Addendum with Exhibits 5-7.Objective Standards
PREPARED BY: SEAN MULLIN, AICP and RYAN SAFTY
Senior Planner Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Planning Manager and Community Development Director
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6872
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
PLANNING COMMISSION
REPORT
MEETING DATE: 6/22/2022
ITEM NO: 3
ADDENDUM
DATE: June 21, 2022
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Review and Recommendation of the Draft Objective Standards to the Town
Council.
DISCUSSION:
The following information is provided in response to Planning Commissioner questions
regarding examples of subcommittee recommendations that were not included in the Draft
Objective Standards. Staff has prepared Exhibit 5 addressing the specific examples provided.
The Planning Commission objective standards subcommittee held five meetings between July
and December 2021. The subcommittee reviewed more than 500 existing subjective guidelines
collated from Town documents to provide recommendations to staff on which subjective
guidelines should be rewritten as objective standards. The subjective guidelines identified and
included in the subcommittee’s recommendations are summarized in Exhibit 6 with references
to the preliminary objective standards created in response to the subcommittee’s
recommendations. Some items identified by the subcommittee were not included in the Draft
Objective Standards. The reasons for exclusions varied but included: duplication of existing
Town Code requirements; creation of unreasonable barriers to development; difficulties in
enforcement; and not being appropriate when applied to multi-family and mixed-use projects.
In collaboration with the Town’s consultant, these recommendations were used to help create
the Draft Objective Standards included as Exhibit 3 to the June 22, 2022, Planning Commission
Staff Report.
Please note that many subjective guidelines identified by the subcommittee look different
when converted into a draft standard. In writing the Draft Objective Standards, it was often
necessary to identify the concept that a subjective guideline was attempting to address in order
to create a standard that addresses the same concept. For example, one of the issues
identified by the subcommittee was to “provide a foot candle limit for parking lot lights.” While
it is possible to write a standard limiting the foot candle power of a parking lot light fixture, the
standard may not completely address the overarching concept, which is to limit light spillage
PAGE 2 OF 2
SUBJECT: Draft Objective Standards
DATE: June 21, 2022
DISCUSSION (continued):
from exterior light fixtures onto neighboring properties. With this in mind, the draft objective
standard developed from this subjective guideline is: Exterior lighting shall be fully shielded and
restrain light to a minimum 30 degrees below the horizontal plane of the light source.
Uplighting is prohibited. (A.5.2).
A Planning Commissioner also emailed links to the City of Palo Alto objective standards, which
is included as Exhibit 7.
Staff looks forward to the discussion and will be available to answer any questions.
EXHIBITS:
Previously received with the June 22, 2022, Staff Report:
1. Town Council Resolution 2019-053
2. Summary of feedback received during community engagement meetings
3. Draft Objective Standards
4. Public Comments received prior to 11:00 a.m., Friday, June 17, 2022
Received with this Addendum Report:
5. Staff response to Commissioner’s questions
6. Issues considered by the Objective Standards Subcommittee
7. Commissioner email regarding City of Palo Alto Objective Standards
Below are several examples of subjective guidelines that do not appear in the Draft Objective
Standards followed by a response from staff in italics:
November 3, 2021 Meeting:
ACCESS
a. Pedestrian Access
7. Encourage the use of decorative bollards at all pedestrian crossings at street
intersections to improve vehicle and pedestrian safety in the Downtown District.
16. Provide special textured and/or colored paving at pedestrian crossings of project
entries.
Response: These types of improvements are typically in the right-of-way and subject to Town
Engineering standards.
November 17, 2021 Meeting:
LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING
a. Street Trees and Streetscape Landscaping
Streetscape Landscaping
11. Landscaping adjacent to street rights-of-way, driveway entrances, or trails should be
avoided when it might restrict sight distance or interfere with already established native
plants.
Response: This is included in A.7.1 and Town Code Section 29.40.0315(a)(3)
EXHIBIT 5
November 17, 2021 Meeting (continued):
LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING
c. Fencing and Retaining Walls
Fencing
4. The use of fences and walls shall be minimized and located so that natural landforms
appear to flow together and are not disconnected. The primary emphasis shall be on
maintaining open views, protecting wildlife corridors, and maintaining the rural, open,
and natural character of the hillsides.
Response: This is very specific to the hillside area, and it is doubtful these properties would be
allow for mixed-use or multi-family development. Additionally, these fencing types may not suit
the needs of mixed-use or multi-family development when located in the commercial areas.
November 23, 2021 Meeting:
2. Building Height; 1. Buildings over two stories are discouraged in areas covered by these
guidelines unless special circumstances warrant additional building height (Commercial Design
Guidelines).
BUILDING HEIGHT
General
1. Buildings over two stories are discouraged in areas covered by these guidelines unless
special circumstances warrant additional building height. Commercial Design Guidelines
Response: This is potentially overly restrictive. The Draft Objective Standards include strategies
to mitigate the mass of buildings greater than two stories in B.1.1, B.1.2, B.4.1, B.4.3, and
B.4.13.
ISSUES CONSIDERED BY THE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS SUBCOMMITTEE
These issues were identified by the Objective Standards Subcommittee. Where applicable, a corresponding Draft Objective Standard is identified.
Issue Number Issue Identified in Subcommittee Meetings Draft OS Response
S.1.Pursue pedestrian connections to adjacent development.None Impractical due to potential private property issues.
S.2. Define a minimum sidewalk width.None In Town Code and Engineering stadards.
S.3.
Determine if new development can be required to provide
pedestrian connections to the Los Gatos Trail unless another agency
would prohibit these connections.
None Impractical due to potential private property issues.
S.4.Consider requiring driveways to be located to the rear of the lot.A.3.1
S.5.Limit the number of surface parking spaces along street frontages or
in front of a building.A.3.1
S.6. Require pedestrian circulation on parking lots exceeding a certain
size.A.1.1, A.1.2 Created requirment and standards for circulation without
tying them to a certain size parking lot.
S.7.Consider increasing the parking lot landscaping requirement from
5%.None Five percent is included in Town Code Section 29.10.155(g)(6).
Stricter requirements may not be consistent with State law.
S.8.Provide pedestrian access from the parking lot to the building
entrance.A.1.1
S.9.Require off street maneuvering areas to eliminate aisle-to-aisle
circulation via the street A.2.1, A.3.2
S.10.Provide objective criteria to require an “active” ground floor.
Perhaps a minimum fenestration requirement.
A.4.2, A.9, A.10.2,
B.1.1.d, B.1.1.e, B.2.1,
B.4.4.a, B.4.7.b, B.4.13
S.11.Limit blank facades facing a public street. Perhaps no more than
50% maximum or step back the façade a certain distance. A.4.2, B.1, B.2, B.4
S.12.Provide architectural articulation of garages facing streets.B.2.1, B.2.3, B.4.5
S.13.Provide parking structure setbacks.A.4.2
S.14.Provide gate setback distance for parking garages.A.4.1
S.15.Consider providing a minimum setback for parking structures.A.4.2
S.16.Require all pedestrian walkways to have lighting for safety.A.5.1
S.17.Consider providing different standards for interior lights not facing
neighboring properties.None
The Town Code requires all exterior light fixtures to be
downward directed and shielded. Not pursued to maintain
consistency with A.5.2 and Town Code.
S.18.Provide a foot candle limit for parking lot lights.A.5.2
S.19.Provide a minimum screening standard (lattice or plants) for
utilities. Make a distinction between ground and roof equipment.A.5.3
S.20.Screen trash and service collection from the street.A.5.3
S.21.Provide and define pedestrian amenities with objective criteria.A.9
S.22.Street trees should come from the Town’s list.A.6.2.b
S.23.
There should be a minimum open space requirement similar to the
North 40 Specific Plan Requirement. Provide a minimum
percentage.
A.6.1, A.9
The inner edge of front setbacks (i.e., away from the street edge)
should be treated as a positive edge with one or more of the
following:
§ Low wall
§ Hedge
§ Trellis structure
§ Buildings
S.25.
Provide a standard for front setback edge treatments at least three
feet in height to screen the front of automobile grilles in the parking
lot from street view.
A.6.3
S.26.Require shrubs used to promote privacy to be fifteen gallon in size
and six feet minimum height at planting.A.6.2.b
S.27.Provide greater landscape buffering adjacent to residential parcels.A.6.2.b
S.28.
Provide landscaping between commercial structures and
neighboring residents to screen, break up, and soften views of the
structures.
A.6.2.b
S.29.Require roof screens to be constructed from the same materials as
the building walls.A.5.3
S.30.Visually screen all trash and outdoor storage areas from view. A.5.3
Pedestrian Access
Vehicular Access
Parking Location and Design
Parking Structure Design
Utilities
Landscaping and Screening
S.24.A.10
EXHIBIT 6
Issue Number Issue Identified in Subcommittee Meetings Draft OS Response
S.31.Make utility screening objective and note that the utilities shall not
be able to be viewed from the right-of-way.A.5.3
S.32.Provide standards on the type/size of landscape screening for
surface parking lots.A.6.3
S.33.Prohibit fences over three feet tall along public street frontages for
mixed-use and multifamily development. A.7.1
S.34.Prohibit solid fencing along streets.A.7.1, A.7.4 Conflicts with need to screen parking lots.
S.35.Prohibit chain link fences. A.7.2
S.36.Require entryway gates and fencing to have an open design. Limit
the size or appearance of monumental entry gates.A.7.4
S.37.Require retaining walls that are visible from a public street to have a
veneer of natural stone, stained concrete, or textured surface. None Too restrictive, may create a style conflict with chosen
architecutral style of building.
S.38.Require terraced retaining walls to be separated by at least three
feet and including landscaping. A.8.1
S.39.Require a break, offset, or planting pocket to breakup retaining
walls for every 50-foot continuous length of a retaining wall. A.8.2
S.40.List prohibited solid wall materials that separate commercial uses
from adjacent residential parcels. None Too restrictive, may create a style conflict with chosen
architecutral style of building.
S.41.Require brick banding along with concrete for commercial street
sidewalks. None
This is an engineering standard (Villa Hermosa) and the focus
of the the objective standards is on building design and
building placement.
S.42.Require a maximum amount of hardscape percentage. A.6.1, A.9.1
S.43.
Require new developments to include common open space areas in
the form of public gathering spaces (i.e., plazas, squares, pocket
parks) that are designed to stimulate pedestrian activity and
complement the appearance and form of adjoining buildings.
A.9
S.44.Require shade trees in common outdoor spaces. A.9.4
S.45.Determine if viewsheds into the surrounding hills can be made
objective. None Very difficult to make objective and specific to development
in the hillside area.
S.46.For Community Place Districts, relate buildings to the street and
locate them on site to reinforce street frontages.A.10.1
S.47.For Community Place Districts, require buildings to be placed close
to, and oriented toward the street.A.10.1
S.48.
If possible, limit the height of buildings located on corners to one
story in height and preserve views into the surrounding hills.
Restrict unnecessary massing at street corners (i.e., domes and
uninhabitable spaces).
None Too restrictive, may create a style conflict with chosen
architecutral style of building.
S.49.
Require new homes to maximize privacy, protection of natural plant
and wildlife habitats, and minimize ecological or visual impacts
affecting open spaces, public spaces, or other properties.
A.6.2, B.1.2, B.4.11,
B.4.12
S.50.Require improvements along outer gateways to the Town. Map
gateways where these requirements would apply. None The locations of Town gateways have not been deterined.
S.51.Locate structures to minimize blocking sun access to living spaces,
outdoor areas on adjacent homes, and solar panel sun access.None Very difficult to make objective and very restrictive to apply
to every project in commercial zones.
S.52.
For Community Place Districts, if there is no conflict with Town
Code, require front setbacks to be similar to those of structures on
adjacent parcels, but not less than ten feet unless those of adjacent
structures are less.
A.10.1
S.53.
For Community Place Districts, require side setbacks to be provided
to set the structures off from their neighbors unless the building is
part of a continues storefront within the same parcel. If no side
setback is provided, the building design should blend with the
adjacent buildings to create a continuous storefront.
A.10.1
S.54.For Community Place Districts, provide setbacks from street
property lines to match those currently existing in the subdistrict. A.10.1
S.55.
For Community Place Districts, require new buildings to maintain a
consistent setback from the public right-of-way in order to create a
well-defined streetscape.
A.10.1
S.56.Require a minimum percentage of garages to be set back from the
front façade. B.4.5
S.57.Prohibit new setbacks on North Santa Cruz Avenue or West Main
Street None Setbacks are established in theTown Code.
S.58.Require larger setbacks for parcels fronting on Santa Cruz Avenue
and Saratoga/Los Gatos Road North of Highway 9.None Setbacks are established in theTown Code.
Building Placement
Issue Number Issue Identified in Subcommittee Meetings Draft OS Response
S.59.
Require accessory buildings and ADUs to be compatible with other
buildings with forms, colors, and materials. Provide objective criteria
for compatibility.
B.3.5
B.3.5 is written to address detached carport. ADUs are
reviewd/approved under a separate process pursuant to State
law.
S.60.Set a limit on height exception for towers, spires, cupolas, and
similar structures not used for human activity or storage.
Zoning Code Sec.
29.10.090
S.61.Require garages to be subservient to entries and ground floor living
spaces. B.2.1, B.2.3, B.4.5
S.62.
Require new outbuildings, such as garages, to be clearly subordinate
to the main structure in massing, and utilize forms, materials, and
details which are used on the main structure.
A.4.2, B.3.5, B.4.5
S.63.Require buildings to be designed at a pedestrian scale.
B.1.1, B.2.1, B.4.1, B.4.3,
B.4.4, B.4.7, B.4.8, B.4.9,
B.4.10, B.4.13, B.4.14
S.64.
Require the scale and massing of new developments to provide
transitions in building height and massing to the physical and visual
character of adjoining neighborhoods. Projects backing up to
residential neighborhoods should be sensitive to their potential
impacts on the residents.
A.6.2, B.1.1, B.1.2, B.3.1,
B.4.3, B.4.11, B.4.12
S.65.Step buildings down as they get close to neighbors that are
smaller/single-story.B.4.3
Town Code requires increased setbacks for nonresidential
properties adjacent or across from residential.
29.60.225(5); 29.60.335(4); 29.60.435(5); 29.70.125(5);
29.70.235(3)
S.66.
Require medium density, high density, and mixed-use parcels in the
Los Gatos Boulevard District adjacent to Single-Family parcels to
include increased site setbacks and multi-story step backs to
minimize the impact and increase compatibility with smaller
adjacent structures.
B.4.3
Town Code requires increased setbacks for nonresidential
properties adjacent or across from residential.
29.60.225(5); 29.60.335(4); 29.60.435(5); 29.70.125(5);
29.70.235(3)
For projects located on corner parcels of streets leading into
residential neighborhoods, special attention should be given to the
following:
§ Breaking building forms into modules that are
similar to those in residential neighborhoods.
§ Providing landscaping and landscape elements that
would be consistent with those used in residential
areas.
§ Screening any parking areas with low walls and
landscaping.
S.68.Require buildings taller than two stories to have floors above the
second floor set back from the walls below. B.1.1, B.1.2
S.69.Provide size transitions between larger and smaller buildings.None
There was concern that applying this would inhibit best use of
a property based on a neighboring building that could
eventually be redeveloped itself.
S.70.
Require new structures, remodels, landscapes, and hardscapes to be
designed to be architecturally consistent and similar in mass and
scale with adjacent development to minimize compatibility issues.
None Difficult to make objective.
S.71.Avoid structures with height and bulk at front and side setback lines
which are significantly greater than those of the adjacent homes. B.1.1, B.1.2
S.72.
Take care in the placement of second floor masses. Unless the
architectural style traditionally has the second-floor front wall at or
near the first-floor wall, set the second floor back from the front
façade a minimum of 5 feet.
B.1.1, B.1.2, B.4.3
Building Height
Massing and Scale
S.67.A.6.2, A.6.3, B.1.2
Issue Number Issue Identified in Subcommittee Meetings Draft OS Response
The design of two-story homes constructed adjacent to one story
houses should include techniques to minimize their visual impact
and provide transitions in scale. Some techniques include:
§ Step down to one story elements near the side
setbacks
§ Provide substantial side setbacks for the entire
house
§ Provide substantial second floor side setbacks
§ Use hip roofs at the sides rather than gables
S.74.Try to protect views of hills. None Very difficult to make objective especially without a Town
view protection ordinance.
S.75.
Eliminate box-like forms with large, unvaried roofs by using a variety
of building forms and roof shapes with cluster units, variations in
height, setback, and roof shape.
B.1.3, B.3.1, B.4.1, B.4.3
S.76.Construct a maximum of 6 attached units in a row.B.1.3
S.77.Elevations shall be mixed within a development to avoid repetition
of identical facades and rooflines. B.3.1
S.78.Require varied building and parapet heights except in locations
where flat parapets are common.B.3.1
S.79.Limit the depth of eaves to relate roof overhangs to the
architectural style of the surrounding neighborhood.B.3.4
S.80.Avoid the use of dome buildings. None Too restrictive, may create a style conflict with chosen
architecutral style of building.
S.81.Require flat profile skylights. B.3.2
S.82.
Require roof forms to include materials, elevations, and finishes that
are consistent with the architectural style and design of the
structure.
The subjective nature of architectural styles prevents this
from being made objective.
S.83.
Encourage horizontal eaves longer than 40 to 50 feet in length to be
broken up by gables, building projections, or other forms of
articulation.
B.3.1, B.3.3
S.84.
Require skylight glazing material that reduces glare at night,
especially for bird safety. Large skylights with dome-style glazing
should be prohibited.
B.3.2 Difficult to make first sentence objective.
S.85.
Try to incorporate a Light Reflective Value (LRV) similar to those in
Hillside Design Guidelines for roof tones that blend with the
environment.
None Impractical and too limiting. Eliminates architectural styles.
S.86.Minimize privacy intrusions on adjacent residences.A.6.2, B.1.2, B.4.11,
B.4.12
S.87.
Minimize contrast between manmade buildings and the
environment. Try to incorporate a Light Reflective Value (LRV)
similar to those in Hillside Design Guidelines.
None Impractical and too limiting. Eliminates architectural styles.
S.88.
Encourage buildings and sites within all Community Place Districts
to integrate design features that create a pedestrian and
neighborhood-friendly environment, including siting buildings close
to the sidewalks, providing space for small plazas, and including
public art.
A.10.1
S.89.
Promote community design which is human-scaled, comfortable,
safe, and conducive to pedestrian use. Strategies for standards
include height of floor plates and width of building face.
B.1.1, B.2.1, B.4.1, B.4.3,
B.4.4, B.4.7, B.4.8, B.4.9,
B.4.10, B.4.13, B.4.14
S.90.Provide pedestrian arcades and/or other one-story architectural
elements to reduce the visual height of tall walls. B.1.1
S.91.
Promote well defined architectural styles through the use of
building massing, setbacks, façade articulation, fenestration, varied
parapets, and other human-scaled architectural features.
B.4.1
S.92.
Require multi-story buildings to incorporate step backs on upper
floors to create a more human-scale and comfortable pedestrian
environment.
B.1.1, B.1.2, B.4.3
Encourage all new and remodeled structures use at a minimum one
of the following architectural design elements to enhance the
uniqueness of the structure:
§ Molding
§ Ornamentation
§ Corbels
§ Cornices
§ Colonnades
S.73.A.6.2
Town Code requires increased setbacks for nonresidential
properties adjacent or across from residential.
29.60.225(5); 29.60.335(4); 29.60.435(5); 29.70.125(5);
29.70.235(3)
Roof Design
Façade Design and Articulation
S.93.B.4.3
Issue Number Issue Identified in Subcommittee Meetings Draft OS Response
S.94.
Break up the façade of horizontal buildings into smaller components
by utilizing vertical adjacent building masses. Add a maximum
amount of linear frontage for each required massing component.
B.4.1
S.95.
Exterior wall planes should be varied in depth and/or direction.
Desirable massing includes: variation in the wall plane; variation in
wall height; roofs containing different forms and located at different
levels.
B.4.1
S.96.
Eliminate box-like forms with large, unvaried roofs by using a variety
of building forms and roof shapes with clusters of units, variations in
height, setback, and roof shape. Make the building visually and
architecturally pleasing by varying the height, color, setback,
materials, texture, landscaping, trim, roof shapes, and ridge
orientation for all elevations.
B.4.1
S.97.Design with architectural integrity on all sides of the structure.B.4.2
S.98.Maintain a strong street presence and design with consistency on all
sides of the structure.B.4.2
Provide visual relief for two story walls. Some techniques include:
§ Belly bands
§ Pop outs and bay windows
§ Material and color changes
§ Chimneys
§ Wide overhangs with projecting brackets
§ Juliet balconies
§ Window boxes and pot shelves
§ Landscaped trellises and lattices
S.100.
Maintain continuity of design, materials, color, form and
architectural detail for all elevations of a building that are visible
from public areas or adjacent residences.
B.4.2
S.101.Orient buildings to avoid blank walls and service areas which are
visible. B.4.1
S.102.
Treat commercial street-facing facades which exceed fifty feet in
length as though they were constructed on individual parcels no
wider than fifty feet.
B.4.13
S.103.
Provide horizontal wall plane changes along street frontages and
areas easily viewed from adjacent properties. Wall plane changes
should have some portions that are at least two feet to provide
building articulation.
B.4.1
S.104.The size and height of all detail elements shall be sympathetic to the
major elements of adjacent structures. None Impractical and difficult to make objective.
S.105.
Avoid blank walls over ten feet long on primary frontages, and from
the first fifty feet from Santa Cruz Avenue or Main Street. Break up
larger blank walls with pilasters and landscaping.
B.4.14
Require some architectural elements of mixed-use buildings to
include:
§ Shaped parapets or projecting cornices at street wall
tops
§ Large display windows framed by high quality
materials.
§ Projecting columns and pilasters
§ Column/pilaster bases and bulkheads below display
windows
§ Projecting belt courses and other moldings
§ Decorative details
For mixed-use buildings, structures taller than one story should have
design elements that emphasize the first floor. Elements might
include:
§ Awnings
§ Planters
§ Projecting signs
§ Divided light windows
§ Small scale materials (e.g., brick, board, and batten
wood)
S.108.
Require the design, form, roof pitch, materials, and color of new
accessory dwelling units to be compatible with the primary
dwelling. Entrances serving the accessory dwelling unit shall not be
constructed on any elevation facing a public street.
None ADUs are reviewd/approved under a separate process
pursuant to State law.
S.107.B.4.4
S.99.B.4.3
S.106.B.4.4
Issue Number Issue Identified in Subcommittee Meetings Draft OS Response
S.109.Consider limiting second-story balconies in single-family scaled
development (detached condos)A.3.11
S.110.Be specific about the minimum/maximum balcony allowed per
product type.None Impractical and not responsive to varying lot sizes
S.111.
Gable dormers, single or an aggregate of multiple dormers, should
rarely exceed 50 percent of the width of the roof. Shed dorms can
be wider.
B.3.3
Relate awning placement to the major architectural elements of the
façade.
§ Add a maximum height
§ Add maximum percentage of fabric awning
§ Avoid covering transom windows or architectural
elements such as bel courses, decorative trim, and
similar features
§ Use separate awnings over individual storefront bays
defined by the columns or pilasters rather than placing
a continuous awning across the building frontage
§ Patterned and striped awnings are discouraged.
§ Operable awnings are encouraged when appropriate
for the style of the building
S.113.Create a list of prohibited building materials. Consider using
maximum LRV. No copper. None Too restrictive, may create a style conflict with chosen
architecutral style of building.
S.114.Make materials and color changes at inside corners rather than
outside corners to avoid a pasted-on look.B.4.6
S.115.Match wall materials to that of the building. None Too restrictive, may create a style conflict with chosen
architecutral style of building.
S.116.
Ensure that all buildings have well designed and visible entries.
Distinctive projecting or recessed entries shall be provided for each
living unit.
B.4.9
S.117.Orient unit entries to streets and common open spaces rather than
parking courtyards. B.4.9
S.118.Create a minimum fenestration percentage for ground-floor
commercial in mixed-use development.B.4.7.b
S.119.Apply a window style consistency if possible. None Too restrictive, may create a style conflict with chosen
architecutral style of building.
S.120.Maintain a high degree of fenestration and transparency on the
ground floor of commercial buildings. B.4.4, B.4.7.b, B.4.8
S.121.Encourage window box planters below display windows. B.4.3
S.122.Prohibit mirror-like window tinting. B.4.8
S.123.Establish a maximum percentage of garage facing along a street, or
garage door articulation.B.2.1, B.2.3, B.4.5
S.124.Carport roof materials need to be the same as the building and
needs to be behind the building.B.2.1, B.2.3, B.4.5
S.125.
Recess garages from unit fronts along streets. Recesses from the
building face of 18 feet or more are desirable to minimize the
prominence of the garages and to allow guest parking on driveway
aprons.
B.2.1, B.2.3, B.4.5
S.126.Front-facing garages should be recessed a minimum of 12 inches
from the front façade of the living space.B.2.1, B.2.3, B.4.5
S.127.
Avoid designs that allow the garage to dominate the street façade.
Garage doors should feature windows, recesses, and moldings to
help blend the garages with the character of the unit.
B.2.1, B.2.3, B.4.5
S.112.B.4.7, B.4.10
From: Jeffrey Barnett <>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 11:33 AM
To: Sean Mullin <SMullin@losgatosca.gov>; Ryan Safty <RSafty@losgatosca.gov>
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting June 22, 2022; Item 3. Objective Standards
EXTERNAL SENDER
Dear Sean and Ryan,
The City of Palo Alto adopted its objective standards on June 1st.. Here is a link to an article
about the project::
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2022/06/02/new-design-rules-for-palo-alto-housing-
projects-govern-everything-from-window-sizes-to-architecture-styles
Here is the link to the City Council's agenda packet for the June first meeting where the
standards were considered. The Staff Report starts at page 32, and the draft ordinances start at
page 51 and extend to Page 211..
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-
minutes/city-council-agendas-minutes/2022/20220601/20220601pccsm.pdf
The draft minutes of the City Council's June 1st meeting show that the Council approved the
objective standards without change.
I kindly request that you distribute this email to the members of the Planning Commission for
consideration prior to our Wednesday meeting.
Thank you in advance.
Jeffrey
EXHIBIT 7
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank