Item 11 Public Comment — Palo Alto City Council, September 9, 2026

From: Jessica Resmini
Subject: Please Retain the 800 SF ADU Exemption — PTC Hearing September 9 Date: Thursday, September 3, 2026 8:36:59 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
!
Dear Members of the Palo Alto City Council and Planning & Transportation Commission, I am writing as a Palo Alto homeowner to urge you to retain the City's current policy exempting the first 800 square feet of an ADU from FAR and other floor-area limits, as adopted in 2020. I understand the PTC will review this issue on September 9 before making a recommendation to Council — after which the Council could act the same evening — and I want to flag a real inequity in eliminating this exemption.

Under the current policy, this exemption applies uniformly — whether a homeowner already has a house on their lot or is building new. Remove it, and that uniformity disappears. A homeowner with an existing smaller home who builds an 800 sf ADU would permanently lose future expansion capacity for the main house. A developer who demolishes that same size home, builds a new primary residence to the maximum allowable FAR, and then adds an ADU would still receive the full benefit. Two identical lots, two very different outcomes — a disparity my own back-of-envelope math puts at roughly $1.4 million in property value, favoring teardown-and-rebuild over the family that's already there.

That's the opposite of what I understand this ordinance is supposed to encourage. If the goal is more ADUs and preserving housing stock, this policy should reward homeowners who add an ADU to a home they already own — not push them toward demolition to stay competitive with new construction.

I ask that the PTC recommend, and the Council ultimately vote, to retain the 800 sf exemption as it was originally intended and adopted.

Thank you for your time and for considering the impact this change would have on longtime Palo Alto homeowners.

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
Cheers,
Jessica Resmini
---
ADU|Collective
Build smart for flexible living.

Jessica Resmini
Architect & LEED AP
Mobile +1 415 823 3213
www.aducollective.com

BACKGROUND
Meeting Date: 8/17/2020
City of Palo Alto City Council Staff Report (ID # 11118)

Page 9 ends

6. Providing a Uniform Exemption of ADU Square Footage from FAR, Lot Coverage, and Maximum House Size Under State rules, the City must allow floor area over a property’s maximum allowable floor area (calculated with respect to site area as a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) maximum) to the extent necessary to construct an 800 sq. ft. ADU. This requirement was incorporated into both the Interim Ordinance and the proposed ordinance without modification. Thus, properties would be entitled to different amounts of exempt ADU square footage depending on the amount of
FAR available for the property after accounting for the primary residence.

This can be illustrated by imagining a 6,000 square foot R-1 lot, which would allow up to 2,550 sq. ft. of floor area. A homeowner with a 2,000 square foot primary residence on this property would be entitled to exempt up to 250 square feet of an 800 square foot ADU (550 remaining square feet + 250 square feet over the maximum FAR = 800 sf). In a second scenario, if the primary residence were 2,550 square feet, the property owner would be entitled to exempt all 800 square feet of the ADU. In a final scenario, if the primary residence were less than 1,750 square feet, ADU floor area exemption would not be required or provided. This creates an incentive for a property owner to build a primary home to the maximum FAR before applying for an ADU. This could have the effect of encouraging tear-down remodels. This approach to ADU square footage also makes it more difficult to construct an ADU over 800 sq. ft, as the entire square footage of the ADU would need to be accommodated within allowable FAR without any exemption. To avoid these effects and to encourage ADU production, staff and the PTC recommend the ordinance provide a uniform “bonus” for ADUs: only square footage above 800 sq. ft. would count towards the floor area maximum (FAR, lot coverage, or maximum house size). This approach could make it easier for the public to understand how these limits can impact what is allowed and make it easier for staff to implement. It also would remove a potential incentive to demolish an existing residence to max out FAR before building an ADU. Finally, this approach
would allow a property owner seeking to build a larger ADU to do so if there is additional FAR available for the site. A uniform approach to exempting ADU square footage would make it marginally easier to maximize the size of both a primary residence and an ADU by eliminating the two-step process. It is unclear to what extent this would impact the ultimate development of properties.

Meeting Date: 8/17/2026
City of Palo Alto City Council Staff Report (Report #: 2605-6356)

Page 7 ends

Codifying Local Practice for Table 1 Detached ADUs
The draft ordinance also includes a change to Table 1 to clarify staff’s interpretation and implementation of its provisions with respect to detached ADUs. Because Table 1 does not include the local bonus/exemption of 800 square feet offered in Table 2, any ADUs proposed under Table 1 are counted against the standard available FAR and lot coverage on a site. At the same time, FAR and lot coverage cannot be used to constrain or deny proposed Table 1 ADUs of up to 800 square feet. For example, if a site has 2,500 square feet of total development potential and an existing single-family home of 2,000 square feet, an 800 square foot Table 1 ADU would “use up” any remaining development potential, limiting future expansion of the primary home. Even though the ADU exceeds the available FAR in this scenario by 300 square feet, the City would still be required to permit it under State law. A homeowner could avoid these impacts on future development potential by instead proceeding under Table 2 (including local tree protection/privacy measures), which offers the local bonus/exemption. Staff presented this approach to Council during the 2020 ADU Ordinance update as a way to incentivize applicants to build using local standards. This would allow the City to support second-unit development while also providing some measures (such as privacy measures) to limit impacts on neighbors. Since then, the City has predominantly seen applicants following the local standards for second unit development instead of using State law allowances.

From: Shivin Devgon
To: Council, City; Planning Commission
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan; Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Public Comment to Council on Agenda Item 11 and PTC on Agenda Item 2: Promote ADUs for All Date: Friday, September 4, 2026 10:14:32 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
Hello planning commission and city council,
My name is Shivin and I live in California Ave. I want our community to create more opportunities for lower-cost homeownership through ADUs.

For PTC on Wednesday 9/9, please vote in favor of item 2 to allow ADU homeownership.

For City Council, please pull item 11 from the agenda and remove the "Main Home Penalty" against Table 1 ADUs by amending footnote 7 of Table 1.

I want to incentivize more housing being built to tackle the affordability crisis and help more young families with kids be able to afford a house near their jobs Thank you for supporting more homes in our community,
Shivin Devgon
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: Andrea Eckstein Gara
To: Council, City; Planning Commission
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan; Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Public Comment to Council: Agenda Item 11 and PTC on Agenda Item 2: Promote ADUs for All Date: Friday, September 4, 2026 10:39:33 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.

Dear Council Members and Planning Commission
Like many of us in Palo Alto, our family has seen changes over the years with more to come.

Having maximum flexibility with our house is top of mind for us. With both our kid's families and an aging parent, we want to ensure that we can change our house to accomodate our future needs, as well as those of our adult child and his family. Will we build an ADU in the future for a parent or ourselves? Will we want to expand the main home for our adult child's family to live in? Will we want to sell an ADU separately from the main house as we attempt to retire in an expensive area? Please keep our options for multi-generational living and aging in place open.

For PTC on Wednesday 9/9, please vote in favor of item 2 to allow ADU homeownership.

For City Council, please pull item 11 from the agenda and remove the "Main Home Penalty" against Table 1 ADUs by amending footnote 7 of Table 1.

Thank you,
Andrea Gara
Community Center
From: Kristen Lomax
To: Council, City; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Lu, George; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Veenker, Vicki; Planning Commission; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Please Retain the 800 SF ADU Exemption — PTC Hearing September 9 Date: Friday, September 4, 2026 12:06:09 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 and Planning & Transportation Commission,
I am writing as a Palo Alto homeowner to urge you to retain the City's current policy exempting the first 800 square feet of an ADU from FAR and other floor-area limits, as adopted in 2020. I understand the PTC will review this issue on September 9 before making a recommendation to Council — after which the Council could act the same evening — and I want to flag a real inequity in eliminating this exemption.

Under the current policy, this exemption applies uniformly — whether a homeowner already has a house on their lot or is building new. Remove it, and that uniformity disappears. A homeowner with an existing smaller home who builds an 800 sf ADU would permanently lose future expansion capacity for the main house. A developer who demolishes that same size home, builds a new primary residence to the maximum allowable FAR, and then adds an ADU would still receive the full benefit. Two identical lots, two very different outcomes — a disparity my own back-of- envelope math puts at roughly $1.4 million in property value, favoring teardown-and- rebuild over the family that's already there.

I ask that the PTC recommend, and the Council ultimately vote, to retain the 800 sf exemption as it was originally intended and adopted.

Thank you for your time and for considering the impact this change would have on Palo Alto homeowners.

This message needs your attention
This is their first mail to some recipients.

Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
Sincerely,
Kristen Lomax (1752 Emerson Street Palo Alto, CA)
--
Kristen Lomax
Partner
Fergus Garber Architects
www.fg-arch.com
650.644.7994
81 Encina Ave.

Palo Alto, CA 94301
From: Karen Marincovich
To: Council, City; Planning Commission
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan; Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Public Comment to Council on Agenda Item 11 and PTC on Agenda Item 2: Promote ADUs for All Date: Friday, September 4, 2026 12:29:30 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
Good Day City Council and Planning Commission,
My name is Karen Marincovich, and I live in the Downtown North Neighborhood of Palo Alto. I'd like our community to create more homeownership opportunities through ADUs.

These I believe add to the valuation of a property parcel. While creating more allowable housing, they nicely don't strangle neighborhoods with over-density. The county gains + revenue, as well, per another assessed property tax. This reads as a Win-Win formula!! For PTC on Wednesday 9/9, I would ask that you please vote in favor of item 2 to allow for our ADU community homeownership.

For City Council, please pull item 11 from the agenda and remove "Main Home Penalty" against Table 1 ADUs, by amending footnote 7 of Table 1.

We best incentivise, not penalize, methods whereby homeowners are encouraged, and rewarded for all their contributions to the City of Palo Alto, and County of Santa Clara.

I hope the above in support of ADU homes in our community, will be recognized, and of a realized value to every involved participant within this discussion.

Respectfully Submitted,
Karen Marincovich
This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.

Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
From: Russell Siegelman
To: Council, City; Planning Commission
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan; Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Public Comment to Council on Agenda Item 11 and PTC on Agenda Item 2: Promote ADUs for All Date: Friday, September 4, 2026 2:33:29 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
Hello planning commission and city council, My name is Russell Siegelman and I live in Old Palo Alto at 244 Santa Rita At. I want our community and all of Palo Alto to create more opportunities for lower-cost homeownership through ADUs and other means. I hear there is an important vote upcoming on this issue. For PTC on Wednesday 9/9, please vote in favor of item 2 to allow ADU homeownership. For City Council, please pull item 11 from the agenda and remove the "Main Home Penalty" against Table 1 ADUs by amending footnote 7 of Table

1. I think it is critical that we allow lower cost ownership of homes in Palo Alto. Taking these steps will be an important step in that direction and not doing so will create another impediment for allowing school teachers, fire fighters, police people and all others who deserve to live and own in Palo Alto.. Thank you for supporting more homes in our community,
Russell Siegelman
This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.

Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
From: Jeremy Levine
To: Council, City
Cc: Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan; Sauls, Garrett; Armer, Jennifer
Subject: Public Comment: Agenda Item 11, ADU ordinance; and Agenda Item 12, Rezoning 470 Olive Ave.

Date: Friday, September 4, 2026 3:19:24 PM
Attachments: 2026.9.9 Public Comment CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item 11 on ADUs; and Item 12 on Rezoning 470 Olive Street (1).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 members,
Please see the attached comment in support of rezoning 470 Olive Avenue, as proposed by staff. We also are requesting that council pull item 11, an update to the ADU ordinance, to make amendments to the "Main Home Penalty," which will arbitrarily punish homeowners who have built ADUs or plan to build them in the future.

Have a great weekend,
Jeremy
This message could be suspicious
The sender's email address couldn't be verified.

Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
September 9, 2026
Palo Alto City Council
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
RE: Agenda Item 11, ADU ordinance update; and Agenda Item 12, Rezoning 470 Olive Avenue
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. To that end, we have supported ADUs in Palo Alto to create more affordable options for seniors to downsize, children to move home, and essential workers to live in our community.

In order to promote ADUs, please remove Item 11 from consent to amend footnote 7 of Table 1.

This footnote codifies a “Main Home Penalty” in Palo Alto’s ADU ordinance, which would punish homeowners who have built an ADU or plan to build one without demolishing their primary home. We agree with staff that the ADU ordinance should be changed to add clarity around square footage exemptions, but the current proposed change penalizes homeowners who have built ADUs and does not reflect recent permitting practices for ADUs.

To avoid penalizing homeowners who build an ADU, Palo Alto should amend Table 1 to include the same Square Footage Exemption as Table 2 (see below) and amend footnote 7 of Table 1 to read: “Square footage of an ADU under this section shall not reduce the allowable square footage of a proposed single-family home any primary dwelling.” The Table 2 language we want inserted into Table 1:

Square Footage Exemption when in
conjunction with a single family
home1
Up to 800 sf
The context:
● As currently written, the ADU ordinance adds footnote 7 of Table 1, which reads “Square footage of a detached ADU under this section shall not reduce the allowable square footage of a proposed single-family home.” The word “proposed” has big implications:
1 New text for footnote 7 of Table 1 in the ordinance: “Square footage of an ADU under this section shall not reduce the allowable square footage of any primary dwelling.” 1 ○ If a single-family home owner demolishes their home and rebuilds it at the max FAR

along

with

800

square

foot

Table

1 ADU,

that

ADU

exempt

from

the

FAR

under

local

zoning

rules.

○ If a single-family homeowner remains in their more modest home and builds an 800

square

foot

Table

1 ADU,

they

would

lose

800

square

feet

FAR

for

their

primary

home

under

local

zoning

rules

they

ever

want

expand

their

house

the

future.
● Staff argue that footnote 7—which was not present in the ordinance council reviewed on August

17—clarifies

longstanding

staff

practice.

However:

○ While a uniform square foot exemption has not been codified for Table 1, City Council

had

this

exact

discussion

2020.

Then,

the

staff

report

recommended

uniform

exemption.
2 ○ Operating under the assumption that there is uniform exemption, ADU builders have

been

submitting

applications

pursuant

Table

1 with

the

exemption.

Staff

has

been

processing

Table

1 ADUs

that

include

800

square

foot

exemption.
○ Furthermore, ADU permitting applications in Palo Alto do not distinguish between Table

1 and

Table

2 ADUs.

That

means

homeowners

who

have

built

ADU

don’t

actually

know

which

ADUs

are

Table

1 or

Table

2 ADUs—and

it’s

not

clear

staff

either.

The

August

17 staff

report

claims

staff

have

been

informally

counting

Table

1 ADUs

toward

FAR;

that

the

case,

homeowners

who

have

built

ADUs

using

Table

1 are

unaware.

ADUs have formed an essential part of the City's housing strategy, consistently resulting in the permitting

than

100

ADUs

annually—even

higher

than

the

64 ADUs

projected

Palo

Alto's

housing

element.

State

law

has

played

essential

role

complimenting

Palo

Alto’s

local

efforts.

Palo Alto can continue building on its ADU success by amending footnote 7 to give Table 1 and Table

2 ADUs

uniform

square

footage

exemption.

Otherwise,

the

City

risks

penalizing

modest

homeowners

who

built

ADU

plan

the

future

while

remaining

their

modest

homes.

The

Main

Home

Penalty

should

removed

entirely

that

Palo

Alto

continues

its

leadership

ADU

development.

Separately, we support the staff recommendation to rezone 470 Olive Avenue from the NV-R1

designation

the

NV-MXM

medium-density

designation.

also

support

staff’s

intent

add

this

site

the

Housing

Element.

2 City of Palo Alto City Council Staff Report (ID # 11118): The report discusses “Providing a Uniform Exemption

ADU

Square

Footage

from

FAR,

Lot

Coverage,

and

Maximum

House

Size,”

which

staff

recommended

because

“This

approach

could

make

easier

for

the

public

understand

how

these

limits

can

impact

what

allowed

and

make

easier

for

staff

implement.

also

would

remove

potential

incentive

demolish

existing

residence

max

out

FAR

before

building

ADU.

Finally,

this

approach

would

allow

property

owner

seeking

build

larger

ADU

there

additional

FAR

available

for

the

site.”

2 470 Olive Avenue already contains a defunct commercial business. The parcel is immediately next

the

Camino

Real

Focus

Area.

When

creating

the

ECR

Focus

Area,

council

directed

staff

independently

evaluate

whether

the

site

would

sufficient

for

new

multi-family

housing.

Having

conducted

their

evaluation,

staff

now

have

proposed

moving

forward

with

mixed-use

designation

better

reflecting

the

property’s

existing

use

and

redevelopment

potential.

Palo Alto’s local zoning should broadly allow development on existing corridors. Most new development

the

City

has

approved

recent

years

has

been

proposed

pursuant

state

laws

the

Builder’s

Remedy

that

circumvent

local

process;

470

Olive

reflects

opportunity

for

the

council

demonstrate

local

prerogative

for

new

homes

the

places

where

the

City

has

stated

wants

them.

The

structure

for

this

business

built

out

the

lot

limits

two

sides.

Replacing

this

with

housing

under

NV-MXM

zoning

would

give

separation,

via

setback

requirements,

those

two

residential

neighbors.

In an SB 79 local alternative plan, Palo Alto should encourage additional height and density on this

site.

For

now,

however,

the

staff

recommendation

will

best

indicate

the

city’s

intent

promote

homes

this

location.

Thank you for your consideration,
Jeremy Levine Executive Director, Palo Alto Forward 3 From: Angela Dellaporta
To: Council, City; Planning Commission
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan; Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Public Comment to Council on Agenda Item 11 and PTC on Agenda Item 2: Promote ADUs for All Date: Friday, September 4, 2026 3:36:23 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.

Dear City Council and PTC Members,
Please incentivize the building of ADUs in Palo Alto.

For PTC on Wednesday 9/9, please vote in favor of item 2 to allow ADU homeownership.

For City Council, please pull item 11 from the agenda and remove the "Main Home Penalty" against Table 1 ADUs by amending footnote 7 of Table 1.

Thank you for supporting more homes in our community,
Angela Dellaporta
Ventura Neighborhood Resident
From: Judith Wasserman
To: Council, City; Planning Commission
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan; Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Public Comment to Council on Agenda Item 11 and PTC on Agenda Item 2: Promote ADUs for All Date: Friday, September 4, 2026 3:46:14 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
To the Planning Commission and City Council,
My name is Judith Wasserman and I live in Leland Manor. I want our community to create more opportunities for lower-cost homeownership through ADUs, among other methods.

ADUs have legislative policies and legal decisions backing them up.

For PTC on Wednesday 9/9, please vote in favor of item 2 to allow ADU homeownership.

Homeownership is one customary basis for generational wealth-building.

For City Council, please pull item 11 from the agenda and remove the "Main Home Penalty" against Table 1 ADUs by amending footnote 7 of Table 1.

ADUs are a minimal way of increasing density in the city without creating major visual changes to the cityscape.

Thank you for supporting more homes in our community,
Judith Wasserman
751 Southampton Drive
Palo Alto, California 94303
650-321-1987
This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.

This is their first mail to some recipients.

Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
From: Garrett Clark
To: Council, City; Planning Commission
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan; Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Public Comment to Council on Agenda Item 11 and PTC on Agenda Item 2: Promote ADUs for All Date: Friday, September 4, 2026 8:11:24 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.

Hello planning commission and city council,
My name is Garrett Clark and I live in Downtown North. I want our community to create more opportunities for lower-cost homeownership through ADUs.

For PTC on Wednesday 9/9, please vote in favor of item 2 to allow ADU homeownership.

For City Council, please pull item 11 from the agenda and remove the "Main Home Penalty" against Table 1 ADUs by amending footnote 7 of Table 1.

Thank you for supporting more homes in our community,
Garrett Clark
From: James Taylor
To: Council, City
Subject: Public Comment to Council on Agenda Item 11: Promote ADUs for All Date: Saturday, September 5, 2026 4:47:15 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
i
To the Palo Alto city council,
My name is James Taylor and I live in Greenmeadow. I have lived in Palo Alto 30 years. Now my kids are grown, I'd really like to downsize to a smaller, more modern house but the lack of development in Palo Alto makes this extraordinary difficult. ADUs represent a key element in Palo Alto's housing supply by making it easier to find smaller places to live and give those of us with houses that are now too big, a crucial way to reduce our own living space while generating retirement income.

Having reviewed the ADU item on your agenda, it seems clear this will penalize those who are adding ADUs to existing homes while favoring developers who are building a wholly new property. I don't believe this was ever the intent of ADUs - they were always meant to help home owners add a source of rental income. I urge you to pull item 11 from the agenda and remove the so-called "Main Home Penalty" against Table 1 ADUs by amending footnote 7 of Table 1.

Thank you
James
This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.

Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
From: Bill Fitch
To: Council, City; Planning Commission
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan; Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Public Comment to Council on Agenda Item 11 and PTC on Agenda Item 2: Promote ADUs for All Date: Sunday, September 6, 2026 7:47:23 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.

Hello planning commission and city council,
My name is Bill Fitch and I live in Evergreen Park. I want our community to create more opportunities for lower- cost homeownership through ADUs.

For PTC on Wednesday 9/9, please vote in favor of item 2 to allow ADU homeownership.

For City Council, please pull item 11 from the agenda and remove the "Main Home Penalty" against Table 1 ADUs by amending footnote 7 of Table 1.

I converted my garage to an ADU last spring. I provide housing for a Stanford postdoc. Please dont make it harder for others to do this..

Thank you for supporting more homes in our community,
Bill
From: Barb V
To: Council, City; Planning Commission
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan; Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Pathways to ownership - Public Comment to Council on Agenda Item 11 and PTC on Agenda Item 2: Promote ADUs for All
Date: Sunday, September 6, 2026 9:58:41 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.

Hello planning commission and city council,
My name is Barb Voss and I live in Palo Alto Redwoods (4250 El Camino Real C221). I want our community to create more opportunities for lower-cost homeownership through ADUs.

For PTC on Wednesday 9/9, please vote in favor of item 2 to allow ADU homeownership.

For City Council, please pull item 11 from the agenda and remove the "Main Home Penalty" against Table 1 ADUs by amending footnote 7 of Table 1.

As an educator who has worked in Palo Alto for 25 years, I know first hand how difficult it is to take the first step towards home ownership in this area. Home ownership provides stability and continuity for middle-class professionals like me who serve the Palo Alto community.

Thank you for supporting more homes in our community,
Barb (Barbara L. Voss)
From: [email protected]
To: Council, City
Cc: John Kelley; Jeremy Levine; Lait, Jonathan
Subject: ADU item on consent 9/9
Date: Sunday, September 6, 2026 10:50:04 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,
Please remove the ADU item from the consent calendar for the many reasons cited by John and Jeremy
AND
remove the item from the 9/9 council meeting and move to a later date AS
the, hopefully unintentional, scheduling of two important ADU items for council and PTC at the same date has the effect, hopefully unintentional, of disrupting/stifling public participation, participation that the council has been trying to make easier and more transparent.

Stephen Levy
This message could be suspicious
The sender's email address couldn't be verified.

Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
From: Alexandra Konings
To: Council, City; Planning Commission
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Burt, Patrick; Veenker, Vicki; Sauls, Garrett; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan
Subject: Public Comment to Council on Agenda Item 11 and PTC on Agenda Item 2: Promote ADUs for All Date: Monday, September 7, 2026 1:54:14 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
!
Hello planning commission and city council,
My name is Alexandra Konings and I am a homeowner in College Terrace. I want our community to create more opportunities for lower-cost homeownership through ADUs.

For PTC on Wednesday 9/9, please vote in favor of item 2.

For City Council, please pull item 11 from the agenda and remove the "Main Home Penalty" against Table 1 ADUs by amending footnote 7 of Table 1.

Regardless of your feelings about ADUs and the need for more homes in Palo Alto, it is unfair to allow only the richest citizens (those who can afford to build from an empty lot and add an ADU to a new construction project) to benefit from the ADU exemption on the FAR, while not allowing the same exemption for those who add an ADU to an existing home. This is extra unfair if we are not adequately informing homeowners with existing ADU projects of what the ADU is doing to their future ability to upgrade their home. Aside from fairness issues, disincentivizing ADUs in this way keeps property values lower than they could be, and thus reduces the sorely needed property tax income for the county and city.

Thank you
Alexandra Konings
This message could be suspicious
Similar name as someone you've contacted.

This is a personal email address.

Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
From: John Kelley
To: Council, City; Planning Commission; Shikada, Ed; Jensen, Christopher; Lait, Jonathan; Armer, Jennifer; Sauls, Garrett
Subject: PA-POLI-letter to (a) PACC re Agenda tem #11 re ADUs and (b) PTC re Agenda Item #2 re ADUs for 9/9/26 meetings
Date: Monday, September 7, 2026 9:32:29 PM
Attachments: PA-POLI-letter to PACC and PTC re 2026-09-09 meetings re ADUs-with exhibits.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.

Dear City Council, PTC, and City Staff,
Please see the attached letter regarding both the City’s Council’s September 9, 2026 meeting and the PTC’s September 9, 2026 meeting.

Respectfully submitted,
John Kelley
From: Rob Nielsen
To: Planning Commission; Council, City
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lu, George; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Lait, Jonathan; Sauls, Garrett
Subject: Public Comment to Council on Agenda Item 11 and PTC on Agenda Item 2: Promote ADUs for All Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2026 1:38:46 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.

Chair Chang and other planning commissioners, Mayor Venker and other city council members,
My name is Rob Nielsen and I live in Midtown. I would like to see our city offer newcomers today some of the same opportunities I had when I moved here in the 1980s. Among these opportunities is lower-cost homeownership, for which I would like to see the city make greater use of ADUs to facilitate this.

For the Planning and Transportation Commission, meeting on Wednesday September 9, I request that you vote in favor of item 2 on the agenda, which would provide for ADU homeownership. For the City Council, meeting on the same day, I request that you pull item 11 from the "consent agenda" in order to amend footnote 7 of Table 1 so that the "Main Home Penalty" against ADUs would be effectively removed.

These actions will greatly aid the creation of new housing opportunities in our community as well as bring new neighbors to Palo Alto—and the many benefits that entails.

Thank you for supporting more homes in Palo Alto.

Rob Nielsen
From: Sadhana Rau
To: Council, City; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Lu, George; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Veenker, Vicki; Planning Commission; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Cc: Sadhana Rau
Subject: Please Retain the 800 SF ADU Exemption — PTC Hearing September 9 Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2026 10:22:46 AM
Attachments: image
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 and Planning & Transportation Commission,
I am writing as a Palo Alto homeowner to urge you to retain the 2020 policy:
the first 800 square feet of an ADU should be exempt from FAR and other floor-area limits and be applied uniformly to all types of ADUs, including Table 1 and Table 2 ADUs. We have a flag lot, which complicates ADU construction and accessibility of such ADUs for rental purposes.

Without this policy, an owner who builds an 800 square-foot ADU could forfeit up to 800 square feet of expansion capacity on their main house. Meanwhile, a developer who demolishes the home, builds a new primary residence to maximum FAR, and then adds an ADU could receive the full exemption. On identical lots, this could create an estimated $1.4 million disparity in property value while encouraging demolition rather than preservation and ADU construction.

That seems to be the opposite of what this ordinance is intended to encourage.

If the goal is more ADUs and preserving housing stock, this policy should reward homeowners who add an ADU to a home they already own — not push them toward demolition to stay competitive with new construction.

I ask that the PTC recommend, and the Council ultimately vote, to retain the 800 sf exemption uniformly for types of ADUs including Table-1 and Table-2 ADUs.

Thank you for your time and for considering the impact this change would have on This message needs your attention
This is a personal email address.

This is their first mail to some recipients.

Mark Safe Report
Powered by Mimecast
longtime Palo Alto homeowners.

Sincerely,
Sadhana Rau
586 Loma Verde Ave Palo Alto CA 94306
9/8/2026
Meeting Date: 8/17/2020
City of Palo Alto City Council Staff Report (ID # 11118)

Page 9 ends

Meeting Date: 8/17/2026
City of Palo Alto City Council Staff Report (Report #: 2605-6356)

Page 7 ends

From: [email protected]
To: Council, City
Cc: Lait, Jonathan; John Kelley
Subject: ADU item on consent 9/9
Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2026 10:59:12 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 support the analysis and recommendations in John Kelley's letter to council on this issue and repeat my ask that not only do you take the item off consent but also schedule the discussion at a later council meeting to respect our public participation goals.

Stephen Levy

Palo Alto City CouncilSeptember 9, 2026

Palo Alto City Council
September 9, 2026