Architectural Review Board - March 6, 2025

Board adopts townhome recommendations and removes tower element

The Architectural Review Board adopted recommendations for revising Palo Alto’s objective townhome design standards, removing a proposed tower element before approving the package with four votes in favor and one abstention. The action followed what members described as their seventh discussion of the standards, a review that began in 2022.

In shaping the recommendation, members favored using the building-code definition of a townhouse as a flexible baseline and adding individual exterior entrances. They resisted tying the definition to parking beneath each unit or to one rigid building configuration, citing changing parking rules and townhouse projects built with podiums or staggered units.

The recommendation includes a 2-foot roof-height variation at corner units and more detailed design treatment for end and corner units. The deleted tower concept had been discussed as extending as much as 15 feet above the RM-30 district’s 35-foot height limit. Members also debated standards for covered entries, balconies and facade modulation, including whether requirements should apply to individual units or an entire townhouse cluster.

The abstaining member said the proposal was not ready. Staff will prepare a clean version containing the agreed language for a future informational review, without reopening the substantive discussion, and use the recommendations to draft ordinance changes for Planning Commission and City Council consideration.

Public-art changes at 824 San Antonio could require new review

The approved housing project at 824 San Antonio will require additional architectural review if its final public art substantially changes the front facade, staff reported. Legal counsel advised that the city could not require a previously contemplated discretionary ad hoc review after the housing project had been approved.

Board members questioned treating an integrated facade screen as public art rather than architecture, expressed concern about setting a precedent and asked what role the board would have if the design changes. Staff will determine whether a future revision is substantial enough to require a new architectural review application.

The final art design will return to the Public Arts Commission, where an Architectural Review Board representative may be invited to comment. Before the project’s approval, the applicant revised the facade panel patterning, rear windows and balcony railings.

Primary sources

Watch the meeting on YouTube · Read the official meeting agenda