Commission doubles down on limiting Palo Alto Commons expansion

The divisive expansion of the Palo Alto Commons assisted living facility was once again scaled back by members of the Planning and Transportation Commission, which on Wednesday signed off on just seven additional units despite City Council direction to nearly double that number.

It’s the second time the commission has arrived at the number of seven units. The last time commissioners recommended that to the full city council for approval, councilmembers split 4-3 but ultimately punted the project back to the commission with instruction to find a compromise between 11 and 13 units and eliminate any on the third floor that would directly face homes on Wilkie Way.

“The decision to go to 13 (units) versus 11 was really our decision,” project applicant Steve Sandholtz told the commission. “We felt like that was following the spirit of the recommendation to remove the most objectionable units that were closer to the property and back away from the property line, but it also helped with the project feasibility.”

What was once a development proposal for an additional 16 units has been repeatedly pared down by the commission and the council, who faced a deluge of opposition to the expansion from neighboring residents of Palo Alto Commons, a facility at 4075 El Camino Way in the Ventura neighborhood. Most of the concerns live on Wilkie Way. Chief among neighbors’ concerns is a lack of parking on their residential street due to Palo Alto Commons staff and visitors. But residents also stated that the expansion of the facility upward and toward their backyards would limit their privacy and block sunlight.

Dozens of neighbors turned out to the commission meeting to reiterate their opposition to the expansion project, and dozens more wrote in with similar messages or signed one of two circulating neighborhood petitions.

“In 1987, the Commons promised not to expand toward the neighborhood. This proposal breaks that commitment,” said Wilkie Way resident James Porter.

Other residents came prepared with presentations and photos to show the extent of the parking situation that they argued would be exacerbated by any further expansion of the Commons. Nearly all speakers urged the commission to stick to its prior recommendation of capping the expansion to seven additional units.

“Historically, Palo Alto Commons was a good neighbor, and that’s why we had supported adding the seven interior units, which the PTC has already approved,” Wilkie Way resident Lily Lee said.

But Lee said that in recent years, the Commons has gone back on previous commitments and exacerbated the parking situation in a way that has poisoned its relationship with Wilkie Way neighbors.

The only positive to come from the proposed expansion, another resident said, was that it brought him closer to his neighbors and forged a stronger sense of community.

In response to continued opposition, Sandholtz told the commission that several changes have been made since the initial proposed expansion. While the latest proposal still included two units on the third floor instead of five, Sandholtz said they would be constructed at a 45-degree angle to avoid the windows looking directly into Wilkie Way residents’ backyards.

He added that the setback at the third floor level was 25 feet back from the property line in an effort to limit the impact on the adjacent neighborhood.

But the commission Wednesday night ultimately found more sympathy with resident concerns than those raised by Sandholtz, who said it would not be financially feasible to build just seven units, given construction costs.

Commissioners particularly took issue with the fact that Sandholtz was still petitioning for units on the third floor at all, despite council opposition to any additional units on that floor.

“To go back to council with the same two third floor units that they had apparently already indicated some displeasure with, I just don’t think it’s a recipe for success. So if you’re interested in success, you might consider something like that,” Commissioner Bart Hechtman said.

By the time the commission moved to recommend just those seven units, Hechtman was the sole “no” vote on Vice Chair Bryna Chang’s motion, which also included a stipulation that no office space be added and that staff must find parking either on-site or at an off-site private location instead of neighborhood streets.

Commissioner Kevin Ji previously advocated against the expansion before joining the commission and recused himself from the discussion and subsequent vote.

“Council’s motion to us was to review an 11 to 13 unit proposal, which we have done, and I’ve come to the same conclusion after that review as I did the last time,” Chang said.

This story originally appeared in Palo Alto Weekly. Riley Cooke is a reporter at Palo Alto Weekly and Palo Alto Online focusing on city government.