HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-03-16 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 1 of 32
Special Meeting
March 16, 2026
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers and by virtual
teleconference at 4:30 p.m.
Present In Person: Burt, Lauing, Lu, Lythcott-Haims, Reckdahl, Stone, Veenker
Present Remotely: None.
Absent: None.
Call to Order
Mayor Veenker called the meeting to order.
Assistant City Clerk Christine Prior called the roll and noted all Councilmembers were present.
Special Orders of the Day
1. Recognition of Sister City Tsuchiura, Japan and Palo Alto Student Exchange Program
Participants
Mayor Veenker introduced Item 1, recognizing the Sister City relationship with Tsuchiura,
Japan, and the Palo Alto Student Exchange Program participants. Mayor Veenker read the
proclamation Welcoming Exchange Students and Chaperones from Tsuchiura, Ibaraki, Japan:
Whereas, exchange programs between middle schools are the foundation of the Sister City
program with Tsuchiura, Japan, which promotes international and intercultural understanding
among our youth; and whereas, Palo Alto and Tsuchiura City have worked together to involve
their respective middle school students and their families in cultural and educational exchanges
and special programs; and whereas, the opportunity to host Tsuchiura students here and to
send Palo Alto students to Tsuchiura, Japan since 1994 has been mutually beneficial. Now,
therefore, I, Vicki Veenker, Mayor of the City of Palo Alto, on behalf of the entire City Council,
hereby express our heartfelt welcome and the best wishes of the City of Palo Alto to Mr.
Hirotomo Araki, Ms. Taeko Banno, Ms. Azusa Nakagoshi, and fifteen students: Rio Sugita, Kanon
Furukawa, Ai Usui, Kanji Ono, Kokoa Sakai, Kiyoka Numata, Sahya Hanaeda, Mai Yaguchi,
Kokone Yoshimura, Ryoichi Kawada, Keita Tsukahara, Sousuke Nasu, Yuuna Kurata, Sayaka
Watanabe, and Kirato Hino. Further, we also acknowledge their Palo Alto buddies: Khloe Chang,
Milla Rosen, Alyssa Leong, Austin Shovkoplyas, Hailyn Kim Cho, Kaya Ishihara, Hui Ching Perri
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 2 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
So, Ella Guo, Ellie Lin, Rohan Chandra, Elijah Straub, Matteo Boog, Lindsay Mo, Adeline Tran,
and Tyler Stutz.
Mayor Veenker welcomed the exchange students and their Palo Alto buddies to the Council
Chambers.
Neighbors Abroad Ed Fike thanked the Council for its recognition and ongoing support of the
Sister City program with Tsuchiura, Japan. The 17-year Sister City relationship and a student
exchange program spanning 3 decades were noted. It was reported that 15 students and 3
chaperones were visiting from Tsuchiura and appreciation was expressed for host families and
volunteers. Co-Vice Presidents Evelyn Shimazaki and Lydia Kou were recognized for organizing
the exchange and upcoming June trip to Tsuchiura. Mr. Fike conveyed gratitude for continued
collaboration between the 2 cities.
City of Tsuchiura Civic Activity Division Staff Hirotomo Araki thanked the Council for the warm
welcome and noted that the student exchange program with Palo Alto began in 1993. Hirotomo
Araki highlighted the long-standing community support for the program and reported that
students would participate in home stays and school visits to learn about local culture.
Hirotomo Araki stated that chaperones would ensure student safety and expressed hope that
the visit would provide a meaningful experience and strengthen the friendship between the 2
cities.
Mayor Veenker welcomed the students and noted meeting the exchange students prior to the
Council session. Reference was made to a prior visit with Mayor Ando of Tsuchiura, including a
tree planting. Mayor Veenker invited the students to the dais to present the proclamation and
take a photo with the Council.
NO ACTION
2. Proclamation Recognizing March 2026 as American Red Cross Month
Councilmember Reckdahl read the proclamation: American Read Cross Month 2026. Whereas,
March is American Red Cross Month, a time when we recognize the humanitarian organization
that eases people's suffering during life's emergencies in the City of Palo Alto, across the United
States, and around the world; and whereas, the Silicon Valley Chapter of the American Red
Cross plays an especially vital role in our local community, providing essential services to
residents of Santa Clara County and beyond, including disaster response, emergency
preparedness education, and support for military families, ensuring that those in need have
access to critical resources and assistance; and whereas, the Silicon Valley Chapter's dedicated
volunteers and staff work to support neighbors affected by home fires, floods, and other local
emergencies, offer lifesaving CPR and first aid training, and collect much-needed blood
donations that save lives every day; and whereas, the City of Palo Alto would like to remember
our heroes who help people in need and work tirelessly to assist their neighbors when they
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 3 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
need a helping hand; and whereas, every day, people in our community depend on the
American Red Cross, whose lifesaving mission is powered by the devotion of volunteers, the
generosity of donors and partnership of community organizations; and whereas, the City of
Palo Alto dedicates the month of March to all those who support the American Red Cross
mission, to prevent and alleviate human suffering in the face of emergencies. Now, therefore,
Vicki Veenker, Mayor of the City of Palo Alto, California, does hereby proclaim March 2026 as
American Red Cross Month. We call upon our residents to join us in recognizing and thanking
the dedicated volunteers, donors, and staff of the American Red Cross for their unwavering
service to our community.
Mayor Veenker thanked the American Red Cross for their lifesaving efforts and invited Sabrina
Melton to the podium to provide remarks.
Silicon Valley Chapter Board Member Sabrina Melton of the American Red Cross Northern
California Costal Region accepted the proclamation recognizing March 2026 as Red Cross
Month and highlighted the role of volunteers, who support the majority of the organization’s
work. It was reported that in Santa Clara County the Red Cross responded to over 100 disasters,
provided 1,700 services to military families, and collected nearly 17,000 blood donations,
supported by more than 2,100 volunteers and donors. The community was directed to
https://www.redcross.org/volunteertoday for volunteer opportunities. Board Member Melton
thanked the City for its partnership in supporting community preparedness and resilience.
Mayor Veenker thanked the entire American Red Cross organization and invited Board
Members Sabrina Melton and Rux Muys-Stoain to the dais for a photo with the proclamation.
NO ACTION
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
City Manager Ed Shikada reported that a previously scheduled closed session at the end of the
meeting had been removed from the agenda and noted that the Council may wish to take its
break later than indicated due to the early start.
Public Comment
1. Jeff W. stated that the El Palo Alto tree is not currently designated as a California
Historical Landmark and described efforts to secure that designation. A prior
application submitted in 1969 was noted as having been denied due to
insufficient historical verification. Newly discovered 1776 Anza expedition field
notes were cited as confirming the location of the El Palo Alto tree and
identifying nearby Ohlone trails and villages. A new application incorporating this
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 4 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
information was described and City consent was requested to allow submission
to the State.
2. Sven T., in attendance with a group of young people, thanked the City for efforts
to address the health impacts of natural gas stoves. Anticipation was expressed
for the rebate program, loaner hot plate program, and outreach to apartment
residents. The City’s hiring of legal counsel with willingness to inform the
community about benzene and formaldehyde as carcinogens was acknowledged.
3. Star T. thanked the Council for its service and indicated plans to provide
additional input on the 3606 El Camino Real project prior to its April 13
consideration. Concerns were raised regarding proposed driveways on Matadero
and Kendall Avenue, which were described as narrow streets with on-street
parking, no bike lanes, and Safe Routes to School designations. The importance
of these streets as key access routes into Barron Park and limited sidewalks in
the area were noted. Safety considerations related to bicycle corridors and
Builder’s Remedy projects were emphasized, along with concerns about traffic
conditions and street safety ratings near El Camino Real.
Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements
Vice Mayor Stone announced community engagement opportunities with The Jed Foundation
and upcoming mental health first aid trainings. Information was provided on the 2-part training
structure, including a self-paced virtual component and an in-person session required for
certification. Training topics include recognizing signs of mental health and substance use
challenges, responding to individuals in crisis, and connecting individuals to resources and help.
Upcoming sessions were noted for April, May, and June and community members were
directed to the City website for registration. Availability of similar training through PAUSD was
noted.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims reported on a recent community listening session regarding
potential closure of the Churchill Avenue railroad crossing, noting attendance of approximately
100 individuals and public input from about 50 speakers. The session was described as part of
the City’s 60-day evaluation process. Community members were invited to submit additional
input via email to the Council and it was noted that the item is expected to return to the
Council in approximately 1 month. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims clarified that consideration
of the Churchill Avenue railroad crossing involves a temporary closure rather than a permanent
action and Councilmember Burt added that the closure would be a temporary trial.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims described attending an interfaith community vigil supporting
transgender youth and their families, held at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Palo Alto and
cosponsored by local faith organizations. Attendance of approximately 100 individuals was
noted and the event was described as demonstrating compassion, belonging, and community
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 5 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
support. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims provided an update on the Cubberley ad hoc meeting,
noting removal of the parcel tax from consideration for a potential ballot measure to support
purchase and renovation of Cubberley. The decision was attributed to polling indicating
insufficient support to meet the two-thirds voter threshold required for a parcel tax. A general
sales tax was identified as the remaining option under consideration, with additional polling
results expected in the coming days.
Mayor Veenker shared updates from the Cities Association of Santa Clara County's March
meeting, including a board study session on automated license plate readers (ALPRs) and a
presentation from regional law enforcement. Attendance at the State of the County event with
Councilmembers Lauing and Burt was noted, including discussion of budget challenges and
positive updates on hospital performance and community recognition across districts. An
upcoming Women’s History Month event was announced for the next City Council meeting,
including recognition of current and former women Councilmembers and Mayors,
consideration of adoption of the United Nation's CEDAW ordinance, and a reception following
that vote.
Consent Calendar
Public Comment: None.
Mayor Veenker asked whether there were any no votes, requests to pull, or recusals for this
item and, seeing none, requested a motion.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Stone moved, seconded by Councilmember Lythcott-Haims, to approve
Agenda Item Numbers 3-10.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
3. Approval of Minutes from March 2, 2026, Meeting.
4. Adoption of a Resolution Making Necessary Findings and Approving a Lease-Purchase
Agreement with Motorola Solutions, Inc for Multi-Band Portable and Mobile Radios and
Accessories for all City Departments in an amount not to exceed $5,848,220 for a Term
of 8.4 Years; CEQA Status – exempt under Regulation section 15601(b)(3).
5. Adoption of a Resolution Approving Edison Electric Institute Master Power Purchase and
Sale Agreements with NRG Business Marketing LLC, DRW Energy Trading LLC, and
Dynasty Power Inc., (collectively the “Master Agreements”), Delegating Authority to the
City Manager to Transact Under the Master Agreements for Electricity-Related
Commodities and Services, and Updating the City’s Standard Form Edison Electric
Institute Master Power Purchase and Sale Agreement; CEQA status: not a project under
CEQA Guidelines sections 15378(a)
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 6 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
6. Approval of Professional Services Contract Number C26193604 with
GOVERNMENTJOBS.COM INC dba NEOGOV in an Amount Not to Exceed $686,277 for
Full-cycle Recruitment and Applicant Tracking, Employee Development and
Management Human Resource Platform for a Term of Five Years; CEQA Status - Not a
Project.
7. Approval of Amendment No. 1 to Contract S23184208 with Flynn Resources Inc., in the
Amount of $170,000 for a revised Total Not-to-Exceed Amount of $425,000 and
Extending Term Two Years to Provide As-Needed Electric Engineering Consulting
Services Related to Electric Transmission Line Expansion, Interconnection, Engineering
Analysis and Regulatory Issues; CEQA Status: the Grid Modernization Project is Exempt
Under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15302, 15303 and 15183.
8. Authorization to Fully Encumber Legal Services Contract S26195211 with Atkinson
Andelson Loya Ruud & Romo For a Total Not- to-Exceed Amount of $255,000; CEQA
Status – Not a Project.
9. Accept the Single Audit Report audited by Macias Gini & O’Connell for the year ended
June 30, 2025, Fiscal Year 2025; CEQA Status – Not a Project.
10. Approval of Professional Services Contract No. C26194015 with Geosyntec Consultants,
Inc. in an Amount Not to Exceed $795,965 for Design and Outreach Services for the City
Park-Green Stormwater Infrastructure Project for the period of March 16, 2026 through
March 31, 2028; CEQA Status – Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15306
City Manager Comments
City Manager Ed Shikada thanked community members for participation in the Churchill
Avenue listening session, noting attendance of approximately 85 in person, 254 live online
viewers, and many additional views of the recording. This item is scheduled for Council
consideration on April 13. Community members were directed to submit comments via
www.paloalto.gov/tempchurchillclosure through March 29. City Manager Shikada provided
additional information on The Jed Foundation’s activities, including in-person workshops and
virtual sessions for teens and young adults, with details available at www.paloalto.gov/BeWell.
Upcoming community engagement opportunities in March were highlighted on topics including
parking policies, a block preparedness coordinator course, a downtown murals tour, the Teen
Arts Council, etc. Available summer internships and camp counselor positions are available and
interested applicants were directed to www.paloalto.gov/summerjobs. City Manager Shikada
noted expected warm weather conditions and identified libraries as cooling centers, with
additional safety information available at www.paloalto.gov/hotweathersafety.
Upcoming City Council agendas were outlined, noting a March 23 special meeting featuring a
single action item, a consent calendar item on the CEDAW ordinance, and boards, commissions,
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 7 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
and committee interviews. The April 6 meeting will include study sessions and action items
related to board and commission workplans, Brown Act updates under SB 707, and follow-up
on Council Committee workplans and goal statements. The April 13 agenda is expected to
include review of the temporary Churchill rail crossing closure and the Builder’s Remedy
application at 3606 El Camino Real. Additional items anticipated for meetings on April 20 and
beyond were shown.
Action Items
11. Approval of an Employment Agreement and Adoption of a Resolution Appointing
Christopher Jensen as City Attorney at an Annual Salary of $380,000.
Human Resources Director Sandra Blanch described the recruitment process for the City
Attorney position, noting selection of Teri Black & Co. as the executive recruiting firm and a
highly competitive candidate pool. Following interviews and consultation with the recruiter,
Christopher Jensen was selected and a background and reference check were completed. In
accordance with California Government Code Section 54953(d), Director Blanch reported the
proposed compensation, including an annual salary of $380,000, a $20,000 annual contribution
to a 401(a) retirement plan, 200 hours of vacation leave, and eligibility for benefits under the
City’s Compensation Plan for Management and Professional Personnel and Council Appointees.
Mayor Veenker thanked Director Blanch and staff for supporting the recruitment process and
recognized Interim City Attorney Caio Arellano for leadership during the interim period. The
Council’s selection of Christopher Jensen was confirmed following a rigorous review of a highly
qualified applicant pool. Mayor Veenker highlighted Christopher Jensen’s experience, including
service as Assistant City Attorney and Deputy City Attorney in Berkeley, prior role as City
Attorney in Cupertino, and work with public agencies and private law firms. His educational
background and early career experience were noted. Confidence was expressed in Christopher
Jensen’s leadership, management approach, and ability to address complex matters. The
transition was anticipated for the end of March.
Public Comment: None.
Mayor Veenker invited a motion to appoint Christopher Jensen as City Attorney and approve
the proposed employment agreement.
Christopher Jensen expressed appreciation for the Council’s confidence in the appointment and
conveyed enthusiasm for serving the Palo Alto community. Anticipation was stated for working
with the Council, City Manager, and staff.
MOTION: Councilmember Lauing moved, seconded by Councilmember Burt, to approve an
employment agreement and adopt a resolution appointing Christopher Jensen to the position
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 8 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
of City Attorney at an annual salary of $380,000, with additional compensation and benefits as
provided in the employment agreement and applicable City compensation plan.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
[Council took a 22-minute break]
12. QUASI-JUDICIAL. 2100-2400 Geng Road [24PLN-00356 & 24PLN-00357]: Request for
Approval of Applications for Site and Design, a Conditional Use Permit, and a Vesting
Tentative Map to Construct 145 For Sale Townhome Units. Thirteen Percent of the Units
Would Be Deed Restricted to Low Income Households. The Project is Proposed in
Accordance with Builder’s Remedy (California Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(5)).
A Senate Bill 330 Pre-Application was Filed on July 8, 2024. The Project Also Includes
Adoption of a Parkland Improvement Ordinance to Authorize Tree Removals in the
Baylands Athletic Center, Which Would be Impacted by the Project. CEQA Status:
Exempt from CEQA in Accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 (Comprehensive
Plan Consistency).
Senior Planner Steven Switzer presented an overview of the project site, noting an
approximately 11-acre location east of Highway 101 with Research, Office, and Limited
Manufacturing zoning and applicable combining districts. Surrounding uses include Baylands
Park, a post office, and nearby office development. Senior Planner Switzer outlined the project
history, including submission of a Senate Bill 330 application in July 2024, followed by formal
applications for Site and Design Review, a Conditional Use Permit, and a Vesting Tentative Map
in December 2024. Prior public review included an Architectural Review Board (ARB) early
feedback hearing in October 2025, Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC)
recommendation for approval in December 2025, Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC)
consideration of the parkland improvement ordinance in December 2025, and a January 2026
ARB recommendation for approval on a 3–0 vote. Senior Planner Switzer described the
proposal to demolish approximately 190,000 square feet of existing office buildings and
construct 145 three-story townhomes across 59 buildings, including 75 four-bedroom and 70
three-bedroom units, with 19 below-market-rate (BMR) units. Parking is proposed at 333
spaces, including 290 garage spaces and 43 on-street spaces, along with approximately 90,000
square feet of open space. Tree removals, site grading to address floodplain conditions, and
associated impacts on City property requiring a parkland improvement ordinance were
described.
Senior Planner Switzer provided an overview of applicable state law constraints, noting the
project qualifies as a Builder’s Remedy project under SB 1893 and may not be denied based on
inconsistency with the Zoning Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan land use. Compliance is limited
to applicable objective standards, with the project evaluated under RM-20 zoning standards
and meeting the minimum density requirement of 11 dwelling units per acre. Senior Planner
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 9 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
Switzer noted that the project includes a State Density Bonus request, allowing waivers and
concessions, and referenced analysis in the staff report regarding consistency with
development standards, objective design standards, the Baylands Master Plan, Baylands Design
Guidelines, and Site Assessment and Design Guidelines. Requested concessions and waivers
were outlined, including 1 concession related to distribution of BMR units and 5 waivers
concerning floor area ratio, building height, front setbacks, rooftop garden widths, and private
street widths. Senior Planner Switzer noted additional considerations, including the site’s
designation as a Housing Inventory Site with an anticipated 170-unit capacity and location
within the Airport Land Use Plan, with related Conditions of Approval applied. Parkland
dedication requirements were identified. Site grading within the floodplain ranging from
approximately 2 to 6 feet was described, necessitating removal of 218 on-site and 50 off-site
trees, with 648 replacement trees proposed. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183,
an Initial Study Checklist was prepared and the project was determined to be consistent with
the Certified Environmental Impact Report for the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Senior Planner Switzer concluded that staff recommends that the Council determine the project
exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15183; approve the Site and Design Review, Conditional
Use Permit, and Vesting Tentative Map subject to findings and conditions in the revised Draft
Record of Land Use Action; and adopt the Parkland Improvement Ordinance in Attachment C
authorizing tree removals at the Baylands Athletic Center.
Strada Investment Group Partner Michael Cohen presented the proposed development,
describing replacement of an existing office park and surface parking with 145 for-sale homes
oriented toward first-time homebuyers and families. The project was described as generally
consistent with City zoning standards despite its Builder’s Remedy status. Project design was
characterized as family-oriented, with all units consisting of 3- and 4-bedroom homes featuring
garages, roof decks, and in some cases private yards, with unit sizes ranging from
approximately 1,600 to 3,000 square feet. Emphasis was placed on community design
elements, including open space, a central gathering area with lawn and a stage, community
gardens, children’s play areas, and 2 pocket parks connected by pedestrian pathways. Strada
Investment Group Partner Cohen highlighted environmental features, including a substantial
increase in tree canopy and native plantings. Ongoing collaboration with City staff over
approximately 18 months was described. Strada Investment Group Partner Cohen
acknowledged Palo Alto staff's responsiveness and professionalism. Unanimous
recommendations for approval from the PTC, PRC, and ARB were noted, along with
incorporation of recommended architectural and design changes. Updates to the project
included increasing native tree species to approximately 63 percent and agreement to apply the
City’s Dark Sky Ordinance through Conditions of Approval. Enthusiasm was expressed for
delivering new housing opportunities to Palo Alto.
Mayor Veenker thanked the applicant for recognition of City staff and expressed appreciation
to the ARB, PTC, and PRC for their review of the project. Councilmembers were asked if they
had any disclosures related to this quasi-judicial item.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 10 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
Councilmember Lauing disclosed having several conversations with the applicant over the past
year to receive updates on project progress.
Councilmember Burt disclosed meeting with the applicant and indicated that no information
was received beyond what has been presented publicly.
Councilmember Lu disclosed meeting with the applicant twice in the last year during office
hours and indicated that information received included the availability of optional solar panels
and battery systems for purchasers of the townhomes.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims disclosed meeting with the applicant 3 times over the past year
and indicated that no information was received beyond what has been made publicly available.
Councilmember Reckdahl disclosed meeting with the applicant twice and indicated that no
additional information was received beyond what was presented publicly.
Mayor Veenker disclosed a recent meeting with the applicant at 2400 Geng Road and noted
observation of storm-related tree impacts not included in the staff materials.
Public Comment:
1. Herb B. referenced his submitted letter for the administrative record and raised
concerns regarding applicability of CEQA exemption provisions. Issues were
identified related to the project’s location within the Airport Influence Area,
including the need for deed restrictions addressing noise and visual impacts and
consistency with Comprehensive Plan requirements. Concerns were raised
regarding consideration of seismic and liquefaction risks, potential impacts
related to oversized vehicle (OSV) use at the Baylands Athletic Center, and
omission of Airport Influence Area factors from the environmental checklist.
2. David H., speaking as an individual, shared mixed views on the project, noting
positive design elements while expressing concern that the proposal primarily
targets families and may limit housing diversity. Consideration was suggested for
incorporating additional housing types, including multi-unit buildings, to better
accommodate a broader range of residents such as seniors and smaller
households. A potential alternative was described involving development of a
multi-story residential building on a portion of the site to increase density and
provide additional affordable units.
3. Randy M. expressed support for the project and the use of Builder’s Remedy,
describing it as an effective approach. Personal experience with the BMR
housing waitlist was shared, including challenges related to unit accessibility.
Support was expressed for expanding housing opportunities for singles, young
workers, and seniors, and encouragement was provided to continue similar
efforts.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 11 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
4. Henry E. acknowledged positive aspects of the project while expressing
opposition due to concerns about development within the floodplain and
associated tree removal. Preference was stated for preserving the area as
natural vegetation and directing housing to alternative sites such as the Stanford
Shopping Center and Research Park. Potential for legal challenges related to
environmental impacts was noted.
5. Adam S., speaking as a resident and on behalf of Palo Alto Forward, expressed
support for the project and encouraged Council approval. Appreciation was
conveyed for staff, the applicant, and the committees involved in the review
process. The project location was described as well situated near recreation and
bike paths. The development was characterized as beneficial for housing
availability.
Interim City Attorney Caio Arellano advised that the applicant may provide up to 3 minutes for
rebuttal but is not required to do so.
Strada Investment Group Partner Cohen responded to public comments, stating that the
project is located within the lowest airport impact zone and that CEQA analysis does not
require additional building measures. Compliance with avigation easement requirements was
noted, including disclosure to future buyers and waiver of claims related to airport operations,
as reflected in the Conditions of Approval. Geotechnical analysis addressing seismic conditions
was referenced. Concerns regarding the feasibility of an alternative multi-family development
were addressed, citing site constraints such as high water table and soil conditions. The
proposed project was characterized as appropriate for the location, with emphasis on providing
housing options for different types of buyers, including first-time homebuyers and older people
who want to downsize.
Mayor Veenker closed the public hearing and transitioned to Council discussion.
Vice Mayor Stone inquired whether the project qualifies as a Builder’s Remedy 2.0 project
based on the 13 percent BMR requirement and raised questions regarding the concentration of
BMR units and the City’s ability to deny the requested concession. Senior Planner Switzer
indicated that the request relates to local affordability distribution standards and may be
permitted under State Density Bonus Law. Assistant City Attorney Albert Yang confirmed that
State Density Bonus Law allows the concession and requires City approval. Vice Mayor Stone
expressed frustration regarding state limitations on local control and impacts on BMR unit
equitable distribution.
Vice Mayor Stone asked whether Safe Routes to School had been consulted regarding student
access from the project site to schools located west of Highway 101. Senior Planner Switzer
stated that the Transportation Department conducted extensive review, including a
transportation study assessing safety impacts, and coordinated with relevant parties. Director
Lait added that the issue was discussed by the PTC who noted the lack of a direct or ideal route
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 12 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
between the site and schools, describing it as a constraint of the project site. Vice Mayor Stone
expressed concern regarding student safety and encouraged further coordination with Safe
Routes to School, PAUSD, and the applicant to improve access for students who want to bike to
school.
Vice Mayor Stone expressed overall support for replacing office space with housing while
noting a preference for higher-density multifamily development and additional affordable units.
Constraints associated with the Builder’s Remedy process were acknowledged, along with
acceptance of the applicant’s explanation regarding site conditions and floodplain limitations.
Market conditions favoring townhome development were referenced and interest was
expressed in identifying future incentives for multifamily housing. Vice Mayor Stone stated his
concern regarding removal of mature trees but appreciated the proposed tree replacement
efforts. A desire to work with staff and Transportation to improve safe school access from the
site was expressed.
Councilmember Lauing highlighted the project as a rare opportunity to provide entry-level
homeownership in Palo Alto and supported the housing type as contributing to a balanced mix
of housing options. While acknowledging that higher density could be achieved, the proposed
project was characterized as appropriate at this location. Tree removal was noted as necessary,
with appreciation expressed for the proposed increase in tree planting. Councilmember Lauing
asked whether additional measures could accelerate canopy growth. Strada Investment Group
Partner Cohen responded that the project exceeds minimum requirements and emphasized a
focus on creating a sustainable and livable environment with enhanced landscaping and
ecological features. Councilmember Lauing commended the project’s design for fostering
neighbor interaction and reiterated his long-standing support for replacing office space with
housing.
Councilmember Burt commended the applicant for responsiveness to community values and
Comprehensive Plan considerations despite flexibility under Builder’s Remedy. The project
location was noted as adjacent to significant open space and recreational amenities. The
proposed density was characterized as consistent with the Baylands Master Plan vision. Support
was expressed for townhome development as contributing to a balanced housing mix in
response to RHNA requirements. Incorporation of native tree species was appreciated, with
encouragement for similar approaches in the Baylands area.
Councilmember Burt raised questions regarding liquefaction risks and seismic resilience of the
project. Senior Planner Switzer stated that a geotechnical analysis included in the CEQA Section
15183 checklist determined that standard construction methods would adequately mitigate
liquefaction impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Councilmember Burt identified limited bicycle and pedestrian access to schools and services as
a key challenge for the project location, referencing nearby crossings at Oregon and Newell
bridges. The need for future City investment in bike and pedestrian infrastructure in the
Baylands area was emphasized, along with the importance of improving access to existing
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 13 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
crossings, including the Oregon overpass. Consideration of these improvements in the Bicycle
and Pedestrian Master Plan was requested. Director Lait confirmed that, per the Chief
Transportation Official, the area will be included in the final plan for further evaluation.
Councilmember Lu expressed support for the project and confidence in its livability while
acknowledging existing challenges. The need to reconsider long-term planning for areas east of
Bayshore was raised, including improvements to bicycle and pedestrian access and provision of
amenities. Limited future housing development in the area was noted as a relief and a concern
and interest was expressed in addressing these issues through future City planning efforts.
Appreciation was conveyed for staff and applicant efforts.
Councilmember Reckdahl raised concerns regarding transportation, including bicycle and
pedestrian access for students and congestion at nearby intersections. A potential bike and
pedestrian bridge connection near Edgewood Market was suggested to reduce vehicle trips and
improve access between neighborhoods and the Baylands. Limitations of existing crossings and
conditions along East Bayshore were noted, with emphasis on the City’s responsibility to
address these issues as development in the area continues. Councilmember Reckdahl expressed
appreciation for the applicant’s responsiveness, including incorporation of native landscaping
and the Dark Sky Ordinance, and characterized the project as high quality. A preference was
noted for a more distributed mix of BMR units but overall support for the project was indicated.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims expressed support for the project and commended the
applicant for advancing housing on the east side of Highway 101, noting the area’s potential
and the project’s focus on first-time homebuyers. The development was described as helping
address a gap in the market for families and multigenerational households. Positive
collaboration with City staff was acknowledged, along with appreciation for proposed tree
replacement and native plantings. Concerns were raised regarding access to schools and the
distribution of BMR units, with a preference for integration across the project. Coordination
with PAUSD was encouraged in anticipation of new residents in the area.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims inquired about opportunities to enhance amenities for future
residents in this development in relation to the nearby airport and golf course, beyond required
disclosures. Strada Investment Group Partner Cohen described outreach to the airport board,
including a meeting to review CEQA analysis and avigation easement requirements, which
addressed initial concerns. Plans were outlined to promote nearby amenities to the new
residents, including providing information about the airport and facilitating connections
between the future homeowners association and local destinations such as the golf course,
airport, and Baylands Athletic Center.
Mayor Veenker expressed general agreement with Councilmember comments and noted
appreciation for the collaborative process with City staff. Support was indicated for exploring a
potential bike and pedestrian bridge in the area. The project’s height and design were
characterized as appropriate given site conditions, including environmental and geotechnical
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 14 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
constraints. Positive remarks were offered regarding the range of housing options, use of a
Housing Inventory site, and proposed tree replacement with a majority of native species.
Mayor Veenker requested clarification on distribution of BMR units across the project and
expressed a preference for broader integration. Strada Investment Group Partner Cohen
responded that BMR units are distributed across most of the project and are not concentrated
in a single area, with a concession applied only to exclude such units from the small lot
detached product type due to financial feasibility considerations. Mayor Veenker confirmed
understanding that BMR units are included in 3 of the 4 product types.
MOTION: Councilmember Lu moved, seconded by Councilmember Lauing, to:
1. Consider the project exempt from CEQA in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section
15183 (Comprehensive Plan Consistency) as documented in Attachment G;
2. Approve the Site and Design, Conditional Use Permit, and Vesting Tentative Map
Applications based on findings and subject to conditions of approval in the Revised Draft
Record of Land Use Action (RLUA) in Supplemental Attachment A; and
3. Adopt the Parkland Improvement Ordinance in Attachment C authorizing the proposed
work and modifications in the Baylands Athletic Center within the City’s Baylands open
space.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
[Council took a 9-minute break]
13. PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 4075 El Camino Way [23PLN-00202]: Adoption of an
Amendment to a Planned Community Ordinance (PC-5116) to Allow for Modifications to
an Existing 121-Unit Assisted Living and Memory Care Facility. CEQA Status: Exempt
from the Provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in Accordance
with CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Modifications to Existing Facilities).
Current Planning Manager Claire Raybould presented the project at 4075 El Camino Way,
describing a request to amend an existing Planned Community (PC) to allow construction of 11
additional units to a 121-unit assisted living and memory care facility, named WellQuest Palo
Alto Commons. The site location near El Camino Way and El Camino Real and proximity to
residential uses were noted, along with the PC process history, including prescreening in August
2023 and subsequent PTC, ARB, and Council review. Council direction in May 2025 to revise the
project to reduce impacts to adjacent Wilkie Way properties was described, followed by PTC
review and recommendation for a reduced unit count. Planning Manager Raybould outlined
PTC recommendations, including approval of 7 units, removal of ground-floor office space,
implementation of annual monitoring and public benefit requirements, updates to ordinance
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 15 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
and condition language, and inclusion of an appendix in the Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Plan for a parking plan. Project revisions by the applicant were described,
including reduction from 16 to 11 units, elimination of office space, additional on-site parking,
implementation of TDM measures, and façade modifications to address neighbor concerns.
Ongoing community concerns were noted regarding privacy, sunlight impacts, parking, zoning
exceptions, compliance with existing requirements, and neighborhood quality of life. Planning
Manager Raybould presented staff recommendations that the Council find the project exempt
from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301, adopt the ordinance amending PC Ordinance 5116 to
allow 11 additional units, and approve the Record of Land Use Action subject to findings and
conditions, noting that Council may modify the proposal.
WellQuest Living CEO Steve Sandholtz, representing the property owner, described project
revisions made in response to Council, PTC, and neighbor feedback, including removal of third-
floor units adjacent to neighboring properties and reduction of total units from 16 to 11. Efforts
to address parking concerns were outlined, including implementation of valet service, staff
carpool incentives, visitor and resident parking education, and relocation of a shuttle bus to an
off-site location. CEO Sandholtz addressed ongoing concerns regarding parking on Wilkie Way,
stating that measures implemented by the facility have resulted in available on-site parking.
Observations were shared indicating that neighborhood congestion is attributable to other
nearby uses as well, including restaurants and retail, and not solely to the facility. It was
reiterated that parking impacts associated with the project have been addressed. CEO
Sandholtz described existing mature landscaping on the site and emphasized that Palo Alto
Commons is not new. Additional tree planting was proposed, with input from neighbors on
species selection to enhance privacy screening. It was noted that existing trees affect sunlight
conditions. It was stated that, with removal of third-floor units, the project complies with the
daylight plane as determined by the ARB and does not propose any violations. It was indicated
that the project remains within height limits and does not significantly increase the scale or
massing of the existing building adjacent to residential properties. Outreach efforts to
neighbors on Wilkie Way were described, noting distribution of materials documenting project
revisions. CEO Sandholtz shared a testimonial from a former Palo Alto Commons resident,
highlighting support for the community and expressing encouragement for the proposed
expansion.
Mayor Veenker announced public comment time limits of 1 minute per individual speaker and
4 minutes per group.
Public Comment:
1. Janis I., speaking on behalf of Oliver C, Nikki P., Edwin O., Jonathan V., and
Minami S., raised concerns regarding long-standing noncompliance with parking
and reporting requirements associated with the existing PC. Historical lack of
reporting and a 2025 acknowledgment of noncompliance were cited, along with
examples of ongoing parking issues on Wilkie Way, including off-site parking,
inconsistent valet operations, and vehicles obstructing fire lanes. Concerns were
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 16 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
expressed regarding credibility and enforcement of conditions of approval.
Adoption of the PTC recommendation for 7 units with annual monitoring was
requested.
2. Henry E. commented on broader housing policy considerations, expressing
concern regarding age-restricted developments and advocating for
intergenerational housing. Reference was made to conditions at Old Creek
Apartments, with concerns about loss of intergenerational character. Expansion
of this project to include housing for younger residents was recommended.
3. Ellen H., a longtime Charleston Meadows resident, recalled prior approvals for
the original Palo Alto Commons development and expressed concern that the
current proposal conflicts with earlier agreements regarding building massing
and setbacks. Concerns were raised regarding consistency with established
conditions of approval and impacts on adjacent properties. Opposition was
stated to expansion within the rear setback area.
4. Mona, a Wilkie Way resident, expressed opposition to the project expansion
along the Wilkie Way side while stating support for senior housing in general.
Concerns were raised regarding perceived noncompliance with prior Council and
PTC direction and the impact of development on nearby residents, with the
project characterized as prioritizing financial considerations over neighborhood
impacts.
5. Andie R. expressed support for the PTC recommendation and raised concerns
regarding parking capacity and access. Questions were raised about the usability
of existing parking spaces, noting that a majority are gated and limit access for
visitors, delivery drivers, and caregivers. It was suggested that keeping garage
parking open during the day could help reduce neighborhood parking impacts.
6. Jenny C., a longtime Wilkie Way resident, urged support for the PTC
recommendation to approve 7 units and emphasized concerns related to project
scale, safety, and adherence to City standards. Concerns were raised regarding
use of older daylight plane standards and potential precedent-setting impacts.
Reference was made to prior commitments limiting expansion toward the
neighborhood, along with ongoing parking and safety issues. The PTC
recommendation was characterized as a balanced approach.
7. Jennie C., a Wilkie Way resident, reiterated concerns regarding proposed units
facing neighboring backyards and referenced longstanding commitments made
during the original approval process in 1987. Impacts related to privacy, sunlight,
and property values were noted, along with concern that the current proposal
departs from prior agreements. Ongoing parking issues and the need for
permanent implementation of parking solutions was emphasized.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 17 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
8. Michael J., a Wilkie Way resident, urged support for the PTC recommendation of
7 units and questioned the feasibility of the applicant’s proposal for additional
units. Support for senior housing was expressed, with emphasis on maintaining
appropriate scale and consistent application of City standards.
9. James C., a Wilkie Way resident, urged the Council to require WellQuest to
comply with PTC recommendations and existing conditions of approval.
Concerns were raised regarding past noncompliance and responsiveness to
neighborhood concerns, including parking impacts. Ongoing oversight and
enforcement were requested to ensure adherence to commitments and
maintain community trust.
10. Jeffrey S. expressed support for the PTC recommendation of 7 units and aligned
with concerns raised by Wilkie Way residents. Questions were raised regarding
the applicant’s claims of financial feasibility given prior revisions to unit counts.
The PTC’s repeated recommendation for 7 units was cited and Council was urged
to adopt the same approach.
11. Penny B. (Zoom) supported limiting the project to 7 additional internal units with
enforceable conditions to address traffic and parking impacts on Wilkie Way.
Concerns were raised regarding the affordability of the facility, with the project
characterized as serving higher-income residents and providing limited
community benefit. Questions were raised regarding compliance with existing
commitments and the broader value of the project to the City.
12. Jayashree (Zoom), a 20-year Wilkie Way resident, stated opposition to the
project expansion along the Wilkie Way side while stating support for senior
housing. Concerns were raised regarding parking, daylight impacts, and effects
on property values. Support was expressed for limiting the project to 7 units
consistent with the PTC recommendation.
13. Shashank D. (Zoom), a Wilkie Way resident, described concerns regarding
privacy, property values, and compliance with daylight plane standards. Support
was stated for senior housing while opposing additional expansion beyond 7
internal units as recommended by the PTC. Broader impacts on quality of life
were emphasized.
14. Devan S. (Zoom), a Palo Alto resident, expressed support for the PTC
recommendation and raised concerns regarding the applicant’s consistency and
credibility. Examples were cited related to prior statements by WellQuest on
staffing, parking, and project feasibility. Support was expressed for senior
housing while urging adoption of the 7-unit recommendation.
15. Aaron S., a longtime Palo Alto resident, voiced support for senior housing and
shared personal experience of visiting his grandmother at Palo Alto Commons
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 18 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
with parking challenges at the site. Based on those concerns, support was stated
for limiting the project to 7 units consistent with the PTC recommendation.
16. Kevin J., a longtime Palo Alto resident speaking as an individual, indicated
support for senior housing while raising concerns about shading impacts on
neighboring properties. Personal experience was shared regarding potential loss
of sunlight affecting backyard use for gardening. Support was stated for the PTC
recommendation of 7 units.
17. JP N., a lifelong Palo Alto resident, voiced support for the PTC recommendation
of 7 units and referenced community support for the Wilkie Way neighbors.
Concerns were raised regarding past noncompliance with parking regulations
and reporting requirements, including delayed responses and incomplete
submissions. The 7-unit recommendation was characterized as a balanced
approach addressing senior housing needs and neighborhood impacts.
18. Maegan C., a lifelong Palo Alto resident, advocated for the PTC recommendation
of 7 units and verbalized support from Wilkie Way neighbors and petition
signers. Concerns were raised regarding precedent, trust, and accountability,
citing past parking and compliance issues. The 7-unit proposal was characterized
as a reasonable compromise balancing neighborhood impacts and housing
needs.
19. Brian C., a longtime Palo Alto resident, spoke in favor of the applicant’s proposal
and emphasized the need for expanded senior housing in the community. The
project was characterized as addressing an unmet need and supporting residents
who wish to remain in Palo Alto as they age.
20. Adrian L. (Zoom), a longtime Palo Alto resident, echoed concerns raised by
Wilkie Way neighbors and petition signers regarding longstanding
noncompliance and neighborhood impacts. Issues cited included parking
violations, missed reporting requirements, and deviation from prior
commitments related to setbacks. The applicant’s request for expansion was
characterized as proceeding without adequately resolving existing concerns.
21. Austin (Zoom) supported the PTC recommendation and referenced prior Council
direction for “review of a project that would eliminate the third-floor units
adjacent to Wilkie Way backyards.” Concern was raised that the revised proposal
does not fully reflect that direction and was evident in the PTC’s subsequent
disappointment. Statements by the applicant were noted, including, “So the only
conclusion to which we could find is a bias against senior population, that
instead of viewing them as neighbors, the Commissioners are viewing them as
damaged goods to be managed.” Concerns were expressed regarding
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 19 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
responsiveness to City guidance, while still acknowledging the need for senior
housing and supporting the PTC recommendation.
22. Jane W., a Palo Alto resident, advocated for the PTC recommendation and
opposed the proposed design. WellQuest Living, identified as a for-profit
company owned by FJ Management, reported $7B in revenue in 2024 and
ranked 89 on Forbes list of the largest private companies in the United States.
The proposal was characterized as prioritizing profit over neighborhood impacts
and the PTC recommendation was described as a more appropriate approach
aligned with community interests.
23. James P., speaking on behalf of Amartina R., John N., Edwin O., Seth F., and
Sergio A., stated support for senior housing and described Palo Alto Commons as
a positive presence in the neighborhood. Support was expressed for the PTC
recommendation of 7 interior units, with opposition to additional units facing
the neighborhood. Historical context was provided regarding the 1987 PC
approval, including downzoning and design commitments intended to reduce
massing and create a transition between residential and commercial areas.
Concerns were raised that the current proposal would increase density and
eliminate prior design features such as step-ups, resulting in greater visual and
sunlight impacts. Issues related to compliance with daylight plane and setback
standards were identified, with concern that portions of the proposal would not
meet current municipal code requirements. Adoption of the PTC
recommendation was urged as a means to balance senior housing needs with
neighborhood protections.
24. Jen O. (Zoom) read a statement on behalf of an anonymous individual who
regularly visits a resident at Palo Alto Commons. Concerns were raised regarding
limited visitor parking, resulting in frequent use of Wilkie Way for parking.
Impacts on neighbors and visitors were described, including difficulty accessing
the facility and potential effects on resident well-being due to reduced visitation.
The statement concluded with support for the PTC recommendation of 7 units.
Palo Alto Commons Owner Steve Reller described the project as having limited impacts, with
parking identified as the primary concern. Existing reporting requirements under the 1987 PC
were characterized as limited and additional measures were outlined, including requiring staff
to park on site, prohibiting parking on Wilkie Way, implementing valet service, providing
parking guidance to residents and visitors, and expanding use of available on-site parking.
Transportation demand strategies were described, including incentives for carpooling, transit
use, and bicycling, along with use of off-site parking for facility vehicles. Owner Reller addressed
concerns regarding ownership, clarifying that references to a large corporation were not
applicable to the ownership of this property or project.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 20 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
Mayor Veenker closed the public hearing and initiated Council discussion, requesting
Councilmembers to disclose any contacts outside of a noticed meeting and identify any new or
different information received that may influence their preliminary views on the item.
Vice Mayor Stone inquired whether disclosures were required only for contacts since the prior
Council discussion. Interim City Attorney Caio Arellano clarified that disclosures should include
any contacts outside noticed meetings and any new information received since the last
disclosure. Vice Mayor Stone indicated no additional contacts or information.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims disclosed one conversation since the prior meeting and
indicated that no new information was received beyond what was presented during public
comment.
Councilmember Reckdahl noted familiarity with the site from prior visits and regular bicycle
travel in the area and indicated no additional information to report.
Councilmember Reckdahl emphasized the importance of assisted living and noted the City’s
need for additional capacity, while supporting the PTC recommendation of 7 units. Concerns
were raised regarding impacts of the additional 4 units on adjacent neighbors, with limited
community benefit identified relative to those impacts. Observations from site visits were
referenced, noting the scale and massing of the existing building. Opposition was stated to the
11-unit proposal.
Councilmember Burt referenced prior Council direction to evaluate a project between 11 and
13 units and to eliminate third-floor units adjacent to Wilkie Way, noting that the revised
proposal reflects the lower end of that range and addresses prior concerns regarding upper-
floor units. Consideration was focused on adequacy of the parking plan and the TDM program.
Planning Manager Raybould confirmed that prior PC requirements related to parking and the
TDM were limited.
Councilmember Burt discussed the proposed parking and TDM program and inquired about
valet operations and garage capacity. CEO Sandholtz explained that valet operations allow for
double parking within the garage and that parking availability has improved with
implementation of TDM measures and staff carpool incentives. Councilmember Burt
acknowledged that effective implementation of parking and TDM programs can address
impacts and raised questions regarding long-term enforcement and reliability. Councilmember
Burt referenced concerns about past compliance at Palo Alto Commons and asked staff about
enforcement mechanisms, including annual reporting and applicant-funded inspections.
Director Lait confirmed that enhanced enforcement tools are available, including use of third-
party code enforcement supported by applicant funding but noted resource constraints and
expressed concern that while compliance can be monitored, meeting community expectations
for enforcement may be challenging. Councilmember Burt inquired about adding a requirement
for the property owner and operator to certify compliance under penalty of perjury. Director
Lait indicated that such a requirement is not currently included and would require consultation
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 21 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
with the City Attorney’s Office. Interim City Attorney Arellano indicated that the addition would
be acceptable. Councilmember Burt noted that such certification could strengthen
accountability and emphasized the importance of effective enforcement of parking and TDM
measures, suggesting these may provide greater neighborhood benefit than reducing the unit
count.
Mayor Veenker highlighted compliance with the daylight plane and noted that removal of third-
floor units reduces potential impacts, identifying privacy and parking as the primary remaining
concerns. Challenges in reconciling differing accounts of parking conditions were noted, along
with interest in strengthening enforcement mechanisms to address trust concerns. Mayor
Veenker inquired about monetary penalties for noncompliance and Director Lait explained that
enforcement may include notices of violation, opportunities to cure, and escalating daily fines
up to $1,000 per day after repeated violations, subject to available inspection resources.
Director Lait confirmed that these enforcement tools are currently available under existing
police authority. Mayor Veenker emphasized strengthening enforcement of parking measures
given ongoing concerns and lack of trust. Director Lait noted that a residential parking permit
program could be considered separately by neighbors, with associated tradeoffs.
Mayor Veenker inquired about the type of units and window orientation for the rear-facing
units and CEO Sandholtz confirmed a mix of assisted living and memory care units with angled
windows. Planning Manager Raybould stated that adjacent Wilkie Way properties are single-
story residences with typical 20-foot setbacks. Mayor Veenker discussed privacy considerations
in the context of typical residential conditions and noted reduced impacts due to elimination of
third-floor units and compliance with the daylight plane.
Councilmember Lu noted that the project is consistent with other recent Palo Alto
developments adjacent to low-rise residential areas, while acknowledging additional complexity
due to its PC history. Based on experience with similar facilities and consideration of proposed
TDM measures, support was indicated for the 11-unit proposal contingent on strong
enforcement and administrative oversight.
Councilmember Lauing addressed concerns regarding parking and trust, noting challenges with
enforcement and personal experience with parking conditions at the site. Privacy and building
massing were identified as more significant issues, particularly in light of existing conditions
along the rear property line. Councilmember Lauing referenced longstanding agreements
dating to 1987 and noted prior neighborhood compromises. The PTC recommendation for a
reduced unit count was characterized as appropriately addressing massing concerns and
support was indicated for that approach in recognition of neighborhood input and the PTC’s
review.
Vice Mayor Stone raised questions regarding application of daylight plane standards and
whether the project complies with current R-1 standards or the previously established PC
requirements. Planning Manager Raybould explained that the project complies with the original
PC daylight plane of 10 feet at a 45-degree angle and noted that Council could consider
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 22 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
applying current 3/6 standards, with limited areas of noncompliance related to parapets.
Clarification was provided that under R-1 standards the project would comply based on how
the property line is defined. Vice Mayor Stone expressed concern that the project requires
significant interpretation to achieve compliance and suggested that the site functions more like
a residential context than commercial. Appreciation was noted for applicant revisions but
opposition was stated to the 11-unit proposal. Support was indicated for the PTC
recommendation of 7 units.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims inquired about the scope of annual monitoring requirements
recommended by the PTC, including reference to Section 3D of the original PC. Planning
Manager Raybould explained that the requirement focuses on ensuring completion of annual
reporting, which had not been consistently provided in the past. Monitoring would include
items such as parking, licensing, and vacancy rates. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims emphasized
the importance of clearly identifying the specific elements to be tracked, given the PTC’s
detailed review. Planning Manager Raybould outlined required annual monitoring conditions,
including reporting on occupancy, vacancy status, number and age of occupants, employee
counts, parking usage, and submission of the facility’s renewal license. Councilmember
Lythcott-Haims asked whether these requirements had been fulfilled and Planning Manager
Raybould stated that reporting had not been completed previously, noting that the report
included in the current packet appears to be among the first submitted.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims expressed support for expanding assisted living capacity and
noted family experience with the need for such services. Concerns were raised regarding
fairness and consistency, referencing the 1987 agreement with neighbors and questioning
whether prior commitments have been upheld. The neighborhood context and prior
compromises were emphasized, along with concern about additional massing impacts.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims questioned the applicant’s responsiveness to prior Council
direction, including consideration of alternative designs focused on the El Camino Way
frontage. Past Council feedback and lack of corresponding revisions were noted. Ongoing
concerns were expressed regarding trust, partnership, and adherence to prior agreements. It
was indicated that support would depend on the final motion.
Mayor Veenker sought clarification regarding application of the daylight plane and whether the
project would comply if Wilkie Way properties were treated as rear yards. Planning Manager
Raybould explained that under the code, the adjacent R-1 zoning standards are applied to the
subject property (Palo Alto Commons) and the interface is considered a side yard, resulting in
application of the 10-foot, 45-degree daylight plane rather than rear yard standards. Further
clarification was provided that this approach aligns with the original PC standards and typical
practice for amendments, which apply existing development standards unless specifically
modified. Mayor Veenker confirmed understanding of that explanation.
Councilmember Reckdahl referenced prior review of the project during service on the PTC and
described interpretation of applicable code provisions, noting that the site configuration
complicates application of frontage and yard definitions. Councilmember Reckdahl stated that
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 23 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
under code definitions the Wilkie Way interface could be considered a rear yard and indicated
that the project may not comply with either commercial or residential daylight plane standards
when those definitions are applied.
Vice Mayor Stone noted the complexity of applying daylight plane standards and expressed
concern that the proposed expansion would negatively impact access to light for adjacent
properties.
Councilmembers and staff discussed and refined the motion language.
Councilmember Lauing summarized that the motion reflects support for senior housing and
medical care, adherence to commitments made in the 1987 PC, and alignment with the PTC’s
recommendation and hard work.
Councilmember Burt stated that the difference between the 7- and 11-unit proposals is
relatively limited and reiterated the importance of the parking and TDM programs, as well as
removal of third-floor units. Visual and privacy impacts were characterized as potentially
mitigable. Support was indicated for the motion to allow the project to move forward.
Councilmember Burt noted broader concerns regarding consistency in how impacts are
evaluated across projects in light of Housing Element requirements and state mandates.
Concerns were expressed regarding past compliance with PC conditions and the need for
stronger enforcement going forward.
Mayor Veenker revisited prior concerns regarding the daylight plane, noting that while the
project may technically comply, further review and public input raised questions about the
basis for that compliance. Parking and privacy impacts were described as potentially
manageable, while concerns related to historical agreements and evolving interpretation of the
daylight plane were emphasized. Based on these considerations, support for the motion was
indicated.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims requested clarification regarding whether the motion
incorporates PTC stipulations, including ongoing reporting requirements. Director Lait
confirmed that the PTC recommendations have been incorporated into the PC ordinance and
the Record of Land Use Action.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims responded to Councilmember Burt's comments regarding
consistency, distinguishing between longstanding agreements under a PC and newer housing
projects subject to state mandates. The situations were characterized as fundamentally
different and it was stated that supporting different outcomes in each context would not be
inconsistent.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Stone moved, seconded by Councilmember Lauing, to approve the staff
recommendation (#1-#3) with the modification described in #4:
1. Find the project exempt from CEQA in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15301;
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 24 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
2. Adopt the ordinance in Attachment B, amending Planned Community Ordinance 5116;
3. Approve the Record of Land Use Action in Attachment C based on findings and subject
to conditions of approval; and
4. Allow the addition of only seven units (units labeled 1-4 and 9-11), consistent with the
Planning and Transportation Commission’s September 2025 recommendation.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
[Council took a 10-minute break]
14. Adoption of an Ordinance Adding a New Section 18.40.280 (Bird-Friendly Design) to
Chapter 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code; CEQA Status: Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15308
(Actions for Protection of the Environment)
Planning and Development Services Director Jonathan Lait introduced Senior Planner Kelly Cha
to present the item and noted that the PTC held a detailed discussion. The availability of
Commissioner Bart Hechtman from the PTC for questions was noted.
Senior Planner Kelly Cha presented the Bird-Friendly Design Ordinance, noting it implements
Comprehensive Plan policy and aligns with a City Council priority. The outreach process was
described, including study sessions with the ARB, multiple PTC hearings, and a revised PTC
recommendation in December 2025 addressing concerns related to cost and availability of bird-
friendly materials. There were community engagement efforts, including input from residents,
businesses, developers, and environmental advocates, along with targeted outreach to local
businesses. Feedback received was incorporated into the draft ordinance and supporting
materials. Senior Planner Cha explained that staff returned to the PTC following its initial
recommendation to address concerns related to the cost and availability of bird-friendly glazing
and the potential burden on property owners and businesses. Additional analysis was
conducted through research and consultation with industry experts, including a glass
manufacturer, glass retailers, architects, and City staff. The draft ordinance reflects the revised
PTC recommendation from December 2025. The ordinance applies to new construction, major
remodels, and bird hazard installations as defined in the draft ordinance, establishes the bird-
sensitive area as locations east of Highway 101 and west of the Foothill Expressway, and
requires varying percentages of each building elevation to incorporate bird-friendly treatments
depending on whether the project is inside or outside the bird-sensitive area and whether it is
residential or non-residential.
Senior Planner Cha described required bird-friendly design treatments, including permanent
visual cues such as dots or vertical lines spaced no more than 2 inches apart, as well as
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 25 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
architecturally integrated features like insect screens as a lower-cost option. Options for
alternative compliance and exemptions were outlined, including allowances for certain ground-
floor commercial uses and portions of residential elevations up to 35 feet. Additional
consideration was requested for similar exemptions to apply to nonresidential development
based on comparable cost and supply impacts. Alternatives such as films or decals were noted
as potential compliance methods. Senior Planner Cha outlined proposed revisions to exempt
airport operations from the ordinance to avoid interference and safety concerns, including
corresponding updates to the exemption language. It was noted that upon adoption, a second
reading would be scheduled as a consent item, with the regulations becoming effective on the
31st day following that reading.
Councilmember Lu sought clarification on applicability of the ordinance to existing buildings
and asked whether interior remodels would trigger bird-friendly requirements. Senior Planner
Cha explained that only substantial remodels, defined under the 50-50-50 rule involving
significant exterior changes, would apply and that interior renovations alone would not trigger
compliance. Further clarification was provided that replacement of existing features “like for
like” would not trigger requirements and that most existing residential and multifamily
buildings would be unlikely to meet the threshold for a major remodel. Exemptions for portions
of buildings up to 35 feet were noted, along with applicability to new development and certain
features such as glass railings. Councilmember Lu questioned the necessity of some exemptions
given the limited applicability and acknowledged the clarifications provided.
Councilmember Lauing asked about the rationale for defining the bird-sensitive area
boundaries. Senior Planner Cha explained that Highway 101 and Foothill Expressway were
selected as delineators, with Highway 101 reflecting the Baylands area and Foothill Expressway
corresponding to boundaries identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
Councilmember Lauing asked about types of nonresidential structures that would be subject to
the proposed 35-foot exemption. Senior Planner Cha explained that this could include retail,
mixed-use projects without residential components, and other nonresidential developments.
Hotels were confirmed to be included as non-residential uses. Councilmember Lauing asked
how the 35-foot exemption would apply to multifamily buildings and whether bird-friendly
treatments would be required above that height. Senior Planner Cha explained that for
multifamily buildings, the exemption would apply from the sidewalk level up to 35 feet, with
requirements applied to elevations above that height. Assistant Director Jennifer Armer
clarified that retail exemptions are tied to specific overlay districts, such as downtown and
California Avenue, where use types may vary.
Mayor Veenker announced public comment time limits of 2 minutes per individual speaker and
6 minutes per group.
Public Comment:
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 26 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
1. Shani K., speaking on behalf of Ce Ci K., Margaret H., Laura M., Inna M., Diane
M., Drey S., Alan K., Melanie B., Doria S., and Bob H., highlighted the ecological,
community, and economic value of birds, noting the large number of visitors to
the Baylands for birdwatching. Examples of bird collisions in Palo Alto were
described, including impacts from reflective and transparent glass, with
observations that collisions are often underreported due to difficulty in tracking
injured or deceased birds. Design-based solutions were emphasized as the most
effective approach to reducing collisions, including minimizing reflective and see-
through glass and incorporating visible cues or treatments to signal barriers to
birds. Resources such as the American Bird Conservancy (ABC) and
www.stopbirdcollisions.org were cited for guidance. Reference was made to a
study at 600 Clyde Avenue in Mountain View, demonstrating reduced collisions
following installation of bird-friendly materials. Shani K. made a request to
address potential risks associated with green roofs in proximity to glass in the
ordinance.
2. Dashiell L., speaking on behalf of Junyan W., Connie C., Rani F., Avroh S., Lisa K.,
Jill H., Linda R., Lynn H., and Jean G., representing the Sierra Club Loma Prieta
Chapter, advocated for adoption of the Bird-Friendly Design Ordinance as
proposed in Attachment A. Research findings were referenced, including a
review of 139 studies identifying window area and glass characteristics as
primary contributors to bird collisions and confirming that visual deterrents and
surface treatments are effective mitigation measures. The presence of bird
habitats throughout Palo Alto, including the Baylands and urban forest, was
noted, along with the ordinance’s development through multiple ARB and PTC
reviews and community input. Concerns were raised that proposed additional
exemptions, particularly extending the 35-foot exemption to all building types,
would significantly weaken the ordinance by excluding areas where most
collisions occur. Comparisons were made to standards in other jurisdictions and
model codes, including ASHRAE, Cupertino, and Berkeley, which apply bird-
friendly requirements more broadly. Retaining the current draft without further
exemptions was urged in order to maintain effectiveness and uphold strong bird
safety standards.
3. Jeff W., a resident of the Esther Clark Park neighborhood, expressed appreciation
for staff efforts while raising concerns about applicability of the ordinance to
lower-density areas west of the Foothills. It was noted there is lack of data
supporting increased bird strike risk in those neighborhoods and consistency in
policy, particularly related to exemptions for residential buildings under 35 feet.
A voluntary, education-based approach was recommended, including use of
bird-safe films, managing outdoor cats, and moving bird attractants away from
danger zones.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 27 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
4. Ed F. described participation in multiple PTC meetings and characterized the
issue as complex with differing viewpoints of committee members. Data and
personal observations were cited to suggest that bird collisions in Palo Alto may
be limited relative to other factors, including building height, feral cats, and
placement of bird feeders. Questions were raised regarding the effectiveness of
regulating window design compared to other mitigation approaches, along with
potential cost and housing impacts.
5. Charlie W., representing the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce, conveyed
business feedback on the proposed ordinance, noting alignment with the goal of
reducing bird collisions while identifying issues related to balance and supporting
data. The absence of local studies demonstrating the scale and location of bird
collisions in Palo Alto was highlighted, with a recommendation to conduct local
analysis prior to adoption. Potential impacts on economic vitality were noted,
including increased costs and potential effects on building attractiveness in a
challenging real estate market. It was suggested that the ordinance may not
represent an immediate priority and that City resources could instead focus on
initiatives supporting business growth.
6. Jeffrey S. raised a legal issue regarding consistency with the Comprehensive Plan,
noting that existing policy language directs the City to “encourage” bird-friendly
design and develop nonmandatory guidelines, and suggested that adoption of
mandatory standards may conflict with that framework. Reference was made to
changes in State law under SB 1333 requiring zoning ordinances to be consistent
with General Plans and it was suggested that adoption of mandatory
requirements may necessitate an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan.
7. Kai S. (Zoom), representing Sand Hill Property Company, expressed appreciation
for staff efforts while urging Council not to adopt the ordinance in its current
form. Issues were identified regarding the breadth of requirements and lack of
localized data, along with potential impacts on housing feasibility, project design,
and commercial leasing. Deferral was requested to allow for additional study and
development of a more targeted approach.
8. Winter (Zoom) commented on the parameters of bird-sensitive areas,
referencing Matadero Creek as a significant wildlife corridor within the
community. Issues were raised regarding nearby planned developments and the
35-foot exemption, which was characterized as insufficient to protect birds in
areas with high ecological activity.
9. Prisha G. (Zoom), a student, spoke about the importance of protecting birds and
maintaining ecological balance, noting the risk posed by glass buildings and the
high number of bird deaths from window collisions. The effectiveness of bird-
safe design features, particularly at tree canopy height, was emphasized.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 28 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
Adoption of the ordinance as drafted was urged, with opposition to expanding
the 35-foot exemption due to its potential to reduce protections where they are
most needed.
Vice Mayor Stone opposed extending the 35-foot exemption to all development, stating that it
would weaken the ordinance’s effectiveness, particularly given that most bird collisions occur at
canopy height. Support was expressed for allowing nonresidential projects to use films or
decals as a more affordable compliance option and clarification was requested regarding
application and approval of those measures. Senior Planner Cha and Director Lait confirmed
that patterned treatments are applied to exterior surfaces and could be extended to
commercial properties through ordinance revisions and that additional standards, including
reference to ABC-approved products or equivalent criteria, could be incorporated by Council.
Vice Mayor Stone supported maintaining residential exemptions while applying stronger
requirements to commercial development and noted alignment with broader policy discussions
regarding incentivizing housing.
Councilmember Lu stated his appreciation for progress on the ordinance while identifying
issues related to cost, quality of life, and equity impacts on residential development. It was
noted that exemptions for buildings under 35 feet suggest meaningful tradeoffs and applying
requirements primarily to larger multifamily housing could disproportionately affect newer or
less affluent residents. Questions were raised regarding alignment with available research on
bird collision risk, particularly at lower building heights. Councilmember Lu expressed support
for allowing films, decals, and other flexible compliance options, potentially guided by ABC
standards. Consideration was suggested for adjusting height-based exemptions, including
exempting surfaces above 60 feet and applying requirements more consistently below that
threshold to better align with collision patterns and reduce inequities.
Councilmember Reckdahl noted Palo Alto’s longstanding commitment to environmental
protection and characterized the ordinance as a natural extension of that effort. The proposal
was described as a compromise shaped through multiple PTC reviews, with questions raised
about whether it has been overly weakened through exemptions. Councilmember Reckdahl
emphasized that most exemptions limit applicability to new construction and referenced
available data on bird mortality, including studies from San Francisco. Quality-of-life tradeoffs
were acknowledged, with the view that visual impacts from treatments are minimal compared
to the potential benefit of reducing bird mortality.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims wondered whether the scope of the original Council referral to
the PTC was intended to produce an ordinance or explore the issue more broadly. Support was
expressed for the goal of protecting wildlife, while questions were raised regarding the
availability of local data on bird collisions, including affected building types and heights.
Potential impacts on housing development and residential construction were noted, along with
consideration of alternative factors such as bird deaths due to outdoor cats. Based on these
factors, support was indicated for limiting the ordinance to commercial applications.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 29 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
Councilmember Lauing emphasized the importance of balancing environmental goals with the
need to support housing production and meet State requirements, noting that additional
constraints could hinder development. Consideration was suggested for limiting bird-friendly
requirements on residential projects. Questions were raised regarding availability and cost of
bird-friendly glass for residential use. Senior Planner Cha explained that local retailers do not
typically stock bird-friendly glass, requiring special orders with additional cost and delay, and
that availability remains uncertain.
Councilmember Lauing raised questions regarding potential impacts on commercial leasing and
usability, including whether visible treatments such as window patterns could affect tenant
appeal, and noted that some details of the ordinance may require further refinement over
time. It was observed that adjustments could be made to the ordinance in the future if needed.
Questions were raised regarding consistency with Housing Element requirements and potential
implications for multifamily housing. Director Lait responded that the ordinance is not expected
to create significant issues given the inclusion of flexible compliance options such as films and
decals, which may reduce impacts on development feasibility.
Councilmember Burt referenced provisions allowing films and decals for residential
development and noted their effectiveness and low cost. Questions were raised regarding
consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Director Lait explained that the Comprehensive Plan
establishes policy direction rather than regulatory requirements and that implementation
through municipal code is standard practice. Interim City Attorney Caio Arellano confirmed that
the ordinance is considered consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, citing existing policy
encouraging bird-friendly design.
Councilmember Burt raised the issue of green roofs as potential bird attractants and asked
whether distance-based standards had been considered. Senior Planner Cha responded that
green roofs were not specifically evaluated or considered.
Councilmember Burt addressed comments regarding focusing more on feral cats as a cause of
bird mortality, noting that impacts from feral cats do not preclude addressing building-related
collisions. It was stated that bird mortality is a recognized issue based on broader studies, even
in the absence of localized data, and that similar policies have been adopted without city-
specific studies. Councilmember Burt characterized the ordinance as the result of extensive
review and supported its overall approach, highlighting availability of lower-cost compliance
options such as films and decals and indicating support for the proposal with potential
refinements.
Mayor Veenker discussed the need to balance protection of bird populations with supporting
housing development and asked whether existing building codes or requirements, including
reach codes, influence window size in a way that could affect applicability of the ordinance.
Director Lait responded that he is not aware of State building code or reach code provisions
that would limit window size, noting that while various performance standards apply, design
flexibility remains available.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 30 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
Mayor Veenker asked whether there is any reason Palo Alto would differ from other
jurisdictions with documented bird collision data and noted the absence of a local study.
Director Lait acknowledged the value of data-driven decisions but stated that existing studies
are sufficient and that a local study is not necessary in this case. It was noted that Palo Alto’s
environmental context, including the Baylands and Foothills, supports a proactive approach
consistent with the 2017 Comprehensive Plan.
Mayor Veenker discussed potential refinements to the ordinance, including allowing ABC-
approved alternatives for residential and commercial uses, considering height-based
approaches used by other jurisdictions, and tracking effectiveness and supply impacts over
time. Questions were raised regarding how the substantial remodel threshold is triggered,
particularly under the 50-50-50 rule, and whether requirements could be tied more directly to
window replacement. Director Lait explained that the substantial remodel definition is intended
to establish a consistent threshold for when full code compliance is required and advised
against creating separate standards for this ordinance. Mayor Veenker expressed concern
about requiring upgrades to portions of a building not being modified, while Director Lait
emphasized the importance of maintaining consistent application of existing code triggers for
major redevelopment.
Planning and Transportation Commissioner Bart Hechtman summarized the PTC’s
recommendation and described the majority’s deliberations, noting the item’s basis in the
Comprehensive Plan and Council priorities. The PTC reviewed multiple iterations of the
proposal and considered issues related to cost, supply constraints, and available research. The
majority found that while national studies exist, they are inconsistent and do not clearly
translate to Palo Alto conditions and that the PTC was not in a position to resolve conflicting
information regarding bird flight patterns and collision risk. PTC discussion addressed whether a
local study should be conducted, which was not recommended due to cost considerations. The
majority expressed difficulty in assessing the scale of the issue locally and, as a result,
questioned how effectiveness of the ordinance could be measured if adopted.
Commissioner Hechtman explained that the PTC asked Council to consider whether, given
existing uncertainties, the proposal should be implemented as an ordinance or as guidelines,
noting that staff has since clarified the appropriate approach. The majority recognized limited
quantifiable local data on the scale of the issue in Palo Alto and emphasized the importance of
evaluating effectiveness over time, particularly for residential development, which informed
the recommendation to include exemptions for residential structures under 35 feet outside the
bird-sensitive area. The two dissenting votes were summarized, with one Commissioner
concluding that the lack of data and measurable outcomes made the proposal premature, and
the other questioning the basis for distinguishing between residential and commercial
structures and between geographic areas without supporting evidence. Commissioner
Hechtman concluded by offering to answer questions.
Mayor Veenker thanked Commissioner Hechtman for the input and invited a motion.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 31 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
Councilmember Reckdahl moved the staff recommendation with the modifications discussed by
Vice Mayor Stone. Vice Mayor Stone seconded the motion.
Director Lait sought clarification on how to incorporate the proposed changes, outlining options
to modify the definition of Patterned Treatments, Limited, to include commercial uses or to
address the change through alternative compliance provisions. Discussion followed regarding
applicability to commercial buildings, particularly those under 35 feet, and potential
implementation approaches. Vice Mayor Stone clarified intent to allow such treatments for
lower-height commercial development, referencing earlier discussion of ABC standards, and
general direction was provided for staff to refine the language accordingly.
Councilmember Lu reiterated his equity concerns and questioned whether requirements should
apply to single-family homes if impacts are minimal, while referencing studies indicating that
most bird collisions occur below 60 feet. A proposal was made to exempt glazing above a
certain height for residential and commercial buildings. Councilmember Reckdahl expressed
reservations about applying such an exemption to commercial uses and Vice Mayor Stone
opposed introducing significant changes at that stage. Director Lait explained that staff had not
included an upper height limit due to local zoning constraints and existing flexibility within
multifamily provisions. Councilmember Lu reiterated concerns regarding application of
requirements at higher elevations and indicated an inability to support the motion.
Councilmember Burt sought clarification on whether Councilmember Lu was proposing to
remove the exemption for residential structures under 35 feet. Councilmember Lu confirmed
support for eliminating that exemption and instead applying requirements below 35 feet, while
supporting an exemption for glazing above approximately 60 feet.
Councilmember Burt proposed an amendment to incorporate bird-safe treatment
requirements within 15 feet of green roofs, noting their potential to attract birds. Director Lait
advised that such a change should be included in the motion in advance of the second reading.
Councilmember Reckdahl accepted the amendment and Vice Mayor Stone indicated
agreement.
Mayor Veenker referenced correspondence from environmental organizations citing research
indicating that most bird collisions occur below approximately 60 feet and proposed an
amendment to establish a height-based limit of 75 feet. Councilmember Reckdahl and Vice
Mayor Stone expressed reluctance to introduce additional changes at that stage, citing
uncertainty and concern about revising the proposal further. Councilmember Lu indicated
interest in voting on the amendment.
Councilmember Burt noted that bird collisions may occur at higher elevations during nighttime
due to building lighting. Councilmember Lauing acknowledged that possibility but observed that
only a limited number of buildings would currently be affected in Palo Alto, suggesting it may
not warrant immediate changes. Mayor Veenker noted that future development could include
additional taller buildings, which may increase relevance of the issue over time.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 32 of 32
Sp. City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 03/16/26
Councilmember Lu asked for clarification on whether the allowance of films and decals for
nonresidential buildings was intended to apply broadly or only below 35 feet and suggested a
friendly amendment to remove the height limitation to reduce costs. Councilmember Reckdahl
noted differences in application and durability between decals and permanent treatments and
stated he would not support the friendly amendment. Senior Planner Cha indicated that decals
can be effective if properly applied but require ongoing maintenance. Vice Mayor Stone cited
maintenance concerns for larger buildings and stated he would not support the proposed
friendly amendment.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Lu moved, seconded by Mayor Veenker, to amend the motion
to exempt portions of residential buildings above 75 feet.
AMENDMENT FAILED: 4-3, Reckdahl, Stone, Lauing and Burt no
MOTION: Council Member Reckdahl moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Stone, to move the staff
recommendation to adopt an Ordinance adding a new Section 18.40.280 (Bird-Friendly Design)
to Chapter 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code with the following modifications:
1. Allow portions of nonresidential buildings below 35 feet to use alternative safety
measures such as films, decals or other products approved by the American Bird
Conservatory or its equivalent; and
2. Direct staff to incorporate into the ordinance second reading a requirement that
treatments occur within 15 feet of green roofs.
MOTION PASSED: 5-2, Lu and Lythcott-Haims no
Closed Session
15. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY-POTENTIAL LITIGATION
Subject: Potential litigation regarding 156 North California Avenue, as set forth in
letter(s) from Holland & Knight LLP dated September 3, 2025
Authority: Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)
Number of potential cases: 1, as Defendant
Agenda Item Number 15 Removed Off Agenda
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 10:56 p.m.