Skip to main content
City of Palo Alto sealPalo Alto Civic
  • Planning and Transportation Commission

Planning & Transportation Commission - October 8, 2025

Palo Alto’s planning commission voted 5-1 to recommend the 660 University project with tree, parking and commercial-use conditions.

Planning & Transportation Commission Regular Meeting video thumbnail

Listen to this AI-generated audio version

Commission recommends 660 University project with added conditions

Side-by-side Street View and map showing the captioned location labeled A

511 Byron Street, 660 University Avenue, and 680 University Avenue, Palo Alto, CA

The Planning and Transportation Commission voted 5-1 to recommend that the City Council approve the 660 University Avenue mixed-use project, subject to changes addressing a protected oak, parking, future street improvements and the use of the project’s commercial space. The recommendation covers the revised environmental review, a Comprehensive Plan amendment, Planned Community zoning and related land-use findings; final authority rests with the council.

The version presented to commissioners called for 70 homes, 20% below market rate, roughly 1,900 square feet of commercial space and 78 underground parking stalls. To reduce encroachment into the oak’s protected area, the commission’s recommendation calls for either the applicant’s 66-unit alternative or removal of balconies from H2 units on floors two through six. The city arborist said the anticipated construction pruning would largely affect one lower scaffold limb and should have relatively little effect on the tree’s overall foliage or stability, while residents argued that canopy pruning and root-zone work could threaten the tree.

Traffic and parking were the other major fault lines. Neighbors raised concerns about loading, emergency access, pedestrian safety and spillover parking on Byron Street, while supporters pointed to the project’s housing and affordability benefits. Several commissioners questioned whether all required Planned Community findings could be made, but the majority advanced the proposal with revised findings and conditions. The dissent objected to the possibility of reducing the project to 66 units and questioned the spillover-parking requirement.

The conditions would establish an easement in the Middlefield Road special setback to 20 feet below grade for possible future city improvements, without requiring replacement of parking removed if the easement is used. Starting two years after occupancy, management would report leased on-site parking annually, and the Office of Transportation would develop a way to measure project-created spillover and apply incentives or penalties. The recommendation also calls for post-construction asphalt removal beneath tree No. 10, bird-safe glass at two sixth-floor corner units and neighborhood-serving uses in the retained commercial space. The project now goes to the City Council.

Commission delays downtown shrink-wrap rule changes

Side-by-side Street View and map showing the captioned location labeled B

East Crescent Drive and Southwood, Palo Alto, CA

In a separate 5-0 vote, the commission continued a proposed rewrite of downtown’s nonconforming-floor-area rules to a date uncertain. Staff had requested feedback rather than a formal recommendation because the change overlaps with the Downtown Housing Plan, retail revitalization efforts and potential standards under Senate Bill 79.

The policy, commonly called the “shrink-wrap” rule, limits how legally noncomplying floor area can be replaced when downtown commercial buildings are remodeled or rebuilt. Proposed revisions would allow existing above-grade floor area to be reconfigured without increasing the total amount of noncompliance. Staff estimated that 47 parcels could be positioned to redevelop under the proposed change in the near term.

Commissioners generally agreed that the current language is problematic but differed over the applicant’s broader draft and a narrower staff option. They asked staff to compare the proposals with the rules used before 2015 and a 1988 interpretation, and to examine potential effects on retail, office and housing uses, historic resources, transfer of development rights and downtown housing policy. No return date was set.

Primary sources

Watch the meeting on YouTube · Read the official meeting agenda

Comments

You may comment anonymously.