Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-05-18 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 26 Regular Meeting May 18, 2026 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers and by virtual teleconference at 5:30 p.m. Present In Person: Burt, Lauing, Lu, Lythcott-Haims, Reckdahl, Stone, Veenker Mayor Veenker departed the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Present Remotely: None. Absent: None. Special Orders of the Day 1. Recognizing May as Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) Heritage Month and May 10, 2026 as AANHPI Mental Health Awareness Day Mayor Veenker announced recognition of May as Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. Councilmember Lu read the proclamation, Recognizing May as Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) Heritage Month And May 10, 2026, as AANHPI Mental Health Awareness Day. Youth Ambassador for NAAPIMHA, Palo Alto Youth Council Member, and Act to Change representative Camille Chu thanked the City for the recognition and discussed cultural and linguistic barriers affecting access to mental health care within AANHPI communities. The importance of reducing stigma, expanding culturally responsive services, and fostering supportive community spaces was emphasized. Community members were encouraged to learn about available resources and support open conversations regarding mental health. Mayor Veenker invited Youth Ambassador Chu to the dais for a photo with Council. NO ACTION Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 City Manager Ed Shikada noted that an amended agenda had been issued removing Item 8 from the consent calendar and adding a supplemental report for Item 12 related to Old Trace Road. Mayor Veenker explained that Item 13 would be heard at approximately 6:35 p.m. due to scheduling adjustments and advised members of the public wishing to comment on that item accordingly. Public Comment 1. JobTrain Government Affairs Community Liaison Larry Moody provided updates regarding recent JobTrain activities, including the annual Breakfast of Champions event featuring Dr. Nadine Burke Harris and recognition of Stanford University and Stanford Hospital with the Paul Cook Alumni Employer Partner Award for hiring JobTrain graduates. An upcoming career fair at Belle Haven Community Campus on May 21 was announced and interest was expressed in partnering with the City of Palo Alto on future career fairs. An invitation was extended to Councilmembers to attend JobTrain’s spring graduation ceremony on June 25 at Cañada College. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Councilmember Reckdahl stated that consideration had been given to pulling Item 6 from the consent calendar but elected not to do so following clarification from the City Manager regarding applicable deadlines, Councilmember Lauing reported attending the opening celebration for the Homekey project, noting completion of 88 transitional housing units approved by Council in 2023. Appreciation was expressed for witnessing the project from approval through construction and ribbon cutting. Councilmember Burt echoed Councilmember Reckdahl’s comments regarding the Business Improvement District (BID) and referenced staff clarification regarding the process timeline. Councilmember Burt noted that state law appears to require Council appointment of an advisory committee prior to development of a funding plan and emphasized that step as a critical path item for establishing a BID. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims referenced the recent ribbon cutting for the Homekey project and celebrated completion of the transitional housing development. A ribbon cutting at the Cannery site on Portage Avenue was noted, where the Sobrato Organization has opened a new building. Future plans for the site were discussed, including retail space honoring Thomas Foon Chew, public art recognizing the site’s history, a future park and restored creek, and an SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 affordable housing development. Appreciation was expressed for the long-term efforts of community members and staff supporting the project. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims acknowledged reopening of The Pro on Ramona Street and referenced a memorial event at Cogswell Plaza honoring fallen Palo Alto police officers Lester Cole, Gene Clifton, and Ted Brassinga in conjunction with National Peace Officers Memorial Day. Palo Alto's first Pride event on June 7 at City Hall was highlighted, which will feature performances, speakers, resource tables, a Pride flag raising, culminating in a party on Ramona Street. Appreciation was expressed to community volunteers, youth organizers, Director Kristen O’Kane, the Community Services Department, sponsors, businesses, and individuals supporting the event. Vice Mayor Stone reminded the public of the May 21 celebration of initiation of construction of the Newell Road Bridge replacement project and thanked staff for preparations related to the event. The May 28 SFCJPA meeting at Menlo Park City Hall was noted as including consideration of certification of the SAFER Bay Final EIR and public participation was encouraged. Appreciation was expressed to City staff, the Police Department, and first responders for managing increased activity associated with recent BTS music concerts in Palo Alto. Councilmember Reckdahl announced a neighborhood meeting for Barron Park and surrounding neighborhoods on Wednesday at 5:30 p.m. at Fire Station 5, to be hosted by Councilmembers Reckdahl and Lythcott-Haims, and encouraged community participation and feedback. Mayor Veenker commented on the recent openings of Mitchell Park Place, the Cannery, and Homekey within a short period of time, describing the projects as significant housing progress in Palo Alto. Mayor Veenker thanked Councilmember Lythcott-Haims for recognizing the recent police memorial event and referenced attendance at the Avenidas Lifetimes of Achievement Awards with Councilmember Burt, congratulating the award recipients. An update was provided regarding the NCPA Executive Committee’s ongoing selection process for a new General Manager. Mayor Veenker further noted that members of the Neighbors Abroad delegation had arrived in Linköping, Sweden for cultural exchange activities and stated her plans to join the delegation for the last couple of days. Consent Calendar Mayor Veenker encouraged members of the public commenting on Item 12 to review the supplemental report included in the agenda packet and asked whether speakers would be permitted to comment again if the item were pulled from the Consent Calendar. City Attorney Christopher Jensen explained that additional public comment would be at Council's discretion and noted that speakers were being given an opportunity to address all consent items during the current public comment period. Due to the full agenda, Mayor Veenker announced a 3- minute speaking limit. Public Comment: SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 1. Charlie W., representing the Chamber of Commerce, expressed support for Item 6 suspending FY 2027 Downtown BID assessments and referenced ongoing outreach efforts and stakeholder meetings regarding the future of the BID. Support was expressed for using the suspension period to evaluate long-term economic development strategies, including the University Avenue Streetscape Project, retail vitality efforts, zoning updates, and potential enhanced services related to cleanliness and homelessness outreach. 2. Jeannie C., a resident of Old Trace Road, requested that Item 12 be removed from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. The commenter had concerns regarding wildfire risk, evacuation access, traffic impacts, and the project’s CEQA exemption status. Reference was made to the site’s location within designated wildfire management areas and the absence of environmental, fire safety, and traffic studies typically associated with discretionary review. 3. Shailesh M., speaking on behalf of Asher L., Shira L., Diane L., Khosrow P., and Marilyn S., urged removal of Item 12 from the Consent Calendar and raised concerns regarding evacuation access, emergency vehicle circulation, traffic impacts, and wildfire safety. Unease was expressed regarding the neighborhood’s single ingress and egress point at Arastradero Road and Old Trace Road, existing parking constraints affecting emergency access, and the cumulative impacts of future development under SB 9 and additional subdivision activity in the area. Questions were posed regarding consistency with the intent of state housing laws promoting transit-oriented development, highlighting the area’s reliance on vehicle travel and distance from mass transit. A request was made for additional safety analysis regarding evacuation and emergency response impacts. 4. Shoshana L. (Zoom), a resident of Old Trace Court, had worries regarding wildfire evacuation, emergency access, traffic congestion, and homeowner insurance impacts related to Item 12. Concerns were expressed regarding evacuation challenges for residents with mobility limitations, increased vehicle and delivery traffic, and the adequacy of existing safety analysis. It was asserted that the proposed density is incompatible with the area and that additional fire, traffic, and safety evaluation is needed. 5. Ellen S., an Esther Clark Park representative, voiced concerns regarding neighborhood character, parking overflow, roadway width, fire risk, and implementation of proposed traffic improvements related to Item 12. Questions were raised regarding the adequacy of on-site parking, dimensions of the proposed private road, and responsibility for installation of the proposed flashing beacon improvement. Increasing homeowner insurance premiums related to wildfire risk were referenced. 6. Kanwar D., an Old Trace Road resident, questioned the accuracy of subdivision maps showing Old Trace Road as 40 feet wide and the proposed private street as 30 feet wide. It was asserted that Old Trace Road is 30 feet wide and the private street would be 20 feet SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 wide. Clarification was requested regarding this type of misinformation before the project moves forward. 7. John C. (Zoom) noted his support for Item 12 and stated that many areas of Palo Alto, including Barron Park, function safely with dense residential patterns and narrow streets. Reference was made to experience with emergency vehicle access in similar neighborhoods and support was expressed for additional housing opportunities in the City. 8. Chris B. (Zoom) expressed opposition to Item 12, citing issues regarding wildlife impacts, neighborhood character, environmental protection, and the suitability of the site for higher-density housing. Reference was made to the area’s limited accessibility and presence of wildlife species. Support was expressed for preserving open space and increasing tree coverage on the project property. Mayor Veenker thanked the public speakers and returned discussion to the dais for consideration of no votes, pull requests, recusals, and a motion on the Consent Calendar. Mayor Veenker recused herself on Item 11 due to ongoing legal services provided to Stanford University and Councilmember Lu recused himself due to the item's relation to Stanford University. Councilmembers Lauing, Burt, and Lythcott-Haims supported pulling Item 12 for further discussion of public safety concerns. Mayor Veenker confirmed that Item 12 would be pulled from the Consent Calendar and heard later in the meeting. City Manager Ed Shikada indicated that staff could accommodate hearing Item 12 either at the beginning or end of the action agenda. MOTION: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Stone, to approve Agenda Item Numbers 2-7, 9-11 and to pull Agenda Item Number 12 off of the Consent Calendar (Agenda Item Number 8 Removed Off Agenda). MOTION PASSED ITEMS 2-7, 9-10: 7-0 MOTION PASSED ITEM 11: 5-0-2, Mayor Veenker and Councilmember Lu recused 2. Approval of Minutes from May 4, 2026 Meeting 3. 2026 Council Priorities & Objectives Q1 Update 4. Adoption of a Resolution Vacating a Portion of a Public Utility Easement at 590 Maybell Avenue; CEQA Status – Exempt under Cal. Code Regs. Title 14, Section 15305 SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 5. Adoption of a Resolution for Senate Bill 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act, for Fiscal Year 2027, Providing the Project List for the Street Maintenance Project, Capital Improvement Program Project PE-86070; CEQA Status – Not a Project 6. Adoption of Resolution Suspending the Levy of Assessments on the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District (BID) Assessment for Fiscal Year 2027; CEQA status – not a project. 7. Adopt a Resolution Approving Amendment Number 1 to California Board of State and Community Corrections Agreement Number BSCC 1164-23 for Organized Retail Theft Grant to Extend the Term One Year with No Change to the Not-To-Exceed Total; CEQA status—not a project. 8. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Borrowing of Funds on an Interim Basis for Improvements to the City's Regional Water Quality Control Plant and Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of a Revolving Credit Agreement and Related Note; CEQA Status - Not a Project Item Removed Off Agenda 9. Approval of Construction Contract No. C26197232 with Selway Construction, Inc. in the Amount Not-to of $261,600 and Authorization for the City Manager or Their Designee to Negotiate and Execute Change Orders for Related Additional but Unforeseen Work that may Develop During the Project Up to a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $26,160 for Site Work for a New Modular Restroom Building at Mitchell Park for the Park Restroom Installation Capital Improvement Project (PG-19000); CEQA status – Exempt Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 10. Approval of Construction Contract No. C26197180 with Casey Construction, Inc. in the Not-to-Exceed Amount of $544,556 and Authorization for the City Manager or Their Designee to Negotiate and Execute Change Orders for Related Additional but Unforeseen Work that May Develop During the Project Up to a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $54,456 for the Storm Drainage System Replacement and Rehabilitation Project (SD- 06101); CEQA status – Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c) 11. Approve Amendment Number 2 to Contract C3780 with Stanford University, to Extend the Contract Term to September 30, 2027 for Public Safety Dispatch Services Provided to the Main Campus of Stanford University; CEQA status—not a project. 12. PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 4103 Old Trace Road [25PLN-00298]: Request for Approval of a Tentative Map to Allow for the Subdivision of a Vacant 1.02-Acre Lot to Create Nine Residential Lots and One Private Street to Facilitate Construction of Nine New Single-Family Residences and Seven Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (25PLN- 00296). CEQA Status: Exempt Pursuant to Assembly Bill 130 (Public Resources Code Section 21080.66). Zone District: RE (Residential Estate) Item Removed Off Consent Calendar to Be Heard on Action SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 City Manager Shikada asked whether Council wished to address the order of action items. Mayor Veenker stated that the Cubberley item should be heard first due to the large number of attendees present and indicated that placement of Item 12 within the agenda could be determined later in the meeting. City Manager Comments City Manager Ed Shikada highlighted several upcoming City events and initiatives, including the City’s forthcoming Prohousing Designation application to the State and availability of the application for public review at this link. Additional announcements included the May 21 Newell Road Bridge construction celebration, ongoing vegetation management and fire mitigation work in the Foothills area through mid-June, the opening of the Bryant Street Community Center on June 3, and the Palo Alto Pride event at King Plaza in front of City Hall on June 7. City Manager Shikada reviewed upcoming Council agendas, including a June 1 study session on the Automated License Plate Reader system, the annual Community Development Block Grant Action Plan, follow-up action related to SB 79, and Cal Ave outdoor activation requirements. The June 8 agenda was noted as including potential follow-up actions related to Cubberley, next steps for the San Antonio Area Plan, and the Urban Water Management Plan. For the June 15 meeting, Council is scheduled to consider potential adoption of the BPTP and final budget actions. It was noted that the Crescent Park Traffic Calming item has been postponed due to the June meeting schedule. Action Items 13. Cubberley Project: Adopt the Cubberley Conceptual Master Plan and a Resolution Adopting the CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigated Monitoring and Reporting Program; Receive the Fourth Round of Community Polling Results; and Provide Direction on Next Steps for a Possible Sales Tax Ballot Measure. CEQA Status - A Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) Report Circulated for Public Review from March 2, 2026, to April 1, 2026. The City published the Final IS-MND on April 9, 2026. Community Services Director Kristen O’Kane introduced 2 Cubberley-related items regarding adoption of the Conceptual Master Plan and CEQA document and consideration of next steps following the fourth community poll. The project background was reviewed, beginning with Council’s December 2024 workplan authorizing pursuit of additional Cubberley property acquisition from PAUSD. The community vision statement developed during the planning process was shared. Director O’Kane described the City’s existing 8-acre ownership area and the proposed acquisition of an additional 7 acres from PAUSD, noting that the expanded 15- acre site would support long-term redevelopment flexibility and phased implementation. The SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 Conceptual Master Plan was described as a long-range framework combining renovated and new facilities with phased development tied to funding availability and partner readiness. Potential funding sources discussed included a ballot measure, partnerships, philanthropy, development fees, and grants. Phase One elements and future development flexibility were reviewed, including previously approved letters of intent related to recreation, wellness, and performing arts uses. Reference was made to proposed future partnerships with Avenidas, Maker Nexus, and Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC). Director O’Kane summarized completion of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to CEQA, including a 30-day public review period, identification of 5 environmental resource areas with mitigated impacts, receipt of 7 written comments, and public meetings including a joint ARB/PTC session. Adoption of the Conceptual Master Plan and CEQA document was described as supporting future phased implementation and partner projects at the site. Assistant Director of Administrative Services Christine Paras presented the fourth and final community poll regarding a potential Cubberley ballot measure. It was explained that the City worked with FM3 to conduct polling to evaluate potential November 2026 ballot measure language for quarter-cent and one-half-cent sales tax options, assess whether partnership agreements and supplemental funding sources could increase voter support, and determine whether competing tax measures would affect voter support levels. FM3 Consultant Miranda Everitt (Zoom) summarized results of the fourth Cubberley community poll conducted in March 2026 using phone and online survey methods with 411 respondents. Polling showed mixed sentiment regarding the direction of Palo Alto in general, with 63 percent of respondents having visited Cubberley and 15 percent participating in community meetings regarding the site. Polling concerning facility funding needs showed 46 percent identifying great or some need for improvements. A potential one-half-cent sales tax measure received 55 percent voter support, compared to 48 percent support in January polling. Support levels remained similar for a quarter-cent measure. Polling indicated stronger support among Democrats and reduced support among Republicans, with little variation by age, gender, or geography. A proposed 30-year sunset provision reduced support levels. Additional polling tested whether information regarding partnerships, Cubberley improvements, outside sales tax contributions, and related funding context affected voter support. Polling showed increased support among undecided voters when informed about partnerships and contributions from non-residents and businesses. One-third of respondents indicated reduced support if the measure appeared on the same ballot as a regional transportation sales tax measure. Consultant Everitt outlined polling regarding voter messaging and stated that support declined as voters received additional information regarding the measure. The most effective messaging related to building safety upgrades, aging facilities, preservation of outdoor space, and consequences of failing to fund improvements. Messaging around local quality of life, partnerships, accountability, and youth programs was less effective. Opposition messaging regarding cost of living concerns, additional taxes, and competing ballot measures reduced support levels and increased opposition intensity. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 9 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 Director O’Kane stated that staff, the PTC, ARB, and PRC recommended adoption of the Final Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Cubberley Conceptual Master Plan. Council direction was requested regarding next steps, including potential pursuit of a November ballot measure for a quarter-cent or one-half-cent sales tax and continued discussions with PAUSD regarding acquisition of the additional 7 acres using existing funding sources. Mayor Veenker thanked Director O’Kane, Assistant Director Paras, and FM3 representatives and invited comments from Councilmember Lythcott-Haims as Chair of the Cubberley ad hoc committee. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims described the Cubberley item as a significant milestone and expressed appreciation to community members, PAUSD, existing tenants, boards and commissions, fellow ad hoc committee members, Council colleagues, and City staff for their sustained work and engagement throughout the planning process. Recognition was given to the community’s long-standing advocacy for improvements at Cubberley, PAUSD’s willingness to pursue discussions regarding the additional 7 acres, participation in development of the Conceptual Master Plan, and ongoing collaboration regarding future uses of the site. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims described a vision for Cubberley centered on wellness, belonging, intergenerational connection, arts, recreation, and community participation. The future site was described as supporting people of diverse ages, cultures, and backgrounds through spaces focused on physical activity, creativity, and social connection. Appreciation was expressed to current community partners: Friends of the Palo Alto Recreation and Wellness Center, TheatreWorks, Maker Nexus, Avenidas, PACCC, and a prospective organization supporting the Chinese community. It was emphasized that community partnerships would be important to advancing a ballot measure and future redevelopment phases and that Phase One is viewed as achievable pending funding and community support. Councilmember Reckdahl stated that work on the Cubberley effort has been underway for approximately 1½ years. It was explained that consultants advised that renovating the existing Cubberley buildings would be more cost-effective and faster than complete redevelopment due to the adequate condition of the underlying structures. The phased approach was described as reducing costs and accelerating implementation compared to a larger-scale redevelopment project. Community partners were identified as important contributors through funding, election support, and future programming expertise. Councilmember Reckdahl additionally referenced polling results showing initial voter support for Cubberley funding measures and emphasized that support increased when respondents were informed about project partnerships. These partnerships were described as strengthening project credibility and reducing opposition intensity. Although support levels declined following negative messaging, Councilmember Reckdahl expressed optimism regarding the measure’s viability and emphasized the importance of continued community outreach and engagement. Councilmember Burt characterized the polling results as narrow and noted that ballot measures typically require stronger polling support prior to proceeding. It was stated that broad SUMMARY MINUTES Page 10 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 community and organizational support could strengthen grassroots outreach efforts and improve the measure’s prospects for success. Councilmember Burt emphasized that the proposed Cubberley expansion would result in a net increase in space and stated that existing nonprofit tenants, clubs, and community user groups would have opportunities to continue operating at the site. Existing users of Cubberley were encouraged to participate as partners in advancing the project. Mayor Veenker noted her excitement to see the large number of public speakers and announced that public comment would be limited to 1 minute per speaker and 6 minutes per group. Instructions were provided regarding speaker order and preparation to approach the podium when called. Public Comment: 1. Ken H., a Palo Alto resident for more than 40 years, expressed support for moving forward with the Cubberley project and supported a one-half-cent sales tax measure. Reference was made to the City’s ownership of the Cubberley 8 acres since 2001 and the need to advance the project at this time. 2. Tony S. emphasized the importance of wellness, mental health, and social connection in the Cubberley discussion and advocated for continued community activities such as dance programs. Reference was made to the physical and mental health benefits of dancing, including balance, exercise, and social engagement. 3. Betsy B., a former Councilmember, encouraged adoption of the Cubberley resolution and cited long-standing community discussions regarding the site. It was noted that HeartFit currently leases space at Cubberley and provides services for approximately 300 participants with heart-related health needs. 4. Sonya R., a neighboring resident to Cubberley for nearly 30 years, indicated support for advancing the Cubberley project and stated that the opportunity for unified City ownership makes this an appropriate time to proceed. Support was expressed for implementing Phase One of the plan and the commenter offered her assistance with future community outreach efforts. 5. Robin W., Executive Director of HeartFit for Life, speaking on behalf of Polly B., Teresa L., Gary R., and Brian S, voiced strong support for advancing the Cubberley project and described Cubberley as an important community resource for nonprofits and wellness programs. Mention was made of HeartFit for Life’s long- term presence at Cubberley, the need for stable and affordable nonprofit space, aging facility conditions, and prior building maintenance issues affecting operations. Support was conveyed for placing a funding measure before voters to determine the future of the site. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 11 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 6. Evan A. was in favor of advancing the Cubberley project and described the site as an opportunity to create a citywide community resource similar to the Mitchell Park Library redevelopment. Reference was made to concerns regarding perceptions of taking land from PAUSD and the importance of communicating the project’s partnership structure and community benefits. 7. Lee P., representing PACCC, advocated for the Cubberley project and described PACCC's growth from 1 childcare center to 18 centers serving more than 1,000 children daily. It was noted that space limitations constrain future expansion and support was voiced for additional community space and continued partnership efforts related to the project. 8. Carmen R., a Greenmeadow resident, endorsed the Cubberley project and thanked the Cubberley ad hoc committee for advancing the effort. The commenter cited the deteriorating condition of the site and emphasized the need for a community center serving children, families, and older adults. Concerns regarding perceptions that South Palo Alto receives less attention were referenced. The commenter advocated for a community center comparable to those found in neighboring communities. 9. Phyllis B., a Greenmeadow resident since 1982, supported renovation of Cubberley and acquisition of the additional acreage from PAUSD. This commenter desired a November ballot measure featuring a one-half-cent sales tax increase, highlighted support from nonprofit partners, and stated that Cubberley’s importance will grow as Palo Alto's population increases. The campus's deteriorating condition was discussed and a commitment to supporting voter outreach efforts was shared. 10. Penny E., a former Cubberley Advisory Committee member, thanked Council and staff for advancing the Cubberley effort and stated that community members are prepared to support a future ballot measure campaign. The commenter highlighted broad community participation in developing the vision for Cubberley and characterized the project as important to meeting future community facility needs as housing growth continues in Palo Alto. 11. Anne Warner C., a 1960 Olympian, voiced support for the Cubberley project and highlighted the importance of exercise, wellness, and community programs. The commenter urged timely action to address deteriorating facility conditions and cited benefits for seniors, youth, and future generations. 12. Yudy D., PRC member, speaking on behalf of Society of Heart’s Delight and Friends of the Recreation and Wellness Center, supported advancing the Cubberley project and placing a funding measure on the November ballot. The commenter described Society of Heart’s Delight’s community engagement efforts and noted that the organization is developing a letter of intent to support fundraising for a potential SUMMARY MINUTES Page 12 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 Chinese heritage center at Cubberley intended to serve as a cultural gathering space for the broader community. 13. Amy L., a Maker Nexus member, advocated for inclusion of Maker Nexus at Cubberley and highlighted the benefits of maker spaces for education, creativity, skill development, and community programming. Youth camps, repair clinics, club activities, and access to equipment were described as valuable community resources. 14. Sharron H. expressed support for the Cubberley project while encouraging retention of the Cubberley Pavilion as a gymnasium. Drawing on personal experience as an older adult, this commenter emphasized the importance of exercise and social connection for healthy aging and described the Pavilion as supporting physical activity and a strong community network. 15. Jennifer D. thanked Council and staff for advancing the Cubberley effort and voiced support for pursuing a sales tax measure. It was stated that Cubberley serves as a regional destination and the project partnerships were characterized as important to building community support and advancing a future ballot measure. The online audience was reported to include hundreds of individuals affiliated with partner organizations. 16. Kristina L., President and CEO of Avenidas, backed the Cubberley project and described Cubberley as an important community gathering place. Reference was made to opportunities to expand senior programming, wellness activities, and collaboration among organizations located at the site. Support was voiced for placing a funding measure on the November ballot. 17. Kai ("Pinki") F., Avenidas Chinese Community Center Program Director, was supportive of the Cubberley project and described ACCC’s programs, including cultural events, wellness classes, and technology workshops. The importance of maintaining space was emphasized for intergenerational programming and community engagement as local needs continue to evolve. Councilmembers were thanked for attending ACCC's AANHPI Heritage Month celebration. 18. D.C. J. voiced support for the Cubberley project and highlighted the diversity of organizations and users connected to the site. The commenter made mention of his family's participation in Maker Nexus programs and PACCC services and voiced his enthusiasm for advancing the project. 19. Ignacio C., a Palo Alto resident and member of Maker Nexus, stated support for the Cubberley project and described maker spaces as fostering cross-generational learning, collaboration, and community connection. It was stated that Cubberley can continue serving as a place where people of diverse backgrounds come together to learn and create. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 13 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 20. Phil S., TheatreWorks Executive Director, speaking on behalf of Katie B., Nancy G. S., Jake A., and Daniel G., stated that TheatreWorks is prepared to advance plans for a performing arts center at Cubberley and has retained fundraising counsel to support a capital campaign. The commenter highlighted TheatreWorks' audience reach, educational programming, and community engagement efforts and affirmed the organization’s commitment to partnering on the project. Katie B., TheatreWorks Silicon Valley Board Chair, added that the organization previously expressed interest in partnering with the City on the Cubberley project and completed a feasibility assessment regarding its potential participation. This commenter reiterated TheatreWorks’ commitment to launching a capital campaign to support development of an enhanced performing arts facility at Cubberley. Nancy G., TheatreWorks board member, highlighted TheatreWorks’ long history in the community and desire for a permanent home. It was stated that TheatreWorks can help engage community members and voters and encouraged framing the measure around investment in a world-class community center instead of raising taxes. 21. Elizabeth H. thanked Council and staff for their work on the Cubberley project and emphasized the importance of preserving Friday night ballroom dancing at the Cubberley Pavilion. Reference was made to the program’s more than 40-year history, volunteer operation, and value as a social and recreational activity for older adults. 22. Harold J. supported the Cubberley project and highlighted the Pavilion’s value as a ballroom dancing venue. Concerns were raised regarding relocation of dance activities to a gymnasium, citing poor acoustics. The commenter encouraged inclusion of acoustic design expertise in any future replacement facility. 23. Rosalie H. thanked Council and staff for their work on the Cubberley project and described the positive impact ballroom dancing has had on her life. The commenter emphasized the need for a large gathering space with high-quality acoustics to accommodate dance activities and offered to assist with planning future facilities. 24. Denuka J., a third-grade student at Hoover Elementary School, encouraged bringing Maker Nexus to Cubberley and described it as an opportunity to strengthen community connections and expand access to maker space activities. 25. Judy K., former mayor, expressed support for the Cubberley project and highlighted the broad community support demonstrated at the meeting. The commenter referenced decades of discussion regarding improvements at Cubberley and characterized the project as an opportunity to create a world-class community center serving all of Palo Alto. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 14 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 26. Gary S., a longtime participant in the Cubberley ballroom dancing program, encouraged retention of the gymnasium as an anchor facility within the project. The commenter cited the gym’s historical significance and expressed confidence that future improvements would address seismic and building code requirements. 27. Phil M., a Barron Park resident, welcomed the broader Cubberley project but urged preservation of the Cubberley Pavilion as a gymnasium. Phil M. contended that conversion of the Pavilion to a theater would provide limited arts benefits while reducing recreational space needed for youth sports and other community uses. 28. Katy R., a Palo Alto resident and frequent user of Cubberley, cited deteriorating conditions at Cubberley, including maintenance issues observed during a recent visit, and emphasized the need to advance Phase One as quickly as possible. 29. Catherine P., a member of Zohar Dance Company, was supportive of renovation of Cubberley and the Conceptual Master Plan. The commenter noted that Zohar Dance Company has utilized dance studios in Building L since 1984 and encouraged development of a clear transition plan for long-term nonprofit tenants and arts organizations currently using the site. 30. Jackie W., a longtime Greenmeadow resident, affirmed support for the Cubberley project, indicated a willingness to assist with future outreach efforts, and provided an email address (PAFuture26@gmail.com) for community members interested in becoming involved. 31. Richard P., a longtime participant in Pavilion dance programs, encouraged renovation rather than replacement of the Cubberley Pavilion. The commenter highlighted the Pavilion’s large dance floor, acoustics, and ventilation and described the facility as an important source of recreation, exercise, wellbeing, and social connection for the community. 32. Jay S., a Cubberley ballroom dance participant, emphasized the cognitive, physical, and social benefits of ballroom dancing for older adults. Consideration of existing dance programs was encouraged as the Cubberley project moves forward. 33. Chris B., a frequent Cubberley user, stated that the site currently provides free recreational opportunities and questioned the need for additional taxes to support proposed improvements and programming. Concerns were raised regarding the cost of a potential funding measure. 34. Scott S., a Greendell resident, supported the Cubberley project and described his family's long-time use of programs at the site. The commenter characterized the facilities as neglected and stated that the project presents an important opportunity to improve Cubberley as Palo Alto's population grows. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 15 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 35. Mark H., a Greenmeadow resident and Palo Alto resident of more than 30 years, described his family's past reliance on PACCC services and stated that Cubberley improvements would help support future families as housing growth occurs in South Palo Alto. The commenter highlighted opportunities for expanded childcare, arts programming, and lifelong learning and advocated for placing a sales tax measure on the ballot. Mayor Veenker thanked community members for their participation and enthusiasm and acknowledged the contributions of the ad hoc committee and staff. The Cubberley project was characterized as a unique opportunity for the City and the importance of continued community partnership was emphasized. Mayor Veenker observed that Cubberley had been identified as a Council priority for the year and moved the staff recommendation. Councilmember Lythcott- Haims seconded the motion. Vice Mayor Stone emphasized the strong public support expressed during the meeting and voiced support for advancing the Cubberley project. Continued collaboration was encouraged to move the project forward for the benefit of current and future Palo Alto residents. Councilmember Lauing was appreciative to the public for its participation and stated that the community’s enthusiasm and support for the Cubberley project were clearly conveyed. Councilmember Lauing requested clarification regarding polling language describing a tax measure that could be "ended by voters." City Manager Ed Shikada explained that ending the tax would require a future voter-approved action, either through a City-sponsored ballot measure or a voter initiative. Councilmember Lauing commented on polling results showing reduced support when respondents were informed of a potential regional transportation sales tax measure on the same ballot and noted that such circumstances would need to be addressed as part of any future ballot measure effort. Councilmember Lu voiced support for the Cubberley project and questioned polling results showing greater support for a measure that could be ended by voters than for a measure with a 30-year sunset provision. Consultant Everitt stated that such results are common in polling and that cost-of-living concerns would likely be a more significant source of opposition. City Manager Shikada noted that ballot measure details could be discussed at the June 8 meeting and Councilmember Lu indicated a preference to defer further discussion until then. Councilmember Lu acknowledged public comments regarding the Pavilion and stated that future planning and design efforts would provide opportunities to address community priorities, including acoustics and other facility needs. MOTION: Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Lythcott-Haims, to: 1. Adopt a Resolution adopting the Final Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project and associated Mitigated Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment A); and SUMMARY MINUTES Page 16 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 2. Adopt the Cubberley Conceptual Master Plan (Attachment B); and 3. Direct staff to pursue a ballot measure for a one-half-cent sales tax in the November 2026 election. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 [Council took a 24-minute break] Mayor Veenker left the meeting at this point. City Manager Ed Shikada announced that Council would next hear Item 14 and then Item 12 and that Item 15 would be referred to the Economic Development Committee. The public was reminded that individuals who had previously commented on Item 12 during the Consent Calendar hearing would not have an additional opportunity to speak on the item. 14. Update Regarding the Builder’s Remedy Project at 156 California Avenue and Consideration of Adding Lot B (APN 124-28-003) Associated with the Development to the City’s Housing Element Sites Inventory. Planning and Development Services Director Jonathan Lait introduced the discussion regarding the application for 156 California Avenue, a revised project concept, and consideration of adding Lot A to the Housing Sites Inventory. Director Lait noted that the staff report incorrectly referenced Lot B and that Lot A, the larger parcel containing the Mollie Stone’s grocery store and parking lot, is the parcel proposed for addition to the inventory. A map showing Lots A and B and the site location was presented. Director Lait noted that the application proposes a mixed-use multifamily development replacing the existing grocery store. A slide summarizing legislative and Builder’s Remedy background was shown. Director Lait reviewed the project’s eligibility under Builder’s Remedy provisions, noting that the application was filed when Palo Alto lacked a certified Housing Element. Renderings of the application on file and the revised concept were presented. It was stated that the current proposal includes a 7-story building along California Avenue, a 17-story tower, and an additional tower element reaching approximately 120 feet. The revised concept would reduce the tallest tower from 177 feet to 144 feet while increasing the height of other building elements. Unit counts were described as generally comparable, with differences in affordable housing requirements based on the applicable Builder’s Remedy framework. Parking totals would be reduced under the revised concept. Building sections along Park Boulevard and a rendering from California Avenue were shown, depicting a ground-floor Mollie Stone’s grocery store with tower elements above and behind it. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 17 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 Director Lait explained that adding Lot A to the Housing Sites Inventory would make the site eligible for a Builder’s Remedy 2.0 application. Unlike the application currently on file, Builder’s Remedy 2.0 establishes specific development standards but reduces the affordable housing requirement from 20 percent to 13 percent. Inclusion of Lot A in the inventory would support the financial feasibility of the revised concept and allow the applicant to proceed under the updated state framework. The proposed terms would require submission of an application within 120 days, referral to the ARB for a courtesy review, and consideration of ARB comments to the extent feasible. Final project approval would remain with the City Council. Director Lait characterized addition of Lot A to the inventory as a significant policy decision that would signal the City's willingness to process a Builder’s Remedy 2.0 application; otherwise, the applicant would likely continue pursuing the application currently on file. Director Lait emphasized that Council was not being asked to approve either project and that either application would be subject to an expedited review process with a decision anticipated within 120 days. A slide summarizing estimated development impact fees was presented. Under the proposed Builder’s Remedy 2.0 framework, development impact fees would not apply to affordable units, consistent with prior City policy. Unused public art contributions would be directed to the Housing Fund, with an estimated contribution of approximately $2.6M. Slides outlining policy considerations and the decision before Council were shown. Key considerations included project design, affordable housing levels, fiscal impacts, and community objectives. Councilmember Lauing, speaking on behalf of the Council ad hoc committee, reviewed the history and intent of the Builder’s Remedy law and noted that it limits local discretion over project characteristics such as height. The 156 California Avenue proposal was identified as including the tallest tower among Palo Alto's Builder’s Remedy projects. Prior discussions with state legislators regarding unintended consequences of the law were summarized. Subsequent state revisions resulted in the Builder’s Remedy 2.0 framework, including a reduction in affordable housing requirements. Councilmember Lauing reiterated that the City has limited authority over Builder’s Remedy projects and described the ad hoc committee’s discussions with the applicant, developer, and City staff regarding a revised proposal. The ad hoc prioritized reducing the height of the 177-foot tower, increasing affordable housing, and improving building massing and streetscape design. The revised concept reduces the tallest tower by 33 feet and addresses other concerns regarding shadows and visual impacts. While affordable housing requirements would be lower under the Builder’s Remedy 2.0 framework, the applicant would comply with the City’s 15 percent inclusionary housing ordinance. Councilmember Lauing further stated that the revised concept would provide a stronger street presence along California Avenue and preserve ground-floor grocery store retail. Although the revised proposal does not fully satisfy all objectives, it was characterized as a meaningful improvement over the application currently on file. Vice Mayor Stone thanked Councilmember Lauing, City staff, and the applicant team for their participation in the ad hoc process. Recent state housing laws were noted as significantly limiting local control over Builder’s Remedy projects and community feedback was described as mixed, with concerns frequently focused on the height of the original 17-story tower. The revised concept was characterized as the result of productive negotiations that reduced overall SUMMARY MINUTES Page 18 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 height, increased housing units, improved sightlines, and created a more cohesive site layout. Vice Mayor Stone emphasized that the policy question before Council at this meeting was whether the revised concept represented a preferable alternative to the Builder’s Remedy application currently on file. Public Comment: 1. Jeff C., project architect for 156 California Avenue, supported the revised proposal and described the site as well suited for transit-oriented development. It was conveyed that the revised concept improves upon the original proposal by reducing building height, increasing housing units, improving the grocery store location and site circulation, and providing a publicly accessible restaurant space. 2. Dan G., counsel for the applicant with Holland & Knight, encouraged adding the site to the Housing Sites Inventory and characterized the revised proposal as an improvement over the original project. The City's handling of Builder’s Remedy issues was commended and it was noted that final project approval would return to the City Council regardless of the action taken on the Housing Sites Inventory. 3. Sharron C., an Evergreen Park resident, raised concerns regarding traffic and pedestrian safety impacts along Park Boulevard, including potential effects on a Safe Routes to School corridor. Additional issues were mentioned regarding building height, loss of natural light for nearby residents, and potential parking spillover impacts on adjacent neighborhoods, including nearby affordable housing residents. Additional project modifications were encouraged to address those concerns. 4. Michael E., a Park Boulevard resident, contended that the revised proposal remains too large for the surrounding neighborhood. Concerns were raised regarding parking demand, spillover parking, and traffic impacts, questioning assumptions regarding reduced vehicle ownership among future residents. The commenter referenced prior efforts to address cut-through traffic in the area. 5. Paul B., a former commercial real estate professional, acknowledged the City's limited authority under state law but was concerned regarding the amount of parking proposed for the project. Assumptions were questioned regarding reduced vehicle ownership among residents and the commenter encouraged the City to consider potential parking impacts on the California Avenue commercial district and surrounding area. 6. Stephen L., a Palo Alto resident, supported the ad hoc committee's recommendation and commended Councilmember Lauing and Vice Mayor Stone for their work with the applicant. The revised concept was characterized as a preferable alternative to the application currently on file and concerns were raised that rejecting the negotiated compromise could discourage future applicants from SUMMARY MINUTES Page 19 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 working collaboratively with the City. Support for adding the site to the Housing Sites Inventory was based in part on its proximity to transit, employment centers, and California Avenue businesses. 7. Scott O. (Zoom) praised the comments made by Stephen L. and expressed support for the revised concept. A preference was indicated for the placement of taller residential elements behind the pedestrian-oriented commercial frontage along California Avenue in the revised design. 8. Chris F., representing Redco Development, thanked City representatives for their engagement throughout the ad hoc process and described the revised concept as the product of numerous design iterations and negotiations. Chris F. opined that the revised proposal is superior to the original project from architectural, operational, and grocery store perspectives and indicated that future project refinements would address parking demand. Councilmember Burt thanked the applicant and ad hoc committee for their efforts to develop a revised alternative and reiterated support for transit-oriented development. The revised concept was observed to provide more total housing units but fewer affordable units and less parking than the application currently on file. Concerns were raised regarding the project's height and compatibility with nearby affordable housing and lower-density neighborhoods. A preference was expressed for directing a portion of public art contributions toward affordable housing. State law was noted to limit the City's authority over parking requirements. Councilmember Burt indicated he would not support the revised concept. Councilmember Reckdahl acknowledged the efforts of the applicant and ad hoc committee and noted that having multiple options for consideration was beneficial. Concerns were raised that the revised concept would reduce affordable housing units, development impact fees, and parking while continuing to have substantial impacts on neighboring properties. The height reduction was viewed as insufficient to meaningfully change the project's overall massing. The application currently on file was characterized as the preferable of the 2. Councilmember Lu supported higher-density housing at the site and described the reduced building height in the revised concept as a meaningful visual improvement. Concerns were raised regarding the reduction in affordable housing units and development impact fees and interest was expressed in combining favorable elements of the 2 proposals. In response to questions regarding vehicle access, Director Lait confirmed that the revised concept includes driveways on Park Boulevard and Cambridge Avenue but not California Avenue. Managing Partner Chris Freise of Redco explained that relocating loading activities away from Park Boulevard and improving the grocery store layout required shifting vehicle access to Park Boulevard. The revised concept was described as replacing loading operations along Park Boulevard with passenger vehicle access, which was viewed as less disruptive from a design perspective. Councilmember Lu stated that he needed additional time for consideration SUMMARY MINUTES Page 20 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 regarding the relative bike and traffic impacts of the 2 concepts and indicated a preliminary preference for the application currently on file. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims acknowledged the challenges created by the Builder’s Remedy process and commended the ad hoc committee, staff, and applicant for negotiating a revised proposal. The reduction in building height was described as a meaningful improvement. Support was expressed for features of the revised concept including the California Avenue- facing grocery store, enhanced building design, and activation of the Cal Ave commercial corridor. Support was expressed for exempting inclusionary units from development impact fees and directing unused public art contributions to affordable housing. Appreciation was noted for the applicant's commitment to address parking demand. Councilmember Lythcott- Haims stated a preference for the revised concept and indicated support for adding Lot A to the Housing Sites Inventory. Councilmember Lauing observed that the revised concept would provide fewer affordable housing units than the application currently on file but noted that affordable housing could be supported through other projects and funding mechanisms, including in-lieu fees and future housing developments. Councilmember Lauing believed that the reduction in affordable units should be weighed alongside other benefits of the revised concept and that it should not be the primary reason for rejecting the Builder’s Remedy 2.0 proposal. Councilmember Lu inquired about the implications of a tied vote. Director Lait explained that a 3-3 vote would not provide direction to add Lot A to the Housing Sites Inventory, allowing the applicant to continue pursuing the Builder’s Remedy 1.0 application currently on file. City Attorney Christopher Jensen added that the City has 45 days from May 7 to act on the request and stated that the matter could return to Council within that timeframe if agendized. Councilmember Lu expressed interest in ensuring a full Council was available for a potentially decisive vote and discussed the possibility of continuing the item for future consideration. City Manager Ed Shikada stated that Council could continue the item to a future meeting, subject to Council approval. Councilmember Lu requested additional information regarding the Park Boulevard frontage in the revised concept and the relative quality of publicly accessible spaces within the 2 proposals. Partner Freise explained that the revised concept replaces a previously proposed corner coffee shop and stair plaza with prominent residential and restaurant lobby entrances intended to activate the Park Boulevard frontage. Partner Freise stated that retail uses were considered less viable along Park Boulevard and described the revised concept as providing greater public access through an 8,000-square-foot rooftop restaurant and deck area. In response to a follow- up question regarding the removal of stair-oriented public spaces from the original proposal, Partner Freise stated that those features were replaced by dedicated access to the rooftop public amenities. Councilmember Lu indicated that the additional public space provided by the revised concept was a meaningful consideration. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 21 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 Vice Mayor Stone described the proposed rooftop restaurant and public deck in the second concept as a significant community amenity and stated that the space could contribute to increased activity and vitality along California Avenue. Councilmember Burt disagreed that the loss of affordable housing units could be readily offset elsewhere, citing the City's Housing Element requirements and the challenges associated with meeting state affordable housing targets. Concerns were reiterated regarding the reduction in affordable units under the revised concept despite the applicant's characterization of the design as an improvement. Councilmember Burt did not believe the community benefits in the revised design justified the reduction in affordable housing and indicated that the tradeoff does not represent a net benefit to the community. Councilmember Lauing reiterated his view that reductions in building height could reasonably result in fewer affordable housing units and noted that additional height reductions sought during negotiations could have further reduced affordable housing production. Councilmember Burt responded that the revised concept includes more total units than the application currently on file and stated that the reduction in affordable housing units was not necessarily required to achieve the revised design. A brief discussion followed regarding the relationship between project height, total unit count, and affordable housing production. Councilmember Lauing stated a preference to proceed with a vote unless additional information from the applicant was needed. Vice Mayor Stone asked whether Councilmember Lu had additional questions for the applicant that could assist in evaluating the proposal. Councilmember Lu inquired whether aesthetic elements of the revised concept, including building materials and façade design, could be incorporated into the application currently on file. Partner Freise responded that the revised concept reflects a comprehensive redesign developed through months of collaboration and involves changes extending beyond exterior architecture to include building layout, circulation, loading operations, and unit configuration. Partner Freise noted that the revised concept contains more units but fewer bedrooms and stated that project economics are influenced by factors such as unit mix, building height, and amenity offerings, making direct comparisons between the 2 proposals more complex than a unit-for-unit analysis. MOTION: Vice Mayor Stone moved, seconded by Councilmember Lythcott-Haims, to direct the Planning and Development Services Director to add Lot A (APN 124-28-045) to the Housing Element Sites Inventory. MOTION PASSED: 4-2-1, Reckdahl and Burt no, Veenker absent Following the vote, Vice Mayor Stone asked about next steps for the project. Director Lait explained that the action would add Lot A to the Housing Sites Inventory, allowing the applicant SUMMARY MINUTES Page 22 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 to pursue a Builder’s Remedy 2.0 application. The applicant would be required to submit an application within the prescribed timeframe, after which the proposal would proceed to the ARB for a courtesy review before returning to the City Council for consideration most likely later in the year. 15. FIRST READING: Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Various Sections of Title 16 (Building Regulations) and Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Implement Retail Vitality Policies in the Comprehensive Plan, including changes to the Zoning Map for parcels zoned CN(GF). CEQA Status: The Ordinance is Consistent with and Represents Implementation of Adopted Policies in the Comprehensive Plan, for Which an Environmental Impact Report (Comprehensive Plan EIR) was Certified on February 5, 2016. Agenda Item Number 15 not heard and deferred to a date uncertain. 12. PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 4103 Old Trace Road [25PLN-00298]: Request for Approval of a Tentative Map to Allow for the Subdivision of a Vacant 1.02-Acre Lot to Create Nine Residential Lots and One Private Street to Facilitate Construction of Nine New Single-Family Residences and Seven Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (25PLN- 00296). CEQA Status: Exempt Pursuant to Assembly Bill 130 (Public Resources Code Section 21080.66). Zone District: RE (Residential Estate) Planning and Development Services Director Jonathan Lait introduced Nishita Kandikuppa and noted that the item marked her first presentation to the City Council. It was noted that staff was well equipped to answer Council questions regarding the item. Associate Planner Nishita Kandikuppa presented the proposed subdivision at 4103 Old Trace Road. It was explained that the vacant site would be subdivided into 9 residential lots served by a private street. A separate entitlement application proposes 9 single-family homes, including 1 BMR unit, with 7 homes containing attached JADUs. A site plan map was presented. Planner Kandikuppa identified the site at the corner of Arastradero Road and Old Trace Road and described the proposed private street, pedestrian improvements, landscaping, and circulation features. The private street would provide 2-way traffic, include red curbs to maintain emergency and refuse vehicle access, and restrict right turns from Arastradero Road to reduce potential conflicts among vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Planner Kandikuppa reviewed requested State Density Bonus Law waivers related to minimum lot size, Arastradero Road setbacks, private street width, and site depth and noted that the applicant would be eligible to request 1 concession through the future Streamlined Housing Development Review process. Key considerations were summarized, including limitations on denying the project based on zoning or Comprehensive Plan inconsistencies and requirements that any denial or density reduction be based on an unmitigable adverse public health or safety impact. Planner SUMMARY MINUTES Page 23 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 Kandikuppa noted that AB 130 exempts qualifying infill housing projects from CEQA and imposes expedited review timelines. Staff recommended that the City Council determine the project exempt under AB 130 and approve the Tentative Map application based on the amended Draft Record of Land Use Action. Transportation staff and a PTC representative were available to answer questions. Vice Mayor Stone complimented Planner Kandikuppa on the presentation and inquired whether any disclosures were required for the quasi-judicial item. No disclosures were made and public comment was opened. Attorney Melanie Griswold, land use counsel for Steel Bridge Homes Palo Alto, LP, requested approval of the Tentative Map application and noted that the project had received staff support and a unanimous recommendation from the PTC. Attorney Griswold described the proposal as a 9-lot subdivision on a vacant 1-acre site providing 16 dwelling units, including JADUs and on- site affordable housing. Attorney Griswold reviewed the legal standards governing the application under the Housing Accountability Act and State Density Bonus Law and maintained that the project could not be denied absent evidence of a specific, unmitigable health or safety impact. Attorney Griswold stated that the record does not support such findings and contended that the project would not create significant traffic or safety impacts. Improvements including sidewalks, intersection modifications, and additional access were cited as enhancing existing conditions. Attorney Griswold further stated that no timely inconsistencies with applicable standards had been identified and urged Council to approve the Tentative Map as recommended by staff and the PTC. Public Comment: Heather C., a neighborhood resident, raised concerns regarding emergency vehicle access on Old Trace Road, particularly in relation to roadway width, on-street parking, and potential overflow parking associated with the new subdivision. Concerns regarding fire safety, evacuation routes, and emergency response access for existing residents were discussed. Heather C. requested clarification regarding any planned measures to address those issues and urged consideration of neighborhood impacts beyond the project site. Vice Mayor Stone indicated that the applicant waived their opportunity for rebuttal and returned the matter to the Council for discussion. Councilmember Burt acknowledged that state housing laws significantly limit local discretion over the project and stated that, while the proposal complies with applicable law, concerns remain regarding wildfire risk in areas adjacent to the Foothills and open space. Questions were raised regarding how wildfire hazards, emergency access, and evacuation considerations were evaluated by staff. Planner Kandikuppa explained that staff reviewed State Fire Marshal maps and determined that the project site is adjacent to, but not located within, a designated wildlife-urban interface or high-severity fire zone. It was noted that Fire Department comments were based in part on that designation. In response to questions regarding Fire Department authority, City Attorney Christopher Jensen explained that the Fire Department retains discretion to impose conditions related to public safety, including emergency access SUMMARY MINUTES Page 24 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 requirements. Attorney Jensen noted that conditions resulting in denial, reduced density, or project infeasibility must be supported by applicable objective standards and comply with the Housing Accountability Act. Attorney Jensen further explained that the Act contains a narrow exception allowing denial based on a specific, unmitigable public health or safety risk, subject to a high evidentiary burden. Councilmember Burt expressed interest in further evaluating wildfire risk policies and development standards applicable to areas near the Foothills and stated that broader policy questions regarding wildfire hazards should be considered separately from the current application. Councilmember Lauing referenced the PTC's unanimous recommendation and noted the Commission's concerns regarding evaluation of fire and safety issues beyond the project boundaries. Support was expressed for exploring broader neighborhood safety measures related to wildfire risk and emergency preparedness in the surrounding area. City Manager Ed Shikada indicated that the City implements programs such as weed abatement and fuel management in areas identified as having elevated fire risk. In response to a question regarding a recent fire near the area, City Manager Shikada clarified that the incident occurred in the Miranda neighborhood. Councilmember Lauing raised the neighbors' concerns regarding potential overflow parking on Old Trace Road and asked whether parking restrictions should be considered to preserve emergency vehicle access independent of the proposed project. Director Lait responded that the project highlights an opportunity to evaluate parking regulations on Old Trace Road and stated that staff would coordinate with the Office of Transportation and the Fire Department regarding any potential improvements. In response to questions regarding roadway width and emergency access, Director Lait stated that the proposal had been reviewed by the Fire Department and the Office of Transportation and that the private street meets the minimum standards necessary for emergency access. Planner Kandikuppa clarified that the overall street width, including landscaping and pedestrian facilities, is 30 feet, 6 inches, while the 20-foot vehicular right-of-way meets applicable fire access standards. Councilmember Lu expressed support for infill housing while acknowledging concerns regarding wildfire risk and emergency access. It was noted that the project does not meet the legal threshold for denial based on health and safety impacts. Questions were raised regarding whether parking restrictions alone would adequately address neighborhood concerns. Planner Kandikuppa explained that plans for sidewalks along Arastradero Road and Old Trace Road were removed after staff review because they would not connect to existing pedestrian infrastructure. A 4-foot-wide sidewalk is proposed within the development, serving the internal loop roadway. Councilmember Lu was supportive of considering sidewalks, setbacks, and related design standards as potential policy tools to improve emergency access and wildfire preparedness in similar areas, with interest in discussing those issues in a future policy setting. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims requested clarification regarding public comments asserting that Old Trace Road is narrower than depicted in the project plans. Planner Kandikuppa explained that the 30-foot measurement refers to the vehicular right-of-way, while the 40-foot SUMMARY MINUTES Page 25 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 measurement includes gutters and other portions of the overall right-of-way. Planner Kandikuppa indicated that references within the plan set use different measurements in different contexts and stated that the plans could be clarified to eliminate confusion. Councilmember Reckdahl sought more information regarding the width of Old Trace Road. Planner Kandikuppa confirmed that the curb-to-curb vehicular right-of-way is 30 feet wide and explained that the larger 40-foot dimension includes additional public access areas adjacent to the roadway. Attorney Jensen further clarified that the public easement is 40 feet wide, consisting of a 30-foot vehicular path and 5-foot public access areas on each side, which is not intended for vehicle travel. Councilmember Reckdahl requested clarification regarding the Housing Accountability Act's standard for unmitigable public health and safety risks. Attorney Jensen explained that risks are generally mitigated through Conditions of Approval and, in some cases, through the CEQA process. Because the project is exempt from CEQA, any mitigation would occur through Conditions of Approval, which can include compliance with applicable codes and standards as well as project-specific requirements. Councilmember Reckdahl was sympathetic to the neighbors' concerns and felt that the project would substantially change the neighborhood. While concerns were noted regarding wildfire risk, Councilmember Reckdahl stated that the project does not meet the legal standard necessary to support denial. Vice Mayor Stone expressed his shared concern regarding the project's potential impacts and stated support for pursuing available mitigation measures. It was reiterated that state housing laws limit local discretion over land use decisions and constrain the City's ability to address concerns raised about the project. Councilmember Burt sought clarification regarding whether the motion incorporated revisions contained in the supplemental report. Director Lait and City Clerk Mahealani Ah Yun clarified that the motion had been taken from the updated staff presentation and that the revisions identified in the supplemental report were incorporated into the motion. MOTION: Councilmember Lu moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Stone, to: 1. Consider the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with Assembly Bill 130 (Public Resources Code section 21080.66); and, 2. Approve the Tentative Map application pursuant to findings and subject to conditions of approval set forth in Attachment A (Draft Record of Land Use Action) of the supplementary report. MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1, Veenker absent SUMMARY MINUTES Page 26 of 26 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 05/18/2026 Vice Mayor Stone reiterated that Item 15 had been removed from the agenda and referred to the Economic Development ad hoc committee. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m.