9 0
4 8
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: ACTION ITEMS
Lead Department: Planning and Development Services
Meeting Date: March 16, 2026
Report #:2512-5753
TITLE
Adoption of an Ordinance Adding a New Section 18.40.280 (Bird-Friendly Design) to Chapter
18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code; CEQA Status: Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15308 (Actions for Protection of the Environment)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommend the City Council adopt an Ordinance adding a new Section 18.40.280 (Bird- Friendly Design) to Chapter 18.40 (General Standards and Exceptions) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Bird-Friendly Design Ordinance (Draft Ordinance) implements Comprehensive Plan Program L6.3.1, which directs staff to develop guidelines that minimize hazards for birds, and has been a City Council Priority objective for several years. The Draft Ordinance (Attachment A) incorporates modifications recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) following its public hearing on December 10, 2025. The Draft Ordinance generally applies to new construction and major remodels involving unbroken glazing of 24 square feet or larger.
The Draft Ordinance regulates residential and nonresidential projects within or outside of Bird Sensitive Area differently, with stricter requirements apply to those within the Bird Sensitive Area.
Acknowledging the high cost and limited availability of specialized glazing, the PTC recommended specific modifications to mitigate impacts on housing production, most notably exempting any portions of residential structures under 35 feet in height located outside the Bird Sensitive Area. This recommendation effectively exempts all single-family homes outside of Bird Sensitive Area from the new regulations, reflecting the PTC’s concern that current market realities and supply chain constraints disproportionately burden smaller-scale residential projects. Additionally, the PTC directed the removal of requirements for the replacement of
9 0
4 8
existing fenestration to further reduce logistical hurdles for homeowners as well as local businesses.
However, the financial and supply chain constraints justifying the residential exemption apply similarly to non-residential developments, as small-scale commercial projects face identical cost premiums and material shortages. To address these feasibility and logistical concerns, staff recommends that the City Council consider extending the 35-foot height exemption universally to all development types. Alternatively, the Council may consider expanding the allowance of films and decals to non-residential projects, an option supported by local businesses to provide a more affordable compliance option when specialized glazing is cost prohibitive.
BACKGROUND
Establishing bird-friendly design standards is the implementation of Comprehensive Plan Program L6.3.1, which asks staff to “[d]evelop guidelines for bird-friendly building design that minimizes hazards for bird and reduces the potential for collisions.” This effort has been a City Council Priority Objective for several years and has advanced through various discussions with the Architectural Review Board (ARB), PTC, and other stakeholders.
Architectural Review Board Study Sessions
The ARB conducted two different study sessions on February 15, 2024,1 and July 18, 2024.2 The ARB recommended tailoring the Draft Ordinance to different areas within the City (e.g., foothills, Baylands, and urbanized areas) and exempting residential projects to avoid increasing housing costs. The ARB recommended considering “substantial remodel” as the threshold for triggering requirements for the Draft Ordinance, using window size limitations, and expressed some concerns about how these standards could affect residential development.
Planning and Transportation Commission Public Hearings
The PTC conducted several public hearings before providing a recommendation to forward the Draft Ordinance to the City Council. The detailed PTC motion from December 2025, along with staff response on how each modification has been incorporated into the Draft Ordinance, is included in Attachment C.
On August 28, 2024, 3 the PTC reviewed the Draft Ordinance with a focus on simplifying applicability and mitigating development costs, recommending reduced buffers and the use of non-permanent markers to avoid hindering housing production. On October 30, 2024, 4 staff subsequently presented the revised Draft Ordinance, establishing key definitions, applicability, and types of Bird-Friendly Treatments to facilitate 1 February 15, 2024, ARB Staff Report Packet (Item #3), starting on Page 130 2 July 18, 2024, ARB Staff Report Packet (Item #3), starting on Page 130 3 August 28, 2024, PTC Staff Report Packet (Item #2), starting on Page 9 4 October 30, 2024, PTC Staff Report Packet (Item #2), starting on Page 10 9 0
4 8
easier implementation. The PTC moved to recommend the Draft Ordinance to City Council but requested specific modifications, including expanding applicability to additional project types and amending the location and amount of required treatments. Additionally, the PTC directed revisions to definitions, such as the Bird Sensitive Area, and changes to the criteria for alternative compliance
On December 10, 2025, 9 staff returned with a revised Draft Ordinance and new research on cost and availability of specialized glazing (described in more detail in the PTC Staff Report,5 and below), encouraging the PTC to reconsider residential requirements based on feasibility. Acknowledging financial burdens, the PTC accepted most modifications staff recommended and added an exemption for residential structures (exempting any portions of residential structures under 35 feet). Despite these changes, the PTC remained uncertain regarding the local significance of bird strikes and debated whether these regulations should be adopted as an ordinance or simply as guidelines.
The final recommendation was for approval of the Draft Ordinance with modifications (as described in Attachment C) by a vote of 5-2, with Commissioners Hechtman and James voting against the motion. Commissioner James expressed concerns about whether the regulations were justified and effective. Commissioner Hechtman appreciated how far these regulations have come but expressed concerns with whether the difference in regulations between residential and commercial uses was appropriate, and whether the regulations were still too strict for residential uses in the Bird Sensitive Area.
Cost and Availability of Bird-Friendly Glazing
Following the PTC direction from October 2024, staff identified concerns regarding the disproportionate cost and limited availability of specialized glazing for small-scale projects like single-family homes. Through conversations with glass manufacturers, architects, local retailers, and other cities, staff learned that a dedicated residential market for these products does not currently exist, forcing homeowners to source commercial-rated glazing that is significantly more expensive and difficult to procure directly. Architects noted that while specialized glazing offers better visibility, the high unit cost, which are often double that of standard options, and extended lead times might make it practically prohibitive for many residential projects. As a result, the glazing specialists typically recommend alternatives like insect screens, which is the cheapest option when architecturally compatible, or non-permanent markers like films, though the latter present challenges regarding installation, bulk purchasing requirements, and environmental waste.
Discussions with other cities confirmed that their ordinances essentially exempt single-family homes. However, when bird-friendly design features are required, applicants generally propose insect screens as part of their applications or staff would recommend revisions to architectural features and materials to mitigate the high cost and limited availability of specialized glazing. 9 December 10, 2025, PTC Staff Report Packet (Item #2), starting on Page 100 9 0
4 8
Local retailers similarly reported a lack of inventory and awareness, indicating that any request for specialized glazing would require special orders from manufacturers, potentially delaying construction timelines. Given these constraints, other cities often exempt single-family homes outright or limit requirements to new construction to mitigate the financial burden. Ultimately, additional research highlighted that mandating specialized glazing for residential projects introduces substantial logistical hurdles and costs, as the current supply chain is not equipped to support individual procurement efficiently.
ANALYSIS
The Draft Ordinance (Attachment A) incorporates language to implement the direction received from the PTC at its hearing in December 2025, representing a culmination of discussion and feedback from previous public hearings. The new regulations include the following components:
Definitions. Defines key terms pertaining exclusively to this ordinance, including, but not limited to, Bird Hazard Installation, Bird Sensitive Areas (hillsides and Baylands), Bird- Friendly Treatments (visual cues such as dots or lines spaced maximum 2 inches apart for permanent installations, residential-only limited applications (decals/films), and exterior features like screens).
Applicability. Applies to new construction, major remodels, and all new fenestration or new or replacement Bird Hazard Installation.
Bird-Friendly Design Requirements.
oMandating Bird-Friendly Treatments for all Bird Hazard Installations and for any unbroken glazing on an elevation that is 24 square feet or larger. oFor residential, within the Bird Sensitive Area, up to 10% of an elevation may be untreated; outside of the Bird Sensitive Area, up to 40% may be untreated. oFor nonresidential, up to 10% of an elevation may be untreated, regardless of location. Alternative Compliance. Allows alternative approaches for any projects seeking to meet the intent of the ordinance through methods other than those specifically prescribed, subject to Director approval.
Exemptions for some structures, including historic buildings, 100% affordable housing projects, first-floor commercial street-facing glazing in specified districts, and any portions of residential structures under 35 feet in height.
The following section describes additional information that staff recommends the City Council consider, in response to public comments received, prior to the adoption of the Draft Ordinance.
9 0
4 8
Exemption on Small-Scale Projects
Acknowledging the financial burden on residential development, particularly for smaller-scale projects like single-family homes, stemming from the higher cost and limited availability of bird- friendly glazing, the PTC recommended exempting any portions of residential structures under 35 feet in height. Because the maximum allowable height for single-family homes in Palo Alto is 35 feet, this recommendation effectively exempts all single-family homes outside of the Bird Sensitive Area.
The PTC recommended this exemption due to the financial burden and availability issues associated with bird-friendly glazing, noting that these challenges disproportionately affect smaller-scale projects. However, these market realities do not discriminate by use type. A two- story office building would face the identical supply chain bottlenecks and cost premiums as a two-story house. By restricting the 35-foot exemption to residential structures, the current policy inadvertently penalizes small-scale commercial projects, which often operate on equally thin margins. Staff recommends that the City Council consider the 35-foot height exemption be applied universally to all development types.
Alternatively, if the 35-foot exemption remains for residential structures only, the draft ordinance could be revised to extend the allowance of films or decals to nonresidential projects to mitigate some of the burdens and expanding compliance options. While this option presents challenges, which include installation difficulties, bulk purchasing requirements, and environmental concerns related to periodic replacement, it remains an affordable alternative when specialized glazing is cost-prohibitive and insect screens or other exterior features are architecturally incompatible. This option was suggested by one of participants during the second focused outreach meeting with Palo Alto businesses after the PTC hearing in December 2025.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Adopting the Draft Ordinance directly implements Comprehensive Plan Policy L6.3 and Program L6.3.1, established in 2017. This ordinance minimizes hazards for birds, reducing collisions within the city. Furthermore, it streamlines the entitlement process by establishing clear bird- friendly design standards, promoting efficient development, and enhancing the aesthetic appeal of the city streets and public spaces.
As part of the implementation of Program 3.2 (Monitor Constraints to Housing) of the Housing Element, the City needs to prepare an analysis in staff reports for initiatives proposing new regulations. This analysis should detail how the regulations may impact housing production, if at all, and recommend solutions to address any adverse impacts. The Draft Ordinance, as explained above, will directly impact housing production by definitively increasing construction costs associated with specialized glazing and materials, in addition to delayed timeline adding to the project budget. This mandatory increase in material and labor costs constrains housing 9 0
4 8
production by reducing project viability and potentially delaying approval for critical housing units.
To mitigate the significant cost burden of specialized glazing, the draft ordinance allows less expensive alternatives such as films, decals, or other similar markers, or exterior features like insect screens to treat fenestration for residential development and the residential portion of mixed-use development. The draft ordinance also has an exemption for residential development or the residential portion of mixed-use development. Any portions of residential structures, located outside of Bird Sensitive Area, under 35 feet are exempt from the regulations in the draft ordinance, which could help reduce the cost of construction, if any developer or homeowner prefers to have specialized glazing over more affordable alternatives like films or decals. While these markers and insect screens, as well as an exemption on residential structures, represent a reduced financial impact, they still increase cost for materials and installation that is not currently required in standard construction. Therefore, the ordinance could result in higher construction costs, confirming its potential adverse impact on housing production.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
The implementation of the proposed ordinance is not anticipated to have any direct fiscal impact on the City budget; the costs for installing bird-friendly design elements would be borne entirely by applicants. The marginal effort of staff to review plans and permit applications for compliance with bird-friendly design requirements is expected to be minimal.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
Staff conducted two study sessions, one in February and another in July 2024 with the ARB to receive input from the ARB and provide a platform for community members to express their views and concerns regarding the proposed ordinance. In addition, staff engaged with representatives from the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society and Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter to solicit their input on the proposed ordinances.
Staff received numerous comment letters from the Santa Clara Valley Bird Alliance (formerly known as the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society) and Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter on various versions of the draft ordinance presented to the ARB and PTC. The public comments included specific modification recommendations on the multiple versions of the Draft Ordinance, of which some of feedback was incorporated throughout the process. Staff also received two public comment letters from two different residents. The residents were particularly concerned about the PTC decision to modify the Bird Sensitive Area definition by adding areas within 300 feet from the centerlines of natural streams.
Major developers, including Stanford University and Sand Hill Properties, strongly object to the Draft Ordinance, arguing that its requirements are overly broad and lack sufficient local data to 9 0
4 8
justify the associated costs. Both entities urge the City to reconsider highly restrictive glazing mandates, such as the 10% limit on untreated glass and the 24 square foot treatment threshold for replacements, which they argue will dramatically increase construction costs, strain supply chains, and negatively impact the aesthetics and marketability of projects. They recommend that the City instead conduct a justifying study or adopt more practical, targeted alternatives, such as exempting retail/lobby areas or narrowly defining the Bird Sensitive Area.
Two focused outreach meetings were held virtually with Palo Alto businesses to get their feedback on the draft ordinance. The first focused outreach meeting was held on October 8, 2025, and a total of 38 participants attended. The participants expressed concern that specialized glazing might be visually unappealing, making buildings harder to lease. They also questioned the Ordinance’s necessity, as no study shows how often birds actually collide with buildings specifically in Palo Alto. The second meeting was held on January 15, 2026, following the PTC hearing, with 16 participants. The Chamber of Commerce requested this additional meeting to ask staff to explain the PTC recommendation to the City Council and how that direction might impact local businesses. Although the impact on existing businesses decreased following the PTC direction from December 2025, concerns remained regarding the cost and availability of materials for nonresidential projects, such as office or research buildings.
Participants expressed that films and decals should be allowed for these developments.
Staff held several meetings with property owners from the Edgewood Neighborhood Alliance.
These owners expressed concerns regarding the Draft Ordinance, specifically how the Bird Sensitive Area definition directly limits their property rights. In response, the specific portion of the definition that placed a disproportionate burden on the Edgewood neighborhood has been removed from the draft. Additionally, owners highlighted practical difficulties regarding the application and long-term maintenance of window films or markers. They also expressed aesthetic concerns over inconsistent glazing appearances and the potential for these requirements to impair outdoor visibility. The PTC addressed their concern by adding a new exemption on any portions of residential structures under 35 feet that are located outside of Bird Sensitive Area, as well as removing the 300-foot buffer from natural creeks from the definition of Bird Sensitive Area.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The City has reviewed the proposed ordinance in accordance with the authority and criteria set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City, as the lead agency, anticipates that the ordinance will be exempt from CEQA in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15308, which includes actions by regulatory agencies for the protection of the environment.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Draft Ordinance
9 0
4 8
Attachment B: Draft Bird Sensitive Area Map
Attachment C: Staff Response to the PTC Motion from December 10, 2025 APPROVED BY:
Jonathan Lait, Planning and Development Services Director