Architectural Review Board
2025-2026 Workplan
Staff Liaison: Steven Switzer, Historic Preservation Planner Lead Department: Current Planning, Planning and Development Services Division
About the Board
The Architectural Review Board is composed of five members , at least three of whom are architects, landscape architects, building designers or other design professionals . Terms are for three years . See Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 2.21. Residency is not required. For the ARB webpage go to bit.ly/paloaltoARB.
Boardmembers
• David Hirsch
• Kendra Rosenberg (Chair)
• Marton Jojarth
• Mousam Adcock
• Yingxi Chen (Vice Chair)
Mission Statement
The Architectural Review Board reviews and makes recommendations to the Planning Director on the building design, site planning, landscape planning, massing and facades, material selection, lighting, signage and other related issues for most ma jor new construction including additions and renovations that alter the exterior building face. The type of buildings reviewed include commercial, industrial, and multiple-family residential. In addition, the ARB is a resource as knowledgeable observers of many varied urban environments, to assist Palo Alto as it develops area plans to accommodate additional housing.
The ARB Scope of Review is fully noted in Title 18 of the Municipal Code, Chapter 18.76 under Section 18.76.020 as well as in Chapter 18.77 under Section 18.77.073.
Prior Year
Accomplishments
• See attached summary for more information.
PROJECT/GOAL 1:
Review Planning applications for conformance with ARB Findings and Objective Standards
BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW /
COUNCIL-APPROVED
This is the Board's main mission and serves to
ensure the City develops high quality projects
On-Going Planning staff prepare staff reports,
packets and presentations. They ensure
paper plan sets and material boards are
ready for ARB review. Other
departments, such as, City Attorney,
Urban Forestry, Transportation, etc., may
be required from time to time.
Consultants, including CEQA
consultants, may also be required.
Issuance of recommendations on
projects and high-quality architecture
throughout the City.
Yes
HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED
POLICY UPDATE
N/A
PROJECT/GOAL 2: Provide feedback to staff and Council on the creation of new guidelines, ordinances, and/or streetscapes, as directed by Council
BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW /
COUNCIL-APPROVED
The ARB has unique feedback to provide as a
stakeholder as they have interest in approving
the aesthetic environment of the City while
also understanding constraints that
architects/developers may come across when
implementing standards being considered
Anticipated to return to the Board
in spring/summer 2025
Staff time. Council Approval Yes
HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED
POLICY UPDATE
• Housing generation and feasibility.
• Innovative housing structures (e.g., micro-units, intergenerational housing, aging adults, students and lower-income units, etc.) consistent with Housing Element Program 6.5.
• Review and recommend aesthetic standards for Wireless Communication Facilities (WCFs) as part of an ongoing WCF Ordinance update.
Yes
PROJECT/GOAL 3: Assist the City as it considers modifications to Objective Standards; Provide feedback based on research from projects as they go through the objective standards ministerial processes. Suggest ways to better address different housing typology.
BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW /
COUNCIL-APPROVED
Streamline the objective standard review
process and ensure that projects using the
streamlined review process/objective
standards conform to the City’s
Comprehensive Plan, Goals and Policies,
including its high-quality design standards
Provide high level modifications
to objective standards to Council
by the end of FY 2026; If
directed by Council, work with
staff to propose specific code
language for Council adopted by
the end of FY 2026
Additional staff at Planning so that the
quality and completeness of the work is
maintained.
Council Approval No
PROJECT/GOAL 3: Assist the City as it considers modifications to Objective Standards; Provide feedback based on research from projects as they go through the objective standards ministerial processes. Suggest ways to better address different housing typology.
HIGH
PRIORITY
LOWER
PRIORITY
COUNCIL-DIRECTED
POLICY UPDATE
• Modifications to South of Forest Area Coordinated Area Plan (SOFA) subjective development standards with objective standards consistent with Housing Element Program 3.7.
• Modifications to address objective standards (18.24) based on review of several projects using the standards at Council’s direction.
Yes
PROJECT/GOAL 4: Discuss specific Coordinated Area Plans/ streetscape improvements and provide comments that the ARB would recommend exploring/implementing.
BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW /
COUNCIL-APPROVED
This project would enhance implementation of the
City's Comprehensive Plan.
On-going Planning staff to help research policies
and programs; coordination with long
range planning section staff.
Increased adherence to
Comprehensive Plan policies
Yes
HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED
POLICY UPDATE
• San Antonio Road Area Plan
• Downtown Housing Plan
• California Avenue streetscape improvements
• University Avenue streetscape improvements
Yes
PROJECT/GOAL 5: Improve Coordination between the Architectural Review Board and other boards, commissions, and Council.
BENEFICIAL IMPACTS TIMELINE RESOURCES NEEDED MEASURE OF SUCCESS STATE MANDATED / LOCAL LAW / COUNCIL-APPROVED
Improved coordination between
boards/commissions and council to get
feedback from colleagues on other boards.
Provide more coordinated feedback from the
City for developers.
On-going Staff time. • Have staff continue to provide
updates in the pending projects
attachment on development
proposals.
• The ARB can appoint a
representative to attend Council
and PTC and to provide feedback
on reviewed projects.
No
HIGH PRIORITY LOWER PRIORITY COUNCIL-DIRECTED
POLICY UPDATE
No
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD ANNUAL REPORT
PRIOR YEAR ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND ARB RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025
ITEMS OF NOTE
• The ARB reviewed roughly 100 projects for the 2025 Design Awards and selected six winners to recognize their contributions to Palo Alto. • The ARB provided a comprehensive review and made recommendations on updates to the objective standards to better address townhome style designs and modifications to SB 9 objective standards. This work was consistent with Goal 2 of the 24/25 Work Plan. • The ARB provided valuable feedback to assist Council with respect to Car Free Streets Implementation Plan, specifically for California Avenue Signage. Although not explicitly identified in the work plan, this work was consistent with Goal 3 of the 24/25 Work Plan. • The ARB provided valuable feedback to assist Council with respect to the Lighting and Bird Safe Glazing Ordinances, Parklet designs, El Camino Real Focus Area, and Housing Incentive Program (HIP) consistent with Goal 4 of the 24/25 Work Plan. • The ARB reviewed around 20 projects, including multi-family housing with below-market units, mixed-use developments, master sign programs, and retail modifications at Stanford Shopping Center, aligning with Goal 1 of the 24/25 Work Plan.
APPLICATION REVIEW
The ARB prides itself on its collaborative review process, where board member’s diverse perspectives enhance proposed projects and improve Palo Alto's built environment. Our oversight has made a significant impact, as shown in the renderings section of this report, comparing initial proposals to final designs.
ADDRESS/PROJECT DESCRIPTION
4075 El Camino Way Assisted Living
Lighting Standards (PAMC 18.40.250) Ordinance
Bird Friendly Design (PAMC 18.40.250) Ordinance
525 University Avenue Master Sign Program
530 Lytton Avenue Master Sign Program
180 El Camino Real The Melt Façade
3000 El Camino Real Office Conversion
4335-4345 El Camino Real Housing (with inclusionary units) Housing Incentive Program (HIP) Ordinance
3150 El Camino Real Housing (with inclusionary units)
70 Encina Ave Housing (with inclusionary units) -Townhomes 3265 El Camino Real Affordable Housing
824 San Antonio Mixed Use (Retail and Assisted Living) 3950 Fabian Way Private Middle School
ADDRESS/PROJECT DESCRIPTION
660 University Avenue Mixed Use (Office with Housing)
El Camino Real Focus Area Ordinance
Architecture Review Board Awards Award Program (Occurs every 5 years) 640 Waverley Street Mixed Use (Office with Housing)
164 Hamilton Avenue Façade
180 El Camino Real Delarosa Façade
California Ave Signage Car Free Street improvements
City Parking Garages Signage Exceptions
180 El Camino Real Cedar & Sage Façade
340 Portage Avenue Master Sign Program
Additionally, several projects were submitted for preliminary review to gather early feedback from the ARB. This early input helped incorporate key programming and design changes, streamlining the formal application process. These projects including 540 University Avenue and 640 Waverley Street.
ARB RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 2.21.030 directs the Architectural Review Board to report annually our “concerns… with respect to the city’s plans, policies, ordinances and procedures as these affect the projects which the board reviews.” Our reviews are site specific, focusing on individual development proposals rather than broad policies. However, we evaluate each project in its physical and regulatory context—considering its impact on the neighborhood and its alignment with City policies, from the Comprehensive Plan to the various design guidelines. Because the ARB looks at many projects each year, and its board members have years of experience in Palo Alto, patterns emerge and specific areas of concern have been identified.
Our comments this year are centered around the increasing importance of housing projects to the city.
1. Objective Design Standard Refinements. In our continuing response to recently enacted state legislation, Palo Alto previously adopted objective design review standards for housing projects, effectively eliminating architectural review on residential and mixed-use projects where objective standards can be met in order to streamline review of those applications.
Several residential projects over the past years were townhouse type developments (3200 Park Boulevard, 739 Sutter Avenue, 420 Acacia, and 70 Encina). In our review, it was noted that some of the current standards focused more on larger multi-family buildings. Therefore, some aspects of townhouse style design were not fully addressed/accommodated for in the standards. Through an Ad Hoc committee we studied many local townhouse developments and have provided the planning department with recommendations to modify the Objective Design Standards to address townhome designs as well as larger multi-family designs.
The ARB recommends that refinements be made to the objective standards based on implementation of the standards for a series of projects as well as with the recommendations from the ARB regarding modifications for townhome designs.
2. Coordinated Area Plans to Encourage Housing Development and Better Planning. • San Antonio Avenue: The San Antonio Avenue area is experiencing increasing residential development but our zoning regulations for the area are outdated and focused on commercial development, resulting in applicant uncertainty and long entitlement processes. The existing one-story light industrial and commercial buildings will be substantially replaced in the coming decade. A coordinated area plan will allow us to consider larger issues such as transportation, neighborhood parks, city services, pedestrian/bicycle pathways, and integration with nearby developments in Mountain View as this area transforms.
• Downtown Housing Plan: To increase housing, the downtown area needs revised standards to accommodate redevelopment of parking lots as to encourage housing additions while maintaining the vibrancy of the downtown area and its pedestrian friendly streetscape. • California Avenue: With State requirements as outlined in AB 2097 and Builder’s Remedy, the California Avenue area will experience more development then in the past. This area should have a coordinated area plan to better scope future development.
3. City Council/Planning Commission Communication. The Architecture Review Board has very little formal interaction with the City Council, the Planning Commission and the Historic Resources Board. Board members are forced to act on individual initiative to gain input from council members and other commissioners. Joint meetings with full boards are rarely productive; yet uncoordinated serial meetings leave commissioners unaware of feedback from colleagues on other boards. Applicants often feel that they are ‘running a gauntlet’ of approvals rather than facing a coordinated review.
• Have staff continue to provide updates in the pending projects attachment on development proposals. • Take direct feedback from the ARB on reviewed projects up for Council approval where Council approval is required. The ARB can appoint a member to represent the board directly to the Council.
• Request staff to schedule joint preliminary discussions between the ARB, PTC and HRB chairs/vice-chairs on projects of common interest.
These ‘preliminary meetings’ would not be to review specifics of a project; rather they would serve to coordinate the review process between boards and planning staff.
• Appoint HRB, PTC and Council liaisons to the ARB to facilitate open communication between boards and commissions and city council. ARB liaisons will provide a clear channel for passing information between reviewing bodies, enabling all board and commission and council members, as well as the general public, direct access to relevant information on a project-by-project basis.
RENDERINGS
Below are renderings of approved projects, showcasing the evolution from their initial proposal to designs with the incorporated ARB feedback. A summary of key design modifications made based on ARB feedback is also provided.
70 ENCINA AVE
Initial Proposal: Final Design:
70 ENCINA AVE
Incorporated Feedback:
• Encouraged more usable landscaped area.
• Encouraged the design to better address privacy between units, including views from the public parking lot into the units. • Consideration of material choices and how the project would be visually compatible to the adjacent Town and Country.
640 WAVERLEY STEET
Initial Proposal: Final Design:
Incorporated Feedback:
• The ARB provided feedback to enhance an already well-designed project, resulting in improving its interface with the neighboring building at 636 Waverley Street through reduced concrete on the façade, a clearer and more efficient parking layout, and refined landscape planting with long- term maintenance details.
• The project provides a good mixed-use development, integrating office and retail spaces on the ground floor with residential units on the upper floors.
3265 EL CAMINO REAL
Initial Proposal: Final Design:
Incorporated Feedback:
• The ARB encouraged for a window or decorative reveal and extended around to the back of the building and for the rooftop terrace to be more engaging.
• The ARB provided feedback on the internal programing and suggestions for the vehicles utilizing the stacking stalls. • The applicant incorporated feedback and also added an additional floor to the development to increase density.
4335-4345 El Camino Real
Initial Proposal: Final Design:
Incorporated Feedback:
• The initial roof forms were complex and recommended to be reevaluated, while still maintaining separate roofs for each unit. This involved the removal of the third story balconies and fake roof dormers for a more simplified rooftop. • The ARB encouraged accenting the doors for more variation, but overall approved the color scheme with its subtle differences in color.
824 San Antonio Rd
Initial Proposal: Final Design:
• Refined material and color selections to ensure better contrast. Simplify the front façade by reducing the visual segments from three to two. • The ARB encouraged the drop-off area to be redesigned in a way that did not impede the front entrance and more simplified balcony designs in relation to their usage by residents.
3950 Fabian Way
Initial Proposal: Final Design:
• Relocated bicycle parking to the front of the building for better site circulation and adding additional skylights to provide more light into the interior of the building.
• The project utilized an existing office building with a new gymnasium addition and interior improvements to accommodate a private middle school.
ARB AWARDS
Beginning in 1998, the awards program has been held every five years to honor the creative and responsive designs that help shape Palo Alto’s unique visual character. By recognizing these outstanding architectural contributions, the program celebrates the efforts of architects and designers who enrich the community and foster a healthy, vibrant environment. From a pool of approximately 100 reviewed projects, the following six were selected:
620 Emerson Street | Nobu 180 El Camino Real | Sushi Roku
588 Webster Street | Arbora Apartments 3705 El Camino Real | Wilton Court Apartments
1700 Embarcadero Road | Mercedes Benz Dealership 3215 Porter Drive | The Hub at Stanford Research Park