Council approves rezoning at 70 Encina for 10‑unit townhouse project amid calls for larger Town & Country master plan

PALO ALTO — On April 14 the Palo Alto City Council approved a rezoning and record of land use action for 70 Encina Avenue, allowing a proposed 10‑unit, townhouse‑style condominium project under the city’s Planned Home Zoning (PHZ) process. The vote was unanimous.

The project, proposed by Stormland Company and designed by Hayes Group Architects, would replace a small portion of the rear parking area of Town & Country Shopping Center with 10 townhome condominiums organized around a shared 30‑foot central courtyard. Two of the units would be deed‑restricted below‑market‑rate (BMR) units at 80% of area median income (AMI), providing a weighted public‑benefit value above the PHZ minimum.

Why it matters: The parcel sits within a transit‑rich area close to Caltrain and bus service. Supporters said the site is a good infill housing opportunity and praised the applicant’s decision to scale the previously proposed larger building down after early council feedback. Opponents — including Ellis Partners, the operator of Town & Country, and several planning commissioners — argued that the site should be planned comprehensively with adjacent parcels and that the proposed density, setbacks, and reduced tree canopy could hamper future coordinated redevelopment and conflict with comprehensive‑plan policies on urban greening and compatibility.

Process and key details: The project went through a multi‑year review. The original pre‑screening proposal in 2022 was a five‑story, 20‑unit building; after meetings with the Architectural Review Board (ARB), Planning & Transportation Commission (PTC) hearings and two ARB reviews, the design was reduced to a three‑story townhouse configuration (10 units). The ARB ultimately recommended approval; the PTC split 3–3 and did not make a unanimous recommendation, so the matter proceeded to the full council.

Staff’s report relied on CEQA Guidelines §15183 (consistency with the comprehensive plan/environmental impact report) and concluded the proposed PHZ findings could be made with the project’s conditions. The staff recommendation included the PHZ zoning change, CEQA checklist consistency, and the record of land use action.

Public comment: Supporters included neighborhood residents, housing advocates and the Williams Charitable Foundation (the landowner that holds the underlying deed for Town & Country) — many urged that housing be built at the site and that the smaller, lower‑scale townhouse approach was appropriate. Opponents, including Dean Rubinson representing Ellis Partners, said the site should be integrated into a larger, master‑planned redevelopment of the Town & Country parking area, noting the applicant’s density (37 units per acre for this parcel) exceeded typical townhouse densities for the neighborhood and raised concerns about tree loss, usable open space and compatibility with the shopping‑center operations. The applicant, Ed Storm, said approval would demonstrate the feasibility of residential development on Encina and would encourage broader, more comprehensive housing proposals.

Council discussion: Council members recognized the competing priorities in play. Members who supported approval emphasized the site’s transit proximity and the project’s family‑sized units and BMR component; several members said the scaled townhouse design responded to earlier direction and that approval would not preclude larger, coordinated redevelopment of adjacent parcels. Dissenting reviewers at the PTC and some ARB members focused on tree loss, setbacks and compatibility; several council members asked staff and the applicant whether additional green‑roof or rooftop amenity options might be feasible to increase urban greening.

Vote and outcome: Council approved the rezoning and record of land use action unanimously. Recorded votes at adoption were: Vice Mayor Venker — Yes; Mayor Loughing — Yes; Council Member Stone — Yes; Council Member Rechdahl — Yes; Council Member Liu — Yes; Council Member Burton — Yes; Council Member Lythcott Haines — Yes. Motion carries unanimously.

Next steps and conditions: The project will proceed with the conditions in the record of land use action, including the PHZ public‑benefit obligations (two BMR units at 80% AMI). The applicant and adjacent property owners may continue to pursue larger coordinated redevelopment concepts; council members asked staff to remain engaged with Town & Country stakeholders and to return with any implementation issues related to the site, public improvements and tree mitigation.

Technical details (as recorded in the staff report): Proposed FAR 1.57 (1.25 ordinarily allowed), lot coverage 58% (50% typically allowed), rear setback reduced in places to 7 inches (where a 10‑foot rear setback would normally be required), and usable open space per unit varying from 79 to 155 sq ft (150 typical requirement). The staff CEQA checklist relied on the comprehensive plan EIR’s mitigation measures where applicable.

The council’s unanimous approval authorizes the applicant to move forward with site‑level approvals consistent with the PHZ record of land use action and applicable building permits.