[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6653289,"mediaKeyId","2484153-d84ff9afa6d2683d7412c59791165d11","parentId",2484153,"title","Council approves first reading to broaden HIP/AHIP incentives; refers retail‑node boundaries to PTC and carves out auto‑dealership area","audioSeconds",8356,"startMs",12360000,"endMs",20716000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2484153-d84ff9afa6d2683d7412c59791165d11&start=12360&end=20716","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2484153-d84ff9afa6d2683d7412c59791165d11/thumbnail_12360000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6653289/Palo-Alto/Santa-Clara-County/California/Council-approves-first-reading-to-broaden-HIPAHIP-incentives-refers-retailnode-boundaries-to-PTC-and-carves-out-autodealership-area","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6653289-3a298a07f38f9782e4b3c00ff54a4396/orig.mp4?Expires=1771008280&Signature=QB1Ftg5FPFeWWsfy8E-Cj75qPuOpLigjD1zxwbZGDn2FOtC4IIb2-6RcjU3V80qd9KO2uBjZVxoqGBYrUOYjUiyKQxqT2wfyHqep7qc4-s4t4UDyMQ~3RxgyXlPC5efXZduAF6u8lg6BgDVE74-eWDuRz58rAJI5FOCOzRd0j~PDiWk3TGagiKTFLNaQtgvOfrHMkkNM3UXsvnum1a9so9MEU0s47Wo-G3qFQvjrjjaRiVjBoLPp~zAu79Sk25rz-3dTjeDnNIgNsb5~FlkDG5p7BMDOjkLUOnlOmjhkLlyLBYM~mZVqzSL4dDN4UlZGUUgpKBnH3KDfM5cmQsY3HQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Palo Alto","date","2025-03-04T07:19:14.83Z","article","PALO ALTO — The City Council voted unanimously on March 3 to approve the first reading of an ordinance that revises Palo Alto’s Housing Incentive Program (HIP), codifies an Affordable Housing Incentive Program (AHIP) and alters the retail preservation ordinance to align with housing‑element implementation. The motion included council direction to the Planning & Transportation Commission to recommend additional retail nodes along El Camino Real and carved out a narrow auto‑dealership area for later study.

Lede: The ordinance — introduced by city planning staff and supported by a feasibility and financial analysis prepared for the city — would expand HIP/AHIP applicability beyond the original downtown and California Avenue districts, allow higher floor‑area ratios and modestly greater heights in certain commercial and residential mixed‑use zones, and align Downtown retail replacement rules with the housing element’s sites inventory.

Nut graf: Staff and consultants told council the changes are intended to make the city’s local incentives more attractive than defaulting to state density bonus law. The HIP revisions also add parking reductions consistent with state law (for some unit sizes), new transportation demand management requirements when parking is reduced, and incentives for family‑sized units (3+ bedrooms). Councilors and community speakers supported the updated incentives but requested a near‑term review of retail nodes on South El Camino to protect neighborhood‑serving commerce.

What the ordinance would do: Staff said the draft ordinance implements housing‑element programs 3.3, 3.4 and 6.2(a). Key elements presented in the staff packet and feasibility testing include:

- Expanded HIP/AHIP eligibility to additional commercial and RM districts and specific housing opportunity sites created in the housing element rezoning; increased floor‑area ratios and modest height increases (examples in the staff table: non‑opportunity CS districts proposed FAR ~2.85 and opportunity sites up to ~3.5 in some districts; exact standards vary by district and are codified in attachment tables).

- Parking adjustments aligned with state density bonus ratios (staff modeled 1.0–1.5 spaces per unit depending on unit size) and added transportation demand management (TDM) requirements for projects that provide below‑standard parking. Staff noted above‑ and at‑grade parking treatment in FAR calculations was clarified in the analysis.

- AHIP retained as a tool focused on 100% affordable projects and HIP focused on market‑rate development; an incentive to provide family‑friendly larger units (three+ bedrooms) tied to additional FAR when at least 10% of units meet that threshold.

- Changes to the retail preservation ordinance to reduce replacement requirements outside clearly defined retail nodes and retain retail‑protection requirements in a limited set of nodes (California Avenue, specified El Camino nodes, and downtown ground‑floor overlays). Staff said the ordinance would allow the council to change node boundaries later by resolution; the council directed staff to send the retail node boundary question to PTC for review and to return a resolution quickly.

Public testimony and stakeholders: Supporters of stronger HIP incentives included housing advocates (Palo Alto Forward, SV@Home) and developers who described projects that had become infeasible amid higher construction costs and interest rates. Speakers urged higher FARs, relief for above‑grade parking counting against FAR and program monitoring. Opponents and some council members requested greater care on where retail protections are removed, noting El Camino Real’s low retail vacancy and the potential effect on neighborhood‑serving businesses.

Data and feasibility: Staff presented prototype site testing and a financial feasibility analysis used to calibrate the proposed standards; consultants said many existing zoning envelopes made larger multifamily building types physically infeasible on smaller lots. Staff emphasized they modeled realistic parking, frontage, daylight plane and height trade‑offs to produce massing that would be buildable and economical under current market assumptions.

Council action and referral: Council voted to approve the ordinance on first reading and directed staff to:

- Work with the Planning & Transportation Commission to review and recommend additional retail nodes along South El Camino (direction specified generally to expedite PTC review and return a recommended resolution to council), and

- Exclude the city’s auto‑dealership corridor at the southern end of the El Camino segment from immediate HIP applicability (the council asked staff to study that area further rather than apply HIP changes to those parcels now).

Vote and next steps: The motion passed on a roll‑call first reading vote (tally: 7–0). Staff said they will prepare a final ordinance, return the updated retail‑node resolution (per council direction) and bring the ordinance back for second reading as required by municipal code. Staff also noted that some related fees and nexus work will be considered as part of follow‑up housing focus‑area analyses.

Why it matters: Staff and several public speakers argued the HIP/AHIP updates are intended to keep development proposals under local rules rather than defaulting to state density bonus provisions — preserving the city’s ability to shape design, affordable housing outcomes and retail mix while making housing projects economically feasible. Councilors emphasized protecting key retail corridors, ensuring that increased density yields livable units (not “boxy” prototypes), and establishing a data dashboard and reporting so the city can track HIP/AHIP uptake and housing production over time.

Staff materials: The packet included development‑standards tables, maps of housing inventory/opportunity sites, prototype massing diagrams and a financial feasibility appendix. The council requested staff return promptly with a PTC recommendation on node boundaries and said they would review the final ordinance at second reading.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council Meeting - March 3, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The City Council approved first reading of an ordinance updating the Housing Incentive Program and Affordable Housing Incentive Program, increasing permitted FAR/height in targeted districts and modifying the retail preservation ordinance, with direction to PTC to review El Camino retail node boundaries.","taxTitle","Palo Alto, Santa Clara County, California","taxId",3867,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6653290,"Palo Alto reviews draft Safe Streets for All safety action plan, seeks input on quick-build projects and equity mapping",1861,6558000,8419000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2484153-d84ff9afa6d2683d7412c59791165d11&start=6558&end=8419","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2484153-d84ff9afa6d2683d7412c59791165d11/thumbnail_6558000.jpg","/articles/6653290/Palo-Alto/Santa-Clara-County/California/Palo-Alto-reviews-draft-Safe-Streets-for-All-safety-action-plan-seeks-input-on-quick-build-projects-and-equity-mapping","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6653290-32762a921e63d1ddd1944ec235722ee3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771008280&Signature=bm~U1uSaCfmbVbYD5JN~mVGfLZHcpICVRu1izMhQxW9BmAXZBArkic8X2C6CdNWed4q92nf-mQpRCmXEanh~XihQiHDurOHYnXVyGHxBj8v5CulTp-ywc7x~0-USP35DiwZPHGtMqVNtQH~5bXneyqzGmfxkvivickIFG0Dc~im85ZD1wzQ4gbdzWZKRdNDEu5Um4joV2w7ftM9rrTgQlPUn7znl5aeEyCqxJ4OlvwrnevIt5nuT9dtV1-N5~dMdT6u1tYKSlXMWDkyata8j6ku52jSiLZheZ1hiTo0Xu1LZ0zswSNi~X2v2TfiAeYLRsAZpm5yI98emlFb3oatUKQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","PALO ALTO — City transportation staff and consultants presented a draft Safe Streets for All safety action plan at a March 3 study session, asking the City Council for feedback on a proposed quick-build program, a safety-focused resolution and a five-year implementation framework intended to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on city streets.

The presentation was led by Sylvia Starlak, transportation planning manager for the Office of Transportation, and consultant Ashley Takushi. Starlak told the council the plan is intended to unlock federal, state and regional funding opportunities — including eligibility for federal Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) grants — and to institutionalize safety into project prioritization, design trade-offs and ongoing policies.

The plan centers on a “safe system” approach, Starlak and Takushi said, combining engineering, speed management, public-health framing and outreach to anticipate human error, limit transfer of kinetic energy in crashes and share responsibility for safety across agencies and road users. A high‑injury network (HIN) derived from crash records spanning 2018–2022 shows that 63% of collisions occur on about 4% of Palo Alto’s roadway miles, the staff presentation said.

Why it matters: The city’s transportation emissions and a growing housing supply increase the need to move more people in limited roadway space, Starlak said, and the council direction would help make Palo Alto eligible for competitive safety grants. The plan aims to increase walking, biking and transit use by reducing perceived danger — a barrier staff said is central to mode shift.

What’s in the draft: Staff said the plan includes the federal SS4A-required elements and proposes a quick-build program for near‑term, lower‑cost physical changes; updates to traffic‑calming, signal timing and intersection treatments; and a resolution that asks staff to consider trade-offs such as vehicle delay, right‑of‑way reallocation, parking changes and transit partnerships.

Community input and concerns: The plan’s outreach included an online survey, interactive map and in‑person events. Public commenters, including a six‑speaker group led by Helene G., urged council to pursue quick wins such as converting a four‑way stop and painting curb “daylighting” red near crosswalks under California’s daylighting law. Helene G. cited a serious collision at Middlefield and San Antonio and urged faster fixes at known dangerous intersections.

Members of Palo Alto’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee and individual residents urged the council to approve the draft framework but to accelerate collection of usage data — bike and pedestrian counts and collision context — so the city can target engineering and enforcement to the causes of crashes rather than relying only on collision “dots” on a map. Eric Nordman, a committee member, urged measurable targets (20% reduction in five years, 40% in ten) toward a longer zero‑fatalities goal.

Data and priorities: Several council members pressed staff on data limitations. Staff said the HIN uses collision data through 2022 and that provisional 2023 data exist but require validation. There is not yet a citywide, consistent bicycle- and pedestrian-count program; staff said the forthcoming Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP) update will recommend monitoring locations and methods. Staff also noted regional equity tools (Metropolitan Transportation Commission equity priority community metrics) do not identify census tracts labeled EPC inside Palo Alto, so the plan used alternative local equity indicators (poverty rates by census block) and considered connections for people commuting from East Palo Alto.

Quick‑build program and speed management: The draft quick‑build program would allow low‑cost, reversible changes to lanes, crossings and buffering that can be installed and adjusted before permanent construction. Staff emphasized a forthcoming speed‑management program to identify where speeding overlaps the HIN so the city can prioritize treatments such as calming, signal timing or enforcement. Councilors and commenters urged more immediate red‑curb painting near crosswalks, improved sight lines at specific intersections and better lighting in nighttime pedestrian corridors.

Implementation and next steps: The draft public comment period closes March 15. Staff plans to compile feedback and return a final plan to the Policy & Services Committee in May and to council in June. Staff also said they will continue coordinating the plan with the BPTP update and with the San Antonio Road area plan so safety recommendations align with land‑use and transit changes.

Council reaction and direction: Council members generally supported the safe‑system approach but expressed concern about data gaps and urged staff to prioritize near‑term, low‑cost fixes that do not depend on federal grants. Several asked staff to return with more specific monitoring plans (bike counts, collision cause analysis) and timetables for quick‑build pilot projects. Council members also asked staff to work with the Planning & Transportation Commission on site‑specific trade‑offs and to return information on how the plan will be tracked and reported publicly.

What council did not decide: The study session did not involve a vote to adopt the plan; it was a request for feedback and direction. Staff said they will bring a final plan to committees and council later this spring after the public comment period closes on March 15.

Context and follow‑up: Councilors and commenters emphasized the need to pair long‑term strategies with immediate action — painting daylighting curbs, correcting misplaced stop signs, and responding to outstanding 3‑1‑1 requests on hazardous crossings. Staff said some near‑term responses are already underway (examples cited included completed stop‑control changes at one roundabout) and that quick‑build pilots and a speed‑management program are planned after plan adoption.

For readers: The draft plan and interactive materials were posted on the city’s website; public comment closes March 15. Staff said the plan is designed to be updated as new collision and usage data are validated and as implementation funding becomes available.","City transportation staff and consultants presented a draft Safe Streets for All safety action plan at a March 3 study session, seeking council feedback on a quick‑build program and a resolution to institutionalize a safe‑system approach.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council approves first reading to broaden HIP/AHIP incentives; refers retail‑node boundaries to PTC and carves out auto‑dealership area

Palo Alto reviews draft Safe Streets for All safety action plan, seeks input on quick-build projects and equity mapping