Palo Alto council approves six-level downtown garage with reserved site for future affordable housing

PALO ALTO — The Palo Alto City Council voted 5–2 on April 14 to advance the city’s long-discussed downtown parking garage project at Lot D (375 Hamilton), approving staff’s recommendation for Option 1A: a six-level, above‑ground parking structure with a reserved area for later construction of affordable housing with separate access on Waverly Street.

The action directs staff to proceed with preliminary design and environmental review for the 274‑space garage; the council also asked staff to continue work on financing, project sequencing and how to treat any interim podium or surface area until housing is built.

Why it matters: Council members said the project is intended to offset parking lost as the city builds affordable housing on multiple downtown surface lots and to provide additional public parking for the downtown core. Supporters said Option 1A balances parking capacity with an opportunity to add 100% affordable housing on a later, separate development; opponents argued the city should prioritize maximizing housing across downtown rather than building more parking now.

Staff and consultants presented three families of concepts: Waverly-front options (Options 1A–1C), “dogleg” options that place housing at the rear (Options 3A–3C) and podium variants that would require building a housing podium with the garage. Ken Hayes of Hayes Group Architects and Public Works staff described tradeoffs among capacity, constructability, security, livability and sequencing.

Assistant Director of Public Works Holly Boyd summarized staff’s recommendation: “Based on our discussions with staff and the design team, we feel strongly about Option 1A as the best option to balance the housing and the parking need.” Boyd noted a local affordable‑housing developer had also preferred Option 1A in early consultations. The option yields the most net new stalls (163 net new vs. smaller counts in dogleg options), provides separate residential lobbies and circulation for future housing and creates space at the Waverly corner that could be converted to open space while housing is pursued.

Supporters on the council stressed the project’s role as part of a package of downtown developments. Council Member Stone said Option 1A “appropriately balances the need for more parking … with the addition of the 15 new 100% affordable housing units” the design would enable later. Vice Mayor Venker and Council Member Lythcott Haines also backed staff’s recommendation, citing livability and developer feedback.

Opponents said the council should prioritize housing and fiscal efficiency. Council Member Burt and one other member argued that Option 2 (a “park-first” option that maximizes stalls and economies of scale) would produce more parking per dollar and free funds for additional housing on other lots. They warned that building parking now at higher per‑stall cost could reduce the resources available for future affordable housing.

Cost and funding: Early, comparative construction cost estimates were presented for the design options; staff emphasized these were rough order‑of‑magnitude figures for direct construction only and excluded other project costs. Council and staff discussed use of the city’s parking in‑lieu fund (previously reported near $15 million) and possible financing strategies (debt, other capital funds). Staff said the total project cost will be refined, and funding decisions would return to the Finance Committee and full council as part of the capital programming process.

Next steps and uncertainties: The council directed staff to proceed with preliminary design and environmental review for Option 1A. Staff will return with more detailed cost estimates, financing options and recommended construction sequence. Several council members asked staff to study potential rooftop or ground‑floor active uses, signage and how to address a blank garage wall should housing not be built immediately.

Vote: The council approved the staff recommendation, 5–2. The roll call recorded: - Yes: Council Member Liu; Council Member Stone; Vice Mayor Venker; Council Member Lythcott Haines; Mayor Loughing. - No: Council Member Burt; Council Member Bridal. Motion carries 5–2.

The council’s action begins environmental review and preliminary design work; construction and financing schedules will be set in later phases and may require additional council approvals.