High-Density Townhome Development and Wildfire Safety on Linda Vista Drive
Summary not yet generated for this topic.
Community sentiment
Related issue
Banley Drive Townhome Development→At a glance
- Public comments
- 17
- Last 30 days
- 0
Last discussed Feb 24, 2026.
Public comments (17)
Argued that the Linda Vista townhome project violates fire code aerial access requirements and setback rules.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:01:09 →Presented a traffic and wildfire evacuation model showing severe bottlenecks and gridlock on Linda Vista Drive during an emergency.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:04:00 →Expressed concerns about high fuel loads along Stevens Creek Trail and requested enhanced wildfire resilience measures for the development.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:09:41 →Suggested including three-bedroom single-story homes and addressing children's recreation and guest parking.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:13:03 →Shared personal experience from the Park Fire in Chico, arguing that high-density developments in fire zones remain highly vulnerable.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:13:49 →Objected to placing a high-density multi-unit complex in a single-family residential zone, citing land-use compatibility principles.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:17:03 →Expressed worry over evacuation routes and wildfire risks, referencing recent fires in Los Altos and the Palisades.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:20:03 →Raised concerns about three-story buildings encroaching on privacy and requested reduced height and increased setbacks.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:23:04 →Detailed multiple conflicts with municipal code standards regarding height, setbacks, FAR ratio, open space, and lack of evacuation analysis.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:24:41 →Highlighted past neighborhood fires and urged the commission to thoroughly review safety concerns before proceeding.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:32:19 →Stressed the extreme danger of high-density housing in high fire hazard zones and urged commissioners to push back against state mandates.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:34:02 →Questioned the validity of the CEQA exemption for a project located in a very high fire hazard zone.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:37:05 →Voiced support for the townhome development as an infill project providing much-needed for-sale affordable housing near schools.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:40:20 →Criticized the lack of neighborhood notification during the zoning change process and raised traffic and congestion concerns.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:42:24 →Expressed sympathy for neighbors dealing with state housing laws and questioned the long-term maintenance of setback landscaping.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:46:01 →Questioned the numerous density bonus waivers and whether the project fits the neighborhood scale.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:49:00 →Expressed strong support on behalf of the Bay Area Council for the townhome project as a vital starter-home opportunity.
Planning Commission — February 24, 2026 · 2:50:26 →