From: Lauma Zunte
To: Sauls, Garrett
Cc: Aivars; Eriks Rungis; Indra Rungis; David Goldberg
Subject: Proposed Residencial Highrise
Date: Sunday, March 22, 2026 1:20:02 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
Dear Mr. Sauls,
My name is Lauma Zunte and I own a small four unit apartment on 569 Addison Avenue in Palo Alto.
Mr. David Goldburg reached out to me recently informing me of a proposed six story apartment complex going up just beyond my backyard fence.
A massive structure as proposed will have a huge impact on my apartment complex. First on my mind is the idea of having such a large structure right next to my small two story building.
Next is the impact on my residents when they go to the pool area that is right next to the common fence.The idea of six stories of prying eyes looking down on the pool area isn't too appealing. Additionally how it will impact the sun in the backyard is also a concern, A large project like this will involve untold months of demolition, clearing and then rebuilding. The noise and pollution alone will create a situation where many of my residents may choose to vacate their units. That will leave me in a financial crisis.
These are a few of my immediate concerns that I hope will be considered if this project moves forward.
Respectfully, Lauma Zunte
This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.
This is their first email to your company.
Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
From: Steve Ludvik
To: Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Development on corner of Webster and Channing Ave Date: Wednesday, April 1, 2026 1:37:38 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
Dear Garrett,
This letter is regarding the proposed 70 unit condominium development at the corner of Webster and Channing Ave.
The development is poorly conceived and the council should reject the proposal.
Channing Ave has become a heavily used thoroughfare between Alma and 101.
Adding congestion from more street parked cars, maintenance services and delivery services (such as DoorDash) traffic will create safety hazards. The crossing at Webster/Channing has already experienced safety events.
Safety:
The proposed development is across the street from Channing House which supports seniors who often walk in the neighborhood. Adding unnecessary risks to their safety is a potential major liability for the city.
I trust you are aware of the many lawsuits filed against the city, the outcome of which can far exceed any tax revenue or other perceived benefits to the city and its residents.
Please consider these factors in your approval process.
I hope that the City makes the correct decision and does not approve the development.
Thank you for your support in this matter
Sincerely,
Steve Ludvik
541 Channing Ave
Palo Alto CA 94301
This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.
This is their first email to your company.
Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
April 6, 2026
Garrett Sauls
Project Planner
City of Palo Alto
[email protected]
Subject: Concerns regarding the proposed 6-story development at 910 Webster St, Palo Alto, CA
Dear Mr. Sauls:
I am writing to you as an owner and resident at 532 Channing Ave, Unit 301, Palo Alto regarding a proposal that has been submitted to the city to develop a 6-story condominium building at 910 Webster St, Palo Alto. My unit sits next to the proposed condominium building.
As a direct neighbor, I have significant concerns about the scale of this project. Our building stands at 3 stories, and the current building at 910 Webster is 1-2 stories. A 6-story structure would tower over our existing building, leading to several immediate impacts (note: although positioned as a 6-story building, there is a 7th floor that includes a community library):
● Loss of Natural Light: Many of our units rely on skylights and natural sun exposure that will be permanently blocked by a building of this height. ● Privacy: The significant height disparity would overlook our private living spaces and common areas.
● Neighborhood Character: A building of this density is a massive departure from the current 2 and 3-story profile of our immediate block.
I am not opposed to new neighbors or a thoughtful development, but I believe this proposal is out of scale for this specific location. We are interested in advocating for a more balanced design—ideally limited to 3 stories —that respects the sunlight and privacy of the existing residents.
Thank you for considering my concerns. I can be reached at for any questions:
[email protected]
Mobile: 650-421-3202
Yours sincerely,
Eric Yuen
Owner and HOA Treasurer
532 Channing Ave, Unit 301, Palo Alto, CA 94301
From: Deborah Dooley
To: Sauls, Garrett
Subject: 910 Webster Project
Date: Saturday, April 4, 2026 10:44:52 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
I am writing this letter in response to the proposed project at 910 Webster St.
The proposal suggests nearly tripling, 24 to 70 residents, the tenant population, and reducing the driveways from three to one. This one driveway in the center of a primary school corridor is unsafe and hazardous. This is going to maximize traffic problems, which already exist during school commuter hours.
The 900 block of Webster is a high-density and high-traffic area, both for cars and pedestrians. This block is next to Addison Elementary School and one of the primary entrances to the school campus.
The street, the parking, and the pedestrian traffic is extremely high during school commuter hours.
At this time, there are currently parking problems, and the street that the proposal suggests one driveway for both entrances and exits will make this unsafe for the student population.
Parking in this area is currently a problem due to over 100 Channing House employees parking on the streets, the Webster Wood, a high-density housing unit, tenant and guest parking on the streets, and Addison School parking on this block. As a private homeowner, there is often no parking available. This additional car parking will make parking a nightmare. Due to the single driveway, which will slow exiting, some tenants will use street parking, and guests will also park on the street.
I have attached photos of street parking to show the current parking status.
One driveway will slow garage parking traffic. This will result in more tenants parking on the street to avoid this.
I have attached photos showing the dense parking currently in this block This proposal is showing minimal concern for the people who currently live in this neighborhood.
The increase in traffic congestion, parking scarcity, noise pollution, environmental pollution, and the loss of natural sunlight to the neighborhood and its residents is at a high cost to current residents.
I live next door, 934 Webster. This proposed single driveway will be 15 feet from my bedroom windows. 140 tenants using this single driveway will create noise and environmental pollution in my home. What is my recourse?
There are enough congestion problems on this block without making what is already bad even worse. I encourage you to take a survey of school commute times to understand what a hazardous environment this proposal creates.
There is a significant loss of sunlight to all surrounding residents.
There is a significant loss of privacy to all surrounding residents.
There is a significant increase in environmental pollution for all existing residents.
This is a block that transitions from 2 and 3-story buildings to single-level homes.
Adding a six-story home is not appropriate for this site. The streets cannot accommodate this. A building with this many tenants needs to be on a street with four lanes of traffic, not in a high- impact, congested area.
I have attached 3 parking pictures. These pictures are NOT during school commuting times.
Deborah Dooley
934 Webster Street
From: David Goldberg
To: Sauls, Garrett
Subject: 910 Webster
Date: Friday, April 3, 2026 4:08:48 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
Dear Garrett Sauls,
This letter is regarding the proposed 70 unit condominium development at the corner of Webster and Channing Ave, which would replace the Webster Oaks Apartments. The site is a good location for more housing, because it can support an increase in density and at the same time be respectful of the lower density neighbors. But the proposed design doesn't take advantage of that opportunity: it does increase the density but it towers above the neighboring homes, casting a large shadow. I urge that in return for rezoning the property, the council require the developer to be more sensitive to us lower density neighbors.
Let me focus on the impacts on my own home, a condo bordering the west side of the proposed development, which has half the height and 1/3 the density.
On the plus side, the proposal has 1.86 parking spots/unit, which is more than the existing apartment complex. And although parts of the proposed building are only 10 ft from our joint property line, the primary exterior wall is 22' away. Also, the architect has updated the plan to add more trees to visually screen our properties from one another. This is all good. But there is virtually no step down toward our homes on the west side. We will be facing an almost straight 6-story vertical wall. As a consequence, in the summer, the morning sun won't shine on our building until after 10:30 am. The illustration titled "Height Transition" on page 4 of their plans gives a visualization of how much the new condo would tower over our condo.
None of this necessary, because there are designs for this site that would support a significantly increased density without having this negative impact on neighbors.
The residents of this neighborhood purchased their homes in the belief that although we have one very tall building (Channing House), the rest would be a mixed-use neighborhood with buildings topping out at three stories. The proposed 6-story project strikes me as more of an initial bargaining offer than a serious proposal that would balance the amount of extra density against harmful impact to the rest of the neighborhood.
In summary, please consider tying any rezoning with a requirement that the project be more suitable for this transitional location, by either lowering the height or having more step down.
David Goldberg
This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.
This is their first email to you.
Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
532 Channing Ave #201
Palo Alto, CA
From: Catherine Cohen
To: Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Opposition to Rezoning Proposal – 910 Webster Street (Channing & Webster) Date: Friday, April 3, 2026 4:44:24 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
Dear Members of the Palo Alto City Council,
I am writing to share my concerns regarding the proposed redevelopment of the Webster Oaks apartment building located at 910 Webster Street, at the corner of Channing Avenue and Webster Street.
I live at 503 Channing Avenue, at the corner of Cowper and Channing, just one block from the proposed site. Given my proximity, I experience firsthand the current traffic, parking, and safety conditions in this area.
The current proposal would replace an existing two-story, 24-unit apartment complex with a six-story, 70-unit condominium development, requiring rezoning of the site. While I support the need for additional housing in Palo Alto, I strongly oppose the rezoning of this site as currently proposed.
This project, in its current form, raises significant concerns related to neighborhood compatibility, safety, and infrastructure impacts.
Scale and Neighborhood Compatibility
A six-story building is not consistent with the surrounding one / two story homes, with only a few 3 story apartment complexes. A six-story complex will fundamentally alter the character of this neighborhood.
While Channing House is a 12-story structure nearby, it has been part of the community since the 1960s, and much of the surrounding neighborhood developed around it. It also functions more as a business/institutional use, bringing with it significant impacts, including more activity, delivery trucks, service vehicles, and emergency response vehicles blocking lanes.
Residents in this area are already dealing with the impacts of that scale and use. For those living closest to Channing House, noise and activity, particularly near the loading and service areas are disruptive, with deliveries sometimes occurring as early as 3:00 AM.
Introducing an additional high-density, multi-story development would further intensify these impacts and significantly change the dynamics of what is currently a residential neighborhood.
This proposal risks creating a precedent for additional large-scale buildings without appropriate transition in height or density. A six-story structure would be out of character and This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.
Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
disproportionately impactful in this setting.
Traffic, Safety, and Congestion
This area is already heavily impacted by traffic and presents real safety concerns, conditions that would be materially worsened by a development of this scale.
Channing Avenue is a key thoroughfare to 101, with an elementary school just one block away. Children frequently walk and bike through this area.
Vehicles traveling from Waverly toward Middlefield often exceed the 25-mph speed limit, making the Channing/Webster intersection particularly dangerous.
Channing House delivery / service trucks and emergency vehicles frequently block one lane of this one-way street, causing ongoing traffic and safety issues.
Residents of Channing House regularly walk in the neighborhood, further increasing the need for safe and predictable traffic conditions.
Adding a development of this scale will significantly increase traffic in the area, and those impacts will not be limited to Webster Street, they will spill over onto Channing and further worsen an already constrained and impacted situation.
The proposed development would significantly increase the number of residents and vehicles while consolidating access into a single driveway, which is likely to create additional congestion and bottlenecks at an already impacted intersection.
Parking and Delivery Impacts
Street parking in this area is already limited due to Channing House staff and visitors, school- related activity, and existing neighborhood demand.
Currently, delivery and rideshare vehicles can pull into the existing property. With a larger, denser development and fewer access points, these vehicles will likely double park on surrounding streets, increasing congestion and creating additional safety risks.
Commercial Use and Loading Dock Concerns
I strongly oppose the inclusion of a restaurant within this development, which introduces a commercial use into what is currently a residential area.
A restaurant will require a dedicated loading dock, which is proposed along Webster Street.
This loading area would be directly adjacent to existing homes, including a one-story residence, and near other neighboring properties. The noise associated with deliveries, trash pickup, and ongoing service activity would have a direct and negative impact on nearby residents.
In addition to increased traffic, this introduces an ongoing operational impact that is not consistent with the character of the neighborhood.
Construction Impacts
There are also important unanswered questions regarding construction logistics:
Where will construction vehicles be staged?
Will workers be transported into the site, or will additional vehicles compete for already limited neighborhood parking? We have the RPP program in place in this neighborhood.
How will disruption to residents be minimized during construction? Given the scale of this project, these impacts will be significant and should be clearly addressed.
Housing Priorities
While I strongly support increasing housing supply in Palo Alto, this project does not appear to address one of the City’s most critical needs: affordable housing. Increasing density without meaningfully contributing to affordability raises important questions about how this project aligns with broader community goals.
For these reasons, I urge the City Council to deny the rezoning request as currently proposed.
I would strongly urge the City to work with the developer on a more balanced alternative, one that meaningfully increases housing while remaining compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. A reduced-scale development, such as a project limited to approximately three stories with appropriate transitions to adjacent properties, would be far more consistent with the character of the area and would mitigate many of the concerns outlined above.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Catherine Cohen
From: Doris Stoessel
To: Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Opposition to the Rezoning Proposal - 910 Webster Street Date: Monday, April 6, 2026 10:01:35 AM
Dear members of the Palo Alto City Council:
I am writing this e-mail to share my concerns regarding the proposed redevelopment of the Webster Oaks apartment complex located at 910 Webster Street. But first let me introduce myself: my name is Doris Stoessel, and I have owned 533 Channing Avenue (one of 24 units in the five building Channing Place Homeowners' Association complex located at 501-547 Channing Avenue) since June of 1982.
I am opposed to redeveloping the Webster Oaks apartment complex for many reasons and am listing four major concerns highlighted below, each followed by a detailed explanation of that specific concern.
1. Too much additional traffic on four city streets: Channing Avenue, Addison Avenue, Homer Avenue, and Webster Street
Let's face it: replacing the 24 unit Webster Oaks apartment complex with a 70 unit complex is going to triple the number of cars currently entering and exiting the complex. I don't have an exact number, but because the residents of our 24 unit Channing Place HOA have roughly 40 vehicles, I am going to assume that the current residents of the Webster Oaks apartment complex also have roughly 40 vehicles. And doing the math leads me to believe that a 70 unit complex would therefore have 120 vehicles. These four city streets were not designed to support an additional 80 (120-40) vehicles each day.
2. Additional traffic will be a hazard to pedestrians on Addison Avenue, Webster Street, and Channing Avenue
Some residents on the 70-unit complex will connect each day from Middlefield to Webster via Homer Avenue and some will connect via Addison Avenue. There's a lot of slow-moving pedestrian traffic on Addison and Webster each morning and afternoon as children and parents walk to and from Addison Elementary School. And there's a lot of slow-moving pedestrian traffic on Webster and Channing as the residents of Channing House stroll around the neighborhood. Adding an additional 80 vehicles each day to this area can only lead to tragic accidents.
3. More (speeding) traffic on Channing Avenue
Channing Avenue is a major connector for Palo Alto residents who live between Alma and Middlefield, and in my opinion, there's already too much traffic on this two lane city street.
There are at least five stop signs along Channing at its western end, but there are no stop signs between Waverley and Middlefield, and drivers speed up along these three blocks despite the 25 mph speed limit. Fourteen of the 24 units in the Channing Place HOA complex enter/exit the complex via a narrow driveway separating our units from Channing House, and near- accidents occur too frequently as we pull onto Channing Avenue at a low speed. Adding up to an additional 80 vehicles each day to this area can only lead to accidents as we try to exit our complex.
4. Lack of sufficient overnight parking spots on Webster Street and Channing Avenue
The 24-unit Channing Place HOA complex includes garages for its residents, but due to the small size of these garages, the residents have to park roughly 16 of their 40 vehicles on the street each night. By my estimate, the residents of the proposed 70 unit complex would end up having to park 50 (120-70) vehicles on the street each night, but there just aren't 50 parking spaces available. They will end up parking on residential streets south of Addison or forcing us to have to park overnight on residential streets of Addison.
In summary, the proposed complex at 910 Webster Street is too much large for our neighborhood and our city streets. Please do not approve it.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
...Doris A. Stoessel
From: Alfred
To: Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Regarding proposed condominium project at Webster Oaks Date: Friday, April 3, 2026 4:42:53 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
Mr. Sauls:
I reside on the corner of Cowper St and Channing Ave. in Palo Alto. I have lived here for over 36 years. After our brief phone conversation I have elected to submit my comments to you through this email. Please add my comments to the presentation to the City Council when they convene on April 20th, 2026.
In response to the proposed Webster Oaks condominium project I am opposed to the proposed condominium project for the following reasons:
There have been no six story structures permitted or built in the Professorville neighborhood in this century.
A project of this magnitude would be out of scale with the rest of the residential area and would set a precedent for additional large scale residential development in this neighborhood.
The area where the proposed condominium project is already congested with vehicle traffic, including delivery trucks, because both the Channing House and Addison Elementary School which are nearly adjacent to the proposed project.
The disturbance and disruption, both during the construction and in the operation of this large condominium project would severely impact the daily life of the seniors living at the Channing House.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Alfred J. Mandel
915 Cowper St.
Palo Alto
This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.
This is their first email to your company.
Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
From: mountain view
To: Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Webster Oaks apartment building project
Date: Sunday, April 5, 2026 1:27:36 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
Hello Admins,
I am writing to formally express my disagreement with the proposed building project currently under consideration.
While I understand the intent to support development and growth, I would like to elaborate on several specific concerns regarding the proposed building project:
1. Parking and Traffic Safety: Street parking in this area is already severely constrained, with occupancy rates exceeding 95% on most days. Given the proximity to Addison Elementary School, additional residential units would further intensify congestion. This will make student drop-off and pick-up significantly more difficult and could increase safety risks for children due to heavier traffic and reduced visibility.
2. Impact on School Capacity: Many families choose to live in this neighborhood because of the quality of the local public schools. Increasing the number of housing units may lead to a rise in student enrollment that exceeds the current capacity of nearby schools, potentially affecting class sizes, resources, and the overall quality of education in the community.
3. Safety Considerations: Taller, denser buildings near an elementary school may introduce additional safety and security concerns. It is important that any development near schools carefully assess potential risks and ensure appropriate measures are in place to protect students and staff.
I believe that these factors have not been fully addressed and warrant more careful evaluation before any decisions are finalized. I respectfully urge the relevant authorities to reconsider or further review the proposal, taking into account community feedback and long-term consequences.
I appreciate your time and attention to this matter and hope that my concerns will be given due consideration.
Sincerely,
VM
This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.
This is their first email to your company.
Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
From: Robert Ord
To: Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Webster Oaks Proposal
Date: Sunday, April 5, 2026 5:41:13 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
To Garrett Sauls,
I live at 940 Webster Street two doors down from the Webster Oaks Apartments. I strongly oppose any changes to current zoning ordinances that would allow the newly proposed 70 units to be built at the Webster Oaks property. Parking is already a highly congested problem on our street!!! Sincerely,
Robert Ord
Property owner
From: victor greene
To: Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Re: Application # 26PLN-00026
Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2026 2:40:08 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
Re: Application # 26PLN-00026
Palo Alto City Council Prescreening Hearing April 20, 2026 Attention: Project Planner Garrett Sauls
I am Victor Greene.
I am the homeowner at 581 Addison Avenue, Palo Alto, CA.
The current property at 910 Webster Street, commonly known as the Webster Oaks apartment building, contains 20 living units in a two story structure.
I am concerned about the proposal to rezone the site at 910 Webster Street to a planned community and redevelop the parcel with a new residential condominium building.
The current zoning district is RM-20.
The proposed rezoning is to zone the district as a PHZ district.
A PHZ district is wholly disproportionate to the existing community.
The surrounding homes and multifamily structures such as apartment houses and condominium structures are no more than two stories in height.
The existing structures are in conformity with the prevailing neighborhood aesthetics.
The Webster Oaks apartment building sits on the corner of Webster and Channing streets.
Channing House, a building directly across on the opposite corner, is zoned PC-8659.
Channing house was erected in the early 1960s and is zoned as a community building for elderly people to receive and enjoy lifetime care.
Channing House is a benefit to our community.
Not so with the proposal to rezone 910 Webster Street.
The disparate impact of a PHZ structure that may rise to anywhere from eighty-one to ninety-two feet in height would overwhelm the residents our community who live in no more than two story high homes.
The proposed condominium project of six stories in height would negatively impact its neighbors.
I and my neighbors do not live downtown where high rise structures are consistent with downtown Palo Alto.
We reside in a charming old neighborhood in what began as cottages adjacent to Stanford University.
Our small lots and diminutive homes of old Palo Alto remain a tribute to the beauty and charm of our city.
I urge the City Council to prevail upon the proposer of the project submitted in Application # 26PLN-00026 to limit the project to RN-20 zoning with no more than twenty units and a structure no higher than two stories.
Respectfully submitted,
Victor Greene
This message needs your attention
You've never replied to this person.
Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
From: Sophia Tyra
To: Sauls, Garrett
Cc: ROY TYRA
Subject: Proposed Development at Channing & Webster
Date: Thursday, April 9, 2026 10:35:31 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
Hello Garrett,
I am a homeowner at 519 Channing Avenue. It was brought to my attention by our HOA that a developer has submitted a preliminary application for a high rise housing development at the corner of Channing and Webster, which is across the street from where I live.
I would like to express my deep concerns for this proposed development. 1) Our zone is residential and although we’re in the downtown, the height and scale of surrounding buildings 3 stories or less. What makes me love my neighborhood is the “homey” feel, with open air views and daylight and trees for homeowners and pedestrians. A high rise development is not conducive to the current look and feel of the neighborhood nor does it fit the vibe of a Palo Alto residential neighborhood. It will cast shadows on surrounding homes and block critical views.
2) If the developer is relying on Channing House as a justifiable precedent for high rise buildings in this neighborhood, they are surely wrong. I live next to Channing House (adjacent to their loading dock side). Not only is that building disproportionally taller than all homes in the surrounding area, CH has proven to be a terrible neighbor to all of us. Between noisy delivery trucks that deliver at all hours day/night, street parking congestion and smoking and littering by their staff, we are all fed up with CH and we don’t want to see a similar development (size/scale) in our neighborhood.
3) Over the last 8-10 years, traffic on Channing Avenue has increased so much so that’s it’s become a main thoroughfare from Alma to Middlefield. There’s public buses, FedEx/UPS/Amazon trucks and countless delivery cars such as Door Dash along our street. This has resulted in drivers not abiding by the speed limit and/or driving the wrong way on a one way street. It’s natural to assume that this new development will add more congestion and traffic concerns with its occupants. A traffic study is necessary. There is a pedestrian crosswalk at Channing and Webster but it doesn’t deter speeders. Young families and children need to tread carefully on these streets to get to/from Addison Elementary. A traffic light intersection should be instalked and I hope that the developer provides an underground parking garage for the tenants. There is a lack of street parking as it stands currently.
This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.
This is their first email to your company.
Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
I realize that I’m submitting my comments a bit late but I hope that you consider them in your findings. I would also like to attend any public hearings on this development.
Thanks,
Sophia Tyra
Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS