Palo Alto City Council
August 17, 2026

From: Pamela Mayerfeld
To: Council, City
Subject: Please don’t allow ADUs to get even bigger in Palo Alto Date: Saturday, August 15, 2026 5:04:30 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.

Dear City Council,
Some of the ADU‘s which are already being built in Palo Alto are huge monstrosities. Take a look at this one in our neighborhood which was recently installed (it was dropped into the property vs being built here). It encroaches horribly on the next-door neighbor and the light in their house. I can’t imagine what this homeowner would’ve installed if they would have been allowed an even larger structure. I’m not against ADUs in principle, but please have some consideration of the character of Palo Alto (and why we chose to live here) when allowing them.

Thank you,
Pam Mayerfeld

Sent from my iPhone
From: [email protected]
To: Council, City; Lait, Jonathan
Subject: Item 6 ADUs
Date: Sunday, August 16, 2026 11:54:48 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.

Dear Mayor Veenker and council members,
I see the following benefits and expanded opportunities from the approval of larger ADUs combined with the opportunity to own and sell the units.

The major benefit and expanded opportunity is the ability to develop starter homes that are more affordable than the SFHs in Palo Alto and also more affordable than the townhomes recently approved.

It is only a starter home if you can own it.

The city has a strong goal of making new housing affordable to new and younger families, which passage of attachment 1 and attachment 3 allows.

There is a benefit of undetermined magnitude to allow older homeowners to downsize while they remain in the community and maintain an ownership stake.

There is a benefit to SFH owners to develop an ADU that can be sole and bring in immediate cash.

The ability to sell/own the ADU will reduce the financing costs (and cost) to the SFH owner to build and the new owner to buy.

To further reduce costs and a barrier to achieving the numerous benefits, impact fees on the larger units should be eliminated. Impact fees are being reduced in other cities to increase affordability by reducing costs.

The way to deal with possible unintended consequences of the new ADU ordinances i NOT by waiting to see what happens in other cities but rather by writing strict and enforceable standards into the ordinances while not interfering with the numerous benefits.

Stephen Levy
From: Jeremy Levine
To: Council, City; Lait, Jonathan; Frick, Coleman; Armer, Jennifer Cc: Scottoneil; Jkelley; Steve Levy; Bryan Baker; Rika Yamamoto; Allan Feldman Subject: Public Comment: Agenda Item 6, promoting ADU starter homes in Palo Alto Date: Sunday, August 16, 2026 3:21:07 PM
Attachments: 2026.8.16 Public Comment Agenda Item 6 Promoting ADU Starter Homes.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
!
Good afternoon Palo Alto City Council (and staff!),
On behalf of Palo Alto Forward, please see the attached comment regarding the city's updated ADU ordinance and proposed draft language for separate conveyance of ADUs, or "starter home ADUs." We support the council and staffs' efforts to promote lower-cost home ownership options in Palo Alto.

Thank you for your consideration,
Jeremy
This message could be suspicious
The sender's email address couldn't be verified.

This is their first mail to some recipients.

Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
August 16, 2026 Palo Alto City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 RE: Agenda Item 6, ADU ordinance update and 21st century starter homes in Palo Alto Dear Mayor Veenker, Vice Mayor Stone, and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, Palo Alto Forward supports policies to further housing affordability and multi-mobility accessibility

in

Palo

Alto.

ADUs

have

formed

an

essential

part

of

the

City's

housing

strategy,

consistently

resulting

in

the

permitting

of

more

than

100

ADUs

annually—even

higher

than

the

64 ADUs

projected

in

Palo

Alto's

housing

element.

ADUs can become 21st century starter homes in Palo Alto, increasing our community’s economic

diversity.

With

appropriate

reforms,

ADUs

will

allow

more

young

families

to

join

our

community

and

more

children

to

attend

Palo

Alto’s

extraordinary

schools;

create

space

for

multi-generational

households;

and

enable

longtime

community

members

to

“downsize

in

place,”

thereby

freeing

up

primary

dwellings

for

new

families.

To further promote ADUs as 21st century starter homes, Palo Alto Forward supports the following

policies:

● Amend and adopt staff report attachment C, allowing ADU-condo homes to be sold separately from the main house, using a clean AB 1033 approach rather than a

costly

and

expensive

SB

9-inspired

approach.

City

Staff’s

proposed

ordinance

adds

unnecessary

complications,

introducing

additional

costs

and

delays

that

will

make

ADU

homeownership

far

more

expensive.

We

strongly

recommend

that

the

City

Council

instead:
○ Ask City Staff, and especially the City Attorney, to identify all of the specific sections of attachment C that are not mandated by AB 1033 ( see Gov. C. § 66342), some of which should be deleted. Broadly, our principle is that the city’s ordinance will most effectively promote ADU homeownership by implementing what

is

required

by

state

statute

without

additional

bells

and

whistles.

See

our

appendix

for

more

exploration

of

unclear

requirements

in

the

draft

ordinance.

○ Delete the requirement that applicants seeking to create ADU-condo homes notify

homeowners

within

600

feet.

That's

a

big

and

expensive

mailer,

the

cost

of

which

will

be

passed

along

to

applicants.

Furthermore,

staff

will

approve

applications

for

ADU-condo

homes

ministerially,

so

notification

requirements

don’t

provide

any

meaningful

information

to

neighbors

and

simply

waste

money.

1 ○ Amend Section 21.09.030(m), which gives the Planning Director discretion to set fees

for

applications

for

parcel

maps

for

ADU-condo

homes.

This

creates

a

subjective,

unpredictable,

and

possibly

burdensome

fee

structure.

Palo

Alto

Forward

prefers

a

predictable

and

straightforward

fee

structure.
● Allow 1,400 or preferably 1,600 square foot ADUs in the updated ADU ordinance. While the PTC correctly recommended increasing the maximum size of ADUs in Palo Alto,

a

1,200-square-foot

limit

is

insufficient

for

family-sized

21st

century

starter

homes.

Homeowners

who

have

lived

for

decades

in

2,500

sf,

3,000

sf,

or

larger

homes

will

find

it

difficult

to

“downsize

in

place”

even

to

1,200

sf

ADUs.

To

create

ADUs

that

are

large

enough

both

for

small

families

and

downsizing

older

adults—ADUs

that

can

accommodate

3 bedrooms,

2 bathrooms,

living

rooms,

and

reasonable

kitchens—a

1,400

square

feet

would

be

a

minimum.

● Waive all impact fees on ADUs; or at least end the ADU fee cliff . Palo Alto charges no

impact

fees

on

scrapes,

single-family

home

teardowns

that

might

change

an

1,800

square

foot

single-family

home

to

a

4,000

square

foot

one.

ADUs

should

have

the

same

benefits.

While

Palo

Alto

Forward

prefers

a

100%

waiver

of

impact

and

building

fees

for

ADUs,

we

would

support

a

compromise

proposal

that

means

ADUs

start

paying

impact

fees

exclusively

on

project

square

footage

above

750

square

feet.
1 Right

now,

ADUs

smaller

than

750

square

feet

pay

no

impact

fees;

an

ADU

750

square

feet

or

larger

pays

impact

fees

calculated

on

its

entire

square

footage.

As

a

result,

a

homeowner

building

an

ADU

might

go

from

paying

$0

dollars

in

impact

fees

on

a

749

square

foot

ADU

to—depending

on

the

size

of

the

main

house—paying

$13,987.50

in

parks

impact

fees

alone

on

a

750

square

foot

ADU,

or

$22,380

on

a

1,200

square

foot

ADU.

And

that’s

just

one

single

fee

among

many.

At

most,

ADUs

should

pay

impact

fees

on

the

marginal

square

footage

above

750

square

feet.

Treating ADUs as 21st century starter homes — including simple and less expensive ADU-condo

procedures

—

can

advance

housing

affordability

in

Palo

Alto.

In

San

Jose,

the

first
“ADU-condo-home” recently sold for $530,000 — less than 40% of the median home price. We expect significant uptake of ADU-condo homes — which have only been allowed under state law

in

the

last

two

years

—

as

more

and

more

cities

embrace

ADUs

as

21st

century

starter

homes.

Additional

study

or

delay

will

not

affect

the

merits

of

the

policy;

ADU

starter

homes

complement

other

policies

that

promote

ADUs.

Thus far, the success of ADUs in Palo Alto has hinged almost entirely on state laws streamlining ADU

production,

creating

clear

standards

for

building

ADUs,

and

removing

fees

on

smaller

ADUs.

We

hope

Palo

Alto

will

continue

building

on

this

success

with

local

prerogatives

to

increase

allowable

ADU

size,

promote

ADU-condo

homes,

and

eliminate

burdensome

and

unfair

fees.

1 SB 1117, a proposed state law likely to pass this year, would also remove the fee cliff by limiting the impact

fees

cities

charge

on

larger

ADUs

to

the

marginal

square

footage

above

750

square

feet.

We

strongly

prefer

waiving

fees

entirely,

as

the

city

would

recoup

"lost"

revenue

through

increased

property

tax

revenue

generated

by

more

ADUs

being

built

in

the

first

place

bringing

taxpayers.

2 Thank you for your consideration,
Jeremy Levine Executive Director, Palo Alto Forward John Kelley
3 Appendix: Additional Notes on ADU Condo Ordinance Attachment C Several sections of Palo Alto’s proposed ADU condo ordinance appear to have been copied and pasted

from

San

Jose’s

ordinance.

These

sections

often

(1)

create

unnecessary

uncertainty

or

ambiguity

or

(2)

contain

language

that

may

not

apply

to

Palo

Alto

or

further

the

ultimate

purpose

of

promoting

lower-cost

ADU

homeownership.

Relevant

sections

include:

● Section 21.09.010 refers to “objective local development standards for condominium subdivisions…”

without

specifying

the

portion(s)

of

the

Palo

Alto

Municipal

Code

to

which

such

reference

is

being

made.
○ Cf. Gov. C. § 66342(b), “The condominiums shall be created in conformance with all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act (Division 2 (commencing

with

Section

66410))

and

all

objective

requirements

of

a

local

subdivision

ordinance
.”

(Emphasis

added.)
● Section 21.09.030(b) creates ambiguity regarding which ADUs can be made into ADU-condo

homes.

The

section

appears

to

require

that

all

structures

and

buildings

on

a

proposed

ADU-condo

parcel

comply

with

“the

building

and

zoning

requirements

applicable

to

the

zoning

district….”

One

apparent

problem,

among

others,

is

that

there

are

different

requirements

that

apply

to

primary

dwellings

as

opposed

to

ADUs,

and

even

different

requirements

that

apply

to

some

ADUs

and

not

others.

Consequently,

such

overly

broad

language

risks

restricting

the

ability

of

almost

all

ADUs

built

using

state

ADU

law

(the

vast

majority

of

ADUs

built

in

Palo

Alto)

to

be

converted

into

condos.

(For

example,

does

this

proposed

language

mean

that

an

ADU

built

in

compliance

with

state

law

(
e.g
.

Gov.

C.

Section

66323)

in

an

R-1

property’s

rear

setback

may

not

become

an

ADU-condo

home?)

Palo

Alto

Forward

would

appreciate

clarity

regarding

why

this

section

exists

in

the

proposed

ordinance

and

whether

it

serves

any

meaningful

purpose.
● Section 21.09.030(e) imposes several requirements for a “home or property owners’ association”

(HOA)

to

be

created

for

any

new

ADU-condo

home,

including

specific

provisions

concerning

“administration,

management

and

maintenance

of

all

common

areas

including

landscaping,

drive

aisles

and

parking

areas,

maintenance

of

the

exterior

of

all

buildings,

pool

or

common

roof,

the

collection

of

dues,

payment

of

public

utilities

not

billed

separately

to

each

unit,

and

enforcement

of

standards

within

the

project.”

Complex

topics

in

HOAs

suitable

for

large,

multi-family

projects

may

not

make

sense

for

“one-main-house-one-ADU-condo-home”

HOAs.

HOAs

are

also

private

agreements;

the

City

need

not

predetermine

the

agreement

between

the

actual

homeowners.
● Section 21.09.030(f)(1) requires city approval of any changes to CC&Rs recorded between

a

primary

dwelling

and

any

ADU-condo

home.

CC&Rs

are

private

agreements

between

owners

in

a

condo

association;

the

city

need

not

involve

itself

in

changes

to

such

agreements

among

private

homeowners.
● Section 21.09.030(j)(2) requires that applicants provide information regarding “scenic trees”

as

part

of

any

application.

Palo

Alto

does

not

appear

to

have

a

clear

definition

of

“scenic

trees”

in

its

municipal

code;

this

language

should

be

amended

to

reflect

trees

actually

described

in

Palo

Alto’s

code.

4 From: Amie Ashton
To: Council, City
Subject: Support for ADUs
Date: Monday, August 17, 2026 12:28:11 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.

Honorable Council,
As someone who was able to enter the property market 20 years ago ONLY as a result of an initial investment in a small condo, I very much support new opportunities for new homeowners (and renters) in our community.

I support ordinance changes to make ADUs independently sellable, more affordable, larger, and faster to build. Why?
- They can provide ownership opportunities for a similar price as a condo. - They provide opportunities for intergenerational families to live together but in their own spaces.
- They can provide emergency and temporary housing for friends and family members who desperately need it.
- They provide needed missing-middle housing opportunities with gentle density. As we all know, the real estate market is not currently providing ownership condos due to a host of reasons, but for-sale ADUs are incredible solution to this embedded problem. - They allow homeowners to diversify a weighted property investment without selling, allow older adults to age in place, and provide young families a path to ownership in our community.

I am aware that no one solution is going to solve our housing crisis, especially given the low number of ADUs built annually in Palo Alto. We need 100 solutions - and I truly believe this could be a very important one.

Thank you,
Amie Ashton