Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 2603-6074CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Monday, April 20, 2026 Council Chambers & Hybrid 5:30 PM     Agenda Item     4.910 Webster Street [26PLN-00026]. Request for Council Prescreening to Rezone the Subject Property from RM-20 to Planned Community/Planned Home Zoning and to Allow Construction of 70 Residential Units in a Seven-Story Structure. CEQA Status: Not a Project. Public Comment, Staff Presentation, Applicant Presentation   CITY COUNCIL Staff Report From: City Manager Report Type: STUDY SESSION Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Meeting Date: April 20, 2026 Report #: 2603-6074 TITLE 910 Webster Street [26PLN-00026]. Request for Council Prescreening to Rezone the Subject Property from RM-20 to Planned Community/Planned Home Zoning and to Allow Construction of 70 Residential Units in a Seven-Story Structure. CEQA Status: Not a Project. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council conduct a prescreening and provide informal comments regarding the applicant’s request to rezone 910 Webster Street from Low Density Multiple- Family Residence District (RM-20) to Planned Community/Planned Home Zoning (PHZ). Comments provided during the prescreening process are not binding on the City nor the applicant. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This prescreening is a request by the applicant to rezone the subject property, which is currently zoned Low Density Multiple-Family Residence District (RM-20) to Planned Home Zoning (PHZ). 1 The project includes deconstruction of an existing 24-unit apartment complex and redevelopment of the 1.15 acre site with 70 residential condominium or apartment units, 20% of which would be provided at below market rate. In accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.79.030(A), a prescreening review is required for legislative changes, including rezoning, prior to submittal of a formal application. Prescreenings are intended to solicit early feedback on proposed projects and, like all study sessions, cannot result in any formal action. Since this proposal may return to the City Council as a formal application, Councilmembers should refrain from forming firm opinions supporting or opposing the project. 1 Referred to in this report as "Planned Home Zoning" to emphasize the focus on housing as the benefit to the community. PAMC Section 18.38, which outlines the requirement and process for Planned Community (PC) Zoning, remains the underlying code supporting application of this policy. Following this prescreening, the applicant may choose to file a formal application to amend the zoning for the site. Planned Community Rezoning applications require an initial review by the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) followed by a formal recommendation from the Architectural Review Board, a formal recommendation from the PTC, and Council’s final decision as set forth in PAMC Chapter 18.38. BACKGROUND ANALYSIS summarizes staff’s preliminary review of the proposal and highlights key policy considerations associated with the applicant’s request. A 2.69:1 FAR where a maximum of 0.5 FAR is allowed for multi-family residential use; 48% lot coverage where a maximum of 35% is allowed (an additional 5% is allowed for covered patios and overhangs); 81 feet and six inches tall where a maximum of 35 feet in height is allowed (This does not include the height of the cupola, which extends to 92 feet and nine inches); An interior side yard and rear yard daylight plane with a 10-foot initial height and 65- degree angle where a 10-foot initial height and 50-degree angle is required; and 130 vehicle parking spaces where 140 parking spaces are required (~7% reduction). PC Special Requirements The project would be subject to special standards for PC districts under PAMC Section 18.38.150(c), (d), and (e). Based on the information provided, the project is not consistent with (e), and consistency with (d) cannot be determined. Staff requests that Council provide feedback on each of these areas. requirements. The RM-20 zone has a maximum density of 20 units per acre. The highest density achievable under State Density Bonus Law would be 40 units per acre (with a 100% bonus). This is well below the 61 du/ac proposed; additionally, the applicant would be required to provide a significantly higher percentage of the units at BMR in order to achieve this density increase in addition to providing those units to lower income levels. The proposal would require the demolition of 24 existing apartment units to be replaced by a potential mix of 70 condominium and apartment units. When existing residential rental units are being demolished, the landlord must comply with the City’s Rental Protection Requirements under PAMC Chapter 9.68 including proper noticing and relocation assistance. In particular, for a just-cause no-fault eviction, the landlord must offer the existing tenants relocation assistance in one of two ways: 3 provides greater weight and flexibility towards providing very-low income units. At this time, the applicant is proposing the equivalent of 20.1% BMR units (12 units) distributed throughout the project, but noted to staff that they may utilize a different option if/when they submit a formal application. The plans don’t identify specific locations for the BMR units, but a breakdown of how many units are proposed at the various income levels has been provided in the table below. Per the Affordable Housing Plan Specifications Form (Item 3), the applicant shall provide a detailed description and chart of each BMR unit's: size, and type relative to the total number of units to verify the project meets the 20% threshold. 3 June 23, 2020 Council staff report. https://www.paloalto.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/agendas-minutes- reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/year-archive/2020/id-10715.pdf Source: Attachment C FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT There is no fiscal or resource impact associated with the recommendation in this report. A future project, if filed, approved and constructed, would generate higher property tax revenue and add residents that would like support in some measure the local economy. A future project would also be subject to development impact fees to address its effects on public services and infrastructure. The precise magnitude of these impact fees will be refined as the application and proposed project advances. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires notice of this public meeting be published in a local paper and mailed to owners and occupants of property within 600 feet of the subject property at least ten days in advance. Notice of a public hearing and postcard mailing for this project was published in the Daily Post on April 10, 2026, which is 10 days in advance of the meeting. As of the writing of this report, staff received 11 written comments in Attachment D. The comments received by staff generally resolve around the following concerns: 1. Concerns with the height and scale of the proposed building in the context of the surrounding area and impacts on adjacent shorter structures. 2. Concerns on impacts to the quality of life, sunlight, and privacy impacts for existing residents and tenants of the surrounding properties. 3. Concerns around increases to traffic and congestion by increasing the density to the property; especially as it relates to senior citizens and children from nearby schools 4. Concerns around the availability of parking stalls for the site for future tenants 5. The first noted impacts on themselves and their tenants during and after construction while the second noted concerns around growing congestion and potential safety impacts that can create for seniors living at Channing House (850 Webster Street) which is across the street from this project. 6. Concerns surrounding daily operational impacts (noise, odor, etc.) from dining hall on adjacent uses. Another member of the public called staff and expressed concerns about scale and transition to low density residential uses next to the site as well as availability of daylight. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ATTACHMENTS APPROVED BY: 6 T h e C i t y o fPC-2P a l o A l t o PC-2836PC-8659Channing House RM-20 Legend Special Setback Frontages Park School abc Building Roof Outline Underlying Lot Line abc Easement abc Lot Dimensions This map is a product of the abc Zone District Labels City Jurisdictional Limits: Palo Alto City Boundary Tree Current Features 0'127' smckay, 2026-03-12 11:49:27 This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2016 City of Palo Alto ATTACHMENT B 910 Webster Street, 26PLN-00026 Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.13 (RM-20 DISTRICT), 18.14 (HOUSING INCENTIVE PROGRAM (HIP) and 18.38.150 (PC SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS) Development Standards Regulation Required Proposed Residential Project Minimum Site Area, width and depth 8,500 sf, 70 feet, 100 feet None for HIP 50,000 sf (1.15 acres) Minimum Front Yard 20 feet 10 feet for HIP 22 feet Rear Yard 10 feet 10 feet for HIP 22 feet Interior Side Yard 10 feet 10 feet for HIP 15 feet Street Side Yard 16 feet 8 feet for HIP 22 feet Max. Site Coverage 35% (17,500 sf) 70% for HIP 48% (24,018 sf) RM-20 Max. Building Height 30 feet 40 feet for HIP 81 feet 6 inches 92 feet 9 inches (to top of cupola) PC Special Requirements for Setbacks 10 feet for interior side and rear 15 feet (side); 22 feet (rear) PC Special Requirements for height 35 ft when within 150 feet of R-1, no restriction otherwise. 81 feet 6 inches 92 feet 9 inches (to top of cupola) Daylight Plane for side and rear lot lines for sites abutting any R-1, R- 2, or RM-20 district. 10-foot initial height and 45- degree angle 16-foot & 45-degree angle HIP 10-foot initial height and 65- degree angle PC Special Requirements for Daylight Plane 10-foot initial height and 50- degree angle 10-foot initial height and 65- degree angle Max. Floor Area Ratio (FAR)0.5:1 (25,000 sf) 2.0:1 for HIP (100,000 sf) 2.69:1 (135,073) Residential Density 20 du/ac per RM-20 Zone 40 du/ac for HIP 61 DU/AC (70 units proposed) Minimum Useable Open Space 150 sf per unit Open Space Provided: 13,606 sf + or 194 sf per unit Table 2: CONFORMANCE WITH CHAPTER 18.52 (Off-Street Parking and Loading) Type Required Proposed Vehicle Parking 1 per unit 1 bedroom or Studio 2 per unit 2+ bedroom 128 spaces total 130 spaces proposed Bicycle Parking 1 LT space per unit (70) 1 ST space per 10 units (7) 119 spaces Loading Space 1 car loading space for a building with 50+ units None 1885 El Camino Real, Palo Alto, CA 94306 • 650 322 2288 • FAX: 650 322 2316 • architects@carrasco.com A Professional Corporation CARRASCO & ASSOCIATES A R C H I T E C T S PROJECT DESCRIPTION “910 WEBSTER STREET” HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINUM UNITS Project Overview The proposed development “910 Webster Street” is a high-density residential community designed to integrate seamlessly into the Downtown Palo Alto context. The project balances the objective of maximizing housing density with a sensitive architectural approach that prioritizes neighborhood compatibility, environmental sustainability, resident well-being and sense of community. Project will include 20% affordable housing units distributed throughout the project. Massing, Solar Access, and Daylight Plane The building’s envelope is the result of rigorous solar geometry analysis (refer to Sheets T.1.03 and T.1.04). To protect the solar impacts to adjacent properties, the design implements a 65-degree Daylight Plane on the South and West elevations. · Shadow Study: Our study confirms that this massing eliminates shading on building structures to the south and west after 10:00 AM during the Winter Solstice. · Contextual Sensitivity: Shading impacts on the Channing House are minimized by directing shadows toward unfenestrated walls, while winter evening shadows are largely intercepted by the existing mature canopy of along the sidewalk of Webster Woods Apartment complex on Webster Street. Community and Pedestrian Orientation “910 Webster” project is centered around a lushly landscaped central courtyard, anchored by four shade trees and a 12-foot-wide circulation veranda. · Active Ground Floor: Indoor common areas, including the dining hall and fitness center, are oriented toward the courtyard to foster social interaction. · Urban Interface: Ground-floor units feature private front yards and individual street- front entries, reinforcing a "row-house" pedestrian scale and activating the Webster Street sidewalk. · Rooftop Amenities: A community library and terrace lounge provide diverse gathering spaces for residents. 1885 El Camino Real, Palo Alto, CA 94306 • 650 322 2288 • FAX: 650 322 2316 • architects@carrasco.com A Professional Corporation Sustainability and Energy Performance The project aims for high energy autonomy, particularly regarding common area climate control. · Integrated PV System: Photovoltaic panels are utilized as a functional architectural cornice, providing both renewable energy production and passive solar shading for the upper floors. · Passive Climate Control: All balconies are equipped with operable Plantation Shutters, allowing residents to manually modulate natural ventilation, solar gain, and thermal comfort. Privacy and Residential Interface The floor plan is strategically programmed to respect the privacy of the adjacent low- density residential zone. · Acoustic and Visual Buffers: Bedrooms are primarily located on the south elevation. · Movable Screening: The floor-to-ceiling plantation shutters on all balconies provide a customizable visual buffer, protecting the privacy of both building residents and neighbors. Landscape and Tree Protection Recognizing Palo Alto’s commitment to its urban forest, the project is designed around the preservation of existing tree health. · Subterranean Setbacks: The underground garage is significantly set back (22’ on North, East, and West; 10’ on South) to ensure the root zones of neighboring trees remain undisturbed. · Permeability: The design maximizes permeable surface area through the central courtyard and perimeter setbacks to manage stormwater runoff effectively. Requested Concessions/Waivers/Incentives for Affordable Housing: FAR: 2.69 proposed Coverage: 50% proposed Stories: Six-story proposed Parking: 8% less vehicle parking Daylight Plane: 65° proposed angle From:Lauma Zunte To:Sauls, Garrett Cc:Aivars; Eriks Rungis; Indra Rungis; David Goldberg Subject:Proposed Residencial Highrise Date:Sunday, March 22, 2026 1:20:02 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mr. Sauls, My name is Lauma Zunte and I own a small four unit apartment on 569 Addison Avenue in Palo Alto. Mr. David Goldburg reached out to me recently informing me of a proposed six story apartment complex going up just beyond my backyard fence. A massive structure as proposed will have a huge impact on my apartment complex. First on my mind is the idea of having such a large structure right next to my small two story building. Next is the impact on my residents when they go to the pool area that is right next to the common fence.The idea of six stories of prying eyes looking down on the pool area isn't too appealing. Additionally how it will impact the sun in the backyard is also a concern, A large project like this will involve untold months of demolition, clearing and then rebuilding. The noise and pollution alone will create a situation where many of my residents may choose to vacate their units. That will leave me in a financial crisis. These are a few of my immediate concerns that I hope will be considered if this project moves forward. Respectfully, Lauma Zunte This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Steve Ludvik To:Sauls, Garrett Subject:Development on corner of Webster and Channing Ave Date:Wednesday, April 1, 2026 1:37:38 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Garrett, This letter is regarding the proposed 70 unit condominium development at the corner of Webster and Channing Ave. The development is poorly conceived and the council should reject the proposal. Channing Ave has become a heavily used thoroughfare between Alma and 101. Adding congestion from more street parked cars, maintenance services and delivery services (such as DoorDash) traffic will create safety hazards. The crossing at Webster/Channing has already experienced safety events. Safety: The proposed development is across the street from Channing House which supports seniors who often walk in the neighborhood. Adding unnecessary risks to their safety is a potential major liability for the city. I trust you are aware of the many lawsuits filed against the city, the outcome of which can far exceed any tax revenue or other perceived benefits to the city and its residents. Please consider these factors in your approval process. I hope that the City makes the correct decision and does not approve the development. Thank you for your support in this matter Sincerely, Steve Ludvik 541 Channing Ave Palo Alto CA 94301 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report April 6, 2026 Garrett Sauls Project Planner City of Palo Alto garrett.sauls@paloalto.gov Subject: Concerns regarding the proposed 6-story development at 910 Webster St, Palo Alto, CA Dear Mr. Sauls: I am writing to you as an owner and resident at 532 Channing Ave, Unit 301, Palo Alto regarding a proposal that has been submitted to the city to develop a 6-story condominium building at 910 Webster St, Palo Alto. My unit sits next to the proposed condominium building. As a direct neighbor, I have significant concerns about the scale of this project. Our building stands at 3 stories, and the current building at 910 Webster is 1-2 stories. A 6-story structure would tower over our existing building, leading to several immediate impacts (note: although positioned as a 6-story building, there is a 7th floor that includes a community library): ● Loss of Natural Light: Many of our units rely on skylights and natural sun exposure that will be permanently blocked by a building of this height. ● Privacy: The significant height disparity would overlook our private living spaces and common areas. ● Neighborhood Character: A building of this density is a massive departure from the current 2 and 3-story profile of our immediate block. I am not opposed to new neighbors or a thoughtful development, but I believe this proposal is out of scale for this specific location. We are interested in advocating for a more balanced design—ideally limited to 3 stories —that respects the sunlight and privacy of the existing residents. Thank you for considering my concerns. I can be reached at for any questions: eric.c.yuen@gmail.com Mobile: 650-421-3202 Yours sincerely, Eric Yuen Owner and HOA Treasurer 532 Channing Ave, Unit 301, Palo Alto, CA 94301 From:Deborah Dooley To:Sauls, Garrett Subject:910 Webster Project Date:Saturday, April 4, 2026 10:44:52 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. I am writing this letter in response to the proposed project at 910 Webster St. The proposal suggests nearly tripling, 24 to 70 residents, the tenant population, and reducing the driveways from three to one. This one driveway in the center of a primary school corridor is unsafe and hazardous. This is going to maximize traffic problems, which already exist during school commuter hours. The 900 block of Webster is a high-density and high-traffic area, both for cars and pedestrians. This block is next to Addison Elementary School and one of the primary entrances to the school campus. The street, the parking, and the pedestrian traffic is extremely high during school commuter hours. At this time, there are currently parking problems, and the street that the proposal suggests one driveway for both entrances and exits will make this unsafe for the student population. Parking in this area is currently a problem due to over 100 Channing House employees parking on the streets, the Webster Wood, a high-density housing unit, tenant and guest parking on the streets, and Addison School parking on this block. As a private homeowner, there is often no parking available. This additional car parking will make parking a nightmare. Due to the single driveway, which will slow exiting, some tenants will use street parking, and guests will also park on the street. I have attached photos of street parking to show the current parking status. One driveway will slow garage parking traffic. This will result in more tenants parking on the street to avoid this. I have attached photos showing the dense parking currently in this block This proposal is showing minimal concern for the people who currently live in this neighborhood. The increase in traffic congestion, parking scarcity, noise pollution, environmental pollution, and the loss of natural sunlight to the neighborhood and its residents is at a high cost to current residents. I live next door, 934 Webster. This proposed single driveway will be 15 feet from my bedroom windows. 140 tenants using this single driveway will create noise and environmental pollution in my home. What is my recourse? There are enough congestion problems on this block without making what is already bad even worse. I encourage you to take a survey of school commute times to understand what a hazardous environment this proposal creates. There is a significant loss of sunlight to all surrounding residents. There is a significant loss of privacy to all surrounding residents. There is a significant increase in environmental pollution for all existing residents. This is a block that transitions from 2 and 3-story buildings to single-level homes. Adding a six-story home is not appropriate for this site. The streets cannot accommodate this. A building with this many tenants needs to be on a street with four lanes of traffic, not in a high- impact, congested area. I have attached 3 parking pictures. These pictures are NOT during school commuting times. Deborah Dooley 934 Webster Street From:David Goldberg To:Sauls, Garrett Subject:910 Webster Date:Friday, April 3, 2026 4:08:48 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Garrett Sauls, This letter is regarding the proposed 70 unit condominium development at the corner of Webster and Channing Ave, which would replace the Webster Oaks Apartments. The site is a good location for more housing, because it can support an increase in density and at the same time be respectful of the lower density neighbors. But the proposed design doesn't take advantage of that opportunity: it does increase the density but it towers above the neighboring homes, casting a large shadow. I urge that in return for rezoning the property, the council require the developer to be more sensitive to us lower density neighbors. Let me focus on the impacts on my own home, a condo bordering the west side of the proposed development, which has half the height and 1/3 the density. On the plus side, the proposal has 1.86 parking spots/unit, which is more than the existing apartment complex. And although parts of the proposed building are only 10 ft from our joint property line, the primary exterior wall is 22' away. Also, the architect has updated the plan to add more trees to visually screen our properties from one another. This is all good. But there is virtually no step down toward our homes on the west side. We will be facing an almost straight 6-story vertical wall. As a consequence, in the summer, the morning sun won't shine on our building until after 10:30 am. The illustration titled "Height Transition" on page 4 of their plans gives a visualization of how much the new condo would tower over our condo. None of this necessary, because there are designs for this site that would support a significantly increased density without having this negative impact on neighbors. The residents of this neighborhood purchased their homes in the belief that although we have one very tall building (Channing House), the rest would be a mixed-use neighborhood with buildings topping out at three stories. The proposed 6-story project strikes me as more of an initial bargaining offer than a serious proposal that would balance the amount of extra density against harmful impact to the rest of the neighborhood. In summary, please consider tying any rezoning with a requirement that the project be more suitable for this transitional location, by either lowering the height or having more step down. David Goldberg This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report 532 Channing Ave #201 Palo Alto, CA From:Catherine Cohen To:Sauls, Garrett Subject:Opposition to Rezoning Proposal – 910 Webster Street (Channing & Webster) Date:Friday, April 3, 2026 4:44:24 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Members of the Palo Alto City Council, I am writing to share my concerns regarding the proposed redevelopment of the Webster Oaks apartment building located at 910 Webster Street, at the corner of Channing Avenue and Webster Street. I live at 503 Channing Avenue, at the corner of Cowper and Channing, just one block from the proposed site. Given my proximity, I experience firsthand the current traffic, parking, and safety conditions in this area. The current proposal would replace an existing two-story, 24-unit apartment complex with a six-story, 70-unit condominium development, requiring rezoning of the site. While I support the need for additional housing in Palo Alto, I strongly oppose the rezoning of this site as currently proposed. This project, in its current form, raises significant concerns related to neighborhood compatibility, safety, and infrastructure impacts. Scale and Neighborhood Compatibility A six-story building is not consistent with the surrounding one / two story homes, with only a few 3 story apartment complexes. A six-story complex will fundamentally alter the character of this neighborhood. While Channing House is a 12-story structure nearby, it has been part of the community since the 1960s, and much of the surrounding neighborhood developed around it. It also functions more as a business/institutional use, bringing with it significant impacts, including more activity, delivery trucks, service vehicles, and emergency response vehicles blocking lanes. Residents in this area are already dealing with the impacts of that scale and use. For those living closest to Channing House, noise and activity, particularly near the loading and service areas are disruptive, with deliveries sometimes occurring as early as 3:00 AM. Introducing an additional high-density, multi-story development would further intensify these impacts and significantly change the dynamics of what is currently a residential neighborhood. This proposal risks creating a precedent for additional large-scale buildings without appropriate transition in height or density. A six-story structure would be out of character and This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report disproportionately impactful in this setting. Traffic, Safety, and Congestion This area is already heavily impacted by traffic and presents real safety concerns, conditions that would be materially worsened by a development of this scale. Channing Avenue is a key thoroughfare to 101, with an elementary school just one block away. Children frequently walk and bike through this area. Vehicles traveling from Waverly toward Middlefield often exceed the 25-mph speed limit, making the Channing/Webster intersection particularly dangerous. Channing House delivery / service trucks and emergency vehicles frequently block one lane of this one-way street, causing ongoing traffic and safety issues. Residents of Channing House regularly walk in the neighborhood, further increasing the need for safe and predictable traffic conditions. Adding a development of this scale will significantly increase traffic in the area, and those impacts will not be limited to Webster Street, they will spill over onto Channing and further worsen an already constrained and impacted situation. The proposed development would significantly increase the number of residents and vehicles while consolidating access into a single driveway, which is likely to create additional congestion and bottlenecks at an already impacted intersection. Parking and Delivery Impacts Street parking in this area is already limited due to Channing House staff and visitors, school- related activity, and existing neighborhood demand. Currently, delivery and rideshare vehicles can pull into the existing property. With a larger, denser development and fewer access points, these vehicles will likely double park on surrounding streets, increasing congestion and creating additional safety risks. Commercial Use and Loading Dock Concerns I strongly oppose the inclusion of a restaurant within this development, which introduces a commercial use into what is currently a residential area. A restaurant will require a dedicated loading dock, which is proposed along Webster Street. This loading area would be directly adjacent to existing homes, including a one-story residence, and near other neighboring properties. The noise associated with deliveries, trash pickup, and ongoing service activity would have a direct and negative impact on nearby residents. In addition to increased traffic, this introduces an ongoing operational impact that is not consistent with the character of the neighborhood. Construction Impacts There are also important unanswered questions regarding construction logistics: Where will construction vehicles be staged? Will workers be transported into the site, or will additional vehicles compete for already limited neighborhood parking? We have the RPP program in place in this neighborhood. How will disruption to residents be minimized during construction? Given the scale of this project, these impacts will be significant and should be clearly addressed. Housing Priorities While I strongly support increasing housing supply in Palo Alto, this project does not appear to address one of the City’s most critical needs: affordable housing. Increasing density without meaningfully contributing to affordability raises important questions about how this project aligns with broader community goals. For these reasons, I urge the City Council to deny the rezoning request as currently proposed. I would strongly urge the City to work with the developer on a more balanced alternative, one that meaningfully increases housing while remaining compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. A reduced-scale development, such as a project limited to approximately three stories with appropriate transitions to adjacent properties, would be far more consistent with the character of the area and would mitigate many of the concerns outlined above. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Catherine Cohen From:Doris Stoessel To:Sauls, Garrett Subject:Opposition to the Rezoning Proposal - 910 Webster Street Date:Monday, April 6, 2026 10:01:35 AM Dear members of the Palo Alto City Council: I am writing this e-mail to share my concerns regarding the proposed redevelopment of the Webster Oaks apartment complex located at 910 Webster Street. But first let me introduce myself: my name is Doris Stoessel, and I have owned 533 Channing Avenue (one of 24 units in the five building Channing Place Homeowners' Association complex located at 501-547 Channing Avenue) since June of 1982. I am opposed to redeveloping the Webster Oaks apartment complex for many reasons and am listing four major concerns highlighted below, each followed by a detailed explanation of that specific concern. 1. Too much additional traffic on four city streets: Channing Avenue, Addison Avenue, Homer Avenue, and Webster Street Let's face it: replacing the 24 unit Webster Oaks apartment complex with a 70 unit complex is going to triple the number of cars currently entering and exiting the complex. I don't have an exact number, but because the residents of our 24 unit Channing Place HOA have roughly 40 vehicles, I am going to assume that the current residents of the Webster Oaks apartment complex also have roughly 40 vehicles. And doing the math leads me to believe that a 70 unit complex would therefore have 120 vehicles. These four city streets were not designed to support an additional 80 (120-40) vehicles each day. 2. Additional traffic will be a hazard to pedestrians on Addison Avenue, Webster Street, and Channing Avenue Some residents on the 70-unit complex will connect each day from Middlefield to Webster via Homer Avenue and some will connect via Addison Avenue. There's a lot of slow-moving pedestrian traffic on Addison and Webster each morning and afternoon as children and parents walk to and from Addison Elementary School. And there's a lot of slow-moving pedestrian traffic on Webster and Channing as the residents of Channing House stroll around the neighborhood. Adding an additional 80 vehicles each day to this area can only lead to tragic accidents. 3. More (speeding) traffic on Channing Avenue Channing Avenue is a major connector for Palo Alto residents who live between Alma and Middlefield, and in my opinion, there's already too much traffic on this two lane city street. There are at least five stop signs along Channing at its western end, but there are no stop signs between Waverley and Middlefield, and drivers speed up along these three blocks despite the 25 mph speed limit. Fourteen of the 24 units in the Channing Place HOA complex enter/exit the complex via a narrow driveway separating our units from Channing House, and near- accidents occur too frequently as we pull onto Channing Avenue at a low speed. Adding up to an additional 80 vehicles each day to this area can only lead to accidents as we try to exit our complex. 4. Lack of sufficient overnight parking spots on Webster Street and Channing Avenue The 24-unit Channing Place HOA complex includes garages for its residents, but due to the small size of these garages, the residents have to park roughly 16 of their 40 vehicles on the street each night. By my estimate, the residents of the proposed 70 unit complex would end up having to park 50 (120-70) vehicles on the street each night, but there just aren't 50 parking spaces available. They will end up parking on residential streets south of Addison or forcing us to have to park overnight on residential streets of Addison. In summary, the proposed complex at 910 Webster Street is too much large for our neighborhood and our city streets. Please do not approve it. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, ...Doris A. Stoessel From:Alfred To:Sauls, Garrett Subject:Regarding proposed condominium project at Webster Oaks Date:Friday, April 3, 2026 4:42:53 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Mr. Sauls: I reside on the corner of Cowper St and Channing Ave. in Palo Alto. I have lived here for over 36 years. After our brief phone conversation I have elected to submit my comments to you through this email. Please add my comments to the presentation to the City Council when they convene on April 20th, 2026. In response to the proposed Webster Oaks condominium project I am opposed to the proposed condominium project for the following reasons: There have been no six story structures permitted or built in the Professorville neighborhood in this century. A project of this magnitude would be out of scale with the rest of the residential area and would set a precedent for additional large scale residential development in this neighborhood. The area where the proposed condominium project is already congested with vehicle traffic, including delivery trucks, because both the Channing House and Addison Elementary School which are nearly adjacent to the proposed project. The disturbance and disruption, both during the construction and in the operation of this large condominium project would severely impact the daily life of the seniors living at the Channing House. Thank you for your time and consideration, Alfred J. Mandel 915 Cowper St. Palo Alto This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:mountain view To:Sauls, Garrett Subject:Webster Oaks apartment building project Date:Sunday, April 5, 2026 1:27:36 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hello Admins, I am writing to formally express my disagreement with the proposed building project currently under consideration. While I understand the intent to support development and growth, I would like to elaborate on several specific concerns regarding the proposed building project: 1. Parking and Traffic Safety: Street parking in this area is already severely constrained, with occupancy rates exceeding 95% on most days. Given the proximity to Addison Elementary School, additional residential units would further intensify congestion. This will make student drop-off and pick-up significantly more difficult and could increase safety risks for children due to heavier traffic and reduced visibility. 2. Impact on School Capacity: Many families choose to live in this neighborhood because of the quality of the local public schools. Increasing the number of housing units may lead to a rise in student enrollment that exceeds the current capacity of nearby schools, potentially affecting class sizes, resources, and the overall quality of education in the community. 3. Safety Considerations: Taller, denser buildings near an elementary school may introduce additional safety and security concerns. It is important that any development near schools carefully assess potential risks and ensure appropriate measures are in place to protect students and staff. I believe that these factors have not been fully addressed and warrant more careful evaluation before any decisions are finalized. I respectfully urge the relevant authorities to reconsider or further review the proposal, taking into account community feedback and long-term consequences. I appreciate your time and attention to this matter and hope that my concerns will be given due consideration. Sincerely, VM This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Robert Ord To:Sauls, Garrett Subject:Webster Oaks Proposal Date:Sunday, April 5, 2026 5:41:13 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. To Garrett Sauls, I live at 940 Webster Street two doors down from the Webster Oaks Apartments. I strongly oppose any changes to current zoning ordinances that would allow the newly proposed 70 units to be built at the Webster Oaks property. Parking is already a highly congested problem on our street!!! Sincerely, Robert Ord Property owner From:victor greene To:Sauls, Garrett Subject:Re: Application # 26PLN-00026 Date:Tuesday, April 7, 2026 2:40:08 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Re: Application # 26PLN-00026 Palo Alto City Council Prescreening Hearing April 20, 2026 Attention: Project Planner Garrett Sauls I am Victor Greene. I am the homeowner at 581 Addison Avenue, Palo Alto, CA. The current property at 910 Webster Street, commonly known as the Webster Oaks apartment building, contains 20 living units in a two story structure. I am concerned about the proposal to rezone the site at 910 Webster Street to a planned community and redevelop the parcel with a new residential condominium building. The current zoning district is RM-20. The proposed rezoning is to zone the district as a PHZ district. A PHZ district is wholly disproportionate to the existing community. The surrounding homes and multifamily structures such as apartment houses and condominium structures are no more than two stories in height. The existing structures are in conformity with the prevailing neighborhood aesthetics. The Webster Oaks apartment building sits on the corner of Webster and Channing streets. Channing House, a building directly across on the opposite corner, is zoned PC-8659. Channing house was erected in the early 1960s and is zoned as a community building for elderly people to receive and enjoy lifetime care. Channing House is a benefit to our community. Not so with the proposal to rezone 910 Webster Street. The disparate impact of a PHZ structure that may rise to anywhere from eighty-one to ninety-two feet in height would overwhelm the residents our community who live in no more than two story high homes. The proposed condominium project of six stories in height would negatively impact its neighbors. I and my neighbors do not live downtown where high rise structures are consistent with downtown Palo Alto. We reside in a charming old neighborhood in what began as cottages adjacent to Stanford University. Our small lots and diminutive homes of old Palo Alto remain a tribute to the beauty and charm of our city. I urge the City Council to prevail upon the proposer of the project submitted in Application # 26PLN-00026 to limit the project to RN-20 zoning with no more than twenty units and a structure no higher than two stories. Respectfully submitted, Victor Greene This message needs your attention You've never replied to this person. Mark Safe Report From:Sophia Tyra To:Sauls, Garrett Cc:ROY TYRA Subject:Proposed Development at Channing & Webster Date:Thursday, April 9, 2026 10:35:31 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hello Garrett, I am a homeowner at 519 Channing Avenue. It was brought to my attention by our HOA that a developer has submitted a preliminary application for a high rise housing development at the corner of Channing and Webster, which is across the street from where I live. I would like to express my deep concerns for this proposed development. 1) Our zone is residential and although we’re in the downtown, the height and scale of surrounding buildings 3 stories or less. What makes me love my neighborhood is the “homey” feel, with open air views and daylight and trees for homeowners and pedestrians. A high rise development is not conducive to the current look and feel of the neighborhood nor does it fit the vibe of a Palo Alto residential neighborhood. It will cast shadows on surrounding homes and block critical views. 2) If the developer is relying on Channing House as a justifiable precedent for high rise buildings in this neighborhood, they are surely wrong. I live next to Channing House (adjacent to their loading dock side). Not only is that building disproportionally taller than all homes in the surrounding area, CH has proven to be a terrible neighbor to all of us. Between noisy delivery trucks that deliver at all hours day/night, street parking congestion and smoking and littering by their staff, we are all fed up with CH and we don’t want to see a similar development (size/scale) in our neighborhood. 3) Over the last 8-10 years, traffic on Channing Avenue has increased so much so that’s it’s become a main thoroughfare from Alma to Middlefield. There’s public buses, FedEx/UPS/Amazon trucks and countless delivery cars such as Door Dash along our street. This has resulted in drivers not abiding by the speed limit and/or driving the wrong way on a one way street. It’s natural to assume that this new development will add more congestion and traffic concerns with its occupants. A traffic study is necessary. There is a pedestrian crosswalk at Channing and Webster but it doesn’t deter speeders. Young families and children need to tread carefully on these streets to get to/from Addison Elementary. A traffic light intersection should be instalked and I hope that the developer provides an underground parking garage for the tenants. There is a lack of street parking as it stands currently. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast I realize that I’m submitting my comments a bit late but I hope that you consider them in your findings. I would also like to attend any public hearings on this development. Thanks, Sophia Tyra Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS If you need assistance reviewing the above documents, please contact the Project Planner or call the Planner-on-Duty at 650-617-3117 or email planner@paloalto.gov Project Plans In order to reduce paper consumption, a limited number of hard copy project plans are provided to Council members for their review. The same plans are available to the public, at all hours of the day, via the following online resources. Directions to Review Project plans Online: 1. Go to: bit.ly/PApendingprojects 2. Scroll down to find “910 Webster Street” and click the address link 3. On this project-specific webpage you will find a link to the project plans and other important information Direct Link to Project Webpage: https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Current- Planning/Projects/910-Webster-St From:Marissa Mayer To:Sauls, Garrett Cc:Zachary S. Bogue; Council, City; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Lu, George; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Veenker, Vicki Subject:Project at 910 Webster Street (Application No. 26PLN-00026) Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2026 4:17:53 PM Attachments:2026.04.06 Ltr to Palo Alto re 910 Webster.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Mr. Garrett Sauls Principal Planner Planning & Development Services Department City of Palo Alto 285 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 100 Palo Alto, CA 94301 Garrett.Sauls@paloalto.gov Dear Mr. Sauls: We are writing to express our grave concerns about this proposed project, which is directly adjacent to our property. The proposed density is simply too much for this location; the proposed structure is too tall and would loom over nearby single-family homes; and it would further intensify the clash between the different zoning designation and land uses already existing on this single block in Palo Alto. Our property is on the same block as 910 Webster Street, the proposed location for a new six- story, 70-unit building that is up to 85 feet tall (the “Project”). Part of the Project includes rezoning the Project site. The City Council is tentatively scheduled to “prescreen” the Project on April 20, 2026. We oppose the Project because the Project’s site’s current zoning is suitable for multi-family housing projects that better fit within the character of the neighborhood and the Project disregards one of the main purposes of the property’s current zoning, which is to serve as a transition between single-family residential housing and denser multi-family residential housing. Our understanding is that the Project proponent wants to rezone the Project site from RM-20 to “Planned Home Zoning,” which is another term for “Planned Community” (PC) zoning. The This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report contemplated Project will be up to 85 feet tall. In several important respects, the Project far exceeds the standards applicable to the Project site’s current zoning, RM-20, which already allows for multi-family residential housing. If a higher residential density is desired, the Project could take advantage of the city’s Housing Incentive Program. The city should not sidestep the options under the Housing Incentive Program to allow a project up to 85 feet tall that is immediately adjacent to single-family homes. Critically, the Project proponent does not appear to have considered the impacts on the neighboring properties zoned R-1 and R-2. (Our home is in the R-2 district.) Project plan pages A1.14 and A1.15A show that many units will face, and look directly down upon, the neighboring single-family homes, including ours. Finally, the Project would be contrary to the purpose of the RM-20 district. The RM-20 district is “intended to create, preserve and enhance areas for a mixture of single-family and multi- family housing which is compatible with lower density and residential districts nearby, including single-family residence districts. The RM-20 residence district also serves as a transition to moderate density multi-family districts or districts with nonresidential uses.”[1] The Project site shares the block with properties that are zoned R-1 and R-2. The requested zoning change would negate the intentionally transitional nature of the RM-20 zoning district by placing high density development directly adjacent to single family homes. Even the regulations for PC districts reflect the city’s intent to have transitional zoning between single-family districts and higher-density residential housing. Palo Alto Municipal Code section 18.38.150(b) states, “The maximum height within 150 feet of any RE, R-1, R-2, RMD, RM or applicable PC district shall be 35 feet” except for RM-30 or RM-40 districts, for which the maximum height “shall be 50 feet.” The Project does not fit the character of the zoning the City has established for this block. The City’s stated policies, goals, and zoning laws do not support an 85-foot project next to and overlooking single-family residential districts. The City should not allow the Project as proposed and should not encourage the developer to continue to put resources into a project that is widely opposed by its neighbors. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Zachary Bogue & Marissa Mayer From:Sarah Levine To:Council, City Subject:yes to housing at 910 Webster St. Date:Sunday, April 19, 2026 9:39:37 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To the City Council: I hope you are doing well. I want to register my support to rezone the property at 910 Webster and build 70 (or more) residential units. I live one block over from 910 Webster. I want more housing in Palo Alto, including in my neighborhood. Best Sarah Levine (she, her) From:slevy@ccsce.com To:Council, City Cc:Armer, Jennifer; Lait, Jonathan Subject:Webster prescreen Date:Saturday, April 18, 2026 12:06:18 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ! Dear Mayor Veenker and council members, When you consider this development, please recognize two important reasons for more housing DTN. 1) DTN housing reduces car use and makes many trips available for walking or biking. That is the experience of families where I live on Forest and many others. DTN housing is an environmental plus 2) Building on point 1, I favor more housing DTN to take pressure off the San Antonio and south PA area. I do support more housing there but am hopeful with projects like this and SB79 there will be more housing incentivized in the north PA where I live. This includes the 332 Forest proposal less than 100 yards from where I live. Steve I also support the consent item authorizing Director Lait to update the HE site inventory. This message could be suspicious The sender's email address couldn't be verified. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Sarah Levine To:Adam Schwartz Cc:Council, City Subject:Re: YES to new homes at 910 Webster (April 20 Agenda #4) Date:Thursday, April 16, 2026 7:05:57 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Oh GOOD WORK! Sent from my iPhone On Apr 16, 2026, at 5:46 PM, Adam Schwartz <adamdschwartz@yahoo.com> wrote:  To the Palo Alto City Council: I write in strong support of building 70 new homes (including 12 affordable homes) at 910 Webster Street. When you meet on April 20 for prescreening (Agenda Item #4), I hope you will do everything possible to encourage the construction of these new homes. https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting? meetingTemplateId=18703 My front door is one-tenth of one mile from these proposed homes, and my townhouse development is across the street. My message is simple: yes in my back yard. I am grateful that the city council and city staff have been working hard to plan new homes on El Camino Real and San Antonio Road. It is important that we build new homes in other This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast parts of our city, too. That includes right here in University South, where we’ve got lots of jobs and amenities. That’s how we affirmatively further fair housing. So many kinds of people could become our new neighbors at 910 Webster Street. Teachers and students who walk down the block to Addison Elementary. Service staff who work at the cafes a half mile north on University Avenue. Tech workers who bike a few miles to the Stanford research park. Our parents and children who want to move nearby us. Refugees from foreign countries. Fellow Americans fleeing intolerant laws. Today, there's 24 rental homes on this property. These incumbent neighbors will be entitled to relocation payments from the developer, under city ordinance. The new building will have 70 homes, for a net gain of 46 homes. Twelve of these new homes will be affordable: three for people with very low incomes, five with low incomes, and four with moderate incomes. The remaining 58 new homes will be market-rate. Study after study shows that building such homes will relieve pressure on our current housing stock, leading to reduced or at least stabilized rents for existing homes at all price points. Parking won’t be a problem. Everyone in my townhome development has a garage with two spots, and it’s easy to park my two cars on the street. The plan for the new building is 130 parking spots for 70 homes, which is ample. There’s also parking for 119 bikes. The height won’t be out of place. Across the street is Channing House, and three blocks away is The Marc. As I walk about my neighborhood, I like looking at these tall buildings, and I enjoy their shade. In sum, please allow new homes for new neighbors in my back yard. Sincerely, Adam Schwartz University South From:Adam Schwartz To:Council, City Subject:YES to new homes at 910 Webster (April 20 Agenda #4) Date:Thursday, April 16, 2026 5:46:43 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To the Palo Alto City Council: I write in strong support of building 70 new homes (including 12 affordable homes) at 910 Webster Street. When you meet on April 20 for prescreening (Agenda Item #4), I hope you will do everything possible to encourage the construction of these new homes. https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting? meetingTemplateId=18703 My front door is one-tenth of one mile from these proposed homes, and my townhouse development is across the street. My message is simple: yes in my back yard. I am grateful that the city council and city staff have been working hard to plan new homes on El Camino Real and San Antonio Road. It is important that we build new homes in other parts of our city, too. That includes right here in University South, where we’ve got lots of jobs and amenities. That’s how we affirmatively further fair housing. So many kinds of people could become our new neighbors at 910 Webster Street. Teachers and students who walk down the block to Addison Elementary. Service staff who work at the cafes a half mile north on University Avenue. Tech workers who bike a few miles to the Stanford research park. Our parents and children who want to move nearby us. Refugees from foreign countries. Fellow Americans fleeing intolerant laws. Today, there's 24 rental homes on this property. These incumbent neighbors will be entitled to relocation payments from the developer, under city ordinance. The new building will have 70 homes, for a net gain of 46 homes. Twelve of these new homes will be affordable: three for people with very low incomes, five with low incomes, and four with moderate incomes. The remaining 58 new homes will be market-rate. Study after study shows that building such homes will relieve pressure on our current housing stock, leading to reduced or at least stabilized rents for existing homes at all price points. Parking won’t be a problem. Everyone in my townhome development has a garage with two spots, and it’s easy to park my two cars on the street. The plan for the new building is 130 parking spots for 70 homes, which is ample. There’s also parking for 119 bikes. The height won’t be out of place. Across the street is Channing House, and three blocks away is The Marc. As I walk about my neighborhood, I like looking at these tall buildings, and I enjoy their shade. In sum, please allow new homes for new neighbors in my back yard. Sincerely, Adam Schwartz University South From:Sauls, Garrett To:Council, City Subject:910 Webster Street - 4/20 Council Prescreening Public Comments Date:Thursday, April 16, 2026 11:09:47 AM Attachments:To Planning Palo Alto.pdf image001.png image002.png image004.png image005.png image006.png image008.png Feedback - 910 Webster New Construction Proposal.pdf Project at 910 Webster Street (Application No. 26PLN-00026).pdf Attachment D Neighbor Comments.pdf Proposed Development at Channing & Webster.pdf image009.png Hello, I received additional public comments after the City Council report was published. Please see attached. Garrett Sauls Principal Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 329-2471 | Garrett.Sauls@PaloAlto.gov Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Application Forms & Handouts | Permit Applications Mapped | Schedule AnAppointment April 20, 2026 www.PaloAlto.gov 910 Webster Street Prescreening Presenter: Garrett Sauls, Principal Planner 2 COUNCIL PRE-SCREENING PROCESS •Required for legislative changes, including rezonings, before a formal application. •Provides early feedback only; no formal decisions are made. •Councilmembers are expected to refrain from forming firm opinions, as the proposal may return for future formal action. 3 Prescreening to rezone from Multifamily Residential (RM-20) to Planned Home Zoning (PHZ) to allow for: o 70 units; including a possible a mix of rental and ownership o Seven-story structure including two levels of above grade parking CONCEPTUAL PROJECT 4 PROJECT LOCATION Location •University South/Professorville Neighborhoods Other nearby housing projects 1.Channing House (PC-8569) – 320 co-op housing units approved in 2006 2.Webster Wood Apartments (PC-2836) – 70 apartment housing units approved in 1974 5 Conceptual Project Site Height •81 ft, 6 in seventh floor Rooftop; 92 ft, 9 in to top of Cupola •RM (20) District Max: 30 ft Lot Coverage •Proposed: 48% (24,018 sf) •RM (20) District Max: 35% (17,500 sf) Floor Area •Proposed: 2.69: 1.0 (135,073 sf) •RM (20) District Max: 0.5:1 (25,000) We b s t e r S t r e e t Channing Avenue 6 Conceptual Project – Site Plan Density •Proposed: 61 du/ac •RM (20) District Max: 20 du/ac Parking and Services •Required: 134 Spaces •Proposed: 130 Spaces (all below grade) •Bicycle Parking: 77 spaces required; 119 proposed Open Space •Ground floor Courtyard/Covered Patio/Pool •Seventh floor Sky Deck 7 Elevations 8 Elevations 9 Elevations 10 Elevations 11 Housing and Affordability •Option 2 Weighted Value BMR Units: 12 BMR units proposed at varying levels (17.1% of units (15% minimum); 20.1% of Weighted Value) •Local Relocation Assistance (PAMC Ch. 9.68) PHZ Requirements •Transitional Height •Daylight plane KEY CONSIDERATIONS 12 1.Support for more housing units on the property, especially affordable housing 2.Height and scale of the proposed building in the context with surrounding area 3.Impacts to the quality of life, sunlight, and privacy 4.Potential increases to traffic and congestion 5.On-site parking for future tenants; spill-over effects to street parking from project 6.Safety impacts for seniors living at Channing House (850 Webster Street) 7.Daily operational impacts (noise, odor, etc.) from dining hall on adjacent uses. COMMENTS RAISED BY NEIGHBORS 13 CEQA STATUS •No review under the California Environmental Quality Action (CEQA) is required for a preliminary review. •A full review in accordance with CEQA would be initiated with the formal filing of a development application. 14 RECOMMENDED MOTION Staff recommends that Council conduct a prescreening and provide informal comments regarding the applicant’s request to rezone the property at 910 Webster Street from Multifamily Residential (RM-20) to a Planned Home Zoning (PHZ). Comments provided during the prescreening process are not binding on the City or the applicant. Garrett Sauls Principal Planner Garrett.Sauls@PaloAlto.gov 650-329-2471 910 WEBSTER STREET WEBSTER WOODS ADDISON ELEMENTARY DESIGN BUILDING THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD & CONTRIBUTES TO OUR HOUSING NEEDS. PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL COMMON AREAS BOTH INDOORS & OUTDOOR THAT FOSTER & STRENGTHEN SOCIAL TIES. MORE THAN 25% PROPOSED FLOOR AREA IS ASSIGNED TO COMMUNITY SPACES PROGRAM OUTLINE 430 FOREST AVENUE APARTMENTS LEED PLATINUM 2020 Green Home of the Year Award Winner Recognition by ARB & Honorable mention LONG TIME PALO ALTO RESIDENT, PART OF THE COMMUNITY FOR THREE DECADES. PREVIOUSLY BUILT AN AWARD- WINNING MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT ON FOREST AVENUE WHICH WAS LEED PLATINUM. WE WILL CONTINUE TO PURSUE ENERGY EFFICIENT BUILDING DESIGN IN THIS PROJECT AS WELL. HAVE OWNED THE CURRENT SITE FOR OVER 2-DECADES CITY PROCESS & COMMUNICATION SHADOW STUDY HEIGHT TRANSITIONS COMMUNITY ENERGY EFFECIENCY DESIGN PRIORITIES NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT 10- Story 6- Story 2- Story STEPPING DOWN FROM THE 10-STORY HIGH RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ACROSS CHANNING AVENUE. PROPOSED FRONTAGE ALONG CHANNING & WEBSTER IS 6-STORY HIGH, FACING HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONES ACROSS THE STREET. ORIENTATION & DESIGN WAS ALSO INFORMED BY THE MOVEMENT OF THE SUN.CREATING A SUN FILLED COURTYARD WHILE MINIMIZING SHADOWS ON ADJOINING PROPERTIES. BUILDING ENVELOPE PROPOSED SIX STORY BUILDING STEPS DOWN FROM THE CHANNING AVENUE FRONTAGE TO 2- STORY VOLUME TOWARDS THE LOW DENSITY R1 & R2 RESIDENCES. WITH 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK FOR 80% OF REAR PROPERTY LINE. DESIGNED AROUND A COURTYARD THE BUILDING DESIGN SHIFTS THE PHYSICAL MASS FURTHER AWAY FROM THE ADJOINING LOW DENSITY ZONES. 10- Story 6- Story 2- Story SHADOW STUDY WINTER SOLSTICE -10 AM WINTER SOLSTICE -3PM SHADOW STUDY SUMMER SOLSTICE -10AM SUMMER SOLSTICE - 3PM COMMON AREAS – COMMUNITY SPACES CENTRAL COURTYARD & LOGGIA FUNCTIONAL & SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING PRIVACY & COMMUNITY CLIMATE CONTROL MOVEMENT OF THE SUN ENERGY & PRIVACY MOVABLE SCREENING:THE FLOOR-TO-CEILING PLANTATION SHUTTERS ON ALL BALCONIES PROVIDE A CUSTOMIZABLE VISUAL BUFFER, PROTECTING THE PRIVACY OF BOTH BUILDING RESIDENTS AND NEIGHBORS. THE FLOOR PLAN IS STRATEGICALLY PROGRAMMED TO RESPECT THE PRIVACY OF THE ADJACENT LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE. PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS PROVIDE RENEWABLE ENERGY PRODUCTION AND PASSIVE SOLAR SHADING FOR THE UPPER FLOORS.