTIAL AREA CALCULATIONS BY FLOOR
LEVEL

FIRST FLOOR
SECOND
FLOOR

THIRD FLOOR
FOURTH

FLOOR / ROOF
TYPE
1A
VB
VB
VB

GROSS AREA (SQ FT)
59,233
41,722
41,918
21,748
164,621 ft²
S/CD
SD

FACE OF STUD, CONCRETE OR
CENTER OF STEEL U.O.N.

FACE OF FINISH
1933 PULGAS AVENUE
1 9 3 3 P u l g a s A v e n u e , E a s t P a l o A l t o

DIRECTORY

VICINITY MAP
RG-Architecture
428 South Van Ness Ave
San Francisco, CA 94103
415.649.6202
Riyad Ghannam, AIA, Principal
[email protected]

ARCHITECT
OWNER

ABBREVIATIONS

WATER CLOSET (TOILET)

WASHING MACHINE

WATER RESISTANT

WATERPROOF, WORK

UNLESS OTHERWISE

TOILET PAPER HOLDER

TONGUE AND GROOVE

SEE STRUCTURAL

DRAWINGS

SMOKE DETECTOR

PRESSURE TREATED

PLASTIC LAMINATE

NOT IN CONTRACT
DET. DETAIL REQ. REQUIRED
INT. INTERIOR

W/O WITHOUT
MISC.

MIN.

MFR.

MECH.

MAX.

M.

LT.

LAV.

JT.

MISCELLANEOUS

MANUFACTURER

MECHANICAL

MINIMUM

MAXIMUM
MASTER
LIGHT

LAVATORY
JOINT
W.R.

W.P.

YD. YARD
POINT
INSUL.

GYP. BD.

I.G.

I.D.

HT.

HORIZ.

HDWR.

HDR.

H.B.

H.

GALV.

GA.

FTG.

FT.

F.S.M.F
F.O.S.

F.O.F
F.O.

FL.

FIN.

FDN.

F.D.

EXT.

EQ.

ELEC.

EL.

EA.
(E)
E
DWR
DWG.

D.W.

D.S.

DR.

DN.

DISP.

DIM.

DIA.

D.F.

FACE OF
T&G

GYPSUM BOARD

INSULATED GLASS

INSIDE DIAMETER

INSULATION
HEIGHT

HORIZONTAL

HARDWARE
HEADER

HOSE BIB
HIGH

GALVANIZED

MEMBRANE FLASHING

FLEXIBLE SHEET

FACE OF STUD

FACE OF FINISH
GAUGE

FOOTING
FEET
W.

WD.

WH.

W.C.

W/
W.

VERT.

V.G.

V.I.F.

V.

WEST

WATER HEATER
WOOD
WITH

VERTICAL GRAIN

VERIFY IN FIELD

VERTICAL
VENT
TRSM.

U.O.N
TYP.

T.V.

T.P.H.

T.O.W.

T.O.P.

T.O.C.

T.O.

TRANSOM

TELEVISION
NOTED

TYPICAL

TOP OF WALL

TOP OF PLATE

TOP OF CURB
TOP OF
EAST

FLOOR DRAIN
FLOOR
FINISH

FOUNDATION

EXTERIOR
EQUAL

ELECTRICAL

ELEVATION
EACH

EXISTING

DISHWASHER

DOWN SPOUT

DOUGLAS FIR
DRAWER

DRAWING
DOOR
DOWN

DISPOSER

DIMENSION

DIAMETER
SPEC. SPECIFICATION
STRUCT.

SUSP.

T.

T.B.

SYM.

STOR.

S.S.D.

STL.

STD.

SQ.

STRUCTURAL

TOWEL BAR

SUSPENDED
SYMBOL
TREAD

STORAGE

STANDARD
SQUARE
STEEL
S.C.

SHEATH'G
SECT.

SIM.

SHT.

S.D.

RDWD.

R.O.

S.

RM.

SOLID CORE

SHEATHING

SIMILAR

SECTION
SHEET

REDWOOD

ROUGH OPENING
SOUTH
ROOM
DBL.

D.

CTR.

CONT.

CLR.

C.J.

B.U.R
BLKG.

BLDG.

APPROX.

ASPH.

ARCH.

A.F.F.

ADJ.

A.D.

ABV
C
@
L

AT (N) NEW

CONTROL JOINT

BUILT-UP ROOFING
DOUBLE
DRYER
CENTER

CONTINUOUS
CLEAR

BLOCKING

BUILDING

ARCHITECTURAL

APPROXIMATE

ABOVE FINISH FLOOR

ADJUSTABLE

AREA DRAIN

DIAMETER

ASPHALT
ABOVE

CENTERLINE
PL. PLATE
(R)
REINF.

REG.

REF.

R.A.

R.

PLYWD.

P.LAM.

P.T.

RELOCATED

REINFORCED

REGISTER

REFRIGERATOR

RETURN AIR

RISE, RISER

PLYWOOD
OPNG.

O/
OPP.

O.H.

O.C.

N.T.S
NOM.

N.I.C.

NO.

OPPOSITE

OVERHANG

OPENING
OVER

ON CENTER

NOT TO SCALE

NOMINAL
NUMBER
PTD. PAINTED

PL PROPERTY LINE

WRB WATER RESISTANT BARRIER

MECHANICAL/

ELECTRIC/PLUMBING
M.E.P.

FF. FINISHED FLOOR
CLG. CEILING
C.H. CEILING HEIGHT
R.D. ROOF DRAIN
S.A.B.F. SELF-ADHERED

BITUMINOUS FLASHING
S.M.D. SEE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS

RECESSED WALL LIGHT FIXTURE

TRACK AND STRIP

LIGHT FIXTURES

CONCEALED STRIP LIGHT

FIXTURE

FLUOR EXPOSED STRIP LIGHT FIXTURE

RECESSED CEILING

LIGHT FIXTURE

RECESSED DIRECTIONAL

LIGHT FIXTURE

WALL MOUNTED LIGHT FIXTURE

SURFACE CEILING

LIGHT FIXTURE

EXISTING CONTOURS

NEW OR FINISHED CONTOURS

ELECTRICAL/ MECHANICAL SYMBOLS

PROPERTY LINE

SPOT ELEVATION

LEVEL LINE OR DATUM
ROOM NO. O/

MATERIAL CODE
FLOOR | WALL | CEILING
+100.0'
###
A#.#
#

REFERENCE SYMBOLS

GRID OR REFERENCE LINE

SKYLIGHT SYMBOL

WINDOW SYMBOL
# = WINDOW TYPE
LETTER = OITC RATING

WALL (FLOOR) TYPE

DOOR SYMBOL
A
W(F)##
S##
##A
D##

ELECTRICAL/MECHANICAL SYMBOLS

GROUND FAULT INTERRUPT

FLUSH FLOOR MOUNTED
OUTLET
240V ELECTRICAL OUTLET

ELECTRICAL OUTLET FOR

PICTURE LIGHT

ELECTRICAL OUTLET,

FULLY SWITCHED

ELECTRICAL OUTLET,

HALF-SWITCHED

SINGLE ELECTRICAL

OUTLET, DIRECT WIRED
P
GFI

FOURPLEX OUTLET

DUPLEX OUTLET
##
##

HIDDEN EDGE, ABOVE OR
BEYOND

HIDDEN EDGE, BELOW OR
BEHIND
R

MD MOTION DETECTOR &

PHOTOCONTROL LIGHT FIXTURE

DIMMER SWITCH
4-WAY SWITCH

PULL SWITCH
3-WAY SWITCH

ELECTRICAL SWITCH
PS
4 3

MANUAL-ON OCCUPANCY

SENSOR SWITCH

SMOKE DETECTOR

J JUNCTION BOX

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER
HEAD

DOWNSPOUT

EXHAUST FAN/ LIGHT UNIT

RETURN AIR GRILL AT

CEILING

RETURN AIR GRILL AT
FLOOR

RETURN AIR GRILL AT WALL

SUPPLY AIR REGISTER

AT CEILING

SUPPLY AIR REGISTER

AT FLOOR

SUPPLY AIR REGISTER AT

WALL OR TOE SPACE

EXHAUST FAN

CEILING FAN

T THERMOSTAT
DS

FD FLOOR DRAIN

SPEAKER OUTLET

MOTION DETECTOR
SP
MD

GARAGE DOOR OPENER
SWITCH

ALARM KEYPAD

INTERCOM STATION

DOOR BELL BUTTON

DOOR CHIME
KP
GD
I
DC
DB
SC
W

SCENE CONTROL

MASTER UNIT

SCENE CONTROL REMOTE

WALL STATION

HOT WATER CONNECTION

C COLD WATER CONNECTION

CENTRAL VACUUM

HOSE BIB

GAS OUTLET
HB
G
V
H

PLUG MOLD
SU

STEAM UNIT CONTROL
PANEL

MULTI-FUNCTION SMOKE &

CO DETECTOR
MM1 (1) CAT-6 & (1) RG6 QUAD
(1) 24/4 PAIR CAT-3
MM2 (2) CAT-6 & (2) RG6 QUAD
CAT-6 (1) 24/4 PAIR CAT-6
TV (1) RG6 QUAD

HDMI HDMI

NEW WALL (PLAN VIEW)
HATCH = STRUCTURE
OUTLINE = FINISH

DEMO WALL (PLAN VIEW)

EXISTING WALL (PLAN VIEW)
SECTION MARKER:

DRAWING # O/ SHEET #
A#.#
#
A#.#
#
DETAIL MARKER:

DRAWING # O/ SHEET #
ELEVATION MARKER:

DRAWING # O/ SHEET #
A B C
G## GUARD SYMBOL
TABLE 705.5 COMPLIANCE
FIRE-RESISTANCE RATING REQUIREMENTS FOR EXTERIOR WALLS BASED ON FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE. a, d, g.

FIRE RESISTANCE SUMMARY
TABLE 601 COMPLIANCE

FIRE-RESISTANCE RATING REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDING ELEMENTS (HOURS) W.R.C. WESTERN RED CEDAR
Ø
CIVIL

STRUCTURAL
MEP

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

ACOUSTICAL ENGINEERING
01 CODES: ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM WITH OR EXCEED THE REQUIREMENTS OF CURRENT

APPLICABLE CITY, COUNTY AND STATE CODES, AND ALL OTHER APPLICABLE CODES,

ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO FIRE DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS, UTILITY COMPANY REQUIREMENTS, AND THE BEST TRADE PRACTICES. SEE CODE EDITIONS ON THIS SHEET.
02 PERMITS: BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FILE ALL REQUIRED

CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS, OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED PERMITS, AND PAY ALL FEES REQUIRED BY GOVERNING AGENCIES. 03 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING

CONDITIONS IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK, AND SHALL REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN DRAWINGS AND FIELD CONDITIONS TO THE ARCHITECT. CALLEDOFF DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED-OFF DIMENSIONS. DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF STRUCTURE (STUD, CONCRETE, STEEL), UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

DIMENSIONS IN SECTIONS AND ELEVATIONS ARE TO TOP OF PLATE OR TOP OF SUB-PLATE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ELEVATION MARKERS ARE TO TOP OF FINISHED FLOORS 04 PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS: THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SUPPLEMENT EACH OTHER.

CONTRACTOR TO IMMEDIATELY REPORT ANY ERRORS, OMISSIONS, AMBIGUITIES OR

CONFLICTS IN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS TO THE ARCHITECT, AND UNTIL THEY ARE RESOLVED, SHALL NOT PROCEED WITH THE AFFECTED WORK.
05 DETAILS: DETAILS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL. SIMILAR DETAILS SHALL APPLY IN SIMILAR CONDITIONS. MINOR DETAILS NOT USUALLY SHOWN OR SPECIFIED, BUT NECESSARY FOR

PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF ANY PART OF THE WORK SHALL BE INCLUDED AS IF THEY WERE INDICATED IN THE DRAWINGS.
06 COORDINATION: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL WORK PROCEDURES WITH REQUIREMENTS OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND BUILDING MANAGEMENT. 07 CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MEANS,

METHODS, TECHNIQUES AND SEQUENCES OF CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE

FOR THE PROTECTION OF ALL CONDITIONS AND MATERIALS WITHIN THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AREA. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DESIGN AND INSTALL ADEQUATE SHORING

AND BRACING FOR ALL STRUCTURAL OR REMOVAL TASKS UNTIL THE NEW PERMANENT STRUCTURE CAN PROVIDE ADEQUATE VERTICAL AND LATERAL SUPPORT. THE CONTRACTOR

SHALL HAVE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGE OR INJURIES CAUSED BY OR DURING THE EXECUTION OF THE WORK.
08 INSTALLATION: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LAY OUT HIS OWN WORK, AND SHALL PROVIDE ALL DIMENSIONS REQUIRED FOR OTHER TRADES (PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, ETC.). ALL MATERIALS

AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE INSTALLED IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S

PRINTED INSTRUCTIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS, UNLESS AGREED TO OTHERWISE BY THE ARCHITECTS.
09 SUBCONTRACTORS: PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED BY PERSONS

LICENSED IN THEIR TRADES, WHO SHALL ARRANGE FOR AND OBTAIN INSPECTIONS AND REQUIRED SIGN_OFFS.
10 REPAIR: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DO ALL CUTTING, PATCHING, REPAIRING AS REQUIRED TO

PERFORM ALL OF THE WORK INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS, AND ALL OTHER WORK THAT MAY BE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE JOB.
11 ABANDONMENT: ALL PIPING AND WIRING SHALL BE REMOVED TO A POINT OF CONCEALMENT AND SHALL BE PROPERLY CAPPED OR PLUGGED.
12 CLOSE-OUT: THE CONTRACTOR, UPON COMPLETION OF THE WORK, SHALL ARRANGE FOR DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS INSPECTIONS AND SIGN-OFFS AS REQUIRED. 13 UPON COMPLETION OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTION AN ERRC TEST SHALL BE CONDUCTED PER SFFD REQUIREMENTS, AND IF IT FAILS, AN ERRC SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED. 14 CABLING AND SHAFTS FOR FIRE ALARM SYSTEM SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH 2-HOUR SURVIVABILITY PER 2016 NFPA 72.
15 FIRE ALARM CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH 2013 NFPA 72, INCLUDING LOW FREQUENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR SLEEPING AREAS. A LIVING ROOM SHALL BE CONSIDERED A POTENTIAL SLEEPING AREA.
16 PROVIDE TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION DEVICE AT ELEVATOR AT ALL LEVELS ABOVE MEZZANINE, PER CBC 1007.8.

GENERAL NOTES

SCOPE OF WORK
PLANNING CODE SUMMARY:

PROJECT SITE: 1933 PULGAS AVENUE, EAST PALO ALTO CA 94303 APN #: 063-492-280
ZONING DISTRICT: EXISTING: R-MD-1
PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE: R-MD-2
GENERAL PLAN: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
LOT AREA: 110,476 SF / 2.536 ACRES
92,161 SF / 2,110 ACRE RESIDENTIAL
18,315 SF / 0.426 ACRE COMMERCIAL
HEIGHT LIMIT: 3 STORIES OR 36 FEET
UNIT COUNT - TOTAL: 62 UNITS
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING: 16 UNITS ( 9 LOW INCOME + 7 MODERATE INCOME) REAR SETBACK: REQUIRED: 20' FOR 1ST FLOOR AND 30' FOR 2ND & 3RD FLOOR.

PROPOSED: 10'
FRONT SETBACK: REQUIRED: 20'
PROPOSED: 30' INCLUDING 20' EASEMENT
SIDE SETBACK: REQUIRED: 10'
PROPOSED: 10'
SITE COVERAGE: REQUIRED: 60%
PROPOSED: LOT COVERAGE RESIDENTIAL - 64%
PROPOSED: LOT COVERAGE COMMERCIAL - 28%
FLOOR AREA RATIO: REQUIRED: .65
PROPOSED: RESIDENTIAL FAR - 1.79 (FOR RESIDENTIAL LOT)
PROPOSED: COMMERCIAL FAR - 0.28 (FOR COMMERCIAL LOT)
OFF STREET PARKING: CAR PARKING REQUIRED: 2 SPACES PER UNIT + 0.2 GUEST PARKING PER UNIT.

CAR PARKING PROPOSED: 120 RESIDENTIAL SPACES + 10 GUEST PARKING SPACES + 5 ADA PARKING.

BIKE PARKING: REQUIRED: TBD
PROPOSED: ONE CLASS 1 BICYCLE PARKING PER RESIDENTIAL UNIT PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: REQUIRED: 200 SF OPEN SPACE PER UNIT (GROUND FLOOR UNITS) & 100’ (UPPER FLOOR UNITS). MINIMUM DIMENSION SHALL BE 6 FEET.

PROPOSED: EACH RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT PROVIDED WITH PRIVATE OPEN SPACE IN COMPLIANCE WITH EAST PALO ALTO DEVELOPMENT CODE 2018, TITLE 18, ARTICLE 2, CHAPTER 18.10.

COMMON OPEN SPACE: NA
BUILDING CODE SUMMARY:

CONSTRUCTION TYPE: TYPE VA OVER TYPE 1A GARAGE:

OCCUPANT GROUP: R-2: RESIDENTIAL THREE STORIES
S-2: GARAGE, BICYCLE PARKING, STORAGE, REFUSE & MEP ON GROUND FLOOR UNITS COUNT: PROPOSED - 62 RESIDENTIAL UNITS
BLDG. HT. & PROPOSED:

NUMBER OF STORY: BLDG. HT. 46' 0" MEASURED TO AVERAGE OF PITCHED ROOF.

STORIES: 3 TO 4 STORY BLDG; 3 LEVELS OF TYPE VA OVER GARAGE (R2,S-2) DEFERRED SUBMITTALS: SPRINKLER SYSTEM IS UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT

SOLAR PANELS UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT

EMERGENCY EVACUATION SIGNS UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT

STAIRWELL IDENTIFICATION SIGNS & EVACUATION SIGNS UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT

FIRE ALARM UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT

ERRC SYSTEM UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT
DEMOLISH EXISTING 1 AND 2 STORY RESIDENTAIL BUILDINGS ON THE EXISTING LOT.

ERECT A 3 & 4 STORY BUILDING CONSISTING OF 62 RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE UNITS, GARAGE AND SHARED AMENITIES.

PREVAILING CODES: 2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE & EAST PALO ALTO AMENDMENTS 2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE & EAST PALO ALTO AMENDMENTS 2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE & EAST PALO ALTO AMENDMENTS 2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE & EAST PALO ALTO AMENDMENTS 2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE & EAST PALO ALTO AMENDMENTS 2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE & EAST PALO ALTO AMENDMENTS 2022 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARD CODE

SURVEYOR
Romig Engineers, Inc. | Geotechnical Services
1390 El Camino Real, 2nd Floor | San Carlos, California 94070 Mobile (510) 295-7546 | Office (650) 591-5224
Michael Sacramento
[email protected]
Lea & Braze Engineering Inc.
2495 Industrial PKWY West
Hayward, CA 94545
510.887.4086 x133
Darren Bunting
[email protected]

THE CALIFORNIA STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW WILL BE EMPLOYED TO INCREASE THE BUILDING HEIGHT BY ONE ADDITIONAL STORIES.

ZONING WAIVERS:

1. WAIVE INCREASE HEIGHT

2. WAIVE DENSITY

3. WAIVE SITE COVERAGE

4. WAIVE FLOOR AREA RATIO

5. WAIVE REAR YARD SETBACK

6. WAIVE PARKING WIDTH DIMENSION FROM 9' TO 8'
Wawaland LLC
6044 Stevenson Blvd
Fremont CA 94538
650.699.6999
Wa Li
[email protected]
TOTAL
A (2) 3 BD 1,707 SF 3,414 SF NET AREA 3.2 %
B (26) 3 BD 1,821 SF 47,346 SF NET AREA 41.9 %
C (2) 2 BD 1,248 SF 2,496 SF NET AREA 3.2 %
D (20) 4 BD 1,846 SF 36,920 SF NET AREA 32.3 %
E (6) 4 BD 1,804 SF 10,824 SF NET AREA 9.7 %
F (4) 4 BD 1,954 SF 7,816 SF NET AREA 6.5 %
G (2) S 608 SF 1,216 SF NET AREA 3.2 %

UNIT MIX

UNIT MIX

TYPE QUANTITY NET SQ FT NET SQ FT TOTAL
TOTAL 62 110,032 SF 100 %
487
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

NEIGHBOR
PHOTOS
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
G0.02

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.2OF39

SUBJECTLOT

1. 1
4 3
2 141312111098765

2. 3.4.

5.6. 7.8.

9.10. 11.12.

13.14. 15.16.
151
6 488
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

SITE ANALYSIS
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
G0.03

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 3 OF 39
Address: 1933 Pulgas Avenue
APN: 063-492-280
Lot Size:

SITE ANALYSIS
Existing Use:

Zoning:

Existing Non-Conforming Retail Commercial, Single Family Residential & Storage R-MD-2, Proposed Zone Change
2 746'-6"
0'-
0 "
1 4
2'-
2 "
2 0'-
0 "
1 1
6'-
1 "
183'-0" 41'-8"
373'-3"
43'-3"
107'-3"
18,315 sq ft 92,161 sq ft
104'-6" 642'-0"
2 0'-
0 "
10'-0"
10'-0" 10'-0"
10'-0"
2 0'-
0 10 "'-0"
20'-0"
(N) COMMERCIAL PARCEL 0.426 ACRES

EASEMENT
(N) RESIDENTIAL PARCEL 2.110 ACRES
(E) 1 STORY

COMMERCIAL
BLDG

DASHED LINE OF REQUIRED SETBACKS
110,476 SF / 2.536 Acres Total Lot Area
92,161 SF / 2.110 Acres Residential.
18,315 SF / 0.426 Acres Commercial.

PROJECT SITE:

2.536 ACRE
110,476 SQ FT.

P
U
L
G
A
S
AV
E

EAST BAYSHORE DRIVE

BAYSHORE FREEWAY

WEST BAYSHORE DRIVE

CAMELLIA DRIVE
N
N
489
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

PROCESS
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
G0.04

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 4 OF 39
1933 Pulgas Avenue 5/5/23 CONCEPT| 04
428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture

CONCEPT

PULGAS AVENUE

PULGAS AVENUE

EXISTING LOT

DEMO/LOT DIVISION

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL

TO REMAIN

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL

TO REMAIN
(N) COMMERCIAL LOT

EXISTING CONDITIONS

REMOVE EXISTING STRUCTURES AND SUBDIVIDE LOT
(N) RESIDENTIAL LOT

PROCESS

PROPOSED

DEMO / LOT DIVISION
490
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

PROCESS
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
G0.05

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 5 OF 39
1933 Pulgas Avenue 5/5/23 CONCEPT| 05
428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture

CONCEPT

PULGAS AVENUE

PULGAS AVENUE
MULTI
FAMILY
30 BUILDINGS

HORIZONTAL

DIVISION

TYPICAL
MULTI
FAMILY

PROCESS EFFICIENT AND HIGH DENSITY,

BUT RESPONDS POORLY TO

NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT

APPROPRIATE ARCHETYPE,

BUT UNSUITABLE MASSING FOR

RESIDENTIAL PROGRAM
30 BUILDINGS

HORIZONTAL DIVISION

ALONG THE WIDTH OF THE LOT
491
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

PROCESS
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
G0.06

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 6 OF 39

PULGAS AVENUE

PULGAS AVENUE

PROCESS MASSING AND PROGRAM

APPROACHING EQUILIBRIUM

BUT SCALE AND DIVERSITY

LACKING

APPROPRIATE SCALE AND

INDIVIDUALITY INTRODUCED
60 BUILDINGS

HORIZONTAL DIVISION ALONG BOTH THE

WIDTH AND THE DEPTH OF THE LOT
492
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

EXTERIOR
PERSPECTIVE +

MATERIALS
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
G0.07

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 7 OF 39

THERMALLY MODIFIED WOOD WHITE ECO STUCCO CHARCOAL ECO STUCCO ALUMINUM-CLAD

WINDOWS

BITUMINOUS ROOFING SHINGLES

COOL ROOF GRAY

GALVANIZED STEEL GUARDRAIL

PRIMED AND PAINTED WHITE
493
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

EXTERIOR

PERSPECTIVES
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
G0.08

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 8 OF 39
N

RENDERING OF THE INTERIOR COURT

RENDERING OF THE INTERIOR COURT

ALTERNATIVE OPTION
1 KEYMAP
494
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

EXTERIOR

PERSPECTIVES
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
G0.09

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 9 OF 39
N

RENDERING OF THE INTERIOR COURT

RENDERING OF THE INTERIOR COURT

ALTERNATIVE OPTION
1 KEYMAP
495
1 933PulgasAvenue
1/12/24
SURVEY| R1.01
428SouthVanNessAvenue | SanFrancisco, CA94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture
STOP
STOP
496
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

EXISTING SITE
PLAN
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A1.01

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 11 OF 39

PULGAS AVENUE
C
A
M
E
L
L
AI D
R
VI E

E BAYSHORE ROAD
1920
PULGAS
AVENUE
1922
PULGAS
AVENUE
1924
PULGAS
AVENUE
1926
PULGAS
AVENUE
1928
PULGAS
AVENUE
1930
PULGAS
AVENUE
1932
PULGAS
AVENUE
1934
PULGAS
AVENUE
1936
PULGAS
AVENUE
1938
PULGAS
AVENUE
1940
PULGAS
AVENUE

PALO MOBILE ESTATES
1885 EAST BAYSHORE ROAD
1107

CAMELLA
DRIVE
203

VERBENA
DRIVE
171

VERBENA
DRIVE
1108

CAMELLA
DRIVE
1916
PULGAS
1914 AVENUE
PULGAS
AVENUE
1912
PULGAS
AVENUE
1961 EAST BAYSHORE ROAD
1895
PULGAS
AVENUE
1927
PULGAS
AVENUE

PALO MOBILE ESTATES
1885 EAST BAYSHORE ROAD
2 0'-0" 14
2'-2"
746'-6"
2 0'-0" 116'-1"
373'-3"
41'-8"
183'-0"
4 4'-6"
43'-3"
107'-3"
(E) BUILDING TO BE DEMOLISHED (E) BUILDING TO BE DEMOLISHED

LANDS OF WAWALAND LLC
110,476 SQ.FT.

2.536 ACRES
(GROSS)
95,546 SQ.FT.

2.193 ACRES
(NET)
(E) COMMERCIAL
1 STORY

BUILDING TO REMAIN
(E) RESIDENTIAL
1 STORY

BUILDING TO BE

DEMOLISHED
(E) RESIDENTIAL
1 STORY

BUILDING TO BE

DEMOLISHED
(E)
SHED
1 STORY
(E)
SHED
1 STORY
(E) PARKING LOT

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
TY
LIN
E
P
R
O
P
E
R
TY
LIN
E

PROPERTY LINE

EASEMENT & CURB
(E) RESIDENTIAL
1 STORY

BUILDING TO BE

DEMOLISHED
(E) RESIDENTIAL
1 STORY

BUILDING TO BE

DEMOLISHED

PROPERTY LINE

EASEMENT
SCALE: 1" = 30'
1 EXISTING SITE PLAN
0 30' 60'
N
497
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

PROPOSED SITE
PLAN
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A1.02

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 12 OF 39

PULGAS AVENUE
C
A
M
E
L
L
AI D
R
VI E

E BAYSHORE ROAD
1920
PULGAS
AVENUE
1922
PULGAS
AVENUE
1924
PULGAS
AVENUE
1926
PULGAS
AVENUE
1928
PULGAS
AVENUE
1930
PULGAS
AVENUE
1932
PULGAS
AVENUE
1934
PULGAS
AVENUE
1936
PULGAS
AVENUE
1938
PULGAS
AVENUE
1940
PULGAS
AVENUE

PALO MOBILE ESTATES
1885 EAST BAYSHORE ROAD
1107

CAMELLA
DRIVE
203

VERBENA
DRIVE
171

VERBENA
DRIVE
1108

CAMELLA
DRIVE
1916
PULGAS
1914 AVENUE
PULGAS
AVENUE
1912
PULGAS
AVENUE
1961 EAST BAYSHORE ROAD
1895
PULGAS
AVENUE
1927
PULGAS
AVENUE

PALO MOBILE ESTATES
1885 EAST BAYSHORE ROAD
N
96'-2"

TO CLOSEST HYDRANT
10'-0"
20'-0"

EASEMENT
18'-8"DRIVE ISLE
20'-7"

DRIVE ISLE
5'-0" SETBACK
10'-0"

SETBACK
13'-5"

SETBACK
19'-0"

SETBACK
5'-10"

SETBACK
21'-7"

SETBACK
10'-0"

SETBACK
20'-0" SETBACK
22'-0"

SETBACK
30'-0" SETBACK

FROM PROPERTY LINE
FDC

DRIVE ISLE

SOLAR PANELS

AS REQUIRED

LOBBY LOBBY
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT

NEW CURB CUT NEW CURB CUT
EXIT
GATE
COURT

RECYCLING

TRANSFORMER

EASEMENT

NEW PROPERTY LINE

ROOF DECKS & WALKWAY
(ABOVE GARAGE STORY)

SIDEWALK

GARDEN MARKET
1933 PULGAS AVE.
(E) COMMERCIAL
BUILDING 1 STORY

ELEVATOR ELEVATOR
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
(E) PARKING LOT
(REDUCED)
(N) RESIDENTIAL UNITS
4 STORIES TYPICAL
(N) RESIDENTIAL UNITS
3 STORIES TYPICAL
SCALE: 1" = 30'
1 PROPOSED SITE PLAN
0 30' 60'
RESIDENTIAL LOT:
92,161 SQ FT / 2.115 ACRE (GROSS)
79,362 SQ FT / 1.821 ACRE (NET)
COMMERCIAL LOT:
18,315 SQ FT / 0.426 ACRE (GROSS)
16,187 SQ FT / 0.371 ACRE (NET)
498
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A1.03

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.13OF39
BAINES STREET.

P
U
L
G
A
S
AV
E
N
U
E

CAMELLIA DRIVE

E BAYSHORE ROAD

W BAYSHORE ROAD
1920
PULGAS
AVENUE
1922
PULGAS
AVENUE
1924
PULGAS
AVENUE
1926
PULGAS
AVENUE
1928
PULGAS
AVENUE
1930
PULGAS
AVENUE
1932
PULGAS
AVENUE
1934
PULGAS
AVENUE
1936
PULGAS
AVENUE
1938
PULGAS
AVENUE
1940
PULGAS
AVENUE
1942
PULGAS
AVENUE
1944
PULGAS
AVENUE
1946
PULGAS
AVENUE
958
BAINS
STREET
956
BAINS
STREET
956
BAINS
STREET
952
BAINS
STREET
950
BAINS
STREET
948
BAINS
STREET
946
BAINS
STREET
944
BAINS
STREET
944
BAINS
STREET
942
BAINS
STREET
940
BAINS
STREET

PALOMOBILEESTATES
1885EASTBAYSHOREROAD
1107

CAMELLA
DRIVE
203

VERBENA
DRIVE
171

VERBENA
DRIVE
1108

CAMELLA
DRIVE
1916
PULGAS
1914
AVENUE
PULGAS
AVENUE
1912
PULGAS
AVENUE
1961EASTBAYSHOREROAD
1905EAST

BAYSHOREROAD
1895
PULGAS
AVENUE
1927
PULGAS
AVENUE
PA
L
O
M
O
BIL
E
E
S
TAT
E
S
1 8
8 5
E
A
S
T
B
AY
S
H
O
R
E
R
O
A
D

BAYSHORE FREEWAY
N
SCALE: 1"=40'
1 NEIGHBORHOODMAP
020'40'80'
1933PULGASAVE. NEW 62 RESIDENTIAL U
NITS
E
L
E
V/
S
TA
I
R
E
L
E
V/
S
TA
I
R
G
A
R
D
E
N
M
A
R
K
E
T
1 9
3 3
P
U
L
G
A
S
AV
E
N
U
E
499
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

FLOOR PLAN
STORY 1 /
GARAGE & 2
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.01

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 14 OF 39

TRANSFORMER
& ELECTRICAL
25YD GARBAGE TRUCK
65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 1 A5.02
RECYCLE 1
10'-0" 20'-0"

EASEMENT
5'-0" SETBACK
10'-0" SETBACK
13'-5"
19'-0"
5'-10"
21'-7"

SITE PLAN
20'-6" 18'-0" 25'-0"
48'-10" 20'-0" 10'-0" 32'-8" 76'-7"
63'-6"
11'-10"
33'-4" 26'-7" 34'-3" 49'-10" 42'-9"
19'-2"

FIRE HYDRANT
FDC

STANDPIPE STANDPIPE STANDPIPE

DOG WASHING STATION

ELEVATOR CONTROL ROOM

MANAGEMENT OFFICE

PACKAGE ROOM

ELEVATOR CONTROL ROOM
4 CARGO

STORAGE
4 STROLLER

STORAGE

BIKE REPAIR

STATION

PULGAS AVENUE
15 PARKING
SPACES
EGRESS
PATH

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL
120 RESIDENTIAL PARKING
10 GUEST PARKING
5 ADA PARKING
LOBBY

RECYCLE
2 TURNAROUND
BFP

LOADING ZONE LOADING ZONE

DOG RUN
PKG.

MAIL MAIL

ELECTRICAL
METERS
JANITORS CL. MECHANICAL
LOBBY

EGRESS PATH

SIDEWALK

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

EASEMENT

NEW PROPERTY LINE

GROSS BLDG
1 A2.07
5 A2.16
5 A4.01
N
96'-2"

TO CLOSEST HYDRANT
10'-0" SETBACK
20'-0" SETBACK
22'-0" SETBACK
30'-0" FRONT

SETBACK TO

PROPERTY LINE
31 BICYCLE PARKING 31 BICYCLE PARKING
4 A4.01
W/D
W/D
W/D

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D

W/D W/D
1 A5.02
1 A2.07
5 A2.16
5 A4.01
5'-0" SETBACK
10'-0" SETBACK
13'-5"
19'-0"
5'-10"
21'-7"

SITE PLAN
32'-8" 30'-10" 45'-9"
20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 9'-0" 3'-0"
32'-8" 30'-10" 32'-8"
31'-4"
19'-2"
8'-5"
12'-9"
4'-7"
20'-8"
79'-2"
26'-4" 126'-4"
0'-0"
25'-2"
10'-0" 20'-0"

EASEMENT

EXTERIOR WALKWAY

ABOVE GARAGE STORY

EXTERIOR WALK WAY EXTERIOR WALK WAY

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

EASEMENT

NEW PROPERTY LINE

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL

GROSS BLDG
N
4 A4.01
10'-0" SETBACK
20'-0" SETBACK
22'-0"
SETBACK 30'-0" FRONT

SETBACK TO

PROPERTY LINE

LOBBYLOBBY

COMMUNITY
ROOM
GYM
SCALE: 1" = 30'
1 STORY 1
0 30' 60'
SCALE: 1" = 30'
2 STORY 2
0 30' 60'
500
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

FLOORPLAN
STORY3&4
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.02

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.15OF39

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D
1 A5.02
1 A2.07
5 A2.16
5 A4.01
1 0
'
-
1 "
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
19'-8"

SETBACK
13'-5"
19'-0"
10'-11"
21'-7"

SITEPLAN
10'-0" 20'-0"

EASEMENT

PROPERTYLINE

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
LIN
E
P
R
O
P
E
RT
Y
L
I
N
E

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTYLINE

EASEMENT

NEW PROPERTY LINE

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL
N
4 A4.01
1 0
'
-
0 "
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
20'-0"

SETBACK
22'-0"

SETBACK
30'-0"FRONT

SETBACKTO

PROPERTYLINE
1 A5.02
1 A2.07
5 A2.16
5 A4.01
13'-5"
19'-0"
21'-7"

SITEPLAN
1 0
'
-
1 "
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
19'-8"

SETBACK
10'-11"
10'-0" 20'-0"

EASEMENT

PROPERTYLINE

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
LIN
E
P
R
O
P
E
RT
Y
L
I
N
E

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTYLINE

EASEMENT

NEW PROPERTY LINE

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL
N
4 A4.01
1 0
'
-
0 "
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
20'-0"

SETBACK
22'-0"

SETBACK
30'-0"FRONT

SETBACKTO

PROPERTYLINE

TYPE ATYPE A

TYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE B

TYPE CTYPE C
SCALE: 1"=30'
1 STORY3
030'60'
SCALE: 1"=30'
2 STORY4/ROOF
030'60'
501
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ROOFPLAN
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.03

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.16OF39
1 A5.02
5 A2.16
5 A4.01
13'-5"
19'-0"
21'-7"

SITEPLAN
1 0
'
-
1 "
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
19'-8"

SETBACK
10'-11"
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
LIN
E
P
R
O
P
E
RT
Y
L
I
N
E

PROPERTY LINE

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL
4 A4.01
1 0
'
-
0 "
S
E
T
B
A
C
K

TYPE FTYPE F

TYPE E/G
/G

TYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE DTYPE D

TYPE ETYPE ETYPE ETYPE ETYPE E

TYPE FTYPE F
1 A2.07
10'-0" 20'-0"

EASEMENT

PROPERTYLINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTYLINE

EASEMENT
N
20'-0"

SETBACK
22'-0"

SETBACK
30'-0"FRONT

SETBACKTO

PROPERTYLINE

TYPE ATYPE A

TYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE BTYPE B

TYPE CTYPE C
SCALE: 1"=30'
1 ROOFPLAN
030'60'
502
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

COMMONSPACE
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.04

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.17OF39
W/D
W/D
W/D
W/D
W/DW/D
20'-8"
79'-2"
26'-4"26'-4"
10'-0"
25'-2"

EXTERIORWALKWAY

ABOVEGARAGESTORY

AMENITYSPACE
1,877sqft

LOBBYLOBBY

COMMUNITY
ROOM
GYM
16 19'-2"
LOBBY
MAILM
ANAGER
OFFICE
PKG.

ELEVATOR

CONTROL
49 PKG.

MAIL
LOBBY

ELEVATOR

CONTROL
N
SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0"
1 GYMANDAMENITYSPACE
04'8'16'
SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0"
2 LOBBY1(SOUTH)
04'8'16'
SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0"
3 LOBBY2(NORTH)
04'8'16'
503
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPEA
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.05

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.18OF39
2'-6"
BED1(IN-LAW)

FOYERSTOOP
MECH

WALK-IN
CLOSET
CLOSET
GARAGE

SIDEWALK
BATH
TYPEA
3BD
389sqft
W/D
12'-6"
FRONT
YARD
BELOW
LIVING

KITCHEN

KITCHEN

PRIVATE IS
LAND
DECK
POWDER
ROOM
DINING
TYPEA
3BD
659sqft
N
STORY2
STORY1

FLOORPLANS
TYPEA-3BRUNITS
1,707SFRESIDENTIALNET
1,917SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONPARKING
2PARKING
504
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPEA
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.06

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.19OF39
22'-6"
BATH
CL. P.B
ED3
BED2
FRONT

YARD BELOW

BALCONY
P.BATH

WALK-IN
CLOSET
TYPEA
3BD
659sqft
TYPEA
N

FLOORPLANS
TYPEA-3BRUNITS
1,707SFRESIDENTIALNET
1,917SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONPARKING
2PARKING
ROOF
STORY3
505
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

ELEVATIONS-
TYPEA
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.07

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.20OF39
TYPEA
UNITA

PRIVATE
DECK
GARAGE
N

UNITA(EAST)UNITA(SOUTH)UNITA(WEST)
506
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPEB
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.08

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.21OF39
BED1(IN-LAW)

FOYERSTOOP
MECH
LIN
CLOSET
GARAGE
BATH

WALK-IN
CLOSET
TYPEB
3BD
573sqft
W/D
LIVING

KITCHEN

KITCHEN ISLAND

PRIVATE
DECK
COMMON
PATH
POWDER
ROOM
DINING
TYPEB
3BD
624sqft
N

FLOORPLANS
TYPEB-3BRUNITS
1,821SFRESIDENTIALNET
1,986SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONPARKING
2PARKING
STORY2
STORY1
507
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPEB
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.09

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.22OF39
BATH
CL. BED 2
P.BED3
P.BATH

WALK-IN
CLOSET

BALCONY
TYPEB
3BD
624sqft
TYPEB
N

FLOORPLANS
TYPEB-3BRUNITS
1,821SFRESIDENTIALNET
1,986SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONPARKING
2PARKING
ROOF
STORY3
508
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

ELEVATIONS-
TYPEB
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.10

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.23OF39
TYPEB
UNITB
GARAGE

PRIVATE
DECK
N

UNITB(EAST)UNITB(WEST)
509
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

ENLARGED

FLOOR PLANS -
TYPE C
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.11

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 24 OF 39
W/D
12'-6"
LIVING

KITCHEN

KITCHEN
ISLAND
DOWN

PRIVATE
DECK
DINING
POWDER
ROOM
POWDER
ROOM
UNIT C
2BD
624 sq ft
N
BATH
CL.

BED 1

STAIR AND ELEVATOR

TO PARKING BELOW

WALK-IN
CLOSET
P.BED 2
P.BATH

BALCONY
UNIT C
2BD
FLOOR PLANS 624 sq ft
TYPE C - 2 BR UNITS
1,248 SF RESIDENTIAL NET
1,360 SF RESIDENTIAL GROSS

COMMON GARAGE
1 PARKING
STORY 3
STORY 2 - LOWEST STORY OF UNIT AND ENTRY
510
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPEC
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.12

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.25OF39
TYPEC
N

FLOORPLANS
TYPEC-2BRUNITS
1,248SFRESIDENTIALNET
1,360SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONGARAGE
1PARKING
ROOF
511
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

ELEVATIONS-
TYPEC
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.13

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.26OF39
TYPEC
UNITC

LOBBYPACKAGE
ROOM
N

UNITC(EAST)UNITC(WEST)
512
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPED
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.14

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.27OF39
W/D
LIVING

KITCHEN

KITCHEN ISLAND
DINING
POWDER
CL. ROOM

PRIVATE
DECK

BALCONY
UNITD
4BD
600sqft
BATH
CL.

CL.

BED1
BED2

PRIVATE
DECK
BELOW

WALK-IN
CLOSET

BALCONY
UNITD
4BD
623sqft
N

FLOORPLANS
TYPED-4BRUNITS
1,846SFRESIDENTIALNET
2,013SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONPARKING
2PARKING
STORY3
STORY2-LOWESTSTORYOFUNITANDENTRY
513
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPED
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.15

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.28OF39
BED3
P.BED4
P.BATH
BATH
CL. P
RIVATE
DECK
BELOW
CLOSET
CL. BED 3
UNITD
4BD
623sqft
TYPED
N

FLOORPLANS
TYPED-4BRUNITS
1,846SFRESIDENTIALNET
2,013SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONPARKING
2PARKING
ROOF
STORY4
514
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

ELEVATIONS-
TYPED
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.16

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.29OF39
N

UNITD(WEST)UNITD(NORTH)UNITD(WEST)
515
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPEE
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.17

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.30OF39
CL. BED 1 (IN-LAW)
CL. BATH CL. COMMUNITY ROOM / GYM

PRIVATE
DECK

KITCHENETTE
UNITE
4BD
356sqft
W/D

KITCHEN

KITCHEN ISLAND
LIVING
POWDER
ROOM
CL. BA
LCONY

BALCONY
DINING
UNITE
4BD
704sqft
N

FLOORPLANS
TYPEE-4BRUNITS
1,804SFRESIDENTIALNET
1,962SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONPARKING
2PARKING
STORY3
STORY2-LOWESTSTORYOFUNITANDENTRY
516
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPEE
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.18

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.31OF39
BED3
P.BED4
BED2

WALK-IN
CLOSET
BATH
P.BATH

WALK-IN
CLOSET

WALK-IN
CLOSET
UNITE
4BD
744sqft
TYPEE
N

FLOORPLANS
TYPEE-4BRUNITS
1,804SFRESIDENTIALNET
1,962SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONPARKING
2PARKING
ROOF
STORY4
517
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

ELEVATIONS-
TYPEE
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.19

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.32OF39
N

UNITE(EAST)UNITE(WEST)
518
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPEF
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.20

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.33OF39
W/D
CL. BED 1 (IN-LAW)
FOYER

WALK-IN
CLOSET
BATH

PRIVATE
DECK

AMENITY
SPACE
ENTRY
COMMON
DECK

KITCHENETTE
UNITF
4BD
543sqft
W/D

KITCHEN

KITCHEN ISLAND
LIVING
POWDER
ROOM

BALCONY

BALCONY
DINING
UNITF
4BD
707sqft
N

FLOORPLANS
TYPEF-4BRUNITS
1,954SFRESIDENTIALNET
2,243SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONPARKING
2PARKING
STORY3
STORY2-LOWESTSTORYOFUNITANDENTRY
519
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPEF
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.21

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.34OF39
BED3
P.BED4
BED2
P.BATH

WALK-IN
CLOSET
BATH

WALK-IN
CLOSET

WALK-IN
CLOSET
UNITF
4BD
746sqft
TYPEF
N
ROOF

FLOORPLANS
TYPEF-4BRUNITS
1,954SFRESIDENTIALNET
2,243SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONPARKING
2PARKING
STORY4
520
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

ELEVATIONS-
TYPEF
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.22

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.35OF39
N

UNITF(EAST)UNITF(SOUTH)UNITF(WEST)
521
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

ENLARGED

FLOORPLANS-
TYPEG
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A2.23

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.36OF39
W/D
W/D
5 '
-
0 "
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
4'-7"
BED1(IN-LAW)
BATH

PRIVATE
DECK

KITCHENETTE
CL. BED 1 (IN-LAW)
CL. BATH CL. P
RIVATE
DECK

KITCHENETTE

KITCHEN

LIVING/

DINING/

SLEEPING
CLOSET
COMMON
PATH
CL. FOY
ER
BATH
FOYER
UNITE
4BD
356sqft
UNITE
4BD
356sqft
N

FLOORPLANS

TYPEG-STUDIOUNITS
608SFRESIDENTIALNET
679SFRESIDENTIALGROSS

COMMONPARKING
1PARKING
STORY2-ONLYSTORYOFUNITANDENTRY
522
NO. DATE ISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWN BY

CHECKED BY
PROJECT NO.
202309

RG / SK

AS NOTED
ISSUE
East Palo Alto, CA 94303

BUILDING

ELEVATIONS
1933 Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWAL DATE

T A T E OF C A L I F O R N
AI

R I YAD GHANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSED ARCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A4.01

PROJECT NAME
APN

DATE OF PUBLICATION
1/12/24

TG / MP
063-492-280
N
O
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
TIO
N
E
N
TIT
L
E
M
E
N
T
O
N
LY.

WAWALAND LLC
6044 STEVENSON BLVD.

FREMONT CA 94538

ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24 ZONE CHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWING NO. 37 OF 39

TYPE A TYPE B TYPE B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B TYPE B TYPE C TYPE B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT C UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT B UNIT A 3 6'-0"
4 6'-0"
4 6'-0"
3 6'-0"
4 6'-0"
3 6'-0"
4 6'-0"
SCALE: 1" = 20'
1 EAST ELEVATION FRONT
0 10' 20' 40'
SCALE: 1" = 20'
2 WEST ELEVATION REAR
0 10' 20' 40'
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"
4 SOUTH ELEVATION SIDE
SCALE 0 8' 16' 32' : 1/16" = 1'-0"
5 NORTH ELEVATION SIDE
0 8' 16' 32'
523
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

BUILDING

SECTIONS
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A5.01

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.38OF39
46'-0"
36'-0"
46'-0"
SCALE: 1"=20'
1 SECTIONLONGITUDINALCOURT
010'20'40'
SCALE: 1"=20'
2 SECTIONLONGITUDINALA
010'20'40'
524
N
O.DATEISSUE

REVISIONS
OWNER
SCALE

DRAWNBY

CHECKEDBY
PROJECTNO.
202309
RG/SK

ASNOTED
ISSUE
EastPaloAlto,CA94303

BUILDING

SECTION
1933Pulgas
Avenue
S

RENEWALDATE

T A T E
OF
C
A
L I

F O R N AI

R I YAD
G
H
ANNAM
C-29116

L ICENSE
D
A
RCHI
TC
TE
06/30/2025
428SOUTHVANNESSAVENUE
SANFRANCISCO,CA94103
415.649.6202
[email protected]
A5.02

PROJECTNAME
APN

DATEOFPUBLICATION
1/12/24
TG/MP
063-492-280
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONENTITLEMENT ONLY.

WAWALANDLLC
6044STEVENSONBLVD. FREMONT CA 94538 ZONE CH
ANGE
01/12/24

ZONECHANGE
01/12/24
DRAWINGNO.39OF39
+2'-6"

FIRSTFLOORRESIDENTIALUNIT
±0"

FIRSTFLOOR
+12'-6"

SECONDFLOOR
+22'-6"

THIRDFLOOR
+32'-6"

FOURTHFLOOR/ROOF
+42'-6"

BULKHEAD
20'-0"

EASEMENT
10'-0"32'-8"30'-9"

ROOFDECKS&WALKWAY
(ABOVEGARAGESTORY)
32'-9"10'-0"

SETBACK
36'-0"
30'-0"SETBACK

FROMPROPERTYLINE

ELEVATOROVERHEAD
BEYOND

PROPERTY LINE

DRIVEAISLE

GARAGEGARAGE

PRIVATE
DECK
SIDE
WALK
REAR
YARD

BALCONY
ENTRY/

LIVING/

KITCHEN

BEDROOMS

BEDROOMS

UNITTYPED

LIVING/

KITCHEN

UNITTYPEB

BEDROOMS
ENTRY/

BEDROOMS
COMMON

PATHWAY

PRIVATEDECKPRIVATEDECK

HEIGHTLIMIT

SETBACK

PROPERTY LINE

DASHED LINE OF EASEMENT

BALCONY
36'-0"

AVERAGE ROOF
HEIGHT
46'-0"

AVERAGE ROOF
HEIGHT
PULGAS
AVENUE
SCALE: 3/16"=1'-0"
1 SITESECTION
04'8'12'
525
1933 Pulgas Avenue 7/1/24 COVER SHEET | 1 428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture 1933 PULGAS AVENUE

EAST PALO ALTO , CA
62 NEW RESIDENTIAL HOMES

REGARDING THE PROPOSED REZONING

FROM R-MD MULTIPLE-FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
SUBZONE 1 TO SUBZONE 2
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION - JULY 16, 2024
Attachment 4 - Project Alternative 2
526
1933 Pulgas Avenue 7/1/24 PROCESS | 7 428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture 1933 Pulgas Avenue 5/5/23 CONCEPT| 04 428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture

CONCEPT

PULGAS AVENUE

PULGAS AVENUE

EXISTING LOT

DEMO/LOT DIVISION

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL

TO REMAIN

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL

TO REMAIN
(N) COMMERCIAL LOT

EXISTING CONDITIONS

REMOVE EXISTING STRUCTURES AND SUBDIVIDE LOT
(N) RESIDENTIAL LOT

PROCESS

PROPOSED

DEMO / LOT DIVISION
527
1933 Pulgas Avenue 7/1/24 PROCESS | 9 428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture

PULGAS AVENUE

PULGAS AVENUE

PROCESS MASSING AND PROGRAM

APPROACHING EQUILIBRIUM

BUT SCALE AND DIVERSITY

LACKING

APPROPRIATE SCALE AND

INDIVIDUALITY INTRODUCED
60 BUILDINGS

HORIZONTAL DIVISION ALONG BOTH THE

WIDTH AND THE DEPTH OF THE LOT
528
1933 Pulgas Avenue 7/1/24 BASEMENT | 15 428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture 18'-0" 24'-0" 24'-1"
115 RESIDENTIAL PARKING
3 ADA PARKING SPOTS PER CBC 2022
12 OF 12 GUEST PARKING
130 PARKING TOTAL FOR 62 UNITS
R
A
M
P
2 0
%
P
U
M
P
R
O
O
M

ELECTRICAL
METERS

ELECTRICAL
METERS

ELECTRICAL
METERS

ELECTRICAL
METERS
1 51
1 52
1 53
1 54
1 10
3 32
1 47
N
1 48
N
GARAGE
529
1933 Pulgas Avenue 7/1/24 FLOOR PLAN STORY 1 | 16 428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D
1 51
1 52
1 53
1 54
10'-0" 20'-0"
E
A
S
E
M
E
N
T
10'-0" SETBACK
13'-5"
19'-0"
10'-11"
20'-0"
20'-2"
20'-2"
20'-2"
5'-0"
3'-8" 3'-8" 3'-8" 3'-8" 3'-8" 3'-8" 3'-8" 3'-8"
3'-8"
4'-0"
6'-0"

FIRE HYDRANT
FDC

NEW CLASS II
(2) BICYCLE PARKING

NEW CLASS II
(2) BICYCLE PARKING

DOG RUN

BIKE REPAIR

STATION
(N) FIRE HYDRANT (N) FIRE HYDRANT

STOP SIGN
FDC

PULGAS AVENUE
13 PARKING
SPACES
EG
RESS
PATH

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL

TURNAROUND

EGRESS PATH

SIDEWALK

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

PROPERTY LINE

EASEMENT
N
E
W
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

PRIVATE
OPEN
SPACE

PRIVATE
OPEN
SPACE

PRIVATE
OPEN
SPACE

PRIVATE
OPEN
SPACE
REC
Y
CLE
1 REC
Y
CLE
2 COMMON
OPEN
SPACE
COMMON
OPEN
SPACE
C
A
M
E
L
LIA
D
RIV
E

PRIVATE
OPEN
SPACE

PRIVATE
OPEN
SPACE
PA
S
S
E
N
G
E
R
LO
A
DIN
G
2% SLOPE5% SLOPE
PA
S
S
E
N
G
E
R
LO
A
DIN
G
5% SLOPE
5% SLOPE
2% SLOPE
1 10
3 32
1 47
96 GAL.

RECYCLE
96 GAL.

RECYCL 9
E 6 GAL.

RECYCLE
96 GAL.

TRASH
96 GAL.

TRASH
96 GAL.

TRASH
96 GAL.

TRASH
96 GAL.

RECYCLE
96 GAL.

RECYCL
9 E
6 GAL.

RECYCLE
96 GAL.

TRASH
96 GAL.

TRASH
96 GAL.

TRASH
96 GAL.

TRASH
64 GAL.

COMPOST
96 GAL.

TRASH
64 GAL.

COMPOST
64 GAL.

COMPOST
96 GAL.

TRASH
64 GAL.

COMPOST
N
10'-0" SETBACK
10'-0" SETBACK
30'-0" FRONT

SETBACK TO

PROPERTY LINE
3'-8" 3'-8"
62 BICYCLE

PARKING
FIR
E
A
C
C
E
S
S
R
O
A
D
B
F
P
M
AIL
FIR
E
A
C
C
E
S
S
R
O
A
D
LOBBY
OPEN
TO
BELOW
R
A
M
P
D
O
W
N
M
AIL
LOBBY

COMMUNITY

ROOM GYM
1 48
N
C C C

E E E E D D D D D D D D D D F /
G

E E E E E E

A B C A A A
A.1 A.1
B B B C.1 B B B B B B B B B B C.1 B B B B
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
530
1933 Pulgas Avenue 7/1/24 FLOOR PLAN STORY 2 | 17 428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D
1 51
1 52
1 53
10'-0" 20'-0"
E
A
S
E
M
E
N
T
10'-0" SETBACK
13'-5"
19'-0"
10'-11"
20'-0"
20'-2"
20'-2"
20'-2"
4'-0"
120 sq ft

PULGAS AVENUE
EG
RESS
PATH

SIDEWALK

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

PROPERTY LINE

EASEMENT
N
E
W
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E
M
AIL
REC
Y
CLE
1 REC
Y
CLE
2 M
AIL
C
A
M
E
L
LIA
D
RIV
E
2% SLOPE
2% SLOPE
1 10
3 32
1 47
N
10'-0" SETBACK
10'-0" SETBACK
30'-0" FRONT

SETBACK TO

PROPERTY LINE
FIR
E
A
C
C
E
S
S
R
O
A
D
B
F
P
FIR
E
A
C
C
E
S
S
R
O
A
D

LOBBY LOBBY

COMMUNITY

ROOM GYM
1 48
N
C C C

E E E E D D D D D D D D D D F /
G

E E E E E E

A B C A A A
A.1 A.1
B B B C.1 B B B B B B B B B B C.1 B B B B
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G

W/DW/DW/DW/D
W/DW/D

W/DW/DW/DW/D
1 51
1 52
1 53
1 54
1 10
3 32
1 47
10'-0" SETBACK
13'-5"
19'-0"
10'-0"

SETBACK
20'-0" 20'-2" 40'-5" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-5" 20'-2" 20'-5" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 60'-5" 20'-2" 20'-5" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-5" 10'-0" 20'-0" E
A
S
E
M
E
N
T
10'-11"

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

PROPERTY LINE

EASEMENT
N
E
W
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL
N
1 48
10'-0" SETBACK
10'-0" SETBACK
30'-0" FRONT

SETBACK TO

PROPERTY LINE
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
OPEN
TO
BELOW
531
1933 Pulgas Avenue 7/1/24 FLOOR PLAN STORY 3 | 18 428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture

W/DW/DW/DW/DW/DW/D
1 51
1 52
1 53
1 54
1 10
3 32
1 47
10'-1" SETBACK
10'-0"

SETBACK
13'-5"
19'-0"
10'-11"
10'-0"

SETBACK
10'-0" 20'-0"
E
A
S
E
M
E
N
T

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

PROPERTY LINE

EASEMENT
N
E
W
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL
N
1 48
10'-0" SETBACK
10'-0"

SETBACK
30'-0" FRONT

SETBACK TO

PROPERTY LINE
N
C C C

E E E E D D D D D D D D D D F /
G

E E E E E E

A B C A A A
A.1 A.1
B B B C.1 B B B B B B B B B B C.1 B B B B
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
532
1933 Pulgas Avenue 7/1/24 ROOF PLAN | 19 428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture 1 51
1 52
1 53
1 54
1 10
3 32
1 47
13'-5"
19'-0"
10'-0"

SITE PLAN
10'-1" SETBACK
10'-0"

SETBACK
10'-11"
10'-0" 20'-0"
E
A
S
E
M
E
N
T

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

PROPERTY LINE

EASEMENT
N
E
W
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y LIN
E

EXISTING

COMMERCIAL
N
1 48
10'-0" SETBACK
10'-0"

SETBACK
30'-0" FRONT

SETBACK TO

PROPERTY LINE
TY
P
E
C
TY
P
E
C
TY
P
E
C
TY
P
E
C
TY
P
E I.1
TY
P
E
C.1
TY
P
E
C.1
TY
P
E
A.1
TY
P
E
A
TY
P
E
A
TY
P
E
A
TY
P
E
A
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
B
TY
P
E
D
TY
P
E
D
TY
P
E
D
TY
P
E
D
TY
P
E
D
TY
P
E
D
TY
P
E
D
TY
P
E
D
TY
P
E
D
TY
P
E
D
TY
P
E
G/H
TY
P
E
G/H
TY
P
E
G/H
TY
P
E
G/H
TY
P
E
G/H
TY
P
E
G/H
TY
P
E
E
TY
P
E
E
TY
P
E
E
TY
P
E
E
TY
P
E
E
TY
P
E
E
TY
P
E
E
TY
P
E
E
TY
P
E
E
TY
P
E
E
N
C C C

E E E E D D D D D D D D D D F /
G

E E E E E E

A B C A A A
A.1 A.1
B B B C.1 B B B B B B B B B B C.1 B B B B
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
533
1933 Pulgas Avenue 7/1/24 GYM AND COMMUNITY ROOM | 20 428 South Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94103 | 415.649.6202 | [email protected] rg-architecture W/D
20'-2"
3'-8" 3'-8"
FDC

STOP SIGN
COMMON
OPEN
SPACE
2 %
SLO
P
E
96 GAL.

RECYCLE
96 GAL.

RECYCLE
96 GAL.

RECYCLE
96 GAL.

TRASH
96 GAL.

TRASH
96 GAL.

TRASH
96 GAL.

TRASH
64 GAL.

COMPOST 96 GAL.

TRASH
64 GAL.

COMPOST

COMMUNITY
ROOM
M
AIL
RECYCLE 2 LOBBY
ELEV. 2

GROSS BLDG
5,145 sq ft
N
L L R

E E E E D D D D D D D D D D F /
G

E E E E E E

A B R A A A
A.1 A.1
B B B C.1 B B B B B B B B B B C.1 B B B B
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
F /
G
20'-2"
3'-8" 3'-8"
3'-8"
FDC
COMMON
OPEN
SPACE
2 %
SLO
P
E
96 GAL.