Los Altos City Council
August 25, 2026

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 4
that the site is physically unsuitable and is not a basis for disapproval absent a finding authorized by Government Code section 65589.5.

5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

This finding cannot be made. The Project is located on a previously developed urban site and is statutorily exempt from environmental review under Public Resources Code section 21080.66, subject to implementation of the required conditions and environmental protections, including measures addressing cultural resources, hazardous materials, air quality, noise, and vibration.

6. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.

This finding cannot be made. The subdivision will not cause serious public health problems because the site is in an urbanized area served by existing infrastructure, including sewer, water, and electricity. Police and fire protection will continue to be provided by the Los Altos Police Department and Santa Clara County Fire Department.

7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

This finding cannot be made. No evidence in the record establishes that the subdivision will conflict with an easement acquired by the public at large. All existing and proposed easements affecting the property shall be shown on the final map and preserved, relocated, or otherwise addressed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and affected easement holders before recordation.

8. The Project is not exempt from environmental review.

This finding cannot be made. The Project is statutorily exempt under Public Resources Code section 21080.66 (AB 130) as a qualifying infill housing development. The 0.16-acre site is within city limits, previously developed, surrounded by urban uses, served by utilities, and satisfies the applicable land-use and minimum-density requirements when considered with the Housing Accountability Act’s Builder’s Remedy provisions. The site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area and would not require demolition of a listed historic resource.

Tribal consultation has been completed, and environmental site assessments have been prepared with required remediation to be completed before occupancy.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 5

EXHIBIT B

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VESTING TENTATIVE MAP APPLICATION NO. TM23-0002
349 FIRST STREET

PLANNING DIVISION

1. Approved Map: The subdivision shall be developed in substantial compliance with the approved Vesting Tentative Map and supporting plans for Application No. TM23-0002, except as modified by these conditions.

2. Expiration: This Vesting Tentative Map is valid for 24 months from the date of approval unless the map is extended in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the Los Altos Municipal Code.

3. Revisions to the Approved Map: Minor revisions that are found to be in substantial compliance with the approved Vesting Tentative Map may be approved by the Development Services Director and City Engineer. Revisions that are not in substantial compliance shall require further review and approval in accordance with applicable law.

4. Consistency with Design Review: The final map and subdivision improvements shall be consistent with the approved plans and applicable conditions for Design Review Application No. D23-0009. Approval of this Vesting Tentative Map does not modify the separate Design Review approval.

5. Environmental Protection Conditions: The Applicant shall comply with all conditions imposed through Design Review Application No. D23-0009 and all statutory conditions and environmental protections required for the Project’s exemption under Public Resources Code section 21080.66.

6. Notice of Right to Protest: The conditions of project approval set forth herein include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code section 66020(d)(1), these conditions constitute written notice of the amount of such fees and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. The 90-day period in which the Applicant may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions pursuant to Government Code section 66020(a) begins on the date of approval of this Project. Failure to file a timely protest complying with all requirements of section 66020 will legally bar a later challenge to such exactions.

7. Indemnity and Hold Harmless: The Applicant and owner shall indemnify, defend, protect, and hold the City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of the City in connection with the City’s defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court challenging any City action with respect to the Project. The City may withhold final maps or permits, including temporary or final occupancy permits, for failure to pay such costs and expenses.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 6

8. Affordable Housing Agreement: Before recordation of the final map, the Applicant shall execute and record an affordable housing agreement, in a form approved by the Development Services Director and City Attorney, restricting four units to lower-income households for at least the period required by Government Code section 65589.5, as applicable to the Project, and establishing the applicable income limits, affordable sales prices, occupancy requirements, monitoring, resale controls, and other provisions necessary to implement the Project’s affordability commitments.

ENGINEERING DIVISION

9. Payment of Fees: The Applicant shall pay all applicable subdivision, map-check, impact, connection, and development fees to the extent authorized by law and required by the Los Altos Municipal Code, at the time specified by the applicable ordinance or fee schedule.

10. Encroachment Permit: Before performing work within the public right-of-way, the Applicant shall obtain all required encroachment and excavation permits. Work within the public rightof-way shall conform to plans approved by the City Engineer.

11. Americans with Disabilities Act: All subdivision and public-right-of-way improvements shall comply with applicable accessibility requirements. Compliance shall be demonstrated on the final improvement and building permit plans.

12. Easements: All existing and proposed easements shall be shown on the final map. Before recordation, the Applicant shall dedicate public access, public utility, emergency access, drainage, or other easements shown on the approved Vesting Tentative Map or otherwise required by utility providers or the City Engineer to serve the subdivision.

13. Subdivision Improvement Agreement: Before recordation of the final map, the Applicant shall execute and return a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and provide any improvement security, insurance, and documentation required by the City Engineer for improvements not completed before recordation.

14. Final Map: The Applicant shall submit and record a final map in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, the Los Altos Municipal Code, the approved Vesting Tentative Map, and these conditions. Plats and legal descriptions shall be submitted for review by the City Land Surveyor, and the Applicant shall provide the required fee deposit for map review. No building permit shall be issued before the final map is recorded.

15. Condominium Map: The Applicant shall record the condominium map and all related documents required by the City Engineer before final occupancy.

16. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions: Before recordation of the final map, the Applicant shall submit proposed Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for review and approval by the Development Services Director, City Engineer, and City Attorney. The documents shall establish a homeowners’ association and provide for the perpetual maintenance, repair, and replacement of common areas, shared access and utility facilities, stormwater facilities, landscaping, mechanical automated parking systems, and other commonly owned improvements.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 7

17. Stormwater Management Plan: The Applicant shall submit a Stormwater Management Plan in compliance with the City’s Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit. The plan shall be reviewed and approved at the Applicant’s expense, and its recommendations shall be shown on the final improvement and building permit plans.

18. Stormwater Certification and Maintenance: Before final occupancy, the engineer who designed the stormwater management system shall inspect and certify that the facilities were installed in accordance with the approved design. The Applicant shall submit a maintenance agreement for review and approval by the City, and the approved agreement shall be recorded when required by the City Engineer.

19. Stormwater Filtration Systems: Stormwater filtration systems and devices shall be designed and maintained to avoid standing water and mosquito or insect infestation.

20. Sewer Lateral: Any proposed sewer lateral connection shall be approved by the City Engineer. Only one sewer lateral shall serve the parcel unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Existing unused sewer laterals shall be abandoned in accordance with City standards.

21. Public Improvements: The Applicant shall install or reconstruct the public improvements required for the subdivision along the First Street and Whitney Street frontages and the rear public alley, as shown on the approved civil and improvement plans and as required by the City Engineer. The improvements shall comply with applicable City standards and accessibility requirements.

FIRST STREET WHITNEY STREET 349 FIRST STREET LOT 1 #5#4 #3 #2 #1 3,056 SQFT

SECOND STREET

SECOND STREET
THIRD STREET VICINITY MAP SITE N PROJECT DATA ” SHEET INDEX LEGEND #XAll drawings and written material appearing herein constitute original, and unpublished work of the architect and may not be duplicated, used or disclosed without the written consent of the architect. OCTANE - 349 FIRST STREET 349 FIRST STREET, LOS ALTOS, CA 02/13/2026 C1.0 NORTH ATTACHMENT 2

PLANNING COMMISSION

STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: August 6, 2026
Subject: 349 First Street –Multi-Family Residential Project Prepared by: Sean Gallegos, Senior Planner
Initiated by: Emeric J. McDonald on behalf of Octane First Street, LLC, Applicant Attachments:

1. Draft Resolution – Design Review

2. Draft Resolution – Vesting Tentative Map

3. Project Plans

4. AB130 Statutory Exemption Memorandum
Recommendations

1. Adopt a Resolution approving Design Review (Application No. D23-0009) for construction of a six-story, 19-unit multiple-family residential development pursuant to the Housing Accountability Act’s Builder’s Remedy at 349 First Street, subject to the recommended findings and conditions of approval; and find the project is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.66 (Attachment 1).

2. Recommend the City Council adopt a Resolution approving a Vesting Tentative Map for condominium purposes (Application No. TM23-0002) for the creation of 19 condominium units at 349 First Street, subject to the recommended findings and conditions of approval; and find the project is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.66 (Attachment 2).

ATTACHMENT 3

Background
Property Description
The 0.16-acre project site is located at the northeast corner of First Street and Whitney Street and contains a two-story, approximately 3,000-square-foot commercial office building constructed in 1960 and an associated surface parking lot. First Street borders the site to the west, Whitney Street to the south, a public alley to the east, and commercial property to the north. The surrounding area consists of a mix of commercial and multifamily residential uses.

Figure 1: Location Map
Application History
The applicant submitted an SB 330 preliminary application on May 5, 2023, before the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) found the City’s Sixth Cycle Housing Element to be in substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law on September 6, 2023. Under the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330), submittal of a complete preliminary application establishes the application submittal date for purposes of determining the applicable fees, ordinances, policies, and development standards, provided the applicant submits the required formal development application within 180 days and the project remains substantially consistent with the preliminary application.

The applicant submitted the formal development application on September 5, 2023, within the required 180-day period, thereby preserving the May 5, 2023 preliminary application date for purposes of SB 330 and the Housing Accountability Act (HAA). Because the preliminary

application was submitted before HCD found the City’s Housing Element to be in substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law and the project would restrict four of the 19 units (approximately 21 percent of the total units) to lower-income households, the project qualifies as a Builder’s Remedy project under the HAA. This is the City’s only current Builder’s Remedy project.

Project Overview
The project proposes demolition of the existing commercial building and associated surface parking lot for the construction of a 19-unit, six-story residential condominium building. The unit mix consists of four studios, nine two-bedroom units, and six three-bedroom units. The four studios, with one located on each of Floors 2 through 5, would be restricted for sale to low-income households.

The primary pedestrian entrance, residential lobby, and mail area are located on the ground floor of the building and oriented towards First Street. Vehicular access is provided from Whitney Street to the ground-floor garage, which contains eight parking spaces and a vehicle lift connecting to the 15-space basement automated parking system. The ground floor also contains bicycle storage, utility areas, and an enclosed trash and recycling room.

The five upper residential floors contain
four units on floors two through five and
three units on floor six. An
approximately 2,283 square-foot
landscaped roof terrace provides a
resident amenity space including seating,
communal cooking and dining areas, and
planters. Rooftop mechanical equipment
is screened by parapets and architectural
elements. The project includes an
interior trash and recycling room and
separate waste, recycling, and compost
collection systems.

The contemporary design incorporates
light- and dark-gray fiber-cement panels,
wood-looking aluminum siding,
smooth stucco, dark-bronze-framed
windows, clear-glass balcony railings,
metal awnings, and trellis elements. Balconies, window groupings, material changes, and variations in wall plane articulate the elevations.

Ground-level landscaping includes low-water-use planting, planters, accent paving, vines, and five new Chinese Pistache street trees along Whitney Street. Two fruitless olive trees are proposed within the roof-level planters.

Figure 2: View from 1st Street

Analysis
Housing Accountability Act and Builder’s Remedy
The California Legislature adopted the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) to “significantly increase the approval and construction of new housing for all economic segments of California’s communities by meaningfully and effectively curbing the capability of local governments to deny, reduce the density for, or render infeasible housing development projects.” The “Builder’s Remedy” is a provision of the HAA that applies to qualifying housing development projects when the preliminary application is submitted at a time when the City’s Housing Element is not in substantial compliance with state Housing Element Law.

When it applies, the City may not disapprove the project, reduce its density, or impose conditions that would render the project infeasible based solely on inconsistency with the General Plan, zoning ordinance, or other local development standards, unless the City can make one of the limited findings authorized by Government Code Section 65589.5(d), including that the project would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety that cannot be satisfactorily mitigated or avoided without disapproving the project, reducing its density, or imposing the condition. In practical terms, the Builder’s Remedy allows an applicant to seek approval of a housing development project that exceeds or differs from otherwise applicable local standards, provided the project satisfies the HAA affordability requirement by restricting at least 20 percent of the total units to lower-income households or 100 percent of the units, excluding managers’ units, to moderate-income households. The City retains authority to process the application, conduct environmental and subdivision review, apply objective health and safety standards, and impose lawful conditions of approval. However, the City generally may not require the applicant to redesign the project to comply with local zoning or development standards that would otherwise apply to the site.

A specific adverse impact on public health or safety must be significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable based on objective written standards in effect when the application was deemed complete. General Plan, zoning, or development-standard inconsistencies do not constitute such an impact by themselves. For this project, inconsistency with the General Plan and zoning does not provide a basis for disapproval because the preliminary application was submitted before the City achieved Housing Element compliance. No other basis for disapproval under section 65589.5(d) has been identified.

As discussed in the Application History section of this report, the project’s preliminary application was submitted before HCD found the City’s Sixth Cycle Housing Element to be in substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law. Four of the project’s 19 units, or approximately 21 percent of the total units, would be restricted to lower-income households, exceeding the applicable 20 percent threshold.

The applicant is relying on the Builder’s Remedy for the project’s proposed deviations from otherwise applicable General Plan, zoning, or development-standards. The applicant is not requesting a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, or parking reduction under State Density Bonus Law. The project site is approximately 0.16 acre, resulting in a proposed density of approximately 117 dwelling units per acre. Neither the Downtown Commercial General Plan

designation or CD/R3 zoning standards in effect on the preliminary application date establish a maximum numerical residential density for the site. Accordingly, the proposed 19 units reflect the applicant’s project proposal and Builder’s Remedy request, rather than the application of a local maximum density standard or a State Density Bonus Law calculation.

General Plan Consistency
As discussed above, because the project qualifies under the Builder’s Remedy, the City may not disapprove the project or require redesign based solely on inconsistencies with otherwise applicable General Plan policies or standards, unless one of the limited findings authorized by Government Code section 65589.5(d) can be made. However, the project is generally consistent with the overall intent of the Downtown Commercial land use designation, which allows residential development and supports additional housing in the Downtown. The project would replace an existing commercial building and surface parking area with 19 residential condominium units, including four units restricted to low-income households. In doing so, the project would contribute toward the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation and further General Plan and Housing Element policies that encourage a broader range of housing types, increased housing production in infill locations, and the creation of affordable housing opportunities.

Zoning Consistency
The following tables identify zoning and objective design standards with which the project does not comply. The applicant identifies these as Builder’s Remedy inconsistencies and states that requiring compliance would render the project infeasible. The tables identify the applicable standards and policy topics and describe the specific way the project differs from them.

Code Section Standard Proposal Requirement
LAMC
§14.52.060.A Front yard 5 feet
10 feet, entirely landscaped,
with at least 60 percent
softscape
LAMC
§14.52.060.C
Rear yard
setback 2 feet, 4 inches 10 feet
LAMC
§14.52.060.C
Rear yard
landscaping
Landscaping is not provided
throughout the otherwise
required rear yard.

Landscape the entire
required 10-foot rear yard,
with at least 60 percent
softscape.

LAMC
§14.52.070
Parking
structure
landscaping
The parking structure does
not provide the otherwise
required five-foot
landscaped buffer along the
Whitney Street frontage and
rear alley.

Provide a minimum five-foot
landscape buffer with
layered planting and
screening between the
parking structure and the
Whitney Street frontage and
rear alley.

Code Section Standard Proposal Requirement
LAMC
§14.52.100.A Height
70 feet, 11½ inches to roof
sheathing and 84 feet, 11½
inches to parapet
35 feet, as shown on Sheet
AP0.00 as the standard in
effect when the preliminary
application was submitted
LAMC
§14.74.080
Residential
parking
23 resident parking spaces;
no dedicated visitor spaces
Provide 41 parking spaces,
consisting of 36 resident
spaces and five visitor
spaces.

LAMC
§14.74.200(3)
Truck loading
space size
The rear loading and trash
staging area does not
provide a conforming truck
loading space.

Provide a truck loading
space at least 10 feet wide by
25 feet long and demonstrate
on-site maneuvering without
backing into the alley.

Zoning Code Section Specific Noncompliance
LAMC §14.52.110(A)(1)(A–B)
Upper stories above 35 feet do not provide the required 10-foot step-backs from the ground-floor façades along
First Street and Whitney Street.

LAMC §14.52.110(A)(1)(C) The uppermost story is not embedded within a sloped roof form.

LAMC §14.52.110(A)(2)(a)
The street-facing façade exceeding 75 feet is not divided into primary bays no wider than 50 feet and secondary
bays defined by a recess at least 3 feet deep and 10 feet wide.

LAMC §14.52.110(A)(2)(b) The ground floor does not provide an entrance at least every 25 feet along the applicable street-facing façade.

LAMC §14.52.110(A)(3)
The street-facing façades do not fully express a distinct base, middle, and top using the prescribed architectural elements.

LAMC §14.52.110(A)(5)(b)
Windows within 10 feet of and oriented toward the
interior side setback do not consistently provide angled glazing, a minimum 42-inch sill, or opaque glazing.

LAMC §14.52.110(A)(6)(v)(c) Parapet segments on the third floor and above exceed 25 feet in length.

LAMC §14.52.110(B)(2)(a–b)
The First Street frontage does not provide the otherwise required forecourt and conforming pedestrian-scaled
entrance type.

Zoning Code Section Specific Noncompliance
LAMC §14.52.110(C)(1) The visible windows do not include sills with the required projection, outward slope, and drip edge.

LAMC §14.52.110(C)(2) Vinyl windows are proposed on façades visible from the public right-of-way.

LAMC §14.52.110(D)(2) Wood-look aluminum siding is proposed as a secondary cladding material.

LAMC §14.52.110(F)(2–3)
Paving adjacent to the sidewalk is not entirely textured, decorative, or permeable, and at least 75 percent of on-site paving is not identified as pervious or permeable.

LAMC §14.52.110(G)
The required front setback does not provide usable
ground-level open space at least 7 feet deep for at least 50 percent of the building’s frontage.

LAMC §14.52.110(H)(1–2)
The structured parking is neither lined with 30 feet of ground-floor nonresidential use nor located at least 4 feet below the adjacent sidewalk, and visible portions are not fully screened as prescribed.

LAMC §14.66.280(B)(1)
Exposed sidewall surfaces do not fully continue the frontfaçade material palette, cornices, wall-top projections, details, and moldings.

LAMC §14.66.280(C)(1)
The elevations do not provide a qualifying cornice,
projecting eave, scupper, gutter, downspout, or rain-chain system that directs rainwater away from exterior walls.

LAMC §14.66.280(C)(4)(A) Windows are not recessed at least 3 inches from the outer wall surface.

LAMC §14.66.280(D)(4)(A–C) The base, body, and parapet are not fully defined with the prescribed materials and parapet-cap treatment.

LAMC §14.66.280(E)
The façade color palette and color proportions do not
conform to the maximum four-color palette and prescribed primary, secondary, tertiary, and accent allocations.

LAMC §14.66.280(J)(4) Vegetation is not installed along all exposed east- and west-facing walls.

Affordable Housing
The project includes four low-income ownership units, which would be constructed concurrently with the market-rate units and made available for sale at the same time as the market-rate units, as conveyed on Sheet AP0.00 of the project plans. To ensure the long-term affordability and proper administration of these units, Condition No. 7 requires the applicant to execute and record an

affordable housing agreement. The agreement will establish the applicable income limits, affordable sales prices, buyer eligibility and occupancy requirements, affordability term, monitoring and reporting obligations, resale restrictions, and other controls necessary to ensure that the units remain available to eligible low-income households consistent with the project approvals and applicable law.

Parking and Transportation
The project provides 23 on-site resident parking spaces, including eight at-grade spaces and 15 spaces within a basement-level automated parking system. The at-grade parking includes one accessible van space. Under the City’s otherwise applicable parking requirements, the project would be required to provide 41 residential and guest parking spaces. As discussed above, the applicant is relying on the Builder’s Remedy for the proposed parking deviation. The project also includes 12 long-term and two short-term bicycle parking spaces, supporting bicycle access for residents and visitors.

For transportation review, the City requires preparation of a Local Transportation Analysis (LTA) for discretionary projects that would generate 50 or more net new daily vehicle trips. Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. prepared a trip generation analysis for the project and estimated that the proposed residential use would generate 43 net new daily vehicle trips compared with the existing office use on the site. Because the estimated net increase is below the City’s 50-trip threshold, the project was not required to prepare a full LTA.

Subdivision
The application includes a Vesting Tentative Map for condominium purposes to subdivide the proposed development into 19 residential condominium units, together with associated common areas and facilities for the development. Although the project qualifies under the Builder’s Remedy, the Vesting Tentative Map remains subject to the applicable findings, procedures, and requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the City’s subdivision regulations, except to the extent those requirements would conflict with the HAA or would be applied in a manner that disapproves the project, reduces its density, or renders the housing development project infeasible based on otherwise applicable local standards. The recommended Resolution includes the subdivision findings and conditions of approval necessary to ensure that the final map and related subdivision documents are prepared, completed, and recorded in accordance with the approved project, the Subdivision Map Act, and applicable City requirements.

Environmental Review
On June 30, 2025, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 130 (AB 130), which established a statutory California Environmental Quality Act exemption for qualifying housing development projects. The exemption became effective on June 30, 2025 and is codified in Public Resources Code Section 21080.66.

The City’s environmental consultant, David J. Powers & Associates, evaluated the project against the statutory requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21080.66 and concluded that the project qualifies for the AB 130 statutory exemption, subject to the recommended conditions of approval (see Attachment 4). The 0.16-acre project site is an infill site located within the

incorporated City, is previously developed, and is surrounded by existing urban uses. The project is also consistent with the General Plan and zoning as modified through the HAA and Builder’s Remedy provisions and is not located in an environmentally sensitive area identified in Public Resources Code Section 21080.66(a)(6). In addition, applicable tribal consultation has been completed, the required environmental site assessments have been prepared, and any required remediation will be completed in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements and project conditions.

Public Notification
A public meeting notice was mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site and published in the newspaper. The applicant also posted the site with a public notice sign in conformance with the Planning Division posting requirements.

At the time of preparation of this report, the Planning Division has not received comments on the proposed project.

Next Steps
The Planning Commission’s decision on the Design Review application is final unless appealed to the City Council. The Planning Commission’s recommendation on the Vesting Tentative Map will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at a separately noticed meeting.

City Council Staff Report
Meeting Date: August 25, 2026
Prepared By: Brittany Whitehill
Approved By: Gabe Engeland
Subject: Adoption of Resolution - Vesting Tentative Map at Sherwood and Acacia Avenue

COUNCIL PRIORITY AREA
Housing
General Government

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving a Vesting Tentative Map for condominium purposes (Application No. TM25-0002) for the creation of 33 condominium units at 966, 994, and 988 Sherwood Avenue, and 987, 994, and 1005 Acacia Avenue, subject to the recommended findings and conditions of approval; and find the project is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66 (Attachment 1)

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
The project is statutorily exempt from environmental review under Public Resources Code Section 21080.66 as a qualifying housing development project on an approximately 1.4-acre project site consistent with the applicable land-use requirements. The site is developed, served by utilities, surrounded by urban uses, satisfies the applicable minimum-density requirement, and is not located in an environmentally sensitive area identified in Section 21080.66(a)(6). The property is not a historic resource, tribal consultation has been completed, environmental site assessments prepared with any remediation to be completed as required, and the site is more than 500-feet from the nearest freeway.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
None.

BACKGROUND
Property Description
The approximately 1.4-acre project site consists of six non-contiguous lots located on both sides of Acacia Avenue. The project site consists of two portions. The western portion includes 994 Acacia Avenue, located on the west side of Acacia Avenue between Sherwood Avenue and the public alley. The eastern portion includes 987 and 1005 Acacia Avenue and 966, 988, and 994 Sherwood Avenue, and is generally bounded by Acacia Avenue, Sherwood Avenue, a private

roadway, and a public alley. Surrounding land uses include a mix of residential and commercial uses and existing land uses on the project site include:
• 987 Acacia Avenue: Vacant/abandoned single-family residence • 966 Sherwood Avenue: Vacant/abandoned single-family residence • 994 Acacia Avenue: One-story, approximately 1,800-square-foot office building (originally constructed as a single-family residence) with a detached garage • 1005 Acacia Avenue: Surface parking lot
• 988 Sherwood Avenue: Surface parking lot
• 994 Sherwood Avenue: Surface parking lot
Project Overview
The project consists of a Vesting Tentative Map for condominium purposes to subdivide the site into 33 condominium units and associated common areas (see Attachment 2). The approved development project associated with the map includes the construction of a 33-unit townhouse development and associated parking and site improvements.

Planning Commission Review
On August 6, 2026, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the Design Review and Vesting Tentative Map applications. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the Design Review and recommended approval of the Vesting Tentative Map application to the City Council. The Planning Commission Report is included as Attachment 3.

ANALYSIS
General Plan Consistency
The project is consistent with the General Plan’s Thoroughfare Commercial Land Use Designation, which supports higher-density residential uses and affordable housing. The designation is intended to promote walkability, support local businesses, and provide opportunities for housing near services and transit. By providing a multi-family residential development including affordable units utilizing State Density Bonus law, the project aligns with these objectives and contributes to a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented corridor and serves as an appropriate transition between El Camino Real and the lower density residential neighborhoods to the south. The project will contribute towards the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) obligation and is aligned with the City’s recently adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element by adding thirty-three (33) units to the City’s housing stock, including one (1) low-income unit and four (4) moderate income units. Portions of the project site are included as housing sites in the Housing Element and are being developed consistent with the stated density.

Subdivision
The Vesting Tentative Map implements the approved residential development by establishing the condominium ownership structure and common areas necessary for the 33-unit project. Staff reviewed the map for consistency with the approved site plan, applicable subdivision requirements, and the findings required under the Subdivision Map Act. As conditioned, the map provides for appropriate access, utility, and common-area arrangements for the development and does not create any subdivision-related conflicts with the General Plan,

Subdivision Ordinance, or applicable state law. The required findings are included in the Draft Resolution approving the Vesting Tentative Map (Attachment 1).

Housing Accountability Act (HAA)
The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) (Government Code Section 65589.5), establishes the state’s overarching policy that a local government may not deny, reduce the density of, or make infeasible housing development projects (projects resulting in more than two (2) housing units or resulting parcels) which includes subdivision of land that are consistent with objective local development standards. Before doing any of those things, local governments must make specified written findings based upon a preponderance of the evidence that a specific, adverse health or safety impact exists. The proposed project is protected under the HAA as it creates additional housing stock within the City of Los Altos.

Public Notification
A public meeting notice was mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site and published in the newspaper. The applicant also posted the site with a public notice sign in conformance with the Planning Division posting requirements. At the time of preparation of this report, the Planning Division has not received comments on the proposed Vesting Tentative Map.

DISCUSSION
See Analysis section.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Attachment 1 - Resolution

2. Attachment 2 - Vesting Tentative Map

3. Attachment 3 - Planning Commission Staff Report

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ALTOS

APPROVING A VESTING TENTATIVE MAP FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES FOR THE CREATION OF 33 CONDOMINIUM UNITS AT 966, 994, AND 988 SHERWOOD AVENUE, AND 987, 994, AND 1005 ACACIA AVENUE
WHEREAS, the applicant, Urbanscape Development, submitted an application for a Vesting Tentative Map (TM25-0002) to create thirty-three (33) residential condominium units on an approximately 1.4-acre project site located at 966, 988, and 994 Sherwood Avenue and 987, 994, and 1005 Acacia Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Project was processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and Los Altos Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, on August 6, 2026 the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing at which members of the public were afforded an opportunity to comment on the project, and at the conclusion of the meeting, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the Vesting Tentative Map; and
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2026 the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law and considered public testimony and evidence and recommendations presented by staff in connection with the Project; and
WHEREAS, the finding and conclusions made by the City Council in the Resolution are based upon the oral and written evidence presented as well as the entirety of the administrative record for the proposed Project, which is incorporated herein by this reference. The findings are not based on the information provided in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, approval of the project is statutorily exempt from environmental review under Public Resources Code Section 21080.66 as a qualifying housing project on an infill site consistent with the General Plan Thoroughfare Commercial (TC) designation and the applicable Commercial Neighborhood (CN) zoning district, as modified by the State Density Bonus Law. The site is developed, served by utilities, surrounded by urban uses, and not located in any environmentally sensitive area identified in Section 21080.66(a)(6). The property is not a historic resource, tribal consultation has been completed, environmental site assessments prepared with remediation to occur before occupancy, and the site is more than 500-feet from the nearest freeway; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Los Altos hereby approves the Vesting Tentative Map subject to the findings (Exhibit A) and Conditions of Approval (Exhibit B) attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.

ATTACHMENT 1

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 2
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a Resolution passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Los Altos at a meeting thereof on the ____ day of ______, 2026 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
___________________________
Sally Meadows, MAYOR
Attest:
_____________________________
Melissa Thurman, MMC, CITY CLERK

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 3

EXHIBIT A

FINDINGS
With regard to the Vesting Tentative Map (Application No. TM25-0002), the City Council finds the following in accordance with Chapter 4, Article 1, Section 66474 of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California:

A. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in 65451.

This finding cannot be made. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Los Altos General Plan, including both the Land Use Element and the Housing Element. The project site is designated Thoroughfare Commercial, which allows subdivision for the creation of thirtythree condominium units. The resulting condominium subdivision complies with the land use and density provisions of the General Plan, as modified by State Density Bonus Law, and is consistent with Housing Element policies that promote the development of new housing opportunities. The project site is not located within an area governed by an adopted specific plan.

B. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.

This Finding cannot be made. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the Los Altos General Plan, including the Land Use Element and the Housing Element. The project site is designated Thoroughfare Commercial, which allows subdivision to create thirty-three condominium units. The resulting lots comply with the land use and density standards established by the General Plan, as modified by State Density Bonus Law, and further support the Housing Element’s goals and policies to facilitate the development of housing opportunities. The project site is not located within an area subject to an adopted specific plan.

C. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.

This Finding cannot be made. The project site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development. The subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and complies with all applicable development standards of the applicable CN Zoning District, as modified by State Density Bonus Law. The site is located within an established, urbanized area of the City and is surrounded by similar commercial and residential uses. The size, configuration, and physical characteristics of the site support the proposed development type, and the site is adequately served by existing public infrastructure and services. No physical constraints have been identified that would preclude development of the proposed type at this location.

D. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

This Finding cannot be made. The project site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. The subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and complies with all

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 4
applicable development standards of the applicable CN Zoning District, as modified by State Density Bonus Law. The site is located within an urbanized area of the City that is served by existing public infrastructure and services and is surrounded by similar development patterns.

The size, configuration, and location of the site support the proposed density, and no physical constraints exist that would preclude development at the proposed density.

E. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

This Finding cannot be made. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not result in substantial environmental damage, nor will they substantially or avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The project site is located within a fully developed, urbanized area of the city and is not situated within or adjacent to any environmentally sensitive habitat areas, riparian corridors, wetlands, or wildlife movement corridors. The proposed subdivision involves development on an infill site with no known biological resources of concern, and the design and improvements are consistent with applicable city policies and development standards intended to avoid or minimize environmental impacts.

F. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.

This Finding cannot be made. The design of the subdivision will not cause serious public health problems because the site is located within an urban context and has access to existing services, including sewer, water, electricity, and public street circulation system. The site is, and will continue to be, served by the Los Altos Police Department and Santa Clara County Fire Department.

G. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

This Finding cannot be made. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. No other easements of record or court-established easements have been identified that would be adversely affected by the subdivision.

H. Approval of the project is statutorily exempt from environmental review under Public Resources Code Section 21080.66 as a qualifying housing project on an infill site consistent with the General Plan Thoroughfare Commercial (TC) designation and the applicable Commercial Neighborhood (CN) zoning district, as modified by the State Density Bonus Law. The site is developed, served by utilities, surrounded by urban uses, and not located in any environmentally sensitive area identified in Section 21080.66(a)(6). The property is not a historic resource, tribal consultation

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 5
has been completed, required environmental site assessments have been prepared with any remediation to be completed as required, and the site is more than 500-feet from the nearest freeway.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 6

EXHIBIT B

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

1. Approved Plans: The project shall be developed in substantial compliance with the design plans and support materials and technical reports approved as part of Los Altos planning application TM25-0002, except as modified by these conditions as specified below.

2. Expiration: This Permit is valid for a period of two years and will expire on August 25, 2028, unless prior to the date of expiration, the Final Map is recorded, or an extension is granted pursuant to the Los Altos Municipal Code.

3. Revisions to the Approved Project: Minor revisions to the approved plans which are found to be in substantial compliance with the approval may be approved by the Development Services Director and City Engineer.

4. Notice of Right to Protest: The conditions of project approval set forth herein include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), these conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a) began on the date of approval of this project. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions.

5. Indemnity and Hold Harmless: The applicant/owner agree to indemnify, defend, protect, and hold the City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of the City in connection with the City’s defense of its actions in any proceedings brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging any of the City’s action with respect to the applicant’s project. The City may withhold final maps and/or permits, including temporary or final occupancy permits, for failure to pay all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City in connection with the City's defense of its actions.

6. ROW Dedication: The applicant shall dedicate a 25’ radius ROW at the south corner (intersection of Sherwood Ave and Acacia Ave) of the property. A paved pedestrian refuge area shall be provided within the dedicated area.

7. Public Access Easement Dedication: The applicant shall dedicate public access easement of 2’ along the alley of APN 170-01-047 for the purpose of providing vehicle access.

8. Public Utility Dedication: The applicant shall dedicate public utility easements as required by the City and utility companies to serve the site.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 7

9. Subdivision Agreement: The applicant shall sign and return Subdivision Improvement Agreement to the City for records and recordation prior to the recordation of the final map.

10. New ADA Ramps and Crosswalks: The applicant shall provide new ADA ramps and crosswalk striping where applicable per the City standards at all of the following intersections:
a. One ADA ramp and striping on either side of the two proposed driveways on Acacia Ave.
b. One ADA ramp and striping across the Alley along Sherwood Ave. c. One ADA ramp at the alley where the sidewalk shall end on Acacia Ave. d. One ADA ramp at the private road where the sidewalk shall end on Acacia Ave. e. One ADA ramp on either side of the cluster of six driveways on Acacia Ave. f. Two ADA ramps located within the bulb out at the corner of Sherwood Ave and Acacia Ave to cross both Sherwood Ave and Acacia Ave.
g. Ensure that the curb ramps meet current ADA standards h. Ensure that the proper truncated domes are provided for City requirements per current City Specifications.

11. Maintenance Bond: A one-year, ten-percent maintenance bond shall be submitted upon acceptance of improvements in the public right-of-way.

12. Public Improvements: Install or reconstruct standard public improvements required for the project along the project frontages of Sherwood Ave and Acacia Ave subject to the city standards. These improvements shall be shown on the building permit plans and shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer or his designee prior to issuance of the building permit. These improvements include the following:
a. New sidewalk and vertical curb and gutter from property line to property line along the frontage of Acacia Ave and Sherwood Ave. and as required by the City Engineer. The sidewalk shall be 5’ in width. The 6-inch curb shown on the site plans shall not be part of the sidewalk. Please incorporate the design into the formal application package. b. Include tree wells on Sherwood Ave. The tree wells shall be a minimum of 9 square feet with a minimum 3-foot width, placed between two consecutive parallel parking stalls, per city of Los Altos Standard Detail SU-22. Please incorporate these improvements into the site plan.
c. The applicant shall install new street trees along the edge of the sidewalk fronting Sherwood Ave and Acacia Ave from property line to property line, as extensively as possible.
d. The applicant shall install street lights with 1’ candles along the frontage of Sherwood Ave and Acacia Ave as all public spaces as part of the development shall be lit. A photometric plan shall be included in the formal design review application package for staff to verify.
e. Ensure ADA compliance and pedestrian safety on the sidewalk along Acacia Ave with the six proposed driveways.
f. The applicant shall install traffic line striping and stop sign striping and signage. g. The applicant shall install micro-surfacing treatment up to half width of Sherwood Avenue, Acacia Avenue, and full width of the alley along the frontages of the project.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 8

13. Final Map Recordation: The applicant shall record the final map Prior to the issuance of the building permit. The applicant shall provide a sufficient fee retainer at the time of the first final map review to cover the City’s review costs.

14. Sewer Lateral: Any proposed sewer lateral connection shall be approved by the City Engineer. All existing unused sewer laterals shall be abandoned according to the City Standards, cut and cap 12” away from the main.

15. Transportation Permit: A Transportation Permit, per the requirements specified in California Vehicle Code Division 15, is required before any large equipment, materials or soil is transported or hauled to or from the construction site. The applicant shall pay the applicable fees before the transportation permit can be issued by the City Engineer.

16. Encroachment Permit: An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Division prior to doing any work within the public right-of-way including the street shoulder.

All work within the public street right-of-way shall be in compliance with the City’s Shoulder Paving Policy.

17. Cost Estimate and Performance Bonds: The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for the improvements in the public right-of-way and shall submit a 100 percent performance bond or cash deposit (to be held until acceptance of improvements) and a 50 percent labor and material bond (to be held 6 months after acceptance of improvements) for the work in the public right-ofway.

18. Public Utilities: The applicant shall contact electric, gas, communication, and water utility companies regarding the installation of new utility services to the site.

19. Americans with Disabilities Act: All improvements shall comply with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The latest edition of Caltrans ADA requirements shall apply to all improvements in the public right-of-way.

20. Undergrounding Utilities: The applicant shall underground the existing overhead utilities and remove the pole located on Acacia Avenue along parcel 170-01-047. The undergrounding of utilities shall be incorporated into the civil drawings of the building permit application.

21. Sewage Capacity Study: The applicant shall show sewer connection to the City sewer main and submit calculations showing that the City’s existing 8-inch sewer main will not exceed two-thirds full due to the additional sewage capacity from the proposed project. For any segment that is calculated to exceed two-thirds full for average daily flow or for any segment that the flow is surcharged in the main due to peak flow, the applicant shall upgrade the sewer line or pay a fair share contribution for the sewer upgrade to be approved by the City Engineer.

22. Sewer Easement: Provide a 10-foot Sewer Easement for the sanitary sewer main that runs through the private road.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 9

23. Ingress/Egress Agreement: Appropriate ingress/egress agreements shall be provided for all utilizing neighboring properties of the private road.

C
P5 C C
C T T C T 3
3 5 5S C
P5 C C
C T T C T 3
3 5 5S BKF ENGINEERS 150 CALIFORNIA STREET SUITE 600 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 (415) 930-7900 www.bkf.com
ATTACHMENT 2

PLANNING COMMISSION

STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: August 6, 2026
Subject: 33 Unit Multi-Family Residential Project – Sherwood and Acacia Avenue Prepared by: Brittany Whitehill, Senior Planner
Initiated by: Jia Li on behalf of Urbanscape Development, Applicant Attachments:

1. Draft Resolution – Design Review

2. Draft Resolution – Vesting Tentative Map

3. Project Plans

4. Density Bonus Report

5. Transportation Analysis

6. AB130 Statutory Exemption Memorandum
Recommendation

1. Adopt a Resolution approving Design Review (Application No. D25-0005) for the construction of a three-story, 33-unit townhome development utilizing State Density Bonus with waivers and concession at 966, 994, and 988 Sherwood Avenue, and 987, 994, and 1005 Acacia Avenue, per the recommended findings and conditions of approval; and find the project is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66 (Attachment 1).

2. Recommend the City Council adopt a Resolution approving a Vesting Tentative Map for condominium purposes (Application No. TM25-0002) for the creation of thirty-three (33) condominium units at 966, 994, and 988 Sherwood Avenue, and 987, 994, and 1005 Acacia Avenue, per the recommended findings and conditions of approval; and find the project is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66 (Attachment 2).

ATTACHMENT 3

Background
Property Description
The approximately 1.4-acre project site consists of six noncontiguous lots located on both sides of Acacia Avenue. The western portion of the site consists of 994 Acacia Avenue, located on the west side of Acacia Avenue between Sherwood Avenue and the public alley. The eastern portion includes 987 and 1005 Acacia Avenue, as well as 966, 988, and 994 Sherwood Avenue, generally bounded by Acacia Avenue, Sherwood Avenue, a private roadway, and a public alley, as shown on the location map below.

Figure 1 – Location Map

Surrounding land uses include a mix of residential and commercial uses and existing land uses on the project site include:
• 987 Acacia Avenue: Vacant/abandoned single-family residence • 966 Sherwood Avenue: Vacant/abandoned single-family residence • 994 Acacia Avenue: One-story, approximately 1,800-square-foot office building (originally constructed as a single-family residence) with a detached garage • 1005 Acacia Avenue: Surface parking lot
• 988 Sherwood Avenue: Surface parking lot
• 994 Sherwood Avenue: Surface parking lot
Preliminary Project Review
The applicant submitted an SB 330 Preliminary Application on May 28, 2025. Pursuant to the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330), submittal of a preliminary application allows an applicant to "freeze" applicable fees and development standards as of the preliminary application date, provided a formal application is submitted within 180 days and the project remains substantially consistent with the preliminary application. The applicant subsequently submitted a formal project application on September 15, 2025, which was within the required 180-day period. Because the formal application maintained a substantially consistent project scope, the applicable City standards are those in effect on May 28, 2025 (referred to in this staff report as the "Effective Zoning Standards").

Accordingly, the analysis in this staff report is based on the standards in effect as of that date.

The project site is currently designated Thoroughfare Commercial (TC) in the General Plan and zoned Commercial Thoroughfare (CT). At the time of the preliminary application submittal, the property was zoned Commercial Neighborhood (CN) under the Sherwood Specific Plan.

Subsequently, the City repealed the Sherwood Specific Plan and rezoned the site (and surrounding properties) from CN to CT. Accordingly, the project has been reviewed and evaluated for consistency with the former CN zoning regulations rather than under the current CT zoning designation.

Project Overview
The proposed project includes the demolition of all existing structures and site improvements and development of seven, three-story residential townhome buildings containing a total of 33 units and associated site improvements and landscaping. The proposed project mix consists of four (4) threebedroom units, twenty-seven (27) four-bedroom units, and two (2) five-bedroom units (see Attachment 3 – Project Plans).

Site and streetscape improvements include new sidewalks, street trees, landscaped areas, mail kiosk areas, and ADA-accessible curb ramps, enhancing pedestrian connectivity and the interface between the development and the surrounding public streets. Mechanical equipment will be located at grade and screened from public view through integrated fencing and landscaping. Trash and recycling carts will be stored within individual unit garages.

Each townhouse is served by a private one-or two-car garage. In addition, the project provides two surface guest parking spaces, resulting in a total of 64 on-site vehicle parking spaces. Class I (long -term) bicycle parking is provided in each unit’s garage for a total of 50 bicycle parking spaces and four (4) Class II (short-term) bicycle parking spaces are provided outdoors on the eastern portion of the site near Acacia Avenue, offering convenient short-term bicycle parking for residents and visitors.

The project features a neo-eclectic architectural design with articulated building forms, varied rooflines, and a mix of stucco, wood siding, and composite trim. Architectural elements such as material changes, wall plane offsets, balconies, canopies, and recessed entries reduce perceived massing and provide visual interest. Clearly defined individual entrances and residential-scale design features reinforce the appearance of individual units, while the varied materials and façade treatments ensure compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood.

The project proposes to remove 15 protected trees, including one tree in the public right-of-way, to accommodate the proposed building footprints, grading, circulation improvements, and site infrastructure improvements. The landscape plan includes replacement trees, along with additional landscaping throughout the site which will enhance site aesthetics and improve the overall pedestrian and residential environment. The proposed landscaping includes a mix of trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other plantings distributed throughout common areas, building frontages, walkways, and other open space areas. Together, these landscape improvements will help provide shade, soften the built environment, contribute to overall site greenery, enhance visual interest, and create a more attractive and cohesive development.

Figure 2 – Perspective from Sherwood Avenue

Analysis
General Plan Consistency
The project is consistent with the General Plan’s Thoroughfare Commercial Land Use Designation, which supports higher-density residential uses and affordable housing. The designation is intended to promote walkability, support local businesses, and provide opportunities for housing near services and transit. By providing a multi-family residential development including affordable units utilizing State Density Bonus law, the project aligns with these objectives and contributes to a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented corridor and serves as an appropriate transition between El Camino Real and the lower density residential neighborhoods to the south.

The project will contribute towards the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) obligation and is aligned with the City’s recently adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element by adding thirty-three (33) units to the City’s housing stock, including one (1) low-income unit and four (4) moderate income units. Portions of the project site are included as housing sites in the Housing Element and are being developed consistent with the stated density.

Zoning Consistency
The project complies with the Effective Zoning Standards of the CN Zoning District, except as modified by State Density Bonus law, as shown in the table below:

CN Zoning District Zoning Standards
Requirement Proposal Project Compliance
Nonresidential
floor area
20-33% of the floor
area shall be for nonresidential uses None proposed
Waiver requested;
additional information
provided under “Density
Bonus Request” section
Front Setback 0 Varies; 15’+ Project Complies
Side Setback 0 Varies; 4’+ Project Complies
Rear Setback 20’ Minimum 5’
Waiver requested;
additional information
provided under “Density
Bonus Request” section
Height 45’ and 4 stories 36.5’ and 3 stories Project Complies Floor Area Ratio No maximum 1.5 Project Complies
Vehicle and Bicycle Parking Zoning Standards
Vehicle Spaces
0 Spaces. Gov. Code
Section 65585., enacted
by AB 2097 eliminates
64 spaces, including
29 full-size garage
spaces, 33 compact
Project Complies

minimum parking
requirements for
projects within one-half
mile of a major transit
stop; the site is located
within this distance and
therefore qualifies for
the exemption.
garage spaces, and 2
surface spaces
Bicycle Spaces
Short-term (Class-II)
bicycle parking: 2
spaces
Long-term (Class-I)
bicycle parking: 50
spaces
Short-term (Class-II)
bicycle parking: 4
spaces
Long-term (Class-I)
bicycle parking: 50
spaces (in garages)
Project Complies
The project is subject to the Objective Design Control Standards in LAMC Sections 14.40.150 (CN District) and 14.66.280 (Multiple-Family and Mixed-Use Development). Except for the requested Density Bonus waivers discussed in the Density Bonus Request section of this report, the project complies with all applicable Objective Design Control Standards.

Additionally, the project complies with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Requirements by designating fifteen (15%) percent of total ownership units (5 out of 33 units) as affordable. It should also be noted that the affordable housing units provided to comply with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Requirements may also be used to satisfy the requirements of State Density Bonus Law.

Density Bonus Request
The applicant requests a Density Bonus pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915 and LAMC Chapter 14.28. Because the TC General Plan designation and CN zoning district do not establish a maximum residential density, the applicant prepared a Density Bonus Report (Attachment 4) and included Base Density Plan Sheets in the project plans demonstrating that the site could accommodate 31 dwelling units while complying with applicable development standards and required commercial floor area. The Density Bonus Report and Base Density Plan Sheets were reviewed by Planning staff and demonstrate that the site can accommodate the base density independent of the requested density bonus incentives and concessions.

The project includes 33 for-sale townhomes, including five affordable ownership units (four moderate-income and one low-income unit), representing approximately 16 percent of the base density. Because the project exceeds the 15 percent affordable ownership threshold required by LAMC Section 14.28.020(B)(2), it is eligible for a seven percent density bonus, which would allow up to three additional units above the 31-unit base density. However, the applicant has elected to utilize only two density bonus units, resulting in a total of 33 dwelling units. Staff finds the project is eligible for the requested density bonus and is also entitled to one concession and unlimited waivers necessary to physically accommodate the project at the permitted density.

Concession

Government Code Section 65915(d) requires the City to grant concessions that provide identifiable and actual cost reductions necessary to facilitate affordable housing. The applicant requests a concession to satisfy the affordable housing requirement with four three-bedroom units and one four-bedroom unit, rather than providing affordable units with a bedroom distribution proportional to the market-rate units. The Density Bonus Report demonstrates that requiring larger affordable units reduces project revenue due to restricted sales prices. Therefore, staff find that the requested concession provides an identifiable cost reduction that supports delivering the affordable units.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(l), the City may require sufficient information to evaluate a concession request but may not require additional financial studies beyond those authorized by State Density Bonus Law. No evidence has been presented that would support denial of the concession under the statutory findings in Section 65915(d)(1).

Waivers
Government Code Section 65915(e) further provides that a qualifying density bonus project is entitled to unlimited waivers of development standards when those standards would physically preclude construction of the project at the permitted density or with authorized concessions/incentives. The project requests the following waivers:

1. Commercial Space Requirement: LAMC Section 14.40.030 requires mixed-use projects to provide a minimum of 20 percent and a maximum of 33 percent nonresidential floor area. The applicant demonstrates that compliance would eliminate approximately 30 dwelling units.

2. Rear Setback: LAMC Section 14.40.100 requires a 20-foot rear setback. The applicant requests a five-foot setback and demonstrates that compliance would result in the loss of approximately seven dwelling units.

3. Upper-Story Step-back: LAMC Section 14.40.150 requires third stories to be stepped back five feet from the ground floor. The applicant proposes no third-floor step-back and demonstrates that compliance would reduce building area by approximately 2,200 square feet and eliminate up to 20 bedrooms.

4. Façade Articulation/Recess Requirement: LAMC Section 14.40.150(B)(3) requires building façades exceeding 75 feet in length to be divided into primary and secondary façade bays, including recesses at least three feet deep and ten feet wide. The applicant demonstrates that compliance would reduce building area by approximately 500 square feet and eliminate up to eight bedrooms.

5. Ground-Level Open Space Requirement: LAMC Section 14.40.150(F) requires ground-level open space within setbacks of 10 feet or greater. The applicant demonstrates that compliance would necessitate relocation of required site features and result in the loss of approximately 10 dwelling units.

6. Ground-Floor Height Requirement: LAMC Section 14.40.150(E) requires the ground floor to be 12 inches taller than upper floors. The applicant demonstrates that compliance would reduce upper-floor living area and result in the loss of approximately 16 dwelling units.

7. Window Recess Requirement: LAMC Section 14.66.280(C)(4) requires windows to be recessed a minimum of three inches from the exterior wall surface. The applicant estimates that compliance would reduce building area by approximately 1,500 square feet.

8. Primary Entrance Orientation Requirement: LAMC Section 14.14.150(C)(2)(b) requires primary entrances to face a public street. The applicant demonstrates that compliance would require an internal vehicular alley within Lot 1, resulting in the loss of at least three dwelling units.

9. Loading Zone Requirement: LAMC Section 14.75.130 requires loading facilities for housing developments containing 10 or more units. The applicant demonstrates that compliance would require removal of at least one dwelling unit.

10. Pedestrian-Scaled Entrance Features: LAMC Section 14.14.150(C)(2)(a) requires building entrances to incorporate pedestrian-scale features such as stoops, dooryards, galleries, arcades, or forecourts that meet the specific design standards and dimensional requirements established in the Municipal Code. While the project incorporates these features at some entrances, the applicant demonstrates that requiring them at every entrance within the 2-unit, 4-unit, and 7- unit buildings would reduce available living area.

Based on the Density Bonus Report and supporting project plans, staff find that compliance with the identified development standards would physically preclude construction of the project at the density authorized under Government Code Section 65915. The applicant has demonstrated that the standards would substantially reduce building area, bedroom count, or housing yield, thereby preventing realization of the approved density bonus. Staff further find that none of the requested waivers would result in a specific adverse impact on public health or safety, cause an unavoidable environmental impact, or result in the demolition of a historic resource. Accordingly, the project is entitled to the requested waivers pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(e).

Tree Removal and Replacement
The project site contains 30 onsite trees, of which 14 qualify as protected trees pursuant to LAMC Chapter 11.08, as well as one protected street tree adjacent to the site. The project proposes removal of the existing onsite trees and the adjacent street tree. Based on the arborist report prepared by Kielty Arborist Services and reviewed by a certified arborist, the proposed removal of the protected trees is supported by the criteria set forth in LAMC Chapter 11.08.100.

LAMC Section 11.08.100(A)(1): The tree is dead, in poor health (as defined in the most recent edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal), or has a risk rating of moderate, high, or extreme which cannot be mitigated through sound arboricultural practices to a low-risk rating.

The following trees exhibit decline, decay, structural deficiencies, drought stress, or other conditions affecting their long-term viability and meet the above criteria for removal:
• Tree No. 3 – Silver Dollar Gum (decay)
• Tree No. 4 – Chinese Elm (decline; leaning toward the street) • Tree No. 7 – Catalina Cherry (poor health and structure)

• Tree No. 12 – Catalina Cherry (poor health and structure) • Tree No. 19 – Catalina Cherry (poor structure with a cavity at the base) • Tree No. 20 – Redwood (severe drought stress and decline) • Tree No. 21 – Redwood (severe drought stress and decline) • Tree No. 22 – Deodar Cedar (history of limb loss)
LAMC Section 11.08.100(A)(5): Preservation of the tree will impede the use of real property and no reasonable or feasible alternative (as determined by the development services director) exists to preserve the tree in the current location.

The following trees conflict with the proposed building footprint, frontage improvements, circulation, or other required site improvements:
• Tree No. 2 – Coast Live Oak
• Tree No. 6 – Coast Live Oak
• Tree No. 14 – Coast Live Oak
• Tree No. 15 – Coast Live Oak (also exhibits trunk decay) • Tree No. 17 – Pepper Tree (also contains a cavity at the base) • Tree No. 30 – Sweet Bay
• Tree No. 31 (street tree) – California Pepper Tree
Tree No. 31 is located on the opposite side of the private road north of the project site. The tree is contained within a bulb-out and has grown into the adjacent roadway. Its removal is required to provide adequate fire truck access to the site in accordance with Santa Clara County Fire Department requirements.

Pursuant to Chapter 11.08 of the Municipal Code, removal of the 15 protected trees generates a replacement obligation equivalent to 29 new 24-inch box trees. The replacement requirement is based on the size and species of the removed trees and is calculated using the City's canopyreplacement standards, which require replacement with trees providing an equivalent mature canopy spread on a one-to-one basis, or with smaller-canopy trees at a two-to-one ratio. Because several of the trees proposed for removal have large canopies, the resulting replacement requirement exceeds the number of trees removed.

Staff and the applicant evaluated opportunities to maximize on-site tree replacement; however, planting areas are constrained by the building footprint, circulation improvements, grading, utility infrastructure, and required stormwater treatment facilities associated with this urban infill site.

Accordingly, the applicant proposes a mitigation strategy that includes 14 on-site replacement trees of varying canopy sizes, including two large-canopy London plane trees, with the remaining replacement obligation satisfied through payment of an in-lieu fee. Staff find the proposed tree removals satisfy the required findings under LAMC Section 11.08.100 and that the proposed combination of on-site replacement trees and in-lieu mitigation adequately addresses the project’s tree replacement requirements.

Subdivision

The project includes a Vesting Tentative Map for condominium purposes. The subdivision will divide the site into thirty-three (33) individual residential condominium units and two common lots, which will be bisected by Acacia Avenue. The subdivision conforms to the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, and provisions of the Subdivision Map Act as substantiated in the Draft Resolution recommending approval of the Vesting Tentative Map (Attachment 2).

Transportation Analysis
The City retains the existing level-of-service policy in the General Plan and continues to require development projects to conduct non-CEQA transportation analyses to evaluate and manage a project’s potential adverse effects on local roadways through operational improvements, as appropriate, during the project review and permitting phases. Under the adopted City policy, a Local Transportation Analysis (LTA) is required for projects that add 50 or more net new daily trips. The proposed project is estimated to generate 204 net new daily trips, including 14 net new AM peak hour trips and 15 net new PM peak hour trips. Accordingly, an LTA was prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. to evaluate the project in accordance with the City’s LTA requirements. Based on the project design and the detailed analysis conducted, the LTA determined that the project would not result in significant impacts on traffic operations under established traffic engineering standards, and no transportation improvements are required (Attachment 5) Legal Context
While not exhaustive, the following State laws and court cases are important to understanding the legal framework that applies to review of the proposed housing development project and should be considered by the Planning Commission in its decision-making.

Housing Accountability Act
The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) (Government Code Section 65589.5), establishes the state’s overarching policy that a local government may not deny, reduce the density of, or make infeasible housing development projects (projects resulting in more than two (2) housing units or resulting parcels) which includes subdivision of land that are consistent with objective local development standards. Before doing any of those things, local governments must make specified written findings based upon a preponderance of the evidence that a specific, adverse health or safety impact exists. Legislative intent language indicates that the conditions that would give rise to such a specific, adverse impact upon the public health and safety would occur infrequently.

The proposed project is protected under the HAA as it creates additional housing stock within the City of Los Altos. Additionally, the proposed project meets all applicable objective design standards, except as modified by Density Bonus law.

Bankers Hill 150 v. City of San Diego and Schreiber v. City of Los Angeles In Bankers Hill 150 v. City of San Diego, the court held that density bonus waivers must be granted where application of a development standard would physically preclude construction of the project at the permitted density, even if the project could theoretically be redesigned to comply with the

standard. Similarly, in Schreiber v. City of Los Angeles, the court confirmed that local agencies may not deny waivers or impose additional evidentiary burdens based on alternative design preferences.

These court cases confirm that a city may only refuse a waiver or reduction of development standards for the limited statutory reasons (specific adverse impacts on health/safety/environment, impacts on historic resources, or conflict with state/federal law) and not based on optional design considerations or the idea that the project could be redesigned without waivers. In other words, the City cannot deny a waiver simply because another design might avoid it, as that would impose an extra evidentiary/design burden not authorized under the State Density Bonus Law.

Environmental Review
On June 30, 2025, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 130 (AB 130), which included a statutory exemption for qualifying housing projects. AB 130 became effective on June 30, 2025, and is codified in the Public Resources Code Section 21080.66.

The City’s environmental consultant David J. Powers & Associates evaluated the project against statutory requirements and concludes that the project qualifies for exemption, subject to the project conditions of approval (see Attachment 6). The 1.4-acre project site is infill, surrounded by urban uses, previously developed, and contains no sensitive habitat or historic resources. The project is consistent with the General Plan and Commercial Neighborhood (CN) zoning as modified through the State Density Bonus Law and is not located in any environmentally sensitive area identified in PRC Section 21080.66(a)(6). Tribal consultation has been completed, environmental site assessments are prepared, and any required remediation will be completed.

Public Notification
A public meeting notice was mailed to property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the project site and published in the newspaper. The applicant also posted the site with a public notice sign in conformance with the Planning Division posting requirements.

At the time of preparation of this report, the Planning Division has not received comments on the proposed project.

Next Steps
The Planning Commission’s decision on the Design Review is final unless appealed. The Planning Commission’s recommendation regarding the Vesting Tentative Map application will be forwarded to Council for consideration at a future meeting and will be noticed separately.

City Council Staff Report
Meeting Date: August 25, 2026
Prepared By: Anthony Carnesecca
Approved By: Gabe Engeland
Subject: Provide Direction - Joint Volunteer Awards Committee

COUNCIL PRIORITY AREA
General Government

RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction on how the Joint Volunteer Awards Committee shall proceed moving forward

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
The resolution is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State Guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970.

FISCAL IMPACT

PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
February 10, 2026 & July 14, 2026

BACKGROUND
Per their Bylaws, "the Los Altos - Los Altos Hills Joint Volunteer Awards Committee is organized jointly by the City of Los Altos and the Town of Los Altos Hills as a non-profit effort to recognize volunteers who have benefited these two communities." The Committee was created in the early 1980s through a partnership between both the City of Los Altos Council and Town of Los Altos Hills Council. In 1983, this Committee first presented awards to volunteers.

In 2009, the City Council approved the new amended Bylaws by an action of the Los Altos City Council and then it was approved by the Town of Los Altos Hills Council.

On June 18, 2026, the Town of Los Altos Hills Council adopted a resolution that reclassifies the Los Altos - Los Altos Hills Joint Volunteer Awards Committee as a non-Brown Act advisory committee.

On July 14, 2026, the City of Los Altos Council adopted a resolution that reclassifies the Los Altos - Los Altos Hills Joint Volunteer Awards Committee as a non-Brown Act advisory committee.

This action means the Los Altos - Los Altos Hills Joint Volunteer Awards Committee is longer be required to follow Brown Act provisions so they could meet whenever would be convenient and retain more flexibility in their efforts to coordinate and plan their annual awards event.

Following Council action, the existing Brown Act committee structure would be dissolved, and the committee would be reconstituted as non-Brown Act advisory bodies. The members of the newly constituted committees would be responsible for establishing their own operating procedures and governance documents as appropriate.

ANALYSIS

DISCUSSION
After Council action that reclassified the Los Altos - Los Altos Hills Joint Volunteer Awards Committee as a non-Brown Act advisory committee, Mayor Meadows requested this item for a future discussion at their July 14, 2026 meeting with support from Vice Mayor Lang and Council member Weinberg.

The Los Altos representatives on the Joint Volunteer Awards Committee met at the end of July after this was agendized as a future agenda topic. At that meeting, the representatives discussed three options for the Committee moving forward:

1. Continue as-is with Los Altos Hills

2. Continue as a committee serving only Los Altos

3. Disband the group and begin again at some future point These representatives recommended that they continue as an appointed committee and support a Los Altos-only option for volunteer community service awards. This would mean that a Los Altos-only committee could propose a format for what areas the awards should include and what the event should look like. It could have a similar focus as has been happening, with the addition of our city recognizing retiring Los Altos Commissioners. Various processes and procedures clarifying the new focus will be identified and recommended by the Committee as one of their first items of discussion.

ATTACHMENTS
None

City of Los Altos 2026 Tentative Council Agenda Calendar All items and dates are tentative and subject to change unless a specific date has been noticed for a legally required Public Hearing.

Items may be added or removed from the shown date at any time and for any reason prior to the publication of the agenda.

September 8, 2026
Regular Meeting – 7:00 p.m.

CONSENT:
• Adoption of Resolution – Update of Bi-Annual Conflict of Interest Code DISCUSSION:
• BMR Unit Allocation Process
• Non-Profit and Community Funding Process
• Future Composition of Library Commissions
September 22, 2026
Regular Meeting – 7:00 p.m.

CONSENT:

DISCUSSION:
• Downtown One-Way Circulation
The remaining 2026 City Council agenda calendar items are pending and will be published at a later date.

PROGRAM SUB PROJECT INITIATION DATE HEU COMPLETION DATE STATUS Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Budget & Hire Planning
Technician December 31, 2022 COMPLETED
Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Amend ADU Ordinance
based upon HCD's letter 6 months or less COMPLETED
Program 6.G: Housing mobility
Allow more than one
JADU (at least two per
site)
with ADU Ordinance
Update COMPLETED
Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements.

Eliminate 3rd Party
Architectural Review February 28, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements.

Dismiss Design Review
Commission February 28, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 3.L: Eliminate the requirement of story poles. March 31, 2023 COMPLETED Program 2.E: Conduct annual ADU rental income surveys.

Budget & Hire Housing
Program 4.J: Facilitate alternate modes of transportation for Manager March 31, 2023 COMPLETED residents.

Adopt VMT Policy &
Transportation Demand June 30, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

RFP-Permit Ready ADU
Plans July 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Financial Analysis July 1, 2023 December 31, 2023 COMPLETED Program 3.D: Evaluate and adjust impact fees. August 1, 2023 December 31, 2024 COMPLETED Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Release RFP December 31, 2023 COMPLETED Program 6.C: Target housing development in highest
resource areas. Initial Outreach September 31, 2023 COMPLETED Program 6.D: Promote Housing Choice (Section 8) rental
assistance program. September 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 2.A: Continue to implement and enhance
inclusionary housing requirements. December 31, 2023 ONGOING Program 2.B: Establish an affordable housing in-lieu fee and commercial linkage fee. Housing in-lieu fee. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED Program 2.F: Water and Sewer Service Providers. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED Program 3.B: Modify building height in mixed-use zoning districts. Downtown Districts December 31, 2023 COMPLETED Program 3.E: Ensure that the density bonus ordinance
remains consistent with State law. December 31, 2023 ONGOING

Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements. Code Amendments December 31, 2023 COMPLETED Program 3.K: Standardize multimodal transportation
requirements.

Bicycle Storage and
Charging Regulations December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 3.K: Standardize multimodal transportation
requirements.

Remove CSC Review of
Housing Developments December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 4.C: Allow Low Barrier Navigation Centers
consistent with AB 101. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 4.D: Allow transitional and supportive housing
consistent with State law. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 4.E: Allow employee/farmworker housing
consistent with State law. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 4.F: Reasonably accommodate disabled persons’
housing needs. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 6.B: Maintain and expand an inventory of affordable housing funding sources. Prepare Inventory. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED Program 6.E: Prepare and distribute anti-displacement
information. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 1.A: Rezone for RHNA shortfall. January 31, 2024 COMPLETED Program 1.G: Rezone housing sites from previous Housing Elements. January 31, 2024 COMPLETED
Program 3.G: Amend Conditional Use Permits findings
applicable to housing developments. March 31, 2024 COMPLETED Program 3.I: Allow residential care facilities consistent with State law. January 31, 2024 COMPLETED
Program 3.J: Explicitly allow manufactured homes consistent with State law. January 31, 2024 COMPLETED
Program 3.F: Reduce Conditional Use Permit requirement for residential mixed-use and
multi-family. September 31, 2024 COMPLETED
Program 1.B: Facilitate higher density housing in the
Commercial Thoroughfare (CT) District. January 31, 2024 COMPLETED Program 1.C: Allow housing in the Office Administrative (OA) District. January 31, 2024 COMPLETED

Program 1.E: Update the Loyola Corners Specific Plan. January 31, 2024 COMPLETED Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Adopt-Permit Ready ADU
Plans December 31, 2024 COMPLETED
Program 3.A: Prepare a Downtown parking plan and update citywide parking requirements. Downtown Parking Plan December 31, 2024 COMPLETED Program 3.A: Prepare a Downtown parking plan and update citywide parking requirements.

Comprehensive Parking
Ordinance Update December 31, 2024 COMPLETED
Program 3.B: Modify building height in mixed-use zoning districts.

Commercial
Neighborhood (CN)
District December 31, 2024 COMPLETED
Program 3.C: Remove floor-to-area ratio (FAR) restriction at Rancho Shopping Center and
Woodland Plaza. December 31, 2024 COMPLETED
Program 3.M: Modify parking requirements for emergency
shelters consistent with State
law. December 31, 2024 COMPLETED
Program 2.B: Establish an affordable housing in-lieu fee and commercial linkage fee. Commercial linkage fee. December 31, 2025 COMPLETED Program 1.D: Allow housing on certain Public and
Community Facilities District sites and
facilitate housing on religious institution properties. December 31, 2025 IN-PROGRESS Program 6.G: Housing mobility
Allow housing on all
religious sites within the
City December 31, 2025 IN-PROGRESS
Program 1.F: Rezone Village Court parcel. December 31, 2025 COMPLETED Program 4.H: Provide additional density bonuses and
incentives for housing that accommodates special needs
groups. December 31, 2025 IN-PROGRESS
Program 4.I: Allow senior housing with extended care
facilities in multi-family and mixed-use zoning districts. December 31, 2025 IN-PROGRESS Program 1.I: Incentivize Downtown lot consolidation. July 31, 2026 Program 4.G: Assist seniors to maintain and rehabilitate their homes. July 31, 2026 ONGOING
Program 6.C: Target housing development in highest
resource areas. Follow-up Outreach September 31, 2026

Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Entitlement Review December 31, 2026 Program 3.N: Modify standards in the R3 zoning districts. December 31, 2026 COMPLETED Program 4.J: Facilitate alternate modes of transportation for residents.

Capital Improvement
Project for above head
pedestrian crossing
signals on San Antonio
Road near Downtown Los
Altos December 31, 2027
Program 5.F: Incentivize the creation of play areas for multifamily housing projects. December 31, 2027 Program 1.K: Participate in regional housing needs planning efforts. Ongoing ONGOING
Program 1.L: General Plan amendments. Ongoing ONGOING
Program 1.M: SB 9 implementation. Ongoing ONGOING
Program 1.N: Facilitate and monitor pipeline housing
projects. Ongoing ONGOING
Program 2.C: Assist in securing funding for affordable
housing projects. Ongoing ONGOING
Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Ongoing ONGOING
Program 2.E: Conduct annual ADU rental income surveys. Annual Survey Annually ONGOING Program 4.A: Support efforts to fund homeless services. Ongoing ONGOING Program 4.B: Continue to participate in local and regional forums for homelessness,
supportive, and transitional housing. Ongoing ONGOING
Program 5.A: Monitor condominium conversions. Ongoing ONGOING Program 5.B: Continue to administer the City’s affordable housing programs. Ongoing ONGOING
Program 5.C: Restrict commercial uses from displacing
residential neighborhoods. Ongoing ONGOING
Program 5.D: Implement voluntary code inspection program. Ongoing ONGOING Program 5.E: Help secure funding for housing rehabilitation and assistance programs. Ongoing ONGOING

Program 6.A: Assist residents with housing discrimination and landlord-tenant
complaints. Ongoing ONGOING
Program 6.B: Maintain and expand an inventory of affordable housing funding sources.

Inform, Evaluate
Apply/Submit Ongoing ONGOING
Program 6.F: Affirmatively market physically accessible units. Ongoing ONGOING Program 7.A: Promote energy and water conservation and
greenhouse gas reduction
through education and awareness campaigns. Ongoing ONGOING Program 7.B: Monitor and implement thresholds and
statutory requirements of climate change legislation. Ongoing ONGOING

DATE: 08/25/2026
TO: COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
SUBJECT: COUNCIL Q&A FOR AUGUST 25, 2026 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Agenda Item 1 (Minutes):
• Item 8: The paragraph describing the motion says “staff will execute a resolution. . . .” I think it this would be more accurate:

Motion by Meadows and Second by Weinberg to adopt a resolution approving change order #1 for the Hillview Outdoor Fitness Project in the amount of $4,669 to Greenfields Outdoor Fitness for design and apparatus modifications. The resolution included in the packet shall be executed if, and only if, , with a contingency that when staff determines the project is complete, after which staff the City Manager (or his designated representative) will execute a resolution accepting completion of and directing the Community Services Director to file a Notice of Completion for the Hillview Outdoor Fitness Project (CF-01041).

Answer: This language will be added to the redlined version of the minutes.

Agenda Item 2 (Acceptance of Treasurer’s Report):
• Given the recent LAFCO approval of annexation into the County Fire District, how many more payments should we anticipate to the district?
Answer: The City's annexation into the Fire District is set to be effective January 1, 2027. However, until the State Tax Board can effectuate the change and start shifting property tax to the District, the City will continue making payments to the District.

Staff anticipates the first transfer to occur no later than December 2027.

Agenda Item 3 (History Museum Roof Replacement):
• So that Council Members can be sure they are in compliance with Government Code Section 84308, please provide the Firm Name, Contact Name, Contact’s Role, and Location of for each of the three contractors that bid on this project.

Answer: Government Code section 84308 does not apply to this contract. Government Code section 84308 governs campaign contributions and is briefly summarized as follows:
o Contribution Limits: Appointed and local elected officials cannot accept, solicit, or direct campaign contributions over $500 from a party, participant, or agent while a

proceeding (like a permit, license, or non-competitive contract) is pending and for 12 months after a final decision.
o Disclosure Requirements: Officials must publicly disclose on the record if they received a contribution over $500 from a party or participant within the 12 months before the decision.
o Disqualification: An official must recuse themselves from voting or participating if they willfully and knowingly accepted a disqualifying contribution. • Is the cost of replacing the sheathing if it’s necessary already included in the bid and if it didn't need replacing the project would be under-budget or is the cost of the sheathing covered in the contingency?
Answer: The cost of replacing the sheathing is included in the bid as part of AddAlternate 1. If the sheathing does not need replacement, there will be a budget surplus for this project.
• The Discussion says three bids were received electronically and one was received physically, but goes on to say two bids were disqualified for physical submission type (and other considerations). Why the apparent mismatch?
Answer: Two bids were disqualified based on both submission type (physical versus electronic) and non-conformity with the project's general provisions. One of the bidders submitted a physical bid, and one of the three electronic bidders did not submit proper paperwork or a required physical bid bond. • Are physical bids commonly submitted? Is the City sufficiently clear that such bids will be deemed non responsive?
Answer: Physical bids are not very common; we expressly state during our mandatory pre-bid meetings to reinforce the RFB wording that only electronic bids will be considered.
• Were at least two responsive bids received, so the City would benefit from cost competition?
Answer: Yes.

Agenda Item 4 (Response to Grand Jury Reports):
• Response to pothole report:

o Response 3b: Penal Code section 933.05(b)(3) says that if the City needs further analysis to respond to a recommendation then the City must give, . . . an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.

The response as proposed does not meet these statutory requirements.

Answer: Staff proposes adding the following sentences to the end of the paragraph:
"The analysis of this recommendation will include what languages may need translation services within the City of Los Altos and how much such services will cost the City. This analysis will be completed by December 15, 2026." • While it is desirable that local municipalities like Los Altos maintain oversight of VTA, the length of board terms is often much shorter than the long-term timeframes associated with transit projects. Has Los Altos ever engaged in multiparty discussions about how this timeframe mismatch might be ameliorated?
Answer: Staff is not aware of any such discussions, however, it may be possible that a Council member representing the City at either VTA or the Group 2 may have participated in discussions on this topic.

Agenda Item 5 (Construction Contract for the Maintenance Yard EV Chargers Project):
• So that Council Members can be sure they are in compliance with Government Code Section 84308, please provide the Firm Name, Contact Name, Contact’s Role, and Location of for each of the seven contractors that bid on this project.

Answer: Government Code section 84308 does not apply to this contract. Government Code section 84308 governs campaign contributions and is briefly summarized as follows:
o Contribution Limits: Appointed and local elected officials cannot accept, solicit, or direct campaign contributions over $500 from a party, participant, or agent while a proceeding (like a permit, license, or non-competitive contract) is pending and for 12 months after a final decision.
o Disclosure Requirements: Officials must publicly disclose on the record if they received a contribution over $500 from a party or participant within the 12 months before the decision.

o Disqualification: An official must recuse themselves from voting or participating if they willfully and knowingly accepted a disqualifying contribution.
• Many competitive bids were received, which is good for advancing the City’s interests. Are there any learnings from this process that could be applied to future contracts to encourage multiple competitive bids?
Answer: Nothing that was performed during this bid process has differed from our typical. Making clear that only electronic submissions will be considered and that physical bid bonds will be required, while hosting mandatory site walks, has increased responsiveness of contractor bids. But this is our standard procedure and not a departure from the norm.

Agenda Item 7 (Lee Street):
• What is the evidence that Lee Street is named in honor of Conf. Gen. Robert E. Lee? Answer: Please see the answer, below.
• What records do we have that show the origin of the Lee Street name in particular, along with the others mentioned in the staff report (Lincoln, Sherman, Sheridan), were made in commemoration of Civil War figures, or is this something the Historical Commission would have the ability to confirm?
Answer: The historical evidence strongly indicates that Lee Street was named for Confederate General Robert E. Lee, although staff has not located a contemporaneous record that expressly states the namesake.

Lee Street is part of the original Los Altos townsite. City historical research shows that Map No. 2 of the Town of Los Altos was laid out during September and October 1907 as part of the Altos Land Company's development of the new community. Santa Clara County's historical survey-map index identifies the streets on that subdivision as Lincoln Avenue, Palm Avenue, Orange Avenue, University Avenue, Sherman Street, Washington Street, Lee Street, El Monte Avenue and Sheridan Street. Map No. 2 was subsequently recorded in 1908.

The grouping of names is the strongest evidence regarding Lee Street. Lincoln, Sherman and Sheridan readily correspond to President Abraham Lincoln and Union Generals William Tecumseh Sherman and Philip Sheridan. Lee appears alongside those names in the same planned subdivision. In that context, Robert E. Lee, commander of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia and the best-known Confederate military leader, is the most plausible namesake.

This is also consistent with historical research by the Los Altos History Museum. Its street-name project found that developers commonly used naming themes within individual Los Altos subdivisions and specifically identifies Lincoln as one of the City's streets named for a historical figure.

Staff has not identified a Lee among the documented Altos Land Company principals or surveyors involved in laying out the original townsite, nor has staff located another local person named Lee who has been connected to the selection of the street name.

Other historical figures named Lee are theoretically possible, but the placement of Lee with Lincoln, Sherman and Sheridan makes Robert E. Lee the substantially stronger interpretation.

Accordingly, the most accurate characterization is that the available historical evidence strongly supports the conclusion that Lee Street was named for Robert E.

Lee, but the conclusion is inferential rather than conclusively documented by an express dedication or other contemporaneous statement.

CITY OF LOS ALTOS

CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2026
7:00 p.m.
1 N. San Antonio Rd. ~ Los Altos, CA
Sally Meadows, Mayor
Larry Lang, Vice Mayor
Pete Dailey, Councilmember
Jonathan D. Weinberg, Councilmember
CALL MEETING TO ORDER – Sally Meadows, Mayor, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

ESTABLISH QUORUM – All Councilmembers were present.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Sally Meadows, Mayor, led the Pledge of Allegiance.

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
No reportable action was taken during the Closed Session meeting on July 14, 2026.

CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
There were no changes to the order of the agenda.

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
The following members of the public spoke during Public Comment:
 Jon Baer
 Alice Mansell

CONSENT CALENDAR
The following members of the public spoke during the Consent Calendar:
 Lynette Lee Eng (Item 5)
 Jon Baer (Item 5)
 Alice Mansell (Item 5)
Jonathan D. Weinberg, Councilmember, requested to pull Items 4 and 8 from the Consent Calendar for further discussion.

Sally Meadows, Mayor, moved Items 4 and 8 to the Discussion Items section of the agenda.

Motion by Lang and Second by Weinberg to approve the Consent Calendar, excluding Items 4 and 8. Motion carried unanimously by electronic vote.

1. Approval of Meeting Minutes – Draft Special and Regular Meeting of June 23, 2026

2. Designation of Voting Delegates- CalCities 2026 Annual Conference Designate by motion, Vice Mayor Lang to serve as Voting Delegate, and Councilmember Weinberg to serve as Alternate for the General Assembly of the Annual League of

City of Los Altos
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 14, 2026

California Cities (CalCities) Conference to be held on Friday, September 25, 2026 at the Anaheim Convention Center

3. Adoption of Resolution - Agreement with ADP Workforce Now Authorize the City Manager to execute amendment No. 1 to the ADP Workforce Now Comprehensive Services Agreement extending the agreement three (3) years with a term through April 25, 2029 and related implementation documents necessary to implement Workforce Manager services, in a form approved by the City Attorney and subject to available appropriations

4. Item 4 was moved to Discussion Items

5. Adoption of Resolution - Appropriation of Funds
Adopt a resolution appropriating funds as part of annexation into the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District

6. Adoption of Resolution - Amending Joint Volunteer Awards Committee Adopt a resolution reclassifying the Los Altos-Los Altos Hills Joint Volunteer Awards Committee as a non-Brown Act advisory committee

7. Adoption of Resolution - Amendment for Roadway Landscape Maintenance Authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the agreement with Del Conte's Landscaping in the amount not to exceed $277,053 annually for city median and roadway shoulder maintenance

8. Item 8 was moved to Discussion Items

9. Adoption of Resolution – Agreement for Consultant Services Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into an agreement in the amount not to exceed $160,000 with Cumming Group for temporary project management services to assist in completing CIMMP projects in fiscal year 2026/27

10. Adoption of Resolution – SB1 Project List
Adopt a resolution that identifies a list of projects that will be funded by Senate Bill 1 in the FY 26-27 budget and find the Council’s action exempt from review under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), and that one of the circumstances in the CEQA Guideline

11. Adoption of Resolution - Weed Abatement Assessment Report Adopt a resolution confirming the report and authorizing collection of the assessment charges

City of Los Altos
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 14, 2026

DISCUSSION ITEMS
Items 4 and 8 were moved from the Consent Calendar:

4. Contract Renewal - Orchard Maintenance Agreement
Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract renewal, totaling $75,000 annually, for orchard maintenance with the Los Altos History Museum The City Council asked clarifying questions regarding the item.

The following members of the public spoke regarding the item:
 Jon Baer
 Alice Mansell
Motion by Dailey and Second by Weinberg to authorize the City Manager to execute the contract renewal, totaling $75,000, for orchard maintenance with the Los Altos History Museum, and to begin evaluation of changing the contracting dynamic and have the contract term be no more than one year. Motion carried unanimously by roll call vote.

Due to a technical issue, the City Council took a roll call vote on the item.

8. Adoption of Resolution - Change Order Approval and Project Acceptance Adopt a resolution:
 Approving Change Order #1 for the Hillview Outdoor Fitness Project in the amount of $4,669 to Greenfields Outdoor Fitness for design and apparatus modifications.
 Accepting completion of and directing the Community Services Director to file a Notice of Completion for the Hillview Outdoor Fitness Project (CF-01041) The City Council asked clarifying questions regarding the item.

There were no public comments regarding the item.

Motion by Meadows and Second by Weinberg to adopt a resolution approving change order #1 for the Hillview Outdoor Fitness Project in the amount of $4,669 to Greenfields Outdoor Fitness for design and apparatus modifications. The resolution included in the packet shall be executed if, and only if, staff determines the project is complete, after which the City Manager (or his designated representative) will direct the Community Services Director to file a Notice of Completion for the Hillview Outdoor Fitness Project (CF-01041).

Motion by Meadows and Second by Weinberg to adopt a resolution approving change order #1 for the Hillview Outdoor Fitness Project in the amount of $4,669 to Greenfields Outdoor Fitness for design and apparatus modifications, with a contingency that when staff determines the project is complete, staff will execute a resolution accepting completion of and directing the Community

City of Los Altos
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 14, 2026

Services Director to file a Notice of Completion for the Hillview Outdoor Fitness Project (CF01041). Motion carried unanimously by electronic vote.

12. Receive Report - Draft General Plan Vision and Guiding Principles Receive and provide feedback on the Draft General Plan Vision and Guiding Principles Andrew Hill, Dyett & Bhatia Representative and Brittany Whitehill, Senior Planner, presented the report.

The following members of the public spoke regarding the item:
 Cindy Andrews
 Alice Mansell
 Jon Baer
 Eric Steinle
 JoAnne Estill
 Pierre Bedard
Informational item only. No motion taken.

COUNCIL/STAFF REPORTS AND DIRECTIONS ON FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS  Sally Meadows, Mayor – Requested a future agenda item:
o Discussion item regarding the Joint Volunteer Community Service Awards Committee (Supported unanimously)
ADJOURNMENT – The regular meeting adjourned at 10:06 p.m.

The meeting minutes were prepared by Melissa Thurman, City Clerk, for approval at the regular meeting on August 25, 2026.
_________________________________ __________________________________ Sally Meadows Melissa Thurman, MMC
Mayor City Clerk
The July 14, 2026, City Council meeting recording may be viewed via the following external website: https://www.youtube.com/@CityofLosAltosCA
The City of Los Altos does not own or operate YouTube. The video referenced in these minutes was live at the time the minutes were published.