Commission recommends approval of tentative map at 4103 Old Trace Road over residents' safety objections

The Palo Alto Planning & Transportation Commission voted 7–0 on April 29 to recommend that City Council approve a tentative map for 4103 Old Trace Road, forwarding the map with added conditions and a set of commission concerns about cumulative neighborhood impacts.

Staff recommended the map after concluding the subdivision complies with objective standards and is eligible for waivers under the state density bonus and AB 130 process. Project planner Nishita Kambikupa told commissioners the proposal would subdivide a 1.02‑acre vacant lot into nine residential lots served by a private street and advance a related housing application for 16 units total, of which seven would be junior accessory dwelling units and one would be a deed‑restricted below‑market‑rate unit on Lot 9.

Neighbors who spoke during the public‑comment period told the commission the project threatens public safety and neighborhood livability. Resident Sean Lou Mara, speaking for five neighbors, said the single ingress/egress, narrow road widths and existing parking behavior make the plan “not at all compliant with the requirements” relied on by the applicant and argued the project would “put our safety at risk in a way that is not mitigatable.” Other speakers detailed prior incidents when emergency vehicles could not pass and noted the area is not within walking distance of reliable transit.

The applicant, developer Melanie Griswold, said the subdivision was redesigned after Architectural Review Board input, that the private street and on‑site driveways meet fire‑code access standards, and that the traffic study reviewed by staff estimated roughly six to seven peak‑hour trips ("one car every 10 minutes during peak hours," she said). Griswold said the project provides a second egress to Rastradero, voluntary pedestrian and bicycle improvements and a BMR unit, and that the private drive width meets California fire code minimums.

City Attorney Mr. Yang summarized the legal constraints commissioners face when an applicant invokes state density bonus or AB 130 tools: "The city is able to regulate on the basis of specific adverse impact on public health and safety," he said, but such regulation must rely on a written objective standard that existed when the application was filed.

After deliberation about guest parking, the number and trip generation assumptions for junior ADUs, and the scope of the fire department’s review, Commissioner Gee moved the staff recommendation with amendments. The motion directed staff to include a deed restriction for the BMR unit as a condition of approval, require the developer to coordinate street naming with the Palo Alto Historical Association and neighborhood where feasible, require the transportation improvements identified in the staff report, revise plans to meet public‑works engineering standards, and include a construction management plan to address construction parking and staging. The commission also asked that council consider broader items raised by commissioners, including objective fire‑safety standards and the cumulative impacts of incremental ADU/JADU growth in low‑density neighborhoods.

The motion passed by roll call, 7–0. The commission emphasized it was recommending the map under the limited findings available for a tentative map while flagging the neighborhood safety and parking concerns for council to consider in the parallel housing approval and any associated conditions.

What happens next: the commission’s recommendation and its list of suggested conditions and concerns will accompany the tentative map when staff transmits the matter to City Council for final action. The council will consider the housing application, related waivers or concessions under state law, and the conditions that the commission requested be attached to approval.