7 6
1 2
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: ACTION ITEMS
Lead Department: Planning and Development Services
Meeting Date: October 22, 2025
Report #:2506-4861
TITLE
Update and Direction to Staff on the Downtown Housing Plan and Implementation of Senate Bill 79. CEQA Status: Exempt Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15262.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council provide direction to staff on the next steps for the Downtown Housing Plan, including citywide implementation of Senate Bill (SB) 79.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report provides an update on the Downtown Housing Plan and discusses the implications of SB 79, which mandates increased residential density, height, and floor area within one-half mile of major transit stations, including Downtown Palo Alto.
The Downtown Housing Plan, initiated in 2024, is intended to expand housing opportunities in the downtown core while maintaining community character. Public outreach shows broad support for additional housing near transit and jobs, though most projects are unlikely to proceed under current market conditions due to high development costs, small parcel sizes, and stronger financial performance of office uses.
SB 79, effective July 1, 2026, establishes new state minimums for building height, residential density, and floor area near transit. Cities may prepare a state-approved Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Alternative Plan to guide how and where this new housing capacity is applied.
Staff seeks City Council direction on completing the Downtown Housing Plan; a proposal to refocus staff and consultant efforts on an SB 79 compliant TOD Alternative Plan, and potentially formation of a Council ad hoc to support staff planning efforts given the limited time available for Alternative Plan development.
7 6
1 2
BACKGROUND
This report provides an update on the Downtown Housing Plan and frames a discussion to inform the City Council’s deliberation and direction to staff related to the Downtown Housing Plan and potentially additional initiatives to respond to the recent signing of SB 79.
Downtown Housing Plan: Initiation and Purpose
The City initiated the Downtown Housing Plan in February 2024.1 This followed City action to designate the University Ave / Downtown Area as a Priority Development Area (PDA) on January 13, 2020.2 This designation, later approved by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), encompasses approximately 206 acres within a half mile radius of the Palo Alto Caltrain Station and generally includes downtown University Avenue, the South of Forest Area Coordinated Area Plan and the Stanford Shopping Center. PDAs as envisioned by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) are established to guide growth around transit and connect housing to jobs and areas of interest.
The Downtown Housing Plan is a focused planning initiative intended to facilitate the development of new housing in Palo Alto’s downtown core, with an emphasis on accelerating housing production. The Downtown Housing Plan seeks to create a comprehensive framework that supports increased residential capacity while maintaining compatibility with existing urban form, infrastructure, and community character. Through policy development, land use analysis, and community engagement, the Downtown Housing Plan will identify strategic opportunities for housing growth, establish updated development standards, and evaluate necessary infrastructure and mobility improvements to support a more livable and inclusive downtown.
The ultimate goal is to advance the City’s housing production targets, enhance economic vitality, and promote a vibrant, mixed-use downtown neighborhood.
This effort is supported by a grant from the MTC and allocation from the City’s General Fund.
Downtown Housing Plan: Outreach and Reports
The Community Advisory Group (CAG), a diverse collective of stakeholders, plays a key role in the Downtown Housing Plan process by offering valuable insights and guidance. Comprising of local business owners, nonprofit representatives, housing developers, residents, and property owners, the CAG’s input informs the planning process and is intended to reflect community needs and fosters broad support.
1 https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/api/compilemeetingattachmenthistory/historyattachment/?historyId=454870f4- 764a-4aef-a47a-85ea3f582fbb
2 Attachment E: Draft Resolution of Proposed Priority Conservation Area Designation of Foothills and Baylands 7 6
1 2
In the project’s initial phase, extensive outreach was conducted to engage community members. Key activities included:
Online Presence: A dedicated project website for updates and feedback. Stakeholder Interviews: Confidential one-on-one interviews with key stakeholders to gather interests and concerns.
Public Events: A Community Open House, a Community Workshop, pop-up booths at local events, and meetings with property owners.
Surveys: Community surveys to capture broader resident feedback.
These efforts attempt to build a transparent and inclusive engagement process with the intention of cultivating support and alignment with the community’s vision for downtown Palo Alto. The summary of the process and the feedback received is available on the project webpage.5
Community Assessment Report
In June 2025, staff published the Community Assessment Report for the Plan area.6 In summary, the document provides an overview of current conditions and key challenges affecting new housing development in downtown Palo Alto. It finds that very little housing has been built in the downtown area in the past decade, largely due to challenges such as small parcel sizes, high land costs, a 50-foot building height limit, and requirements for ground-floor retail and parking.
These factors make most housing projects unlikely to build under current regulations and market conditions. The report also identifies clear opportunities in this area due to the downtown’s proximity to transit, services, and jobs, making it well-suited for smaller housing types, including units for seniors and essential workers. Community input shows support for more housing, especially if it is well-designed and in alignment with downtown’s character.
Housing Development Economic Feasibility Analysis
As part of the Downtown Housing Plan, an economic feasibility analysis was prepared to help inform future policy discussions in support of greater housing production. The feasibility analysis assessed a range of development prototypes designed to represent typical site conditions and housing product types in the downtown area. These prototypes, which included variations of mixed-use buildings with retail, office, and residential components, as well as mid- rise residential buildings, were analyzed to understand the financial factors influencing housing 5 Downtown Housing Plan – City of Palo Alto, CA
6 https://www.paloalto.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/long-range-planning/area- plans-and-studies/downtown-housing/june-16-item-b-staff-report.pdf 7 6
1 2
production and identify policy opportunities for increasing the likelihood of development. The analysis focused on key factors such as construction costs, potential revenues, and the impact of City fees and requirements on overall project feasibility. This analysis is available on Attachment A. The report findings are summarized below.
Key Findings
Current Feasibility: Under current market conditions, the development prototypes analyzed do not generally meet financial feasibility thresholds. Ownership vs. Rental: Smaller ownership prototypes (condominiums) outperform rental prototypes due to a high local price premium for luxury ownership housing. Mid-Rise Rental Projects: Mid-rise rental prototypes are unlikely to be built under current conditions, but their feasibility can change quickly with shifts in development conditions.
Office vs. Residential: Office uses continue to outperform residential uses financially in the Plan Area, although office performance is also constrained by broader development challenges.
Parking Costs: Parking spaces add substantial costs to housing development, ranging from $25,000 to $123,000 per housing unit, depending on the parking format. Impact Fees: Removal of affordable housing requirements has a minor positive impact on financial feasibility. The removal of all City fees (including impact and permitting fees) results in a substantial increase in the financial feasibility performance of the prototypes.9
Challenges:
Broader Market Trends: Construction cost inflation and increased thresholds for return on investment (related to higher interest rates) pose challenges to housing development throughout the Bay Area.
Site Constraints: Difficulty providing market-required parking and efficiently using smaller sites. Lot consolidation has historically been rare in Palo Alto, underscoring the need for development incentives or other tools to encourage parcel assembly. 9 NOTE: The feasibility analysis and this report do not recommend eliminating fees as these serve other important City service and infrastructure needs. However, the analysis suggests as part of a future policy discussion some re- calibration to balance impact fees with housing production. This work is soon to get underway as part of the Development Impact Fee update with results expected to be shared with Council in 2026. 7 6
1 2
Office Competition: The strong desirability of office uses in the Downtown Housing Plan area creates competitive challenges for housing development, as property owners may prefer to maintain high-value office uses.
Fees: The City's affordable housing requirements and other fees are not the main reason the prototypes are unlikely to develop under current conditions, but the requirements and fees create an additional cost challenge that reduces the likely timing and pace of housing delivery as development conditions improve.
Opportunities to Support Housing Production
Adjust Zoning and Land Use Requirements: Increase height and FAR (Floor Area Ratio) to support higher-density housing, allow a greater variety of housing product types, provide flexibility in accommodating parking, and increase the opportunity to produce housing under different market cycles.
Link Office Production with Housing Production and Encourage Site Assembly: Create requirements or incentives, such as an office transfer development rights program, that link office production with housing production and encourage site assembly; modify restrictive zoning that limits existing non-conforming office from redeveloping. Reduce City Impact Fees for Housing: Consider reducing or waiving impact fees for housing to improve financial feasibility, while also weighing the importance of these fees in funding critical City infrastructure needs.
Flexible Affordable Housing Requirements: Consider greater flexibility in meeting affordable housing requirements, especially for ownership housing products (e.g., allowing fees in lieu of on-site units).
Downtown Housing Plan: Next Steps
Prior to the adoption of Senate Bill 79, staff and the consultant team were preparing for a community workshop event to refine input on where within the Downtown Housing Plan area greater development potential, such as increased building height and floor area, should be allowed, and where the existing downtown character should be preserved. The project team assigned subareas to the project boundary to gather feedback on where to increase height and floor area. While there was no clear consensus, there was general support for increased height and floor area in Subarea A, closest to the Caltrain station. Opinions regarding future development along Lytton and Hamilton Avenues in Subareas C and D, respectively, and along University Avenue in Subarea B, were mixed between maintaining existing standards and allowing varying levels of increased height (Attachment B). Figure 1 depicts the subareas. 7 6
1 2
The community
workshop and related
outreach were also
intended to address
concerns about
potential impacts on
adjacent residential
neighborhoods and to
evaluate properties
unlikely to redevelop
due to factors such as
historic designation,
recent construction, or
continued office use.
In addition, the project team sought to begin discussion about revisiting City policies that currently discourage the redevelopment of noncomplying commercial spaces . As highlighted in the Economic Feasibility Analysis, staff began exploring concepts that would allow noncomplying office floor area to be rebuilt or transferred to another site when paired with new housing. The goal is to encourage additional residential development, either as part of a mixed-use project that includes office space, or as a standalone housing project where the existing office use is relocated and its development potential combined with another commercial site.
These and other factors continue to warrant evaluation and Council and community input as work progresses on the Downtown Housing Plan. However, the recent passage of SB 79 alters the planning process significantly. Rather than relying on a community-driven engagement effort, SB 79 effectively establishes the location, height, and density of housing development not only within the Downtown Housing Plan area but also across much of the broader Priority Development Area.
The law allows jurisdictions to adopt a TOD Alternative Plan, subject to approval by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). This Plan must ensure that local agencies maintain at least the same overall zoned capacity as required by the state for total housing units and residential floor area across all designated transit-oriented development zones.
Figure 1: Downtown Housing Plan Sub Areas
7 6
1 2
Key provisions of an TOD Alternative Plan include maintaining at least 50 percent of the statutory density for individual residential sites, except in high-risk areas such as very high fire hazard zones, sites vulnerable to sea level rise, or those with historic designations. Additionally, no single site may accommodate more than 200 percent of the capacity established by state law.
This framework provides local governments limited flexibility to manage development while remaining consistent with the state’s overall housing policy objectives. Additional context and specific requirements of SB 79 are provided below.
Senate Bill 79 (2025-2026)
The legislature approved the bill on September 12, 2025 and it was signed into law by Governor Newsom on October 10, 2025; the law becomes effective on July 1, 2026. The stated intent of SB 79 is to increase the supply of affordable housing, reduce greenhouse gas emissions through reduced vehicle miles traveled, and enhance the efficiency of public transit systems. A copy of the legislation is available online.11
The primary effect of SB 79 is the mandated upzoning of land located within proximity to rail stations and rapid bus corridors to encourage transit-oriented development. The degree of upzoning depends on the classification of the transit stop and the distance from the station, as measured from the pedestrian access points to the stations. The location of “pedestrian access points” requires additional clarity from MTC; the exhibits included with this report are for reference and are subject to change.
Classification of Transit Stops: SB 79 designates transit stops as Tier 1 or Tier 2, with corresponding development standards applicable to areas within one-half mile of a designated stop. The Palo Alto Station, California Avenue Station, and San Antonio Station are all classified as Tier 1 stops (Attachment C). (Gov. Code § 65912.156) Applicable Development Standards for Tier 1 Stops (Downtown Palo Alto, California Avenue, and San Antonio Caltrain Stops) (Gov. Code § 65912.157, subd. (a)):
Within one-quarter mile, local governments must allow:
oBuilding height of 75 feet.
oResidential density of 120 dwelling units per acre (average unit size 1,750 square feet).
oResidential floor area ratio (FAR) of 3.5.
oIf site is “adjacent” to the transit stop (within 200 feet of a pedestrian access point) it is allowed an additional 20 feet in allowable height, an additional 40 11 SB 79 Legislative Text: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB79 7 6
1 2
dwelling units per acre in allowable density, and an increase of 1.0 in allowable residential FAR.
Between one-quarter and one-half mile, local governments must allow:
oBuilding height of 65 feet.
oResidential density of 100 dwelling units per acre (average unit size 1,750 square feet).
oResidential FAR of 3.0.
Additional Provisions of Interest:
A project under SB 79 must include at least five dwelling units and meet the greater of a minimum of at least 30 dwelling units per acre or the minimum density required under local zoning.
Inclusionary Housing Requirements (Gov. Code § 65912.157, subd. (c) and (i)) oSB 79 requires each transit-oriented development to satisfy one of the following minimum affordability standards:
7% of units affordable to extremely low-income households; 10% of units affordable to very low-income households; or 13% of units affordable to lower-income households.
oWhere a local jurisdiction requires a higher percentage of inclusionary units, the local requirement supersedes SB 79.
Density Bonus Eligibility (Gov. Code § 65912.157, subd. (d)) oA transit-oriented development shall remain eligible for density bonuses, incentives, concessions, waivers, or reductions in development standards pursuant to Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus Law) or a local density bonus program.
oFor purposes of calculating density bonuses, the base density shall be the minimum density mandated by SB 79.
oIf the proposed building height for a project exceeds the local limit, the local jurisdiction need not provide a waiver of height beyond the height mandated by SB 79.
Relationship to CEQA and Ministerial Approvals (Gov. Code §§ 65912.157, subd. (l), and 65912.159)
oSB 79 does not modify the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, individual projects may still take advantage of various CEQA streamlining provisions and exemptions.
7 6
1 2
oSB 79 does not establish a new ministerial approval process. However, projects qualifying under existing state streamlining statutes (SB 35 and SB 423) may be eligible for ministerial approval, subject to compliance with those statutes.
Affordable housing requirements for such projects are not contingent upon the jurisdiction’s RHNA compliance status.
TOD Alternative Plan Provision: As noted above, a local jurisdiction may elect to adopt a local TOD Alternative Plan in lieu of implementing SB 79 directly. Requirements for the TOD Alternative Plan include (Gov. Code § 65812.161):
Maintains at least the same net zoned capacity (both total units and residential FAR) as prescribed by SB 79.
Does not reduce the maximum allowed residential density for any site by more than 50 percent of the density required under SB 79, except in cases where the site:
oIs located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone; oIs vulnerable to at least one foot of projected sea level rise; or oContains a designated historic resource on a local register.
In aggregate, such exceptions may not exceed 10 percent of the eligible TOD zone area. Does not allow any site to exceed 200 percent of the maximum density prescribed by SB
79. Excludes from capacity calculations any sites exempted on the basis of fire hazard, sea level rise vulnerability, or historic resource designation.
A local TOD Alternative Plan may provide an opportunity to guide higher building height, density and floor area away from lower density single family or lower density zoning or potentially from University Avenue if there is interest in maintaining a lower profile experience to match the existing character of this retail-oriented street. However, this effort will not preserve the lower density development standards for single family districts within the SB 79 radius.
The most the City could reduce allowable density or a property’s floor area ratio through an TOD Alternative Plan is to 50 percent of the new minimum standards established by the legislation. This effectively establishes a baseline development capacity of 1.5 FAR and 50 dwelling units per acre for these sites. For comparison, the City’s R-1 Single-Family Residential zoning currently allows an FAR of 0.45 for lots 5,000 square feet or smaller, and 0.30 for lots larger than 5,000 square feet. In addition, it is unclear whether a 3.0 FAR development would occur on a typically sized R-1 lot in Palo Alto if the statutory density is not modified by an alternative plan.
ANALYSIS
The original intent of this scheduled discussion with the City Council was to provide an update on the Downtown Housing Plan, describe upcoming community outreach, and receive feedback 7 6
1 2
on the project’s next steps. With the passage of SB 79, staff’s focus now broadens to seek Council feedback not only on the future of the area planning initiative but also on related efforts connected to SB 79’s broader community implications. This discussion is also informed by other recent legislative changes, including updates to state density bonus law, AB 2097 (which exempts on-site parking for new development), and AB 130 (which provides for streamlined application processing and exemptions from certain state environmental laws).
To help focus the Council’s discussion, staff has identified the following components and requests feedback on how the Council would like staff to proceed:
1.Continue to work on the Downtown Housing Plan. Staff believes there continues to be value in completing the Housing Plan. At a minimum, it can serve as a vision document reflecting Council and community interests for the future development of this area.
Completing the Downtown Housing Plan is not a requirement of the Housing Element.
There is no obligation to reimburse MTC for any grant funds expended on this project should the City choose not to complete the initiative. Staff recommends this effort continue in parallel with but ultimately trailing work on item 2 below, the TOD Alternative Plan.
2.Focus Resources on Implementing a TOD Alternative Plan. If the City Council determines that a more tailored approach to SB 79 standards is appropriate for Palo Alto, staff recommends temporarily redirecting efforts on the Downtown Housing Plan to prioritize development TOD Alternative Plan. Due to the substantial geographic overlap between the Downtown Housing Plan area and the scope of SB 79, work on the TOD Alternative Plan would also advance the broader goals of the Downtown Housing Plan. The TOD Alternative Plan would be a distinct effort from the Downtown Housing Plan; at this time, staff does not anticipate that this shift in focus will significantly impact the Downtown Housing Plan’s overall timeline.
If directed by the Council, staff would seek to accelerate development of the TOD Alternative Plan by utilizing scheduled and noticed public meetings before City boards and commissions, rather than initiating a separate outreach process. Once a plan is endorsed by the City Council, HCD will have up to 120 days to complete its review. Based on prior experience, an iterative review process is expected, and staff will engage HCD early and collaboratively to help reduce potential delays.
While completion of the TOD Alternative Plan before SB 79 takes effect on July 1 is unlikely, staff anticipates finalizing the plan by the fourth quarter of 2026. The plan would cover the Downtown Housing Plan area as well as all locations within a half-mile radius of the University Avenue Caltrain station, including SOFA, the Transit Center, and the Stanford Shopping Center (see Attachment D). If the Council directs staff to proceed, the existing contract with Wallace Roberts & Todd (WRT) would need to be amended to include the additional scope of work related to the TOD Alternative Plan. 7 6
1 2
3.Consider directing staff to create a TOD Alternative Plan for the California Avenue and San Antonio Road Caltrain stops. If the City Council supports pursuing a TOD Alternative Plan for the University Avenue Caltrain station, a similar approach may be appropriate for the California Avenue and San Antonio Road stations, which also serve the Palo Alto community. These areas, due to their proximity to single-family neighborhoods and historic districts, may warrant additional attention to address potential impacts from the increased height and density allowances permitted under SB 79.
While a TOD Alternative Plan would not preserve the current development potential on lower-density parcels, it could facilitate improved transitions in height and density between higher- and lower-intensity areas. To promote efficiency, staff recommends that, if the University Avenue plan proceeds, the existing contract with WRT be amended to include the development of SB 79 implementation strategies and TOD Alternative Plans for the California Avenue and San Antonio Road stations.
If supported, this work would be conducted concurrently, with public outreach occurring through scheduled, noticed meetings before City boards, commissions, and the City Council.
Initiating this additional task could also support the Council’s previous direction to accelerate housing efforts around the California Avenue station.
4.Identify additional sites and opportunities for affordable housing development. Housing Element Program 1.4 contemplates using the Downtown Housing Plan to identify alternate sites for affordable housing development if the City is not on track to meet its quantified objective of 290 affordable units by 2027. Given the current uncertainty surrounding the City’s ability to meet this objective, staff recommends commencing this work as part of its TOD Alternative Plan, if supported, or Downtown Housing Plan, as appropriate.
5.Consider input from the Transit Center ULI study. The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, City of Palo Alto, and Stanford University are hosting the Urban Land Institute’s Advisory Services Program to assess operational efficiency and connectivity at the Palo Alto Transit Center. At the time of this report, a panel of experts are conducting more than 60 stakeholder interviews. This initiative aims to improve transit circulation, enhance station functionality, and explore redevelopment opportunities. Staff will consider the results of this study when developing recommendations for the TOD Alternative Plan, if supported, or Downtown Housing Plan, as appropriate.
6.Explore opportunities to unlock downtown properties for housing production.
Independent of SB 79, certain properties are unlikely to redevelop unless the City amends policies that discourage the rebuilding of older, noncomplying commercial buildings. Staff 7 6
1 2
recommends evaluating options to promote housing production, including allowing commercial office floor area to be transferred from a sender site within the Downtown Housing Plan area to facilitate higher-quality office space in conjunction with new multi-family housing, either as mixed-use or standalone residential development, at another site.
7.Appoint a Downtown Housing Plan/SB 79 Implementation Ad Hoc Committee. Given the volume of work and accelerated timeline, staff recommends considering a City Council ad hoc committee to work with staff and serve as a resource to reflect Council and community values related to changes in the development standards. While most of this work implements state law, these changes represent a significant departure from current City requirements. Where local discretion remains, the ad hoc committee could help staff respond quickly and effectively. The ad hoc would serve for a limited term of less than one year and would not have decision-making authority. Engagement with the ad hoc would not be subject to Brown Act requirements; however, all recommendations and actions would be reviewed through publicly noticed hearings before applicable boards, commissions, and the City Council.
The combined effects of recent state housing laws, including changes to the density bonus law, AB 2097, AB 130, and now SB 79, require the City to allow greater height, floor area, density, and development concessions within one-half mile of a Caltrain station than previously anticipated in local planning efforts, including the Housing Element. Staff anticipates that these legislative actions will result in significant physical changes to the City’s built environment over the next several years, particularly if market conditions improve.
While the City can establish a vision for how areas around the Caltrain stations should evolve, local control is increasingly more limited. State density bonus law allows developers to request waivers of physical development standards as well as concessions that reduce costs to support inclusionary housing, a threshold that is generally easy to meet. These concessions may include removing retail requirements or increasing office floor area, both of which can affect the character and activity level of these areas.
Establishing clear, locally informed visions for the Caltrain station areas that align with state laws, and reflect community priorities to the extent feasible, offer the best opportunity to achieve balanced outcomes that support an evolving built environment in Palo Alto.
NEXT STEPS
Based on Council feedback, staff will continue to proceed with developing the Downtown Housing Plan, while pivoting initially to develop one or more TOD Alternative Plans to implement a modified version of SB 79, as directed by Council. Work related to the Downtown Housing Plan is not anticipated to be significantly impacted as this work aligns with other necessary tasks to complete the plan. Future community outreach for the TOD Alternative Plan 7 6
1 2
and Downtown Housing Plan will be directed to noticed public meetings before applicable City boards, commissions and City Council. A contract amendment for expanded services and resulting budget implications will be presented to Council in a separate consent calendar report. While staff will work to get as close to the implementation schedule for SB 79 as possible, conducting the analysis, preparing the plan, having it reviewed, potentially iteratively, by HCD and preparing any required environmental analysis will likely extend the effort to Q4 2026. If supported, staff will engage the Council ad hoc to maximize Council and community values and expectations in the TOD Alternative Plan and Downtown Housing Plan initiatives.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
The Downtown Housing Plan is funded by the PDA Planning Grant (administered by the MTC, $0.8 million) and in the General Fund FY 2026 Adopted Budget. The City Council approved a professional services agreement with Wallace Roberts & Todd on February 26, 2024, 2025, totaling $1,371,14013 for this project, of which $0.6 million has been expended to-date. With the enactment and forthcoming implementation of SB 79, staff anticipates the need to revise the project scope to encompass additional geographic areas not previously included within the Downtown Housing Plan boundary. Following Council direction, staff will return with an updated cost assessment and contract amendment as appropriate.
In addition to the anticipated fiscal impacts, the accelerated timeline and expanded scope required to develop TOD Alternative Plans for up to three Caltrain stations will demand significant staff resources from both the Planning and Development Services Department and the City Attorney’s Office. To meet the projected completion date in 2026, work would need to begin immediately following Council authorization.
While this effort is not expected to significantly affect the City Council’s current priority objectives, it will require additional managerial oversight, which may impact timelines and responsiveness for certain projects. Looking ahead, implementation of the TOD Alternative Plans and related activities is expected to affect the department’s capacity to take on new Council priority initiatives in the following year.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
To support community engagement and transparent communication, staff and the consultant team have implemented a comprehensive outreach strategy that includes a dedicated project webpage, regular updates through social media, formation of a Community Advisory Group (CAG) and a Technical Advisory Group (TAG), stakeholder interviews, community workshops, open houses, surveys, and pop-up outreach at public events and local venues such as farmers markets.
13 Professional Services Agreement with Wallace Roberts & Todd, LLC:
https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/api/compilemeetingattachmenthistory/historyattachment/?historyId=6a9a1f e5-16fb-44c4-9675-89bbc13567a6
7 6
1 2
Over the past year, the project team has conducted the following outreach activities:
Community Workshop (June 18, 2025) – Held at the Downtown Library and attended by approximately 25 participants, the workshop included an interactive mapping exercise to identify areas suitable for increased residential density within the Downtown Plan Area. Community Survey (September 6–28, 2025) – Approximately 270 responses were received.
Staff is consolidating and analyzing the results.
Community Open House (October 10, 2024) – Hosted in the Community Meeting Room at City Hall, the event provided an opportunity for participants to share perspectives on key challenges and opportunities related to housing development in the Downtown area. Essential and Service Worker Survey (Fall 2024) – Conducted through two focus groups and a printed survey distributed to downtown business employees; approximately 50 participants provided input on housing needs and commuting patterns. Resident Community Survey (November 18–December 20, 2024) – Received approximately 406 responses. Results have been published on the project webpage for public access. Pop-Up Engagement Events – Project staff participated in the City’s Annual Tree Lighting Event, the California Avenue “3rd Thursday” event, and the Farmers Market, and distributed informational materials to commuters at the Palo Alto Caltrain Station. Community Advisory Group (CAG) Meetings – Convened on January 14, 2025, and July 1, 2025, to review site test fits, discuss feasibility analyses, and provide feedback on engagement strategies and preliminary planning concepts.
These activities reflect the City’s commitment to a transparent, inclusive, and ongoing planning process that incorporates the perspectives of residents, businesses, and other key stakeholders throughout development of the Downtown Housing Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The actions recommended in this report are exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262: A project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions that has not been approved, adopted, or funded would not have significant impact on the environment. The City will prepare an environmental analysis for the Downtown Housing Plan when more project specifics have been identified.
The City will conduct appropriate environmental review for the Downtown Housing Plan and any SB 79 transit-oriented-development Alternative Plans directed by the City Council.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Housing Development Economic Feasibility and Implementation Analysis Attachment B: Community Outreach Summary and Preliminary Policy Recommendations Based on Feasibility Analysis
7 6
1 2
Attachment C: SB 79 Map Based on Caltrain Platform Location15 Attachment D: SB 79 boundary in relation to Downtown Housing Plan and SOFA Boundary APPROVED BY:
Jonathan Lait, Planning and Development Services Director 15 The area impacted by SB 79 on based on pedestrian access points rather than platform location, which may result in an expanded boundary. Identification of these points is still being evaluated by staff.