0160185_20260318_ay16
1 3
2 6
2 ACTION NO. 2026-__
RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION FOR 530 BARRON AVENUE: INDIVIDUAL REVIEW AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT [25PLN-00021] At its meeting on _________, 2026, the City Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City Council”) upheld the Director’s decision denying the request for Individual Review for the demolition of an existing single-family residence and construction of a new 2,530-square-foot two-story single-family residence, which included removal of a 107-inch coastal redwood tree making the following findings, determinations, and declarations:
SECTION 1. Background.
A. On January 23, 2025, Thomas Sullivan applied for an Individual Review application to allow demolition of a 924-square-foot one-story residence and construction of a new 2,530-square-foot residence (“The Project”). A planned attached 303 square-foot Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit and 497-square-foot Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit are shown for reference but are not subject to Individual Review. The project also requires the issuance of a Protected Tree Removal Permit, as the proposed structure requires removal of a 107-inch coastal redwood tree (“Tree #1”).
B. The project site is comprised of one existing lot (APN No. 137-08-040) of approximately 5,932 square feet. The site contains a single-story, single-family development in a single-family residential (R-1) zoned neighborhood.
C. Following staff review, on August 28, 2025, staff, on behalf of the Director of Planning and Development Services, tentatively approved the project, including removal of the protected tree, with conditions.
D. On August 29, 2025, the City received two timely requests for a Director’s hearing from neighboring property owners at 3730 La Selva Drive and 538 Barron Avenue.
E. On October 15, 2025, the Director held a duly noticed public hearing at which members of the public were provided an opportunity to comment. The Director determined that sufficient evidence had not been provided to demonstrate that a protected tree removal permit could be issued under PAMC Section 8.10.050(b)(2) for removal of Tree #1.
The Director continued the hearing to allow the applicant to provide more information to support the proposed removal of Tree #1.
F. On November 25, 2025, the applicant submitted supplemental information, which is reflected in the January 12, 2026, Director’s Hearing staff report. The supplemental information provides an alternative to the proposed project, an arborist report that concludes that the alternative would preserve the protected tree, and states that the cost to construct the project alternative would cost less than the proposed project. 0160185_20260318_ay16
2 3
2 6
2 G. On January 12, 2026, the Director held a duly noticed public hearing at which members of the public were provided an opportunity to speak and considered the supplemental information submitted as part of the public record.
H. On January 26, 2026, the Director denied the application, finding that although the project meets the Individual Review Design Guidelines (for two-story development) as well as the development standards set forth for the R-1 Zone District, the applicant has not submitted information to show compliance with the findings for removal of a protected tree, as set forth in 8.10.050 of the municipal code. Because the tree removal permit could not be issued, and removal of the tree is necessary for the proposed project, the project application was denied.
A. On February 4, 2026, Thomas Sullivan appealed the Director’s decision in accordance with the appeal process set forth in PAMC Section 18.77.075.
B. On April 6, 2026, in accordance with PAMC Section 18.77.075, the appeal was placed on the City Council’s consent calendar. Based upon a review of the evidence in the record, and after all persons were afforded an opportunity to be heard in accordance with the City Council’s policies and procedures, the City Council upheld the Director’s decision denying the application.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City, acting as the lead agency for the Project, has determined that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with CEQA Guideline section 15301, which provides an exemption for small structures.
SECTION 3. Findings for Project Application Denial. The proposed improvements require the issuance of a Protected Tree Removal Permit pursuant to PAMC Chapter 8.10. Specifically, for removal of a protected tree when associated with a proposed development in the single-family (R-1) zone, PAMC Section 8.10.050(b)(2) requires a finding that:
1. There is no financially feasible design alternative that would allow for preservation of the tree(s). For the purposes of this subsection (b)(2), a financially feasible design alternative means a design alternative that preserves the tree(s) and would not increase the project cost by more than twice the reproduction cost of the tree(s) or ten percent of the given project valuation, whichever is greater.
The valuation of the tree is estimated at $94,300. The construction cost for the design alternative was not provided though information from the applicant states that the alternative would decrease the cost of construction compared to the proposed project. Although the applicant asserts that the design alternative would reduce the total value of the project, PAMC Section 8.10.050 speaks only to the project cost. The applicant’s arborist stated that the alternative design would not adversely impact the tree in certain conditions. Therefore, the 0160185_20260318_ay16
3 3
2 6
2 evidence in the record establishes that the design alternative would allow for preservation of the tree and would not increase the project cost by more than twice the reproduction cost of the tree or ten percent of the project valuation. Accordingly, the required finding cannot be made.
Because a Protected Tree Removal Permit cannot be issued, pursuant to PAMC Section
8.10.050(b)(2), and the proposed project requires removal of Tree #1, the project application must be denied.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
_________________________ ____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________ ___________________________ Assistant City Attorney Director of Planning and
Development Services
PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED:
Those plans prepared by Chris Spaulding titled “Proposed New 2-Story Home For the Sullivan Family 530 Barron Avenue Palo Alto, California” consisting of 16 pages, dated and submitted July 6, 2025.