Architectural Review Board - November 7, 2024

Board gives favorable feedback on 368-home design but seeks circulation fixes

Palo Alto’s Architectural Review Board gave generally favorable feedback on the proposed seven-story, 368-unit development at 3150 El Camino Real while seeking changes to internal circulation, balconies and the shared driveway and loading area. The review was a study session only: the board took no vote and made no recommendation, and the Director will decide the streamlined application after staff and environmental review.

The plan would replace the existing McDonald’s and Fish Market commercial buildings with an 85-foot residential building. It includes 74 deed-restricted units, or 20% of the total, for households earning 50% to 80% of area median income. Staff said the application complies with applicable base zoning, El Camino Real Focus Area standards and objective design standards.

Chair Kendra Rosenberg and board member Peter Baltay called for more direct, intuitive connections among the lobby, mail and package area, elevators, amenities and homes. Baltay also suggested preserving the option to convert ground-floor spaces to retail in the future, if feasible. David Hirsch focused on the concentration of loading, deliveries, trash, garage traffic and pedestrian and bicycle activity near the entrance. Yingxi Chen sought clearer balcony access and privacy separations, more equitable balcony provision and secure long-term bicycle storage.

Members also asked for window and balcony construction details that deliver the depth and proportions shown in project renderings, along with clarification of roof-deck access, railings and drainage. Public comments generally supported the housing and affordability components, although one commenter urged stronger construction labor standards. Staff was preparing a CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 infill exemption and, at the meeting, anticipated a Director decision before the end of 2024 or in early January 2025.

Ten-condo Encina project is continued pending environmental review

The Architectural Review Board voted 5-0 to continue a proposed 10-unit condominium project at 70 Encina Avenue to a date uncertain while its environmental analysis is completed. The board requested that the project return as expediently as possible, with the next review focused on the environmental analysis and related issues. The continuation did not approve the development.

The proposal calls for a three-story, 22,355-square-foot building with two below-market-rate homes on a surface parking lot surrounded by Town and Country Shopping Center parking. The Planned Community and Planned Home zoning application seeks several departures from existing standards, including a 1.86 floor-area ratio rather than 1.25, 58% lot coverage rather than 50%, and no rear setback where a 10-foot residential setback would typically apply. Staff also identified potential vehicle queuing and garage-access problems associated with the driveway gate.

Board members differed over the project’s broader setting even as most supported its architectural direction. Chair Kendra Rosenberg viewed the three-story building as an appropriate transition and sought improvements to rear garage maneuvering. Yingxi Chen and Peter Baltay supported housing at the transit- and amenity-adjacent location. David Hirsch said the architecture was well designed but opposed the project in its current broader site-planning context, questioning whether housing surrounded by parking should proceed without comprehensive planning for nearby parcels.

Commenters associated with Town and Country raised concerns about parking spillover, early-morning deliveries, trash collection, noise, landscaping, density and compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and CEQA. A housing advocate supported the project and cautioned against delaying housing on the constrained site. Staff said the environmental analysis could use a CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 exemption if the applicable requirements are met; the project is expected to return to the board for a recommendation after that analysis is available for public review.

Primary sources

Watch the meeting on YouTube · Read the official meeting packet